There was this Tumblr post a while back that made an interesting point about UNDERTALE - that the reason the game was so wildly successful is that all the characters in it were the fanfiction versions of themselves. (It was called the "Undertale Prime" theory, and this being Tumblr the response was to call the guy who came up with it a homophobe.) I think that's basically correct, and I think something similar is going on with plots like the ones you're describing here - a game with real conflict between characters would be worse as fodder for a cozy coffeeshop AU.
This put into words so beautifully something that has been bothering me in a lot of recent fiction. I've gotten so impatient with this cozy, conflict-free, gently dystopian utopia. It feels like everything is like this now, is sanding the edges off of the most basic of human conflicts. No one in a story can have genuinely competing interests from everyone else - even if it *seems* they do, in the end, it turns out their interests were all the same the whole time, way deep down.
I really like this post but I'm a little confused by the inclusion of 'A Game of Thrones.' The first three novels came out 1996-2000 before the War on Terror began.
They did, but I was thinking more of what time period most people associate them with, since the show skyrocketed their appeal. And I do think the grimdark genre in general didn't really kick off until around 2005/2006, at least in terms of mass appeal and success.
But, yes, grimdark as a genre, and Game of Thrones, were out before the War on Terror.
I do think Book 4 is one of the masterpieces of wartime fiction, honestly. I think it's one of the few books that really deals with the calamity--socially, culturally, economically, and politically--of a nation at war. So I would not be surprised, especially knowing Martin's political leanings, that Book 4 was especially transformed by the War on Terror, even if only unconsciously.
There was this Tumblr post a while back that made an interesting point about UNDERTALE - that the reason the game was so wildly successful is that all the characters in it were the fanfiction versions of themselves. (It was called the "Undertale Prime" theory, and this being Tumblr the response was to call the guy who came up with it a homophobe.) I think that's basically correct, and I think something similar is going on with plots like the ones you're describing here - a game with real conflict between characters would be worse as fodder for a cozy coffeeshop AU.
This put into words so beautifully something that has been bothering me in a lot of recent fiction. I've gotten so impatient with this cozy, conflict-free, gently dystopian utopia. It feels like everything is like this now, is sanding the edges off of the most basic of human conflicts. No one in a story can have genuinely competing interests from everyone else - even if it *seems* they do, in the end, it turns out their interests were all the same the whole time, way deep down.
I really like this post but I'm a little confused by the inclusion of 'A Game of Thrones.' The first three novels came out 1996-2000 before the War on Terror began.
They did, but I was thinking more of what time period most people associate them with, since the show skyrocketed their appeal. And I do think the grimdark genre in general didn't really kick off until around 2005/2006, at least in terms of mass appeal and success.
But, yes, grimdark as a genre, and Game of Thrones, were out before the War on Terror.
Ah, got it. Now that I think about it, I wonder if Books 4 and 5 were delayed in part because the War on Terror had impacted Martin and the genre.
It's possible!
I do think Book 4 is one of the masterpieces of wartime fiction, honestly. I think it's one of the few books that really deals with the calamity--socially, culturally, economically, and politically--of a nation at war. So I would not be surprised, especially knowing Martin's political leanings, that Book 4 was especially transformed by the War on Terror, even if only unconsciously.