Friday, December 6, 2013

A quick thought about "The Princess and the Queen"

I won't provide you with a full review of George R. R. Martin's new...well, not exactly novella...let's call it text. The reason for this is that I will talk to Sean T. Collins and Steven Attewell about it next week on the new BLAH, and I guess we will all three be the wiser after it, because synergy. So, just let me give some bullet points. 

- The story really isn't what you call an enjoyable read. The perspective of a maester writing a history book makes for a pretty dull and at times forced read. There's none of what makes the books usually enjoyable, especially the sharp dialogue and point-on descriptions. 

- That doesn't mean it's not a compelling read. It just feels a bit like work. 

- There is so much stuff in there, especially about but not limited to, dragons, I can hardly begin to sum it all up. Great, great information dump. 

- Oh boy, this war is bloody. If you ever doubted our theory that Martin essentially writes an anti-war-story, read this thing. 

- Vermithor! Syrax! Tessarion! Did we just jump into High Fantasy? 

- Somehow I don't believe Prince Daemon's final stunt. 

- I love just how much goes wrong in this. 

More on the next BLAH next week!


  1. I can't wait to read this. I love the info dumps.

    Stefan: My wife is finishing up AFFC right now. I can't believe how fast she's getting through the books. I've told her she might want to read the D&E novellas before moving on to ADWD. Since we don't own them and it's going to be a few weeks before our library can get them all for us, I think she's just going to go on to ADWD. Is there any reason why she couldn't read The Princess and The Queen before going on to ADWD?

  2. Stefan, if you have time, share your thoghts on this:

  3. Hi Stefan,

    I have 2 questions that I hope you can answer/discuss either here or on the BLAH.

    1) Have any of your perceptions of certain Westerosi Houses changed now that we have more back story about them than what was previously provided in the ASOIAF and D&E series? (I.E. the Dustins were awesome, The Hightowers not so much)

    2) Did you find it frustrating that the narrative style would be inconsistent? For example, in the aforementioned last scenes of Daemon Targaryen the writer is third-person omniscient, narrating the exact conversation between Daemon and Aemond. But a few paragraphs later the writer cannot conclude on the whereabouts of Daemon's remains

    1. Hi Ryan,

      I take it in, thanks! Short version:

      1) No.

      2) You got that wrong: the writer isn't omniscient, he just writes down hearsay as facts. That's pretty common among historians until way into the 20th century. Read Thukydides, for example, and you find the same annoying thing.