My husband and I are both reading George R R Martin's Song of Ice and Fire series (are you sick of hearing me talk about him yet?). Now that we own A Game of Thrones (book one), A Clash of Kings (book two), and A Storm of Swords (book three), we are racing through them, and I am proud to say I'm a book ahead of my husband! Although this time, I'm not going to deal with the frustration that is A Feast for Crows (book four) until I have A Dance With Dragons (book five) firmly in hand.
I just finished book three, he just finished book two. I'm enjoying the books for what they are, he is analyzing them. It's easy to go crazy with the analyzing while reading book two, because in my opinion, that is the weakest novel in the collection.
The analysis is going something like this so far: The good guys keep getting screwed! The Stark family is awesome, how come members of the family keep getting killed and there aren't enough brothers and sisters around to do anything? Why do our favored characters come from small, insular families with little ties to power, and the bad guys have unlimited families, unlimited influence and power, and seemingly unlimited gold? Why should someone who is a “good guy” do the right thing, when doing the right thing will could get them demoted, banished, or killed?
What is Martin trying to tell us? Is he giving the message that it's not worth it to be a good guy and do the right thing, because they only get screwed in the end? I don't think so. I think he's telling us to be a good guy, and do the right thing. Because it's the right thing to do. And bad guys aren't anywhere near as smart as they think they are.
However, now that I'm done with book three, and trying to remember what happens during the frustrating book four, I'm starting to reconsider my strict lists of “good guys” and “bad guys”.
Should you find out when A Dance with Dragons is really supposed to show up, please let me know.