Compare and contrast
Dec. 2nd, 2012 09:11 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
asterrocI want to write a compare-and-contrast essay about the following three serieses:
The three worlds are pretty similar: large complex worlds at a level somewhere between real-world Medieval and classic fantasy. Each has multiple nations with different modes of government, mostly feudal related though. Each has some amount of magic which seems to follow laws, though the reader and the characters have different amounts of knowledge about those laws. Each world is large enough for different terrains/climates/weathers. The worldbuilding is not what distinguishes the three serieses from each other, that would be the characters and their motivations.
The Wheel of Time is classic escapist fantasy, with everyday normal people being tapped on the shoulder and told "you have been chosen to save the world," and then being forced to follow an epic destiny while trying to retain self-determination. There is magic in abundance, following certain rules. It is set in a classic fantasy world, with a little bit more gender equity than most: some lands are ruled by queens rather than kings, or by committees which include women. Magic is held/controlled primarily by women called Aes Sedai, and men who can wield magic are anathema. There is destiny and rebirth, and the promise of breaking free from the cycle is tempered by the fear of destroying the cycle. There is an epic struggle of good and evil, and the sympathetic characters know they are somewhere between being on the side of good and the side of “leave me the heck alone,” but they don't always know the motivations of others, and don't know the best way to get where they want to go. The protagonists are teens who are mostly naive about sex and relationships, with both the women/girls and men/boys thinking the other gender is inscrutable. Most of society follows traditional gender roles for men and women, and for most people this is an equitable division of labor, and though some struggle against those gender roles, they are not treated too horribly for doing so – but maybe that’s because they give in to the roles assigned to them when they “need” to do so.
A Song of Ice and Fire is a gritty near-real fantasy set in an alternate middle ages Europe. The (many!) main characters are all nobles, or the bastard of a noble, or a noble pretending to be a bastard, or a noble pretending to be a peasant, or the occasional random peasant who interacts with nobles and then dies. There is no point to the story, just horrible people grubbing for power and innocent people struggling to survive long enough for them to become jaded and horrible too. There are very rigid gender roles in this society, and all men and women conform to them, regardless of social status. Women are meek, or shrews, or silently cunning. The one woman who fights against her role is constantly described as hideously ugly and brutishly strong, and she is constantly insulted by others and threatened with rape. The “strong” women are obsessed with their children and live through them. The “strong” girls are … well I don’t even know what I can say without giving away everything. There is lots of sex and violence, much of it pointless. The TV series added to the sex but might have actually reduced the level of violence.
The Sword of Truth starts off as a classic fantasy, as a forest ranger everyman is drawn into a nearby kingdom of magic and political intrigue, learning that he is a classic savior with a magic sword, and falling in love with a woman with powerful magic that can learn the truth and destroy men (and presumably women, though that’s less important). But by the third book Goodkind is determined to recreate Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged” and attempts to shove her “enlightened self-interest” philosophy down the throats of the readers. For example: the oppressed have only themselves to blame for not throwing off their oppressors, and the poor are poor because they’re lazy and would rather mooch off the system than actually work hard to improve themselves. These are things the main character says when he goes into a nation ruled by a powerful wizard. His words stir up the populace to revolt while he kills the wizard. (Yeah, I just spoiled the book for you, but I don’t think anyone on my friendslist would want to voluntarily read a Rand ripoff.) By the time I stopped reading the series, I was only doing so b/c I wanted to know what horrible thing would happen to the two main characters next, and Goodkind never failed to deliver, devoting an entire book to the torture of that formerly powerful woman who I grew to hate.
Part of why I like The Wheel of Time best is that the characters are sympathetic and easy to identify with. Even though The Sword of Truth starts with an everyday guy, by the end Goodkind has warped him so thoroughly that I enjoy it when he is hurt and am disappointed when he survives. Goodkind’s supposed everyman does not remember his roots and instead looks down on the ordinary people as being too mentally weak to throw off their shackles the way he has. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire however, doesn’t even have any ordinary people, so there’s nothing to relate to to start with, and then he goes and makes so many of his characters horribly evil twisted people.
But they are fascinating evil twisted people with so much depth, that I read them wanting to know how they will react and grow and change. Goodkind’s characters are cardboard cutouts who rarely change, and then only for the worse. Martin’s characters can grow or descend into depravity, and I actually have a favorite character (Tyrion). His characters are flawed imperfect humans, but we see them struggling against their imperfections, and we see their good sides as well. Even the most selfish tyrannical queen is acting to try and protect her children. Even the brutal guard turns out to have a scarred past which has made him who he is, and a soft side for the vulnerable girl he is ordered to (and does) beat up.
Jordan’s characters do not have quite as much depth as Martin’s, but they are consistent in their actions. When Martin attempts to add more depth to a character’s background, it often comes off as ad hoc, tacking on flashbacks which could have been explained earlier, rather than exactly when it was convenient. With Jordan’s characters, we always know their motivations and we see why they are doing what they do. Jordan’s characters are more idealized versions, assuming that people are consistent even in the face of changing circumstances, while Martin’s characters are assuming the worst of humanity and putting it down on paper. Goodkind’s characters too are idealizations, but of an idea with which I disagree strongly.
I think part of why I like The Wheel of Time better than A Song of Ice and Fire is my own optimistic nature. I want to think good of people. I want rulers to act in the best interests of their people. I want police to be the good guys. I can watch all sorts of violence like the film “American History X,” but give me a crooked cop like the TV series “The Shield” and I can’t even get through a single episode. Martin is such a good writer with such complex characters that I’m able to hold on despite that, as long as I get a month or two and a nice rainbow unicorn kitten chaser in between books. The Wheel of Time not only has likable everyman main characters who have consistent, easy to understand, and charitable motivations, but it has an epic fight between Good and Evil. Those charitable motivations I mentioned? Stopping Satan (Shaitan) from escaping from Hell and destroying the world in Armageddon (Tarmongaiden).
So yeah. This isn’t a real essay so I don’t need a real conclusion. :) Go read The Wheel of Time if you haven't already.
Originally posted on Dreamwidth.
comments there. Comment here or there.
- The Wheel of Time by Robert Jordan (I have read through “A Feast for Crows”), Wikipedia
- A Song of Ice and Fire by George R. R. Martin (I have read through “Knife of Dreams”), Wikipedia
- The Sword of Truth by Terry Goodkind (I have read all but the prequel, and don’t care if that’s spoiled for me), Wikipedia
The three worlds are pretty similar: large complex worlds at a level somewhere between real-world Medieval and classic fantasy. Each has multiple nations with different modes of government, mostly feudal related though. Each has some amount of magic which seems to follow laws, though the reader and the characters have different amounts of knowledge about those laws. Each world is large enough for different terrains/climates/weathers. The worldbuilding is not what distinguishes the three serieses from each other, that would be the characters and their motivations.
The Wheel of Time is classic escapist fantasy, with everyday normal people being tapped on the shoulder and told "you have been chosen to save the world," and then being forced to follow an epic destiny while trying to retain self-determination. There is magic in abundance, following certain rules. It is set in a classic fantasy world, with a little bit more gender equity than most: some lands are ruled by queens rather than kings, or by committees which include women. Magic is held/controlled primarily by women called Aes Sedai, and men who can wield magic are anathema. There is destiny and rebirth, and the promise of breaking free from the cycle is tempered by the fear of destroying the cycle. There is an epic struggle of good and evil, and the sympathetic characters know they are somewhere between being on the side of good and the side of “leave me the heck alone,” but they don't always know the motivations of others, and don't know the best way to get where they want to go. The protagonists are teens who are mostly naive about sex and relationships, with both the women/girls and men/boys thinking the other gender is inscrutable. Most of society follows traditional gender roles for men and women, and for most people this is an equitable division of labor, and though some struggle against those gender roles, they are not treated too horribly for doing so – but maybe that’s because they give in to the roles assigned to them when they “need” to do so.
A Song of Ice and Fire is a gritty near-real fantasy set in an alternate middle ages Europe. The (many!) main characters are all nobles, or the bastard of a noble, or a noble pretending to be a bastard, or a noble pretending to be a peasant, or the occasional random peasant who interacts with nobles and then dies. There is no point to the story, just horrible people grubbing for power and innocent people struggling to survive long enough for them to become jaded and horrible too. There are very rigid gender roles in this society, and all men and women conform to them, regardless of social status. Women are meek, or shrews, or silently cunning. The one woman who fights against her role is constantly described as hideously ugly and brutishly strong, and she is constantly insulted by others and threatened with rape. The “strong” women are obsessed with their children and live through them. The “strong” girls are … well I don’t even know what I can say without giving away everything. There is lots of sex and violence, much of it pointless. The TV series added to the sex but might have actually reduced the level of violence.
The Sword of Truth starts off as a classic fantasy, as a forest ranger everyman is drawn into a nearby kingdom of magic and political intrigue, learning that he is a classic savior with a magic sword, and falling in love with a woman with powerful magic that can learn the truth and destroy men (and presumably women, though that’s less important). But by the third book Goodkind is determined to recreate Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged” and attempts to shove her “enlightened self-interest” philosophy down the throats of the readers. For example: the oppressed have only themselves to blame for not throwing off their oppressors, and the poor are poor because they’re lazy and would rather mooch off the system than actually work hard to improve themselves. These are things the main character says when he goes into a nation ruled by a powerful wizard. His words stir up the populace to revolt while he kills the wizard. (Yeah, I just spoiled the book for you, but I don’t think anyone on my friendslist would want to voluntarily read a Rand ripoff.) By the time I stopped reading the series, I was only doing so b/c I wanted to know what horrible thing would happen to the two main characters next, and Goodkind never failed to deliver, devoting an entire book to the torture of that formerly powerful woman who I grew to hate.
Part of why I like The Wheel of Time best is that the characters are sympathetic and easy to identify with. Even though The Sword of Truth starts with an everyday guy, by the end Goodkind has warped him so thoroughly that I enjoy it when he is hurt and am disappointed when he survives. Goodkind’s supposed everyman does not remember his roots and instead looks down on the ordinary people as being too mentally weak to throw off their shackles the way he has. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire however, doesn’t even have any ordinary people, so there’s nothing to relate to to start with, and then he goes and makes so many of his characters horribly evil twisted people.
But they are fascinating evil twisted people with so much depth, that I read them wanting to know how they will react and grow and change. Goodkind’s characters are cardboard cutouts who rarely change, and then only for the worse. Martin’s characters can grow or descend into depravity, and I actually have a favorite character (Tyrion). His characters are flawed imperfect humans, but we see them struggling against their imperfections, and we see their good sides as well. Even the most selfish tyrannical queen is acting to try and protect her children. Even the brutal guard turns out to have a scarred past which has made him who he is, and a soft side for the vulnerable girl he is ordered to (and does) beat up.
Jordan’s characters do not have quite as much depth as Martin’s, but they are consistent in their actions. When Martin attempts to add more depth to a character’s background, it often comes off as ad hoc, tacking on flashbacks which could have been explained earlier, rather than exactly when it was convenient. With Jordan’s characters, we always know their motivations and we see why they are doing what they do. Jordan’s characters are more idealized versions, assuming that people are consistent even in the face of changing circumstances, while Martin’s characters are assuming the worst of humanity and putting it down on paper. Goodkind’s characters too are idealizations, but of an idea with which I disagree strongly.
I think part of why I like The Wheel of Time better than A Song of Ice and Fire is my own optimistic nature. I want to think good of people. I want rulers to act in the best interests of their people. I want police to be the good guys. I can watch all sorts of violence like the film “American History X,” but give me a crooked cop like the TV series “The Shield” and I can’t even get through a single episode. Martin is such a good writer with such complex characters that I’m able to hold on despite that, as long as I get a month or two and a nice rainbow unicorn kitten chaser in between books. The Wheel of Time not only has likable everyman main characters who have consistent, easy to understand, and charitable motivations, but it has an epic fight between Good and Evil. Those charitable motivations I mentioned? Stopping Satan (Shaitan) from escaping from Hell and destroying the world in Armageddon (Tarmongaiden).
So yeah. This isn’t a real essay so I don’t need a real conclusion. :) Go read The Wheel of Time if you haven't already.
Originally posted on Dreamwidth.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-12-03 02:03 pm (UTC)I've been dragging myself through A Dance with Dragons. I'm only a few chapters in, still. I suppose I'll see what happens with those girls.
I think Tyrion is everybody's favorite character.
no subject
Date: 2012-12-03 06:00 pm (UTC)Sansa starts off as a ridiculously naive little girl who slowly grows more callous. Sure she was a rotten little brat at first, but I didn't hate her for that, I pitied her. I've grown to like her a bit more, but not a lot.
Daenerys I'm lumping in with the noble adult women whose only drives are power and protecting her children (the dragons). Sure she started off as more of a child and a victim, but by the start of "A Feast for Crows" she has "grown" into an adult who can victimize others herself. "A Dance with Dragons" is in my queue of books to read, so we'll see if my opinion of her changes then.