A Game of Thrones

[mumra]

Just wanted to make sure that everyone on this forum is aware of the incredible fantasy series Game of Thrones (which starts its second season next month).

It's proper, serious fantasy, for adults. There are no elves, orcs or goblins to be seen. It does have wargs, but ... not what you think. It has one dwarf but he's, well, let's just say he's a far cry from your stereotypical Tolkien dwarf. It has sex and violence (and lots of both). It has some magic but it's done in a very toned down way and actually sort of believable. It has a rich, detailed, and varied system of gods (which Crawl players will love, although really you have to read the books to get the full picture). It's also, having subsequently read the books after I saw the series, the most perfectly realised fiction-to-TV adaptation I've ever seen.

So, just saying: if you haven't seen this, go and find it right now...

[dk]

I've only played the board game so far...

[mumra]

The board game looks epic, I need to get hold of one!

[dk]

Yeah, it's totally epic.

[Mankeli]

Just wanted to make sure that everyone on this forum is aware of the incredible fantasy series Game of Thrones (which starts its second season next month).

It's proper, serious fantasy, for adults. There are no elves, orcs or goblins to be seen. It does have wargs, but ... not what you think. It has one dwarf but he's, well, let's just say he's a far cry from your stereotypical Tolkien dwarf. It has sex and violence (and lots of both). It has some magic but it's done in a very toned down way and actually sort of believable. It has a rich, detailed, and varied system of gods (which Crawl players will love, although really you have to read the books to get the full picture). It's also, having subsequently read the books after I saw the series, the most perfectly realised fiction-to-TV adaptation I've ever seen.

So, just saying: if you haven't seen this, go and find it right now...

Yeah, this is very true and you have some nice points there. I'd like to add that the series and the books are more about cruel politics in fantasy world than fantasy and the fantasy world itself imo. At times I almost feel like the fantasy part is only used as a tool to aid storytelling. And it's great! I also started reading the books after watching the show and it is hard to say which format is more epic: the show not only captures all the characters and atmosphere nicely but it is also structured the same way as the books are written as well...in a good way. Don't know how the explain it properly, just read it and watch it! If you aren't allergic to fantasy that is. And even if you are, maybe you should anyways.

[BlackSheep]

Also like Crawl, people die a lot.

[mumra]

Yeah, this is very true and you have some nice points there. I'd like to add that the series and the books are more about cruel politics in fantasy world than fantasy and the fantasy world itself imo. At times I almost feel like the fantasy part is only used as a tool to aid storytelling. And it's great! I also started reading the books after watching the show and it is hard to say which format is more epic: the show not only captures all the characters and atmosphere nicely but it is also structured the same way as the books are written as well...in a good way. Don't know how the explain it properly, just read it and watch it! If you aren't allergic to fantasy that is. And even if you are, maybe you should anyways.

Absolutely - well, like much great fiction it's largely a study in human nature, and the world it's set in could be any old background flavour. GoT's fantasy is pretty low-key anyway; it's basically a medieval world full of humans all trying to get one over on each other. Actually sometimes it seems almost a bit out of place when one of the more overtly fantasy elements jumps out!

Also like Crawl, people die a lot.

Yes. And quite often, characters you really didn't want to splat.

[eharper256]

Song of Ice and Fire is very much low-fantasy; though you forgot that there are Dragons, too...

Can't say I've seen the TV series. But, in the case of the fiction, the books start great, but really start to meander and creak under their own weight eventually. It's like George RR Martin has too many stories to tell by book 4 or so; at least in my opinion, and this is reflected in how it took 7 years to get the most recent one released and there's still no sign of closure on the horizon.

There is, after all, a reason that fantasy works best in either phat trilogies of three, or more compact pentacles of five books; even wheel of time, for example, becomes ponderous after a while.

He could have had a tighter, better saga if he'd just focused on, say, the Starks, Casterleys, and Daenyrys only. But ah well...

If you want the other end of the spectrum, damn fine high fantasy done right; I'd recommend Patrick Rothfuss and Brandon Sanderson. Specifically, The Name of the Wind => Wise Man's Fear; the Mistborn trilogy, and The Way of Kings.

[Moanerette]

What I loved about the TV show was that the actors looked to be having a really good time; it was splendidly fruity and over-the-top, done with flair and elan. And Tamzin Merchant is magnificent.

What I really, really love about the books (well, the first two at least, which is as far as I've got) and the TV show is that they make feudalism look as downright miserable and horrible as it surely was for most people. Too much fantasy seems to be wistful for the old days, pining for a time when 'everyone knew their place' and there were none of those horrid machines or pesky working people demanding their rights. Tolkien is a big offender here, and his imitators tend to follow suit (I do like LOTR, but as with HP Lovecraft you have to take it with a pinch of salt).

[mumra]

Song of Ice and Fire is very much low-fantasy; though you forgot that there are Dragons, too...

I didn't forget ... I tried to use spoiler tags (it is only a minor spoiler, but still) then realised this forum doesn't support them. So I took it out

Can't say I've seen the TV series. But, in the case of the fiction, the books start great, but really start to meander and creak under their own weight eventually. It's like George RR Martin has too many stories to tell by book 4 or so; at least in my opinion, and this is reflected in how it took 7 years to get the most recent one released and there's still no sign of closure on the horizon.

The first series covers the first book, so we'll see how the next ones go. I've read all the books now except the most recent, and personally I thoroughly enjoyed every one of them. There are times when the stories seem to be taking forever, but it always ends up worth it for the epic reveals, arcs, plot twists. I've been lending the books to friends and watching them get hooked one after another ...

He could have had a tighter, better saga if he'd just focused on, say, the Starks, Casterleys, and Daenyrys only. But ah well...

The crazy thing is, that's pretty much all he does focus on, although I admit it doesn't always feel like it. But the vast majority of perspectives are members of those three families or people immediately entangled with them. Most of the other side characters (e.g. Stannis, Greyjoy, Dorne) that you get now and then don't actually get all that many chapters of their own, and the ones you do get are directly depicting consequences of or preliminaries to Stark/Lannister/Targaryen goings on.

If you want the other end of the spectrum, damn fine high fantasy done right; I'd recommend Patrick Rothfuss and Brandon Sanderson. Specifically, The Name of the Wind => Wise Man's Fear; the Mistborn trilogy, and The Way of Kings.

Will have to check them out once I'm done with Dance with Dragons ...

[Blade]

I second the Sanderson recommendation. He is by far my favorite author -- I was at his midnight release parties for Way of Kings and Alloy of Law. It was great.

I read the first book of ASoIaF, but the sexual elements ended up rather turning me off of the series. Not really my style, unfortunately.

[dassem]

I'll also agree with the SoIaF recommendation for the books. I haven't seen the series yet and am waiting for the DVDs.
However, I've got to say that I've been very disappointed with the last two books, where very little happens. IMO that's true of Martin's other stuff where a strong editor could trim it from the "good" to the "great" category. Still, the first 3 books were so very good that I'll keep buying and reading the next ones, which is probably the goal...

There is a common fantasy author trap where they forget about the main story line and just have their favorite characters wander about and have "adventures" like a soap opera with swords.

Now, if you want fantasy that reminds you (well, me anyway) of Crawl, then I have to recommend Steven Erikson. Most of my character names are based on his. He has characters that can turn into dragons, high magic, and literally armies of undead, but still manages to make it grittily realistic. His 10 book series is excellent, and although it's perhaps a little heavy handed towards the end, he ties up the main storyline nicely.

[cerebovssquire]

I think that Song of Ice and Fire 1-4 are some of the best fantasy books I've read - along with maybe the books The Witcher is based on by Sapkowski (yes, these are actually very good). It has believable characters and combat and removes the whole overly-epic-and-dramatic aspect from fantasy along with pure "heroes" and "villains", which are all things that annoy me in any book.
I don't really have much respect for fantasy as a literary genre because it's too filled with other people's ideas, cheap moral cliches and black/white sides (not in a literal sense ) and, to a certain extent, if you've read five authors you've read them all.

Song of Ice and Fire isn't perfect either though - personally I think he could really use a lot more focus in his plot especially towards the 3rd and 4th book. I could have done well with two-thirds less of the information and don't think I would have lost anything worth knowing. Also less time-wasting on often unneccesary sex scenes please.
An entirely subjective and biased part of the rant now: aargh dragons come on I stopped liking dinosaurs when I was seven years old and they don't get cooler just because they spit fire what are they doing in a book series focussed on politics this is entirely populistic and dumb aargh

Considering that the strengths of the book are in believability and the affairs between the houses being described really well, along with the description of physical combat, I think the series might have worked just as well or even better as a purely pseudo-historic series than a sort-of-fantasy series.

I'm taking bets on if he dies before completing the series. I say he will.

I don't have a TV and never have had one, but if I had I would be watching this series. I hope I'm not missing out on too much by just reading the books?

[evilmike]

I don't have a TV and never have had one, but if I had I would be watching this series. I hope I'm not missing out on too much by just reading the books?

In my opinion the tv series is a lot better than the books. This is not something I say often. Usually adaptations leave something out, but I think this one actually adds more than it takes away (what it does cut is mostly unnecessary and boring stuff). The books do contain a lot more backstory and world-building though, if you are into that. The show is much more focused on the characters and the plot (which is good, imo).

I enjoyed most of the books, but I'd still only say they are good compared to most other genre fiction. This is not very high praise.

he TV show is just a really good TV show. It manages to adapt the books faithfully, while also having a much broader appeal. I also didn't like books 4 and 5 (too long, too slow, too much stupid crap that I didn't care about) and the TV series will probably fix this.

[Grimm]

If you want some non-cliche fantasy, try David Lindsay's A Voyage to Arcturus. There's no book like it.

William Hope Hodgson's The Night Land is written in a very clumsy way but has some wild ideas. It was a major influence on Lovecraft. Again, utterly uncliched.

[evilmike]

If you want some non-cliche fantasy, try David Lindsay's A Voyage to Arcturus. There's no book like it.

William Hope Hodgson's The Night Land is written in a very clumsy way but has some wild ideas. It was a major influence on Lovecraft. Again, utterly uncliched.

Thank you for the recommendation. I have read a voyage to arcturus and think it's great. Generally when I do enjoy science fiction or fantasy, it tends to have a more philosophical or literary angle to it. I'm not really into "straight" scifi/fantasy stuff, although I read it sometimes.

[dk]

... Generally when I do enjoy science fiction ..., it tends to have a more philosophical ... angle to it. I'm not really into "straight" scifi ... stuff, although I read it sometimes.

Sounds like you could have fun reading Stanislaw Lem.

[omegasean]

I recommend the audio books for a game of thrones series.

What a great listen they are ! Or you could just read the books.

thanks for posting this wonderful topic.

[evilmike]

... Generally when I do enjoy science fiction ..., it tends to have a more philosophical ... angle to it. I'm not really into "straight" scifi ... stuff, although I read it sometimes.

Sounds like you could have fun reading Stanislaw Lem.

Yeah, although I wish I could find decent translations of his work. Apparently the most common english edition of Solaris is badly translated from a bad french translation of the original polish. Maybe I could try the french version. I doubt it's worth it though.

[defen]

I strongly recommend the First Law trilogy and subsequent standalone novels by Joe Abercrombie. Even GRRM will seem comparatively gentle with his characters after this

[dk]

... Generally when I do enjoy science fiction ..., it tends to have a more philosophical ... angle to it. I'm not really into "straight" scifi ... stuff, although I read it sometimes.

Sounds like you could have fun reading Stanislaw Lem.

Yeah, although I wish I could find decent translations of his work. Apparently the most common english edition of Solaris is badly translated from a bad french translation of the original polish. Maybe I could try the french version. I doubt it's worth it though.

Maybe it doesn't help you, but the german translations are quite good (at least most of them).

[eharper256]

I strongly recommend the First Law trilogy and subsequent standalone novels by Joe Abercrombie. Even GRRM will seem comparatively gentle with his characters after this

True, Abercrombie writing is cruelty given form. Not actually a great storyteller, but he is visceral...

[mumra]

I read Abercrombie's "Best Served Cold" based on a Waterstones staff recommendation and frankly I was somewhat disappointed. The characters were ok (but they were all a bit smug and I never cared about them) and some scenes stood out, but I felt the story tied together really flimsily, and he had a habit of massively overdoing this kind of connective device between scenes. Character is Scene A is saying something ... cut to Scene B ... where a completely unrelated character happens to be saying exactly the same thing but in a different context for dramatic effect. He did that at literally ever other scene change and it started just getting really obvious after a while! Maybe some of his other books are better but that one really put me off.

[defen]

BSC relies on a lot of backstory (and emotional investment in one of the central characters) from the trilogy. I doubt I would have enjoyed it nearly as much if I had read it first.

[eharper256]

Actually, I also found BSC to be a bit lacking, even though I read the original trilogy. And frankly, the original trilogy was mostly just a tolerable story carried on the backs of likeable characters, like Logan, Dogman, and Glotka. Like I say, Abercrombie isn't that great a storyteller, he just excels in describing brutality.

As an aside; if people are looking for more Low-Fantasy, I would also now recommend The Lies of Locke Lamora by Scott Lynch. Although it does have a sorcerer in it, it's charm is in the aptly titled 'Gentleman Bastards' and how well it explains the capers they pull.

Also, back in the High-Fantasy, Brandon Sanderson's new release 'Warbreaker' is pretty much up to his usual standard of quality (if not as epic as The Way of Kings).

[defen]

Lynch is a better worldbuilder and wordsmith. Abercrombie has some of the best characters I've seen outside of ASOIAF. (I'd probably stand by this even if I didn't share Glokta's hatred for stairs ).

[slowcar]

Now, if you want fantasy that reminds you (well, me anyway) of Crawl, then I have to recommend Steven Erikson. Most of my character names are based on his. He has characters that can turn into dragons, high magic, and literally armies of undead, but still manages to make it grittily realistic. His 10 book series is excellent, and although it's perhaps a little heavy handed towards the end, he ties up the main storyline nicely.

I am all aboard here, Erikson is one of my favorites, and currently the leader (by far) in the epicness (is this even a word?) category.
unfortunately i started reading his books on German, so i not only have to wait a year or longer for the translation, but also have to buy two books for every English one.
I also enjoy the side-stories from his friend Esslemont which have the same world and share many characters.

What was not mentioned here so far is R. Scott Bakker with his Prince of Nothing/Aspect Emperor series, which is sometimes a bit strange, but also has many new ideas, an interesting take at a magic system and a really great main character (Drusas Achamian)

[Grimm]

Another unique pre-Tolkien work of high fantasy is Eddison's The Worm Ouroboros. It's written in a dense archaic style and is rich with heroic incident.

[dassem]

I guess we've hijacked this a little into a "good fantasy books" thread, for which I apologize, but I am really enjoying!

Now, if you want fantasy that reminds you (well, me anyway) of Crawl, then I have to recommend Steven Erikson. Most of my character names are based on his. He has characters that can turn into dragons, high magic, and literally armies of undead, but still manages to make it grittily realistic. His 10 book series is excellent, and although it's perhaps a little heavy handed towards the end, he ties up the main storyline nicely.

I am all aboard here, Erikson is one of my favorites, and currently the leader (by far) in the epicness (is this even a word?) category.
unfortunately i started reading his books on German, so i not only have to wait a year or longer for the translation, but also have to buy two books for every English one.
I also enjoy the side-stories from his friend Esslemont which have the same world and share many characters.

Yeah, good point! I also really liked Erikson's short stories about Bauchelain and Korbal Broach: Light comedy about murder, zombies and evil magic. I guess they'd be a good place to start for anyone a bit shy of diving into such a huge series.
Now I'm just waiting on the US release of Esslemont's latest. I think his writing has improved steadily since his first book, so I'm hopeful!

What was not mentioned here so far is R. Scott Bakker with his Prince of Nothing/Aspect Emperor series, which is sometimes a bit strange, but also has many new ideas, an interesting take at a magic system and a really great main character (Drusas Achamian)

Ooh, yes again. I really liked that series too.
A friend of mine had a criticism that it was a bit like a RPG where one person is level 20, while everyone else is level 2 or 3, but you could level that same comment at most fantasy.
I loved some of the set-pieces, such as where Drusas escapes and his subsequent actions; also the whole idea of how Seswatha passes on his life story; and I really like the ambiguity of Kellhus - is his progression really the standard "our hero triumphing over evil" storyline or is it setting up something terrible? If you can read these books with the notion that Kellhus might turn out to have really questionable motives, that adds a different perspective. It's definitely a bit more adult than most fantasy.

[mumra]

What I loved about the TV show was that the actors looked to be having a really good time; it was splendidly fruity and over-the-top, done with flair and elan. And Tamzin Merchant is magnificent.

Just re-reading the thread and I spotted this - Tamzin was originally to played Daenerys but Emilia Clarke took the role in final production.

I guess we've hijacked this a little into a "good fantasy books" thread, for which I apologize, but I am really enjoying!

In this case I'd call it "logically connected conversation" rather than hijacking And it's pretty good to get recommendations, am always looking for something to read next.

Nobody mentioned David Gemmel, I would have to recommend him on the basis of Ironhand's Daughter which I read some years ago, he also has a way with depicting somewhat brutal turns of events.

I'm also inclined to file Iain M Banks' "Culture" series under fantasy, even though it features spaceships and interstellar travel The technology levels of the involved races are so extreme that it's for all purposes magic anyway, and the stories are largely about characters, deception, power, intrigue, and often a bit medieval in ambience. He's probably my favourite author of epic fiction.

[evilmike]

I'm also inclined to file Iain M Banks' "Culture" series under fantasy, even though it features spaceships and interstellar travel The technology levels of the involved races are so extreme that it's for all purposes magic anyway, and the stories are largely about characters, deception, power, intrigue, and often a bit medieval in ambience. He's probably my favourite author of epic fiction.

These are pretty good. Just about the only "space opera" series I can tolerate. He's a good writer and I like his take on utopian fiction (which is really what the Culture novels are). I wouldn't call any of his books "epic" though. The Culture setting is certainly big in scale, but the stories aren't. Also, the setting really isn't really used for any "epic" purposes - it just exists so Banks can write about anarchism, AI, power, and other fun things like that.

[Grimm]

While I like Banks's ideas I found his prose in Consider Phlebas so droningly flat that I could barely finish the book. I now ringfence him with Asimov in the "never read again" compound.

[evilmike]

While I like Banks's ideas I found his prose in Consider Phlebas so droningly flat that I could barely finish the book. I now ringfence him with Asimov in the "never read again" compound.

Read Use of Weapons, that's his best science fiction book. Consider Phelebas is the first one he published afaik (although not his first novel), and it's not as well written as most of his other books.

[mumra]

While I like Banks's ideas I found his prose in Consider Phlebas so droningly flat that I could barely finish the book. I now ringfence him with Asimov in the "never read again" compound.

Read Use of Weapons, that's his best science fiction book. Consider Phelebas is the first one he published afaik (although not his first novel), and it's not as well written as most of his other books.

Yeah, I never recommend Consider Phlebas for someone just getting into the series. The best ones are Player Of Games, Use Of Weapons, Excession. I think Gurgeh from Player Of Games is one character that a lot of Crawlers might identify with! He also writes some really good stories outside the Culture series - The Algebraist, Transition, Against a Dark Background, and Feersum Endjinn are all fantastic.

[eharper256]

Yes, Consider Phlebas is a bad way into the Culture. Fortunately, I read Player of Games first, which is a magnificent book; and it's possibly one of my all time favourite Sci-Fi's. I have Phlebas on my shelf only for completionist purposes.

Frankly, I love the idea that humanity becomes a bunch of hedonist idiots reliant on AI; though its not specifically stated that The Culture is originally humanity, I suppose.

[sardonica]

Yes, Consider Phlebas is a bad way into the Culture. Fortunately, I read Player of Games first, which is a magnificent book; and it's possibly one of my all time favourite Sci-Fi's. I have Phlebas on my shelf only for completionist purposes.

Frankly, I love the idea that humanity becomes a bunch of hedonist idiots reliant on AI; though its not specifically stated that The Culture is originally humanity, I suppose.

I think most Minds would be insulted at being called mere AI

[mumra]

Yes, Consider Phlebas is a bad way into the Culture. Fortunately, I read Player of Games first, which is a magnificent book; and it's possibly one of my all time favourite Sci-Fi's. I have Phlebas on my shelf only for completionist purposes.

Frankly, I love the idea that humanity becomes a bunch of hedonist idiots reliant on AI; though its not specifically stated that The Culture is originally humanity, I suppose.

The books / official backstory do specifically mention Earth and that it's not a Culture planet, at least not at the time of the books; it's hinted at as a young civilisation that the Culture are actively investigating but is at too low a tech level to become Involved proper at this stage.

In fact that's one thing I really like about the Culture - visions of humanity's future are usually so bleak ...

[eharper256]

I think most Minds would be insulted at being called mere AI

Haha, yes indeed.

The books / official backstory do specifically mention Earth and that it's not a Culture planet, at least not at the time of the books; it's hinted at as a young civilisation that the Culture are actively investigating but is at too low a tech level to become Involved proper at this stage.

Yeah, in State of the Art, duh, I forgot (been ages since I read that one).