Quote:
Originally Posted by CinnamonGirl
I just wanted to note... Baraka has only read the first book, and Martian hasn't read the fourth yet; while this thread definitely has AGOT spoilers, please, please don't spoil the other books for them. The series would've lost quite a bit of impact if we'd known about certain situations beforehand, and I'd like to make sure that "impact" is still there for those who haven't read the other three yet.
|
Yes, thanks, Cinn. It should be the case in all the threads based on series, for both the fantasy reading list and the speculative fiction reading list. Remember: for each book thread, discuss the book itself, not the series as a whole. The exception would be to discuss things that happened in previous books.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martian
I also very much liked Tyrion Lannister, and my fondness for him has only grown as the series has progressed.
|
This comes up a lot. Everyone likes Tyrion. I'll argue that one reason for this is that Martin gives him what are by far the best lines in the book, and I'm guessing it will remain the case in proceeding books. But what else is it about him? What is compelling? On the surface, he's ugly, and in outward actions, he's unsavoury. But why do we like him? How does Martin create this character of questionable values into someone with whom we sympathize if not root for? (This question is for everyone, really....)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Martian
By far my favourite character in the series is Arya Stark, though I couldn't pin a reason why on it.
|
In my own experience with Arya, I find her admirable because of her independence, and at such a young age. Today we call these children "free spirited" and many of us find them unruly, but in Arya's case it's compelling because we know this is a man's world, and she is "just a girl." By the end of the book it comes quite obvious too that she has to grow up motherfucking fast. (I will say more about this in response to the next book.)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Martian
Joffrey Lannister in particular is rather loathesome to me. You say Viserys is dangerous because he's a coward and weak. Joffrey is Viserys given power.
|
I see distinct differences though. Joffrey is the overprivileged, spoiled heir who is given the throne. Viserys is the exiled, last of his line of male heirs who believes is the rightful king. He's down and out and has a strong sense of entitlement, which is a toxic mix. The problem, too, is that he's brash and impatient. His sense of entitlement leads to his downfall, but it's his entire character that ultimately spelled out his doom. It's a pretty clear case in my eyes. Joffrey, however, still remains a bit enigmatic. He's young and immature and untested. (And still alive.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinnamonGirl
And I absolutely loathe Cersei. Really, I don't think I've ever hated a fictional character as much.
|
What is it about her? What makes her such a great villain?
Why do you hate her?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by fresnelly
Oh, and comeuppances. Sweet, sweet comeuppances. Those are the best.
|
Do you think Martin's world is essentially fatalist (what goes around comes around) or is it merely chaos and based on chance?
Quote:
Originally Posted by levite
His characters suffer like hell. I love that he has essentially taken the kind of epic adventure of the classic Anglo-French Medieval courtly-love/chivalry genre (I am very much minded of Chretien de Troyes), and turned it on its head: almost none of the knights in Martin's world have any honor, and the few who do have much honor get their ass handed to them, almost literally. War is ugly, not beautiful, the common people suffer greatly for it, the nobles all suck, and you can't turn around without running into rapists, thieves, murderers, and traitors. Martin is like the ultimate revisionist of the courtly love epic of chivalry.
|
This is my take too. This is why I compared it more to the early medieval period than to, say, Middle-Earth. It's gritty, it's real, and anyone could die---and they die horribly, and not necessarily heroically or epically.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEden
Every character GRRM wrote played their part to the tee. The villains were evil enough to be convincing but not over-the-top black mustache villains. What "good" guys there were, they fit perfectly in the story line without sticking out like a sore thumb. I loved that characters had life spans, no "1 HP left" heroes here. When edward stark died half way through the book, I knew I had sold my soul to this author and would stick with him through thick and thin.
|
I think this is crucial to Martin's work, this idea of moral ambiguity. There are no heroes, there really aren't any villains in the classic sense. There are merely allies and enemies, just like in the real world. And even "the good guys" must make choices that are morally questionable. This is a bit of a deviation from, say, the work of Tolkien, where the lines between good and evil are usually clearly defined.