One common complaint about Robert Jordan and his Wheel of Time saga is that he didn’t know how to write women and that all his women characters are interchangeable. They aren’t interchangeable, and each has their place in the story, but because of the way Jordan inverted traditional gender roles, I can see why people think it’s true. Fans also say the characters don’t act like any woman they know, but the characters aren’t supposed to act like women we know.
In the Wheel of Time world, women have the assumption of power (in our world, boys and men used to have the assumption of power and the rest of us, no matter our age, were “just girls”). It was one of Jordan’s themes — turning gender assumptions on end. Those of us who grew up in his era understand why all his women characters treat men as if they are naive boys and why they never bothered to see things from their point of view — because that’s how boys and men treated us “girls.” As if we had no sense. As if we had no point of view worth seeing. As if we were so empty-headed we needed to leave all thinking to them.
But the world today is different from the one that existed when Jordan began developing his saga 50 years ago. (The first book was published almost forty years ago, but before the first word was written, he spent ten years researching and developing his ideas.) To younger generations, gender assumptions are . . . fluid, to say the least, so they can’t relate to that particular theme of Jordan’s. Still, the saga is a fantasy, a creation of a different world, so it should be read only from the point of view of Jordan’s world and not judged by current beliefs in our world.
Admittedly, I don’t like one of his major women characters, and don’t read her point-of-view chapters on rereads. Fans of this teenage character complain that other readers don’t like her because she’s a woman, that if she was a man, there would be no problem with her. (Which sort of illustrates Jordan’s theme, that she was acting like a man from an earlier generation.) But the thing is, people — men or women — who will walk all over anyone, lie, do anything to garner power, might be compelling characters, but will never be someone I like in real life and definitely not in fiction. This woman did not have a character arc — it’s a straight shot upward.
Whenever she saw someone with power, she did all she could to be like them, to become one of their group, use them, and then move on to the next group who could further her objectives. This is the most divisive character among fans — some women think this character is the real hero of the story (which isn’t surprising, since that’s what the character herself believes), while some (like me) see her as evil. The only reason as far as I can see that she doesn’t go over to the Dark One is that she’d have to swear fealty and be second-in-command at best. If she isn’t evil, she certainly portrays the dark triad of personality traits: narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. She never changed, never had a moment of self-discovery or reckoning. Anything heroic she did was a side effect of her power grab. And she never stopped grabbing.
A second major character isn’t unreadable so much as she is the young heir to a throne, raised to believe in her right to rule and that she was superior to everyone else, always “sticking her nose in the air,” as one character described her. Despite that, of the three main women characters, she tended to be the most considerate (which isn’t saying a whole lot) and also sometimes acted as peacemaker between the other two. But even that isn’t as much of a problem as that a large portion of a couple of books are devoted to her claiming her throne, a story line that is way out of balance to the rest of the books and one, moreover, that does nothing to move any of the many plots forward. I have a hunch that Jordan planned to go somewhere with that whole subplot to make it less of an add on and more intrinsic to the story, but since the substitute author killed off her realm first thing when he took over, it became even more of a waste of words. As it is, her character arc is meandering, sometimes up, sometimes down, but never going anywhere since she doesn’t really change, just goes from being heir to the throne to being queen, simply becoming more of who she always was.
I started out liking the third one of his major women characters. She was a bit older than the other two, a healer and moral caretaker in the small town most of the heroes came from. Because of her youth, she had to bully people to make them see her authority, but still, she did her best to take care of everyone. She joined with the other heroes so she could look out for them but ended up dealing with a quest of her own. She became more and more of a bully as she tried to keep her place in the world, which irritated me until I saw her character arc. One by one, those she once had authority over turned the tables and she ended up subservient to each until there was only one left for her to bully. When she finally realized she had to give in to his authority too, she cried. That was the end of who she’d been. From there, though, she gradually built up her power base, starting with herself, until she became a true hero, the only one of the three women who did. An actual character arc.
(I wonder if Jordan planned that — one was too much, one too little, and one just right.)
There is another female triumvirate in the saga based on the legend of the three wives of King Arthur, who in Jordan’s books also represent the three aspects of the goddess — maid, mother, crone. (The maid is not a child but rather a warrior, a Maiden of the Spear. The mother is the queen mentioned above, who will have the hero’s children. The crone, though almost as young as the other two, represents the “truth teller” aspect of the crone archetype.) This “three wives” subplot is an unsettling part of the story for many readers (me, included), though it does make sense since Jordan is playing with our myths and legends, imagining what the sources might have been. The maid and crone have similar character trajectories to the queen/mother — ups and downs, with minor changes and an acceptance of their place, but mostly just becoming more of what they’d always been with no major arc that I can see.
Readers often point to the women’s annoying characteristics, such as straightening their clothes, messing with their hair, crossing arms, sniffing loudly, as proof that these characters are written badly, but these are tics, something every writer has. I can’t imagine writing four million words and having to constantly come up with different ways to show vexation or nervousness or disdain. The characters also spend a lot of time describing clothes, but the clothes give hints as to where they are and what they are thinking. It does make me wonder about his wife, though. Jordan says he gave every one of his women characters one of his wife’s characteristics, though he’d never tell her which ones.
In writing this, I developed a better sense of who these characters are, so I might decide someday to read every word of the whole series, including the parts that annoy me.
But maybe not. Since I know their arcs, such as they are, I don’t need to know anything beyond that. At least, I don’t think I do.

***
Pat Bertram is the author of Grief: The Inside Story – A Guide to Surviving the Loss of a Loved One.
Not a Private Forum
March 18, 2026 — Pat BertramI got an email from a woman who had left an emotionally raw comment on one of my grief posts. She had been hurting and wanted understanding as so many grievers do. But then as the rawness passed, she got on with her life. She googled herself to see what prospective employers would see, and she was shocked that the comment she left here on this blog showed up in search results. She said she thought this was a private forum otherwise she would never have responded to my post. She asked me to remove her comment, which I did.
I didn’t know comments on blogs could show up on search results. This blog is a rather small cubbyhole — pinhole, actually — in the vastness of the internet, so it never occurred to me that comments were searchable. (Especially since, come to think of it, few people leave their names, and those who do usually want to be recognized.) That this blog itself is searchable is all to the good — searching for help with grief is the major reason that people find me.
I only mention this to warn you not to put anything in a comment you don’t want strangers to find. Of course, by now, most of us know that there is no privacy online anymore, if, in fact, there ever was. Knowing this, there are a few things I never post here — my birthday, my house address, my email address, and probably a hundred other things I am so used to keeping private that I don’t remember. Other than those personal privacy issues (I’ve had a few blog stalkers over the years, and I certainly didn’t want any of them showing up at my doorstep!), my life is an open book. Actually, my life being an open book is why I’ve been careful about those privacy issues. I don’t want all the dots to be connected by people I don’t want connecting the dots.
Quite frankly, sometimes it makes me nervous about how much of myself is on here, especially all the things I wrote about during my grief years. As someone once told me shortly after I started telling a truth few wanted to admit, “It’s time to take off the mantle of grief,” but I never did.
So far, when I’ve found myself feeling nervous about any previous posts, I’ve managed not to delete them. And I won’t. But that means, your comments are there, too.
Anyway, I hope this doesn’t deter you from leaving comments. I cherish every response I get.
***
Pat Bertram is the author of Grief: The Inside Story – A Guide to Surviving the Loss of a Loved One.