Game of Thrones Thread

Is it confirmed fact that "Aegon" is in fact false?
Unless there had been indications otherwise, this Aegon is false until proven otherwise. There has been too many witnesses to the Mad King's fall to have an additional secret child somewhere.
 
Yeah, I don't think Aegon is Aegon. I'm only 70% sold on him being a Blackfyre or something, but he's not Aegon. There's a bunch of people who aren't who they say they are, and he's one of them.

But like Varys says, it only matters in this case what people think is true.
 
its the upcoming show, one of three spinoffs to GoT, mostly likely going to be a trainwreck
I can tell by the casting choices alone that it's going to be a mess, they got that goofy looking guy from Doctor Who to play Daemon Targaryen who is supposed to be this rugged adventurer type, some dumpy looking chick for Rhaenyra Targaryen who was known as 'the realm's delight' and one of the most beautiful women ever and they made fucking Corlys Velaryon black which makes no sense whatsoever since the Velaryons came from Valyria with the Targaryens and are essentially a Targaryen cadet branch with the same pale skin, silver hair and purple eyes.
Also the actress that is going to play Alicent Hightower was virtue signaling about how there would not be any gratuitous violence against women on the show, wonder how she'll react when she finds out the main female character gets fucking devoured by a a dragon in front of her son, leaving him a traumatized wreck for the rest of his life
 
Martin thinks he's better than Tolkien.
I think people read too deeply into this. I never took it to mean he's shitting on Tolkien but that he wanted to do something different, which is kind of the reason most of us are reading ASoIaF.
 
I think people read too deeply into this. I never took it to mean he's shitting onhh/ Tolkien but that he wanted to do something different, which is kind of the reason most of us are reading ASoIaF.
Nah, he shits on Tolkien all of the time. Catelyn and Jon are both brought back from the dead because he didn't like how Tolkien did it with Gandalf.

 
Nah, he shits on Tolkien all of the time. Catelyn and Jon are both brought back from the dead because he didn't like how Tolkien did it with Gandalf.

Unsurprising that he completely misses the point of Gandalf's resurrection. Gandalf is strongly implied within the story (and outright explicitly stated in secondary material) to be a higher being of sorts, someone who was sent to Middle-Earth to ensure the forces of good prevail. Tolkien himself likened Gandalf to an angel incarnate.

If Gandalf were a normal human being who was resurrected and brought back more powerful than ever, then I could see where he was coming from. When Gandalf mentioned being sent back to complete his mission, something that only happens to him and no one else in the story, that should have clued anyone paying attention in that Gandalf is perhaps far greater than he lets on. Martin's line of thinking feels like he's more concerned with the realism of the story while ignoring the spiritual and mythological references it continually draws upon, which is a pretty shallow way to examine Tolkien's work.
 
I think it's just more cynical rather than anything malicious towards Tolkien- he is a lapsed Catholic after all, and it shows.

Unlike in the works of Tolkien, there's almost certainly no higher moral power interested in the good of the world in ASOIAF . Any greater powers in his works tend to be malicious mind controlling entities (like Fungus or weird pyramids) or outright lies to keep a population in line.
 
Tolkien finished his series and made a prequel in the Silmarillion which gave fans the history of Middle Earth they wanted so much. He is also the Father of modern fantasy.

George has not finished his series, is literally doing nothing with it due to creating a mess with his storytelling and how many sub plots he created. He is also a massive sellout.

George has no room to criticize any author right now. Let alone Tolkien.

Finish your series George.
 
One major detail not mentioned in the thread is Tolkien had real jobs and a career throughout his adult life and writing was something he did on the side.
He was also a veteran of the Somme who lost most of his friends in the war, while Martin chilled in the States during Vietnam as too fat for basic training a conscientious objector.
 
He was also a veteran of the Somme who lost most of his friends in the war, while Martin chilled in the States during Vietnam as too fat for basic training a conscientious objector.
You can tell Tolkien expirienced the most brutal and terrible war in human history, a lot of the stuff set in Mordor seems like he's drawing from personal memories regarding nomansland and the trenches. Like when Sam and Frodo are forced to drink some putrid, stinking water since it's the only spring that they could find. Some other things, like the arrival of reinforcements to a raging battle and how it turns the tides, seems pretty in line with those memories, too.

It just goes to show, anyone can write a story, but someone who went through many types of situations, good or bad, will be able to write stuff, drawing from his personal experience and create something far better than a mollycuddled asshat, who never had to face hardship or had to work hard for his success, ever could.

I mean, just compare a shitty writer like Chuck Wendig, who dares speaking up against such masters like Tolkien, and what kind of life that guy had compared to a veteran and scholar like Tolkien. I don't know where to put Martin in this spectrum, I would wager that he at least read enough stuff and is smart enough to think and theorize about some things, so he can put certain themes into his books, kinda like they were second hand experience based on his readings whereas someone like Wendig isn't even worthy of offering his works as a substitute for toilet paper to a writer like Tolkien.
 
Some other things, like the arrival of reinforcements to a raging battle and how it turns the tides, seems pretty in line with those memories, too.

The eerie, preserved, and haunted corpses in the Dead Marshes (leftovers from the battles to invade Mordor over 3000 years before) were directly inspired by things like the soldiers who drowned in the mud at Passchendaele by the thousands.

I mean, just compare a shitty writer like Chuck Wendig, who dares speaking up against such masters like Tolkien, and what kind of life that guy had compared to a veteran and scholar like Tolkien. I don't know where to put Martin in this spectrum, I would wager that he at least read enough stuff and is smart enough to think and theorize about some things, so he can put certain themes into his books, kinda like they were second hand experience based on his readings whereas someone like Wendig isn't even worthy of offering his works as a substitute for toilet paper to a writer like Tolkien.

Say what you will about Martin, it's clear he's had real life experiences (if not on the level of being a Great War combat veteran), where writers like Wendig are mostly drawing on the stuff they've absorbed from writers who came before them. There's a similar problem with comic books, where the great writers and artists of the last generation were blue collar dudes and veterans, while now comics are being made by ... comics fans. Yech.
 
The eerie, preserved, and haunted corpses in the Dead Marshes (leftovers from the battles to invade Mordor over 3000 years before) were directly inspired by things like the soldiers who drowned in the mud at Passchendaele by the thousands.



Say what you will about Martin, it's clear he's had real life experiences (if not on the level of being a Great War combat veteran), where writers like Wendig are mostly drawing on the stuff they've absorbed from writers who came before them. There's a similar problem with comic books, where the great writers and artists of the last generation were blue collar dudes and veterans, while now comics are being made by ... comics fans. Yech.

The creative fields, such as writing books, comics or making movies or videogames, have been taken over by people who -at best- take their inspiration from the works in their respective field that already exist. Instead of creating something new based on their own personal experience or at least from a varied source of other works, it's a rather incestuous cycle of regurgitating ideas taken from material in the exact same field. Fans of superhero comics make superhero comics based on the superhero comics they read themselves, reusing whatever they like. At best, that genre, like many others, has become nothing more than a blender that picks ideas, tropes, cliches and sometimes new political garbage like SJWdom and creates something akin to compost of the genre. A cargo cult of ideas.

We have an entire generation of writers who have been raised on nothing but Harry Potter, MLP and maybe a few 90s comics. And these tards now win Hugo awards like clockwork, since all it takes is sucking the right cock and kissing the right asses, writing ability is no longer a requirement to be an award-winning author.
 
And these tards now win Hugo awards like clockwork, since all it takes is sucking the right cock and kissing the right asses, writing ability is no longer a requirement to be an award-winning author.

I give you NK Jemisin's three-peat Hugo Awards, when by any reasonable measure she never should have gotten a nomination.
 
The folly of realism is that reality is so much more complex and bizarre. Constantine, Alexander, Genghis Kahn, Nobunaga, Atilla, and so many others are remembered for the nearly impossible achievements they made.
There's a bit from How Not to Write a Novel that summarizes this: "God can work with the most mind-bending coincidences, far-fetched plot contrivances, and perverse dramatic ironies, never giving a moment's thought to whether or not his audience will buy it. You do not have this luxury." When writing a fantastical world, internal consistency is important (which Martin realizes) but part of that consistency is following through even if the realism is questionable. If you have Sir So-and-so who's got a career-defining joust coming up that you've been building towards for half a novel, don't have him step on a rusty nail and die of lockjaw out of nowhere, even though tetanus was something that really killed people in the Middle Ages. If the story is going to end on a complete anticlimax, you probably should just remove it.

I've seen people try to make excuses, that the inconsistency of the seasons don't allow for development, that constant warfare doesn't allow for development, that there's a secret sci-fi order holding society back, etc. These are all excuses for a critical lack of accuracy in an accuracy based series and don't explain things like how the "common tongue" is able to be spoken across an entire feudal continent for 8,000 years.

Wait, isn't "feudal stasis that's secretly enforced by high-tech alien cabal" the premise of the Gor books?

Considering how sex usually shakes out in ASoIaF, I'm starting to see a resemblance.

Unsurprising that he completely misses the point of Gandalf's resurrection. Gandalf is strongly implied within the story (and outright explicitly stated in secondary material) to be a higher being of sorts, someone who was sent to Middle-Earth to ensure the forces of good prevail. Tolkien himself likened Gandalf to an angel incarnate.

It's subtler than that, even. Saruman and Radagast are both the same type of being as Gandalf, but lost their way, becoming consumed by lust for power and love of nature respectively. The wizards were (basically) angels who were sent down to aid the races of Middle-Earth in their battle against Sauron, but they were free-willed and thus fallible. Gandalf himself acknowledges this in both the books and the movies, when he he rejects the One Ring specifically because he fears succumbing to it. It's that sort of philosophical perspective, where the power of the One is inherently corrupt and corrupting, that raises LOTR above "shiny swords n' shit."
 
Back