How is it George makes such interesting characters?

[madmanmorty]

I'm an aspiring author it always amazes how dynamic and interesting every single one of his characters are. Such detail in every single one off then. Have you noticed any particular way he has done things?

[NorthRemembers10]

He makes each one human. He shows their flaws, what whats them good and what makes them bad. Each one has some kind of inner or self dilema that they are constantly dealing with. Everyone can usually find something to relate to or can understand.

[Queen‍‍‍‍‍‍ Alysanne‍‍™]

is it only me or I find all the Ironborn boring except theon and Asha

[Steinnis]

They're quite realistic and there's more to them than meets the eye. They all have their personal goals, motivations and doubts. There's a lot of self conflict in there too with some of the more complex characters.

[WTFSalami]

It helps tremendously that he chose to write in a first person narrative style. Being privy to the inner thoughts of these characters makes them more real.

[Pero the first of His name]

When he writes someone`s POV he tries very much to think like that character, pretend he is in it.

With some characters it is harder than others.

[Oreo Crumbs]

You should listen to George's interviews. He often brings up this point: "I've always agreed with William Faulkner—he said that the human heart in conflict with itself is the only thing worth writing about. I've always taken that as my guiding principle, and the rest is just set dressing."

And of course if George reads Faulkner, then you should too (The Sound and the Fury is a phenomenal book). Reading prolifically is probably the single most important thing for any writer.

[pride of the 7 kingdoms]

He shows all the characters with good and bad sides. Characters are not black and White. All characters are very different from each other. The thing one says good, the other says bad. They all have their own characteristics, goals and histories.

[Queen Elsa]

Here's what he says when it comes to writing different POV characters:

In order to get inside their skin, I have to identify with them. That includes even the ones who are complete bastards, nasty, twisted, deeply flawed human beings with serious psychological problems. Even them. When I get inside their skin and look out through their eyes, I have to feel a certain - if not sympathy, certainly empathy for them. I have to try to perceive the world as they do, and that creates a certain amount of affection.

[RoamingRonin]

He puts his characters through every range of emotion every chance he gets.

He's a master at creating intense drama which is incredibly important because characters are built around actions, not words. If they don't have anything to do then they (and the story) are boring.

If you want to create compelling characters, put them in a compelling story.

[Oreo Crumbs]

He puts his characters through every range of emotion every chance he gets.

He's a master at creating intense drama which is incredibly important because characters are built around actions, not words. If they don't have anything to do then they (and the story) are boring.

If you want to create compelling characters, put them in a compelling story.

I don't mean to discount your methods, but I get the feeling GRRM would disagree with the last point. He always talks about how the characters drive the story, i.e. what happens next is determined by the character's personality and situation, not some pre-determined fate that GRRM wants to write. Often the story turns in ways that he didn't expect. In other words, he would probably reverse your point: if you want to create a compelling story, let it be played out by compelling characters.

[Rooseman]

It helps tremendously that he chose to write in a first person narrative style.

Just to be a smartass, he writes third person limited POVs, not in the first person.

This way he can choose to omit certain things (Brienne screaming "a word", Arya warging into the cat etc.) and expand on others (like when he gives us detailed accounts of things that had happened in the past, while the character himself doesn't necessarily go through all these information in his brain at that moment).

If he was always forced to stick to the character's actual thoughts, he'd be way more limited.

[Mikkel]

Just to be a smartass, he writes third person limited POVs, not in the first person.

This way he can choose to omit certain things (Brienne screaming "a word", Arya warging into the cat etc.) and expand on others (like when he gives us detailed accounts of things that had happened in the past, while the character himself doesn't necessarily go through all these information in his brain at that moment).

If he was always forced to stick to the character's actual thoughts, he'd be way more limited.

That's not being a smart-ass, that's being right, and on-topic.

I always felt that his choice of (as you put it) third-person limited POV is one of the masterstrokes of the series - it may not be unique, but then it doesn't have to be, when it's done as well as it is with Martin.

[Arthur Dayne's Honor]

He likes to make us love character then he kills them. That's his thing and I'm pretty sure he gets off on it

[Pero the first of His name]

He likes to make us love character then he kills them. That's his thing and I'm pretty sure he gets off on it

[Jon of the Dead]

A good technique he uses for character development is that he has most characters saying or thinking certain things or trying to convince themselves of something, but through their actions they do the exact opposite. This makes them very real and complex, imo.

[The Prince of Newcastle]

He is just a quality author.