|
SPOILER WARNING If you only watch the show, this thread will spoil you of future events in HBO's Game of Thrones. Thread contains discussion of all books of the series A Song of Ice and FireClick Here for the spoiler-free thread. |
On April 23 2014 22:20 c0ldfusion wrote:
I'm not saying they're terrible books. Most reasonable people, I think, would find the pacing of books 1-3 to be vastly superior to that of books 4,5.
I agree. The problem with books 4 and 5 is not that the story lines are boring (even the ones that on a first read-through I found thoroughly disappointing revealed some interesting stuff on rereading), it's that after being thrown from intrigue to war to more intrigue in books 1-3, books 4 and 5 have little to nothing happening: the frantic pace that was maintained in the first three books is slowed down to a crawl. If you read AFfC and ADwD in the expectation of having more of the same, you come away rather disappointed.
This, by the way, seems to be a major issue in most longer series. Just look at WoT, where the pace slows down quite significantly between Path of Daggers and Knife of Dreams, where it picks up again. The middle books aren't necessarily bad, and there is plenty of interesting stuff happening, but one does get thoroughly fed up at yet another 3 page description of Nynaeve tugging her braid; just as in ASoIaF Brienne chapters describing yet more slogging through wilderness encountering very little of interest can be trying at times.
|
WoT slows down halfway through? I had to give up halfway through book 1 because everything felt so slow (and nobody was dieing, ASOIAF really spoiled me in that regard).
|
Well i don't agree, i think book 4 was probably his best work so far, i just don't need one wtf moment after another.
On April 23 2014 22:20 c0ldfusion wrote:
I'm not saying they're terrible books. Most reasonable people, I think, would find the pacing of books 1-3 to be vastly superior to that of books 4,5.
"reasonable people" , okay^^ I don't think i can argue with that 
|
On April 22 2014 07:02 Conti wrote:GRRM himself weighs in on the Jaime/Cersei scene: Show nested quote +I think the “butterfly effect” that I have spoken of so often was at work here. In the novels, Jaime is not present at Joffrey’s death, and indeed, Cersei has been fearful that he is dead himself, that she has lost both the son and the father/ lover/ brother. And then suddenly Jaime is there before her. Maimed and changed, but Jaime nonetheless. Though the time and place is wildly inappropriate and Cersei is fearful of discovery, she is as hungry for him as he is for her.
The whole dynamic is different in the show, where Jaime has been back for weeks at the least, maybe longer, and he and Cersei have been in each other’s company on numerous occasions, often quarreling. The setting is the same, but neither character is in the same place as in the books, which may be why Dan & David played the sept out differently. But that’s just my surmise; we never discussed this scene, to the best of my recollection.
Also, I was writing the scene from Jaime’s POV, so the reader is inside his head, hearing his thoughts. On the TV show, the camera is necessarily external. You don’t know what anyone is thinking or feeling, just what they are saying and doing.
If the show had retained some of Cersei’s dialogue from the books, it might have left a somewhat different impression — but that dialogue was very much shaped by the circumstances of the books, delivered by a woman who is seeing her lover again for the first time after a long while apart during which she feared he was dead. I am not sure it would have worked with the new timeline.
That’s really all I can say on this issue. The scene was always intended to be disturbing… but I do regret if it has disturbed people for the wrong reasons. (source)
Thanks for posting this. I was wondering how George felt about this very 'interesting' change.
|
On April 23 2014 22:48 Mikau wrote:
WoT slows down halfway through? I had to give up halfway through book 1 because everything felt so slow (and nobody was dieing, ASOIAF really spoiled me in that regard).
You're missing out big time there, while books 7-10 are indeed sub par (by WoT standards) the series develops really fast until book 6 and the character development is probably among the best in the entire genre. Admittedly main characters don't die as often as in ASOIAF, but then, no one is as ruthless with his characters as Martin.
|
I liked Book 4-5 more, I think that is finally when I fill that the story is even starting to progress.
Let's face it, who sits on the Throne when Whitewalkers are coming to town won't matter.
|
Book 4 and 5 really represent the time when the dust settles. The events of the first 3 books are pretty crazy, and there is a lot of action. It's a war after all. By book 4, the war is more or less over, and people are picking up the scraps and trying to return to their normal lives.
It's the calm before the storm though, as it's pretty obvious that The Winds of Winter is going to bring a lot of action, the one that involves the Others. GRRM himself has said we will see a lot more of them in TWOW, and if the series is 7 books long, it'd make sense to stretch the "real" and final conflict over two books.
I think the pace of AFFC and ADWD was necessary. There was some filler, mostly in Meereen, but the rest was fine to me. I liked them.
|
|
|
On April 24 2014 01:09 Spaylz wrote:
Book 4 and 5 really represent the time when the dust settles. The events of the first 3 books are pretty crazy, and there is a lot of action. It's a war after all. By book 4, the war is more or less over, and people are picking up the scraps and trying to return to their normal lives.
It's the calm before the storm though, as it's pretty obvious that The Winds of Winter is going to bring a lot of action, the one that involves the Others. GRRM himself has said we will see a lot more of them in TWOW, and if the series is 7 books long, it'd make sense to stretch the "real" and final conflict over two books.
I think the pace of AFFC and ADWD was necessary. There was some filler, mostly in Meereen, but the rest was fine to me. I liked them.
Where AGOT was mostly exposition and ACOK was setup for ASOS, I see AFFC/ADWD as the setup for all the shit that happens in TWOW. So far the preview chapters have been pretty telling that shit will go down.
|
http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/george-r-r-martin-the-rolling-stone-interview-20140423
I really like how he says people are more interested in the fake history of the Targ dynasty than real history. Maybe we should change the way we teach history. I mean isn't that what the old cultures used to do anyway, pass down history through stories and myth.
"We're coming to the end of our class. So what happened to
Brutus and Cassius? Did Mark Antony really love Cleopatra and Who was Titus Pullo? Find out next time on Dragon BallZ ... I mean next week's class"
|
On April 24 2014 01:09 Spaylz wrote:
Book 4 and 5 really represent the time when the dust settles. The events of the first 3 books are pretty crazy, and there is a lot of action. It's a war after all. By book 4, the war is more or less over, and people are picking up the scraps and trying to return to their normal lives.
It's the calm before the storm though, as it's pretty obvious that The Winds of Winter is going to bring a lot of action, the one that involves the Others. GRRM himself has said we will see a lot more of them in TWOW, and if the series is 7 books long, it'd make sense to stretch the "real" and final conflict over two books.
I think the pace of AFFC and ADWD was necessary. There was some filler, mostly in Meereen, but the rest was fine to me. I liked them.
All of Dany is filler straight from Book 1 if she isn't going to live to see Westeros (Which I really hope she doesn't).
Dany Books 1 through 6 summary:
Had 3 Dragons
Gave said dragons to the Ironmen/John Snow/Bran/whoever else is actually Azor Ahai
|
On April 24 2014 21:57 Figgy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2014 01:09 Spaylz wrote:
Book 4 and 5 really represent the time when the dust settles. The events of the first 3 books are pretty crazy, and there is a lot of action. It's a war after all. By book 4, the war is more or less over, and people are picking up the scraps and trying to return to their normal lives.
It's the calm before the storm though, as it's pretty obvious that The Winds of Winter is going to bring a lot of action, the one that involves the Others. GRRM himself has said we will see a lot more of them in TWOW, and if the series is 7 books long, it'd make sense to stretch the "real" and final conflict over two books.
I think the pace of AFFC and ADWD was necessary. There was some filler, mostly in Meereen, but the rest was fine to me. I liked them. All of Dany is filler straight from Book 1 if she isn't going to live to see Westeros (Which I really hope she doesn't). Dany Books 1 through 6 summary: Had 3 Dragons Gave said dragons to the Ironmen/John Snow/Bran/whoever else is actually Azor Ahai
Honestly I too wonder about where Dany's story line is going.
The bottom line is, dragons would make the war against the Others too damn easy. Drogon alone could wreck a whole army probably. I don't mean to say the Others can't fight back, they probably can, but it just seems to me that dragons are an overwhelming force to deal with for them.
On the other hand, it's possible that GRRM might go that way, but throw some wenches in the works. For instance, Dany could get to Westeros, and then her dragons are out of control and they do more bad than good. Ultimately, I do think Dany will reach Westeros. Somehow, I'm convinced she will die when she does. As in, she sails or flies to Westeros badly wounded or something, and she reaches it right before her death.
Time (or GRRM) will tell though.
|
On April 24 2014 21:36 sths wrote:http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/george-r-r-martin-the-rolling-stone-interview-20140423I really like how he says people are more interested in the fake history of the Targ dynasty than real history. Maybe we should change the way we teach history. I mean isn't that what the old cultures used to do anyway, pass down history through stories and myth. "We're coming to the end of our class. So what happened to Brutus and Cassius? Did Mark Antony really love Cleopatra and Who was Titus Pullo? Find out next time on Dragon BallZ ... I mean next week's class"
Real history is, most of the time, really boring. Of course your average teacher/professor makes it look even more boring, so I would guess that's one reason.
Besides, when the average student is learning history in class, he is trying to memorize what could potentially be asked in an exam, and not really trying to enjoy it...
|
Well also consider that most real history classes are exceptionally condensed. Everyone probably studied something about World War II in school, but I know my teachers never went into any of the details about any of the specific battles, it was all a very broad over view of what caused it, and who won. Lots of names and dates, but the stories rarely got into the detail necessary to form a connection with the person you were studying that day to want to know what happened next. In fact most historical figures had their entire life work reduced to a paragraph or two of most notable accomplishments so there was no what happens next to that guy to look forward to. So it's not that history is boring, it's that you have to study specific events in history in much more detail for it to be as interesting as the details of the Targ dynasty's history.
|
On April 24 2014 23:47 karazax wrote:
Well also consider that most real history classes are exceptionally condensed. Everyone probably studied something about World War II in school, but I know my teachers never went into any of the details about any of the specific battles, it was all a very broad over view of what caused it, and who won. Lots of names and dates, but the stories rarely got into the detail necessary to form a connection with the person you were studying that day to want to know what happened next. In fact most historical figures had their entire life work reduced to a paragraph or two of most notable accomplishments so there was no what happens next to that guy to look forward to. So it's not that history is boring, it's that you have to study specific events in history in much more detail for it to be as interesting as the details of the Targ dynasty's history.
I don't really think we can criticize too much the way history is taught, because its aim is not to tell interesting stories of warped human beings, but rather to give a more general sense of what happened to make today's world the way it is. If you are interested, you will find your own way to the intricacies of court intrigue, wonderful speeches or military strategies and tactics; all of which we are taught a slight tiny bit about in history.
|
I agree. I was just explaining why those who find learning real history boring compared to fictional history of the Targs, aren't really comparing equivalent things. There is interesting stuff in real history every bit as dramatic, but you have to read deeper than the average high school or college world history text book is going to cover to find it.
|
How dare you say history is boring!
Almost all parts of our history are interesting. I personally find it fascinating to go back and learn about Ancient Greece or Ancient Rome, or even WW2 and the Hundred Year War.
It's also rather fascinating to study characters with a focus, e.g. Churchill or Thucydides. Maybe it's just me, I do have plans to study history for fun in my free time soon 
In any case, it's true that in school, we tend to fly over history due to time restrictions, but depending on where you are you also learn a lot. For instance, if you study in France, you will learn a lot about WW2 naturally, which is always interesting. I believe we French learn a great deal more about WW2 than Americans, or at least that's what I've noticed when meeting American students. Our courses tend to go more in depth about the key characters on the French side, such as Pétain or Laval, who are not necessarily known to North Americans or even some Europeans. Of course the same probably goes for Americans, who I imagine learn a lot more about Roosevelt than we do, for example.
edit: If you are a fan of ASoIaF, learning about the War of the Roses is also interesting, as I believe GRRM has stated he largely inspired himself from it to write the novels.
|
United States43565 Posts
On April 24 2014 22:48 fabiano wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2014 21:36 sths wrote:http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/george-r-r-martin-the-rolling-stone-interview-20140423I really like how he says people are more interested in the fake history of the Targ dynasty than real history. Maybe we should change the way we teach history. I mean isn't that what the old cultures used to do anyway, pass down history through stories and myth. "We're coming to the end of our class. So what happened to Brutus and Cassius? Did Mark Antony really love Cleopatra and Who was Titus Pullo? Find out next time on Dragon BallZ ... I mean next week's class" Real history is, most of the time, really boring. Of course your average teacher/professor makes it look even more boring, so I would guess that's one reason. Besides, when the average student is learning history in class, he is trying to memorize what could potentially be asked in an exam, and not really trying to enjoy it...
Real history is really interesting, it's all about presentation. History is the study of people and people are fucking fascinating.
|
On April 24 2014 22:48 fabiano wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2014 21:36 sths wrote:http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/george-r-r-martin-the-rolling-stone-interview-20140423I really like how he says people are more interested in the fake history of the Targ dynasty than real history. Maybe we should change the way we teach history. I mean isn't that what the old cultures used to do anyway, pass down history through stories and myth. "We're coming to the end of our class. So what happened to Brutus and Cassius? Did Mark Antony really love Cleopatra and Who was Titus Pullo? Find out next time on Dragon BallZ ... I mean next week's class" Real history is, most of the time, really boring. Of course your average teacher/professor makes it look even more boring, so I would guess that's one reason. Besides, when the average student is learning history in class, he is trying to memorize what could potentially be asked in an exam, and not really trying to enjoy it...
You've probably never had a good history professor if you think that.
|
uh.. FiWiFaKi just posted _the_ bomb in the other thread.. I mean....
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
