Sign in with Facebook
Shannon's Reviews > A Feast for Crows
A Feast for Crows (A Song of Ice and Fire, #4)
by
by
Shannon's review
bookshelves: fantasy-scifi, owned, books-reviewed, the-sweeping-epic, reviews-that-need-pics-added
Nov 17, 2011
bookshelves: fantasy-scifi, owned, books-reviewed, the-sweeping-epic, reviews-that-need-pics-added
Whew, this is a tough book to review simply because it doesn't follow on the expectations of the readers after A STORM OF SWORDS.
Now some people are already saying that the book is horrible and a great letdown and others go to the other extreme and hold faithfully that it's just as good as the previous books.
I don't feel either take is fair or accurate.
To be fair, yes, the book doesn't move like the previous books, especially a STORM OF SWORDS. There are simply not the same level of WHAM BAM big moments nor shocking realizations (i.e. who killed Jon Arryn?). Additionally, some of the favorite characters of readers, like Jon, Dany and Tyrion, are not in this novel. Lastly, there are two new main POVs so we need to adjust to those. BTW, since other readers are spoiling the mystery POVs, did most of you notice that Brienne is apparently a descendant of Dunk from THE HEDGE KNIGHT. Pretty kewl. :)
Getting back to the debate, remember that:
(1) This is only half of a mega-sized book. GRRM is putting out only half of it and the other half is going to be in the next book. So, in essence, for those complaining he's taking too long, this is like four books as the average novel is 400 pages. Additionally, remember the guy has been writing for something like 30 + years and he's finally getting national acclaim. He has been asked to write scripts to some of his old novels, there's a game based on his series that he looked over, he's also gone over the HEDGE KNIGHT comic strip, he's written two novelettes on the hedge knight, hes been asked to attend dozens upon dozens of readings at various book/convention events (and, most recently, the prestigious one in D.C. where he was asked to give a long speech), he tends to answer the emails he gets from everyone which is in the thousands, he taught at the Odyssey program for about six weeks back east, etc. Most of these in the last two years.
So, bully for him as he's getting more acknowledgements but keep in mind the guy has said he can't write except back in New Mexico. Things are going to go slower; and
(2) While several of the POVs don't have resolutions, also keep in mind that they may show up in the next book with all those WHAM BAM moments everyone is seeking. Additionally, it probably isn't fair to view this as a stand alone simply because book four and five are like one book. The reason he broke it up, per his webpage at [...], is that his publishers demanded he get it out. For all we know, book four may be the midpoint of the story and book five is going to have a lot of climaxes.
AFFC is really a come down from several climaxes. As the dust settles, lots of information is shared. There's a great deal of focus on characters. Lots and lots of characters, even if fleeting. As a result, not as much seems to happen. To some, this might be seen as meanderings, and, well, yes, some of it probably is. lol For those who want to know more about the world, here's your chance. Just don't expect it to be like ASOS.
I remember several complaints by earlier reviewers of previous books that there wasn't enough about context and almost nothing about the religion of the times. People complained that one would think the religion would have a greater impact and political power base than shown in the last three books. Well, you get it in this book. Big time.
Another thing to keep in mind: there are probably about 35-50% more character POVs simply because there are several small focuses on various characters all over the globe. We get a lot of focus on Dorne and the Iron Isles as well as King's Landing. There are sprinklings in other areas, too, like Oldtown and where Brienne travels (i.e. don't want to spoil it so I won't say where).
As result, these characters slows the story down from having big moments because there's more to tell.
While I get this is probably the least popular book of the four, assuming we were to take a tally, I still feel GRRM is the best living fantasy author out there if you want tales that don't overuse archetypes and have complex characters and plots.
I challenge anyone to email me to suggest a better author.
On that note, for people who haven't read the previous books, here's why GRRM is a superb writer from my previous review on ASOS:
First off, I'm a heavy duty fan of GRRM. I've read over a 100 different fantasy authors in my time. Took about 5 years off from the genre b/c I felt it was all getting too formulaic and cliched. Typical archetype character who turns out to be the missing heir or boy wonder who saves the world against the Dark Lord.
So, when I came back to fantasy at the end of 1999, I read the usual: Goodkind, Jordan, etc. and then someone told me about GRRM and man, that was the kicker!
Here are the reasons to choose GRRM. I've also listed the reasons not to choose him to make it fair b/c I know their are certain personalities who won't like this series:
WHY TO READ GRRM
(1) YOU ARE TIRED OF FORMULAIC FANTASY: good lad beats the dark lord against impossible odds; boy is the epitome of good; he and all his friends never die even though they go through great dangers . . . the good and noble king; the beautiful princess who falls in love with the commoner boy even though their stations are drastically different . . . the dark lord is very evil and almost one sided at times . . . you get the idea. After reading this over and over, it gets old.
(2) YOU ARE TIRED OF ALL THE HEROES STAYING ALIVE EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE UNDER CONSTANT DANGER: this gets even worse where the author kills a main hero off but that person comes back later in the story. Or, a hero does die but magic brings him back.
This sometimes carries to minor characters where even they may not die, but most fantasy authors like to kill them off to show that some risked the adventure and perished.
(3) YOU ARE A MEDIEVAL HISTORY BUFF: this story was influenced by the WARS OF THE ROSES and THE HUNDRED YEARS WAR.
(4) YOU LOVE SERIOUS INTRIGUE WITHOUT STUPID OPPONENTS: lots of layering; lots of intrigue; lots of clever players in the game of thrones. Unlike other fantasy novels, one side, usually the villain, is stupid or not too bright.
(5) YOU ARE INTERESTED IN BIASED OPINIONS AND DIFFERENT TRUTHS: GRRM has set this up where each chapter has the title of one character and the whole chapter is through their viewpoint. Interesting tidbit is that you get their perception of events or truths. But, if you pay attention, someone else will mention a different angle of truth in the story that we rarely see in other novels. Lastly and most importantly, GRRM doesn't try to tell us which person is right in their perception. He purposefully leaves it vague so that we are kept guessing.
(6) LEGENDS: some of the most interesting characters are those who are long gone or dead. We never get the entire story but only bits and pieces; something that other fantasy authors could learn from to heighten suspense. Additionally, b/c the points of views are not congruent, we sometimes get different opinions.
(7) WORDPLAY: if you're big on metaphors and description, GRRM is your guy. Almost flawless flow.
(8) LOTS OF CONFLICT: all types, too; not just fighting but between characters through threats and intrigue.
(9) MULTILAYERED PLOTTING; SUB PLOTS GALORE: each character has their own separate storyline; especially as the story continues and everyone gets scattered. This is one of the reasons why each novel is between 700-900 pages.
(10) SUPERLATIVE VARIED CHARACTERS: not the typical archetypes that we are used to in most fantasy; some are gritty; few are totally evil or good; GRRM does a great job of changing our opinions of characters as the series progress. This is especially true of Jaime in book three.
(11) REALISTIC MEDIEVAL DIALOGUE: not to the point that we can't understand it but well done.
(12) HEAPS OF SYMBOLISM AND PROPHECY: if you're big on that.
(13) EXCELLENT MYSTERIES: very hard to figure out the culprits; GRRM must have read a lot of mystery novels.
(14) RICHLY TEXTURED FEMALE CHARACTERS: best male fantasy author on female characters I have read; realistic on how women think, too.
(15) LOW MAGIC WORLD: magic is low key; not over the top so heroes can't get out of jams with it.
REASON TO NOT READ GRRM
(1) YOU LIKE YOUR MAIN CHARACTERS: GRRM does a good job of creating more likeable characters after a few die. But, if that isn't your style, you shouldn't be reading it. He kills off several, not just one, so be warned.
(2) DO NOT CARE FOR GRITTY GRAY CHARACTERS: if you like more white and gray characters, this may unsettle you. I suggest Feist or Goodkind or Dragonlance if you want a more straight forward story with strong archetypes.
(3) MULTIPLE POINTS OF VIEWS TURN YOU OFF: if you prefer that the POVS only go to a few characters, this might be confusing for you.
(4) SWEARING, SEX: there's a lot of it in this book just as there is in real life. If you have delicate ears, this book may upset you.
(5) YOU DEMAND CLOSURE AT THE END OF EVERY BOOK: this isn't the case for all stories in the series. Some are still going on; some have been resolved; others have been created and are moving on.
(6) IF YOU WANT A TARGET OR SOMEONE TO BLAME: this can be done to some extent but not as much. This is b/c he doesn't try to make anyone necessarily good or evil.
(7) ARCHETYPES: some readers like archetypal characters because it's comfortable; we like the good young hero (sort of like Pug in Feist's THE RIFTWAR SAGA); it's familiar and we sometimes like to pretend we're this upcoming, great hero. You wont' get much of this in GRRM with the exception of one or two characters. There really aren't any super heroes compared to all the other characters as it's more grittier and no one is shooting fireballs every millisecond or carrying around some super powerful sword.
(8) LENGTH: you don't want to get into a long fantasy epic series. In that case, look for shorter works as this is biiiiiig.
(9) PATRIARCHY: men are most of the main characters with lots of power (one female exception). While this is realistic of the medieval era, some readers may not prefer this if they want more girl power, so to speak.
By the way, if you don't want to commit to a big book until you know the author better, check out his short story, THE HEDGE KNIGHT, in LEGENDS.
Now some people are already saying that the book is horrible and a great letdown and others go to the other extreme and hold faithfully that it's just as good as the previous books.
I don't feel either take is fair or accurate.
To be fair, yes, the book doesn't move like the previous books, especially a STORM OF SWORDS. There are simply not the same level of WHAM BAM big moments nor shocking realizations (i.e. who killed Jon Arryn?). Additionally, some of the favorite characters of readers, like Jon, Dany and Tyrion, are not in this novel. Lastly, there are two new main POVs so we need to adjust to those. BTW, since other readers are spoiling the mystery POVs, did most of you notice that Brienne is apparently a descendant of Dunk from THE HEDGE KNIGHT. Pretty kewl. :)
Getting back to the debate, remember that:
(1) This is only half of a mega-sized book. GRRM is putting out only half of it and the other half is going to be in the next book. So, in essence, for those complaining he's taking too long, this is like four books as the average novel is 400 pages. Additionally, remember the guy has been writing for something like 30 + years and he's finally getting national acclaim. He has been asked to write scripts to some of his old novels, there's a game based on his series that he looked over, he's also gone over the HEDGE KNIGHT comic strip, he's written two novelettes on the hedge knight, hes been asked to attend dozens upon dozens of readings at various book/convention events (and, most recently, the prestigious one in D.C. where he was asked to give a long speech), he tends to answer the emails he gets from everyone which is in the thousands, he taught at the Odyssey program for about six weeks back east, etc. Most of these in the last two years.
So, bully for him as he's getting more acknowledgements but keep in mind the guy has said he can't write except back in New Mexico. Things are going to go slower; and
(2) While several of the POVs don't have resolutions, also keep in mind that they may show up in the next book with all those WHAM BAM moments everyone is seeking. Additionally, it probably isn't fair to view this as a stand alone simply because book four and five are like one book. The reason he broke it up, per his webpage at [...], is that his publishers demanded he get it out. For all we know, book four may be the midpoint of the story and book five is going to have a lot of climaxes.
AFFC is really a come down from several climaxes. As the dust settles, lots of information is shared. There's a great deal of focus on characters. Lots and lots of characters, even if fleeting. As a result, not as much seems to happen. To some, this might be seen as meanderings, and, well, yes, some of it probably is. lol For those who want to know more about the world, here's your chance. Just don't expect it to be like ASOS.
I remember several complaints by earlier reviewers of previous books that there wasn't enough about context and almost nothing about the religion of the times. People complained that one would think the religion would have a greater impact and political power base than shown in the last three books. Well, you get it in this book. Big time.
Another thing to keep in mind: there are probably about 35-50% more character POVs simply because there are several small focuses on various characters all over the globe. We get a lot of focus on Dorne and the Iron Isles as well as King's Landing. There are sprinklings in other areas, too, like Oldtown and where Brienne travels (i.e. don't want to spoil it so I won't say where).
As result, these characters slows the story down from having big moments because there's more to tell.
While I get this is probably the least popular book of the four, assuming we were to take a tally, I still feel GRRM is the best living fantasy author out there if you want tales that don't overuse archetypes and have complex characters and plots.
I challenge anyone to email me to suggest a better author.
On that note, for people who haven't read the previous books, here's why GRRM is a superb writer from my previous review on ASOS:
First off, I'm a heavy duty fan of GRRM. I've read over a 100 different fantasy authors in my time. Took about 5 years off from the genre b/c I felt it was all getting too formulaic and cliched. Typical archetype character who turns out to be the missing heir or boy wonder who saves the world against the Dark Lord.
So, when I came back to fantasy at the end of 1999, I read the usual: Goodkind, Jordan, etc. and then someone told me about GRRM and man, that was the kicker!
Here are the reasons to choose GRRM. I've also listed the reasons not to choose him to make it fair b/c I know their are certain personalities who won't like this series:
WHY TO READ GRRM
(1) YOU ARE TIRED OF FORMULAIC FANTASY: good lad beats the dark lord against impossible odds; boy is the epitome of good; he and all his friends never die even though they go through great dangers . . . the good and noble king; the beautiful princess who falls in love with the commoner boy even though their stations are drastically different . . . the dark lord is very evil and almost one sided at times . . . you get the idea. After reading this over and over, it gets old.
(2) YOU ARE TIRED OF ALL THE HEROES STAYING ALIVE EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE UNDER CONSTANT DANGER: this gets even worse where the author kills a main hero off but that person comes back later in the story. Or, a hero does die but magic brings him back.
This sometimes carries to minor characters where even they may not die, but most fantasy authors like to kill them off to show that some risked the adventure and perished.
(3) YOU ARE A MEDIEVAL HISTORY BUFF: this story was influenced by the WARS OF THE ROSES and THE HUNDRED YEARS WAR.
(4) YOU LOVE SERIOUS INTRIGUE WITHOUT STUPID OPPONENTS: lots of layering; lots of intrigue; lots of clever players in the game of thrones. Unlike other fantasy novels, one side, usually the villain, is stupid or not too bright.
(5) YOU ARE INTERESTED IN BIASED OPINIONS AND DIFFERENT TRUTHS: GRRM has set this up where each chapter has the title of one character and the whole chapter is through their viewpoint. Interesting tidbit is that you get their perception of events or truths. But, if you pay attention, someone else will mention a different angle of truth in the story that we rarely see in other novels. Lastly and most importantly, GRRM doesn't try to tell us which person is right in their perception. He purposefully leaves it vague so that we are kept guessing.
(6) LEGENDS: some of the most interesting characters are those who are long gone or dead. We never get the entire story but only bits and pieces; something that other fantasy authors could learn from to heighten suspense. Additionally, b/c the points of views are not congruent, we sometimes get different opinions.
(7) WORDPLAY: if you're big on metaphors and description, GRRM is your guy. Almost flawless flow.
(8) LOTS OF CONFLICT: all types, too; not just fighting but between characters through threats and intrigue.
(9) MULTILAYERED PLOTTING; SUB PLOTS GALORE: each character has their own separate storyline; especially as the story continues and everyone gets scattered. This is one of the reasons why each novel is between 700-900 pages.
(10) SUPERLATIVE VARIED CHARACTERS: not the typical archetypes that we are used to in most fantasy; some are gritty; few are totally evil or good; GRRM does a great job of changing our opinions of characters as the series progress. This is especially true of Jaime in book three.
(11) REALISTIC MEDIEVAL DIALOGUE: not to the point that we can't understand it but well done.
(12) HEAPS OF SYMBOLISM AND PROPHECY: if you're big on that.
(13) EXCELLENT MYSTERIES: very hard to figure out the culprits; GRRM must have read a lot of mystery novels.
(14) RICHLY TEXTURED FEMALE CHARACTERS: best male fantasy author on female characters I have read; realistic on how women think, too.
(15) LOW MAGIC WORLD: magic is low key; not over the top so heroes can't get out of jams with it.
REASON TO NOT READ GRRM
(1) YOU LIKE YOUR MAIN CHARACTERS: GRRM does a good job of creating more likeable characters after a few die. But, if that isn't your style, you shouldn't be reading it. He kills off several, not just one, so be warned.
(2) DO NOT CARE FOR GRITTY GRAY CHARACTERS: if you like more white and gray characters, this may unsettle you. I suggest Feist or Goodkind or Dragonlance if you want a more straight forward story with strong archetypes.
(3) MULTIPLE POINTS OF VIEWS TURN YOU OFF: if you prefer that the POVS only go to a few characters, this might be confusing for you.
(4) SWEARING, SEX: there's a lot of it in this book just as there is in real life. If you have delicate ears, this book may upset you.
(5) YOU DEMAND CLOSURE AT THE END OF EVERY BOOK: this isn't the case for all stories in the series. Some are still going on; some have been resolved; others have been created and are moving on.
(6) IF YOU WANT A TARGET OR SOMEONE TO BLAME: this can be done to some extent but not as much. This is b/c he doesn't try to make anyone necessarily good or evil.
(7) ARCHETYPES: some readers like archetypal characters because it's comfortable; we like the good young hero (sort of like Pug in Feist's THE RIFTWAR SAGA); it's familiar and we sometimes like to pretend we're this upcoming, great hero. You wont' get much of this in GRRM with the exception of one or two characters. There really aren't any super heroes compared to all the other characters as it's more grittier and no one is shooting fireballs every millisecond or carrying around some super powerful sword.
(8) LENGTH: you don't want to get into a long fantasy epic series. In that case, look for shorter works as this is biiiiiig.
(9) PATRIARCHY: men are most of the main characters with lots of power (one female exception). While this is realistic of the medieval era, some readers may not prefer this if they want more girl power, so to speak.
By the way, if you don't want to commit to a big book until you know the author better, check out his short story, THE HEDGE KNIGHT, in LEGENDS.
Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
A Feast for Crows.
Sign In »
Quotes Shannon Liked
“We were king’s men, knights, and heroes . . . but some knights are dark and full of terror, my lady. War makes monsters of us all.â€�
“Are you saying you are monsters?�
“I am saying we are human. You are not the only one with wounds, Lady Brienne”
― A Feast for Crows
“Are you saying you are monsters?�
“I am saying we are human. You are not the only one with wounds, Lady Brienne”
― A Feast for Crows
“My old grandmother always used to say, Summer friends will melt away like summer snows, but winter friends are friends forever.”
― A Feast for Crows
― A Feast for Crows
Reading Progress
Started Reading
January 1, 2005
–
Finished Reading
November 17, 2011
– Shelved
November 9, 2012
– Shelved as:
fantasy-scifi
November 9, 2012
– Shelved as:
owned
January 27, 2013
– Shelved as:
books-reviewed
April 24, 2013
– Shelved as:
the-sweeping-epic
April 24, 2014
– Shelved as:
reviews-that-need-pics-added
Comments Showing 1-50 of 52 (52 new)
That's the theory. I suppose the question is how many "giant spawn" are out there.
Fixed a few typos after somebody new liked it recently.
Good review for a book that does get overshadowed by the other books in the series. I do disagree a bit with the following - but, of course, that's just my subjective feelings. "(14) RICHLY TEXTURED FEMALE CHARACTERS: best male author on female characters I have read; realistic on how women think, too."
Thanks. Hmmm, I should change that to fantasy author on female character rather than all of the authors I have read.
Well I completely agree with the point on deep female characters.I've read several persons saying this series was misogynistic and this baffles me.
These books have very strong women, all different in their strength, whatever is their age, social condition...
Indeed I would recommend ASOFAI for those who like strong female characters.
I agree with your other points, I especially love the legends and stories sprawling on several generations, but all done like a puzzle, you learn a bit here a bit there, so that it's never boring.
The multilayered intrigues and deep, evolving characters are also some of my favourite things in the series.
Concerning this 4th book in particular, I also think it doesn't deserve all the hate it got from some people ^_^
It is slower than Book 3, but Book 3 was exceptionally intense. I felt like we were back to the quiet style of Book 1.
Can't wait to start Book 5!! :)
I'd probably give book four a B to B plus and the same for book five though I almost gave it a B plus. We'll see when I do the review.
So you were not bothered that you got to see the perspective of a character that brings nothing to the story and dies the next time we read of him? You had no problem with the long long chapters of nothingness which would all inevitably end with the only things actually worth reading? Nothing would have been lost with this book cut down to 200 pages instead of 600. Martin should take "kill your darlings" more seriously, and with darlings I don't mean characters, but actually useless words and sentences.
I disagree with your leading questions.Strongly.
Maria: because you think the book could have been cut down to 200p doesn't mean it's a fact. I don't share your opinion. I completely disagree with your "nothing would have been lost". Besides, for someone who presents her own subjective opinion as something objective, you don't even back up your claim (like which parts/chapters would you have cut down)...
True, Tatiana.As alluded to in my review book four doesn't "move" as fast as the first three but then four and five are more focused on the world and character development so if you just want to see battles and the like you should have stopped after book three.
Note that book four was a bestseller so I doubt the people paying GRRM or going to try and tell him to write differently.
I agree with both Tatiana and Shannon:))
(Don't know if I still have to announce this, but there will be spoilers in this message!)Obviously it's not all about the battles and action. I do understand the necessity of creating a context, atmosphere and other things as long as this is done in a way that makes sense. Introducing characters for character's sake, introducing perspectives of people I don't care about, prevents me from actually sinking into the story, immersing into the world.
Martin is extremely repetitive with the information he provides in this book. How many times do we have to read that Crow's Eye cheatead with Victarion's wife? I think it's mentione 3 or 4 times. I would understand it if each time we would get more information about what happened, but we don't. All we know is Victarion killed his wife and Balon sent his brother in exile. Then, the meeting in the inn of the Greyjoys before the election, is completly useless from the narrative point of view, because all the arguments that we hear then, we will also hear during the kingsnot (and some of them we have already heard during Asha's conversation with the Reader). So again, 3 times the same thing. Same characters, same words, hardly anything new added.
Ok, I get that a dozen characters need to be introduced so that we don't stick only with the Starks and Lannisters as it's not just their war anymore. But then why does Martin, who knows for a fact people want to read about Jon, Tyrion, Dany (he says so in the end of the book), deliberatly prevents us from attaching to any new character, by constantly shifting the point of view. Do we really need 3 perspectives for the Greyjoy reunion? Ok, maybe Asha's and the Profet's. By why Vicatarion's? What does he have to tell me as a character? Why is he so special? He only stops me to connect more strongly with Asha.
The same goes for Arys Oackheart. Couldn't the fact that he was sleeping with Arrianne be presented in her chapter? Because I've already read everything about the moral dilemmas about duty and love in the Jon Snow chapters. Or in the Jamie chapters. I personally don't need yet another character - a mix of the two, saying again the same things. And apparently Martin also didn't need him that much, since he actually killed him.
Cersei's chapters are again very repetitive. How many times do we have to read about Margaery's hens and Maggy's prophecies? Ok, she is obsessed with the prophecy so it keeps coming back to her mind. A repetitive word I would imagine, a sentence, a phrase at best, not the whole moment over and over and over again. What is the point of this? What does one gain as a reader? Boredome! as far as I was concerned.
Arya's chapters are probably the best mix of description, action and context. Yes, they have a slower pace justified by the fact that she is not running anymore and she is discovering this new place, so it all made sense. But even there, we always have the same type of thoughts. As if nothing that is happening to Arya anymore could get her beyond swift as a deer, quick as a shadow mode. Why doesn't she have dilemmas when she is meeting the men of the Night Watch. Yes, she made a promise to forget her past, but here are these people right in front of her, and they might, just might know something about Jon. And she doesn't have for a second the impulse to run to them and ask? In a book that is considerably lacking in action, wouldn't it have been interesting for us readers to explore these conflicts more in depth? Isn't that one of the points of slowing down the pace? To give more nuances to characters, to let them develop better?
Which characters are developing in this book? Only Arienne and Sam! Cersei is, if possible, even with less substance than in the previous books, being portrayed as a maniac. Jamie also doesn't change too much from book 3. Brienne stays the same. Arya only gains more knowledge herself, but we see her in the exact same way.
I am sorry, but just because I am curios to see what will finally happen with these people and will continue reading the other books of the series, doesn't necessarily mean George Martin is a good writer, nor that he did a good job with this book. He had a very good idea and an awesome beginning, but he is simply not able to continue at the level that he started with.
And because you didn't like all those things does NOT necessarily mean either that Martin isn't writing well enough or isn't at the level. I for one (and I'm not alone) disagree with that.
I get the frustration of not seeing this or that character, the drastic change of rhythm that can upset some people (though we're actually back to the rhythm of Book 1, it's not as if this was anything new), etc...
I get why some people disliked this book or liked it much less than the previous ones, but I don't get people like you thinking it means the writer f*cked up.
You mention characters you "don't care about". Well that is your opinion, your problem, not Martin's. I wasn't bothered by the "stand alone" chapters. I won't go back on everything you said. Obviously we didn't perceive things the same way.
I'm simply baffled that anyone would argue Martin isn't a good writer. He just didn't write what you were waiting for and made choices you didn't appreciate.
And if he's soooo bad why are you planning to read the next book, Maria?
I would agree with a few things Maria is saying.The first three books of the series had a lot more happening with big "ahas!" or "WTF!" moments. This is why some of the perplexing hate babies on the Amazon reviews and comments say nothing is happening even though they need to work on how they string words.
Book four and five are more lyrical. Some of the writing is arguably the most beautiful in the series though less takes place and it turns inward more with introspection. Some readers were disappointed that Tyrion didn't do more in book 5, for instance, but what did you expect? Our favorite dwarf hit rock bottom.
Shannon and Tatiana, let's make some things clear. I did not read about 2000 pages of a series, just to trash its author on Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ. I have better things to do with my time. I am not ill intentioned towards Martin by default. I have rated his first and third (though arguably only for its second half) books of the series with 4 stars, while the second got 3 (which is probably the same rating the fifth will get as well when I will finish it). He clearly has some story-telling talent, he can clearly engage an audience up to some point, he has some qualities which I will not underestimate. The fact that he makes me curious is such a quality, and Shannon you should not take that likely as more acclaimed authors have failed to do so with me.Shannon, you say that book and five are more lyrical. First of all I would not put book 4 and 5 together. I am not done with book 5 yet, and though the beginning chapters are once again frustrating (even when written from Tyrion's pov), the book clearly has better writing style than its predecessor (I even manged to enjoy an entire chapter from beginning to end). Then, when you mention lyrical, I think emotions. I think being one with the characters, seeing things as they see them. But I couldn't relate with the characters in book 4, and not because they were doing bad things, but because they were too one dimensional. Before the 4th book, I used to think that the major quality of this series comes from the fact that there are no real bad and real good characters. You could understand them all. I could relate with Cersei, I understood Catelyn, even Sansa made sense. From my point of view, the only one sided character was Geoffry.
The perspectives that Martin was choosing as narrators, were not just to tell what was happening, but to make the reader see how complex this world is. There were good reasons for all the choices he made for characters - narrators. I might not have liked them all (for instance Theon was kind of hard for me to relate with), but I understood his choices.
Then at 4 all hell broke loose. You're saying it's more lyrical and introspective. I'm saying it's more action based, while there is hardly any action happening. Suddenly the perspectives are not for me to understand, for me to relate with. They are not build up as much, they are just ticking boxes. The descriptions of the feelings of the characters are more superficial, are more one sided. I could relate with Cersei in book 1 to 3, I could not relate with her in 4 because Martin turned her into Geoffrey. There is no mother protecting her kids anymore, we only have an avid frustrated eager-to-rule queen. She was witty in the things she was saying before, in the things she was doing. She was a sort of Tyrion. Not anymore. One could argue that power gets to her head, and that's the whole point. Jamie changes, Tyrion changes, it should only be fair that Cersei changes as well. But the manner in which she changes is all wrong. She literally changes from one page (end of volume 3) to another (beginning of volume 4). And maybe I wouldn't be complaining at all, if this would happen in another book or written by another author. There are a lot of things I've read and enjoyed with one sided characters. But Martin has done a better job in the past. The evolution of all his other characters came gradual. Even if you didn't get their perspectives. Robb has become a man under our own eyes. He didn't transform in one, over night, he grew into it. So Martin is capable of doing better. That's what's so frustrating. That's why I am annoyed so much with this book.
I am not going to reproach Martin the things he was never able to do such as is for instance: making me cry at the death of a character. But I am going to complain about the things that used to be good, and are not there anymore. And once again, it is not the action itself that I am missing, is the involvement as a reader, the connection with these povs.
Tatiana you say that it's not Martin's problem that I don't care about his characters. That would be true, if I would have just started reading the series and discovered I didn't like it, and decided to stop after the first book. The fact that I did like the first books, the fact that I did care about his initial characters, makes it Martin's problem that I no longer do so. Because it's obviously not a problem of tastes, or enjoying a certain type of narrative, but it's a problem of the writing itself. And in my opinion, authors should care if their readers are frustrated or not. I hope you can understand from everything I've written, that I am not talking about silly frustrations such as one character dieing, one going in the wrong place etc.
His name if Joffrey not Geoffrey or Geoffry.
Yes you're right. I probably have other mistakes as well. I apologize for my ignorance in remembering/ double checking names.
This is a great thorough review of AFFC as well as GRRM's writing. I have not typically been a huge fan of the fantasy genre because of its dependence on archetypes and high use of magic. It is the character development and the way the characters have facets (not black and white), as well as a well developed storyline which has drawn me in. You perfectly captured reasons for enjoying the series and reasons to avoid it depending on personal preference. Nice insight!
Maria:As I said in my previous post, I totally get why some people don't like or are bored with this book.
However, when you say Because it's obviously not a problem of tastes, or enjoying a certain type of narrative, but it's a problem of the writing itself I don't agree.
It IS a problem of tastes.
And again, I get why this book is liked less by some readers. I know you're not talking about superficial things like "we didn't see this character". Still, you didn't like the way the book is written and organized etc.
For my part, I am okay with this book (though I like it less than Book 3 for instance). I DON'T THINK there is anything wrong with the writing itself.
You say the problem is the writing in itself and i say it's not. How do you propose to determine who's right? ;-)
I really find it strange that you would insist your opinion is objective and not about tastes.
Does it really make sense to say Martin lost his ability to write well or coherently?
Of course it's a possibility, but the book still gets almost a 4 star rating here in Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ, so despite all the protest, this book still has a high note. Meaning that if you dislike this book, it's not the same for everyone.
Doesn't it make more sense to say Martin gave another pace (but not a bad pace), an approach a bit different (but not a bad approach) to this book, and that some readers, such as you, couldn't get into it (and that's very normal, I'm not saying you should like it)?
P.S: the way Cersei is presented in Book 4 didn't upset me at all. We simply discover that she's not as smart as she thinks she is (as her father tells her in the show) and as she seems to be from the outside...
One could also argue that Jaimie is totally different in Book 3. Once we get in his head, we see him differently (and this even before his hand gets chopped off). We see he's not such a bastard after all, and in Book 4 we see Cersei is maybe not that smart after all.
Yes, you are right Tatiana, even in my wish to be an objective reader I am still being subjective, as such things can't be avoided. So indeed, it's still a matter of tastes. I can agree that some people, like you and Shannon, enjoyed the book ( thus clearly it was not bad for everybody). I just wanted to understand better why, and what you thought about the things that didn't work for me. That's why I posted on the review of somebody who enjoyed the book (and showed some common sense) as opposed to posting on other reviews of people trashing book 4.The Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ rating in this case is and is not relevant. I think a lot of people just rated the entire series rather than giving stars for each book in part. This would explain the high rating. What I can say is that for this particular book there were a lot of unhappy reviews showing in my feed (i don't know exactly if everybody sees the same comments in their own feeds). I read some of the comments,and although they were not universally valid truths, most of them did seem resonable.
Martin even claimed himself he struggled with the book. I just thought it shows. Having read the 5th book as well (which I would have probably rated with 4 stars, had it not been for the very long tedious beginning, reminescent in style with book 4), I can safely say that there is a huge difference for me between book 4 and all the others. It just seems to have a lot of things missing as far as I am concerned.
Even the fact that I can defend choices he made for his characters in the other books, is quite telling. I mean yes, the Jaime we discover is not what we expected from reading book 1. Then again, we only saw Jaime's pov after he was defeated and imprisoned. So it is understandable he is not the same arrogant, self-assured warrior, he was initially. In some ways he has been brought down to Earth, even before his hand was cut.
In a similar way, we also meet Cersei after she goes through a traumatic event for her (or even two). So, it would make sense she would be different. But not in the ways presented in the book. If a warrior defeated becomes more humble, why does a mother robbed of her son become more obsessed with power, more interested in rulling? She says a couple of times that this is her time to enjoy, her time to be queen and she was not planning to give it up any time soon (in fact she is very resentful towards Tomen every time he tells her he is the king). It just doesn't feel right.
I am not claiming I know Martin's characters better than him. But it just felt inconsistent with the ways he was building things in the past (and the ways he built them afterwards). I somehow felt cheated by this book, just I would if in a detective story all the clues would be pointing in one direction and then at the end,the detective reveals a piece of information that he got from an external source which changes everything.
I think a lot of people just rated the entire series rather than giving stars for each book in part. This would explain the high rating. Now why would anyone do that? if they wanted to rate the whole series they could've rated this http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/12.... Why would they choose 4th book of all books to rate the entire series?
If a warrior defeated becomes more humble, why does a mother robbed of her son become more obsessed with power, more interested in rulling?
So because Jaime became 'more humble' does Cercei have to go through the same changes? We all are different, you know. Two people can have a completely different reaction to the exact same situation.
Nermin wrote: " I think a lot of people just rated the entire series rather than giving stars for each book in part. This would explain the high rating. Now why would anyone do that? if they wanted to rate the ..."
Why would anyone do that? I think because they are fans of something, and when you're a fan you kind of enjoy everything automatically, regardless of the quality differences. Also, because it's not the type of series in which you can also read the books independently one from the other, it's really one story spread on 7 (we hope) books.
It's not the way I do it, but I can understand it.
But we can better ask Tatiana about this, as she gave book 4: 5 stars even though she said she enjoyed it less than other books in the series.
About Jaime and Cersei, obviously I didn't want them to do the same thing. Cersei was not a warrior, hence why would I want her humble?
She was a mother though, one that was priding herself about doing everything to protect her children (isn't that what she told Ned?). I don't necessarily want her to turn into Catelyn, but I would have expected to read in her thoughts more concern about her kids and less excitement about ruling the seven kingdoms. Yes, she sends somebody to bring back her daughter, but there are hardly any other thoughts on this matter. Why doesn't she fear something might happen to Myrcella?
I expected the death of one son would make her overprotective of the others, but she really doesn't seem to to care. Also towards Tommen, she seems almost jealous with him for the fact he will eventually become king.
There is a difference between saying something like: "I have to stop Margaery from influencing my son, because it's my time to rule" and "I have to stop Margaery from influencing my son because I don't want to lose control of him, have him turning into Joffrey and doing stupid things for the kingdom". Both statements ultimately imply she wants to keep the control, but I think the second would have been closer to what we have seen from her until this point.
Similar things happen also in relation to her father's death. There's one thing to say "finally it's my time" and another to say "I am the only child from Twyin Lannister left with the ability to rule, it's my job now to make my father proud / carry on his legacy". Her thoughts could have been presented in such a way as to make her actions more understandable.
Maria, I am a fan of this series but I did rate this book 5 stars because I loved it. do you have proof or something to base on your suggestion that those( 45426 people) who gave this 5 stars rated the series as a whole? I think your problem with this book is that it's not written the way you'd want it to be written. it's like you say "why did Martin write it this way? I wouldn've done that, I wouldn't have included this character, that storyline.i wouldn't act like that if I was cercei" Jesus, it's Martin's story. I trust him to know what he's doing.
I've seen countless parents who think they are doing the best for their children, that doesn't mean they are good parents or what they are doing is necessarily good for their kids. I've always thought Cercei loved her kids until I 'get into' her head. I ended up thinking she is a selfish narcisistic, power hungry bitter and delusional woman obsessed with a prophecy some mage made when she was still a young girl. She probably thought she could control Joffrey and by making Joffrey a king, she could rule the kingdom. Who knows?
I think it's been said more than once that you can't rely on POV characters opinions and descriptions of other characters and events. So you can't compare the book 1,2,3 Cercei to the POV Cercei and say characterization is inconsistent. Because we didn't really know what Cercei was thinking when she was doing the things she'd done.
Given that reviews are subjective I really wish people would stop telling others that their review is wrong. This is a place to share and express our personal thoughts and perspectives of a book. If you don't agree, that's great, move on. If you do agree, like, comment, meet new people with your same interests and tastes in books. If you don't agree with someone's review you can comment too, but disagree respectfully and share where you didn't like something the writer of the review did, but no one has a right to tell anyone else their opinion is wrong about something they liked or didn't like. For crying out loud people, we are adults, not five-year olds, and this is Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ, where in theory well read people chat and discuss books, not myspace or facebook....and sorry StoryTellerShannon for hijacking your thread to say this. A friend of mine commented, so this review happened to come to my attention.
Nermin wrote: "Maria, I am a fan of this series but I did rate this book 5 stars because I loved it. do you have proof or something to base on your suggestion that those( 45426 people) who gave this 5 stars rate..."Out of curiosity, how much did you give the other books from the series? If you gave them all 5 stars, I would like to know if you enjoyed them all equally.
My impressions are based on the comments that I've read. The 5 and 4 star comments for this book, came from people that in general seemed very excited about the whole series. I have yet to read a comment that said that this was a better book than the ones from 1-3. I'm not saying such an opinion doesn't exist, I'm just saying I didn't encounter it.
And yes, you are right, this book is not written the way I'd want it. I would have liked to be entertained, engaged more, moved in some parts (pretty much what had happened in the other 4 books). It just didn't happen with this one for me. The reason for that were the inconsistencies, the repetitions, the one-side-ness of characters...I had problems feeling them.
You are also right in pointing out that we don't know exactly how Cersei thought in the 1-3 books, so my image of her might have been wrong in some points. I have been surprised about other characters as well (both for the better and for the worse), so I'm definitely not saying Martin should meet my expectations at all times. But I think he should still make the characters believable and true to themselves. I mean I can see even Sansa picking up a knife and stabbing somebody to save her own life, but I don't see Sansa doing that in other circumstances (say like Arya). So if we will see that, out of a sudden, in a future pov of Sansa, I'm not just going to say: "well it's George Martin's character so he can do whatever he wants and I just have to be ok with it". Because it would not be consistent with how he described Sansa up to that point.
Kristina wrote: "Given that reviews are subjective I really wish people would stop telling others that their review is wrong. This is a place to share and express our personal thoughts and perspectives of a book. I..."Just to be clear, it was not my intention to tell anybody that their opinion/review is wrong. I just wanted to understand a perspective that was not my own, from a person that I felt might be open for a conversation and debate.
If I have offended/ bothered Shannon in any way, he simply has to say so, and I promise to no longer post on his reviews.
Maria wrote: "Kristina wrote: "Given that reviews are subjective I really wish people would stop telling others that their review is wrong. This is a place to share and express our personal thoughts and perspect..."Noted, and I respect open discussion when people have disagreements of opinion. Your first post gave me more a feeling of hostile argument than discussion though, and judging from other people's responses they seemed to me to have felt an argument coming also. I apologize if you feel I am singling you out, that wasn't my intention. I really meant it as a general complaint to people all over Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ which is why I apologized to StoryTellerShannon for hijacking his review thread.
I'm okay with this off tangent debate. :D
Yeah, this is sometimes a problem with online discussions, as it's slightly more difficult to capture a certain tone. My initial questions might have felt agressive, but I actually meant them as a provocation for talk and debate and in no way as a personal atack to Shannon. Should have probably used some smilies to reinforce that I wasn't there for anybody's head (and this includes Martin as well, as I still want him to finish the story ;))))
Maria wrote: "Yeah, this is sometimes a problem with online discussions, as it's slightly more difficult to capture a certain tone. My initial questions might have felt agressive, but I actually meant them as a ..."Haha, yes, that can be an issue when having any sort on online discussion. I was probably quick to jump to conclusion too, because it is just something I've noticed more and more on this site and it is driving me a little batty. Haha
>_<
But we can better ask Tatiana about this, as she gave book 4: 5 stars even though she said she enjoyed it less than other books in the series I haven't started Book 5 yet, and I gave 5 stars to all of the previous books. Book 3 is my favourite. It's actually one of my all-time favourite books. I would have given it 6 stars if possible :D
I loved Book 1, 2 and 4. I couldn't really say which one more and which one less.
I love the chapters about Bran, and you don't have them in Book 4. You also don't see much of Arya. And there are chapters about Cersei, a woman I can't stand... At first I also thought I was going to be annoyed by new perspectives from the Greyjoys or other people. And I had heard the book was overall boring. So I didn't start having the best feeling about the book. I definitely didn't give it a 5 just because I'm a fan of the series.
I gave it a 5 because I remained engrossed by the story, I enjoyed it, thought it was still very well imagined and written, and contrary to you Maria nothing seemed odd to me.
Especially concerning Cersei. Yes we see she wants to rule, but we also see that she's very scared something would also happen to Tommen now that he is king. Both are not incompatible. We still see that she's concerned for her children. The impression I got through her chapters is that she didn't really want to admit to herself that she wanted power even if it meant stealing it from Tommen, she pretends it is her normal right. Well Tommen is just a child so she's not entirely wrong. But I had this feeling she somewhere knew she was stealing her son's right, that is why she kept thinking things like "it's my time" or "I was made for this", as if to convince herself.
It also seemed to me that she is quite troubled. She pretends she's in control but she knows things are going down (her uncle refusing to be the Hand, Pycelle contradicting her, Margaery influencing Tommen, the new High Septon difficult to handle, etc etc). That's also why she's so obsessed with that prophecy. She is witnessing it becoming true.
I really had no problem at all in her chapters. I actually thought her psychology was very well thought out.
However... I found all characters coherent, but I didn't always understand Arya's choices. Still, I would not describe the character as incoherently written. In life too sometimes you don't get why some people make this or that choice. Arya's personality is evolving (she's a child/teen), so even if her choices sometimes left me a bit perplexed because I'd have imagined something else, I still think it has coherence on a writing level. I'm not sure I'm being clear xD
Concerning Jaime, I think early in Book 3 he's still VERY arrogant, the captivity didn't change him. But we see more depth in his personality, we glimpse that there is more to him than arrogance.
Overall I understand why some readers have issues with the rhythm or the stand alone chapters in Book 4. But I really don't see any incoherences concerning Cersei or any characters.
This seems like a balanced take! I really liked this book and tried to remember its context in the rest of the series. Personally, I lean towards the positive view of this book. And if it is the worst of the four, that means the series is doing pretty well! :)
Tatiana wrote: "P.S: the way Cersei is presented in Book 4 didn't upset me at all. We simply discover that she's not as smart as she thinks she is (as her father tells her in the show) and as she seems to be from the outside..."I was just reading through the replies here after seeing this review pop up in my Updates again and I saw this and I thought 'Yes!' It's because, for me, that was my favourite part of the whole book - finding out who Cersei really is and not who people think she is. It made me maniacally laugh out loud as the truth started to come out!
And that, really, is GRRM's skill - being able to write each perspective so brilliantly that there are quite often surprises when you see it from the other POV.
And that was probably one of the things that won me over most with this book, watching Cersei try to manipulate things without someone there to defend her from the worst and getting it all so wrong...
Part of me did want to pity her, because of the reasons she was doing it and because of the unfair balance of the sexes, but she enjoyed the power and wanted to prove that she was just as much a man as her father. Yet all those manipulative twists just meant that I couldn't.
Anyway, I also liked the insight into the Greyjoys and, eventually, the small insight into the Citadel (although I didn't like the Prologue at first, because you didn't find out what this information was about for so long).
Maria wrote: "Nermin wrote: "Out of curiosity, how much did you give the other books from the series? If you gave them all 5 stars, I would like to know if you enjoyed them all equally. "Sorry that it took me so long to respond to your post. I've given the first four books 5 stars and the 4 star to the last one because aDwD is my least favorite installment in this series. I've enjoyed 1st, 2nd and the fourth books equally, the third one is by far my favorite but Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ has only so many stars to give, right?
Dany not being in this book is one of the main reasons I loved it.
I think TFOC is in itself an achievement of sorts. Any other (lesser?) author would have been tempted to outclass a book like TSOS in the succeeding installment. More twists, more action, more major characters dying; but that would have milked the series dry soon enough. Martin is, I think, brave enough not to let the success of TSOS dictate terms to him. He is telling the story in the way he wants.
I really adore Tyrion, too bad he isnt in here but great review though!
I haven't started reading book 4 as of yet. I wanted to check the reviews to get a prospective from readers and you guys certainly open the flood gates on book 4. I wasn't sure if I was going to start reading it this week but the healthy debate has encourage me to seek my own opinion - Thanks for the motivation to check book 4 off my list...
That's a strange choice to make since a majority favored the book but okay. :)
Shannon, well said! Admittedly, yes, AFFC is a bit of a letdown after the crazy roller-coaster ride that is ASOS, but every good story needs a lull. Like you, I came late to the party - indeed, the series was already in full swing on HBO, and I started reading because I'd seen the last two episodes in Season 1 and had no clue what I was watching. I was most of the way through ASOS when I started watching the series, and am now thoroughly hooked. (And as if that weren't enough, I also play the game on Facebook [Game of Thrones Ascent, which allows you to play a character based loosely on GoT, although it's running more with the HBO series than the books]. But that's how I roll).
Thanks.How is that FB game?
The game's pretty good - like I say, it follows along more with the HBO series than with the books, but since so many were introduced to the books through the series, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Your own character usually gets an amalgam of names culled from the books (my particular game character is one Lord Alaric Halfhand, formerly smallfolk who married nobility and became a noble - one of the threads you can play - and you get to do conquests and wars and so on); it's almost as if you're writing alternate chapters within the framework of the books, but without taking anything away from them, and allowing your character to become interactive with the actual story. I actually quite enjoy the game, but it takes some dedication to stay with it. You do have opportunities to reincarnate as a new character if you're not entirely happy with the character you've created - I started with a different character, chose reincarnation at around level 65, am now at level 178 with my current character.
I just might check it then. Thanks.
excellent breakdown of why to read/not to read GRRM. And although book 4 was a change of pace, I enjoyed the slower pace and greater depth into these characters.
did most of you notice that Brienne is apparently a descendant of Dunk from