posted
On Ned's death, yeah, maybe if I had had any interest in him as a character, it would have been engaging or even suprising. After the scene where he told the queen what he knew, I figured he had to die, otherwise, what intrige did exist would vanish. My reaction was sort of, "it's about time."
Twinky, I agree with the entire post (with the spoilers) up to, obviously, the stuff I haven't read. Feel free to recommend books at me.
And I think Xav is over reacting. I didn't hate the book, man, I just didn't get into it at all. If you want to talk about books I actually hated, you'll have to start a thread about...actually, last time it came up, I ended up writing a long apology to someone who took my hatred of that disgusting peice of crap personally, so I'll just not mention it again.
Tom, I have to agree that knowing what the series is about isn't a requirement. I still don't know what The Wasp Factory was about, but I certainly enjoyed reading it. (aside from the last chapter, which where he assumed his readers were idiots)
quote: I stopped reading the second book in the middle of a scene that was describing oral sex with more detail than I was comfortable with.
hmm...maybe I should read the second one.
Posts: 3956 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think there's anything wrong with celia and twinky's opinion here. I mean, not everyone gets into every book. It's just a fact of life, doesn't mean there's necessarily a flaw in the book or a flaw in the reader. Even if you think you're writing the greatest epic ever known to mankind (and I nominate A Song of Ice and Fire for precisely that honor), you must assume that a good thirty percent of the people in the world will detest it, and an even larger percentage won't care.
But, twinky and celia, I think you're getting the reactions you're getting because you're trying to cite specific features of these books as flaws, when for many of us, those exact features are the things we like the most. Like Ned Stark, for instance. You keep saying that George R. R. Martin didn't spend enough time with him to make you care when he died. Personally, I got really involved with his character the first time I spent time in his head. He's the kind of character that I am naturally drawn to, and it was my connection to his story that pulled me through the first section of the book.
So, what does that mean? That I'm a sucker and a dupe? That Martin didn't bother to develop the character, but I fell for it anyway? See, when you say, absolutely, that Martin failed to develop good characters, it makes me wonder what you must think of me
You don't always need to blame the author when you don't like a book, especially when you just don't like the KIND of book he's writing. That's like saying, I don't know, that Vienna Teng is a terrible songwriter when all you listen to is hip-hop. Well, duh, of course you don't like Vienna, then. Doesn't mean that she sucks or that she failed to write a good song. It just means that you're not in her audience.
But, that said, Xavier, they weren't actually going that far when this thread began. They were just saying that they didn't enjoy the books, and they were trying to articulate why. You know, reading a book because you like to get deeply involved with a single character doesn't make you stupid, and it doesn't mean you need to be spoonfed. It's just a preference, like any other. Celia and twinky enjoy getting a certain kind of intimate understanding of an individual when they read, they don't like getting distracted from it, and they don't get as swept up in grand, epic, world-sweeping plots. So these books probably aren't for them. You don't have to be insulting about it.
posted
I find that Martin does develop his characters and shows a great deal of complexity in them. He just does it over a longer time scale than most stories.
Remember, in the first three books alone he's written over 3000 pages--enough for between 7 and 15 regular novels. And he's just started! I can only guess how his characters will turn out in the end.
Tyron has become quite a complex character in these first three books, gaining my sympathy, empathy and disgust. He's a hero, but a questionable one.
But then, just about everyone in the story is.
You do have to keep all the characters sorted out in your head, which is quite a task in these novels. But like a good soap opera, you get involved in all of their stories, and so end with a richer experience, IMHO.
The only complaint I have about the series is that Martin keeps making each new book longer. For crying out loud, the first one was all ready too long!! I don't have the time for all these pages! Posts: 2473 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
bobble, that smilie combination is a spanking. if i just used the eek one, or if i ever at you, feel free to Yowza.
Posts: 3956 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess it shouldn't come as a surprise that the California Grape smilies are the most sexually explicit. Those crazy Californians.
Posts: 3243 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
So... amazon(uk) tells me that A feast for Crows will be released on Monday. Could it be true this time? I've been checking regularly. At the previous release dates, the date has been changed well before the actual date. Anyone with inside information? I'm reluctant to check the message boards, because I want to start the book fresh when it finally arrives, and it seems they all have been reading chapters released on the internet.
Someone in this thread mentioned lack of character development in the series. I can't agree with that. The change the characters undergo is one of the things that have really hooked me to these books. I started out hating Jamie Lannister. Now I find myself harboring some sympathy for him, and if he continues to change I might end up liking him and rooting for him. It's nice to know that it could happen for anyone
posted
(currently half way into the second book) I might actually come to like Jaime Lannister?! I think not, that man will never have my sympathy.
Then again, I said I'd never like Sansa after I found out she ratted out her father and thereby causing his death, but Xavier promised I would, and sure enough... I guess she's not so bad after all..
Posts: 2064 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know if this has come up, yet, because I'm only floating through this thread, but...
Has anyone else played the Fantasy Flight game based off of A Game of Thrones? I havn't read the book, but my Song of Ice and Fire-fanboy friend bought the game recently and it's one of the best board games I've played in a long time. I highly reccomend it, even if you know nothing about the storyline (like me).
Posts: 903 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, I agree, loads of character development here.
quote:(currently half way into the second book) I might actually come to like Jaime Lannister?! I think not, that man will never have my sympathy.
Then again, I said I'd never like Sansa after I found out she ratted out her father and thereby causing his death, but Xavier promised I would, and sure enough... I guess she's not so bad after all..
I didn't like either Sansa or Jaime at all in the beginning either but by the end of the third book (I am not quite sure precisely when since I have not read the books in a long time) I think began to take a liking to them. They're not perfect, but maybe not all that bad either.
That's the thing that makes me like this series so much- the realism and the uncertainty. I like how the characters are not clearly defined and not black and white. It's more real for me that there is no definate protagonist. It's more real for me that death is not something predetermined by their status (ie. hero and villain) and that every character has their own faults and attributes.
What is odd though, is that while many appeared to have enjoyed Tigana because of the character development, I disliked it because of its seemingly lack of character development to me.
Posts: 35 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I like the series so much simply because I have read so much fantasy it was starting to bore me. I have a very good library of over 800+ fantasy books, so for me to say I was getting tired of fantasy is quite a statement. I have been reading fantasy for 25 years, ever since I was bitten by the LOTR bug (The Hobbit, actually) at the age of 9. It is one of my favorite things, and I read several books a week.
However, even with the current glut of fantasy writing that has happened over the last 56 or so years (or perhaps because of the glut) I have felt my enthusiasm begin to wane. I still like reading, and I love to reread my favorites, but it all started to blur together.
Then along cam Martin, and he did things to me as a reader that I had not experienced in years. Main characters dying in the first book of a series? Impossible! How dare he...
Thank God he did. I woke up out of my apathy, ad began reading again. I found Octavia Butler, and Neal Stephenson, and a lot of writers I had ignored or not noticed, and found myself intrigued buy their writing styles.
Kay did the same thing for me 5-6 years ago. I was surprised by how fresh his ideas were, as opposed to the ho-hum D&D based books were, and he surprised me with each book. Now he doesn't surprise me as much, but I still enjoy his take on historical fantasy.
BtL, I found the Night Walkers to be one of the better chapters of Tigana, and as that is one of my favorite books of all time, that is saying a lot. I understand that the flow from chapter to chapter at time seemed to jar a bit, but I think it was due to the scope of the story. I love the way Kay includes both styles of stories we have been discussing; the Epic and the Personal. I like his characters, and care what happens to them for personal reasons. At the same time, they are caught up in these sweeping, world-changing events.
posted
I recently started reading the series and have been surprised at how much I enjoy it. You see, I can't put my finger on what exactly about it I like so much. If I were to tell someone: there's this series about some nobles and their intrigue and whatnot... there just doesn't seem to be anything all that special there.
But then I also feel that way about a certain anime series: Juuni Kokki, or Chronicle of 12 Kingdoms. (Based on a book or series, I think.) It is similar in that it is a story that brings in characters from a multitude of different places. And they keep bringing in new ones! Eventually I expect they bring in aspects of all 12 kingdoms. (I haven't got that far yet.)
While it starts with a clear protagonist, given time there is no longer any one clear protagonist. It also is about countries, and intrigue amongst rulers of kingdoms. Nothing all that special. And yet I *love* it more than any other anime series I have seen. (Not that I have seen all that many.) It feels so real in the same way that ASOIAF does.
So the whole multiple-character thing in ASOIAF didn't bother me. But then, I knew a lot about the series going into it. For instance, I knew from the start that a certain beloved character would die. I knew that there was no clear protagonist. Maybe that meant I was prepared to accept these things ahead of time. But then, for some reason the multiple-character thing doesn't strike me as all that odd or unique, just an alternate style that I already feel acustomed to. I have enjoyed it.
What does bug me is when authors take you up to some climactic event and then suddenly switch scenes without resolving that event. ARGH! Just when you are dying to know what will happen next, you are suddenly wisked off to something you have no interest in. I think it is their way of getting you to tolerate the boring parts because you are trying to get to the part you actually care about. Movies are guilty of this too. I don't think Martin has abused this, at least not enough for it to bother me.
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by twinky: Kay doesn't really count as fantasy, either.....
Raja, I'm curious--do you continue to believe this? It seems like to me like a puzzling assertion to make, and one that would require an incredibly restrictive definition of "fantasy".
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by twinky: After The Darkness that Comes Before, I've gone running back to Kay again (The Last Light of the Sun). And guess what? Chapter one is over, and I have myself at least one major character.
Edit: I'm glad I'm not the only one.
BTW, Kay is my favorite author, and I love all his books so far.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know what you're talking about, Tom. There's something about Kay's work that reminds me of what it's like being outside in the woods during a heavy snowfall, and I could see the quality that feels that way to me feeling boring to someone else.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I love his books. They are dense, and full of interesting scenes and great protagonists. I love how descriptive he can be too, and his interweaving of historical situations and fantasy.
Some of his books start slow, a bit, but he hasn't disappointed me once in all the years I have been reading him.
And he has a way of coming out with one sentence, or one phrase, that is so rich and complex that it changes the whole situation. I have had to put down a book of his after reading one of these sentences, because it evoked such emotion in me, in relation to the story, that I got the chills.
Not even Martin, as great as he is, has done that to me more than once or twice.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I liked Last Light of the Sun; was not a fan of Ysabel. I would put him in the tier below Martin, Erikson, Bakker, Mieville & Cook (to name a few).
Posts: 644 | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd probably put him in a subtier, just below Martin. If Martin were an A+, Kay would be a solid A, and would share that slot with Bakker. I'd probably put Cook in the B+ tier. I haven't read Erikson or Mieville, though I've been meaning to.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by twinky: Kay doesn't really count as fantasy, either.....
Raja, I'm curious--do you continue to believe this? It seems like to me like a puzzling assertion to make, and one that would require an incredibly restrictive definition of "fantasy".
As you know, my view of Bakker at least has completely inverted in the five years that have elapsed since this thread was last bumped. He's my favourite fantasy author by a healthy margin -- not just favourite fantasy author currently writing, but favourite period. I've also developed an appreciation for stories without clear protagonists.
Additionally, I haven't read or reread any Kay since Last Light (which left me a little bit disappointed). Ysabel didn't interest me, because it was set in the "real" world. So honestly, I haven't thought about where I file him mentally all that much.
I'm currently reading Glen Cook's Tyranny of the Night, which is "not quite historical Earth," or "historical Earth with the names changed and fantastical elements," in much the same way that a lot of Kay's writing is. I suppose I'd put Kay in similar territory: in the fantasy section, but over at the pseudo-historical end of it.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by twinky: As you know, my view of Bakker at least has completely inverted in the five years that have elapsed since this thread was last bumped.
Yeah, I know. It's interesting to see how much people's tastes change over that kind of a span of time.
quote:I've also developed an appreciation for stories without clear protagonists.
I wonder if you'd like ASoIF more now. I can't remember if you've read beyond the first book of that series. Have you?
quote:Additionally, I haven't read or reread any Kay since Last Light (which left me a little bit disappointed).
Am I misunderstanding you, or are you saying that you haven't read any Kay is at least five years? If I'm reading you right, it's kind of funny--I think of Kay as being one of "your" authors, because you introduced me to him (I think of Cook and Bakker the same way, but not Watts for some reason. I think I've recommended him to enough people that I think of him as "mine" now). If you reread any of his stuff I'd be interested to know if your perception of it/appreciation for it has changed at all.
quote: So honestly, I haven't thought about where I file him mentally all that much.
quote:Originally posted by twinky: Kay doesn't really count as fantasy, either.....
Raja, I'm curious--do you continue to believe this? It seems like to me like a puzzling assertion to make, and one that would require an incredibly restrictive definition of "fantasy".
As you know, my view of Bakker at least has completely inverted in the five years that have elapsed since this thread was last bumped. He's my favourite fantasy author by a healthy margin -- not just favourite fantasy author currently writing, but favourite period. I've also developed an appreciation for stories without clear protagonists.
Additionally, I haven't read or reread any Kay since Last Light (which left me a little bit disappointed). Ysabel didn't interest me, because it was set in the "real" world. So honestly, I haven't thought about where I file him mentally all that much.
I'm currently reading Glen Cook's Tyranny of the Night, which is "not quite historical Earth," or "historical Earth with the names changed and fantastical elements," in much the same way that a lot of Kay's writing is. I suppose I'd put Kay in similar territory: in the fantasy section, but over at the pseudo-historical end of it.
I thought Last Light was good, but not one of Kay's best works. I also wasn't interested in Ysebel at first, but he ties it in with the Finovarr books well, and while it was slow to start it was very, very good.
I'd love to read more about the main protagonist, he COULD be one of Kay's BEST creations in future stories.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read the Fionavar books as a teenager and wasn't really wowed by them. My favourites of Kay's are the ones where the story isn't overtly riffing on something else -- Tigana and the Sarantine books. Possibly Arbonne, I wouldn't know.
quote:Originally posted by Noemon:
quote:I've also developed an appreciation for stories without clear protagonists.
I wonder if you'd like ASoIF more now. I can't remember if you've read beyond the first book of that series. Have you?
No. It's one I'd consider revisiting, but not until it's finished. I'll probably just watch the HBO series instead.
quote:Originally posted by Noemon:
quote:Additionally, I haven't read or reread any Kay since Last Light (which left me a little bit disappointed).
Am I misunderstanding you, or are you saying that you haven't read any Kay is at least five years?
That's right. Ysabel came out after that, and I didn't read it. That said, I've thought a couple of times lately that he must be just about finished something, so I checked just now -- apparently his next book is due in the spring of 2010, and it looks like one I'll want to read.
quote:Originally posted by Noemon: If you reread any of his stuff I'd be interested to know if your perception of it/appreciation for it has changed at all.
I almost never reread. I don't even manage to replay video games that have branching plot paths. Too much in the queue!
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've actually just started A Song of Ice and Fire. I'm on page 560-something of A Game of Thrones. It's good.
It's also getting really painful. This is definitely not a happy story. I go and read parts of other books and am stricken by how much more cheery even a lot of the serious ones are.
Anyway, the novel's really detailed and interesting. I like it a lot.
Posts: 1577 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It's also getting really painful. This is definitely not a happy story.
Hee. Let me know if you can finish Game of Thrones without hurling it across the room at least once. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:If I can read more than a couple of hundred pages in a book (let alone more than five hundred, which was the case here) without being able to figure out who the main character is, I think there's something wrong with the book. Does anyone else find this as irritating as I do?
I haven't read the entire thread so forgive me if I'm repeating something. Books without a clear main character aren't in the least unusual. It seems like at least half of the books I've read recently don't have a single main character and have not suffered as a result. Here are a some examples of great books/stories that don't have an obvious main character Tale of Two Cities, Moonstone, Guerrilas, The Brother's Karamazov, War and Peace, Speaker for the Dead, Crossing to Safety, Grapes of Wrath, The Sound and the Fury, A Midsummer Night's Dream, The Princess Bride, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, I could go on and on.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Heh. This definitely sounds like it's in the catagory of "don't worry, it gets worse."
Anyway, I'm having fun. If by fun you mean watching all these characters I've grown to care about a little bit get totally, and irrevocably screwed.
I'm getting the feeling the fates/personalities of the direwolves is a huge reflection on the fate/personalities of the Stark kids, though.
Posts: 1577 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's a great series, one of my all time favorites. I have read a TON of fantasy, most of what is out there to be honest.
Old school and modern. It's my idea of a good time, curling up with a good series and reading all the way thought it. Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jon Boy: I was also annoyed by his inconsistent and obnoxious quasi-archaisms. What's up with "maester" and "ser"? Why use "gaoler" instead of "jailer"? And why does everybody need to say "would that I could" every other page?
Well, since I went through the trouble of reading this thread only to discover that it's a relic, I need to post something... so:
Gaol is not archaic, is is merely the British spelling of jail. And yes, Brits are weird, but it doesn't mean that they're archaic.
I use "would that" occasionally, but from my reading, it also appears to be more common in British English. I could be mistaken on this matter, though. In any case, it's a fun/pretty way of noting a subjunctive.
Posts: 2705 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
at you, feel free to Yowza.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
I guess she's not so bad after all..
