1269 réponses à ce sujet

[Pacifien]

jcainhaze wrote...
Whatever! Martin has permanently killed off plenty of characters.  Major characters!   Eddard Stark comes to mind. Or maybe Robert Baratheon. Or a dozen others. 

I think you missed the part where Nameless One and I imply that Martin does not have the balls to kill off another POV character since Eddard Stark. And he hasn't.

He uses Eddard's death in the first book to toy with the readers that he can do it to another POV character at any time, such as Davos and Theon whose viewpoints disappeared for an entire two books before he revealed they were alive and well. He again toys with the readers in virtually every single chapter of A Dance With Dragons, only to reveal the characters manage to survive for yet another chapter. He does this for every character save one, which brings me to my next point....

jcainhaze wrote... 
Really?  Robert Jordan was certainly guilty of unnecessary detail but not George R.R. Martin.

GRRM could have cut out Quentyn Martell's entire POV story and I'd say we as the readers would have lost little. What pivotal role he did contribute to the overall story could have easily been told through a POV that GRRM inevitably had to add anyway, which was that of Barristan Selmy.

Then I wouldn't have to complain that the only reason why he added a new POV in the latest book was because he wanted to demonstrate he could still kill off a POV character. And I will stick by this complaint until I pick up The Winds of Winters and see that Jon is dead. Then I will come back to this thread and go GRRM's kung fu is the greatest.

[Addai]

I highly doubt GRRM is motivated to "prove" anything. He's got a story he wants to tell, and characters he wants in it. The story is master.

Not staying dead is no boon to the characters, that's for sure. And he's still killing off major characters. Why is it necessary for a POV character to die? GRRM has nothing to prove. Ned had to die because that's what was necessary to move the story.

[Pacifien]

If it's not necessary for a POV character to die, it's certainly not necessary to end each chapter where they're on the precipice of death. It's a modern day writing trope developed when writers realized cliffhangers helped keep viewers interested over a long break.

If people want to stop using GRRM's indiscriminate killing of characters as proof that he will not let his love of a character get in the way of where the story leads him, then I'll stop ****ing when it's apparent that he is actually not doing anything of the sort. I don't want to see a series I happen to enjoy be treated as sacrosanct when it isn't.

[Brockololly]

Pacifien wrote...
He uses Eddard's death in the first book to toy with the readers that he can do it to another POV character at any time, such as Davos and Theon whose viewpoints disappeared for an entire two books before he revealed they were alive and well. He again toys with the readers in virtually every single chapter of A Dance With Dragons, only to reveal the characters manage to survive for yet another chapter. He does this for every character save one, which brings me to my next point....

True, I think he's overplayed the soap opera-ish cliffhanger endings of "Oh no! Character X is dead for sure!" at the end of chapters now. It works every once in a while, but IMO, those kinds of contrived cliffhangers (like with Brienne) fall flat when they're resolved in the follow up book that took years to come out and is resolved with little fanfare at all. 

Its fine in moderation but he's used that narrative trick too much now such that its not generating suspense anymore. If he's going to kill off people, I 'd hope its clear they're dead within the same book, not like how he's handled Theon, Brienne and now Jon.

Pacifien wrote...
GRRM could have cut out Quentyn Martell's entire POV story and I'd say we as the readers would have lost little. What pivotal role he did contribute to the overall story could have easily been told through a POV that GRRM inevitably had to add anyway, which was that of Barristan Selmy.

Then I wouldn't have to complain that the only reason why he added a new POV in the latest book was because he wanted to demonstrate he could still kill off a POV character. And I will stick by this complaint until I pick up The Winds of Winters and see that Jon is dead. Then I will come back to this thread and go GRRM's kung fu is the greatest.

While he did bring Cat back from the dead, its not like she's the same character now as she was before. Let alone that she's no longer a POV character. So its not like he brings back characters from the dead all the time- its that he tries to fake out people in thinking people are dead or rumored to be dead.

But I kind of agree- I'd be more surprised if Jon is truly dead than if he warged into Ghost or is Azor Ahai reborn by Melisandre or something. Thats not to say I need to have characters die by the boat load. While GRRM  probably needs a better editor, I enjoy his writing and so long as he actually finishes the series, whatever he comes up with I'll gladly read. Eventually all these plots and characters need to start converging again, so I'd imagine that'll involve some of them kicking the bucket.

Pacifien wrote...

If it's not necessary for a POV
character to die, it's certainly not necessary to end each chapter where
they're on the precipice of death. It's a modern day writing trope
developed when writers realized cliffhangers helped keep viewers
interested over a long break.

Agreed. Again, in moderation its a good device but IMO, only when the ambiguity of death is resolved in the same book. From book to book it loses any punch it might have. You can have other plot developments that make for better suspense building than possible death. I think the end of GoT was great in getting me hyped for the next book in thinking how Ned's death would affect things or Rob as king or the dragons. Same with the aftermath of A Storm of Swords.

Modifié par Brockololly, 16 janvier 2012 - 03:45 .

[Nameless one7]

Just a question, I believe in A clash of Kings or a Storm of Swords when Danaerys was going through the magic visions she saw an old King, does anyone know who that king was supposed to be?

[jcainhaze]

Pacifien wrote...

jcainhaze wrote...
Whatever! Martin has permanently killed off plenty of characters.  Major characters!   Eddard Stark comes to mind. Or maybe Robert Baratheon. Or a dozen others. 

I think you missed the part where Nameless One and I imply that Martin does not have the balls to kill off another POV character since Eddard Stark. And he hasn't.

AH, yes I missed that part.  I have a feeling The Winds of Winter is going to be a death fest of main characters.  Except for Jon......can't kill Jon.

Addai67 wrote...

I highly doubt GRRM is motivated to "prove" anything. He's got a story he wants to tell, and characters he wants in it. The story is master.

Not staying dead is no boon to the characters, that's for sure. And he's still killing off major characters. Why is it necessary for a POV character to die? GRRM has nothing to prove. Ned had to die because that's what was necessary to move the story.

I kinda feel like you feel Addai.  The story is master.  And why would GRRM feel obligated to prove anything?  He's already proven to be one of the all time masters of fantasy. 

Modifié par jcainhaze, 16 janvier 2012 - 05:18 .

[Pacifien]

jcainhaze wrote...
AH, yes I missed that part.  I have a feeling The Winds of Winter is going to be a death fest of main characters.  Except for Jon......can't kill Jon.

Why not? That's where the story took him.

[jcainhaze]

Pacifien wrote...

jcainhaze wrote...
AH, yes I missed that part.  I have a feeling The Winds of Winter is going to be a death fest of main characters.  Except for Jon......can't kill Jon.

Why not? That's where the story took him.

Cuz he's my favorite character. 

Seriosly though, he's probably too important to the plot to die yet.

[Addai]

Pacifien wrote...

jcainhaze wrote...
AH, yes I missed that part.  I have a feeling The Winds of Winter is going to be a death fest of main characters.  Except for Jon......can't kill Jon.

Why not? That's where the story took him.

Oh, sarcasm.  That's original.

Anyway, I don't have this issue, have never felt he was being cheesy or manipulative.  I cheered when it turned out Mance Rayder wasn't dead, and I knew Brienne wasn't dead.  Just killing people off for the sake of shutting critics up, that's what I hope he doesn't do.

[Eski.Moe]

I do agree that he overdoes the 'cliffhanger' thing when it comes to quite a few POVs. I think every major one in aDwD had one of some kind. I know he used to work in television and film and it is good as a literary device. When used sparingly.
It loses a lot of its shine when used and again but it seems to be his favourite way to end a chapter.

The one with Arya in aSoS would have been hilarious had it not followed one of possibly the most traumatic moments in narrative. 'His axe took her in the back of her head'.
'Oh, it was just the blunt side!' is the realisation in her next POV.

[Pacifien]

Addai67 wrote...

Pacifien wrote...

jcainhaze wrote...
AH, yes I missed that part.  I have a feeling The Winds of Winter is going to be a death fest of main characters.  Except for Jon......can't kill Jon.

Why not? That's where the story took him.

Oh, sarcasm.  That's original.

It's a sarcastic point, though.

Once upon a time, I was discussing A Game of Thrones on another forum around the time when the book first came out. And the book was treated as a revelation to the fantasy genre.

We specifically discussed Ned's death. I still remember the comment from someone at the time "Gandalf should have stayed dead." And I will be honest here, the first time I read the book, when I read Ned's death, I threw the book across the room against a wall. Then I gave a heavy sigh and kept reading. As I kept reading, it became apparent that Ned was really dead and that GRRM really didn't sound like he was bringing him back. The magic that we see by the time of A Dance With Dragons is nonexistent in A Game of Thrones. Ned is missing a head. Ned is dead. GRRM did something that was actually rather nonstandard for the genre and kill not only an important character, but a beloved character.

And that's always been my problem with stories in general, about how the love of a character will alter the story rather than let the character flow with the story. Now that's going to be a given when you have fairly standard story with a clearly defined protagonist. Tradition states the protagonist must develop to some state of conclusion by the end of the story, and so the story must include the protagonist until that conclusion.

Some stories, particularly fantasy operas such as Song of Ice and Fire, will have many protagonists, and so the idea that each one must reach the conclusion of the whole series does not hold. In fact, the reason why GRRM's series was treated as such a revelation back in 1996 was the promise that all the standard conventions wouldn't hold. No wizards in pointy hats. No dwarves who came from a long line of smithies and drank ale all day. No elves with fantastic archery skills and keen eyes. And Gandalf stayed dead.

For the most part, GRRM holds true to this initial promise. Almost.

Addai67 wrote...
Anyway, I don't have this issue, have never felt he was being cheesy or manipulative.  I cheered when it turned out Mance Rayder wasn't dead, and I knew Brienne wasn't dead.

Be glad you don't feel manipulated then. Believe me, my issue isn't Mance Rayder's survival, which I thought was clever, nor Brienne's, which I have to agree was poorly followed up by a cameo status in Jaime's practically cameo POV chapter. It's really GRRM's jeopardy writing tactic.

I don't even think GRRM consciously even knows he's doing it. As Eski.Moe pointed out, GRRM used to write for television, where ending each Act on that particular type of cliffhanger would have worked marvelously. Perhaps being involved in the HBO series while finishing A Dance With Dragons put him in the wrong mindset, I don't know. If you don't see it, don't look for it.

[Seagloom]

In my eyes the issue has less to do with GRRM killing or sparing perspective characters than what Pacifien wrote above. You know what made Eddard Stark's demise special in my eyes? How unceremonious it was. There was dramatic buildup. No last goodbyes. No closure. One moment Ned is standing there giving his lie ridding confession and in the next he is a head shorter.

Contrast how Ned's execution was handled in AGoT to the HBO rendition. The former is sudden and brutal. The latter is borderline melodramatic. Tearful, but heavy-handed just the same. I enjoyed both versions for different reasons.

That surprising and swift way to write a character out forever was lost by the time of the Red Wedding. By then GRRM began telegraphing major events for what I assume was dramatic tension. That is, if he was doing it intentionally.

AGoT read like a window into the lives of various characters. Later books read like most stories do: with predictable scenarios and plot device characters. In short, ASoIaF is a hell of a puppet act with visible strings. GRRM puts more care into dazzling us than making his performance feel real.

Modifié par Seagloom, 18 janvier 2012 - 01:35 .

[Pacifien]

Seagloom wrote...
Contrast how Ned's execution was handled in AGoT to the HBO rendition. The former is sudden and brutal. The latter is borderline melodramatic. Tearful, but heavy-handed just the same. I enjoyed both versions for different reasons.

That surprising and swift way to write a character out forever was lost by the time of the Red Wedding. By then GRRM began telegraphing major events for what I assume was dramatic tension. That is, if he was doing it intentionally.

The Red Wedding never impressed me very much, and I never could quite describe to anyone exactly why it didn't. I had more reaction reading about its aftermath, that sickening feeling when I found out what they did to Robb and his direwolf that only then made me truly hate what the Freys did rather than the original massacre itself. And I knew that my reaction was odd.

And I think now I understand why. It's because the Red Wedding is told through Catelyn's perspective, and the entire chapter is filled with her suspicious dread. She doesn't like the wedding from the start and views it with a critical eye from the beginning, expecting the worst, and then the worst happens. Had we seen Ned's confession through the eyes of someone who had that capacity for fearing the worst, his execution would have simply been the culmination of the dread.

I think that's supposed to be what makes the Stark children chapters work is that they are looking at the political play around them without fully understanding, and thus we as readers share in that lack of understanding with them. Actually, no, now I'm just too tired to keep thinking about it, so I pulled that observation out of my ass.

[Seagloom]

Pulling things out of our ass is a tried and true tradition! Besides, most of the conversation in these threads is based on mostly groundless conjecture. We can make an informed hypothesis based on our reading and what scant information GRRM shares with us, but none of has unfettered access to his brain last I check. Nor are we all going to interpret everything the same way.

The point you make about the Stark children does have a grain of truth in it. On GoT, we were not limited to Arya's perspective of Eddard's execution. Our view was that of an omniscient figure taking it all in at once. It made for great drama, but came across differently from the book as a result. Now that I think about it though, GRRM did include a cliffhanger in AGoT with Arya. It just wasn't at the same level of forced suspense as his future cliffhangers.

I gotta say, for all my enjoyment of this series there is no way I could name it one of my favorites of all time in good conscience. For all the things GRRM does right, he does almost as many wrong. That's okay. He doesn't need to pen a masterpiece for me to enjoy his stories. But it does mean I can't relate to those that put this series on a pedestal and worship it.

[Nameless one7]

So does anyone think Daenarys will ever come to Westeros? I think GRRM should rename A song of fire and ice to the Queen who has better things to do.

[Seagloom]

It's inevitable unless GRRM has no idea how to write foreshadowing. Not that it's foreshadowed subtly. Dany has been dreaming of retaking Westeros since AGoT. It will happen. It has to.

Modifié par Seagloom, 22 janvier 2012 - 10:11 .

[Nameless one7]

I can see GRRM saying Dany falls off the Dragon and dies, the end of Dany's story arc.

[Pacifien]

Nameless one7 wrote...
So does anyone think Daenarys will ever come to Westeros? I think GRRM should rename A song of fire and ice to the Queen who has better things to do.

I imagine GRRM thought this was going to be much easier to do when he was planning a five year gap in time for the characters between A Storm of Swords and A Dance With Dragons.

I did find ADWD a bit of a chore to read whenever we were on POV characters outside of Westeros, because they were all swirling around Daenerys whose own storyline GRRM had to then drag out of the sedentary state he put it in. And I do give GRRM quite a bit of credit on that part, I think he did a marvelous job of showing a girl who was desperately trying to play the part of benevolent ruler and losing the game. I mean, it was boring to read, but he had to write about it because that's Dany's story.

If Dany's last chapter in ADWD isn't the beginning of what happens when you "wake the dragon," then I give up.

[Nameless one7]

Pacifien wrote...

Nameless one7 wrote...
So does anyone think Daenarys will ever come to Westeros? I think GRRM should rename A song of fire and ice to the Queen who has better things to do.

I imagine GRRM thought this was going to be much easier to do when he was planning a five year gap in time for the characters between A Storm of Swords and A Dance With Dragons.

I did find ADWD a bit of a chore to read whenever we were on POV characters outside of Westeros, because they were all swirling around Daenerys whose own storyline GRRM had to then drag out of the sedentary state he put it in. And I do give GRRM quite a bit of credit on that part, I think he did a marvelous job of showing a girl who was desperately trying to play the part of benevolent ruler and losing the game. I mean, it was boring to read, but he had to write about it because that's Dany's story.

If Dany's last chapter in ADWD isn't the beginning of what happens when you "wake the dragon," then I give up.

Yes, it's time for Dany to go to Westeros, because we all know the books are going to get really interesting as soon as Dany comes to Westeros.

[Pallid]

Seagloom wrote...

It's inevitable unless GRRM has no idea how to write foreshadowing. Not that it's foreshadowed subtly. Dany has been dreaming of retaking Westeros since AGoT. It will happen. It has to.

I noticed that if some character has been wanting something to happen really bad, often thinking and talking about it - than it will NEVER happen.

Modifié par omskman, 23 janvier 2012 - 05:29 .

[Pacifien]

omskman wrote...
I noticed that if some character has been wanting something to happen really bad, often thinking and talking about it - than it will NEVER happen.

What? Nonsense. Bran can totally fly.

[jcainhaze]

Pacifien wrote...

omskman wrote...
I noticed that if some character has been wanting something to happen really bad, often thinking and talking about it - than it will NEVER happen.

What? Nonsense. Bran can totally fly.

He's just not very good at the landing part.

[Pacifien]

jcainhaze wrote...

Pacifien wrote...
What? Nonsense. Bran can totally fly.

He's just not very good at the landing part.

He gets better at it.

[Seagloom]

omskman wrote...

I noticed that if some character has been wanting something to happen really bad, often thinking and talking about it - than it will NEVER happen.

I think Dany is a special case. She is obviously one of this story's central characters. If anyone in this series could be a considered a proper protagonist, Dany would make the short list.

Then again, maybe you're right. I've been waiting for the Winter Apocalypse for-freakin'-EVER. Of course, I'm not a character in the books, so... nevermind...

Modifié par Seagloom, 24 janvier 2012 - 12:01 .

[Nameless one7]

So does anyone else think Littlefinger will get whats coming to him in the next book? I think they gotta kill of Varys or Littlefinger.