Amazon Review

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rane Longfox

Red Rane
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
2,651
I wonder how long it will take for our newly-found Martiniac to shout me down after I post this;)
I didn't write this review, I found it on amazon. Its nice to see someone ripping into Martin for a change, even if I don't agree with quite a bit of it;)

George R.R. Martin's "Song of Ice and Fire" series, of which the Game of Thrones is the first of a projected seven volumes (the fourth of which is due to be published in mid-2004), is the most overrated fantasy series of the day. The poor writing and the lack of likeable or believable characters combine to create an unworkable mess.
Martin's show-biz mind comes up with numerous ludicrous moments. His "heroes" are impossible to take seriously because they keep doing impossibly dumb things such as putting themselves and their families into the hands of their enemies. His "villains" are impossible to take seriously because they are incapable of successfully assassinating a middle aged woman, or, for that matter, a young child.

(The fact that Martin's characters are generally trying to commit such deeds makes for extremely unpleasant as well as frustrating reading).

The scare quotes two paragraphs above indicate the moral ambiguity of Martin's universe. He does not really believe in heroism or villainy, which makes for an extremely blah story. Granted that two-shaded, black or white storytelling is _almost_ as mindless as writing gets, Martin still does not improve on this. He actually falls short of even that low standard. His one shade of gray in the middle for everybody is even more mindless. It also creates a story that is inherently uninteresting - why should the reader care who "wins" when one character is as good/bad as another?

Like horror movie protagonists, Martin's characters are often defenestrated, throat-slashed, thrown into the river, or set on fire - yet they just keep coming. The extremely graphic violence would be less unbearable if it weren't all so ineffective.

The motivations and actions of the characters are completely unbelievable. How much familial loyalty would a real man have left if his father had the young man's girlfriend raped by an entire company of soldiers (including the young man's brother) because she was unworthy of their family? That Martin revels in such moments is bad enough. That his characters' responses to them are so flat goes far beyond the bounds of credibility. Fantasy setting or not, people are simply not like this. No author who understands human nature so little can have much of interest to say.

Martin believes that he has single-handedly discovered a major flaw common to almost all other writers: that their major characters inevitably survive to the end (or close to the end) of the production. He does not understand that he is putting the cart before the horse, and so missing the point entirely. Of course other authors have "mortal" characters. However, other authors are simply intelligent enough to realize that the major characters of a work (or a real-life episode) are generally to be found among those who are alive for a significant part of it, and to construct their storytelling accordingly. By repeatedly focusing on characters who shortly thereafter meet their demises, Martin succeeds only in punishing his readers with a series of unproductive false starts.

Martin's writing is similar in many ways to that of another very flawed writer, one whose many faults are more widely recognized: Terry Goodkind. Martin shares Goodkind's penchant for violence and sex, though Martin's versions are even more graphic and unappealing (he does, fortunately, lack Goodkind's particular brand of sappy smarminess). Nevertheless, the comparison ultimately favors Goodkind because he can at least wrap a story up, something Martin, like Robert Jordan, is incapable of doing. Goodkind is under the disadvantage of having published eight books with which to annoy readers, as opposed to Martin's three (in this series).
Whaddya all think?
 
A damning critique indeed. I've only read half of volume 1 of the series (and gve up) so I'm not qualified to really address all these points, but I did get a distinct 'who cares who wins' feeling from it.
 
I actually find that I agree with everything said in this review, apart from the Goodkind refferences because I'm not familiar with his work, but still really enjoyed the book.

Mind you I've only read the first novel so maybe it'll get more annoying as I go on:confused:
 
I've been critical of Martin, but I think the criticisms in the quoted review are quite unfair and pretty lfat. I'm inclined to think of "review trolling", more than anything else.

The person who wrote it seems to completely misunderstand a lot of the book, and instead settles on sweeping statements that are not particularly justified.

For example, the second to last paragraph complanis about point of view characters not surviving - but only one single character POV dies so far as I remember, and that's pretty much predictable anyway (Dune, anyone?).

There an underlying truth in some of the comments - not least not being able to wrap up the story - but the criticism itself seem so exagerated as to be something of a parody of itself as a critique.
 
Ok, that reviewer is an idiot!:D Let's just say that I completely disagree with just about everything he says.

I can understand how the series is not everyone's cup of tea, but come on. I could almost think it's actually someone who originally liked the book, but is now completely frustrated that the next one in the series hasn't come out yet.;)
 
OKAY THAT REVIEW WAS DONE BY A CHILDRENS BOOK REVIEWER! PERIOD. omfg but first of all when it all comes down to it arent we all just as good/bad as the other..... when i read melanie rawn's dragon star trilogy i certainly knew who was good and bad and i about gagged and wanted to put my head through a wall because it was sooooooo comfounded cheesy.

but i wont rant and rave anymore because this is AFTER ALL coming from who????????????????

A M A Z O N

and A M A Z O N
is that GREAT company who has yet to send me four book i ordered four weeks ago with a 5day delivery time.

anyone that takes amazon seriously has totally lost allll credibility with me. i mean they gave kate forsyth's Witches of Eileanan series good ratings and you know i lost about 500hrs of my life just TRYING to read those.

i cant believe that review was even posted... in the interests of good taste.

i am gonna have to go to therapy for this!!!:D (if it was me the founder of this post was referring to)
 
caladanbrood said:
I wonder how long it will take for our newly-found Martiniac to shout me down after I post this;)
I didn't write this review, I found it on amazon. Its nice to see someone ripping into Martin for a change, even if I don't agree with quite a bit of it;)


Whaddya all think?

I JUST GOT OFF WORK MAN
 
I said:
I've been critical of Martin, but I think the criticisms in the quoted review are quite unfair and pretty lfat. I'm inclined to think of "review trolling", more than anything else.

The person who wrote it seems to completely misunderstand a lot of the book, and instead settles on sweeping statements that are not particularly justified.

For example, the second to last paragraph complanis about point of view characters not surviving - but only one single character POV dies so far as I remember, and that's pretty much predictable anyway (Dune, anyone?).

There an underlying truth in some of the comments - not least not being able to wrap up the story - but the criticism itself seem so exagerated as to be something of a parody of itself as a critique.
more than that and it has been a while since i have finished and i can name four right off hand... but you know spoilers and all as i have already seen a few ppl post on this who havent finished the first book
 
Mmmm look the arguments are mostly very poor since they usually cut at both sides. I can shoot down most of his sentences and the whole image he is trying to create isn't very solid either.
Let's start with the beginning:
is the most overrated fantasy series of the day.
A normal person would use: one of the most, since it's impossible for one to have read all fantasy series of today and form an opinion about it. (Anyone with some bit of brains can see that this, however you want to call it, isn't written by more than (I'll be generous) 2 people)
As for the next arguments they can be used to say good as well as bad, since the grey zone he speaks of is just the thing what most people that I know that have read the book(s) like.
How much familial loyalty would a real man have left if his father had the young man's girlfriend raped by an entire company of soldiers (including the young man's brother) because she was unworthy of their family?
See what this guy would have done being the imp would have been: 'okay I'm despised because I'm an imp, the only thing that I have(and that keeps me alive) is the luck that I'm the son of a great and rich ruler. Damn I will say bye dad, I never want to see you again.' Tyrion isn't loyal to his family, he is loyal to both his purse and the power he can wield.
I admit that it must be very uninteresting to read the book if you are unable to understand such things. (people who are like that shouldn't be allowed to use the word 'dumb' unless they are saying something about themselves)

At last I totally disband his explanations by pointing out why I (scalem the tenth) read fantasy and usually dislike non-fiction and fiction that is set into this world. The point of fantasy (to me) is that you can start from a blank sheet of paper, you create the world, there are no prejudices about elves being or not being green or the existance of winged lions or anything. Off course Martin's characters wouldn't be normal in this kind of world even in the middle ages. But where has martin told that his human characters were in fact identical to the humans that live in the world we live in? The correct answer is he hasn't (further in the books you can find numerous examples of people that are clearly not human), so why can't their habbits be strange sometimes? He judges fantasy like I read non-fiction or detective stories, if for example in 'the memory game' (Nicci French) I read some weird things like: the police does the effort for a DNA research and then the main character finds something that was left in the ground were the body was found, I'm annoyed by that. But If I should read in a fantasy story that something alike, I would assume that this was normal in that world. If I find contradictions between those created facts it will annoy me too but fantasy has much more credit on my account.

I shall end with a quote from 'meditations on middle earth' (forgot the writer that wrote this particular part)
Those who can write, write.
Those who can't write, they teach.
Those who can't even teach, they become critics.
 
The reviewer clearly did not understand what George was trying to achieve.
The reviewer has no understanding of medieval politics or warfare.
The reviewer likes violence to be soft and gentle.
The reviewer fears sex.
The reviewer is a loser and I suspect to be a fundamentalist christian.
The reviewer of course is entitled to their opinion, no matter how invalid it appears to be.

Why are people so opposed to large fantasy series? This is nothing new, and is most certainly a very common occurence in heroic fantasy. For those of you who read comics, why do they still run stories on Spiderman, The Incredible Hulk, Captain America and Treasure Chest?
 
Last edited:
hodor said:
more than that and it has been a while since i have finished and i can name four right off hand... but you know spoilers and all as i have already seen a few ppl post on this who havent finished the first book
I'm thinking of "Game of Thrones" only, though. :)
 
I can only think of two POV characters who don't live through the whole series...sort of.;):p
 
Its true, Martin has failed to catch my interest in the eventual result the way Erikson has done. I don't know about these characterisation comments though, I've heard people shout back and forth between the Erikson and Martin corners on several forums about how the other can't "characterise" without really saying what they even mean by this. They both create believeable characters in as much as we can recognise what a real character would be like with our (of course vast) personal experience of a medieval world with dragons, three-year-long winters and magic...

Nonethless, I still think the reviewer has some good points. Martin overuses his sex scenes too much. Not in quantity - if they were written well it would be fine, but he has a childish style of writing that belies his writing in the rest of the books. They make me cringe.



This comment however
How much familial loyalty would a real man have left if his father had the young man's girlfriend raped by an entire company of soldiers (including the young man's brother) because she was unworthy of their family?
shows he hasn't read enough of the books in enough detail, which makes me think he (or she, sorry, must be pc you know;)) Its very major spoilers if I expand on that more though, so I'll let it lie for now;)
 
There are very few sex scenes. Those who say so clearly have not read the book. The sex scenes are far from childish, you are now talking out of your hat. The scene between Jaime and Cersei in the church is as real as it gets.

No loyalty to a particular family. You clearly have not read the book. The Starks are clearly the 'good' family - the heroes if you like.

People die in civil wars.
 
****SPOILERS****




the loyalty quote is not referring to the Starks... its the Lannisters, and Tyrion.

Also, the sex scens in later books get worse, Game of Thrones isn't to bad...


**********
MAJOR SPOILERS
**********


Sansa and Tyrion? Come off it, for gods sake!!!:eek:
 
I was replying to Knivesout. As long as the Stark family are okay, I do not really think it matters who wins the civil war.

The sex scenes get worse. Are you gay?


***A Spoiler***

No sex takes place between Sansa and Tyrion.
 
hodor said:
at least three for real and another well sorta
I must be having a brain freeze, cause I can't think of who else( a POV character only) dies or is killed. If you don't want to post it here please send me a pm to let me know who it is. Refresh my memory as it were, cause mine sucks.:rolleyes: :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads


Back
Top