-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
OK nerds, you win. Song of Ice and Fire is gud.
- Thread starter Stinkles
- Start date
- Status
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
Dali said:I was going to wait until I was a bit further along through the series before posting, but since someone's bumped this thread I guess I'll say this now. I started about a week ago and now I'm about 3/4 through the second book and so far my thinking is Song of Ice and Fire is not gud and I hate every last one of you bastards in this thread.
Maybe my problem is I keep comparing it to the vastly superior Wheel of Time series. WoT juggles equal parts action, magic, fantasy creatures and political intrigue all at once, creating a perfectly paced (well... sometimes more perfectly paced than others) fantasy epic. A Game of Thrones was just like WoT... minus the action, magic, and fantasy creatures. Yeah... it's basically all fucking political positioning. Who the fuck cares about the boring plans and ambitions of these people in a pretty boring and fantasy-less, fantasy land? The last maybe ten pages you finally get something that leads you to believe all the crazy shit that's hinted at here and there will be a bit more prominent in the second book. Wrong! Well, if the first 80% of Clash of Kings is anything to go by, that is. Wait, I take that back... It is a bit more prominent, but this shit is getting tedious.
I'm going to finish the series as I'm halfway through and it's been quick reading so far. Right now, I'd rate it at "bleh" (one step below "meh"), but I feel like it's just developing really... really... really slow and the last book could possibly be worth reading.
But know this: All of you guys ITT are on the list for talking this shit up.
I could hug you man. What's worse for me is the fact that this should be right up my alley. It's well written, it's fantasy, there isn't a Mary Sue character is site...but fuck. They could all be congressmen for all the ties to the fantasy world they supposedly inhabit.
EDIT: Except for the WoT thing. That series went nowhere...slowly. And Rand = biggest Mary Sue who ever Mary Sued.
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
Dali said:
:lol
...when you think about it, that's a kind of power.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Dali said:I was going to wait until I was a bit further along through the series before posting, but since someone's bumped this thread I guess I'll say this now. I started about a week ago and now I'm about 3/4 through the second book and so far my thinking is Song of Ice and Fire is not gud and I hate every last one of you bastards in this thread.
Maybe my problem is I keep comparing it to the vastly superior Wheel of Time series. WoT juggles equal parts action, magic, fantasy creatures and political intrigue all at once, creating a perfectly paced (well... sometimes more perfectly paced than others) fantasy epic. A Game of Thrones was just like WoT... minus the action, magic, and fantasy creatures. Yeah... it's basically all fucking political positioning. Who the fuck cares about the boring plans and ambitions of these people in a pretty boring and fantasy-less, fantasy land? The last maybe ten pages you finally get something that leads you to believe all the crazy shit that's hinted at here and there will be a bit more prominent in the second book. Wrong! Well, if the first 80% of Clash of Kings is anything to go by, that is. Wait, I take that back... It is a bit more prominent, but this shit is getting tedious.
I'm going to finish the series as I'm halfway through and it's been quick reading so far. Right now, I'd rate it at "bleh" (one step below "meh"), but I feel like it's just developing really... really... really slow and the last book could possibly be worth reading.
But know this: All of you guys ITT are on the list for talking this shit up.
Sounds like you like your super powerful magic all up front and in your face-style. That's not what ASoIaF is about. It doesn't claim to be so, and the books wouldn't be nearly as popular, or good, as they are if they were like that.
The fantasy genre is plagued with series where all-powerful magic is all too prominent. The fact that insane "OMG WTF badassery" doesn't occur every couple of pages like a Steven Erikson novel is what makes ASoIaF a little more grounded, believable, and enjoyable.
i_am_ben
running_here_and_there
Zefah said:
ironically, whenever magic is shown in ASoIF it's incredibly overpowered and cheap.
I also prefer WoT more as well. Everyone keeps talking about the political nature of ASoIF and how that makes the books so good but i'm honestly I'm yet to be impressed. Its more soap opera than political.
Dali said:I was going to wait until I was a bit further along through the series before posting, but since someone's bumped this thread I guess I'll say this now. I started about a week ago and now I'm about 3/4 through the second book and so far my thinking is Song of Ice and Fire is not gud and I hate every last one of you bastards in this thread.
Maybe my problem is I keep comparing it to the vastly superior Wheel of Time series. WoT juggles equal parts action, magic, fantasy creatures and political intrigue all at once, creating a perfectly paced (well... sometimes more perfectly paced than others) fantasy epic. A Game of Thrones was just like WoT... minus the action, magic, and fantasy creatures. Yeah... it's basically all fucking political positioning. Who the fuck cares about the boring plans and ambitions of these people in a pretty boring and fantasy-less, fantasy land? The last maybe ten pages you finally get something that leads you to believe all the crazy shit that's hinted at here and there will be a bit more prominent in the second book. Wrong! Well, if the first 80% of Clash of Kings is anything to go by, that is. Wait, I take that back... It is a bit more prominent, but this shit is getting tedious.
I'm going to finish the series as I'm halfway through and it's been quick reading so far. Right now, I'd rate it at "bleh" (one step below "meh"), but I feel like it's just developing really... really... really slow and the last book could possibly be worth reading.
But know this: All of you guys ITT are on the list for talking this shit up.
Your basic complaint - which isn't a criticism so much as a statement of preference about the amount of magic you want in your pussy books - says you simply want to be pacified with the horrific writing and characterization of Wheel of Time, where huge segments of books are taken up by the mundane comings and goings of characters who have little to no consequence who have powers we don't care about since everyone has them.
There are plenty of horrible books where everybody wields wands and casts cute spells while everyone is so used to the idea of magic. Song of Ice and Fire is not one of those.
It's a seething political drama influenced by The Wars of the Roses, and its potency is derived from the fact that everyone in this world lives in a time when magic and other such fantastical beings are assumed thousands of years gone by, and all that is left is the cold and hard scheming of brutal tyrants.
Of course, this concept wouldn't work the way it does unless the build up to the increase of fantasy elements wasn't there. The books elegantly pace the appearance of magic and fantasy, so that when it comes, it's shocking, almost wonderful. There's a suspense there that is like the way Spielberg kept Jaws hidden from view for so much of his movie. We know, based on all we hear, that magic is out there... that it's growing larger, more dangerous. Users who before were tricksters are suddenly performing more amazing feats. The creation of Wildfire is suddenly incredibly more efficient among the alchemists. And somewhere out there, the Others sweep across a land causing an exodus. And dragons are seen for the first time in a hundred years.
If you want your pussy books where everything is spelled out in some retarded whimsy, you have them. But to call Wheel of Time "vastly superior" suggests everyone should from here out safely ignore any and all of your suggestions, since it assumes your absurd necessity to be pampered by shit concepts, not quality words.
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
...that was unnecessarily harsh, wasn't it? Also, am I missing something, RE: 'pussy' books?
i_am_ben
running_here_and_there
hamchan said:
I think ASOIAF relies heavily on twists and bombshells.
I also think the politics are dumbed down. Politics is tedious and and like ramming your head against a brick wall over and over and over again (just check out poligaf :lol ). In ASOIAF whilst things don't always go to plan they seem incredibly easy to implement which just isn't what happens in real life.
In WOT (because who doesn't love controversial comparisons that annoy people?) many people criticise the amount of time spent on minor nobles and tier 3 characters but the detailed nature of Jordan's writing allows him to capture the tediousness of politics far better than Martin does.
Also the penultimate Wheel of Time book is out in just a few days! yesssssssss
I was going to reply to Dali, but Amix0r already beated the bejesus out of it :lol
Talking seriously, you sound like the kind of guy that likes Dragonforce: bloated, in your face, and baroque. The awesomeness of ASIOFAF is precisely the subelty of everything. If you are constantly using magic, even for wipping your ass, guess what? Magic stop being magic and turns into a mundane element. Same goes with badassery, and same goes with honour. When you make all these 3 elements scarce, they shine way more brightly once they appear.
Also, political gameplay is exactly what makes these books vastly supèrior to the general retarded, simpleton "good vs evil" formula that plages the genre. Because guess what? In the real world, people, human people like you and me moves by personal interest and people rarely, if ever acts out of sheer evil of goodness, which is why so many people dismiss this genre: not because the fantasy itself, but rather because the reactions and motives of the characters are impossible to believe.
If you want a good deal of supernatural elements treated in a proper, realistic manner, try with The Witcher books (Chronicles of Geralt the Rivian).
About the Wheel of Time, I readed the first book and I never got what the fuss was about. It was an average book and formulaic as hell. Oh, a golden age of light and ancient technologically advanced civilization destroyed by darkness, and a hero inhabiting a small, pintoresque countryside town *yawn* does it gets better on the latter books or is it still cliche filled as the first one?
Talking seriously, you sound like the kind of guy that likes Dragonforce: bloated, in your face, and baroque. The awesomeness of ASIOFAF is precisely the subelty of everything. If you are constantly using magic, even for wipping your ass, guess what? Magic stop being magic and turns into a mundane element. Same goes with badassery, and same goes with honour. When you make all these 3 elements scarce, they shine way more brightly once they appear.
Also, political gameplay is exactly what makes these books vastly supèrior to the general retarded, simpleton "good vs evil" formula that plages the genre. Because guess what? In the real world, people, human people like you and me moves by personal interest and people rarely, if ever acts out of sheer evil of goodness, which is why so many people dismiss this genre: not because the fantasy itself, but rather because the reactions and motives of the characters are impossible to believe.
If you want a good deal of supernatural elements treated in a proper, realistic manner, try with The Witcher books (Chronicles of Geralt the Rivian).
About the Wheel of Time, I readed the first book and I never got what the fuss was about. It was an average book and formulaic as hell. Oh, a golden age of light and ancient technologically advanced civilization destroyed by darkness, and a hero inhabiting a small, pintoresque countryside town *yawn* does it gets better on the latter books or is it still cliche filled as the first one?
WanderingWind said:
Truth is sometimes harsh. Nothing unnecessary about it. Coming into a thread to bitch "WAH WAH THIS BOOK DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH MAGIC, EVEN THOUGH THAT'S LITERALLY THE POINT" is about as farcical a criticism can be. It says far more about the person saying it than the book he attempts to smear.
RE: Pussy books -
Books like Harry Potter and Wheel of Time, where moral consequences are bled in the shade of BLACK AND WHITE, where there is no such thing as nuance and subtlety; where the writing quality could at best be described as "serviceable" and at worst "fucking garbage around the level of a seventh grade yuri fanfiction writer."
cmonmanreally
Member
meh, so i pretty much blazed through the first three books over the summer, and now im about 200 or so pages into a feast for crows and for whatever reason, i can't seem to want to continue. it's weird because i'm actually really enjoying the way martin is writing in this book, but i've had this book for the past two months and i'm only reading half a chapter every other night, if that.
it gets better right?
it gets better right?
cmonmanreally
Member
Amir0x said:
haha you're right. i like the characters enough, but i think my main problem right now is that i'm not exactly sure what's going on. or i do, but things are just moving at a very slow pace, (not that it didn't at some points in the previous books).
i_am_ben said:
This is just a theory, but maybe that has something to do with the fact that the government in ASoIaF is an unstable feudal monarchy rather than a two-party representative democracy.
As Amirox mentioned, the series is largely modeled on the War of the Roses - a real historical period - that was full of all sorts of dramatic political intrigue.
i_am_ben
running_here_and_there
Ikael said:
Although not your point, in addition to human squabbles, ASOIAF is still a good vs evil book. I'm not sure if i've said so here but i'm curious to see how martin handles the move from human squabbles to the war with the others. It could be a very very interesting time on message boards :lol
yeah wheel of time changes dramatically. The tone of the book changes substantially from the first and then keeps on evolving.
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
Amir0x said:
You're really taking this a bit too personal, I think. Maybe you and Dali have some sort of back history or something, but I really don't see how you got any of that from what he said. It's completely valid to say, "This isn't my type of fantasy book," which is how I took what he said. He didn't say they were crap - though comparing them to WoT sort of implies that lulz - he said it was mostly political positioning. Which it absolutely is, as the people who are supporting it are saying.
Also, it's a bit odd to start in with "pussy books." I mean...come on. You're acting like a Whedon fan who just heard somebody say they didn't like Firefly or something.
i_am_ben
running_here_and_there
tokkun said:
Politics didn't start becoming tedious with the move to representative democracy.
and why does the war of the roses thing get focused on so much? :lol people constantly mention it and im perplexed as to why. All fantasy takes things from history (often shamelessly) and yet i've never seen it brought up so much as it is with ASOIAF and the war of the roses. Is it just because it's not taught in American schools that it gets so much focus?
PhoenixDark
Banned
Great way to put it.Amir0x said:
I can see why someone wouldn't like the pace and lack of magic, but as someone who has read a lot of fantasy it hit me with such a breath of fresh air I was blown away. Often a fantasy epic's best moments might be a huge battle or the aftermath of some action scene, yet my favorite moments throughout this series are quite action-less. Conversations, schemes being revealed, character development, etc. The political intrigue is right up my alley.
Interestingly it seems like the second half of the series is going to be quite fantasy/magic driven compared to the first half. It's impossible for me to doubt Martin at this point, but I'm definitely interested in seeing how things change.
PrivateWHudson
Member
RE: WOT vs ASOIAF
I'm almost finished the third ASOIAF book and am current on the WOT series.
Rand
was so much better than
.
was so obvious between
you knew some shit was going to go down. The action was a whole of three pages, so all it had going for it was the bombshell factor which was just not that surprising.
I like both series for what they are, but WOT feels much more epic. It has more problems than ASOIAF, but if you skim a bit here and there it has more gems as well.
I'm almost finished the third ASOIAF book and am current on the WOT series.
Rand
getting out of the box
The Red Wedding
The Red Wedding
the wolf trying to attack, and the hot wife
I like both series for what they are, but WOT feels much more epic. It has more problems than ASOIAF, but if you skim a bit here and there it has more gems as well.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
i_am_ben said:
Lancaster and York.
Lannister and Stark.
WanderingWind said:
Sorry, truth is the truth. I don't pussyfoot around for the rainbow-and-unicorn set.
However, even to your point, it's false.
"He didn't say they were crap."
Dali said:
Opposite of "gud" is "bud", or in this case, "not gud" = "bad."
Selective reading hurts Wandering. I hope we don't have to get into semantics about the relative severity of the word 'crap' versus 'bad.'
Dali said:
LULZ
Dali said:
And as I said, his criticism is farcical - it says more about him then the book. He couldn't even call people out properly.
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
Amir0x said:
...again, it's not really brave to "call somebody out" over having a differing opinion on reading material. "ASOFAI isn't good" "WELL GO BACK TO YOUR PUSSY HARRY POTTER PUSSY BOOKS."
If you can't see how you completely overreacted, than I think we're done here. I'm not about to get in a pissing match with somebody who gets so offended over the notion that somebody might like Fantasy Series A over Fantasy Series B. Even if "B" in this case is WoT and really ought to be "Z."
Just to make it clear, while I find Martin to be a fantastic writer, he does tend to get too far into the drier side of politics. As to what I really think of WoT -
-I find them patently ridiculous and drawn out about, oh, 7 books too long.me from some other thread said:
TestMonkey
Member
Amir0x said:
SoFaI is guilty of this also. After the first book the lines are fairly well drawn. Martin attempts to give his rogues weepy backgrounds in order to make the reader believe they aren't that bad. This doesn't work for serial killers and it doesn't work for fictional characters. Probably the only modern fantasy that I've read that goes away from this is Joe Ambercombie.
TestMonkey said:
All the characters in this fucking novel are just shades of gray, all of them. About the only one who I've seen that isn't completely corrupted in SOME way (so far) is Brienne, and even then... she has clear character flaws that make her interesting.
None of the characters are all good. None of them are all bad (well, ok, one or two of them are pretty all bad... that one that raped the young girl in front of her father and then demanded change because she wasn't worth the full price... fucked up :lol)
Count of Monte Sawed-Off
un33dab@dpu$$y
Amir0x said:
The Mountain is so fucking awesome.
cant wait til its finally revealed that Jon is the son of Lyanna Stark and Rhaegar Targaryen, and him and his *edit* aunt will join forces to defeat the evil Others and Wights, and the Song of Ice and Fire will be complete, and as generic as anything in other fantasy
will be fun to see Amirox try to spin that
will be fun to see Amirox try to spin that
Count of Monte Sawed-Off
un33dab@dpu$$y
zeroshiki said:
I'm hoping he has the ability to spit Oberyn's poison into peoples' eyes.
TestMonkey
Member
Amir0x said:
Come on now. Eddard Stark and Jon Snow are about as white knight as I've seen in fiction. As for all the other characters being grey I call bullshit. Please explain to me the redeeming qualities of Joffrey. Better yet try to show how all the fucked up shit Tyrion does makes him a good guy and no wussing out by claiming his deformity or childhood made him do it.
TestMonkey said:
All of the characters, no matter how small, have sinned. Jon Snow's specific excursion with the free peoples was mired with grays; it is not altogether certain he made the right choice either by first going with the free peoples, and then after - even after seeing they are often good people with a high spirit - going to war against them. There's no right answers in the Song of Ice and Fire. Where you might say he "had no choice", that does not excuse one from the consequences of those actions.
Eddard Stark had a bastard, slaughtered many mercilessly in his rebellion with Robert, etc. His "honor" seems positively angelic versus some of the characters in the book, but he was not perfect. That's what makes these characters interesting.
TestMonkey said:
Tyrion is the ultimate gray character. That's the point. He is not a "good guy" or a "bad guy" - he can be extremely kind to people who he feels have been given a false play (Sansa, for example, in his refusal to bed her), and he can be extremely cruel when he wants to protect himself (in the killing of the singer merely for knowing his secret. Even though the singer DID try to bribe him).
Joffrey is but a child, so it's hard to really see him as anything BUT a product of his surroundings - which were, as he was raised, an extremely loveless family where he was regularly beat by Robert and was taught that cruelness and scheming was the way of the world. Children often have a far simpler sense of 'right' and 'wrong', so it doesn't shock me that his character was slightly more 'broad strokes' then some of the others who had time to grow up and develop as men.;
Amir0x said:
Yep, that's about right. Even if the Starks tend to be the good guys, and you basically root for them throughout the books, they often venture into knight templar territory (
Arya killing the deserter is a good example
One of the few things that annoyed was the Joffrey/Tommen pure evil/pure innocence dichotomy. A tad too simplistic, though I've seen it happen in real life.
edit: as for Ned,
I don't think Jon is his son - and given the countless theories I've read, that's not a novel idea.
The one thing that gave an edge to Joff's character was
Jon Snow though... I will agree that he's one of the most outright goody-good characters in the series, which also makes him one of the least interesting to follow. I always find it baffling that he's such a fan favorite.
. Mostly the Jon chapters are interesting because of the events happening around him, not because of the man himself. I always thought of him as this universe's Tintin. Sort of. Characters like Tyrion, Cersei and Jaime can carry chapters with nothing but vicious dialogue and insights into their mind. I like them more.
him being responsible for Bran's assassination attempt, thinking this was what his father would do. Joff was an intensely vile and cruel piece of shit kid, but he was always seeking approval and attention from his equally piece of shit father.
Jon Snow though... I will agree that he's one of the most outright goody-good characters in the series, which also makes him one of the least interesting to follow. I always find it baffling that he's such a fan favorite.
I didn't miss his POV one bit while reading FFC
hamchan said:
But not every character has to be, either, as long as it's logical. Sam was a rejected wuss all of his life and even when he's accepted by his fellow Watch members he's
broken his vows and is just following orders from Jon, Aemon or Marwyn... not much of a chance for being black or white there
Thaedolus
Gold Member
Amir0x said:
Not so sure about that, right? I think the case against Ned is more along the lines that he was blinded by his honor, or at least the facade of it. He was too concerned with always doing the right thing that he always made that choice over the wise choice. So I think yes, Ned may be a great example of a "white knight" character in ASoIaF, however I think Martin illustrates quite plainly with Ned's fate at the end of A Game of Thrones, and how the Starks end up by the end of A Storm of Swords, the merit of blindly following your honor. The Starks seem like they could've used a little bit more of a self-serving patriarch, if you ask me. But then if that were the case, I guess they wouldn't be the Starks.
TestMonkey
Member
He had a horrible childhood so it's okay that he's a serial killer but on the inside he's a good person. You really believe that line? Charles Manson was an avid supporter of environmental causes so you can excuse the whole serial killer thing? There are only three excuses for killing another person: self-defense, defense of another or in armed combat. Eddard participated in the revolution because
Tyrion killed
because he was being weepy.
Aerys executed his father and brother and demanded his head before the conflict started.
his father and former lover
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll