Jump to content

Will ASOIAF stand the test of time?


ViserysLAD

Recommended Posts

Well, Tolkien's first book came out in 1937, and The Lord of the Rings came out in 1954-1955, yet he didn't become really popular until the 1960s.

 

Lovecraft was a nonentity at the time of his death in 1937. His legacy was only saved via Derleth keeping the stories alive.

GRRM's impact has already surpassed Lovecraft

 

The cosmic horror of Lovecraft is awesome, but it doesn't play that great a role in the public imagination. His biggest impact is probably inspiring Stephen King

Only I am not talking about popularity but about quality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lovecraft was a nonentity at the time of his death in 1937. His legacy was only saved via Derleth keeping the stories alive.

 

Derleth gets some credit to be sure.  But I prefer to say that HPL's legacy was saved by the quality of his stories.  If Derleth had not done it, someone else would have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

GRRM's impact has already surpassed Lovecraft

 

The cosmic horror of Lovecraft is awesome, but it doesn't play that great a role in the public imagination. His biggest impact is probably inspiring Stephen King

 

If impact is measured by inspiring others or having an effect greater on "teh culture" than being a hit today...then it still remains to be seen where GoT will end up on the scale.There hasn't really been another show like it on air as far as I know, and I don't know if it's really inspired trends or shifts in the fantasy community (I would expect it to happen in TV first, since it's closer to virgin territory)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

GRRM's impact has already surpassed Lovecraft

 

The cosmic horror of Lovecraft is awesome, but it doesn't play that great a role in the public imagination. His biggest impact is probably inspiring Stephen King

 

Depends. Social impact? Well, Cthulhu is a very well-known geek icon. Literary impact? Lovecraft wins easily, even among authors who have never read a word of his writing. He's probably the single most important figure in the entire horror genre (or else is second only to Poe). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Martin has done nothing more than write a couple of great fantasy books, and a few mediocre one. He'll be remembered as a good fantasy writer, and maybe ASOIAF will be counted amongst ONE of the best fantasy series, but let's not kid overselves ; Martin is no trailblazer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back before the days of browsers and google, there was a dial-up board of forums free for the members of SFWA and associated members and fans, called GEnie -- sponsored by sf/f fans who worked at, well, yah, GE.   :)

 

For more than a year before sitting down to write Got the author of same interrogated every fantasy writer member on what they did in their books, every one of them from Tad Williams to Robin Hobb and requesting every fantasy writer -- and fans -- to give their opinions on what works and doesn't work in everything from LotR to Thomas Covenant to you name it. What were the classics?  What were not. Who were the new fantasy writers?  What were they doing? etc.

 

IOW, the Got author was consciously constructing a template of what readers wanted.  He stated up front he was going to write the blockbuster of fantasies.  He was planning it to be a trilogy, and it was clear dragons were essential for broad popular mass appeal.

 

The prescient thing was, that the commodified popularity of zombies had not happened yet when he began writing Got -- Buffy and romantic vampires were still all the Biggest Thing. Very 20th century.  But the author of Got had always worked the horror-dark fantasy side of fantasy as a writer, and thus zombies.

 

Zombies are the 21st century.  And, so is global climate change. But then, we had forms of that in McCaffrey's Pern series too -- and, of course, dragons.

 

But, for me, it's the white walkers and Winter that make ASOIAF more 21st century than 20th -- and that's without the HBO series.  So for me this is what I admire about GRRM's sensibility -- his own imagination -- or, if one prefers, his creative subconscious -- made for what is the most original about ASOIAF, zombies and climate change within the traditional 'medievalesque sort of' quest fantasy epic.     :hat:  :read:

 

When he began writing this series it was the 1990s, and personally, I think he earns credit for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CP,

 
His writing ability is fine (though many of his writing choices are questionable).  It is his ability as a story-teller that is subject to extreme doubt.  The story that he is most famous for is one that remains unfinished, and is impossible to judge in its current state.
 
Of his completed novels so far, the best has been THE ARMAGEDDON RAG.  And that was a bit of an anticlimax at best.  After that one, I'll think I'll go with THE DYING OF THE LIGHT for some nice worldbuilding moments and genuinely atmospheric passages.  But as a story it is just awful.  The American Tolkien has yet to demonstrate his ability to seal the deal.


What was "awful" about the story of The Dying of the Light? I found it tight interesting and well worth my time. I didn't find it nihilistic at all. If anything it is a story founded in the romantic tradition of novels like A Tale of Two Cities.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I loathed Armageddon Rag -- but then, that's because I've been so deeply inside the music biz and know so many of the really best musicians, in many of the musical forms.

 

Also, it just fell apart. Incoherent ideas > incoherent plotting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CP,


What was "awful" about the story of The Dying of the Light? I found it tight interesting and well worth my time.

 

My impression of the message of The Dying of the Light is "life is meaningless and empty and I might as well kill myself".  Ending emphasizes general atmosphere of nihilistic despair.  I see no value in such a message; but admit that in this case it was so over-the-top it was almost funny.  

 

That said, I did find certain aspects and ingredients of the novel to be "interesting".    The story certainly was not "tight", though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you find the end of A Tale of Two Cities nihilistic? There are distinct similarities with The Dying of the Light.

 

[spoiler] Are you arguing that the hero of THE DYING OF THE LIGHT martyred himself for any other cause than his own pride and despair?   Maybe so.  But if he did, I failed to pick up on it.  I was really really bored at that point in the novel, and was just trying to finish. [/spoiler]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I loathed Armageddon Rag -- but then, that's because I've been so deeply inside the music biz and know so many of the really best musicians, in many of the musical forms.

 

Also, it just fell apart. Incoherent ideas > incoherent plotting.

 

I don't really have a strong argument against this.  I just liked it better than the other two.  The ending was anticlimactic, and the buildup interminable.  But I thought I understood, and appreciated, what he was trying to do.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends if he finishes it to some extent. I also wonder if it's too long to remain popular. I can imagine trends where overly long books fall out of fashion and it is very long. I do think his shorter books have a better chance. That or Wildcards because it's "open-source" and may take on an existence similar to superhero comics.

 

Ultimately I don't mind though - it's been great while I've been reading it. I'll be interested to see if I even rate it so highly if I read it again in 30 years (or when the series is finished)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...