XyzzyB - The genius of GRRM Comments

Comment on 'The genius of GRRM' by Stephen

2007-09-07T13:48:45Z

Spoilers

Ah, I see what you are saying re: female secondary characters. Honestly I think that’s a setup for the ultimate rule that Daenerys will be bringing (unless we get another big plot twist, e.g. she can’t teach her dragons not to hunt children!).

My personal favorite plot buildup would be Jon “Snow” Targaryen, Daenerys, and Tyrion being the three heads of the dragon of prophecy. It seems clear that the Valaryian language doesn’t differentiate by gender, so the prince that was promised was a Westeros interpretation of the Valaryian for ‘royal child’ and that child is Daenerys.

Re: Character wisdom, Eddard Stark of course comes to mind. But he is genuinely naive about the ways of court politics so can be forgiven somewhat. The character that I really see change is Tyrion. When he is sent to King’s Landing to serve as the Hand, he could have really done some good as far as keeping the kingdom from falling into bloody chaos. Instead he focuses all of his attention on playing pointless power games with Cersei. He was born to rule, he knows the ways of court politics, he’s damn clever, and he should have known better. Of course it makes sense in the context of the character and his relationship with Cersei and his father, but I’m still a little disappointed in him when I read Clash of Kings.

I’m also let down by Rob Stark. Yes he’s a military genius, but like his father he’s entirely innocent of political knowhow. If he had learned from his father’s death he would have established a solid Kingdom in the North behind Moat Cailin and forced the Lannisters to come to him or deal. If only Prince Doran could have lent him some council. Too bad they’re on opposite sides of the kingdom.

GRRM may have taken on too much, but I still don’t have the heart to cut out much. I think his love for the plots and characters has infected me too much. He always makes me nervous, major characters and plots (Drogo’s march on the seven kingdoms, Eddard, Rob as King) get the axe, literally in two of those cases.

I do love how even after all these pages, we still don’t have a clear account on the King’s Tourney at Harrenhal, an event prior to the books that more than any other seems to have shaped everything that has happened. Or what exactly happened at the ‘Tower of Joy’ where, I assume, the Kingsguard were protecting Lyanna and infant Jon.

Comment on 'The genius of GRRM' by donald

2007-09-07T03:09:11Z

As a ruthless editor, I’d cut out the Iron Men entirely. If Winterfell needs to fall, let Roose team up with some renegade wildings to do it, a band that got through the, uh, 700’ tall wall. Made of ice. Riiiiight. Anyway, them, or a larger band of mutinous Northmen. Myrish raiders could take the Shield Islands. Go ahead and kill Stansa early, lose the Aerie subplot entirely, and we’re already much tighter without having to lose much. Seriously. I think GRRM actually realizes this somewhat, given his decision to split the last book, but he loves his characters too much. He also seems to be planning for some big payoff down the road (Bran, Arya), but I wonder if he’s taken on too much.

I take your point on male secondary characters, but I still disagree. Perhaps I should better have said incidental characters, but really, almost every time a female incidental comes up, a sexual comment of some kind is made, while it’s hardly the case that something violent happens to most of the male incidentals. I do think one could make a case that’s it’s just a feature of the society he’s portraying, but I still find it detracts from my enjoyment of the books to some extent.

It’s funny you see character’s wisdom change on rereading, I’m curious who in particular you have in mind? I think, by and large, everybody acts fairly rationally with the limited knowledge they possess. (Rationally in the context of their goals and motivations, of course, tempered by their idiosyncrasies.)

Comment on 'The genius of GRRM' by Stephen

2007-09-06T22:18:52Z

Now, regarding flaws.

Too many characters. The great thing about these books is that every time I read or listen to them I discover some new nuance. I can’t think of anyone that I would cut out, except in the fourth book where I was rather bored with the iron men.
Geography isn’t fixed. Yes, you’re right about that. I think that Westeros from North to King’s Landing is pretty well defined, but south of KL things get a little murky and outside of Westeros things are seriously out there. But distances aside, what a world! He’s got shades of a good swath of historically major civilizations all over the place and has invented some seriously neat cultures to boot.
Female characters treated badly. Just look at what happens to most of his male secondary characters. I’d have more of an issue with this if his singled women out for the pain and hardship, but dude, anyone in these books who isn’t maimed, tortured, psychologically fucked with, or hideously killed should hit the casinos because they would bank.

Your last point is where it’s at. GRRM develops characters that we care about different ways at different times. A character that I practically loathed in the first book has become one of my favorites over the course of the series, and vice versa. Characters that, on first reading, I thought were acting entirely correctly and rationally I now see as absolute idiots on subsequent readings. That multilayered meaning is just so deftly done.

Comment on 'The genius of GRRM' by Stephen

2007-09-06T22:05:13Z

Ah, Mephisto, I didn’t realize, assumes pure html formatting for comments by default. I’ve changed it to use textile.

So this should be a new paragraph.

Comment on 'The genius of GRRM' by donald

2007-09-06T20:22:32Z

Holy moly, mephisto doesn't translate double newlines into paragraphs? That's crazy.

Comment on 'The genius of GRRM' by donald

2007-09-06T17:04:49Z

I enjoy GRRM's epic works, but I do find a few significant flaws therein: 1. There are too many characters, slowing down the pace of the story too much for my liking. I do find all of the characters interesting, but watching the story unfold is sort of like watching glaciers attack. 2. Speaking as a former DM, I'm not sure the land and population sizes are consistent with the story, or even from book to book. To some extent, this is okay - I rather like the BSG notion that the starships move at the speed of story - but it's somewhat at odds with the meticulous attention he pays to other sorts of details. 3. As a feminist, I take some issue with his portrayal of women as secondary characters. Specifically, they seem to only exist to be fucked, usually by rape. I get that he's trying to paint a picture of a gritty world. I appreciate that he contrasts this with female protagonists who are strong in both conventional and unconventional ways. I also like that he's realistic about the role of noble women in feudal society, namely, used as strategic assets in marriage. So he's got all that going for him, and yet, I'm still put off by the coarse and prurient way he treats his secondary female characters. Still, I think that we can both agree that GRRM excels at developing characters about whom we care, for good or ill, at different ways at different times. Reminds me of Oz in that way (the video series, not the land or the author).