Why I think that "A Song of Ice and Fire" is poorly written. *Warning, spoilers likely*

[spartan231490]

I know why he doesn't act like a Lannister. I want to know why he is working for the betterment of house Lannister? In his situation, I would want my whole house to collapse, with just a few exceptions.

It's called daddy issues. He is a Lannister at heart, and he wants to be accepted by his father, is that really so hard to see? I guess you aren't far enough into book 3 yet?

Oh SNIP

I can agree to a certain extend to what you are getting at, but you have just read the first 2 books. I have read almost all 5 of them

That said, I disagree that the characters are shallow, I would rather say they are human. In real life there are no good or bad guys, there are just guys.
The Lanisters are a good example of this, they have their own agenda. Tyrion is not a bad guy at all in my mind, he is an outsider.

But to quote a character in book 3 "You know nothing, Jon Snow" Because this series changes fast, and what you thought you'd knew is not always what will happen.

Sure you can figure out a lot of what is going to happen, if you are paying attention, but to me that signals a good book.

Also the points of view I like, it helps broaden the story.

OK, I'm going to add an edit to the OP because it seems like a lot of people are misunderstanding what I said. I DO NOT THINK that the characters are shallow because there are no good and bad guys. I think the characters are shallow because I rarely saw a character battle with conflicting motivations.

Spoiler

I used Davos as an example before. he feels in his gut that the water battle at the capital is going to go badly, and he worries about having 4 sons in the battle, but he only worries about it for like 2 lines, and then he just moves on. He doesn't have an internal battle about trying to get his sons to not participate and then eventually decide that Stannis needs every able sailor to help him. He doesn't consider sending one of his sons home to his wife under the guise of delivering a message and then decide not to because it would offend the boys honor. He's just like: "if this goes badly, 4 of my sons will die along with me, oh noes!" It's unbelievable to me, it's the action of a shallow character because he exists purely to serve Stannis. He has no other goals in life. He doesn't dream about living long enough to see a grandchild. He doesn't bemoan the fact that he doesn't have a daughter. He doesn't hope to be able to gain acceptance for his family among the nobles through marriage. At least not that I saw, his only motivation is to serve Stannis. it should be his strongest motivation, but he should have others that sometimes conflict. Like, he decides to save Stannis by killing the Red Lady, but he doesn't even wait long enough to go give his son a hug when he learned that his son survived.

I don't agree, sure Davos doesn't contemplate it much in the written text, but he does worry about them, but he feels he owes his life to Stannis.


All in all you know nothing Jon Snow. By the end of book 3 we can talk again

See the post directly above me. at least at the point I'm at, Tyrion is nothing like the other Lannisters.

That section is from Davos's POV, we are in his head and his thoughts, if he's having conflicted emotions and thoughts, we should be reading them. Not just, "Oh, I'm worried about my sons." and then move on.(I'm obviously exaggerating, but there was no where near enough text there. He is a character that is 100% one dimensional in his drive to help Stannis. It's not that his other goals are less important, he doesn't even seem to have them. In the example I used above, why not even take the 1 hour to talk to and hug your son? A character can owe his life to someone, and help them in every way possible, and still have their own life and dreams and ambitions.

Spoiler

when he thinks he's going to die on that rock, he laments only two things, that most of his family is dead, and that he can no longer help Stannis, and Stannis took up a far greater portion of his thoughts. He didn't lament the fact that he would never have a daughter. He didn't lament the fact that he would never see his house become accepted. He didn't lament the fact that his ship was destroyed. I mean, he thought he was dying and he had lots of time, I imagine his lamentations would have encompassed more than 2 subjects. It was a perfect opportunity to flesh out the character of Davos and show us a little more about how he ticks, but Martin didn't, because the Davos is nothing but a servant to Stannis, that's all there is to his character. That's about as shallow as it can get.

Also, the only thing that the character gave us is the written text. Sure, he doesn't have to spell out every thing exactly, but it shouldn't be our job to imagine in half of a character either.

 

[spartan231490]

That's not that indicative. What does Robb do with his spare time? What's Robb's hobby? What's His worst fear? Did he have any childhood sweethearts? Martin switches characters so often(at least I assume this is the reason) that even the main character's are left almost completely unknown elements. Kahlan hates cheeze because when she was a kid and got sick, and they fed her cheeze constantly and now she can't stand it. And she used to hang out in the kitchens and with the marble-workers who repaired the castle when she was a child. Richard passed messages back and forth with his father using a vase because George Cypher was always traveling. Richard used to stick-dual with his brother, who was bigger and stronger, and would make Richard give a "loser's salute." Richard's brother sold one of the artifacts that their father found by lying and then the father never let him near another artifact again. What similar small details do we know about the main characters of Ice and Fire? I can't think of any.

The problem is that even though you're exposed to various parts of either of these characters histories, they're still very second dimensional. I've only read the first book of the Sword of Truth series, but its characters weren't it strong points. Richard and Kahlan are the self sacrificing heroes set on their quest by the ambiguously powerful mentor who at the same time is incapable of influencing the plot in any way. All their actions only reinforce their "self-sacrificing" personality, without adding really any further layers. Richard continuously charges forth on his insane quest despite being reminded all the time how insane it is. Kahlan whines about how she should be the one sacrificing herself blah blah. I could go on a long time about how flawed/cliche the book is, but its not TERRIBLE.

Having deeply flawed "grey" characters, multiple perspectives, and foreshadowing aren't "bad" things. Its just nothing something you prefer.

Not going to address Sword of Truth, just because if I did this would become the single biggest wall of text you have ever seen.

I have no problem with deeply flawed and morally ambiguous characters, or forshadowing, or multiple perspectives.

I have problems with characters that have only a single dimension of motivation. Look at the post above this for an example. To use an example from Wheel of time:

Spoiler

Nynaeve wants to become an Aes Sedai because she wants to get back at Moraine, but she also wants to learn more about healing and help people, she also wants to help Egwene be the Amyrllin, and she very much wants to marry Lan. She also wants to help Rand save the world, and she doesn't want Rand to suffer or die. She wants to be accepted by the Aes Sedai as one of them, and she wants to bond Lan as her warder. The list goes on. Most of the characters in Ice and Fire series have maybe 2 motivations, and they only really work towards one goal. Like the above example.

Real people have many motivations. I want to go become a high school teacher, but I don't want to end up in debt up to my eyeballs from college, and I also want to write for fun in my spare time, and I want to retire near where I grew up, but I don't really want any children I might have to grow up in that community. I want to learn the guitar, and I want to study the martial arts more. I also want to help my friends as much as I can and a million other things. Real people, and good characters, have complex motivations that I just don't see from this series.

I have no problem with foreshadowing, but foreshadowing should be hints, not a map to what's going to happen, or it isn't interesting anymore.

Multiple perspectives is a good thing, so long as you don't have so many that the reader is overly distanced from the characters. Fewer POV characters means that the reader is more invested in the POV characters because the reader is closer to them. They don't flit around and end up in the minds of every character in the book for a reason, that's obviously an exxageration, but the line exists somewhere and I think Martin Crossed it with Ice and Fire.

And changing perspectives every single chapter really interrupts flow and creates a massive amount of distance from the characters involved and even distances you from the story a lot, because it destroys immersion by never allowing the reader to really get into it before the perspective change suddenly yanks them back into reality.

 

[spartan231490]

Also, I'm going to amend my previous statment and say that I have seen well over 30 POV characters in the first two books, maybe a good deal more than that.

Okay, that's a damn lie.

Including the odd one-off throwaway characters, which I normally would not, there are exactly twelve. In the interest of bolstering your flagging claim, it seems you have just started making things up.

I haven't counted, so it's probably not over 30, although it feels like it. I seriously doubt that it's under 20, and I know it's over 12. I can think of at least 13 off the top of my head.

Spoiler

Eddard, Catelyn, Jon, Robb, Arya, Sansa, Bran, Rickon, Sam Tarley, Daenerys, Jaime, Tyrion, and Davos.

That's 13, right off the top of my head. Maybe you shouldn't make things up.

There was never a chapter with Rickon or Robb as the main char. And though I don't recall everything from the fourth book I am pretty sure there was never a chapter with Jaime as the main char either.

Ed, Jon, Tyrion, Sansa, Arya, Daenerys, Theon, Catelyn, Davos and Bran. Add the two prologuechapters. This is less than 13. So I suggest that you stop making things up.

I know for a fact that there are several chapters with Jaime as the main Character in book 3. I thought that Rob and Rickon had chapters, but so be it. that's still 11 just off the top of my head. I wasn't even counting the prologue.

Spoiler

I can also remember a chapter with a brother of the night watch planning an escape immediately before 3 horns sounded signalling an attack of "the others."

so make it 12.
And the exact number of POV characters doesn't really matter anyway, so if I have the wrong number I apologize, I was guessing. My point is unaffected.

Edit: Not the best source but a quick google led to wiki: http://iceandfire.wikia.com/wiki/POV_character
14 main POV characters
10 minor POV characters
7 prologue/epilogue characters
That's 31, but go with 24. significantly more than 12

 

[Atmos Duality]

1) It has way too many POV(Point of View) characters, and way too many POV changes, which is really just a cheap way of increasing dramatic tension at the expense of emotional attachment to the characters and the development of the main characters.

For the sake of argument, I'll assume you meant all of this as an opinion. That is what you meant in the topic title, right?

Personally, I found the POV perspective to be the most effective because it places you directly into the action by pulling you down a bit further from the Fourth Wall.
This is a particular novelty limited to books. Without visual and audio input ala Games and Movies the reader is forced to interpret the scenes themselves. By giving the reader the character's perspective you are giving them more specifics of the "intangibles": A set of immediate thoughts, emotions and a perspective.

By placing the reader into the character's perspective (rather than narrating everything), they can better grasp what sort of mood or feeling they should be feeling, and given the series' very dark political tone this is more effective than some secondary or straight-narrative.

As a form of comparison, this perspective technique is commonly used in GOOD thrillers and suspense novels (Koontz in particular springs to mind here) not because it's "cheap", but because it works. There's plenty of shitty fantasy novels out there.

With tension/suspense/thrillers it's better to keep the reader guessing what happens next rather than guessing about what they just read. J.R.R Martin is putting that to good use here since his series IS intense and there are a lot of character arcs going on.

Well, if nothing else, it works for me.

If I had serious criticism for the series, I'd say that many parts of it go for far too long without any levity. Even in thrillers, if you hold tension too long, it becomes more stressful to read than it's worth.

Cheerio.

 

[Giest4life]

Ok, so it's not poorly written, but I really don't think that it's particularly well written either. And here's why:

1) It has way too many POV(Point of View) characters, and way too many POV changes, which is really just a cheap way of increasing dramatic tension at the expense of emotional attachment to the characters and the development of the main characters.

2) Virtually nothing happens in the story. In the first two books, like nothing happens. What I mean by that, is that Martin spends more time describing what the characters think is going to happen, than he spends describing what actually happens. At least it seems that way to me. Everything that really happens gets about 2 pages of time, and half of them don't even happen while the character reads them, but the characters will spend a whole chapter just thinking about what might happen and how to deal with it, and worse, much of what they're thinking is either obvious, or tedious.

Spoiler

The one big exception to that is Theon's actions in the second book, probably because the author wants him to seem stupid, but half of the schemers come across as far less intelligent because they act irrationally. Stannis, Eddard, and Cersei are the three obvious examples.

Edit: By this I mean that the author spends more time on characters thinking about an event then he does on actually having the event happen, even for seriously major events, which I find ridiculous. It's like, he builds up all this massive amount of suspense about something, and then it's over. It's just over. It kinda leaves me with this: "really? That was it?" type of feeling.

3) The characters change ?sides? too often. A character will undoubtedly be an enemy for half a book, and then suddenly we are reading chapters from that character's POV and Martin tries to make us like that character, after having spent the last half of a book trying to make us hate them.

Spoiler

Tyrion, and Jaime come to mind.

Edit: By this, I more so mean that the author seems to deceive us about the intentions of too many characters. It works well once or twice, but IMO Martin overuses it and that just builds a sense of distrust in what is happening, as well as creating very Jarring changes in the story, where we have built up a massive amount of hatred for a character, and then suddenly we are in that characters mind and the author tries to make us sympathize with that character.

4) Many of the characters are essentially one-dimensional, which is unsurprising since the books are split amongst so many different characters, but many of them are one-dimensional and annoying, if not outright whiny and pathetic.

Spoiler

Lysa, her son, Bran, Rickon,(ok, so those three are kids) Sansa,(she's a kid too, she has a second dimension, unfortunately it's stupid, and by that I mean that her second dimension is to be a stupid person, her first is being whiny and annoying) Hot Pie, Catelyn,(whose motivations seem to change seemingly every single chapter she shows up in, either that or she is just acting incredibly irrational right now) Viserys, Cersei,(who also acts in an incredibly irrational manner, now that I think about it, half the characters on this list or more do that, and some characters that aren't on the list do too) Brienne, Renly, Stannis, Theon, and there are 3 brothers of the night watch whose names I can't remember that are just as bad

16 of them, and those are just the ones that I can think of off the top of my head.

Edit: I DO NOT THINK that the characters are shallow because there are no good and bad guys. I think the characters are shallow because I rarely saw a character battle with conflicting motivations. They all seem to be completely driven by a single motivation. Davos is an incarnation of Loyalty to Stannis, Eddard is an incarnation of honor, Tywin is an incarnation of power-lust. Catelyn is driven entirely by the desire to save her children. They don't even seem to care about much else. Davos is only passingly interested in his children. Eddard has like one action that isn't driven by honor, it's randomly driven by compassion. Tywin acts out of hatred for his crippled son like once or twice. Catelyn has no interest in the outcome of the war, despite the fact that her life and the lives of her precious children likely depend on it.

Also, the majority of the characters are either shockingly short-sighted, horrifyingly irrational, or just plain stupid.

5) The two most interesting "Main" characters: Daenerys and Jon, get some of the least time in the book, seemingly they are almost afterthoughts. Some of the most interesting and most fleshed out characters: Sam Tarly, Ser Jorah, The Hound, Jojen, and Asha Greyjoy are small-part side characters. It's almost as if the more time Martin spends on a character, the more erratic and the less interesting they become. The one exception I can think of is Tyrion, he's literally the only character I can even tolerate anymore.

6) The symbolism is all painfully obvious. The direwolf pups being the most painful example. The black hands of ?the others? being almost as bad. Most everything that happens is painfully obvious. I knew

Spoiler

that Daenerys was going to find a way to hatch the dragon eggs the minute she found them. I knew that Khal Drogo was going to die from the minute we first found out about him. I knew that Rob was going to be Crowned king in the north from the minute the war began. I knew that Eddard was going to die pretty much the minute he showed up in the capital. I knew that the royal children were pure Lannisters the minute that Eddard found out that the last Hand had been looking into Geneologies.

I mean, there is no subtlety at all, despite the fact that Martin seems to be trying to make the story more about political intrigue than anything else.


Disclaimer: I have only read 2 of the books, and I'm a few chapters into the third. It's really hard to get into, I just don't care enough about the characters or what's happening to read the books. Hell, even now I'm bored and I'm making this thread instead of reading it. I'm watching an episode of SG-1 that I've seen before. I think this is honestly the longest I've ever tried to read a book. I really don't think it's that bad, but I just can't get into it at all.

So, what are your thoughts? Do you agree or do you think that I'm a nutjob? Do they get better after the first 180 pages of the third book? Or should I just give up on it now?

Edit: Yes I like Sword of Truth. Yes, I know that most of you probably don't, most people on the internet don't seem to. I would love to argue with you about Sword of Truth for days and days, but this is not the thread for it. Maybe I'll do a why I think that Sword of Truth is well written thread when I get back from my vacation, but I definitely don't have time for it now. Suffice it to say, In no way was I comparing this series to Sword of Truth, I was well aware it was about political intrigue when i started reading it, and as different from SoT as a fantasy series can get.

Edit 2: Sword of Truth has nothing to do with A song of Ice and Fire. I posted the first edit because people were starting to comment on the fact that I enjoyed Sword of Truth more often than about A Song of Ice and Fire, and I am leaving on vacation tomorrow so I really don't have time to talk about Sword of Truth.

Most of this is exactly why I love the book. This is the hallmark of High Fantasy; Tolkien created the template (not the POV part) and Jordan, Martin, Rothfuss, and Erkison have all followed this format.

But I'll leave you to your opinion.

 

[Thedayrecker]

I don't know I've never read a book that affected me emotionally as much as

Spoiler: Dont open If you're not at least 3/4 through the third book

The chapter where Robb is killed

Seriously, I was torn up, and actually considered stopping, and giving up on the series.

I just couldn't go on.

 

[Thedayrecker]

snip

IMO the third one is the best. Keep reading it, and if you don't like it, then you have my permission to give up.

 

[Dejanus]

Also, I'm going to amend my previous statment and say that I have seen well over 30 POV characters in the first two books, maybe a good deal more than that.

Okay, that's a damn lie.

Including the odd one-off throwaway characters, which I normally would not, there are exactly twelve. In the interest of bolstering your flagging claim, it seems you have just started making things up.

I haven't counted, so it's probably not over 30, although it feels like it. I seriously doubt that it's under 20, and I know it's over 12. I can think of at least 13 off the top of my head.

Spoiler

Eddard, Catelyn, Jon, Robb, Arya, Sansa, Bran, Rickon, Sam Tarley, Daenerys, Jaime, Tyrion, and Davos.

That's 13, right off the top of my head. Maybe you shouldn't make things up.

There was never a chapter with Rickon or Robb as the main char. And though I don't recall everything from the fourth book I am pretty sure there was never a chapter with Jaime as the main char either.

Ed, Jon, Tyrion, Sansa, Arya, Daenerys, Theon, Catelyn, Davos and Bran. Add the two prologuechapters. This is less than 13. So I suggest that you stop making things up.

I know for a fact that there are several chapters with Jaime as the main Character in book 3. I thought that Rob and Rickon had chapters, but so be it. that's still 11 just off the top of my head. I wasn't even counting the prologue.

Spoiler

I can also remember a chapter with a brother of the night watch planning an escape immediately before 3 horns sounded signalling an attack of "the others."

so make it 12.
And the exact number of POV characters doesn't really matter anyway, so if I have the wrong number I apologize, I was guessing. My point is unaffected.

Edit: Not the best source but a quick google led to wiki: http://iceandfire.wikia.com/wiki/POV_character
14 main POV characters
10 minor POV characters
7 prologue/epilogue characters
That's 31, but go with 24. significantly more than 12

But you said in the first two books, which was where my number, which is exactly correct, came from. Feast and Dance add loads more, but we were not even discussing those yet. You said first two, and in those, there are exactly 12, not the 'at least 30' you said.

 

[Dejanus]

*Double post, please ignore.*

 

[Casual Shinji]

I have not seen a "Villian" in this series. And I read all 5 books up until now. May be your problem is that you think in this terms.

What about Joffrey?

Given I've only seen the HBO series, but at the end of the first season I was ready to reach into my TV screen in order to choke that little inbred c*ntspawn.

 

[spartan231490]

1) It has way too many POV(Point of View) characters, and way too many POV changes, which is really just a cheap way of increasing dramatic tension at the expense of emotional attachment to the characters and the development of the main characters.

For the sake of argument, I'll assume you meant all of this as an opinion. That is what you meant in the topic title, right?

Personally, I found the POV perspective to be the most effective because it places you directly into the action by pulling you down a bit further from the Fourth Wall.
This is a particular novelty limited to books. Without visual and audio input ala Games and Movies the reader is forced to interpret the scenes themselves. By giving the reader the character's perspective you are giving them more specifics of the "intangibles": A set of immediate thoughts, emotions and a perspective.

By placing the reader into the character's perspective (rather than narrating everything), they can better grasp what sort of mood or feeling they should be feeling, and given the series' very dark political tone this is more effective than some secondary or straight-narrative.

As a form of comparison, this perspective technique is commonly used in GOOD thrillers and suspense novels (Koontz in particular springs to mind here) not because it's "cheap", but because it works. There's plenty of shitty fantasy novels out there.

With tension/suspense/thrillers it's better to keep the reader guessing what happens next rather than guessing about what they just read. J.R.R Martin is putting that to good use here since his series IS intense and there are a lot of character arcs going on.

Well, if nothing else, it works for me.

If I had serious criticism for the series, I'd say that many parts of it go for far too long without any levity. Even in thrillers, if you hold tension too long, it becomes more stressful to read than it's worth.

Cheerio.

I don't have a problem with close third person perspective(that's what you are describing), I think he has too many POV characters, and too many POV changes. I'm well aware of the benefits of writing in the close 3rd person perspective, I am also aware that the more characters you use as POV characters, the more you counteract those benefits by creating distance between the reader and the characters.
http://www.sfwa.org/members/bell/writingtips/spring10.html
http://www.sfwa.org/members/bell/writingtips/winter09.10.html

Ok, so it's not poorly written, but I really don't think that it's particularly well written either. And here's why:

1) It has way too many POV(Point of View) characters, and way too many POV changes, which is really just a cheap way of increasing dramatic tension at the expense of emotional attachment to the characters and the development of the main characters.

2) Virtually nothing happens in the story. In the first two books, like nothing happens. What I mean by that, is that Martin spends more time describing what the characters think is going to happen, than he spends describing what actually happens. At least it seems that way to me. Everything that really happens gets about 2 pages of time, and half of them don't even happen while the character reads them, but the characters will spend a whole chapter just thinking about what might happen and how to deal with it, and worse, much of what they're thinking is either obvious, or tedious.

Spoiler

The one big exception to that is Theon's actions in the second book, probably because the author wants him to seem stupid, but half of the schemers come across as far less intelligent because they act irrationally. Stannis, Eddard, and Cersei are the three obvious examples.

Edit: By this I mean that the author spends more time on characters thinking about an event then he does on actually having the event happen, even for seriously major events, which I find ridiculous. It's like, he builds up all this massive amount of suspense about something, and then it's over. It's just over. It kinda leaves me with this: "really? That was it?" type of feeling.

3) The characters change ?sides? too often. A character will undoubtedly be an enemy for half a book, and then suddenly we are reading chapters from that character's POV and Martin tries to make us like that character, after having spent the last half of a book trying to make us hate them.

Spoiler

Tyrion, and Jaime come to mind.

Edit: By this, I more so mean that the author seems to deceive us about the intentions of too many characters. It works well once or twice, but IMO Martin overuses it and that just builds a sense of distrust in what is happening, as well as creating very Jarring changes in the story, where we have built up a massive amount of hatred for a character, and then suddenly we are in that characters mind and the author tries to make us sympathize with that character.

4) Many of the characters are essentially one-dimensional, which is unsurprising since the books are split amongst so many different characters, but many of them are one-dimensional and annoying, if not outright whiny and pathetic.

Spoiler

Lysa, her son, Bran, Rickon,(ok, so those three are kids) Sansa,(she's a kid too, she has a second dimension, unfortunately it's stupid, and by that I mean that her second dimension is to be a stupid person, her first is being whiny and annoying) Hot Pie, Catelyn,(whose motivations seem to change seemingly every single chapter she shows up in, either that or she is just acting incredibly irrational right now) Viserys, Cersei,(who also acts in an incredibly irrational manner, now that I think about it, half the characters on this list or more do that, and some characters that aren't on the list do too) Brienne, Renly, Stannis, Theon, and there are 3 brothers of the night watch whose names I can't remember that are just as bad

16 of them, and those are just the ones that I can think of off the top of my head.

Edit: I DO NOT THINK that the characters are shallow because there are no good and bad guys. I think the characters are shallow because I rarely saw a character battle with conflicting motivations. They all seem to be completely driven by a single motivation. Davos is an incarnation of Loyalty to Stannis, Eddard is an incarnation of honor, Tywin is an incarnation of power-lust. Catelyn is driven entirely by the desire to save her children. They don't even seem to care about much else. Davos is only passingly interested in his children. Eddard has like one action that isn't driven by honor, it's randomly driven by compassion. Tywin acts out of hatred for his crippled son like once or twice. Catelyn has no interest in the outcome of the war, despite the fact that her life and the lives of her precious children likely depend on it.

Also, the majority of the characters are either shockingly short-sighted, horrifyingly irrational, or just plain stupid.

5) The two most interesting "Main" characters: Daenerys and Jon, get some of the least time in the book, seemingly they are almost afterthoughts. Some of the most interesting and most fleshed out characters: Sam Tarly, Ser Jorah, The Hound, Jojen, and Asha Greyjoy are small-part side characters. It's almost as if the more time Martin spends on a character, the more erratic and the less interesting they become. The one exception I can think of is Tyrion, he's literally the only character I can even tolerate anymore.

6) The symbolism is all painfully obvious. The direwolf pups being the most painful example. The black hands of ?the others? being almost as bad. Most everything that happens is painfully obvious. I knew

Spoiler

that Daenerys was going to find a way to hatch the dragon eggs the minute she found them. I knew that Khal Drogo was going to die from the minute we first found out about him. I knew that Rob was going to be Crowned king in the north from the minute the war began. I knew that Eddard was going to die pretty much the minute he showed up in the capital. I knew that the royal children were pure Lannisters the minute that Eddard found out that the last Hand had been looking into Geneologies.

I mean, there is no subtlety at all, despite the fact that Martin seems to be trying to make the story more about political intrigue than anything else.


Disclaimer: I have only read 2 of the books, and I'm a few chapters into the third. It's really hard to get into, I just don't care enough about the characters or what's happening to read the books. Hell, even now I'm bored and I'm making this thread instead of reading it. I'm watching an episode of SG-1 that I've seen before. I think this is honestly the longest I've ever tried to read a book. I really don't think it's that bad, but I just can't get into it at all.

So, what are your thoughts? Do you agree or do you think that I'm a nutjob? Do they get better after the first 180 pages of the third book? Or should I just give up on it now?

Edit: Yes I like Sword of Truth. Yes, I know that most of you probably don't, most people on the internet don't seem to. I would love to argue with you about Sword of Truth for days and days, but this is not the thread for it. Maybe I'll do a why I think that Sword of Truth is well written thread when I get back from my vacation, but I definitely don't have time for it now. Suffice it to say, In no way was I comparing this series to Sword of Truth, I was well aware it was about political intrigue when i started reading it, and as different from SoT as a fantasy series can get.

Edit 2: Sword of Truth has nothing to do with A song of Ice and Fire. I posted the first edit because people were starting to comment on the fact that I enjoyed Sword of Truth more often than about A Song of Ice and Fire, and I am leaving on vacation tomorrow so I really don't have time to talk about Sword of Truth.

Most of this is exactly why I love the book. This is the hallmark of High Fantasy; Tolkien created the template (not the POV part) and Jordan, Martin, Rothfuss, and Erkison have all followed this format.

But I'll leave you to your opinion.

1) He has too many POV characters, not saying there should be one, I'm saying that there shouldn't be 31(from post above).
2) LOL WUT(in response to this being hallmark of High Fantasy)
3) Not saying that characters shouldn't change radically, just saying that this shouldn't happen without warning, and that the reader shouldn't be mislead about so many of the important characters.
4) LOL WUT
5) LOL WUT!
6) Not saying that there shouldn't be foreshadowing, I'm saying that there should be hints, not a map of what's going to happen next.(That's kinda what it felt like to me. This book is so obvious to me that there really isn't any mystery)

 

[spartan231490]

Spartan, I think you've gotten as much of an answer as you can reasonably expect. I personally love the vast numbers of POVs, just as I love stories from the perspective of a single character for different reasons. But if the style of the books doesn't work for you, no problem. Read a different book. There's not going to be anything in any form of media that can please everyone. I for one am waiting for someone to explain to me why "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" isn't regarded as one of the worst books ever written, let alone an international sensation with two movie adaptations.

Good point, god knows I disagree with the masses on a lot of things, guess I shouldn't be all that surprised that I disagree here. I am a little amazed that there doesn't seem to be anyone on this site who agrees with me, but nothing that's been said on this thread has changed my opinion yet.

 

[Atmos Duality]

I don't have a problem with close third person perspective(that's what you are describing), I think he has too many POV characters, and too many POV changes. I'm well aware of the benefits of writing in the close 3rd person perspective, I am also aware that the more characters you use as POV characters, the more you counteract those benefits by creating distance between the reader and the characters.

Except this is also a "war story". By that, I mean that characters die, and we don't know when or which characters will die.

By not neglecting character development, we don't have purely "throwaway characters" or non-arcs. We have different perspectives of different parts of the world at all times.

I admit, it's quite burdensome to read at times because of this, but when certain characters ate it, I know I wouldn't have given a toss if I hadn't been with them for such a long time.

 

[spartan231490]

Also, I'm going to amend my previous statment and say that I have seen well over 30 POV characters in the first two books, maybe a good deal more than that.

Okay, that's a damn lie.

Including the odd one-off throwaway characters, which I normally would not, there are exactly twelve. In the interest of bolstering your flagging claim, it seems you have just started making things up.

I haven't counted, so it's probably not over 30, although it feels like it. I seriously doubt that it's under 20, and I know it's over 12. I can think of at least 13 off the top of my head.

Spoiler

Eddard, Catelyn, Jon, Robb, Arya, Sansa, Bran, Rickon, Sam Tarley, Daenerys, Jaime, Tyrion, and Davos.

That's 13, right off the top of my head. Maybe you shouldn't make things up.

There was never a chapter with Rickon or Robb as the main char. And though I don't recall everything from the fourth book I am pretty sure there was never a chapter with Jaime as the main char either.

Ed, Jon, Tyrion, Sansa, Arya, Daenerys, Theon, Catelyn, Davos and Bran. Add the two prologuechapters. This is less than 13. So I suggest that you stop making things up.

I know for a fact that there are several chapters with Jaime as the main Character in book 3. I thought that Rob and Rickon had chapters, but so be it. that's still 11 just off the top of my head. I wasn't even counting the prologue.

Spoiler

I can also remember a chapter with a brother of the night watch planning an escape immediately before 3 horns sounded signalling an attack of "the others."

so make it 12.
And the exact number of POV characters doesn't really matter anyway, so if I have the wrong number I apologize, I was guessing. My point is unaffected.

Edit: Not the best source but a quick google led to wiki: http://iceandfire.wikia.com/wiki/POV_character
14 main POV characters
10 minor POV characters
7 prologue/epilogue characters
That's 31, but go with 24. significantly more than 12

But you said in the first two books, which was where my number, which is exactly correct, came from. Feast and Dance add loads more, but we were not even discussing those yet. You said first two, and in those, there are exactly 13, not the 'at least 30' you said.

You said 12 before, now you say 13. and reagardless, as I said, I apologize for getting the number wrong, I was guessing, and the exact number is irrelevant anyway. I believe there are way too many for the story. Admittedly, if it is only 12 or 13, it may not actually be the number of POV characters, just that he is switching POV characters too often, which is a serious problem either way. I think the story could be told more effectively only using 8 or maybe 9.

 

[4173]

I know why he doesn't act like a Lannister. I want to know why he is working for the betterment of house Lannister? In his situation, I would want my whole house to collapse, with just a few exceptions.

It's called daddy issues. He is a Lannister at heart, and he wants to be accepted by his father, is that really so hard to see? I guess you aren't far enough into book 3 yet?

Oh SNIP

I can agree to a certain extend to what you are getting at, but you have just read the first 2 books. I have read almost all 5 of them

That said, I disagree that the characters are shallow, I would rather say they are human. In real life there are no good or bad guys, there are just guys.
The Lanisters are a good example of this, they have their own agenda. Tyrion is not a bad guy at all in my mind, he is an outsider.

But to quote a character in book 3 "You know nothing, Jon Snow" Because this series changes fast, and what you thought you'd knew is not always what will happen.

Sure you can figure out a lot of what is going to happen, if you are paying attention, but to me that signals a good book.

Also the points of view I like, it helps broaden the story.

OK, I'm going to add an edit to the OP because it seems like a lot of people are misunderstanding what I said. I DO NOT THINK that the characters are shallow because there are no good and bad guys. I think the characters are shallow because I rarely saw a character battle with conflicting motivations.

Spoiler

I used Davos as an example before. he feels in his gut that the water battle at the capital is going to go badly, and he worries about having 4 sons in the battle, but he only worries about it for like 2 lines, and then he just moves on. He doesn't have an internal battle about trying to get his sons to not participate and then eventually decide that Stannis needs every able sailor to help him. He doesn't consider sending one of his sons home to his wife under the guise of delivering a message and then decide not to because it would offend the boys honor. He's just like: "if this goes badly, 4 of my sons will die along with me, oh noes!" It's unbelievable to me, it's the action of a shallow character because he exists purely to serve Stannis. He has no other goals in life. He doesn't dream about living long enough to see a grandchild. He doesn't bemoan the fact that he doesn't have a daughter. He doesn't hope to be able to gain acceptance for his family among the nobles through marriage. At least not that I saw, his only motivation is to serve Stannis. it should be his strongest motivation, but he should have others that sometimes conflict. Like, he decides to save Stannis by killing the Red Lady, but he doesn't even wait long enough to go give his son a hug when he learned that his son survived.

I don't agree, sure Davos doesn't contemplate it much in the written text, but he does worry about them, but he feels he owes his life to Stannis.


All in all you know nothing Jon Snow. By the end of book 3 we can talk again

See the post directly above me. at least at the point I'm at, Tyrion is nothing like the other Lannisters.

That section is from Davos's POV, we are in his head and his thoughts, if he's having conflicted emotions and thoughts, we should be reading them. Not just, "Oh, I'm worried about my sons." and then move on.(I'm obviously exaggerating, but there was no where near enough text there. He is a character that is 100% one dimensional in his drive to help Stannis. It's not that his other goals are less important, he doesn't even seem to have them. In the example I used above, why not even take the 1 hour to talk to and hug your son? A character can owe his life to someone, and help them in every way possible, and still have their own life and dreams and ambitions.

Spoiler

when he thinks he's going to die on that rock, he laments only two things, that most of his family is dead, and that he can no longer help Stannis, and Stannis took up a far greater portion of his thoughts. He didn't lament the fact that he would never have a daughter. He didn't lament the fact that he would never see his house become accepted. He didn't lament the fact that his ship was destroyed. I mean, he thought he was dying and he had lots of time, I imagine his lamentations would have encompassed more than 2 subjects. It was a perfect opportunity to flesh out the character of Davos and show us a little more about how he ticks, but Martin didn't, because the Davos is nothing but a servant to Stannis, that's all there is to his character. That's about as shallow as it can get.

Also, the only thing that the character gave us is the written text. Sure, he doesn't have to spell out every thing exactly, but it shouldn't be our job to imagine in half of a character either.

The future of his family is really dependent on Stannis. Even Stannis' supporters don't view him as nobility. His family doesn't have any value as hostages, they don't have any allies. If Stannis falls, Davos' land will be given to some knight or lord as a reward. If his family is lucky, they will go back to fishing or smuggling, except all the living sons are pretty young, so if they are lucky they will be beggars. If they are unlucky, they will be executed as traitors.

If Stannis could be convinced to surrender, then they may have a chance to hold onto some of what they have. Even that is a risk, because their only protection is Stannis saying they are noble, and he won't exactly have a strong bargaining position.

While lamenting Stannis, he is lamenting his sons who died for nothing; his raped and peniless wife; his son Devan never learning to read (which he mentions more than once as really important to him. It signifies a level of potential he never thought his son would have); he is lamenting the lost opportunities of his even younger sons. He even laments saving Stannis all those years ago from time to time. He laments trying to improve his lot in life. (and that doesn't include the smaller regrets: not seeing his wife again etc.)

His goals are inexorably tied to Stannis, because that is the nature of the feudal world he inhabits.

 

[Dejanus]

Also, I'm going to amend my previous statment and say that I have seen well over 30 POV characters in the first two books, maybe a good deal more than that.

Okay, that's a damn lie.

Including the odd one-off throwaway characters, which I normally would not, there are exactly twelve. In the interest of bolstering your flagging claim, it seems you have just started making things up.

I haven't counted, so it's probably not over 30, although it feels like it. I seriously doubt that it's under 20, and I know it's over 12. I can think of at least 13 off the top of my head.

Spoiler

Eddard, Catelyn, Jon, Robb, Arya, Sansa, Bran, Rickon, Sam Tarley, Daenerys, Jaime, Tyrion, and Davos.

That's 13, right off the top of my head. Maybe you shouldn't make things up.

There was never a chapter with Rickon or Robb as the main char. And though I don't recall everything from the fourth book I am pretty sure there was never a chapter with Jaime as the main char either.

Ed, Jon, Tyrion, Sansa, Arya, Daenerys, Theon, Catelyn, Davos and Bran. Add the two prologuechapters. This is less than 13. So I suggest that you stop making things up.

I know for a fact that there are several chapters with Jaime as the main Character in book 3. I thought that Rob and Rickon had chapters, but so be it. that's still 11 just off the top of my head. I wasn't even counting the prologue.

Spoiler

I can also remember a chapter with a brother of the night watch planning an escape immediately before 3 horns sounded signalling an attack of "the others."

so make it 12.
And the exact number of POV characters doesn't really matter anyway, so if I have the wrong number I apologize, I was guessing. My point is unaffected.

Edit: Not the best source but a quick google led to wiki: http://iceandfire.wikia.com/wiki/POV_character
14 main POV characters
10 minor POV characters
7 prologue/epilogue characters
That's 31, but go with 24. significantly more than 12

But you said in the first two books, which was where my number, which is exactly correct, came from. Feast and Dance add loads more, but we were not even discussing those yet. You said first two, and in those, there are exactly 13, not the 'at least 30' you said.

You said 12 before, now you say 13. and reagardless, as I said, I apologize for getting the number wrong, I was guessing, and the exact number is irrelevant anyway. I believe there are way too many for the story. Admittedly, if it is only 12 or 13, it may not actually be the number of POV characters, just that he is switching POV characters too often, which is a serious problem either way. I think the story could be told more effectively only using 8 or maybe 9.

I mistyped that, not that it matters.

You have a right to that opinion, but its not objectively a mistake, its simply not to your particular taste as a reader. That doesn't make you an idiot but it sure as hell doesn't make the series poorly written. You don't see what millions of others see in it, fine, but calling it poorly written is nothing short of an insult.

In short, if you don't like it, stop reading. We've made our case, well supported and with millions behind it. You've made yours, sort of, though it still isn't very clear or well presented in my opinion. Let's agree to disagree before someone else smells that you actually like Sword of Truth and this turns into a flame war.

 

[spartan231490]

I don't have a problem with close third person perspective(that's what you are describing), I think he has too many POV characters, and too many POV changes. I'm well aware of the benefits of writing in the close 3rd person perspective, I am also aware that the more characters you use as POV characters, the more you counteract those benefits by creating distance between the reader and the characters.

Except this is also a "war story". By that, I mean that characters die, and we don't know when or which characters will die.

By not neglecting character development, we don't have purely "throwaway characters" or non-arcs. We have different perspectives of different parts of the world at all times.

I admit, it's quite burdensome to read at times because of this, but when certain characters ate it, I know I wouldn't have given a toss if I hadn't been with them for such a long time.

You can use fewer POV characters and still develop all the characters we need to. It's really not that hard to develop a character that isn't the POV character, Martin has done it. Rickon, Robb, The Fish of Riverun, Hot Pie, Gendry, there are dozens of characters that are well developed without being POV characters. Hell, at the point I've read to, Sam Tarley is probably the most developed character that I've read about and he's only had one POV chapter. and he was as well developed before he got that chapter, all from Jon Snow's chapters.

 

[spartan231490]

Also, I'm going to amend my previous statment and say that I have seen well over 30 POV characters in the first two books, maybe a good deal more than that.

Okay, that's a damn lie.

Including the odd one-off throwaway characters, which I normally would not, there are exactly twelve. In the interest of bolstering your flagging claim, it seems you have just started making things up.

I haven't counted, so it's probably not over 30, although it feels like it. I seriously doubt that it's under 20, and I know it's over 12. I can think of at least 13 off the top of my head.

Spoiler

Eddard, Catelyn, Jon, Robb, Arya, Sansa, Bran, Rickon, Sam Tarley, Daenerys, Jaime, Tyrion, and Davos.

That's 13, right off the top of my head. Maybe you shouldn't make things up.

There was never a chapter with Rickon or Robb as the main char. And though I don't recall everything from the fourth book I am pretty sure there was never a chapter with Jaime as the main char either.

Ed, Jon, Tyrion, Sansa, Arya, Daenerys, Theon, Catelyn, Davos and Bran. Add the two prologuechapters. This is less than 13. So I suggest that you stop making things up.

I know for a fact that there are several chapters with Jaime as the main Character in book 3. I thought that Rob and Rickon had chapters, but so be it. that's still 11 just off the top of my head. I wasn't even counting the prologue.

Spoiler

I can also remember a chapter with a brother of the night watch planning an escape immediately before 3 horns sounded signalling an attack of "the others."

so make it 12.
And the exact number of POV characters doesn't really matter anyway, so if I have the wrong number I apologize, I was guessing. My point is unaffected.

Edit: Not the best source but a quick google led to wiki: http://iceandfire.wikia.com/wiki/POV_character
14 main POV characters
10 minor POV characters
7 prologue/epilogue characters
That's 31, but go with 24. significantly more than 12

But you said in the first two books, which was where my number, which is exactly correct, came from. Feast and Dance add loads more, but we were not even discussing those yet. You said first two, and in those, there are exactly 13, not the 'at least 30' you said.

You said 12 before, now you say 13. and reagardless, as I said, I apologize for getting the number wrong, I was guessing, and the exact number is irrelevant anyway. I believe there are way too many for the story. Admittedly, if it is only 12 or 13, it may not actually be the number of POV characters, just that he is switching POV characters too often, which is a serious problem either way. I think the story could be told more effectively only using 8 or maybe 9.

I mistyped that, not that it matters.

You have a right to that opinion, but its not objectively a mistake, its simply not to your particular taste as a reader. That doesn't make you an idiot but it sure as hell doesn't make the series poorly written. You don't see what millions of others see in it, fine, but calling it poorly written is nothing short of an insult.

In short, if you don't like it, stop reading. We've made our case, well supported and with millions behind it. You've made yours, sort of, though it still isn't very clear or well presented in my opinion. Let's agree to disagree before someone else smells that you actually like Sword of Truth and this turns into a flame war.

I think it is objectively a mistake. Just because people like it, doesn't mean it's the best choice, or even that it's a good choice. I think that, as I've said, the benefits of his massive number of POV characters and the way he changes POV every single chapter(I actually can't think of any advantage to changing POV every single chapter), have huge disadvantages to the story, character development, and most importantly immersion, which have very few, if any, benefits; certainly not enough benefits to outweigh the disadvantages.

 

[Dejanus]

Also, I'm going to amend my previous statment and say that I have seen well over 30 POV characters in the first two books, maybe a good deal more than that.

Okay, that's a damn lie.

Including the odd one-off throwaway characters, which I normally would not, there are exactly twelve. In the interest of bolstering your flagging claim, it seems you have just started making things up.

I haven't counted, so it's probably not over 30, although it feels like it. I seriously doubt that it's under 20, and I know it's over 12. I can think of at least 13 off the top of my head.

Spoiler

Eddard, Catelyn, Jon, Robb, Arya, Sansa, Bran, Rickon, Sam Tarley, Daenerys, Jaime, Tyrion, and Davos.

That's 13, right off the top of my head. Maybe you shouldn't make things up.

There was never a chapter with Rickon or Robb as the main char. And though I don't recall everything from the fourth book I am pretty sure there was never a chapter with Jaime as the main char either.

Ed, Jon, Tyrion, Sansa, Arya, Daenerys, Theon, Catelyn, Davos and Bran. Add the two prologuechapters. This is less than 13. So I suggest that you stop making things up.

I know for a fact that there are several chapters with Jaime as the main Character in book 3. I thought that Rob and Rickon had chapters, but so be it. that's still 11 just off the top of my head. I wasn't even counting the prologue.

Spoiler

I can also remember a chapter with a brother of the night watch planning an escape immediately before 3 horns sounded signalling an attack of "the others."

so make it 12.
And the exact number of POV characters doesn't really matter anyway, so if I have the wrong number I apologize, I was guessing. My point is unaffected.

Edit: Not the best source but a quick google led to wiki: http://iceandfire.wikia.com/wiki/POV_character
14 main POV characters
10 minor POV characters
7 prologue/epilogue characters
That's 31, but go with 24. significantly more than 12

But you said in the first two books, which was where my number, which is exactly correct, came from. Feast and Dance add loads more, but we were not even discussing those yet. You said first two, and in those, there are exactly 13, not the 'at least 30' you said.

You said 12 before, now you say 13. and reagardless, as I said, I apologize for getting the number wrong, I was guessing, and the exact number is irrelevant anyway. I believe there are way too many for the story. Admittedly, if it is only 12 or 13, it may not actually be the number of POV characters, just that he is switching POV characters too often, which is a serious problem either way. I think the story could be told more effectively only using 8 or maybe 9.

I mistyped that, not that it matters.

You have a right to that opinion, but its not objectively a mistake, its simply not to your particular taste as a reader. That doesn't make you an idiot but it sure as hell doesn't make the series poorly written. You don't see what millions of others see in it, fine, but calling it poorly written is nothing short of an insult.

In short, if you don't like it, stop reading. We've made our case, well supported and with millions behind it. You've made yours, sort of, though it still isn't very clear or well presented in my opinion. Let's agree to disagree before someone else smells that you actually like Sword of Truth and this turns into a flame war.

I think it is objectively a mistake. Just because people like it, doesn't mean it's the best choice, or even that it's a good choice. I think that, as I've said, the benefits of his massive number of POV characters and the way he changes POV every single chapter(I actually can't think of any advantage to changing POV every single chapter), have huge disadvantages to the story, character development, and most importantly immersion, which have very few, if any, benefits; certainly not enough benefits to outweigh the disadvantages.

You know what, I quit. The disadvantages you mentioned seem to reside only in your head, just like the supposed poor characterization. You see flaws where there are none, and it seems you are largely alone.

I and many others have made salient points. Your arguments boil down to you simply taking the opposite stance and calling out flaws with no objective basis.

So yeah, I quit. I think anyone reading this thread can see who holds the better supported position.

 

[OneEyeX]

Ok, so it's not poorly written, but I really don't think that it's particularly well written either. And here's why:

This post deserves a full run-down because it's quite well thought out and an ACTUAL GOD DAMN OPINION compared to what normally gets put on Escapist.

1) It has way too many POV(Point of View) characters, and way too many POV changes, which is really just a cheap way of increasing dramatic tension at the expense of emotional attachment to the characters and the development of the main characters.

My opinion of this is that; it attaches you to characters you'd normally never feel for (Samwell) and lets you get a grasp of some of the 'antagonist' characters (Jaimie). Seriously; if we never POV'd Jaimie, we'd be losing out on a lot of what caused him to BE the Kingslayer. It's a style of writing, and I can understand why people who not like it, but I wouldn't call it cheap. It's pretty taxing to keep track of several main characters.

2) ...Stuff here
Edit: By this I mean that the author spends more time on characters thinking about an event then he does on actually having the event happen, even for seriously major events, which I find ridiculous. It's like, he builds up all this massive amount of suspense about something, and then it's over. It's just over. It kinda leaves me with this: "really? That was it?" type of feeling.

"The most important events will not take years, they'll take milliseconds."

By that I mean, a lot of what these characters THINK and KNOW is important to the POV. I mean, lets say there was a story about me and you. We're both POV chatacters; you have NO idea what I'm wearing, eating or thinking. Part of watching someones perspective is their thoughts, frankly, it's the most important part.

3) The characters change ?sides? too often. A character will undoubtedly be an enemy for half a book, and then suddenly we are reading chapters from that character's POV and Martin tries to make us like that character, after having spent the last half of a book trying to make us hate them.

Spoiler

Tyrion, and Jaime come to mind.

Edit: By this, I more so mean that the author seems to deceive us about the intentions of too many characters. It works well once or twice, but IMO Martin overuses it and that just builds a sense of distrust in what is happening, as well as creating very Jarring changes in the story, where we have built up a massive amount of hatred for a character, and then suddenly we are in that characters mind and the author tries to make us sympathize with that character.

Song of Ice and Fire is not about Lawful Good Vs. Chaotic Evil. Every character has their faults and their are no Every-man-good-guys. Nathan Drake will not be in future installments.

But on the distrust factor; yeah, because no one does malice for no reason. Every characters actions are generally driven by their motives and what they think is right.

Also, the majority of the characters are either shockingly short-sighted, horrifyingly irrational, or just plain stupid.

Shortening due to this point getting to rant-y. Just understand; some characters who are short-sighted have REASONS to be short sighted. Irrantional people exist. Stupid people exist too, but we're working on that.

5) The two most interesting "Main" characters: Daenerys and Jon, get some of the least time in the book, seemingly they are almost afterthoughts. Some of the most interesting and most fleshed out characters: Sam Tarly, Ser Jorah, The Hound, Jojen, and Asha Greyjoy are small-part side characters. It's almost as if the more time Martin spends on a character, the more erratic and the less interesting they become. The one exception I can think of is Tyrion, he's literally the only character I can even tolerate anymore.

Everyone loves Tyrion, he's like a short Jack Sparrow.

But really; Ser Jorah wouldn't have much of a roll without Daenerys. Sam wouldn't be much with Jon. The reason these characters are interesting is because they're extending the setting from Darnerys or Jon. They are characters who flesh out the world while the Protagonists handle the central events. That's why they're 'main' characters, they're closer to the events of the story then the secondary characters.

6) The symbolism is all painfully obvious. The direwolf pups being the most painful example. The black hands of ?the others? being almost as bad. Most everything that happens is painfully obvious. I knew I mean, there is no subtlety at all, despite the fact that Martin seems to be trying to make the story more about political intrigue than anything else.

Breaking the spoiler down;

Spoiler

that Daenerys was going to find a way to hatch the dragon eggs the minute she found them. Same, it's forgivable.

I knew that Khal Drogo was going to die from the minute we first found out about him. I sorta suspected it but not how it happened.

I knew that Rob was going to be Crowned king in the north from the minute the war began. I didn't really catch it. I figured Catelyn would just become the ruler or something, not her son.

I knew that Eddard was going to die pretty much the minute he showed up in the capital.
Did NOT see that coming personally

I knew that the royal children were pure Lannisters the minute that Eddard found out that the last Hand had been looking into Geneologies.Fair enough, I figured it had something to do with Rob's bastards.