"Game of Thrones or Shakespeare play?" Topic

link

Take the quiz and brag about how well you know the obscure plays.
I scored 100%.

80% Must know Shakespeare better than I though as I have no Idea about 'Game of Thrones' having not seen or read any of it.

x42

That really only means that you can brag about how much you know about GoT. If you really think that one is as brag-worthy as the other, well…

100%! Woo-hoo! In your face, some other guy!

* Not you, personally John, but most people. Like *I* haven't read 6K pages of GRRM, and significantly fewer from the guy in the ruff!

90%.

I will admit that I got the Coriolanus one right because I don't remember that plot arc from GoT.
I never read or saw Coriolanus. I think it's about Rome or something like that.

In 500 years, Game of thrones will be known as a 500 year old fantasy series pf books. It will only be known to dissertation writers.

90%

I am probably one of the few not enthralled with Game of Thrones. The HBO series has some great talent and there have been some nice execution of the book's material. However the books have become overblown and aimless. A story should have a beginning, middle, and end. Not ramble and changing venues without much preamble for five plus mega volumes. My other issue is just about any character you do come to care about ends up killed and the entire premise seems to be that being bad and ruthless is the only way to be successful and survive. While there may be a certain unhappy truth to that I like to see the good guys win and prevail at some point.

50%. I have never seen Game of Thrones. Shows my Shakespeare knowledge is half-assed.

70%… although I have only watched the series and know little of the classics.

80% meh

My other issue is just about any character you do come to care about ends up killed and the entire premise seems to be that being bad and ruthless is the only way to be successful and survive.

My guess is that he's trying to make the point that, 500-odd years ago, life could be pretty nasty, even for those who weren't mucking around in the dirt with a hoe that was a family heirloom. Though having your prize destrier to trample under said grubby peasant's turnips before laughing all the way back to the castle has it's advantages.

Still, I suppose there really isn't a fine line between having fiction reflect cold reality, and jerking your readers around. YMMV.

I have to agree with Kallman, books four and five seem to just be killing time in the main. How many times must we read about Tyrion and his member? Steven King would have covered this in two books tops, written it better and a whole lot faster. I think, forgive me John the OFM, and I say this as a reader anticipating the next book, in 500 years everyone will wonder what all the fuss was (actually probably in 50)

I say this as a reader anticipating the next book, …

To add to his time wasting activities, Martin is stumping the campaign trail for some obscure senator in New Mexico.
HBO will have long left him in the dust.
He has given up, and is willing to let HBO finish it for him. HBO seems to have abandoned the War of the Iron Islands Succession, Arianne Martel, etc. Arcs that Martin should never have even begun.
Unfortunately, they have brought in the Sand Snakes.
Will we be treated to Sam's interminable ocean voyage?

50? I say 20.

I'm impressed with myself…..80%!

I've never seen Game Of Thrones and wouldn't consider myself all that knowledgable about Shakespeare.

It must be my father's influence. He went to school with Shakespeare, although he was a couple of years behind……

90% and have never read or neither am I interested in the books.

100% but my wife costumes for a theater company which just completed the entire Shakespeare canon (including Edward III just to be sure).

The articles author makes a good point about the parralels between the two works (people find Shakespeare boring as well). Both authors will keep character actors employed for many years to come.

(And thank goodness Stephen King did not write Ice and Fire – no thanks to word processor books. To be fair King is a great admirer of Ice and Fire and has specifically written as to why its better than the TV adaptation.)

TomT

70% and I won't have a word said against Game of Boobies!

In 500 years, Game of thrones will be known as a 500 year old fantasy series pf books. It will only be known to dissertation writers.

That's about when they will have perfected human cloning so they can bring back George RR and have him finish the series.

100% – A hit, a very palpable hit!

Ron

My other issue is just about any character you do come to care about ends up killed and the entire premise seems to be that being bad and ruthless is the only way to be successful and survive.

Still, I suppose there really isn't a fine line between having fiction reflect cold reality, and jerking your readers around. YMMV.

I have some big problems with this aspect of the story (Martin's).

Aristotle or some other dead smart guy said of drama that our Protagonist must be a generally admirable sort, but possessed of a tragic flaw. If he were simply a villain, any bad thing he gets in the end would be his just deserts. On the other hand, if he is a paragon of nobility, the evils visited upon him are a terrible miscarriage of justice. It is only when his character is generally sound, but manifestly imperfect, that his inexorable march into the jaws of Fate seems appropriate, inspiring fear and pity.

All that stuff is why I hate disaster movies, but simply adore a well-told tragedy.

Ron

90%. Forgot the premise of Othello for a minute.

I'm inclined to both agree that GoT would be a good inroad to Shakespeare for the average illiterate teenage, phone-addicted media junkie and to want to throw up at the idea of comparing Martin to Shakespeare.

Axabrax:

You clearly have not read enough Shakespeare then.

Both authors are wordy and like to toss curve balls, like as a major plot point randomly stabbing a curtain which just happen to kill off a major character…

But both have a pretty good handle on human nature and the mixed bag of nobility, self delusion, rationalization and plan meaness that bubles around in all of us.

TomT

All the criticism of GoT/ASoIaF in this thread seems to boil down to two points:

1. "This story is too long!", and
2. "This story is not predictable enough!"

The good news is, pretty much all other fantasy novels on the market are shorter and more predictable than this one, so you guys are spoilt for choice.

You just need to admit to yourself that ASoIaF is not your cup of tea, drop it, and pick up some other novel or series of novels. That would surely be a much better use of your time than complaining about a series that you don't enjoy anymore?

For me its not that GoT is too long, its that its pretty obvious that books 4 and 5 are basically killing time. In a great series the books should individually stand on their own, apart from the rest of the series. While its nice to know who D'Artangan and Athos and Porthos and Aramis are and how they came to be comrades it's not vital to enjoying "Twenty Years After". You can enjoy "The Far Side of the World" even if you haven't read "Master and Commander". But I think that if "A Dance with Dragons" had been the first book there would be no HBO series or cottage GoT industry. Its a poorly written book, we're on a trip to nowhere. It's almost as though Martin is afraid to finish this series.

But the reality of course is that he doesn't have to. "The Three Musketeers" was originally going to be one book, the Hornblower series was going to be three. The thing is that most GoT fans want more, not less. But the majority seem to want these plot lines moved forward, they want to see a resolution to the Iron Throne and Winterfell.

Actually, books 4 and 5 are fine books. That they are somehow worse than the first three is just an oft-repeated internet myth. The disgruntled readers who don't like the latest two books also usually find the series as a whole too long and too unpredictable. See my above post.

In a great series the books should individually stand on their own, apart from the rest of the series.

Sorry, but that's a rule you just made up. Some series consist of stand-alone novels that just share the same protagonists, and some series are one continuous long story. To say that one is "great" and the other isn't is nonsense.

As it happens, "Feast/Dance" (books 4 and 5 combined, since they happen simultaneously) is more self-contained than any of the first three novels, certainly more so than books 2 and 3.

But I think that if "A Dance with Dragons" had been the first book there would be no HBO series or cottage GoT industry.

Well, obviously it's the middle part in an epic story. You need the first part to understand what's going on. Duh.

Actually, books 4 and 5 are fine books. That they are somehow worse than the first three is just an oft-repeated internet myth.

It's a lot easier to dismiss opinion with opinion than facts with facts. in a strange sense books 4 and 5 are signs of a lazy writer and undisciplined writer. He can't be bothered to bring things to a conclusion. So he wanders off on tangents like the Iron Islands that few care a flip about. These are the chapters I skip on re-reading that I had to suffer through in first read.
Who is the French essayist who apologized for writing a long letter, because he did not have the time to write a short one ? Martin should have taken that lesson. Now he is paying that price, with the power of HBO added to whining fans. I can see him publishing Book 6 just before Season 5 starts and then abandoning the story to HBO to finish.

Its a rule I made up? Ever study literature? You can enjoy Henry Vth without seeing HenryIVth, or The Man in The Iron Mask without having read The Three Musketeers. Good books stand on their own , its not a "rule that I made up". And books four and five just aren't very good, I realize that hurts you as a fan but most critics and many readers will agree with me. They take the story off on tangents, introduce all sorts of new characters that don't seem to advance the story. They certainly don't match up to the first three. Suddenly everyone is off to serve/marry Dany? "And I know she'll marry me because…." when there is little or no prior connection? Oh and by the way she's not the last Targaryen, but she is the fulfillment of a prophesy. Suddenly it's a fantasy version of "It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World. The Three Headed Dragon, the Three Betrayals, I imagine that when these guys reach Mereen they'll hit a gorge where an old man will say "Answer me these questions three ere the other side you see."