Game of Thrones - I give up

[Nuxxy]

My friends sold me on the books by describing them as full of politics and shenanigans and manipulations. They're... really not. They're books about politics failing. It takes something serious for me to compare a series favourably to something by Raymond E. Feist, but his Daughter of the Empire books are vastly superior when it comes to the kind of politics and double-dealing that A Game of Thrones seemed to promise, but that subsequent books utterly failed to deliver.

Really? Feist?

Really?

I...I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

In defense of the Empire Trilogy (Daughter of, Servant of and Mistress of), they were written more by Janny Wurts than by Feist. I thoroughly enjoyed them, especially the first one. It's almost a pity you have to slog through Magician first to understand it properly.

Interestingly, although the heroine obviously doesn't die, she does suffer quite a few horrid experiences. Multiple assassination attempts, an abusive husband, loss of family, loss of child. If nothing else, read it for the Spy Master, Arakasi.

 

[Headdrivehardscrew]

George Fat Fat Martin kills off characters whenever he gets bored with them. He did it many times in Wild Cards and that's why I gave up on reading those books. Stupid fanboys will try to invent justifications on why he does it but when Boil-chin gets bored with a character they die and he always gets bored with any character that's too good or honest. He's a gluttonous, slothful liar and those are the characters he likes to write for.

Wow... Rarely do I get upset from forum posts but.. I really hope you're trolling. Go back to your fairies and rainbows if you crave happy endings.

The Smurfs usually have happy endings. And even the bad guys are cute.

Some people never evolved beyond the Smurfs.

 

[Headdrivehardscrew]

I don't have any interest in Game of Thrones really mainly due to the story. I have tried many times, but it has always felt like it's a record of an "Imaginary war fought with toy figures by a 9 year old" (ignoring the sex because 9 year olds don't know what sex is. They think it's kissing naked).
Maybe I just don't enjoy the structure. Perhaps I prefer stories like Lord of the Rings or the Hobbit where it's got a structure of sorts. Game of Thrones comes across as fantasy-reality TV. It's not my cup of tea, or glass of wine.

I don't feel like or intend to be mean, but might I inquire as to whether your preference lies with the books you might just have mentioned or more with the, ahem, movies you might just have mentioned?

The Hobbit, in its original form, which would be that of a book, is a children's book. I like it. The movie of the same name is an abomination. An entertaining one, granted, but a shallow and twisted one. It is made up of mostly empty calories and quite a bit of nonsense. It makes your brain fart and your soul burp.

The Lord of the Rings, alas, has not yet been properly rendered, condensed and selectively put into a proper movie. Some sequences were true to the original, the whole thing was and is... quite a bummer. The books or, even better, book rendition of the Lord of the Rings in its annotated and 'complete' form has the dimensions of a proper bible. And it sure beats the qu'ran when it comes to bring light and hope and inspiration to random mortal minds willing to read piles of squiggly symbols on very thin sheets of dead trees.

I like movies, I really do. But the movies made out of Tolkien's original material are more aimed towards entertaining you, amazing you, making some sort of visual impression. They don't inspire people like the books do. And the Hobbit will inevitably bring this whole charade to a new low, qualifying as a scam. It's badly ported, it's made up and 'enhanced', it's got no soul, just piles of cash thrown at false gods and the little bearded guy that once made Bad Taste and Braindead/Dead Alive. Oh, the irony.

 

[Kittyhawk]

I find it hilarious, the amount of people acting up about Game of Thrones. Kind of reminds me of the same kind of people who also acted up over The Walking Dead, which in a similar way is written where any of the characters are expendable.

Its always a shame to read half of a story, but some stories need the tragedies and characters fall from grace so they can later go through self discovery, rise and triumph over their odds. Its fine to be upset as it'd also be a shame for a work to get one emotion expressed for it.

I've done all the GoT books (done them via audio books) out so far and they are cool, and while there are plenty of dark bleak parts, you have to be a true adventurer (and hopefully an adult) to brave them and get to the parts where hope dwells and shines. If you want your fantasy like boring dot to dot hero tales, then GoT is not for you (plenty tamer stuff you can enjoy). War is a bleak business in any book and people do dark things on the path of ambition and greed.

So, what you need to ask yourself is are you an adult reader/watcher with an iron stomach, clear eyes and full heart or a child like reader/watcher, who's needs have to be ego stroked and pandered to. With regards to the tv show, I feel many who watch it aren't used to adult gritty HBO type shows and this is their first experience with fantasy like this, so fall into the latter. I also think that much tv has suffered for such pandering, where execs step in and change things to be more 'palletable'. Such meddling spoils a lot of tv, films etc.

GoT thrives because it doesn't compromise its vision much. There's nothing wrong with it, its some of the audience, who have been chained to traditional tv for so long, that they are not ingrained in other ways to consume a story. The Red wedding was a great part of the story and there's more cool stuff ahead.

If you want to exit the game, before its over and a winner crowned, its your loss.

 

[Azahul]

Really? Feist?

Really?

I...I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Well, as Nuxxy said, the quality of Daughter of the Empire and its trilogy is probably more down to the co-writer Janny Wurts than Feist. Still, it is very similar in a lot of respects to A Game of Thrones, just a lot more interesting to read because each of the rival factions are actually good at politics. With all the rival factions of ASOIAF playing like a comedy of dunces, it seems that the longer it goes on the more the series turns into a generic fantasy story of a dragon-riding Chosen One returning to her Lost Throne to save the Kingdom from the Forces of Darkness (TM). Comparing the two series is probably an unfair comparison. They started in similar places but ended up going in different directions, I guess.

 

[Aesir23]

I wonder how many animals were skinned alive to provide for the fur used in that show. Entertainment > Life

Where in the world did you get that kind of information?

Skinning animals whilst alive is a big no-no. Not just for ethical reasons but for practical ones as well. If an animal is alive during the skinning process obviously it will struggle and bleed, pretty much rendering the pelt useless.

 

[BLAHwhatever]

There's not enough shows and books that do something like this.
And I've got to say Ned's fate and pretty boy losing a hand were equally if not more shocking to me than the red wedding. To be honest seeing the dire wolf shot was what got me the most.
The last 30 seconds were so brilliant, and the muted credits really set a masterful atmosphere.

just brilliant

 

[Lilani]

Okay, those of you who watch the series and know the book probably know what this is all about as it concerns the events of the most recent GOT episode, "The rains of Castamere".

Basically, I knew the ending was coming. I've known ever since season two, which was when I was really into the books. And it was the point in the books where, reading those events, made me so angry and so disgusted with the story, that I literally threw the book aside and never picked it up again. And to this day I've never returned to the books to find out what happened afterwards because I was so upset at the time.

The only reason I watched the show after that was because I held out hope that maybe they'd handle that part of the story in a way that didn't anger me as much as the book did. That was not the case. Once again, this story has made me feel terrible, and so, like with the books, I have decided to abandon the entire thing.

Now I am not saying that I think Game of Thrones is a bad show, far from it. The acting, the way the story is told, all of it is great. But as with all things, there is a line for me. A point that, if passed, forces me to turn away from such stories. And now, GOT has crossed that line.

Call me foolish if you wish. Call me hopelessly old-fashioned for wanting things to turn out happy for the heroes and for everything to be okay. But I'm just like that. I want there to be a light at the end of the tunnel in stories like this. And after this, there is no light bright enough to possibly make this dark and bloody tunnel worth passing through.

I'm done with it.

Eh, don't worry. I never got into GoT either, simply because nobody said any key words to pique my interest. I hear it most lauded for being a "realistic" depiction of medieval politics but only if magic were real, and that just doesn't appeal to me. Shit, if we're going to have a world with dragons and magic, then I want some quirk, wonder, and happiness. Don't give me Shindler's List with dragons, give me Arthurian legends as told by Hayao Miyazaki. I want some color and amazement, not people getting killed as historically accurate as possible.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

With all the rival factions of ASOIAF playing like a comedy of dunces, it seems that the longer it goes on the more the series turns into a generic fantasy story of a dragon-riding Chosen One returning to her Lost Throne to save the Kingdom from the Forces of Darkness (TM). Comparing the two series is probably an unfair comparison. They started in similar places but ended up going in different directions, I guess.

ASOIAF was always a marriage of traditional high fantasy elements and historical realism, which was cribbed heavily from real world events. Where you see "dunces", I see people acting with human motivations and displaying human frailties, whereas a more typical fantasy narrative would feature fail-proof heroes demonstrating superior judgment and borderline precognitive foresight time and time again. Your "Dragon Riding Chosen One" would indeed have been an unfortunate direction for the series to hew in, and the fact it hasn't has been one of the primary bitches about the series...most particularly the last book. All I ever hear is the same monotonous spiel about "too many boring politics" and "when is Dany coming west with her dragons". Daenerys is busy being mired neck deep in regional intrigues and the imminent collapse of her ill conceived revolution to come west. And her dragons have gone utterly feral. Oh right, and she might be going insane.

ASOIAF is many things, not all of them good, but "generic fantasy" is not one of them. Indeed, the story gained popular and critical traction precisely because it was an aggressive subversion of what was, at the time, an incredibly incestuous and repetitive genre. A lot of the best post millennial fantasy writers, like Abercrombie, Rothfuss and Lynch, were heavily influenced by Martin's work, which is widely regarded as a seminal classic. Criticize it if you must, but criticize it fairly.

I know stuff happened in AFFC, but the problem is, Martin is so obsessed with minutiae that when the "stuff" finally comes, it's taken us nearly 700 pages to get there.

I *like* the amount of detail and context he folds into his world. I consider it the primary merit of the series. It's like criticizing The Wire for striving to be too realistic, or criticizing Arrested Development for being too cynical. I don't think Martin's obsession with minutiae is the problem, I think a lack of editorial oversight is the problem. As I said previously, he's been allowed free reign to indulge in authorial excess, and it's hurt not only the pacing of the later books but also the pacing of their release. I think two weighty travelogues with a dozen new POV characters would've been easier to swallow had they not taken over a decade to arrive in our laps.

I mean, whenever Margeary does something that looks like it'll make Cersei lose it, but no, she fumes mentally and does nothing. It seems as if Martin was trying to show Cersei being cautious for a change, but sitting on her arse all day and fuming to herself is not the way to do it. There is no drama.

Eh. I hated Cersei's POV chapters on a first read. On subsequent reads I have found them some of the most entertaining chapters in the entire series. Certainly some of the most effortlessly comical. To each their own I suppose.

And the Dornish folk, so many one off characters, all relatives of The Red Viper. They all want to go to war, but Oberyn says no. For most of their allotted time, it looks as if he's nothing but a giant wimp, but then near the end, it's revealed that he had a master plan all along, and it involves Dany, somehow, I don't know, it wasn't clear.

I'm assuming you mean Doran. Yes, due to a lack of emotional investment in the characters, the chapters with Dorne and the Ironborn are some of the weakest in the series. I've warmed to Dorne on subsequent reads, but the Ironborn chapters still leave me wanting more. Both would have been greatly enhanced had George found a way to maneuver a more well loved POV character into place to see the action. That's why, IMO, the Winterfell/Wall chapters in ADWD work so well, despite having the action focused almost entirely around non POV characters Stannis, Ramsay, and Roose. You're invested in Jon, and you're invested in Theon despite yourself.

AFFC was nothing but tedium.

Disagreed.

Martin mentioned something about The Meereenese Knot of his story and how difficult it was to untangle it, drawing parallels to the Gordian Knot from the legends of Alexander the Great. Of course what Alexander did to that knot was cut it in half with his sword. That's what Martin should have done with AFFC, taken his authorial sword and cut the plot knot in half.

The fabled "Meereenese Knot" was his attempt to detail what had previously been planned as a "five year gap" where everyone would age and certain pieces would be shuffled around behind a curtain. Martin took some previous criticism about a lack of attention to detail (a horse was the wrong sex, someone had the wrong color of eyes) to heart, and seemed slavishly devoted to making sure everything made logistical sense and timelines overlapped properly. It really was a nightmarish task, and in retrospect perhaps he would've been better off just abandoning the plan and sticking with the original 5 year gap. I find it hard to blame the guy for not offloading years of work when it became apparent he'd bitten off a lot to chew, though. What I DO blame him for is allowing his attentions to be pulled in 100 directions instead of finishing the epic that has become his most notable work.

I should probably mention that this is all my opinion, informed by my own biases and not gospel truth. You can disagree with me and state why and I'll gladly receive it and respond, but it's doubtful you'll change my mind.

I think I've met maybe two people in my almost 40 years of life who have been willing to have their minds changed in debate. Alas, most of us just like the sound of our opinions, and we find ourselves utterly convincing. I'll say it again...I'm not above criticizing ASOIAF. I'm CERTAINLY not above criticizing GOT, which drives me to distraction sometimes. I just think the criticisms should be fair, and thoughtful. I am not always of a mind with critical consensus either, but when I find myself at odds with large scale public and/or critical acclaim I usually assume the fault is with my tastes, and not the work itself. That's not making an appeal to popularity either, just accepting the fallibility of my own idiosyncrasies. For example, I despise almost all of the films of Stanley Kubrick, yet he is widely regarded as a visionary auteur. Rather than assume I am the benchmark of good taste and sneer at his proponents, I fully admit I'm clearly too daft or unsophisticated to appreciate the man's work. Something about him just rubs me the wrong way. Likewise J.R.R. Tolkien, whose volumes I found to be the very soul of tedium, packed with laborious and dull descriptions of every meal and roadside plant, and nigh endless pages of hobbits and elves bursting into spontaneous verse. I always hurl the volume across the room in disgust before I can even get to Rivendell. Yet what is more likely? That the most influential and acclaimed fantasy series of all time is rubbish? Or that I'm just an impatient clod? Alas, I think most likely the latter.

 

[Winterbird]

Eh, don't worry. I never got into GoT either, simply because nobody said any key words to pique my interest. I hear it most lauded for being a "realistic" depiction of medieval politics but only if magic were real, and that just doesn't appeal to me. Shit, if we're going to have a world with dragons and magic, then I want some quirk, wonder, and happiness. Don't give me Shindler's List with dragons, give me Arthurian legends as told by Hayao Miyazaki. I want some color and amazement, not people getting killed as historically accurate as possible.

It's "realistic" in the sense that it's largely inspired by actual history. For example the conflict between the Starks and the Lannisters is inspired by the Wars of the Roses between the Yorks and the Lancasters.
There's plenty of quirk, wonder and happiness but also a lot of the opposite, which you don't usually see much in this type of fiction. "Schindler's List with dragons" is not a very accurate description of this series. The reason why a lot of people die in this series is because it doesn't have a single main character. In other stories you know the main character isn't going to die no matter what kind of danger he/she faces because of "protagonist immunity". That's not the case here, the books are written form the perspective of a number of point-of-view characters which have more or less equal importance in the story. This allows for some of them to die because the others still carry on the narrative and this keeps you on your toes because nobody is safe. That's the main advantage this series has over any other.

 

[TheDoctor455]

Basically, I knew the ending was coming. I've known ever since season two, which was when I was really into the books. And it was the point in the books where, reading those events, made me so angry and so disgusted with the story, that I literally threw the book aside and never picked it up again. And to this day I've never returned to the books to find out what happened afterwards because I was so upset at the time.

The only reason I watched the show after that was because I held out hope that maybe they'd handle that part of the story in a way that didn't anger me as much as the book did. That was not the case. Once again, this story has made me feel terrible, and so, like with the books, I have decided to abandon the entire thing.

Honestly, I think you were being far too optimistic. The show is very closely tied to the books. There are a load of (minor) variations, but those events are extremely crucial to the plot of everything. Expecting it to be different in a bright and happy way wasn't going to end well.

If you like stories that are brighter, then it's probably for the best that you stopped there. Without spoiling anything, there's a lot more bad events to come (The aftermath, which I'm not sure how much detail they'll actually show, is very disturbing), though I do think that's the darkest moment in all 5 books.
It's a dark story in which dark things happen, and I'm surprised you lasted this long if that's not to your taste.

All five so far

There are still two more to go.

Personally, I rather liked the Red Wedding.

Its a brilliantly tragic moment in the story.

Why? Because everyone involved saw it coming a mile away and it still happened anyway.

Robb could have prevented if he had placed his role as King of The North above his own personal honor.

Kat could have prevented if she'd smacked Robb and got him to cancel his wedding to the nurse... and stuck with his promise to the Freys.

And before the Lannisters made Walder a deal... all he had going for him was a very impractical revenge scheme against them. Because... well... by that point, even after letting Robb and his army use the bridge, Walder was a very... neutral party in the war.

Everything about the Red Wedding makes sense, and is consistent with what we know about the characters involved.

Which is a lot more than you can say about ME3's ending, even after the EC.

And its not the ending. The series is still marching on. It might have a happy-ish ending, might not.

Nobody knows yet.

 

[Ishal]

Okay, those of you who watch the series and know the book probably know what this is all about as it concerns the events of the most recent GOT episode, "The rains of Castamere".

Basically, I knew the ending was coming. I've known ever since season two, which was when I was really into the books. And it was the point in the books where, reading those events, made me so angry and so disgusted with the story, that I literally threw the book aside and never picked it up again. And to this day I've never returned to the books to find out what happened afterwards because I was so upset at the time.

The only reason I watched the show after that was because I held out hope that maybe they'd handle that part of the story in a way that didn't anger me as much as the book did. That was not the case. Once again, this story has made me feel terrible, and so, like with the books, I have decided to abandon the entire thing.

Now I am not saying that I think Game of Thrones is a bad show, far from it. The acting, the way the story is told, all of it is great. But as with all things, there is a line for me. A point that, if passed, forces me to turn away from such stories. And now, GOT has crossed that line.

Call me foolish if you wish. Call me hopelessly old-fashioned for wanting things to turn out happy for the heroes and for everything to be okay. But I'm just like that. I want there to be a light at the end of the tunnel in stories like this. And after this, there is no light bright enough to possibly make this dark and bloody tunnel worth passing through.

I'm done with it.

Eh, don't worry. I never got into GoT either, simply because nobody said any key words to pique my interest. I hear it most lauded for being a "realistic" depiction of medieval politics but only if magic were real, and that just doesn't appeal to me. Shit, if we're going to have a world with dragons and magic, then I want some quirk, wonder, and happiness. Don't give me Shindler's List with dragons, give me Arthurian legends as told by Hayao Miyazaki. I want some color and amazement, not people getting killed as historically accurate as possible.

That makes sense. Its actually one of the reasons I like MLP. I like having something on the side to just have fun with and put a smile on my face to contrast the various other things I enjoy in media, like GoT.

Characterization is something that everyone claims to love about the series, and there are a great number of well written characters in it. I'm not one of those people who enjoy it as much. I don't often find myself rooting for any main characters of any story since I can grasp a basic idea of what happens to them throughout the story. I'm no Nostradamus, I get caught up in twists as much as the next person, but after a while the tropes tend to get old. With GoT the tropes are subverted... and not just any tropes, but the tropes I dislike. The "protagonists" of the series, the Stark family, I never liked. Big surprise, I never like protagonists in these sorts of stories. But what do I discover? Perhaps the author doesn't like them either? He's willing to kill them off to subvert tropes and get rid of plot armor?

The thing that hooked me with the series was lore and world building that I believe RR Martin does well. But it was also that there was a world where actions have consequences. Just because you have a title, win battles, are handsome, call yourself a cool name "young wolf" and hold a sense of *snickers* "honor" it will NOT free you from consequences of actions. As someone already said, it is refreshing to see a "hero" or "good guy" fall. Why? Because not everyone considers them a hero, and a strong moral backbone should never stop a dagger in the back. Honor in fantasy often overrides reason... and frankly I'm tired of it.

 

[AkatsukiLeader13]

Why has technology stagnated? It hasn't. The Third Age is the age after the Fall of Numenor. Technology had been advancing (not in terms of weapons and armour, because the world was largely at peace, but culture and art and medicine and the understanding of magic), until the hubris of the men of Numenor and the manipulations of Sauron brought everything crashing down. The Third Age is Middle Earth in recovery. Technology hasn't been stagnant all this time, it's risen and then regressed. On top of this, the most powerful force in Middle Earth has historically been a race of immortal, nature-loving beings who never sicken and really have no force driving them to technological innovation. Over on Sauron's side, where there is a drive for industry, we have rudimentary assembly lines, factories, and even explosives and the invention of gunpowder during the Third Age. And it's not like A Song of Ice and Fire is exempt from this trope. We're talking a setting with something like a ludicrous 5,000 year documented history, without technology ever going much past the faux-Medieval stage of almost all Western fantasy. Sure, it's been said that the record keepers are probably wrong about how extensive their history is, but it still doesn't give the impression of an advancing world. Frankly, ASOIAF always struck me as much more stagnant than LOTR.

Perhaps but you're forgetting about Valyria, the most advanced civilization in the world, the lost homeland of the Targaryens and the GoT's world equivalent to the Roman Empire. Of course part of what made Valyria more advanced was their magic and connection to the dragons and with the Doom, magic and the dragons went into the decline. And that happens to be another part of the novels that the show doesn't really talk about much. For instance Valyrian steel while mentioned several times in the show they don't take the time to explain that it's a magical alloy that was forged in Valyria and can't be recreated in Westeros or anywhere else now for that matter. That's why they make a big deal about Valyrian steel weapons from time to time. At the same they don't really talk about that with the return of the dragons, magic is in resurgence as well suggesting that perhaps in time the lost wonders of Valyria could be recaptured.

 

[Winterbird]

i always wonder why the starks get so much fan love.

Because they're the only typical fantasy heroes (at least Ned, Robb and Jon are) in a non-typical fantasy setting. They're easy to like quickly and guide you into the world.

 

[Mert Matthews]

Rob was an idiot and he deserved it, i thought why Frey didn't send assassins before but i guess this was more fun now stop your pointless moaning, its war people die, idiots die faster most of the time. I think Martin is a decent writer and really knows how to surprise the audience with reality. I mean people got used to "Heroes don't die" in the stories so when one of them dies it's worldwide panic and despair.

 

[odanhammer]

Go look up the history of the War of the Roses . which is real history , which also happens to be where George got some of his ideas. The Actual events of the Red Wedding are based on the events are based around what is called the Black Dinner. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clan_Douglas (do a search for black dinner ctrl f) if you don't want to read all about clan douglas.
But it happened , in the real world , the real history , he took the events of the Black Dinner and twisted it a bit.
Giving up on this show and book is silly because of this one event.

 

[Valanthe]

I wonder how many animals were skinned alive to provide for the fur used in that show. Entertainment > Life

No animals were harmed. It's all made from human scalps.

That and the animals are usually dead first, the squirming ruins the pelts.

 

[Azahul]

Perhaps but you're forgetting about Valyria, the most advanced civilization in the world, the lost homeland of the Targaryens and the GoT's world equivalent to the Roman Empire. Of course part of what made Valyria more advanced was their magic and connection to the dragons and with the Doom, magic and the dragons went into the decline. And that happens to be another part of the novels that the show doesn't really talk about much. For instance Valyrian steel while mentioned several times in the show they don't take the time to explain that it's a magical alloy that was forged in Valyria and can't be recreated in Westeros or anywhere else now for that matter. That's why they make a big deal about Valyrian steel weapons from time to time. At the same they don't really talk about that with the return of the dragons, magic is in resurgence as well suggesting that perhaps in time the lost wonders of Valyria could be recaptured.

I am certainly not forgetting about Valyria. For the record, I've read all the books and am well aware of what Valyrian steel is. I didn't mention it because I was responding to Mr F's series of fallacies about the Lord of the Rings, namely that Middle Earth had stagnant technology. I pointed out the existence of Numenor as evidence that technology had both risen and fallen in the history of Middle Earth, and then to Third Age inventions like blasting powder and the rudimentary factories of Saruman and Sauron as evidence that technology had continued to advance after the Fall. Valyria isn't relevant to the discussion, especially as I can't remember them actually being described as a state of technological innovation. Magic, yes, but Valyrian Steel seems to be fairly magical and I remember getting the impression that magic was the only thing they were good at. Regardless, Valyria has nothing to do with the technology, stagnant or otherwise, of Middle Earth and only matters if you want to argue the point that Westeros has a history of being even more stagnant. That wasn't really my intention, I just wanted to show that saying Middle Earth has stagnant technology is completely wrong.

ASOIAF was always a marriage of traditional high fantasy elements and historical realism, which was cribbed heavily from real world events. Where you see "dunces", I see people acting with human motivations and displaying human frailties, whereas a more typical fantasy narrative would feature fail-proof heroes demonstrating superior judgment and borderline precognitive foresight time and time again. Your "Dragon Riding Chosen One" would indeed have been an unfortunate direction for the series to hew in, and the fact it hasn't has been one of the primary bitches about the series...most particularly the last book. All I ever hear is the same monotonous spiel about "too many boring politics" and "when is Dany coming west with her dragons". Daenerys is busy being mired neck deep in regional intrigues and the imminent collapse of her ill conceived revolution to come west. And her dragons have gone utterly feral. Oh right, and she might be going insane.

ASOIAF is many things, not all of them good, but "generic fantasy" is not one of them. Indeed, the story gained popular and critical traction precisely because it was an aggressive subversion of what was, at the time, an incredibly incestuous and repetitive genre. A lot of the best post millennial fantasy writers, like Abercrombie, Rothfuss and Lynch, were heavily influenced by Martin's work, which is widely regarded as a seminal classic. Criticize it if you must, but criticize it fairly.

I call them dunces because in two books, I honestly can't think of a single major decision made by any character with any power that actually turned out well. And a lot of them are obviously bad ideas. Look at Cersei giving power to the Church. Even before Jaime points out to her that previous kings spent their entire reigns wresting that power away, it's pretty clear that giving a huge number of fanatical soldiers to the religious authorities is hardly a way to secure your position. Cersei's POV chapters kill any and all possibility of taking her seriously as a threat, especially when her character motivations seem to increasingly rely on her coming off as just plain unhinged and oblivious to fact. It might be realistic for the "big bad" of the story to just be a bumbling fool who was born/married into power, but it hardly makes for an engaging story.

As for Daenerys, you have a huge number of prophecies that clearly mark her out as a Chosen One, with an evil race of undead pouring down from the north that her dragons are perfectly suited for fighting. As a veteran of The Wheel of Time, the fact that she's mired in politics and possibly going insane doesn't really do much to set her apart from fellow classic Chosen Ones (in my eyes at least). Heck, "mired in politics" even applies to the characters of the Dragonlance books in the original trilogy. ASOIAF has an impressive scope and a similarly impressive attention to detail, and is a lot more willing to have characters (both good and bad) fail than many series, but it still plays out like a lot of what people criticise as generic fantasy. It is, of course, yet to be seen whether or not it'll end that way... up to GRRM I guess, but there's every indication so far that it will end in just the way I described. And it certainly doesn't stop Daenerys coming off like a plethora of fellow fantasy protagonists at about the mid-point in their story arc.