Fire and Blood is a work of “history” describing the rise of Targaryen power in Westeros, and the tumultuous century of losing/gaining said power which followed. It is Song of Ice and Fire in concentrated form.
But also engaging. Where reading real world history is sometimes a dull, dry affair, Martin plays off two things to keep his fantasy history interesting: 1) humanity's penchant for all things royal, and 2) portraying humanity's foibles in the arena of power and pleasure, i.e. titillating drama. Martin also plays a bit off readers' prior knowledge of the world, but it's not necessary to know what role the Starks or Lannisters play in Song of Ice and Fire to enjoy Fire and Blood.
Compared to the two most recent Song of Fire and Ice novels, Fire and Blood is a breath of fresh air. Simply put, it contains more creative energy and is focused. Let's get a little deeper in that.
It came as a surprise to many readers that instead of releasing the looooooong awaited Winds of Winter, Martin instead chose to release the first half of a duology on Targaryen history, i.e. Fire and Blood. If he found the energy to pen 600+ pages on the Targaryens, why not use that energy to finish Winter? The answer is obvious: Martin had already completed the story of Song of Ice and Fire, even if vicariously, through the tv series. The artistic desire to get that story out of his imagination and into the public's eye had already been sated. In short, he blew his artistic load on HBO. As such, it's easy to picture Martin struggling to collect the energy to tell the story, again, in Winter. In rumination upon the NEXT BIG PROJECT, the fertile fields of Targaryen history unfurled themselves in his imagination—blue skies begging to be put on paper. And off he went with the vigor that we associate with the first three Ice and Fire books.
Fire and Blood reads energetically and dynamically--the Martin of "old". Technique wise, he is on top of his game. The narrative is tight, end to end, and its goals and movement are clear. The same cannot be said of Feast for Crows or Dance with Dragons. And we wait... and wait, and wait, and wait, with bated breath, how Winter will turn out. Will it have the same creative energy, let's see.
I have seen some people comparing Fire and Blood to Tolkien's The Silmarillion. At the high level, its impossible to disagree. Both works are fantastical histories which complement and help build the backdrops to worlds which became popular through other novels. Both works also forefront the darker sides of human nature, particularly when it comes to power and pleasure, and the effort it takes to be “good”.
But there are two key points separating the books; they are distinctly different in tone and import. Firstly, Martin's work is mimetic and graphic in detail. It portrays the vicissitudes of life in a way Tolkien never touched with a ten foot pole—incest, treachery, narcissism, psychological issues, rape, etc. Tolkien's work, on the other hand, has an ethereal, mythic feel to it that describes power and pleasure in an idealistic manner. Secondly, Tolkien is highly selective of the places in his faux-history he chooses to present. He puts the spotlight on a handful of moments/relationships which were most impactful to the outcomes of his history. Martin spreads his story far further. The number of characters is significantly greater, and the details of each generation/period are given relatively equal weight, from times of peace to times of war. In short, Fire and Blood reads more like a real work of history, whereas The Silmarillion reads more like a collection of interlinked fables/myths—very different.
In the end, Fire and Blood is a fun book that plays endlessly with Westeros. It's mostly for diehard fans, but at the same time it's entirely possible to read as a standalone. As stated, it is Song of Ice and Fire in concentrated form, and with more energy than “recent” novels in the series. Don't read it, however, if you're enjoying the series House of the Dragon. It spoils everything.
No comments:
Post a Comment