Serious and Fantastical in Ice and Fire

[Eulalia]

Once upon a time, in a land far away, there was a class on Fantasy and Science Fiction. The prof was a complex guy, whose main thesis contended that fantasy and science fiction used "cognitive estrangement" to explore serious ideas. He said that Fantasy or SF are used as an alien playground and distancing mechanism to illustrate ideas and to cause people to be more open to looking at issues.

I think there a many serious ideas in aSoIaF that GRRM explores. I think he plays with ambiguity.

There are thoughts about slavery, leadership, roles of women, economics, sexuality, the effects of violance, class, war, warriors, weapons, religion, fanatasim, loyalty, cults, ends and means, honour, character, beauty, personal responsibility and much and more.

I wish Ice and Fire had been around back in the day. Had to make do with the likes of Kurt Vonnegut, Isaac Asimov, Jonathan Swift and Mary Shelley!

 

[juleska]

Without a doubt. If this story was simple escapism I really wouldn't be so engaged with it as I am, and I certainly wouldn't be seeking out forums on the internet to dissect the finer points of it. What I appreciate is how he weaves each of the issues you mentioned into the story seamlessly and manages to expose their weaknesses without coming off as "preachy". Every character seems on one hand to accept the reality of their world, yet on the other hand compelled to move against those constraints. And that's how real change happens in any society. None of the subjects you list feel (to me) as if they were retrofitted to suit the author's agenda. All of it works in the context of the world created in his books.

 

[Boaz]

Eulalia, ends and means are a great topic. Before I forget, is that Mary Pickford as your avatar? Beauty is a also a great topic in ASOIAF.

Back on topic, the theme of ends justifying means is a favorite in ASOIAF. Is there a one word term, mayhaps in Latin, that describes ends and means? For Pete's sake, there's a word for tossing a living person out of a window... there should be a word for ends and means.

Anyway, GRRM puts Baelish at one extreme and Eddard at the other. Littlefinger uses any and all amoral and immoral methods... and he always gets what he wants. Eddard on the other hand, always took the high road and he lost everything. Tyrion, Dany, Jon, Jaime, Arya, Sansa, Sam, and Theon are all somewhere in between. If the ends justify the means, then Baelish is THE hero of the story... but I think we all find him reprehensible. So if means dictate results, then what did honor buy Eddard? Peace? I can hear the High Septon intone, "As we sin, so do we suffer." Is that true? How about... Mycah? Layna, the brewer's daughter? Jeyne Poole? Tysha? Baby Aegon? Chiswyck? Aerys II? Craster? Gregor? Septon Utt? Wow... So should we all just be like Baelish and Varys and Tyrion? If you're smart enough, skilled enough, and lucky enough, then you can do whatever you want... forget about morals. Is that GRRM's view?

Ah, that leads me to religion. I'm not sure what GRRM's final statement will be regarding religion. But it's scary how the Lord of Light has observable supernatural power while the Seven show nothing, but their followers are about to take over the kingdom... and that is power. Demonstrating power is one thing, but religion to me should be more about redemption... and as if on cue, Bob Marley's Redemption Song just came on my iPod.

Bloodthirsty vampires, brutal Orcs and brain-eating zombies are easy to recognize as evil... and to mark for extermination. But what about people? Viserys and Dany were children... was Robert right to fear them? Eddard did not like it, but Tywin's present of Rhaenys' and Aegon's corpses made things much easier politically. The Blackfyre pretenders plauged the Targaryens for five generations... monarchs never can be at peace when others have better claims to the throne. I've read GRRM's blog during the last few U.S. presidential elections, I know how he stands... but would he advocate Machiavellian political policies?

I think he likes discussion and exploration, but he may not declare himself definitively on all issues... or mayhaps I'm just not that careful of a reader.