Comparing R. Scott Bakker with George R. R. Martin

[TerraPrime]

I suppose the heart of the matter is that Martin's world is just grindingly medieval with all the assorted miseries while Bakker's world is capable both of higher peaks and lower lows. If things go wrong Bakker's world may end up a Hell on Earth but if things go right great things are possible. Maybe that makes me a person who sees a glass half full...

I don't think people in Bakker's world are objectively less miserable. In fact, the women in Bakker's world are, manifestedly and by author fiat, more miserable than the women in Martin's world. I'm counting miserableness as both physical and emotional wellness. It is true that Martin's world is more true to the common concept of what medieval life was like, but Bakker's world isn't exactly steampunk either. I will even rank the tech level of Bakker's world as lower than Jordan's WoT, where we start to see steam power coming into play and machine automations. The use of magic in Bakker's world for some common tasks may make them seem more advanced than what is understood to be medieval, but socially, politically, and culturally, that world resembles a more-or-less medieval feel to me.

But even if what you said there is true and I agree with it, that doesn't seem to fit the definition of cynicism. For something to be cynical, I think it needs to be upfront about saying that people's stated motivations, to themselves or to others, are in contradiction to their true intention, wherein we find out about their true intention through revelation, access to inner dialogues, or described events that contradict the stated purposes. Or perhaps, cynicism in how the author reveals his/her view of mankind, in that we're always going to be selfish hairless apes despite our stated lofty goals. In that, I'd say that Abercrombie is the most cynical of them all, but if we compare Bakker and Martin, I'd say Kelthus alone will overshadow anything that Martin can come up with. Kelthus' whole gig is that he can see through people's emotional weaknesses and do whatever is needed to achieve his own goal, including lying and deceiving others into trusting him, as well as manipulating others into doing what he wants them to do. Tywin would be comparable to Kelthus in a way, and so would Baelish. The difference though is that Kelthus is metaphysically cognizant of this whereas Baelish and Tywin are more immersed in their own desires. That makes, in my view, Bakker's world a more cynical one, and not the other way around.

Inrau. Achamian. Proyas. Xinemus. I'm not saying they don't have flaws, but I think all of them are always trying to do the right thing.

The characters I consider decidedly evil include Kellhus, Cnaiür, Conphas (the mini-Kellhus), and Xerius.

Eh? You don't think Cnaiur is trying to do the right thing, in his own mind? Or Conphas, for that matter? What makes you think that they are knowingly doing what is wrong?

[Shryke]

Uh, what? Good intentions are all that is needed to be a good character? I can't believe you would consider Achamian to be white (whatever that means). A man who is strongly implied to be a pedophile? A man who tried to manipulate one of his students into spying for him, even when he knew it would probably result in Inrau's death? And that's just book one.

Ned Stark is a flawed man, but he's far more morally defensible than Achamian. It's not even close.

Achamian convinced Inrau to spy for him because it was important and because otherwise they'd have just had him killed. This is spelled out in the book.

Also, even if one goes with the implications about Achamian and his students, it's implied to be more on the level of the old-school Greek view of older/younger men pairings then the kind of pedophilia you are implying.

[Grack21]

I never got the impression Achamian was a pedophile at all, just that he was a teacher who could become overy fond of his studetns.

[Happy Ent]

Both authors have released treats within the last few days.

Martin has published one of the chapters that were moved from Dance to Winds on his website. Bakker has published a short story on his blog.

Both show the authors at their best. Martin gives us a glimpse of how well he can write, and monumentally satisfying Dance could have been. I love it. Bakker’s story is just jaw-droppingly awesome.

I think neither excerpt makes much sense without having read the corresponding 5 volumes of either author, so they are bad introductions. But they work well to highlight the differing strengths of both authors when they’re at their finest.

Interestingly, both stories take place in a tower. Both are written from the perspective of a character that has been through a mind-altering personal transformation because they were exposed to terrible torture. Both feature an important character with a luminous magic item.

[awesome possum]

Comparing? Nah.

Contrasting? Okay:

One is good. One is boring.

[DemonKing]

In these moments I like to think about which series I would like to have with me if I was trapped on a desert island with no other source of entertainment.

On that basis, I would have to go with Martin. I like reading Bakker, and he can come up with some good moments, but even if Martin never lives to finish ASOI&F he has given us so many memorable characters and jaw-dropping moments and such a rich, complex tapestry to back it up that I always get something new whenever I read them. I'll admit that there are some things in Martin that don't make sense, such as how the Night Watch has managed to survive as an organisation for 10,000 years with no evidence of the Others or how years are determined when seasons are of random length but that's just nitpicky I guess.

Bakker's dialog is a little but other-worldy for me (which is probably why Kellhus and his brood work) and I felt that his first trilogy relied a little heavily on the Crusades for inspiration. Also I find the "threat" of the Consult and Non-God as a little bit existential compared to the Others in ASOI&F. He's certainly worth a read but he doesn't inspire me to religiously scour his webpage every day for any new tidbits of information regarding his next book in the way GRR does.

[Pineapple]

I felt that his first trilogy relied a little heavily on the Crusades for inspiration.

And ASOIAF relies heavily on the War of the Roses (not that I mind)

[Seraphimal]

Devout Bakkerite so I guess I have to go with Bakker.

In terms of both of them portraying alternative POVs. . . I'd say that they're both kind of mediocre. Every Daenerys chapter in AGOT couldn't help but mention Dany's "supple breasts". That was just one of the more obvious instances in which Dany's perspective is interjected by GRRM commenting on the quality of her tits. Of course, Bakker does this just as often with his philosophical reveries. Although Bakker's was more interesting for me because of Kellhus' perspective, and it's difference from everyone else's. But IMO if you want to see good multiplicity-of-perspective in fiction, read As I Lay Dying, by Faulkner. Faulkner's style really puts you in every characters' minds.

Bakker takes the conventions of fantasy and uses them to explore ground that's at least somewhat new. Even though it's heavily based off of real-world history, Lord of the Rings, and DUNE, the metaphysics, scenarios and questions explored are much more interesting (only opinion) than GRRM, where magic is more of a plot device and the stakes never seem to be elevated beyond politicking.

As far as world-building goes. . . gonna catch hell from Kal for this. . . lol. I immensely prefer Bakker's. Whenever reading history, I am usually more swept up in the larger themes of the cultures and civilizations in play. Individual generals and kings and battles, like Belisarius, Theodoric, and Manzikert, stick out to me for their historic significance. Long lists of kings and battles on their own bore me, I want to know how a region or culture developed as a people, or how that ruler or battle affected them as a people...

Bakker's cultures just feel more vibrant and fully-fleshed. I get no real sense of "culture" or "history" from Martin. When I was a kid, I was kind of impressed by all of the Free Cities people having colorful, wacky beards. Post-Bakker, Martin's "exotic cultures" seems thin in comparison. It's something of a no-contest, in my opinion. I just get no sense of competing cultures coalescing, interacting vibrantly, and crumbling in decay from Martin (I do, however, get this impression from real world history and Bakker) . And religion definitely has much more weight in Bakker's world, for numerous reasons. While Martin's use of archaic culture is done from a sort of cursory and decorative standpoint, Bakker seems to really want to explore a world inhabited by thoroughly pre-industrial, non-modern people.

Also the scope and the stakes in Bakker's world feel a lot heavier. Compare the No-God to the Others. I haven't read ADWD, but are the Others EVER going to do anything? Because they seem largely decorative at the moment. The Dragons and Others just feel tacked on to ASOIAF and never seem to really exert any force on the primary plot, and while it's an entertaining read, at times I wish GRRM actually explored the genre more enthusiastically. Again, just my subjective opinions/personal preferences.

Prince of Nothing Timeline

ASOIAF Timeline

Just feels like more happens in 6,000 years in the Bakkerverse than 6,000 years in Westeros.

[Tears of Lys]

Bakker v. GRRM: I wouldn't want to live in Westeros, but I really, REALLY wouldn't want to live in Earwa.

[Pineapple]

Bakker v. GRRM: I wouldn't want to live in Westeros, but I really, REALLY wouldn't want to live in Earwa.

Caste-noble life doesn't sound too bad (Conphas had quite a fun time). And according to the beliefs of the caste-menials, true salvation awaits in the afterlife.

[Happy Ent]

Bakker v. GRRM: I wouldn't want to live in Westeros, but I really, REALLY wouldn't want to live in Earwa.

I don’t understand why people keep saying that.

The difference is that GRRM doesn’t give us Jeyne Poole’s POV. He almost exclusively writes about aristocrats.

[Sci-2]

If I woke up in Westeros, I'd do my best to become some up-jumped minor lord with a little bit of land in Dorne to start a vineyard.

If I woke up in Earwa, I would frantically scramble to find the nearest sharp object with which I could slit my throat.

If I woke up in Earwa, I would blind myself and hope to God that being an asshole counts as "passion" for purposes of channeling Water.

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

I don’t understand why people keep saying that.

The difference is that GRRM doesn’t give us Jeyne Poole’s POV. He almost exclusively writes about aristocrats.

In Bakkerworld, hell exists and you (yes, you) are probably going.

[Shryke]

In Bakkerworld, hell exists and you (yes, you) are probably going.

Not hell doesn't seem particularly fun either frankly.

The afterlife is basically a free-for-all for your soul it seems like.

[Tears of Lys]

I don’t understand why people keep saying that.

The difference is that GRRM doesn’t give us Jeyne Poole’s POV. He almost exclusively writes about aristocrats.

In Westeros you could be Jeyne Poole, yes, (or Theon or any number of woebegone peasant folk) whereupon you're basically f'ed. But once you're dead, your agony is pretty much over. In Earwa you're possibly looking at being chased around by a Ciphrang with a gleam in its eye. And while you're still around, don't forget all those charming little rapers who would just love to bundle you off to Golgotterath to play with, not to mention that your "savior" may plan on handing you over just as a diversionary tactic.

No. Uh-uh. Count me out.

[wolverine]

HAHAHAH.

Molly was NOT THE RIGHT PERSON. You're not talking about Molly, whoever the hell she is, you were talking about Lollys Stokeworth. The fact that you don't even know her actual name gives you no remote basis to criticize my knowledge. Troll elsewhere.

Yeah. Good one Grack. You had me thinking I was the worst ASOIF fan ever. Molly, who the fuck is Molly?

Just my 2 cents on some of the recurring themes in the thread since I don't have time to frequent the board like I would like to.

I feel that Bakker has much better prose and I am not really a 'prosey' guy. I like how his writing flows. I also feel the philsophy in his books bogs the reader down much much less than late Erikson. Looking back I would believe someone if they told me that a 100 pages of TTH was about the emotions of an ox. There just seem to be pages and pages of boring philosiphising in Erikson that I don't ever recall from Bakker.

Martin is amazing at getting you to hate someone and then like/empathize with them. I sill think he can spin a pretty good yarn. He is one of the few authors who come close to making me laugh out loud (Erikson used to do that with Tehol and Bugg). Bakker's books have a very different mood. He writes few characters that are very likeable. I don't know if I have read anything that can feel as dark. I actually think that is an accomplishment.

I think Bakker's world feels much more realistic. It has a denser feel for me and a more believable one. ASOIF feels more like a story and Bakker's stuff feels more like it could have happened.

A while ago I never thought I would even consider Bakker in the same league as Martin. Mostly because I viewed Martin so far above everything in fantasy. Now I honestly don't know which one "is better." Depends on what you want or what you are in the mood for. I know I don't rush out to buy the next Bakker like I do the next Martin, but I don't think that makes Martin better. Bakker is more of a chore to read at times but may be more rewarding.

EDIT: I forgot this: Bakker's names are awesome. They add to the story and I don't just mean Yalgrotta Sranchammer.

[spinwallah]

first post dudes. it's bakker. after storm of swords i would have said martin was in the midst of the greatest series ever. after wlw i'd say that bakker is. feast and dance were too disappointing for words.

[Sci-2]

I wonder if I'm one of the few that thinks with the exception of the Cersei plot, Feast is one of the better books written in fantasy...or at least one that attempts to accomplish something novel. I mean, the novel addresses PTSD as well as a genuine aftermath of war. There's an examination of class, a recognition that the poor are often pushed to fight wars.

[Pineapple]

I wonder if I'm one of the few that thinks with the exception of the Cersei plot, Feast is one of the better books written in fantasy...or at least one that attempts to accomplish something novel. I mean, the novel addresses PTSD as well as a genuine aftermath of war. There's an examination of class, a recognition that the poor are often pushed to fight wars.

Yes, but that Cersei plot takes up 1/5 of the book. And the cliffhangers... Had I known prior to reading, I would've started from the last few chapters.

PS: Sci, I salute you. PS:T is one of my favorite games

[Grack21]

I actually really liked Feast. But I love reading from the perspectives of crazy villains.