/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.3398535]

> We have too many kings!
> Why is the river on fire

900 pages.

[Anonymous No.3398538]

A good read.

[Anonymous No.3398560]

>>3398535
Why was the river on fire?

[Anonymous No.3398564]

worst of the series, not saying much tho

[Anonymous No.3398607]

[Anonymous No.3398624]

>>3398607
>What has GRRM achieved in one book, let along four?

There are five books there. Perhaps all that time wasted reading classic could have been spent on basic mathematics?

[Anonymous No.3398650]

>>3398624
counting isn't mathematics.

And the image has a point. Although never reading anything that might be bad is a pretty stupid policy

[Anonymous No.3398667]

>>3398607

As much as I love the classics, I have to say GMMR's work caters much better for times in need of a mindless story to immense myself into.

And besides, yes they are classics but their value does not stem purely from their literary merit. For example The Saga Of Gilgamesh reads like a children's book. Its value stems mostly from being a relic of a long gone advanced civilization.

[Anonymous No.3398670]

>>3398650
The image actually just doesn't have that much of a point. By what measure are those classics "better?" What if the reader places enjoyment/readability as his highest criterion?

[Anonymous No.3398680]

>>3398607
The only reason those books, with the exception of Dante and Chaucer, are classics is because they're old as fuck. What a dumb picture.

[Anonymous No.3398683]

>>3398667
>For example The Saga Of Gilgamesh reads like a children's book.
It doesn't. Either you didn't read it or you didn't understand.

[Anonymous No.3398686]

>>3398650
>"counting isn't mathematics."
-/lit/

[Anonymous No.3398688]

Idunno where people got this idea that ASOIAF is mindless. It has depth and quality of writing when you look at it as a fantasy series, which is what it is. GRRM is a very witty storyteller.

[Anonymous No.3398707]

>>3398688
> Idunno where people got this idea that ASOIAF is mindless.
From reading the piece of shit books, I guess.

>It has depth and quality of writing when you look at it as a fantasy series,
No. Not even with that retarded caveat.

>which is what it is. GRRM is a very witty storyteller.
Not even close.

[Anonymous No.3398714]

>>3398670
>What if the reader places enjoyment/readability as his highest criterion?
They're all much more enjoyable and readable than ASOIAF. (Maybe you have problems with basic reading comprehension of anything that isn't meant to be a TV series script.)

[Anonymous No.3398715]

>>3398683
>Either you didn't read it or you didn't understand.
You obviously read the translation and not the tablet.

[Anonymous No.3398720]

>>3398714

Yes, and that's an absolute. In noway can that be subjective.

[Anonymous No.3398727]

>>3398715
>You obviously read the translation and not the tablet.
Translation has nothing to do with it. It has adult themes, humor and philosophy. It doesn't read like a children's story.

[Anonymous No.3398782]

>>3398680
What? If anything, the Inferno/Divine Comedy is probably the shittiest read on there. It's considered a classic because it's influential.

And you seriously consider The Odyssey, Beowulf and Ovid not worthy of being considered classics? I ain't even mad, I just feel sorry for your limiting tastes.

[Anonymous No.3398802]

I loved asoiaf but I'm not even going to argue with the elitists that composes /lit/

What I do want to know is if I liked that series, will beouwolf appeal to me? I have no idea what its about, but I'm assuming its something like that shitty 3d movie that came out a few years back right? I just want another fantasy epic, with knights and shit

[Anonymous No.3398803]

>>3398727
>not growing up on children's books about prostitutes and fucking
Do you not remember Mog the Cat Buys Some Pussy?

[Anonymous No.3398843]

>We have too many wannabe kings!
>Why does Henry the IV wear a curtain on his head

30 years.

[Anonymous No.3398868]

[Anonymous No.3398893]

>>3398868

wow, what a good point. sometimes I forget about how only flowery language with complex sentence structures is the only kind of good writing, and about how george rr martin only writes about dysentery

[Anonymous No.3398911]

[Anonymous No.3398913]

[Anonymous No.3398922]

[Anonymous No.3398925]

[Anonymous No.3398940]

>>3398893
Post a good example of Martin's writing

hard mode: it can't contain the words 'jape', 'nuncle', 'ser', or 'fat pink mast'

[Anonymous No.3398955]

[Anonymous No.3398997]

>>3398868
The difference here being that GRRM have made more money than all of the classic litterature faggots combined. Produced more entertainment than them combined. Made a more pirated TV series than them combined.

Not to mention, last but most important:
HAVE MADE MORE PEOPLE READ BOOKS THAN THE FUCKING FAGGOTS COMBINED!

[Anonymous No.3399018]

n-no spoilers y-you guys

[Anonymous No.3399043]

<--- Read some real fantasy, not Martin's agonizingly prolonged incestuous fuck-fest.

Pic Related.

[Anonymous No.3399081]

>>3399043
>The Sea of Trees
Hello Thomas Andrew Shuttleworth.

[Anonymous No.3399092]

>>3398997

[Anonymous No.3399110]

>>3399043
fuck off asshole

[Anonymous No.3399817]

>>3398940
> The godswife did not cry out as they dragged her to Khal Drogo's pyre and staked her down amidst his treasures. Dany poured the oil over the woman's head herself. "I thank you, Mirri Maz Duur," she said, "for the lessons you have taught me."
> "You will not hear me scream," MIrri responded as the oil dripped from her hair and soaked her clothing.
> "I will," Dany said, "but it is not your screams I want, only your life. I remember what you told me. Only death can pay for life." Mirri Maz Duur opened her mouth, but made no reply. As she stepped away, Dany saw that the contempt was gone from the maegi's flat black eyes; in its place was something that might have been fear. Then there was nothing to be done but watch the sun and look for the first star.
> When a horselord dies, his horse is slain with him, so he might ride proud into the night lands. The bodies are burned beneath the open sky, and the khal rides on his fiery steed to take his place among the stars. The more fiery the man burned in life, the brighter his star will shine in the darkness.
> Jhogo spied it first. "There," he said in a hushed voice. Dany looked and saw it, low in the east. The first star was a comet, burning red. Bloodred, fire red; the dragon's tail. She could not have asked for a stronger sign.

[Anonymous No.3399837]

>>3398997
>derp he sold more, made money, hordes of plebs read it

[Anonymous No.3399845]

>>3399817

[Anonymous No.3399875]

>>3399817

[Anonymous No.3399897]

Crap writing, great read. Haters hate. Fankids will rage. Who cares? No one. That's who.

[Anonymous No.3399947]

>multiple hugo awards
>greatest short story writer in genre history
>bad writing
>mfw when i have no face

get back to niggerjewing /pol/. this is not for you.

[Anonymous No.3399956]

>>3399947
>he's good because he's popular

[Anonymous No.3399963]

>>3399947
>hugo award

[Anonymous No.3400016]

>>3399956
>>3399963
>great writers never get recognition during their lifetime

[Anonymous No.3400083]

Love the tv series. I'm going to read the books too. Problem?

[Anonymous No.3400087]

>>3400083
Nah, do.

[Anonymous No.3400109]

>>3400083
I was in the same boat as you a year ago. I read up until around halfway through the third book and then stopped out of boredom. The first book is shit, the second book is worth a read, and the third book was boring tripe again.

I have better things to be doing than reading about the angsty cripple who is slowly unlocking his green wizard powers while constantly moping about how he can't use his legs. Or their mother who constantly mopes about how her family is all dead. Or the daughter that constantly mopes because she is the king's prisoner.

It's all very, very boring.

[Anonymous No.3400122]

once robb, joffrey and tywin die, Martin has no idea what to do and the story becomes shit.

>mfw spoilers

[Anonymous No.3400722]

>>3398607
>Bad
>Good
>Subjectivity

[Anonymous No.3400780]

I like this idea

"Man I sure was drunk and old a lot."
Weird shit happens with robots

714 pages.

[Anonymous No.3400790]

I want an honest answer. Would /lit/ be so hostile towards ASOIAF if it hadn't become wildly popular of the past couple years?

[Anonymous No.3400794]

>>3400790
over the past*

Derp.

[Anonymous No.3400806]

>>3400790
Look at all the other shovelbooks that are produced in a year in this same kind of style. The only reason this one took off was pure luck. I've read the entire series, and was completely disappointed. I made sure to read it all though, so I could give an accurate review.

Martin doesn't know what he's doing with the story half the time, and it's evident by his writing style. He will build up and item, man, or something else, only to ditch it and leave you wondering what the hell happened to it and why it was important in the first place.

The entire series can be summed up thus: Cool shit is about to happen and then doesn't. The End.

[Anonymous No.3401237]

>>3400806
>Cool shit is about to happen and then doesn'tThe End.

Sounds like life.

[Anonymous No.3401251]

>Man these priests sure are gay!
>Everybody expects the Italian inquisition!
>Fuck you and your laughter.

460 pages

[Anonymous No.3401256]

>>3400790
Yes, but naturally as popularity increases so too must discourse on the topic.

[Anonymous No.3401261]

>>3400806
it's like you're dumb. read it again without the edgycool glasses on that make you hate anything popular. the series is fantastic. I came so many autistic buckets. try having friends to discuss it with and you too can experience the speculation autism.

[Anonymous No.3401263]

>>3401251
Shit, forgot the imaeg

[Anonymous No.3401266]

>>3401263
Thank you, because nowadays I couldn;t tell you what The Name of the Rose actually is without a picture.

[Anonymous No.3401281]

>>3401261
>the series is fantastic.
Fantastically generic and average, you mean.

[Anonymous No.3401357]

Grrm does really good with setup,
but the problem is, that his faults outweigh the two things that he does well.
People read out of a desire to see what happens. To see the execution and evolution of the plot. But sadly, there's not really a plan.
You can tell. especially with the Dany subplot. You can tell that he started with a plan of her coming into westeros and being a part of the major plot, but he found himself not needing her yet, and pushes her off into purgatory, "Just, go simmer on the back burner, because I'm not ready for you yet."
He doesn't know where he's going with this. But he's given himself a lot of options, open so that when the time comes to end it, he can just cut short more subplots, by killing people, and resolve the conflict as needed, and people will go "it's brilliant!"
But he's very good with the set up, don't get me wrong.

[Anonymous No.3402306]

>>3401357
My main problem with GoT is to have likeable characters, great set-ups, and major events that get killed/resolved in exposition/out of POV.

Other than that, enjoy 'em for what they are.

[Anonymous No.3402384]

>>3401281
you try reading them all, you ignorant twat or are you just espousing ignorance like the rest of the 'non-conformist' e/lit/ists?

[Anonymous No.3402416]

>>3402384
>reading them all
Why would he do this? Reading the first one is enough to realize how shit it really is

[Anonymous No.3402432]

>>3402384
I have read them all, and I regret it deeply. Always a promise of a payoff and he delievers nothing.

This whole series is more or less romance novels for men. Pulpy, pathetic story, lots of character development, but in the end, nothing of note.

When I finished the last book I simply put it down and went to another book. No "that was great!", no "How satisfying!".

I just assume if you liked the series that you haven't actually read anything good yet. And by that I don't mean classics, I just mean any good books period.

[Anonymous No.3402436]

>first world problems
>1500 pages

[Anonymous No.3402443]

>>3402436
2deep4u

[Anonymous No.3402597]

The best fantasy book series is still The Wheel of Time. Nothing even comes close.

[Anonymous No.3402605]

>>3402597

Please

[Anonymous No.3402622]

>>3402597
Jordan is guilty of many of the same pitfalls that GRRM falls into.

[Anonymous No.3402624]

>>3402597
what did you just say?

[Anonymous No.3402629]

>>3402622
Like which?
>>3402624
That's just crap popular polish fantasy.

[Anonymous No.3402638]

>>3402597
It was the best until Lord of Chaos. A Memory of Light was a pretty underwhelming conclusion that wasted most of the long time characters and left several plot holes.

[Anonymous No.3402652]

>>3402629
That's Rake from Malazan.

[Anonymous No.3402672]

>>3402652
I tried reading Malazan and had to stop after the first few chapters. It was so boring and derivative.

[Anonymous No.3402674]

>>3402629
Jordan:

Prose suffers at points with unnecessary techniques that unintentionally mislead the reader, or just reflect a questionable writing style. I.e. absolute constant use of adverbs that don't need to be.

[Anonymous No.3402742]

>>3402672
Haha. I wouldn't call it derivative, and I wouldn't take that criticism from a fan of Jordan.

[Anonymous No.3402749]

>>3402742
Not really a fan of Jordan. I thought WoT was damn fine fantasy up til Lord of Chaos and then went to shit.

But please. Explain how it isn't derivative.

[Anonymous No.3402750]

>>3398607
>>3398667
My english is ridiculous, but let's go.

I read The Art of War, a version translated by a guy who studied a lot the chinese culture and literature, and the guys wrote that the ancient China loved simple write, that's why The Art of War is simple.
GRRM just want to write a good story (I think) and a book doesn't need to be "ornate" to be good.

[Anonymous No.3402767]

>>3402750
>a book doesn't need to be "ornate" to be good.
no, but it needs to have more than a 'good story', and many people wouldn't call ASOIAF a 'good story'

[Anonymous No.3402796]

>>3402767
>many people wouldn't call ASOIAF a 'good story'
I can't deny that. It's a simple story, the political plot and without good guys vs bad guys (the first step for people who don't read like /lit/).

>but it needs to have more than a 'good story'
What would it be? If possible an example.

[Anonymous No.3402805]

>>3402749
Well what's derivative about it? The magic is pretty unique and interesting, the races/cultures likewise, same for the characters. And I think the narrative too, and the prose. Overall I just don't think it's derivative...

[Anonymous No.3402827]

>>3398607
Holy shit, this just might be worth reading, if it's keeping me away from books like The divine Comedy (come at me) and Beowulf

[Anonymous No.3402834]

As an aside, this series is only popular because of Robert Jordan, whose supertitular blurb on the first edition of Game of Thrones ginned up interest in the book.

[Anonymous No.3402839]

>>3401357
This. Good comment.

[Anonymous No.3403021]

ASOIAF is a good series with flaws that are hardly new to the genre of multi-volume epics. Before the show came out literally every anon on /lit/ was praising it as THE single best fantasy series on the market.

[Anonymous No.3403025]

>>3403021
I remember the time when every anon on 4chan was a basement-dwelling neckbeard too

[Anonymous No.3403032]

>>3403025
No man this was back in like 2009 when people were still bitching about normalfags.

[Anonymous No.3403067]

>>3398650
>numbers
>no math

Retard alert. Tell me little autistic child how could one count without math. 1+1=2+1=3+1=4 That is how counting works, that is math, stop posting.

[Anonymous No.3403076]

>>3403067
>1+1=2+1
What number system you using there?

[Anonymous No.3403116]

>>3403076
The same number system the world has used sense the invention of math?

2+1=3, 3+1=4 ect ect It's called counting, a simple form of math, try to keep up, counting to 4 isn't so hard.

I starts with 1 then you add represented by a "+" also called a plus sign. When you have 1 then "add" another 1 you get 2.

People who have the correct number of chromosomes get it, keep at it though, math any 4 year old can do wont elude you forever.

[Anonymous No.3403161]

>>3403067
>>3403116
your notation on that is laughably incorrect

what you appear to be trying to get across would be a basic incremental algorithm, or:
n=n+1

n gradually gets larger, and that is what counting is. Welcome to basic mathematics.

[Anonymous No.3403182]

>>3403116
That's addition, you silly goose. Counting is the accumulation of sequential integers. It uses symbols, but not mathematics. Let us count to ten. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10. See? The accumulation of sequential integer symbols.

I suggest reading:
-Leo Toldstoy
-Hunter S. Toldson

[Anonymous No.3403184]

>>3398650
>>3403161

Ok mister counting isn't math, you can fuck off now.

Counting is math, that was my only point, seeing as this is a lit bored and not a math bored I wrote the numbers in the simplest way, as if I was teaching a child how to count because thats about how smart the average 4chan user is.

Exhibit A: You

Sorry you are too retarded to understand that I wasn't aiming for the math book notations faggot
welcome to /lit/ where no one gives a fuck about math but trolling retards that are too retarded to know what math is is good times.

[Anonymous No.3403206]

>>3403182

With out math the numbers 1-10 would have no meaning so counting would therefor be meaningless.

Counting is math, stop being retarded.

Count how many apples are in that bowl. Can you do that with out math? Deriving a number is using math. Just because you can count effortlessly doesn't make it not math, its simply a math operation your brain has gotten use to doing.

When you count you are adding. If you think otherwise you have no concept of math or its underlying mechanics, otherwise people would "count" using random words and it would be the same.

1 2 3 4 5
apple peach tree tar death

Here I have counted to 5 twice, once using math and once using bullshit that you are spewing forth.

[Anonymous No.3403235]

>>3403206
>once using bullshit that you are spewing forth.
No, no. I agree to use your system. I lined up some objects and counted - apple, peach, tree, tar. We be counting now, son.

I turned away for a second and the pile seems smaller... Hmmm.. I wont use addition, subtraction, quadratic equations, differential calculus, I don't want to get into maths here. But, I can count. Lets count again. apple, peach, tree. I don't know what it means, I'm not subtracting or adding, but I counted your the objects while voicing your order and it's tree.

Further reading.
-Told Atlas by David Mitchell
-To kill a Mockingtold.

[Anonymous No.3403302]

>>3403235

You sure did. Only problem is you're to stupid to understand that numbers, without the math backing them are as meaningless as the words you counted with.

Numbers don't have some magic meaning, they are symbols and what they represent is math. Just because it is the basics of math doesn't make it any less math.

I can say I have 5 apples and you know what I mean. I can say I have t-rex apples and you would be confused.

If you are using numbers you are using math.

Its like saying I use letters but not words when I comunicate. its letters mmhmm no words on this website at all, only letters that form not words and sentences and language, just 26 alphabetical letters that mean nothing and that's how it works herp derp

Are you really this retarded? If so try to be less retarded or stop posting, I know its taxing.

Further reading:
Math for dummies

If that proves to hard for you try:
Numbers, why are they so hard and make me feel so god damned retarded?

[Anonymous No.3403738]

>ASOIAF
>One of the best dissections of the nature of history/causality/Fortune in recent memory.
>Dismissed for having bad writing.

/lit/

[Anonymous No.3403749]

>>3403738

>One of the best dissections of the nature of history/causality/Fortune in recent memory.

Who is feeding this shit to these neckbeards? I know they don't come up with it themselves. Is there a blog or something devoted to "analyzing" shitty fantasy for the purpose of phony intellectual reassurance for neckbeards?

[Anonymous No.3403750]

>>3403302
Actually the guy you're arguing with is right.

[Anonymous No.3403763]

>>3403749
I'll say this as clearly as I know how to: if you want the attention you're craving, you'll need to put a lot more effort into those trolls of yours. At least attempt to refute the point that was made, it will lend some legitimacy to your post.

[Anonymous No.3403771]

>>3403738
>bad writing
Well, but isn't bad writing a good point to criticize?
Why are so upset about it?

[Anonymous No.3403801]

>>3403771
Who's upset? I only meant to say that what the books accomplish very well are always ignored, while focus is instead concentrated solely on one aspect of the books. It's a very unfair, narrow way of gauging their overall quality. The writing isn't nearly as bad as certain people here want to believe. In fact it's quite strong in terms of its intentions. It's just that it clearly isn't the main strength. It's understandable if people wanted to criticize it while acknowledging what the author does very well.

[Anonymous No.3403811]

>>3403801

The author does nothing well except pander to neckbeards who've been waiting for an excuse to read soap opera.

[Anonymous No.3403843]

>>3403811
Sigh...rip /lit/.

[Anonymous No.3403857]

>>3403843

/lit/ was dead the moment game of thrones got popular and brought a bunch of mouthbreathing neckbeards here to discuss fantasy trash.

[Anonymous No.3404712]

>>3403857
no, discussing ANYTHING in a half intelligent matter is fine. Kneejerk reactionary posts by elitist hipster trash against anything merely based on popularity? Now that, and your post are the reason /lit/ is a shithole these days.

[Anonymous No.3404716]

>>3403811
2Edgy4U called, they want their mascot back.

[Anonymous No.3404734]

>>3403811
Soap Opera is a genre.
When I say he does set up well I am already acknowledging all the flaws with the series.

The mere fact that it is set up in a Soap Opera format isn't the problem. The problem is consistency and continuity. Building up conflicts as important and than dismissing them, and I know that there are people out there who will say that "That's just inherent to the soap opera formula" But it's not. You can still arrange the conflicts and have the sort of slow build, and simmer, soap opera plot driven story and still have it be good writing if you do everything else well too, if you scale the resolutions to the amount of conflict built up. If you keep track of subplots and bring them to satisfying conclusions, If you give characters development rather than just busy work, Then you can still have the same kind of Soap Opera structure but have it come out better.
But it takes planning, outlining, this is one of the big problems Stephen King runs into, and with Stephen King too, I am just as objective about what he does well and what he stinks at. Stephen King really understands anxiety, he really understands how to communicate feelings of unsettling terror, he's fairly decent at representing realistic inner monologue and getting you inside the head of a character, but he sucks at execution, the plot and character development, he establishes well and then doesn't take the characters to their fullest potential.

Sorry, didn't mean to ramble, it's just you can learn so much from even the "mediocre" writers. Because when they achieve mainstream success it's usually because they did at least one part of the process really well.

[Anonymous No.3404739]

>>3403857
people have been discussing ASOIAF, and more broadly discussing fantasy, as long as /lit/ has existed. whatever time you're imagining - when there was no fantasy discussion, and whatever kind of discussion you love had free range over the board - never existed. if that kind of discussion existed, it always co-existed with fantasy.

[Anonymous No.3404825]

>>3404734
Abruptly 'finishing' subplots, leaving them seemingly unconcluded, and killing off characters has nothing to do with adhering to a soap opera formula or not. They have to do with the authors's specific aims, namely capturing the unpredictable, unforeseeable and apparently whimsical nature of interconnected events. Asoiaf tries (and succeeds immensely, imo) to grasp certain fundamental aspects of the way history plays out, like the ebb and flow of people's fortunes, particularly in relation to their place within positions of power. If you're familiar with the discipline of history and the way historians analyse events, you'll instantly recognize how similar the way asoiaf progresses is to their process. This is the particular angle that GRRM comes from. Of course, the last to books cause doubt due to the split character approach, but hopefully Martin can now bring the two branches back together.

[Anonymous No.3404876]

>>3404825
Nice try, no

It's not an intentional affectation that he's doing on purpose to showcase how war is messy and how events spiral out of control. If it was you wouldn't be seeing the problems he was having.
You can tell by reading the books and by listening to the interviews he's given and by going back and rereading the subplots individually that there are plenty of times where he does not know what to do with these characters. He's making it up as he goes along.

And writing without a specific outline is very hard, You can tell he had a broad outline, "I'm going to do this, here, and I"m going to do that there, and this conflict is going to fold into that here, and Dany is going to be building over there and she's going to come in and whatnot."

That's why I'm saying he is good at set-up. I'm acknowledging what he does well, I don't completely write him off. I can praise the good elements in bad work, and this isn't a bad work, the series does okay, You'd know about it if I thought it was horrible.

But what I am criticizing him for is the way he executes the subplots when it's time to draw them together, he is strongest when it's time to put the pieces on the board, but when it's time for two pieces to get to the moment they've been building to, ehh.

just eh,

And he really fails when he has to improvise and push off conflicts that would screw things up,
Oh shit, I really have a good thing going with this one set of characters, but what am I going to do with these others, they can't be allowed to interfere, not yet, not until the time is right, Time for a Procrastination subplot,

Again, it's not terrible, It's just, you know that you're watching a man who is juggling. It's good juggling, it's exciting juggling, but without a specific outline, it makes it that much easier to spend too much time with a character that can't be allowed to make too much progress yet. or to not spend enough time with characters that need the stage time.

[Anonymous No.3404880]

>>3404825
again, I'm not trying to bust his balls, in fact, the opposite, when you pretend someone did everything perfectly, it diminishes their actual achievements.
There are things he genuinely deserves praise for, and those can't be showcased if the only two camps you get to be in are the "Game of Thrones sucks, or Game of Thrones is Epic an perfect."

I just want to be the one on the side with the sign that says "Game of Thrones has flaws but is an enjoyable read."

[Anonymous No.3404923]

Implying this is't 100% correct

[Anonymous No.3404951]

>>3398564
Fuck you, a Feast for Crows was the worst in the series. Literally nothing happens other than Cersi gets arrested

[Anonymous No.3404962]

>>3404923
>Davos and Theon not being in high tier

[Anonymous No.3405048]

>>3404876
Well of course he's juggling and making a lot of it as he goes along. How could an author possibly have even the roughest plan concerning all the different subplots and character arcs of a seven-part series before he put pen to paper? A plot-focused work of this size, and more importantly, of this theme, is going to have a huge amount of constant improvisation and revaluation. And that's most likely always going to produce a better result than something that is set in stone from the beginning. Like >>3404880
said: "when you pretend someone did everything perfectly, it diminishes their actual achievements."

However, what I am arguing is that the directions Martin takes these subplots is still most definitely the product of his particular approach to history and whatnot, even if you have issue with their execution and the way he ties them up. There is no way to say otherwise. There are so many examples of both individual character arcs and larger events that are so obviously guided and progressed and concluded in a manner to showcase the themes and ideas I posted above, at least in the first three books. The thematic inspiration for his plots and what they are meant to explore are too starkly there, even if Martin's having trouble fitting them together in a satisfying way for some.

I personally don't have a problem at all with the way Martin has linked and tied up his giant tapestry of stories, at least not in general. But even if you do, the end result is too blatantly the intentional affection of he's themes and such, as you put it.

[Anonymous No.3405051]

>>3405048
>How could an author possibly have even the roughest plan concerning all the different subplots and character arcs of a seven-part series before he put pen to paper?
But that's exactly what writers that aren't shit-tier do. (Are you trolling or something?)

[Anonymous No.3405061]

>>3404923
>100% correct
>Cersei in top tier
>Davos in low tier

There are other minor quibbles, but c'mon, those are obvious mistakes.

[Anonymous No.3405065]

>>3404951

Feast was all sorts of "WTF?" but at least it was entertaining.

Dance was just fucking boring for the most part. I mean, when the Bran chapters are some of the best shit going on you know something wrong.

[Anonymous No.3405066]

>>3405061
Cersi's chapters are probably the most interesting out of everyone's. Political intrigue and and actual plot development in every chapter

[Anonymous No.3405067]

>>3405066

Problem is those POV chapters ruined her character.

[Anonymous No.3405071]

>>3405065
I'd say the books a also a bit suffering from the fact its become hard to simply kill off a character, which in turn puts us a bit to much on ease and makes things boring

like how we all know Jon isn't dead, and if he dared kill Dany before she reached westeros his fans would eat him alive

[Anonymous No.3405080]

>>3405071

Yeah, the plot armour has grown strong on certain characters. Which is a shame, but yeah, no one thought for one minute Jon is really dead (not to mention Grim has done the bait 'n switch so many times now).

I wouldn't mind Dany dying before she gets to Westeros though. In certain ways it's probably the best thing that could happen to the series. But... I never did care much for all the stuff in Essos anyway.

[Anonymous No.3405094]

Am I the only one who has only one problem with ASOIAF?
I mean the sex scenes. They're poorly written and pointless, aside from one or two, that are semi-revlevant to the plot.
And when I say poorly written, I mean that George was probably writing them with one hand in his pants.

[Anonymous No.3405100]

>>3405051
>Are you trolling or something?
I should be asking you that. Martin obviously knew what his series was going to be devoted to, and he obviously knew 90% of his story before writing (I definitely exaggerated in that sentence you quoted, my bad). What I meant to say was there's still going to be a degree of deciding on the finer plot points as he writes (which, as I said, usually ends up being a good thing). That's inevitable when writing 5000 pages over 25 years. Plus, in the last two books he might seem to have written himself into a corner, although that may just be the result of splitting them to set the story back on track for the sixth book.

[Anonymous No.3405113]

>>3405094
half the Dany chapters in the last book were essentially "hi I'm George and these are my fetishes"

[Anonymous No.3405114]

>>3405094
The sex scenes are rarely meant to be relevant to the plot. They're usually meant to be relevant to the characters.

[Anonymous No.3405175]

>>3405048
*Affectation, not affection, google it

>how could an author possibly have even the roughest....

I'm going to stop you right there, J. K Rowling,
I'm not going to restart the great "Is harry potter patrician or plebe" debate, but one thing you can definitely say is that she planned, she did the homework,

and I'm not even criticizing him for not making a plan, I was criticizing him for not being better at juggling the things he started. There are ways to put characters on simmer without making the audience feel like they are going nowhere, there are things that Danys could do that would develop her character instead of make us feel like she is undergoing the same thing every time.

You're not really countering my argument when I say that Martin wastes all this extra potential his stories could have had, and you come back with "but look, he did do organization here and here." "his themes were developed here and here."

It's essentially like I'm saying that he tilled 16 rows worth of earth and planted 5 rows of plants. You come back with, "Look at what a great pattern he made with these 5 rows, and I just say, yeah but he's using less than a third of his potential."

He's telling a smaller story than he setup,
I'm not trying to ream him, because creating engaging characters that you actually care about and cheer for or hate, is not easy and should not be overlooked.

all I'm saying is there are better ways of frustrating your characters' plans without frustrating the audience. And there are ways to progress the story a bit at a time while still building the tension for the end.

I'll be the first to give him credit if he manages to stick the landing, But I can also see a lot of ways he could "in case of too many variables, break glass" and make an ending that would resolve everything, but not be satisfying.
and say "look, this ending was thematically foreshadowed all along!"

"Yeah, but you also foretold this and that,"
kind of have a lot of outs

[Anonymous No.3405251]

>>3400806

If you read ASoIaF as you would an historical account, the lack of structure and payoff is a lot more palatable. GRRM's series is essentially a cluster of small storylines, and the grander tale more of a series of events like historic literature (or an endless, sprawling soap opera), rather than one coherent story.

However, this is only enjoyable as an ongoing series. The problem is going to come at the conclusion of the series, when GRRM has all these characters with all sorts of stuff going on, and given his storytelling structure, no satisfying way of concluding anything. This is a problem suffered by many TV series.

People criticise formulaic stories such as Lord of the Rings, but there's a reason they exist.

[Anonymous No.3405263]

>>3405094

THIS. "Oh, I'll make this presumably straight character have totally out of character lesbian scenes because it turns me on!" Fuck you, George. Remember: plot, not porn.

[Anonymous No.3405265]

So, guys, if you were in ASOIAF, would you rather be studying at The Citadel or fighting on The Wall?

I'd be torn between the two options personally.

[Anonymous No.3405279]

>>3405265
Braavos

[Anonymous No.3405294]

>>3405265

The Wall - bunch of thieves and rapists, no ladies around, boring as fuck (for like the last thousand years anyway) and even more cold.

Citadel - Warm, learn useful things. Easy to get into positions of influence and then you do what the fuck you like.

Pretty obvious choice to me.

[Anonymous No.3405297]

>>3405263

> All lesbians must have short hair and nose rings

[Anonymous No.3405305]

>>3405297

More like there was no buildup or hint at either Cersei or Dany being bisexual, just GRRM throwing in his personal fap fuel.

[Anonymous No.3405307]

>>3405265
I would be satin

[Anonymous No.3405321]

>>3405294
This. How can you even compare the two? Only a fucking retard would WANT to go to the Wall.

[Anonymous No.3405323]

>>3405265
would learn how to play the lire, travel with army, fuck bitches, kill men, they'd call me the the warrior bard

[Anonymous No.3405328]

>>3399837
>Hey, GRRMs book are horrible because there are tons of people that are reading it. They are truly an abomination to literature.

[Anonymous No.3405335]

>>3398868
If you don't understand why this is flawed, you are inherently a bad writer and don't understand good writing (not that I'm saying GRRM is better than SF, but the picture is illogical)

[Anonymous No.3405344]

>>3405100
>implying focus/outline and planning can only be applied before writing.

s'no excuse for dropping threads, and writing himself into a corner. GrrMartin just needed to proofread,

[Anonymous No.3405349]

>>3398607
I don't know how autistic you'd have to be to believe this.

[Anonymous No.3405352]

What's wrong with you know, liking Classics and modern books?

[Anonymous No.3405373]

The only issue I have is this- How the hell did Ned track down Syrio Forrel to teach Arya?

[Anonymous No.3405394]

>>3405373
Craigslist

[Anonymous No.3405399]

>>3405373
He was already in Kings Landing

[Anonymous No.3405445]

Do not open a thread about ASOIF on /lit/, it's too popular, everyone tries to be edgy bashing it while it doesn't deserve it.

[Anonymous No.3405586]

>>3405445
You sure are timely 139 posts in:
"I better say something"

[Anonymous No.3405766]

>>3404923
2/10 did not rage

[Anonymous No.3405769]

>>3405066
Thank you

[Anonymous No.3405796]

>>3405067
How so?

>>3405769
You're welcome. Uhh, what?

[Anonymous No.3405843]

>I'm not going to restart the great "Is harry potter patrician or plebe" debate, but one thing you can definitely say is that she planned, she did the homework,

I disagree. Authors who plan and do their homeworks don't randomly introduce cheap, plentiful time travel into their settings and then forget about it.

[Anonymous No.3405878]

>>3405843
I think she planned on a time travel story but didn't realize just how bad adding time travel (of the non-alternate dimension kind) to a story is

[Anonymous No.3405935]

>>3405878
I would argue that the way in which she wrote out the problematic plot thread of time travel was more elegant and consistent than anything GRRMartin's done to deal with his plot holes.

Most of JK Rowling's plot holes deal with the mechanics of her universe, and not with the harmony of her story. Again, I'm not saying it's perfect or even great literature, I'm just holding it up as an example of focused writing, and whether or not you like her story, you have to admit, she knew her own story well. GRRMartin is finding out what happens along the way just as much as we are.

[Anonymous No.3405958]

>>3405935
I'd argue she knew the wide outline of her story, knew that she wanted A to happen, and then B to happen, and then C to happen, and then those things happened regardless of whether or not C still made sense after A.

Martin, on the other hand, has the opposite problem - he wants it all to make sense, but now he needs something to happen that he can't make make sense - he wants all the characters to be older by 5 years for his plot to continue. And if he were Rowling, he'd simply say five years passed and miraculously nothing happened in that interval, and he wouldn't give a fuck if that made sense or not. Or he'd pull a magic spell out of his ass that magically aged everyone by 5 years instantly, giving them 5 years of living experience as if they had really lived that long, but which did not alter the real world in any way. And then that spell would never be brought up again by anyone.

But he doesn't do that, and the last two books and ten years of writing have been an awkward attempt to resolve this dillema.

[Anonymous No.3405970]

Also, the idea of outlining and brainstorming being anathema to "good writing" is one of my pet peeves. I can't stand the idea that writer's are supposed to start at the beginning of the story and write blindly until the end and then not work to at least organize the elements into a structure but instead treat the work as a precious spontaneous good.

That's not how cinematographers do it, It's not how painters do it, it's not even how musicians do it. "I can't figure out the notes of the bridge until I've written both the lyrics and the melody of the first verse...oh shoot, now I have musicians' block!"

I don't like that type of thinking in general, but I acknowledge that some literature is done that way, and depending on the author's ability to adapt, improvise and keep track of his plot and subplots, it can be very good, even great. Especially in character driven, and plot-less forms. But I especially hate it in genre fiction. and ASOIAF is genre, and genre fiction has several conventions, one of the most common is a structured narrative that builds to some type of climax.

Now what ASOIAF does is open several lines of rising tension and then try to construct the best story it can with the pieces once they are in motion. It's not going to use all of the pieces to their full potential. (Which is okay) It's going to cut plotlines short (less okay, but still fine) and it's going to eventually resolve into one large climactic ending, played out with whatever pieces still have the requisite dramatic tension. That's fine, but it's not the same as having it all planned from the start.

[Anonymous No.3405983]

>>3402306
who's been killed "off-screen" that you liked?

[Anonymous No.3405988]

>>3405970
Outlining isn't bad if you do it for standalone novels. The problem shows up when you have an outline for a long series, and you start putting things in that make things that are supposed to happen later in the outline impossible. Like, say, the character is meant to be heartbroken by the death of the loved one in Book 4, but you resolve the plot of Book 2 by bringing someone back to life in a way that isn't a once-in-a-billion-years miracle.

But hey, your outline says it happens, so you just go ahead and write it that way anyway.

And I really, really don't think genre fiction has the problem of not being plotted out ahead of time.

[Anonymous No.3406010]

>>3405958
What?

If Rowling wrote like Martin, you'd see Harry Potter repeating years of school because his development was threatening to clash with other pov characters growth that he was having trouble integrating into the main storyline. He'd kill any side character he needed to get an action beat to fuel the drama, and throw in several chapter ends where he cuts off from a pov character in a way to make you think they've been killed, and off in a faraway part of the world a verging mary sue character would be always on the cusp of developing, but never really reaching it, and always just in the right position to be able to be immediately called into service in the main plot whenever he needed her.

[Anonymous No.3406051]

>>3405988
outlining doesn't keep you from changing it, it just gives you a framework that you can follow to make sure things line up. You can always change your plan.

>And I really, really don't think genre fiction has the problem of not being plotted out ahead of time.

It is a problem when you realize that your earlier outline isn't working and yet you stretch and contort the plot by having characters repeat character development that they've already gone through or have them encounter obstacles that are only set up to waste their time and not to change their character. See it's not enough just to write out "This is what I want to happen." You have to have a plan for each character's arc.
George had an idea for several characters who had mutually exclusive desires and had enough interesting back story and personality conflicts so that their interactions would be exciting, But you can't read the books and say that he knew what would happen to Robb from the start, or that some characters weren't killed because he no longer needed them, and they were worth more to the plot dead,

He plots, but he plots one book at a time, with a vague sense of what he wants to have happen in the next one. Which isn't as good as it would be if he just let the fallout happen organically, or planned the books out all at once.

[Anonymous No.3407757]

>>3401237
Bingo.

[Anonymous No.3407904]

>>3405175
>You're not really countering my argument when I say that Martin wastes all this extra potential his stories could have had, and you come back with "but look, he did do organization here and here." "his themes were developed here and here."
>It's essentially like I'm saying that he tilled 16 rows worth of earth and planted 5 rows of plants. You come back with, "Look at what a great pattern he made with these 5 rows, and I just say, yeah but he's using less than a third of his potential."

Sigh...That's not what I said, don't be silly. Now you're repeating yourself and making the effort of steering clear of my points.

You want Martin's plots to adhere to a path that restrains all these sprawling and blossoming subplots towards a satisfying conclusion. Fine. But that 'wasted potential' is only you wanting the author to do what you think he should do.

You're always going to judge unfairly how Martin succeeds at 'juggling the things he started' if you only dwell narrowly on how instantly gratifying and satisfying his arcs are plot-wise, and don't take into account the inconclusive, anti-climactic way events in real life have always progressed, it's exploration being one of the entire reasons he wrote this series. As much as you may not like it, GRRM's plots follow the decentralized structure recounting history tends to produce more than it follows a typical, single coherent one, as >>3405251 points out

Plus, nobody can really be commenting on how good Martin is at concluding these plots until we're closer to the end of the series, other than expressing purely subjective opinions on half-completed stories. I'm not trying to justify him heading off in seemingly impossible corners

Yes, tying up his loose ends is becoming seemingly harder for him to achieve, and it's partly due to developing the story on the fly. As should be clear, there's naturally going to be a degree of this in a work written over so long. Pointing out JK Rowling isn't saying anything

[Anonymous No.3407925]

>>3405263
lol wat? What kind of previous indication or clues did you need for these two women to be convincingly lesbo in your eyes? You only presumed they weren't capable of eating carpet because..well, you presumed. Don't do that when reading asoiaf.

[Anonymous No.3407971]

>>3398802
Read either LoTR or the Dark Tower series (not quite what you are looking for but close enough). Beowulf is boring and it can only be enjoyed by weird elitists who post on /lit

[Anonymous No.3408006]

>>3407904
You're giving Martin too much credit. It's obvious that the problems with ASOIAF are due to:
a) "lol planning and foresight is for fags"
b) "fuck continuity, acquire money"

('B' is obviously at the publisher's urging.)

[Anonymous No.3408028]

>>3407904
Fuck it, I can't keep writing paragraph after paragraph trying to explain basic rhetorical composition.

I'd be willing to, if you wanted clarification, but not if you're going to "Derp, you just don't think plots are resolved well because the characters don't do what you think they should do." and "Derp, you can't judge pacing until the end."

I give up. Somebody else can argue with you.

[Anonymous No.3408032]

>>3407925
It's not about "hetero-normative indicators" or presumption,

It's about their character, the scenes came right the fuck out of nowhere and left just as quickly,
They weren't built on anything, and they didn't go on to establish anything"

[Anonymous No.3408053]

>>3405970
>and ASOIAF is genre, and genre fiction has several conventions, one of the most common is a structured narrative that builds to some type of climax.
Shit man,if you've read these books you would know for certain that conventional climax is in some respects completely the opposite of what Marty is going for. Read through this thread about the way things in real life come to an unsatisfying or anti climactic end when compared to traditional literary conventions. That is one of the series' entire points, to showcase this, after all.

>Now what ASOIAF does is open several lines of rising tension and then try to construct the best story it can with the pieces once they are in motion.
At this early stage one could prematurely say there is a degree of this, yes, but at the same time you'd be missing the point and underlying theme of unresolved causality that goes against what you personally want to occur. Remember, despite the emphasis on plot in genre fiction, asoiaf is first and foremost about how events diverge or trail off from the expected path. Not saying that Martin doesn't plan 100% of his work before he begins it (I don't understand your aversion to it; it can often be far more successful). I'm just saying at the same time keep all of this in mind.

[Anonymous No.3408061]

>>3408028
>but not if you're going to "Derp, you just don't think plots are resolved well because the characters don't do what you think they should do." and "Derp, you can't judge pacing until the end."
So was I arguing with a troll this whole time? Was I being taken for a ride? "I can't continue to partake in this conversation any longer because you don't get anything I'm saying." Really? That's what you come up with?

[Anonymous No.3408069]

What are these sex stories that are gross? I just remember long descriptions of food and Dany shitting in the woods.

Fetishes?

[Anonymous No.3408074]

>>3408028
>I can't keep writing paragraph after paragraph trying to explain basic rhetorical composition.
We should be saying the same thing to you.

[Anonymous No.3408427]

>>3408061
No, I wasn't trolling you, I was reading your opinions, and trying to explain myself as completely as I could,

and then you came with this
>Sigh...That's not what I said, don't be silly. Now you're repeating yourself and making the effort of steering clear of my points.

fuck that passive aggressive shit.

If you all want to discuss rhetorical theory I'm in there all night long, but I'm sure as hell going to quit the thread if you're just going to argue for the sake of argument.

Cause I can lecture till I'm blue in the face about the merits of structured pacing and plot development only to have some wank off say "How can you say what SHOULD be done?"

If I write 9 paragraphs explaining my points clearly and then get a response that's a single paragraph dismissal, how am I supposed to respond?
I either have to compose a thorough essay refuting the stupid comments, or just say fuckit.

I know I come off looking like an asshole for it, but I'm probably going to come off looking like an asshole anyway. I can't say anything more than I sincerely tried to have a rational discussion of my analysis of the series, and I've just got to the point where I feel I'm putting more effort into my responses than the people who are questioning me. As impolite as it may seem, I just reached the fuckit point.

so fuckit

[Anonymous No.3408437]

>>3398607

gold star

[Anonymous No.3408441]

>>3398624
If I remember right, this graphic was made before the last book came out, so at the time there was only 4 in published existence.

I could be wrong, though. I've been here a long goddamn time.

[Anonymous No.3408444]

>>3408427
Trying to critically analyze Game of Thrones.
That was your first mistake.
Trying to argue with GRRM's neckbeard fanbase,
That was your second mistake.

[Anonymous No.3408475]

>>3408427
>If I write 9 paragraphs explaining my points clearly
But you didn't.

>and then get a response that's a single paragraph dismissal
Pretty sure you were the first one to arrogantly dismiss any opposing view with the 'I'm too smart to convince this person, going to give up now lol' card. You haven't said much of substance, ignored certain key points made by simply repeating things you've previously said, and attempted to cover this with an exasperated-at-the-intellectually-ferior-swine air.

Damn I hate this holier than thou attitude that's rampant on this board. Grow up, man.

[Anonymous No.3408524]

>>3408475
If he's simply repeating some things he have previously said, then maybe they really are some answers to your points, or at least something that he believes you didn't understand. You also need to be humble.

[Anonymous No.3408529]

>>3408475
Oh, and also, I really hate this boards tendency to be holier-than-thou and employ domination techniques and such, but I sincerely think this is not the case right now.

[Anonymous No.3408545]

>>3408524
Thing is, at the expense of sounding like an arrogant prick myself, I also tried explaining certain things more than once, addressing certain points of his that I don't think he may have understood. I really have no idea what more I can say. It's late here and I'm tired and frustrated.

[Anonymous No.3410221]

my favorite fantasy is the book of the new sun

[Anonymous No.3411656]

>>3410221
I like Dragonponies Book 4: The Cakening

[Anonymous No.3411664]

>>3402827
>Beowulf

You just haven't read the right translation. Try Frederick Rebsamen.

[Anonymous No.3411669]

>>3403235
>>3403182

Fantastic troll, 10/10. Do you have a portfolio?

[Anonymous No.3411682]

>>3405251
Lord of the Rings isn't formulaic (outside of the obvious Quest Story foundations); its formula has simply been copied by many, many, MANY people.