Bad Worldbuilding in ASoIaF

[Aldarion]

2 hours ago, Ran said:

You are citing this quote, which is not about worldbuilding at all:

 

As sifth notes, if that is what he really meant, then he failed as well. POV characters at least are basically never in any danger.

[Ran]

I think he has the whole series in mind. I don't think all of the characters you name are going to be alive at the end of the series, personally.

[sifth]

1 hour ago, Ran said:

I think he has the whole series in mind. I don't think all of the characters you name are going to be alive at the end of the series, personally.

I can only speak for what is currently published. Plus if he waits until the final two books to start killing main characters, that still means he gave most of them plot armor for over 2/3's of the series.

So far this series has not quite been, "every main character could die in any chapter" and more a case of "most main characters are safe in each chapter, while most supporting characters are not".

Edited January 29 by sifth

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

11 hours ago, Aldarion said:

As sifth notes, if that is what he really meant, then he failed as well. POV characters at least are basically never in any danger.

I don’t necessarily see that as a problem. If everyone’s story ended midway through, that would be poor storytelling.

[Aldarion]

1 hour ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

I don’t necessarily see that as a problem. If everyone’s story ended midway through, that would be poor storytelling.

I don't think it is a problem either. Problem is that Martin has made claims which he has then failed to deliver on.

Just Google "George Martin" "gritty" "realistic". Yeah.

[Ran]

 

4 minutes ago, Aldarion said:

I don't think it is a problem either. Problem is that Martin has made claims which he has then failed to deliver on.

Just Google "George Martin" "gritty" "realistic". Yeah.

That Google leads you to what other people say about his work, not what GRRM says. 

What he says is, basically: I'm writing fiction, I'm writing fantasy, but I try to put "some realism" into it as well, moreso than maybe readers of fantasy were used to, but even in the parts where he borrows from history he throws in some fantasy as well. 

Here's an example:

Quote

A lot of bad Fantasy takes place in a sort of Disney Middle Ages, and that had no appeal to me, but I did not want to write thousands of pages about mud and lice and plague either. That would be just as false, in the other direction. The real Middle Ages had room for both plagues and pageantry, and I wanted both sides in my books as well -- heightened somewhat, since this is Fantasy.

It's a fantasy with a veneer of realism, not a fantasy devoted to realism.

[sifth]

9 minutes ago, Aldarion said:

I don't think it is a problem either. Problem is that Martin has made claims which he has then failed to deliver on.

Just Google "George Martin" "gritty" "realistic". Yeah.

Yea, I can't say I've ever been "afraid to turn the page" because I was worried about any of these characters safety. Come to think of it, Bran and Theon also have "fake out" deaths in the second book.

[sifth]

3 minutes ago, Ran said:

 

That Google leads you to what other people say about his work, not what GRRM says. 

What he says is, basically: I'm writing fiction, I'm writing fantasy, but I try to put "some realism" into it as well, moreso than maybe readers of fantasy were used to, but even in the parts where he borrows from history he throws in some fantasy as well. 

Here's an example:

It's a fantasy with a veneer of realism, not a fantasy devoted to realism.

I always feel GRRM takes things from the real world and just makes them bigger. Most of his castles and the The Wall, being the prime examples of this.

[Fist of the Dragon]

10 hours ago, sifth said:

I can only speak for what is currently published. Plus if he waits until the final two books to start killing main characters, that still means he gave most of them plot armor for over 2/3's of the series.

So far this series has not quite been, "every main character could die in any chapter" and more a case of "most main characters are safe in each chapter, while most supporting characters are not".

Edited 9 hours ago by sifth

 

If you mean 6 main characters, it is not correct. It doesn't matter what Martin says and what he wants from the audience (for example, the lack of security for the protagonist while you are turning the page).The reality of the story is something else. What George showed in the Red Wedding was not a rule, but a warning that regardless of their position in the story, the characters pay for their mistakes, and yes, they can be in dangerous situations that endanger their lives, but when you read a fantasy story, you should never expect one of the main characters of the story to be killed, while you know that the character you are looking for is growing and evolving and a great task is planned for them. It will be a complete disgrace if they are killed before they fulfill the mission and duty that fate has planned for them. Besides, when you are facing the biggest threat in the entire history of humanity, expect a much more effective death and much bigger dangers than what happens just because of stupid political games. For example, you see that Robb Stark and his companions turn into mincemeat. You are probably cursing here, but you already knew that the suspicious atmosphere around the twins is not a good thing, and that Walder Frey is a sly weasel. So this whole damn thing is not something that affects the logic of the story. Instead you don't expect the Sons of the Harpy to kill Daenerys in a successful operation (or any other mortal danger) because that's a flaw in the canon of storytelling.

[Aldarion]

56 minutes ago, Ran said:

 

That Google leads you to what other people say about his work, not what GRRM says. 

What he says is, basically: I'm writing fiction, I'm writing fantasy, but I try to put "some realism" into it as well, moreso than maybe readers of fantasy were used to, but even in the parts where he borrows from history he throws in some fantasy as well. 

Here's an example:

It's a fantasy with a veneer of realism, not a fantasy devoted to realism.

Yeah, that is not entirely correct. Or really correct at all:

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

Quote

“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://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/6040/

Quote

The Dothraki were actually fashioned as an amalgam of a number of steppe and plains cultures... Mongols and Huns, certainly, but also Alans, Sioux, Cheyenne, and various other Amerindian tribes... seasoned with a dash of pure fantasy.

https://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/1432/

Quote

Martin does a lot of research on any story that has a historical or quasi-historical setting. For the series, he immersed himself in the Middle Ages, reading everything he could about such things as castles, tourneys, knighthood, food, medicine, clothing, and customs. He also read histories of things like the Hundred Years War, the Wars of the Roses, the Crusades, and so on. In his opinion, the more you can take in of a period, the more your work will have a sense of truthfulness.

https://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/1176

Quote

Some people, sure. But thankfully there are also many thousands who prefer a more complex, adult, and realistic flavor of fantasy. What can I say? Tastes vary. Some people like to eat at McDonald's.

And this is just what I have managed to find with a five-minute Google search. I am fairly certain there are more statements out there where Martin claims to be writing "realistic" fantasy.

1 hour ago, Ran said:

Here's an example:

Quote

A lot of bad Fantasy takes place in a sort of Disney Middle Ages, and that had no appeal to me, but I did not want to write thousands of pages about mud and lice and plague either. That would be just as false, in the other direction. The real Middle Ages had room for both plagues and pageantry, and I wanted both sides in my books as well -- heightened somewhat, since this is Fantasy.

It's a fantasy with a veneer of realism, not a fantasy devoted to realism.

That is basically him saying that he wanted realism with veeneer of fantasy.

Unfortunately, he too ended up creating Disneyland Middle Ages, just to the opposite extreme of most. I mean, once you remove all the grimdark, Warhammer 40k's Imperium is a more realistic depiction of feudalistic society than anything we see in Westeros.

[SeanF]

I don't see plot armour for the main characters as a major problem.  That's true of any war story.  No way could people like Hornblower, Sharpe, Aubrey and Maturin have survived so many life and death fights, in real life.  Most soldiers in real wars fight in a couple of battles, with the rest of the time being away from combat.

Even with the main six, I suspect that only half will ultimately survive.

Edited January 29 by SeanF

[sifth]

39 minutes ago, Fist of the Dragon said:

 

If you mean 6 main characters, it is not correct. It doesn't matter what Martin says and what he wants from the audience (for example, the lack of security for the protagonist while you are turning the page).The reality of the story is something else. What George showed in the Red Wedding was not a rule, but a warning that regardless of their position in the story, the characters pay for their mistakes, and yes, they can be in dangerous situations that endanger their lives, but when you read a fantasy story, you should never expect one of the main characters of the story to be killed, while you know that the character you are looking for is growing and evolving and a great task is planned for them. It will be a complete disgrace if they are killed before they fulfill the mission and duty that fate has planned for them. Besides, when you are facing the biggest threat in the entire history of humanity, expect a much more effective death and much bigger dangers than what happens just because of stupid political games. For example, you see that Robb Stark and his companions turn into mincemeat. You are probably cursing here, but you already knew that the suspicious atmosphere around the twins is not a good thing, and that Walder Frey is a sly weasel. So this whole damn thing is not something that affects the logic of the story. Instead you don't expect the Sons of the Harpy to kill Daenerys in a successful operation (or any other mortal danger) because that's a flaw in the canon of storytelling.

I mean Robb was never a main character; he was always a supporting one. His entire story was told through other characters eyes and never his own. Also Cat returned from the dead, so I’m lukewarm, if that even counts as a “main character dying”. I know most people in this community consider Cat and Stone Heart to be “different people”, but I’m not one of them. For me it’s more of a turning point for the Cat character, from a main character into a supporting one.

[Craving Peaches]

Daenerys, Tyrion and Littlefinger have ridiculous plot armour. Tywin also really gets lucky. Jon to a lesser extent as well.

[Ran]

1 hour ago, Aldarion said:

more complex, adult, and realistic flavor of fantasy

Again, you need to realize that GRRM's statements need to be taken all together. He is aiming to be more realistic, not absolutely realistic. His benchmark for realism is "not the Disney Middle Ages". He is not writing historical fiction for reason.

You've created a strawman that you're tilting against. The real target of your ire are people who take ASoIaF to be "the Middle Ages",  and don't understand that the idea is that his fantasy world is "more" like "the Middle Ages" than some past works of fantasy, but are not actually "the Middle Ages".

[Aldarion]

43 minutes ago, Ran said:

Again, you need to realize that GRRM's statements need to be taken all together. He is aiming to be more realistic, not absolutely realistic. His benchmark for realism is "not the Disney Middle Ages". He is not writing historical fiction for reason.

You've created a strawman that you're tilting against. The real target of your ire are people who take ASoIaF to be "the Middle Ages",  and don't understand that the idea is that his fantasy world is "more" like "the Middle Ages" than some past works of fantasy, but are not actually "the Middle Ages".

While it is true that "real target of your ire are people who take ASoIaF to be "the Middle Ages"", my point is that Martin himself - by intent or by accident - has also supported such views. They may be overblown, but they do have origin.

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

3 hours ago, sifth said:

Come to think of it, Bran and Theon also have "fake out" deaths in the second book.

That actually worked very well in Theon’s case, because we don’t see him at all for a really long time. And when we meet him as Reek in ADWD, it’s a huge reveal.

[astarkchoice]

1 hour ago, Craving Peaches said:

Daenerys, Tyrion and Littlefinger have ridiculous plot armour. Tywin also really gets lucky. Jon to a lesser extent as well.

Id say jts pushing it to say plot armour 

 

Daneys does get it a bit bit lucky but she has an incredible protectionn detail and she does see blowback for many bad decisions

Tyrion  grmm admitedly does admit back when he was riding around swinging his axe he didnt understand the limits of dwarfism so yeah but outside that hes plot armour free 

LF: i think the knife thing has been massively overblown as 'plot armour' 

 

Tywin gets as much bad luck as good to be fair

Jon lucky? Hmm maybe/sorta  with the stannis rescue but that was gonna happen regardless of who controlled the watch

[sifth]

1 hour ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

That actually worked very well in Theon’s case, because we don’t see him at all for a really long time. And when we meet him as Reek in ADWD, it’s a huge reveal.

I mean we’re quite literally told he’s still alive in the third book.

[Craving Peaches]

46 minutes ago, astarkchoice said:

LF: i think the knife thing has been massively overblown as 'plot armour' 

It's not just that, it's the fact that no one bothers to investigate him even when they suspect his accounting is dodgy, how no one realised what he was up to etc. because he isn't always subtle about it...

47 minutes ago, astarkchoice said:

Daneys does get it a bit bit lucky but she has an incredible protectionn detail

Yes but she gets really lucky. She survives the Wineseller's poisoning attempt, avoids being shipped off to the Dosh Khaleen, survives burning alive (she had no idea whether the magic would work), survives essential fatty acid deficiency etc. in the Red Waste, survives the HotU because Drogon happens to attack, survives the Sorrowful Men assassination attempt and gets out of Qarth alive because Barristan happens to turn up at just the right moment, Astapori Masters are dumb enough to fall for that plan, sellswords are dumb enough to fall for that plan, survives the assassination attempt by Mero, doesn't get killed in Daznak's Pit (if it was to poison her), doesn't get killed by Drogon, doesn't die of starvation/exposure after Drogon abandons her in the Wilderness...

Also, she doesn't really receive much fallout from the mistakes she's made, because something usually happens to resolve her of any liability or solve it. Astapor gets ravaged because she didn't leave her ruling council with a way to defend itself, but it's Cleon's fault. No one seems that concerned that her dragon probably ate a child. Harpy's Sons that she failed to deal with never try to target her for some reason...

Other characters get lucky too but at least most of them get lucky in a way where they manage to use their own skill to escape the situation, Daenerys (and Tywin and to a lesser extent Tyrion) get out of situations because their enemies are idiots (same goes for LF) or because people/places/things magically show up at the right time.

[astarkchoice]

27 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

-it's not just that, it's the fact that no one bothers to investigate him even when they suspect his accounting is dodgy, how no one realised what he was up to etc. because he isn't always subtle about it...

-Yes but she gets really lucky. She survives the Wineseller's poisoning attempt, avoids being shipped off to the Dosh Khaleen, survives burning alive (she had no idea whether the magic would work), survives essential fatty acid deficiency etc. in the Red Waste, survives the HotU because Drogon happens to attack, survives the Sorrowful Men assassination attempt and gets out of Qarth alive because Barristan happens to turn up at just the right moment, Astapori Masters are dumb enough to fall for that plan, sellswords are dumb enough to fall for that plan, survives the assassination attempt by Mero, doesn't get killed in Daznak's Pit (if it was to poison her), doesn't get killed by Drogon, doesn't die of starvation/exposure after Drogon abandons her in the Wilderness...

Also, she doesn't really receive much fallout from the mistakes she's made, because something usually happens to resolve her of any liability or solve it. Astapor gets ravaged because she didn't leave her ruling council with a way to defend itself, but it's Cleon's fault. No one seems that concerned that her dragon probably ate a child. Harpy's Sons that she failed to deal with never try to target her for some reason...

Other characters get lucky too but at least most of them get lucky in a way where they manage to use their own skill to escape the situation, Daenerys (and Tywin and to a lesser extent Tyrion) get out of situations because their enemies are idiots (same goes for LF) or because people/places/things magically show up at the right time.

- no one realised his accounting was dodgy(it still might not be)  , shit tyrions one of the smartest guys in the books and even he cant  fully follow it yet to see if anythings dodgy!   so far it looks like he DID make good investments , the fact no one questions it is probably down to nobles not understanding finances well on top of robert actualy spending like a drunken sailor in a whorehouse

 

-def lucky but its questionable  if its to the point of plot armour.

Jorah was on guard as he was warned is just in time for the wineseller just as ser barristan hobo edition was watching her for assasins. She survices the red waste but so do lots of her followers and we can assume they ensure she gets the best of theit limited food and water, wizzards forgetting  dragons breathe fire was lucky as hell though!

She was probably never gonna be hurt by drogo  in the pit  and when he leaves her  starvation takes time(she does drink some muddy water and red berries if i recall)

Now yunkia is def plot armour lucky or close enough...one captain falls fkr her drink and schedule ploy and the other side one falls foe her and turns his company over! 

Astopor has been covered at length   , the wise masters arent dumb as her dec is not only  utterly random but its like ducking the russian mafia only to plug a member.of the italian mafia so both sides want u dead!

As for harpies no she soends al her time ina pyramid surrounded by unsullied its virtualy impossible to get a shot at her til she decides to go outside or later to the pits

 

As for the rest tyrion and tyrion get as much bad luck as good