I don't think what really makes it engrossing is the fact that it's realistic. Not every detail in the story is realistic. I'm not really familiarized with Medieval History enough to say that for sure. But not sugar coating does not directly make it realistic. I came to realize, A Song of Ice and Fire is purposely written to be a form of entertainment, like a show. GRRM is a genius when it comes to television and entertainment. His story meets the demands of this generation of constantly being entertained with all kinds of information. Always searching for something new. Something surprising happens all the time in the books. The character we were rooting for dies. The city which was in peace is suddenly invaded and destroyed. The other character we like suddenly marries to an imbecile. A new character no one has ever heard (or thought to be important) is suddenly introduced. Another character is suddenly sentenced to death and we don't want him to die. All drama. Much like soap-opera (like some people already mentioned). In this way we are always entertained, engrossed. I do agree also that ommitting violence, sex, and horrific acts would make books more fake. However, I don't think they should really be stark aspects of a book in order to make it realistic. They could be used in smaller degrees, in case a writer would want to write a realistic book with different themes.
Mmm, I would put their technology closer to 14th century. There's no printing press, feudal economics, limited literacy, no developed legal system, and no cannons. I am not quite an expert on economic and technological history but I dont think its that unfathomable. Both are fragile progressions where the absence of a key attribute can stunt development. In this case, I think its the printing press. Yes, the timeline is somewhat unlikely but not so much that it, for me at least, suspends my disbelief. All that said, if someone wants to walk through the technology trees in Westeros and explain why one technology is unlikely to exist without a set of comparable ones that Martin as has neglected, go for it.
I think different people enjoy the books for different reasons. My partner is a fantasy fan and loves the complex world building aspect- fictional histories, maps, genealogies etc I nearly didn't read the series because that's definitely not my bag. However I really like the characters. I'm interested in power as a general theme in fiction. So a character like Tyrion- wealthy, intelligent, member of powerful ruling family but also physically hugely vulnerable- is interesting to me. (And he has all the best lines!) I think there's a lot of that in Asoiaf: Dany, Jaime, Brienne, Bran, Sansa, Arya, Jon, Cersei all move between having an upper hand and being at risk and have to work in the context of people's perception of them. There's a few characters that play that game well and stay true to themselves, which are my favourite. As part of that, the fact they are under genuine threat in a world where bad things happen gives it added impact. Bran's or Jaime's character arcs are hugely influenced by their own and others' reaction to the violence they suffer and resulting disability. The sex fits in to that theme of power for me- Dany getting jacked off by the hand maiden is her moving from being a sexual object, abused by her brother and married off as a commodity, to being the one with power to demand sexual favours for her own satisfaction. By the most recent book she has had something more like a mutually consensual relationship. Has anyone mentioned in the 'soap' discussion that GRRM was originally a TV writer? Seems relevant Personally, I am very happy with things being a bit melodramatic and trashy- although I'm getting annoyed with the introduction of ever more characters which seem to be slowing the story rather than moving it on. However, at this point I'm committed enough to the world that I want to find out what happens. Sigh.
I'd say the success of the series has to do a lot with the characters. His characters are very deep and complex and (almost) none of them is completely evil or completely good, and readers can identify with them easily. Plus, there's this feeling of brutal and harsh honesty which takes a lot of courage to write, I'd say. People sense that.
Sorry I must have missed the part in history class where our ancestors had to manage to live through years-long winters, invasions of zombie hordes and magic. Also I'd question some of your assumptions: Feudal economics, limited literacy: And the 15th/16th century did have these things? No developed legal system: Well there's clearly a universally-known legal code in Westeros. I don't know how you'd qualify 'developed' but IMO if everyone on a continent the size of Westeros adheres to a roughly homogenous legal code it's pretty well developed. That said, it'd be really interesting if GRRM introduced the Printing Press to Westeros and followed the cause and effect on society.
Yes they did. The invention of the printing press spread literacy at a huge rate, and starting around 1550 or so there's a big shift from feudal agriculture to husbandry and trades (caused by the potato). This is actually more around the 17th century, but the genesis of these changes is in the 16th @Dunning Kruger is referring to a court system, appointed or elected in order to address grievances, as well as a constabulary to maintain order. Westeros either has not such system, or Martin never brings it up. Having a "universally-known legal code" is pretty fucking useless if no one is around to enforce it, or add to it.
And, again, to reiterate and add to the above, what struck me as improbable, all things considered, is the stonkingly huge span of known and recorded history they seem to have. 8000 years ago, in real terms, takes us to the 6th millennium BCE, and the Neolithic period. In 8 thousand years our very broken, fraught, damaged history takes us from the beginning of the use of copper as a pinnacle of technology to satellites and space travel and this little bit of technology over which I am communicating right now, which, just a few hundred years ago, would have been considered witchcraft and my ownership thereof would have bought me a ticket to my own barbecue. And we don't have a clue as to the names of anyone from 8000 years ago or their individual deeds. In Martin's universe they do. It just feels like a number that could have been a bit more realistically chosen by Martin. Science Fiction authors make a similar mistake all the time, but in the reverse, where the spectacular and amazingly different future is only a decade away. It always gets an eyeroll from me when I read it and it's very, very common. ETA: Though I guess I am willing to accept the availability of magic as a mitigating factor that would seem to reduce the need for inventive technology to some small degree. Necessity, the famous mother of invention, would have this secondary venue for satisfaction in some things.
Oh, do they? Do you have an example? Because I'm pretty sure they don't. But you won't accept years-long winters? I think you're seriously underestimated the impact that would have on society, especially pre-modern society.
