laineyg's review against another edition
I’ve read most of this already through various asoiaf wiki pages over the years lol but still good! grrm very unserious for naming riverlords after muppets and sesame street characters
magnoliapigeonbookblurbs's review against another edition
3.0
My brain has melted.
So much information.
So much information.
yannick_td's review against another edition
3.0
wekt veel interesse in de wereld, maar is uiteindelijk beschouwing en heeft daardoor weinig inlevingsvermogen
aradeia's review against another edition
dark
informative
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
I love the Targaryens. They're my favorite house in Westeros. I think their history is very interesting, and I love all the colorful characters that make up their dynasty. I've also lost my mind for the new House of the Dragon show, and I can't seriously be expected to wait another 2 years to find out what happens next in the Dance of the Dragons. So I picked up "Fire and Blood."
I knew it was a fictional work of history, not a novel. This actually was in its favor, because I love history, and more to the point, I love historiography. I find the way we write history, the way we talk about history, the way we think about our past fascinating, so fascinating I wrote my MA thesis on Tacitus and Livy's historiographies. Unfortunately, archmaester Gyldayn is just not Tacitus or Livy.
What I mean is that "Fire and Blood" seems to be missing a real authorial voice. I've read a good deal of ancient and medieval historiographies, and the writers of these texts generally take a side and show their biases pretty obviously. They're generally not telling history for the sake of the history, but to push an argument. Gyldayn must be ahead of his times, because he presents fairly sympathetic views of everyone, even when he's talking about religious warfare and civil war. Now obviously there are some characters like Maegor the Cruel and Mysaria that he disdains. But even for these characters, he often allows negative interpretations of a character's actions or motivations to exist side by side with more positive or at least sympathetic interpretations in the same paragraph, thus allowing his readers to make up their own mind. Tacitus wouldn't let me do this.
All that said, I don't think George Martin can actually publish a more genuinely medieval or ancient style historiography today. The level of sexism and classism that would be present in such a book would be too much for me to accept in a contemporary work of fiction. So I accept archmaester Gyldayn as he is.
I knew it was a fictional work of history, not a novel. This actually was in its favor, because I love history, and more to the point, I love historiography. I find the way we write history, the way we talk about history, the way we think about our past fascinating, so fascinating I wrote my MA thesis on Tacitus and Livy's historiographies. Unfortunately, archmaester Gyldayn is just not Tacitus or Livy.
What I mean is that "Fire and Blood" seems to be missing a real authorial voice. I've read a good deal of ancient and medieval historiographies, and the writers of these texts generally take a side and show their biases pretty obviously. They're generally not telling history for the sake of the history, but to push an argument. Gyldayn must be ahead of his times, because he presents fairly sympathetic views of everyone, even when he's talking about religious warfare and civil war. Now obviously there are some characters like Maegor the Cruel and Mysaria that he disdains. But even for these characters, he often allows negative interpretations of a character's actions or motivations to exist side by side with more positive or at least sympathetic interpretations in the same paragraph, thus allowing his readers to make up their own mind. Tacitus wouldn't let me do this.
All that said, I don't think George Martin can actually publish a more genuinely medieval or ancient style historiography today. The level of sexism and classism that would be present in such a book would be too much for me to accept in a contemporary work of fiction. So I accept archmaester Gyldayn as he is.
sagittariusreads_'s review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
informative
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.5
baby_loona's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
funny
mysterious
relaxing
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
izreading88's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
emotional
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
5.0
The most interesting fictional history I’ve read yet
gewidder's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
emotional
informative
relaxing
slow-paced
4.75