GRRM ruined a song of ice and fire by killing too many good characters

If you didn't find the three-hundred generations of superfluous character's family trees in LotR as a form of padding, we may have read different versions....

I do believe GRRM has been padding it a bit much in the past two, but things have been progressing at a somewhat reasonable rate and even in at least a decent portion of the padding there is a lot of background information being imparted for my taste. I can see it wearing thin for some people though and during the first read of each even I was a bit annoyed as a result - but during subsequent reads, as with most subtext and the like, it becomes much more involving. As long as he doesn't lose the sense of progression to 'Wheel of Time' levels of inaction or making it so that nothing in the background having any consequence or anything close to that, I'll happily stay along for the journey as long as he wants to make it. There does come a point where the filler outweighs the good stuff for certain, I just think there's a long ways to go for this series before it hits that point. Mileage may vary on that per reader though.
 
If you didn't find the three-hundred generations of superfluous character's family trees in LotR as a form of padding, we may have read different versions....

Only if you read the Appendices in The Return of the King...No one said you had to.

It is hardly debatable that Tolkien was the best of world-builders, and it was something that Jackson carried into the films really well, with the Shire, Bree, the ruins, Rivendell, Moria, etc. In the books themselves, the description serves to make the world itself a character, and this is a rare animal. I've seen it only in a few fantasies, most notably LOTR. The Malazan universe does this, but it is much better done, if a lot smaller, in Wurts' Wars of Light and Shadow. Mind you, Erikson and Esselmont went really, really hugely massive with the Malazan world. Too big an undertaking, really, and not quite pulled off due to its massive size.

GRRM's world has not quite reached the status of being its own character. Instead, he has focussed, rightly or wrongly, on the human characters themselves. And that's just fine with me.
 
I was gonna say that, yeah, I think we did read different versions but it looks like Clansman made the point already. I didn't touch those appendices nor did I read The Silmarillion or any of that other stuff. I was just saying that he managed to do a ridiculously excellent job of world-building right in the meat of the story and did it in far less pages. I mean, I'm not a big Tolkien fan (maybe you assumed I was) but give credit where credit is due. If you like long-winded passages about what everyone in the room is wearing and eating then cool, I'm not going to change your mind.
 
Joao, you should read the Children of Hurin (excellent novel) if ASoIaF is too gloomy for you. :D
 
There seems to be a few people thinking that Jon and Dany will be the main long term characters. Perhaps so but Aria and Bran seem like they will be thereabouts too (though I haven't read book 5 yet).
 
Jon and Dany HAVE to be main characters. I mean, long term ones. Fire and Ice? Who else can it be? R'hllor and The Other? Naw. I'm pretty sure that the two of them are Fire and Ice.
 
I hope that's a joke, since I don't remember CoH to be at all happy happy joy joy. o.o

Note the smiley.:D

The CoH is worthy of a Wagnerian operatic score to go with it. Nobody would dare confuse it with a happy, Hollywood-esque ending. In the words of Bugs Bunny: "what do you expect in an opera, a happy ending?!?"

"Kill the wabbit! Kill the wabbit!" Heh heh.
 
There seems to be a few people thinking that Jon and Dany will be the main long term characters. Perhaps so but Aria and Bran seem like they will be thereabouts too (though I haven't read book 5 yet).

I hope not. They aren't really my favorites, and it would be hard for me to stick with at that point.
 
Joao, you should read the Children of Hurin (excellent novel) if ASoIaF is too gloomy for you. :D

My problem with ASoIaF is not its gloominess at all. In fact, that is a quality I appreciate in the series. But I just can't go back to loving it now that the author killed most of the characters that attracted me to the series. Most deaths in ASoIaF seem like cheap shots to shock the readers, in my opinion. Exactly the same problem that screwed up Harry Potter.

I agree with TS. The deaths of many 'good people' made me stop caring for the series. I now read the rest of the series without having my emotions tied down to it. My current favourite is Dany, but I am prepared that she may die at any point in the story.

I was not grieving for Rob and Cat when I wrote this post. I didn't even like Cat. But they shouldn't have died so soon, nor Tywin. Or Theon's father (forgot his name). Or Joffrey. And most importantly, not in that way. It just made me stop caring for the story. What attracted me to ASoIaF, what made me devour the books, was the war between north and south, the revenge of the Starks, while the Others menace approached.

With all those characters dead, the focus of the series shifted completely. The Starks will never get revenge, because Joffrey and Tywin were already killed by others. And the remaining starks are boring.

It feels to me that if you kill too many of your main characters, all you have left are their short stories and a long term background story. I think that works great for mithology, like greek and Norse. After all, when you read about Achiles, Hercules, Icarus, Heimdall, Tyr, etc, you know you're not supposed to get too attached to them, because the characters themselves are not as important as the moral messages of their tales. I truly don't think that applies to a fantasy series such as ASoIaF, which put so much emphasies on the Starks trajectory during two and a half books.

Moreover, i have another gripe: GRRM tries to keep things "real" in Westeros, with all these treasons and untimely deaths. Why doesn't he do that with Dany? Because he needs to get her to the point that he wants. Therefore, a savage Dothraki becomes a gentle and obedient husband who asks for permission to have sex, she escapes countless murder attempts, no one ever steal her dragons, she gets an army, she gets gold, she gets a city... despite being a spoiled teenage girl. Every apparent setback in her journey is clearly an excuse to make her following victory look more believable. I see two measures. One for Westeros, one for Dany.
 
I see what you are saying here Jaoa, and it certainly is a valid point. Many a character got built up and given backstory and all that, only to get beheaded, cut down or shot in the belly while on the crapper. and the Starks certainly had it the worst, especially since we basically began the story in Winterfel.

I can't dispute the fact the we were certainly made to believe that the starks would be our tried and true heroes throughout the saga. I guess where we differ is that, I truly loved the evolution of the story. how it keeps switching focus and graduating from character to character is great. GRRM keeps shooting down our expectations for the book.

in the begining, we assume Joffery is going to be the Bad guy, with the help of Tywin Lannister. Joff and Tywin get cut down so now only Cersei is left, but when we look back, she was the bad guy right from the begining, hiding behind the Monster that was her family. and now that she has stepped out, we see that truly, she is the worst of them. We were (or at least I was) unsure what Dany's roll is in all of this would be, considering that, at the begining she was prepared to go to War with Robert and the Starks (our good guys), but now it looks like she will be revolting against Joff and the Lannisters, then its Tommen and the Tyrells, but now it looks like Cersei is back in charge. So her roll went from "bad guy?" to "Good guy!" while she never actually changed her stance on the matter. It is fantastic.

but that's just my opinion.
 
in the begining, we assume Joffery is going to be the Bad guy, with the help of Tywin Lannister. Joff and Tywin get cut down so now only Cersei is left, but when we look back, she was the bad guy right from the begining, hiding behind the Monster that was her family. and now that she has stepped out, we see that truly, she is the worst of them. We were (or at least I was) unsure what Dany's roll is in all of this would be, considering that, at the begining she was prepared to go to War with Robert and the Starks (our good guys), but now it looks like she will be revolting against Joff and the Lannisters, then its Tommen and the Tyrells, but now it looks like Cersei is back in charge. So her roll went from "bad guy?" to "Good guy!" while she never actually changed her stance on the matter. It is fantastic.

Good thoughts, Arsten, and I have more thoughts, too:

Dany still isn't on the Starks' "side". In fact, she doesn't a thing about them other than they helped Robert take the throne. I.e. she's still out to crush *everyone* in the Seven Kingdoms with the possible exception of the Martells. I feel like the biggest reason R + L = J is true is because the only way Dany joins up with Jon to fight the Others is if it turns out they are related. Otherwise, she's going to be out to destroy him just like she's out to destroy everyone that took the throne away from the Targaryens.

So my point is that in this series "good" and "bad" are all dependent on your point of view. If you want the Starks to "win" then you should automatically view Dany as a bad guy. But we know that's not really true because she really just wants to reconquer her lands. Now we could argue the evils of war itself but then that would make the cast of characters bad. The Lannisters aren't even necessarily bad. They are just trying to grab power the same as every other House. It can be argued that Cersei does what she does in an effort to protect the power of her House for her kids. She's incredibly inept but that, from a certain point of view, doesn't make her bad.

Anyway, long story short: The series is about the shades of grey in everyone and how good and evil all depend on your point of view.
 
Anyway, long story short: The series is about the shades of grey in everyone and how good and evil all depend on your point of view.

That was what I was trying to get accross, although I did muck it all up. I was trying to say that if you think of the starks as "good" and the lannisters as "Bad" (althought I would argue that Tyrion is "good", and Arya is nowehere close to either extreme) Then Dany went from a Bad guy, who wanted Ned Dead, to a good guy who wants Cersei dead. But in her mind, they are all one and the same. She didn't change her mind. that's why I love this series.

The only definate bad guy in my opinion is Ramsey Bolton. But your right, everyone else is shades of grey.
 
Joao, we differ then, because I found the deaths impressive, and GRRM denied me the cheap satisfaction of revenge that can be found in a myriad of stories, and which to be honest is really predictable and unoriginal. I thought Ned Stark was going to be Aragorn, but GRRM cut him down and there was brutal epicness galore as a result. I was rooting for Robb, and in the back of my mind was sure he would come out as the victor, but GRRM denied me this cheap satisfaction with the Red Wedding. I loved Winterfell, and was absolutely sure that this ancient stronghold would remain a power to be reckoned with, but GRRM burned it down, and displaced the Starks to various parts of the world.

This was a shock, but I love the fact that I have no clue where the story is going. The Lannisters are in just as bad of a shape as the Starks, they simply enjoy the facade of a royal court, however they lost their boy King Joffrey, they lost their major pillar in the form of Tywin, they lost Myrcella to Dorne, they lost Tyrion to a different world, they lost Jaimie, he's MIA. That's how badass GRRM is, he might not have used Starks to take revenge on House Lannister, but this does not change the fact that the Lannisters have suffered just as badly as the Starks, and this gives me closure.

I also think you're way too hard on Dany. She lost her dynasty, then was sold as chattle, and then suffered marital rape. Then lost her son, and afterwards lost her husband, and individuals close to her. She also lost the Khalasar, and had to start from scratch. I think all the advances she is making in terms of manpower, wealth and alliances is well-deserved, and to be honest we're not even sure if she actually is the main heroine of the story, GRRM could always end up killing her in the end.

Oops.
 
I prefer the actual deaths over the "OMG he/she's dead...wait, no he/she isn't" moments that pepper the series.

I agree with that. However, it's not nearly as bad as most series where no one important dies ever. Heck, even Lord of the Rings couldn't keep Gandalf dead (spoiler alert). The worst, by far, that I've seen is the Malazan series where, not only does no one ever stay dead, but they come back MORE POWERFUL THAN EVER. It's one of the many, many reasons I couldn't stand to read that series past book 3. And I only got that far because everyone kept saying that book 3 was one of the best fantasy books ever on par with ASOS. I thought it was terrible and ended my Malazan experience right there.

Anyway, ASOIAF certainly isn't perfect but it's damn good.
 
I agree with that. However, it's not nearly as bad as most series where no one important dies ever. Heck, even Lord of the Rings couldn't keep Gandalf dead (spoiler alert). The worst, by far, that I've seen is the Malazan series where, not only does no one ever stay dead, but they come back MORE POWERFUL THAN EVER. It's one of the many, many reasons I couldn't stand to read that series past book 3. And I only got that far because everyone kept saying that book 3 was one of the best fantasy books ever on par with ASOS. I thought it was terrible and ended my Malazan experience right there.

Anyway, ASOIAF certainly isn't perfect but it's damn good.

:D:D:D:D, sorry but that made me LOL.
 
I see what you are saying here Jaoa, and it certainly is a valid point. Many a character got built up and given backstory and all that, only to get beheaded, cut down or shot in the belly while on the crapper. and the Starks certainly had it the worst, especially since we basically began the story in Winterfel.

I can't dispute the fact the we were certainly made to believe that the starks would be our tried and true heroes throughout the saga. I guess where we differ is that, I truly loved the evolution of the story. how it keeps switching focus and graduating from character to character is great. GRRM keeps shooting down our expectations for the book.

Arsten, you were one of the few who understood my arguments. Most people jumped to the conclusion that I was simply sad because my dear characters died. I expected that, so it is nice to know someone got my meaning.

You're right, though, we differ about the merits of the evolution of the story. I hate that it "keeps shifting focus and graduating from character to character" like it does. But hey, that just means we are different kind of readers, and that's alright. I kind of envy you for still caring about the series, I wanted to remain in love with it. But this shift in focus ruined my interest. I invested in three big books waiting for the climax between Ned, Joffrey, Cat, Robb, Theon's father, Walder Frey, Tywin, Cersei, Jaime. It never happened, the conclusion of the first part of the saga (Starks Vs. Lanisters) was completely unsatisfying, and that was what captivated me in the first place. I don't care as much for Jon, Arya, Sansa, Bran. Tyrion is misplaced. And i hate Dany.

So, for me, all the emotion I put on the books so far was a waste of time. You could say "move on, that's how life is, the next books will tell the stories of the rest of the characters". That's just it: I don't care anymore about them.

in the begining, we assume Joffery is going to be the Bad guy, with the help of Tywin Lannister. Joff and Tywin get cut down so now only Cersei is left, but when we look back, she was the bad guy right from the begining, hiding behind the Monster that was her family. and now that she has stepped out, we see that truly, she is the worst of them. We were (or at least I was) unsure what Dany's roll is in all of this would be, considering that, at the begining she was prepared to go to War with Robert and the Starks (our good guys), but now it looks like she will be revolting against Joff and the Lannisters, then its Tommen and the Tyrells, but now it looks like Cersei is back in charge. So her roll went from "bad guy?" to "Good guy!" while she never actually changed her stance on the matter. It is fantastic.

but that's just my opinion.

I agree there are no pure "bad guys" or "good guys". I've actually always perceived Dany as a good guy. Even when she wanted to go to war with Ned and Robert, that was her right as the true heir to the seven kingdoms. But you know how people in this forum praise GRRM for being "unpredictable" and "realistic", regarding what does to the characters in Westeros (as we discussed) above? Well, if that is true, why doesn't he do that with Dany? From the moment she was wed to Drogo, I knew she would be invincible untill she made her move on Westeros.

Oh, and someone said something about "marital rape". Drogo asked her permission to have sex with her. "No?" "Yes!".
 
I agree there are no pure "bad guys" or "good guys". I've actually always perceived Dany as a good guy. Even when she wanted to go to war with Ned and Robert, that was her right as the true heir to the seven kingdoms. But you know how people in this forum praise GRRM for being "unpredictable" and "realistic", regarding what does to the characters in Westeros (as we discussed) above? Well, if that is true, why doesn't he do that with Dany? From the moment she was wed to Drogo, I knew she would be invincible untill she made her move on Westeros.

Oh, and someone said something about "marital rape". Drogo asked her permission to have sex with her. "No?" "Yes!".

in regards to the Bold Bold part, that is why I put a question mark when I said Dany went from Bad? to Good. Im sure most people, as I did, perceived Dany to be a good guy.

Joao, this isn't directed at you in particular, just rambling.

But Is she Really? does she really have the best interest of the Realm in mind? nope, she wants to bring war and death to westeros. If she was truly a good guy, she would content herself with just going to live back in her house with the red door.... with her dragons I guess. she certainly wouldn't have any problems with her neighbours....
 
I can comprehend how you feel, Joao, even if I don't quite agree. I mean, when I read the Red Wedding, to stop reading the books crossed my mind, but I never really took it into consideration. Back then, I hated Catelyn, and although I though, and still think, Robb was an interesting character, I could see he was losing the war anyway. In a story level of perspective, I think it was merciful of Martin to just kill him, suddenly and unexpectedly, rather than torture us readers with a new succession of failures.

That's why I disagree with some people here, who thinks Martin has made a habit of killing characters when they're about to win. That has happened sometimes (Renly, Tywin), but Robb's death is not one of them. He was, to a degree, foolish. He made mistakes. He trusted Theon, and for that, he lost both the North and his brothers. He married Jeyne Westerling, and for that, he lost the Frey's support and fall right into Tywin's trap. Edmure's stupidity didn't help his cause either.

Plus, we were all warned of Robb's death. There were a number of subtle and not so subtle clues. I don't expect anyone could understand the prophecies about the Red Wedding, but the unusual satisfaction of Tywin with the betrayal of the Westerling was very suspicious, and I doubt Martin could have been more explicit than in the Davos chapter where Stannis burns the leeches while murmuring the names of his oponents. You can choose not to belive the latter is real magic, but considering Melisandre's past doings, you should had at least expected something to happen, specially after Balon's demise. In thant, Joao, you were lucky. I somehow managed to miss the first half of Storm of Swords without realizing it, only reading it very long after.

But as I was saying at the beginning of this post, the Red Wedding was shocking, but I don't think Martin decided to kill Robb and Catelyn just to surprise us poor readers. As I proved in the previous paragraph, it wasn't a rushed decission. It was carefully planned and suggested several times before it happened. I don't think he kills a character after another in order to seem more realistic. I think he does it to remove characters from the stage. There are simply too many of them, and most are competing in this Game of Thrones. And I believe he also does it because A Song of Ice and Fire is a bit like a survival story, and many people read it because they want to know who's still alive by the end.

For what you say, I take it that what you don't like is that your favorite character, as well as your favorite subplot, have been, let's say, terminated. I find it comprehensible. I wouldn't like to read a story where the characters I most like have all died. But even so, if I were you, I would keep reading. Why? Because it won't hurt you to do so and you might be surprised. Because first impressions are tough, and you may take a while in leaving them behind. Trust me, I also thoug the series were ruined when I finished the third book, although it was mostly because I only read half the book. And who knows, you may end up taking some other character's cause. I supported Robb till he died, and now I'm with Stannis. Short version: give the series a chance.

And note that I don't even really like A Song of Ice and Fire. I think people give it too much credit. I would expose my reasons why, but that would be off topic. Let's just say that, in a more personal way, it doesn't upset me as much Martin killing good characters (in the moral sense), as most of his good character being idiots and/or lacking personality, or being obsesed with honor. Being honorable and being good is not the same thing. For a Kingsguard Knight it's honorable to stand by doing nothing while a madman burns people alive, and keep protecting and supporting that madman no matter what else he does, but there's no way you're convincing me that's morally right, oath broken or oath kept. Anyhow, I still think these series are amusing and well-written, so I keep following it.

Well, that's my opinion. I hope you consider my advice, and that of others. By the way, are you Brazilian? Your name and location make me think so. Even if I'm right, I don't speak portugués, so please don't try that with me xD,

Good luck!
 

Similar threads


Back
Top