[QuickTidal]

Yeah, but even Arya's wanderings were fruitfull to develop her as an AWESOME character...so those had a point.

[Brahm_K]

Brienne's did as well. I'll admit the Nimble Dick chapters were very pointless, but most of her chapters either dealt with her character development, observations about the state of Westeros after the War of the Five Kings, or plot development.

[QuickTidal]

Come on, you know as well as I do that Brienne's chapters served as keeping us in touch with the fact that SOME people in Westeros are still pulling for the Starks, without ever letting her find either of the girls.....that's about it. GRRM decided that he would draw out things cause I guess maybe he doesn't have anything else for Brienne to do.....I mean she could have done umpteen other things in the course of finding Sansa, but no, we get more of the same stuff she did in ASOS....but the problem is ....we've BEEN there already!!

PErsonally I believe GRRM Knows this, but LOVES to talk about stuff that can be tedious and boring.....but also the man made ASOS which really is an incredible accomplishment as a book....so who knows. I WANT the rest of the story to be good, and I want to LOVE this series when I am done it, but let's just say that there is one book so far on the "don't need to ever read again list"

[Brahm_K]

Eh, fair enough, to each his own. The Brienne chapters seem to divide the fanbase pretty evenly; many consider them the best in the book and many hate them. I don't believe either, and perhaps two or three of them should have been molded into one chapter, but I really did enjoy them.

[Mulliman]

Duiker said:

I just finished Feast. 'T was a good read: I think as good as could be expect of this lesser part of the cast (let's face it, except for Jaime all cool chars were out). I especially enjoyed the Ironmen and of course my personal fav Jaime.

And concerning the Brienne chapter, let me put it this way; I liked the pchapters because of the exposition they gave of the Riverlands, but I really can't stand Brienne. She just too much of a... victim.

BTW how do spoiler tags work here?

I agree, though i must add Cersei to your list.
Martin portrays her complete inability to gauge other humans, see the truth, see the lie, take good advice, not completely **** things up, think of others than herself etc. extremely well. A more ignorant and egoistic bitch than her, i have never encountered in literature .

[Brys]

Seems that I'm one of the few people who really enjoyed Feast. I thought the Jaime and Cersei chapters were amazing, equal to his writing in A Storm of Swords, the latter Brienne chapters were very good, the Arya and Sansa chapters were mixed, but on the whole good, and even the last couple of Arianne chapters were quite interesting. There was definitely some filler in the novel, but it wasn't anything like as bad as I had expected. I really enjoyed all of the political intrigue of the Kings' Landing, but some of the Ironmen and Dorne chapters were drawn out too much, as were the early Brienne chapters, and the Sam chapters were pretty awful compared to the rest. It wasn't as good as any of the previous books, but neither do I think the WoT comparisons were justified. I'm worried about the next book though - there'll only be two very interesting character POVs in it - Tyrion's and Jon's. I didn't like the Daenerys chapters in the previous books, but I can't think of any other characters that'll be worth reading about in aDwD.

[Werthead]

In ADWD I'm looking forward to see what Arya and Asha (yes, they're both in it) are getting up to. I've a strong suspicion that Asha's realised she can't claim the throne directly so needs a puppet to do it for her. Someone with a good claim on Balon's throne, who has performed daring and brave (if utterly stupid) deeds to win the ironmen's respect, someone who is a prisoner in a certain northern castle being continuously tortured and who would do anything out of gratitude for his rescuer... :Erm:

It also looks like the plan is to try and slip in some of the AFFC characters into ADWD as well. So we may get one or two chapters apiece from Cersei, Jaime and Brienne (possibly the others as well). The reason for this is to keep the timelines in check. At the moment, ADWD is covering a longer period of time than AFFC and GRRM wants to keep the storylines advancing at relatively the same pace.

GRRM's device of killing off major characters has slightly backfired in the sense that quite a few people can't feel emotionally connected to the story, which is a valid response. However, the world of Westeros is no 'darker' than Erikson's world IMO (actually, it is arguable that it isn't as 'dark').

[Tes'thesula]

GRRM's storyline confuses me, i am still not sure who to be rooting for. Who to root against is obvious enough, e.g. cersei, but everyone seems to have a valid point of view, which is good, but what is the overarching stortline, what is the point of the books. With SE we come to know that the CG is an ultimate enemy, or something, but with GRRM, there is not much of a direction for the story. Don't get me wrong, i really like his books and enjoy reading them, but when i am finished reading i start to wonder, whats the story.

[First Seguleh]

The story, as far as I can tell, is really about the effects of a resurgence of magic on a reasonably stable human populace (i.e. their civilisation isn't about to fall). I think it's going to end up as the humans against the various magical beasties (with the occasional human accomplice, of course), and the beasties against each other... if only they could get rid of these pesky humans. The series is called a Song of Ice and Fire, after all, and the almost complete lack of these elements in the first couple of books is masterful. I wouldn't be surprised if the whole focus of the series changes soon...

[Abyss]

There are some other conflicts tho'... polytheist (old gods) versus monotheist (one god), east (Dany and co.) versus west (...ertos), new kingdoms versus old empire...

There's an open question about whether 'fire' is a good thing, when you consider how Melisandre's sorcery works, or how Caitlin has been changed, or whatever is going on with the dragons...

All in all, it's a complex web grrm has spun.

- Abyss, "those aren't sheep bones".... creepy.

[Werthead]

In the same way that in MBF the Crippled God is the main 'enemy' (or at least the antagonist) and the struggles against the Pannion Domin, Raest, the Whirlwind etc are sideline stories, in ASoIF the ultimate enemy is definitely the Others. After all it is the Song of 'Ice' (the Others) and 'Fire' (Daenerys and her dragons, possibly Jon as well according to a plausible theory). The War of the Five Kings, the Lannisters, the Greyjoys etc are again sidelines, although more centrally tied to the central struggle than in MBF, since the civil war that has just finished and the civil war that is to come are sapping Westeros' strength, making it weaker to stand against the Others' inevitable strike.

That level of 'greyness', by making you hate Jaime for example in AGoT and ACoK and then root for him in ASoS and AFFC, I think is what sets ASoIF (and for that matter MBF and Bakker's PoN) apart from the black-and-white good-and-evil approach which has dominated fantasy for decades.

[First Seguleh]

I agree with Abyss about the ambiguity of the Ice and Fire sides. They're very... elemental - that is to say, pretty much devoid of human morality. The humans are just tools or obstacles in the conflict that's developing. There's not saying that the Others are any more dangerous to mankind than the dragons... not yet anyway. I for one will be disappointed if one ends up being the "goodies" and the other the "baddies"; I think the whole idea of the indifferent forces is a good one.

[Brys]

mjgill said:

GRRM's storyline confuses me, i am still not sure who to be rooting for. Who to root against is obvious enough, e.g. cersei, but everyone seems to have a valid point of view, which is good, but what is the overarching stortline, what is the point of the books. With SE we come to know that the CG is an ultimate enemy, or something, but with GRRM, there is not much of a direction for the story. Don't get me wrong, i really like his books and enjoy reading them, but when i am finished reading i start to wonder, whats the story.

The exact reason I find Martin to be one of the top fantasy writers of the moment, and the one criticism I have of Erikson, seem to be the opposite for you. I hate the idea of too clear-cut characters, and IMO Erikson's weakest point is in his characterisation for some characters, like the Crippled God, who seem to much like motiveless evil (though the CG has some motives). And Cersei is much more complex than you first think - and some of those you sympathise with, ie Margaery Tyrell, may well be as horrible as Cersei, it's just not how Martin's presented it, which I feel is his real skill as a writer - creating realistic characters who are interesting to read about. And there are the Others in Martin, if you need an enemy. Martin may have become a little too lax with letting the plot meander a bit in A Feast for Crows, but I still think it's got a pretty strong direction - and it's character driven, which means that it isn't a predictable direction, but nonetheless it exists.

[QuickTidal]

Brys said:

The exact reason I find Martin to be one of the top fantasy writers of the moment, and the one criticism I have of Erikson, seem to be the opposite for you. I hate the idea of too clear-cut characters, and IMO Erikson's weakest point is in his characterisation for some characters, like the Crippled God, who seem to much like motiveless evil (though the CG has some motives). And Cersei is much more complex than you first think - and some of those you sympathise with, ie Margaery Tyrell, may well be as horrible as Cersei, it's just not how Martin's presented it, which I feel is his real skill as a writer - creating realistic characters who are interesting to read about. And there are the Others in Martin, if you need an enemy. Martin may have become a little too lax with letting the plot meander a bit in A Feast for Crows, but I still think it's got a pretty strong direction - and it's character driven, which means that it isn't a predictable direction, but nonetheless it exists.

Yeah, well it doesn't change the fact that like 20 people I know who have read it (AFFC that is) have been QUITE dissapointed by it. Those of you who are defending it seem to be on the losing end of the stick as the mass consensus is that it's the least best of all four out, and everyone has the same critisisms, which for me spells out that "something" is definitely wrong with it.

[Arkmam]

Finished "The Hedge Knight" last night, and I have to tell you it's toally freaking awesome. Knights, tourneys, half a dozen princes and everything else that makes a story great. I plan to re-read it with a targaryen family tree at my side, to understand things better.

[RodeoRanch]

Indebted said:

How exactly does disagreeing with the most popular view point put someone on the "losing end of the stick"?

It's a really heavy stick?


I read "Crows" over my holidays and just loved it. It's setting up for some seriously nifty stuff to come.