Jump to content

Do many famous Writers that view George RR Martin and Song of Ice and Fire with Contempt?


paramount

Recommended Posts

What made me think of this was an article in which George RR Martin admitted that Tolkien if he was alive would have been appalled by Game of Thrones. I cannot pretend to be surprised by that and I have no doubt that C S Lewis would also be even more appalled by Game of Thrones and thereby view it with contempt.



However what I am not sure about is what modern readers would view the Song of Ice and Fire and whether they would dislike it.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tolkien and Lewis would probably be appalled mainly by the sex and gore because of their (christian) conservatism.


I guess most "serious" contemporary writers simply ignore fantasy fiction. Many of them would probably regard it as shallow and trivial.


And with all due respect, GRRM is not very good as far as language and style are concerned which is one aspect "serious" writers and critics focus on.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tolkien (and I assume Lewis, though I know nothing of him save for his strong Christian views) definitely would have been shocked and disgusted at ASoIaF, and slammed it massively.

As to other writers not liking Martin's work. Well, they are entitled to their own opinions. While a portion of those people would simply ignore ASoIaF because it's fantasy, a larger majority simply don't consider it to be among 'high literature,' a stance I also agree on. ASoIaF is incredibly entertaining and exciting, but not particularly well written in any remarkable way. It will never be studied or discussed in the ways that works like Lolita and Lord of the Flies are, two examples off the top of my head. It's not thematically deep, nor remarkably written, so I understand why other writers wouldn't look upon it too kindly. I definitely wouldn't if I were a writer seeing a guy get praise endlessly for making some entertaining fantasy that's ultimately shallow (I'm not slamming ASoIaF, I love it, but I know what it is and isn't).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tolkien (and I assume Lewis, though I know nothing of him save for his strong Christian views) definitely would have been shocked and disgusted at ASoIaF, and slammed it massively.

As to other writers not liking Martin's work. Well, they are entitled to their own opinions. While a portion of those people would simply ignore ASoIaF because it's fantasy, a larger majority simply don't consider it to be among 'high literature,' a stance I also agree on. ASoIaF is incredibly entertaining and exciting, but not particularly well written in any remarkable way. It will never be studied or discussed in the ways that works like Lolita and Lord of the Flies are, two examples off the top of my head. It's not thematically deep, nor remarkably written, so I understand why other writers wouldn't look upon it too kindly. I definitely wouldn't if I were a writer seeing a guy get praise endlessly for making some entertaining fantasy that's ultimately shallow (I'm not slamming ASoIaF, I love it, but I know what it is and isn't).

Come to think of it I agree though A song of Ice and Fire may have many strong themes and be considered relatively well written as of opposed to other fantasy novels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not thematically deep, nor remarkably written, so I understand why other writers wouldn't look upon it too kindly.

I must disagrre. GRRM touches on many themes germane to the human condition: honor, family, war, social justice, law, love, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's startlingly presumptuous to suggest that Tolkien would have been 'appalled' by Game of Thrones. Sure, he'd probably not have been a huge fan of all the sex, but who's to say that he couldn't have looked past it and judged the rest of the work on its own merits?

Same goes for CS Lewis although in that case the presumption might be a bit more deserved because of things like the problem of Susan and Lewis' greater tendency to actually moralise in his work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Come to think of it I agree though A song of Ice and Fire may have many strong themes and be considered relatively well written as of opposed to other fantasy novels.

As opposed to other fantasy novels, absolutely. It's probably among the very best of fantasy in terms of themes and complexity. But, I don't think that extends beyond fantasy into non-genre works of fiction. Still, Martin should definitely be commended for his fantastic work, and I'm not trying to say he doesn't deserve his acclaim. I just don't see ASoIaF comparable to other non-genre works of fiction in terms of themes and complexity that should be studied. The themes of ASoIaF aren't particularly groundbreaking or original at all, though in the fantasy genre they're definitely praise-worthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

heinlein would've been annoyed with the differentiated female characters, but would thumbsup the incest and the jugs. asimov would be puzzled by the sex and bored with the violence, but not appalled, and would appreciate the liberal orientation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must disagrre. GRRM touches on many themes germane to the human condition: honor, family, war, social justice, law, love, etc.

He touches upon them...but they aren't themes running throughout the story or being explored in depth. It's a consequence of writing about so many different characters. The story jumps around, so it's hard to really find and undercurrent and delve into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert Stanek would be jealous in a "I'm going to photobomb you at a booksigning and then Photoshop some garbage out of the way to make it looks like we're pals and authors together" kind of way.

Anyone that thinks Asoiaf isn't 'thematically deep' should go check out some of the stuff from the poster Tze over in the.bookthreads expecially regarding Jon, Sansa, and the North. (Maybe you're just missing it)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ASOIAF isn't thematically deep in the sense that its themes are right at the surface, and not difficult to access. It is thematically deep in the sense that it dwells intently on its themes- power, violence, duty, identity- without which there would be no series. It doesn't just fart around and happen to land on a few ideas, it's all about the ideas.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theme theme theme. Why are people so obsessed with the notion of 'theme' as the measure of the literary value of a work? Why is that inherently more valuable than a story that is written just to be beautiful, or to deliver an emotional experience, or explore the depths of a character or two or, hell, just to be a ripping good yarn?




I also have problems with the notions, twinned by several users in this topic, that (1) fantasy is in some way less likely to give us works of literary depth (of whatever sort) than any other genre, and (2) that aSoIaF is a particularly strong example of the genre. I mean, it's not a weak one, but it's not superior either.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

The themes of ASoIaF aren't particularly groundbreaking or original at all, though in the fantasy genre they're definitely praise-worthy.

Well, if one needs to write about original and groundbreaking themes to be a worthy author, we haven't had many worthy authors for the last 2.400 years. I won't say it was over after Homer, but it was pretty much done with after Aeschylus and Sophocles.

Heck, even Shakespeare was writing to entertain too, first of all; he wasn't just thinking "what deep themes would Puck and Titania ponder about?"

I won't deny that a lot of fantasy is badly written, but no one can seriously claim that the bulk of "serious" literature is acutally truly well-written. There's a lot of appalling trash out there, with the added malus of not being even entertaining because it's about "serious matters". Of course, plenty of good well-written stuff, but that's not the rule, by far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm honestly not sure what Tolkien would have made of the series (at least the books anyway). We know he read science fiction in his spare time (he apparently quite liked Asimov), and there is plenty of sex and violence in the Norse myths that interested him so much. I actually think his biggest problem with ASOIAF would be the inadequate worldbuilding (languages? what languages?).


Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, another look at Letter 294, and we get some idea of Tolkien's literary tastes: he liked Death of Grass (apocalyptic science fiction), Isaac Asimov's stuff, and Mary Renault's historical fiction novels set in Ancient Greece. He also read everything by E.R. Eddison (whom he actually met, though Tolkien thought Eddison glorified cruelty a bit much), and interestingly Eddison's fantasy stuff does contain sex and violence. We have no way of knowing for certain, but given the description of the Watcher in the Water, it would not surprise me if Tolkien read a bit of Lovecraft too.



We do know Tolkien hated Narnia, and that he thought Dante could get a bit petty.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theme theme theme. Why are people so obsessed with the notion of 'theme' as the measure of the literary value of a work? Why is that inherently more valuable than a story that is written just to be beautiful, or to deliver an emotional experience, or explore the depths of a character or two or, hell, just to be a ripping good yarn?

I also have problems with the notions, twinned by several users in this topic, that (1) fantasy is in some way less likely to give us works of literary depth (of whatever sort) than any other genre, and (2) that aSoIaF is a particularly strong example of the genre. I mean, it's not a weak one, but it's not superior either.

Because strong themes help to make one's point more vividly and clearly. Touching on many different themes as opposed to exploring only a few mean that there's less of an impact on the reader.

It's perfectly okay to write like that, but at the same time, it means that your work isn't as cohesive as it could be...which is a valid criticism of Martin's work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any more fantasy by Eddison besides "The Worm Ouroboros"? (Which is kind of cool, but also close to unreadable, so I am not sure, I will ever read it again, but neither have I culled it from my shelves).


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...