Does GRRM follow a certain story structure?

[King Adrian Storm]

Have any of you ever noticed a specific structure that George follows when writing the books? A consistent habit in each book, like writer Dan Harmon who created the story circle. Maybe the structure involves all the characters together in the book, or maybe he uses different structures for each character. I'm just curious because Grrm is a very unconventional writer, and might be one of the kind that rejects story structure all together and does his own thing.

I myself haven't been able to pick up on a specific structure he follows throughout each of the books. Not that that's a bad thing. I'd say the 1st and 2nd book follow a structure that have a clear beginning middle and end. The 3rd book seems like a third act to the 1st two books, and the 4th and 5th book I have trouble relating the structure to the first book. I like his way of being able to surprise you at any moment. I'm just obsessed with story structure and analysis' of stories. So my real question is do you guys notice certain tricks that Grrm does with his story telling, that a lot of other people don't pick up on?

[Rose of Red Lake]

Might not answer your question but he does talk about using a literary sleight of hand here: 

"There are some mysteries in these books. There are some things that I'm gonna reveal later on that I'm planting clues for. There are some later plot twists that I'm foreshadowing. There are things that are gonna happen in Book 5 and Book 6 and Book 7 where I've planted a seed for it in Book 1. But I don't necessarily want to give away my hand. So, what do I do when I plant the seed? Well, I plant the seed, but I try to do a little literary sleight of hand, and while I'm planting the seed, my other hand is up there waving and is distracting you with some flashy bit of wordplay or something that's going on in the foreground, while the seed is being planted in the background. So hopefully the seed is there, the foreshadowing is there, but maybe you won't notice it, because it's surrounded by so many other things." (x)

[King Adrian Storm]

That would certainly explain r+l+=j. He planted the seed for it in AGOT, then later he starts to mention Ned and Ashara as a distraction.

[Mithras]

If there ever was a structure, GRRM demolished it after ASoS.

[chrisdaw]

He writes standard character arcs. He's just writing so many concurrently as part of the one story that it is so big that people lose perspective.

If you took every Austen novel and set them all in the same time and world, jump from character to character and have them intersect, you would have the structure of ASOIAF, and still the heart and focus would remain the character arcs. That is all that is happening.

Ned died at the start of the first act, he's Mufasa. The Red Wedding is Bambi's mother. It isn't really unconventional story telling, it is just good story telling.

[FictionIsntReal]

19 minutes ago, chrisdaw said:

Ned died at the start of the first act, he's Mufasa. The Red Wedding is Bambi's mother. It isn't really unconventional story telling, it is just good story telling.

Having both Mufasa and Bambi's mother in the same story is a bit unusual. Particularly if Bambi's mother dies after (as far as she knows) her last living child.

[Rose of Red Lake]

On 6/15/2020 at 5:48 AM, King Adrian Storm said:

That would certainly explain r+l+=j. He planted the seed for it in AGOT, then later he starts to mention Ned and Ashara as a distraction.

Yeah, it's all flashy and dramatic. "OOOH lady jumps off a tower!! Must be where this is going!"

Probably sets readers up to get very invested in the flashy/dramatic characters, on the whole.

[Lord Lannister]

With the way Feast and Dance were structured I would say he is not following any traditional writing style.

[Back door hodor]

Not so much to do with story structure but I do notice some habits as you would call them. The constantly repeating turns of phrase and some of the songs in different POVs for example, some seem to be world building filler, "Dark wings, Dark words" and The Bear and the Maiden Fair".

Others seems to be much more important and serve a deeper thematic purpose than fluff, things like Valar Morgoulis, The Dornishman's Wife, and the bits of Jenny's Song(with flowers in her hair.) that we get come to mind. 

[Seams]

GRRM has told us to pay attention to Old Nan's stories. I think he is writing "future legends" which will be told and retold, losing and gaining elements, conflating characters and passing through the editing process of politically-motivated historians or other unreliable narrators. But these future legends are already variations on Westeros legends of the past. If we look at Old Nan's stories and try to connect them with elements of the contemporary plot, we will find that elements repeat, that structure comes from wordplay and that variations on a theme explore "alternate worlds" where (for instance) a character might die in one arc but live in another arc.

Some examples worth exploring:

Brave Danny Flint. A girl who dressed as a boy, joined the Night's Watch and was murdered. Should we be looking for a girl dressed as a boy, such as Arya, Brienne or Alleras? Should we look for someone who was raped, such at Tysha, Lollys, Jeyne Poole or Pretty Pia? Should we look at some of the Free Folk women who have become fighters in the strange new alliance between the wildlings and the Night's Watch? Or will there be some unexpected twist that puts the Danny Flint story in an entirely new and unexpected context?

The Rat Cook.

Mad Axe.

Hardhome.

The thing that came in the night.

Many of Old Nan's stories are conveniently interrupted before she can finish. Other times, the narrator tells us that Old Nan varies the details each time she tells the story. I think GRRM is deliberately keeping us in the dark, so to speak, withholding some details that would give away too much about the eventual resolution of the story.

Of course, not all legends come from Old Nan. There are clearly shared elements in the Maidenpool legend and the Ser Galladon of Morne story from Tarth, and probably also the Florian and Jonquil story (another story whose plot is conveniently never fully described for us). The Clarence Crabb story with the heads of slain men serving as advisors at The Whispers might hold hints about the Faceless Men or the Winterfell Crypt or the Golden Company.

[Seams]

On 6/13/2020 at 11:22 AM, Rose of Red Lake said:

(x)

I love the linked Reddit theory! That fits a number of details and would explain a number of connections that seem necessary for plot resolution. Thanks.

[Rose of Red Lake]

The structure also appears to be a series of expectation set ups that are knocked down:

"I knew it almost from the beginning. Not the first day, but very soon. I’ve said in many interviews that I like my fiction to be unpredictable. I like there to be considerable suspense. I killed Ned in the first book and it shocked a lot of people. I killed Ned because everybody thinks he’s the hero and that, sure, he’s going to get into trouble, but then he’ll somehow get out of it. The next predictable thing is to think his eldest son is going to rise up and avenge his father. And everybody is going to expect that. So immediately [killing Robb] became the next thing I had to do." (x)

[Mithras]

1 hour ago, Seams said:

I love the linked Reddit theory! That fits a number of details and would explain a number of connections that seem necessary for plot resolution. Thanks.

Check the date of the post