# George R.R. Martin novel news



## Rydac (May 30, 2005)

The latest installment in the A Song of Fire and Ice series....maybe more popularly known as the Game of Thrones series......is finished.

But there is a catch which you can read all about under A Feast for Crows over at George's site http://georgerrmartin.com/


----------



## Thanee (May 30, 2005)

> (And before anyone asks, yes indeed, this development means that Parris was right all along. It will now probably require seven books to complete the story).




Heh. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Aris Dragonborn (May 30, 2005)

Memo to Mr. Martin (and Mr. Jordan, too):

While I am anticipating the next books in _A Song of Ice and Fire_ and _The Wheel of Time_, it's frustrating that the number of books in these series grew beyond what was originally stated, i.e. _Wheel of Time_ was originally slated to be 6 or 7 books, IIRC. As it now stands, _WoT_ looks to end after 12 books, with the volume succeeding _Knife of Dreams_. 

Please understand that I have an enormous amount of respect for anyone who undertakes the writing of a novel - _especially_ a fantasy novel. Creating your own world, the races, the kingdoms, the cultures, and doing it in a way that resonates with the reader and keeps them enthralled with your story is extremely difficult (I'm still struggling creating my world!).

I don't for a second believe all the claims that Mr. Jordan is dragging the series out in order to make more money. I don't think Mr. Martin is doing it either. I think that they found themselves with more story and plot lines than they initially thought they had. But I can't help but feel that if these two gentlemen had utilized an outline in the planning stages of their respective series, things might have gone more smoothly.

Looking forward (eagerly) to _Knife of Dreams_, _A Feast of Crows_, and _A Dance with Dragons_.

P.S. Anyone got a line on what the final volume of _The Wheel of Time_ will be called? Just curious.


----------



## Methinkus (May 30, 2005)

*Woot!*

I'm at the edge of my British chair waiting for this story!  However . . .

. . . shouldnt this be in the Fantasy Movies Novels and TV forum?


----------



## mythusmage (May 30, 2005)

So book four has turned into two books. How many books will the old 5th volume become?


----------



## Thanee (May 30, 2005)

Well, given that there is some exponential growth happening, the last book will certainly beat the _encyclopedia britannica_ in size. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Dagger75 (May 30, 2005)

Aris Dragonborn said:
			
		

> Memo to Mr. Martin (and Mr. Jordan, too):
> 
> 
> 
> P.S. Anyone got a line on what the final volume of _The Wheel of Time_ will be called? Just curious.




The title will be............ Wait Till The 14 Prequels Come Out


----------



## Snowy (May 30, 2005)

you know how eagerly I've been waiting for this!!!

My sister and the people she lives with started lending the books out to everyone that visited them about 6 months ago, just so they had more people who understood why they were anxiously awaiting the next one 

p.s. anyone read/reading "age of misrule" bu mark chadbourn?


----------



## Darkness (May 30, 2005)

Moved to the Books forum.


----------



## The Serge (May 30, 2005)

Not concerned.  I'm glad he's releasing something and that he already has much of the next installment ready.


----------



## Lichemaster (May 30, 2005)

I have heard this book come up before, I take it is well written.
What is the first book in the series so I can pick it up and see for myself?


----------



## Thanee (May 30, 2005)

1) A Game of Thrones
2) A Clash of Kings
3) A Storm of Swords
4) A Feast for Crows + A Dance with Dragons

Highly recommended reading and immensely enthralling, but it is also some pretty mature material (pretty hefty violance and also some intimacies).

Anyways, A Song of Ice and Fire is one of the best fantasy novel series ever written for sure.
It starts out in a kinda historical fashion, yet slowly but steadily fantasy elements are introduced.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## TwistedBishop (May 30, 2005)

The first book in the Song of Ice and Fire series is A Game of Thrones.  It starts off sort of slowly (I was about to put it down about 30 pages in), but the series is fantastic if you keep going.

Edit:  And I would have gotten away with posting first too, if it wasn't for that meddling Thanee!


----------



## takyris (May 30, 2005)

About time.


----------



## Nifft (May 30, 2005)

I'm re-reading the first three in preparation for Feast of Crows. Wow, it's a lot better the second time through. Maybe a really astute reader would have picked up what I'm now seeing, but I sure didn't.

The books are THICK. Not just in page count -- they are densely pack with sticky plot and character goodness.

 -- N


----------



## JohnClark (May 30, 2005)

Excellent news! I can't wait for this book to come out, after much prodding from my friends I picked up this series and after reading it I don't know why I waited so long.


----------



## Pants (May 30, 2005)

Nifft said:
			
		

> I'm re-reading the first three in preparation for Feast of Crows. Wow, it's a lot better the second time through. Maybe a really astute reader would have picked up what I'm now seeing, but I sure didn't.
> 
> The books are THICK. Not just in page count -- they are densely pack with sticky plot and character goodness.
> 
> -- N



Damn straight.
There were soooo many things I missed the first time through that seem so obvious after a second and third time.

[sblock]For example, many critics that I've talked to have said that Martin just randomly kills his characters off. The best example they use to support this claim is Robb. Unfortunately, Robb's death was foreshadowed since _Clash of Kings_ and the first half of _Storm of Swords_ is FULL of intimations that something bad is going to happen.

I missed that all on my first read, but I caught it on my second. Great stuff.[/sblock]


----------



## Krug (May 30, 2005)

Never thought Martin would be susceptible to Rowling syndrome.  But I'm glad it's done!


----------



## The_lurkeR (May 30, 2005)

WOO-HOOO! 

Perhaps the coolest news is that ADwD is half-finished already. So that should be out after Feast in record time   

Thank you GRRM


----------



## GoodKingJayIII (May 30, 2005)

Good plotting, good characters, good story.  I never really understood the sex scenes in the book.  They didn't seem to move the plot all that often, and they're pretty gratuitous as well.  Maybe they were necessary and I'm just forgetting stuff (read Swords at least 3 years ago), but they got really irritating.  Unless I hear _a lot_ of great things about this newest book, I won't be reading it.  The useless sex scenes, I can easily skim or skip those.  But the fact that he's dragging the series out for another 3 books just gets under my skin.  Milking literature is never a good idea.


----------



## Berandor (May 30, 2005)

The series was always to be either six or seven books. He wanted to keep it to six, but said seven was a possibility. Even when he decided to insert a novel into that number, his aim was to keep to six books, not seven. So far, Martin is not milking it.


----------



## Captain Tagon (May 30, 2005)

Berandor said:
			
		

> So far, Martin is not milking it.




That could be debated. But I'm waiting until the story is finished before reading any more of it. Even if that means I never finish it. It is good writing but I don't _enjoy_ reading it, somewhat like how _Passion of the Christ_ amazed me as a film but I didn't enjoy it at all. Not really the same thing, but somewhat related.


----------



## Starman (May 30, 2005)

Aris Dragonborn said:
			
		

> P.S. Anyone got a line on what the final volume of _The Wheel of Time_ will be called? Just curious.




If it's not called The Last Battle, I'll be shocked.

Starman


----------



## Starman (May 30, 2005)

Berandor said:
			
		

> The series was always to be either six or seven books. He wanted to keep it to six, but said seven was a possibility. Even when he decided to insert a novel into that number, his aim was to keep to six books, not seven. So far, Martin is not milking it.




Actually, when he first envisioned the series it was a trilogy. He even outlined it as such. When  he wrote the first draft of A Game of Thrones, he realized that he wasn't nearly as far along as he was supposed to be for his trilogy and then expanded it. 

Starman


----------



## Aesmael (May 30, 2005)

Starman said:
			
		

> Actually, when he first envisioned the series it was a trilogy. He even outlined it as such. When  he wrote the first draft of A Game of Thrones, he realized that he wasn't nearly as far along as he was supposed to be for his trilogy and then expanded it.
> 
> Starman




True dat. _Wheel of Time_ was meant to be a trilogy as well.

I won't be disappointed in the expansion of this series unless I feel that Martin's writing has decreased in quality. For now: hurray! Already have my money set aside for it (If I can find it - haven't looked in a year!). Mark my words, all the others will be finished in less time than this, it was an aberration.

And if I'm wrong, having marked them you can make me eat them.


----------



## Krafus (May 30, 2005)

GoodKingJayIII said:
			
		

> Good plotting, good characters, good story.  I never really understood the sex scenes in the book.  They didn't seem to move the plot all that often, and they're pretty gratuitous as well.  Maybe they were necessary and I'm just forgetting stuff (read Swords at least 3 years ago), but they got really irritating.  Unless I hear _a lot_ of great things about this newest book, I won't be reading it.  The useless sex scenes, I can easily skim or skip those.  But the fact that he's dragging the series out for another 3 books just gets under my skin.  Milking literature is never a good idea.




If you think GRRM is milking his readers, you haven't read Robert Jordan's _Wheel of Time series_...

As for the sex scenes, I'm glad they're in it. Sex is a part of life, and I'm sick of fantasy authors who give us blood and gore by the bucketful but shy away from any mention of sex.


----------



## Captain Tagon (May 30, 2005)

Krafus said:
			
		

> If you think GRRM is milking his readers, you haven't read Robert Jordan's _Wheel of Time series_...
> 
> As for the sex scenes, I'm glad they're in it. Sex is a part of life, and I'm sick of fantasy authors who give us blood and gore by the bucketful but shy away from any mention of sex.





Except both are extremely lame when added solely for their own sake.


----------



## KenM (May 30, 2005)

Captain Tagon said:
			
		

> Except both are extremely lame when added solely for their own sake.




  IMO they are not in aSoIaF for its own sake. It shows the characters needs, desires and sometimes there brutallity.


----------



## Captain Tagon (May 30, 2005)

KenM said:
			
		

> IMO they are not in aSoIaF for its own sake. It shows the characters needs, desires and sometimes there brutallity.





::shrug::

It's been a while since I've read any of the books. I was just making a general statement.


----------



## JoeBlank (May 30, 2005)

I think this is a fair compromise, and I'll probably like it better split up into two books. With the earlier books, a chapter would often end in a cliffhanger and it would be a wait of possibly hundreds of pages to get to the resolution. I don't mind some waiting, but it takes me quite a while to read a book of this length, one of the drawbacks of having 3 small children. 

Anyone have a guess on how the characters will be divided in the two books? I can figure out a few, but I have not been keeping up with which characters get chapter-treatments and such.


----------



## Krafus (May 30, 2005)

JoeBlank said:
			
		

> I think this is a fair compromise, and I'll probably like it better split up into two books. With the earlier books, a chapter would often end in a cliffhanger and it would be a wait of possibly hundreds of pages to get to the resolution. I don't mind some waiting, but it takes me quite a while to read a book of this length, one of the drawbacks of having 3 small children.
> 
> Anyone have a guess on how the characters will be divided in the two books? I can figure out a few, but I have not been keeping up with which characters get chapter-treatments and such.




The characters from Westeros (Jaime, Sam, Sansa, *spoilers*Cersei, Asha Greyjoy,*end spoilers*, the unknown mystery POV) will be in AFfC. This books will concern the King's Landing, the north (other than the Wall), Dorne and the Iron Islands.

The characters from the Wall and beyond and the east (Bran, Arya, Dany, Tyrion, Jon) will be in ADwD. Though there will be a bit of overlap in some cases.

Not sure about Davos.

Hmm... Did I miss anyone?


----------



## KenM (May 30, 2005)

Krafus said:
			
		

> The characters from Westeros (Jaime, Sam, Sansa, *spoilers*Cersei, Asha Greyjoy,*end spoilers*, the unknown mystery POV) will be in AFfC. This books will concern the King's Landing, the north (other than the Wall), Dorne and the Iron Islands.
> 
> The characters from the Wall and beyond and the east (Bran, Arya, Dany, Tyrion, Jon) will be in ADwD. Though there will be a bit of overlap in some cases.
> 
> ...




  My paperback cope of Storm of Swords has a chapter from Feast for Crows. Chersi POV.  I hope Tyrion is in Feast, he is my favorite character.


----------



## Dark Jezter (May 31, 2005)

Glad to hear that a Feast for Crows is finally done, as I've really enjoyed aSoIaF so far.  I'm kinda disappointed that Tyrion won't be in the book, but I can wait until aDwD to hear more from that character.

Oh, and as much as I enjoy the series, I do agree that most of the sex scenes are gratitious and, in many cases, downright distasteful.


----------



## BryonD (May 31, 2005)

So, does anyone have any industry type knowledge that would reveal how long it takes to get from this point to having a book in my hands?

Thanks


----------



## KenM (May 31, 2005)

Do we know for a fact Tyrion won't be in the book?


----------



## Fast Learner (May 31, 2005)

Krafus said:
			
		

> The characters from Westeros (Jaime, Sam, Sansa, *spoilers*Cersei, Asha Greyjoy,*end spoilers*, the unknown mystery POV) will be in AFfC. This books will concern the King's Landing, the north (other than the Wall), Dorne and the Iron Islands.
> 
> The characters from the Wall and beyond and the east (Bran, Arya, Dany, Tyrion, Jon) will be in ADwD. Though there will be a bit of overlap in some cases.
> 
> Not sure about Davos.



Is this your guess, or did you find this information somewhere?


----------



## The_lurkeR (May 31, 2005)

> Now as to the questions of which POV's show up in which book, the following will show up in AFFC:
> 
> Jamie, Cersei, Arya, Sansa, Sam (Jon will be in the first Sam chapter), the Iron Isles, Dorne, mystery POV (we don't know who the mystery POV is yet!). Asha will be in AFFC, in fact, all the chapters in Arms of the Kraken will show up in AFFC.
> 
> ...




I got this from the SoIaF Westeros.org bulletin boards. This is a quote from someone was at the convention this past weekend, where GRRM announced that the book was being released. Take it with however much salt you want.


----------



## Steel_Wind (May 31, 2005)

KenM said:
			
		

> Do we know for a fact Tyrion won't be in the book?




Sounds like.

I really object to the way the book is being split. Every single one of my favorite characters will be missing. 

Every. Single. One.  (Though it looks like Arya manages to make it in. If that is so, I am mollified).

The lone bright star on the horizon of the proposed split may be Sam.  IF he is included. I would have thought he was in the North though.

We are left looking forward to Sansa Stark and Little Finger.  Mixed in amongst a great deal of Jaime and Cersei and Asha Greyjoy. *sigh*  

While I am happy to get the book in any form - this is going to end up being a lot less fun that I had hoped.


----------



## Vocenoctum (May 31, 2005)

Krafus said:
			
		

> As for the sex scenes, I'm glad they're in it. Sex is a part of life, and I'm sick of fantasy authors who give us blood and gore by the bucketful but shy away from any mention of sex.




It was one of the things that got tiresome for me in the trilogy. Sex is a part of life, but it was in nearly every chapter, it just grew old. I enjoyed the trilogy, but by the time I was finished... it was done. I doubt I'll read the new one, and if I do, it'll be in 20 years when he's finished it all.


----------



## Krafus (May 31, 2005)

Fast Learner said:
			
		

> Is this your guess, or did you find this information somewhere?




I got it at the Westeros board, which The_lurkeR mentioned.


----------



## KenM (May 31, 2005)

Krafus said:
			
		

> I got it at the Westeros board, which The_lurkeR mentioned.




  Link please??


----------



## stevelabny (May 31, 2005)

The following post will discuss some of the previous books in the series and my take on the characters. If you haven't read the series, skip this post and go read it. While I don't intend to discuss specific spoiler plot points, you might be able to piece together certain things that have happened by my opinions on the current situation of Westeros.


I'm not necessarily a Dani fan, but I tend to like her chapters. Tyrion is fun, but also not my favorite. Jon? Its possible some of you might remember how much i dislike the boy, and consider him the villain of the series, even though others consider him the one true hero. I still eagerly await his death, but didnt expect it to happen in the next book anyway.
Bran probably is the one I consider the "good one" but as he's been too young to be interesting, I'm not in a rush to read more of him. Although sadly, no Bran means no Hodor. HODOR!

There seems to be some debate as to which book Arya will be in. I like her and think she has tons of potential, but if she winds up absent from the book, I won't mind.

I do look forward to seeing more about the Greyjoys. As I had liked Theon, and fell in love with Asha in the little we saw of her. ( I have NOT read ANY of the preview chapters in any location, although i DO know that there was a ton of Greyjoy stuff printed in Dragon)
Littlefinger and Sansa should make for interesting chapters as she has finally been put in a situation that should make her as big a player as her siblings.
Jaime was a great character but I felt that Brianne was missing a little something character-wise and was weighing down his chapters a bit.
Cersei? Recent events should make her chapters VERY interesting.

Of course, I'm a strange one. NONE of my favorites are ever main characters.
I want to see more of the Hound, Bronn, Loras, Theon, Varys, Timmett son of Timmett, Shagga son of Dolf,  and all the other characters whose final allegiances will be the reason one side wins or loses in the end. Maybe I'll get lucky and the mystery POV will be Loras or the Hound. (I think/hope that the Tyrell and Martell families will have to become more involved before long)

I also want to see what happens with the new and much improved Catelyn. I hated her as much as Eddard and Jon, but her new situation makes her a dangerous piece on the board.
"In the game of thrones, you win or you die." But what the hell happens when you die and keep playing?


----------



## Krafus (May 31, 2005)

KenM said:
			
		

> Link please??




Here.


----------



## Krafus (May 31, 2005)

stevelabny said:
			
		

> There seems to be some debate as to which book Arya will be in. I like her and think she has tons of potential, but if she winds up absent from the book, I won't mind.




Er - why the debate? According to the posts on the Westeros board, Arya will be in ADwD. Plus, *spoilers*her first spoiler chapter shows her arriving in Braavos, which is away from Westeros*end spoilers*.

EDIT:



> But what the hell happens when you die and keep playing?




You make those responsible for your death wish they'd done a better job of it.


----------



## Eosin the Red (May 31, 2005)

I never noticed the "gratitious sex scenes." I know the book is graphic and not "grandma" safe but they just didn't leap out at me as overly done or overly frequent - and part of aSoI&Fs charm (IMO) is the very base human emotions _(revenge, lust, greed, fanatisism)_  that drive the whole series. Most fiction glosses over sexuality as ocuring off stage and with little bearing on the overall story (Arthur, Lancelot, & Guinevere anyone) but really those desires are core to many great tales. Then again maybe I am a little more desensitized than most?


----------



## Dr. Strangemonkey (May 31, 2005)

GoodKingJayIII said:
			
		

> Good plotting, good characters, good story.  I never really understood the sex scenes in the book.  They didn't seem to move the plot all that often, and they're pretty gratuitous as well.  Maybe they were necessary and I'm just forgetting stuff (read Swords at least 3 years ago), but they got really irritating.  The useless sex scenes, I can easily skim or skip those.




Think about how much of the good plot, good characters, and good story rely on children, succession, and obsession and then reevaluate your concern with regard to the sex.

It's not just about eroticism its also about reproduction and maturity and I think the way sex is used in those books makes that point very well.  Particularly in that it makes it clear that all three of those issue vary a great deal by the individual despite how the social norms enforce them.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jun 1, 2005)

Dr. Strangemonkey said:
			
		

> It's not just about eroticism its also about reproduction and maturity and I think the way sex is used in those books makes that point very well.  Particularly in that it makes it clear that all three of those issue vary a great deal by the individual despite how the social norms enforce them.



What did it for me was the Arya chapters. Go through and see how many of them involve some form of rape. Now, it's been a long time, so I can't really be sure, but memory wise, it started to get excessive.


----------



## Steel_Wind (Jun 1, 2005)

I think you mean Danaerys.

In her case, sex was with her husband, with a willing hand maiden and otherwise was something men around her wanted to have with her and she was/is confused with the subject and her desires.

There was the depiction of rapine and slaughter by the Dothraki. She saved one victim from it - and paid for it with the life of her son.

In Sansa's case, she feared rape at the hands of Joffrey, the Hound,  Marillion and now Little Finger.  She would have done her duty with Tyrion.  He didn't want that.  

Arya has not been involved in sexual situations in her PoV chapters. She is still prepubescent.  She was at a whore hourse, but the Hound spared her from any impact from that.


----------



## Dark Jezter (Jun 1, 2005)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> What did it for me was the Arya chapters. Go through and see how many of them involve some form of rape. Now, it's been a long time, so I can't really be sure, but memory wise, it started to get excessive.



 What did it for me was the scene in _A Storm of Swords_ when (spoiler text, don't highlight if you have a weak stomach) 



Spoiler



Jaime Lannister has sex with his sister (who happens to be on her period at the time) on the alter in a church.



I'd been put off by some of the sex scenes described in the book prior to that, but that particular scene almost made me quit the entire series in disgust.  I really hope GRRM tones such stuff down in future books, before the series begins to resemble a Penthouse Forum compilation volume.


----------



## EricNoah (Jun 1, 2005)

Ah, cool, now I can begin re-reading the series.  Should make for a fun couple of months!  And then when the book is released, Amazon will finally ship that sucker to my friend Andy (I bought it for him for his birhtday like 3 years ago).


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jun 1, 2005)

Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> Arya has not been involved in sexual situations in her PoV chapters. She is still prepubescent.  She was at a whore hourse, but the Hound spared her from any impact from that.



That's my point. She's 10ish in the series, and yet almost all of her scene's have someone having sex, usually rape, sometimes not directly seen, but in Book 3, it's there an awful lot.

Mind you, it's been a while, and I'm not rereading it to justify that, but I remember the feeling sticking with me.


----------



## Thanee (Jun 1, 2005)

The_lurkeR said:
			
		

> Perhaps the coolest news is that ADwD is half-finished already. So that should be out after Feast in record time




Yeah, like only 3 years this time... 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Steel_Wind (Jun 1, 2005)

Dark Jezter said:
			
		

> What did it for me was the scene in _A Storm of Swords_ when (spoiler text, don't highlight if you have a weak stomach) Jaime Lannister has sex with his sister (who happens to be on her period at the time) on the alter in a church.
> 
> I'd been put off by some of the sex scenes described in the book prior to that, but that particular scene almost made me quit the entire series in disgust.




I saw nothing profane or erotic about the scene. It made sense in the context in which it was delivered.  I really don't see why or how "a weak stomach" enters into your quote at all.

I expect that sex and menstruation is something that all adults  - the target audience - are familiar with.

It is scenes like this that break the cookie cutter elements of traditional fantasy and make GRRM's work stronger - not weaker.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jun 1, 2005)

Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> It is scenes like this that break the cookie cutter elements of traditional fantasy and make GRRM's work stronger - not weaker.




While others of us find such scene's overused and excessive. Different strokes for different folks and all. It comes down to the age old question of whether such elements add more sales than they subtract.

Tracy Hickman (IIRC) in Annotated DL Chronicles called it the "boots scene" (or something), referencing Star Trek, where Kirk would have sex with some alien or another. You'd see Kirk getting really close, then flash to Spock & Bones talking about something, then return to Kirk putting on his boots.

I'm not saying adult situations have no place in the novels, but I feel it's excessiveness detracts from the story itself.


----------



## Steel_Wind (Jun 1, 2005)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> While others of us find such scene's overused and excessive. Different strokes for different folks and all. It comes down to the age old question of whether such elements add more sales than they subtract.
> 
> Tracy Hickman (IIRC) in Annotated DL Chronicles called it the "boots scene" (or something), referencing Star Trek, where Kirk would have sex with some alien or another. You'd see Kirk getting really close, then flash to Spock & Bones talking about something, then return to Kirk putting on his boots.
> 
> I'm not saying adult situations have no place in the novels, but I feel it's excessiveness detracts from the story itself.




Except for the fact that:

1 - the mores of American TV are designed with the FCC and children in mind - A Song of Ice and Fire is aimed at adults;

2- the _DragonLance Chronicles_ were written with a primarily adolescent audience in mind, and _a Song of Ice and Fire _ is aimed at adults;

3 - Tracy Hickman is a practicing Mormon who is on record as being appalled by the _Book of Vile Darkness _ and other sexual situations and outright acts of evil being depicted in a game world or novel - whereas GRRM is a committed, left of centre agnostic who does not share Mr. Hickman's values, sensitivities or world perspective.

The sales records and the intense interest in GRRM's series indicate that cookie-cutter bowdlerized fantasy is not what GRRM's target audience seeks.

There is nothing excessive in GRRM's series. I fear your senstivities are attuned to a _much _ lower level than mine.  More to the point - a much lower level than the audience GRRM is writing for.


----------



## jasamcarl (Jun 1, 2005)

This is one of only two fantasy series i've ever read, and if the thematically appropriate sex scenes in this here are out of the norm of the genre, i'm glad for it. 

There are very few scenes that can be described as 'erotic' in any of the books according to my recollection. Of course, I'm sure they are meant to be pleasurable to many of the characters involved, but from the perspective of the majority of the p.o.v. characters, it comes off as trivial and mundane. The aformentioned scene with the Lannister siblings in the church made perfect scence given that 1) they had not seen each other in some time and 2) they don't really believe in the sanctity of the church or really any other institution in a realm obviously more beholdent to the complimentary ideals of family and power than to any sense of a true public welfare/virtue or law; they are realists/cynics, as pretty much most of the major 'villians' in the series are. A crappier pulp author would have used a pretentious narrative to outline this and skip past the actual scene, but I think its a virtue that Martin shows as oppossed to tells.

As to the rape, he certainly doesn't endorse it, but nor does he judge it. Nor should he because the society he is depicting doesn't really do so. Again, show instead of tell and hope the readers get the subtext. I common place nature of rape is consistent with the themes of gender, class, and general status that are laced throughout the story and is IMO a much more important part of 'world building' than geography or a fantastical history because it gives the series texture.

By the way, I'm glad to see the next book is done. It's my favorite guilty pleasure read and I've already wish listed it on amazon.


----------



## KaosDevice (Jun 1, 2005)

Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> There is nothing excessive in GRRM's series. I fear your senstivities are attuned to a _much _ lower level than mine.  More to the point - a much lower level than the audience GRRM is writing for.





I've got to agree with Steel here, there is nothing about SoFaI that is intended really for anyone under the age of 17 if we were going to go by current movie standards. The Dragonlance books seemed definite PG-13 fare to me. I think comparing those two is really an apples and oranges affair. I think the sales statistics of GRRM's books definitely proves there is a market for adult themed fantasy (or, well to go all the way back to Norman's Gor books to invoke the past.)


----------



## Zaukrie (Jun 1, 2005)

I'm excited we'll get a new book this year. I really enjoy these books.

As for the sex, Guy Kay Gavriel, my favorite author right now, has a few scenes you may want to skip, as they are even more graphic than these. Also, I'm sure some would need to skip books from Mercedes Lackey, as I remember a few scenes that would shock some people.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jun 1, 2005)

Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> Except for the fact that:
> 
> 1 - the mores of American TV are designed with the FCC and children in mind - A Song of Ice and Fire is aimed at adults;
> 
> 2- the _DragonLance Chronicles_ were written with a primarily adolescent audience in mind, and _a Song of Ice and Fire _ is aimed at adults;



For starters, I'm 32. The Hickman quote was part of my attempt to illustrate that sexual situations can be present without being overt and excessive. As the saying goes "why is so much that is labeled Adult, usually so immature?"



> 3 - Tracy Hickman is a practicing Mormon who is on record as being appalled by the _Book of Vile Darkness _ and other sexual situations and outright acts of evil being depicted in a game world or novel - whereas GRRM is a committed, left of centre agnostic who does not share Mr. Hickman's values, sensitivities or world perspective.
> 
> The sales records and the intense interest in GRRM's series indicate that cookie-cutter bowdlerized fantasy is not what GRRM's target audience seeks.



It's a bit random really, since there's no way to know if the people driven away by the excessive sexual situations are outnumbered by those encouraged by them. I won't drag religion into it, but perhaps you're failing to see that otehrs view points don't mesh with yours?


> There is nothing excessive in GRRM's series. I fear your senstivities are attuned to a _much _ lower level than mine.  More to the point - a much lower level than the audience GRRM is writing for.



My sensitivities are no lower. They are different. And I didn't lose interest in the books because of the sexual scene's gratuitously planted in every chapter, even those of the 10 year old. It was however one of the things that contributed to my feeling "done" with the books once I finished the trilogy. I'd say you need a refresher on public discussion if the only way to defend the novel is to call people's sensitivities "lower".
Heck, especially given that if I WAS more senstitive, it'd be higher, or something!

You think the sexual situations add to the book, I feel they detract from the book. A difference of opinion.


----------



## Zaukrie (Jun 1, 2005)

I will say I'm not sure they actually add anything to the book. But, I think they are a great marketing gimick, because people feel they are reading "adult" fantasy, instead of kid fantasy. That isn't a slam on anyone, but trust me, that stuff is used to sell the books to adults. I could live without the scenes, I can certainly live with them.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jun 1, 2005)

Zaukrie said:
			
		

> I will say I'm not sure they actually add anything to the book. But, I think they are a great marketing gimick, because people feel they are reading "adult" fantasy, instead of kid fantasy. That isn't a slam on anyone, but trust me, that stuff is used to sell the books to adults. I could live without the scenes, I can certainly live with them.



Like I said, if that were the only detractor from the series, I'd... well, truthfully I'd probably still have lost interest after the long wait. 
I picked them up at once, I didn't wait years to read them. I'd never heard of Martin before reading the books. I do think his influence is a bit over exaggerated in these kind of threads, but then most of the posters are probably pretty diehard fans.


----------



## Mallus (Jun 1, 2005)

Whenever the subject of the 'gratuitous sex scenes in ASoIaF' comes up I get this disorienting 'Damn, did I wake up in an alternate universe again?' feeling... Did we read the same books? 

I have a sneaking suspicion that the answer to that is 'no, no two people ever read the same book, because so much of a book isn't actually on the page'...

Nothing about the series struck me as particularly extreme, compared to other kinds of mainstream fiction. I have to wonder if objections to ASoIaF's content are due to the lingering misconception that fantasy is kiddie lit (which looks to be tacitly accepted by a lot of fantsay fans. Or it could just be that a signifigant number of fantasy readers don't like to read sex scenes). On the whole, fantasy is certainly a tamer genre than, say, thrillers, or horror, or police procedurals, or --gasp-- romances.

You want extreme? Samuel R. Delany's _Dhalgren_, published in 1974. One of the first SF novels to see 1,000,000 copies in print. And its marvelous, to boot.


----------



## KaosDevice (Jun 1, 2005)

Just to mention it again, if you want a pretty obvious example of unneeded eroticisim in fantasy really you need look no farther then John Norman's Gor books...makes ASoFaI look pretty tightly constructed and purposeful by comparison.


----------



## Dark Jezter (Jun 2, 2005)

Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> I saw nothing profane or erotic about the scene. It made sense in the context in which it was delivered.  I really don't see why or how "a weak stomach" enters into your quote at all.




Probably because I'd imagine that most people find incestuous menstral sex a tad on the disturbing side.



> I expect that sex and menstruation is something that all adults  - the target audience - are familiar with.




Familiar with, yes.  Particularly enjoy reading about... well, it's pretty obvious from the responses in this thread that many people (myself included) would rather do without them.



> It is scenes like this that break the cookie cutter elements of traditional fantasy and make GRRM's work stronger - not weaker.




The reason I've (mostly) enjoyed the series so far is because of the intriguing setting and characters.  Not because of gratitious and mostly unneeded sex scenes that seem to occur every few chapters.  You feel such scenes add to the story, but I feel that they definately detract from it.


----------



## KenM (Jun 2, 2005)

Some people think its exessive sex, some people think its fine. It all depends on what each person thinks is exessive and if they think its important to the story.


----------



## soulforge (Jun 2, 2005)

In my opinion just to chime in on the sex scenes I would say that Martin uses them in thematic ways that stay consistent to the story.  That said, I don't mind a randomness to certain stories that occurs while not necessarily furthering the story more so than to cast light on characters.  That's how I view some of the erotic scenes.. namely the greyjoy boatride chapter... 

Another book that people highly argue about, and I'll point to as worse than Martin "although I still enjoy" is the Donaldson Chronicles of Thomas Covenant.


----------



## Endur (Jun 2, 2005)

To be really honest, I kind of skip over the sex scenes and don't really notice them.  I'm more interested in Eddard's flashbacks to Knights of Old and the Targaryen period.

I can see how some people would be offended by the sex scenes.  And, this is yet another way that Martin reminds us that the Lannisters are the "Bad Guys", they even engage in bad sex (i.e. adultery, incest, prostitution, etc.).

Its as unfair to claim Martin's audience likes the sex scenes as it is unfair to claim that Martin's audience does not like the sex scenes.  Martin's audience likes the books as a whole, there are obviously many parts in each book that each reader likes and does not like.  Some like Jon, some do not, etc.

For myself, I tend to agree that the three main characters of the series are Dany, Jon, and Tyrion, which will make this next book somewhat interesting, since none of the three main characters are in it.

My guess is that Jaime will become a feature focus of the next book (i.e. the hero of the book) along with perhaps the Hound and Asha.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jun 2, 2005)

GoodKingJayIII said:
			
		

> Good plotting, good characters, good story.  I never really understood the sex scenes in the book.  They didn't seem to move the plot all that often, and they're pretty gratuitous as well.



The one in the tower in "A Game of Thrones" is a huge plot point, actually. The ones with Daenyrs may or may not be relevant -- there hasn't been enough of her story told yet to know.



> Milking literature is never a good idea.



There doesn't seem to be an ounce of fat in the actual plot. Not sure where the milking would be.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jun 2, 2005)

Starman said:
			
		

> If it's not called The Last Battle, I'll be shocked.



C.S. Lewis got there first and his books are often in the same section of the bookstore.


----------



## Fast Learner (Jun 2, 2005)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> While others of us find such scene's overused and excessive. Different strokes for different folks and all. It comes down to the age old question of whether such elements add more sales than they subtract.



I all comes down to what the author wants to depict, not what affects sales.

It's the total garbage (imo) of most D&D fiction that is the result of it all coming down to whether choices add more sales than they subtract. I know which series will still be read 100 years from now, and it sure isn't Hickman.


----------



## Berandor (Jun 2, 2005)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> FMy sensitivities are no lower. They are different. And I didn't lose interest in the books because of the sexual scene's gratuitously planted in every chapter, even those of the 10 year old. It was however one of the things that contributed to my feeling "done" with the books once I finished the trilogy. I'd say you need a refresher on public discussion if the only way to defend the novel is to call people's sensitivities "lower".
> Heck, especially given that if I WAS more senstitive, it'd be higher, or something!




SPOILERS TO FOLLOW

Now, if we're talking about a good discussion, then I would suggest you abstain from using hyperbole as well. You may have felt as if every chapter was full of gratitious sex scenes, but even with generous counting, that is not nearly true.
Almost all the chapters of the Nightwatch that are not set beyond the wall have no sex in them. I say almost even though I can't remember a specific instant, because maybe there was one.
Almost all of Arya's chapters have no sex in them, even when you have a very low threshold to calling a situation sexual.
A lot of Catelyn's chapters don't have sex. Davos, as well. Sansa's early chapters have no reference to it, and later it's more her fear of being raped - she doesn't even sleep with her husband on their wedding night.

The fact that you attribute every chapter with sexual scenes is simply a personal feeling that is not substantiated by facts. 

I grant you that some scenes were very explicit, but every sexual scene I can remember furthered the plot or my understanding of the characters and the world. It is a harsh world, and therefore the sex scenes are equally harsh at times. I realize that such a world and tone is not for everyone. You don't like it, alright. But you go around stating facts and exaggerations and then attack people for not leading a reasonable discussion. 

If you were interested, we could talk about specific scenes and why I felt they were not gratitious and you felt they were. But since you express no further interest in the books, I don't know whether it would be helpful. The Song of Ice and Fire didn't meet your expectations and preferences, that's fine as is.

I do wonder, though, why nobody feels there's too much violence in the books, especially since a lot more people are killed than get laid, and there are some gruesome descirptions there, as well.


----------



## Endur (Jun 2, 2005)

I'm willing to bet that the original DragonLance trilogy by Weis and Hickman will be read 100 years from now.  

Don't forget -- the original trilogy was hugely popular, so popular it spawned a whole shelf in most bookstores.  

D&D novels before the Dragonlance chronicles were few and far between.



			
				Fast Learner said:
			
		

> It's the total garbage (imo) of most D&D fiction that is the result of it all coming down to whether choices add more sales than they subtract. I know which series will still be read 100 years from now, and it sure isn't Hickman.


----------



## Rhialto (Jun 2, 2005)

Man, if there were any way to collect on that bet, I'd take it...


----------



## takyris (Jun 2, 2005)

Ditto. I read it and liked it as a kid, but even then, I wasn't confusing it with a great work of art or a life-changing piece of entertainment.

If it resonated very deeply with you on a personal level, that's great, but it doesn't have the literary merit to be preserved by the critical-studies folks, and it doesn't have wide enough appeal to still be read and loved 100 years from now.

(My assumption, for those wishing to attack it, is that a book could still be *widely* read after 100 years for two reasons: either it has such literary merit or fills a particular niche in such a way that a bunch of schools start assigning it as a classic (either a simple "this is really good" classic or a "this is an excellent way of seeing how people felt about sin/women/monarchies/the nature of text in this time period"... *or* it is such a massive popular success that it still maintains some popularity in the later time. There aren't many of the latter. I loved reading _Pride & Prejudice_ and several of the Shakespeare plays, and I did so on my own, but I doubt I'd have done so without having a school tell me to read 'em in the first place. The works of Poe might still be considered popular enough that people who read one Poe story in school might hunt for others on their own.  

Beyond those, I can't think offhand of anything being widely read as popular fiction and not a school assignment today that was written 100 years ago. That leaves only the "works assigned in lots of colleges or universities because of the literary merit of the story", and as I said, I liked the original Chronicles, but I don't think many people in a position to judge seriously are going to argue that the Dragonlance Chronicles should be stuck next to _Gawain and the Green Knight_ or _La Morte D'Arthur_ or _Beowulf_ or _The Tempest_ as a literary powerhouse in the annals of fantasy. I can see the occasional university picking up the Chronicles and assigning it near the end of the semester, after the students have read the old literary classics and then Tolkien, as kind of a "And here's an iconic example of what it looks like today" thing -- but only as an afterthought in a class already devoted to reading fantasy, and probably not when there are works with stronger literary prowess that could be put in the same place.

While my enjoyment for these books was about equal to my enjoyment of the Chronicles, I'd expect to see Mieville or Bujold or Gaiman taught in a fantasy-lit class before Weiss & Hickman. That says more about lit classes than it does about the books in question, but that's been my experience. When I took a course on Science Fiction literature, we read Neuromancer and Blade Runner (and some Stanislaw Lem and Cordwainer Smith and other people I'd never have known about beforehand); we didn't read Star Trek novelizations.

And as I said, without the college-lit angle, that only leaves sheer popularity and possible book-club "You and all your friends should get together and read this book and discuss it!" stuff, and I don't see that happening, either. It just isn't that widely read beyond the gamer field.)


----------



## Starman (Jun 2, 2005)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> C.S. Lewis got there first and his books are often in the same section of the bookstore.




It's not as if it has never happened before. Do you think that anyone would really confuse the two?

Starman


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jun 3, 2005)

Fast Learner said:
			
		

> I all comes down to what the author wants to depict, not what affects sales.



Sales are a good indication of what the fan's like though, nay? It's pointless as there's no way to say how they would have sold any other way.


> It's the total garbage (imo) of most D&D fiction that is the result of it all coming down to whether choices add more sales than they subtract. I know which series will still be read 100 years from now, and it sure isn't Hickman.




There's no way to know, but I'm still not sure why folks think Martin's works are so lauded. Aside from this message board I hadn't heard of him. They don't get special placing in the bookstores or anything. If the measure of success is that they are lauded by college lit professors, then I use a different measure.


----------



## Teflon Billy (Jun 3, 2005)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> ...I'm still not sure why folks think Martin's works are so lauded. Aside from this message board I hadn't heard of him. They don't get special placing in the bookstores or anything. If the measure of success is that they are lauded by college lit professors, then I use a different measure.




I'm almost certain you do. I place almost no value on what the lowest common denominator finds value in. MacDonalds, Celine Dion, and Danielle Steele novels hold no cachet with me despite the overwhelming support of the masses.

And the hell of it is...I don't think of my tastes as being particularly refined.

I just don't think saying "It sells very well" should be the silver bullet when discussing quality. Ussually if somehting sells well it's because it's the most simply executed and because it requires the least effort from the consumer.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jun 3, 2005)

Berandor said:
			
		

> SPOILERS TO FOLLOW
> 
> Now, if we're talking about a good discussion, then I would suggest you abstain from using hyperbole as well. You may have felt as if every chapter was full of gratitious sex scenes, but even with generous counting, that is not nearly true.



It's not totally true, you got me there. But "gratuitous sex scene" is different than what I'm talking about. The content of the scene's may not be gratuitous in and of themselves, but their overuse was gratuitous.



> Almost all of Arya's chapters have no sex in them, even when you have a very low threshold to calling a situation sexual.



It's been a while, but while she was captured, I remember a rape scene here and there.


> The fact that you attribute every chapter with sexual scenes is simply a personal feeling that is not substantiated by facts.



No, it's simply a misstatement by myself. I know not every chapter has sex in it, but at the same time, you're neglecting quite a few scene's that contained sexual content that were not central to that scene.


> I grant you that some scenes were very explicit, but every sexual scene I can remember furthered the plot or my understanding of the characters and the world. It is a harsh world, and therefore the sex scenes are equally harsh at times. I realize that such a world and tone is not for everyone. You don't like it, alright. But you go around stating facts and exaggerations and then attack people for not leading a reasonable discussion.



Perhaps you missed it, but my comment was directed towards being told I have lower sensitivities. You seem to attribute the comments from that post to every other post I've made in the thread.




> If you were interested, we could talk about specific scenes and why I felt they were not gratitious and you felt they were. But since you express no further interest in the books, I don't know whether it would be helpful. The Song of Ice and Fire didn't meet your expectations and preferences, that's fine as is.



We couldn't, simply because I don't have the books anymore, and it's been a while since I read them. In many ways, it's window dressing I think, most people probably glossed over the  little details that bugged me, so unless one or both of us did a careful rereading, it's pretty pointless as a discussion, nay? 

A word about expectations though. I had none, I pretty much picked up the first novel at random, because it was big. I enjoyed it enough to buy the next two novels. All the little details just culminated in a feeling I didn't care to read the rest. Besides, like I said, given the timeframe involved, I doubt I'd have remained loyal even had a liked them.


> I do wonder, though, why nobody feels there's too much violence in the books, especially since a lot more people are killed than get laid, and there are some gruesome descirptions there, as well.



Because I live in America, and sell guns! I'm totally desensitized to violence!
Actually, the violence is to be expected a book such as this, and a lot of the gory details were fairly glossed over. Catelyn's throat cutting may have been excessive perhaps, but by then I truely hated Catelyn's chapters and nearly cheered when I thought they were over.

Really, the sex stuff was maybe 5-10% of why I disliked the books at the end. More had to do with the lack of achievements/landmarks for a lot of the characters, who it seemed wandered back and forth at times. There were other things too, but I've been in these discussions before, and it never goes anywhere.


----------



## Endur (Jun 3, 2005)

Well, that's kind of what folks said about Tolkien's Lord of the Rings.  They even wanted to take his professorship away from him because they felt they were below his position.



			
				takyris said:
			
		

> If it resonated very deeply with you on a personal level, that's great, but it doesn't have the literary merit to be preserved by the critical-studies folks, and it doesn't have wide enough appeal to still be read and loved 100 years from now.




Its really hard to say whats going to have appeal 100 years later.  

If you were to roll the clock back to the first decade after they were written, would you expect Sherlock Holmes, Conan, Doc Savage, Lord of the Rings, or the Chronicles of Narnia to still be popular even 50 years later, let alone 100 years?


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jun 3, 2005)

Teflon Billy said:
			
		

> I'm almost certain you do. I place almost no value on what the lowest common denominator finds value in. MacDonalds, Celine Dion, and Danielle Steele novels hold no cachet with me despite the overwhelming support of the masses.
> 
> And the hell of it is...I don't think of my tastes as being particularly refined.
> 
> I just don't think saying "It sells very well" should be the silver bullet when discussing quality. Ussually if somehting sells well it's because it's the most simply executed and because it requires the least effort from the consumer.




I tend to find that most college lit material is more geared towards making things match their preconceptions of what good literature is. When something that is nearly unreadable is lauded for being a great piece of literature, because it's written by someone taught on that method, it doesn't really make it a good piece IMO.

I don't think dismissing the catagory out of hand is right either, though. I just mean it's only one method of figuring the worth of a book. Sales alone aren't really the best method, given that you need to BUY the book before you can read it. 

(Like the NY Times Bestseller Lists. They have quite a few catagories, and I'm sure the book companies stagger releases to get Top Ten by virtue of not much else to choose from that week. 

So, if in 100 years, Song of Ice & Fire is held in high regard in college circles, it doesn't make it a good book, any more than it makes it a bad book. If Dragonlance Chronicles is only popular by virtue of being a great selling book in 100 years, that doesn't mean it's garbage.

And, no one tell the DM I'm here typing this while I'm supposed to be paying attention!


----------



## Dark Jezter (Jun 3, 2005)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> Actually, the violence is to be expected a book such as this, and a lot of the gory details were fairly glossed over. Catelyn's throat cutting may have been excessive perhaps, but by then I truely hated Catelyn's chapters and nearly cheered when I thought they were over.




And I thought I was the only one. 

Yeah, Catelyn really started to grate on my nerves after a while.  By Book 3, I was so tired of Catelyn's constant angsting that her death came as a relief.  She was easily my least-favorite of the POV characters.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jun 3, 2005)

Dark Jezter said:
			
		

> And I thought I was the only one.
> 
> Yeah, Catelyn really started to grate on my nerves after a while.  By Book 3, I was so tired of Catelyn's constant angsting that her death came as a relief.  She was easily my least-favorite of the POV characters.




For me, it was worse than that, not only did I hate Catelyn, but everyone in her chapters seemed diminished by it.


----------



## Pants (Jun 3, 2005)

Hm, I never really felt the Catelyn hate. True, she was one of my 'least favorite characters' (okay, maybe she was my least favorite, though I never cared for Bran much...), but a lot of her actions felt justified by what was happening to her and her family...

I REALLY, abosolutely hated and loathed Sansa up until _Storm of Swords_ somewhere. Ugh, prissy little princess and her fawning over Joff made me hate her. Especially how she took almost every chance to lash out at Arya and blame her for stuff...

Then again, her last chapter in _Storm of Swords_ was heartbreaking...


----------



## ShadowX (Jun 3, 2005)

I am slightly irked both by the explicitness of the sex scenes and their frequency.  Someone mentioned Gavriel Kay as using such scenes similarly.  Both authors spend too much time on gratuitous details that are ultimately trivial to the story.  However, Kay only uses, at most, two or three such scenes in his books and nearly every one has some ulterior context or significance.  In contrast, Martin abuses intercourse; the power is drained from it until it becomes trite and its efficacy is lost when it truly matters.


----------



## Nifft (Jun 3, 2005)

I just love the GRRM perspective shift with each PC-- er, POV character.

Sure, some I relate to less than others -- Sansa and Catelyn rank high in not relating -- but still, I get the impression that I'm really seeing through the eyes of someone who's strictly honor-bound like her late lord father, but in severe denial about what's going on around her (Sansa) or someone who's severely depressed by the loss of her children, her father, and her lord husband's death (Catelyn) and is seeing the world colored by thick, grey despair.

I most closely relate to Jon Snow and Arya.

 -- N


----------



## Captain Tagon (Jun 3, 2005)

Nifft said:
			
		

> I most closely relate to Jon Snow and Arya.
> 
> -- N




Yeah, Jon is easily my favorite character.


----------



## Dark Jezter (Jun 3, 2005)

Before his death, Ned Stark was my favorite character.  Now, my favorite character is probably Tyrion, followed by Arya.

Of course, there are some non-POV characters I really like, too: such as the Hound, Bronn, Shagga, the Blackfish, and (of course) *Hodor*.


----------



## Captain Tagon (Jun 3, 2005)

Dark Jezter said:
			
		

> Before his death, Ned Stark was my favorite character.  Now, my favorite character is probably Tyrion, followed by Arya.
> 
> Of course, there are some non-POV characters I really like, too: such as the Hound, Bronn, Shagga, the Blackfish, and (of course) *Hodor*.





I agree with all of that except Tyrion, lol. But it is all good. Bronn and the Hound are two that really intrigue me.


----------



## takyris (Jun 3, 2005)

Endur said:
			
		

> Its really hard to say whats going to have appeal 100 years later.




I agree. Which is why I didn't do so. 

I make no claims of knowing what *will* be widely popular 100 years from now. I can, however, comfortably hazard a guess as to whether an individual work *won't* be widely popular 100 years from now.

Dragonlance won't be taught in schools -- which, while I accept and heartily endorse Voc's point that what's taught in schools isn't a mark of true quality any more than popularity is, still means that it won't get that university publicity that Virginia Woolf and Jane Austen are getting these days. And while the Chronicles are reasonably popular (and very well-known within the gamer-geek world), they don't have the mass of appeal that Holmes, Conan, Savage, Hobbits, or Aslan do -- heck, they might sell better, but the folks above are so well-remembered at least partly because they were the big fish in the little pond of the time, creating a new genre or showing themselves to be remarkably fine examples of a genre with few competitors. Dragonlance, on the other hand, is one fantasy series among a whole lot of other fantasy series. It's great that it's based on D&D -- that's why I read it -- but 100 years from now, that's not going to be a selling point for anyone but very old roleplayers. If it weren't based on D&D, what would differentiate it from all the other fantasy in the very big fantasy-fiction pond?  (Sure, not as big as I'd like, but a heck of a lot bigger than it was 100 years ago.) What's going to make people 100 years from now choose these books instead of Tolkien, Martin, Gaiman, Hobb, Keyes, Modessit, Lackey, Britain, or anyone else? I'm not saying the aforementioned authors are better, but if you ask in general fantasy-reader circles and not gamer-specific-circles, I believe all of the above (except maybe Britain) outsell the Dragonlance Chronicles.

The only thing different about the Dragonlance books is the D&D basis, and I doubt that's going to keep it going for anyone but historical gamer-geeks a hundred years from now.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jun 3, 2005)

takyris said:
			
		

> The only thing different about the Dragonlance books is the D&D basis, and I doubt that's going to keep it going for anyone but historical gamer-geeks a hundred years from now.




I think DL is a bit more well known than most of the D&D fiction, but hard to say. I wonder how the Young Adult series is going...
Anyway, I brought up DL, not to compare the books, but to credit the quote to Tracy Hickman about Boot Scenes.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jun 3, 2005)

Nifft said:
			
		

> I just love the GRRM perspective shift with each PC-- er, POV character.
> -- N




The POV stuff was nicely done and I also thought he did a great job of introducing new characters that were very important later in the books (or adding a viewpoint, ala Jaime) and making them interesting.
On the other hand, I think he didn't develop the old characters as well over time. The "no character is safe" style didn't bother me, but I also didn't think it was some great advancement in writing.


----------



## Berandor (Jun 3, 2005)

> Because I live in America, and sell guns! I'm totally desensitized to violence!






> Really, the sex stuff was maybe 5-10% of why I disliked the books at the end. More had to do with the lack of achievements/landmarks for a lot of the characters, who it seemed wandered back and forth at times. There were other things too, but I've been in these discussions before, and it never goes anywhere.



True; that's why I didn't really press on specific scenes. I'm not going to make you like the books, and you're not going to make me not read them.


----------



## KenM (Jun 3, 2005)

I have a slight problem with the POV style. Whenever GRRM puts in a new POV, you end up symathizing with that character. The Storm of Swords paperback had a preview from Feast for Crows, a Chersi POV. I have not read it, but I think reading her POV will detract from the character a bit. We need "good" bad guys. If he starts a Chersi POV, you might end up liking her. 
I have an idea on Sansa's fate: 



Spoiler



She will kill Chersi and in the process become excatly like her, the person she hated the most, in order to survive.


----------



## Mallus (Jun 3, 2005)

KenM said:
			
		

> I have not read it, but I think reading her POV will detract from the character a bit.



Huh? So good characters come from _less_ characterization? Sounds kinda Zen... 


> We need "good" bad guys.



What do you mean? It sounds like your saying 'we need cyphers for pure evil' rather than antagonists who are fully fleshed out human beings.

How is having access to a character's interior life detrimental? Isn't that sort of the point of fiction?

BTW, I think your spoiler is dead-on.


----------



## KenM (Jun 3, 2005)

I think that the when you have bad guys in fiction, movies, ect.. You need to have the audence really not like them. If you show part of why they do what they do, it might make the audence sympathize with them, reducing how "bad" or "evil" they are.


----------



## Mallus (Jun 3, 2005)

KenM said:
			
		

> If you show part of why they do what they do, it might make the audence sympathize with them, reducing how "bad" or "evil" they are.



But the more an audience is made to indentify with the villians, the more powerful the emotional response to their villiany. It closes the distance. Makes my a little complicit. If I'm made to question, even for a moment, the difference between myself and a person who  commits atrocities, then I've had exactly the kind of experience I'm looking for in art. Works the other way too. I want heroes that are flawed, accessible. Its hard for me to vicariously participate in their heroism if they are so completely removed from my interior world. 

Theres a place for Snidely Whiplash and robots bulit for evil; I think they're as fun as the next guy. But I'm just not going to have a deep and meaningful response to them.


----------



## KenM (Jun 3, 2005)

Good points, Mallus. Just sometimes I like to understand a bad guy (Vader, Mr. Morden) other times I just want a bad guy to be a bad guy.


----------



## Mallus (Jun 3, 2005)

KenM said:
			
		

> Just sometimes I like to understand a bad guy (Vader, Mr. Morden) other times I just a bad guy to be a bad guy.



I can relate. Sometimes fun should just be fun. In the way food should sometimes jsut be sugar and fat...

Though I'd say Mr. Morden is a pure bad guy, a cypher with style and some great lines. Now Bester on the other hand (or even Londo, though I don't accept he's one of B5's proper villians)...


----------



## KenM (Jun 3, 2005)

Mallus said:
			
		

> Though I'd say Mr. Morden is a pure bad guy, a cypher with style and some great lines. Now Bester on the other hand (or even Londo, though I don't accept he's one of B5's proper villians)...




  If you get a chance, try to read the B5 novel "The Shadow Within" it deals with Anna Sheridian's and Mr. Morden's trip to a little planet. Provides some good insights to his character. Sorry for the hijack.


----------



## KaosDevice (Jun 3, 2005)

A POV I would like to see would be either Berric Dondarrion or Thoros of Myr, I love those guys.


----------



## Dagger75 (Jun 3, 2005)

[sblock] I still think The Hound is dead.  I don't know what you are all looking forward to. [/sblock]

 I would love a PoV chapter for Bronn.  He was one of the coolest "background" characters.  I just hope Syrio pops up again.


 And really the only chapters I had a hard time reading where Bran's.  I didn't mind Sansa or Caitlyn.


----------



## Rhialto (Jun 3, 2005)

Dagger75 said:
			
		

> [sblock] I still think The Hound is dead.  I don't know what you are all looking forward to. [/sblock]
> 
> I would love a PoV chapter for Bronn.  He was one of the coolest "background" characters.  I just hope Syrio pops up again.
> 
> ...




[sblock]You're waiting for the return of Syrio, and you're snorting at the people who think the _Hound_ is dead?    [/sblock]

But I'm happy he's finished--sorta...


----------



## Lord Pendragon (Jun 3, 2005)

My two bits regarding the sex in the series:

Some have claimed that the sex scenes are "trivial to the plot" and therefore excessive and gratuitous.  While I agree that they're mostly trivial to the _plot_ (save Cersei and Jaime at the beginning of GoT, of course), they _aren't_ trivial to the _story_.  In nearly every instance, the sex scenes furthered atmosphere, characterization, or theme.

Take the rapine present in many of the army scenes.  For me, it served to reinforce the realization that these are _not_ the armies of _Lord of the Rings_ or _Braveheart_ or _First Knight_.  That these aren't the clean, whitewashed armies you see in much fantasy, that march across the plains without stripping the land of food and raping whenever they can.  The rape told me that these were _dirty_ armies.  Sure, GRRM drives this point home in other ways as well, but the rape is a part of that.

Tyrion's sex scenes helped characterize him as much as his political intrigues, maybe more.  I could see him falling in love with Shae, and I could see her _not_ falling in love with him.

Likewise the blunt, disturbing nature of Cersei and Jaime on that altar showed me a lot about their relationship.  It also served to slightly repulse me viscerally, which by that point the mere reality of their incest no longer did.  I was shocked into remembering just how twisted their sexual relationship is.

Even Dany's scenes with Khal Drogo revealed a lot about Dany's state of mind.

Really, the only sex scenes that I didn't feel showed me a lot were the scenes between Dany and Irri.  And one could make a decent case that those serve to emphasize female sexuality in a thematic sense.  To drive home the sexual motivations that all people--male and female--are driven by.







			
				KenM said:
			
		

> I have a slight problem with the POV style. Whenever GRRM puts in a new POV, you end up symathizing with that character. The Storm of Swords paperback had a preview from Feast for Crows, a Chersi POV. I have not read it, but I think reading her POV will detract from the character a bit. We need "good" bad guys. If he starts a Chersi POV, you might end up liking her.



Have you read any Guy Gavriel Kay?  He's infamous for writing novels with no villains.


----------



## Dagger75 (Jun 3, 2005)

Rhialto said:
			
		

> [sblock]You're waiting for the return of Syrio, and you're snorting at the people who think the _Hound_ is dead?    [/sblock]
> 
> But I'm happy he's finished--sorta...




Yup, thats exactly what I'm doing.


----------



## Endur (Jun 4, 2005)

[sblock]The Hound has to kill the Mountain.  Its what has to happen.  Ideally, the Hound has to save Sansa from the Mountain.  Which requires the Mountain to get better first, of course.[/sblock]



			
				Dagger75 said:
			
		

> [sblock] I still think The Hound is dead.  I don't know what you are all looking forward to. [/sblock]


----------



## Endur (Jun 4, 2005)

Huh?  He had villains all over his novels.  
Fionvar Tapestry: Lots of villains.

Song for Arbonne: Two major villains, although one comes close to being redeemed and several minor villains.

Granted, Guy Gavriel Kay does make his villains look like human beings, but that doesn't change that they are villains.





			
				Lord Pendragon said:
			
		

> Have you read any Guy Gavriel Kay?  He's infamous for writing novels with no villains.


----------



## Lord Pendragon (Jun 4, 2005)

Endur said:
			
		

> Huh?  He had villains all over his novels.
> Fionvar Tapestry: Lots of villains.



I can't really speak to this one.  I've tried reading it a couple times, and found it unreadable every time.  Sad, since I know it's GGK's favorite of his own works.  :\ 







> Granted, Guy Gavriel Kay does make his villains look like human beings, but that doesn't change that they are villains.



No, it's more than that.  You mentioned one book.  Let me give you a few more to consider.

Tigana:  *spoiler tagged by request*



Spoiler



The "villain" is a sorcerer-king who cursed an entire country and stole it's name.  Why?  Because they killed his beloved son in battle.  Was he an evil man?  Not at all.  Indeed, he's so noble that a woman from Tigana who spends _years_ infiltrating his regime winds up unable to take her revenge on him.  He loved his son, and struck out against the people who killed him.  It was a harsh revenge, but arguably more merciful than many other things he could have done.



The Lions of Al-Rassan:  Who was the villain here?  Roderigo, fighting for his people?  Or Ammar, fighting for _his_?

Sailing to Sarantium:  Again, where's the villain?  The Emperor?

Plenty of characters come into conflict with each other.  Plenty of characters have selfish motives, but just as many have noble ones.  Yes, there are antagonists.  But I stand by my assertion that for the bulk of GGK's works, there aren't any villains.


----------



## JoeBlank (Jun 4, 2005)

Hey Lord Pendragon, any chance you can spoiler your summary of Tigana? It is one of my favorites, but your description reveals a little too much for those who have not read the book.


----------



## Endur (Jun 4, 2005)

Spoilers for Guy Gavriel Kay novels Tigana and Lions of Al Rhassan
[sblock]
Tigana: The Sorcerer-King was close to redemption, but he was a villain when he was younger.  He chose to conquer nine countries to create a second kingdom.  Conquest is villainy.  Perhaps not Chaotic Evil, but certainly Lawful Evil.

Other villains in Tigana ... the rival sorceror-king, the Queen in the South, various lesser players in the story.  Yes, they are "human" villains, but villains nonetheless.

The Lions of Al-Rassan ... neither Roderigo nor Ammar.  The villains were their rulers who sent them out to die.

etc.
[/sblock]


----------



## Lord Pendragon (Jun 4, 2005)

Endur said:
			
		

> Spoilers for Guy Gavriel Kay novels Tigana and Lions of Al Rhassan
> [sblock]
> Tigana: The Sorcerer-King was close to redemption, but he was a villain when he was younger.  He chose to conquer nine countries to create a second kingdom.  Conquest is villainy.  Perhaps not Chaotic Evil, but certainly Lawful Evil.
> 
> ...



Suffice it to say, we disagree about the nature of these characters.  Or perhaps the nature of villains.  I certainly disagree with your comment that conquest is villainy.


----------



## ShadowDenizen (Jun 7, 2005)

> The only thing different about the Dragonlance books is the D&D basis, and I doubt that's going to keep it going for anyone but historical gamer-geeks a hundred years from now.




Not to go all "Off-Topic" here, but the Dragonlance books (Well, the Chronicles and Legends, anyway!!)  have appeal far beyond the D+D audience: I personally know of quite a few people (ALL of them "Non-Gamers", many of them female) who read and enjoyed these books.

While it was Weis and Hickmans' debut together, and the prose isn't quite as good (realtively speaking) as some of their later stuff, there's still alot to recommend these books, even to Non-Gamers.  Interesting characters (many of my Non-gamer friends know who Raistlin and Tasslehoff are), a love-triangle and an interesting thematic statement that "Good Redeems it's own, while Evil inevitably turns upon itself."

While I do agree that they don't have the status of the "Narnia" books, or the "Tolkien" books, and probably never will, but don't discount the Chornicles and Legends having some staying power.  They've been around for about 20 years, and are STILL being reprinted for new audiences.

Meanwhile, wandering back to the topic...
Gotta say that my favorite characters are Hodor and Danys, though I think I most identify with either Jon or Tyrion.


----------



## GoodKingJayIII (Jun 8, 2005)

Krafus said:
			
		

> If you think GRRM is milking his readers, you haven't read Robert Jordan's _Wheel of Time series_...




I have read all 10 of Jordan's monstrosities.  Needless to say I'm hooked, but not in the good way, but more in the "this is one train wreck I have to see to the end" way! 



			
				Krafus said:
			
		

> As for the sex scenes, I'm glad they're in it. Sex is a part of life, and I'm sick of fantasy authors who give us blood and gore by the bucketful but shy away from any mention of sex.




I can't deny that fantasy has been known for its prudishness.  But whatever the scene is portraying, it should advance character development, plot, or something else important that drives the novel forward.  Maybe these bits and pieces moved the novel forward for you, but they didn't for me.


----------



## stevelabny (Jun 8, 2005)

not every bit and piece needs to move the books plot forward. 
character development is important too.

and i have one question to those who think the sex scenes dont move the book forward or add anything of value.
do you like the lord of the rings?
because those books have tons of stuff that is completely irrelevant to the plot, the characters, the mood, and anyting else you can think of.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jun 8, 2005)

stevelabny said:
			
		

> not every bit and piece needs to move the books plot forward.
> character development is important too.
> 
> and i have one question to those who think the sex scenes dont move the book forward or add anything of value.
> ...




I liked LotR, but the return question is simply this:
Plenty of folks didn't like LotR because of all the added stuff, which they believe ruined the pacing and made the books impossible to read. Are those people Wrong?

Different people have different opinions, there's no reason to go on the offensive to make them see the "error of their ways" because they don't agree with yours. Unless somehow bringing up LotR wasn't some attempt at saying "if you liked LotR, but not SoI&F, you're a hypocrit".


----------



## GoodKingJayIII (Jun 8, 2005)

stevelabny said:
			
		

> character development is important too.




Hence, the reason I said a scene should advance character development, among other things 



			
				stevelabny said:
			
		

> and i have one question to those who think the sex scenes dont move the book forward or add anything of value.
> do you like the lord of the rings?
> because those books have tons of stuff that is completely irrelevant to the plot, the characters, the mood, and anyting else you can think of.




I love LotR for a number of different reasons (nostalgia not being the least of them).  That doesn't mean I can't identify its faults either.  Reading them now is more difficult, and to be honest, I'll skip filler to move to the parts I love.

I'm not saying Martin is a bad author.  I think he's very good, and I imagine I'll read this book eventually (especially since I love AGoT so much).  What I am saying is that there are a certain kind and amount of filler I can tolerate.  As a personal preference, I tend to prefer authors that discuss sex more discreetly and less overtly.  If there are explicit scenes, I judge them based on any other overt action:  does it move plot forward?  Does it advance character development?  Is it interesting?  Can I relate to it?  Obviously not everything in a book is going to move the plot forward, but if I'm disagreeing with the importance of a lot of scenes in a book, I'm probably not enjoying it.

But this horse is long dead, and I probably shouldn't have scrounged up the responses to my earliest post.  No more responses from me on this particular topic.  Be happy to continue talking about the book though.


----------



## Dark Jezter (Jun 9, 2005)

stevelabny said:
			
		

> and i have one question to those who think the sex scenes dont move the book forward or add anything of value.
> do you like the lord of the rings?
> because those books have tons of stuff that is completely irrelevant to the plot, the characters, the mood, and anyting else you can think of.




Yes, I like Lord of the Rings despite the fact that parts of it are agonizingly slow and pointless (not to mention the bad poetry thrown in every few pages), just as I like a Song of Ice & Fire despite the all of the gratitious and pointless sex scenes (after reading the 20th or so sex scene between Shae and Tyrion, I started to notice they were following a pattern: Tyrion shows up at wherever he's hiding Shae, he contemplates on how badly he missed her, Shae talks dirty to him and calls him pet names like "my Giant of Lannister", they get naked, do the deed, followed by some pillow-talk and angsting over their secret affair.  Lather, rinse, repeat).


----------



## ssampier (Jun 14, 2005)

Thanks George! Now since you wrote half of ADwD, you can finish the book and series before I'm old and grey*.

As for the sex, I like it. I admit, on one hand I like the idea of sex in a fantasy novel, it's so anti-Tolkein. Tolkein creatures never seem to breed, rather than just "pop" out of the earth (and sky). On the other hand, the incestuous sex is disturbing; I never thought I’d think to myself, “What the HELL am I reading?”

I continue reading anyway and I learned quite a bit about the characters by their sexual demeanors, as it were. I anxiously await Jaime’s reaction when he realizes that his sister is not faithful as he is.

*I’m 24 now


----------



## The_lurkeR (Jun 14, 2005)

ssampier said:
			
		

> I anxiously await Jaime’s reaction when he realizes that his sister is not faithful as he is.




I don't think he cares anymore. My interpretation from the end of the last book is that he has moved on, and discovered his true love is the knighthood. I think the Jaime we see in the future books will be very different from what we've seen so far.


----------



## BryonD (Jun 24, 2005)

Release date is Nov 8 per Georgerrmartin.com.


----------



## KenM (Jun 24, 2005)

BryonD said:
			
		

> Release date is Nov 8 per Georgerrmartin.com.




  Any word on final page count?


----------



## BryonD (Jun 24, 2005)

Nope just the date.

The old update said 1650 to 1700 pages before he split it into two books and he also said that the next book is now half done due to the split.  So I'd guess around 2/3 of 1650 or in the 1100 ballpark.


----------



## Alaric_Prympax (Jun 24, 2005)

Those are manuscript pages GRRM is talking about.  The ratio is one and half manuscript pages to a printed page, at least that's what I've heard  (or I should say read) from him in the past.  GRRM also said that AFfC should be about the size of AGoT.  I hope that helps.


----------



## BryonD (Jun 24, 2005)

Ah, thanks.


----------



## The_lurkeR (Jun 25, 2005)

Approx. 1100 pages, or comparable to AGoT.



Edit: 
(woops... didn't see the replies already on this page.)


----------



## Nifft (Jun 25, 2005)

[whine] I want it sooner. [/whine]

 -- N


----------



## Lalato (Jun 27, 2005)

Eosin the Red said:
			
		

> I never noticed the "gratitious sex scenes." I know the book is graphic and not "grandma" safe but they just didn't leap out at me as overly done or overly frequent - and part of aSoI&Fs charm (IMO) is the very base human emotions _(revenge, lust, greed, fanatisism)_  that drive the whole series. Most fiction glosses over sexuality as ocuring off stage and with little bearing on the overall story (Arthur, Lancelot, & Guinevere anyone) but really those desires are core to many great tales. Then again maybe I am a little more desensitized than most?




I agree...  I hardly noticed it.  I'm not sure why others see it as gratuitous.  

I'm eagerly awaiting the next installment, I don't care if it has to be split into two, three or four books.  I enjoy reading about all the characters.  

EDIT:  I wrote my comments above before reading the remainder of this thread...  please there is no need to continue to the "sex" discussion.  

--sam


----------



## Nifft (Jun 29, 2005)

Hey, I just noticed something: Joffrey's now-unused sword ("Widow's Wail") is just the right size to replace Needle, some day in the future.

And it kinda belongs with a Stark.

I wonder if Rikkon will get Oathkeeper.

 -- N


----------



## Sarigar (Jul 17, 2005)

FoC has been pushed back to November.  Maybe this time we will get it when expected.  







Or, maybe not.


----------



## Andre (Jul 18, 2005)

Krafus said:
			
		

> As for the sex scenes, I'm glad they're in it. Sex is a part of life, and I'm sick of fantasy authors who give us blood and gore by the bucketful but shy away from any mention of sex.




Defecation is a part of life. I don't want explicit defecation scenes in my books. The miracle of birth is a part of life. I don't want explicit birth scenes in my books. There's a big difference between a book having "adult" material and having "mature" material. 

IMO, too much of Martin's writing is both adult and immature. A real pity, as he has some good, imaginative ideas for fantasy stories.


----------



## Fast Learner (Jul 18, 2005)

So very weird to me. It's like when people suggest that breast feeding in public is wrong because we defecate in private. That comparison makes as much sense to me as this one. I'm not mocking; I just literally cannot follow the logic.


----------



## BryonD (Jul 18, 2005)

Fast Learner said:
			
		

> So very weird to me. It's like when people suggest that breast feeding in public is wrong because we defecate in private. That comparison makes as much sense to me as this one. I'm not mocking; I just literally cannot follow the logic.



The Martin stuff doesn't bother me, so I'm not defending the "its bad" side.

But.....

I think you've twisted the arguement here.  He didn't suggest anything at all like that.
The "point" was made that graphic sex is ok in fiction simple because it is it is part of real life.
This is a very weak arguement and Andre showed the weakness of it.  He wasn't stating that being done in private means it SHOULD NEVER be in lit, he was just saying that being part of life alone does NOT at all establish any value of putting it in lit.

Of course, bad arguements can be made for the "right" side of a debate.  I'm fine with the gratuitous nature of the books because it does maintain the overall tone of what these people deal with and what motivates them.  That some of these things are also part of day to day life has no bearing whatsoever on how they would fit in or add to the book.  And in my opinion it is pretty silly to suggest that this reasoning somehow supports it.


----------



## Dark Jezter (Jul 18, 2005)

Andre said:
			
		

> Defecation is a part of life. I don't want explicit defecation scenes in my books. The miracle of birth is a part of life. I don't want explicit birth scenes in my books. There's a big difference between a book having "adult" material and having "mature" material.
> 
> IMO, too much of Martin's writing is both adult and immature. A real pity, as he has some good, imaginative ideas for fantasy stories.



 That pretty much sums up my thoughts on the sex scenes as well.  Good post.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 18, 2005)

Having recently re-read all three books in a row, I did notice a jump in sexual explicitness in book 3 (_Storm of Swords_). The other two books had sex as an element vital to several plots & characters, but used some tact in discussing it. The third book was -- well, explicit.

It did kinda rub me wrong. The style of the first two felt more classy.

 -- N


----------



## ssampier (Jul 19, 2005)

Nifft said:
			
		

> Having recently re-read all three books in a row, I did notice a jump in sexual explicitness in book 3 (_Storm of Swords_). The other two books had sex as an element vital to several plots & characters, but used some tact in discussing it. The third book was -- well, explicit.
> 
> It did kinda rub me wrong. The style of the first two felt more classy.
> 
> -- N




Incestuous sex is "classy"? I agree, with you, though -- sorta. Book Three had more blatant sex between Tyrion and his paid "love".


----------



## Nighthawk (Jul 19, 2005)

At this point, any future books are not a priority. Because of the gap in time, I have moved on to other books. I am not unhappy or intensely dissatisfied, I just moved on. Because of that, I am unlikely to go back. I have yet to decide whether or not I will purchase any of the books, although if I do so, it will only be after the complete series is available to the public.


----------



## BlackSilver (Jul 20, 2005)

Nifft said:
			
		

> Hey, I just noticed something: Joffrey's now-unused sword ("Widow's Wail") is just the right size to replace Needle, some day in the future.
> 
> And it kinda belongs with a Stark.
> 
> I wonder if Rikkon will get Oathkeeper.




Such a good point (no pun intended).    


A recent thought was brought to my attention and I have been thinking about it.

If you like the books, but have trouble reading them (for what ever reason) I suggest the audio version.  I have read all the books a couple of times now, but when I heard it read the books became something else- something better (thank you, Harmon for the suggestion).  

My GF has struggled to get through the books for years (not her style of read, but she knows I love the books so they can’t be bad), upon hearing the first hour of GoT she was hooked.  

It was this “hooking” that my GF said something (the point of this post) about George’s age and concern that he would finish the books before his passing  :\ .  It is kind of a cold or cruel thing to think, however it is very realistic.  Should writers that work on series scribble out notes as to where the story is going so that other writers can pick up the pieces after their passing?


----------



## Darthjaye (Jul 20, 2005)

Well ask yourself this.  Should or could anyone else have finished the John Carter of Mars series that EGB started?  I say no.  If it's incomplete it leaves it open to your imagination to fill in the blanks and expand upon the story in your own fashion.


----------



## BlackSilver (Jul 20, 2005)

Darthjaye said:
			
		

> Well ask yourself this.  Should or could anyone else have finished the John Carter of Mars series that EGB started?  I say no.  If it's incomplete it leaves it open to your imagination to fill in the blanks and expand upon the story in your own fashion.




There are just so many ways the series could go, and I do so dislike the feeling that things have been left undone and unsaid.    

It’s a poor ending to something that has been so great.


----------



## Darthjaye (Jul 20, 2005)

I equate this best to another form of entertainment....movies.  Would you have rather they left Highlander alone or done the horrible sequel they did that hurt the vision and continuity of the first movie?  Subsequent visions of the world have done it more harm than help.  I love the original idea and dislike what they did when insisting that there was more to offer which they eventually showed us there wasn't.   i know it's not the dying/ ded author theory, but it's an idea of what goes wrong if you tamper or let someone new take on an idea better left to it's creator and lost with said person that to ruin it with another's.  You taint what is there for what you want to see.  At least with the expectations of what you think might have happened if the story were to continue in your own mind, there is mystery and interestm and almost never dissappointment on your behalf.


----------



## BlackSilver (Jul 21, 2005)

Highlander is perhaps a bad example.  At the end of the first movie they were "happily ever after."

A better instance would be George Lucas passes away just after Empire Strikes back is completed.  How many fans would have been pleading with someone to get RotJ out?  

As the series stands there are some serious questions about what will happen next.  If George leaves us at this point then there will be a lot of debate about Tyrion and Dany getting together (it is a theory I have and nothing based on fact), what is Bran doing north of the wall with the Crow (becoming a Magi for certain), how will Sansa get out of her situation, and so many others instances.  

It just seems the kind thing to do as a writer.


----------



## Eosin the Red (Jul 21, 2005)

Darthjaye said:
			
		

> I equate this best to another form of entertainment........SNIPPAGE.





In general I agree with you but a few works have shown me that it can be done and done well. I really dislike Kevin Anderson's writing style but will be one of the first to admit that he did some amazing stuff with the recent revival of the DUNE series. A large section of my friends are Dune fanatics and their praise finally made me relent off the position of "No Kevin Anderson, not now, not ever" and I am glad I did. I am sure their are folks out their who hate the new Dune series just as there are folks who hate the LotR movies but my small subjective sampling of some Dune freaks tells me it was well recieved.

In specific, I think works like aSof&I, Dune, SoT, LotR, & WOT should pass into the great beyond with their maker. They are wonderfully crafted visions that are a bit too broad to be mastered by someone who is both an excellent (or passible) author and dedicated enough to own the subject.


----------



## BlackSilver (Jul 23, 2005)

Has anyone seen a thread about favorite characters?

I am curious about who would be the favorite of most.


----------



## Harmon (Jul 24, 2005)

BlackSilver said:
			
		

> Has anyone seen a thread about favorite characters?
> 
> I am curious about who would be the favorite of most.




To my knowledge- no.

I would have to say Arya and Jon are my favorites with Ghost bringing up a close third place.


----------



## Dagger75 (Jul 24, 2005)

BlackSilver said:
			
		

> Has anyone seen a thread about favorite characters?
> 
> I am curious about who would be the favorite of most.




  There have been a few already.   They contain tons and tons of spoilers.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 24, 2005)

ssampier said:
			
		

> Incestuous sex is "classy"? I agree, with you, though -- sorta. Book Three had more blatant sex between Tyrion and his paid "love".




No no no. You're missing the point.

Telling me _that_ people are doin' it is plot and character related. That's classy.

Telling me _how_ they are doin' it is more information than I need (unless it's plot or character related, which is arguable in some cases).

Books 1 & 2 were IMNSHO clearly the former, while Book 3 had several instances of the latter. I thought the Tyrion scenes were kind of sweet, actually... and I think it's important that she calls him a "giant", just as he was called early in the 1st book (back on the Wall, by Maester Aemon).

I can recount some specifics if anyone cares, but I'd rather drop it.

 -- N


----------



## ssampier (Jul 25, 2005)

Nifft said:
			
		

> No no no. You're missing the point.
> 
> Telling me _that_ people are doin' it is plot and character related. That's classy.
> 
> ...




I suppose I could buy that. I hope Martin tones down the sex a bit. I don't mind it, but I don't want his fantasy novel turning into a Romance Novel.


----------



## RaceBannon42 (Jul 29, 2005)

Wow, Its really enlightening to see what some people take from a book compared to others.
While I certainly agree that ASOIAF is gritty and even graphic,  I've never seen anything that I consider Gratuitous. Sure many of the scenes would be out of place in a Drizzt novel, but they fit in perfectly in what Martin has created. IMO the world of Westeros is one of the most realistic I've ever read in fantasy. The "heros" all are flawed, the "villians" have redeaming qualities. Having said that everyone has different tastes.

I am eagerly awaiting my UK version of AFFC, hopefully it will arive before the US version is released.


----------



## BlackSilver (Aug 2, 2005)

RaceBannon42 said:
			
		

> IMO the world of Westeros is one of the most realistic I've ever read in fantasy. The "heros" all are flawed, the "villians" have redeaming qualities. Having said that everyone has different tastes.




The characters are three dimensional (by that I mean they appear to be someone that could be real).  It is that feeling, and that characterization that has drawn me back to read the three books more then once and have the audio of all three.


----------

