A Song of Ice and Fire (Game of Thrones)

I found, for free, the first two books of the series. I read the first one, I don't expect to read any more. I have also watched the first two seasons (all that have been broadcast) of the HBO series. My summary of the general backstory would be:

A thousand years ago people from the continent crossed over a land bridge to a previously long isolated island and established a kingdom. The land bridge closed and everything was isolated again for several hundred years. Then people started to come across by boat and new kingdoms were carved out. Eventually this guy who had some dragons decided to unite the whole island, this was about three hundred years ago. That guy made a throne out of swords of his enemies which is still being used. Then his family ruled, with incest as a rule, until one particularly crazy guy got the throne. The people rebelled, and the old king was killed. This is about ten-fifteen years before the story starts. Book one deals with the end of usurper king's life, and the rest of the series is about the "free-for-all battle" for power. Will it remain a single kingdom or revert to separate smaller states? Who will have power and how much? There are long histories of who did what to whom that are still motivating people.

The island is somewhat modeled after England, with a frozen northland kept walled off (ie, Scotland) and a continent to the East. There are various families with substantial power at the start, each with their own motivations, rules of conduct, and resources. Each family also has distinguishing physical attributes and naming styles. Eg, the Lanisters are all rich and blond; there is a tradition in the Starks of naming one boy in every generation "Brandon".

There are hints of a substantial threat mounting in the frozen northland that will probably figure into the conclusion of the last book. The story in many ways uses examples from European history for how things are done. King Robert, in the first book, reminds me of Henry VIII in many ways: his love of tournaments and hunting, and his lavish spending. Robert has a single wife, however, and does not instigate a religious shift.

I've heard people gripe about the new words the books introduce.

I did not find this to be a problem. Some of the words are not real terms, but coined for the series, eg "sellsword" for "mercenary". All of them seem well enough obvious from context. Or perhaps I'm just better versed in medieval terms.

There is far too much visual detail about everything. My understanding is he is a frustrated TV script writer who turned to novels because TV companies did not want to work on the scale he did. The books, if half as long, might be worth reading, but bleh. I'd rather read something that's a real history, or something that is really historical, not bloated fiction about a fictional world.

Final thought: just finished Les Liaisons dangereuses (1990 translation of 1782 book)

Sarah Vowell

I've previously read Assassination Vacation, and Unfamiliar Fishes (a history of Hawaii mostly focused on the period between the visit of James Cooks and becoming the 50th State). I'm pretty sure I've read The Partly-Cloudy Patriot, but that would have been some years ago. I have not read her other three books (Wordy Shipmates, about Pilgrims; Radio On, I'm guessing about radio; and Take the Cannoli, for which I don't really know the topic).

To kids, she is problably best known as the voice of the teen daughter, Violet, in Pixar's The Incredibles.

Vowell has very engaging histories. She clearly likes this country, but she also refuses to look past it's warts. And there are so many warts that regular histories gloss over or ignore.

Final thought: Chcking imdb I see she's also in several other smaller movie roles.

LOAD"FROWN FISH",8,1

Last night I read The Octonauts & the Frown Fish to my six year old. At one point a character tries to get information about the "frown fish" at a computer by typing

LOAD"FROWN FISH",8,1

I read that aloud (load frown fish comma eight comma one) and laughed a little. My son laughed, repeated it, laughed again, repeated it, and then asked "Why is that funny?"

If you don't know: It's how to load a program from disk on a Commodore 64.

Go watch The Watchmen

In Aug of 2009, I wrote:

I enjoyed it a lot and I have not read the original. Judging by the special features, the Rorschach character is a favorite of people who read the book, but he definately wasn't a favorite of mine (not that I disliked him). The Comedian, there was a character I liked. Here's a misanthrope who believes life's biggest joke is life, a cynical muscle man with a big sexist streak, but at times has a Lebowski air to him.

Having now completed the book, I can see how Rorschach is more significant there (at least more significant than I remember him in the movie). Much of the story is clearly told from Rorschach's point of view. The Comedian is here, but seems a more minor character. Much of the story is as I remember it from the film, and the panels have very careful art that foreshadows and hints and provides depth.

There are some things, besides the psychic squid, that are only in the book. There is an arc with a kid reading an old comic (there is a difference in halftone size to show the switch) with bits of that story echoing things going on around him ("Tales of the Black Freighter", a demonic pirate story). Each chapter in the book (presumably issue in the original) ends with a non-comic segment. "Excerpts" from books, magazines, and other sources, providing additional background on various characters and the world they live in.

I don't read a lot of graphic novels (or even novels) but I enjoyed this.

Final thought: heading to the library to try to get How Buildings Learn next