Do many famous Writers that view George RR Martin and Song of Ice and Fire with Contempt?

[Arakan]

...you mean the pattern of answering someone else who made a comment about the show? Because I didn't 'derail' the thread, if you had payed attention. And I would pay attention if I were about to call someone out publicly for something so asinine :P

If you want to call someone out for bringing up the show, why don't you find the person who actually did instead of accusing me of "liking the show more than the books"...especially given that I wrote quite a lot before then about the use of themes in the books.

Yes I call you out because protar and QOW made two small harmless comments and you immediately jumped on the train (or felt the necessity) to defend the TV show or tell us where the show is better than the book (now polishgenius expanded this). Whatever, I dont care.

And it is a pattern which I saw in other threads as well. I know that you and especially protar often have those book vs. show arguments. Which is ok. But this thread had another purpose.

Sorry for OT

[rondo has three heads]

I agree that ASOIAF probably won't be studied in years to come, but that because it's fantasy and literature snobs dismiss fantasy. Not because it isn't worthy of being studied, because in my opinion it is. It touches on a lot of themes and in my opinion is rather extraordinarily written. Martin's only big flaw is his lack of concision and even that has only crept into his recent books. The first three, while they are large, feel like they're exactly as big as they need to be. I certainly wouldn't call ASOIAF shallow. I don't know how anyone could say that.

Honestly this whole concept of "high, classical literature" is nonsense. Most classical literature is mind numbingly dull. If ASOIAF manages to be interesting and exciting it's surpassed those books. That's where a lot of this genre snobbery comes from I think. Literary fiction writers spend their time being "deep" and "philosophical" and then genre fiction comes along and manages to be infinitely more entertaining, often while being intelligent literature in it's own right. In my opinion at least.

There is a bit of conflict here, no? I won't even begin to explain why "most" classic literature is not dull, because I suppose it's opinion. Books SHOULD be exciting and entertaining. But a cheap thrill (not saying that's what ASOIAF is) pales in comparison to a passage, chapter, or story/novel that is moving on a spiritual and intellectual level.

To make the point clear, there are dozens of paragraphs I can think of off the top of my head from Gatsby, Lolita, Farenheit 451 (sci fi!!), Catcher and etc. that are not only aesthetically pleasing, but can be diagrammed and picked apart to show just HOW MUCH the writers are doing with language, motifs, and so forth.

We pick apart George's word trying to find clues, because that's what he does. He is a master story teller. He sometimes uses symbolism as part of his trickery, such as the blue roses and the sphinx/Sphinx debate. But...compare the first 180 pages of GOT (or ADWD :drunk: ) and hold it up to what Fitzgerald completed in the same space.

For those putting GRRM on the level with "high literature classics," what are a few paragraphs you find particularly moving? Or simply beautifully written? I don't put this as a challenge, reading books is the same as watching TVs or movies. All just opinion, I'm just curious.

[Lyanna Stark]

I can think of plenty. Lots.

The main additions that I approve of is the series of conversations between Varys and Littlefinger (a lot less subtle than the slow unveiling of that plot in the books, but this is where the show can't really be that subtle because, for example, Arya might not recognise certain people in the tunnels but we would, and the dialogue between them is great) and the change that Arya is Tywin's cupbearer.

But there's also lots of some things like Jaime's conversation with the guard in season 1, some Tywin scenes with Joffrey... and just generally, the dialogue is better handled.

I just find that plot breaking, cos in the books, LF isn't competing with Varys for the throne. Varys wants to pull strings behind the throne, while LF wants to break the Tullys and have pseudo!Cat and a whole host of powers, but he doesn't necessarily want the throne at all. So the characters are simply different characters, which if they have the same backstories as in the novels just makes it weird and plot breaking. LF's motivations are his backstory with Cat, unless people buy into him having been born OMG EVIL!!! Same with Varys plotting with Illyrio. If he's after the throne it doesn't make sense. Just none. It breaks the internal plot consistency and it breaks the characterisation.

Arya being the cupbearer of Tywin is also pretty dumb, what with him being all "hur hur" about her obviously not being who she says she is. Book!Tywin would have thrown her in the dungeons at the very least, or tortured some spy secrets out of her, but show!Tywin is all "hey let's induldge this random obviously noble girl and tell her all my secrets cos it makes for great exposition and isn't at all character breaking".

At the same time, we are to believe that this mild mannered Tywin is so frightening as to bully poor, belaguered white knighting, rainbow shitting Tyrion into forcing himself onto Sansa Stark in a forced marriage of force, purely by his magnificently kitchen-girl saving precence? I think not. Again, this breaks the characterisation of Tywin as a cold, ruthless mutherfucker, which he is. The Rains of Castemere Tywin isn't one who chats amicably to obviously lying noble cupbearer girls anywhere in any sensible plot that isn't more full of holes than a Swiss cheese.

While I agree that the dialogue in itself may be better, frankly I could not hear it for the gnashing of teeth I had to endure due to the plot breaking elements of stupidity that was forcibly inserted into the story.

The sexposition was pretty terrible, but they did take that on board and reduce it a lot later on, plus you can't really believe that GRRM is somehow less sexually skeevy just because you can't see the tits. I mean, Dany's first sex scenes with Drogo. :ack:

Oh, GRRM does skeevy a lot. But that's on purpose. The Dany-Drogo relationship is certainly meant to be not all kosher. A lot of relationships aren't really kosher, as a matter of fact. Rhaegar-Lyanna, Jon-Ygritte, Dany-Drogo, hell Dany-Daario, not to mention Jaime-Cersei, Aemon the Dragonknight with his sister, etc etc. Hell, I have a more difficult time coming up with a relationship that isn't a little bit on the Wrong Side of what is Proper, but that is ultimately by design. I doubt that it's meant to fill us readers with a sense of political correctness or Things Done Properly. Most of ASOIAF is morally ambigious and depending on how you see it, there are loads of different interpretations to those situations.

Besides, "skeevy" doesn't necessarily meant "dipped in male gaze and placed there to titillate". I don't think Dany's marriage to Drogo is particularly titillating. The handmaiden scene is far worse in that regard.

So imho, there's skeevy and there's skeevy. The intention here is key. Was it meant to titillate? The HBO strippers, random tits and ass and facefull of brothels complete with more than two people doing the horisontal tango are clearly meant to titillate. I mean, in the novels, you have Cersei having a go at some woman on woman action, but it's really more about Cersei trying to emulate the men she's trying to replace and to wield the same sort of power in the same way than about titillation. Still skeevy, but it's sad-skeevy, not titillation-skeevy, if you get my drift.

[David Selig]

I can think of plenty. Lots.

The main additions that I approve of is the series of conversations between Varys and Littlefinger (a lot less subtle than the slow unveiling of that plot in the books, but this is where the show can't really be that subtle because, for example, Arya might not recognise certain people in the tunnels but we would, and the dialogue between them is great) and the change that Arya is Tywin's cupbearer.

But there's also lots of some things like Jaime's conversation with the guard in season 1, some Tywin scenes with Joffrey... and just generally, the dialogue is better handled.

I very much disagree. The dialogue is the worst part of the show by far IMO. So many terrible lines pretty much each episode. For such an ambitious show with a huge budget it's downright embarrassingly bad way too often.

[sj4iy]

Yes I call you out because protar and QOW made two small harmless comments and you immediately jumped on the train (or felt the necessity) to defend the TV show or tell us where the show is better than the book (now polishgenius expanded this). Whatever, I dont care.

And it is a pattern which I saw in other threads as well. I know that you and especially protar often have those book vs. show arguments. Which is ok. But this thread had another purpose.

Sorry for OT

I don't care what "pattern" you think there is with my comments...the point is you called me out for derailing a thread when I wasn't the person who did so. You could have called out the person who actually did it, but you called me out because you disagree with my comment.

[The Marquis de Leech]

I think the biggest obstacle to ASOIAF being studied isn't its genre, it's its length. Five large books, and counting...

[sj4iy]

There is a bit of conflict here, no? I won't even begin to explain why "most" classic literature is not dull, because I suppose it's opinion. Books SHOULD be exciting and entertaining. But a cheap thrill (not saying that's what ASOIAF is) pales in comparison to a passage, chapter, or story/novel that is moving on a spiritual and intellectual level.

To make the point clear, there are dozens of paragraphs I can think of off the top of my head from Gatsby, Lolita, Farenheit 451 (sci fi!!), Catcher and etc. that are not only aesthetically pleasing, but can be diagrammed and picked apart to show just HOW MUCH the writers are doing with language, motifs, and so forth.

We pick apart George's word trying to find clues, because that's what he does. He is a master story teller. He sometimes uses symbolism as part of his trickery, such as the blue roses and the sphinx/Sphinx debate. But...compare the first 180 pages of GOT (or ADWD :drunk: ) and hold it up to what Fitzgerald completed in the same space.

For those putting GRRM on the level with "high literature classics," what are a few paragraphs you find particularly moving? Or simply beautifully written? I don't put this as a challenge, reading books is the same as watching TVs or movies. All just opinion, I'm just curious.

While I wouldn't put ASoIaF up with classical literature, I think it does contain extremely well written prose. It's very natural, and very rarely clumsy. It flows well and makes it very easy for the reader to follow.

[The Marquis de Leech]

For those putting GRRM on the level with "high literature classics," what are a few paragraphs you find particularly moving? Or simply beautifully written? I don't put this as a challenge, reading books is the same as watching TVs or movies. All just opinion, I'm just curious.

Well, this is particularly moving:

I said the words, Sam thought again, but one of her nipples found its way between his lips. It was pink and hard and when he sucked on it her milk filled his mouth, mingling with the taste of rum, and he had never tasted anything so fine and sweet and good. If I do this I am no better than Dareon, Sam thought, but it felt too good to stop. And suddenly his cock was out, jutting upward from his breeches like a fat pink mast. It looked so silly standing there that he might have laughed, but Gilly pushed him back onto her pallet, hiked her skirts up around her thighs, and lowered herself onto him with a little whimpery sound. That was even better than her nipples.

In a "let's move the readership to unintended laughter" sense. ;)

[Lyanna Stark]

We pick apart George's word trying to find clues, because that's what he does. He is a master story teller. He sometimes uses symbolism as part of his trickery, such as the blue roses and the sphinx/Sphinx debate. But...compare the first 180 pages of GOT (or ADWD :drunk: ) and hold it up to what Fitzgerald completed in the same space.

For those putting GRRM on the level with "high literature classics," what are a few paragraphs you find particularly moving? Or simply beautifully written? I don't put this as a challenge, reading books is the same as watching TVs or movies. All just opinion, I'm just curious.

Dude, no offence, but you need to check out some of the re-reads that have been done cos you haven't readlly done that, have you? While I would not say ASOIAF is in any way similar to certain works of classic literature, it can certainly stand on its own two feet when it comes to themes and symbolism if you dig a bit deeper.

Here is some stuff you may want to at least check before jumping the proverbial gun on how genre is trash and the classics are the classics and nothing Can Touch That Shit, so to speak:

Sansa Pawn to Player. Six re-read threads, over 20 threads of essays and analysis.

Re-reading Tyrion

Re-reading Jon Snow

Learning to Lead

Rethinking romance

[rondo has three heads]

Well, this is particularly moving:

I said the words, Sam thought again, but one of her nipples found its way between his lips. It was pink and hard and when he sucked on it her milk filled his mouth, mingling with the taste of rum, and he had never tasted anything so fine and sweet and good. If I do this I am no better than Dareon, Sam thought, but it felt too good to stop. And suddenly his cock was out, jutting upward from his breeches like a fat pink mast. It looked so silly standing there that he might have laughed, but Gilly pushed him back onto her pallet, hiked her skirts up around her thighs, and lowered herself onto him with a little whimpery sound. That was even better than her nipples.

In a "let's move the readership to unintended laughter" sense. ;)

Haha right when I read the word "nipple" I was....moved

[protar]

There is a bit of conflict here, no? I won't even begin to explain why "most" classic literature is not dull, because I suppose it's opinion. Books SHOULD be exciting and entertaining. But a cheap thrill (not saying that's what ASOIAF is) pales in comparison to a passage, chapter, or story/novel that is moving on a spiritual and intellectual level.

To make the point clear, there are dozens of paragraphs I can think of off the top of my head from Gatsby, Lolita, Farenheit 451 (sci fi!!), Catcher and etc. that are not only aesthetically pleasing, but can be diagrammed and picked apart to show just HOW MUCH the writers are doing with language, motifs, and so forth.

We pick apart George's word trying to find clues, because that's what he does. He is a master story teller. He sometimes uses symbolism as part of his trickery, such as the blue roses and the sphinx/Sphinx debate. But...compare the first 180 pages of GOT (or ADWD :drunk: ) and hold it up to what Fitzgerald completed in the same space.

For those putting GRRM on the level with "high literature classics," what are a few paragraphs you find particularly moving? Or simply beautifully written? I don't put this as a challenge, reading books is the same as watching TVs or movies. All just opinion, I'm just curious.

Obviously in my opinion the classical literature I have read has been mind numbingly dull. And it was wrong to say most as I've read very little (and never for my own reading pleasure). I just really do despise genre snobbery so I got carried away somewhat. But if someone wants to enjoy it that's fine. I won't belittle their tastes if they don't belittle mine. For me though it doesn't matter how deep a passage an author can write, or how beautiful a message is conveyed. If it's not entertaining and interesting just to read I don't care much about it. I haven't been hooked in enough to care about plumbing the depths of the book and finding deeper meaning. It's got to be fun on the surface before I want to go deeper. And in my view, if you need a University Professor to explain the meaning of your books to your readership you've failed as an author.

[rondo has three heads]

Dude, no offence, but you need to check out some of the re-reads that have been done cos you haven't readlly done that, have you? While I would not say ASOIAF is in any way similar to certain works of classic literature, it can certainly stand on its own two feet when it comes to themes and symbolism if you dig a bit deeper.

Here is some stuff you may want to at least check before jumping the proverbial gun on how genre is trash and the classics are the classics and nothing Can Touch That Shit, so to speak:

Sansa Pawn to Player. Six re-read threads, over 20 threads of essays and analysis.

Re-reading Tyrion

Re-reading Jon Snow

Learning to Lead

Rethinking romance

None offense taken because 1) I embarrassingly spend hours every day on these forums reading such theories

2) I did not mention themes, and only mentioned symbolism as something ASOIAF features readily

3) My whole post was in response to people comparing ASOIAF to classic literature, which you have said you are not doing

4) Genre is trash ?! First, I am on this website. I obviously love the books. Second, I included a sci fi book in my post for the express purpose of not disregarding genre work.

All I was pointing out is that GRRM is more focused on telling a story, whereas other works focus more on ideas or aspects of culture. I did not say one is better than the other.

In fact, all I really wanted was someone to post a passage from the books they find particularly beautiful/well written. Preferably no nips next time

[sj4iy]

None offense taken because 1) I embarrassingly spend hours every day on these forums reading such theories

2) I did not mention themes, and only mentioned symbolism as something ASOIAF features readily

3) My whole post was in response to people comparing ASOIAF to classic literature, which you have said you are not doing

4) Genre is trash ?! First, I am on this website. I obviously love the books. Second, I included a sci fi book in my post for the express purpose of not disregarding genre work.

All I was pointing out is that GRRM is more focused on telling a story, whereas other works focus more on ideas or aspects of culture. I did not say one is better than the other.

In fact, all I really wanted was someone to post a passage from the books they find particularly beautiful/well written. Preferably no nips next time

I would also mention that classic literature encompasses many different genres...it's really a "best if the best" list more than a genre unto itself.

[rondo has three heads]

Obviously in my opinion the classical literature I have read has been mind numbingly dull. And it was wrong to say most as I've read very little (and never for my own reading pleasure). I just really do despise genre snobbery so I got carried away somewhat. But if someone wants to enjoy it that's fine. I won't belittle their tastes if they don't belittle mine. For me though it doesn't matter how deep a passage an author can write, or how beautiful a message is conveyed. If it's not entertaining and interesting just to read I don't care much about it. I haven't been hooked in enough to care about plumbing the depths of the book and finding deeper meaning. It's got to be fun on the surface before I want to go deeper. And in my view, if you need a University Professor to explain the meaning of your books to your readership you've failed as an author.

I agree, genre snobbery (or snobbery of any kind) is the worst. While a lot of the classic stuff is great I'd rather get my appendix put back in my body and removed again before I suffered either of the Bronte sisters.

As I said, books are forms of entertainment just like TV and film, so entertainment should be part and parcel. However, a story that is purely entertaining and contains no substance is unlikely to be remembered, by me anyway. That said, I've closed many "classics" after a few pages because I could just not be bothered enough to care.

Also, I didn't mean to imply good books should be complicated. Gatsby is extremely straightforward in most of its messages. I just meant that you can go over almost every line in that book with a magnifying glass and find something satisfying.

[rondo has three heads]

I would also mention that classic literature encompasses many different genres...it's really a "best if the best" list more than a genre unto itself.

You're right. Brave New World and 1984 are, simply, science fiction novels. They've managed to invade the "classic literature" genre though. I wonder how.

[sj4iy]

You're right. Brave New World and 1984 are, simply, science fiction novels. They've managed to invade the "classic literature" genre though. I wonder how.

Given time, all genres become accepted as such...once people come to the realization that superb art can exist in any form. At one time, "Frankenstein" was considered trash and Dickens was considered "pop fiction". But I think attitudes are a bit different today and change is accepted more rapidly than it used to be.

[Lyanna Stark]

None offense taken because 1) I embarrassingly spend hours every day on these forums reading such theories

2) I did not mention themes, and only mentioned symbolism as something ASOIAF features readily

3) My whole post was in response to people comparing ASOIAF to classic literature, which you have said you are not doing

4) Genre is trash ?! First, I am on this website. I obviously love the books. Second, I included a sci fi book in my post for the express purpose of not disregarding genre work.

All I was pointing out is that GRRM is more focused on telling a story, whereas other works focus more on ideas or aspects of culture. I did not say one is better than the other.

In fact, all I really wanted was someone to post a passage from the books they find particularly beautiful/well written. Preferably no nips next time

I had no idea you judged classic literature after which passages you found moving. Learn something new every day eh?

While ASOIAF is certainly a smashing story, a lot of its themes are what makes it have an appeal outside genre fiction and outside the normal genre fiction fans who will just as happily swallow a story about a farmboy with a Really Big Sword going off to foreign parts to Vanquish a Big Bad Evil.

You scratch a bit on the surface of ASOIAF, you'll find stories about finding agency, moral quandries about honour vs family, the values of knighthood, the corruption of society, criticism of war and patriarchy along with a healthy dose of old-skool courtly love romance stories. Among other things.

But then, I don't read classics for the moving passages either. I read them because they have themes, characters and stories that are of interest to me. And occasionally, like with The Sorrows Of Young Werther, to hate its guts forever. If I want moving passages, I tend to pick up poetry instead. IMHO.

[Weeping Sore]

I think GRRM belongs in the same breath as Stephen King or Elmore Leonard, excellent writers without too many frills to their prose, their strengths being story, characterization and dialogue. All three work(ed) their themes and world-view into genre material and are really no less important for being popular. King and GRRM's work (more than Leonard's) sometimes suffers from an unfortunate tendency to bloat.

I think if you look at how critics have viewed Stephen King over his career, you can see dismissal, then intermittant grudging admiration, and finally respect.

ETA: So I think GRRM's legacy will probably be similar: Respected, if not immortal.

[Suttree]

but that because it's fantasy and literature snobs dismiss fantasy.

*yawn*

Funny how whining about "lit snobs" pops up vastly more often than anyone actually acting as such.

[protar]

*yawn*

Funny how whining about "lit snobs" pops up vastly more often than anyone actually acting as such.

Really? I find quite the opposite.