Will ASOIAF/GOT be remembered as a classic series?

[Gregor Clegane's head]

I think in the long term stories that make you think last much longer with you than stories that are simple or black & white.

[DeathYon]

If shows like 24, LOST, Prison Break, Miami Vice and some others I am forgetting can be considered classic I am willing to bet GOT will too. By the way many people are already saying Walking Dead is classic TV.

GoT is currently the second or third highest rated show on IMDB. I don't know if this helps but I thought I'd just mention this.

I'd disagree with the people who think that The Walking Dead is a classic series, to each their own I guess.

[UVA]

But isn't social critique in classical novels set in the time where the novels were written? ASOIAF is a fantasy series so it doesn't show us much on a historical level and because it was written during the modern ages it doesn't have the impact and revolutionary thought that say, Leviathan (by Thomas Hobbes) has. ASOIAF already shows us the stuff we know and do not practice anymore. We as modern readers already know that bloodlines aren't important, ASOIAF doesn't impact our society since we already have the information and thought process that ASOIAF shows. We wouldn't marvel the same way as we would for John Locke's Two Treaties of Government because it was written during a time and place where the divine right of God was widely accepted and anybody who thought different was crazy or a traitor. The social issues do not and will not affect our society in anyway which is the value of social criticism in novels.

Indeed I wouldn't, but Locke was a philosopher Martin is a fiction writer. But that doesn't exclude us noticing the social critique Mladen mentioned. I understand your point but I think there's a distinction between evaluating characters as if they are written with a "modern" moral code versus analyzing characters or events through a modern lens. Unlike some other fantasy/historical fiction authors who write characters with modern sensibilities Martin's characters have a certain authenticity, and they are constrained by many of the same realities that bound their historical analogues (well, save for the ice demons, dragons, and zombies.)

But this doesn't speak to whether or not readers can legitimately interpret the story through their own current sensibilities. I'll mention Cersei again -- in no way is she a feminist character but we can impose a feminist reading on her arc -- striding against a patriarchal system, the sexual politics, her sexualized punishment, argue that Cersei is herself a misogynist, etc. Martin is a terrific writer, storyteller and like all good writers, he is very intentional in stressing many facets of the human condition, which really don't change despite being framed in fictional Medieval-like world.

[Cat of the Rivers]

I was answering whether it is "classical fantasy story"... I agree with you in terms of some impact, but that doesn't mean that GRRM isn't touching some very sensitive issues for even us. He is contemporary writer writing for contemporary audience. ASOIAF does deal with some issues we care about. The morality of the wars, or the use of nuclear weapons, exterior force changing the systems, the leadership role etc. Certainly we won't be impacted with Dany ending slavery or inheritance war,but that just gives us a fertile soil for some other discussion, few of which has something to do with the medieval setting.

The morality of wars part is one of my favorite things about Cat's POV! I actually like how GRRM shows the futility of wars and how each side has good and bad people both.

I'm sorry I'm confused on "nuclear weapons" part. Are you talking about Dany's dragons? Could you clarify a bit, please?

Exterior force changing the systems. But in our society doesn't deal with lots of cases of military power ("conquests" in ASOIAF case but there certainly are some cases of military power taking over the system in our lives but not as many times it would occur in a medieval setting) changing the system so I cannot see how that would affect our lives.

I disagree on leadership roles. I personally think that because the responsibility of leaders, the aim that the leaders in ASOIAF want to accomplish and education that leads to the characters becoming leaders is so vastly different I cannot see that impacting our society.

[Cat of the Rivers]

I fear that's why ASoIaF won't catch on like LotR. ASoIaF is still relevant because it's on-going, and it's in the height of it's popularity with the TV series, but most people don't like to get invested in stories that make them think. A lot of people I know don't like ASoIaF because it's "confusing" and "depressing", but love LotR because of it's simplicity.

Yeah, admittedly it's quite confusing and depressing. And because ASOIAF is part of the fantasy genre most people would read it for escapism and would be shocked at the horrors of Westeros.

[jaimereborn]

pretty obvious really that this is one of the most high impact and game-changing fantasy series ever. not to mention it has one of the largest and most fanatical fanbases ever produced. think it's pretty safe to say it will be remembered as a classic.

[WhiteOwl18]

It's possible. But it's also too soon to know for sure.

[ChillyPolly]

If shows like 24, LOST, Prison Break, Miami Vice and some others I am forgetting can be considered classic I am willing to bet GOT will too.

Is this meant to damn GOT with faint praise?

[Mladen]

I'm sorry I'm confused on "nuclear weapons" part. Are you talking about Dany's dragons? Could you clarify a bit, please?

Yeah, I meant on dragons. And they do represent ASOIAF's counterpart for weapons of mass destruction, as shown in Astapor, and as history taught us how they have been used in the past. The dragonriding is like having the launching codes of nuclear bombs, and the level of their destruction is always conected with the person controlling them. That gives us space for discussion what type of person should have control over such power.

Exterior force changing the systems. But in our society doesn't deal with lots of cases of military power ("conquests" in ASOIAF case but there certainly are some cases of military power taking over the system in our lives but not as many times it would occur in a medieval setting) changing the system so I cannot see how that would affect our lives.

I don't know where you live but from Putin's aggression on Ukraine, to NATO interventions all over to world, we don't live in the world where military power doesn't play the role. It does deal with the things like the objectively judging the systems and creating the new ones (not the best comparison but certainly we have US in Middle East). So, it does put into discussion about justification of military actions to help someone, and in general are people right to go into war for whatever purposes.

I disagree on leadership roles. I personally think that because the responsibility of leaders, the aim that the leaders in ASOIAF want to accomplish and education that leads to the characters becoming leaders is so vastly different I cannot see that impacting our society.

The setting is different undoubtedly, but when we hear "enlightened speech monarch" about Aegon in ADWD, when we discuss what is a good leader based on what we have in the series, we actually discuss what is a good leader in general. And that sort of discussions always have an impact on how we see our leaders.

[DeathYon]

Yeah, admittedly it's quite confusing and depressing. And because ASOIAF is part of the fantasy genre most people would read it for escapism and would be shocked at the horrors of Westeros.

To be honest, I like how ASOIAF depresses me and makes me think. Not many things can make me feel this way.

[Lord Tony of House Stark]

i would put GoT right up there with Breaking Bad and Madmen for classic shows for my generation. they are all so well done and i know i won't be forgetting Walter White, Jon Snow or Don Draper anytime soon

[Cat of the Rivers]

To be honest, I like how ASOIAF depresses me and makes me think. Not many things can make me feel this way.

I like that it makes me a bit morbid and think about things too. But I certainly wouldn't use these books for escapism which is what most people use for fantasy.

[Loic]

I believe GRRM to be quite sick at rearranging pre-existing materials and ideas rather than creating new ones (the first example I'd use would be his "In the lost lands" short story. Nothing seriously original, but presented in such a fine way that you don't care and just let him guide you), I hope that my post doesn't suggest the idea that creating something new is even remotely simple or easy.

As far as being a timeless classic I don't really know especially since the ending lies nowhere in sight, but given the mediatic exposure he will be surely remembered because of the shock value of Ned Stark's death.

[Janicia]

I'm confident that both ASOIAF and GoT will be widely enjoyed for the next 20 years. Who knows what will speak to people further in the future.

I'm not sure that ASOIAF or GoT are really ground-breaking - at least not in the sense that in 100 years, they'll be listed in textbooks as turning points. But the book series is a great specimen of fantasy literature, the show is a great specimen of fantasy TV. And the show's success at a hugely ambitious project will certainly impact what shows get made.

I seriously doubt that another TV adaptation will be attempted in the next 30 years, if ever.

[dread pirate davos]

I think it'll be a classic in fantasy, but I doubt it will be up there with real literary classics like moby dick or as I lay dying. As for the TV show its definitely a part of this golden age of TV we're having with the likes of the wire, sopranos, breaking bad etc. Also while we're here, I think the big difference between asoiaf and lotr is that Lord of the rings is all Beowulf and myths. Whereas a song of ice and fire is Shakespeare and soaps. Not that withers better but I think the epic kind of romanticism( not the literary type) lends itself better to being considered a classic than the melodrama of grrm.

[Primalsplit]

I was answering whether it is "classical fantasy story"... I agree with you in terms of some impact, but that doesn't mean that GRRM isn't touching some very sensitive issues for even us. He is contemporary writer writing for contemporary audience. ASOIAF does deal with some issues we care about. The morality of the wars, or the use of nuclear weapons, exterior force changing the systems, the leadership role etc. Certainly we won't be impacted with Dany ending slavery or inheritance war,but that just gives us a fertile soil for some other discussion, few of which has something to do with the medieval setting.

I definitely agree with this.

Let me add three more I have found:

One of the main points of Asoiaf is to show "what war does to us". There are millions who believe a war can be utterly rightous. Do I need to explain it any further?

It also made me question the age-maturity relationship. If 15 was considered to be an adult age back in the day, maybe in the future it will be closer to 25? Who knows. Given our accepted age of maturity is 18 (widely accepted?), I think our opinion is also subjective. I think both opposite perspectives should be used at the same time.

POV bias. We always see things through POVs, and accept what they think as reality. Obviously, not all the time. However, sometimes even the most objective reader can be tricked into inheriting the bias of the POV characters sometimes, only for them them to realize those were not the objective truths they believe it was.

[Drth Fel]

Lords of the Rings gained its popularity and reputation from being a very complete fantasy. Tolkien was a linguist, first and foremost, and also a fairly able historian. Frodo, Sam and Smeagol have character development but the rest of the characters don't have it in any significant manner and because character development is a driving force in today's stories, it seems that Lord of the Rings is lacking something.

Except, it isn't. :P It just takes some historical perspective to remember what it represents... and the lessons it informs us. Stories were written differently then, and the preference for character-driven plot will be replaced by something else and our books will seem archaic, too. But some will be so great they remain intriguing throughout the future.

Lord of the Rings was written by a World War I veteran who became disillusioned with the apparent progression of humanity. The fact that a war could escalate to such a scale, undo four great empires (the Ottoman, German, Russian and Austro-Hungarian) leave the vast plains ravaged and yet leave the world almost no different, no more equal, no more "great" was a turning point of history, and in how it is treated. World War I changed the idea that war was inherently "good" for people and that a lot of what humanity regarded as "progress" was actually regression.

Tolkien's stories reflect this attitude, and it's no coincidence that many of the horrific factors that shaped the world throughout World War II also influenced his books (given they were written during that period). Sauruman's rise in Isengard is at the expense of the natural beauty he once protected and admired. Over time, he grew indifferent to nature and soon sought to exploit it. It's interesting, though, that his aim was not to drive the wheel of industry and benefit the world around him, rather he turns to conquest; pulling down trees to fuel the fires of his armies.

The existence of orcs in Tolkien's works have unfortunately been tainted by white-supremacists insisting that Tolkien was advocating mono-racial policies. In fact, he detested racism (which was ground breaking given he grew up in the shadow of two nationalistic, highly racially charged wars). Instead, the elves represent the best ideal humanity could strive for and the orcs are the worst. Both are strong "races" in their own ways; one is wise, long-lived, conciliatory and largely lives without nature noticing. The other breeds quickly, fights constantly, plunders the Earth and uses aggression to solve problems. Attempting to use warfare to solve their problems was the eventual undoing of the elves; their people couldn't sustain war forever and it cost them their wisdom if their immortal lives were cut short through violence. In the end, the elves decided to leave the world for "undying lands," heavily implying that peaceful people are forced into violence or refuge if their neighbours are the aggressors. For Tolkien, this message was very real, as it was to everyone in the 1940s, as it soon became chillingly apparent what was happening to all of the refugees fleeing the Nazis who were refused entry into other European nations... :(

Tolkien also challenges the idea that history is an inevitable march towards a better future. After all, it's a constant theme throughout his story that life was once better than it was when Frodo and Sam set off to leave the Shire. Then again, it was also worse when Sauron was at his peak... but human greed postponed his defeat and evil remained. He doesn't suggest a cyclical view of history as, say, the Wheel of Time series does, rather he seems to contend that the impact of human agency on the world can be a force for the better or worse.

And, of course, there is the not at all subtle imagery that hobbits, the most overlooked, least appreciated and undervalued peoples of the world are the ones whose eventual actions change it. The bravery of the hobbits: Frodo's resistance to the Ring's power, Sam's outward optimism (that he later resigns himself to admitting isn't probable), Merry's desperation to fight despite his stature and Pippin's inquisitiveness in the face of pure evil; these are the characters who are the most human of all. And Tolkien very deliberately gave the most beautiful human qualities to characters who aren't even human, but treated as less than such by their peers.

My only real gripe with Lord of the Rings, as much as I love it, is that (and it's not unique to this series) there are only three female characters with anything remotely resembling impact on the plot: Arwen, Eowyn and Galadriel.

Despite that, the series is magnificent... and that's why it has lived on.

If A Song of Ice and Fire truly encapsulates what it is to be alive today, with the best and worst of human nature, the causes and effects of decisions we all make, and explores that with gorgeous imagery, then it may just well be another classic for all. I think it can do that, but it depends on how the story goes.

Nothing left to say.

[NOT A TARG I SWEAR]

Classic isn't such an easy thing to define. Certainly there are books and stories that can generally be agreed upon as classics just based on either their quality, sheer amount of people exposed to them, and/or how long they have been around and continued to be read. It's tougher to define with newer stories as they haven't quite had to stand the test of time some of the older ones had.

For ASoIaF it largely depends on the quality of the remaining books and if they are ever even finished. Many find there to be a fairly steep drop off in the tightness of the story over the last 2 books(film crit hulk has a great analysis on the books of which I am definitely more of a fan than he is, but I think his analysis is very good and thorough and points to some of the books' issues).

Additionally the more new characters he introduces, the less time for fleshing out those characters have. How he decides to resolve a lot of the over-arching conflicts in the story will be a big determinate as well.

I doubt the series will ever take the classic role of say a Lion, Witch, and the Wardrobe by being ubiquitous in class rooms as it deals with far more mature themes. It isn't the first to define a whole genre as Tolkien's books have. The traction this series has is that of the character work, some intricate plotting/political intrigue of which I find to be becoming more a problem as the series goes on, and A LOT(read too much) of world building. There are other books that do individual aspects of these better for sure, but Martin has done a relatively great job keeping all of these elements of good to great quality overall in this semi-historical/semi-fantastical setting which is fairly rare.

If he can reign in the plot some, cut down on some of the bloat, and not allow newly introduced fantasy elements to completely take over to conclude the series via a collection of deus ex machina I think it has a great chance to be considered a classic.

[lancerman]

Book series depends on the last two book. If the ending is universally loved or hated will go a long way. But I think WW and ADOS need to really rocket the series in a sprint towards the end after the slow jog of the last two books.

People will accept a slow character heavy volume as long as it goes somewhere. For a modern example, the Harry Potter series, after hitting it's turning point in book 4, had Order of the Pheonix which was very much about fleshing out the world and history around Harry, more characters were introduced and the levity of the situation was raised, and that was compounded on with the even slower and darker Half Blood Prince where the villain was given characterization and it was setting up the grand task of the finale. Then the final book lived up to everything, paid all the plot points off, and gave a satisfying conclusion so the last thing it's remembered for is triumph.

GRRM is in a similar situation right now where he faces the daunting task of making the prior two books mean something and give us the ending we crave. If he can do that and end on a high he will have a classic series. But I do think he has to start now with Winds of Winter. After how great Storm of Swords was, we were due for a bit of pull back. But now is the time to really kick it into high gear to finish the race with a win.

Also god forbid he doesn't finish it. That's worst case scenario. The jokes about how long it takes for him to write and all that will become it's legacy. We really don't want that.

The show is a little different. It undisputedly opened the door and pioneered the advent of a fantasy genre show. However it is also occurring during a television renaissance that began many years ago with the Sopranos. So I think big picture it will be remembered as one of many greats.

[ummester]

I agree with you points on the ending lancerman and don't think GRRM can stretch this any further before it loses steam.

This is where, if rumours are true, HBO is making the right decision by refusing to go more than 7 seasons. They know the middle of the story has been told with seasons 3 & 4 and they know that series that extend past 6 or 7 years invariably decline in quality and interest.

AFFC & ADWD had better be setting up for the home run and TWOW & ADOS better be delivering that home run, otherwise I fear 'classic' status is off the table for the series. Also, the home run has to tie into everything that has gone before to be remembered classic - like Poly mentioned.

The difference between LoTRs and Lost is that LoTRs tells a complete story, where as Lost starts to tell a good one, becomes serialised and just whacks a stupid ending on when it runs out of steam. Lost is remembered as a pop culture phenomenon but not a classic - ASoIaF/GoTs is at this crossroads, between becoming a pop culture phenomenon or a classic, this is why most of the fans are really invested in how it is going to end now, how its all going to wrapped up.