maestro Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 I had this too, although I feel the next book is going to somehow funnel it together and I really hope it will. You're putting into words my "too much info yet not enough" feeling I was getting but couldn't explain. what?? That's about his main strength. He tells about a real world. With lots of people living and influencing each other. Not with a hero and villain on which these 2 characters everything in the whole universe depends on. I love his style of writing. The only thing I agree in is the example 'train' and 'stroll'. It's not (for me at least) cause of the number of characters, but there just doesn't happen a lot with the characters he's telling us about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banipal Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 Well, it is my quibble. I like that there are lots of people living and influencing each other. But it is not a roleplaying game, it is a series of novels. AGOT had a large number of people and events, but it seemed like it was going somewhere. When I read a book, I expect a plot. And I expect each novel in a series to have its own plot. At some point, he is going to have to resolve everyting. With AFFC, it is like some massive roleplaying expanded universe game, which is greatly lessening my enjoyment of the series. I went back to reread AGOT, and just think it was so well done in every way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of Oop North Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 I think Rhagar and Lyanna's supposed "perfection" (far from it) works well because they are both dead at the beginning of the story and add a real mythic quality. Its quite realistic actually, the people that are remembered most are either really good or really evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seven Pointed Star Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 The word 'leal' meaning - I assume - 'loyal' popped up quite a bit (ok, maybe 5 times) in AFFC; I don't remember it in any of the previous books. I thought it was a typo the first time I encountered it, but several other times someone would refer to the 'leal service' they had given to House This or in Office That. As for the use of f**k, it seems to be confined to refernces to intercourse, and I don't remember it's being used in a more modern way, ie., 'that's all f**ked up'. Sex in Westeros is pretty unsentimental - you can be f**ked, bedded, or occasionally, lain with. And if you were thinking about having sex, you would be thinking about having someone 'in' you, or being 'in' someone. We get (sorry - don't know if these words are crossing the line here) cunts, teats, cocks, masts, swamps - nothing prettied up or romantic there! ETA - also, the phrases 'many and more' and 'half a hundred' are a bit overused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 "Leal" is also used a few times in ASoS. Not before that, though, so it seems to be a word GRRM came across while writing that novel. Roose, Regarding "lass" and "grass", are you sure it doesn't rhyme in at least some dialects of the U.K.? Because Yeats rhymes them in "The Sad Shepherd". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathanael Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 At even if they don't, you can have half rhymes in songs, so it's a non-issue. Good is often rhymed with words like mood, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pellegrina Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Also, Yeats was Irish, wasn't he? So technically, not UK*** *** In modern usage, anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Yeats was Irish, yes. At the time, the whole of Ireland was still in the U.K. For that matter, I thought Northern Ireland was part of the United Kingdom, although it's true that Yeats was from Dublin. In any case, yes, plenty of reason not to be particularly bothered by "lass" and "grass". If it's good enough for Yeats... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seven Pointed Star Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 In any case, yes, plenty of reason not to be particularly bothered by "lass" and "grass". If it's good enough for Yeats... Many and more reasons? Half a hundred reasons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Northern Island is part of the UK, but the accent is very different from the standard English. Actually, there's no such thing as a 'standard' English. Scottish and Welsh can be strongly accented, as can regional subdivisions like Cornwall, Yorkshire, Essex, Suffolk, Norfolk etc. I have occasionaly problems with GRRM's use of retcons, coming up with a new idea and writing it in when it slightly conflicts with previous information (Dorne joining the Seven Kingdoms is a much more complex tale than when it appeared in AGoT's appendix, the Doom has shifted 100 years forward in time). However, on every occasion this has deepened the appeal of the backstory and the history so I'm more than content to live with it. The only problem I had with 'nuncle' is that Terry Pratchett mercilessly ripped the piss out of it in Wyrd Sisters, which took me out of AFFC a bit whenever I saw it. As a keen fan of maps and geography, I'm also puzzled why GRRM simply didn't put a map of the east into AGoT or a map of the Waste and Qarth into ACoK. I understand his reasoning to some extent and working out our own maps is fun, but at the end of the day it seems an odd thing to deny us. He (presumably) has a map of the east ready to go. We, his fans (or some of us anyway) want to see that map. Why not put it up on a website somewhere or into one of the books? Or let the RPG guys put it in the RPG rulebook? Mildly puzzling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fenris Wolf Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 I think Rhagar and Lyanna's supposed "perfection" (far from it) works well because they are both dead at the beginning of the story and add a real mythic quality. Its quite realistic actually, the people that are remembered most are either really good or really evil. I agree LotN. I love hearing about some of the more recent, semi-mythical characters in the culture of Westeros, like Rhaegar, Ser Arthur Dayne, and others. I think it adds to the realism of the books by contrasting our memories of genuinely good people (who were of course imperfect, but remembered in a state of perfection) and our memories of evil people (who again, were not utterly evil but will always be remembered that way. One big fault that I find in his writing is the utterly meaningless nature to some of the violence. But I've beaten that dead horse enough! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Other-in-law Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 As a keen fan of maps and geography, I'm also puzzled why GRRM simply didn't put a map of the east into AGoT or a map of the Waste and Qarth into ACoK. A map of the red waste would have undermined the bewilderment of Dany's party, lost in the desert. If we knew where Qarth was their situation would have lost it's tension. A map of the Free Cities in aGoT wouldn't have really been necessary either, since we were just being introduced to the world and the events there were treated as an impressionistic blur, not so complex or crucial as to require a guide, in my opinion. By now, though, yeah. I want to see the map! Personally I liked "much and more", "many and more", and "little and less" . I think they have been present in the series throughout, to varying degrees, and they add a little of the dialect (though not specific to any one region) which some people wish was better developed. Much like "just so", it's the type of thing I'd like to see more of rather than less. Where was "mom" used? I agree that sounds bad, but I didn't notice it. Of course "mum" and "bum" would be annoying as well.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bac5665 Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 I love GRRM's book series, but the man is far from flawless. If you actually read AFFC, the book os riddled with inconsistancies. I don't know how to protect spoilers so I can't point these plasces out, but look and they are there. There are times with in the same chapter that GRRM will cotradict himself or have mistakes that should result in the fireing of an editor. So clearly there are flaws. But I do love his detail and the many and more extra characters he descpribes. Also, Dany is one of my fav POVs and she has had plenty of chalange and hardship, as pointed out above. on the other hand, the phrase half a groat did bother the heck out of me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYC Falcon Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 He...to a lesser degree has a fault stephen king has with some of his novels(see eyes of the dragon and see IT. In eyes of the dragon the prince Peter is almost perfect, and in IT there is a long description of Bill being pure and having an aura of goodness) He usually has one or two charecters who are perfect in every way. Lyanna: From what we know, she was good hearted but was fierce, was tough but also really sexy, and fell in love and bagged the most handsome man in the kingdom. Give us some dirt man! I love Tyroin because he is clean AND dirty! Rheager: SO FAR we get an image of a sad sad guy who is just has it hard. He is often shown as super handsome and super kind and a top rate fighter. Got to admit, i kind of like him but...he seems too flawless./quote] Well in defending Martin I'll use one of his (and mine) current day heroes to prove my point. What's bad about Tiki Barber? Some great people are also nice and honest and honorable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devil Hanzo Posted January 5, 2006 Author Share Posted January 5, 2006 But they were not so...perfect. Look at wong fei hung. He was said to be a very good man when he existed, but he had some issues with his kids. Ueshiba, the creator of Akido was said to be a very very gentle man and good hearted, generous. but before he became like that, he used to love fighting and beat lots of people up for the sake of fighting, but he became introspective and changed himself due to this introspection. No one is spotless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HokieStone Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 You know what annoyed me in AFFC? (I don't really think this is a spoiler in any kind of way...) The use of the word "nuncle". I think that's an uncle on your mother's side? Anyway, we hadn't seen this term before(I don't think), and it here it was popping out of the mouths of several characters, in different parts of Westeros. I don't know why it struck me as odd, but it just seemed out of place to first hear it from character X in one part of Westeros, and then from character Y, on the other side of the continent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All Hail House Lannister! Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 There are quite a few typos in "A Feast for Crows", though I suppose the editors are to blame. Do not ask me to find them, but there are many. For instance, "So Jocelyn must needs eat the meal Cersei would sooner have served..." (pg. 172). Must needs eat the meal, aye? There are many more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maestro Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Well I'm dutch, so I guess I don't have the grammatical problems you guys have. If I can understand it, it's good enough for me Alos, the fact that GRRM is only telling a part of a huge story makes it complete. All the events that have taken place before AGoT starts really adds to the reality of the realm and make the characters with their histories and memories a lot livier. That was also the reason I liked (the old) star wars soo much. It's only part of a bigger story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Other-in-law Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 AHHL, Would you prefer "needs must" to "must needs" or do you dislike that sort of construction entirely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joryn snow Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 There are quite a few typos in "A Feast for Crows", though I suppose the editors are to blame. Do not ask me to find them, but there are many. For instance, "So Jocelyn must needs eat the meal Cersei would sooner have served..." (pg. 172). Must needs eat the meal, aye? There are many more. Well, English is not my first language...but if I am not completely mistaken, I've read the phrase "must needs do whatever..." quite a few times before - at least it does not sound wrong to me. I really would be interested to hear whether or not it's correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.