I don't care for the Zombie Apocalypse.

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

15 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

 

Its called an opinion and I am allowed to like certain aspects of the series and dislike others. 

Well for the most part Ice and Fire is that series. Far more so than Wheel of Time, Light and Shadow or Stormlight.  I mean none of those series have what I'd call a Daenerys equivalent; at all.

You have the Game of Thrones, this cast of characters and in particular Danys arc. However the series ultimate direction is likely to push those things to one side and bring the weaker elements of the story to the forefront. As a political and character driven story Ice and Fire is great. As a world with a developed magic system and fantasy antagonist it isn't. That when compared to Wheel of Time the series falls short. Which hasn't mattered because that has always been a trivial part of the narrative. When it becomes the focus, that's when the story stops being the one I like.

Why should I like or care about this zombie invasion that's going to come like an obnoxious fart into a good storyline?

LOL I think you have made a crucial mistake. You are assuming this is a fantasy story. GRRM is a sci-fi writer, and asoiaf is a sci-fi story. So you aren't going to get the same sort of exposition explanations of magic that are present in some fantasy stories. Rather, there are sci-fi aspects like telepathy and genetic mutations, and it is up to the reader to infer the laws of sci-fi physics in the asoiaf universe.

I don't see how the zombie invasion is any different thematically from Dany using dragons to kill people, or Mel using shadow babies to kill people, or Euron using a horn that controls people's minds to become king. It is just another sci-fi weapon in a long series of sci-fi weapons.

[falcotron]

13 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

GRRM is a sci-fi writer, and asoiaf is a sci-fi story. So you aren't going to get the same sort of exposition explanations of magic that are present in some fantasy stories

GRRM writes fantasy and horror as well as sci-fi. Armageddon Rag is not a sci-fi novel, for example.

The reason you don't get exposition explanations of magic is not that ASoIaF is sci-fi in disguise, but that GRRM thinks fantasy shouldn't explain how magic works. For example, in SSM 4555:

Quote

Magic has to be magic - something that violates law of nature. "Unknown" - published between the two World Wars writen by Campbell - a real rationalist with a particular brand of fantasy. Campbell treated magic as science. GRR enjoyed reading them but that approach to magic and the aproach in role playing games is...just science, not magic. Magic has to be more mysterious than that. He wants less Campbell and more Lovecraft. It has to be dark stuff we can't fully comprehend. Use it sparingly so it has impact.

In fact, the kind of "sci-fi in disguise" fantasy that you're suggesting is exactly what John W. Campbell and Unknown magazine are famous for. The author's guidelines required all magical elements to be systematic and explicable, and ideally in "natural scientific terms" (which included ESP and all the fringe science Campbell believed in).

[kissdbyfire]

11 hours ago, falcotron said:

GRRM writes fantasy and horror as well as sci-fi. Armageddon Rag is not a sci-fi novel, for example.

The reason you don't get exposition explanations of magic is not that ASoIaF is sci-fi in disguise, but that GRRM thinks fantasy shouldn't explain how magic works. For example, in SSM 4555:

In fact, the kind of "sci-fi in disguise" fantasy that you're suggesting is exactly what John W. Campbell and Unknown magazine are famous for. The author's guidelines required all magical elements to be systematic and explicable, and ideally in "natural scientific terms" (which included ESP and all the fringe science Campbell believed in).

I agree. There's also an old-ish (?) interview where the interviewer asks him something about midichlorians (in connection to ASoIaF) and his reply is something along the lines of, "ASoIaF is fantasy not sci fi. If I wanted to write a sci fi story I would write a sci fi story". 

[Makk]

I think I understand where the OP is coming from (although I personally have the same issue with dragons as I do with the Others). I like a good fantasy story so long as it is grounded in reality, which so far GRRM has done very well. But he has written an amazing story, and it would still be every bit as good if you removed all the magic, others and dragons. I just don't want all the different story threads to become basically irrelevant and completely overshadowed by the mystical presence currently lurking in the background. I don't think it will be though. I can't see a guy who has so perfectly woven all these complex threads and relationships to just let them play out with no importance.

[falcotron]

1 minute ago, Makk said:

I just don't want all the different story threads to become basically irrelevant and completely overshadowed by the mystical presence currently lurking in the background. I don't think it will be though. I can't see a guy who has so perfectly woven all these complex threads and relationships to just let them play out with no importance.

I agree. And the best reason to trust him is to go back and read Dany's story. Her getting dragons was a huge deal, but it didn't at all overshadow the rest of her story or make all the political and personal intrigue irrelevant. In fact, we've gotten a lot more complex intrigue post-dragons than pre-dragons in her story.

[Tyrion1991]

7 minutes ago, falcotron said:

I agree. And the best reason to trust him is to go back and read Dany's story. Her getting dragons was a huge deal, but it didn't at all overshadow the rest of her story or make all the political and personal intrigue irrelevant. In fact, we've gotten a lot more complex intrigue post-dragons than pre-dragons in her story.

 

But those dragons were babies and so her training and using them didn't have anywhere near as much of a central role. If the dragons were full grown, which they are getting to right now and Dany started having to train it then it would have had a significant impact on her story.

However, the Dragons are:

* Really cool.

* Fit pretty neatly into a grounded medieval setting. A big flying dinosaur that breaths fire that people use as mounts isn't too much of a deviation from reality. Creatures that big did exist. Humans domesticate animals as mounts for use in war. 

 

However a Zombie Apocalypse, especially one that involves full resurrection as opposed to a virus, completely dispenses with reality and is incredibly OTT. Plus the very nature of the Others as a faction runs counter to the rules GRRM has laid out. Political infighting, considering logistics, making mistakes, the fog of war and battle tactics don't apply to the Others. They just charge, always win and are this monolithic thing because they are rooted in horror. Even a cursory look at the Targaryen history makes it clear that having dragons doesn't detract from any of these things. I mean even GRRM had made them Orcs or Dark Elves, you could still have done all of those things as well. It really is specifically the fact that the faction consists of zombies and a bunch of ice spirits. 

Basically the Others as antagonists have none of the character, depth, realism, complexity, nuance and even ambiguity of say the Lannisters or the Ironborn. As antagonists they are just nowhere near as interesting. It is an undead horde led by ice spirits. Think about some of the most important moments in the series, Ned being beheaded, Tyrion killing Tywin, Sansa being held captive, Joffrey being poisoned etc etc. You simply couldn't have done any of these storylines with a zombie horde. All they have done so far is kill everything they encounter. There is no moral dilemma here or complex personal relationships to navigate. They are a threat. They must die. GRRM cannot turn around and say they are good guys if they have refused to negotiate or speak to their human opponents who are oblivious to their existence. It is an unprovoked attack.

[kissdbyfire]

23 minutes ago, Tyrion1991 said:

However a Zombie Apocalypse, especially one that involves full resurrection as opposed to a virus, completely dispenses with reality and is incredibly OTT. Plus the very nature of the Others as a faction runs counter to the rules GRRM has laid out. Political infighting, considering logistics, making mistakes, the fog of war and battle tactics don't apply to the Others. They just charge, always win and are this monolithic thing because they are rooted in horror. Even a cursory look at the Targaryen history makes it clear that having dragons doesn't detract from any of these things. I mean even GRRM had made them Orcs or Dark Elves, you could still have done all of those things as well. It really is specifically the fact that the faction consists of zombies and a bunch of ice spirits. 

I think you might get a pleasant surprise... b/c you are making a lot of assumptions and taking them as fact. But the truth is, we don't know any of that yet. We [effectively] know very, very little about the WWs. There are loads and loads of theories, some wrapped tightly in tinfoil, but we have close to nothing in terms of facts, or proper knowledge about them. 

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

15 hours ago, falcotron said:

GRRM writes fantasy and horror as well as sci-fi. Armageddon Rag is not a sci-fi novel, for example.

The reason you don't get exposition explanations of magic is not that ASoIaF is sci-fi in disguise, but that GRRM thinks fantasy shouldn't explain how magic works. For example, in SSM 4555:

In fact, the kind of "sci-fi in disguise" fantasy that you're suggesting is exactly what John W. Campbell and Unknown magazine are famous for. The author's guidelines required all magical elements to be systematic and explicable, and ideally in "natural scientific terms" (which included ESP and all the fringe science Campbell believed in).

Good points. But I do firmly believe asoiaf is effectively sci-fi disguised as fantasy. It just shares too many elements with his sci-fi work, particularly his Thousand Worlds stories. I mean, you could call asoiaf a fantasy if you want, but I think the preconceived notions of "fantasy" we have in our head allow us to say things like, Oh don't worry too much about the explanation of how Mel sees visions of the future in the flames. It's just MAGIC. Mel is using "fire magic". Where as if we look at it from a more sci-fi perspective and assume it is following some sort of consistent rule set (albeit a not-explicitly-explained rule set), then someone like me looks at Mel and concludes, OK, Mel's third eye is opened when she stares into flames. Bran's third eye opens when he is in darkness. Are there similarities between the two? Well the obvious similarity is that being in darkness renders you blind, and staring for hours at a fire also renders you blind. Therefore, there is effectively no difference and probably nothing special about fire that is facilitating Mel's "magic".

[falcotron]

1 hour ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Good points. But I do firmly believe asoiaf is effectively sci-fi disguised as fantasy. It just shares too many elements with his sci-fi work, particularly his Thousand Worlds stories. I mean, you could call asoiaf a fantasy if you want, but I think the preconceived notions of "fantasy" we have in our head allow us to say things like, Oh don't worry too much about the explanation of how Mel sees visions of the future in the flames. It's just MAGIC. Mel is using "fire magic".

But it's not "don't worry about it, it's just magic".

The great forces that run the universe being indifferent to us and incomprehensible to us is central to the entire idea of weird fantasy. You should worry about it very much. But there's no hidden answer to alleviate that worry. Magic is, as GRRM puts it, "dark stuff we can't fully comprehend". There's no Gandalf working as a servant of Iluvatar, or neutral-good wizard who's figured out the secrets of the universe so he can help us defeat the bad guy, they're just people who have made dark compacts with things they don't understand, and been twisted by them, and the fact that w have to rely on them is scary.

In-universe, everyone who thinks they understand magic turns out to be disastrously wrong. People make great sacrifices for magic, and sometimes they get nothing in return. Or they do get something, sometimes even out of nowhere, but often it's a burden—look at Beric, who does get to sort of keep living, but he lives only for the Red God's purposes, and doesn't even know what those purposes are.

1 hour ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Where as if we look at it from a more sci-fi perspective and assume it is following some sort of consistent rule set (albeit a not-explicitly-explained rule set), then someone like me looks at Mel and concludes, OK, Mel's third eye is opened when she stares into flames. Bran's third eye opens when he is in darkness. Are there similarities between the two? Well the obvious similarity is that being in darkness renders you blind, and staring for hours at a fire also renders you blind. Therefore, there is effectively no difference and probably nothing special about fire that is facilitating Mel's "magic".

You're free to do that of course, but you're doing exactly what GRRM says he doesn't like in fantasy. He wants "more Lovecraft, less Campbell", so if you insist on reading it as Campbell anyway, you're missing his point.

If he'd wanted to write another Thousand Worlds story, he would have written another Thousand Worlds story. But instead, he wanted to write a story that shared some of the same themes, but also some different themes.

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

1 hour ago, falcotron said:

But it's not "don't worry about it, it's just magic".

The great forces that run the universe being indifferent to us and incomprehensible to us is central to the entire idea of weird fantasy. You should worry about it very much. But there's no hidden answer to alleviate that worry. Magic is, as GRRM puts it, "dark stuff we can't fully comprehend". There's no Gandalf working as a servant of Iluvatar, or neutral-good wizard who's figured out the secrets of the universe so he can help us defeat the bad guy, they're just people who have made dark compacts with things they don't understand, and been twisted by them, and the fact that w have to rely on them is scary.

In-universe, everyone who thinks they understand magic turns out to be disastrously wrong. People make great sacrifices for magic, and sometimes they get nothing in return. Or they do get something, sometimes even out of nowhere, but often it's a burden—look at Beric, who does get to sort of keep living, but he lives only for the Red God's purposes, and doesn't even know what those purposes are.

You're free to do that of course, but you're doing exactly what GRRM says he doesn't like in fantasy. He wants "more Lovecraft, less Campbell", so if you insist on reading it as Campbell anyway, you're missing his point.

If he'd wanted to write another Thousand Worlds story, he would have written another Thousand Worlds story. But instead, he wanted to write a story that shared some of the same themes, but also some different themes.

You may be right. But honestly I would think that asoiaf is another Thousand Worlds story except for the fact that he explicitly said it isn't in an SSM. So far there is no discernible difference between the "magic" in asoiaf and the "magic" in the Thousand Worlds and some of his other non-Thousand Worlds sci-fi stories. He has reused at least some of the same concepts. Like, you could cut+paste the Others and the Valyrians and dragons and zombies and stick them in a Thousand Worlds story and I wouldn't even blink. I would just be like, oh those guys must have been genetically engineered by the Prometheans. But I bet they can still breed with the basic! Wow, some of these guys seem strong enough to be class one telepaths! Maybe the Others and Valyrians have something more mysterious and magical going on, but I think we can infer (based on his sci-fi work) that the Others, Valyrians, COTF, giants, and squishers are effectively genetically mutated humans who can all still breed with "normal" humans, and from that we can infer that the Others are not some dark, evil, Sauron-type force that must be destroyed. Rather, the ending will involve "normal" humans making peace with the Others (aka the other humans). Hence my original reply to the OP that the zombie apocalypse will not play out as he thinks. The zombies are just another sci-fi/magic weapon like dragons and shadow-babies. And because GRRM has written stories about nefarious actors sending false prophecies/visions to the leaders of mankind to trick men into killing themselves, I think the same thing is happening in asoiaf.

I think he basically wanted to write a giant Thousand Worlds-type story but not bother connecting it to his already-existing universe, which is actually a fictional version of our own universe. I could be wrong. Regardless, I think he is reusing certain concepts that he has basically copy+pasted from old stories into asoiaf, most notably false prophecies/visions and time travel. He put a decent amount of thought into writing the time travel stories Under Siege and Unsound Variations and explicitly explained the basic rules of how time travel works. And I think he is using the exact same time travel "rules" in asoiaf. The rules are basically: 1) you can only go backward in time, not forward, 2) you can only send your consciousness back in time not your physical body, 3) any changes you make to the timeline only affect a new "version" of the timeline/universe, and 4) you can send your consciousness back in time permanently by physically dying while time traveling. I give it a 99% chance we will see at least Bran use this type of time travel based on his brief weirnet adventures in ADWD when he spoke to Ned.

But again, I could be wrong about all of that and won't be particularly surprised if I am.  

[Tyrion1991]

8 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

I think you might get a pleasant surprise... b/c you are making a lot of assumptions and taking them as fact. But the truth is, we don't know any of that yet. We [effectively] know very, very little about the WWs. There are loads and loads of theories, some wrapped tightly in tinfoil, but we have close to nothing in terms of facts, or proper knowledge about them. 

 

You mean he has been misleading the audience and then dumps a load of info which contradicts all of the Others behaviour up until this point? 

 

[Ghost+Nymeria4Eva]

On 9/20/2017 at 0:24 PM, Wild Bill said:

I'll give an analogy of WWII - is it of the story of a battle of civilizations or of Gandhi looking to overthrow the colonial yoke in India? Not to be flippant (and I enjoyed your use of "glib":)), I think of ASOIAF being like WWII, and... you are talking about Gandhi (solely India). A bad analogy, but still, even if there was to be a zombie apocalypse - it was preordained from the earliest chapters of the first book! - what did you expect?

It will solely depending on which side you are with wouldn't it? You called WWII "battle for civilizations" as in of Europe, because that's how you see things from the Western side. But someone from the Indian side would call the "battle for civilizations" for what Gandhi did for India. There are still many countries that side or empathize with Germany in WWII, not because they approve of Holocaust, but because it helped get rid of the British Empire. It's all a matter of what threatens you the most.

It's the sort of thing GRRM is trying to show here I think with his play of perspectives. People who are fans of the King's Landing stuff thinks it's the most important and Dany should go there asap. Then if there are Essoi fans they would like to see how Dany's anti-slavery mission changes the politics there and also see what is going on in places like Asshai. In the end, I think both matters a lot to the overall plot to overthrow the Others, if not overtly, at least subtly. If you obsess over one POV, then you will miss seeing the overall picture. 

[Essan]

6 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

 

You mean he has been misleading the audience and then dumps a load of info which contradicts all of the Others behaviour up until this point? 

 

What behaviour?   We have only met them twice (the Prologue and the attack on Sam - their presence at the Fist of the First Men was intimated by Sam, but never actually described).   As kissdbyfire says. we know nothing about them.  I suspect they are not quite what we have been led (mainly via Nan's tales) to assume.

[Spilledguts]

On 2017-09-19 at 1:19 PM, Tyrion1991 said:

 

Its called an opinion and I am allowed to like certain aspects of the series and dislike others. 

Well for the most part Ice and Fire is that series. Far more so than Wheel of Time, Light and Shadow or Stormlight.  I mean none of those series have what I'd call a Daenerys equivalent; at all.

You have the Game of Thrones, this cast of characters and in particular Danys arc. However the series ultimate direction is likely to push those things to one side and bring the weaker elements of the story to the forefront. As a political and character driven story Ice and Fire is great. As a world with a developed magic system and fantasy antagonist it isn't. That when compared to Wheel of Time the series falls short. Which hasn't mattered because that has always been a trivial part of the narrative. When it becomes the focus, that's when the story stops being the one I like.

Why should I like or care about this zombie invasion that's going to come like an obnoxious fart into a good storyline?

 

I beg to differ about Danny and Wheel of Time because she always seemed like GRrMs version of the Dragon Reborn along with the plot armor, possible madness and all the 'magic by accident' saving the day. Only difference is that she is female and acutally HAS dragons. 

[Tyrion1991]

8 minutes ago, Spilledguts said:

I beg to differ about Danny and Wheel of Time because she always seemed like GRrMs version of the Dragon Reborn along with the plot armor, possible madness and all the 'magic by accident' saving the day. Only difference is that she is female and acutally HAS dragons. 

Yeah she's a messianic character like Rand.

2 hours ago, Essan said:

What behaviour?   We have only met them twice (the Prologue and the attack on Sam - their presence at the Fist of the First Men was intimated by Sam, but never actually described).   As kissdbyfire says. we know nothing about them.  I suspect they are not quite what we have been led (mainly via Nan's tales) to assume.

 

Well then they won't try breaching the wall then and won't get involved in the story.

Chekovs gun. They have to do something major otherwise all this end of the world and chosen one stuff comes to nothing. 

The Others cannot simultaneously be a Lovecraftian monster and a morally grey foe. Moral greyness implies humanity and that there is some good in something. If there is good then it can be reasoned with and will not always destroy me. It becomes known. Cthulu is not morally grey. He is unknowable, Alien and monstrous. Beyond human morality. Humanising the Others and having some silly peace treaty would run counter to the very notion of that. 

It would also not make any sense. If the Others don't want to kill us then why are they killing us? Is every wildling a liar? 

If the Others are going to breach the wall and invade Westeros (which the plot requires them to do since nobody is invading the Heart of Winter) then that is an unprovoked act of aggression that will cause the deaths of millions of people. There is no moral excuse on earth to justify that. This is Hitler invading Poland and exterminating its people. End of story.

 

 

[Tucu]

14 minutes ago, Tyrion1991 said:

Yeah she's a messianic character like Rand.

 

Well then they won't try breaching the wall then and won't get involved in the story.

Chekovs gun. They have to do something major otherwise all this end of the world and chosen one stuff comes to nothing. 

The Others cannot simultaneously be a Lovecraftian monster and a morally grey foe. Moral greyness implies humanity and that there is some good in something. If there is good then it can be reasoned with and will not always destroy me. It becomes known. Cthulu is not morally grey. He is unknowable, Alien and monstrous. Beyond human morality. Humanising the Others and having some silly peace treaty would run counter to the very notion of that. 

It would also not make any sense. If the Others don't want to kill us then why are they killing us? Is every wildling a liar? 

If the Others are going to breach the wall and invade Westeros (which the plot requires them to do since nobody is invading the Heart of Winter) then that is an unprovoked act of aggression that will cause the deaths of millions of people. There is no moral excuse on earth to justify that. This is Hitler invading Poland and exterminating its people. End of story.

 

 

The Others don't necessarily have to be evil to kill some wildlings and preserve them as wights. The Long Night will be harsh and wights can be stored for a long time. Think of them as magical predators practicing a form of canning.

[Amris]

I find the title of this thread strange.

Do you really want us to discuss what you care for or don't?

I mean it makes sense to discuss why there are wights in the story, what is their purpose and so on but - making a thread solely about whether you - personally - care for them? Hm.

The other thing is the title makes it seem like it is cut and dried that the story will be about a zombie apocalypse. When we don't really know that.

It would make sense to discuss whether we think a 'zombie apocalypse' is what will happen or what else GRRM may have in stow - but starting the whole thread with the premise that nothing else can happen but a zombie apocalypse? What is the thread to discuss then?

 

 

[Makk]

2 hours ago, Tucu said:

The Others don't necessarily have to be evil to kill some wildlings and preserve them as wights. The Long Night will be harsh and wights can be stored for a long time. Think of them as magical predators practicing a form of canning.

Also need to point out that the Others didn't even really kill that many wildlings. Just enough to convince them to try to pass the wall. 

This means that the Others are either not (currently?) that much of a threat or they didn't want to kill them all. If they didn't want to, that raises the question of whether they just weren't interested or perhaps manipulated the wildlings to try to pass the wall by attacking the Nightswatch (and maybe even blow that horn).

It's largely speculation if you try guessing their motivation. We have been given clues, but not enough imo to make any real solid theories.

[snow is the man]

actually as someone who loves zombies I am confused as to why you think that these are zombies. First of all they may be the "army of the dead" yet the zombies your thinking of are not made using necromancy like these are. TWD zombies are more of a sickness type thing as are most of the zombie books and movies. These are necromancy zombies and unlike most of the zombies in movies and books these aren't killed by hitting them in the head or something of that nature. So they aren't like most zombies. They don't eat the things they killed either.

 

Also the WW are the real threat and if it helps they control and raise the "army of the dead" thus to fit in with the fantasy setting they are like a bunch of necromancers who are incredible swordsman with the ability to control ice as well and have magical armor and weapons. S

[snow is the man]

57 minutes ago, Makk said:

Also need to point out that the Others didn't even really kill that many wildlings. Just enough to convince them to try to pass the wall. 

This means that the Others are either not (currently?) that much of a threat or they didn't want to kill them all. If they didn't want to, that raises the question of whether they just weren't interested or perhaps manipulated the wildlings to try to pass the wall by attacking the Nightswatch (and maybe even blow that horn).

It's largely speculation if you try guessing their motivation. We have been given clues, but not enough imo to make any real solid theories.

to be fair though it's implied that they are the big bad and want to kill every human. I don't see anything to suggest otherwise