Storm of Swords

[Lord of Winterfell]

Agreed Jinglehopper... How anyone can question GRRM's plotting of his books? Characterization and plotting are GRRM's greatest attributes as a writer, in my opinion.

 

[Brian G Turner]

It's not so much his use of plot, as much as use of character point of view either diminishing - or even getting in the way of plot.

For example, as a point-of-view character, Catelyn seems to have added nothing directly to the plot since she took Tyrion to the Eeyrie. All she did in volume 2 was wander around seeing other things happen to other people - instead of Robb's viewpoint of the war, we had Catelyn looking at Robb. To myself, that means there's an argument for her getting in the way of the story.

Also, Daenerys hasn't offered anything directly to the story - she is outside of the main plot for what appears to be towards 5,000 printed pages. That has to beg the question - if a character plays no direct role in the first 5,000 pages of a story, should that character really be a focus as a point of view character?

Now, that's probably a value-judgement made in hindsight, which is obviously easier to do than with foresight - for example, with hindsight, GRRM could possibly have left Daenerys out of the first few volumes, provided a summary of her exploits when she lands on Westeros, then spun out a background novel on the life and times of Daenerys before reaching Westeros.

But, of course, Daenerys plays some essential future role in the story, so when George R R Martin first started A Song of Fire and Ice, it obviously seemed important to put her in. Fine.

But...it seems that sometimes he is struggling to juggle so many character viewpoints in the story, and sometimes he includes viewpoints that are perhaps are better left out - or perhaps scenes anticipated written from another point of view (Catelyn and Onion Knight vs Robb and Stannis POV's).

Which leaves the possibility of an epic story dangerously diluted - which is a point I raise about "epic vs soap-opera" - the novels as not having a sense of closure in themselves.

I'm not at all saying that his writing is bad - his scences are engaging and his attention to detail is amazing, actually - but sometimes in trying to provide such a wide overview of events in the entire continent, some of the other key characters seem to potentially suffer from lack of focus and direction.

Ultimately, though, it's only a statement of my own personal opinion - and obviously it's easier to be critical than write such a large story. Perhaps at the end of the day my own own complaints are nothing better than "I would have done it different"?

Either way, I'm still enjoying Storm of Swords - been tempted to skip a few scenes, but I'm still reading all of it. But I thought as a discussion point it would definitely be interesting to raise - not because I wanted to challenge other people's preference in ASoFaI, or condemn either the work or GRRM - as much as to see how much other people shared some sense of that perception - and if in different ways, then in what way different.

 

[AryaUnderfoot]

It's not so much his use of plot, as much as use of character point of view either diminishing - or even getting in the way of plot.

For example, as a point-of-view character, Catelyn seems to have added nothing directly to the plot since she took Tyrion to the Eeyrie. All she did in volume 2 was wander around seeing other things happen to other people - instead of Robb's viewpoint of the war, we had Catelyn looking at Robb. To myself, that means there's an argument for her getting in the way of the story.

Also, Daenerys hasn't offered anything directly to the story - she is outside of the main plot for what appears to be towards 5,000 printed pages. That has to beg the question - if a character plays no direct role in the first 5,000 pages of a story, should that character really be a focus as a point of view character?

But...it seems that sometimes he is struggling to juggle so many character viewpoints in the story, and sometimes he includes viewpoints that are perhaps are better left out - or perhaps scenes anticipated written from another point of view (Catelyn and Onion Knight vs Robb and Stannis POV's).

Which leaves the possibility of an epic story dangerously diluted - which is a point I raise about "epic vs soap-opera" - the novels as not having a sense of closure in themselves.

I, Brian, I suppose it's just a matter of different tastes, but I like the fact that all of the characters are not necessarily central to the action going on in the book. I think that if that were the case, there would be too many parallels between all of the main character, and it would really boil down to this guy fighting that guy. With Catelyn, for example, you get to see the action of Robb's character, but you also get to read from a mother's point of view, which is interesting. Davos is much more engaging to me than Stannis, because I think he sees things with a nice, simple clarity. Those two characters note a lot of what goes on behind the scenes, and their involvement in the plot is rather large, although more subtle than if they were Robb or Stannis. Their actions cause little ripples that turn into large waves (i.e. Catelyn let Jaime go, which led to the death of her and her son, as well as certain character changes in Jaime himself, etc).

As for it being epic vs. soap opera, I think it would be much more like a soap if it left out characters like Catelyn and Daenerys. It would be all heroes and little substance. Let us not forget that the Odyssey, great epic that it is, still includes the grieving wife and mother character of Penelope. And while she isn't exactly the most edge-of-your-seat character, she is real, and rounds out the story very well.

 

[Jay]

I respectfully, and completely disagree:


STORM OF SWORDS SPOILERS

Also, Daenerys hasn't offered anything directly to the story - she is outside of the main plot for what appears to be towards 5,000 printed pages. That has to beg the question - if a character plays no direct role in the first 5,000 pages of a story, should that character really be a focus as a point of view character?

It can be argued that she is playing the MAIN roll in the entire book. The prophecys in her cahpters are the most engaging and informative of the whole novel, for example:

"The man had her brother’s hair, but he was taller, and his eyes were a dark indigo rather than lilac. “Aegon,” he said to a woman nursing a newborn babe in a great wooden bed. “What better name for a king?”
“Will you make a song for him?” the woman asked.
“He has a song,” the man replied. “He is the prince that was promised, and his is the song of ice and fire.” He looked up when he said it and his eyes met Dany, and it seemed as if he saw her standing there beyond the door. “There must be one more,” he said, though whether he was speaking to her or the woman in bed she could not say. “The dragon has three heads.” - Storm of Sword - George R.R. Martin

Perhaps the most relevant excerpt in the entire series. She adds nothing? It is sumised that the coming fo Dragons is what is returning magic to the world (as shown throughout the novel in Storm of Swords). She is the Mother of Dragons.

But...it seems that sometimes he is struggling to juggle so many character viewpoints in the story, and sometimes he includes viewpoints that are perhaps are better left out - or perhaps scenes anticipated written from another point of view (Catelyn and Onion Knight vs Robb and Stannis POV's

).

Personally I thin kDavos is one of the best Pov's. The preference of Rob and Stannis over Cat and Davos seems rooted in the desire for rudimentary fantasy, that desire to see the "warriors" as if they have some quality of depth to them. I liked Rob, I thougth he was a good character, he is also among the most one dimensional, and potentialy the least interesting POV choice. He is his father, the novely clearly indicates that, we know about Eddard thus we don't need to know about Rob's train of thougth.

The character and POV choice of Caetlyn is critical IMHO. It is with her we can get a good grasp of all the Stark children, what they were, what they are, what they never will be. She and Cerseii are the perfect examples of 2 woman though very different but in essence share the same over riding principal. Motherly love, and the contrast is exceptional IMHO.

In regards to Soap opera vs. Epic, if it means exceptional plot, attention to detail, a lack of cartoon absolute good and evil within characters, exceptional characterization, an author who puts his story above any fans desire to see a "hero" and above any single character. Than give me Soap Opera, and I hope the other epic writers writing ridiculous, derivative, sophmoric nonesense (Goodkind, Brooks, Newcomb, Eddings) get a clue.

Peopl earen't reading A Song of Ice and Fire because it uses the same elements other's are using better, they are reading it because it superiorly written, and doesn't depend on concepts of past successes that plague epic fantasy with its overwhelming redundancy.

 

[Andyhug]

I respect your criticisms of the series, I, Brian... they are valid points. But I think you should just surrender to the pleasure of reading an author at the height of his creative powers...

If you can just concentrate on enjoying the tale, without picking it apart as you read it, I think you will count yourself amongst the legions of GRRM devotees...

If not... well, there's always Goodkind.

Agreed! Though it is nice to see these kind of discussions taking place =) I personaly can't find any flaws with the book, nor would I want to! But then again I am no deep thinker, I just read and enjoy, or I read and don't enjoy, in which case I flame the writer . I see you had a dig at Goodkind in your post, go on do it again. The guy is so rubbish!!

 

[Brian G Turner]

I, Brian, I suppose it's just a matter of different tastes, but I like the fact that all of the characters are not necessarily central to the action going on in the book.

Agreed - and it is the fact that GRRM can very successfully express these scenes with believable character that really makes this series - many people can associate or empathise with at least one or more chaarcter viewpoints themselves.

The preference of Rob and Stannis over Cat and Davos seems rooted in the desire for rudimentary fantasy, that desire to see the "warriors" as if they have some quality of depth to them.

It's more that Rob and Stannis would have presented point of views from people making the decisions, rather than from people simply observing these decisions made. And so we do miss on a lot of the direct turmoil and tension that these characters can bring.

However, you are probably quite right that to include them could have been dangerously unbalancing, with too many warrior point of views, and not enough coverage of the wider issues.

Juxtaposing Catelyn and Cersei is certainly interesting, though I will never forgive Catelyn's attitude to Jon, especially after Bran's fall. Perhaps that is clouding my reading of her?

Also, good point about Daenerys - the pivot upon which everything is moving, eh? So George simmers her presence until it's time for her to boil over into the story proper - I guess it would be quite reasonable to argue that bringing her first appearance late in the series could also seem unbalanced.

 

[Raven]

I, Brian: wrt Dany, it's important to note that, in the original scheme of things, the three books published so far were the first part of a trilogy. Therefore, in the original plan, Dany would have arrived in Westeros a lot earlier.

OTOH, this just shows the problem you're getting at. GRRM is aware of it himself: he says, frequently, that 'the tale grew in the telling' (quoting Tolkien).

On the encouraging side, he is still aiming for six books rather than seven (which most people think will be the final number), and has (as I said) indicated a willingness to kill off some more POV characters. This at least shows that he is conscious of the need to maintain the story's discipline. Whether he is succeeding is a reasonable question.

I sympathise with the view that you can't have too much of a good thing, yet you only have to look at Robert Jordan to see what happens when the plot starts to drown in sub-plots: the books become glacially slow.

For me, the jury's out on this one. I'm waiting to see what happens in AFFC.

As for Cat vs. Robb, and Davos vs. Stannis: GRRM has said many times that he prefers to use POVs that are not necessarily generals in the thick of things. He prefers to tell battles from the POV of ordinary footsoldiers, and wars from the POV of bystanders.

Besides, a Stannis POV would reveal too much. Why, with a Stannis POV we would know exactly whether he really believes he is Azor Ahai reborn, or is just using Melisandre.

 

[Jay]

Juxtaposing Catelyn and Cersei is certainly interesting, though I will never forgive Catelyn's attitude to Jon, especially after Bran's fall. Perhaps that is clouding my reading of her?

I'm not saying your doing this, but jsu tas a general observation (one can see it with Sansa for example) people have difficulty differentiating "badly written characters" and "character they don't like", they are msot defintely not synonymous. I find it very interesting that people hate reading about for example Sansa, largely voicing what she does in novel as there reasoning. My question is, isn't that writing at its best , when an author can make a reader despise a characters actions? Sansa did nothing that one wouldn't expect from a girl of her up bringing, and character, and her age. She has always been daughter "who was normal or ideal" in most people eyes. I f nd it amazing that many detractors are uspet with Sasna because she doesn't have the skill of those older and wiser than her, that have these skills because they lived in court, and there positions required such skills.

Regarding Catelyn's attitude toward John, I find it hardly worth noting as it was quite normal in such a setting, it was Eddard who kept him around that was odd, as reflected by most characters in the novel. John ws treated much better than perhaps every other ******* in the realm, from a certain perspective.

Also, good point about Daenerys - the pivot upon which everything is moving, eh? So George simmers her presence until it's time for her to boil over into the story proper - I guess it would be quite reasonable to argue that bringing her first appearance late in the series could also seem unbalanced

.

Also notable is that we perhaps are not even Half-way thru the series, by reading Feasts for Crows spoiler chapters we know that many big players are converging toward Daenerys, and many already have wothin SOS.

 

[AryaUnderfoot]

I find it very interesting that people hate reading about for example Sansa, largely voicing what she does in novel as there reasoning. My question is, isn't that writing at its best , when an author can make a reader despise a characters actions? Sansa did nothing that one wouldn't expect from a girl of her up bringing, and character, and her age. She has always been daughter "who was normal or ideal" in most people eyes. I f nd it amazing that many detractors are uspet with Sasna because she doesn't have the skill of those older and wiser than her, that have these skills because they lived in court, and there positions required such skills.

Regarding Catelyn's attitude toward John, I find it hardly worth noting as it was quite normal in such a setting, it was Eddard who kept him around that was odd, as reflected by most characters in the novel. John ws treated much better than perhaps every other ******* in the realm, from a certain perspective.

Good points. However, I think what I have found is that most readers who really prefer Fantasy/Sci-Fi are the sorts who, as they say, "dance to the beat of their own drum." Perhaps what is most reprehensible about Sansa as a character is that she is the exact opposite. I'm not saying that she lacks in good qualities- in fact, as time goes on, I sympathize with her character much more, and I find that I am quite beginning to like her. I'm merely pointing out that there's a bit of a "cheerleader/homecoming queen" mentality to Sansa that rubs me the wrong way, as one who was part of the nerd herd in high school. However, I'm as open-minded as the next person, and I'm really enjoying watching Sansa grow and develop as a character.

 

[Brian G Turner]

OTOH, this just shows the problem you're getting at. GRRM is aware of it himself: he says, frequently, that 'the tale grew in the telling' (quoting Tolkien).

Now that I've almost ploughed all the way through Storm of Swords, I'm much happier with it than Clash of Kings - as that second volume I felt lost a lot of direction, and where the plot was supposed to move, it seemed weakly done (I couldn't help but read Renly's death as deux ex machina - no other way to write out such a powerful adversity - yet the method completely ignored when the battle really counted, ie, King's Landing).

A Game of Thrones was buoyed for a long time by it's sense of tension - Eddard Stark riding to King's Landing was so like Duke Atriedes voyaging to Arrakis in Dune - obvious traps, with the tension in how the traps would be sprung.

Storm of Swords goes back into developing tension, which the second volume seemed to lack in comparison.

On the encouraging side, he is still aiming for six books rather than seven (which most people think will be the final number),

If the book needs seven, let him have seven. Throw in an epilogue volume 8 as a crowd pleaser if he wishes - the absolute last thing we should want is for him to rush it all too quickly in six books just because buggers like me complained of it wandering.

and has (as I said) indicated a willingness to kill off some more POV characters. This at least shows that he is conscious of the need to maintain the story's discipline. Whether he is succeeding is a reasonable question.

It's not killing the point of view characters that's the issue - it's whether any individual scene is actually necessary for the story. A question of having a brutal editor, rather than brutal storyteller, perhaps?

From what I've read of Storm of Swords, it looks like there are a few scenes missing that I would have otherwise thought he'd have wanted to put in. For example, we haven't had a scene involving the Iron Lands yet (no Theon).

I'm expecting to see one just for the overview, but I wouldn't be surprised if he'd have tried to write one or more for earlier in the book, but with it over-sized as it is, something had to go.

Also, curiously, the "Steel and Snow" part 1 here in the UK ends with the scene of Jon fleeing the Wildlings at Queenscrown - but in that point-of-view we also see lightning hit the tower where Bran, Hodor, and the Crannogmen are. However, when we hit the next Bran scene, there's no reference. I wondered if perhaps he'd tried writing a scene with Bran and co. coping with the lightning strike, then edited it out.

Either way I haven't dreaded some of the point of view characters so much, and even in bringing new secondary point-of-views, such as Samwell Tarly, they've actually been interesting - you can really see why he felt a need to do it.

Bran still plods as a story element, but as we're about to meet Benjen proper (I figure that's who it is, from info dropped in discussions) it seems like we're really going somewhere proper there again.

Also, Daenerys is growing stronger in her own chapters - the more she wraps up with sub-plots from Westeros the stronger her own side of the story becomes.


Anyway, his writing does seem stronger overall in Storm of Swords - I'm still amazed at the detail he puts in, and how skillfully he uses it. As an aspiring writer, I used to think that I was great at using realism and everyday detail in a mediaeval setting - but George has easily gone passed my own standards and shown a superior attention to every detail, constructing the sort of tight character-driven scenes that have made him so popular.

 

[Young Wolf]

Welcome to the GRRM fan club I Brian. I definitely agree with the Stark/Atreides comparison, especially when looking at the similarities between Rob/Catelyn and Paul/Jessica.

 

[Raven]

If the book needs seven, let him have seven. Throw in an epilogue volume 8 as a crowd pleaser if he wishes - the absolute last thing we should want is for him to rush it all too quickly in six books just because buggers like me complained of it wandering.

Oh, absolutely, Brian. And in common with most others, I think seven is actually what it will take.

But the point is that he is still aiming for six. That's good, IMO. It shows discipline, and an awareness of the danger of allowing the story to get out of hand.

It's not killing the point of view characters that's the issue - it's whether any individual scene is actually necessary for the story

.

Again, I agree. One of the things I like about AGOT is that every chapter contains at least one scene that is, in retrospect, absolutely essential to the story.

Whether the same is true of ACOK and ASOS, well, we may have to wait to find out. We need that ability to look 'in retrospect' to judge.

 

[Lacedaemonian]

I agree with Brian to a point. Much of the book is concerned with the politics and rivalry between the several major families. This whole politicking is surely a side show. I do not doubt its relevance, but for me the true story lies with Jon and beyond the wall, and Dany's return home. The thing is I enjoy the politicking very much. The book is simply an invented history with fantastical elements.

Arya becomes one of the most interesting characters in later chapters.

 

[Brian G Turner]

I finally read it - had to slow myself down towards the end as I really didn't want to finish it and have nothing left to continue with after...


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


Well, the Red Wedding, and the deaths of Lord Tywin and Joffrey, were all events I inadvertently picked up from reading the threads here, so there was no surprise there (I'll be one of the first to read A Feast for Crows to prevent that next time ).

However, as with A Game Of Thrones, even if where the plot seems predictable, it's always good to see the execution of it - even if you think you know the "when", George still does a goob job of the "how".

I actually did enjoy A Storm of Swords very much - namely, because the story actually seemed to be going somewhere real with the characters started with. This contrasts markably with A Clash of Kings where the characters often didn't seem to be going anywhere: Catelyn, Sansa, Arya, and Bran often suffer from not bringing much to the story, with the characters simply observing events of the plot, or simply moving outside of the sphere of the plot to not seem particularly relevant. However, remove those characters from volume 2 and there's not all that much book: really, just Jon and Tyrion with some throwaway Theon and Davos.

A Game of Thrones set a great sense of tension to be played, which although possibly lost in A Clash of Kings, seemed much returned in A Storm of Swords.

However, there was still some degree of lack of sense of completion at the end of the novel - it would have been great to see a sense of completion with the Bran meeting - for example, is it Benjen they've met with? What of the Jon response to the offer by Stannis? And has Jorah Mormont really left?

I guess space was already a major issue, though final scenes of other major characters would have been a bit too much in an already overlong work.

Davos actually worked here - I wasn't keen on his use in 2, but here he worked properly with the story, not least because Stannis is finally entering the story proper.

Also, it's nice to see Daenerys developing - Barristan Selmy's return is eye-opening, but it's a genuine shame about what's happening to Jorah - hope to see that foolish/wise old man back soon.

Highlights:

- Red Wedding
- Gregor's duel
- Stannis appearing against the Wildlings
- Jaime's evolution
- Jon voted in by the Blackwatch
- Petyr throwing Lysa out of the eeyrie

Biggest disappoint:

- Catelyn still alive (even in the form she is in now)

Anyway, I guess that means it's been a long and difficult conversion, but I'm hungry for more.

 

[Raven]

Brian: some of that 'lack of completion' is deliberate, because George wanted to leave a few cliffhangers. I don't think he expected to keep us hanging quite this long, mind you.

The identity of Coldhands is one of the major long-running topics on the main ASOIAF boards. Benjen is the most obvious candidate, particularly given one or two other pieces of info: his men turning up as wights, for example, and Coldhands having wightish appearance (the eyes). It makes sense that, if there is one man who can resist being turned into a wight, it would be a Stark.

Then there's the cache of dragonglass Jon found in ACOK, wrapped in the cloak of a NW-man. Could this have been secreted by Coldhands? If so, he was a NW-man. And the knowledge of the gate, and how to open it, suggests that too.

Jon turning Stannis down will have repercussions, but not of the type that could be dealt with easily in a chapter or two. I know from spoiler chapters that this is dealt with in the early part of AFFC, where I think it really belongs.

As for Jorah, my pet theory is that he will join up with one or more of Drogo's old kos and betray Dany. She is still due another betrayal. But I think it's clear as of the end of ASOS that he has left, for now.

Davos is also more active in his own right in ASOS, which is good.

Cat is one of my favourite characters now, though I didn't like her at first reading. She's an unusual character for a fantasy novel - no martial skill, no great powers, not even a master politician like Varys or LF. Just a mother trying to protect her children, but without the tools to do it. I have the feeling I won't like her so much now though.

I too found her resurrection slightly disappointing, because her death was so sad. It seemed to take the sting out of it. But then, it does not look like her present 'life' will be much of an improvement on her 'death'.

 

[Lord of Winterfell]

Welcome to the fold, I, Brian...

 

[Brian G Turner]

Brian: some of that 'lack of completion' is deliberate, because George wanted to leave a few cliffhangers.

That does come into in.

Somehow I guess ideally I'd liked to have seen a greater separation of the novels in terms of being complete cycles in themselves. But I guess with the scale of the story itself, that's not going to be easy anyway - not without cutting down on the scale itself.

It makes sense that, if there is one man who can resist being turned into a wight, it would be a Stark.

I've been wondering how the warg issue may apply here ...

Cat is one of my favourite characters now, though I didn't like her at first reading. ... I too found her resurrection slightly disappointing, because her death was so sad.

It's like my earlier complaint that we're not seeing the perspective of those moving the story - hence why it's difficult for myself to connect with someone like Catelyn.

And it was a tragic death - the resurrection sort of spoils the pathos.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Welcome to the fold, I, Brian...

Yeah, I'm a step closer to fandom.

 

[Jinglehopper]

I've been wondering how the warg issue may apply here ....

Interesting point. How would an undead warg appear?

It's like my earlier complaint that we're not seeing the perspective of those moving the story - hence why it's difficult for myself to connect with someone like Catelyn.

And it was a tragic death - the resurrection sort of spoils the pathos.

I too mourned Catelyn and was surprised at her sppearance at the close of ASOS. I couldn't help feeling that she somehow deserved to reborn because she was so ineffectual in life. Perhaps the "dead" Catelyn will actually be more successful as a protector of her children than the live one ever was. How's that for pathos?

 

[Brian G Turner]

Interesting point. How would an undead warg appear?

I'm possibly way-off the beaten track here, but if a person can inhabit more than one body at once - then perhaps if their human form is taken by the Others, there is still enough person on the outside of the body to animate it according to their own will.

Interesting to note that Coldhands effectively controlled ravens when rescuing Sam Tarly.