You're GRRM's editor. He gives you his manuscript of A Feast for Crows. There's a red pen in your hand.

[WhitewolfStark]

 

Oh, forgot about Pate. Yep, that was the worst prologue in the series. His sniveling about Rosey the whole time was just pathetic.

Good idea to make Arys the prologue.

And miss the fact that Pate is replaced by a Faceless Man--and thus that there's a greater game going on in Oldtown?

As with every other speculative topic, readers would be wiser to wait until the conclusion of the series, and then make their assessment. It's still too premature to start Monday morning the author just now. All these alterations and omissions people mention might be necessary to the story. We don't, nor can't, know at this time. And if all you amateur authors think you know better than GRRM, then write your own novel series, get it published, and see where it stands, literally, against this one. And then watch a new crop of amateurs dissect your life's work and talk like they could do better, and see how you'd feel.

This is why we have novels such as The Last of the Mohicans by James Fenimore Cooper. He grew so angry with a book he was reading, his wife told him that if he was so angry he could write his own book. And he did.  Personally I could have done without Cooper's romanticizing life on the colonial frontier.

[Nevets]

The biggest problem with AFFC is bloat.  Even if characters and stories are vital to the next two books, there is too much dead space.  And if some of these are not essential, then they need to go.

So, I would ask if Brienne, the Ironborn, and Dorne are vital to the next two books.  If so, I would tell him to cut about a fourth of their material. For example, "The Princess in the Tower" was glacially paced and the Kingsmoot needed trimming.   Brienne's journey could be easily trimmed without difficulty. If they are not vital to the final books, then get rid of them.  For example,if Brienne is not going to play a very important role in the remaining books, then her chapters need to go, and I say this as someone who likes the Brienne chapters.  But,if she isn't important going forward, I will consider them a waste of time and space. At this poinit, if they disappeared, the book wouldn't miss them.  But that's only if she isn't important.  If she plays a big role, then they would only need some trimming.

Cersei's and Sam's stories need trimming.  I would probably cut Cersei down to about 6 or 7 chapters (from 10), and Sam to 3 (Wall; sea and Braavos; sea and Oldtown).  The rest of AFFC I would leave the same.

With respect to "Feast of Dragons", I am not familiar with how many pages each one is, but they have a total of 119 chapters.  I checked, and the word count on the chapters is about the same in each book.  So, to get a book the length of ASOS (probably the maximum), you would need to remove close to a third of the chapters.  Whether or not this would be an improvement I don't know. While a bit bloated, I am not sure the combination could handle that much removal, especially if Brienne, Dorne, and the Ironborn are vitally important going forward.

[FuzzyJAM]

It's worth noting that not all books are written purely for enjoyment.  Plenty of novels deliberately confuse or bore or anger at certain points.  Just because a book isn't as enjoyable as it could be doesn't mean the author wrote poorly.

What I'm saying is that it's entirely possible that GRRM deliberately made the books more "bloated" with minor incidents and more tangential plots.  One potential reason is to make the point that what at first seemed a relatively simple story (AGOT is not simple, but it's far simpler than AFFC/ADWD - there's clear growth here) has ripples that everyone feels that are well beyond the initial protagonist's intentions.  Robb was not thinking about Pod Payne getting hung when he had his coronation.  Another is to give the reader a sense of fatigue and aimlessness akin to what many of the characters are experiencing: the first jolt of energy and the excitement of war has died out and the reader is made to feel that.  And there are plenty of other possibilities.

Of course, maybe it is just comparatively worse writing and GRRM hasn't achieved the effect he was going for.  IDK.

[Beorn Snow]

It's worth noting that not all books are written purely for enjoyment.  Plenty of novels deliberately confuse or bore or anger at certain points.  Just because a book isn't as enjoyable as it could be doesn't mean the author wrote poorly.

What I'm saying is that it's entirely possible that GRRM deliberately made the books more "bloated" with minor incidents and more tangential plots.  One potential reason is to make the point that what at first seemed a relatively simple story (AGOT is not simple, but it's far simpler than AFFC/ADWD - there's clear growth here) has ripples that everyone feels that are well beyond the initial protagonist's intentions.  Robb was not thinking about Pod Payne getting hung when he had his coronation.  Another is to give the reader a sense of fatigue and aimlessness akin to what many of the characters are experiencing: the first jolt of energy and the excitement of war has died out and the reader is made to feel that.  And there are plenty of other possibilities.

Of course, maybe it is just comparatively worse writing and GRRM hasn't achieved the effect he was going for.  IDK.

I kind of agree with that thinking. AFFC, or at least Brienne isn´t meant to be that exciting, but I think some parts of her journey are really great writing. Some of the best stuff GRRM wrote in fact.

I get the feeling that Damphair has something important to do, otherwise why have him around. He has a pov-chapter in TWOW that GRRM seemed excited about at some distant con in the past.

I do agree however with the idea of making Arianne the POV for the entire Dorne-arc. Arys and Hotah being unnecessary. Also I think Hotah breaks a pattern where all POV´s are noble-born.

[tallTale]

Having read the book a couple times I've noticed the Cersei chapters get more and more annoying.

 

She isn't likable in any way and I have no interest in anything that happens to her.

[Thuckey]

Although certain things may seem unnecessary, GRRM plants seed all over the place some we may find obvious but others may not seem relevant until certain things happen later on in the series, so best to wait for the next two (or three) books come out before jumping to conclusions. 

 

What seems like pages of unnecessary extra material, may ultimatally end up as critical foreshadowing for something much grander. GRRM is king of the subtle and part of what makes his story telling ability so brilliant. 

 

I found the books much more enjoyable the second time, because certain things became apparent to me having the pre-knowledge of knowing what would happen next.. and sometimes I just had to stop, and shake my head in astonishment at what a work of art I was reading when the first time around I didn't give the material a second thought.  

[Abdallah]

I'd have him kill off cersei so she won't fuck over the lannisters. 

[Good Guy Garlan]

As with every other speculative topic, readers would be wiser to wait until the conclusion of the series, and then make their assessment. It's still too premature to start Monday morning the author just now. All these alterations and omissions people mention might be necessary to the story. We don't, nor can't, know at this time. And if all you amateur authors think you know better than GRRM, then write your own novel series, get it published, and see where it stands, literally, against this one. And then watch a new crop of amateurs dissect your life's work and talk like they could do better, and see how you'd feel.

By that "logic" no one would be allowed to comment or criticize anything ever unless they also work on the field they're addressing. It's a remarkably old and incredibly flawed "argument" that would render any and all criticism invalid because of a fallacy of false equivalence: that authors and readers have to be on the same level professionally for the opinions of the latter to have any value. Frankly, it's not only weirdly elitist, but also highly ignorant in that it ignores the advances that have been made during the last 60 years or more regarding reception theory in literature, how the reader reconstructs a text every time he or she reads it, and how the author, contrary to what was common belief in the 19th century, no longer has the last word in terms of how his or her work is received.

Secondly, common sense dictates that when an author publishes his work and releases it out into the world, so to speak, he must be prepared for said work to be thoroughly dissected and criticized. If he's not, then perhaps such an author should consider another line of work. As GRRM has been writing for decades now, I'd expect he's fully aware of this fact.

Thirdly, while it is true that this is series is still unfinished, criticism shouldn't be withheld because of this fact alone. Every novel in the series, though a part in a bigger picture, is by itself a proper novel and should be judged on its individual merits as well as on its contribution to the overall series.

I gotta say I'm completely disappointed and frustrated every time people come out with these same old arguments that basically boil down to "how dare you say ASOIAF/GRRM has flaws". I appreciate the undying devotion to an author, but this tiresome censorship prohibits any kind of critical thinking or interesting discussion and is the reason why threads like "Daario = Rhaegar" thrive. 

[Beautiful Bloody Sword]

By that "logic" no one would be allowed to comment or criticize anything ever unless they also work on the field they're addressing. It's a remarkably old and incredibly flawed "argument" that would render any and all criticism invalid because of a fallacy of false equivalence: that authors and readers have to be on the same level professionally for the opinions of the latter to have any value. Frankly, it's not only weirdly elitist, but also highly ignorant in that it ignores the advances that have been made during the last 60 years or more regarding reception theory in literature, how the reader reconstructs a text every time he or she reads it, and how the author, contrary to what was common belief in the 19th century, no longer has the last word in terms of how his or her work is received.

Secondly, common sense dictates that when an author publishes his work and releases it out into the world, so to speak, he must be prepared for said work to be thoroughly dissected and criticized. If he's not, then perhaps such an author should consider another line of work. As GRRM has been writing for decades now, I'd expect he's fully aware of this fact.

Thirdly, while it is true that this is series is still unfinished, criticism shouldn't be withheld because of this fact alone. Every novel in the series, though a part in a bigger picture, is by itself a proper novel and should be judged on its individual merits as well as on its contribution to the overall series.

I gotta say I'm completely disappointed and frustrated every time people come out with these same old arguments that basically boil down to "how dare you say ASOIAF/GRRM has flaws". I appreciate the undying devotion to an author, but this tiresome censorship prohibits any kind of critical thinking or interesting discussion and is the reason why threads like "Daario = Rhaegar" thrive. 

Well, that's my opinion, and, obviously not yours. I have, my entire life, absolutely despised people who have no experience, expertise, or accomplishments in a given field, sports, art, science, etc., and yet take it upon themselves to disparagingly criticize people who are actively involved at high level, not neccesarily professional, have a vast wealth of knowledge and /or hands on experience, and are accomplished by being recognized in the form of awards or acclaim, for their participation in their talent. 

 

The best example I can give is when I'm at the bar or a friends house watching a professional sporting event with a large group of people that I'm familiar with and when a player or coach does something foolish or subpar, they verbally berate that person through a TV screen as if they were better or could do better. Now, I was a two sport scholar-athlete at a Division 1 university and before that a very accomplished and decorated high school athlete and amateur boxer and martial artist. I have more trophies, plaques, medals, ribbons, and certificates, signifying a high level of aptitude and accomplishment in whatever I participated in, than I know what to do with. And when I watch professionals at work, and they make a mistake or error, I keep my mouth shut, because they have reached the highest level of competition for a reason, and no amateur, like myself, have any justification to verbally slander someone in a field where they themselves have not accomplished jack shit in, nor have even participated in.

 

Sure, there's free speech, which includes idiotic speech freely offered. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. And when you do, you should at least have some merit and accolades to back up your lofty opinions. When you don't, you look like an ignorant, unjustified, unsubstantiated blow hard that needs to shut up for the sake of their dignity.

[kimim]

Feast is not much longer than Game and Brienne takes up a fifth of it. Get rid of her, cut Aeron, Hotah. Get rid of Arianne's pointless plot. Cut Gilly's endless sobbing and get Sam to the Citadel in a single chapter. The only thing of interest in that chapter would be Aemon's death. You end up with a fairly short fantasy novel.

Edit: Dance needs editing as much as Feast. Honestly, no reason why these two can't be combined into a single novel not much longer than Storm.

[Good Guy Garlan]

Well, that's my opinion, and, obviously not yours. I have, my entire life, absolutely despised people who have no experience, expertise, or accomplishments in a given field, sports, art, science, etc., and yet take it upon themselves to disparagingly criticize people who are actively involved at high level, not neccesarily professional, have a vast wealth of knowledge and /or hands on experience, and are accomplished by being recognized in the form of awards or acclaim, for their participation in their talent. 

 

The best example I can give is when I'm at the bar or a friends house watching a professional sporting event with a large group of people that I'm familiar with and when a player or coach does something foolish or subpar, they verbally berate that person through a TV screen as if they were better or could do better. Now, I was a two sport scholar-athlete at a Division 1 university and before that a very accomplished and decorated high school athlete and amateur boxer and martial artist. I have more trophies, plaques, medals, ribbons, and certificates, signifying a high level of aptitude and accomplishment in whatever I participated in, than I know what to do with. And when I watch professionals at work, and they make a mistake or error, I keep my mouth shut, because they have reached the highest level of competition for a reason, and no amateur, like myself, have any justification to verbally slander someone in a field where they themselves have not accomplished jack shit in, nor have even participated in.

 

Sure, there's free speech, which includes idiotic speech freely offered. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. And when you do, you should at least have some merit and accolades to back up your lofty opinions. When you don't, you look like an ignorant, unjustified, unsubstantiated blow hard that needs to shut up for the sake of their dignity.

With all due respect, I really don't care about your accolades and won't get into a dick measuring contest with you, for several reasons. For one, you could be lying, and for two, like I said, I really, really don't care if you are. You could be a backwoods hermit typing from some run down trailer or a Man Booker prize finalist writing from his Upper East Side apartment, in the internet is all the same. Isn't that beautiful? I could be a dog for all you know, a really clever one who learned to type with his paws while taking pauses to lick his balls. Sure, I could be like you and wave my accolade dick around, but for what? To impress some equally anonymous entities on a forum about a fantasy series? Context is everything, man. I honestly dread an Orwellian type of society of such baseless elitism and censorship where you have to publish a book series or be a professional athlete in order to formulate an opinion. Like, what kind of reverse Harrison Bergeron?

Suffice it to say that I do think I have the sufficient knowledge about literature, the capacity of critical thinking and just the right number of brain cells to be qualified to criticize a book. If you don't feel you're up to the task, well, that's your problem.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Well, that's my opinion, and, obviously not yours. I have, my entire life, absolutely despised people who have no experience, expertise, or accomplishments in a given field, sports, art, science, etc., and yet take it upon themselves to disparagingly criticize people who are actively involved at high level, not neccesarily professional, have a vast wealth of knowledge and /or hands on experience, and are accomplished by being recognized in the form of awards or acclaim, for their participation in their talent. 

You don't need to be a high-class chef to tell the difference between a gourmet meal and airline food. Or a film director to tell the difference between Lawrence of Arabia and Plan 9 From Outer Space.

Fact is, books exist to be read, not written. We're the arbiters of the books' quality, not the author, and we're doing the books (and ourselves) a disservice if we cheer everything simply because some people think that's what a fandom does. If a subsequent book comes out and retrospectively makes Feast and Dance into works of staggering genius? I'll change my opinion then, not before.  

[White Ravens]

GRRM's books aren't perfect but I really really like them.  Apparently there are some fans that feel that they could have used some kind of editorial magic to make the books less boring and more exciting by cutting and scratching out all of the descriptions of food and long walks through the countryside and most of anything to do with Dorne but somehow I think that the books we have are likely far better than the Good Guy Garland condensed but more exciting edition would be. 

[Beautiful Bloody Sword]

With all due respect, I really don't care about your accolades and won't get into a dick measuring contest with you, for several reasons. For one, you could be lying, and for two, like I said, I really, really don't care if you are. You could be a backwoods hermit typing from some run down trailer or a Man Booker prize finalist writing from his Upper East Side apartment, in the internet is all the same. Isn't that beautiful? I could be a dog for all you know, a really clever one who learned to type with his paws while taking pauses to lick his balls. Sure, I could be like you and wave my accolade dick around, but for what? To impress some equally anonymous entities on a forum about a fantasy series? Context is everything, man. I honestly dread an Orwellian type of society of such baseless elitism and censorship where you have to publish a book series or be a professional athlete in order to formulate an opinion. Like, what kind of reverse Harrison Bergeron?

Suffice it to say that I do think I have the sufficient knowledge about literature, the capacity of critical thinking and just the right number of brain cells to be qualified to criticize a book. If you don't feel you're up to the task, well, that's your problem.

Context is everything, and that's what I tried to create in the example I gave. I didn't get too specific and audacious in what I disclosed about myself, at least I didn't mean to. My point was that when I'm watching sports with others, I, someone who has played a lot them for a fairly long time at a fairly high level, can't stand to listen to people, who aren't really even athletes themselves, chastise and critique,in an obnoxious way, athletes on TV who do what they're doing for a living. These critics don't really know what it takes to do it and do it at the highest level. What's missing is respect, how can people respect what they don't know intimately themselves? By being generally respectful. That's what I try to do. What I offered was my amateur opinion on other amateur opinions. I don't need a leg to stand on to do that, but I think one should when they critique someone who performs at a higher level.

[Good Guy Garlan]

Context is everything, and that's what I tried to create in the example I gave. I didn't get too specific and audacious in what I disclosed about myself, at least I didn't mean to. My point was that when I'm watching sports with others, I, someone who has played a lot them for a fairly long time at a fairly high level, can't stand to listen to people, who aren't really even athletes themselves, chastise and critique,in an obnoxious way, athletes on TV who do what they're doing for a living. These critics don't really know what it takes to do it and do it at the highest level. What's missing is respect, how can people respect what they don't know intimately themselves? By being generally respectful. That's what I try to do. What I offered was my amateur opinion on other amateur opinions. I don't need a leg to stand on to do that, but I think one should when they critique someone who performs at a higher level.

"How can people respect what they don't know intimately themselves?" Eh...really easy? I don't have a degree in Engineering, but I can still respect an engineer's work just as I can complain about it if a bridge collapses. You act as if there aren't fields upon fields of people whose job is to criticize other people's, from movie critics, to sports commentators, to book reviewers. Not to mention, of course, another fallacy in your argument: E.L. James wrote an incredibly successful series of novels, outselling GRRM himself in several venues. Would you value her opinion on ASOIAF more than that of a critic who hasn't been published but has an extensive knowledge of all things sci fi, fantasy and literature in general? And what about editors? Most of the time they aren't even writers themselves, much less published, and yet their JOB is to criticize, change, torn to shreds other people's work. The gall of them! How dare they, if they haven't put out a novel of their own, their opinion is invalid!

The bottom line is this: just as you don't need to be a best-selling author to think Feast and Dance are the best thing since sliced bread, I don't need the Pulitzer prize to say I think they're pretty bad books. Oh, yes, it cuts both ways. If my amateur criticism doesn't count, then neither does your praise, because by your logic, any opinion, positive or negative is unsubstantiated when not coming from a professional writer. 

I just gotta say it, it's ridiculous I have to get into the same old arguments EVERY SINGLE TIME I dare say GRRM is not a literary demigod. I swear to god, people jump out as if I just slapped their mom's butt if I say there's something wrong with Feast. It's like they want this never-ending GRRM circle jerk or echo chamber of like ad nauseam worshipping. Honestly, this level of immaturity just pisses me off to no end. If you clutch your pearls every time someone's being a big meanie by saying the precious flower that is GRRM is anything less than perfect, then maybe go and open a thread called "Why GRRM is Jesus and Arthur C. Clark but better". I'm happy to discuss the merits of the POVs and characters and whatnot, but just saying "You can't say this because so and so" contributes absolutely nothing to the conversation. 

[Regular John Umber]

 Feast For Crows is Martin's Kid A: impossible to live up to what came before it; a massive about-turn from what came before; essentially one part of two; and utterly, utterly essential for the 'story' to move forward. It's perfect, leave it alone.

 

 Also, Radiohead is a pretty good band hey?

 

 

[Consigliere]

First off I would just like to say that I completely agree with what Good Guy Garlan and RBPL have said. Saying that someone's criticism isn't valid just because that person is not a professional author is kinda ridiculous. Funnily enough, this argument only seems to get made when negative opinions are being expressed.

I don't have a problem with the writing and dialogue in Feast and Dance but where these books really fall down is in the structure, pacing and editing. No amount of chapter reordering can fix that. The geographical split was a big mistake, there is too much bloat and the plot did not progress as far as it should have given the page count. As a result we have ended up with two books that have a beginning and middle but no ending.

I'm not against characters like Brienne, Sam, Aeron etc. getting POV's, yet their storylines should have progressed further than they actually did and the same argument can be made for just about every single POV. In the case of Aeron and Arianne, I was quite irritated that both characters got 2 chapters in Feast and then nothing in Dance. If these characters are being made POV's then they should have gotten at least 4-6 chapters otherwise it is really difficult to become invested in their storylines, and I'm not at this stage. Did Quentyn even need 4 chapters?

I agree that Arys should have been the prologue chapter and that these two books should have been condensed into one. If the publishers had issues with printing such a large book then publish in two volumes but it is unacceptable that the ending be pushed over in TWoW. Based on the sample chapters that have been released/read thus far, nothing in there suggests to me that the pacing has improved. Now I feel that we are in danger where the ending of Feast/Dance is going to eat too much into TWoW and we end up with another book that has no ending.

[Maxxine]

Completely agree with with Good Guy Garlan. I for one believe I am intelligent enough to form an opinion about whether something was written well or if it has flaws despite not being a professional writer myself.

But back to the OP. I can't believe I forgot about this on my first post. I also would've gotten rid of the nicknames for chapter names as opposed to just the POVs first names. I kind of get it with Sansa and Arya (even though I still don't like it and don't think it was actually necessary), but he got way too cute with the rest of the characters having nicknames, especially with characters we had never even seen before, like the Soiled Knight and the Queensmaker. Just say Aerys and Arianne. These books are complicated enough without me having too figure whose POV I'm in. Reek is the only time I agree with (an probably liked) using another name for a chapter heading.

[David Selig]

Since I wouldn't want to lose my good job as an editor of a star writer, I certainly wouldn't cut whole chapters or plotlines.

[Nerevanin]

I would cut up AFFC and ADWD and make a new two volume book called A Feast for Dragons that includes all the POV's and broken down into chronological order.

Feast/Dance tandem reads is how I do rereads. So much fun.

This.

What I don't like about AFFC is that the chapters go like Brienne-Cersei-Jaime-Brienne-Cersei-Jaime-a random other character-Brienne-Cersei-Jaime. Plus Brienne's chapters seem a bit pointless in the way that she is looking for Sansa but you know all the time that she's not gonna find her because you know that she is in the Eyrie. What I don't like about ADWD is that the chapters go like Tyrion-Jon-Daenerys-Tyrion-Jon-a random other character-Daenerys-Tyrion-Jon-Daenerys.... If all the characters had been present in both books, the story would have been much more dynamic and enjoyable.