What Did GRRM Mean By This?

>Battlestar Galactica ends with 'God Did It.' Looks like somebody skipped Writing 101, when you learn that a deus ex machina is a crappy way to end a story.
>Yeah, yeah, sometimes the journey is its own reward. I certainly enjoyed much of the journey with BSG. But damn it, doesn't anybody know how to write an ending any more?
>Writing 101, kids. Adam and Eve, God Did It, It Was All a Dream? I've seen Clarion students left stunned and bleeding for turning in stories with those endings.
Top kek
The writer of the garbage that is ASOIAF is complaining about bad writing?

>Doesn't anybody know how to write an ending anymore?
>write an ending
>write

at least they fucking finished the series u fat fuck

Back up your claim that his writing is bad.

Maybe he should spend less time critiquing Battlestar Galactica's ending and actually end his own fucking book series

>ASOIAF
>garbage
nice meme
(inb4 "sunset found her squatting in the grass")

I can't wait for D&D to make their garbage ending to Game of Thrones and have them blame George as everyone tears it to shreds then watch that fat fuck kill himself

...

Maybe GRRM should actually finish his story first before making these claims.

But to be fair, ASOIAF is vastly beyond BSG, even if BSG is better than GoT.

Are you serious m8?

BSG's ending was in fact complete and utter shit

How would you have ended it?

AND based fatman took Racist Tolken to task, utterly BTFO if you ask anyone

>Ruling is hard. This was maybe my answer to Tolkien, whom, as much as I admire him, I do quibble with. Lord of the Rings had a very medieval philosophy: that if the king was a good man, the land would prosper. We look at real history and it’s not that simple. Tolkien can say that Aragorn became king and reigned for a hundred years, and he was wise and good. But Tolkien doesn’t ask the question: What was Aragorn’s tax policy? Did he maintain a standing army? What did he do in times of flood and famine? And what about all these orcs? By the end of the war, Sauron is gone but all of the orcs aren’t gone – they’re in the mountains. Did Aragorn pursue a policy of systematic genocide and kill them? Even the little baby orcs, in their little orc cradles?

>The war that Tolkien wrote about was a war for the fate of civilization and the future of humanity, and that’s become the template. I’m not sure that it’s a good template, though. The Tolkien model led generations of fantasy writers to produce these endless series of dark lords and their evil minions who are all very ugly and wear black clothes. But the vast majority of wars throughout history are not like that.

>But Tolkien doesn’t ask the question: What was Aragorn’s tax policy? Did he maintain a standing army? What did he do in times of flood and famine?

wtf i hate lotr now

He's right though

wtf i hate tolkien now

Those aren't at all the most famous lines from asoiaf, take your /lit/ shit back to /lgbt/

GRRM worships Tolkien though. He only hates how LOTR has become a template for fantasy.

>Dany walks into fire
>Woops she survived and the eggs hatched we need no men XDDD

Martin has no room to complain about BSG

Choosing one of Gatsby's most provocative passages and choosing ASOIAF's 'shittiest' hardly counts as a valid comparison between the two works. Try again.

Many of these aren't the "most famous" lines of ASOIAF, and the ones that ARE famous are, again, just particularly bad lines that the community mocks. So again, whoever made the image picked particularly bad lines to try and prove their point.
>"I am the storm, my lord. The first storm, and the last.
Not particularly poetic, but there's nothing wrong with it. It alludes to Euron's apparent command over the weather and omnipresence.
>it looked as though he had a dagger up his butt.
A quote referencing 'butts' doesn't inherently make it bad. It adequately describes how Alliser is walking. All of the inclusions of quotes like this make me think a 16 year old saw these quotes, though, "haha, sex words, that must mean it's bad", and made this image.
>Men call me Darkstar, and I am of the night.
It's a bad line, but not as bad as it's typically made out to be because it skips the context. Darkstar is introducing himself to a 10 year old girl. He's not even calling himself Darkstar, he's just saying that men call him that. And most importantly, he says he's "of the night" as an explicit way of contrasting himself against his legendary brother, Arthur Dayne, the Sword of the Morning.

This. He pretends to subvert tropes, but most of ASOIAF is comprised of cliches and tropes played straight.

...

He's absolutely right. While LotR is more beautifully written and structured, ASoIaF is in some sense more philosophically mature.
LotR promotes the 'right to rule' of absolute hereditary monarchies. It's anti-technology. Whether a character in LotR is good or bad is decided by their race. It's an oversimplified fairy tale that reflects Tolkein's own simplistic, reactionary understanding of the world.

Not bait. Not sure why you'd think it is. Fuck off.

ASOIAF's """"""""""philosophy"""""""""" doesn't delve much further than basic feminism.

Because you completely ignored the wonky parts of those phrases and "analyzed" them as if there's nothing wrong with them. It just looks like your typical "villain did nothing wrong" bait.

I just mean it presents a more realistic view of the world with more realistic, nuanced characters. It delves into the consequences of wars and politics and the nature of political power. It eclipses LotR in all of those respects.

GRRM has yet to write anything as godawful as the BSG ending.

What wonky parts?

>It's an oversimplified fairy tale

It's called a myth, and it's not supposed to be realistic. Unlike GURM's writings which, while pretending to be realistic, are very much not, and actually try to justify the "right to rule" of certain dynasties as having family magic.

I remember A Storm of Swords release. Such a good times. There was no place for logical fallacies like this

It was fucking terrible though.

Yeah, and Tolkien aiming for a mythical tale full of what amounts to racism and pro-monarchy rhetoric was stupid.
The Targaryens just have some minor magical abilities because they're descended from the ASOIAF equivalent of Rome, where all citizens had the same type of magic. The Targaryens were also shown to be inconsistent rulers, and more of them were shitty than not. The last one got off on burning people alive and was basically insane.
LOTR, conversely, portrays Aragorn, a guy with no experience in ruling, as some idealistic infallible king.

Get rid of the horrible, horrible epilogue. Remove Starbuck explaining point blank that she's a fucking angel. Get rid of the completely idiotic flying the fleet into the sun detail.

Either that or end it at the second part of the finale where they forge peace at the colony invasion and vow to go their own ways, before the Final Five go full retard and fuck it all up.

He's a good king because he does what's good for his country and isn't in the job for selfish reasons. A king doesn't have to do administrative work. GRRM just hates normies like Aragorn so he tries to paint him as a bad ruler.

Again, Tolkien was trying to write a myth, not an analogy to our world and history. He specifically said that he dislikes LotR analogies. It's retarded to think of his work in realistic terms, which is what neckbeards like GRRM who are obsessed with "realism" and "grittiness" because they think it makes them look more clever don't understand.

>Remove Starbuck explaining point blank that she's a fucking angel.
She wasn't an angel though, just a person that got resurrected and lobotomized by God

>he Tolkien model led generations of fantasy writers to produce these endless series of dark lords and their evil minions who are all very ugly and wear black clothes. But the vast majority of wars throughout history are not like that.

Oh you don't say? Martin fucking thinks he is a genius, what a idiot (millionaire butidiot)

Those are both bait images. Do you really think the guys who maintain the /lit/ rec wiki aren't the same ones who make those images?
There's a reason it's still on their recommended list despite all the images.

And the reason that "he does what's good for his country and isn't in the job for selfish reasons" is because, in the context of Tolkien writing the series, Aragorn is the rightful king by blood. Denethor was portrayed (in the films, at least) selfishly and foolishly because he didn't have any royal blood and was trying to take the place of the rightful king. Aragorn
A king does have to make a lot of difficult decisions that LotR never talks about. Of course, I'm sure Aragorn would make all the right decisions because he has le royal Numenorean blood.

Right, it's a myth, but it's still trying to leave a distinct pro-monarchy view on the reader. Tolkien was personally pro-monarchy and it's no coincidence that it leaks into LotR a lot. He tried to change our minds about something in the real world by writing a series that isn't even remotely realistic. That's (unintentionally) manipulative, in a way.

The image references a fucking Quentin image you newfag. Quentin was notorious for creating bait images where he'd compare shit to The Great Gatsby all the fucking time. Even in the bait images where he's not comparing literary pieces he'll slip in a fucking Great Gatsby Reference just to fuck with you.

>full of what amounts to racism and pro-monarchy rhetoric was stupid.
I was 100% with you until this. Seriously man, I wish you retarded revisionists wouldn't inject your racism narratives into everything, Jesus christ.

>what amounts to racism
All orcs are bad, all elves and hobbits are good, all dwarves are greedy, all men have good hearts but are corruptible. Again, your nature in LotR is defined by what race you were born as.

>pro-monarchy rhetoric
The entire guiding theme of the third book/film is that Gondor is lost and only with the return of its 'rightful' king (by blood) (a 'king' who's just lived as a wanderer his whole life and has no political experience) can Gondor return to its true course and defeat Sauron. Please lrn2 obvious themes.

>ASoIaF is in some sense more philosophically mature

>Aragorn would make all the right decisions because he has le royal Numenorean blood.

Lol no, you're missing the point again. Remember Aragorn's ancestor, Isildur, who caused this all mess with the ring?

And you can't compare LotR monarchy with RL monarchy because in LotR the monarchy is literally more powerful and gifted.

Tell me, do you think Dany is the villain of ASOIAF?

I mean, really dude. LotR was written over half a century ago. Is it so difficult to believe that it might have some racist undertones, or are you so triggered by cries of racism that you won't accept that racism ever existed? Chris, fuck off.

No Chris, you fuck off

As the other user said though, Tolkien is not critiquing society like George was, he's simply writing an incredibly entertaining, yet very simple story that takes place in a very deep and fleshed out mythology. You're reading into his work way too much.

>Obese fucktard who writes paragraphs about people taking a shit lecturing others on how to write.

>Hasn't finished a book in over 16 years

KEK

I think whatever undertones you're seeing are completely of your own making. It's a story about wizards and elves and orbs, and unlike ASOIF, it makes no effort to be realistic.

Have you read the series?

>Remember Aragorn's ancestor, Isildur, who caused this all mess with the ring?
So what? He and Isildur share a tiny amount of blood. In what way does that make him responsible for Isildur's failures, or capable of negating them? Again, it goes back to Tolkien's retarded belief that somehow, royal blood is important.

>And you can't compare LotR monarchy with RL monarchy because in LotR the monarchy is literally more powerful and gifted.
Again, not a coincidence that Tolkien himself and LotR are both pro-monarchy; his personal views leak into the text. Tolkein is using the "Aragorn is Numenorean" thing to metaphorically imply that the monarchs of the European powers of the time were somehow inherently better than the people they ruled.

Not really. She's blinded in her belief that she's entitled to Westeros despite having no memories of the place, but I think she'll come to her senses eventually.

Aragorn is a good king for the exact same reasons that everybody thought Ned was a good ruler. It's the fact that Aragorn isn't as much of a douche bag as the Steward and also the fact that the world is basically ending. Meanwhile everybody thought Ned was hot shit for nearly no reason other than muh honor.

Orcs*

I really can't see it being a coincidence that Tolkien was vehemently pro-monarchy and the central theme of Return of the King was that absolute hereditary monarchies are good.

So? Stories that feature fantasy or sci-fi elements can and are used to push their authors' viewpoints. A story taking place in a 'realistic' world doesn't inherently make it more capable of pushing a viewpoint. Whether or not Tolkien did it intentionally, it simplifies the relationship between 'who's good and bad' and their ethnicity to an absurd black-and-white extent.

No Chris, you fuck right off m8

>In what way does that make him responsible for Isildur's failures, or capable of negating them?

You said that it was Aragorn's Numenorean blood which made him a good king. I showed that it's not.

They thought Ned was a good ruler because he actually gives a fuck, he's someone they can trust not to fuck them for personal gain. I know there are retards here who think Littlefinger will be a good ruler simply because he knows administrative stuff, and all I can say is that you deserve to live in the kind of shithole ruled by someone like Littlefinger if you think that way.

WHY THE FUCK IS HE WATCHING FUCKING BSG

FINISH WRITING YOUR GOD DAMN BOOKS YOU OLD SAILOR CUNT

FUCK

IM SO TIRED OF HIS SHIT

Right, but the reason that Tolkien wrote Aragorn as good/wise and Denethor as stupid/selfish is because he was pushing a pro-monarchy view.

Make yourself scarce Chris, you're a nuisance.

Is Quentinposting back?

6 and 7 are the only really egregious onea, famalan

I think he's really just symbolic of man correcting his previous errors. Also the whole "this random good guy is king." has been a thing for a long ass time. There needed to be an opposite to that to give conflict. I don't think it has to do with a pro-monarch or blood view.

Newfags repost his pictures unironically, they have no idea who he is.

quenposting just became Sup Forums posting

It's mostly because even though the prose itself may leave you wanting he very rarely actually uses asspulls such as the ones he mentioned.

You can say "ohhhhh but what about the magic systems of I Don't Gotta Explain Shit" most magics have been used then come back later in more important things.

Though GRRM should shut the fuck and finish his 25 year old series, Robert Jordan fucking died and even he finished it.

It's not really an "asspull" when it has been a major theme of the series since the first episode

even if a series establishes a meddling God it's still lazy for him to appear and go "XD problem solved" when the characters have been fighting on their the rest of the story.

>some meme infographic

not an argument

maybe next time

Try being a little more contrarian

>Again, it goes back to Tolkien's retarded belief that somehow, royal blood is important.
Clearly an idea that GRRM would never, ever, ever use.

>What was Aragorn’s tax policy?
Someone quote ANY description of taxes in ASOIAF that goes into half as much detail as Martin's typical description of a character's breakfast.

>Again, not a coincidence that Tolkien himself and LotR are both pro-monarchy;
Getting angry at this is like getting mad at a fictional universe for having a god
In LotR the kings are literally created by divine powers

This is always taken out of context.

GRRM loves Tolkien, but he's illustrating that he wants to do a different take on high fantasy.

Tyrion's tax policy is talked about a good bit in ACOK

Why lie so obviously? The word tax only appears 3 times in ACOK.