What Does ASOIAF Do Right?

[The Mighty Dragonzzilla]

I was a bit conflicted whether to post this in ASOIAF or here, but I decided here. My question pertains a bit more I think to writing in general than the intricacies of ASOIAF's plot.

What does GRRM do right, or more specifically ASOIAF? Its success makes it pretty clear that it hits a lot of the right buttons. It's a fantasy series, yet it seems to evade a lot of the pitfalls of fantasy writing that I've been studying. I myself aspire to write, but don't take this to mean I want to start at GRRM's level. He has a lot of experience I have yet to acquire by simply writing. But I sort of want to learn as much as I can before starting (a dangerous pitfall in itself, I know). So what does ASOIAF do right to draw your attention?

[Liffguard]

But I sort of want to learn as much as I can before starting (a dangerous pitfall in itself, I know).

I'm not a writer, but I'm pretty sure the best way to learn about writing is to write. Just get words down on the page.

[The Mighty Dragonzzilla]

I'm not a writer, but I'm pretty sure the best way to learn about writing is to write. Just get words down on the page.

Yeah. I'm starting to learn that. But this is also an academic question: Why is ASOIAF interesting?

[C.T. Phipps]

Yeah. I'm starting to learn that. But this is also an academic question: Why is ASOIAF interesting?

If I had to post it shortwise?

I think because it's a fantasy novel we've only rarely seen. It feels a lot more grounded than most and unexpected events occur to heroes as well as villains.

It feels, if not REAL, then AUTHENTIC to its universe.

People are multifacted, motivations believable, flaws are real, and the characters are well-developed.

[Lies And Perfidy]

That is a huge question! Beyond the obvious - it's engaging and character-focused - I think the best way to answer that concisely is that ASOIAF engages reader expectations in interesting ways. Those expectations run the gamut from historicity and "medievalish" fiction, to the fantasy genre, to literary and storytelling devices as a whole; George took those expectations into account when writing and explored some, subverted others, and deconstructed yet more. Just for three really obvious examples:

-People are conditioned, by modern interpretations of Western European history, to think of chivalry and knighthood as a good thing. George examined the historic dark side of feudalism and chivalric culture, while still including examples of the ideal.

-Fantasy doorstopper series, in 1996, could generally be counted upon to introduce their "good guy" early and stick with him. George killed his in the first book.

-Readers see things from the point of view a writer gives them; a change in that point of view can upend their preconceptions. George established Jaime Lannister as a real shitty dude, and then put us in his head to understand why.

Now there are two tricky things about that from a writer's perspective. The first is that expectations now in fantasy are different than they were in 1996, in many ways because of the runaway success of ASOIAF. Nobody would be surprised by Ned Stark's death anymore. So it's about understanding those expectations - and I very much want to hammer home that I'm not just talking about plot here. How do real-world impressions underly your world-building? How does your reader expect that this sentence will end? Why is this character sympathetic, and this one not?

The other thing is that, once you understand expectations, you can't just go "TWIST" and subvert everything. That's gimmickry; eventually you're M. Night Shyamalan and nobody wants to work with you. George understands that and that's why sometimes he plays it straight. Or subverts it and plays it straight at the same time. Reader expectation is a tool in the toolkit, but it's not the only one. It's just the one that ASOIAF is particularly good at using.

So uh, I guess my advice is to think about the parts of ASOIAF that made you go "OH SHIT YEAH" and figure our why they made you think that. And then read a lot of other stuff and do the same thing. I hope this helps.

[Jo498]

Some have pointed out things that were comparably new in the mid/late 90s, such as killing of main characters (early) and lots of brutality.

But I am pretty sure that one reason for success is also that many of the fantasy tropes are safely in place (only slightly subverted), but done well . E.g. Jon's arc is fairly conventional. So is Dany's rise to power although the double twist at the end of the first book is both unexpected and extraordinarily well done.

[polishgenius]

I'm not a writer, but I'm pretty sure the best way to learn about writing is to write. Just get words down on the page.

That's certainly necessary to learn how to write but doing that without any critical reflection on your own work and others won't help you at all.

[Bluetiger]

There is a thread for 'aspiring writers' here http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/130732-boarders-writing-a-novel-part-13/page-4#entry7163069Welcome to the boards! :)

[three-eyed monkey]

Yeah. I'm starting to learn that. But this is also an academic question: Why is ASOIAF interesting?

GRRM is very good at making choices with regards to storytelling. The very first choice he made when he sat down to write the books was the POV structure. This is central to a lot of what I like about ASoIaF. The mix of third-person-limited and first-person in italics really helps put the reader in the skin of the character, and that goes a long way towards getting the reader invested in the central characters.

You do have to sit down and write every day, but decide on how you want to tell the story first, because it will impact every sentence you write. There are various pros and cons to the different forms of POV, and not every form will suit the type of story wou want to tell.

[Khorkalba]

I've thought about this quite a bit in the past. As a fan of fantasy, I actually think GRRM is a pretty terrible fantasy writer. The world that he's created is so unimaginative and simple in places that it's almost an insult to mention him along with the likes of Tolkien.

That said, I still love his novels for the characters, the human conflict and political intrigue, the unpredictability, the harsh reality of good guys dying, etc. You could literally strip away all of the weak fantasy elements and replace them with a more modern setting and the novels would be just as good, if not better.

[Lord Conover]

What's made this series so iconic is that George has stayed away from grandiose magical intervention. The series focuses more on political intrigue than on these ridiculous feat of magic and grand prophetic fatalism. It's more mundane than other series and magic is peripheral. He also blends real history into it very well.

[Drogon's Personal Trainer]

I've thought about this quite a bit in the past. As a fan of fantasy, I actually think GRRM is a pretty terrible fantasy writer. The world that he's created is so unimaginative and simple in places that it's almost an insult to mention him along with the likes of Tolkien.

That said, I still love his novels for the characters, the human conflict and political intrigue, the unpredictability, the harsh reality of good guys dying, etc. You could literally strip away all of the weak fantasy elements and replace them with a more modern setting and the novels would be just as good, if not better.

You see, it's the opposite for me. Until recently I'd never been a massive fantasy reader, so George's world, having a more realistic, Mediaeval historical base, was perfect for me. He reads like historical fiction with a dragon or two thrown in :)

If I were to say what is great about ASOIAF: definitely the characterisation and world-building - and yes, politics and human conflict. His characters in particular seem very real to me. So does the world. Precisely because he grounds his world in such authentic roots, the reader can accept dragons and white walkers much easier.

[SyShaRa]

In not so many words, the fact that his world seems "lived in" as in you actually get the sense that characters are just a part of a real social structure.

Take Harry Potter for instance, Harry is the only POV of the entire saga. Whilst that allows for tighter plotting, The Wizarding World doesn't feel like a "World", rather it feels like a recollection of Harry's thoughts.

I suppose the greatest selling point of asoiaf is the 31 POV characters + 900 auxiliary characters.

[Nights Kings Queen]

You see, it's the opposite for me. Until recently I'd never been a massive fantasy reader, so George's world, having a more realistic, Mediaeval historical base, was perfect for me. He reads like historical fiction with a dragon or two thrown in :)

If I were to say what is great about ASOIAF: definitely the characterisation and world-building - and yes, politics and human conflict. His characters in particular seem very real to me. So does the world. Precisely because he grounds his world in such authentic roots, the reader can accept dragons and white walkers much easier.

This is why i like the books as well.

And everything George does he does for the story. He doesn't needlessly kill a character for the sake of shock (aiming this at you d+d). He doesn't resort to the nearest, cheapest theory for the sake of a temporary wow (aiming this at you d+d with your jaqen thing). He's very logical when it comes to story telling, everything in his story flows very richly. Not awkward and clumsy (aiming this at you d+d)

[rumple9]

It starts out effectively as a murder mystery set in medeival times. Low fantasy and grounded. There is a lot of political intrigue, scheming and shenannigans.

The plot then starts to sprawl into a battle epic and Martin gradually introduces higher fantasy elements as the story goes on.

In addition to which there are a lot of twists and turns, and as others have said unexpected things happening to good or likeable characters.

Martin creates a whole world but in reality he is simply writing an alternate history of the earth making a new story in respect of many actual historical events that have really happened.

What really does it for me though is Martin's style of writing. I have never read any books that I have enjoyed as much due to his prose.