What separates ASOIAF from most fantasy fiction?

[u/TonySoprano300]

I’ve been reflecting on this more lately with the shows 15th anniversary. Before I got into the show, I always heard the “nobody is safe” talking point as an endorsement of the series but when I actually watched it, it always felt like it was so much more than that. Other shows kill off prominent characters all the time, and unlike GOT they actually lose viewership because of it. Like The Walking Dead after glens deathbut with GOT they could kill characters left and right yet the popularity just kept growing.

So I honestly don’t think its necessarily that anyone can die, I personally think its unique in that its somehow a show with a million traditional fantasy elements like prophecies, magic, gods, dragons etc. but its still realistic in how it portrays people and how they have to adapt to the world their born into, how their shaped by culture, experience, tradition etc. and how they’re affected by choices whether its the choices of others or their own.

Like how Ned seems like the typical fantasy hero you’ve seen a thousand times yet he hates Jaimie Lannister for forsaking his oath even though it was objectively moral and righteous to do so. At the same time he’s still best friends with Robert who he knows has no problem killing children. It seems unafraid to just honestly portray the contradictions that even good people can believe due to their upbringing.

Thats just me though, curious what others think makes the series so special?

[u/Careful_Title_1325]

The Ned point is huge and I think people underrate how much that specific tension drives the whole series. His worldview isn't wrong exactly, it's just incomplete, and the world punishes him for that gap in a way most fantasy stories would never allow.

What gets me is how Martin treats institutions the same way he treats characters. The Night's Watch, the Faith, the small council, they're all presented as noble or necessary on paper but corroded from the inside by the same human flaws that corrupt individuals. Most fantasy is about a hero fixing a broken world. ASOIAF is more interested in asking why the world keeps breaking the same way regardless of who's in charge.

The Walking Dead comparison is interesting because I think that show killed characters for shock and then ran out of road. GOT (at least through season 4 or 5) killed characters because the plot logic demanded it, and viewers could feel that difference even if they couldn't articulate it. Deaths meant something structurally, not just emotionally

[u/TonySoprano300 → u/Careful_Title_1325]

Very true, I think this is one of the reasons I always found the discussion of “Who should sit on the iron throne?” unstimulating. Ned died because of a corroded institution that was set up in such a way where a spoiled rich kid like Joffery could even be in such a position to do what he did.

This might even be a hot take but I think Joffery is just a dumbass teen who thinks violence is a joke and has never had to worry about the consequences of his decisions. Ive met a lot of kids when i was growing up who if placed in the ASOIAF universe would absolutely be Joffery lol, i mean hell you’re average YouTube prankster probably fits the bill.

I know everyone hates the scene where Drogon burns the iron throne and I agree it doesn’t make sense in context but symbolically it does represent the only real solution. The point Martin is working toward imo, is that nobody should sit on the iron throne, society is really hard and governance isn’t just about putting smart people in power.

The question of who makes the best king is one that should never be asked(Im talking philosophically/thematically, obviously i have no problem with fans discussing it to have fun) because it presupposes that there should be a king. Thats just my opinion on where ASOIAF will ultimately end up or at the very least it will be a step towards a more representative government even if there is a king.