Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 trexmeyer wrote:
Writes a fairly realistic series of novels.
Gets accused of writing in gruesome scenes for the sake of shock value.

Okay then, that's enough internet for today. Personally, I'm a bit invested in several of the characters and of course I want to see what happens when Winter actually arrives. Of course, that's a lie, I'm just reading the books to fap to the smorgasbord of death scenes.

Nice strawman there. I never said anyone fapped to the red wedding. I just said that he sometimes kills people off just to keep being edgy and keep his persona up.

Anyway, I like the series, I've come around and am a believer.

 trexmeyer wrote:
Personally, I'm a bit invested in several of the characters and of course I want to see what happens when Winter actually arrives. Of course, that's a lie, I'm just reading the books to fap to the smorgasbord of death scenes.

Climax is coming.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 EmilCrane wrote:

 trexmeyer wrote:
Writes a fairly realistic series of novels.
Gets accused of writing in gruesome scenes for the sake of shock value.

Okay then, that's enough internet for today. Personally, I'm a bit invested in several of the characters and of course I want to see what happens when Winter actually arrives. Of course, that's a lie, I'm just reading the books to fap to the smorgasbord of death scenes.

Nice strawman there. I never said anyone fapped to the red wedding. I just said that he sometimes kills people off just to keep being edgy and keep his persona up.

Anyway, I like the series, I've come around and am a believer.

I just said that he sometimes kills people off just to keep being edgy and keep his persona up.

Which is exactly what he said...

Writes a fairly realistic series of novels.
Gets accused of writing in gruesome scenes for the sake of shock value.

So you called his response a Straw Man...then confirmed his comment as an accurate description of your remark.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 EmilCrane wrote:
Dunno if it was in the book but I loved this little exchange between the hound and Arya Stark

"Of course you named your sword"
"Lots of people named their swords."
"Lots of c**ts."

I used to not like GoT, used to think it wasted characters for shock value and tried to force it's own warped morals on me. However I'm slowly growing to like it.

It still wastes perfectly good characters though.

Yeah. Just like real life. Weird huh? Its almost as if the author is deliberately trying to avoid the traditional cliched fantasy story where the good guys always win or die heroic meaningful deaths...

People just don't get that.

Best US sniper in Vietnam suffered horrific burns over his entire body and was rendered combat ineffective. He died years later in extreme pain. If that was fiction these people would say the author was just being edgy...

Russian rape of Berlian, rape of Beijing, Vlad the Impaler's atrocities, etc would all qualify as simply "being written in for shock value." Do mean people not understand that ASoIAF is heavily influenced by historical events in medieval Europe? Specifically the War of the Roses? The Red Wedding is just the Black Dinner. The atrocities in the books really pale in comparison to actual history.

I was talking about fapping to death scenes. I never said anything about getting perverse pleasure from his killing off of characters.

 trexmeyer wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 EmilCrane wrote:
Dunno if it was in the book but I loved this little exchange between the hound and Arya Stark

"Of course you named your sword"
"Lots of people named their swords."
"Lots of c**ts."

I used to not like GoT, used to think it wasted characters for shock value and tried to force it's own warped morals on me. However I'm slowly growing to like it.

It still wastes perfectly good characters though.

Yeah. Just like real life. Weird huh? Its almost as if the author is deliberately trying to avoid the traditional cliched fantasy story where the good guys always win or die heroic meaningful deaths...

People just don't get that.

Best US sniper in Vietnam suffered horrific burns over his entire body and was rendered combat ineffective. He died years later in extreme pain. If that was fiction these people would say the author was just being edgy...

Russian rape of Berlian, rape of Beijing, Vlad the Impaler's atrocities, etc would all qualify as simply "being written in for shock value." Do mean people not understand that ASoIAF is heavily influenced by historical events in medieval Europe? Specifically the War of the Roses? The Red Wedding is just the Black Dinner. The atrocities in the books really pale in comparison to actual history.

Aye. The Lannisters have got nothing on Medieval Scots.

 trexmeyer wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 EmilCrane wrote:
Dunno if it was in the book but I loved this little exchange between the hound and Arya Stark

"Of course you named your sword"
"Lots of people named their swords."
"Lots of c**ts."

I used to not like GoT, used to think it wasted characters for shock value and tried to force it's own warped morals on me. However I'm slowly growing to like it.

It still wastes perfectly good characters though.

Yeah. Just like real life. Weird huh? Its almost as if the author is deliberately trying to avoid the traditional cliched fantasy story where the good guys always win or die heroic meaningful deaths...

People just don't get that.

Best US sniper in Vietnam suffered horrific burns over his entire body and was rendered combat ineffective. He died years later in extreme pain. If that was fiction these people would say the author was just being edgy...

Russian rape of Berlian, rape of Beijing, Vlad the Impaler's atrocities, etc would all qualify as simply "being written in for shock value." Do mean people not understand that ASoIAF is heavily influenced by historical events in medieval Europe? Specifically the War of the Roses? The Red Wedding is just the Black Dinner. The atrocities in the books really pale in comparison to actual history.

Don't presume to lecture me about history. I have a degree in military history, I know exactly what real life is like. That's not why I read fantasy. If I wanted to know about things like that I'd read a book about the rape of Nanking, not a fantasy book.

Point is moot though because I said numerous times that I still like the story.

Then why are you accusing him of writing for shock value?

 trexmeyer wrote:
Then why are you accusing him of writing for shock value?

Because even if I like the story I'm allowed to have things I don't like about it too.


Let me put it another way, lord of the rings is my favourite piece of fantasy work ever, full stop, but I still think it's over long and wordy at times, I also think it can be an incredibly racist piece of fiction, but I still like it. I still like a song of ice and fire, even if I disagree with the authors handling of certain events. It's a testament to the authors skill at writing and story crafting that I like it despite the fact that I don't like gritty fantasy.

Okay, you don't like gritty fantasy, that is perfectly fine and understandable. Putting the author on blast for completely BS reasons isn't really called for simply because you prefer sunshine magic fairy pixie dust fantasy.

 EmilCrane wrote:

 trexmeyer wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 EmilCrane wrote:
Dunno if it was in the book but I loved this little exchange between the hound and Arya Stark

"Of course you named your sword"
"Lots of people named their swords."
"Lots of c**ts."

I used to not like GoT, used to think it wasted characters for shock value and tried to force it's own warped morals on me. However I'm slowly growing to like it.

It still wastes perfectly good characters though.

Yeah. Just like real life. Weird huh? Its almost as if the author is deliberately trying to avoid the traditional cliched fantasy story where the good guys always win or die heroic meaningful deaths...

People just don't get that.

Best US sniper in Vietnam suffered horrific burns over his entire body and was rendered combat ineffective. He died years later in extreme pain. If that was fiction these people would say the author was just being edgy...

Russian rape of Berlian, rape of Beijing, Vlad the Impaler's atrocities, etc would all qualify as simply "being written in for shock value." Do mean people not understand that ASoIAF is heavily influenced by historical events in medieval Europe? Specifically the War of the Roses? The Red Wedding is just the Black Dinner. The atrocities in the books really pale in comparison to actual history.

Don't presume to lecture me about history. I have a degree in military history, I know exactly what real life is like. That's not why I read fantasy. If I wanted to know about things like that I'd read a book about the rape of Nanking, not a fantasy book.

Point is moot though because I said numerous times that I still like the story.

Then you're reading the wrong fantasy series. GRRM deliberately and explicitly set out to write a rather "realistic" fantasy series that subverts and twists typical fantasy memes and cliches. Hell, he was even reluctant about including Daenery's dragons in the story and only did so when his wife persuaded him.

He made the "evil" race of ice demons (The Others) beautiful and ethereal creatures.

His "Elf" analogues (the Children) are short, primitive, and slightly ugly and inhuman in appearance, and they're hinted to practice cannibalism.

The "good guys" (the Northerners) count despicable monsters such as Roose and Ramsay Bolton among their number, and Northern soldiers commit rape and other atrocities throughout the war, just like the bad guys (Lannisters).

 trexmeyer wrote:
Okay, you don't like gritty fantasy, that is perfectly fine and understandable. Putting the author on blast for completely BS reasons isn't really called for simply because you prefer sunshine magic fairy pixie dust fantasy.

Dude just chill a bit, I'm on your side. I like high fantasy, yes. But I also appreciate well written low fantasy, like this. I'm just voicing my displeasure with one aspect of the story I don't like as much. I don't hate George RR Martin I don't know the guy.

 EmilCrane wrote:

 trexmeyer wrote:
Okay, you don't like gritty fantasy, that is perfectly fine and understandable. Putting the author on blast for completely BS reasons isn't really called for simply because you prefer sunshine magic fairy pixie dust fantasy.

Dude just chill a bit, I'm on your side. I like high fantasy, yes. But I also appreciate well written low fantasy, like this. I'm just voicing my displeasure with one aspect of the story I don't like as much. I don't hate George RR Martin I don't know the guy.

Right, and its your criticism that we're ridiculing, because its inherently illogical and missing the point.

You complain that interesting characters are killed off too often, but that is the sort of series that GRRM intends to write - a world where the "good guys" don't always win, where characters with lots of promise and potential get executed, or choke on a pigeon pie, or get assassinated. Where the bad guys often win because they're willing to be more ruthless and amoral than their enemies in order to win and survive.

GRRM wants to write a story that reflects the real world. Where no-one is truly good or evil, where the most ruthless and amoral are often the most successful.

From book one and season 1 of the show, lots of readers and viewers might have assumed that Eddar Stark (Sean Bean) was the main character, that he would lead his army, defeat the Lannisters and justice would prevail, because the good guys always win in the end or die heroically. But instead Eddard slipped up, got outsmarted by the enemy and was executed right at the start of the Series.

Thats why the series is so popular, and so entertaining. Because it subverts memes and cliches, to keep the story fresh and unpredictable rather than following an established formula. You can't predict that Character X will survive to the end of the story and sit on the Iron Throne because hes the main character and the good guy.

And nor can you predict that Character Y will get his comeuppance, because hes a despicable bad guy. In some cases, even the very worst villains end up displaying some redeeming qualities and become somewhat sympathetic characters (Jaime Lannister and the Hound).

If you want to read a really good subversion of the fantasy genre, read the First Law trilogy.

It manages to really twist your preconceptions around; and it also managed to do it in an enjoyable, fairly succinct manner, which GRRM is currently failing to do.

 Bromsy wrote:
If you want to read a really good subversion of the fantasy genre, read the First Law trilogy.

It manages to really twist your preconceptions around; and it also managed to do it in an enjoyable, fairly succinct manner, which GRRM is currently failing to do.

Only in the last couple books.

Game of Thrones, Clash of Kings and Storm of Swords were great. Feast for Crows and Dance with Dragons were dire.

But thanks, I will check that series out and see if its on the Kindle.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 EmilCrane wrote:

 trexmeyer wrote:
Okay, you don't like gritty fantasy, that is perfectly fine and understandable. Putting the author on blast for completely BS reasons isn't really called for simply because you prefer sunshine magic fairy pixie dust fantasy.

Dude just chill a bit, I'm on your side. I like high fantasy, yes. But I also appreciate well written low fantasy, like this. I'm just voicing my displeasure with one aspect of the story I don't like as much. I don't hate George RR Martin I don't know the guy.

Right, and its your criticism that we're ridiculing, because its inherently illogical and missing the point.

You complain that interesting characters are killed off too often, but that is the sort of series that GRRM intends to write - a world where the "good guys" don't always win, where characters with lots of promise and potential get executed, or choke on a pigeon pie, or get assassinated. Where the bad guys often win because they're willing to be more ruthless and amoral than their enemies in order to win and survive.

GRRM wants to write a story that reflects the real world. Where no-one is truly good or evil, where the most ruthless and amoral are often the most successful.

From book one and season 1 of the show, lots of readers and viewers might have assumed that Eddar Stark (Sean Bean) was the main character, that he would lead his army, defeat the Lannisters and justice would prevail, because the good guys always win in the end or die heroically. But instead Eddard slipped up, got outsmarted by the enemy and was executed right at the start of the Series.

Thats why the series is so popular, and so entertaining. Because it subverts memes and cliches, to keep the story fresh and unpredictable rather than following an established formula. You can't predict that Character X will survive to the end of the story and sit on the Iron Throne because hes the main character and the good guy.

And nor can you predict that Character Y will get his comeuppance, because hes a despicable bad guy. In some cases, even the very worst villains end up displaying some redeeming qualities and become somewhat sympathetic characters (Jaime Lannister and the Hound).

Ok, thats good, but thats not the sole aspect of why one might like the show or book. I like the setting and the characters. You don't get to determine who is allowed to be a fan of GoT and who is not.

 EmilCrane wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 EmilCrane wrote:

 trexmeyer wrote:
Okay, you don't like gritty fantasy, that is perfectly fine and understandable. Putting the author on blast for completely BS reasons isn't really called for simply because you prefer sunshine magic fairy pixie dust fantasy.

Dude just chill a bit, I'm on your side. I like high fantasy, yes. But I also appreciate well written low fantasy, like this. I'm just voicing my displeasure with one aspect of the story I don't like as much. I don't hate George RR Martin I don't know the guy.

Right, and its your criticism that we're ridiculing, because its inherently illogical and missing the point.

You complain that interesting characters are killed off too often, but that is the sort of series that GRRM intends to write - a world where the "good guys" don't always win, where characters with lots of promise and potential get executed, or choke on a pigeon pie, or get assassinated. Where the bad guys often win because they're willing to be more ruthless and amoral than their enemies in order to win and survive.

GRRM wants to write a story that reflects the real world. Where no-one is truly good or evil, where the most ruthless and amoral are often the most successful.

From book one and season 1 of the show, lots of readers and viewers might have assumed that Eddar Stark (Sean Bean) was the main character, that he would lead his army, defeat the Lannisters and justice would prevail, because the good guys always win in the end or die heroically. But instead Eddard slipped up, got outsmarted by the enemy and was executed right at the start of the Series.

Thats why the series is so popular, and so entertaining. Because it subverts memes and cliches, to keep the story fresh and unpredictable rather than following an established formula. You can't predict that Character X will survive to the end of the story and sit on the Iron Throne because hes the main character and the good guy.

And nor can you predict that Character Y will get his comeuppance, because hes a despicable bad guy. In some cases, even the very worst villains end up displaying some redeeming qualities and become somewhat sympathetic characters (Jaime Lannister and the Hound).

Ok, thats good, but thats not the sole aspect of why one might like the show or book. I like the setting and the characters. You don't get to determine who is allowed to be a fan of GoT and who is not.

Now who's using Straw Men?

Please point out where I said I get to determine who is and is not allowed to be a fan?

You're complaining about an aspect of the story which happens to be a deliberate design choice by the author. GRRM wants it this way (where just about any character can be unpredictably killed, leaving their potential and storylines unfulfilled and unresolved, just like real life).

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 EmilCrane wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 EmilCrane wrote:

 trexmeyer wrote:
Okay, you don't like gritty fantasy, that is perfectly fine and understandable. Putting the author on blast for completely BS reasons isn't really called for simply because you prefer sunshine magic fairy pixie dust fantasy.

Dude just chill a bit, I'm on your side. I like high fantasy, yes. But I also appreciate well written low fantasy, like this. I'm just voicing my displeasure with one aspect of the story I don't like as much. I don't hate George RR Martin I don't know the guy.

Right, and its your criticism that we're ridiculing, because its inherently illogical and missing the point.

You complain that interesting characters are killed off too often, but that is the sort of series that GRRM intends to write - a world where the "good guys" don't always win, where characters with lots of promise and potential get executed, or choke on a pigeon pie, or get assassinated. Where the bad guys often win because they're willing to be more ruthless and amoral than their enemies in order to win and survive.

GRRM wants to write a story that reflects the real world. Where no-one is truly good or evil, where the most ruthless and amoral are often the most successful.

From book one and season 1 of the show, lots of readers and viewers might have assumed that Eddar Stark (Sean Bean) was the main character, that he would lead his army, defeat the Lannisters and justice would prevail, because the good guys always win in the end or die heroically. But instead Eddard slipped up, got outsmarted by the enemy and was executed right at the start of the Series.

Thats why the series is so popular, and so entertaining. Because it subverts memes and cliches, to keep the story fresh and unpredictable rather than following an established formula. You can't predict that Character X will survive to the end of the story and sit on the Iron Throne because hes the main character and the good guy.

And nor can you predict that Character Y will get his comeuppance, because hes a despicable bad guy. In some cases, even the very worst villains end up displaying some redeeming qualities and become somewhat sympathetic characters (Jaime Lannister and the Hound).

Ok, thats good, but thats not the sole aspect of why one might like the show or book. I like the setting and the characters. You don't get to determine who is allowed to be a fan of GoT and who is not.

Now whos using Straw Men?

Please point out where I said I get to determine who is and is not allowed to be a fan?

Man what is your deal with me?

Earlier you said I'm reading the wrong fantasy. I can read any fantasy I chose, not the ones you say I can.

 EmilCrane wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 EmilCrane wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 EmilCrane wrote:

 trexmeyer wrote:
Okay, you don't like gritty fantasy, that is perfectly fine and understandable. Putting the author on blast for completely BS reasons isn't really called for simply because you prefer sunshine magic fairy pixie dust fantasy.

Dude just chill a bit, I'm on your side. I like high fantasy, yes. But I also appreciate well written low fantasy, like this. I'm just voicing my displeasure with one aspect of the story I don't like as much. I don't hate George RR Martin I don't know the guy.

Right, and its your criticism that we're ridiculing, because its inherently illogical and missing the point.

You complain that interesting characters are killed off too often, but that is the sort of series that GRRM intends to write - a world where the "good guys" don't always win, where characters with lots of promise and potential get executed, or choke on a pigeon pie, or get assassinated. Where the bad guys often win because they're willing to be more ruthless and amoral than their enemies in order to win and survive.

GRRM wants to write a story that reflects the real world. Where no-one is truly good or evil, where the most ruthless and amoral are often the most successful.

From book one and season 1 of the show, lots of readers and viewers might have assumed that Eddar Stark (Sean Bean) was the main character, that he would lead his army, defeat the Lannisters and justice would prevail, because the good guys always win in the end or die heroically. But instead Eddard slipped up, got outsmarted by the enemy and was executed right at the start of the Series.

Thats why the series is so popular, and so entertaining. Because it subverts memes and cliches, to keep the story fresh and unpredictable rather than following an established formula. You can't predict that Character X will survive to the end of the story and sit on the Iron Throne because hes the main character and the good guy.

And nor can you predict that Character Y will get his comeuppance, because hes a despicable bad guy. In some cases, even the very worst villains end up displaying some redeeming qualities and become somewhat sympathetic characters (Jaime Lannister and the Hound).

Ok, thats good, but thats not the sole aspect of why one might like the show or book. I like the setting and the characters. You don't get to determine who is allowed to be a fan of GoT and who is not.

Now whos using Straw Men?

Please point out where I said I get to determine who is and is not allowed to be a fan?

Man what is your deal with me?

Earlier you said I'm reading the wrong fantasy. I can read any fantasy I chose, not the ones you say I can.

What is "my deal?" My deal, is that you're complaining that GRRM isn't writing the story the way you want it to be written.

I didn't say that you can't read it. I said that if you don't want a gritty realistic fantasy in which characters can unpredictably die, then this is the wrong fantasy series for you. The stories unpredictability and tendency to kill off a large number of its main characters is an intrinsic part of the nature of the story.


You posted a comment that I disagreed with. If you don't want a debate with people who disagree with your opinions, then don't post them in the first place.

It is an intrinsic part of the story, I agree. I personally don't like it, but I understand why its done. I can't change it, and I like the story in spite of it. Is that wrong?

 EmilCrane wrote:
It is an intrinsic part of the story, I agree. I personally don't like it, but I understand why its done. I can't change it, and I like the story in spite of it. Is that wrong?

No. You posted an opinion that people disagreed with, then got defensive. No one's out to get you.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 EmilCrane wrote:
It is an intrinsic part of the story, I agree. I personally don't like it, but I understand why its done. I can't change it, and I like the story in spite of it. Is that wrong?

No. You posted an opinion that people disagreed with, then got defensive. No one's out to get you.

No. I posted a comment about a quote from the series and then explained why I used to not like the series. Then you got aggressive.

 EmilCrane wrote:

 trexmeyer wrote:
Writes a fairly realistic series of novels.
Gets accused of writing in gruesome scenes for the sake of shock value.

Okay then, that's enough internet for today. Personally, I'm a bit invested in several of the characters and of course I want to see what happens when Winter actually arrives. Of course, that's a lie, I'm just reading the books to fap to the smorgasbord of death scenes.

Nice strawman there. I never said anyone fapped to the red wedding. I just said that he sometimes kills people off just to keep being edgy and keep his persona up.

Anyway, I like the series, I've come around and am a believer.

I fapped to the red wedding , it had a bedding.

I like how GRRM writes semi-realistic fantasy. I find fantasy books to generally be the most prudish books around. The fact that people die, feth and swear I find refreshing. Having characters who are soldiers who don't swear , feth or die has to be one of the weirdest hallmarks of fantasy books.
anyway on to the quote
“Shagga son of Dolf likes this not. Shagga will go with the boyman, and if the boyman lies, Shagga will chop off his manhood-"
"-and feed it to the goats, yes," Tyrion said wearily.”

 Bullockist wrote:

 EmilCrane wrote:

 trexmeyer wrote:
Writes a fairly realistic series of novels.
Gets accused of writing in gruesome scenes for the sake of shock value.

Okay then, that's enough internet for today. Personally, I'm a bit invested in several of the characters and of course I want to see what happens when Winter actually arrives. Of course, that's a lie, I'm just reading the books to fap to the smorgasbord of death scenes.

Nice strawman there. I never said anyone fapped to the red wedding. I just said that he sometimes kills people off just to keep being edgy and keep his persona up.

Anyway, I like the series, I've come around and am a believer.

I fapped to the red wedding , it had a bedding.

I like how GRRM writes semi-realistic fantasy. I find fantasy books to generally be the most prudish books around. The fact that people die, feth and swear I find refreshing. Having characters who are soldiers who don't swear , feth or die has to be one of the weirdest hallmarks of fantasy books.
anyway on to the quote
“Shagga son of Dolf likes this not. Shagga will go with the boyman, and if the boyman lies, Shagga will chop off his manhood-"
"-and feed it to the goats, yes," Tyrion said wearily.”

Further to your quote...

"Chop off his manhood, and feed it to the goats."
"There are no goats, half man".
"Well make do."

My sister and I quote this scene from the show all the time

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9Yev8rb4oA