Ditto. Something we can agree on for a change. I hated the one book I read of The Sword of Truth Series!Quote:
Originally Posted by JBI
Printable View
Ditto. Something we can agree on for a change. I hated the one book I read of The Sword of Truth Series!Quote:
Originally Posted by JBI
Right mortal--fantasy teaches modern readers how lucky they are, and the overeducated have no right to show it up as crass, which it is, barring LOR, because there, the enticement of evil is taken seriously, and the novels do have ideas about justice, righteousness, and the cost of selling out to the demonic--but we can't say Martin is tasteless, since that would be an offense to the moral code of his readers.
JBI, actually, hit the nail right on the head when he mentioned the anxiety of influence. The entire modern practice of fantasy writing seems to be distancing itself from the color of Zelazny and Eddison's tradition and creating bleak environments to challenge its characters with. The marginalization and violence therein really is just part of that atmosphere.
I was searching the internet and found this excellent review of the entire Song of Ice and Fire Series that has been published so far: Link.
I also liked this review because this guy seems to notice exactly what I do in the series. He gets at the core theme dominating the story, which is essentially power and its abuse. Not to mention he offers a nice checklist at the end that I thought was creative for a review: Link.
I also find it a tad ironic that for all the comments about what genre fans do and don't like, they have the same exact debates we've all been having (is the sex in the series too gratuitous? Is the medieval society accurate enough?): link.
I don't mean to beat a dead horse (pardon the cliche), but the librarian in me wanted to offer some more resources so those considering the series have a lot of different viewpoints.
I think it key to note, that all the reviews you posted were written by men, most of whom have a natural bias, being that they are all fans, and therefore aren't writing their perspective of the specific from a very objective perspective. Those reviews aren't scholarly in the least, and Martin's world isn't as accurate as they pretend, given the nature of the source material he used, according to his website:
Hardly the most scholarly books, of course, most of which based on old documents, or old ways of approaching history.Quote:
THE MEDIEVAL SOLDIER Gerry Embleton & John Howe
A DISTANT MIRROR Barbara Tuchman
MEDIEVAL SWORDMANSHIP John Clements
THE MEDIEVAL WARFARE SOURCE BOOK David Nicolle
LIFE IN A MEDIEVAL CASTLE and LIFE IN A MEDIEVAL CITY, both by Joseph and Frances Gies
THE DICTIONARY OF HERALDRY by Joseph Foster
TOURNAMENTS by Richard Barber & Juliet Barker
GREAT CITIES OF THE ANCIENT WORLD by L. Sprague de Camp
THE CHRONICLES OF ENGLAND, FRANCE, SPAIN, AND OTHER PLACES ADJOINING, by Sir Jean Froissart
I don't think I presented them as being scholarly, only reviews. Neither reviewer as far as I can tell is a fan of the fantasy genre (or solely a fan of the genre anyway), but rather they are fan of this particular work as evidenced by the reviews themselves. Both offer a sober picture of the work talking about its various qualities fairly indepth, while recognizing some of these elements will turn certain readers off and trying to address those concerns. They are actually two examples of fairly successful reviews, although certainly not scholarly. I also chose them because I think they are pretty much spot-on in their descriptions. I don't really see them as being much different than someone posting here on the forum. If I was in a format that required scholarly sources (say I myself were writing a scholarly paper) that would be a different matter.
Not to mention that part of your argument borders on being a Genetic Fallacy. It can certainly be relevant to point out bias in certain cases, but it has to go beyond just, "reviewer has male genitals," and "they are a fan."
Add on top of all this that in my very substantial post in this very thread I DID in fact link to female feminists who liked the series and some of their thoughts, which pretty much match the male reviewers, and I'm not really sure what your point is anymore.
As far as the books Martin read I would have to check most of them myself to determine how scholarly or not they are, but I am pretty sure the Gies book is a Gold Standard for medieval history. I suspect their biggest problem is being old and perhaps a tad outdated.
However, the accuracy of his medievial society is a moot point anyway whether someone is arguing it with you or fantasy fans with each other. It needs to have ENOUGH accuracy, but at the end of the day it is a FANTASY world.
God, JBI, why are you trying so hard to guilt trip every reader who enjoys this series. You think its misogynistic, you think it is rapist fantasy, WE GET IT. Plus, you just keep rehashing the same points, like because it is fantasy it shouldn't bean excuse, blah blah blah. Getting old.
And I don't really get why the prose is bad. Pretty good if you ask me, but I guess I don't measure everything against Faulkner.
God, Matuatis-Mutandi, why are you trying so hard to doge a reader who dislikes this series. You think its quality literature, you think it is a work of imaginitive genius, WE Get IT. Plus, you just keep rehashing the same points, like because it is fantasy, it should be excused, blah blah blah. Getting old.
And I really don't see why it's good prose. Pretty crummy if you ask me, but I guess it's fantasy so there isn't a need to measure it against Faulkner.
I've read some of the titles, and none offer anything more than trivial rubbish, like different occupations of people at the time. None offer real historical study, of any sort, and all of them are dated, being that they don't take into account recent movements in historical scholarship (I am referring to the ones I have read from the list).
It's pretty basic, I just wanted to point out that there is no real scholarship, in the sense that Eco's Name of the Rose, or Baudolino.
As for your link in your thread Drkshadow, one is dead, another points nowhere, and I read the third, but it doesn't talk about the book specifically, so it only creates a rather vague, unscholarly overview of one perspective of a whole genre. Especially when one describes herself as a post-feminist, meanwhile, contradicting herself over and over again, as well as breaking completely with the objectives, and essentially the definition of post-feminist (as vague a term as it is).
I may be wrong, and I'm not a history buff, but isn't Froissart's Chronicles one of the primary documents of medieval European history? I was under the impression that it ranked right up there with the Venerable Bede's Ecclesiastical History of the English People and Holinshed's Chronicles.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBI
Perhaps, but Greis certainly isn't. Either way that is a historical record of events more of the battles in the Hundred Years War than an historical record of society. The Battles, knowing they are lifted from history doesn't really change anything. The views of medieval towns and society are based on mediocre research.
Either way, a primary from those times perhaps will give an idea of one account, but it is not grounds for labeling something historically accurate.
It's a fantasy series. The only way Martin could be inaccurate is if he were stricken with amnesia; it's his creation. There are no current trends in scholarship on the history of Martin's world.
Drk, the fact that you recognize thematic intent in Martin's work does not mean that he is a good writer, sorry. He has pacing down, which is commendable, but I can do that too. This segment is from one of my stories which an editor from the now defunct Bone & Flesh praised for being "a realistic depiction of violence against women". And it is a fantastical piece, though in an urban setting:
"His erection came upon him before Frecca knew a man was there, before the shape and form of an intruder brooked alarm to her mind, before she knew it as a man was there, before she knew he was a man or even the pronoun of maleness (before she knew a man was there), even before she knew something was wrong as she stepped from the kitchenette to the living room, simultaneously speaking to her feline as a mother would speak to an adored adolescent child about the *****iness of the day, before she knew anything else, before he lunged at her--as erections, semen full and charged, somehow seem to signal themselves, she knew of it, her flesh knew of it, and the flesh turned, hackles raised, wanting to tear that aroused sensation out of the air, when he did lunge at her, threw himself at her with the force of a semi-automatic, the bulk of his body impacting against the muscular flesh of her intestines as she screamed, her eyes flashing the horror in phosphorescent red and green and yellows, don’t faint! the horror no this is not happening to me, no! But was there time for denial? The apartment had been empty when the key had unclicked the lock, this she would have sworn to, had she known she still had the ability to swear. She felt the danger a live wire seething just before it hits your skin with its tinge and sizzle, and then this man was on her, threw himself at her, his denim jeans scratching against her stockings, like burlap, the sound. She struggled hard even with the shock of it rolling on her in waves, fortunate in that her body was naturally athletic, taking its routines of jogging and workouts with ease, being an active member of the Washington Square Theatrical Performers Gym though you would never see her near the stage: An arrangement had been worked out in exchange for her occasional paid weekend instruction, that she could have permanent membership at a discount--and so she fought back, as equally, as what she had been given to fight against. Where did he come from? Where was the answer?"
The only reason I did not get paid was the magazine went under, but I will take my work ethic over Martin's any day. I don't care what the genre is, fantasy authors have no excuse for poor diction. No one is saying Martin has to be Faulkner, but he also doesn't have to be as lazy as his excerpts display him to be.
JBI: to answer your earlier question, Disney does not display graphic violence in its adaptation of Seeker-- it still sucks. :)
I wasn't talking about graphic violence, but graphic sex - that is the central content of the book - men getting killed, and women get raped, or in some cases, men getting sado-masochistically slaved. (I only read the first one, but according to a reader I know, he only gets worse, not better).
No, I am trying to contradict the perceived notion of Martin as a realist, and giving a realist portrayal of the middle ages, to an extent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebeard
Not that I can tell. It is closer to a really watered down TH White's The Once and Future King. Wizard places orphan with decent family. Orphan grows up. Good witch rushes to find him to give him special book. Wizard then conveniently informs orphan he is messiah to the Midlands, where a dark lord is trying to become all powerful. Wizard, Witch, and Seeker then kill entire brigades and run around trying to coax dark lord out of his lair, and have various misadventures in the process.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBI
I wouldn't watch it, but the scenic view is nice, and Bruce Spence doesn't really take his Merlin role seriously, but he is a riot, and I don't have cable, so I can go postal, or take a smile where I can find it; the story has picked up a little, but they really can't film decent battle scenes.
"you think it is a work of imaginitive genius"
I never said That. It is a good read.
The whole series doesn't focus on sex. That just seems to be the only parts you payed any attention to.
JBI, I just looked up where you got your information on Martin's site. You got your information from the FAQ on his website. He lists the titles as books he would recommend to the average reader wanting to buff up on medieval history.
Then follows up with the following lines which you conveniently failed to include:
Those are just the tip of the iceberg. There are also specialized books that focus on things like Fools and Jesters, Medieval Feasts, the Knights Templar, and the history of the Hundred Years War or the Wars of the Roses.
A writer cannot do too much research... though sometimes it is a mistake to try and cram too much of what you learned into your novel. Research gives you a foundation to build on, but in the end it's only the story that matters. (emphasis mine).
In other words, you took that entire section out of context.
This will be my final post here:
I highly reccomend ASOIAF to any fantasy fan who can handle violence and sex. Anyone who wants to stray away from the normal fantasy formula, this is for you. I will not claim it is completely original, just different than the norm. There are no clear "good guys" (except maybe Jon) or "Bad Guys" (except maybe Joff). The use of magic is very minimal, which I like. Too many authors like to use magic as a scapegoat for any tricky place they find their narrative to be in. It is well written, keeps you interested.
I absolutely love ASOIAF... can't wait for the next one... I enjoy complicated plots and circling, etc. This truly is epic fantasy at its best, as far as I'm concerned.
Excellent series. The anti-Tolkien in various respects, which suits me just fine, as I could never enjoy The Lord of the Rings.
I also take issue with this:
Have you read Perdido Street Station? Titus Groan or Gormenghast? The Liveship Traders, or maybe American Gods? I think the main problem is that I don't actually know what you personally regard as 'decent prose' -- I think slamming an entire genre (aside from Kay) is far too hasty, though.Quote:
something which is unseen in Fantasy fiction - decent prose.
This is my favorite fantasy series as well, and I can't wait to see what the next books hold.
I have a theory that this series will never see its end. I read the first 3 volumes in this series and was looking forward to the fourth. And then we learned that volume 4 was too big and the editors wanted Martin to split it into two pieces, which took over a year to produce volume 4. Over a year later, volume 5 has yet to be published. If volume 4 was finished at one point, what takes so long to seperate it into two volumes?
I suspect that Martin has lost interest in his own story. I also suspect that Martin lacks the work ethic to stay focused enough to complete the story. The story was supposed to be six volumes, now its seven or possibly eight and the next in the series are not forthcoming. I suspect that Martin will never finish it. He'll either give up or croak before it's finished.
When I get back to reading mindless popular fiction, I may reread this series, but with a different light. Is Martin really revolutionizing the fantasy genre or is he just injecting gratuitous atrocities to sell books? I suspect that JBI is correct on this and that it's the latter.
I can sympathise with those suspicions -- the wait between books has become utterly ridiculous, to be honest. Poor form from Martin.Quote:
Originally Posted by PabloQ
This is an interesting question. I would argue that he has changed the genre to a degree -- most current big authors in the field acknowledge the influence he has had over their work (Lynch and Abercrombie, for example. Hobb has stated that she was 'stunned' by his work. Stover isn't as big, but he's also gone into his admiration for Martin in an interview). From another perspective, however, it's not so much him as it is the changing tone of society as a whole, with the shift toward darker/grittier material. In popular culture, the best examples would be the 'reboots' of classic franchises, in the form of Casino Royale and Batman Begins.Quote:
Is Martin really revolutionizing the fantasy genre or is he just injecting gratuitous atrocities to sell books? I suspect that JBI is correct on this and that it's the latter.
But, getting back to the point, I think that implying Martin is only selling books on the basis of 'gratuitous atrocities' doesn't fly. Maybe more people are embracing this 'dark' factor than ever before, but a good story needs more than that. It needs characters that the reader can connect to (on some level or another) for one. I think Martin is excellent in the realm of characterisation -- it's not just due to the format of one perspective per chapter, but due to the psychological verisimilitude of his portraits. Many people talk of being 'sucked in' to his work, and this is due to (in my opinion, of course) his skill with fleshing out characters on the page. Not an easy thing to do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drkshadow03
So I did finally get around to reading the first three books of this series. I found them quite enjoyable, and I look forward to reading the rest of the series. I think Martin handles his multiple point-of-view approach pretty well; I thought it was a nice touch that the prose in each character's sections reflected that character -- Arya's sections sounded bratty, Tyrion's sections were jaded, and Daenery's sections were visionary. Unfortunately, I feel like he doesn't really have the plot under control, and it doesn't seem like he has the ability to write a good ending. I agree with you (Drkshadow03) that the nature of power is one of the central themes of all three books, along with the conflict between idealism and pragmatism (or between naivete and unscrupulousness?). I liked that he explored these themes in a fairly grown up way -- ideals contradict each other, power is unstable, cunning moves come back to cause catastrophes.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluevictim
It's blatantly obvious that he is aware of and comments on the rampant misogyny in the story (he does this quite explicitly, really). I don't find the accusation that Martin himself is being misogynistic very convincing; he deals the women a bad hand, but he also gives many of the women in the story the strength (mental and physical) and self agency to play their hands well. At the risk of exposing to the world that I am a twisted pervert, I didn't really find the depictions of sex overly graphic or gratuitously titillating.
By the way, I am curious what the rest of the reading list for your hypothetical fantasy course would contain?
I know it was a long time ago that you posted this, but I wonder if you'd care to be more specific about what you feel makes the excerpt from your story better writing than Martin's? You hinted that you think Martin's diction betrays a lack of effort. I thought his prose was quite useful and appropriate for his novels. Whether or not he spent a lot of effort on it doesn't seem to be particularly relevant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jozanny
Yeah, I think this becomes more obvious in the 4th book where the plot really feels like it's meandering. He claims he can finish it in 7 books, but so far finishing book 5 has taken him forever, which is making me wonder if he really has lost control of his story.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluevictim
Still, I'm looking forward to the HBO series.
The Odyssey by HomerQuote:
It's blatantly obvious that he is aware of and comments on the rampant misogyny in the story (he does this quite explicitly, really). I don't find the accusation that Martin himself is being misogynistic very convincing; he deals the women a bad hand, but he also gives many of the women in the story the strength (mental and physical) and self agency to play their hands well. At the risk of exposing to the world that I am a twisted pervert, I didn't really find the depictions of sex overly graphic or gratuitously titillating.
By the way, I am curious what the rest of the reading list for your hypothetical fantasy course would contain?
The Tempest by Shakespeare
Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien
The Wizard of Earthsea by Ursula K. LeGuin
Smoke and Mirrors by Neil Gaiman
Perdido Street Station by China Mieville
A Game of Thrones by George R. R. Martin
Course reader:
Epic Pooh essay by Michael Moorcock
"The Library of Babel" by Jorge Luis Borges
"The Call of Cthulhu" by H. P. Lovecraft
"Little Gods" by Tim Pratt
"The Fantasy Writer's Assistant" by Jeffrey Ford
"Paladin of the Lost Hour" by Harlan Ellison
"Travels with the Snow Queen" by Kelly Link
A few other essays/lit crit on fantasy perhaps.
Maybe, or maybe not. There are a lot of directions I could go with a fantasy class. I am not happy that there are no people of color represented in the list, unless you count Borges. I am not thrilled that there are only two women (one novel, one short story). The book selection has a dual personality since one goal when constructing it was to get students to think more broadly about what constitutes fantasy, while focusing heavily on epic, but also including works of Urban fantasy or weird non-traditional fantasy.
Yeah, I just read the first three books because there was a long gap between it and the fourth book so I hoped he would have brought the story to some kind of stopping point. I'll probably wait at least until he finishes book 5 before taking the series up again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drkshadow03
Your inclusion of the Odyssey reminds me of a discussion I had a while ago with Petrarch's Love about fantasy being the inheritors of the epic tradition. I disagreed with her because I felt the fundamental nature of fantasy fiction and the role it plays in society were too different from epic. On those points I still pretty much feel the same, but having read more epic fantasy now I see that fantasy writers have adopted many conventions from epic.Quote:
The book selection has a dual personality since one goal when constructing it was to get students to think more broadly about what constitutes fantasy, while focusing heavily on epic, but also including works of Urban fantasy or weird non-traditional fantasy.
I have read the first four and i have to say i became nearly obsessed with them ever sense. I have never really been into High Fantasy like Tolkien or the god awful Wizard's first rule series, but A Song of Ice and Fire really sucked me in. I like the Large cast of distinct characters, the pacing and flow of the stories and some of the events which made me nearly jump up and cheering wildly at work. I love how much realism there is because, well, fantasy can sometimes get too caught up in the fantastic and i have a hard time believing what I'm reading. I dont see that with Martin. There may be Dragons, but there's also back-stabbings, infidelity and mothers who just miss there sons.
I am a late comer to the conversation, but have input both on JBI's condemnation of Martin and on the issue of Fantasy prose.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBI
I have read GRRM's series as far as he has finished writing them and have enjoyed them to a point. His structuring of medieval politics and war are interesting as well as, often, historically accurate. His writting is servicable for the story and even occasionally sustains about as much aesthetic liscense as the mass of fantasy audiences will allow. Mostly, I'm impressed with his endlessly inventive characters--though not as psychologically deep as say Fyodor D.'s--who constantly bring new variations on the many perspectives of the events occuring. He rarely falters from pointing out the evil done by the "good" side, or the incedental justice imposed by the "bad" side. Succinctly, his characters are human, driven by human drives and act intellegently toward their desires, not as plot devices.
I do find myself however enjoying the story despite the treatment of sex. I read Lolita, not unflinchingly, because I read most of it during a week of watching my daughter while my wide was in class. It is difficult and heady, however, I never felt the author excused or condoned the actions--rather, there was a very circuitous absurd, horror at the events. G. Martin however, is not telling the story of a pedophile but the epic of a country. Is the percentage devoted to taboo sexuality really representitive of the percentage it neccessitates in the plot? No, I believe it is not. Like battle scenes, dramatic arguements, escapes, captures the sex is used as entertainment, another event loaded with excitement. But when something as awful as pre-pubescent rape is used in such a wanton manner I find it often obscene and always unnecissary. This is not to condemn all manner of illicit sexual writings, just ones that use such loaded concepts for such cheap aims. It is also, weak and beneath an artist.
As to whether Kay's best works have accomplished the "unseen" in fantasy, in the form of decent prose I must strenuously object. Even the modern dismissal of Lewis and Tolkein--in large part due to their politics and popularity--I would think any student of prose must be impressed with LeGuin, Chesterton, Crowley and even Gene Wolff. All of them--though LeGuin seems of the group the most concerned with substance over style--maintain a level of quality comparable with the highest standards of quality.
I have refrained from bogging down my thoughts with the essential "in my opinion" and hope that the fact that I am writing this makes clear that all of the above is just that.
Historically accurate? Please, show me where - I feign to see the "historical accuracy" in anything there - if we are to take the setting as The War of the Roses, than the warfare is anachronistic - Longbow was the way to go, not heavy cavalry - the Knight errand of the medieval imagination was all but replaced as the main bulk of the army by then - or better yet, the sexual morals which, having done some research into the subject, can be dismissed as anachronistic, and almost entirely a product of Martin's imagination too.
As for my statement about something "unseen" - that was largely hyperbole - I have praised the work of other fantasy authors at various points - I guess I just got carried away in the argument.
On another note, I think this whole concept of "round" fantasy, that is, fantasy without good or bad as something problematic - ultimately there is a good and bad, it is just hidden in its engagement with the audience. The removal of the world implies some necessity, or at least desire from removal - if the world is reflecting this urge of relocation, ultimately it must project an imprint that is a) readable, to an extent, meaning it tells a story people would choose to read, and b) marketable, meaning it tells a story that has the potential of an audience that can make decent money (otherwise we wouldn't all know about it).
In that sense, the removal of Martin's world acts as a means of carrying out a fantasy - one which seeks out the facets of this world, for whatever reasons - be they aesthetic or political. The moralizing then is, if we say that there is no definite good and bad, transferred to the reader, who, by cheering when the prepubescent girls are raped, or shouting when one character is killed, or another not killed ends up being part of that moralizing feature - the fact that there is a desire to read the book implies there is some subjectivity in the reading - it is impossible to escape good and bad, as, ultimately, the reader will decide if it is not obviously spelled out for them - neutrality isn't exactly possible given the nature of the diegetic removal.
In that sense, I don't think it is too big a stretch to suggest that the book invites a sort of rape fantasy - if it itself is not moralizing, the desire to rape - the urge to portray a sort of landscape filled with rape and murder, and forced prostitution - is made all the more disturbing. This isn't Atwood where the moral, or stance of the text is defined - As you put it, everything in Martin is supposedly "Grey", how then can we view an anachronistic portrayal of sexual violence? Can we take it as being part of a "desire" by Martin to have little girls raped in his books? Or a desire of the reader to read about little girls getting raped - either way, the diegesis reflects a fantastical vision of a rather disturbing rape fantasy - it perhaps "aestheticizes" violence against women as a form of entertainment - I think morally such a thing needs to be commented on - why is it that there is so much rape and violence against women in the text? Why is it that the characters are grey? why is it that the book is constructed to portray these things, and how does that fit into marketing?
If we look at other rape sequences in fantasy literature, perhaps we can come up with some other, although still strange, conclusions.
Goodkind is probably the king of rape fantasy fiction - I didn't read too far in his series, but I don't think there was one major female character who is not brutally raped somehow throughout the text - even some of the male characters get thrown to these weird dominatrix-rapist types - the landscaping of his world seems intent on creating an obscure dystopia for some strange political reasons - the actual rape is more commonplace than almost any other event besides dialogue - here we have a world constructed out of violence, and rape, with a sort of hazy political, anti-communist message tied in. What do we make of that then? What is the significance of the landscape in telling a story?
Another strange example is Thomas Covenant (we'll take the first one, since I doubt anybody besides a true devotee to fantasy could go further) by Stephen R. Donaldson. What is the meaning of the rape at the beginning of the text? What does it signify - well, ultimately it is perpetuating a political impression based on the workings of our world. The fact that the book opens in our world suggests an intended meaning to the removal from the realistic plain into the fantasy - the rape then acts, I would argue, as the rape of the fantasy world itself - the world is open, and almost unreal in its existence, and the anti-heroic hero comes in, and does what he wants to it - he is unable to moralize, and is intended to show the weakness of our species, in that, perhaps, some of us aren't able to come to the right decision - still, I know many people who found the scene to be disturbing, and offputting (though, the terrible prose could have facilitated that). How then do we read the text? Well, that is another matter.
JBI, let me begin by saying I agree with you on most of your points, specifically those associated with the troublesome preoccupation with rape and other sexual abuses. Also, I find myself largely alone among my peers in agreeing with your view of morality in fantasy. My main qualm is a feeling that things are brought in for marketing purposes, or as a clumsy plot device. As I said, this type of usage is obscene and immoral.
I completely understand your hyperbole regarding the prose, no harm done.
As far as historical accuracy, I meant not so much perfect coordination between his world and ours, but a sense that things were organic within the cast rather than driven by the authors plan. Many times surprising, main characters are killed in a very unglorified, even "offstage" manner. Rather than following the formula of good losing every battle until the end--in which they are hopelessly outnumbered--and then winning soundly, I NEVER knew going in who would win. In the middle of a book would be a battle where we'd find out the anagonists were absolutely trounced. This as opposed to someone like Robin Hobb, who seems to give the protagonist no success until the last chapter. It always seemed like Martin flipped a coin to see who won battles and just wrote on the back of fate.
I've read the first two books. I hated the head-hopping which each chapter (combined with short chapters) and the treatment of women. Whenever I got into one person's story he would change the perspective so that I had to spend three or four pages reading against my will untill I became interested in this persons story, and then he would change it again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandi
Martin was portraying a misogynistic world for the sake of it. Because he could, because it sells, because it's fantasy and escapism and he could fall on that sword. He wasn't saying anything important about the treatment of women, he was just describing it.
I think it's poor. But remember that this man can write what he wants.
Did JBI just seriously argue that Martin's work is primarily a rape fantasy, despite the fact that if you brought together all the sexual content and rape scenes at best it would only make up perhaps four chapters of material from a four book series with 500+ pages in each book? And I don't remember the story ever directly depicting a non-consensual rape. There were scenes where the power differences made the sexual engagement questionable, but I don't remember any scene where they depict a completed rape in detail, challenging the titillation hypothesis, and pretty much confirming that most the sexual content is there to complete the "realist" aesthetics of violence as a critique of the fantasy genre's often sanitized violence, and to add another commentary on power dynamics, which is one of the main themes of the story (reason for its inclusion).
The multiple female POV characters (Arya, Sansa, Cersei, and Brienne) that directly comment on the misogyny of their world and restrictions on them as women, completely invalidates JBI's comments that one cannot discern Martin's POV on those issues like one could in Atwood's work. If he wasn't trying to comment on the misogyny of his world there would be no need for these characters whose decisions and desires directly pit them against that misogyny and who directly comment on it during their POVs.
JBI's analysis also confuses what is meant by "grey" characters. They are grey characters because their are many angles to what makes them tick, they have reasons for their behavior, but most importantly of all they are not by essence evil or good (this last point is the crux of the matter). That doesn't mean some of their deeds aren't immoral. To de-sexualize the content, trying to murder an eight-year-old by pushing him off the window sill is clearly immoral. Funny, no one is declaring that people get off on Bran falling and crippling himself, and it's really a child abuse fantasy or a disability fantasy. Having grey characters doesn't mean there are no moral issues; it just means they're more complex, and right and wrong isn't as easy to separate from each other, not that there is no right or wrong at all, hence the misreading.
So I will agree with one point that JBI makes, that the story invites a rape fantasy for certain readers. Usually very unsophisticated readers.
I was looking through old posts of mine and stumbled on to this, one of my first real debates on LitNet (one I executed quite poorly, I see now). Since this took place, I've grown a lot as a reader and appreciator of literature. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire still ranks as my favorite books.
Reading over this thread, the accusation that I most disagree with now is that Martin's prose and diction are poor (the pro-rape argument just seems silly, now). Just false.
Anyways, just bumping this to see if anyone has anything to say on the series. I'm really looking forward to the HBO adaptation; it looks really good. I just hope Martin actually finishes his series before he keels over.
Why would he finish it now? His check's already cleared.
Yet, he continues to work on a ton of other projects. I think the guy just has the worst case of writer's block imaginable. I mean seriously it's been five freaking years since the last one and he supposedly had half the book already done five years ago (in his decision to split A Feast of Crows and the long-awaited Dance of Dragons)!Quote:
Originally Posted by mortalterror
The fifth book is a bit overdue, it's been five years since the last one was published and Martin is tight lipped about his progress on the most recent one.
Edit: I wouldn't be surprised if he pulled a Robert Jordan though.
That's what I'm saying. He's got FU money now and can do whatever he wants, which doesn't include finishing this series. Meanwhile, HBO just drove another truckload of cash up to his house and dumped it on his lawn. You'll notice incidentally that the title of the series is A Game of Thrones, NOT A Song of Ice and Fire. If we get lucky and they pick up the series for sequential seasons he doesn't have to write another book for at least four years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drkshadow03
I think he's written himself into a deep hole, which he's pretty much admitted, calling his current process unraveling a great "Knot," or something of the like. He's created such a complicated story, he doesn't know where to go. Or, maybe he realizes he doesn't have the ability to write a satisfactory ending, for him or his fans.
I'm still hopeful that it will be finished, though. After-all, more books means more cash. Plus, I would be surprised if there isn't a desire to see his project through. I am prepared, though, to not get an ending.
Maybe. I think Mutatis has it right, though, and it's probably a bad case of writer's block. This was probably his most ambitious project to date in that previously all his novels have been single books, not 500-1000+ page multi-book monstrosities. He's probably stuck for that reason. It's like nothing he's ever written previously, and he has plenty of money to do what he feels like without worrying about putting food on the table.Quote:
Originally Posted by mortalterror
Supposedly he's almost done with the next book. Rumor has it he only needs to finish 5 more chapters.
It's a great series. I hope he gets around to finishing it. I stumbled onto the first one and recommended it to my brother. We both eagerly awaited the next publication. This one has been a long time coming.
He's a good writer. I was impressed by the quality in Fevre Dream.
Yes, Fevre Dream is excellent.
And Drkshadow has it right in that this is completely different than anything he's written. All of his other stories, long and short, usually follow only a couple characters and have a strict beginning-middle-end structure, which ASOIAF definitely doesn't have,
And, I too heard the five-chapter thing a few months ago. I'm hesitant to put any stock on his updates concerning progress, haha.