LoTR and A song of fire and ice?

dr gonzo

I understand that i may be making an unfair comparison here so apologies for that but ive been digging the idea of re-reading LoTR recently after rewatching the films but the thought struck me that i might equally enjoy something new along the same lines. I dont know all that much about fantasy though (despite asking several questions on here before) so the only books that have come to mind that might fit the bill are the a song of fire and ice series. So my questions are simply: Is game of thrones etc like lord of the rings and are they a good read?

I know i probably shouldnt base my book choices on their specific connection to another series altogether but i really do like the idea of reading something lord of the ringsy.

Cheers all.

Denerick

I tried to read George RR Martin's first book in that series and I thought it was pitifully boring and formulaic. Perhaps it is unfair because I gave up after 100 pages... but really.

I love LOTR. Its one of my favourite books. Its a 'new' mythology.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

lotr and asoiaf are nothing alike, they're both fantasy technically but apart from the genre they share next to nothing. Definitely read Game of thrones but don't expect it to remind you of tolkiens work.



also seriously Denerick, 100 pages and you gave up? Don't ever try anything by tad williams so, just about the entire first books of memory, sorrow and thorn and Otherland series do nothing but set the stage for the brilliance that is to follow.

Denerick

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

also seriously Denerick, 100 pages and you gave up? Don't ever try anything by tad williams so, just about the entire first books of memory, sorrow and thorn and Otherland series do nothing but set the stage for the brilliance that is to follow.

I thought the writing was tacky, the characters quickly resembled wooden stereotypes. I liked Wheel of Time when I was younger but what really annoys me about the fantasy genre is the 'farmboy/shepard goes on an epic quest...' cliche. Thought some of David Gemmel's stuff was pretty good too, but no comparison with LOTR, which alone of all fantasy books must rank as true literature, as its prose, its various literary allusions, its internal mythology, outrank any other attempt by any other literary also ran of the genre.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

aye, but a song of ice and fire grows so much as the story goes on. It;s pretty unfair to compare it to the wheel of time, which is the bones/CSI of the fantasy world. A song of ice and fire is more like your sopranos/breaking bad.. .sure it's not perfect, but there's serious depth to the characters and story and it does go places.

although on a side note, I don't think you can really compare other fantasy stories to LOTR. It's more of an old style epic myth/legend than a modern fantasy story. Ignoring the fact that I said that for a minute, the series that reminded me most of lotr was Tad Williams Memory, Sorrow & thorn and until Asoiaf it was the only fantasy series to really blow me away almost like LOTR did.

dr gonzo

thanks for the replies. I figured they would be too different to properly compare but im in the market for a good fantasy series and i was thinking (and still do) that George R. R. Martin is the way to go.

I may give wheel of time a look too since that seems to be another one that comes up very often.

fishtastico

I'm going to recommend The Name of the Wind by Patrick Rothfuss. Amazing stuff

pljudge321

Denerick wrote: »

what really annoys me about the fantasy genre is the 'farmboy/shepard goes on an epic quest...'

Yeah I'm pretty sick of that too, A Song of Ice and Fire completely avoids this though. I wasn't too fond of it on my first read through and didn't really start enjoying it until I was around halfway through the first book and by te time I reached the end I immediately bought the second book and read them all straight through.

It remains my all time favourite fantasy series and I'd highly recommend giving it another shot and reading the first book at least.

To the OP go for it, would probably be better to read the book before the tv show is broadcast.

PeakOutput

i gave up on tlotr after 100 pages but am waiting anxiously for the next book in the george rr martin series (which comes out early summer apparently) not to mention the tv show

the one annoying thing about the series is george may well die before completing it

SuperInfinity

Denerick, you don't have a clue what you're talking about. Martin is an incredible writer, widely accepted by people with many different tastes in literature as one of the best in the world. The fact that you only read 100 pages of a fantasy series thousands of pages long and yet feel qualified to have an opinion on it is enough to show how ridiculous your posts are.

Don't bother coming in again with various cliches like "also rans", you're only digging yourself further into a hole. The fact that you don't consider it "true literature" shows just the amount of respect you have about the fantasy genre. What is "true literature"? It's a meaningless phrase. If it's good then it's good, it's a million times better written than most of the thrillers around... I suppose you wouldn't consider them true literature either, even though they're in fact, ye'know, literature. Also rans? What are you even on about....

trellheim

Name of the Wind is one book when I'd finished was truly awesome. (I've just seen that Book 2 is out a couple of weeks ). goes along familiar rails but oh hell does it do it well.

Or "The Blade Itself" . If you like characters who really are "hard". Serious torture and serious violence. Sand Den Glokta is a wonderful creation, and the "Bloody-Nine" should not be met in a dark alley.

Or the Painted Man stuff , all good readalongs.

Denerick

SuperInfinity wrote: »

Denerick, you don't have a clue what you're talking about. Martin is an incredible writer, widely accepted by people with many different tastes in literature as one of the best in the world. The fact that you only read 100 pages of a fantasy series thousands of pages long and yet feel qualified to have an opinion on it is enough to show how ridiculous your posts are.

Don't bother coming in again with various cliches like "also rans", you're only digging yourself further into a hole. The fact that you don't consider it "true literature" shows just the amount of respect you have about the fantasy genre. What is "true literature"? It's a meaningless phrase. If it's good then it's good, it's a million times better written than most of the thrillers around... I suppose you wouldn't consider them true literature either, even though they're in fact, ye'know, literature. Also rans? What are you even on about....

Don't take it so personally. I have my opinion and you have yours, starting a post with 'you don't know what you're talking about' is not nice...

Paddy Samurai

Denerick wrote: »

I tried to read George RR Martin's first book in that series and I thought it was pitifully boring and formulaic. Perhaps it is unfair because I gave up after 100 pages... but really.

I love LOTR. Its one of my favourite books. Its a 'new' mythology.

I was totally the opposite.I tried 3 or 4 times to read The Fellowships of the Ring ,but could'nt get into it at all.Although I did love the films.My most sucessful attempt was about a third read.
On the other hand , i loved GOT from the start.



Different strokes............

gravityisalie

Paddy Samurai wrote: »

I was totally the opposite.I tried 3 or 4 times to read The Fellowships of the Ring ,but could'nt get into it at all.Although I did love the films.My most sucessful attempt was about a third read.
On the other hand , i loved GOT from the start.



Different strokes............

completely agree , LOTR was a fairly boring read , but am really enjoying GOT , cant wait to see the series but i wanna finish the book first

SuperInfinity

Denerick wrote: »

Don't take it so personally. I have my opinion and you have yours, starting a post with 'you don't know what you're talking about' is not nice...

Neither is coming in and calling something beloved by many "pitifully boring". Let's just drop it.

Denerick

...

dr gonzo

Cheers for the advice guys, bought GoT but cant start it til after the aul exams but really looking forward to it.

Coriolanus

Denerick wrote: »

I thought the writing was tacky, the characters quickly resembled wooden stereotypes. I liked Wheel of Time when I was younger but what really annoys me about the fantasy genre is the 'farmboy/shepard goes on an epic quest...' cliche. Thought some of David Gemmel's stuff was pretty good too, but no comparison with LOTR, which alone of all fantasy books must rank as true literature, as its prose, its various literary allusions, its internal mythology, outrank any other attempt by any other literary also ran of the genre.

I'm utterly confused. You have Gemmel and WoT in your good column and ASoIaF in your bad...

Anyway OP, they're nothing alike. If you liked LotR, check out Lord Dunsany et al.

Denerick

Denerick wrote: »

I tried to read George RR Martin's first book in that series and I thought it was pitifully boring and formulaic. Perhaps it is unfair because I gave up after 100 pages... but really.

I must make a confession. I read the wrong book. I read the third in the series or something like that. That was why I was so wrong. After watching the tv series I started the first novel... And its pretty, pretty, pretty good.

Honey-ec

Denerick wrote: »

I must make a confession. I read the wrong book. I read the third in the series or something like that. That was why I was so wrong. After watching the tv series I started the first novel... And its pretty, pretty, pretty good.

Fair play to you for admitting it.

LotR is one of those books that it's almost blasphemy to admit to not liking. I'd say there's swathes of people out there professing to love it who have either A) not read it, read it but found it incredibly boring, or C) started it, but never finished it. I will happily admit to giving up on it the first time I attempted it. However, after seeing Fellowship of the Ring in the cinema, I tried it again, ripped through it and loved it. It is not, however, an easy read and can definitely be daunting to first-time readers. Tolkien is not a uniformly excellent writer, and would definitely have benefitted from a good editor.

I'm currently on A Feast for Crows, which is book 4 of ASoIaF (although there are two separate books to Book 3, confusingly). The series is comparable to LotR in scope and ambition, but in subject matter, they couldn't be farther apart. ASoIaF is definitely more accessible than LotR, but does this make it "worse" or less worthy in any way? Only if you're a literary snob.

Denerick

I think you are too harsh on Tolkien; behind his writing there is a rich love and admiration for the mythologies of various northern European cultures. In effect he constructed his own mythology, and like all great mythologies he borrowed from others. I still would consider Tolkien one of the great writers of all time if only because of the depth of his writing and the wonderful prose.

pljudge321

Honey-ec wrote: »

I'm currently on A Feast for Crows, which is book 4 of ASoIaF (although there are two separate books to Book 3, confusingly).

It's all in one volume if you get the hardcover. It was split for the softcover version as it was (supposedly) too big, though I suspect the chance of charging twice for one complete book was a factor in the publishers decision.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Denerick wrote: »

I must make a confession. I read the wrong book. I read the third in the series or something like that. That was why I was so wrong. After watching the tv series I started the first novel... And its pretty, pretty, pretty good.

if you are in the market for another epic fantasy series after ASOIAF check out tad williams - otherland. his memory,sorrow and thorn series is fantastic but it is a bit "farm boy goes on an epic quest".

tHE vAGGABOND

Read Fire and Ice books 1 and 2 on my holidays, and reading the 3rd one now. [Kindle, otherwise Ryanair would not let me have any other luggage!!]

Excellent books, I love how they jump between all the key characters all the time, keeps things interesting and moving [but Im sure some people will hate them for that!].

For the record, LoTR would be my favorite book [but oddly I have not read too many other fantasy series at all].

Kinski

Honey-ec wrote: »

LotR is one of those books that it's almost blasphemy to admit to not liking. I'd say there's swathes of people out there professing to love it who have either A) not read it, read it but found it incredibly boring, or C) started it, but never finished it. I will happily admit to giving up on it the first time I attempted it. However, after seeing Fellowship of the Ring in the cinema, I tried it again, ripped through it and loved it. It is not, however, an easy read and can definitely be daunting to first-time readers. Tolkien is not a uniformly excellent writer, and would definitely have benefitted from a good editor.

Lots of people are actually quite open about their poor opinion of Rings. Disliking Tolkien is not some shameful secret!

We did Fellowship for the Junior Cert; it was not a good introduction. Our teacher had a ridiculous accent - notoriously, he pronounced "yeah" as "yaw," and frequently used it as an interjection - and hearing him say "Mordor" tended to deprive that name of the sense of foreboding it was intended to provoke!

I found the novel quite dull; the opening section went on for far too long, while the Tom Bombadil scenes were a killer! I thought the prose could be graded on a sliding scale ranging from mediocre to turgid. Still, I intend to revisit it someday, to see if my opinion will change at all.

Thinking of reading the Martin books also; does anyone consider it worth reading the novels before watching the series?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

pretty much everyone thinks it's best to read the books before watching the series. the series follows the books quite faithfully but there's some depth and small details you'll miss out if you just watch the tv show, or watch it first.

dr gonzo

Back again after a while. Read GoT a few weeks back and ploughed through it, loved ever word of it. Immediately bought the second one but ive a funny habit of not going straight through a series so i decided to put it aside temporarily and have been reading around. After reading all these comments though i feel like the time has come to get back to it, im falling behind!

Clash of Kings here i come.

lordgoat

dr gonzo wrote: »

Back again after a while. Read GoT a few weeks back and ploughed through it, loved ever word of it. Immediately bought the second one but ive a funny habit of not going straight through a series so i decided to put it aside temporarily and have been reading around. After reading all these comments though i feel like the time has come to get back to it, im falling behind!

Clash of Kings here i come.

Take your time, you'll be years waiting for him to finish the series anyway.

I love Martin, infinitely better than Tolkien imo. But even as much as i love him i won't be reading his books til the series is all published.

Bloody Nipples

I got into LotR when I was about 13 because the movies were out and I adored them, tried to convince myself for ages that I liked the books but after a few years, I came clean to myself and accepted that while I respect the effort tolkien put into the series, he writes an epic tale like it's some kind of historical treatise. His style of writing is (I believe) as dull as ditchwater and really doesn't bring his world to life. He's too matter-of-fact and not descriptive enough for me. And don't get me started on Tom Bombadil and the Frodo and Sam trekking to Mordor parts, I used to just skip past those.

ASOIAF is so, so, so much more enjoyable! Though GRRM is 63 now so hopefully he lives long enough to actually finish the series

Hoki

Last week i spotted Game of Thrones in the airport & bought it having heard good things about it. 3 days later & it was finished, i thought it was brilliant & couldnt put it down.
Now, havin returned from my hols i just bought the complete set & can't wait to get stuck into the second one when it arrives. I plan on watching the tv series shortly also, its meant to be pretty fantastic as well.

raah!

Don't know if there's another game of thrones thread so I may as well post this here. I think I noticed some strange differences between the series and the books. I may well be very wrong though, It's been many years since I read them.

So the two differences I noticed were the sex related ones:

First, that Daenery's was advised to "take control of the situation" ,sexually, in the series. And this was some sort of feminist jive. But as far as I can remember in the book, it was more along the lines of "The Dothraki like to do it like this" being the motivation for this alternation of sexual position.

Secondly, I can't remember anything which implied that Robert's brother and the knight of flowers are gay lovers in the book. Though it's possible that it was implied, and that the HBO series simply opted for a more vulgar disposition.

There were alot of additional gratuitous sex scenes which I think they may lay off of now that they have people watching the series for the plot.

As to the OP, I read LOTR when I was 13 , and I did enjoy it immensely. I would almost be inclined to say that I enjoyed Martin's work more, but I'd really have to read LOTR again. At the moment, out of reverence for Tolkiens scholarship, and after reading some of what he has written about Beowulf I would currently rate his work as being of more intellectual merit than Martin's. I've read alot of Martin's work and he most definitely caters to the baser inclinations in his readers.

At least he doesn't delve into constant over-descriptions of things like "honeyed bread" and other such pointless articles. Nobody cares how good Tom Bombadil is at baking... (or how good whoever is really good at baking is at baking).