: Although I understand your argument, there is one major factor that in my opinion you are overlooking. Tolkien's works were good in Book One and Book Two, Three, Four and so on. The entire series (usuing Tolkien's division of six books here) was superb. Granted, Jordan has not finished, but if Book One is good, Two okay, Three mediocre and Four--Eight poor, the series as a whole, no matter how good Nine--Thirteen may be, cannot be viewed as a success on par with the LOTR.

Agreed, but that all depends on how you view the succession of books, and their overall quality. Of course I am biased toward that end, so I will reserve further comment, and I believe that I have made myself clear in previous posts.

: And I think you are absolutely right in asserting that Jordan reworked the LOTR. If he had the Wheel of Time series would be much better, if unoriginal. Take the Sword of Shannara for instance. Quite obviously a reworking of the LOTR framework and it is enjoyable. But not equal to the LOTR either.

Agreed again on the Sword Of Shannara, however, I would rank it (and all of Brooks's subsequent works) lower on the scale then Jordan's. Sword was a nice adaptation (and a very obvious re-telling), and the rest of the first series was equal in scope and Tolkien inspried work, but the remainder became bogged down in psychological detail and exploration and lacked the balance of action that both Jordan and Tolkien have.

-RobRoy