A Dance with Dragons
discussion
Character Problems
date
newest »
newest »
I agree that the way characters are killed off makes me wary to get too attached to them, but on the other hand, the series taught me to look at characters more critically than I did before. Being popular, courageous, just or kind doesn't automatically mean you'll live to see the end of the book. If you don't play the game well enough, you die. If other players cheat, no deus ex machina will come and save you. It's cruel, but it makes the story a lot less predictable - and that's what I enjoy about this series.Quentyn Martell's death didn't really touch me either, but that's because I found him obnoxious to begin with. He was too naive and dreamy. Those dragons were locked up under a pyramid for a reason - how stupid can you be to think it's a good idea to go say hi when even their "mother" can hardly contain them anymore?
Jon Snow isn't dead yet. The story ended with him blacking out, not with him being buried. Unless Martin shows the corpse, I am not convinced that Jon is dead - Martin played the same trick with Davos Seaworth a few times. As for Catelyn - I fully agree that dead characters should stay dead. Raising them as zombies after they've been murdered and buried... I'm not sure I like where that is going. I don't like anything that has to do with R'hllor so far, really.
Michael said: "However that just comes off as bad writing, you can't kill a character off and then bring them back and just say 'magic did it'. If you killed a character off you have to stick by your decision to kill off that character and deal with the consequences."Alas, I can see that the writers of the TV show agree with you, but they also missed the point grossly.
Catelyn was not brought back. Lady Stoneheart is not Catelyn, at all. Everything that Catelyn was when she was alive, Lady Stoneheart is not. Catelyn wanted peace and for the bloodbath and pain to be over. Lady Stoneheart is animated by blind revenge, kill them all and kill them now. Can't you see that there is a message there, and a strong one? This is hardly the case of "oh shit, I didn't really want to kill her, here, she's back". She's not back.
Furthermore, there is a message about letting the dead stay dead. There was a reason why Thoros didn't want to revive her in the first place, and we are supposed to understand the horror that this creature is, the creature who once was Catelyn.
I can agree to other parts that seem less interesting to me, but that's not one of them.
I don't think we're all supposed to get attached to every PoV character we meet. In our daily life we meet all sorts of people; we like some a lot and others less so, we dislike some. These characters are just like that. That's the reason why, for example, some people idolize Sansa and some demonize her, with a lot in the middle.
As explained by GRRM himself, the early deaths of Ned and other seemingly main or "likable" characters weren't only shock value, but also to have the reader feel that NOBODY is safe, that "the good guy/girl" who seems to be huge in the story can die next just as the last peasant.
I think he has proven emphatically that no character is safe, now it's coming off and just sadistic. He doesn't need to prove that he can kill off any character he wants, of course he can he is the author. If he wants Dany to spontaneously sprout wings and turn into a Dragon he can, it's his world.As for the lady stoneheart thing, I get what he is trying to get off but I think it is being done rather clumsily. Yeah I get it he is playing the 'sometimes dead is better' card. However among all the other points and issues being raised by this series is this one he really need to take on? It seems like an odd gimmick he put into a series in which he is losing ideas and momentum.
Michael wrote: "*SPOILERS*I am having an issue with characters in this series.
GRRM did a wonderful job as creating characters and making you like and root for those characters. I was attached to characters man..."
I agree. The death of characters you don't connect with does become anticlimactic. The shock factor wears off. Quentyn was never a dynamic character for me.
so then what was the point of quentyn, why introduce him at all? we could have received the same plot points from another source.
As rumors spread, it is likely that word gets back to Westeros that Dany fed him to her dragons herself. Who knows what complications that could cause for her over there. At the very least, its a massive public relations disaster.
Michael wrote: "so then what was the point of quentyn, why introduce him at all? we could have received the same plot points from another source."I agree. He really did nothing for me.
Charles wrote: "As rumors spread, it is likely that word gets back to Westeros that Dany fed him to her dragons herself. Who knows what complications that could cause for her over there. At the very least, its a..."Exactly, politically dangerous. He was prince of Dorne, not just any random suitor who got killed.
In regards to Quentyn, prince of Dorne, he is a Martell, house of the sun. Westeros is west, Essos is east. He was born in Westeros and died in Essos. I'll let you piece that together and draw your own conclusions as you look back towards the end of book 1.After all, coming back from the dead seems to be a theme. I'll assume that's just coincidence though. For now.
Many people, with various degrees of wishful thinking, see Doran as exactly what you are implying (cough Mirri Maz D-cough cough), especially considering what we last saw of Dany.(view spoiler)
So... yeah, I don't think that's going to happen. I think Quentyn needed to go try the impossible and be dragon toast for different reasons. But we'll have to wait and see. As Charles said, I wonder how the news will get to Dorne and what Doran will think of it!
I think it's pretty telling that the show is planning to simply forgo the entire Quentyn story line
From what I've heard, Jaime Lannister will be the one going to Dorne instead of Arys Oakheart, so that may be telling for his fate in the books as well.Edit: I just read he may be filling Balon Swann's role.
Michael wrote: "I think it's pretty telling that the show is planning to simply forgo the entire Quentyn story line"It only tells that the same parts of the story that interested you interested the producers of the show, not necessarily that those parts were not important for the story.
Michael wrote: "*SPOILERS*I am having an issue with characters in this series.
GRRM did a wonderful job as creating characters and making you like and root for those characters. I was attached to characters man..."
Tom Clancy had a tendency to introduce a guy, give you his backstory as he is about to engage in combat or perform a dangerous act to save the sub or land the plane or what have, and then kill them on the spot, not 300 pages or a novel later. It may not come off cleanly to the reader, individual perception being what it is, but to the writer, it made all the sense in the world.
Having said that, farewell to Quentyn didn't bring any tears to my eyes, either. It's a parable for what being stupid and a noble can do to you, I suppose. But with all things GRRM, one must suppose there is a deeper, darker reason behind the gore. We've been waiting five years to find out.
Christopher wrote: "Michael wrote: "*SPOILERS*I am having an issue with characters in this series.
GRRM did a wonderful job as creating characters and making you like and root for those characters. I was attached t..."
For the deeper darker meaning behind Quentyn, my suspicion is the repercussions to come from a Martell dying at the hands of Targaryen dragons. Maybe make whatever alliance a bit more tenuous.
However, Drinkwater and Yronwood were both there and saw what happened. If they are knights of honor they would tell people that not only was Daenarys not even in the city at that time, but that it was Quentyn's own hubris that got him killed. I mean they were THERE and saw EVERYTHING.
Michael wrote: "However, Drinkwater and Yronwood were both there and saw what happened. If they are knights of honor they would tell people that not only was Daenarys not even in the city at that time, but that i..."I get what you're saying, but I find it hard to believe that the Martells will be all like "Ok cool lets take over Westeros. Yeah, use your dragons. We trust the dragons. They're safe. Let's do this!" Admittedly that's shitty dialogue but you get my point. Especially after the knights report on how dangerous the dragons are.
Michael wrote: "However, Drinkwater and Yronwood were both there and saw what happened. If they are knights of honor they would tell people that not only was Daenarys not even in the city at that time, but that i..."If they make it alive out of the warzone that's cooking outside Mereen...
yeah but if Mereen falls then all this talk of Daenyris coming to westeros is worthless
She still might win it, even if Drinkwater and Yronwood die.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
I am having an issue with characters in this series.
GRRM did a wonderful job as creating characters and making you like and root for those characters. I was attached to characters many characters. Then he would kill off the characters and it would be a gut wrenching/mind blowing event.
Then he started using that device too much. Most of the characters I was attached were killed(notice I said MOST, I know tyrion and dany are still alive and kicking). So now I am only left with characters that I either don't like or don't have enough character building to have any sort of meaningful attachment to.
The perfect example of this is Quentyn Martell. He was referenced off handedly a couple of times before being introduced as a main character. Then I had a handful of chapters and he is killed. I know this was supposed to be a meaningful and emotionally charged moment, but all I felt was this overwhelming sense of indifference.
You can't introduce a character I have never met and kill him off in the same book and expect me to react to the death with anything but apathy. He has created a world were characters lives are cheap and that emotional investment in any one character is foolhardy at best.
I liken it to a soldier's experience in World War II, after losing enough friends you simply stop trying to make friends. He is so reckless with his characters that I no longer have a favorite character.
(Note: No I am not making light or minimize combat and I have a very deep respect and reverence for military men and women)
I realize people will point a myriad of theories that Jon Snow isn't really dead, and this or that character isn't really dead, and that Catelyn was resurrected from the dead. However that just comes off as bad writing, you can't kill a character off and then bring them back and just say 'magic did it'. If you killed a character off you have to stick by your decision to kill off that character and deal with the consequences. Unfortunately I think GRRM is painting himself into a corner and soon all we will be left with is characters that we don't like or have no connection to.
That makes the story far less compelling and interesting if I don't care about any of these characters, and I am much less likely to continue reading the series