Starks and Lannisters
Aug. 19th, 2009 08:49 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dolorosa_12So, about a decade late (I'm a shameless bandwagon-jumper, as you know), I started reading George R. R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire series. I'm about halfway through the first book, A Game of Throne, and I adore it immensely, but one thing is bugging me.
I know I shouldn't expect that much from heroic fantasy, which does cling to its tropes and Tolkienesque concepts, even if it's consciously trying to reject them, but you'd think that Martin could've presented the two sides in his conflict in a slightly more even-handed way. But no.
On the one side, we've got the honourable, intelligent Starks. Eddard Stark loves and respects his wife, who loves and respects him. They have five lovely children, all of whom were brought up with love and respect, and who, in turn, love and respect their parents. The only blight on this landscape of familial bliss is Eddard's illegitimate son Jon - and even there, Eddard does the decent thing and has Jon brought up with his other children, not shamefully hidden away. That Eddard's wife Catelyn hates Jon is the only mark against her. The Starks are loyal and honourable. They see the flaws in their political system and try to make things better. They always try to do what's right.
On the other side, we have the scheming, Machiavellian Lannisters. They're married into the ruling house, but constantly trying to undermine it. They're cruel, violent and dishonourable. One of the Lannisters killed the former king. Their children are stupid, selfish and arrogant. If that weren't enough against the Lannisters, they're also incestuous.
It's pretty clear who we're supposed to be supporting. And that shouldn't bother me. A Song of Ice and Fire is loosely based on the Wars of the Roses, with Stark=York and Lannister=Lancaster. I suspect I'm a shameless Yorkist, so I should be pleased to see my favourites presented in a positive light. But I'm not. I want each side to be presented in an equal way, each given a chance to present its point of view, so that then I can see beyond the gloss and really make up my mind. Janny Wurts does this in her Wars of Light and Shadow series - and this does not mean that I don't strongly support one side over the other - I do. But I feel better in my partisanship when I know that my decision is an informed one. If one side is presented as black-hearted monsters, it leaves me with no choice.
Reading this series has rekindled my interest in the Wars of the Roses (I thought I'd never find something to tempt me away from my Angevin and Poitevin obsession). I'm keen to read more books that explore this period of history (either straight historical fiction, or fantasy like A Song of Ice and Fire). Anyone got any suggestions?
I know I shouldn't expect that much from heroic fantasy, which does cling to its tropes and Tolkienesque concepts, even if it's consciously trying to reject them, but you'd think that Martin could've presented the two sides in his conflict in a slightly more even-handed way. But no.
On the one side, we've got the honourable, intelligent Starks. Eddard Stark loves and respects his wife, who loves and respects him. They have five lovely children, all of whom were brought up with love and respect, and who, in turn, love and respect their parents. The only blight on this landscape of familial bliss is Eddard's illegitimate son Jon - and even there, Eddard does the decent thing and has Jon brought up with his other children, not shamefully hidden away. That Eddard's wife Catelyn hates Jon is the only mark against her. The Starks are loyal and honourable. They see the flaws in their political system and try to make things better. They always try to do what's right.
On the other side, we have the scheming, Machiavellian Lannisters. They're married into the ruling house, but constantly trying to undermine it. They're cruel, violent and dishonourable. One of the Lannisters killed the former king. Their children are stupid, selfish and arrogant. If that weren't enough against the Lannisters, they're also incestuous.
It's pretty clear who we're supposed to be supporting. And that shouldn't bother me. A Song of Ice and Fire is loosely based on the Wars of the Roses, with Stark=York and Lannister=Lancaster. I suspect I'm a shameless Yorkist, so I should be pleased to see my favourites presented in a positive light. But I'm not. I want each side to be presented in an equal way, each given a chance to present its point of view, so that then I can see beyond the gloss and really make up my mind. Janny Wurts does this in her Wars of Light and Shadow series - and this does not mean that I don't strongly support one side over the other - I do. But I feel better in my partisanship when I know that my decision is an informed one. If one side is presented as black-hearted monsters, it leaves me with no choice.
Reading this series has rekindled my interest in the Wars of the Roses (I thought I'd never find something to tempt me away from my Angevin and Poitevin obsession). I'm keen to read more books that explore this period of history (either straight historical fiction, or fantasy like A Song of Ice and Fire). Anyone got any suggestions?
