Books: A Song of Ice and Fire [SPOILERS]
Discussion
Season 1 - Game of Thrones has finished on TV and a lot of people are reading the books or have read and re-read the books.
Thought I'd start this thread so we can discuss the books that are currently published - all the way up to book 4 without fear of ruining the story for others.
Expect this to contain spoilers for all the published books.
When book 5 comes out next month please don't discuss that (or avoid the thread) for a few weeks please!
Thought I'd start this thread so we can discuss the books that are currently published - all the way up to book 4 without fear of ruining the story for others.
Expect this to contain spoilers for all the published books.
When book 5 comes out next month please don't discuss that (or avoid the thread) for a few weeks please!
I'd put this int he Books section but there isn't one so TV etc. will have to do.
It'll all depend on the ratings if HBO keep it up but they've admitted to wrongly cancelling a number of shows prematurely, Deadwood included.
It's frustrating having finished book 4 a while abck that book 5 has been outstanding for so long - they allegedly cover teh same time period as each other but book 4 is based in and around Kings Landing (and plots that start there) and book 5 primarily 'elsewhere'.
Much of the material was written, according to GRRM's author's note, while in book 4 which he split into 4 & 5. If that's actually the case then it's about the longes gap between writing and editing I can imagine! Lazy bugger!
It's frustrating having finished book 4 a while abck that book 5 has been outstanding for so long - they allegedly cover teh same time period as each other but book 4 is based in and around Kings Landing (and plots that start there) and book 5 primarily 'elsewhere'.
Much of the material was written, according to GRRM's author's note, while in book 4 which he split into 4 & 5. If that's actually the case then it's about the longes gap between writing and editing I can imagine! Lazy bugger!
Mars said:
For example, why is this world locked into a middle ages scenario for thousands of years? Isn't there any scientific dicovery? Hasn't anyone mapped any more land than what we're presented with? Doesn't anyone ask questions why the seasons last as long as they do? Etc etc etc...
I think I just find it hard to totally suspend disbelief given that he has taken such great pains to write such detailed accounts of people's characters and the political machinations. Perhaps it's the scientist/engineer in me.
The technologial progress 'issue' is one that many fantasy books with long histories don't deal with. If we look at the GRRM world it's essentially been a Medieval society for 5000 years. From there to here in reality took us 1500 years. I think I just find it hard to totally suspend disbelief given that he has taken such great pains to write such detailed accounts of people's characters and the political machinations. Perhaps it's the scientist/engineer in me.
It's maybe not unreasonable then to say 5k years may pass if there were 'resets' to development or if drivers of progress were not present - e.g. population growth.
Many fantasy authors use the presence of magic to dictate that science isn't needed but a few authors have gone down the route of having both and of the contantion between the two.
As for land - later books open up much more fo the world, it's much bigger than Westeros which, in many respects, is a little backwater.
Mars said:
Tonsko said:
The point about fantasy worlds not progressing to an industrial revolution - something I've never considered and feel very small mentally for not doing so!
Wouldn't worry about it. I once went to a Pratchett "talk" in a Hotel in Brum and asked a similar question about whether the Discworld characters would ever achieve a level of scientific advancement - totally missing the point of the novels. 
In my defence, I was in my teens and trying out some independent thinking for the first time.
richtea78 said:
Id always just thought that things like the long winters that came along kind of "reset" the development in Westeros, maybe I am totally wrong.
This would be my take on it but it doesn't really explain why other continents and equatorial places haven't progressed.Saying that we can ask the same questions of certain remote parts of the globe and ask why an Amazonian tribe hasn't developed the jet engine yet.
Lack of tech isn't so hard to work with.
richtea78 said:
as I nearly wet myself laughing when the guy on the other thread suggested Caitlin cut off Jaime's hand. Either he has read the books and is playing about or he got in a very lucky guess.
I know, inspired guess I think.I quite like that GRRM doles out a certain amount of justice to some pretty evil characters. There was a point where all teh good guys were dieing left, right and centre and I was feeling a bit shocked by it. Some of the balance is addressed though.
richtea78 said:
The thing I am looking forward to about book 5 most of all is that hopefully there will be no Briene in it as her POV was covered in book 4. I wouldnt mind if they clear up if she is dead or not though, mainly because I hope she is. I cant stand her.
Brienne is one of the characters I really like. From her time with Jaime heading back to King's Landing and her 'quest' after that. I really doubt she's dead but then again GRRM isn't sentimental about killing people off!richtea78 said:
Im really looking forward to find out what Jon has been up to with Stannis though.
Quite a lot of this was covered towards the end of book 3. I'm guessing in 5 we'll see the 'recruitment' of the Wildlings and the beginning of skirmishes with The Others. Mostly I'm looking forwards to Danerys' development and her joining the fight.My prediction for the end: All parties vieing for the Throne will put aside their differences to fight the Others. One side will turn out to be on the Other's side. The good guys win and there's a bitter scramble for control. Dany and Jon wed to form a ruling house.
Probably too obvious though.
Tonsko said:
Did Dany not feature at all in a Feast For Crows? Can't remember now. Her story was one my favourite threads I think. I guess the title gives it all away :P
Was that 3 or 4 - I read them all back-to-back so it's all blurred somewhat! If it's book 3 then her story develops mostly there from memory. i.e. the bilding of her army and 'empire'Reading the books on Kindle I tend to ignore the book title!
She becomes a significant power in her own right by the time focus turns to Westeros and Kings Landing in book 4.
richtea78 said:
I have read all of book 4, I think he is still alive and captured by the Bolton's, remember what they are famous for? I reckon they would save their special treatment for him
I'll dig out the books - pretty sure he's dead and not captured.ETA: his wiki entry seems to think he's a captive but presumed dead by his family.
Edited by IainT on Thursday 23 June 10:42
d?richtea78 said:
Its a very popular theory, fueled by the fact that in the TV show Ned only says "you have my blood" and the producers of the show have seen the overall story arcs that GRRM is working to.
That quote is pretty unambiguous by Ned then. It could be taken to indicate that Jon may not be Ned's son BUT they are related 'by blood'.We also find out, from a fairly certain source who Jon's mother was.
I'd also go with book > screenplay.
richtea78 said:
Oh do you mean Arya when Edric Storm tells her that her and Jon had the same wet nurse? I dispute that because it says they are milk brothers, it is possible that Wylla nursed Jon because Lyanna is dead, therefore he would need milk nursing.
More discussion of it here
http://www.angelfire.com/ma4/mlarchives/faq/jon.ht...
No, defiantely Jon's biological mother not wet nurse.More discussion of it here
http://www.angelfire.com/ma4/mlarchives/faq/jon.ht...
Famous Graham said:
But, again, I will stand by the assertion that it contains some excruciatingly bad prose (see my examples above - as much as the latter one is decipherable, it's still dreadful). To me, it's abundantly clear that the writing is improving, but I wonder why he didn't go back and edit the initial chapters.
I'm normally a very very picky reader and will put down books that contain poor writing. It's not a criticism that I came close to levelling at the early books in the series.They do improve but, having read thousands of pages, one gets acclimatised to any author's style and may begin to overlook stylistic elements that grate.
Some of the best books I've read have been stylistically hard work at the outset - either because of an unusual perspective or assumed tone. Hugh Cook was one such author. His 'Chronicles of and Age of Darkness' series varied from book-to-book so much it's hard to credit the same author.
If you want to discuss terrible writing try the 'Tek' books from Shatner (yes, Captain 'Shoot to Kill' Kirk Shatner).
Gassing Station | Books and Literature | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff