 |
Talk Back Registration is NOT necessary to use this forum
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jeffp Homo Sapiens


Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 990 Location: Los Gatos, CA
|
Posted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:19 am Post subject: 44. A Clash Of Kings, by George R. R. Martin |
|
|
A Clash Of Kings is the second in the ongoing series by George R. R. Martin. It's better than the first, in my opinion, but still suffers from a nit or two.
The first thing you should know about this tome is that it is huge. My paperback copy is 969 pages long, and that doesn't include the appendices. The story revolves around the struggle for the throne between many (and I mean many) competing groups of people. At one point there are at least five men calling themselves kings of some or all of the continent.
The story is complex enough to require a thousand pages, with a lot of political intrigue and double dealing. Keeping track of who is in whose pay is nearly impossible without a score card. Just remembering the names of all the minor characters was impossible period. In the end, I simply had to trust the author to remind me of who someone was when it mattered.
Lastly, magic exists here, though its form(s) and potency are still unclear. Thus far I have found the magical element to be interesting and well designed.
As to why it is better than the first volume, I can say that my biggest issue with A Game Of Thrones was the unexpected death of a major character, one I'd come to like over hundreds of pages. That doesn't happen here, though the threat looms over all the major characters nearly all the time. Some reasonably well developed characters do die, even some we met in the first book, but they'd always been wearing red shirts, so their deaths didn't cause me to swear at the author.
It is also the case that this time around I wasn't as bothered by the changes in point of view. It didn't seem as though they were as obviously designed to conceal things from the reader, with the obvious exception of one case - a cliff hanger drawing you into the next volume. That said, some interesting action does happen off stage and we only hear about it later from someone not directly involved. That happens even when the character doing the deed - whatever it may have been in a specific case - is one that we're following directly at times.
On the downside, we still have two parallel but related stories going on that have yet to intersect in any major way, and that's after something like 1600 pages of writing. It is clear they will cross paths eventually, but how many thousands of pages we'll read before then I cannot tell.
I also still have an issue with the writing style, though I may be growing less sensitive to it. As before, I was capable of putting this book down at almost any time. Not quite mid sentence, but certainly mid paragraph. I'm not sure why that was the case, but I am starting to suspect that the huge cast of characters and the fact that any of them could die at any time is keeping me from getting wrapped up in any of them too deeply.
In addition, no one is given a the clear role of hero, victim or bad guy. Everyone is painted gray to varying degrees. While that makes it more realistic in some ways, it also makes me less willing to bond to someone. Martin doesn't pick favorites either. As far as I can tell, every side in the conflict presented thinks all other sides have it wrong, and therefore they would be right if they win out in the end. Put more succinctly, they all think "we're good, they're evil." With that presentation and the continual change in perspective, we have no idea as readers who (if anyone) we're supposed to be pulling for in this conflict. That may also be keeping me from getting lost in this book the way I have in other cases.
One final nit: why does the world here contain some things that so familiar to us, and yet is clearly fictional? Why can a ship sail far away and bring back giraffes, for example? Just how is this place related to the real world? No answers are given, but I feel like they should be. It's a small point, but it's been in the back of my head since the first volume.
Despite those issues A Clash Of Kings kept me reading. The events are interesting and the world is deeply thought out. The story is complex enough to keep me guessing what is going on, and the writing is good enough to keep me entertained.
It's still not the best fantasy I've read, but it's pretty good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
shaw Java Man

Joined: 04 Aug 2003 Posts: 1025
|
Posted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 3:17 pm Post subject: Re: 44. A Clash Of Kings, by George R. R. Martin |
|
|
It is interesting to me that the things you dislike about this book are often things that I like about it.
| jeffp wrote: | | In the end, I simply had to trust the author to remind me of who someone was when it mattered. |
One of Martin's strengths in this volume, in my opinion, is that you can trust him to do this.
| jeffp wrote: |
As to why it is better than the first volume, I can say that my biggest issue with A Game Of Thrones was the unexpected death of a major character, one I'd come to like over hundreds of pages. That doesn't happen here, though the threat looms over all the major characters nearly all the time. |
We discussed this in your last review. But I claim that the previous death is the REASON that the threat looms over all the major characters. You know Martin is a twisted bastard who has killed before and can kill again. I loved this.
| jeffp wrote: | | On the downside, we still have two parallel but related stories going on that have yet to intersect in any major way, and that's after something like 1600 pages of writing. It is clear they will cross paths eventually, but how many thousands of pages we'll read before then I cannot tell. |
I count three. The main one, one which hasn't intersected in a major way, and one which hasn't even intersected in a minor way. (okay, maybe very minor) I loved that, too. There are these two very BIG EVENTS going on that the kingdom should REALLY be preparing for, and all they do is fight among themselves over who should be king. You want to scream SETTLE IT AND START PREPARING! and maybe you do but they hear not.
Kind of like a planet I know where Oil is running out, the Rainforests that make our air are being destroyed, and the leaders are fighting about gay marriage.
| jeffp wrote: | | In addition, no one is given a the clear role of hero, victim or bad guy. Everyone is painted gray to varying degrees. [...] As far as I can tell, every side in the conflict presented thinks all other sides have it wrong, and therefore they would be right if they win out in the end. Put more succinctly, they all think "we're good, they're evil." |
Again, we agree, and that's another thing I love about the book. All sides think they are right, and have some reason to think so.
| jeffp wrote: | | With that presentation and the continual change in perspective, we have no idea as readers who (if anyone) we're supposed to be pulling for in this conflict. That may also be keeping me from getting lost in this book the way I have in other cases. |
We are supposed to be pulling for whoever we want to. I don't know about you, but I hated the holy hell out of the Lannisters, and wanted to see them all boiled in oil and eaten by maggots that liked fried food. Except for whats-his-name, the Dwarf. I was pulling for him throughout the book.
Another thing I like is that my perspective on the characters changed. The mother of the six Starklets- I'm blanking on her name, too - started out as someone I liked in this novel, and by the end I didn't like her nearly as much. And the guy with the burned face who hates knights - I started out disliking him as a Bad Guy, but by the end of the book I was pulling for him to achieve some degree of power and contentment.
I'm not trying to persuade you about anything, I'm just really enjoying how we are reading the same book, noticing the same things, and having such different reactions to it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jeffp Homo Sapiens


Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 990 Location: Los Gatos, CA
|
Posted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 4:24 pm Post subject: Re: 44. A Clash Of Kings, by George R. R. Martin |
|
|
| shaw wrote: | | It is interesting to me that the things you dislike about this book are often things that I like about it. |
You're right that it is interesting. I find it amusing as well, but apparantly I cannot just agree with you now.
| shaw wrote: | | jeffp wrote: | | In the end, I simply had to trust the author to remind me of who someone was when it attered. |
One of Martin's strengths in this volume, in my opinion, is that you can trust him to do this. |
I'm still struggling with this issue, alas. I've read plenty of complex fiction, and never had this issue before. I think (for me) that it may be that Martin has crossed my limit here somehow. There are just too many characters, so he constantly has to remind me of who they are. If he doesn't, I stop and wonder "Now who was that again? The name sounds familiar, but which chapter I last saw it in I have no idea." I guess it's just so large that the reminder requirement (if you will) bugs me. Perhaps my brain is full, though.
| shaw wrote: | | jeffp wrote: | | As to why it is better than the first volume, I can say that my biggest issue with A Game Of Thrones was the unexpected death of a major character, one I'd come to like over hundreds of pages. That doesn't happen here, though the threat looms over all the major characters nearly all the time. |
We discussed this in your last review. But I claim that the previous death is the REASON that the threat looms over all the major characters. You know Martin is a twisted bastard who has killed before and can kill again. I loved this. |
Well, no, it wasn't actually his death that caused it all. It was before then... when he took the job he took, thereby putting his neck in the noose, as it were. Or it was farther back - before the first novel even started - when he helped the former king come to power. Or it was before that, in some conflict before he was even born. In any case I view his death as an arbitrary act caused by the erratic behavior of the previous king. And that, you may recall, was a criticism I leveled at the first novel in the series. That one character (Robert) didn't have enough character development to let me understand why he did what he did. His actions - stupid and possibly irrational - precipitate the entire situation being protrayed, and they didn't have a good basis. Why Robert did what he did is never explained at all. Not even explored. I can't go into any more detail on it without spoiling all kinds of things, but that irks me still.
| shaw wrote: | | jeffp wrote: | | On the downside, we still have two parallel but related stories going on that have yet to intersect in any major way, and that's after something like 1600 pages of writing. It is clear they will cross paths eventually, but how many thousands of pages we'll read before then I cannot tell. |
I count three. The main one, one which hasn't intersected in a major way, and one which hasn't even intersected in a minor way. (okay, maybe very minor) I loved that, too. There are these two very BIG EVENTS going on that the kingdom should REALLY be preparing for, and all they do is fight among themselves over who should be king. You want to scream SETTLE IT AND START PREPARING! and maybe you do but they hear not. |
Your count is right. Three it is. But at least the separate northern story has participants directly related to the main conflict over who is going to be the next king.
| shaw wrote: | | Kind of like a planet I know where Oil is running out, the Rainforests that make our air are being destroyed, and the leaders are fighting about gay marriage. |
Now that is an analogy I can agree with, 100%.
| shaw wrote: | | jeffp wrote: | | In addition, no one is given a the clear role of hero, victim or bad guy. Everyone is painted gray to varying degrees. [...] As far as I can tell, every side in the conflict presented thinks all other sides have it wrong, and therefore they would be right if they win out in the end. Put more succinctly, they all think "we're good, they're evil." |
Again, we agree, and that's another thing I love about the book. All sides think they are right, and have some reason to think so. |
I understand the appeal, but it is also a bit frustrating. When the reader's opinion of a character is constantly changing - or never settles down - it grates. As with my last review, I may be showing my lack of education here, but so be it.
| shaw wrote: | | jeffp wrote: | | With that presentation and the continual change in perspective, we have no idea as readers who (if anyone) we're supposed to be pulling for in this conflict. That may also be keeping me from getting lost in this book the way I have in other cases. |
We are supposed to be pulling for whoever we want to. I don't know about you, but I hated the holy hell out of the Lannisters, and wanted to see them all boiled in oil and eaten by maggots that liked fried food. Except for whats-his-name, the Dwarf. I was pulling for him throughout the book. |
The dwarf is named Tyrion. And yes, by and large I hated the Lannisters too as I was reading this. But what about Stannis and his "advisor"? What about Renly? Even Robb and his followers are doing some things I disagree with on moral grounds here. And the ironmen... don't get me started on that sub-plot. But even Tyrion - who I find attractive at times and who you say you're pulling for as well - isn't entirely likeable as a character. Is he a hero? An anti-hero? What is he? I really don't know, but after something like 1600 pages (probably more, actually) I'd think I'd have some sort of clue.
| shaw wrote: | | Another thing I like is that my perspective on the characters changed. The mother of the six Starklets- I'm blanking on her name, too - started out as someone I liked in this novel, and by the end I didn't like her nearly as much. And the guy with the burned face who hates knights - I started out disliking him as a Bad Guy, but by the end of the book I was pulling for him to achieve some degree of power and contentment. |
The mother is Catalyn and the other is referred to as The Hound, though he's got a real name - something like "Clegaine", right? I didn't come out disliking her, but Martin does leave you wondering at the very end. Of course, she's slipping into despair, and for good reason. The Hound is a bizarre case. I'm hoping there will be more development on him in the next book. If he just vanishes, well, we're back to irrational character actions.
| shaw wrote: | | I'm not trying to persuade you about anything, I'm just really enjoying how we are reading the same book, noticing the same things, and having such different reactions to it. |
I agree. It is fun. Now let me bounce something back at you...
If you like this, and you like the way Martin takes his characters and runs them through a meat grinder, doesn't Donaldson have some of the same appeal? The entire "Gap" series I reviewed at the beginning of the year does similar things on a smaller scale. And the Covenant series does it too. For my money, Donaldson is a somewhat better writer, but I can see how that could be argued. And anyone bothered by Covenant's initial actions on entering the Land should not read the Martin series. Let's just say that Covenant's transgression is multiplied by a million here, often without the horrific and ongoing consequences. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
shaw Java Man

Joined: 04 Aug 2003 Posts: 1025
|
Posted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 7:42 pm Post subject: Re: 44. A Clash Of Kings, by George R. R. Martin |
|
|
| jeffp wrote: |
If you like this, and you like the way Martin takes his characters and runs them through a meat grinder, doesn't Donaldson have some of the same appeal? The entire "Gap" series I reviewed at the beginning of the year does similar things on a smaller scale. And the Covenant series does it too. For my money, Donaldson is a somewhat better writer, but I can see how that could be argued. |
I never read the Gap series. I liked the first Covenant trilogy. (I was reading it when you and I first met, actually). I disliked the second trilogy, because the characters would whine, fall into comas, come out of the comas, whine, and fall back into them. What percentage of the novels were Covenant and Linden conscious at the same time and not whining? I would say 3%, tops.
Tops. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|