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

[FuzzyJAM]

Everyone is free to criticise and say what they like or don't like about any work of art.  This is fine and true.

But if you think that your idea of what's good writing is strictly speaking correct then. . .nope.  What we can say is "I think I would have preferred it if it were this way", not "It would be better if it were this way."  To be sure, we sometimes use the second as shorthand for the first, and this is fine so long as it's clear that that's what's meant.  Plenty of people disagree on works of art, not least creators and consumers.  If you want to say the creator's judgement is final, then almost every work of art ever is pure gold.  If you want to say the consumers' judgement is final, then every work of art is simultaneously the greatest thing ever and the worst thing ever.  Plainly this is nonsense.  

All we can talk about is how a work impacted us, and how we think it will impact others.  To be sure, we can talk about objective failures in writing insofar as an intention does not come off (e.g. if GRRM was trying to make his readership aroused by fat pink masts, I think it's safe to say he failed for 99.9% of readers), but there we need to know what was intended and can only really talk about general consensus and personal experience rather than the book as a whole: there's always the 0.1%, and hey, maybe that's who the author particularly wants to speak to!  

Art is supposed to generate discussion, and that's great.  It's totally fine if people have extremely negative views of a work.  I think the issue of respect comes into play when someone seriously thinks their own negative views are in any way definitive.  Such a person is just silly.

[A spoon of knife and fork]

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.

bam, this is the sad truth right here.

i feel very sorry for GRRMs editors.  There is zero incentive for them to do a halfway decent editing job, and plenty of incentive for them to rush it out the door.

on the other hand, I do know people who have sworn off the series because of how bad these books are.  Overall those will just end up being a tiny blip in overall sales, if noticeable at all.

[Good Guy Garlan]

Everyone is free to criticise and say what they like or don't like about any work of art.  This is fine and true.

But if you think that your idea of what's good writing is strictly speaking correct then. . .nope.  What we can say is "I think I would have preferred it if it were this way", not "It would be better if it were this way."  To be sure, we sometimes use the second as shorthand for the first, and this is fine so long as it's clear that that's what's meant.  Plenty of people disagree on works of art, not least creators and consumers.  If you want to say the creator's judgement is final, then almost every work of art ever is pure gold.  If you want to say the consumers' judgement is final, then every work of art is simultaneously the greatest thing ever and the worst thing ever.  Plainly this is nonsense.  

All we can talk about is how a work impacted us, and how we think it will impact others.  To be sure, we can talk about objective failures in writing insofar as an intention does not come off (e.g. if GRRM was trying to make his readership aroused by fat pink masts, I think it's safe to say he failed for 99.9% of readers), but there we need to know what was intended and can only really talk about general consensus and personal experience rather than the book as a whole: there's always the 0.1%, and hey, maybe that's who the author particularly wants to speak to!  

Art is supposed to generate discussion, and that's great.  It's totally fine if people have extremely negative views of a work.  I think the issue of respect comes into play when someone seriously thinks their own negative views are in any way definitive.  Such a person is just silly.

No offense, but I think this line of thinking is borderline silly itself. I mean, if I say Feast is a bad book it obviously doesn't mean Feast is magically going to turn into an objectively bad book and GRRM is going to weep whenever he looks at it henceforth. That we're all formulating opinions and not spouting cold hard facts is, again, obvious and implicit. The need to clarify this just reeks of that same bizarre GRRM worshipping and sort of extreme fear of offending him and his work in even the slightest way. Like, we'd end up saying "In my own, humble, amateur and thoroughly subjective opinion, I think the book impacted me personally in a way in which I felt (again, subjectively) that GRRM could have (not saying should have, because it is clear HE knows better than my lowly self) included fewer Brienne chapters, but again, this is merely my own subjective opinion, and let it not be said that I judged or qualified his book in any other way"

[SeanF]

What do you do?

Very little. Feast is a good book.

[FuzzyJAM]

No offense, but I think this line of thinking is borderline silly itself. I mean, if I say Feast is a bad book it obviously doesn't mean Feast is magically going to turn into an objectively bad book and GRRM is going to weep whenever he looks at it henceforth. That we're all formulating opinions and not spouting cold hard facts is, again, obvious and implicit. The need to clarify this just reeks of that same bizarre GRRM worshipping and sort of extreme fear of offending him and his work in even the slightest way. Like, we'd end up saying "In my own, humble, amateur and thoroughly subjective opinion, I think the book impacted me personally in a way in which I felt (again, subjectively) that GRRM could have (not saying should have, because it is clear HE knows better than my lowly self) included fewer Brienne chapters, but again, this is merely my own subjective opinion, and let it not be said that I judged or qualified his book in any other way"

I disagree.  This is a point that needs to be reiterated rather a lot because people very often think their own ideas about art are in some sense the right ones.

And given that I explicitly said that it's OK to use shorthand and say things in a way which is strictly speaking wrong, IDK why you're setting up a strawman to ridicule what I'm saying.  I'm talking about having a background understanding which is often missing in discussions, not about totally changing how people talk.  

[Good Guy Garlan]

I disagree.  This is a point that needs to be reiterated rather a lot because people very often think their own ideas about art are in some sense the right ones.

And given that I explicitly said that it's OK to use shorthand and say things in a way which is strictly speaking wrong, IDK why you're setting up a strawman to ridicule what I'm saying.  I'm talking about having a background understanding which is often missing in discussions, not about totally changing how people talk.  

Look, I just can't muster the strength to keep up with this argument. It's exhausting, and just astonishing that every single time someone here goes off the beaten path and tries to say something about the books that isn't praise, people immediately come out of the woodwork and attempt to silence or censor any opinion they don't like. 

I mean, it's been four pages in this thread I now regret having started and I haven't even been able to actually write my opinions on the subject because I'm too busy DEFENDING them in advance from people who just want to sing GRRM's praises or shut other people up or split hairs over opinions vs facts to avoid offending GRRM's imaginary ego.

Like, I'm literally arguing about the right to be able to voice my opinion. 

[FuzzyJAM]

Look, I just can't muster the strength to keep up with this argument. It's exhausting, and just astonishing that every single time someone here goes off the beaten path and tries to say something about the books that isn't praise, people immediately come out of the woodwork and attempt to silence or censor any opinion they don't like. 

I mean, it's been four pages in this thread I now regret having started and I haven't even been able to actually write my opinions on the subject because I'm too busy DEFENDING them in advance from people who just want to sing GRRM's praises or shut other people up or split hairs over opinions vs facts to avoid offending GRRM's imaginary ego.

Like, I'm literally arguing about the right to be able to voice my opinion. 

Yes, and I think that's silly, which is why I'm explaining the background understandings of art criticism to those who don't get it and view it as some sort of definitive attack or whatever.  

Plainly such explanations are necessary if others don't understand art criticism, no?  You're saying it's ridiculous to need to clarify this - well, plainly not, because others aren't getting it.  

[kimim]

I disagree.  This is a point that needs to be reiterated rather a lot because people very often think their own ideas about art are in some sense the right ones.

...

Normally, I'd say that this is true. We get a lot of people saying stuff like "Dany is evil" or "Jon is dishonorable" as if these were facts instead of opinions based on a certain reading of the text.

Here, the subjective nature of the thread is built in. It's a fantasy scenario. Pretend you're GRRM's editor. What would you do?

My answer was I'd cut Brienne, Hotah, etc. I didn't have to say that "in my opinion I'd cut Brienne," as that would be ridiculous. That this is my opinion,that I'm not GRRM's editor, should be clear without my having to express it. 

[FuzzyJAM]

Normally, I'd say that this is true. We get a lot of people saying stuff like "Dany is evil" or "Jon is dishonorable" as if these were facts instead of opinions based on a certain reading of the text.

Here, the subjective nature of the thread is built in. It's a fantasy scenario. Pretend you're GRRM's editor. What would you do?

My answer was I'd cut Brienne, Hotah, etc. I didn't have to say that "in my opinion I'd cut Brienne," as that would be ridiculous. That this is my opinion,that I'm not GRRM's editor, should be clear without my having to express it. 

You don't know people who seriously think they're thoughts on art are the right ones?  "This music is bad" isn't something you've heard someone say in a literal sense?  

I agree, the background understanding of such discussion should be that this is essentially about personal likes and dislikes.  But many people don't understand such background, in part because many discussions and people don't actually hold to it.  That's why pointing out that that's what's going on here is necessary.  

[White Ravens]

Look, I just can't muster the strength to keep up with this argument. It's exhausting, and just astonishing that every single time someone here goes off the beaten path and tries to say something about the books that isn't praise, people immediately come out of the woodwork and attempt to silence or censor any opinion they don't like. 

I mean, it's been four pages in this thread I now regret having started and I haven't even been able to actually write my opinions on the subject because I'm too busy DEFENDING them in advance from people who just want to sing GRRM's praises or shut other people up or split hairs over opinions vs facts to avoid offending GRRM's imaginary ego.

Like, I'm literally arguing about the right to be able to voice my opinion. 

So go ahead and write your opinions then.

[Good Guy Garlan]

So go ahead and write your opinions then.

You people of the Cult of George have drained all of my motivation just because you can't conceive the idea of someone not thinking Feast is the Last Great American Novel.

You don't know people who seriously think they're thoughts on art are the right ones?  "This music is bad" isn't something you've heard someone say in a literal sense?  

I agree, the background understanding of such discussion should be that this is essentially about personal likes and dislikes.  But many people don't understand such background, in part because many discussions and people don't actually hold to it.  That's why pointing out that that's what's going on here is necessary.  

But who cares? That person would be on the wrong, it would would be his problem. Imagine if I'd get my panties in a bunch every time a 12 year old girl comments on YouTube that "1D is the best band ever!" and that "Pink Floyd is boring!". What do I win by getting into an argument with anyone who doesn't have the "proper background"? What do I get by engaging in a discussion with someone who's argument is "Dany is evil, lol" or "Feast is great"? That person is obviously set on his ways, and pointing out his lack of background would accomplish nothing. I find this search for reassurance puzzling.

[kimim]

You don't know people who seriously think they're thoughts on art are the right ones?  "This music is bad" isn't something you've heard someone say in a literal sense?  

I agree, the background understanding of such discussion should be that this is essentially about personal likes and dislikes.  But many people don't understand such background, in part because many discussions and people don't actually hold to it.  That's why pointing out that that's what's going on here is necessary.  

Of course I do. This particular thread is a fantasy scenario, though, and that is built into it. So those people who say they'd cut Brienne are making their opinion known. Those people who say that the novels are perfect, and should not be discussed in this particular fashion, are also making their opinion known. The positive and the negative opinions are equally subjective. 

I dislike the last two novels. IMO for every sentence from here on:

Something went wrong when GRRM got rid of the five year gap. Cutting the gap forced GRRM to slow down Dany, Jon, and Tyrion. Since these are the three leads whose stories drive the novel, bringing them to a near standstill destroyed plot progression.

Meanwhile, other characters had to speed up. With a five year gap, Cersei would have years to wreck Westeros. Once GRRM got rid of the gap, she had to wreck the place in a fairly short time, through a series of bad decisions, which border on the insane. That in turn meant that a villain who had something resembling a brain in the first three novels turned into a villain even Disney, nowadays, would scorn as too simplistic. That, in turn, wrecked Cersei for me.

Feast was padded to look like a complete GRRM novel, hence Brienne, who contributed little to plot progression, Sam's adventures on his way to the Citadel, Aeron's ruminations, Arianne's plot which came to nought. Feast was a stop gap measure, giving GRRM time to struggle six more years over Dance. Dance, sadly, had similar problems which boded ill for future books: It introduced too many new characters, while keeping the leads at a standstill. Both the novels read to me like GRRM had lost control over his plot. 

Which is why I'm very, very, very worried about Winds.

 

 

[The scourge of westeros]

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.

this... times 1,000.

I'm gonna be seriously pissed if he eats too much into WINDS finishing up existing arcs from the previous books of FEAST and DANCE. If we end up with half of another book due to this, I for one will be outraged at his inability to cohesively wrap up and connect storylines. 

[drhenry]

I actually love AFFC ADWD however could have been helped by cutting both Jon and Dany's chapters in half, give the Hotah chapter to Arianne or one of the sand snakes and more Arya because she's Arya! 

[A spoon of knife and fork]

I actually love AFFC ADWD however could have been helped by cutting both Jon and Dany's chapters in half, give the Hotah chapter to Arianne or one of the sand snakes and more Arya because she's Arya! 

the Arya chapters in feast and Dance were almost unreadable to me.  I literally fell asleep while reading them. She suffered really badly from the loss of the 5 year gap in that we basically got 5 chapters of training montage...

[The scourge of westeros]

To me, the arya and cersei chapters in feast and dance were the worst to read. I came to wonder how much more soft core assassin training was necessary, and I never wanted someone to die as bad as cersei. It did not take that many chapters to convey the flaws that would lead to her downfall. I ended up wanting for her and myself to both be put out of our misery. 

[PCK]

Of course I do. This particular thread is a fantasy scenario, though, and that is built into it. So those people who say they'd cut Brienne are making their opinion known. Those people who say that the novels are perfect, and should not be discussed in this particular fashion, are also making their opinion known. The positive and the negative opinions are equally subjective. 

I dislike the last two novels. IMO for every sentence from here on:

Something went wrong when GRRM got rid of the five year gap. Cutting the gap forced GRRM to slow down Dany, Jon, and Tyrion. Since these are the three leads whose stories drive the novel, bringing them to a near standstill destroyed plot progression.

Meanwhile, other characters had to speed up. With a five year gap, Cersei would have years to wreck Westeros. Once GRRM got rid of the gap, she had to wreck the place in a fairly short time, through a series of bad decisions, which border on the insane. That in turn meant that a villain who had something resembling a brain in the first three novels turned into a villain even Disney, nowadays, would scorn as too simplistic. That, in turn, wrecked Cersei for me.

Feast was padded to look like a complete GRRM novel, hence Brienne, who contributed little to plot progression, Sam's adventures on his way to the Citadel, Aeron's ruminations, Arianne's plot which came to nought. Feast was a stop gap measure, giving GRRM time to struggle six more years over Dance. Dance, sadly, had similar problems which boded ill for future books: It introduced too many new characters, while keeping the leads at a standstill. Both the novels read to me like GRRM had lost control over his plot. 

Which is why I'm very, very, very worried about Winds.

 

 

We do need to start seeing a payoff of these arcs. I'd like to know why Dorne and the Iron Islands needed three POVs each. 

[Beautiful Bloody Sword]

"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. 

I'm not saying people shouldn't have opinions. All people can't help but form opinions on everything they experience. But it's what we do with those opinions that I am remarking upon. To say that something doesn't exactly tickle your fancy or that something isn't someone's best work is one thing. To completely dissect and dismantle someone's work and offer what you would do instead is something else. It's audaciously presuming that your better than them. I think that's disrespectful. I would like to see those people produce a better novel, and in doing so put their money where their mouth is. Talk is cheap when it's not backed up by action.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

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

The only thing we needed to know about Pate was that he was replaced by a FM. But we were given a whole chapter of him being horny over a girl and how his life sucked.

We already have Sam for that!

Seriously, we DO have Sam for that. The change of Pates (heh) could have been implied in any way during some of Sam's chapters. Like, even before Arya knew what Jaqen was, we kinda realised something was odd about that guy.

And it didn't even need to be Pate. Jaqen could have been anyone. That would have been much better and much more fun: who is the FM?!?!?! <O>

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.

I disagree with the implication that Plan 9 is a bad movie... but I agree 100% with the other. Many people end up using that as an counterargument: "you can't say the book is bad because you don't write books!". Also, some fans have the wrong notion that being a fan is accept everything an author/artist does and never give critic.

Now, I don't believe Feast and Dance are as bad as mostly people believe, but they do need a few adjustment here and there.

[Beautiful Bloody Sword]

"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. 

I'm not praising GRRM. I don't think he's a god. I think he's an accredited best selling author, one of many. What I'm saying is that he's better than all of us amateurs. When one amongst us produces a better literary work than he has, then they have all the leg they need to stand on to shit on his work, but not until.