R.R. Martin - Ice & Fire.

Sup /book/. This is my first time here, so I wouldn't know whether or not you can hold a fairly decent discussion in here, or if this board, like almost all other 4chan boards, is just a means of holding a shitstorm. Hell, let's give it a shot.

So I just started reading the first book in R.R. Martin's Ice & Fire series after a ton of people recommended it to me.

I don't know how many pages I've read, as I use an electronic dictionary to read it.

Is it just me, or is the book total shit? Does he really expect us to remember 500 names of people and places that are given such a poor introduction and are often introduced far too fast?

I thought I was about to read a fantasy book, but it seems I am really reading a trivia of how well you can remember useless and uninteresting information. I wonder if there's a question sheet in the back to confirm my suspicions.

...Just, don't read fantasy. It doesn't sound like your cup of tea.

I fucking loved it. I was hooked right from the first chapter when they find the pups and the mother with the antler in her.

As for the useless trivia you refer to, I thought all or most fantasy is like that. You get flooded with information that's supposed to build the world. You get to know the multitude of characters as the story progresses.

Its a good series and its not that hard to remember.

>>2
>>3
>>4
You guys can't be serious. I've read alot of fantasy books, and while it is true that many authors suck beyond belief when it comes to character introduction, I've never seen anything even remotely as bloated as the incredibly bloated first book in the Ice & Fire series.

What the other authors don't completely suck at, though, is re-introducing the characters a couple of times so you don't have to spend all that time finding out who Earogys Smythz by searching for the introduction on some random previous page.

Don't get me wrong, I'm still going to continue reading it despite my doubts, but you have to admit that the character introduction in the book is something that could've been improved, especially the part where he never gives you pointers to who a person is after having introduced him or her once.

Well, you don't have to admit it, but if you don't, you're obviously a fanboy that would've liked the book no matter how shitty it was.

I can see that this would be an issue if you take many breaks or just don't read that often, but for me personally it was rather easy to memorize the character since I usually read like three hours or more in a row when I'm hooked up to a good book.

We don't agree with your opinion so clearly that means we're raging fanboys who are unable to form objective criticisms.

>>7
if you like crap like this book then that is definitely true

>>8
agreed.

>>5
>>2-4

Please optimize how you cite posts!

^{THE NEED FOR W}EED

Marijuana MUST be legalized.

BBCode MAST^ERS smoke _WEED!

GREEE^EEEN

Marijuana _MUST be legal_i^zed.

B^{BCode MAST}ERS smoke WEED!

i, too, was taken aback by the number of characters. but unlike you i noticed that whenever a character's mentioning was important, the context gave you all the clues you needed.

this series is so mindblowingly entertaining, i can't understand how such a minor thing can hold you back from enjoying it.

all in all martin handled his personae very realistically. just as in real life you often hear many names and do not form a picture of them until there is further and repeated interaction.

I've been looking for something new to read as well, and decided to sink back into the pile of shit that is fantasy novels (Only Pratchett has ever written ANYTHING worth reading in this misbegotten genre) and was looking up the series on wiki.

Seriously?  The western lands are named Westeros and the eastern lands are named Essos? Are you shitting me?  Is this indicative of the whole series? I guess that would be my question.

I just hope this doesn't turn into a debacle like that sword of truth horseshit.  What kind of ignorant man child could stomach more than half a book of that before throwing it away in disgust?  Well, other than Randroids of course.

>>14
Only Pratchett has ever written ANYTHING worth reading in this misbegotten genre
C.J. Cherryh, bro.

That's scifi, not fantasy.

Even typical shlock like Star Trek can once in a while get into the philosophical and adheres to, well, some physics of reality.

>>16
Cherryh? She's written plenty of fantasy. I have six books right here.

>>14

nice troll.

I would also like to read more fantasy books but I hear comments of excessive fluff after the first three or four books of any series, so the amount of progression per page would be better spent on some other fantasy medium like games.  If the pages consist of dense but enjoyable material then it's much better.

>>19
I suggest you play more video games.

>>20
UM I THINK HE KNOWS ABOUT FANTASY GAMES HE'S JUST POINTING OUT THAT THESE DUMB FANTASY STORYLINES WOULD BE BETTER AS GAMES??????? DID YOU NOT REALIZE THIS

They're not necessarily better, though they are.

>>18
'snot a troll, it's an honest question, how good can a series be with that sort of naming convention right off the bat?


Unless you mean sword of truth then hahahahahaha

>>23
"Not very" has always been my assumption.

>>23
have you read the books?

if you have, then you should already know how good they are.
if not, then you should trust reviewers more and read them.

who the fuck would judge a book by two names??

>>25
You can't trust reviewers, because you can find someone to give a positive review to anything. All you can trust are your own kneejerk reactions.

>>26
knee-jerk reaction means predictable, automatic

>>27
It means reflexive, without thought.

Come on, you really thought you caught me misusing a word?

>>28
the troll stamp sticks until you answer me why you judge a book by two names?

The next book is finally being released.

when?

>>29
That was the other guy.

>>31
April 01

>>32
my apologies.

This is the only series worth reading in the whole fantasy genre. Yes, it's true. Obviously OP disagrees so he is a raging David Eddings fanboy.

>>35
Actually it's one of the many that aren't, much like Eddings. There are three or so worth reading, though, but I'm not telling you what they are, and I doubt you'll be able to guess.

>>35
Are they really worth reading? I see them at the library often and they give me a bad vibe. Anyway, the Fortress series is worth reading and probably better than Grrm.

whats it with retards and their unfounded criticism of ASOIAF?

damn trolls.

>>38
Who are you to pooh-pooh the feelings I get about books on the shelf? You can judge a book by its cover.

However it looks like I have these on my computer, so maybe I'll read them and see what's up.

>>39
>You can judge a book by its cover.

if you don't mind getting shot down for it, sure.