# George RR Martin Update on his site



## Dagger75 (Nov 7, 2004)

Before I post the link, I would like to remind to everyone about the rule of politics here.

www.georgerrmartin.com

EDIT Spelled the link wrong.


----------



## Fast Learner (Nov 7, 2004)

Without going into politics, I know well how tough it can be to be creative when real life is pressing on you. I hope he recovers soon.


----------



## Krieg (Nov 7, 2004)

Dagger75 said:
			
		

> Before I post the link, I would like to remind to everyone about the rule of politics here.




Perhaps it is a better idea to just not post links that feature someone whining about politics.


----------



## EricNoah (Nov 7, 2004)

Writing isn't like making something on an assembly line -- you do it as inspiration strikes.  I have confidence his muse will return in time.


----------



## EricNoah (Nov 7, 2004)

Krieg said:
			
		

> Perhaps it is a better idea to just not post links that feature someone whining about politics.



Yeah but there's also information on how the book is coming along, so it's appropriate -- though not necessary for us to discuss his (or our) political views.


----------



## Krieg (Nov 7, 2004)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> Yeah but there's also information on how the book is coming along, so it's appropriate -- though not necessary for us to discuss his (or our) political views.




It's just a pet peeve of mine when someone posts or links to something highly politicized and then adds a "no politics" disclaimer.

I know that wasn't D75's intent, just touched a personal nerve.

Feel free to ignore me for the rest of the thread. 

(I just want him to get the darn book done so GOO can finish up their RPG adaptation. lol)


----------



## KnowTheToe (Nov 7, 2004)

Nice excuse for writers block.

I just hope he finishes it in 2005.  At this point I am beginning to wonder how clear a vision he does have.  This book has more delays than rush hour in Boston.  I hate starting series of books when they are not finished.  When I started them I thought this was going to be a trilogy


----------



## takyris (Nov 7, 2004)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> Writing isn't like making something on an assembly line -- you do it as inspiration strikes.  I have confidence his muse will return in time.




Respectfully, I disagree.  You do it as inspiration strikes when it's your hobby, the thing you do to get away from the real world and escape for a little while into flights of fantasy.

If you want it to be the thing you do for a living, you're much better off treating it like a professional treats his job.

If I go to my boss and say, "Boss, I'm just not feeling the muse speaking to me today about the copy I'm supposed to produce for our newsletter, which needs to go out to the printer on the 16th so that it can come back by the 27th and then get out to the post office bulk mail department by the 30th," my boss will respectfully tell me to get my act together and produce the darn copy.  Or, if she's feeling charitable, she'll say, "Alright, then ditch that for today.  Instead, write up the new website article you were going to put together, and come back to the newsletter tomorrow."

I don't mean to be deliberately argumentative -- GRRM has enough money that he certainly isn't in danger of losing his home or anything.  He can afford to not write for the rest of his life, if he does not feel the pull of the muse.  But from a professional perspective, he's well past the "whetting our appetite" point and into the "people are moving on with their lives and might not pick it up when it does come out, or might have grown enough in the five-plus years that they will have issues they didn't have before" stage.  He's free to do so -- he's had a long and distinguished career, and it's not like he's seriously hurting himself by taking so long -- but this doesn't deserve the "oh, writing is art, and you can't put a timeline on art" speech, in my opinion.

I make time to write at night after getting home.  I sit my butt down and do it.  If the muse isn't there, I do it anyway.  If I physically can't, then I work on another scene, or another writing project.  And no, I don't have a zero percent failure rate, no argument there, but I'm doing it in addition to working a forty-hour-a-week job and having the requisite life stresses.

If my persistence combines with luck to the point where someday I don't need to work a day job, where writing *is* my day job, well, I'm fairly certain that even with liberties taken for beach days or Farscape marathons, I'll still be able to crank out without five year gaps between books.  I've cranked out three novels since reading the last GRRM book, and that's with moving twice, going through unemployment depression (and not writing), moving through several different jobs, working three part-time jobs simultaneously to help make ends meet, and supporting my wife through her pregnancy.  They ain't published as of yet, so the only difference between me and any other wannabe writer is that I've got three of them out there waiting to hit that jackpot -- but the difference between me and GRRM is that I'm actually completing my stuff.

Again, like I said -- GRRM is free to take five years to get things done, if the story he needs to tell demands that.  Good for him.  I can't wait until I've got people willing to defend me taking five-plus years to complete a novel when that's my day job.  But I think the myth of the muse serves to keep a lot of promising writing hobbyists as hobbyists instead of professionals.  It's a bad example to set.


----------



## Krieg (Nov 7, 2004)

Just keep in mind that Tacky wrote for the pulps in another life.


----------



## Dagger75 (Nov 7, 2004)

Krieg said:
			
		

> It's just a pet peeve of mine when someone posts or links to something highly politicized and then adds a "no politics" disclaimer.
> 
> I know that wasn't D75's intent, just touched a personal nerve.
> 
> ...




 I went to his site and saw update for Feast of Crows.  I was so happy.  I read it.  I know there a ton of people here love his books and thought they would like to see his update on the progress.  

 I know the content of some his stuff was taboo here and just thought I would mention it to nip any problems before they arose.  I didn't want to cause any arguments.

 I just want him to finish the darn books.


----------



## takyris (Nov 7, 2004)

Heck, Krieg, I write for the pulps in *this* life.    For the moment, anyway.


----------



## Nightfall (Nov 7, 2004)

I would write more but I'm stuck in a janitorial job, trying to get a SL game going, also working out ways to bring back SL...and maybe write something too.
(So far this Inuyasha fan fic has my attention. But only momentary.)


----------



## Lord Pendragon (Nov 7, 2004)

takyris said:
			
		

> but the difference between me and GRRM is that I'm actually completing my stuff.



Another difference is that his stuff sells.

Really.  Until you've got a few published works under your belt, I don't see how anything you say about the requirements of the craft can be taken seriously.


----------



## Dinkeldog (Nov 7, 2004)

Pendragon, Taky has published stuff. 

And as a (former professional) musician, I should point out that the difference between an amateur and a professional is that the professional gets paid.  There's no statement on ability or anything else.  The professional just gets paid.

Finally, [moderator hat on] please remember to consider other people and not be rude or sharp when it's not required.  Thanks. [moderator hat off]

Dinkeldog --Moderator


----------



## SableWyvern (Nov 7, 2004)

Yup. If you've read any of Tacky's stuff, or talked to him at length about writing, you'll find he's perfectly qualified to say what he said.

There's a big gap between someone who just talks about being a professional writer, and someone who acts like one. Takyris is the latter (although, not knowing any better, it's generally a fair bet to assume the former, so I can understand where Lord Pendragon was coming from).


----------



## takyris (Nov 7, 2004)

Good point, Pendragon.  My novel sale count is a big fat ol' ZERO.  So I could well be talking out of my butt.  Short story sales (of which I currently have 10) are well and good, but they're not going to get me out of the day job, so I shouldn't be casting aspersions.  Sorry for being snarky.

I'm not sure why I feel it necessary to come in and make the "writing is not a mystical thing -- hit your deadlines and act like a professional" speech in every GRRM thread.  I *like* the Song of Ice and Fire.  I like it a bunch.  I'll be buying the next one whenever it comes out.

So, next time a GRRM thread pops up, and somebody says, "It will get done when it gets done -- you can't rush art," I will do my best to shut up.


----------



## SableWyvern (Nov 7, 2004)

Hey, Tacky, no need to be so hard on yourself.

All you were doing was exhibiting frustration at what is, in most cases, a misunderstanding about how writers do their job. And, like I said, I think you're more than qualified to be making that sort of comment.

Besides, plenty of successful novelists (and writers of all descriptions) have said much the same thing.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Nov 7, 2004)

Well, whenever he gets it done, I'll still be frustrated because I'm waiting for the paperback version.  I have the others in paperback, and I like my collection to be consistent -- so an extra six-to-eight month wait for me. 

Aside -- I had know idea he was the author of "Sandkings".  That was a cool -- and rather disturbing -- story!


----------



## Alaric_Prympax (Nov 7, 2004)

Krieg and Dagger75 summed up my opinion as well.  I just want him to finish AFfC so I can read the book and so GOO can finally publish thier game based on ASoIaF.  

I'm getting tired of all these delays.  There are so many preview chapters and readings from conventions that we might have the entire book, except for the mystery Point of View, before it ever gets published.  That's why I have stopped reading them, I don't want to spoil my reading of what I hope will infact be a great feast of a book because I'm starving here!


----------



## takyris (Nov 7, 2004)

Hey Sable,

Thanks.  By the way, how is *your* writing going?  You ever get that third act written in your military fantasy story?  The novel you helpfully critted is now in the slushpile at Tor, with about 3/4 of the swearing removed and after several moderate to drastic changes to the plot.


----------



## KenM (Nov 7, 2004)

IMO, the reason this book is taking so long is it was not orginally planned. It was planned as two trilogy's. AFFC takes place betwen them.


----------



## Aesmael (Nov 8, 2004)

Not quite true. It was originally intended to be a trilogy, with the events at the end of A Storm of Swords coming at the end of the first book. Obviously there has been some significant restrcturing along the way.

I hope I find out some day what he spent the past few months rewriting.


----------



## SableWyvern (Nov 8, 2004)

takyris said:
			
		

> Hey Sable,
> 
> Thanks.  By the way, how is *your* writing going?  You ever get that third act written in your military fantasy story?  The novel you helpfully critted is now in the slushpile at Tor, with about 3/4 of the swearing removed and after several moderate to drastic changes to the plot.




You know that wide gap I was talking about earlier? I'm on the other side of it.

I think that when (if) I get motivated enough to start writing seriously again, Herald of the Dawn will more than likely sit by the wayside for a while.

I do have plans to rewrite it from the start (thanks in no small part to the feedback I got from you et al) ... when I get around to that remains to be seen.

Good to see you're doing alright, anyway. Herosmith, IMO, is a better story than many other published works similar in style; hope it gets picked eventually. Oh, and "I told you so," re: excessive profanity.


----------



## JoeGKushner (Nov 8, 2004)

Lord Pendragon said:
			
		

> Another difference is that his stuff sells.
> 
> Really.  Until you've got a few published works under your belt, I don't see how anything you say about the requirements of the craft can be taken seriously.




Uh, I'm calling BS on this.

Would you feel better if he quoted one of several (dozens) writing books that state that you don't sit around waiting for inspiration to write? I agree with what a few others have stated, if he was writing this to feed his kids, it'd be done. Since it's a labor of love for him, we're screwed.


----------



## nikolai (Nov 8, 2004)

http://www.georgerrmartin.com/nextbook.html



> A FEAST FOR CROWS is still not finished. Yes, I have written some more pages since the June update. No, the book is not yet done. My August and September schedule was full of conventions, travel, and speaking appearances, which cut deeply into my writing time during those months. Yes, I could have made more progress on the book if I had stayed at home chained to the desk, but I make these commitments years in advance and I take them very seriously.
> 
> Also, some of the writing that I have done since June has actually been rewriting. My goal, as I have said repeatedly in these updates, has always been to produce a book that is a good as it can be, so when I suddenly realize that one of my story threads can be made much more powerful and dramatic with some restructuring, I restructure... even if that means going back, tearing up finished chapters, and reworking them from start to finish.
> 
> That's done, anyway. A FEAST FOR CROWS will be much better for it, and now I am back at work on new chapters once again...




Where did this talk of writers block (or even deadlines) come from? I don't see anything to indicate that GRRM is suffering from this! He says he's just been busy from other things. The delay from A STORM OF SWORDS is because he had to virtually restart the book, as the earlier structure didn't work. GRRM is taking his time on it because he wants to get get it right, as he thinks it's his masterwork. There isn't a deadline, and certainly no indication that he's suffering from writers block.


----------



## Nellisir (Nov 8, 2004)

JoeGKushner said:
			
		

> Uh, I'm calling BS on this.
> 
> Would you feel better if he quoted one of several (dozens) writing books that state that you don't sit around waiting for inspiration to write?




"The art of writing is the art of applying the seat of the pants to the seat of the chair." 
~~ Mary Heaton Vorse


 
Nell.


----------



## nakia (Nov 8, 2004)

It sounds like some of Martin's delay is just a matter of priorities.  If he spends August and September doing other things (speaking and traveling), then not much is going to get done on the novel.  I certainly can't fault him for honoring other obligations, even as I wish he would do those things less and write more (out of a selfish desire to read the next book).  Although all those folks who got to see him at a con or some other event were probably glad he was there.

It is sort of like Stephen King and _The Dark Tower_ series.  That took forever to finish, but in the meantime he wrote lots of other novels.  That didn't stop me from being disappointed every time one of those new books came out that _wasn't_ a Dark Tower book.

And, as someone who is finishing his dissertation (which is not a novel, of course, but a mammoth project nonetheless), let me add to the chorus of folks who note that writing is really as much about hard work and discipline as it is about inspiration and the muse.


----------



## takyris (Nov 8, 2004)

Sable: Very cool!  Can't wait to see some of the next stuff you write!  And *hermph* on the strong language... just because people were saying, "It was a lot of fun, but man, that language was sometimes beyond me," when I'd taken out 3/4 of the swearwords from the draft that you read... In the one I'm currently editing, I kept it to PG-13 (in violence and in language) just to play with the style a bit more.

Oh, and the one you read is now called "Gilding the Apocalypse", since everyone told me "This needs a goofy title -- otherwise, people will think you're serious."

Having gotten the critique from She Who Must Be Obeyed, I can now get the next one (the PG-13 swashbuckling romantic-comedy fantasy... thing) polished up and out into slushland (possibly for the Wizards open call) and get to work on the next 'un.  That one is setting up to be a fantasy version of Ocean's Eleven -- a caper job to steal an ancient elven manuscript from one of the most powerful men in the floating city that rules the rest of the kingdom. We'll see how that goes...

And, to bring this back on topic... what I find worrisome as a fan is the fact that so many of GRRM's announcements have said, "I'm taking longer so that it can be perfect.  I'm slowing down so that it can be perfect.  I want to get it just right."  After five years, though, it's possible that his writing style will be different (I dunno if I'm the only one reading Robert Aspirin, but after his multiple years of "writer's block", his next Myth novel came back with a completely different style and a lot of instances of people telling the hero that he drinks too much...).  It's also possible that however good it is, even if it hits us all in our happy place, there's going to be a feeling of "Well, he didn't do this as well as he could have -- I mean, he did spend five-plus years on it."

For me, at least, it's becoming one of those unpleasant deals where I know that as a reader, I'm going to have trouble forgetting that the writer spent five years writing and rewriting -- so it's going to be a kind of conscious presence for me there, the idea of the author choosing to do each thing that's happening.  I am likely overanalyzing this in a huge way, and if the book is anything like the last ones, I'll be pulled in within the first twenty pages and will completely forget all that other stuff.  That's the hope, anyway.

I'd hold onto that "Never read a fantasy series until it's done" rule that some of my friends have, but then I couldn't talk about the new stuff with folks like you...


----------



## Sarigar (Nov 8, 2004)

And here I thought George was Canadian!  

Turns out he graduated from the same college as my dad (My dad is older and graduated years before GRRM).

I find inspiration in writing when I actually sit there and start putting ideas on paper (OK, computer).  More ideas come to me as I write than when I sit around thinking up ideas to write about.


----------



## LeapingShark (Nov 8, 2004)

> GRRM:
> I could have finished the book by now, but I prefer to travel, make appearances, and languish in the limelight; I take all these leisurely activities very seriously.



Ya George, but what about your commitment to writing my damn book!  I want it yesterday!


----------



## ssampier (Nov 8, 2004)

LeapingShark said:
			
		

> Ya George, but what about your commitment to writing my damn book!  I want it yesterday!




Really?! I wanted it months ago (April 2004  was the last random date Amazon decided it might be finished by).


----------



## Cthulhu's Librarian (Nov 9, 2004)

nakia said:
			
		

> Although all those folks who got to see him at a con or some other event were probably glad he was there.




Yeah. They got to ask him in person when the next book is coming out. I'm sure they were really enjoyable speaking and signing engagements. 

Fan #1: When's the next book coming out?
GRRM: When it's finished.

Fan #2: When's the next book coming out?
GRRM: When it's finished.

Fan #3: When's the next book coming out?
GRRM: When it's finished.

Fan #4: When's the next book coming out?
GRRM: When it's finished, damn it! Why don't you people get a life?!?

 :\


----------



## ledded (Nov 9, 2004)

Nellisir said:
			
		

> "The art of writing is the art of applying the seat of the pants to the seat of the chair."
> ~~ Mary Heaton Vorse
> 
> 
> Nell.



I love that quote.

I'm not a professional writer by any means (even though I've gotten paid once or twice) and I really just do some neophyte scribbling for friends and for a Story Hour, I do find that the best inspiration for writing is to just sit down and write. Even if it hurts at first, or you end up going back and tossing most of it, just framing it mentally by writing it seems to work a lot of the time for me. Of course, I'm not very good at it, so that might explain a few things... 

However, I often have to do that with my job also, so that may be a correlation unique to me.

Anyway, I've really seen no indication from GRRM that he is suffering from anything other than a bit of perfectionism on top of a heaping helping of Other Commitments.  He's probably at the point where it wont matter to him if the delays and business and continued "it's gotta be perfect" raise many expectations to the point of the inability to be satisfied with the end product for many readers, because he will have published it to please *himself*.  If you have that luxury, that's probably a very cool feeling.


----------



## ASH (Nov 10, 2004)

Let me just point out that this update not only annoy's me but insults me.  Its all BS in my humble opinion. Maybe he really is upset about it all, but i cant see giving him an ounce of empathy because he called everyone that disagree's with him a bigot...Had he said, "i am not writing because i dont want my anger and disappointment to enter my stores" i could have delt.. but the way he puts it.. damn him, damn him for writing wonderful books and then putting his fans at his political opinion's mercy.

PLEASE MR MARTIN... if you read this at all... move to canada and finish the book.


----------



## myrdden (Nov 10, 2004)

From my perspective, while I quite enjoyed the first three books immensely, it has been so long since I have read them that my enthusiasm for the series has waned considerably.  If the book comes out within the next year - so be it, but I no longer am "waiting with baited breath" for it.


----------



## CrusaderX (Nov 10, 2004)

ASH said:
			
		

> Let me just point out that this update not only annoy's me but insults me.  Its all BS in my humble opinion. Maybe he really is upset about it all, but i cant see giving him an ounce of empathy because he called everyone that disagree's with him a bigot...Had he said, "i am not writing because i dont want my anger and disappointment to enter my stores" i could have delt.. but the way he puts it.. damn him, damn him for writing wonderful books and then putting his fans at his political opinion's mercy.
> 
> PLEASE MR MARTIN... if you read this at all... move to canada and finish the book.




True.  I'm sure alot of people were holding their tongues after reading Martin's rantings, since political flames aren't welcome here.  Suffice to say, I lost alot of respect for Martin.  But I'll still read his books.


----------



## takyris (Nov 10, 2004)

Exactly. I don't think that his post necessarily helped his position with people who agree with his politics, but I'm fairly comfortable believing that his post *hurt* his position with people who *disagree* with his politics.

Teen nymphet Lindsay Lohan, of all people, said that she refused to discuss politics because whatever she said, it was guaranteed to lose her fans on one side of the fence or the other.  It seems GRRM could stand to learn something from Lindsay Lohan... which, really, *must* be one of the signs of the apocalypse.


----------



## Fast Learner (Nov 10, 2004)

Only if fame is more important to you than speaking out with the microphone fame gives you.

I'd call Linsday Lohan's statement one of low moral character, myself, and whether I agree with Mr. Martin or not, I applaud his willingness to lose fans in exchange for using his reasonably-large soapbox.

EDITED TO ADD: So you can see how not only can opinions differ on the specific politics, but also on whether or not one should take a stand and speak from one's heart.


----------



## takyris (Nov 10, 2004)

Fast Learner,

With respect, I disagree with that assessment.  Movie stars or other famous folks have several great ways to help causes they believe in. They can volunteer their time as a guest of honor at events, and they can donate money.  I currently work for a nonprofit, and we would kill to have a large-name celebrity either give us a boatload of money (either as a direct donation or as an endowment) or appear as a guest of honor at one of our events.

If Lindsay Lohan wants to show up at one of my fundraising events, I would love to have her there. Heck, if Lindsay Lohan wants to show up on the Ellen Degeneres show and say, "I wish that everyone would give money to Tacky's nonprofit, because they do such great work with children, and they're one of the few places in the nation that provides this service regardless of the parents' ability to pay," that would make my day.  That's a *great* use of her soapbox.

But I agree with her that for the vast, *vast* majority of movie stars, talking politics is a dumb idea. A nonprofit organization that helps kids is not divisive. Arguing that policy XX is a horrible policy that only evil/lazy/immoral people would support, and that policy XX needs to be torn down, is divisive.  And more than that, it doesn't help.  Did anyone look at the actors and singers in the most recent U.S. election and say, "Gosh, I was on the fence, but now that Hillary Duff has told me her opinion, I'm gonna have to go her way," on election day?

Exceptions exist, of course -- there are some actors who have actually done enough research and really read up on the issues, so that they can say more than sound bytes.  But for the vast *vast* majority, all they end up doing is making themselves look stupid.

I don't think that phrasing it as "speaking from your heart" is fair.  In fact, I think that's somewhat naive.  (I don't think *you're* naive, but I think that trying to pin this statement on this argument is oversimplifying the matter.)  The best way for actors to get audiences to agree with their values isn't to give them a dumbed-down oversimplified soundbyte.  The best way for actors to get audiences to agree with their values is to sign on for films or perform songs that deliver those values in their message -- the multibillion-dollar entertainment industry is a far better soapbox than an impassioned "Hi, this is the real Jessica Simpson, and I'm hoping you vote for _____" left on my voice mail.

I'm not saying that movie stars shouldn't have political beliefs.  I'm saying that if they truly want to use the power that they've been given, there are more effective methods to accomplish this goal.  I'm also saying that making large pronouncements like this on your website brings in some awfully large assumptions of audience, and it's not going to help -- nobody is going to change their minds because of this message, but some people will become angry and stop reading you as a result -- and when you could have convinced people of the rightness of your position through your art instead, you've not only lost a fan... you've lost the chance to convert that fan in the future.

Hmm... upon rereading, I sense some internal topic drift.  To clarify my points:
-Donating money or time for non-divisive issue (like rescuing pets or working with disabled kids): Good
-Becoming marketing shill for non-divisive issue: Good.  No one's going to hate you for speaking out about the need to rescue pets.
-Donating time or money for your political cause: Good.
-Choosing movies or songs that incorporate your personal political values: Good.
-Directly appealing to people to follow your political beliefs because you're telling them to: Ineffective, divisive, and generally not a good idea.


----------



## Fast Learner (Nov 10, 2004)

I think it's clear that we need to agree to disagree.

I certainly agree that it's great for those with fame to donate their time, presence, and support to good causes.

However, I feel it's every citizen's duty to promote their political views. I also feel it's every citizen's duty to respect people even if their views differ from yours. The latter, however, will never come about without the former. 

Of course I'm also big on humanizing celebrities, and revealing themselves to be just as clueless about life and politics as the general public would go a long way towards that.

The important part, for me, though is the "every citizen's duty" part.

And again, I think we'll just need to disagree.


----------



## takyris (Nov 10, 2004)

Agreeing to disagree.    No offense intended.

And to clarify: I don't think it's evil or immoral or anything for celebrities to endorse their personal political beliefs.  I just think it's not the most effective way to use their power.  So when I say "Bad", that's what I mean.  Everyone has the right to state their personal beliefs, and I'm sorry if I implied otherwise.


----------



## Eridanis (Nov 10, 2004)

Thank you to everyone  for keeping this discussion calm and mature. In the meantime, we've wandered into talking about Lindsay Lohan's political beliefs, which is a long way from a fantasy novel series.  

If we want to keep talking about Martin's writing habits, that's OK; but let's keep the usual ENworld rules in mind.


----------



## takyris (Nov 10, 2004)

So I've been working on a new epic fantasy series based on the political beliefs of Lindsay Lohan, but I'm having trouble finishing it because my artistic muse wants me to go play _Shadows of Undrentide_ and eat Cheetos instead...

_(Oh, darn it.  Given my volatile imagination, I now *am* actually imagining an epic fantasy series starring Lindsay Lohan.  That's just wonderful.  That's great.  Like I'm gonna get any work done this afternoon *now*.)_

(Black screen, white letters slowly fading in)

*Winter is Coming...*   (epic music)

(Quick cut of a people in mid-battle in the snow, screaming as blades flash...)

*Magic is Returning...* (epic-er music)

(Quick shot of a figure made entirely of shadows, choking the life from a warrior...)

*And only one person can stop...
The OTHERS*  (music now totally epic beyond all recognition)

(Quick shot of bizarre alien figures, obviously CGI, leaping through the forest and tearing people's heads off -- and then a sword lops one of their heads off.  The other creatures look over in fear.  The camera pans over to show Lindsay Lohan in a chainmail bikini, holding a claymore.)

Lindsay: _Valar morghulis,_ baby!  (spins sword and lunges forward as screen goes black)

*Linsay Lohan IS...
Arya Stark, Girl Adventurer!*

(Shot of Lohan fighting her way up palace steps)

Lohan: Affordable healthcare!

(Shot of Jeremy Irons in House Lannister's royal colors. because, really, in a movie this bad, you'd need Jeremy Irons to be the bad guy.  It's tradition at this point.)

Irons: _Destroy_ that welfare queen before she convinces Jon Snow and Tyrion to marry!

*Arya Stark: Girl Adventurer
Summer, 2005... if it's finished by then*

(Based on the novels and political beliefs of George R.R. Martin)
(This film has not yet been rated)
(Well, it was rated "Awful" on Rotten Tomatoes, but that hardly counts)
(And Harry of Ain't-it-Cool-News loved it)


----------



## JoeBlank (Nov 10, 2004)

takyris said:
			
		

> _That's just wonderful. That's great. Like I'm gonna get any work done this afternoon *now*.)
> _




Same here, but it is all your fault for saying: 



			
				takyris said:
			
		

> Lindsay Lohan in a chainmail bikini, holding a claymore.



For what it is worth, and to add something substantive while I can still concentrate a little, I agree with your position. Simply stating one's political leanings does little if anything to benefit a celebrity, and often damages one's reputation. As far as GRRM goes, I was buying the bit about taking a lot of time to get things right, but this just seems like a lame excuse now.


----------



## Cthulhu's Librarian (Nov 10, 2004)

takyris said:
			
		

> The camera pans over to show Lindsay Lohan in a chainmail bikini, holding a claymore.
> 
> *Linsay Lohan IS...
> Arya Stark, Girl Adventurer!*




MUST... KILL... TAKY...


----------



## barsoomcore (Nov 10, 2004)

Am I bad for my primary reaction being "What a butt-ugly website"? It's worse than Steven Brust's!

Geez, people, get a clue.


----------



## myrdden (Nov 10, 2004)

Eridanis said:
			
		

> ...talking about Lindsay Lohan's political beliefs...




Who would've thought this would ever have appeared on this message board?


----------



## barsoomcore (Nov 10, 2004)

Oh just to contribute to the whole "Artist + Politics" thing --

The big problem in your view, taky, is that not everyone agrees on what's divisive and what isn't. To some people, arguing that universal health care is a good thing ISN'T divisive. In fact, it's not.

In Canada.

To some people, suggesting that spending valuable community resources on ANIMALS when there are PEOPLE who need help IS divisive.

I reckon if the law says "right to speak freely", it applies to famous people and not-famous people, and if I don't like the things a famous person says, I don't have to see their movies, listen to their music or buy their books. If they'd rather speak up than be famous/successful, that's not a moral failing. They may only be exposing their own lack of knowledge and intelligence, of course. That's their perogative.

But saying "Famous people should only discuss topics I think aren't divisive," isn't very helpful. They may WANT to influence public opinion. They may believe that if they speak up, more people will consider their point of view, come to agree with them, and act accordingly. And that's a fine thing to try and do, every bit as fine (if less likely to succeed, perhaps) as volunteering at an orphanage. Indeed, if the action hoped-for is of sufficient benefit to society, it's BETTER for them to speak up.

Honestly, I AGREE with you, mostly. I'm more impressed by an artistic statement than a direct one. I admire artists who can express their ideas about the world and nature of humanity and what's right and what's wrong through their work. But I don't insist that they do so.

I just turn off the TV whenever Sting appears.


----------



## Retro-Rocket (Nov 11, 2004)

A friend of mine was at a party in which George RR Martin was in attendence. After a few drinks, my friend went up to George and told him that he should consider himself pimp slapped for taking so long to write the next book. Needless to say George was not too happy about the comment. LOL!


----------



## Dagger75 (Nov 11, 2004)

And apprently Mr Martin has gotten some e-mails about his update and has posted another one.   He seems to be writting again.  We shall see.

www.georgerrmartin.com


----------



## CrusaderX (Nov 11, 2004)

takyris said:
			
		

> (Black screen, white letters slowly fading in)
> 
> *Winter is Coming...*   (epic music)
> 
> ...




Ha!   That ruled.   

Where do I buy my ticket?


----------



## ShadowX (Nov 11, 2004)

Going off of memory, the original update has disappeared from his site, I do not see why such strong opposition exists.  His feelings coincide with many people who think Bush is destroying this country.  Also, his updates are similar to the millions of blogs that have proliferated as of late and many of them express political views as well.  Why hold him to a different standard when it comes to politics?  Even more shocking is those who think less of him or will no longer buy his books because he chose to exercise his right to speech.  Now if you are merely upset that he is taking time off from the next book, that is perfectly fine.   I no longer care, as I forsee long interims beyond just this book and there is other, better literature to read rather than suffer interminably long waits.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Nov 11, 2004)

ShadowX said:
			
		

> Going off of memory, the original update has disappeared from his site, I do not see why such strong opposition exists.




My initial impression went something along the lines of "...so you're distraught over the election results?  And *that* is what's getting you to write again?  What if Kerry had won?  Would we never see the (bleep)ing book, then?  What if Bush won 65% of the popular vote?  Would it be out by Christmas then?"

There's just something about saying he's going to try and drown his sorrow by immersing himself in writing that makes me lose respect for him.

Edit:  Then again, I also think putting a political bumper sticker on your car is tacky.

Brad


----------



## Fast Learner (Nov 11, 2004)

Um, Brad, I'm not sure what you read, but he said that he *was not* writing because he was depressed from the election results, and that while writing might help him escape the real world, he wasn't able to do so. Not that he _was_ writing because of it.


----------



## Berandor (Nov 11, 2004)

takyris said:
			
		

> (And Harry of Ain't-it-Cool-News loved it)



So true. 

Still, I'd watch the movie. Lohan as Arya - why not? And Irons as Kevan Lannister could work.


----------



## Sarigar (Nov 11, 2004)

Rule #1 - Don't watch movies to learn history.
Rule #2 - Don't watch movies to find religion.
Rule #3 - Don't listen to Jessica Simpson telling me to vote.  Do I really want all of Jessica Simpson's fans voting because she told them to and not because they feel that it is their duty to?  Same applies to any "famous" person.
There are reasons people don't talk about Religion and Politics.  Everyone has an opinion, and their opinion is the right opinion.  
Nice one Taky.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Nov 12, 2004)

Fast Learner said:
			
		

> Um, Brad, I'm not sure what you read, but he said that he *was not* writing because he was depressed from the election results, and that while writing might help him escape the real world, he wasn't able to do so. Not that he _was_ writing because of it.




Really?  Oh.

Well, there goes any pretense that I can read.

Brad


----------



## Fast Learner (Nov 12, 2004)

Sarigar said:
			
		

> There are reasons people don't talk about Religion and Politics. Everyone has an opinion, and their opinion is the right opinion.



True, but I'd also argue that the reason people rarely really *consider* their beliefs/opinions about religion and politics -- often just going with whatever's easy, or popular, or what their parents did -- is because we're so afraid to talk about them. The only way we as a society will ever be able to talk rationally and peaceably about our political and spiritual beliefs is to learn to be tolerant of each others' viewpoints, and that can't happen if we're constantly shielded from them. To sum, the long term solution certainly isn't _not_ talking about them.


----------



## jasamcarl (Nov 12, 2004)

I tend to agree that a creative type is better off expressing their belief through their craft, though they shouldn't be lambasted for throughing out one or two pithy, reductionist political lines. I can assure you that everyone, regardless of how well informed, presents their views simplistic manner, simply because it would be tiresome to toss out a thorough argument each time they were asked for comment.

That said, I would argue that Martin in particular has hinted at his politics and world view throughout his books. Though written before 9/11 or the war, it doesn't take a genious to see how the tragic characteristics of Rob Stark, who suffered a wrong by the death of his father, waged an ultimatly futile campaign for justice and honor in which he won every battle but lost the war, causing so many deaths that his original gripe seemed petty by comparison, applies to the current debate over international policy. 

If the Song of Ice and Fire is anything to go by, Martin pretty much comes from the realist school, far from the peacnik sterotype often attributed to those with his politics.


----------



## KnowTheToe (Nov 12, 2004)

I stopped recommending these books a year ago because it was clear that it will be a long time before the series is finished.  I think it could be 10 years before it is done.


----------



## ledded (Nov 12, 2004)

Sarigar said:
			
		

> Rule #1 - Don't watch movies to learn history.
> Rule #2 - Don't watch movies to find religion.
> Rule #3 - Don't listen to Jessica Simpson telling me to vote. Do I really want all of Jessica Simpson's fans voting because she told them to and not because they feel that it is their duty to? Same applies to any "famous" person.



Oh, *so* agreed.  I don't mind when celebrities speak out on a political issue that they may have some reasonable amount of research or experience with.  I don't listen to it, agree with it, nor put up with it in any of my media sources, but hey at least they are executing thier right to free speech properly; I prefer to do actual research myself.  It's the dingbats that blather on about a cause that are so detached from reality and anything remotely tangible to the average person that really get on my nerves;  personally, some of these guys are darn close to the 'screaming fire in a crowded theater' example of how free speech is *not* guaranteed to you IMO, and there are a few that are in desperate need of the proverbial whack with a clue-by-four.  Preferably with a rusty nail in it.  

Of course, I'm also of a mind that if someone feels their opinion about an issue swayed just because someone famous spit out a sound bite about it, that's less a problem of the celebrity and more a problem of the person's inability or apathy towards thinking it through.  Just my opinion.



> There are reasons people don't talk about Religion and Politics. Everyone has an opinion, and their opinion is the right opinion.



Well, I've always felt that people shouldnt talk Religion and Politics in 'polite' situations not because everyone thinks they are right, but because too many people respond to a challenging idea with hostility and hurt feelings.  I have plenty of folks I debate these things with that dont get upset when I disagree with them even when they think I'm completely full of it, because they're mature and open enough to be able to entertain my ideas without _having_ to believe in them.  But I also believe that the purpose of debate or discussion like that is not to convince another person that you are right, but to bolster or explore the depths of your own understanding/belief on the matter, and to possibly get an informed peek at the other side in the meantime.



> Nice one Taky.



Agreed Taky, that was funny, and stated your opinion in an _artistic_ way 

As far as GGRM is concerned, I honestly could give a rat's patootey what he thinks or says politically.  I hate that he's been so delayed with the book, and if this is one of the reasons I care about as much as any other reason he's given.  I give him a little less respect just for not being able to show a little personal restraint (and for being such a public freakin' drama queen ), but that's not going to lose him any sleep either, because you know what, GRRM doesnt care what some guy on ENWorld thinks about him one blinkin' bit .  I just wish he'd finish the book before I completely lose interest in it altogether.


----------



## Fast Learner (Nov 12, 2004)

ledded said:
			
		

> Of course, I'm also of a mind that if someone feels their opinion about an issue swayed just because someone famous spit out a sound bite about it, that's less a problem of the celebrity and more a problem of the person's inability or apathy towards thinking it through.



And that's the key, imo. I think anyone -- star or not -- should be welcome to express his/her political opinion, and in fact has a certain duty to do so. Yet if you base your own conclusions exclusively on the fact that someone famous said it, you're just being idiotic.


----------



## CrusaderX (Nov 13, 2004)

Fast Learner said:
			
		

> The only way we as a society will ever be able to talk rationally and peaceably about our political and spiritual beliefs is to learn to be tolerant of each others' viewpoints




And that's the problem right there.  It really sounded as if Martin *wasn't* tolerant of other viewpoints.  He basically insinuated that those who voted for Bush were ignorant, bigoted, etc.  _That_ is why people have lost respect for him.  Not for speaking out, but for demonizing those with different beliefs than his own.


----------



## Fast Learner (Nov 13, 2004)

I appreciate that, but people -- Martin included -- won't learn to be tolerant without a period of uncomfortable intolerance, a period where we remind each other to be civil.

For example, I participate in a board online where we actually discuss politics and religion all the time. When we discuss politics we have people from the left, the right, the up, the down, you name it. We have people from Europe with their political perspectives, people who are pistol-shootin' Texans, people from other parts of the world, too. When we discuss religion we have athiests, Christians (of many stripes, including various Protestants, Catholics, Jehovahs Witnesses, and Mormons), Jews, one Muslim, a variety of Buddhists and New Agers, Wiccans, and more.

And yup, early on it was tough to discuss things peacefully. But for the last several years our conversations are almost entirely completely respectful, with no one attacking each other at all. Is it perfect? No, but it's really amazing. Yet we would never have reached that point without going through some discomfort first, with people hanging in there even though the signal-to-noise ratio wasn't the greatest for a while. Now, though, we can discuss _anything_ peacefully, and we do.

I firmly believe the same is true of society as a whole. Yes, at the beginning there will be intolerance and discomfort, and a certain amount of that will probably never go away. But today's world, where you're not allowed to talk about the things that _most affect your life and happiness_, is highly disfunctional, and keeping quiet isn't going to fix it.


----------



## CrusaderX (Nov 13, 2004)

Discussion is good.  But Martin wasn't discussing.  He insulted 50% (or 51%  ) of Americans, in a one-sided format that talked _at_ them, not _with_ them.


----------



## Fast Learner (Nov 13, 2004)

It's easy to point and say, "He's so intolerant" when someone presents his opinion, yet it is the very essence of intolerance to do that pointing. Tolerance begins when people _aren't_ upset by others' intolerant viewpoints, not in waiting for people to say something nice.


----------



## Nifft (Nov 13, 2004)

People, please.

_Disagreement_ isn't _insult_. If I think you are _doing a stupid thing_, that's different from calling you stupid.

If people were "right" too often, we'd run out of innovation any day now. I don't think there's much danger of that. 

So, lots of room for discussion.

 -- N


----------



## RyanL (Nov 13, 2004)

Fast Learner said:
			
		

> It's easy to point and say, "He's so intolerant" when someone presents his opinion, yet it is the very essence of intolerance to do that pointing. Tolerance begins when people _aren't_ upset by others' intolerant viewpoints, not in waiting for people to say something nice.




I think you've confused tolerance and acceptance.  Don't you watch South Park?  

Lemmywinks, Lemmywinks...


----------



## jasamcarl (Nov 13, 2004)

CrusaderX said:
			
		

> Discussion is good.  But Martin wasn't discussing.  He insulted 50% (or 51%  ) of Americans, in a one-sided format that talked _at_ them, not _with_ them.




Wow, you must hate most blogs then. While most acknowledge other viewpoints (as Martin has when referencing the letters), bloggers don't tend to directly engage others in discussion.

So, you're notion of what is acceptable discourse would be for those who have strong beliefs to never air them unless they can be directly challenged and engaged in a constant back and forth. 

Please..he was airing his opinion. What you are really upset about is not the way he aired it, but his actual opinion. Fair enough, but don't be so quick to claim the high ground next time. 

And yes, he believes that 51% of the voting public was wrong. I'm sorry you couldn't have what some consider very dumb descicion immediatly validated; in fact, it sounds like you really are on the defensive.  As others have said, there is a distinction to be drawn between the believers and the beliefs.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Nov 13, 2004)

KnowTheToe said:
			
		

> I hate starting series of books when they are not finished.  When I started them I thought this was going to be a trilogy




I hear ya their... Not so much with modern day fiction novels, but with fantasy novels it’s a killer…   I usually don’t touch a series until the last novel has been out for a year…  (By then you can find out from the net how many books it’s going to be…)

They’re so many good books/series out there that you’re really not hurting yourself with reading something “older”.


----------



## Fast Learner (Nov 13, 2004)

RyanL said:
			
		

> I think you've confused tolerance and acceptance.



Nah, Matt and Trey were simply wrong there. Their point -- that you can still be pissed off while tolerating -- is a fine first step, but you don't have to accept something to not be pissed off about it. The advanced version of tolerance allows you to not be pissed about it, yet still work to change it.

But we're pretty far off-topic now, I think.


----------



## Sarigar (Nov 13, 2004)

ledded said:
			
		

> Of course, I'm also of a mind that if someone feels their opinion about an issue swayed just because someone famous spit out a sound bite about it, that's less a problem of the celebrity and more a problem of the person's inability or apathy towards thinking it through.  Just my opinion.




True, but you know someone out there is wanting to use that person who does not think things through.  I respect the ads that talk about being informed and voting, yet too many just tell you to go vote.

I never took into consideration George's political beliefs when I read the first three books, and now it makes sense.  His views on war and politics rings loud and clear now.  Ulitimately, most of us would agree with these views even if we don't share his RL political viewpoints.

I like this updated post by GRRM better than the first, although the first is an expression of anger, this one is of hope, HOPE THAT THE BOOK WILL BE FINISHED THIS YEAR!


----------

