Breaking the Author/Reader Contract.

[ledded]

But I don't see that as a contract violation. GRRM illustrates pretty clearly from the beginning that things aren't going to be nice, cut and dried or follow the classic fantasy tropes. The minute that

Spoiler

Jamie, having been caught in the act of incest with his sister, throws the young Stark heir to his near death

, you know that things aren't going to follow your classic gig.

While I recognize that we're really talking about two things, I still saw the part where

Spoiler

Jamie, having been caught in the act of incest with his sister, throws the young Stark heir to his near death, along with the Stark's abject dislike of him, set him up as a very dastardly bad guy, until a later book where you soon realize that he is not so 'bad' or inhuman, but possibly even made that decision in a point of panic or merely because he is not entirely evil, just flawed. You know, a person. I get the feeling by the end of the last book that he has been entirely misread by everyone who knows him/knows of him, and that while he has done grand and terrible things, they are mostly no less terrible than things done by almost every other character in the books (with some exceptions, of course), only made so much worse or grander by the hype surrounding him

. So to me, that is one of the good examples of what I was saying. Only the next book will hold whether that is actually true or not.

That doesn't mean he doesn't kick you in the junk...but since there is no central viewpoint character, it's much harder to say that he's breaking the contract with you.

I disagree *just* a little... I felt that Ed Stark and subsequently his Children were the central characters, especially Ed, until the end of the first book. That is when I realized, truly, that Martin was not playing around. But the buildup during the first half of the first book looked very much like a small set of very likable characters were going to drive the story throughout the series.

It's clear from fairly early on that he's not writing the classic 'young boy discovers he has powers, rises from tragedy into his own and then defeats the great evil' story, although there are elements of that to be found within it.

Oh, it started becoming obvious it was different, but again the end of the first book was what truly punctuated that for me, made me realize completely that I was reading something entirely different. After wading through so much fantasy cliche, here was a guy who was not afraid to have the story be driven by the story, not the characters, which is something that the long-standing tradition of protagonist/antagonist in fantasy literature has not very often done in quite that complete of a manner, or at least in one that didnt seem disjointed and fragmentary, IMO. Don't get me wrong, I have often enjoyed well done stories of a hero or heros who, while maybe flawed, struggle against impossible odds while growing and making mistakes, etc.

You don't cheer for heroes or boo bad guys in Martin's book. You grab onto the story and try to hold on while it twists and turns and tries to throw you off.

Contrast that with over 2000 pages worth of believing that you're reading one thing, and then having the rug yanked out from underneath you at the very end. The former says "fasten your seatbelts", while the second says "Ha! Made you look!" :\

Oh, I agree, though I still say it as a nicely done break away from the typical fantasy novel. However, it's pretty obvious in the first book that it is not the typical fantasy novel. I guess I'm not very bright , because it took me most of the first novel to figure out just how different it was going to be.

 

[starkad]

Robert Jordan.

First 3 books were great. 4th book was eh. 5th-8th sucked, 9th made me perk up, but 10th was trash. Now I won't even bother with the series anymore.

 

[Warrior Poet]

... The last was the re-release of the Elric Saga by WW where a major charecter (Moonglum) was written out ...

As you noted, this ... this is just wrong ...



Warrior Poet

 

[Warrior Poet]

... The last was the re-release of the Elric Saga by WW where a major charecter (Moonglum) was written out ...

As you noted, this ... this is just wrong.

In fact, something the rogue himself said serves as a great commentary on that: "Ah, no! Elric, I had not expected this!"



Warriot Poet

 

[Warrior Poet]

OK! Who left the door open so the double post could wander in?

... oh ...

... right ... sorry.

(How embarrasing)

Warrior Poet

 

[Warrior Poet]

Moorcock made the decision. He has a habit of tweaking his books when they are rereleased, and for this release, he wrote new sections connecting the novels, changed the order of a few things, and rewrote a few things. Sort of like George Lucas.

If you look at the different editions of almost any of Moorcocks books, especially between the US & UK editions, there are small changes all over the place. This time, he made a few bigger changes, probably for the worse.

Ah, I had not yet reached this part of the thread when I posted just moments ago.

I hadn't realized Moorcock had authorized such a change.

Still, it makes me sad. Moonglum was a wonderful foil and charge for Elric, a delightful character to have along for (part of) the ride in a series that was, in many ways, such a triumph of strange fantasy storytelling.

Still, if Moorcock gave it the o.k., well, there's not much to be done, I suppose. Perhaps Moorcock himself struggles much with Chaos and its incarnations, and his works reflect that ...

"... still would've left Moonglum in, were it my choice, though," he said, trying not to grumble too loudly.



Warrior Poet

 

[WizarDru]

I disagree *just* a little... I felt that Ed Stark and subsequently his Children were the central characters, especially Ed, until the end of the first book. That is when I realized, truly, that Martin was not playing around. But the buildup during the first half of the first book looked very much like a small set of very likable characters were going to drive the story throughout the series.

That's a pretty reasonable point, actually. It really does sort of start of that way, doesn't it? Of course, then things go all to hell, but until that point, I could see how someone might find that as a contract violation. It's certainly no failing on the reader's part....in point of fact, I think it was GRRM's intention. After all,

Spoiler

when Ned Stark is killed

, it hits you like a ton of bricks. "That's NOT SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN!", you think to yourself. The same is true of the third book's

Spoiler

Horrific "Red Wedding"

, which made me put down the book, I was so distraught.

You don't cheer for heroes or boo bad guys in Martin's book. You grab onto the story and try to hold on while it twists and turns and tries to throw you off.

You ain't just whistlin' dixie, brother.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Resurrecting a nearly dead horse to beat some more. Regarding Thomas Covenent. I loved the books, but for me, before I ever read the series, I picked up an art anthology called Realms of Fantasy. It has various artists interpretations of what particular portions of "The Land" looked like, interspersed with commentary about the books.

Right away, the commentary noted that Thomas Covenent was a different anti-hero surrounded by real heroes. Especially with regards to Donaldson's experience with lepers while in India influencing his choice of making the point-of-view character a leper. With this commentary about the character in mind, I grabbed the books. I can understand how folks wouldn't like the trilogies going into the books cold. For me, I was under no assumptions about what Thomas Covenent would be like in the books. Yeah, his complaining got tiring into the second trilogy.

To bring this back on point: For me, the second trilogy verged on breaking the contract because it so felt like Donaldson was just trying to "break" his world, like Weis in Hickman did with Dragons of Summer Flame.

Speaking unconventional heroes, I heartily recommend reading the Icelandic Sagas. Filled with drunk, violent, authority-hating, average-Joes... er... average-Olafs. Each story starts up right in the middle of what's going on, and often ends anti-climactically. Totally breaks the contract! Oh, wait... There was no implied "contract" back then... Gosh dern Snorri Sturluson!

But if you have a hard time reading Tolkien, don't bother with Icelandic Sagas unless it is one filled with footnotes explaining kennings and other meanings. And a thick dictionary handy because so many archaic words are used. I partly expected to read them as novels after hearing for so long how much influence the sagas had on the development of the modern novel, doing so will give a unprepared reader the sense of the "broken contract". Knowing ahead of time just what you are getting when you pick something up, like anything, is important to the sense of whether the author is breaking the contract.


Regards,
Eric Anondson

 

[Naxuul]

I have two book series I can think of that broke the contract. But not for the normal reasons most people had, these two broke it because they diverged from the main theme of the original series to seemingly become exploration of creepy masturbatory fantasy time. Note that this will contain some spoilers for the Wheel of Time and Hannibal.

First is Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time. I could deal with it not having a end in sight, a fantasy novel can just be a cashcow as long as it is a fun read. Not necessarily a good read, but something fun enough that I would read it on a road trip. In the last three or four books of the series I felt like the corny fantasy romp about the duality of sexes, along with enough Duneisms to choke a horse, slowly devolved into a very creepy place of mysogynistic sex values. It's like if a corny bad teen drama started splicing in the Spice channel in the latter half of the series.

Rand's constant sextastic polyamory storyline, the repeating descriptions of women's clothes and bath cycles, Matt going from trickster boy to oversexed fratboy with no explanation, the constant allusions to Green Aes Sedai having whole hosts of Warders who are either young pretty boys or older rugged types that they sex up constantly. But the straw that broke the camel's back was when all the evil females got raped and sex slaved by the main male villain and then Jordan constantly pointing out the giant jumblies on one of the female villain's new raped sex slave body. I just can't read another one of his books if it has one of those 'author masturbating next to you' feeling scenes.

The other series is the Red Dragon/Silence of the Lambs/Hannibal series.. which was great up until Hannibal. Instead of being a realistic depiction of violent insanity, psychology and murder.. I felt like it was a book of the writer going out of his way to Mary Sue the title character, giving him gobs of plot immunity and all his wildest dreams coming true.. without one bit of consequence either.

What was especially disturbing is that the violence of the previous books, which was clinical in it's nastiness and unrelenting in it's lack of sympathy or humanity, was completely changed. The violence was now Hannibal winning. Something the reader should be proud of, cheer on and hope for. I don't know why but the whole thing had a distinctly sexual tint to it, especially around the end where it was definitively sexual. I could only read another novel by the author if I was assured there were no Mary Sueish characters.

If I tried hard I could probably think of several other series of books I felt broke the contract, but those would be minor infractions to the slaps in the face of the above.

-Naxuul

 

[Rhialto]

I just have to ask on the whole Elric/Moonglum thing--why'd Moorcock do it? Does it work? Could you give me a link to where you found out about this?

I'm just puzzled mind you. I always thought Moorcock loved Moonglum (who is when you get down to it, a bit of a self-portrait). I mean, he even showed up in the Multiverse comic he did a while back...

(Also may I state that this is the ONLY place I've read about this. I cannot find a single reference to this anywhere else. Not on the Moorcock fansites--not anywhere. So really--I want some confirmation...)