Iron Council by China Miéville Let me preface by saying that I adore China. I've loved everything he's written save for this one book. I know China is a political creature at heart, and when one knows this the evidence is easily found in his writing. Iron Council, though, was the one book where his politics took center stage and pushed the story to the back curtain. It was so bloody polemic. It was... masturbatory. Finishing it was like pulling teeth with your fingers.
I must admit I'm a big fan of GOT and find Martin's style mainly very readable though he does bang on about food a lot in the books. Every feast there's pages about food. Seriously, who cares? But generally I think he's easy to read. His latter books go off on tangents and he starts focusing on minor POV's too much but that's another story. I also really liked The Princess Bride. I didn't spot the author's hatred for women at all but that's not to say it's not there. Maybe he is known for this, or maybe it's just one view, I don't know. It's one of the funniest books I've read, and yes, Buttercup is ridiculously hard for most of the book but again it's more comical than anything else. Plus, her feisty side does make her an independent and capable character, even though she is kidnapped still. It puts a satirical twist on fairytale stories which I like. Plus, wasn't Fezzik's parents really kindhearted? It's been a long time since I read the book. I suppose the men do come across better, but then again, the Prince, Count Rugen and Vizzini are all bad guys and come across very poorly, so that's three guys already. Seems about even to me! I've had a couple of dud books this year that I haven't liked. Mary Renault so far is a disappointing writer. I've been reading 'Alexander the Great' and while determined to finish, it's not an easy read. I actually get confused whose POV it is and sometimes struggle to follow the plot. That rarely happens with me. Plus, it mostly just skirts around a notion of a story than anything very intriguing. She's a good writer in some respects, but by damn does she love semi-colons. I'm just not all that impressed. Oh, and the 'Broken Isles' series seems rubbish. I ended up reading the last book recently, and it's just terrible. There's nothing to it. A really boring read. Wasn't a massive fan of William Boyd's 'Waiting for Sunrise'. Seemed a bit dull and uninteresting to me. Not a terrible book, but hardly grabbing. As for Stephen King, I am still very much a fan. I think he has a very homely and entertaining style. I know he's not necessarily the most graceful writer, but he puts so much personality into his narration that it doesn't matter. He's so skilled at bringing you into his stories. But that's just my opinion.
I think it's very subjective...I love H.P Lovecraft and Tolkien and have met several people who can't stand their books, mostly because of their way of telling stories...on the other hand, the small bits I've read of Twilight and Fifty shades of grey makes me wonder why anyone would read that garbage, and yet, they're huge international successes. *edit*: Come to think of it, I have read Mein Kampf and found it hard to get through and an absolutely horrible book...but I guess most people can figure out why.
I'd have to disagree with you there, Jupes. Though I think he's a magnificent story-teller, I've read furniture assembly instructions in foreign languages that have better narrative flow than Martin. I actual feel bad for the guy because the filmmaker's adaptation make his writing look doubly ridiculous by comparison. And he is not a happy camper that they're going to beat him to the finish line with the show.
I didn't have a problem with the first couple books. I got a bit frustrated by the last one because I felt like he'd lost control of the story and was just introducing new characters and story lines wily-nily without a real plan for wrapping everything up, but the few couple books? I was with him, for sure.
I honestly have little criticism to give with Martin, just because I was so hooked. Maybe I was just glad to finally have a fantasy author who grabbed me from the word go. Now, Book 4 and 5 are a totally different kettle of fish, but there you go. Why he chose to start introducing a hoard of unnecessary POV's is beyond me but I find his world-building and character development incredible. And you're right about his storytelling, absolutely fantastic. Maybe his narrative flow is clunky and jarring in places, but I was too absorbed in the story to feel disorientated or frustrated. Plus, he's one of the few writers who can write in so many POV's and make it work. But I know a lot of people who would agree with you and some genuinely don't like his writing at all. I just find it very accessible. Every character comes to life and all of their stories take flight over time. There are some like Bran and Dany who just take forever to get going, but I am intrigued by their overall significance. Others like Ned and Arya have you hooked throughout I think.
I'd like to add Neil Gaiman's 'Stardust' was very disappointing and really bland. I actually really want to like Gaiman because he seems to have a very good sense of humour and I like who he is. I'm the same about Terry Pratchett. 'Good Omens' was quite enjoyable, though again could've been better. But 'Hogfather' didn't impress me at all. I always feel sad when these classics fail to make an impression, because I feel as if I'm the problem somehow, but I can't help my reaction as a reader. Oh, and immensely unpopular, but I never really got on with 'Lord of the Flies'. It's a good idea of course but mostly I didn't really click with the writing or even the plot. Shame.
It must be hard to continue your story when your invention has been better (?) portrayed in pictures. Especially when the show runners have asked you to divulge the ending because you appear too unhealthy to survive long enough to complete them. I would add my voice to disliking the GOT novels, I read the first two, but it was a struggle. I enjoyed Lord of the Flies as a kid, but only as a kid- there is not much subtlety there. His other novels are unreadable. I enjoy Gaiman, but it is light weight, extremely light weight.
That was probably in agreement before they even sat down with him. There was no asking involved. Standard operating procedure in case the writer gets hit by a bus the day after the contract gets signed.
HBO wouldn't have given him a choice. They'd be negligent if they greenlit hundreds of millions of dollars for a project that could evaporate in the event of the author's death. Though I suppose they could have said, "You've got two choices, George. You can tell us how it ends or we can make up an ending for you. Not to hit a soft spot here, but we at HBO believe you will too busy describing buffets and wardrobes to finish the story before the actor who plays Bran has his growth spurt and can no longer realistically portray a teenager."
Still unsure. All interviews indicate HBO wanted this, and had to court JRR Hartley (or whatever his name is) extensively. Legal agreements are written by the person with the power. The power of grayskull. I have the power.