Zulofritter Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 After reading more of the comments on the page, I'm convinced that he decided to pick a fight with GRRM fans because they were more likely to react in an entertaining fashion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightsnake Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 He's either delusional or just plain foolish. I'm noticing he didn't even bother to respond to Wert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 It's amusing that his postion has been demolished more thoroughly than a stack of cards in an earthquake yet he stubbornly holds onto his untenable position. It's like debating with [poster name redacted for politeness' sake] but with better grammar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeanMrMustard Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 It's like debating with [poster name redacted for politeness' sake] but with better grammar. What the fuck? My grammar is fine and my positions are both tenable and awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightsnake Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Just responded. This guy's idiocy just bugs me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nex Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Clueless and ignorant and proud of it. Worst possible combo. I say don't feed the troll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Someone should point out that Martin has been a professional writer since the age of 20 and making a living is probably a lot higher on his list of priorities than writing art for art's sake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Ah, now the selective reading comes into play. He's read this thread, spotted the mistake I made (I confused him with someone using a very similar debating technique on SFFWorld a few years back) and then failed to acknowledge the apology I gave him when Dylanfanatic spotted it. Anyhow, if nothing else this has been educational. One of criticisms I've seen of GRRM over the years is the lack of deeper themes in ASoIaF, but now I can add subtle anti-authoritarianism to the use, abuse and consequences of power as a key theme of the series, and it'll certainly cover my next read of AFFC in particular. Plus it generated a five-page thread during a slow week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry. Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 Yeah, I read through that section and noticed that as well. Oh well. I had thought about commenting at length again, but since there are still some awkwardly-defined words (such as the failure to realize that "liberal" in history isn't what it means in American politics, among many others), I think I'll just wait for it to die out. After all, I have more important things to worry about, such as trying to see if a single Hugo nominee for Best Novel will actually be worthy of having such a moniker attached to it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 The liberal thing is more surprising as I believe he's actually British. As for the Hugo Awards, QFT. Temeraire will probably win it and will be a far less deserving winner than Spin. At least Spin had some good ideas at heart, even if it was far too reminiscent of other novels (Contact and Childhood's End keep coming to mind as I read it). That did fit in with the whole retroactive-look-at-SF thing that was apparently big at the awards last year. Temeraire on the other hand is just a cute 'n' cuddly but rather insignificant big ball of fluff. That does remind me that I do need to pick up a copy of Blindsight though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zulofritter Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 You need some sort of word to stand in as the opposite of authoritarianism. Without sounding like a hippie. Or Bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom the Merciful Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 If you really want to have fun, read some of his movie reviews. For example review of 300 or a review of a DVD realease of Attenborough's BBC documentary Planet Earth. His views are disgusting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 Err, Spin already won the Hugo... last year. Nominees list here. I'm dubious that His Majesty's Dragon will win it, though I think it's a better pick than some of the novels on the list (it may not be deep literature, but I think it exactly achieves its aims and is entertaining as it does so, which is nothing to be scoffed at in a first-time author). That said, I suspect Eifelheim is the frontrunner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matrim Fox Cauthon Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 Why are you all still here talking about this garbage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 Err, Spin already won the Hugo... last year. Yep, I was saying it didn't deserve it IMO. AFFC or Accelerando should have taken it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bellis Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 I liked Eifelheim. I'm pulling for it to win. On topic, I notice JM seems to have divided SFF along somewhat strange lines. To him, epic fantasy is conservative, while sci-fi deals with big ideas. How else would you justify calling Baroque Cycle sci-fi and not fantasy? (me, I'd call it shoddy historical fiction, but that's how my tastes run) The lines between all these sub-genres are so blurred though. I would rather judge each work as an independent work and not representative of any field. Generalizations are odious. This also seems to be an issue with some of the commentary by Martin fans - not wanting GRRM to be lumped with other heroic fantasy. A lot of heroic fantasy is conservative by the definition of JM, however, a lot of sci-fi, especially space opera, is equally conservative (band of rebels overthrows the evil hegemon to establish new world government). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bellis Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 I also should add that I really enjoyed reading Ran's, Arilou/Galactus' and Wert's defenses and analyses of GRRM. Even if JM obviously didn't get it. Good posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted September 1, 2007 Share Posted September 1, 2007 Apparently we've scared him off and he'll never talk about fantasy again. McC has mistaken robust debate for a vindictive hate campaign and has presented himself as a martyr set upon by rabid GRRM fans rather than, as actually is the case, someone who didn't put very much thought into their argument and was taken by surprise when he was called on it and unable to provide any kind of response using specific examples and sources which he'd actually read. Is this what passes for debate these days? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Maid Posted September 1, 2007 Share Posted September 1, 2007 I don't think he was expecting such a huge learned responses from GRRM fans, with us supposedly being all sheep-like. And he says that he welcomes robust debate, but apparently can't stand it when it's shown he's clearly out of his depth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The WaterDancer Knight Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 you know the old saying about opinions and assholes. You mean that even assholes have opinions ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.