Why do people hate essos?

[Aldarion]

3 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

Because he wanted one character far removed from the others and to experience a different part of his imaginary world?  There's no hurdle here he has to pass in order to be allowed to write about his creations.  It's not your cup of tea, I get it.

He has set himself a hurdle. I would agree with you here, if George Martin had just set out to write fantasy. But look at his statements in interviews:

https://entertainment.time.com/2011/04/18/grrm-interview-part-2-fantasy-and-history

Quote

I was also reading a lot of historical fiction. And the contrast between that and a lot of the fantasy at the time was dramatic because a lot of the fantasy of Tolkien imitators has a quasi-medieval setting, but it’s like the Disneyland Middle Ages. You know, they’ve got tassels and they’ve got lords and stuff like that, but they don’t really seem to grasp what it was like in the Middle Ages. And then you’d read the historical fiction which was much grittier and more realistic and really give you a sense of what it was like to live in castles or to be in a battle with swords and things like that. And I said what I want to do is combine some of the realism of historical fiction with some of the appeal of fantasy, the magic and the wonder that the best fantasy has.

https://ew.com/article/2015/06/03/george-rr-martin-thrones-violence-women/

Quote

“The books reflect a patriarchal society based on the Middle Ages. The Middle Ages were not a time of sexual egalitarianism. It was very classist, dividing people into three classes. And they had strong ideas about the roles of women. One of the charges against Joan of Arc that got her burned at the stake was that she wore men’s clothing—that was not a small thing. There were, of course, some strong and competent women. It still doesn’t change the nature of the society. And if you look at the books, my heroes and viewpoint characters are all misfits. They’re outliers. They don’t fit the roles society has for them. They’re ‘cripples, bastards, and broken things‘—a dwarf, a fat guy who can’t fight, a bastard, and women who don’t fit comfortably into the roles society has for them (though there are also those who do—like Sansa and Catelyn).

“Now there are people who will say to that, ‘Well, he’s not writing history, he’s writing fantasy—he put in dragons, he should have made an egalitarian society.’ Just because you put in dragons doesn’t mean you can put in anything you want. If pigs could fly, then that’s your book. But that doesn’t mean you also want people walking on their hands instead of their feet. If you’re going to do [a fantasy element], it’s best to only do one of them, or a few. I wanted my books to be strongly grounded in history and to show what medieval society was like, and I was also reacting to a lot of fantasy fiction. Most stories depict what I call the ‘Disneyland Middle Ages’—there are princes and princesses and knights in shining armor, but they didn’t want to show what those societies meant and how they functioned.

https://thecriticaldragon.com/2015/10/29/a-response-to-george-r-r-martins-interview/

Quote

“I’m writing about war, which what almost all epic fantasy is about. But if you’re going to write about war, and you just want to include all the cool battles and heroes killing a lot of orcs and things like that and you don’t portray [sexual violence], then there’s something fundamentally dishonest about that. Rape, unfortunately, is still a part of war today. It’s not a strong testament to the human race, but I don’t think we should pretend it doesn’t exist.” – Martin

Martin has clearly set out to write realistic work, in all aspects: realistic especially when it comes to human nature, but also in regards to culture, society and so on.

It is safe to say, he has failed miserably. And while Westeros too is a failure in that regard, Essos - and especially the Slaver's Bay - is so obvious of a failure that it becomes a fist in the eye. A very obvious fist in the eye, which is why so many people dislike it.

You won't find me bemoaning lack of realism in Conan the Barbarian, the Dune or Warhammer, simply because nobody ever expected realism from that stuff - least of all their authors (though Warhammer is actually surprisingly realistic once you get past the whole "heroes beating the crap out of demons with warhammers" stuff. Hardly realistic, and does tend to sacrifice the realism for the sake of GRIMDARK!, but a lot of the basic aspects of the setting are actually realistic - political organization of the Empire of Man, for one). But ASoIaF is a series where both its author and its audience have created or accepted expectation of realism.

3 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

As of the end of AFFC we have 20 pov characters (excluding prologue/epilogue characters).  1 of those 20 is in Essos, Dany, and 1 other, Arya, has just arrived.  It's very definitely a sideshow imo.  And we only have Dany's pov for all of it for most of 4 books. 

Problem seems to be Meereen and ADWD because we get Barristan and Quentyn, Tyrion's travelogue, with Vicatarion en route, but no pay off or story resolution.

Problem, I think, are primarily the Dothraki and the Slaver's Bay (especially Meereen), because they are so important for Daenerys' story. And considering Daenerys is arguably one of two main protagonists of the books, I would not agree with Essos being a sideshow - at least not these parts with which Daenerys directly interacts.

3 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

Ok, that's your opinion.  But not an objective fact 

It is objective fact that he has failed to create a realistic society there - or at least, in areas we see in some detail (Dothraki and the Slaver's Bay). Subjective opinion is whether that matters.

3 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

Well, that first's still a large claim.  Essos is a big place.  Slaver's Bay is a caricature though GRRM has moved from the idiocy of the Astapori to more nuance with the Ghiscari in Meereen as the reality of ruling hits Dany.  The Dothraki have an outline - which I find just fine for story purposes - analogous to the Rohirrim as I've said before.

My point is, parts of Essos we actually interact with the most clearly fail Martin's own stated goal of achieving realism (Braavos at least seems a-OK in that respect, though).

3 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

Oh, indeed.  But as I said, the Spartans were renowned for being great warriors so you have set yourself a large task to battle the baleful influence of 300, Herodotus, any other contemporary sources and several millennia of received wisdom.

ETA: You should add Tom Holland to your list.  I read "Persian Fire" last year and really enjoyed it.

Thanks. I will read it, when I get time.

But when you read history of Greece, Sparta actually had a lot of failures, and many of her successes were not due to Spartans themselves. It won the war against Athens, but only did so with Persian gold and major help from allies. In fact, when Athenian army attacked Thyrea in Cynuria, Spartan army was present but did not dare defend the city. Athens failed due to resistance of Boethia, and the fact that both Macedon and Persia assisted Sparta against the Athens.

3 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

But they're a horse-based society that migrated from the north and settled in Rohan when Eorl aided Gondor and was granted Gondor's northern provinces.  Rohan is a vast area so they should be nomadic, widely dispersed and follow the herds.  They "should" drink fermented mares' milk and live in yurts or equivalent.  Instead they have mountain fortresses like Edoras and The Hornburg so even if these were built by the Numenoreans/Gondor they feel semi-sedentary at least but with no agriculture.  And JRRT, as an Englishman, turned them into anglo-saxons, more like Beowulf or Roland (yes I know he's a Frank), with housecarls and shieldwalls and drinking halls filled with warriors quaffing mead and singing songs.

It doesn't bother me but I never quite got how Rohan was supposed to work so all this talk of worldbuilding and realism makes me point out that neither Gondor nor Rohan are particularly well-developed in LOTR.  They don't need to be but still.

Why do you think all nomads have to be Mongols? Or that horse-based societies have to be nomadic?

Rohirrim population is clearly in good part sedentary. They are not Mongols: in fact, in terms of their role in the story, they are more akin to Poland of Jan III Sobieski; Theoden's charge at Pelennor is essentially equivalent to Sobieski's charge at Vienna (even numbers are related: 6 000 Rohirrim is exactly one-third of Sobieski's 18 000 Hussars). And frankly, expecting Rohirrim to be nomads makes about as much sense as expecting the same of Poles.

We know that they have herds of horses in the vast areas of Calenardhon, and these are tended to by the herdsmen who themselves live as nomads, moving with the herds. And in Tolkien's Letters, specifically Letter #297, Tolkien explicitly calls the Rohirrim as being "still partly nomadic":

https://bibliothecaveneficae.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/the_letters_of_j.rrtolkien.pdf

Quote

Rohan. I cannot understand why the name of a country (stated to be Elvish) should be associated with anything Germanic; still less with the only remotely similar O.N. rann 'house', which is incidentally not at all appropriate to a still partly mobile and nomadic people of horsebreeders!

To see how this works, we can look at Byzantine Anatolia during 7th to 8th centuries: many people were basically nomadic herders, tending to herds because any crops will have been burned by Arab raids... yet majority of population overall was still primarily sedentary. Similarly, vast majority of population of medieval Hungary was sedentary, but there were still some nomadic groups as late as 15th century - specifically Szekelys - who provided horse archers for Hungary. By contrast, Cumans - who also were nomadic horsemen - managed to preserve their nomadic lifestyle for some time, but by early 15th century had assimilated with the sedentary population and were no longer nomads.

Also, there is the fact that, unlike Mongols or the movie Rohan, major portion of the Rohirrim army in the books is infantry. Heavy infantry, even. And Riders are also capable of fighting on foot, as seen in the second quote:

Quote

The host passed through the breach and halted on the sloping sward above. They now learned to their joy that Erkenbrand had left many men to hold Helm’s Gate, and more had since escaped thither.
‘Maybe, we have a thousand fit to fight on foot,’ said Gamling, an old man, the leader of those that watched the Dike. ‘But most of them have seen too many winters, as I have, or too few, as my son’s son here. What news of Erkenbrand? Word came yesterday that he was retreating hither with all that is left of the best Riders of Westfold. But he has not come.’

Quote

There suddenly upon a ridge appeared a rider, clad in white, shining in the rising sun. Over the low hills the horns were sounding. Behind him, hastening down the long slopes, were a thousand men on foot; their swords were in their hands. Amid them strode a man tall and strong. His shield was red. As he came to the valley’s brink, he set to his lips a great black horn and blew a ringing blast.
‘Erkenbrand!’ the Riders shouted. ‘Erkenbrand!’
‘Behold the White Rider!’ cried Aragorn. ‘Gandalf is come again!’

And looking at historical examples, Polish army in 16th century was primarily cavalry, yet Poles were not nomadic. Hungaro-Croatian army in early 15th century had basically no infantry (only during John Hunyadi and Matthias Corvinus would that be rectified), yet neither Croatians nor Hungarians of the time were nomads.

Only unusual thing about the Rohirrim is their utilization of horse archers, but their primary way of combat is clearly with lances. So while a portion of Rohirrim society may be nomadic, majority are not. And that is hardly weird: Mongols had to pass laws to maintain their steppe way of life after their conquest of China, and Hungarians very quickly became a sedentary society and adapted European way of life after settling in the Pannonian Plain. Rohirrim managing to retain any semblance of nomadic life after so long, especially considering close contact with very much sedentary Gondor, is a massive achievement.

And as I have said: it is actually good that Tolkien hasn't gone into detail, because there is less to get wrong.

[the trees have eyes]

2 hours ago, Aldarion said:

He has set himself a hurdle. I would agree with you here, if George Martin had just set out to write fantasy. But look at his statements in interviews:

It is safe to say, he has failed miserably. 

Oh God.  I actually don't take that from those quotes. 

I mean in the first you literally have him saying he wants to add gritty realism from historical fiction of what living in castles and battles with swords are like and he delivers that in spades!  No Gimli and Legolas having a nice sanitised kill count duel at The Hornburg (both over 40 iirc) or Hurin slaying 70 Trolls at the Battle of Unnumbered Tears in The Silmarillion, it's much more down and dirty with throats cut, decapitations, dismemberments and disembowelments.

In the second he talks about how patriarchal and classist medieval society was and how circumscribed the roles of women and I would have thought we could agree he manages to portray that pretty well.  There are no people walking on their hands are there - maybe the squishers?

As for the third on sexual violence, well, I'm glad he didn't go overboard but we have Poor Pretty Pia, the even more unfortunate barmaid who met Gregor Clegane on a bad day, the women at Harrenhall tied to posts for the "use" of the guardsmen, the basket or red worms in Meereen after Dany stipulated castration as the punishment for rape - and Ramsay Bolton.  So maybe he did go overboard after all.

It's safe to say he achieved what he set out to 

2 hours ago, Aldarion said:

Thanks. I will read it, when I get time.

Well I certainly didn't read it with any particular focus on Sparta.  He refers to Herodotus a fair bit and I certainly didn't come away thinking those Spartans were overrated so I figured you would want to set the record straight 

2 hours ago, Aldarion said:

It won the war against Athens, but only did so with Persian gold and major help from allies.

Valid points.  But equally valid is that The Athenians exploited the Delian League and alienated their own allies.  They basically showed how not to do it.

3 hours ago, Aldarion said:

Why do you think all nomads have to be Mongols? Or that horse-based societies have to be nomadic?

Rohirrim population is clearly in good part sedentary. They are not Mongols: in fact, in terms of their role in the story, they are more akin to Poland of Jan III Sobieski; Theoden's charge at Pelennor is essentially equivalent to Sobieski's charge at Vienna (even numbers are related: 6 000 Rohirrim is exactly one-third of Sobieski's 18 000 Hussars). And frankly, expecting Rohirrim to be nomads makes about as much sense as expecting the same of Poles.

We know that they have herds of horses in the vast areas of Calenardhon, and these are tended to by the herdsmen who themselves live as nomads, moving with the herds. And in Tolkien's Letters, specifically Letter #297, Tolkien explicitly calls the Rohirrim as being "still partly nomadic":

I don't, it's just shorthand and an easy handle for wide-ranging cavalry armies.  And large herds of horses are constantly on the move seeking fresh pastures or seasonal grazing.  Staying in one place and forming permanent settlements means  breaking apart into smaller groups.  It's The Ride of The Rohirrim not The March of The Rohirrim: I'm unconvinced they are sedentary farmers or particularly mobile infantry.  But then, I'm not really clear how they work.

I don't get the bolded from the books as I don't think it's clearly developed .  Mongols were worried about going soft when they conquered or moved into areas with fertile agriculture and settled populations.  There's no equivalent in Rohan, just grasslands and mountains to the south.  It doesn't look like Polish farmland to me and it clearly supports a very small population only.

[Aldarion]

14 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

Oh God.  I actually don't take that from those quotes. 

I mean in the first you literally have him saying he wants to add gritty realism from historical fiction of what living in castles and battles with swords are like and he delivers that in spades!  No Gimli and Legolas having a nice sanitised kill count duel at The Hornburg (both over 40 iirc) or Hurin slaying 70 Trolls at the Battle of Unnumbered Tears in The Silmarillion, it's much more down and dirty with throats cut, decapitations, dismemberments and disembowelments.

In the second he talks about how patriarchal and classist medieval society was and how circumscribed the roles of women and I would have thought we could agree he manages to portray that pretty well.  There are no people walking on their hands are there - maybe the squishers?

As for the third on sexual violence, well, I'm glad he didn't go overboard but we have Poor Pretty Pia, the even more unfortunate barmaid who met Gregor Clegane on a bad day, the women at Harrenhall tied to posts for the "use" of the guardsmen, the basket or red worms in Meereen after Dany stipulated castration as the punishment for rape - and Ramsay Bolton.  So maybe he did go overboard after all.

It's safe to say he achieved what he set out to 

He went overboard. Medieval society was far less patriarchal and classist than the post-medieval society, or the society Martin portrays.

https://www.avclub.com/the-middle-ages-weren-t-as-sexist-as-game-of-thrones-wo-1834980838

Fact that it is cynical does not mean it is accurate. In reality, it was the post-medieval society that was rife with literally all the bad things that are ascribed to the Middle Ages.

14 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

Valid points.  But equally valid is that The Athenians exploited the Delian League and alienated their own allies.  They basically showed how not to do it.

Agreed. Athens was certainly not a nice defender of freedom as it is sometimes portrayed. But on the flip side, when Spartans overthrew the Athenian tyranny, they proved to be even worse than the Athens - and in fact, relied a lot on Persian help to maintain their own authority.

So yeah... Phillip II stomping over everyone was quite likely an improvement for most poleis.

14 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

I don't, it's just shorthand and an easy handle for wide-ranging cavalry armies.  And large herds of horses are constantly on the move seeking fresh pastures or seasonal grazing.  Staying in one place and forming permanent settlements means  breaking apart into smaller groups.  It's The Ride of The Rohirrim not The March of The Rohirrim: I'm unconvinced they are sedentary farmers or particularly mobile infantry.  But then, I'm not really clear how they work.

I don't get the bolded from the books as I don't think it's clearly developed 

 

.  Mongols were worried about going soft when they conquered or moved into areas with fertile agriculture and settled populations.  There's no equivalent in Rohan, just grasslands and mountains to the south.  It doesn't look like Polish farmland to me and it clearly supports a very small population only.

 

Tolkien has provided as much detail as we need for the story. And a lot can be found out by careful reading: Aragorn speaks of Rohirrim having herds and herdsmen, and Eomer mentions removing "herds and herdsfolk" beyond Entwash. So the nomadic aspect of the Rohirrim is present in the book, even if we don't actually see much of it.