Next Game of Thrones book The Winds of Winter won't be out until 2016

[kentonio]

I don't know what you mean by a "stereotypical" good guy. I feel bad for King Lear, and he's a vain, pompous fool. And I have no intention of watching The Wire, or most any other TV show.

You have no interest in watching the greatest TV show ever made? Wow..

I'm listing the reasons I don't read the books: they (supposedly) take place in a world bereft of beauty or goodness. Basically a cage match between Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini and Tojo. Who gives a damn who wins?

Except that isn't in any way a reasonable comparison. Many of the characters in GoT are sympathetic, they are also just also very human. Each 'hero' also has flaws, and the story isn't shy about revealing those flaws. Eddard Stark is very much a traditional hero, yet his flaws are made clear as the story unfolds. It's far more satisfying than if he was just the golden boy who could do no wrong.

[Jon Miller]

I'm listing the reasons I don't read the books: they (supposedly) take place in a world bereft of beauty or goodness. Basically a cage match between Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini and Tojo. Who gives a damn who wins?

There are a lot of books, especially recently due to being inspired by aSoIaF, which are this way. I also often give them a pass (unless they are really good). I do not think that aSoIaF is there, despite what people may claim/etc.

I think that GRRM hasn't lost the point that the world can't exist bereft of beauty or goodness (unlike some who are inspired by him). Sometimes the books spend quite some time in a part of the world that is in a pretty bad place though.

JM

[Lorizael]

Except that isn't in any way a reasonable comparison. Many of the characters in GoT are sympathetic, they are also just also very human. Each 'hero' also has flaws, and the story isn't shy about revealing those flaws. Eddard Stark is very much a traditional hero, yet his flaws are made clear as the story unfolds. It's far more satisfying than if he was just the golden boy who could do no wrong.

Indeed. One of GRRM's greatest talents as a writer is to get inside the POV of his characters. When he does this well, he can take characters that were basically just villains and turn them into complex characters you want to keep reading about, if not root for.

[Elok]

Well, I'm just reporting what I've read. Let me put it this way: do these people ever struggle against their flaws? Do they recognize their own darkness as an enemy? Or is it the case that some of them beat their wives twice a day, and some only twice a week, and so we root for the latter by default? I liked the film LA Confidential even though the three main characters were a maniac, a shill and a backstabber, and all three hopelessly crooked in general--because, over the course of the film, each of them comes to face his own demons and makes some effort against them, even as he's tracking down the film's official villains.

[Jon Miller]

Well, I'm just reporting what I've read. Let me put it this way: do these people ever struggle against their flaws? Do they recognize their own darkness as an enemy? Or is it the case that some of them beat their wives twice a day, and some only twice a week, and so we root for the latter by default?

Yes. Yes. No. (the characters who don't answer yes to the first two are villains)

I think that a lot of people look at it in a very grimdark (and emphasize that) way (and many imitators of GRRM actually do write grimdark stuff); but this is not GRRM at all.

JM
(I would be worried that GRRM will change due to his readers, but he very much tries not to be influenced by them.)

[Lorizael]

Some do, some don't. The character I was thinking of above* most certainly does. Because of an act he committed when he was much younger, he's viewed as evil by most of the world. At the beginning of the series, he's basically accepted this mantle. But interaction with some of the other almost objectively nice characters (one of whom was mentioned above) during the course of the series has caused him to look inward and try to change himself.

*

Spoiler:

Jaime Lannister

[Imran Siddiqui]

You have no interest in watching the greatest TV show ever made? Wow..

Elok never mentioned Breaking Bad

[FlameFlash]

Breaking Bad... that's another one I haven't watched...

[N35t0r]

You left out the key part which is that the previous record was set by THOR.

Oh great. Now we'll have Viking suicide bombers for disrespecting their god

[Dinner]

Well, I'm just reporting what I've read. Let me put it this way: do these people ever struggle against their flaws? Do they recognize their own darkness as an enemy?

One could make an excellent case that this is exactly what Jaime Lannister is currently doing.

[I AM MOBIUS]

It's absolutely nothing like either The Borgias or The Tudors. The name thing is true though.

WTF - you are joking, right? It's totally the Borgias, though more the Wars of the Roses than the Tudors - but definitely elements of the Tudors - I hope you're watching Wolf Hall...

Take the Borgias:

There's a Gioffre (Jofré) Borgia who marries Sancha (Sancia) when he's 12 and she's 16 - the fact that GRRM names two young characters in GoT after them must mean he himself admits he based at least part of the books on the machinations of the Borgias...

Let's not also forget:

Gioffre's relationship with his father was poor. Pope Alexander VI legitimized him, but privately expressed doubts that Gioffre was his son.

You know nothing, Kent Onio...

[I AM MOBIUS]

But what troubles me most about these accounts I've heard is that it's an essentially nihilistic universe--there's no real good guys, no moral focus, just people stabbing each other in the back, or front if they're feeling brave, until eventually enough ambitious people are dead that the high king of whatever is determined by process of elimination. I want somebody to root for, or some overriding theme beyond a fishbowl crowded with bettas.

That just sounds so goddamned American...

There are plenty of people to root for - not to mention a number of people who seem on the face of it not-good guys, who may yet turn out to be good guys...

Personally, one of the qualities of the show I like the most is it's moral ambiguity, and the fact that you're never quite sure if a seemingly major character is going to get offed or not.

It's realistic - and not the usual fairy tale good Vs evil bollocks you usually get.

[I AM MOBIUS]

Well, I'm just reporting what I've read. Let me put it this way: do these people ever struggle against their flaws? Do they recognize their own darkness as an enemy? Or is it the case that some of them beat their wives twice a day, and some only twice a week, and so we root for the latter by default? I liked the film LA Confidential even though the three main characters were a maniac, a shill and a backstabber, and all three hopelessly crooked in general--because, over the course of the film, each of them comes to face his own demons and makes some effort against them, even as he's tracking down the film's official villains.

To that I say, open your eyes!

What you describe is completely alien to what I have read so far: one of the things I like about the book is the very real shifting sands nature of the characters in the books. As well as JM's response and at least one (spoiler) character named, I can think of many that fit your criteria: Some are 'good guys' who pay the price of 'bad' flaws - and some are 'bad' guys who learn to become 'nicer' - so far...

[I AM MOBIUS]

One could make an excellent case that this is exactly what Jaime Lannister is currently doing.

One could make a case that evidently Elok might not have read that far to realise this and that you've posted an overt spoiler...

[Jon Miller]

That just sounds so goddamned American...

There are plenty of people to root for - not to mention a number of people who seem on the face of it not-good guys, who may yet turn out to be good guys...

Personally, one of the qualities of the show I like the most is it's moral ambiguity, and the fact that you're never quite sure if a seemingly major character is going to get offed or not.

It's realistic - and not the usual fairy tale good Vs evil bollocks you usually get.

Good versus evil is a bit 'false' but it is just as 'false' to make everyone greedy and evil bastards like some authors do.

JM
(well, in some subsets everyone are greedy and evil bastards, but you can choose not to read about those subsets)