[Callan S.]

Maybe GRRM is one of the last stands of artistic protagonism in a world drenched with entertainment - a last stand of the artist coming before.

Maybe he is, but I have a hard time believing that the HBO series wasn't simply for entertainment and money. Don't get me wrong, if I had the chance, I'd sure as hell take that contract too. Its basically free money. It just doesn't scream "artistic protagonism" lol.

Depends how much they violated the artwork - I haven't actually seen the series. How much did they change in the name of entertainment?

If there was little change (preferably no change at all), I don't see how having an offshoot series is counter to artistic protagonism?

It's best if it doesn't scream artitic protagonism - that's not the important thing to go on about. But it can still be there, even if it's not an excercise in trumpeting about itself.

[Wilshire]

Eh, I've done enough airing of my own opinions here I think . You should really watch a couple episodes and see for yourself. It could just be one of those things that if you are a big enough fan, it doesn't really matter what it is, you'll like it. If a HBO series about TSA came out, I'd watch it every week until it got canceled regardless of how good it was.

[Kellais]

Maybe GRRM is one of the last stands of artistic protagonism in a world drenched with entertainment - a last stand of the artist coming before.

I'm glad at least someone got what I was trying to say.

Not sure if the rest of us didn't understand what you were trying to say...i think it was more of a "we do not agree".

And i am with Wilshire here on account of the series and why Martin said "yes" to that project. I totally understand that decision, don't get me wrong...and i am also not damning any author who sells his/her books for tv or cinema...just to be clear. I'd do it as well if i had a novel hollywood would want to buy from me.
But i laugh into the face of anyone who tries to convince me that such a step was taken so as to ensure or expand the artistic value/horizon/what-have-you of ones work and property.

[Wilshire]

Don't be too hasty Kellais. I'd definitely say that there could be "good" reasons for doing something like that. For example from what I understand, Orson Scott Card has waited decades to make his movie of Ender's Game, and thrown out multiple contracts long into the process when he finds that the producers are trying to change around his ideas (specifically not having anyone but a child be the main character. I think his limit was 12 years old or something). We will see what the movie is like later this year, but it seems to me that Card found a very positive way to disseminate his own work without twisting it into pop-culture garbage.

On the other hand, I hear that World War Z is almost completely different from the book, with nearly all political/socio-economic commentary removed and its essentially just a cool action flick. Though I've never read the book nor seen the movie so I can't say either way.

Its not inherently selfish to agree to put a literary work onto a screen. Nor am I necessarily saying that GRRM was just in it for the money. I'm just saying dont condemn or commend everyone at once. Its likely a volatile subject and painting with a broad brush tends to make people upset. If you haven't seen the show in question and read the book, I'd suggest that you do both before having an opinion either way.

[Francis Buck]

Maybe GRRM is one of the last stands of artistic protagonism in a world drenched with entertainment - a last stand of the artist coming before.

I'm glad at least someone got what I was trying to say.

Not sure if the rest of us didn't understand what you were trying to say...i think it was more of a "we do not agree".

And i am with Wilshire here on account of the series and why Martin said "yes" to that project. I totally understand that decision, don't get me wrong...and i am also not damning any author who sells his/her books for tv or cinema...just to be clear. I'd do it as well if i had a novel hollywood would want to buy from me.
But i laugh into the face of anyone who tries to convince me that such a step was taken so as to ensure or expand the artistic value/horizon/what-have-you of ones work and property.

Hah, dude, I was just being cheeky. I completely understand where you guys are coming from.

[Callan S.]

But i laugh into the face of anyone who tries to convince me that such a step was taken so as to ensure or expand the artistic value/horizon/what-have-you of ones work and property.

Just as much as the books are duplicated, the TV show just seems a duplication (that's why I ask about them changing things - to see if its not really a duplication)

Are the book duplications being taken as 'not for the money' whilst the TV show is being taken as being 'for the money'.

There is something folksy about writing - it's something you can do on your front porch, while obviously the TV show could not be done that way, which isn't as intimate as something that can be done on our own porch is. But the books are still mass produced and enter a distribution chain.

[Kellais]

@ Wilshire - Please don't put words into my mouth. I explicitely stated that i am not condemning anyone for taking that step. I am just convinced that someone who has a successful novel and agrees to a tv or cinema deal is not doing it for the intellectual worth or artistic value of their work.
And i have read the books (the first 4 anyway) and seen all 3 Seasons of the TV series.

@ Francis - lol...ok, you got me ... i guess i am internet-irony-prone...i'm kind of the Forum-Sheldon 

@ Callan S - Not sure what point you are trying to make? And as you quoted me, i guess it is directed at me? Care to elaborate?

If the books are what comes first (no pun intended ), then i guess you can never be sure that you'll make any money with them. So while you might hope to "write them for the money" you still have to write them because you want to tell a story and have real passion for that...because chances are you'll never see a dime out of it. Now if someone like Martin with his SoIaF gets approached for a tv series, he is guaranteed to make a shit-load of money...even if the series flops...because they have to pay him for the rights to produce it anyway. So for me, there is a definite difference here. Not sure if that is what you were hinting at, Callan?

[Callan S.]

So you're saying the books were originally written without a hope of recompense (though surely the latter books in this case would have had signs of sales?) but the TV series was definately going to be a paid thing?

I'm not sure about the lack of recompense - do we really expect authors to have absolutely no hope of paying for food and shelter in their efforts - it has to be 'just for the love'? I mean sure, not hoping for $1000+ an hour of work (or even more, though he probably gets some obscene amount now), but something about twice that of minimum wage ($30 an hour?)

I guess GRRM might have gone into it with no hope of any recompense at all. I just kind of doubt it - surely lots of artists have a love for their work - but also want a certain level of pay for it as well? Or am I out of touch on that?

Granted the whole TV series is simply even more money on top. But if you take it that the concern at the begining wasn't just 'for the love'  but also some amount of money, then it's both an expansion of both - if GRRM wants to pass on some kind of lesson with his work, the TV series would help that. And his other goal was to pay rent - yeah, it expands that. But yeah, it probably is a good question - does it expand the money too far? Does GRRM prattle on about winter coming, but doesn't donate any of that extra loot to third world charities or anything?

[Garet Jax]

Now we are getting kinky...

You are both right.  In my opinion most authors start and continue writing because they have a passion for it, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to do certain things to make sure they profit more from said writing.

Oh wait, was that too short again? 

[Kellais]

So you're saying the books were originally written without a hope of recompense (though surely the latter books in this case would have had signs of sales?) but the TV series was definately going to be a paid thing?

No to the first part...but yes to the second part. If you read my last post closely, i said that if you write books, you cannot be sure you'll be paid for them. I guess in case of Martin, this might only be a half-truth because when writing the first SoIaF book he already was a publised and known author so he could be reasonably sure that someone would pick his fantasy series up. I was more speaking from a general standpoint.
And i also think it is reasonable to assume that if you have a well selling book series and you get approached by a TV channel or a cinema production firm, you'll definitely make money if the pick it up.

Anyway, i guess if you really disagree with those statements, this discussion is going nowhere...so let us end it. We are way off topic anyway 
If you want to answer my questions from my last post and/or elaborate on your post before my last, then feel free to send me a PM.

Cheers

[Madness]

I realize I've ignored this conversation for this long (read: not generating content) but I wonder if the subjectivity of value isn't the crux in this matter.

Historically, artists have enjoyed patrons...

For instance:

I have a friend whom, when I met him years back, I asked to redo the bottom of my longboard. Finally, this past summer, I simply traded mine for his, leaving mine at his house. I'd hounded him for years (literally) about scraping my deck and the day after I left my board at his house, it had begun.

Now I always intended to pay him for this task. However, both he and I have had hilarious thoughts and conversations about the ridiculousness of putting a monetary value on art and still cannot decide what I should pay for it. We've jokingly settled on a cool million, which I'll pay over time.

As I've followed along, I think Garet's most recent comment nails the crux; what I've tried to illustrate more clearly with my anecdote.

The job got done, not because I hounded my friend and threw money at him for the entirety of our relationship, but because he wanted to draw something.

We, as a society, don't seem to take the effort to cultivate a more balanced appreciation of art, with which we might reward, instead of marginalize, those creative fonts among us and so push our human boundaries.

[Callan S.]

If you read my last post closely, i said that if you write books, you cannot be sure you'll be paid for them.

True, but this doesn't tell us what intent the author had in writing it. That the author might not get paid doesn't automatically mean they weren't writing with hope of financial recompense. But it is possible.

[Madness]

Lol - All the deaths in "A Song of Ice and Fire" sticky-noted [no spoilers].

Now let's compare instances of rape across "grimdark" authors ...

[Davias]

Nice picture, Madness.
It is funny to see, what people do with enough time and their favourite fantasy book series. I have read the first four books three or four times, but I hadn't had an idea like this...

Now, let us do some IMPORTANT things and do a mathematical research of how many Scranc in a ten-yoke-legion one mandate sorcerer could possibly kill in one hour...

[Madness]

Hmm...

Many.

Achamian's strategy of just letting them encompass his wards (as per Eskeles and Sorweel) and then using the Compass of Noshainrau seems pretty devastating.