Amph ASOIAF: "A Clash of Kings" Chapter-by-Chapter: Chapter Thirty-Two: Sansa

Nevermind, this debate began when you made fact-based assertions in the other thread regarding the supposed similarities between ASoIaF and the War of the Roses, and the ensuing predictability of the former.

I have shown your claims to be spurious and uninformed. Point by point, character by character, event for event, ASOIaF is wholly dissimilar to the details of tWotR; hits only occur in the broadest, "two-warring-families-vie-for-the-throne" sense. I'll be happy to quote my posts here if my claim is contested.

You have so far neglected to address any of my points, but went on to accuse part of the imagery of the novels to be based on Welsh iconography. When I showed this, too, to be entirely invented on your part, and not at all factual or valid, you again ignored my post and switched tactics, with a run of derogatory opinions leveled at the novels.

Nevermind, you're certainly entitled to your opinions. So you think Bran is a dumb name based on breakfast cereal. Are you unaware that an ancient Welsh hero-deity, associated with ravens, has that same name? Are you suggesting that the pre-Roman Welsh also coined dumb fantasy names, or does that only happen when GRR Martin attempts it? Even your opinions are ill-informed, and your insults childish.

If you don't like the books, fine! Great! It's a shame you can't, or won't, enjoy this remarkable series, though ultimately that's up to you. But if you're going to level fact-based accusations against the books, and attempt to use history to justify your contempt, please be prepared to defend those claims, to back them up with evidence.

Upthread I note you've linked Richard of York to Eddard Stark, this well after I demolished that facile association in the other thread. It's as if you never read my rebuttal; or if you did, it's as if you don't care what the facts are, so long as your invective has some facade, no matter how illusory or erroneous, to prop it up.

By all means, carry on with this game in which you decline to present any evidence for your derogatory claims, preferring to assert that because this is "your thread" you are somehow exempt from the rules of reasoned debate. We who are reading your fallacious screeds know the truth -- which is, namely, that you're trolling. As a Moderator, you should be ashamed of your unscrupulous and intellectually dishonest postings.

 

I'm not expecting you to buy anything, actually. I don't expect to control your praise of the books, and you don't get to control my criticism of them either. If you don't like the form of this thread, you are not obliged to participate in it.

Moving on...

Chapter Two: Catelyn

Summary: Having executed a man, Eddard gets to feel angsty about it, which is a tremendous consolation to Gared, I'm sure. He also learns of the death of his BIL and a visit from the King and a visitation by the Queen.

Some Thoughts: This is mostly exposition, some reasonably good and some silly; at one point Catelyn tells her youngest son's father how old he is. Thanks, Mom!

For ye Fanboys: Nothing this time.

Where Have I Seen This Before? Dept: N/A

Grammatical Errors: 0

Speaking Forsoothly: 0

The Department of Silly Names: The matriarch of the Stark family has a suburban teenager's name. 'Brandon the Builder' brought 'Bob the Builder' to mind.

What we learn: Eddard doesn't like the Queen, and does like the King.

Criminal Record: 2 murders, 1 execution.

Rating: 3/5

 

Chapter Three: Daenerys

Summary: We meet another of the contenders, of House Targaryen.

Some Thoughts: The dragon imagery suggests Wales here. Whether it is Llewellyn the Great or the Tudors, I can't say yet.

For ye Fangirls: The 'pale lilac eyes' and 'molten silver hair' of both brother & sister

Where Have I Seen This Before? Dept: The brother/sister marriages? Egyptian pharaohs.

Grammatical Errors: 0

Speaking Forsoothly: 0

Bad dialogue: "Caress the fabric."

The Department of Silly Names: the Unsullied.

What we learn: Viserys is a pimp.

Criminal Record: 2 murders, 1 execution,

POVs to date: 4

Rating: 2/5

 

Too bad the mention of the former predates the existence of the latter by three years.

 

You do sort of wonder about the guys who made Bob the Builder, though. "Hey, I've got an idea, what about a kids' show with a construction worker?" "My god that's brilliant! But what to call it?" *Executive spies his copy of Game of Thrones* "Bran the Builder! No, wait, that sounds like a breakfast cereal - um... Bob! BOB THE BUILDER!" "FANTASTIC! We'll make bank!"

 

"Brandon the Builder" does sound like a construction worker to me, though. It made me LOL when I read it.

Rowling had a reason Harry and Ron never read "Hogwarts: A History". Exposition is always tricky, and perhaps one of the reasons I find most epic fantasy inherently absurd is these types of information dumps.

So far, we have met a good many characters, but none have made much impression with the possible exception of Jon.

 

I'm loving this, Nevermind, particularly the "Speaking Forsoothly" part, which always drives me crazy in these novels. I'm currently reading A Clash of Kings, and while I'm reasonably fond of the series, I'm disinclined to think of it as the Great Pinnacle of English Literature that it's often (erroneously) portrayed to be, and I do find it ridiculous and silly in some parts. I believe there is brilliance to be found in this series, though, but you certainly can't find it in the laughably pretentious prose or stereotypical fantasy settings, names, and plot devices. In any case, I'm looking forward to your analysis of further chapters.

 

Like the Stark/York connection, I've already dismantled this imaginary source of inspiration in the other thread.

WALES: West: Home of Ancient Britons: Residence of the native inhabitants since c. 3000 BCE
TARGARYEN: East: Recent Invaders: Rulers of Westeros for only 300 years

Customarily, when one make an unsupported claim that is then shown to be in error, it is courteous and intellectually honest to acknowledge the error and/or rethink one's position. Nevermind has done neither -- not with my systematic demolition of his spurious War of the Roses claims, not with the indisputable point that the name Bran has an ancient provenance, and not with this absurd claim about the Targaryens being Welsh even though they're recent invaders from the East, which is the farthest thing from Welsh that is humanly imaginable.

 

Chapter Four: Eddard

Summary: We meet King Robert & he makes Eddard an offer he should refuse.

Some Thoughts: Robert has gained 112 pounds (8 stone). Probably based upon Edward IV, a great, tall warrior who indulged himself, gained a lot of weight, and died young and suddenly, leaving the kingdom in chaos.

For ye Fanboys: Robert's description of southern girls; Robert v. Rhaegar;

Where Have I Seen This Before? Dept: N/A

Grammatical Errors: 0

Speaking Forsoothly: 0

Bad dialogue: the 'southern girls' monologue is pretty ripe.

The Department of Silly Names: As noted before, Howland Reed is a character name for an Edith Wharton novel.

Characterization: Robert is a more attractive person than his wife, but he is also lazy, self-pitying and extremely self-indulgent.

What we learn: Robert was in love with Eddard's sister. How she died is not specified. Eddard's brother was also killed just before he was about to marry Catelyn.

Criminal Record: 2 murders, 1 execution.

POVs to date: 4

Rating: 3/5

 

Chapter Five: Jon

Summary: We meet Benjen Stark and Tyrion Lannister

Some Thoughts: These are two more rather attractive characters than not.

For ye Fanboys: N/A

Where Have I Seen This Before? Dept: The dwarf son of a prominent family? Miles Vorkosigan in the Vorkosigan saga, which is scifi and includes 15 books to date. After a rather slow start, it catches fire about the time of "Brothers in Arms" and the next 4 books, "Mirror Dance", "Memory", "Komarr" and "A Civil Campaign" are all terrific, the last being an almost perfect opera bouffe in style. Unfortunately, the two subsequent books are disappointing. [NOTE: I will save darthramza the trouble of looking it up: the first book of this series predates AGOT by about ten years]

Grammatical Errors: 0

Speaking Forsoothly: "I am almost a man grown", "My mother died birthing me" etc. etc.

Bad dialogue: See above.

The Department of Silly Names: Benjen is perhaps the worst yet.

Characterization: Nothing memorable.

What we learn: Jon can't hold his liquor.

Not thinking it out: I'm assuming that the Night Watch is based on the Knights Templar. However much celibacy is important in fighting monks, in wall watchers, it does not seem so important. You are unlikely to attract the sort of men you might want, let's say. So 'taking the black' sounds catchy, but doesn't really make sense in this context.

Criminal Record: 2 murders, 1 execution.

POVs to date: 4

Rating: 3/5

 

I believe the idea for the watch is that they hold no lands, father no children, take no wives, so that they have no attachment that may come in the way of their duty, rather like the Jedi. And as I'm sure you know, it has lead to a lot of problems with recruitment, as you say.

You might as well say that the Watch is based on the Shaolin monks. While I'm sure there's inspiration, there's not really a lot of similarity with the Templars in their mission or conduct.

 

Yes, but if you have a wife and children, surely you are *more* devoted to protection of the realm?

 

You might be more inclined to flee the Wall with them though, rather than stay and die.

It is excessive though. I don't consider Jon or Sam to have ever broken their vows, despite what they think.

 

This is not a discussion.

In this thread, Nevermind posts his opinions, many of which are snarky and derogatory without being substantiated by anything other than his own ill-informed misapprehension of the material, and its supposed basis in some other work, which Nevermind has read about and thus attributes to plagiarism.

Several posters attempt to engage Nevermind in debate, to rebut his spurious historical attributions and to demonstrate that, for example, several of his "silly name" complaints have actual, historical and/or legendary bases.

Nevermind ignores all of this and plows onward as though no one has said a word or, worse, dismisses all objections with a single cursory phrase, before moving on to his next pseudo-historical or faux-literary equivocation.

In all reputable discussion forums, formerly this one, this is known as trolling.

Earlier today, in a PM reply to my complaints about his questionable "debate" style, Nevermind responded that if I did not like the way this thread is going, I'm under no obligation to participate. Quid pro quo, I will remind Nevermind that he is under an obligation -- one of courtesy and respect to his fellow forum members -- partly as a member of these boards, and most especially as a Manager. I used to be a Manager here and I know what's expected of us.

Ignoring evidence that refutes one's position. Making unsupported criticisms, then continuing to post those same criticisms after they've been shown to be in error. Refusing to engage those posters who challenge one's derogatory claims. These are the behaviors and posting styles of an Internet Troll. Nevermind is guilty of all this and more. I'm sick of it and I'm calling him out.

 

http://boards.theforce.net/PostForms/PostReply.aspx?brd=10382&topic=8844512&quote=31763386

 

Chapter Six: Catelyn

Summary: The Starks are between a rock & a hard place.

Some Thoughts: I guess this is where the wolf cub prophecy comes in: the white cub is driven off.

For ye Fanboys: N/A

Where Have I Seen This Before? Dept: N/A

Grammatical Errors: 0

Speaking Forsoothly: "Clearly there was more to this than the seeming."

Bad dialogue: "The lenscrafters of Myr are without equal." This had me rolling about on the floor laughing.

Purple Prose: Ashara Dayne's 'haunting violent eyes'

The Department of Silly Names: Arthur Dayne, Sword of the Morning.

Characterization: Nothing memorable. Eddard does the angst bit again.

What we learn: Catelyn is stronger than her husband.

Not thinking it out: See Bad dialogue.

Criminal Record: 2 murders, 1 execution.

POVs to date: 4

Rating: 3/5

 

You seem to be mistaking "control" for "some desire for this thread to be at all worthwhile." If you're not interested in having anyone buy anything you say, you're not interested in having anyone actually engage with what you're saying, and god forbid having to condescend to explain yourself to anyone else or otherwise engage them, what is the point? What is this meant to accomplish? If you're not interested in explaining your opinion, or in persuading anyone with your opinion, then what is the point of proclaiming your opinion, in the barest one-line form, other than hearing yourself talk? Generally, the purpose of discussing art is to discuss it, not to say one line and then pitch a fit when anyone else tries to discuss your opinion, engage it, or ask for an explanation. The point of publishing an opinion to the public in a discussion forum is to encourage public discussion. If there is to be no discussion, if there is to be no interest in making the opinions expressed clear or persuasive, if the sole purpose of the thread is to be the soapbox for the author's own self-gratification, if we are to get nothing but indignant responses to any attempt to clarify or explain your position beyond one sentence and "Look it up yourself, I can't be bothered to explain myself to the likes of you," then I fail to see the purpose of posting it to a public discussion forum, as clearly the participation of the public is entirely irrelevant to the intent of the thread, except as passive recipients of the author's proclamations, and its existence on such a board is patently useless, except perhaps as an example of exactly what not to do.

In which case, there is indeed no point in continuing to pay any mind to the thread, and no point in encouraging it further with the negative attention it seems designed to attract. If so, I leave you to your monologue.

 

Yes, I propose we leave Nevermind to talk to himself on this thread, since he is clearly not interested in defending his opinion with actual evidence.

 

Chapter Seven: Arya

Summary: We get another POV, that of Arya Stark.

Some Thoughts: Given that the Daenerys POV is easily the most boring of the lot, I'm not looking forward to more evidence that Martin is not particularly gifted at writing women, especially young ones. It is at this point that the rotating POV goes from a minor irritant to a major pain in the neck.

For ye Fangirls: The neglected but morally and intellectually superior daughter is outshone by her pretty but dim and weak sister.

Where Have I Seen This Before? Dept: A lot; in fanboy material, of course, it's brothers.

Grammatical Errors: 0

Speaking Forsoothly: "Any bruises they take in the practice yard must come from trueborn swords."

Bad dialogue: "This is your prince. Who are you to tell him..."etc. etc.

Purple Prose: "She played the high harp *and* the bells." Bet that brings the house down.

The Department of Silly Names: Septa Mordane

Characterization: Arya is the female version of Jon, and thus gets her own POV. One's enough. In fact, one POV is enough.

What we learn: Jon messes with Arya's hair a lot.

Not thinking it out: N/A

Criminal Record: 2 murders, 1 execution.

POVs to date: 5

Rating: 1/5

 

How would you propose telling the story of Dany (and Jon, once he leaves) without multiple POV? Omniscient?

 

I'd leave her out completely; probably Arya as well. Of course, the books would be shorter, not necessarily a bad thing.