Characters Welcome discussion

>Deep Breath<

I am at a slight disadvantage when discussing George R. R. Martin for three reasons. The first is that I only read 1.5 of his books (I stopped about halfway through the second book in the series). The second is that I read those books many years ago.

The third, and probably most important reason, is that I have a great deal of respect for him. It isn't often that my objective and subjective reactions to an author are so diametrically opposed. Objectively, I recognize that he has made a wonderful contribution to literature and to epic fantasy. His world building, particularly in terms of politics and sociology, is outstanding. Subjectively, I did not care for his books at all. They are not for me. Recognizing this dichotomy, I have not rated or reviewed any of his books, nor will I.

But this is a character group, ad we got into this because when I laid down my thoughts on what is and is not a good character story, I put Martin on the outside. Why? Because he has too many characters for me to immerse myself in any one of them. Because the characters I like quickly die off. But mostly because when I say I want to read a character story, I'm not just talking about any story with a three-dimensional character. I'm talking about the ones in which a personal connection with a character (or maybe two, but rarely more than that) is driving my need to complete the story.

Martin's characters have to be well-drawn, three-dimensional, and believable. This is the heart of his complex political thriller set in another world. It's about the people in power, or trying to get in power, or associated with power, and the things they do to shift the balance.

Yet no single character tore at my heart. Oh, there were a couple decent people in the mix of gray, dark gray, and black. John Snow, of course, and the girl, the youngest Stark sister, both had the makings of heroes. If only I did't have to wait 10 chapters to get to either one of their points of view. If only every chapter didn't take me to a new character, a new place, and a new perspective. I never had a chance to forget a connection because I never spent enough time with any one person, and a lot of those I had to spend time with were despicable.

I hear about this series all the time because my husband loves it -- it's one of those things we agree to disagree about. :)

This might sound strange, but I have often considered watching the HBO series based on these. I find myself wondering if point of view was taken out of it, if the thing I crave from reading (intimacy with a character I like) is removed, if this wouldn't be a wonderful multi-faceted drama. I don't know.

The HBO series is startlingly accurate. And Jaime actually has one of the greatest character changes in the history of writing, for which I adore him. Arya is easily one of my favorite characters of all time, and Tyrion is just loveable and adorable.

I'm blanking on Jamie -- is he the boy who fell out of the window or the disfigured bastard son of the king? Or someone else?

One thing I considered touching on, but I didn't want my original post to get too long, is that in the Robert Jordan vs. George R. R. Martin debate, I come down on the Jordan side. (I say this having only read 9 of his books...now that the entire series is out, I plan to start over and read them back to back. I'm just waiting for a year of my life to open up! :) ) The thing Jordan did that gave him an edge, IMO, is begin with far fewer characters, none of whom I disliked, one of whom was the focus, then branch out from there. I had a chance to care about a group of people before the story splintered into the epic socio-political-military conflict it ultimately became. (Although I do have complaints, chief among them too many point of view characters as the series progressed.)

Jordan also has well-drawn characters that change over time, but I wouldn't call him a character author, either. He's a great world builder, like Martin. The difference between the two is that Jordan gave me enough of what I needed early on (character intimacy) that I got hooked.

Jaimie is the twin brother/lover to Cersei. And lol, you keep catching me when I'm tired, but I have absolutely no idea--none--why Martin does not appeal to you as a character writer. His characters are some of the most vivid and real I've ever seen. His characters build the story, and every choice they make has consequences over the course of the book. Several of his characters didn't appeal to me, but that wasn't because they were written poorly--quite the opposite. It was because they were written so well that they reminded me of people that I do not particularly like. The characters I did like were so utterly, brilliantly done that it overshadowed the POVs I didn't enjoy as much. Further, it's a testament to Martin's skill with character that different types of people like different characters, and that he has such a rabid fanbase for EACH INDIVIDUAL character, even before the HBO series came out. People I know would literally come to near-blows over which character was more awesome. Perhaps you need to read Martin's stuff again, because it is the epitome of character writing. Just look at the (really) rabid fanbase. They're not screaming and frothing at the mouth over which country will rule in the end--they're rooting for the characters themselves. I.e. It's not a worldbuilding story, but a character story. Further, I've noted that a work that produces such rabid fans is never about the setting--it's about the people involved. Check the internet. Look at all the posters of Jaime and Cersei and John Snow and Arya. That kind of hero-worship and fannage doesn't come from worldbuilding. If it WAS worldbuilding that had people so worked up, they'd be showing objects on those posters, not people.

I seriously think you need to read the Song of Ice and Fire series again, if only as an academic thing. Because, seriously, if you can't see the extremely masterful character work woven through it, you're missing something important and should read it again. (And again. And again, until you see it...)

One added note about worldbuilding vs. unforgettable character: Jordan was a worldbuilder. I forgot his characters almost immediately, because they never did anything especially emotional or dramatic or heroic or special or human. They did what they were told to do by the writer to fulfill the next segment of the plotline. Martin's characters will live with me until I die, because they did what THEY wanted to do, throughout the whole damn series, and constantly keep people guessing. Which, of course, is what makes them so awesome. They act like real people, not cardboard cutouts following a writer's agenda. :)

Now see, I had precisely the opposite reaction. I can't recall most of Martin's characters, but Jordan's live with me to this day. The last time I read that series was over a DECADE ago, but I still remember Rand, Perin, Matrom (might be misspelling the names), Elaine, Egwayne, and Nineve. The core six. I didn't even have to think hard to recall their names or who they are. There are a few others I can recall with little difficulty as well. Jordan's world building is great, but there are real stakes for the characters, and I feel it from the start. The very start.

Martin, on the other hand, spent the beginning of book one building up a character (the father...Edward or some fantasy-esque variation) then promptly chopping his head off. So can't root for him anymore. The kids, the wife, the king, the queen...and then there was that weird dragon lady somewhere who didn't tie into the rest of the story. (So that when I read chapters form her POV it was like, "And now for something completely different!")

Another thing Jordan did that Martin didn't was establish RELATIONSHIPS. Real, binding RELATIONSHIPS between the characters. And I didn't have to read the entire series to see them forged. They were right there in the beginning, so alive and poignant that when the characters began to separate, I found myself thinking, "Oh, what's so and so going to think about that when they get back together!"

I never felt that way about Martin's characters at all, and in fact, to the extent I can recall them at all, I recall them separately.

And far from fighting over which of the characters is the best, I struggle to think of any characters I liked at all. There was an underlying core of ruthlessness, selfishness, and lack of empathy prevalent in most of my memories of the characters. It was all very Machiavellian. In fact, I would describe the series in general as a Machiavellian tale set in a fantasy kingdom.

There's more to a great character the believability. There's heart.