Will we ever get another series like ASOIAF?

[Pecan]

Maybe this is a dumb question. I don't know. But I wonder if we'll ever get an epic fantasy series like this again, at least in my lifetime? I'm in my mid-40's, so there's some time. 

Here's what I think, in a generic sense, would more or less qualify:

1) Epic in scale with solid world building and the sense that there is a big, big world out there with a deep history

2) Strong characters that we can identify with and have empathy for

3) Prose that flows and isn't distracting (for an example of terrible prose, try Ken Liu's The Grace of Kings)

4) Low magic

5) Politics and intrigue included, dynastic rivalries and conflict - that sort of thing

6) It should be about people, not elves, dwarves, hobbits, orcs, faeries, sprites, etc. 

It seems to me, if I were an up and coming author interested in writing fantasy literature, I would be looking at ASOIAF as a model. But I don't know if that's really the case. In some ways, I think GRRM is very unique in this genre because he's so heavily influenced by real history and historical fiction. Also, low magic seems to be a tough one for a lot of these authors.

 

 

[Jordan La Cabra]

It is a hard question to answer, as ASOIAF may not be everyone who likes epic fantasy series choice of the greatest example of it.

A lot of people will always believe LOTR is the top, for instance, and may be of the belief that there has been no better epic fantasy series since LOTR, even now.

I believe that even if there was another brilliant piece of fantasy work out there that ASOIAF would always be number one for me. I can't imagine even if thirty years down the line another epic series came out to rival it that I would even prefer it to ASOIAF, because by then I will have invested so much time in re-reading that it would be difficult for something else to come and eclipse it.

The way I look at it is, ASOIAF will probably be the fantasy series of this generation - certainly for the majority of the people on a forum like this. But I do believe that, somewhere down the line, something of equal or even better quality will be produced, perhaps for another generation to enjoy.

[The Marquis de Leech]

56 minutes ago, Pecan said:

Maybe this is a dumb question. I don't know. But I wonder if we'll ever get an epic fantasy series like this again, at least in my lifetime? I'm in my mid-40's, so there's some time. 

Here's what I think, in a generic sense, would more or less qualify:

1) Epic in scale with solid world building and the sense that there is a big, big world out there with a deep history

2) Strong characters that we can identify with and have empathy for

3) Prose that flows and isn't distracting (for an example of terrible prose, try Ken Liu's The Grace of Kings)

4) Low magic

5) Politics and intrigue included, dynastic rivalries and conflict - that sort of thing

6) It should be about people, not elves, dwarves, hobbits, orcs, faeries, sprites, etc. 

It seems to me, if I were an up and coming author interested in writing fantasy literature, I would be looking at ASOIAF as a model. But I don't know if that's really the case. In some ways, I think GRRM is very unique in this genre because he's so heavily influenced by real history and historical fiction. Also, low magic seems to be a tough one for a lot of these authors.

Tolkien's hobbits are people, explicitly so. That's the entire point of them - they are audience surrogates, figures for the reader to identify with in a world with so many larger than life figures.

I also have to disagree about Martin's world-building. He is a good character writer, and a good plotter, but world-building is not his strength - Westeros is just fifteenth century England with variable seasons and magic (and frankly. he doesn't do a particularly good job at showing the effects of the seasons on his setting. He has oak trees growing north of the Wall, for goodness sake). The less said about the unsavoury orientalism in Essos, the better.

As for comparable series, I would point you in the direction of Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn, by Tad Williams - there's less politics, and more focus on the actual ice demons, but it pre-empts much of Martin by a good decade or more (it was written in the 1980s). For a current series, see R. Scott Bakker's Second Apocalypse books - the first trilogy is influenced by the First Crusade in the same way Martin is influenced by the War of the Roses. Bakker has much more magic though, and the politics of his setting is much more religious/philosophical than Martin.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Another series that I'd compare with Martin (it was clearly influenced by ASOIAF) is Jacqueline Carey's Kushiel Legacy:

• Its world-building is even more overtly "alternate Earth" than Martin (specifically, the focus is on an idealised alternate France, rather than an England analogy).
• It's got the politics and scheming.
• It's got low magic (generally lower than Martin).

Where it differs is that each trilogy is single POV, rather than multiple POV, there is much less violence, and much more emphasis on sex (the protagonist of the first trilogy is an elite prostitute specialised in BDSM - not as bizarre as it sounds, since prostitution is a sacred calling in the setting), and the prose is much more lush/purple than Martin's.

Then there is Stephen Donaldson's Gap series, which is another one that pre-empts Martin. It has lots of political scheming, rotating POV structure like ASOIAF, and an emphasis on darkness and horrible things happening to the protagonists. It just happens to be science-fiction (specifically a sort of literal space opera - it is a loose adaption of Wagner's Ring Cycle In Space). 

[HexMachina]

2 hours ago, Pecan said:

Maybe this is a dumb question. I don't know. But I wonder if we'll ever get an epic fantasy series like this again, at least in my lifetime? I'm in my mid-40's, so there's some time. 

Here's what I think, in a generic sense, would more or less qualify:

1) Epic in scale with solid world building and the sense that there is a big, big world out there with a deep history

2) Strong characters that we can identify with and have empathy for

3) Prose that flows and isn't distracting (for an example of terrible prose, try Ken Liu's The Grace of Kings)

4) Low magic

5) Politics and intrigue included, dynastic rivalries and conflict - that sort of thing

6) It should be about people, not elves, dwarves, hobbits, orcs, faeries, sprites, etc. 

It seems to me, if I were an up and coming author interested in writing fantasy literature, I would be looking at ASOIAF as a model. But I don't know if that's really the case. In some ways, I think GRRM is very unique in this genre because he's so heavily influenced by real history and historical fiction. Also, low magic seems to be a tough one for a lot of these authors.

 

 

ASOIAF is not low magic, unless Dragons, the undead, warging, shadow babies, face changing, shadowbinding, greenseeing, summoning storms, prophetic visions etc. falls under your definition of 'low' which would be quite the expansive interpretation. And I would  suspect in future books there is only going to be more magic.

Also not sure why an epic fantasy series should exclude other races. What should be important is that those races are humanised and seem like real characters. 

On your last point regarding up and coming fantasy authors using ASOIAF as a model, I think that would actually be a terrible idea. Do that and you will face inevitable comparisons to the original, and the market will be inundated with bad ASOIAF copies just like the Tolkien emulators of the past. New (or existing) authors are far better trying to come up with an original idea for their novel(s). 

 

Robin Hobb's Realm of the Elderlings books fit most of your criteria, except the worldbuilding and low magic (although I wouldn't say there is any more magic really than ASOIAF). Worldbuilding is okay but not the strength of the series at all. But again, as RBPL says, I don't think world building is Martin's strength either. 

 

[SeanF]

 

2 minutes ago, HelenaExMachina said:

ASOIAF is not low magic, unless Dragons, the undead, warging, shadow babies, face changing, shadowbinding, greenseeing, summoning storms, prophetic visions etc. falls under your definition of 'low' which would be quite the expansive interpretation. And I would  suspect in future books there is only going to be more magic.

Also not sure why an epic fantasy series should exclude other races. What should be important is that those races are humanised and seem like real characters. 

On your last point regarding up and coming fantasy authors using ASOIAF as a model, I think that would actually be a terrible idea. Do that and you will face inevitable comparisons to the original, and the market will be inundated with bad ASOIAF copies just like the Tolkien emulators of the past. New (or existing) authors are far better trying to come up with an original idea for their novel(s). 

 

Robin Hobb's Realm of the Elderlings books fit most of your criteria, except the worldbuilding and low magic (although I wouldn't say there is any more magic really than ASOIAF). Worldbuilding is okay but not the strength of the series at all. But again, as RBPL says, I don't think world building is Martin's strength either. 

 

I think that good worldbuilding is something that's nice to have, rather than something that's essential.

[HexMachina]

1 minute ago, SeanF said:

 

I think that good worldbuilding is something that's nice to have, rather than something that's essential.

Agreed. As long as it isn't blatantly awful and suffices for the purpose of the plot, I'm happy. (I think Hobb is somewhat better than that, I might add ). Obviously something the level of Tolkien is great fun and I love to nerd out reading about it, but hardly essential

[Jordan La Cabra]

2 minutes ago, HelenaExMachina said:

ASOIAF is not low magic, unless Dragons, the undead, warging, shadow babies, face changing, shadowbinding, greenseeing, summoning storms, prophetic visions etc. falls under your definition of 'low' which would be quite the expansive interpretation. And I would  suspect in future books there is only going to be more magic.

When you lay out every element of magic within the story, of course it is going to sound like ASOIAF is riddled with magic. But I think what the OP is referring to is the integration of magic to the story being subtle and progressive. It never truly feels like magic is lumped on us all at once.

There are many epic fantasy novels that the fantasy element is right at the forefront, but so far, fantasy has filtered in and out of the story, progressively building as time passes. As you say, though, it is only likely to increase in the future books, but the pace that it has been implemented into the story is what a lot of people that wouldn't typically follow fantasy find appealing about ASOIAF.

[HexMachina]

1 minute ago, JordanJH1993 said:

When you lay out every element of magic within the story, of course it is going to sound like ASOIAF is riddled with magic. But I think what the OP is referring to is the integration of magic to the story being subtle and progressive. It never truly feels like magic is lumped on us all at once.

There are many epic fantasy novels that the fantasy element is right at the forefront, but so far, fantasy has filtered in and out of the story, progressively building as time passes. As you say, though, it is only likely to increase in the future books, but the pace that it has been implemented into the story is what a lot of people that wouldn't typically follow fantasy find appealing about ASOIAF.

The first book literally opens with ice zombies killing a man and resurrecting him and closes with the birth of dragons. I tend to think people really downplay how much magic is in this series and how pervasive it is for some strange reason, as though magic in a book is something to be ashamed of

[The Marquis de Leech]

While it depends on the work, you can have world-driven fantasy. I'd put both Tolkien and Peake in that category.

• Tolkien: World > Theme > Plot > Character
• Peake: World > Character > Theme > Plot
• Martin: Character > Plot > Theme > World (he's the anti-Tolkien)
• Bakker: Theme > World > Character > Plot
• Erikson: World > Plot > Theme > Character

[Jordan La Cabra]

Just now, HelenaExMachina said:

The first book literally opens with ice zombies killing a man and resurrecting him and closes with the birth of dragons. I tend to think people really downplay how much magic is in this series and how pervasive it is for some strange reason, as though magic in a book is something to be ashamed of

And in between those two points there is Jon Snow killing a wight to save Jeor Mormont, amongst other things. No one here is denying the fantasy elements, or trying to play it down, as if is something to be ashamed of. If you don't like fantasy at all, it would be impossible to like ASOIAF given how important the fantasy elements are to the story. I have never seen anyone complain about there being too much or too little magic in ASOIAF, so, to me, it suggests it is well balanced.

But going by the OP's point No. 6, where he is clearly comparing ASOIAF to LOTR, we can assume that he is also comparing his point No. 4 'Low magic' to a series like LOTR, where it would be hard to argue against LOTR being more entrenched in fantasy than ASOIAF is.

[baxus]

19 minutes ago, JordanJH1993 said:

When you lay out every element of magic within the story, of course it is going to sound like ASOIAF is riddled with magic. But I think what the OP is referring to is the integration of magic to the story being subtle and progressive. It never truly feels like magic is lumped on us all at once.

ASOIAF is definitely not a low magic series. People are confusing "low magic" with "magic has consequences". Dragons are born because Daenerys burnt Mirri Maz Duur, killed Drogo's stallion and walked into the damn fire of Drogo's funeral pyre, warging slowly but surely eats you up as a human, Toros is drained after returning people from the dead etc.

Magic in ASOIAF is not an every day occurrence but that most definitely does not mean that the series is low on magic.

On the OP's question - why on Earth would we ever want a series that's similar to ASOIAF? Have you ever read a book that's similar to LOTR that you didn't immediately go "Now, this is a LOTR rip off if ever there was one"?

I want new series, not a rehashing of an "old" one, no matter how well it may be written.

[SeanF]

14 minutes ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

While it depends on the work, you can have world-driven fantasy. I'd put both Tolkien and Peake in that category.

• Tolkien: World > Theme > Plot > Character
• Peake: World > Character > Theme > Plot
• Martin: Character > Plot > Theme > World (he's the anti-Tolkien)
• Bakker: Theme > World > Character > Plot
• Erikson: World > Plot > Theme > Character

I'm pretty sure no other writer would do as Tolkien did, create a world, with its own legends, histories, and languages, purely for his own intellectual amusement, 20 years before he actually published anything set in that world.

[HexMachina]

21 minutes ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

While it depends on the work, you can have world-driven fantasy. I'd put both Tolkien and Peake in that category.

• Tolkien: World > Theme > Plot > Character
• Peake: World > Character > Theme > Plot
• Martin: Character > Plot > Theme > World (he's the anti-Tolkien)
• Bakker: Theme > World > Character > Plot
• Erikson: World > Plot > Theme > Character

Did you have a thread on this at some point? I seems familiar that's all.

15 minutes ago, JordanJH1993 said:

And in between those two points there is Jon Snow killing a wight to save Jeor Mormont, amongst other things. No one here is denying the fantasy elements, or trying to play it down, as if is something to be ashamed of. If you don't like fantasy at all, it would be impossible to like ASOIAF given how important the fantasy elements are to the story. I have never seen anyone complain about there being too much or too little magic in ASOIAF, so, to me, it suggests it is well balanced.

But going by the OP's point No. 6, where he is clearly comparing ASOIAF to LOTR, we can assume that he is also comparing his point No. 4 'Low magic' to a series like LOTR, where it would be hard to argue against LOTR being more entrenched in fantasy than ASOIAF is.

Given the amount of people who show up on these boards and say 'I like ASOIAF because there isn't much magic/fantasy' I think it's clear some people are almost embarrassed to admit liking a fantasy story.

[Jordan La Cabra]

3 minutes ago, baxus said:

ASOIAF is definitely not a low magic series. People are confusing "low magic" with "magic has consequences". Dragons are born because Daenerys burnt Mirri Maz Duur, killed Drogo's stallion and walked into the damn fire of Drogo's funeral pyre, warging slowly but surely eats you up as a human, Toros is drained after returning people from the dead etc.

Magic in ASOIAF is not an every day occurrence but that most definitely does not mean that the series is low on magic.

Again, I am not arguing the point here that ASOIAF shouldn't sit in the fantasy section of a bookstore because there is literally next to no magic in the damn thing - sure, it may as well just be a fifteenth century England period drama. No one is saying that, not even the OP.

What you mention about 'magic has consequences' is probably along the lines of what the OP meant. There are dangers with magic, it's not some kind of prize, like being handed a wand and sent to Hogwarts. Magic is much more complex and often sinister in ASOIAF, which, somehow, makes it seem more realistic becomes it can often come at a price or it, as you say, can have 'consequences'.

 

[The Marquis de Leech]

24 minutes ago, HelenaExMachina said:

Did you have a thread on this at some point? I seems familiar that's all.

Not a thread to itself. I've hijacked a thread or two in my time though.

[The Marquis de Leech]

34 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I'm pretty sure no other writer would do as Tolkien did, create a world, with its own legends, histories, and languages, purely for his own intellectual amusement, 20 years before he actually published anything set in that world.

It's more like 37 years. The Hobbit was not originally set in the same world as The Silmarillion, and was retrospectively shoe-horned in.

(The Silmarillion itself was submitted for publication in 1937, but was rejected by a thoroughly confused reader).

[End of Disc One]

4 hours ago, Pecan said:

3) Prose that flows and isn't distracting (for an example of terrible prose, try Ken Liu's The Grace of Kings)

I must enjoy terrible prose, then.  So there's no need for me to contribute to this topic.

[Rhom]

Personally; I hope there's never another series that starts great, meanders off course, and is never finished.

YMMV.   

 

[redeagl]

So basically a rip off? Also, the "low magic" thing isn't true,  especially in the books. K.J Parker and certain GGK books have lower magic than ASOIAF. Same about races. You have Others, Children of the Forest, Dragons etc... In ASOIAF.