Subverting Tropes?

[The Man from Nowhere]

It's been discussed how GRRM likes to subvert some common fantasy tropes, such as those in lotr, wot and other popular books. If this is the case what do you think would be the common trope and how does the author subvert it. An obvious example is Ned not escaping death in some way as would have happened if it was a typical high fantasy. Or the characters not dying in some honourable and epic way as per lotr.

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

There's that "hooker with a heart of gold" cliche. Actually, they do appear in the series. Only Tyrion a little late realizes that Shae isn't one. Another one, the "knight in shining armor", gets ruthlessly deconstructed through the whole series. A ser can be just as vicious, low, dishonorable a motherfucker as any lowborn bandit.

Generally, though, I don't believe the books are mostly about subversion and deconstruction. I feel George most often than not plays them fantasy tropes straight. Which isn't a bad thing in my book.

[A Man Has Said]

I think he's pretty selective about when to subvert tropes and when to cling to them like they were the only thing afloat after a shipwreck.

As far as Ned not escaping death, that subverts a trope that is almost universally perceived to be bad writing; Deus Ex Machina. But in other instances, rather than subvert it, he INverts it to the even worse technique of bad writing: Diabolus Ex Machina. Either trope comes under the larger heading of AssPull.

Whether you perceive any given event in the novels as being pulled out of GRRM's ass without any foundation being laid ahead of time is a matter of personal judgment. For my part, I'll give you a couple of examples that MIGHT be thought of as Diabolus Ex Machina.

- The Shadowbaby killing of Renly Baratheon is definitely an asspull. This form of magic is not discussed prior to the event. We are led down the garden path of believing that Renly is going to kick Stannis' ass, then take his superior army to KL and put an end to the Lannisters. IMnsHO, it is horrendously bad writing, perhaps the worst bit in any of the novels. (and that judgment, TBPH, is probably tempered by the fact that I liked Renly, didn't like Stannis, and felt that things would have gone far better for the Stark protagonists if it had never happened - YMMV) However one may feel about the gloom and doom of the series, this does not and cannot come off as making the narrative more realistic.

- The Red Wedding, though it's just as horrible or more so for the Starks, is not an asspull. From our very first encounter with Lord Walder Frey we see that he is a treacherous, self-serving bastard and well capable of something like this. The preceding chapter and the chapter it takes place in are redolent with foreboding. You'd have to be a bit dense not to expect it.

Nor was Ned's execution an asspull. It just failed to be an instance of Deus Ex Machina.

[The Mountain That Flies]

The trope of a young man going on a crazy adventure that results in him becoming a hero is pretty brutally subverted by Quentyn's story arc.

The trope of a plucky young kid navigating her way through trouble unscathed is subtly subverted by Arya. While she is physically fine, she is clearly mentally wrecked and is a much darker character than she was at the start.

The trope of a conflicted protagonist ultimately making the right choice and being rewarded for it is subverted by Theon, who constantly blunders his way through his plot and pays dearly for it.

There are others, but those are some of the bigger ones that haven't been mentioned yet.

[The Man from Nowhere]

I agree with the idea that it's not all about playing with conventions and that mainly he is getting across the moral ambiguity of people in general as opposed to black and white.

We all expect Danny to arrive in westeros and kick some serious ass, and Jon to discover his lineage, and Arya to kill some people on her list. But imagine if instead Danny never arrives, Jon dies or his lineage is actually not targaryen, or Arya dies or worse.

I sometimes think GRRM plays with the readers beliefs of characters deserving particular outcomes. Such as Ned is honourable and should come out a winner or Jon try's his best and respects people and should be King and so on. Hence the popular meme "tell me, who's your favourite character?".

I guess, for me, it comes down to whether i believe GRRM actually likes moderately happy endings. He said it will be bittersweet but for him that might be half of westeros is dead alongside most main PoV characters.

[Fat Mac]

I think he's pretty selective about when to subvert tropes and when to cling to them like they were the only thing afloat after a shipwreck.

As far as Ned not escaping death, that subverts a trope that is almost universally perceived to be bad writing; Deus Ex Machina. But in other instances, rather than subvert it, he INverts it to the even worse technique of bad writing: Diabolus Ex Machina. Either trope comes under the larger heading of AssPull.

Whether you perceive any given event in the novels as being pulled out of GRRM's ass without any foundation being laid ahead of time is a matter of personal judgment. For my part, I'll give you a couple of examples that MIGHT be thought of as Diabolus Ex Machina.

- The Shadowbaby killing of Renly Baratheon is definitely an asspull. This form of magic is not discussed prior to the event. We are led down the garden path of believing that Renly is going to kick Stannis' ass, then take his superior army to KL and put an end to the Lannisters. IMnsHO, it is horrendously bad writing, perhaps the worst bit in any of the novels. (and that judgment, TBPH, is probably tempered by the fact that I liked Renly, didn't like Stannis, and felt that things would have gone far better for the Stark protagonists if it had never happened - YMMV) However one may feel about the gloom and doom of the series, this does not and cannot come off as making the narrative more realistic.

- The Red Wedding, though it's just as horrible or more so for the Starks, is not an asspull. From our very first encounter with Lord Walder Frey we see that he is a treacherous, self-serving bastard and well capable of something like this. The preceding chapter and the chapter it takes place in are redolent with foreboding. You'd have to be a bit dense not to expect it.

Nor was Ned's execution an asspull. It just failed to be an instance of Deus Ex Machina.

Well we do technically know that Mel is a "shadowbinder" we just don't really know what that meant until Renly's death.

[Daena the Defiant]

The captive princess, sold as chattel, flips her captivity on its head and becomes a conqueror.

[A Man Has Said]

The captive princess, sold as chattel, flips her captivity on its head and becomes a conqueror.

That's a very good example of a trope to which GRRM has adhered rigidly thus far. :agree:

[Batbob45]

The sinister Jester, who is the fool for a noble house

[KingAlanI]

Brienne being ugly as a twist on the beautiful badass. Also, her not being a knight but acting like one fits with the dishonorable knight theme.

[LordStoneheart]

Renly's death is foreshadowed in the prologue of Clash. I don't see it as an asspull at all.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

A subtle one: Jon doing all he's doing to honour his lost love.. who happened to be a guy instead of a lady like every other romantic knight...

Switch Elia for Rhaegar and it's a classic trope.

[Fire Eater]

The hidden prince/king trope is subverted with fAegon.

The trope of the highborn girl eloping with the man of her choice over her father's arranged match is subverted with Lyanna's story.

The rightful king trope is subverted with Aerys and every other monarch we've seen in the main series.

The trope of the white savior is subverted with Dany and Astapor.

[Anythingatall]

Jons whole character and story line is trope-a-rific. Not that I am complaining.

[ChillyPolly]

I hate the phrase "subverting tropes". It is meaningless to me. Whether or not something "subverts a trope" has nothing to do with whether it is good, bad or indifferent.

[Good Guy Garlan]

The monomyth is thoroughly subverted in Quentyn's storyline, from its very first line: " Adventure stank"

That is also the only instance in the series that I feel is first and foremost a subvertion and adds little to the actual plot, but that's just me

[Buried Treasure]

The hidden prince/king trope is subverted with fAegon.

What I particularly like is that this trope is being deliberately invoked in-universe by Varys. All that shit about Aegon going hungry and living the modest life of a peasant is a narrative Varys is building so that ' the hidden heir returns' trope can be sold to the masses.

Also fun, the way George plays with ' the princess in the tower' trope and Val. She isn't one, but because the people at Castle Black want life kept simple, she's being treated like a princess to the point of almost becoming one.

[Miodrag]

- The Shadowbaby killing of Renly Baratheon is definitely an asspull. This form of magic is not discussed prior to the event. We are led down the garden path of believing that Renly is going to kick Stannis' ass, then take his superior army to KL and put an end to the Lannisters. IMnsHO, it is horrendously bad writing, perhaps the worst bit in any of the novels. (and that judgment, TBPH, is probably tempered by the fact that I liked Renly, didn't like Stannis, and felt that things would have gone far better for the Stark protagonists if it had never happened - YMMV) However one may feel about the gloom and doom of the series, this does not and cannot come off as making the narrative more realistic.

Not really. A narrative doesn't have to be more realistic. It has to be engaging, captivating, inspiring, interesting, and in order to be that it obviously must contain enough realism for readers to identify or empathize with it, but more realistic is in no way a tantamount to better. A reader is perfectly entitled not to like supernatural elements in any story, but the history of fiction is loaded with unrealistic stories that are universally and rightfully regarded as masterpieces.

Also, while I disagree shadow-babies are pulled out of the ass (that Mel has some tricks in her sleeves is shown from the get-go), have to ask: why should everything be discussed before being introduced? That would be a formula on its own, and not a particularly interesting formula most probably. Some surreal elements in ASOIAF are foreshadowed, some aren't, but what's more important is the purpose each of them serves in the story, and so far none was used purely for the shock or as a cop-out, because none was presented as a one-time wonder without any baggage or side-effects. (Possible exception is Mel's magic on Mance in ADWD, but Martin has at least two more books to make some sense out of that.)

As for Renly, his death sends a rather strong message that just because you think you're awesome and people around you mostly agree with that and you're generally loved and you're even well-intended, it doesn't give you the right to do everything that comes up in your mind. That's what Cressen hints at in the prologue of ACOK. Also, it's not unlike the main theme of "Crime and Punishment", for example. In any case, the message wouldn't be as powerful if Renly's death wasn't as surprising as it actually was, most probably.

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

I hate the phrase "subverting tropes". It is meaningless to me. Whether or not something "subverts a trope" has nothing to do with whether it is good, bad or indifferent.

You are right, subverting tropes (or playing them straight) is not an indicator of goodness or badness. So?

[Ser Arthur Hightower]

The hidden prince/king trope is subverted with fAegon.

The trope of the highborn girl eloping with the man of her choice over her father's arranged match is subverted with Lyanna's story.

The rightful king trope is subverted with Aerys and every other monarch we've seen in the main series.

The trope of the white savior is subverted with Dany and Astapor.

How is that necessarily subverted?