I like fantasy as a genre, but only a few novels grow on me. Besides Lord of the Rings and some other lackluster titles (IMHO, of course!), I had given up on fantasy. Then I begin to hear rave reviews of a Song of Ice and Fire. Is it good? Why? Why shall I spend a valuable fraction of my life span reading a Song of Ice and Fire?
I think so. I like them, but then I like historical fantasy, and that’s what they feel like. Martin says they’re not based on the Wars of the Roses, but the first couple of books definitely felt like it.
Here’s a consensus opinion from another board, comparing three of the (currently) most popular fantasy writers – Martin, R. Scott Bakker, and Steven Erikson. Maybe it’ll help you decide if Martin’s books are for you.
Martin - character based, character driven. Little worldbuilding, little magic. Lots of historical influence. Medium - large cast. Very little humour.
Bakker - Character based, quite a bit of realistic characterisation, medium amount of worldbuilding, quite a bit of magic, significant (but much less than Martin) historical influence.
Erikson - Huge cast, mainly plot driven, relatively limited characterisation but realistic (as opposed to romantic). Limited historical influence, lots of magic, huge amount of worldbuilding, huge world, and quite a bit of humour.
Everyone’s opinion will vary, of course…
I hated it. Bored the piss out of me. It may have been because I was on heavy pain meds when I was trying to read it, but I just never gave a rat’s behind about anyone in the books.
Hmm…maybe I shall be a bit more definite. One thing that I stopped reading fantasy all together is because it is cliche and predictable. Is the novel that way? Are they:
~ Ancient civlisations and long-lost races whose technology or secrets are pivotal to the plot
~ A war threatneing to tear the whole land apart?
~ An exotic nation, from an extreme compass direction, which threatens the security of the nation? (eg. Southrons in LOTR)
~ Hordes of goblinoid races
~ Wizards who hailed from secretive orders of mages?
~ A civilisation/legion of great horsemen?
~ A siege, in which “all hope are lost” and many gongs for retreat are sounded, but somehow aid arrived “unlooked for”?
~ A central artefact, character or plot device which the entire story is hinges on (The Ring from LOTR, for example).
~ An eccentric but kindly old wizard? (Gandalf, Elminister etc…)
…to sum up, is it your typical “evil is threatening the entre world and the heroes are the only one preventing it?”
I’m just going through the books (in the middle of “A Clash of Kings” now), and I have to say it’s definitely worth it! I’m not that much a fan of fantasy books. When its all about wizards and magic and stuff, I run. The Song of Ice and Fire is far less about magic (although some exists to be sure) than it is about medeval politics. It’s about the interplay of Noble House interworkings and relations.
I also like the third person limited POV. Each chapter follows around a particular character and you only know what that person knows. There are about 5-6 ‘main’ characters per book.
As for the cliches (in your list)… funny enough that list shares many similarities with the plot, but does it in a fairly different way (though there is no real ‘evil’ - more on that later). Though there is no kind or eccentric old wizard. There are maesters, but they are more like the healers of the age, and none really stands out as a protagonist. There is also no central artefact that everything hinges upon, unless you consider the bloodlines (or lack there of) of the nobles to be such ;).
As for good v evil, there are mostly shades of grey, and I’ve heard (but not gotten there) in the 3rd book you take the viewpoint of one of the people you’ve been trained to dislike (by the other protagonists in the story) [and yes, I know which person it is… but best not to spoil it for others ;)]. It really is a power struggle between houses and thus good v evil can get a bit subjective at times.
I also appeciate that Martin doesn’t consider his protagonists to be supermen (or women). They make HUGE mistakes and sometimes those mistakes end with their heads. They don’t always make the mistake and then make a brilliant recovery. They aren’t Aragorn in LOTR, who can do no wrong and can always win against great odds. They are taken by surprise at times and are very mortal indeed.
Oh lord… I fear I have gushed… though I am enjoying this series very much (after reading the 1st one, I rushed out the get the 2nd and 3rd, even though I have a stack of books waiting much longer that need reading).
Ask any fan of GRRM how long it takes them to read his latest, A feast for Crows, and it won’t be “a valuable fraction of my life span”, it will be more like 2 days (and that’s with rationing 
). Its not some Joycean tract to labour through, its a lightening fast read that will disappear down your literary gullet in one mighty gulp.
Not so far.
Heck yeah. There’s more rebellions and battles and betrayals and counterbetrayals in the first books then you can shake a stick at.
Well there’s some type of super evil to the far north that seems to be waking up. Worst part of the book IMO I really perfer the other parts of the story.
No.
No though there’s some magical moments, and an odd ‘cult’ that’s backing one of the rebels.
Great horsemen? Well there is a race that seemed to be loosely based off the Mongols. I wouldn’t call them any kind of typical “and here’s a nation of horsemen who can do stuff that no horsemen could really do and they’re all really badasses” in fantasy.
Not in any typical sense. There have been a few seiges with different outcomes.
No
No
Very few ‘heroes’ as such in these books. In fact most of the truly noble characters are dead.
One of the best things about the series is that it is NOT a tale of good vs. evil. There are many sides in the wars, and for most of them, you can understand why they are doing what they are doing, and can sympathize. Even several of the “villains” are sympathetic. Some are very selfish, cruel people, as well, and some are fairly noble.
Regardless, all are mortal, and fallible, and prone to weakness. For all that, you will love some characters, and you will mourn the passing of some.
The book conflicts with itself, because each chapter is from a certain character’s point of view, and each has a different perspective, and different information available. It’s not always clear what the truth is. You know, like real life.
You WILL spend a significant fraction of your life reading it, because you’ll want to go back and re-read the series on the eve of each new release. I know I do.
Keeping in mind that I haven’t read Crows yet, is there anyone who would qualify as noble heroes besides Robb and Ned?
And they’re dead…
Anyone else who qualifies?
-Joe
Selmy is the epitome of formal nobility, but the noblest character all round has to be Jon.
Jon Snow. That’s about it in my estimation. But I haven’t read the fourth book yet ( bought it yesterday ).
As for the OP:
Not really - it doesn’t slavishly follow or even resemble standard Tolkienesque/Dungeons and Dragons fantasy tropes by any means if that’s what you are asking. It’s about as far from a hack like Terry Brooks as you are likely to get in the same general genre. As mentioned it is very heavy on the political intrigue and complex characters, fairly light on the magic. And it can be rather grim - the good guys sometimes succeed, sometimes die in ugly ways. Martin likes his readers to feel ‘nervous’.
IMHO it is one of the best fantasy series ever written ( so far ).
On the other hand if you want to try something much more steeped in magic and traditionally heroic ( but with plenty of political intrigue as well ), more faeriesque than Tolkienesque, try Jack Vance’s ‘Lyonesse’ trilogy. Set on a large mythical, Atlantis-based isle in a historical early middle ages Bay of Biscay. Good stuff.
- Tamerlane
Granted I’m in the middle of Book 2, but I’d say Catelyn Stark qualifies as noble as well (her treatment of Jon Snow, while not nice, is understandable and I don’t think disqualifies her nobility). And the Old Bear Mormont as well (though who knows what is in store for him from where I am in the series).
It’s understandable given her upbringing and status, but ignoble IMO.
As far as I’m concerned she comes close, but no cigar and that blind spot in particular is key.
- Tamerlane
Frankly I wouldn’t consider that a black mark on her considering for all she (and we) know, he was conceived through her (lord) husband’s adultery.
Oh, and speaking of which, so far (middle of Book 2, remember) Sandor Clegane has his own sort of noble, well I guess he wouldn’t be a hero per se. He is loyal to a Lord that calls him ‘dog’ and refuses to be a knight because of his brother, even when he could have had the title easily. He’s a man of principle, even though it seems he doesn’t like the people he’s supposed to protect and follow.
I like just about everything I’ve ever read by Martin (“Fevre Dream” and “Tuf Voyaging” are particular favorites), and the “Song of Fire and Ice” books are definitely worth reading. They’re big, yes, and there are a lot of characters to keep track of, but I didn’t find it too hard - they’re all distinct enough that I’ll bet they won’t get mixed up in your mind. There are few, if any, complete heroes or unredeemable villains - lots of shades of gray, as noted above, and many intriguing twists and turns along the way.
Politics, scheming, dynastic ambition, sex, dragons, heroism, and a sprinkling of magic - what’s not to like? I find myself racing through the books, big as they are. Haven’t gotten the latest yet, but I will.
I’m a big Tolkien fan, too, but comparing him to Martin is apples-and-oranges. Both excellent in their own right, but they wrote/write very different stuff.
So why should her husband’s infidelities attach themselves to an innocent and by all apearances noble and kind lad?
Nope, it’s pettiness of a particular narrow-minded elitist sort. She’s an admirable character and very close to heroic, but like all of Martin’s characters, flawed. Which is perfectly human and I greatly respect the writing and appreciate the character.
But I don’t particularly like her as a person, despite her heroic qualities. Stuck-up, upper-class bitch :D.
- Tamerlane
Honestly, I’m in the middle of rereading (about 300 pages into book 2 before I get Feast) and I can’t remember if we ever find out why Mormont joined the Watch?
After all, being a Black Brother COULD be considered noble…but unless there was some special sacrifice (like Maester Aemon) I see Mormont as just doing his job.
As for Catelyn…I think she’s just kind of a selfish “mama wants to protect her kids” type.
Sandor Clegane, around Book Two, I think begins to realize that he’s hitched himself to an amoral selfish little shit…just like the brother he hates so much - but Joffrey has money and power rather than Gregor’s insane physical power. I think Sandor is doing a Dusty “If I’d have had friends like you my life would have been completely different. I can see that now” Ayres kind of thing. Hopefully an Invid won’t blow him to atoms once he choose the good side.
And I’d forgotten about Selmy. I can’t remember if he makes a reappearance after he disappears in Book One. He’s certainly the most noble character in the books, I think.
Finally, for some random speculation…
I was skimming the ‘Game of Thrones RPG’ and found a reference to Westeros’s version of the morning after pill. Part of its effects, if unsuccessful is that it can cause birth defects. And cause someone to bleed profusely.
It’s kind of weird that the RPG writers would pull this out of nowhere.
Sound familiar…? Do we know what really happened to Mama Lannister?
-Joe
Since we’re trying to convince someone who’s never read “The Song of Ice and Fire” to [del]join the dark side[/del] try it, may I suggest that we go easy on the unboxed spoilers?
I’m not very fond of Lord of the Rings, and I love SoI&F. It’s got a very dark view of the world. There’s a scene somewhere where a minor lord comes complaining to his liege lord, saying “Soldiers raped my wife, killed my peasants and burned my castle.” And the liege lord just looks at him and says “That’s war.” There are plenty of noble acts of heroism, but just because a character is doing something heroic doesn’t mean (s)he isn’t a complete bastard in some way, and it doesn’t mean (s)he’ll succeed in whatever (s)he’s trying to do.
More “power struggles, selfishness, pettyness, idealism, heroism – in short, people acting like human beings is resulting in a lot of carnage, and those who try to improve things aren’t all that successful, have very different ideas about what “improve” means, and frequently make matters worse”. I do expect that at the end of the series, the country will be united in peace under one competent ruler (and I have my guesses about who that ruler will be), but I’m also pretty sure that we’ll see a lot of petty and cruel as well as heroic and idealistic acts on all sides leading up to that end.
Oh, and I agree with Tamerlane about Catelyn.
What I like about the series is that I have absolutely no idea how it’ll end. He has a lot of options, but no matter which way he goes, someone(s) he’s made us like is going to get royally (heh) screwed over.