Martin writing style: He doesn't like showing us Northern victories first hand

[Free Northman Reborn]

I was thinking about the great Northern victories that have taken place during the course of the books, and it struck me that Martin has chosen a writing style where great achievements for the protagonists are not depicted first hand. Great setbacks, though, are almost always shown to us from a first hand POV.

The net effect is that he is able to achieve great negative emotional impact like rage, sadness and loss amongst the readers, while the grand positive experiences are robbed of their impact and sanitized by second hand accounts.

It is almost certainly an intentional strategy for the first half of the series, in order to create the "Rocky Balboa-type" down-and-out feeling in the 12th round of the fight, before the heroes make a miraculous return that is supposed to give you all the emotional pay-off to compensate for the negative emotions experienced up till that point.

In brief, the substance of this claim is based on the following:

Great Northern victories thus far:

1. The Whispering Wood - not shown to us directly, but filtered through Catelyn's distant point of view.

2.The Battle of the Camps - again, not shown to us live from the point of view of the Northmen charging into and obliterating the Lannister encampents, but in a second hand telling, if I recall.

3. The Battle of Oxcross - presented in a second hand, raven delivered summary, told to Sansa after being filtered through Joffrey.

4. The raiding of the Westerlands by the Greatjon and Lord Karstark - again, based on second hand, filtered accounts.

5. Ser Rodrik's defeat of the Ironborn at Torhenn Square - reported to Bran by Maester Luwin after receiving word by raven.

6. The Mormont's destruction of the Ironborn longships in Dance - told to us in a letter from Stannis to Jon.

7. The Dustins and Ryswells destruction of the Ironborn at the Fever River ,and burning of their ten longships - reported to us after the fact.

None of these victories are shown to us firsthand. In sharp contrast, the following Stark defeats are shown to us from a first hand point of view:

1. The Defeat at the Green Fork

2. Ramsay's slaying of Ser Rodrik's 2000 strong host at Winterfell.

3. The Red Wedding and the slaughter outside the Twins

4. The killing of Benfred Talhart's Young Hares

The only northern victory that is shown to us firsthand, is depicted from Asha's point of view, and then twisted to show massive northern losses inflicted by the few elite Ironborn warriors around Asha. And it is worth nothing that this victory likely occurs after the intended 5 year gap, meaning that the intention was most probably to have the first half of the series create an overwhelming sense of Stark loss, adversity and struggle.

Does anyone else agree with me that Martin set out to deliberately prevent us from experiencing clear Stark successes from a first hand point of view during the series to date?

[Kienn]

Victories first hand just don't feel like victories since they make you see how characters did it (lots of murder).

See Dany and Astapor/Meereen.

[Talleyrand]

The only northern victory that is shown to us firsthand, is depicted from Asha's point of view, and then twisted to show massive northern losses inflicted by the few elite Ironborn warriors around Asha. And it is worth nothing that this victory likely occurs after the intended 5 year gap, meaning that the intention was most probably to have the first half of the series create an overwhelming sense of Stark loss, adversity and struggle.

What about the Northern takeover of Harrenhal?

[Free Northman Reborn]

What about it? That was Arya exercising her newly found Faceless Man connections, and set up Roose Bolton's successes. Hardly a battle victory to make the heart beat faster.

[Talleyrand]

Its a Northern Victory - you asked for one and there it is

[Free Northman Reborn]

Ok, I guess that invalidates the entire point then or what?

[Lion Of The Night]

GRRM is being very deliberate in this. We know he doesn't always follow standard writing clichès, he likes to buck the system. But though ASOIAF may end on a bittersweet note, there will be some sense of justice for the north, and comupance for the rest. In the end we will see first hand one northern victory, the big one, the one that counts.

[Chaircat Meow]

I think some of it is having Cat as a POV, so not sure it's intentional as such. It flows from the logic of the POV structure.

I also think he doesn't like writing battles.

[HexMachina]

What about it? That was Arya exercising her newly found Faceless Man connections, and set up Roose Bolton's successes. Hardly a battle victory to make the heart beat faster.

Arya had nothing to do with the Harrenhal takeover - there was apready a plan in place, organised by Vargo Hoat and Roose.

[Talleyrand]

Ok, I guess that invalidates the entire point then or what?

No its just that you said Deepwood Motte was the only victory we see first hand, I was just saying that it wasn't

[Mal Malenkirk]

That's a good point by the OP.

By not seeing some protagonist's victory first hand, we also do not get to seem them acting as violently as their opponents.

For example, Whispering Woods is at its heart an ambush and If we had seen it first hand through a POV, we would have been treated to a narrative and descriptions eerily similar to those that occured in Arya's POV when she saw the Northerner massacred outside of the towers during the Red Wedding. And as bonus, we would have seen Jaime's gallant charge against the odds nearly suceeding in taking out Robb. It would have swung sympathy substantially.

[Lord Varys]

I agree with you that ADwD goes to great lengths to make it appear as if Stannis and his Northern allies are almost certainly doomed, especially with the slow revelation of the Karstark betrayal, and the appearance that Wyman Manderly's plan and presence at Winterfell seems to go nowhere.

But I wouldn't say we witness many of the Stark defeats firsthand, either. We get parts of the Red Wedding, especially what transpires in the Twins, but there are only glimpses of what's going in the camps.

And Ramsay cutting down Rodrik's army is also only seen from afar, not witnessed firsthand. Even the Battle at the Green Fork is only shown through Tyrion's eyes. We see not much of the battle apart of what Tyrion does, and afterwards we get some summary of what happened elsewhere. The fact that the Stark men lost is not really felt or shown firsthand.

[Elessar]

What abut the first defense of the Wall? Pretty awesome chapter there, rousing and what-not. But yeah, since no POV characters are at any of the battles you mentioned OP, it makes sense that we wouldn't see them. And he's said in the past he did it deliberately, to make Robb feel more like a legendary hero. You would hear of all these great deeds but never see them. There are lots of battles and skirmishes only seen second hand, it's not just the north.

Whoever said he doesn't like writing battles must not have read Storm of Swords... or the few sample chapters from Winds.

[A Man Reads]

Does anyone else agree with me that Martin set out to deliberately prevent us from experiencing clear Stark successes from a first hand point of view during the series to date?

That's interesting. GRRM certainly uses the POV system to "hide the ball" from the reader. We cannot be certain of the eventual outcome. Starks? Lannisters? Targaryens? Baratheons? All together? It's hard to predict when we follow all of them. That's the beauty of a strict POV system.

If GRRM is having the Starks fade before they come roaring back in later books, underemphasizing northern victories and "brutalizing" the reader with evocative accounts of northern setbacks would further that goal. As you say, it has "great negative emotional impact."

I'm not sure whether he is deliberately obscuring northern achievements and purposefully underling northern setbacks though. There are other reasons explaining your lists:

1. GRRM's faithful adherence to a strict POV structure. A POV character cannot be everywhere, and this necessarily limits what we the reader experience.

Using secondhand and distant witness accounts mirror reality. Most accounts of pre-modern battles came from a "distant perspective." For that matter, the news of battles and events making their way across the land was a reality. Doing so in the books feels more authentic; the fog of war and all that stuff.

Practical writing concerns. An author would be reluctant to have so many direct accounts of battles. It would be exhausting to write, add to the length of the books, and probably tire the reader eventually.

EDIT: Though I should be clear, it's a good catch. I'm just not sure about the reasons for it.

[Hand to King Davos]

Yeah, I have noticed that Martin doesn't write a lot of battle scenes. Good catch, although I do agree with the other posters who say that it is also part of the POV structure. I think this is part of the goal though, by making us feel more upset about the Stark's misfortunes.