# Game of Thrones, Modern Fantasy, and Writing



## Firawyn (Feb 15, 2019)

I keep hearing people talking about George RR Martin like he's the second coming of Tolkien. Now don't get me wrong, I enjoy Game of Thrones, but I kind of find it offensive - the comparison. 

Yes, there are many similarities between the two writers, but the fact of the matter is that every single thing that Martin did, Tolkien did first. Every mythology that Martin steeped into, Tolkien explored first. 

I guess the big question in my mind is that, because Tolkien explored SO much of the mythology, is there any way we can look at modern fantasy and not feel like it's a rip off of Tolkien? 

And how does a writer even begin to try and come up with an original concept that isn't so clearly "been there, done that" from Tolkien? 


Fir-


*waves a bit* Yeah, I'm one of the Antiques of this fine establishment.


----------



## Miguel (Feb 15, 2019)

If JRRT's and GRRM's works were two magazines, could we see it as "C_ars, Guns and Sex" _in the case of George's and John's _"The Finest Cars"_?.

Tolkien did borrow inspiration from other things as well but his work compared to Martin's feels much more ancient. GOT is more mundane regardless of it's fantasy aspects, and that's because of the contrast between all the pretty stuff and sheer filth that goes on in it. GOT feels more real when we compare it to "this world" or "this reality" or whatever we may call it, everyone has their own personal perception of reality or idea of how things are or should be. We have to take into consideration that this are different times, George's books spawned a TV show 14 years after the 1st book was released and then he had to catch up with the show because they needed more stuff so that they could make more episodes/seasons. George got into the business, i personally wouldn't like being pressured to write more stuff because they have to make more money but he might like it or be fine with it IDK. 

GOT is a very enjoyable and entertaining show/books with lots of blood, double crossing and getting horny here and there but i think that the overall message it sends to viewers/readers is a negative one. 

Tolkien's work in the other hand is a very important message and has a certain finesse the former does not have. However, when it comes to portray it on the screen, i believe it needs to walk a little tiny bit more on the"filthy mundane" road to not end up being a cringe fest like the Hobbit movies where, LORT trilogy had it two but not as hard. 

One of the reasons i think a Quenta Silmarillion adaptation should be considered is that it carries a very important message all humanity should get to know. However, making that happen and having the result that it's needed would be a whole different story.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Feb 15, 2019)

Welcome back, Firawyn -- it's great to see more returning veterans! I'm a relative newbie, myself.

There's another recent thread on the subject here:

http://www.thetolkienforum.com/index.php?threads/game-of-thrones-is-it-worth-reading.23616/

I posted my current favorite take on the debate at the bottom of page 1, under a spoiler alert (mainly because of language). I still watch it once a week or so.


----------



## Ithilethiel (Feb 15, 2019)

Personally, I am not a GOTs fan. I've watched a few times and maybe I couldn't get past the violence, blood and "horny" stuff Miguel mentions. Plus it's too depressing for me. It just didn't interest me.

Firawyn asks the difference. For me it is as in literature. The Professor is high fantasy. His writings bring his readers full circle. We are immersed in the total experience of his world and the beings who inhabit it. 

Martin's is simple fantasy. I'm not saying he is not creative and imaginative. Only that it appeals to our baser instincts, sex, violence, murder, intrigue, sloth, etc. with a few bones thrown to us for a hook of humanity. It's easier to write to these low subjects. 

It is by far more difficult to elevate one's readers. Make us stretch our hearts and minds to finer things. Not that there isn't violence, murder and intrigue in JRRT's works but the difference is in the way he handles them. There is always hope in Tolkien's writings. The hope of mankind. Martin to me offers only more of the same. Perhaps I didn't watch enough GOT but what I did watch only made me cringe and despair.

As far as imitation, all great artists borrow from one another. As was said, Tolkien borrowed from MacDonald and others. But Tolkien raised his works to such astronomical heights all fall short of him. All.


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (Feb 16, 2019)

Firawyn said:


> And how does a writer even begin to try and come up with an original concept that isn't so clearly "been there, done that" from Tolkien?


Well, I try, at least.



I hope everyone enjoys my High Fantasy!



CL


----------



## Annatar (Jul 31, 2022)

Did I not search well enough or is this the ONLY thread on GoT/ASoIaF?
If the latter, I would be very surprised, since GRRM is definitely marketed as the last Tolkien successor in terms of fantasy. Whether this is justified or not.


Ithilethiel said:


> As far as imitation, all great artists borrow from one another. As was said, Tolkien borrowed from MacDonald and others. But Tolkien raised his works to such astronomical heights all fall short of him. All.


I only know McDonalds and would only eat there if I was drunk, but in principle I agree with you about "astronomical heights". 

However, I only knew that Tolkien was inspired by ancient Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, Nordic, Celtic, Finnish and Mediterranean myths. And of course from his experiences, the First World War, English hill and Swiss mountain landscapes - and his love of languages..

Still, I would be interested to know who this MacDonald was and how he influenced JRRT. Somehow he has to fit in there. 



Ithilethiel said:


> Martin's is simple fantasy. I'm not saying he is not creative and imaginative. Only that it appeals to our baser instincts, sex, violence, murder, intrigue, sloth, etc. with a few bones thrown to us for a hook of humanity. It's easier to write to these low subjects.
> 
> It is by far more difficult to elevate one's readers. Make us stretch our hearts and minds to finer things. Not that there isn't violence, murder and intrigue in JRRT's works but the difference is in the way he handles them.


I can absolutely agree with you there, and of course I also find Tolkien's approach better and more sensible in direct comparison.

But GRRM probably only had the choice of trying to copy Tolkien (which in the end could only become a bad copy) or create something new if he wanted to succeed in the fantasy genre.

And although you've already met me as a purist when it comes to Tolkien adaptations, I must also say that GRRM's approach is a legitimate alternative for me. He has managed to depict human abysses and thus more realism. Tolkien was the idealist, Martin the realist - and he did an excellent job of describing that, and at least about the first half of the series adaptation was excellent and true to the books.

Reality sucks, and with fantasy you'd like to escape to worlds where good and evil are clearly separated and where you're not penetratingly reminded that absolutely everyone is basically just a pathetic worm. That's one reason among many others why Tolkien became popular, and the reason why many oldschool fantasy geeks can't handle ASoIaF/GoT. 
(Namely because they can't or won't accept the negative sides. Although Tolkien also addresses that very well in parts, especially in the Sil and the UT, but for some readers ironically too subtle for today's world).

For me, Martin has revolutionized and expanded the fantasy genre in a positive way with his "explicit facts", so I won't denigrate him in comparison.
Though I appreciate and value his work, I would still prefer Tolkien's works, and yet GRRMS's books (at least his first ASoIaF ones) definitely deserve a high appreciation in the fantasy genre in my opinion - and especially from the perspective of an open-minded Tolkien purist like me.
It's still good high-fantasy, but on a more realistic and perhaps more pessimistic basis, but even that view deserves to be presented with all its consequences....

For the older fantasy connoisseurs, however, I would put up for debate the extent to which GRRM's approach was actually revolutionary, independent of the media and also independent of Tolkien.
Because there was probably fantasy literature before GoT that was perhaps similar in principle, such as Michael Moorcock's Elric of Melniboné. I once participated in a role-playing game in that world many years ago without knowing the books, but looking back there were many similarities....
(And I'm sure there are a few more authors in that regard as well. You name them as well as the quality of their works...)

Anyway, I'd be interested to know what the old fantasy and role-playing experts and geeks would say about GRRM's success.

Of course also in comparison with Tolkien's statements. But since I can already imagine the result to a certain extent in advance, I would also be interested to know how this work is viewed and evaluated independently of Tolkien within the fantasy genre:
Is its popularity deserved, or is it rather a late, even just exemplary accidental breakthrough, or a mixture of both?
And how much was inspired or even "stolen" from previous works, both in terms of traditional and progressive fantasy?
And how do you think this will affect current and future adaptations?
Could this even be completely obsolete again for TV adaptations in 2022 (and later)?

I myself have partly only contradictory pseudo-answers for many of these questions.... But maybe you have clearer positions?


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Aug 1, 2022)

Annatar said:


> Did I not search well enough or is this the ONLY thread on GoT/ASoIaF?


I posted a link to another one in my post above.

Fantasy post-Tolkien has, broadly speaking, tended to go in one of two directions: copying him, like Terry Brooks or David Eddings, or arguing with him, like Stephen Donaldson, Tad Williams -- or GRRM. Some try to simply ignore him, but no one can escape him.

As for George MacDonald:









George MacDonald - Wikipedia







en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## d4rk3lf (Aug 1, 2022)

I just read the first book (even before series), and watched series few times. 
From my point of view they are not even close. 

Pros: 
What I think he did great is world building (it's not on the Tolkien level of course, but still very impressive). The locations are huge, there are many cultures, and they are pretty believable. The other good things is characters. Many of them are pretty interesting, and I enjoyed the series because of the great actors, and great job they did (unlike, unfortunately PJ Lotr). 

Cons: 
Main story, and sub stories. 
You can't just kill characters just because of shock, and then don't know how to proceed with the story. You have to have GOOD reason for killing main characters, and he didn't had any. 
Ok for the Ned Stark, and if he stopped there, it would be much better imho. 
All gone to BIG mess, after the Red wedding imho.... very stupid decision, because everything we watched upon that point of time (Rob wars) suddenly becomes pointless. Why did he showed us everything before, if he was just about to kill everyone? He should have then started book on that point of time (after Red Wedding), not wasting our time with these characters and events, that are now completely meaningless. 
The white walkers are also meh to me, because they are pretty much just the stupid zombies.
LOL, story with them are so funny... he is building conflict with them all the time, and it's resolved after the FIRST battle with them.  
Also, the zombies are very weak, if all you have to do is kill that main White Walker... they could have just gather something like 500 archers, go beyond the wall, and fire arrows with dragonglass into the main guy, and it would be instant defeat. 
I am not sure if Martin last book will be like in the series (they said it will be), because what happened in the series is just plain stupid., 

This guy made WAAAAAY better ending then it was in the series:


----------



## Radaghast (Aug 1, 2022)

I was totally invested in _A Song of Ice and Fire_ (the formal title of the book series; it is not 'Game of Thrones'), even with its shortcomings. I read _A Feast for Crows_, and even if I found it a little wanting I eagerly awaited the next volume, patiently waiting six years for it. Book 6, _A Dance with Dragons_, was a bit of a disappointment as well but ended in a couple of cliffhangers. So I was again left eagerly awaiting the next volume.

Not coincidentally, though, the HBO series _Game of Thrones_ debuted that same year, 2011. George Martin had sold the rights to the series in 2006 or 2007, several years before the fifth book even came out, and he was heavily involved in the scripts and direction. He also became involved in other writing projects, went on book tours, etc. He also liked to talk about extra-curricular stuff like conventions, sports, etc. — pretty much anything *except* _A Song of Ice and Fire_ — on his "Not a Blog".

So, fans like me waited. And waited. And waited. Eleven years later some of us have stopped waiting because we have lost faith that Martin is actually interested in completing the series. He has co-created a new HBO series called _House of the Dragon_, which is backstory for one of the houses from ASoIaF. Martin seems to be taking a lot of stuff onto his plate and, as far as his ASoIaF fans' concerns about finishing the series, his answer:



> “I know, I know, for many of you out there, only one of those projects matters,” Martin writes. “I am sorry for you. They _ALL_ matter to me.”



Also, the series (which some have argued was bad all the way through) brought the story to a conclusion. Even if it was a highly unsatisfactory one, one can imagine why that would dampen the enthusiasm to finish it in book form. Fans have a basic idea of how things will unfold. I though at the time I'd heard the news of the rights being sold that it was a bad idea, with the book series still incomplete and the volumes not coming as quickly as they did at the series' start.

So, anyway, my point in all of this is, if you're thinking of reading ASoIaF, don't. There's no guarantee it will ever be finished. I would wait until that happens, if ever, before picking up the first book, _A Game of Thrones_ which, incidentally, was released in 1996. GRRM was 48 that year, still a relatively young man at the time.


----------



## arivista (Aug 23, 2022)

I don't think GoT and LoTR are really comparable. They belong to a different sub-genre. It would be something like comparing hopeful, optimistic Star Trek with some post-apocalyptic dystopian sci-fi. Although I agree there is also aspect of "polemics" with Tolkien's approach in GRRM writings.


----------

