Anyone gonna watch Game of Thrones?

[JonFromMaplewood]

After finishing the first book, I am definitely hooked on this story.  With the exception of some sexual content clearly written by a weird, drooling troll, the story and prose are impressive.  I see no reason to pass on the TV adaptation, especially considering Dinklage plays such a prominent role.

[Sarah]

Hell, yeah.  I've read the first three books, and the fourth is sitting on my bookshelf waiting for me.  No way I won't be watching this (I guess I should knock some wood now).

[Pregnant Pause]

Absolutely, I love those books. 

[Kormod]

Yes. It should be a good alternative to Camelot. I hope the next thing HBO does is get cracking on their adaptation of James Ellroy's Underworld USA Trilogy.

[Sarah]

Let's hope it's a lot better than Camelot.

[Kormod]

Camelot is indeed horrendous. AV Club gave this week's episode of Camelot the same grade they gave the series premiere of Game of Thrones. I hope that doesn't mean anything.

[Sarah]

An AV Club grade seems to reflect what the reviewer thinks a show is capable of doing.  If that's so, the grades for Camelot suggest Ryan McGee doesn't expect much of it.  I imagine the hopes for Game of Thrones are much loftier, so the reviewer will be much more critical.

[wood and iron]

I kind of take exception to your description of Martin's take on sex in his books. I don't find it to be written by a drooling troll. In fact, compared to a lot of genre fiction, I felt like Martin was rather restrained. Granted, some of his descriptions are overdone but sex in most books is pretty terrible.

I'm about a third of the way through the 4th book, A Feast for Crows. God, I can't imagine waiting 6 years between books like people who have read them as they came out have. Yikes.

And yes, I am absolutely looking forward to watching this series.

[JonFromMaplewood]

Granted, some of his descriptions are overdone but sex in most books is pretty terrible.

I guess that is what I am responding to. For example:

"They scented her with spiceflower and cinammon, a touch on each wrist, behind her ears, on the tips of her milk-heavy breasts. The last dab was for her sex. Irri's fingers felt as light and cool as a lover's kiss as it slid softly up between her lips."

And this character is thirteen years old. Maybe from a female author I wouldn't feel quite so icky after reading it.

[buffcoat]

Plus, "fingers" are not an "it".

[wood and iron]

I don't know why I'm playing White Knight for Martin but: I have read interviews where he justifies his use of sexualized 13 year olds as based in actual medieval practice. They didn't have the concept of adolescence, you went directly from childhood to adulthood.

I also think that since the chapters are written from the POV of the characters, the level of description fits. In other words, the quote you produced, while icky realizing that it is about a 13 year old, has both a historical precedent and the chapter is from that character's POV and thus that would be a pretty significant detail she would be noticing.

I'm afraid I'm being too knee jerk based on how some of the reviews of the show tend to take aim at fantasy as a genre rather than the actual work presented. I'm not a fantasy reader, this series and Lord of the Rings is about as deep as I go, but to have The New York Times get so condescending and describe the work as "boy fiction" really rubs me the wrong way.

[JonFromMaplewood]

I am totally with you, Woodandiron.  I am not chafing at the sexualization of underage characters.  Elements like that are crucial to the gritty realism of the story (and the historical accuracy if we treat the story less as fantasy and more as medeival historical fiction).

I guess it is the way he lingers on such details (as in the example I provided) that makes me queasy.  But you make a good point about POV and such a detail being relevant to the character.  It's all kind of irrelevant anyway, because I am really enjoying the books and the criticism was a minor one.

[wood and iron]

Oh I know, I just enjoy having a lively discussion. And I do agree that at times he lingers too much over details of the transgressive sex. The horrendous back story of Tyrion's first love and Martin's continual revisiting of it really makes my gut churn. But at the same time, I think that's part of the power of including such detail like that. During those chapters, we're in Tyrion's head and so of course the description of that event will be a gut punch, it was a gut punch to Tyrion and rightfully so.

[Pregnant Pause]

I thought the pilot was pretty good, although I'm curious as to how it will play to people who haven't read the books. 

Not a fan of the actor who plays Jamie, but I wonder if that's because his character is in such a different place in my mind than in the beginning of the books. 

[JonFromMaplewood]

Not a fan of the actor who plays Jamie, but I wonder if that's because his character is in such a different place in my mind than in the beginning of the books.

Agreed.  The guy playing Jamie is a little too John Wesley Shipp for my tastes.  I pictured someone nicknamed "The Kingslayer" to be a little more rough around the edges.