Leave a comment

danieldwilliam June 11 2013, 12:44:24 UTC
My speculative fiction tends to be more SF than F. In my youth I was enjoyed a good fantasy novel as much as the next person but got a bit out of the habit.

Partly, that’s because during the time when BB and the Captain were small I didn’t have a lot of time or energy for reading so pruned my interests down (perhaps too much). Take this weekend as an example. 4 or 5 years ago I’d have risen at 9, had breakfast and taken a blanket and a cushion and a book on to the meadows, popped back at lunch time and carried out a beer or two and still been there reading at 8 at night. This year it’s riding on miniture railways, catching tadpoles in a net, watching a small boy defy death and cultural norms about trousers at a play park.

Partly it’s a philosophical or political decision to focus on speculative fiction that discusses how the future might be and how we might be in that future. That’s certainly a reason why I don’t go for much steam punk. I’m sure there is lots of fantasy that acts as a social commentary on how society could be organised differently but SF seems more direct about it’s engagement with change. With a much tighter time budget fantasy seems to have fallen by the wayside.

Specifically on Game of Thrones it just seemed to have passed me by. I reckon I’m likely to give it a go at some point but it looks like a huge undertaking. It took months to work through the Baroque Cycle and the Bas Lang books.

Reply

andrewducker June 11 2013, 13:23:20 UTC
Yeah, if it's not a direction you're focussed in then I totally understand that you haven't engaged with it. It's not like there's a shortage of fiction that you actively want to read.

Should you fancy the TV series then I can lend you the Blu-Rays of the first season.

Reply

danieldwilliam June 11 2013, 13:37:31 UTC
That would be kind.

Is it best to read first then watch or the other way round?

Reply

naath June 11 2013, 14:13:03 UTC
I think it's better to read them first; but then I actively enjoy reading looooooooooong fantasy series and find it MUCH easier to tell apart the CAST OF THOUSANDS (er, dozens) in text than on screen (I'm bad at recognising people AND I often knit whilst watching TV such that "watching" is more "listening to").

The TV comes in bite-sized chunks; and the whole thing is faster to get through (unless you are a very fast reader indeed).

Reply

danieldwilliam June 11 2013, 14:22:52 UTC
Thanks both - helpful.

Reply

spacelem June 11 2013, 15:36:37 UTC
Personally I find it much easier to watch the series, and then read the books, as I've then got some idea of who the many people are, and what's going on. I tend to have difficulties visualising things in text, including faces (and voices) and any action scenes, where I have no idea what the author is intending me to see.

Reply

andrewducker June 11 2013, 14:16:06 UTC
Watch then read, as I found the cast of thousands much easier to tell apart when I could see their faces, and got lost repeatedly when I first tried to read the books.

Also, the books cover more than the TV series, so I could watch the series and then go and get the Expanded Edition in book form, whereas watching a cut-down version would probably have annoyed me.

(You may now take whichever set of advice best fits your personal preferences/experience.)

Reply

a_pawson June 11 2013, 15:05:16 UTC
I found it the opposite way around. I watched the first two series and by the end of series 2 was really struggling to remember exactly who half the characters were and what all their motivations were. I then went off and read the books, which have more time to point out exactly who is related to who, and why they may or may not hold a 500 year old grudge. It made the whole thing far more accessible to me, not least because of the ever handy appendices. Watching the latest series having read the books was a far more enjoyable experience.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up