Mostly what I've seen in forum discussions regarding the topic are statements of complaint about certain aspects of WoT and stated preference from some posters for Erikson and Martin. Despite this I see little with respect to why anyone should consider Erikson's or Martin's series "higher quality". Now I don't mind if this is what you believe. Really I don't. But it would be interesting to actually see someone commit to such a stand and then methodically explain it by comparing the works in question rather than simply damning Jordan with faint praise or such a litany of complaints that an outside party would be surprised to learn that the malcontent still plans to pick up the next book.
"Faint praise?" Maybe.
"...a litany of complaints that an outside part would be surprised that the malcontent [me? malcontent? c'mon now] still plans to pick up the next book?" Hardly. That's a fairly exaggerated and melodramatic summary of my posting on the matter.
Of course no one is obligated to give such an explanation,...
Bingo. Opinions, after all.....
...but this is a discussion forum after all. Furthermore if Erikson's and Martin's series are to be held in highest esteem and considered the fantasy standards, it bears understanding what qualities they possess that earn them such pride of place, whether those qualities are beneficial or inimical, and what they portend for the future direction of the fantasy genre.
Alright, I'll attempt the explanation. This might be an endeavor for someone else however, since while I read Erikson's and Martin's series, I am certainly not their biggest advocate.
By way of comparison, Martin has deeper characters than Goodkind or Jordan. Erikson's characters are more of a push with Jordan's, but still better than Goodkind's. The worlds of Erikson and Martin are better than those of Goodkind or Jordan. None of which are particularly lyrical, so I'm not going to bother with prose. On the matter of plot, suspense, etc., Erikson and Martin are, again, ahead of Jordan and Goodkind. In terms of action, Erikson has the most while Jordan and Martin might be even and Goodkind, well, you know. Jordan gets the nod when it comes to a magic system while Martin has to get a special acknowledgement for limiting magic and keeping it from being the cure-all to difficult problems, or surmounting insanely impossible odds. Erikson is far more unique and innovative than any of the others in terms of creatures, races and cultures than the rest. As far as the progression of a story goes, along with its associated level of predictability, Martin and Erikson best both Jordan and Goodkind.
So, there's the explanation, but as I initially posted in this thread, I would hope that no one succeeds Goodkind or Jordan in this particular medium since the "never ending" series would seem to be something that ends up sacrificing quality for quantity.
Do they share the same shelf space? I know here in Aus they don't.
