The other controversial scene (spoilers)

[Quarinius]

How many interns does D&D have? None, in real life. Twenty, on westeros.org. They are fictional characters; they never existed. Real life is real life, the forum is the forum; two different tellings of the same story.

[Jeyne's Addiction]

I'm not sure what you think you accomplish by making posts like these, but it comes off as childish and petty.

I may not agree with it, but I got a good chuckle.

[Prince of the North]

Trant is a minor character who doesn't need that kind of development. If there was a scene in the previous seasons that alluded that Trant was interested in little girls, no one would have noticed and no one would have cared.

So why did they just devote so much time and effort that could have been used elsewhere on establishing his pedophilia? I t seems you're saying it wasn't necessary at all but it also seems the show runners disagree with you that he "didn't need that kind of development". Like I said, "deus ex machina" and hamfisted, lazy, unimaginative story telling. :thumbsdown:

[Jeyne's Addiction]

So why did they just devote so much time and effort that could have been used elsewhere on establishing his pedophilia? I t seems you're saying it wasn't necessary at all but it also seems the show runners disagree with you that he "didn't need that kind of development". Like I said, "deus ex machina" and hamfisted, lazy, unimaginative story telling. :thumbsdown:

It's not about him, it's about Arya. Giving her a quest, and putting her in danger.

[Borodin]

It's not about him, it's about Arya. Giving her a quest, and putting her in danger.

You don't need child rape to do that.

[Khal Boner]

I don't understand, why is it wrong to exchange Raff with Trant and change the circumstances?

It isn't but there are book purists who have a default bad reaction to any change and then there's those that I suspect have a real world agenda of wanting to censor certain things but instead of being open about it they make irrational attacks on the showrunners and their motivation or competence.

[A Wolf Among Sheep]

So why did they just devote so much time and effort that could have been used elsewhere on establishing his pedophilia? I t seems you're saying it wasn't necessary at all but it also seems the show runners disagree with you that he "didn't need that kind of development". Like I said, "deus ex machina" and hamfisted, lazy, unimaginative story telling. :thumbsdown:

What I was saying was that Trant doesn't need consistent characterization because he's such a minor character. There would have been no reason to establish Trant's character as a pedophile in earlier seasons because no one would have remembered up to the point where that character trait actually matters. Establishing it now is the right time because it's a set up for the following episode.

[Jamie Lannister]

Not gonna lie, I thought it was pretty funny. It was such a painfully forced way to tack more villain credentials onto this character that I couldn't take it seriously. Maybe they thought people had forgotten who he was.

[Jeyne's Addiction]

You don't need child rape to do that.

No, you could have used her true identity, but really she's been in danger for being a Stark since season one. They need to mix things up a bit. This is way better, especially as she's been in no danger at all since the start of this season. Booooring.

[edit]

Maybe they thought people had forgotten who he was.

Entirely possible. It has been years, and the show doesn't exactly have a small cast to keep track of.

[Quarinius]

I find it logical that if Arya is going to try to play on Trant's taste in young girls in an attempt to kill him, there should be a scene establishing said taste. This will also mirror Arya's scene in the final episode of S3, where she drops her coin to get a clean stab at one of the Red Wedding soldiers.

And no, child rape isn't necessary. Nothing is necessary in fiction. Child rape is just one of several alternatives to use when building up to Trant's death. Another alternative would be to show the girl go willingly. Now that would have been worthy of criticism.

[Borodin]

I find it logical that if Arya is going to try to play on Trant's taste in young girls in an attempt to kill him, there should be a scene establishing said taste. This will also mirror Arya's scene in the final episode of S3, where she drops her coin to get a clean stab at one of the Red Wedding soldiers. And no, child rape isn't necessary. Nothing is necessary in fiction. Child rape is just one of several alternatives to use when building up to Trant's death. Another alternative would be to show the girl go willingly. Now that would have been worthy of criticism.

It's logical, but the question is why use pedophilia and child rape as a plot point when you don't have to? It adds nothing to Arya's motivation or arc. Trant is already dispicable. She already wants to kill him. Nothing more to establish.

[Borodin]

When I ask why a screenwriter would choose to make child rape a plot device when character motivations have already been established, the most comon answer seems to be "Why wouldn't child rape be the plot device?!"

[Modesty Lannister]

It's not "pretty much the same thing" just because Arya faces a sexual situation.

First, there is one limit to suspense of disbelief. Arya is already past her child years. People on the streets made her some remarks about her and at least they all are some perverts as well, it's kinda obvious she already attracts men's stares. She is, in no way, bait for a pedophile. There is no need to make Trant this just because Arya in the books is younger.

This is one of those cases when A CHANGE FROM THE BOOKS is good and it proves that us, as readers, don't simply ask for "things just like happens in the books!". Here, it makes absolutely no sense.

The thing with Mercy chapter is that it's disgusting. We are NOT SUPPOSED to root for Arya nor feel this like an empowering moment despite

she manages to kill someone from her list and despite the guy is a pedo and an awful human being. It is a very sad situation, not only the scene itself but due to the set up. It's quite obviously pointed out in the chapter that Arya doesn't even menstruate, she's still a child, and there she goes, fondling a guy's cock in order to distract him and kill him

She is THAT fucked up already. It's awkward. It's meant to be that way.

Here, they simply made Trant the awful pervert who hurts little girls so we can say "fuck yeah, Arya!". We are not meant to cheer for her in this scene. We're meant to feel SAD she has become this.

ETA: adding spoiler, sorry.

:agree:

[Jeyne's Addiction]

When I ask why a screenwriter would choose to make child rape a plot device when character motivations have already been established, the most comon answer seems to be "Why wouldn't child rape be the plot device?!"

Yeah, why wouldn't it? Because it offends your sensibilities?

What do you think "Little Red Riding Hood" is about?

[Borodin]

Yeah, why wouldn't it? Because it offends your sensibilities?

No, because the motiations have already been established.

Imagine The Avengers are about to destroy Ultron and out of the blue it is revealed that Ultron is also a pedophile child rapist. Completely unecessary. Nothing to do with over-sensitivity, just bad writing.

[Jeyne's Addiction]

No, because the motiations have already been established.

Imagine The Avengers are about to destroy Ultron and out of the blue it is revealed that Ultron is also a pedophile child rapist. Completely unecessary. Nothing to do with over-sensitivity, just bad writing.

This isn't a comic book movie for kids. Not everything has to be PG rated.

[edit] However, if you were to reveal that Ultron has a heretofore unknown power that endangers the Avengers to a new and greater extent, that's good story telling. That's all we're seeing in Arya's story, a new and different danger, which she can also utilize to her advantage, if she's brave and talented enough.

[Sasha Steelsong]

Her motivation to kill him has been established, but her ability and method of getting close to a man who is fully armored the whole time has not. Arya needed to see it in order to figure out how she would get her opportunity to kill him, not for her to have a reason. She was literally handed her method of killing the insurance salesman rather than having to figure it out on her own (as in the books), since Trant is not a sanctioned kill already officially set up, she needed to see in order to figure out how she will get close enough to kill him.

[ShadowKitteh]

Well, for me that is the problem. Again, the show runners wanted to replace Raff in the "Mercy" chapter with Trant. Thus, they needed to make Trant a pedopihile. Great! I'm with them up to this point. Where they lose me (again) is that, knowing this, they didn't show us Trant being a pedophile until, literally, the episode before it will be the manner in which Arya gets close enough to assassinate him. That's bad writing. They could have and should have foreshadowed that earlier - and it would have been sooooooo easy.

But they DID foreshadow it, before this last episode, back in season 2.

Just because Trant likes them überyoung, you have no idea what his particular fetish is with these girls once he gets them alone.

Note what he says to the Madame: "You'll have a FRESH one for me tomorrow."

Meryn Fucking Trant is a Sadist along the lines of his former employer, Joffrey. Don't forget - he beat Sansa.

Kitchen girl is likely dead or completely useless as a kitchen girl now. Arya is taking a risk. She knows from first-hand experience that Joffrey's a monster. But she'd already run away by the time Joffrey became King, so she has no idea just how much of a monster he was, or that he had Trant beat her sister.

Trant may not even be interested in straight sex, kind of like Joffrey... he'd rather watch someone get physically tortured than have actual sex. Trant is probably the same, only he probably enjoys delivering the torture himself.

I'm far more interested in how they do the upcoming Trant-Shanking scene itself, and if they throw a few things in to make Arya seem as though she's in danger, and not being able to complete her objective.

[Quarinius]

It's logical, but the question is why use pedophilia and child rape as a plot point when you don't have to? It adds nothing to Arya's motivation or arc. Trant is already dispicable. She already wants to kill him. Nothing more to establish.

Well, this is just my theory, based on what I think George has been doing with Arya as a character up till now, and also where I think she goes in the future (as suggested by the "Mercy" chapter, anyway).

I agree that Arya already wants to kill Trant. But the child rape doesn't provide the motivation for the murder, it provides the method. The method is sick, of course, which is the point: Arya is losing her innocence the more names she crosses off her list. For her—and to an extent, the readers/audience—it's catharsis, but the one Arya really is killing is not Meryn Trant or Polliver or the Tick, but herself. The young tomboy that was once Arya is slowly vanishing, being replaced by a slightly older, but still very young girl who will play off a man's paedophilia so she can get a clean shot at him. And the worst thing is: she might be a natural at this, even enjoying it to a degree. So even though she's changing, she will still enjoy the taste of catharsis. But for the readers/audience, the taste will be bittersweet.

[Jeyne's Addiction]

Something else to ponder: None of us really believe that Arya will die. There is a lot she can survive however. We need something to fear.