A Game of Thrones

This book frustrated me for so many reasons, and it's too difficult to not write a book about why because (unintentionally, I presume) I was made to think far too much about it. This review, sadly, is more of a jumble to keep the length down.

So here's a short list of the things I absolutely disliked:

1. In terms of clarity, switching between names in the narration text (even simple swaps between Ned/Eddard and Dany/Daenerys because nicknames are better used to indicate relationships between people). One of the first moments this caught on was switching between Theon/Greyjoy in the narration (rather than picking one of the two), which made me have to double-check that this was the same person. Also, throwing in nicknames between characters without making it clear to whom they refer (Pimple? Lover?).

2. Euphemisms for genitalia. All of it. Especially 'manhood'. How sexuality is discussed/used. Anything related to sex, honestly, because it's so badly written.

3. Eddard and House Stark as a whole. I have so many frustrations here because of how badly Eddard was handled (conflicting writing and personality, punching bag, etc), how Sansa and Bran were so badly written, how Arya was meant to be incoherent in overhearing something (but was coherent enough to then match with the beginning of Eddard's immediate chapter and Eddard didn't put the two things together) and how Catelyn was used as an observer (for comatose Bran, Lysa, and Robb rather than doing anything (and capturing Tyrion doesn't count).

4. The disconnect between the three arcs with vague and shallow connections between them, making it seem like they should be different series entirely.

5. Unnecessary incest, even if it's "plot relevant."

6. The vague discussion (and lack of commentary) of rape as a plot device or rape as a motivation. Mirri Maz Duur and her "cycle of revenge," in particular.

7. The overburdening of detail for telling the reader about things they don't need to read a dozen times (house sigils, I swear), but not giving necessary details (how Eddard deduces a lot of things without having much insight or narrative hints, how people learned of different events, etc).

8. Making characters who will betray too obvious (Littlefinger/Varys), especially since they can't stop talking about how they're untrustworthy... And then having Eddard trust one of them? Yeah, because he's so insightful?

The parts I liked were seriously under-utilised: The interactions of Sansa and Sandor, Arya and Syrio (which would've been a lot more interesting if it were shown), Eddard's moments of trying to better understand what happened (except he stopped doing this for no reason and started believing people despite his characterisation of 'being smart' or 'being insightful'), Tyrion and Jon, Tyrion and Bran, basically the moments where Tyrion actually had a heart.

I'm not sure what made me pick this up from the library. I don't even know what caused me to even look at the graphic novel section at the library in the first place, because I'm not actually a graphic novel sort of person. Unless you count the occasional Asterix album or similar. I enjoyed it enough to pick up the next volumes as well, and it's fairly quick to get through it. You can tell that it's an abridged version of the story because it's a pretty break-neck pace. Admittedly I never actually completely read it in it's original novel form, although it's been on my shelf for many years. I got stuck about two thirds through and that was probably ten years ago. Might try again soon, though, to get the more detail that the non-abridged work offers and also to try and become a little more familiar with the hundreds of characters and who they are in relation to one another, because I suspect that knowledge would have been helpful. I'm having a little trouble remembering who's who and I find sometimes the characters look much the same, depending on how the angle from which they're shown or other stuff going on in the drawing. This is not, I should say, any fault of the artist who drew it. It's simply me not being used to this format and not being used to this style of drawings. It's not really something you can compare with Asterix at all.

First let me say I know that there are many people who adore this series, and I respect that. For your own peace of mind, and mine, maybe stop reading now. For I did not find A Song of Ice and Fire all that I was lead to expect it to be.

Disclaimer: The following review is highly subjective and contains spoiler

For the first two hundred something pages of "A Game of Thrones", I was thrilled enough to buy the boxed set. If I hadn't, book three, "A Storm of Swords", would have been the last for me, and possibly I wouldn't even have finished it.

So, what was my problem?
Great expectations, so to speak. From what I had heard about this series, it was better than Tolkien and had basically none of the typical stereotypes of the fantasy genre. It was supposedly well-balanced (something that always appeals to me as a pen and paper player), well-written, and flawless... Nope, it isn't.

First of all, I expected a great fantasy epic in the league of the Lord of the Rings, but for quite some time I got a historical fiction series which transplanted the War of Roses and other bits of British history to an imaginary world. The fantastic elements seemed more decorative than a necessity to the plot for quite a lot of the time. Yes, the dragons were said to be important for the overall great plot of Targaryens returning to power – but as far as the books reach now, their maximum use was to set the occasional enemy or shepherd boy on fire and otherwise be kept locked up. And yes, there is the whole Bran plot line. But so far there hasn't been anything useful coming of that, or even any explanation for the rising enemies, white walkers, or Coldhands who seems one of those but actually helps the heroes.
None of the fantastic elements feel as if there is an actual system of magic with rules and regulations behind it all. They seem to be put in place mostly for showy effect. If otherwise, I guess one of the two (said to be) following books will have to focus on that, and nothing more, to make it comprehensive.

The other book, then, will have to deal with wrapping up the stories of characters not accounted for by Bran's or Daenerys' more magical plots. As of “A Dance with Dragons”, they are scattered all across this fictitious world, without much connection and not exactly quick ways of transportation. Arya will take a few years to become the super-assassin she seems intended to be. Sansa is still busy being object of desire/ward of Peter Baelish in that remote valley. The other potential dragon rider, John Snow (who so obviously is the late Ned's nephew by his sister and Daenerys' also late father – gosh, they'll have so much to talk about once they're married as brother and sister should be!), is kind of dead or dying – which, of course, is nothing that ever kept anyone from mucking about in Westeros, is it? And then there is Cersei, and Tommen, and Jaime and Brienne, and, oh yes, Rickon Stark who supposedly also wanders about still somewhere, and the Ironborn, and Theon.
I don't quite see how Mr Martin'll do it in two books without pulling some cheap tricks. And neither does he, it seems, when you look at the publication dates have come and gone...

Then there is this whole topic about female representation (which seemed to me bound up in clichees from the 1950s, such as a lack of brains, self-discipline, and independence – even Brienne of Tarth regularly needs men to save her from her enemies) here, and sexual encounters which so often are strongly initiated (not to say: violently forced) by the men. I'll leave it at that, or else this will turn very long and ranting.
In the same field, somehow, there is the gods. This is so blatantly directed to show that Christian monotheism is the right thing that I wanted to scream at points: Who is the only God here who gets things done? Not the old heathen tree gods, not the newer, more civilized Seven – but the one God of Light. Anybody else reminded of some guy with a typical halo whose followers had a nasty habit of burning people at the stake for a while?

So, to cut a long rant short:
A Game of Thrones was a historical novel with some fantasy stage props, but it wasn't a bad read at all.
A Clash of Kings was my favourite part, with less action, but more general development story-wise.
A Storm of Swords was a bloodbath where I felt that even the author sometimes forgot where he was headed, with all the rolling heads and hacked-off limbs, and so forth.
A Feats for Crows was like reading about people doing everyday housework while a radio in the background lets you know that there are interesting things happening elsewhere – which you don't get to hear about, though.
A Dance with Dragons was not quite as bad, but it definitely had too many characters just moping or being indecisive which lead to an (unnecessary) lack of development in the greater plot line.

Having begun to watch the TV series now, I can see where the adoration in many cases comes from. This adaption is much improved due to strict editing, and if you have the TV characters in mind while reading the books, they might even overlay their shortcomings (of intellect in female characters, for example) in print.

If you haven't read this so far and haven't watched the TV series, but would like to, do not expect as much of it as you will have heard people praise it for. Make allowances for lengthiness and clichees. Then you might be able to enjoy this more than I did.

There's no denying that GRRM is a master worldbuilder- all of the lore behind his world is incredible and echoes in several modern series, video games, and D&D campaigns that I follow. I'm so inspired by his character creations, geography, naming conventions, language, and ability to weave historical events into the plot of his stories.

That being said, I have a huge problem with GRRM. After reading A Game of Thrones , I'm fairly convinced that GRRM had a specific audience in mind while writing this book, and didn't consider how his use of rape and sexual violence as plot advancement would affect his readers. For a world that's so creative, fantastic, and unrealistic, I'm thoroughly disappointed that GRRM would go the lazy writing route of using sexual violence as a plot device. I'm well aware that the historical time period in which A Song of Ice and Fire reflects was chock full of terrible things, but frankly, GRRM has gone overboard.

GRRM doesn't give any of his female rape victims agency. He denies them the ability to tell their own story, except for two women out of the whole series (and they're both villains). He doesn't even give them names.

What does it say about an author who uses women solely as character development for his male characters?

I'm going to continue this series, but I won't hold my breath for anything revolutionary in terms of women's agency in his newest book.

Dear A Song of Ice and Fire - fans,
the following review is merely my opinion, and not intended to slander the series, be it in written or visual form.

I will spare anybody who reads this details about the actual story - because I might just have been one of the last ten people who haven't read or watched more of this than myself.

This said...

What A Game of Thrones is, is a solid and well written start to a fantasy series which often feels more like historical fiction. The central male characters seem to have as much depth and complexity as you could wish for, and the world itself feels well thought out and logical in its limitations and rules. It is quite easy to get into and lost in, and, though sometimes on the brutal side, an entertaining read.

What A Game of Thrones isn't (to me), is the Holy Grail or the Philosopher's Stone of Fantasy fiction, nor the reinvention or redefinition of the genre as such. As often happens, the female characters seem to get less depth and more function in the way of moving the storyline to crucial points by their actions. Sansa and Catelyn Stark have yet to show that they are more than the rather unthinking motivators of the downfall of their own family, and Cersei Lannister-Baratheon needs to prove herself an intelligent king's mother rather than merely a (more or less) cleverly-scheming puppet of her father. Arya so far has failed to be anything but the tomboy, and to contribute to the story at all (which is a pity). Daenerys feels very much based on Kriemhild, from The Lay of the Nibelungs, which might turn out quite interesting or a horrible collection of clichees about warrior queens - lets see if there will be a Hildebrand to slay her when everybody else has perished in her thirst for revenge.

The return of the dragons was a bit on the obvious side of things, though I never thought of them as mammals before which need to be suckled. But then, it makes such a great and slightly disturbing final tableau.

I do intent to read on (in the hope that Mr Martin might finish the series pre-humously), in spite of all my criticism. My fear is that I merely have heard too much praise before reading so that I'll always expect more than the series can possibly offer.

Préambule : cet avis a été écrit il y a plusieurs années, avant l'arrivée de la série TV "Game of Thrones" sur HBO.

A Game of Thrones est le premier volume de la saga « A Song of Ice and Fire » de l'auteur américain George R.R. Martin. Paru en 1996, ce roman a apporté un peu de sang neuf et un souffle nouveau dans le monde de la fantasy. Certains y voient même une véritable révolution, je me contenterais de parler de renouvellement bienvenu et très réussi pour un genre parfois convenu et insipide.

En français, le premier tome A Game of Thrones a été traduit en deux volumes distincts intitulés « Le Trône de Fer » et « Le Donjon Rouge ». J'ai découvert cette saga en français, je crois avoir lu en VF les 5 premiers volumes, qui correspondent aux 2 premiers tomes en VO : A Game of Thrones dont je parle ici et [b:A Clash of Kings|91973|A Clash of Kings (A Song of Ice and Fire, #2)|George R.R. Martin|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1386092380s/91973.jpg|3272005], le deuxième volume de la saga. Depuis, j'ai recommencé ma lecture de la saga en VO et j'ai relu plusieurs fois les 6 tomes parus à ce jour : je connais donc mieux les termes VO qu'en VF, ce sont donc ceux-là que j'utiliserai dans cet avis si je ne me souviens pas de leur traduction dans la version française.

L'action de A Game of Thrones se déroule dans un monde médiéval-fantastique mais la dimension fantastique y est d'abord très discrète, au profit des intrigues entre les différentes factions qui dominent Westeros, le continent au centre du récit. Ici, pas d'elfes, d'orques ni de gobelins, mais des humains qui ne croient plus à la magie depuis la disparition des derniers dragons.

Quinze ans après la rébellion qui a mis fin au règne du roi fou Aerys II et à la domination de la dynastie Targaryen sur les Sept Royaumes, le roi Robert Barathéon fait appel à son ami d'enfance Eddard Stark, Lord de Winterfell dans le Nord, pour l'aider à gouverner son royaume après la mort de Jon Arryn, leur mentor et ancien titulaire de la fonction de Main du Roi (un rôle ingrat que l'on pourrait comparer à celui de Premier Ministre). La mort (naturelle ?) de Jon Arryn et le départ d'Eddard Stark pour King's Landing, la capitale des Sept Royaumes sont le point de départ d'une histoire parfois surprenante et souvent passionnante.

La saga A Song of Ice and Fire a pour particularité de narrer l'histoire à travers le point de vue de différents personnages. Chaque chapitre commence en effet par le nom du personnage qui en sera le narrateur. Dans ce premier roman, on dénombre ainsi le point de vue de 9 personnages qui se partagent 73 chapitres :

- Will, un ranger de la Night's Watch (Garde de Nuit) que l'on suit uniquement dans le prologue, qui paradoxalement est le chapitre qui contient le plus d'éléments de fantasy classique

- Eddard Stark, Lord de Winterfell, chef droit et honorable de la maison Stark qui domine l'ancien Royaume du Nord désormais intégré dans les Sept Royaumes

- Catelyn Stark, née Tully (une autre maison noble de Westeros), épouse aimante d'Eddard Stark, mère attentive de ses cinq enfants légitimes, et soeur aînée de Lysa Arryn, veuve de Jon Arryn

- Sansa Stark, fille d'Eddard et Catelyn Stark, une demoiselle tout juste âgée de treize ans qui rêve d'amour et chevalerie

- Arya Stark, l'autre fille d'Eddard et Catelyn Stark, un véritable garçon manqué, l'exact contraire de sa grande soeur Sansa

- Bran, deuxième des trois fils d'Eddard et Catelyn, un garçon de sept ans qui veut devenir chevalier et rêve d'aventure en escaladant les tours de Winterfell

- Jon Snow, fils illégitime d'Eddard Stark qui a toujours refuser de révéler l'identité de la mère de l'adolescent

- Tyrion Lannister, un nain, frère de la reine Cersei et fils de Lord Tywin Lannister (l'un des hommes les plus puissants du royaume)

- Daenerys Targaryen, seule survivante de la dynastie Targaryen avec son frère aîné Viserys, exilée dans les Cités Libres, loin de Westeros et de la haine du roi Robert Barathéon

L'alternance entre les différents personnages narrateurs présente à la fois des avantages et des inconvénients : certains chapitres sont moins intéressants que d'autres (selon ce qui s'y passe mais aussi de l'intérêt que l'on a pour tel personnage ou tel autre) mais le récit est bien construit et le suspense habilement mené, jusqu'à un final qui révèle son lot de surprises. Le scénario est très riche et les personnages ont une vraie profondeur à laquelle nous ne sommes pas forcément habitués dans les romans de fantasy.

J'ai particulièrement apprécié les intrigues à la cour entre les différentes familles proches du Trône de Fer, il est très facile de se prendre au jeu et de prendre parti pour telle ou telle faction. A ce petit jeu, je dois avouer avoir un petit faible pour la famille Lannister, de brillants intriguants qui sont un peu présentés comme les « méchants » de l'histoire, même si la notion de « gentils » et de « méchants » n'existe pas vraiment dans l'univers de George R.R. Martin : rien n'y est tout blanc ou tout noir, tout y est gris et nuancé. Hormis Tyrion et Daenerys, tous les narrateurs appartiennent au « clan » Stark, ce qui fait de cette famille les principaux protagonistes de ce roman. Dans les romans suivants, d'autres personnages n'appartenant à la maison Stark vont apparaître et nous faire découvrir d'autres points de vue comme le font déjà merveilleusement les excellents chapitres de Tyrion Lannister dans ce premier épisode.

Autre point fort de ce roman et de la série A Song of Ice and Fire : avec George R.R. Martin, aucun personnage n'est immortel, mais je n'en dis pas plus pour ne pas gâcher la surprise de celles et ceux qui voudraient découvrir ce roman après lu cet avis.

A Games of Thrones est un excellent roman, une pièce maîtresse dans la bibliothèque d'un amateur de fantasy. Ce n'est que le premier volume d'une série, encore inachevée à ce jour, qui devrait en compter sept : nombreux sont les fans qui maudissent George R.R. Martin pour l'attente insoutenable entre les tomes successifs. L'intérêt de ce premier volet, outre sa qualité intrinsèque, est évidemment de poser les fondations, solides et prometteuses, pour la suite de la saga. Je l'avais découvert il y a quelques années et j'avais été totalement emballé, le situant au niveau du Seigneur des Anneaux. Je l'ai relu trois ou quatre fois depuis et mon plaisir ne s'est pas émoussé. Si vous aimez la fantasy et que vous cherchez une oeuvre passionnante et riche, je vous conseille vivement de vous jeter sur ce roman qui sort des sentiers battus.

Given the rating that I'm giving this super-popular book, I want to acknowledge that I recognize it as a generally well written book, it simply wasn't for me.

I appreciate the unique take on the idea of what would generally happen to "honorable and heroic" men in the real world. The thing is, I read a lot of history, and so I am very well aware of what happens to "honorable and heroic" men in the real world. I don't need fiction to tell me about it.

I was also greatly disappointed in the fact that the book introduces a great threat to the world in the prologue and then never comes back to it. I really felt a sense of 'bait and switch' with that.

If the author ever finishes the series, I might give it a second chance in spite of everything, but for now I just have to rank it among my bigger disappointments.

That was epic.

I first heard about Game of Thrones from the TV series. I watched Season One, and a little bit of Season Two. To be honest, I really REALLY wanted to like it. But hard as I tried, I couldn't get into it; everything was just so confusing, and there were way too many characters and plot lines to follow. I gave up after the third or fourth episode of Season Two.

Then, people started talking about how much better the book is. I still really REALLY wanted to like it, so I decided to give it a read.

Those people were right. As is typically the case, the book is about a thousand times better than the TV series. There are still lots of characters, and many different plot lines. In fact, there are more sub-plots than there are on TV, but the book goes into so much more detail, that everything just started falling into place. That, and the fact that I'm reading the book at my own pace, and can always page back if I forget who a certain character is, or where he fits into the story.

The characters are all instantly memorable, but fair warning: what you've heard about Mr Martin's propensity to kill your favourites off without warning is absolutely true. It makes the world feel more REAL, though, and it's very period-appropriate. One moment you believe that a character's going to be the saviour of the world, and live on throughout the series, and the next there's a jousting accident and he's dead. Gone. Never to be mentioned again.

My favourite character, like I think most people's favourite is (whether you're reading the book or watching it on TV), is Tyrion Lannister, the Imp. He was cast perfectly in the TV show, but he's portrayed in even more detail in the book. If you'll indulge me, I'll share a quick quote:

"How would you like to die, Tyrion Lannister?"
"Peacefully in bed, with a young whore's mouth around my cock, at the age of eighty."

Something like that. I may have paraphrased.

Other things I noticed, that made the world seem more real, and more appropriate to the period, were the ages of the characters. I think they're mentioned on TV, but it's little more than a gloss-over, if I remember correctly. Jon Snow, for example, is fourteen years old when he goes to spend the rest of his life on The Wall. Dany is thirteen on her wedding night, and her husband is something like twenty-five. I understand that stuff like that would be difficult to portray on screen, because of modern sensitivities to things like the age of consent and statutory rape.

If you've watched Season One of the TV series, you're sure to enjoy the book, because it contains things that I don't remember seeing on TV. If you haven't, you're even surer to enjoy the book.

Oh, one more thing: the book actually ends a little way (probably the third or fourth episode) into Season Two of the TV series. Which happens to be about when I gave up watching, so from here on in, EVERYTHING'S going to be new for me!

So, A Game of Thrones needs no introduction. I had no intention of reading it at first and I only watched the TV version recently, but now I’m caught up with that, I can see myself getting impatient between series. It’s already happening just waiting a week between episodes. I’m much more a TV marathon kinda gal. So a few weeks ago, I bought an ebook of the first instalment. Have you seen the size of it? No way would my weakling wrists have coped with that in paper. Yet there is one thing that paper would have been better for. At the back is an appendix of the main families, which would be perfect to flick to when you start to get confused. But Kindles aren’t designed for flicking. They want you to read from beginning to end in a straight line.

The thing is, there are too many characters. I thought this watching the first episode and it took me ages to remember who was who and who was related to whom and what they had done and why they were where they were. Exhausting, I know. If I had started to read the book without that visual reference, I don’t think I would have made it to the end. I’m pretty sure this is standard for epic fantasy though. And, brace yourselves; this is the first epic fantasy I have ever finished. Yup, never got past the first few pages of Lord of the Rings.

The vast cast of characters is the one the reasons you can get sucked into this world though, and also justifies the sheer length of the story. I do think the whole series is really one story. It’s the story of a nation’s entire politics, a history of sorts, no wonder it needs so many people. But real history has reference points. The back-story seems to be fed through in drips and drabs. The back story is what I want to read these books for! I already know the story of two and a half seasons (I’m guessing each season follows a book?).

The adaptation is pretty faithful to the book. One of the main differences is the age of characters. The Stark children are much, much younger than they are in the show. The reason for this is because HBO didn’t want to remove the sex scenes because they were so crucial to the story. I was expecting, sex all over the place, but it’s really rather tame and skipped over. Not like the show at all. But my mind has already placed the actors into roles, so I couldn’t read them as children; or not as children as young as they were described. I would much rather imagine Kit Harington than some scrawny blonde kid thanks very much.

Fortunately my favourite characters were still my favourite characters in written form. Jon Snow is still kind and loved his moments with Ghost. Tyrion Lannister is just the same. I had forgotten that Daenerys Targaryen started off a bit pathetic so was set out to be disappointed, although she turns kick ass soon enough. Although I think Emilia Clarke’s defiant acting adds so much to her character.

I also made connections that were previously missing. Yes there are two Mormonts and they are related. I wasn’t getting them mixed up. Catelyn’s apathy towards Jon Snow is much clearer. I understand a bit more about the world they live in and the godswoods. I seriously love those trees in the series. Yes, I’m weird. The Hound also came across as a much more sympathetic character, although maybe I just missed the interactions between him and Sansa before.

I can’t really comment on what the book would be like with a fresh mind. Friends who have read it in ignorance say it’s a real page turner. I think once you get into it or if you’re really good with names, it’s going to be a really immersive series. The last few chapters were rather powerful, but I think I need that a bit earlier on in the book for it to be a real winner. I have got the second book and will probably carry on with my strategy of reading a few chapters between other books. Although once I get past series three, I might change my mind.

If you like historical fiction full of shifty political manoeuvring, read it. If you want dragons, dragons and more dragons, you may need more patience than you have to get to them. It's really only slightly fantasy. Which was apparently HBO's big selling point; fantasy for people who don't like fantasy.

I have seen the first two seasons of "Game of Thrones" on TV, so that colored my reading of this book. One thing that is probably bad is that now I can only visualize the main characters with the appearances of the actors who play them. I was surprised by how much I still enjoyed reading the book, even though I knew the major plot points. Having watched the TV show, reading the book became a means of getting background on the characters. There was more time for backstory, and events that took place on the show were fleshed out.

I don't know if I can offer a useful review, because I'm not sure how much I would have liked the book without seeing the show. I do enjoy fantasy novels and stories that include a lot of history. But since I read a variety of books, I'm generally not up on the latest and greatest in the fantasy genre. I know this book has been out for many years, but I didn't know of it until the TV show came about. I suppose the real test for me will be when I read far enough in the series to go beyond the events of the show.