Ehh.
There are some astonishingly bad descriptions in the early books where the cliches become overwhelming and it just turns to genre shock, but he is excellent at structure and some of the dialogue is worthy of much better books.
He really can do engaging politics, which is a gift few writers have, let alone in fantasy.
The inverse of the descriptions is that in the early books he was much better at following the logic of events rather then trying to give the audience what it wants. By the end too many of the truly gruesome charterers were getting killed in various protracted ways that seemed to just be there for the set piece.
I have to admit to not having finished the last book, so i think im done. It was fun but it got too into developing it's setting then the actual stuff i was there for. Like homie IDGAF who John Snow's mother is. Give me more cutthroat politics in King's Landing.
>Like homie IDGAF who John Snow's mother is. Give me more cutthroat politics in King's Landing.
What? That's a main question you'd have after reading the first four or so chapters. Not like it matters, we already know the answer from fan theory + show confirmation, but still.
This is such a strange take. > Like homie IDGAF who John Snow's mother is.
This takes up maybe 0.001% of the entire plot, there's like two hundred more setups of similar importance. The reason you feel like it's a big focus is because fans actually DO care, and discuss this a lot.
I used to be very into ASOIAF so I take no pleasure in acknowledging that the man can only be called a failure; his life's work has come to nothing. Unfortunately for the anti-chuds, fantasy is the reactionary genre par excellence, and those who attempt to write it with a cynical spin inevitably come into conflict with the whole point of the genre itself. ASOIAF, like Elric and so many other lame fantasy series, lives for ever in the shadow of the Tolkien legendarium but instead of eclipsing it the series can only seethe impotently. If any of us were wise at the time, we would have had the foresight to see that this series never had a chance of being good after Ned died.
https://www.firstthings.com/article/2018/10/vice-and-fire
Of course, he is. Look, nobody has ever been able to compare to Tolkien in regard to medieval sword and sorcery fantasy epics. Nobody. You’d probably need a PhD in medieval history, literature, language, whatever to even come up with something approximately as inspired. Game of Thrones is nihilistic soap drama with swords and armor. It appeals to women.
>nihilistic
that's key. It's not a world anyone wants to return to, least of all its creator. Him not finishing it after making enough money to not give a shit is only natural and predictable.
I actually do have a PhD in medieval history, and I've dabbled a bit in prep work for a book. It's been helpful in the sense that one has a better grasp of plausibility and flavour but unhelpful in the sense that I lost touch with what normies could tolerate a long time ago. I'd like my book to focus primarily on day-to-day government and politicking of petty courtiers, but I'm just not sure very many people would have a tolerance for that kind of thing. Tolkien didn't ruin fantasy, nor even Martin, but Gary Gygax sure did.
Yeah. I’m not sure that would be particularly popular. Have you read Laurus? It was written by a Russian medievalist, or maybe philologist specializing in medieval languages (I’m not sure). His book is basically about religion, not court politics. You can see how the former is something that people are really interested in a scholarly point of view but the latter maybe not so much. GRRM has been succesful but he’s not exactly scholarly. Sorry I don’t have better advice. Maybe you can do something scholarly but add your own sort of popular modern embellishments. I’m a little jealous of you to be honest. I’ve always wanted to study medieval studies but never did and I’m probably too old to do so. I think Tolkien should be the model personally. Do you want to write fantasy or medieval historical fiction?
Yes, I think you have probably hit the nail on the head. Despite the mass abandonment of God (maybe because of it?) there is a mass interest in religious or quasi-religious storytelling. I think we are living through a crisis of faith, and popular readers are looking to have their certainties reinforced in their fiction.
>Do you want to write fantasy or medieval historical fiction?
Neither, I am writing a fake chronicle. It is fantasy in that the world is made up, but it with entirely realistic attitudes and c. 13th century attitudes. I am also trying to mimic the particular lilt of Latin-English translation in the prose.
Ironically, GRRM did try this recently with some master thing about the Targs. It was dogshit, the man has never read a chronicle in his life.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Sorry for the phone-post, should say technology and attitudes.
books 1, 3 and 5 were good. 2 and 4 were okay. Just release the sixth book already!!!!!!
think of the books you could have read instead... in a human lifespan there isn't enough time to start to even get interested in trash like that
I have a shitty connection 🙁
Who is it? Houellebecq? DFW? Taleb?
grr martin
Nobody ever asked you to pretend he wasn‘t you delusional weirdo
>There is a giant wall protecting us from an upcoming cataclysmic winter
WHAT. A. HACK
Disagree
The Black Swan and Antifragile are solid reads
he writes genre fiction.
I'm only half a dozen chapters into AGOT and I already know this book is a masterpiece.
Ehh.
There are some astonishingly bad descriptions in the early books where the cliches become overwhelming and it just turns to genre shock, but he is excellent at structure and some of the dialogue is worthy of much better books.
He really can do engaging politics, which is a gift few writers have, let alone in fantasy.
The inverse of the descriptions is that in the early books he was much better at following the logic of events rather then trying to give the audience what it wants. By the end too many of the truly gruesome charterers were getting killed in various protracted ways that seemed to just be there for the set piece.
I have to admit to not having finished the last book, so i think im done. It was fun but it got too into developing it's setting then the actual stuff i was there for. Like homie IDGAF who John Snow's mother is. Give me more cutthroat politics in King's Landing.
>Like homie IDGAF who John Snow's mother is. Give me more cutthroat politics in King's Landing.
What? That's a main question you'd have after reading the first four or so chapters. Not like it matters, we already know the answer from fan theory + show confirmation, but still.
This is such a strange take.
> Like homie IDGAF who John Snow's mother is.
This takes up maybe 0.001% of the entire plot, there's like two hundred more setups of similar importance. The reason you feel like it's a big focus is because fans actually DO care, and discuss this a lot.
I used to be very into ASOIAF so I take no pleasure in acknowledging that the man can only be called a failure; his life's work has come to nothing. Unfortunately for the anti-chuds, fantasy is the reactionary genre par excellence, and those who attempt to write it with a cynical spin inevitably come into conflict with the whole point of the genre itself. ASOIAF, like Elric and so many other lame fantasy series, lives for ever in the shadow of the Tolkien legendarium but instead of eclipsing it the series can only seethe impotently. If any of us were wise at the time, we would have had the foresight to see that this series never had a chance of being good after Ned died.
https://www.firstthings.com/article/2018/10/vice-and-fire
I've read his novels multiple times. I really enjoy his style and the content since they tick most of my fantasy medieval needs.
The only thing I wish he could get better is understanding medieval warfare but it is what it is. Can't have it all and it's fine.
When you realise Elden ring is his magnum opus and not SOFAI
Of course, he is. Look, nobody has ever been able to compare to Tolkien in regard to medieval sword and sorcery fantasy epics. Nobody. You’d probably need a PhD in medieval history, literature, language, whatever to even come up with something approximately as inspired. Game of Thrones is nihilistic soap drama with swords and armor. It appeals to women.
>nihilistic
that's key. It's not a world anyone wants to return to, least of all its creator. Him not finishing it after making enough money to not give a shit is only natural and predictable.
this
I actually do have a PhD in medieval history, and I've dabbled a bit in prep work for a book. It's been helpful in the sense that one has a better grasp of plausibility and flavour but unhelpful in the sense that I lost touch with what normies could tolerate a long time ago. I'd like my book to focus primarily on day-to-day government and politicking of petty courtiers, but I'm just not sure very many people would have a tolerance for that kind of thing. Tolkien didn't ruin fantasy, nor even Martin, but Gary Gygax sure did.
Yeah. I’m not sure that would be particularly popular. Have you read Laurus? It was written by a Russian medievalist, or maybe philologist specializing in medieval languages (I’m not sure). His book is basically about religion, not court politics. You can see how the former is something that people are really interested in a scholarly point of view but the latter maybe not so much. GRRM has been succesful but he’s not exactly scholarly. Sorry I don’t have better advice. Maybe you can do something scholarly but add your own sort of popular modern embellishments. I’m a little jealous of you to be honest. I’ve always wanted to study medieval studies but never did and I’m probably too old to do so. I think Tolkien should be the model personally. Do you want to write fantasy or medieval historical fiction?
Yes, I think you have probably hit the nail on the head. Despite the mass abandonment of God (maybe because of it?) there is a mass interest in religious or quasi-religious storytelling. I think we are living through a crisis of faith, and popular readers are looking to have their certainties reinforced in their fiction.
>Do you want to write fantasy or medieval historical fiction?
Neither, I am writing a fake chronicle. It is fantasy in that the world is made up, but it with entirely realistic attitudes and c. 13th century attitudes. I am also trying to mimic the particular lilt of Latin-English translation in the prose.
Ironically, GRRM did try this recently with some master thing about the Targs. It was dogshit, the man has never read a chronicle in his life.
Sorry for the phone-post, should say technology and attitudes.
4th book is my favourite
he's filthy rich and I'm sick of pretenting you are too
Yeah no shit op imagine wasting your time reading this trash