People who love one of these stories tend to either really love, or at times really hate, the other. I guess it's just one of those sports teams kind of thing. Anecdotally, I'd say that there are more fans of Berserk who delved into A Song of Ice and Fire rather than the other way around, perhaps because the former, while universally beloved amongst manga fans, didn't quite achieve the same level of international fame throughout its ongoing run and adaptations, whereas Game of Thrones was a colossal hit. In any case, and being a fan of both, the comparisons between them got me thinking, and when going through the main themes within each story, I've found quite a few similarities which, if anything, are fun to point out.
Before even getting into the stories themselves we can find some interesting meta stuff in that both stories began quite a while ago, Berserk in 1989 and Ice and Fire in 1996, both born into a certain medium, manga and novels respectively, but they would eventually receive adaptations that, were sadly found to be lacking. That creates a distinct echo when recommending them to other people, namely the old tune of – yeah, watch the show, why not, but the real meat is in the books... Both stories found their adaptations rather insufficient, Berserk fans did so because the original anime was rather incomplete in terms of the story itself, and the modern adaptations, well, they didn't look great... And Ice and Fire for the same reason but also because its adaptation simply deteriorated with a kind of butterfly effect. And funnily enough, both creators, Kentarō Miura and George R. R. Martin, are still finishing their respective works in what is becoming a long, painstaking process that keeps fans in a strange limbo of complacent pessimism and eager optimism. At this present time neither story is completed and, though both creators claim to have an outline fairly planned out, it's tough to guess how so many characters and plot points will be resolved any time soon.
When it comes to the stories themselves they are both set in a kind of alternate medieval world, similar to ours in many ways, from which a distinct sense of realism derives. That is to say, feudalism works more or less as it did in real life – kings and lords gather in council to discuss warfare and political strategy, armies form and require funds and detailed organization but also allegiance, which can at times be fickle, travels are slow and dangerous, and so on. The idea is to ground the characters in a harsh but familiar world, a real world. But the twist is that, in all that realism, magic is real. And though in Berserk that magic is more mystical and derived from characters who appear to be actual deities or supernatural creatures, whereas in Ice and Fire the magic is more obscure and shrouded in prophecies that may or may not be true, there is still a strong similarity in that both stories begin with an awakening of that magic. Most characters find magic to be obsolete, they are skeptical and consider that it is gradually becoming a thing of history but, over the course of the story, it becomes more and more overwhelming in their lives. While in Berserk the magic appears to be visually striking and representative of its philosophy, in Ice and Fire it appears to be more symbolic of its political and religious themes. Though it's interesting how both awakenings converge with magic being reborn into the world. In a way, the dreaded eclipse in Berserk seems to coincide with the birth of Daenerys' dragons.
Original artwork by “fredrickruntu”
As far as the realism goes, which is something people often deride on first glance due to the contrast with the fantasy stuff, I'd say that actually, at least to me, it's a source of great strength in both stories because it's where human nature comes in. Yes, as we advance through the pages we find that there are magical creatures and supernatural events but, in truth, it's human nature that rules the realm. People are still consumed by their thoughts, their ambitions, their jealousy, their struggles to climb a chaotic and ruthless social ladder, they have to win in the courtroom with the same viciousness as they have to win in the battlefield. And in both stories, those ambitions often reveal some rather unbecoming aspects of people's urges, something which, though it can at times fall into exaggeration in Berserk, is nonetheless an accurate and striking depiction of human nature, accurate and blunt in that it aims to dispel the myths we at times have regarding a kind of purity of our ancestors. At times we can fall into the trap of romanticizing olden days, conjuring them in our minds as a kind of lost paradise. Well, to say the least, Midland and Westeros aren't great holiday destinations.
Furthermore, that realism is revealed through an inversion of the typical medieval fantasy tropes. The knights are supposed to be brave and honorable, the noble families are supposed to be kind and dedicated to the people, the beautiful people are meant to be good, the ugly people are meant to be evil. That is the usual idea but both stories completely flip this notion on its head. For instance, in Berserk, Griffith is the typical knight. He's kind, he speaks softly and eloquently but he's also capable of a commanding voice when rallying his troops, he's smart and, all things considered, he's good. But over the course of the story, he stumbles and falls, he's revealed to be a deeply troubled man, riddled with guilt over the deaths his conquests caused and for having to sell his own body. Yet still he understands the political games and plays them with ready recourse to violence, all in pursuit of his dream. He understands that being wholly good won't quite cut it in that world. And then, even after his fall, he still retains his beautiful appearance, all clad in white, a color typically associated with purity. Meanwhile, Guts, the actual protagonist, is initially a typical mercenary with no great cares other than swinging his sword in random battles, but he is slowly revealed to be a victim of the world, though one who keeps on fighting even when vilified by everyone as the dreaded Black Swordsman.
In Ice and Fire something similar happens. Jaime Lannister is perhaps the character most similar to Griffith in that he is the beautiful knight who completely lacks the stereotypical notions of honor and service to the helpless. And as naive readers, or viewers, we strangely expect him to live up to those ideals, but we quickly discover that he absolutely doesn't, at least not initially. The same happens with other players, from the kings and queens, to the lords and ladies, and even the handmaidens. The kings are often drunk, boisterous and adulterous, or insane, paranoid and raving mad, the lords and ladies constantly seek their own gain through lying and backstabbing, and the handmaidens, doing what they can to ingratiate themselves with nobility, keep their eyes and ears open for secrets. As far as the political game itself goes, Ice and Fire goes much more in depth with it, at times too much so perhaps, it's almost its bread and butter. Berserk is slightly more straightforward, opting mostly for large scale conflicts, though the same themes are there, the greatest similarity between the two being that the characters of both stories live in worlds where being good isn't always smart. And in any case, the political themes are more or less secondary to the main theme – the monsters.
George R. R. Martin has said it a million times – his work is about the human heart in conflict with itself, meaning that each character is written to have a good side and a bad side, and the story is then essentially the constant synthesis between the two. As such, while there are plenty of vicious legendary creatures and strange magic, the true monsters are, quite often, the people themselves. Supposedly honorable men and women abuse their power, they torture the weak, they lie and manipulate, they can't let go of their ego, even for the good of the realm. And when war breaks out, poverty is spread throughout the kingdom, the reports of ugly crimes rise up, all committed by perhaps otherwise good people, or maybe it's just that they are letting their bad side win out. In Berserk there is something quite similar in the sense that the monsters that rise up, seemingly out of nowhere, were at one point normal people, equally consumed by their fears and ambitions. Those monsters may take a more literal appearance but behind each transformation is still the body, or maybe just the mere shell, of a man, a real man, but one who disgraced himself. In many ways, while the aggressors take different forms, the human heart is still the source of the violence. Indeed, in Berserk the highest creature, one that could be possibly called God, takes the form of a heart.
But while all that sounds quite gloomy, and I suppose it is, the truth is that somewhere in all that darkness... is light. Because if the battle within the human heart often ends in absolute evil, then it also has the potential to end in absolute good. Both stories have a recurring theme of perseverance through the violence, through the war and helplessness, and that idea seems to be a kind of constant struggle. Because even if it gets tough, even if it seems hopeless, the characters continue, something which, though more obvious in Berserk since it has a main character, seems prevalent in both stories, namely this notion that behind all the violence there is some kind of truth and meaning to discover.
Though as another unfortunate similarity, that truth can't come soon enough. Both works are quite far from completion, and their creators are, more or less understandably, taking their sweet time. My fear is that we might not get a conclusion at all, at least not one written by the creators themselves, but another fear is that the conclusion itself might not be satisfactory. That is because an unfortunate point of similarity I find between the two is that because both stories rely on a build-up to an epic conflict, then maybe whatever happens until then is, in some ways, filler. Pieces are being set into place as we move towards that epic conflict which, when it arrives, should be completely mind-blowing. But until then, we have so many different characters and so many different storylines to resolve that the resolution becomes quite distant.
Until then we can all take solace in remembering that the eclipse is coming, and Gregor did nothing wrong.
Comments
Post a Comment