Finished Game of Thrones, I liked it more than I expected. Tyrion is a pretty cool character, and the story overall was entertaining. I think it could have been better paced, the first three-fourths is really slow, and then stuff gets much more frantic near the end.
I'm kind of disappointed in the
magic and zombies at the end. I guess I already knew about the zombies from the prologue, but the plausible parts of the book are already so interesting that I don't see what they really add. I see that they're a really interesting addition to the story since presumably they're going to make everyone want to band together to fight them off while everyone is fighting for the throne, but the King Beyond the Wall guy could have been that twist himself without the need for zombies.
And the witch lady thing was totally lame I thought, and came out of nowhere. I don't see how she contributed anything at all to the story. During the part where she resurrected Drogo and Dany killed him anyway a day later, and apparently Dany gave birth to a devil or something, I was thinking "What the hell is happening here?" Personally I think Drogo should have just died from the wound, Dany should have been injured during the battle and her baby died that way, and we arrive at the same point where Dany had lost everything that was finally making her happy. She can still walk into the funeral fire with the eggs, no need for the totally random witch lady.
The zombies I can begrudgingly accept, the dragons I think are actually pretty cool, but I really hope there isn't more magic going forward. Speaking of dragons, I'm wondering how things are going to shake out, since unless the dragons take a really long time to mature, assuming she can control them I would assume that Dany could take over the realm pretty easily with them.
Anyway, a lot of my complaints are nitpicky, it was a decent read and I'm looking forward to the sequels. I just wish they weren't so long.
It seems that most of the complaints about the existence of magic and supernatural elements in the series come from people who don't read fantasy often and seem to have an intrinsic distaste for it or feel that it cheapens the narrative. Personally I don't really get it, as it is a fantasy book after all, and also a major theme throughout the book that magic is a very real thing in this universe that most people have forgotten about or even deny ever existed.
To ask "what does magic add to the story?" is essentially like asking "what does the story taking place in Westeros add to the story?" It doesn't add anything, it is the story. On a similar note, to isolate those elements aside from the "plausible parts" doesn't really make sense either unless we're imagining this story taking place on earth. Those things are plausible in this world.
None of this is an attack on you in the slightest, by the way. I'd just like to hear more about why the inclusion of magic/zombies/dragons is inherently disappointing to some people. To me, it seems like an aversion to fantasy in general.
I really really like this. It's sort of like a mix between Catcher and the Rye and Perks of Being a Wallflower, but with much less complaining. Main character is a 23 year old traveling through Los Angeles, trying to figure out his life. Super modern too, Facebook, iPhones, etc.
It seems that most of the complaints about the existence of magic and supernatural elements in the series come from people who don't read fantasy often and seem to have an intrinsic distaste for it or feel that it cheapens the narrative. Personally I don't really get it, as it is a fantasy book after all, and also a major theme throughout the book that magic is a very real thing in this universe that most people have forgotten about or even deny ever existed.
To ask "what does magic add to the story?" is essentially like asking "what does the story taking place in Westeros add to the story?" It doesn't add anything, it is the story. On a similar note, to isolate those elements aside from the "plausible parts" doesn't really make sense either unless we're imagining this story taking place on earth. Those things are plausible in this world.
None of this is an attack on you in the slightest, by the way. I'd just like to hear more about why the inclusion of magic/zombies/dragons is inherently disappointing to some people. To me, it seems like an aversion to fantasy in general.
It's true, I don't read fantasy. I loved the Hobbit as a kid, and I've read the first half of the Chronicles of Amber (which is actually one of my favorite stories, or was when I last read it in high school), but for the most part I don't read much fantasy at all. Actually, as I was typing this, I just remembered that I read and enjoyed the Kingkiller Chronicles last year too, and I've Harry Potter.
Anyway, still, I'm not a huge fantasy fan, and a big reason I don't read much fantasy or sci fi is because I really don't like stuff that feels derivative. For the first three-fourths of the book I was thinking "Wow, here's a really popular fantasy series where the author didn't feel the need to throw in magic just because it's expected. The setting still has a fantasy feeling what with all the talk of dragons and legendary figures and ancient castles and structures like the Wall, but the plot itself is actually pretty plausible."
And then, out of nowhere, we get the witch lady. I just feel like if you're going to write four-fifths of your book with no magic, why not just do away with it? I respect an author who can think outside of genre conventions. The author who thinks "I want to dramatically kill this character and can't think of anything cool... well this is a fantasy novel after all so fuck it, magic", not so much.
I wouldn't have minded as much if it were a common occurrence in the book, but it's not, and it feels out of place to me because of it. Regarding your comment that the magic doesn't need to add something to the story because it is the story, I don't agree because a huge, huge majority of the book is completely magic-free (outside of references to bygone eras and whatnot). I think if you're going to suddenly introduce magic, it should be for a good reason.
The zombies feel a little pointless to me as well, though they were there from the beginning so I can't really complain as much. And like I said earlier, I'm nitpicking with the magic thing, don't think that because I'm writing so much about it it completely ruined the story for me, I did enjoy the book.
I already said this, but I don't understand this attitude at all.
I like the fantasy backstory of ASoIaF, the idea that this world used to be full of magic and dragons but it's mostly been forgotten is a cool idea to me. And like I also said, I think the
dragons coming back
is actually pretty cool. The only part I have a problem with is that there is no magic present for the entire book, and all of a sudden there's a magician in a situation where there doesn't need to be.
It isn't explained at all either. What exactly was
demon that Dany gave birth to
near the end? Was there any significance to it, or was it just a random
demon?
Would there have been any consequences if it hadn't been killed? What made the magic possible? Is the whole thing proof that the Seven gods are or aren't real?
It just seems really lazy, especially if the rationalization for including it is "Well, magic IS fantasy, so you have to shoe-horn it in there somewhere, otherwise you may as well read historical fiction."
And as far as genre classification goes, the series is already fantasy with its gods and legendary heroes and zombies and
dragons
. It's not like the arbitrary witch and magic was necessary to remind us we're not reading a story set in medieval times.
Something is bothering me: I just read "My Father's Mask" and I wonder if anyone else got everything that was going on there. I'm still trying to figure it out.
I got this much from my first read through:
- mother has dark hair, father has red hair - colors of playing cards
- MC is named "Jack"
- the appraiser is a playing card
- the boy on the bicycle with angel wings is almost certainly the back of the Bicycle playing cards
- maybe something about the cards being fate and fate catching up to Jack? Or maybe everyone is a playing card and everyone's life is basically at the hands of the dealer?
- the mother cheats at cards to survive, even sacrificing the father?
Now I just can't figure out
a) what the grandfather's story has to do with any of this
b) why the mother being pregnant is important (assuming it's a beginning of a new cycle...a new hand?
c) the mask - maybe how we put up a mask when playing cards to disguise what we have?
d) is the son becoming the father and taking his place or just saying he'll be the man of the family? there's a bizarre Oedepidal undertone in this story.
I already said this, but I don't understand this attitude at all.
I like the fantasy backstory of ASoIaF, the idea that this world used to be full of magic and dragons but it's mostly been forgotten is a cool idea to me. And like I also said, I think the
dragons coming back
is actually pretty cool. The only part I have a problem with is that there is no magic present for the entire book, and all of a sudden there's a magician in a situation where there doesn't need to be.
It isn't explained at all either. What exactly was
demon that Dany gave birth to
near the end? Was there any significance to it, or was it just a random
demon?
Would there have been any consequences if it hadn't been killed? What made the magic possible? Is the whole thing proof that the Seven gods are or aren't real?
It just seems really lazy, especially if the rationalization for including it is "Well, magic IS fantasy, so you have to shoe-horn it in there somewhere, otherwise you may as well read historical fiction."
And as far as genre classification goes, the series is already fantasy with its gods and legendary heroes and zombies and
dragons
. It's not like the arbitrary witch and magic was necessary to remind us we're not reading a story set in medieval times.
That may be fine then. I have only read the first book in the series, so all of my comments are on that specific book. Maybe magic finds its place in the series as a whole, but in the first book it seems like a thrown-in afterthought.
And it still will if questions like "Why is magic coming back? Why was it gone? How is it used?" etc. aren't answered. I don't have much patience for genre fiction because I have limited time for reading (and playing games, listening to music, watching movies, exercising, spending time with friends and family), so I feel like I'm wasting my time by reading a book by an author who has read nothing but fantasy (or sci-fi, or detective novels, or whatever) for a majority of his life and is just shitting out a series of established genre conventions.
To me, most of A Game of Thrones was an engaging political story that happened to be set in a world with fantasy elements. The few fantasy elements seem to be there for a good reason, the
dragons
give the broken Targeryen house a way to
contend the Throne.
I don't know for sure yet, but I'm assuming the zombies are going to act as a pressure for the various Houses to act together instead of fighting.
If the series suddenly heavily involves magic for no better reason then "It's fantasy, what did you expect" I'm going to be disappointed. An author spending so much time creating a world and filling thousands of pages with its story should be putting more thought into things then "There wasn't magic before, but I felt like including it all of a sudden, so now it's coming back. Eh, I don't know why, but this isn't historical fiction after all, so just roll with it."
That may be fine then. I have only read the first book in the series, so all of my comments are on that specific book. Maybe magic finds its place in the series as a whole, but in the first book it seems like a thrown-in afterthought.
And it still will if questions like "Why is magic coming back? Why was it gone? How is it used?" etc. aren't answered. I don't have much patience for genre fiction because I have limited time for reading (and playing games, listening to music, watching movies, exercising, spending time with friends and family), so I feel like I'm wasting my time by reading a book by an author who has read nothing but fantasy (or sci-fi, or detective novels, or whatever) for a majority of his life and is just shitting out a series of established genre conventions.
To me, most of A Game of Thrones was an engaging political story that happened to be set in a world with fantasy elements. The few fantasy elements seem to be there for a good reason, the
dragons
give the broken Targeryen house a way to
contend the Throne.
I don't know for sure yet, but I'm assuming the zombies are going to act as a pressure for the various Houses to act together instead of fighting.
If the series suddenly heavily involves magic for no better reason then "It's fantasy, what did you expect" I'm going to be disappointed. An author spending so much time creating a world and filling thousands of pages with its story should be putting more thought into things then "There wasn't magic before, but I felt like including it all of a sudden, so now it's coming back. Eh, I don't know why, but this isn't historical fiction after all, so just roll with it."
Putting this in spoilers for everyone else, but no plot points revealed.
As of yet, GRRM isn't interested in specifically detailing the origin of any magic or any sort of system to it. It's used pretty rarely, but it will definitely come up again. Giants and stuff like that too as we go further and further north.
I read another 200 (well, 100) pages of Three Kingdoms to finish Volume III, which leaves me with just Volumes IV and V to finish it up. But I decided to take a short break from it to begin reading Michael Kimmel's The Gendered Society. I am only about 40 pages in, but I've already learned some really fascinating things about the differences - or lack thereof - between men and women's brains. I had read before in another book, Olivia Skene Johnson's The Sexual Spectrum about several differences between men's brains and women's brains, but apparently many of these are inaccurate or based on single studies whose findings have not been replicated. And more interestingly, Kimmel talks about how research to determine, say, what side of the brain is responsible for higher reasoning or tests to determine intelligence or whether brain lateralization was better or worse, and so forth. And over and over again, when women did better, the standards were changed. When women did better on the first IQ tests than men, the tests were changed because of what scientists "knew": Men were more intellectual. Or when women did better on comprehensive examinations at New York University, it was not attributed to their intelligence, but to them working harder at it; it was argued that when a man works as hard, he inevitably does better. Or as perceptions about which side of the brain was "better" shifted, the side that men and women were associated with *magically* shifted to keep the "better" side associated with men.
It is interesting learning that some of these differences I thought I knew about are actually inaccurate and since I have a lot more to go, I imagine that there's more I thought I knew that could be debunked.
None of this is an attack on you in the slightest, by the way. I'd just like to hear more about why the inclusion of magic/zombies/dragons is inherently disappointing to some people. To me, it seems like an aversion to fantasy in general.
"You put a crab in hot water, hell jump right out, Mr. Martin said. But you put him in cold water and you gradually heat it up the hot water is fantasy and magic, and the crab is the audience."
It worked well for me, actually - I didn't notice how much fantasy the series actually had in it until I really stopped to think about all the elements. But I am sort of inured to fantasy elements.
Putting this in spoilers for everyone else, but no plot points revealed.
As of yet, GRRM isn't interested in specifically detailing the origin of any magic or any sort of system to it. It's used pretty rarely, but it will definitely come up again. Giants and stuff like that too as we go further and further north.
is actually pretty cool to me. Not to sounds cheesy, but building up these legends and myths and then introducing them is exciting, it feels like an adventure.
On the other hand, (end spoilers for first book) going
"I want to ruin Dany's world, so I'll kill her husband and kid, since they've been giving her a happiness she hasn't known her whole life. But wait! I can use magic to bring him back to life, and then kill him AGAIN! And the kid? I'll turn it into a monstrosity! How tragic!"
is just stupid to me.
Similarly, if there's a situation where magic is used to do something like "Did you think this villain was scary before? Just wait until he starts shootin' lighting bolts!" it's going to be very lame.
And it's disappointing to hear that he doesn't go into the origin of magic or how it works or anything. I know that this is a common praise of the series, but I liked how in the Kingkiller Chronicles the magic actually had rules and limitations that the characters had to work around and use creatively. If you're going to draw a map of the region your series takes place in, make an elaborate history of generations for each of a dozen Houses, and name damn near every single character in the book regardless of how significant, how is it possible that you don't have the time or creativity to go into a bit of detail of what magic is?
"You put a crab in hot water, he’ll jump right out,” Mr. Martin said. “But you put him in cold water and you gradually heat it up — the hot water is fantasy and magic, and the crab is the audience."
It worked well for me, actually - I didn't notice how much fantasy the series actually had in it until I really stopped to think about all the elements. But I am sort of inured to fantasy elements.
That's definitely the exact opposite of my experience, the book goes from no magic at all to
voodoo lady sacrificing horses and dancing with demons to resurrect the dead
at the end. Maybe it is just because I don't read much fantasy, but to me it wasn't a smooth transition whatsoever.
I haven't mentioned, another thing that bothers me about the magic is how
Dany
used it. Similar to how the witch may bother me more because I'm not very into fantasy, maybe this bothers me more than some because I'm not very spiritual, but I thought it was annoying how in the last chapter
Dany just somehow randomly knows from a combination of vague dreams and intuition how to hatch the dragon eggs. "Hmmm, I saw her kill a horse and perform a chant to bring my dead lover back to life, so if I burn her to death with the twice-dead corpse of said lover, and throw in these dragon eggs I've been carrying around, and then walk right into the fire, I'm sure they'll hatch" just doesn't make any sense, whatsoever. I would have much, much preferred it if Dany left the eggs with Drogo as a sort of parting gift and they happened to hatch.
And the whole thing with Dany being
impervious to fire
is weird and dumb too. Apparently she thought it was possible because her house sigil is a dragon, but if that's the case, why can't Robb
similarly live in freezing conditions
or Catelyn
breathe underwater.
The rest of the book I really enjoyed, so it's weird to have this one single instance where all of a sudden there's this lazy level of writing that I'd usually associate with something like a super hero comic.
On the other hand, (end spoilers for first book) going
"I want to ruin Dany's world, so I'll kill her husband and kid, since they've been giving her a happiness she hasn't known her whole life. But wait! I can use magic to bring him back to life, and then kill him AGAIN! And the kid? I'll turn it into a monstrosity! How tragic!"
I want to ruin Dany's world. I think it was more of him showing how her kindness towards someone else and trying to do the "right" thing in trying to save the women from being raped by the other soldiers could still have negative consequences. In the real world, it's not always the right idea to do the "right" thing. It's another reminder of the sort of world you are viewing. If Drogo had just died from an infection it would've been kind of anticlimactic. imho. While you seem to deride the tragedy, I thought it was a seemingly genuine feeling of loss to have Dany want to sacrifice everything to be with this man that she had grown to love throughout the course of the book only for it to still not be enough. I'm not sure why Ned Stark's "tragic" death would get a pass just because it included no magic in it but this scene would seem hokey. I didn't think it was lazy writing but then again, I like fantasy so to each their own I guess.
That's definitely the exact opposite of my experience, the book goes from no magic at all to
voodoo lady sacrificing horses and dancing with demons to resurrect the dead
at the end. Maybe it is just because I don't read much fantasy, but to me it wasn't a smooth transition whatsoever.
I haven't mentioned, another thing that bothers me about the magic is how
Dany
used it. Similar to how the witch may bother me more because I'm not very into fantasy, maybe this bothers me more than some because I'm not very spiritual, but I thought it was annoying how in the last chapter
Dany just somehow randomly knows from a combination of vague dreams and intuition how to hatch the dragon eggs. "Hmmm, I saw her kill a horse and perform a chant to bring my dead lover back to life, so if I burn her to death with the twice-dead corpse of said lover, and throw in these dragon eggs I've been carrying around, and then walk right into the fire, I'm sure they'll hatch" just doesn't make any sense, whatsoever. I would have much, much preferred it if Dany left the eggs with Drogo as a sort of parting gift and they happened to hatch.
And the whole thing with Dany being
impervious to fire
is weird and dumb too. Apparently she thought it was possible because her house sigil is a dragon, but if that's the case, why can't Robb
similarly live in freezing conditions
or Catelyn
breathe underwater.
The rest of the book I really enjoyed, so it's weird to have this one single instance where all of a sudden there's this lazy level of writing that I'd usually associate with something like a super hero comic.
But what's the point of that? Reading is supposed to be pleasurable. I don't enjoy it when I fracking hate all the characters, which was the case with The Marriage Plot. No actually, I would have enjoyed the book if they all died in a roaring fire at the end.
I'm recovering from some pathetic exercise injuries so mostly been sitting on the couch all day, which made it perfect for reading this:
It's a psychological thriller and an easy page-turner. Easy enough where it only took me a few hours to read. The way the chapters are split between the past and present was gimmicky at first, but I liked it in the end. It was neat to see the past character slowly change into the present one. I also liked the portrayal of OCD in one of the characters.
But what's the point of that? Reading is supposed to be pleasurable. I don't enjoy it when I fracking hate all the characters, which was the case with The Marriage Plot. No actually, I would have enjoyed the book if they all died in a roaring fire at the end.
That was as I contemplated the slow demise of Eugenides as well.
edit: now that I've had some time to think about it since finishing it last night (and stopped raging), Mitchell was . . . alright. He at least learns enough to bail out of an unpleasant situation. Pity that the majority of the novel is focused on Madeline, who is so weak-willed, and so selfish, and so boring that she's nothing more than a spectator to Leonard's mood swings.
It's kind of amazing that in the end, she still refuses to make a decision, and to move on. It's only when it's forced on her, first by Leonard, then Mitchell, that she finally understands, or so we are led to believe.
Minor A Game of Thrones spoilers: I think you forgot about
the undead and the wights
; I think that it sort of tips its hand as to what sort of series it is (or will be) there, but then it apparently forgets all about it and you are only slowly re-introduced to various elements as the book continues.
I haven't mentioned, another thing that bothers me about the magic is how
Dany
used it. Similar to how the witch may bother me more because I'm not very into fantasy, maybe this bothers me more than some because I'm not very spiritual, but I thought it was annoying how in the last chapter
Dany just somehow randomly knows from a combination of vague dreams and intuition how to hatch the dragon eggs. "Hmmm, I saw her kill a horse and perform a chant to bring my dead lover back to life, so if I burn her to death with the twice-dead corpse of said lover, and throw in these dragon eggs I've been carrying around, and then walk right into the fire, I'm sure they'll hatch" just doesn't make any sense, whatsoever. I would have much, much preferred it if Dany left the eggs with Drogo as a sort of parting gift and they happened to hatch.
And the whole thing with Dany being
impervious to fire
is weird and dumb too. Apparently she thought it was possible because her house sigil is a dragon, but if that's the case, why can't Robb
I want to ruin Dany's world. I think it was more of him showing how her kindness towards someone else and trying to do the "right" thing in trying to save the women from being raped by the other soldiers could still have negative consequences. In the real world, it's not always the right idea to do the "right" thing. It's another reminder of the sort of world you are viewing. If Drogo had just died from an infection it would've been kind of anticlimactic. imho. While you seem to deride the tragedy, I thought it was a seemingly genuine feeling of loss to have Dany want to sacrifice everything to be with this man that she had grown to love throughout the course of the book only for it to still not be enough. I'm not sure why Ned Stark's "tragic" death would get a pass just because it included no magic in it but this scene would seem hokey. I didn't think it was lazy writing but then again, I like fantasy so to each their own I guess.
Yeah, I got the stuff with the witch betraying Dany, and the interaction with the two of them was pretty cool actually. Again though, the magic isn't necessary, just have her
secretly poison Drogo with her "healing salve" or something.
I think even without the witch the impact would have been pretty much the same though. I mean, Drogo pretty much did
just die of an infection. He was only alive after being zombified for what seemed like a few minutes after Dany woke up. Dany killing him herself had some impact, but there's so many more creative ways to go about it. Martin created an interesting and brutal culture in the Dothraki. What if Khals were brutally killed after falling off their horse as a symbol of intolerance of weakness? What if a Khal looking to make a name for himself made plans to kill Drogo in some horrible way to make a name for himself? Dany still gets an opportunity to mercy kill him, she still learns a lesson from trusting the witch, and instead of an inexplicable demon baby we learn a new aspect of Dothraki culture.
I'm just spitting out ideas off the top of my head here, but it seems like the author had an opportunity to have some fun fleshing out this culture he's created, but instead he uses magic as a crutch because that's what he's used to and what the fans expect.
And as far as Ned's death goes, it "gets a pass" because it had a purpose and conveyed that purpose in a manner consistent with the tone of the rest of the book. To me, if you made Ned's death equivalent to Dany's scene, Joffrey would have executed him by suddenly summoning a lion familiar and having it bite Ned's head off.[/spoiler]
Assuming that Dany knew that magic existed before the witch did her thing (which I'm pretty sure she didn't, I could be wrong but wasn't magic like the Others where everyone knew that they had existed at some point but thought that it was long gone?), she isn't trained in it.
So yeah, it's a pretty big logic leap that she seemingly mastered it after watching one "spell" being performed.
It would be like if a character knew no physics whatsoever, looked over an engineer's shoulder as they sketched a design for an airplane wing, and then the next day created a design for a perfect aerodynamic car body. And after that, you say "That wasn't a big leap in logic at all, physics exist in this world."
She sees one magic thing performed, and suddenly is certain of the exact procedure required to do something completely different.
I know that symbolic dreams were a common theme throughout the books, but this just felt ridiculous to me, another instance where it seems like the author got lazy and hid behind genre convention to excuse a scene that is really out of place with the rest of the book (unless of course you're a fantasy fan).
And that's really delving into shitty writing territory from my perspective. Just like on gaming side everyone knows a game is nothing special if recommendations are prefaced with "If you're a fan of the genre..." if I need be familiar with the genre tropes a book uses to appreciate it, something's not quite right.
I don't want to spend too much time taking up space in this thread talking about this once specific aspect in this one specific book (especially since I think I'll be more accepting of it if the upcoming books use magic more), but I do think that this could have been handled better. Drop hints of practicing magicians in the book, give a logic that allows
Dany to learn it
in a more satisfying way, something. But as is that scene feels really out of place.
What a freaking amazing book! I was afraid it would be a bit dry but luckily Gilberts a pretty funny dude. I can't wait to try some of the things on the court.
I finished The Hunger Games trilogy and World War Z recently. Hunger Games was good - the writing was a bit dodgy, but the story was compelling and Katniss was great (apart from the angst in the last book). World War Z was good too, but at the beginning I thought it might have some interesting things to say about... something... but it didn't and I've forgotten what I thought it might have been trying to get at.
Now I haven't read anything in two weeks, and during this time I've bought maybe eight books (unfortunately one of those books was The Marriage Plot). I just can't decide.
But what's the point of that? Reading is supposed to be pleasurable. I don't enjoy it when I fracking hate all the characters, which was the case with The Marriage Plot. No actually, I would have enjoyed the book if they all died in a roaring fire at the end.
You guys are killing me here...I cannot wait to read this now. The last book I read where I fucking hated the characters was Freedom, and I really enjoyed that book.
My gf bought me this, and it was great vacation reading while I was in Mexico:
Looking online, I didn't realize how many people absolutely hate this guy. I had never heard of him before getting this book. As far as the book goes, a solid 75% of it has been repetitive stories about him getting wasted and acting like a douchebag, but still, some of them had me laughing my ass off.
Going to pick this up tomorrow. I've read every part up until this one, but I've been out for sometime now. I miss the Discworld environment, so I will be continuing tomorrow
I can't be arsed to read novels anymore, I don't know why.
I really really like this. It's sort of like a mix between Catcher and the Rye and Perks of Being a Wallflower, but with much less complaining. Main character is a 23 year old traveling through Los Angeles, trying to figure out his life. Super modern too, Facebook, iPhones, etc.
I'm rotating chapters (sort of) on all four of these right now.
I've decided to work through this series again so I can read some of the more recent books. According to everyone I've talked to, the quality gets back on track and I don't want to miss out. Reading this again has reminded me how great the start of the series is. At the moment, this book is kicking the ass of all the other books I'm reading even though I've already read it once while the others are fresh. This is like reading a Steven Spielberg movie. The character interactions are kind of ham-handed, and there are plenty of cliche's but the entertainment factor is off the charts and the world building is fantastic.
This series is pretty good, even great at times, but I find myself constantly disappointed by it anyway. There is a strong whiff of pretentiousness here, and sometimes it hurts. I would even say it's a little over-hyped. I've actually loved all the Dan Simmons books I've read before this, but they've all been horror novels. I'm not saying I don't like this, just that it's very indulgent and Simmons allows strange nonsense to get in the way of simply telling the story a lot of times. Sometimes these bits of pretension have paid off, but sometimes they haven't.
Asimov's writing style is so strange... Basically pure conversation with people going on and on about stuff that just happened and stuff they plan to do... Very little action or description or anything else. Still, manages to be fairly entertaining and there are some very cool ideas in this series.
The main character is pretty despicable here, which I know is the point, but I'm not sure how I feel about it quite yet. The world seems interesting and Donaldson has an excellent writing style.
Yeah, I got the stuff with the witch betraying Dany, and the interaction with the two of them was pretty cool actually. Again though, the magic isn't necessary, just have her
secretly poison Drogo with her "healing salve" or something.
I think even without the witch the impact would have been pretty much the same though. I mean, Drogo pretty much did
just die of an infection. He was only alive after being zombified for what seemed like a few minutes after Dany woke up. Dany killing him herself had some impact, but there's so many more creative ways to go about it. Martin created an interesting and brutal culture in the Dothraki. What if Khals were brutally killed after falling off their horse as a symbol of intolerance of weakness? What if a Khal looking to make a name for himself made plans to kill Drogo in some horrible way to make a name for himself? Dany still gets an opportunity to mercy kill him, she still learns a lesson from trusting the witch, and instead of an inexplicable demon baby we learn a new aspect of Dothraki culture.
I'm just spitting out ideas off the top of my head here, but it seems like the author had an opportunity to have some fun fleshing out this culture he's created, but instead he uses magic as a crutch because that's what he's used to and what the fans expect.
And as far as Ned's death goes, it "gets a pass" because it had a purpose and conveyed that purpose in a manner consistent with the tone of the rest of the book. To me, if you made Ned's death equivalent to Dany's scene, Joffrey would have executed him by suddenly summoning a lion familiar and having it bite Ned's head off.
Assuming that Dany knew that magic existed before the witch did her thing (which I'm pretty sure she didn't, I could be wrong but wasn't magic like the Others where everyone knew that they had existed at some point but thought that it was long gone?), she isn't trained in it.
So yeah, it's a pretty big logic leap that she seemingly mastered it after watching one "spell" being performed.
It would be like if a character knew no physics whatsoever, looked over an engineer's shoulder as they sketched a design for an airplane wing, and then the next day created a design for a perfect aerodynamic car body. And after that, you say "That wasn't a big leap in logic at all, physics exist in this world."
She sees one magic thing performed, and suddenly is certain of the exact procedure required to do something completely different.
I know that symbolic dreams were a common theme throughout the books, but this just felt ridiculous to me, another instance where it seems like the author got lazy and hid behind genre convention to excuse a scene that is really out of place with the rest of the book (unless of course you're a fantasy fan).
And that's really delving into shitty writing territory from my perspective. Just like on gaming side everyone knows a game is nothing special if recommendations are prefaced with "If you're a fan of the genre..." if I need be familiar with the genre tropes a book uses to appreciate it, something's not quite right.
I don't want to spend too much time taking up space in this thread talking about this once specific aspect in this one specific book (especially since I think I'll be more accepting of it if the upcoming books use magic more), but I do think that this could have been handled better. Drop hints of practicing magicians in the book, give a logic that allows
Dany to learn it
in a more satisfying way, something. But as is that scene feels really out of place.
I've enjoyed reading your thoughts even if I don't really agree with all of it. But yeah, I don't want to overload this thread either. So to address the root question here, I'll say that while the magic elements continue to be present, the series never becomes the fantasy cliche that you're fearing. That political and character stuff is always the primary focus.
I've been reading The Burning Soul by John Connolly.
His Charlie Parker series has that wonderful mixture of supernatural and crime, though not too much of the former that it overpowers the entire feel of the book.
Thoroughly recommend anyone who likes crime or thrillers check out Every Dead Thing by him. It won him a slew of awards.
Finished: I couldn't be happier with how it ended. Sadly, in 2012, it was too easy to see how this was all going to play out, but still great. One of my favorites.
Even before I read a single word or even knew what it was about, I knew I'd love it. The author's background in physics and astronomy and a tour of Vietnam is all I needed to know.
And it still surpassed my expectation; the most entertaining book I've ever read.
edit: oh, this is what I'm currently reading. Gets you right from the start with strong emotions.
I'm about 150ish pages in so far and I really hope something changes for the better, because this is probably one of the most boring books I've ever read. (Which is a double cardinal sin because its a zombie book!) Please tell me it picks up, because I'm getting pretty tired of reading about how they blog for political campaigns in the post-apocalypse.
I found it underwhelming. The characters get so sick of constant blood testing and this is conveyed to the reader all too well. There are a few moments that are excellent, but overall I have no desire to read the rest of the trilogy. I've read part 2 on wikipedia and that's enough for me.
Going to pick this up tomorrow. I've read every part up until this one, but I've been out for sometime now. I miss the Discworld environment, so I will be continuing tomorrow
I can't be arsed to read novels anymore, I don't know why.
I don't particularly like him as a character, but he has been involved in some of my favourite Pratchett books like Jingo, Interesting Times & The Last Continent. Out of all the recurring characters though, Rincewind is my least favourite. I wish Pratchett would write another novel centred on Death, as I feel Reaper Man is vastly underrated. Also, it's been a while since we've had a book about The Witches themselves, rather than with them appearing Tiffany Aching books.
The Sisters Brothers by Patrick deWitt
I'm liking it a lot more than I thought I would. I dislike reading westerns, which was why I was not looking forward to it, but I like the emphasis on good oral hygiene in this book so far.
Also this: JavaScript: The Good Parts by Douglas Crockford
As you can guess, it's a short book, but packed full of helpful information. Even though I've been working with JS for years, there's a lot of stuff I didn't know about JS! This book is really handy if you want to move towards treating JS as a real programming language.
Nearly finished with Caliban's War and it's been enjoyable so far, perhaps a little too similar to Leviathan Wakes, but good nonetheless.
I don't particularly like him as a character, but he has been involved in some of my favourite Pratchett books like Jingo, Interesting Times & The Last Continent. Out of all the recurring characters though, Rincewind is my least favourite. I wish Pratchett would write another novel centred on Death, as I feel Reaper Man is vastly underrated. Also, it's been a while since we've had a book about The Witches themselves, rather than with them appearing Tiffany Aching books.
Don't get me wrong, I've really enjoyed all the Tiffany Aching books, but I wouldn't mind one that's focussed more on Granny Weatherwax & Nanny Ogg again.
Yeah, I got the stuff with the witch betraying Dany, and the interaction with the two of them was pretty cool actually. Again though, the magic isn't necessary, just have her
secretly poison Drogo with her "healing salve" or something.
I think even without the witch the impact would have been pretty much the same though. I mean, Drogo pretty much did
just die of an infection. He was only alive after being zombified for what seemed like a few minutes after Dany woke up. Dany killing him herself had some impact, but there's so many more creative ways to go about it. Martin created an interesting and brutal culture in the Dothraki. What if Khals were brutally killed after falling off their horse as a symbol of intolerance of weakness? What if a Khal looking to make a name for himself made plans to kill Drogo in some horrible way to make a name for himself? Dany still gets an opportunity to mercy kill him, she still learns a lesson from trusting the witch, and instead of an inexplicable demon baby we learn a new aspect of Dothraki culture.
I'm just spitting out ideas off the top of my head here, but it seems like the author had an opportunity to have some fun fleshing out this culture he's created, but instead he uses magic as a crutch because that's what he's used to and what the fans expect.
And as far as Ned's death goes, it "gets a pass" because it had a purpose and conveyed that purpose in a manner consistent with the tone of the rest of the book. To me, if you made Ned's death equivalent to Dany's scene, Joffrey would have executed him by suddenly summoning a lion familiar and having it bite Ned's head off.[/spoiler]
Assuming that Dany knew that magic existed before the witch did her thing (which I'm pretty sure she didn't, I could be wrong but wasn't magic like the Others where everyone knew that they had existed at some point but thought that it was long gone?), she isn't trained in it.
So yeah, it's a pretty big logic leap that she seemingly mastered it after watching one "spell" being performed.
It would be like if a character knew no physics whatsoever, looked over an engineer's shoulder as they sketched a design for an airplane wing, and then the next day created a design for a perfect aerodynamic car body. And after that, you say "That wasn't a big leap in logic at all, physics exist in this world."
She sees one magic thing performed, and suddenly is certain of the exact procedure required to do something completely different.
I know that symbolic dreams were a common theme throughout the books, but this just felt ridiculous to me, another instance where it seems like the author got lazy and hid behind genre convention to excuse a scene that is really out of place with the rest of the book (unless of course you're a fantasy fan).
And that's really delving into shitty writing territory from my perspective. Just like on gaming side everyone knows a game is nothing special if recommendations are prefaced with "If you're a fan of the genre..." if I need be familiar with the genre tropes a book uses to appreciate it, something's not quite right.
I don't want to spend too much time taking up space in this thread talking about this once specific aspect in this one specific book (especially since I think I'll be more accepting of it if the upcoming books use magic more), but I do think that this could have been handled better. Drop hints of practicing magicians in the book, give a logic that allows
Dany to learn it
in a more satisfying way, something. But as is that scene feels really out of place.
Many of the things you mention do get brought up. Magic is known to have been real but has been dead for awhile. But, a lot of things in the series, like The Others and Dragons, were thought to be the same. Magic becomes important to some characters but for others it's just far-off non-sense that doesn't concern them.
Many high born characters do know quite a bit about magic though. It's something that is known to have existed some have read quite a bit about it -- like dragons or Others but it's fallen into the realm of fantasy in Westeros for most.
About 1/3 through. I'm loving right now, great prose.
![B]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51rDo096K5L._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA240_SH20_OU03_.jpg[B][/B]){kind=icon}
/Eric%20-%20Terry%20Pratchett_resizedcover.jpg)
