/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.3785935]

So, is GRRM disliked because he's simply a bad writer or that he's a competent writer but "there's a lot better people you could be reading?"

This is the only book I've got lying around, and I need something to kill time between trips at work. I'd like to know /lit/'s consensus.

[Anonymous No.3785939]

Get Ovid's Metamophoses out the library

[Anonymous No.3785962]

He's entertaining, but a bad writer. George is just good at foreshadow and plot twists.

[Anonymous No.3785964]

>>3785962
>foreshadow
Plot is a rather plebeian element of literature. Similar to rhythm in music.

[Anonymous No.3785970]

Read it, you'll like it it's entertaining, it's just empty calories. There's no shame in reading it, or liking it, in fact it's in our sticky. The filler will get to you after the third book, (There's filler before that, but it gets worse) And the third is going to be the best book for you. But we don't ban the book, we just don't talk about it cause there's nothing really to discuss, And even if there were, /tv's got an eternal /got general thread going.

[Anonymous No.3785972]

>>3785964

What are the most important elements in a book for you then?

Also, GRRM is quite bad, and this shows at times, quite blatantly. Ultimately, Game of Throne's 'plot' is a copy-paste of a lot of medieval research. Sure, the dialogue can be witty or even entertaining, but god knows how much of it is stolen directly from people he's in contact with, since he must have tons of friends by now.

Not only is he average at best, but given his age - yes he's quite bad.

Having said that Game of Thrones, a Clash of Kings and A Storm of Swords are some of the best books you will ever read, and each one gets better and better.

[Anonymous No.3786020]

I've never seen the Tv series or been part of the hype,
but wondered what all the fuss was about, so I read the first book and half of the second.

The first book is ok. The series is entirely character driven and the first book sets everyone up.
In regard to quality and style I'd compare him to Tamora Pierce.
Which would be perfectly allright for YA, but the problem is that he writes for adults.

The reason why it's so popular is because there's such a wide array of different characters (imo).
You are bound to like at least one of them, even if it's just temporarily.

Halfway into the second book though, I only gave a shit about Arya but I'm not going to torment myself by reading 4000 or so more pages only to discover that she's getting raped or killed or something in book X.

Since with the second book everything get's darker.
Which can be fine. Many fantasy novels become darker over time.
But Martin does it very childishly. A few chapters in some marauders rape women on top of a corpse pile.
This doesn't make the novel feel more adult. Quite the contrary.

He also tends to omit important situations and conversations because he knows he can't write them.

It's not bad, but certainly not good either. It's very mediocre.
There's nothing new or creative about his story.
He doesn't play with clichés but uses them deliberately for appeal.

Just another mediocre time-waster for the fantasy shelf of Barnes and Noble.

If you want to read Dark Fantasy I'd recommend reading Moorcock.

[Anonymous No.3786036]

>>3785962
I wouldn't say the strength is the plot.
I'd say the strength is the character building,
not the execution, but their backstory, their relationship to the other characters.
That's what I think the series real strength is. The characters feel set up well. They are established and distinct. After that it's just kind of letting shit happen and following the consequences.
And the characters don't get developed well, that's not what I'm saying, Character building is different from character development, one is how they are set up and the other is how they grow.
A few characters really grow. several don't grow at all. For some the only development they get is they die.

[Anonymous No.3786055]

>>3786020
>generic pretentious goodreads review
Getting squeamish over bitches getting raped, really?
>He doesn't play with clichés but uses them deliberately
Simply by killing Ned in the first book he shattered the worst fantasy cliché of them all.

[Anonymous No.3786083]

>>3786055
>Getting squeamish over bitches getting raped, really?
Not really. It's just silly how he handles these "darker" aspects.

>Simply by killing Ned in the first book he shattered the worst fantasy cliché of them all.
And what cliché would that be exactly?

Also I don't use goodreads because it's pretty awful.
Also also considering how defensive you reacted I assume ASOIAF is the best fantasy you've read or something along those lines for which you have my condolences.

[Anonymous No.3786099]

>>3786020

>arya is my favorite character

Stopped reading. You are 2pleb.

[Anonymous No.3786102]

>>3786099
>>3786020

Probably a woman as well.
Also Moorcock is fucking shit.

[Anonymous No.3786112]

>>3786020

>tamora pierce
>arya
>complains about rape
>block of text

[Spoiler]Your typical woman that reads fantasy.[/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.3786123]

>>3785964
Please, please tell me you're being facetious, especially about the rhythm in music part.

[Anonymous No.3786126]

>>3786099
>>3786102
>>3786112
>>3786055

[Anonymous No.3786135]

>>3786083
How would you prefer all the brutality to be handled? I'm not trying to be confrontational, I'm curious.

[Anonymous No.3786191]

I liked the books,
I know they're not written well, but that "All the literature you could have read in the same page count" is dumb. Game of Thrones is written for mainstream reading level you can shotgun them pretty quick. You try and read Canterbury tales in the same amount of time and you're just going to ruin the experience.
That's not to argue that you should or shouldn't read the series, only to argue that if your reading time is so crunched that you have to choose between reading classics and reading Game of Thrones, you're not making enough time in your schedule for reading.

[Anonymous No.3786227]

>>3786135
I don't know, I don't read many books that are violent for the sake of being violent.

I'm just asking myself why it's necessary to rape the woman on top of a corpse pile.

There's no reason to do it. Wouldn't he rather do it away from the corpses?
I mean, they're probably covered in blood, shit and piss and smell awful.

I'll tell you why, because Martin follows a formula.
Which is:
violence = dark = adult
more violence = darker = more adult

This is pretty much teenager logic.

On another note the most entertaining way how to handle violence that I know, is probably the movie Lancelot du Lac.

[Anonymous No.3786239]

He's disliked because he's a popular writer and /lit/ strongly dislikes / does not trust / feels resentment towards the people who are reading his work. Any actual criticism of his work is enormously secondary in the collective consciousness of /lit/ to our feelings about his readership. We are not capable of judging GRRM (as a collective; as individuals many of us are capable of making very cogent points for or against his merits as an author)

[Anonymous No.3786241]

>>3786227

I would rape a woman on a pile of corpses, because it makes it worse for her and far more gross overall = hotter.

Stop being such a stupid cunt.

[Anonymous No.3786252]

>>3786241

[Anonymous No.3786262]

>>3786252

Except in this situation Jacob's alone, you dumb piece of shit.

>have no arguments
>'hurdurr your edgy XD'

[Anonymous No.3786268]

>>3786262
Go to bed, Kevin.

[Anonymous No.3786274]

>>3786268

How about you go get raped on a pile of corpses?

[Anonymous No.3786286]

>>3786274
>>3786262
>>3786241
Typical GRRM fanboy getting all butthurt about people rightfully calling his books garbage.

[Anonymous No.3786296]

[Anonymous No.3786317]

>>3786286

>fanboy

Continue believing that, you straw-manning shitheel. However, unlike you, my reasons for disliking GRRM are valid and the result of serious consideration; yours are simply the result of possessing a vagina, which apparently nowadays results in the inability to have taste or even think clearly.

You like Arya, quite possibly the MOST boring and cliche characters in the novels, since she's conceived of being the fucking opposite.
You complain about a fetish, because welp, you find it un-realistic, when there are far more serious issues with the books like the pathetic world-building, the lackluster prose and the downright fucking abysmal quality of books four and five.
You repeatedly fail to give reasons as to why the books are bad beyond 'le personal opinion and limitation XD' while posting the reaction images you probably picked off your Facebook wall.
Or you make blatant statements such as: 'He also tends to omit important situations and conversations because he knows he can't write them.' - without backing them up.

And after all of that, you recommend Moorcock, whilst genuinely implying that I'm the one being dark and edgy.

You are just a disgusting human being.

[Anonymous No.3786330]

>>3786317
you are a Bad Poster

fyi (and not because of your opinion on GRRM)

[Anonymous No.3786336]

>>3786317

>opinion
>baseless inference

I only see one shit poster here, anon.

[Anonymous No.3786349]

>>3785935
I think people don't like him simply because he's a successful writer who got a tv show made after his books. And if there's one thing /lit/ hates its a successful writer

[Anonymous No.3786350]

>>3786330

>>>/SA/

[Anonymous No.3786740]

Anyone have the picture that lists all the classic fantasy one could have read with the same number of pages as ASoIaF

[Anonymous No.3786874]

Gurm's writing improves a lot in A Feast for Crows. I know many people think the series goes downhill after the first 3 books, but that's really just talking about plot tweests. AFFC has better writing style than any of the first 3 books.

>>3786740
Here.

[Anonymous No.3786887]

they're okay.
it's stupid to judge every author on prose. might as well judge ESPN the same way you judge HBO, or Al-Jazeera the same way you judge Fox (hurrdurrtroleU).
They're good books, he starts to do some funky shit concerning the essence of time in the latest books.
People condemn him for his use of tropes, and I think that he does use tropes too liberally, but only for things he's writing. The history he paints for the world is pretty imaginative, as well as down to earth.

Then again I'm reading ASOIAF the same way I read a Shouen manga: cheap thrills.

[Anonymous No.3786899]

Decent, if sometimes stretched-out, character driven plot line. Plenty of twists for those into that. A very large array of unique, memorable characters. I find it's world is quite underrated. It's real world influences are obvious, but it feels rich and interesting, as the guy above me put, it's more down to earth than most fantasy. It can be poorly written at times, his writing style is sub-par, but it's entertaining and interesting and very much worth reading at least the first 3 books.

[Anonymous No.3787161]

>>3785970
>it's in our sticky
you mean in the wiki where any two-bit fucko can just log in and add books?

GRRM is a shit writer, but if you like fantasy you'll like GRRM
and d&d and cheetos and dicks

[Anonymous No.3787183]

He has the diction and mentality of a 12 year old, everything is cock this, bollocks that and everything is 2edgy4me.

It gets tiring very quickly

[Anonymous No.3787334]

>>3787161
Eh? I like fantasy but dislike GRRM, D&D, cheetos and dicks.

[Anonymous No.3787384]

>>3786317
Moorcock is a much better writer though.

His ideas are creative and original,
the plots are interesting,
and his prose isn't half bad.

He's a dick in person though and his "epic pooh" essay is incredibly stupid.

>you make blatant statements such as: 'He also tends to omit important situations and conversations because he knows he can't write them.' - without backing them up.
Dude, seriously. It's all over the place.

Like when Tyrion becomes leader of the clans inbetween chapters.

>You like Arya, quite possibly the MOST boring and cliche characters in the novels
They're all fairly boring and cliché.

Btw you accuse other of having no valid arguments but don't have any yourself and constantly resort to argumentum ad hominem.

I'll just assume you're only 16 or something,
because being older would make you look rather pathetic.

[Anonymous No.3787401]

>>3787161
You see? This is why we can't have nice things.

[Anonymous No.3787408]

>>3787401
lame of groans isn't 'nice'. fuck off, neckbeard

[Anonymous No.3787414]

>>3787408
Actually, I shave daily.
But how's that exuberant social life brought on by your politeness, sincerity, and quick adaptation to change?
Is that getting you published?
Do people love you for it?

[Anonymous No.3787437]

>>3787408
>lame of groans

Could you be more fedora?

[Anonymous No.3787489]

I don't know about his books, but every time I've caught the TV series there's been guys raping guys, guys raping lolis, or virgins making whores refuse to take their money because they're so good in bed. Except for one time when some blonde whore terrorized some poor Arab schmuck with her pet dragons because lol she could. And then dismissed him and his allies without knowing who they were, thus obviously guaranteeing her downfall (how stupid do you have to be to start a conflict for fun when you don't know who your enemy's allied with).

[Anonymous No.3787691]

ASOIAF used to be the go-to fantasy recommendation on /lit/ - that is, before the tv-show aired and popularity increased. There were always those who would dismiss GRRM in favour of Abercrombie or Erikson, but GRRM was generally one of /lit/'s favourite fantasy writers (if not the favourite).

That just told you more about /lit/ than GRRM. Eh.

[Anonymous No.3787699]

>>3787414
>he still thinks a neckbeard is someone with a beard on their neck
>he thinks everyone on /lit/ is writing a novel and trying to get it published

[Anonymous No.3787700]

>>3787437
but

you're the fedora

[Anonymous No.3787703]

>>3787700
ASOIAF at this point has a vastly more 'normal' readership than whatever arty-farty nonsense you carry in your back pocket to show off in coffee shops.

Only a complete autist could come up with 'Lame of Groans.' Absence of self-awareness is defining trait of fedora wearers, so I don't expect you to understand.

[Anonymous No.3787865]

>>3787703
>ASOIAF
>normal

nah mate, you're really not
just because the TV show is popular doesn't mean all the cool people are suddenly reading this shit

[Anonymous No.3787911]

>>3787865
>Owning unmatching publications
Absolutely disgusting.jpg

[Vice-a-Roni No.3787912]

>>3787699
He thinks the most relevant comment in my post was about publishing, and not about something like, oh, a decent character, respect for other human beings, or an active social life.

Really. When did it become cool to treat people so badly? Why do you think other people care more about your opinions when you insult other people's preferences? And is "neckbeard" really not a hypocritical insult when you're on 4chan telling other people what does and does not constitute literature while you hole yourself up with Heidegger?

I'm not bothered by "neckbeards", as you put it. I just wish you'd accept yourself for the beautiful snowflake that you are and stop pretending that you can troll us to death with your elitism. I really don't care, except that I see you all over the place, and you really don't matter to the world. So I'm just going to say that what you're doing with your intelligence is neither endearing nor significant and not reply to you again.

[Anonymous No.3787916]

>>3785935
GoT is pretty good. My Eddard Stark.
You have a lot to look forward to. Yeah he isn't nabokov, but damn he has a story to tell.

[Anonymous No.3787956]

>>3787911
He's quite clearly homeless, just look at that beard. I'm surprised he owns any version at all to be honest.

[Anonymous No.3787989]

>>3787865
Leave your cave once in a while, mate. You can't get on a train these days without encountering an ASOIAF reader. Normal looking people who shave their necks and have jobs and girlfriends and are often even female themselves.

[Anonymous No.3788617]

>>3786296
This is pretty poor writing.

[Anonymous No.3788656]

>>3788617
It's also cherry picking. There are a few other examples of his prose getting shitty, but most of the time it reads we
ll and I found that it could get quite good in places.

[Anonymous No.3788662]

>>3786887
Where are these tropes everyone talks about?

[Anonymous No.3788675]

>>3787691
Sad isn't it
>>3786874
Was the turning point, once people have an image to hold onto, they don't need to make an argument.

[Anonymous No.3788680]

>>3786874
Most of the books on display there were considered escapist shit at their time of writing.

[Anonymous No.3788698]

>>3786874
Oh boy crap you were forced to read in highschool is truly the high point of human literary achievement.

How about you read what you like instead?

[Anonymous No.3788717]

It's a bottom-of-the-barrel boring fantasy series for edgy teenagers that's only popular becuase of the TV show which is almost as bad.

[Anonymous No.3788726]

>>3788698
>hurr durrr you don lik it yur just pretenshus leetist hipster. it doesn even hav any dragons or beleebable magic system

[Anonymous No.3788727]

>>3788662
Asoiaf actively subverts traditional fantasy tropes, I don't know what he's talking about.

[Anonymous No.3788730]

>>3788717
It was one of the most highly recommended series on /lit/ before the show came along.
>edgy
I tend to discount people who factor this word into their argument.

[Anonymous No.3788734]

>>3786296
is this real?

[Anonymous No.3788736]

>>3788726
>strawmanning
ASOIAF uses magic sparingly, and dragons are little more than a plot device.

[Anonymous No.3788739]

I'm aspiring to be a science fiction writer. I feel like I could learn a lot from the critiquing of GRRM. Please continue.

[Anonymous No.3788738]

>>3788726
Your greentext just highlights the weakness of your argumentation and reasoning skills.

Face it, you hate popular stuff because it's popular- unless it's only popular among pretentious elitist hipsters like yourself.

[Anonymous No.3788740]

>>3788656
>it could get quite good in places.

I'd love to see an example.

[Anonymous No.3788747]

>>3788730
you mean

>It was one of the most highly recommended fantasy series on /lit/ before the show came along.

and still is
and that doesn't mean it's not garbage

[Anonymous No.3788754]

>>3788740
>the way all the characters are handled
>vocabulary and prose changing slightly with different characters
>dialogue
>that on Septim speech in AFFC
>descriptions of the river with turtles

[Anonymous No.3788756]

>>3788739
Don't get popular.

By popular I mean Stephen King or GRRM major television popular. You ultimate goal is Philip K. Dick popular. Just big enough that everyone has heard of you and they can feel good about name dropping your books, but not so big that people no longer feel special by name dropping.

[Anonymous No.3788759]

>>3788727
>return of dragons
>evil fire witches
>an unseen evil force closing in
>mary sue main characters (killing of one main character early doesn't count, LOTR does that too)
>characters that are secretly more important heros
>one-off magic events that don't make sense
>"power in king's blood"
>ancient mystical weapons of power
>ancient heros being reborn
>children who are way too young being way too competent
>visions and fortune tellers
>MOTHERFUCKING FOREST ELVES

Yup, sure subverting all those tropes, nothing generic fantasy about this series...

[Anonymous No.3788760]

>>3788756
That's not something you can control.

Anyway if you're stephen king popular who cares if some neckbeards on an anime image board don't like you?

[Anonymous No.3788765]

>>3788756
What kind of popular is Twilight and 50 Shades?

[Anonymous No.3788768]

>>3788754
I mean an actual excerpt.

Any idiot can say "I love Harry Potter because the way the characters are handled."

[Anonymous No.3788769]

>>3786296
Can someone verify that this is an actual excerpt from one of the books?

[Anonymous No.3788770]

>>3788765
That's that special kind of every desperate girl bought this book popular. Twilight was bought by every teenage girl who wanted a prince charming in disguise and 50 shades was bought by every mom who was desperate for something sexually new to get their dried up cunts wet.

[Anonymous No.3788771]

>>3788769
I'm pretty sure it is.

[Anonymous No.3788775]

>>3788759
>Mary sue main characters
Which one? The incestuous, the perverted midget with a superiority conplex? Or are you talking about the ptst'd former princess?
>children way to young being way to competent
are you saying children can't be intelligent?
>prophecies
Subverted in the first book
>ancient weapons of power
Good metalworking isn't magic dingus

[Anonymous No.3788780]

>>3788770
So that's a completely different kind of popular to hordes of teenage neckbeards buying a book to fulfill their masturbatory escapist fantasies of living in a magic medieval world full of undead creatures and badass warriors?

Ok

[Anonymous No.3788782]

>>3788768
Septon Meribald disagreed. “More less than more. There are many sorts of outlaws, just as there are many sorts of birds. A sandpiper and a sea eagle both have wings, but they are not the same. The singers love to sing of good men forced to go outside the law to fight some wicked lord, but most outlaws are more like this ravening Hound than they are the lightning lord. They are evil men, driven by greed, soured by malice, despising the gods and caring only for themselves. Broken men are more deserving of our pity, though they may be just as dangerous. Almost all are common-born, simple folk who had never been more than a mile from the house where they were born until the day some lord came round to take them off to war. Poorly shod and poorly clad, they march away beneath his banners, ofttimes with no better arms than a sickle or a sharpened hoe, or a maul they made themselves by lashing a stone to a stick with strips of hide. Brothers march with brothers, sons with fathers, friends with friends. They’ve heard the songs and stories, so they go off with eager hearts, dreaming of the wonders they will see, of the wealth and glory they will win. War seems a fine adventure, the greatest most of them will ever know.

[Anonymous No.3788783]

>>3788775
Not defending the other guy becuase he obviously doesn't know what a mary sue is, but the valyrian steel sword are said to be made with magic, as well as the whole "lightbringer" thing.

[Anonymous No.3788787]

>>3788783
But Ice, a Valyrian sword, was melted pretty easily.

[Anonymous No.3788791]

>>3788780
>people who describe Westeros as magical
This is getting ridiculous.

[Anonymous No.3788797]

>>3788782
“Then they get a taste of battle.
“For some, that one taste is enough to break them. Others go on for years, until they lose count of all the battles they have fought in, but even a man who has survived a hundred fights can break in his hundred-and-first. Brothers watch their brothers die, fathers lose their sons, friends see their friends trying to hold their entrails in after they’ve been gutted by an axe.
“They see the lord who led them there cut down, and some other lord shouts that they are his now. They take a wound, and when that’s still half-healed they take another. There is never enough to eat, their shoes fall to pieces from the marching, their clothes are torn and rotting, and half of them are shitting in their breeches from drinking bad water.
“If they want new boots or a warmer cloak or maybe a rusted iron halfhelm, they need to take them from a corpse, and before long they are stealing from the living too, from the smallfolk whose lands they’re fighting in, men very like the men they used to be. They slaughter their sheep and steal their chickens, and from there it’s just a short step to carrying off their daughters too. And one day they look around and realize all their friends and kin are gone, that they are fighting beside strangers beneath a banner that they hardly recognize. They don’t know where they are or how to get back home and the lord they’re fighting for does not know their names, yet here he comes, shouting for them to form up, to make a line with their spears and scythes and sharpened hoes, to stand their ground. And the knights come down on them, faceless men clad all in steel, and the iron thunder of their charge seems to fill the world…

[Anonymous No.3788802]

>>3788787
The steel itself it treated with some sort of magic to make it never lose it's edge. Ice was just melted down and made into two new swords with the same properties.

[San Marino !UgUl4dXA4Y No.3788800]

I enjoyed it.
I wouldn't say it was masterful, or even good, but it was enjoyable.
The writing isn't all that great, and a lot of what he writes seems unnecessary and just for filler, but the books are "fun" to read. The world he builds is nice, I guess.

Oh, and I read it before I watched the TV show, but I did only read it because I had heard positive things about the TV show. Judge me how you will.

[Anonymous No.3788804]

>>3788797
“And the man breaks.
“He turns and runs, or crawls off afterward over the corpses of the slain, or steals away in the black of night, and he finds someplace to hide. All thought of home is gone by then, and kings and lords and gods mean less to him than a haunch of spoiled meat that will let him live another day, or a skin of bad wine that might drown his fear for a few hours. The broken man lives from day to day, from meal to meal, more beast than man. Lady Brienne is not wrong. In times like these, the traveler must beware of broken men, and fear them…but he should pity them as well.”
When Meribald was finished a profound silence fell upon their little band. Brienne could hear the wind rustling through a clump of pussywillows, and farther off the faint cry of a loon. She could hear Dog panting softly as he loped along beside the septon and his donkey, tongue lolling from his mouth. The quiet stretched and stretched, until finally she said, “How old were you when they marched you off to war?”

happy?

[Anonymous No.3788808]

>>3788800
>tv
>trip
Your opinion is invalid

[Anonymous No.3788809]

>>3788804
That is pretty generic actually. Basically any book with war in it is going to have a passage that says "war isn't what most people thing it is".

[Anonymous No.3788810]

GRRM is disliked first and foremost because:

>he writes genre, however unique his work is withing its genre
>he's popular and successful
>accessible prose
>it's read by many casual readers

Yes, the writing is inconsistent in quality and occasional descends to some bad levels, but to disregard everything else that's great about the series is to me rather ridiculous; the above points usually take precedence here on /lit/.
Most of the people who bad mouth the books on this board have probably never read them, or never read past the first. Unfortunately asoiaf has become /lit/'s go-to troll card. People like >>3788717 bait and troll fans with this kind of shit all the time.
Op, if you like medieval-esque politics and intrigue, complex and addictive plot, a large cast of fascinating characters, metanarrative, easy free-flowing (but unstimulating) writing that moves plot along nicely, then read it.

[Anonymous No.3788816]

>>3788809
the prose is what makes it great, that and the dialogue

[Anonymous No.3788821]

>A warhorn blew
>Horoooooooooooooooooooooo, it cried.

[Anonymous No.3788828]

>>3788810
>accessible prose

Shitty prose, it's shitty prose. Accessible means understandable. GRRM falls below understandable, to the point where it becomes obvious that he has very limited imagination when it comes to his writing style. Phrases are repeated constantly not becuase they're important but becuase he doesn't know how else to word them. Plus, he can't help but be juvenile; every penis is a cock, every vagina is a cunt no matter what. He has very limited writing style, not accessable.

[Anonymous No.3788832]

>>3788810
>or never read past the first
The first volume is 800 pages long.
Are you saying 800 pages isn't enough for someone to decide whether they like a book or not?
You want people to read all the books before they're allowed express an opinion?

[Anonymous No.3788833]

>>3788828
>every penis is a cock
The prose is affected by the POV

[Anonymous No.3788837]

A song of Ice and Fire is fun. Reading is a subjective experience no matter what elitist cocks may say. My life was changed by the book It, and even though Harold Bloom may rub his nipples and proclaim Stephen King a trash writer, it doesn't lessen the effect that book had on me in the summer of 2005. I can't stand the Twilight books. I gave them a shot. I think they're terrible. But I certainly don't think people who honestly believe them to be the finest in literary works are WRONG to think so. It's subjective. Can anyone enlighten me if there is a type of literary theory that focuses more on reading itself rather than the content that is being read? I admit my knowledge of the subject is a bit lacking.

[Anonymous No.3788838]

>>3788759
Well you might as well regard using imagination to invent a world as a trope.
Asoiaf does throw many fantasy tropes out the window, or plays around with them intelligently, but just because it (inevitably) retains some doesn't somehow mean it's to be despised. The best examples of genre will always function to some extent through tropes; that isn't inherently a bad thing.

[Anonymous No.3788839]

>>3788833
Not really, every character talks and thinks the exact same way. No difference in vocabulary, maturity or style. Even the youngest children think in cocks and cunts.

[Anonymous No.3788840]

>>3788832
Yes. If you want a full understanding of the work your criticizing, you should finish it.

[Anonymous No.3788853]

>>3788839
Are you trolling me? I'm pretty sure Arya does, but Sansa certainly doesn't, neither does Jon.

[Anonymous No.3788857]

>>3788839
Anon, you don't know what your talking about.

[Anonymous No.3788893]

>>3788828
It is shitty in places, but to regard all of it as shitty is just wanting to dislike the author's work. It is accessible, with quality ranging from bad to decent, even good occasionally. Generally it remains at an average, sometimes frustratingly unrewarding standard. I don't deny he's limited in imagination regarding his style, but what you're saying is exaggerating.
I don't see what's juvenile about much of his choice of words either; words are repeated according to point of view or as established phrases in his world.

[Anonymous No.3788900]

I read game of thrones a while ago before all the hype and that, when I think only three books were out.

Its the neighbours of fantasy or whatever you have in your shitty countries. Its like a literary fantasy soap opera. I really don't think that it is supposed to be a groundbreaking work of art. Its just meant to be a good read.

The main reason it appeals to the masses has been mentioned already, it has a fairly wide range of characters, almost everyone will find a few they identify with.

I think its a bit hit and miss with your more in depth fantasy or literary reader, as even their is many varied characters many of them are quite simple, just like the masses really.

I agree with some of the other posters in here, to me arya is by far the most likeable and interesting character to me, her and the wolves pretty much save the books.

Its not a bad read but its certainly not my first recommendation. A good starter however for 'normal' people who havent read anything but the hobbit but yeah its too late now everyone will just watch the shows instead.

If i were to read something simple and fun i would choose a different author someone like gemmel... and if i wanted a complex world and characters id choose a different author, someone like erikson.

Game of Thrones is a good read in that dan brown kind of sense, you just want to read it to find out what happens but it doesnt have much depth so you probably wont read it over and over again.

You never know, he could have been writing for the screen the whole time....

[Anonymous No.3788907]

>>3788893
I agree, that is a bad criticism.

Its fantasy, hes using language consistent with the world he is writing. That is the kind of language those kind of people would use in that place.

[Anonymous No.3788909]

>>3788832
If you want an understanding of the events of the first book alone, then read it and nothing else. You'll get a grasp of Martin's talent with plot and characters, but to appreciate fully his thematic approach and conceptualization of history and society and such, you'll need to read the entire thing. This is why posters who claim to have given up after 10 pages don't exactly hold much weight with their critiques.

[Anonymous No.3788913]

>>3787912

Don't waste your time typing out a rationed argument. With no accountability, people can be as dumb as they want with no repercussions and there is nothing you or I can do about it.

I really wish I could punch people through my computer sometimes, though, especially on /pol/.

[Anonymous No.3788950]

>>3788900
I'd give it slightly more credit than that, dude. Everyone recognizes the extent of Martin's skill with language, but I've never understood describing asoiaf as merely 'fun' or 'entertaining', although there's nothing wrong with being such.
I see on this board a widespread tendency to establish what constitutes entertainment and what constitutes 'literature' like it was that easy.
To me, things like plot can potentially be as significant as anything else. Personally I find far more value in ASOIAF than entertainment, although as I said there's nothing wrong with being simply entertainment. Obviously it is't in the prose, but literature isn't prose first and foremost, despite what some english lit students are taught. There's depth in martin's story for example, in a sort of iceberg theory way; you aren't blown away by the amazing writing that's instantly recognizable, but instead you dwell on the implications of events, on how and why characters reacted the way they did, on what there is to say about all the different aspects of society that are examined. There's a far more formidable array in literature's arsenal. That's why I need to read both literary and genre works; I can't stay with one type forever, because I feel like I'm missing out on the whole picture of what books offer.

[Anonymous No.3788968]

>>3787912
I don't know why you argued with such an obvious troll.

That is half of what A Song of Ice and Fire threads are: people baiting fans. It's obvious and annoying, but more so when people fall for the trolls. Half the posters couldn't care less about these books; they're here to piss of it's readers. They're easy to spot: one line critiques, constant auto spamming of phrases like neckbeard, soap opera etc. Stop giving them the satisfaction.

>>3787916
This.

[Anonymous No.3788969]

>Books 1, 2, and 3: Engrossing tales of political intrigue and medieval warfare.
>Books 4 and 5: Unforgivable filler

[Anonymous No.3788991]

Every asoiaf thread ever:

>trolls derail topic almost instantly
>posters argue with them
>100 posts later trolls get tired and leave
>we can finally begin discussion

Well I thought Ned's story was very tragic, what about you guys?

[Anonymous No.3788996]

>>3786874
>Every one of these texts are masterpieces and examples of the highest art in literature

This Nicholas had risen to take a piss, and he thought he would contribute to the joke; he should kiss him before he ran off! And he threw up the window in haste and quietly put his ass out--past the buttocks, all the way to the thigh-bone. Thereupon spoke this clerk Absalom, "Speak, sweet bird, I know not where thou art." This Nicholas then let fly a fart as great as a thunder-clap, so much so that with the stroke Absalom was almost blinded; and he was ready with his hot iron and smote Nicholas on the ass
-Chaucer, The Miller's Tale

[Anonymous No.3788999]

>>3788950
I essentially agree with you, I'm just speaking from my own perspective.

I don't really find this kind of character plot on its own to be all that interesting... especially in a world that despite its quirks is very earth like. Although many other people will.

I have read them a few times they aren't bad books but I have a lot of fantasy and there are many other books that I have read some ten twenty thirty times easy and just wont tire of.

Its just too much like a soap opera to me, he said, she said, all intrigue and guile. I dont really identify with a lot of the characters, im just not dying to find out what happens to them.... even the world, who becomes the king or the queen? who wins the game of thrones? I really don't care.

All I am captivated by and adamantly interested in finding out about, is the starks and the wolves.

I mean If the books centered entirely on the starks and the north as the main conflict, not the petty squables over power in the kingdom.... if it spent lots of time in depth with these characters i probably would like it a lot more.

But a lot of people would probably hate it, it wouldnt be as near as popular and there would likely be no cable tv show. I really get the feel that its written for the screen.

[Anonymous No.3789061]

ITT: /lit/ babbies that need to go back to >>>/tv/

[Anonymous No.3789241]

>>3789061

The game of thrones books have probably half the words per page of a classic though. Also since he subject matter is so simple and clear and nothing will make you stop and think I expect the average joe could get through it a lot quicker.

Still it's true though... bad books suck

[Anonymous No.3791733]

>>3789241
>Also since he subject matter is so simple and clear and nothing will make you stop and think
>bad books suck

[Anonymous No.3791846]

>>3788991
Yeah, he was the last true knight and got royally fucked as a result. Telling the bad guy what you're going to do before you do it is top-tier stupid though.

[Anonymous No.3791847]

>>3789061
>dat pic
>dat cherry picking
>those 'paragons of highest art'
mid lel/10

[Anonymous No.3791853]

Read a sentence of any of his books out of context and then try arguing that he's a "competent" writer.

>>3785964
Obvious troll is obvious. That or this board has reduced the "literary"/"genre" divide to one of its stupidest conceivable formulations, which would actually explain a lot.

Yeah, plot is important. So is style and themes and such. Plus there's a lot of nuance even to being good at plot alone. "Foreshadows and plot twists" doesn't actually cut it.

[Anonymous No.3791859]

>>3785972
I'm pretty sure a lot of good writers steal dialogue from their life experience. You never heard the stereotype of the writer quietly sitting in coffeeshops or on public transit, "observing the human condition"?

Otherwise, valid post.

[Anonymous No.3793778]

>>3785935
Fucking awful. I'm a lecturer in Mediaeval Lit. (inb4 medieval, lrn2middleenglish) and have TWO dissertations in my lap on these piece of shit novels. I was forced to take them on despite my objections and am planning on giving the both of them C/D's.

Their face(s) when.

[Anonymous No.3794128]

>>3787912
Thank you, whether or not your intended target read this doesn't matter. It does make a difference that more people who act like that or may potentially start did read it. And it makes the rest of us who've noticed a downward trend in overall decent behaviour feel a bit better.

[Anonymous No.3795053]

>>3793778
You sound like a horrible person, anon.

[Anonymous No.3795083]

>>3793778
God bless you.

[Anonymous No.3795085]

>>3795083
see>>3795053

[Anonymous No.3795116]

On another note, how was the episode tonight?

[Anonymous No.3795200]

>>3795116
>on a durr durrr durrr, durrr dee durrdy durrrrr hurrr?
>>>/tv/