The Dragonbone Chair & A Song of Ice and Fire

[nikolai]

I've been reading Tad Williams The Dragonbone Chair recently. It is a derivative Tolkien-clone; but is still the one of the best derivative Tolkien-clones I've read. What has really come as a surprise is the enormous and obvious influence it had on George R. R. Martin when he came to write A Song of Ice and Fire. Martin has pillaged wholesale much of the background and motifs of The Dragonbone Chair, but handled it much better than Williams. I have been really surprised by this. Has anyone else noticed it?

 

[Evil Eli]

Keep reading the Tad Williams series. It gets better, as being a Tolkien Clone, I have to disagree, but that is a personal opinion.

As for George Martin and his Game of Thrones he seems to be following the Wheel of Time way of writing.(Too many plot threads and not enough character development!)

 

[Umbran]

I don't think Williams is a Tolkien clone. You must remember that Tolkien stole liberally from older traditions. I think perhaps Williams wanted to use them, too, and set about to do so in ways different than Tolkien, and succeeded very well. Similarly with Martin.

 

[The Serge]

Williams is on record as indicating that the trilogy that begins with Dragonbone Chair is intended to be a reaction against Tolkien (although I think it pays homage as much as it criticizes LotR).

However, the similarities between Williams and Martin are due to the "realism" of the characters and the world, and the maturity/sophistication of the texts more so than the latter author's work to date being derivative of the former's work.

That said, I love William's trilogy as much as I have so far enjoyed Martin's cycle.

 

[nikolai]

I just want to try and defend my remarks, which no-one has agreed with so far...

Keep reading the Tad Williams series. It gets better, as being a Tolkien Clone, I have to disagree, but that is a personal opinion.

I've almost finished the first book, I'm up to Lothlorien. So I've only a provisional opinion at the moment - and I will keep reading. So far it looks to me like the begining of The Sword in the Stone tacked on to a retread of Fellowship. I realise the series is supposed to be very influential and highly thought of, but so far I can't see it. Much of what's happening seems to be recycling a series of genre cliches.

I don't think Williams is a Tolkien clone. You must remember that Tolkien stole liberally from older traditions. I think perhaps Williams wanted to use them, too, and set about to do so in ways different than Tolkien...

Tolkien did adopt stuff from older traditions. But he did inovate a lot too. Much of the "quest to prevent an evil lord from world domination" which is played out as an extended travelog is original. So far the books to me seems to be staying very close to Tolkien's model. I don't think this is as bad a criticism as it sounds, I think Williams likely intended it as a piece of genre writing in that vein, and with that in mind The Dragonbone Chair is about as good as it gets.

However, the similarities between Williams and Martin are due to the "realism" of the characters and the world, and the maturity/sophistication of the texts more so than the latter author's work to date being derivative of the former's work.

I think the similarities are much, much closer and more pervasive. Firstly, you have the writing style: writting in a third person limited narrative, Point of View shifts, characters thoughts in italics. The whole stylistic aspect really was adopted wholesale by Martin. I think the only real difference was his one chapter per Point of View rule.

Secondly, you have the setting. This is very similar too, above and beyond the standard fantasy elements: several kingdoms under a high king, war between them breaking out, the coming of winter with famine etc., a supernatural threat from the north. Feudal aspects of the setting are copied as is court intrigue (even with positions like the King's Hand). There's also limited magic, mysterious fey beings who have long since abandoned contact with man (Children of the Forest/Sithi).

Thirdly, you have specific plot elements. I don't really want to list these, because there are a lot of them and they are spoilers. But various aspects of The Dragonbone Chair keep on cropping up in A Song of Ice and Fire. We're talking about very specific motifs which are sometimes copied, sometimes expanded upon and sometimes taken in a new direction by Martin. This really was a surprise for me and kept on surprising me as things I had sort of seen before in Martin, kept happening.

Fourthly, and the killer point, Martin has said that Williams' series got him thinking about how to do fantasy. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ts/feature/11609/104-7867210-6435913

I'm not saying Martin has ripped off Williams, lots of things are very different. But Williams' series was clearly a major inspiration. For what it's worth I think A Song of Ice and Fire is better than The Dragonbone Chair, it's interesting to see where some of the ideas came from.

 

[PatrickLawinger]

Tolkien did adopt stuff from older traditions. But he did inovate a lot too. Much of the "quest to prevent an evil lord from world domination" which is played out as an extended travelog is original. So far the books to me seems to be staying very close to Tolkien's model. I don't think this is as bad a criticism as it sounds, I think Williams likely intended it as a piece of genre writing in that vein, and with that in mind The Dragonbone Chair is about as good as it gets.

Um, sorry, the "quest to prevent an evil lord from world domination" as played out in an original travelog is not original. Um, not even close. You can find similar stories from the 12th and 13th centuries, and I am certain that if you find stories based on oral traditions from several cultures you can find the same type of theme and style. This is far from "Tolkien's model."

In times where people rarely traveled further than 5-10 miles from their own home, the very idea of traveling to distant places was worthy of a fantastic tale.

I like Williams and Martin, I think both series are good. Then again, Martin's isn't over yet ...

 

[ASH]

Keep reading the Tad Williams series. It gets better, as being a Tolkien Clone, I have to disagree, but that is a personal opinion.

As for George Martin and his Game of Thrones he seems to be following the Wheel of Time way of writing.(Too many plot threads and not enough character development!)

I have to disagree with you about Martin following in Jordan's steps. I feel that he has developed the characters amazingly, and the plots. He still has 4 books to come out before its done and I hope that he stays on track with the overall feeling of the books.
I have never red Williams, so I dont know how its compares to Martin.

 

[Umbran]

Tolkien did adopt stuff from older traditions. But he did inovate a lot too. Much of the "quest to prevent an evil lord from world domination" which is played out as an extended travelog is original.

The quest to stop an evil power is scattered throughout mythology. And Jules Verne was writing travelog stories a long time before Tolkien published (Journey to the Center of the Earth in 1864, Around the World in 80 Days in 1873).

I think the similarities are much, much closer and more pervasive. Firstly, you have the writing style: writting in a third person limited narrative, Point of View shifts, characters thoughts in italics. The whole stylistic aspect really was adopted wholesale by Martin.

Yes. But oddly enough, the third person limited narrative and character thoughts in italics are standard modes not just in fantasy, but in fiction in general. You see it in westerns, mysteries, and romance novels. You see it bloody everywhere! Given that, how can you say that Martin got it specifically from Williams, and not from say, his English teacher, or from reading gods only knows how many books on his own?

Secondly, you have the setting. This is very similar too, above and beyond the standard fantasy elements: several kingdoms under a high king, war between them breaking out, the coming of winter with famine etc., a supernatural threat from the north. Feudal aspects of the setting are copied as is court intrigue (even with positions like the King's Hand). There's also limited magic, mysterious fey beings who have long since abandoned contact with man (Children of the Forest/Sithi).

The King's Hand I'll give you, even though I should think most kings have trusted aids and advisors. The rest - several kindoms under a high king, and the war breaking out after the king's death is Arthurian. Winter and famine and the threat from the north are derived from European historical facts, and low magic is typical for European mythology as well. The mysterious fey are, of course, found all over European legend.

All in all, you've got three authors drawing from a similar pool of elements. Yes, they may be modelling one upon the other (and there's some evidence that they are doing so). But you might well expect them to choose similar elements anyway. We can see it as an observation about the authors, but I don't see it as particularly valuable criticism. Any author who is influenced by European myth might make similar choices, so it's hardly a big deal.

I'm not saying Martin has ripped off Williams...

No, you didn't say that, you said, in fact, that Martin "pillaged wholesale" from Williams. Those were your words in your first post. So which do you prefer - characterizing Martin as a petty theif, or a barbarian horde (from the North, obviously) ?

 

[Eosin the Red]

I disagree that either Martin is Williams or that Martin is Jordan. Martin is Martin.

I liked the Dragonbone series but felt that the end was telegraphed from the very first pages. I think he shares some similarity with Martin in that both will let bad things happen to good people. Martin moreso than Williams.

I like the Wheel of Time and hope to see the series get back on track but Jordan is not Martin either. Jordan is going for much more symbolism and epic feel than Martin.

 

[nikolai]

Um, sorry, the "quest to prevent an evil lord from world domination" as played out in an original travelog is not original. Um, not even close. You can find similar stories from the 12th and 13th centuries, and I am certain that if you find stories based on oral traditions from several cultures you can find the same type of theme and style.

Would you care to cite some of these stories? I've no doubt that Tolkien drew on Medieval and Norse tales and poems, but these stories are very different from the Lord of the Rings in both form and content.

The quest to stop an evil power is scattered throughout mythology. And Jules Verne was writing travelog stories a long time before Tolkien published (Journey to the Center of the Earth in 1864, Around the World in 80 Days in 1873).

I'm not claiming that Tolkien originated either travelogs or the battle against evil stories. I don't know how you got that idea.

Yes. But oddly enough, the third person limited narrative and character thoughts in italics are standard modes not just in fantasy, but in fiction in general. You see it in westerns, mysteries, and romance novels. You see it bloody everywhere! Given that, how can you say that Martin got it specifically from Williams, and not from say, his English teacher, or from reading gods only knows how many books on his own?

First, although all the stylistic aspects are found seperately elsewhere, they are all found together, for the purpose of epic fantasy, in Williams. Martin has cited Williams as an inspiration to him of how fantasy can be done well, and proceeds to use all of the devices that Williams used. Unless Martin somehow deliberately erased his memory of this, there's a strong case that Williams played an important part in inspiring their adoption by Martin.

The King's Hand I'll give you, even though I should think most kings have trusted aids and advisors. The rest - several kindoms under a high king, and the war breaking out after the king's death is Arthurian. Winter and famine and the threat from the north are derived from European historical facts, and low magic is typical for European mythology as well. The mysterious fey are, of course, found all over European legend.

I am not claiming that any of the above were invented by Tad Williams! I am saying that the series of elements which are all key parts of the meta-plot in The Dragonbone Chair (kingdoms degenerating into civil war, the coming of a magical winter, the gradual rise magical fey, etc., etc., etc.), were taken - pretty much wholesale - by Martin and used in the same manner in A Song of Ice and Fire.

Since we know that The Dragonbone Chair was an inspiration; because Martin said so. Either (1) Martin did take them from there, or (2) he, somehow, forgot Williams' use of them but, coincidently, decided upon exactly the same element for his series.

No, you didn't say that, you said, in fact, that Martin "pillaged wholesale" from Williams. Those were your words in your first post. So which do you prefer - characterizing Martin as a petty theif, or a barbarian horde (from the North, obviously) ?

I'm not trying to characterize Martin as anything. I'm just pointing out that the The Dragonbone Chair was an inspiration and he took rather a lot from it.