My view is that most of the characters are unsympathetic because the values of the time period are not ours. That said, I actually think it's a pretty accurate reflection of what the "romantic" Middle Ages were like, if a bit exaggerated.
That was my take as well. Most fantasy novels tend to be the Middle Ages by way of the 1800s Victorian sensibilities...which I always found to be incredibly amusing. As if the writer were writing the tale from a Victorian mindset or view of their own age.
Martin's is closer to the actual circumstances and a lot less romanticized.
Granted, you could say that his choice of time-periods is a bit circumspect, but most fantasy tends to take place in the Middle Ages - because there's no science and technology back then, and more reliance on magic and superstition. In short - it's more believable to have horses, wizards, and dragons in that setting. Not to mention war by sword as opposed to guns. Also, all ages have a certain level of rape and pillaging associated with war - so picking modern times wouldn't necessarily be better. Martin tends to like a certain degree of realism in his story-telling, and fantasy, which tends to be a bit darker. ( The Wire -for example - is a bit noirish for the same reason, yet totally different time period.)
To the extent that I do like particular characters, though, the ones I like are the women: Dany and Arya in particular. I don't think of the series as anti-women, since the men are, if anything, more unsavory than the women (I mean, is Cersei really worse than Tywin?).</i.
I tend to agree. We have a range. Catelynn - I found to be more sympathetic and a lot brighter than Ned Stark. And Cersei is in some respects more likable than her father Tywin - who in many ways created her. Her motives make more sense than his. Granted you could argue that Jamie and Tyrion have better arcs than Cersei, but in some respects Yasha has a better arc than say Theon Greyjoy. It's well balanced.
May depend on how "romantic" the reader's world-view is? I mean if you prefer CS Lewis or Terry Moore, this may not be your thing?
Re: GRRM
That was my take as well. Most fantasy novels tend to be the Middle Ages by way of the 1800s Victorian sensibilities...which I always found to be incredibly amusing. As if the writer were writing the tale from a Victorian mindset or
view of their own age.
Martin's is closer to the actual circumstances and a lot less romanticized.
Granted, you could say that his choice of time-periods is a bit circumspect, but most fantasy tends to take place in the Middle Ages - because there's no science and technology back then, and more reliance on magic and superstition. In short - it's more believable to have horses, wizards, and dragons in that setting. Not to mention war by sword as opposed to guns. Also, all ages have a certain level of rape and pillaging associated with war - so picking modern times wouldn't necessarily be better. Martin tends to like a certain degree of realism in his story-telling, and fantasy, which tends to be a bit darker. ( The Wire -for example - is a bit noirish for the same reason, yet totally different time period.)
To the extent that I do like particular characters, though, the ones I like are the women: Dany and Arya in particular. I don't think of the series as anti-women, since the men are, if anything, more unsavory than the women (I mean, is Cersei really worse than Tywin?).</i. I tend to agree. We have a range. Catelynn - I found to be more sympathetic and a lot brighter than Ned Stark. And Cersei is in some respects more likable than her father Tywin - who in many ways created her. Her motives make more sense than his. Granted you could argue that Jamie and Tyrion have better arcs than Cersei, but in some respects Yasha has a better arc than say Theon Greyjoy. It's well balanced. May depend on how "romantic" the reader's world-view is? I mean if you prefer CS Lewis or Terry Moore, this may not be your thing?