[Spoilers] Rant & Rave without Repercussions - First We Take King's Landing Edition

[Arrow of the Morning]

52 minutes ago, rosehustle1 said:

Yes! How empowering and progressive are these female characters when they are all basically the same? Brienne and Sansa are two in the novels that are still morally good and compassionate people and that is where a lot of their strength derives. But in the show they're both cold and violent. And Ellaria is a woman who sees the futility of revenge and would rather raise her children in peace. Asha is ten times more compassionate toward Theon when she meets him again than Yara. Dany actually does try everything she can to work within the culture of Mereen and make diplomatic negotiations. Cersei's spiral into madness in the books is gradual and actually makes sense in terms of the prophecy (which she helped fulfill) and her own internalized misogyny. She has depth in the books. The show made her Carol for four seasons and then in one episode turned her into a Cheryl the Villain. Such a caricature. And the Sand Snakes are just walking, talking caricatures of "Strong Women". No individual personalities at all.

Just for you see how insane the "Strong Woman" pattern became in the show: Imperator Furiosa of Mad Max Fury Road, the best female protagonist in action movies in recent years would not be considered a "Strong Female Character" in Game of Thrones and forone reason: she have compassion!

She lives in a much worst universe than Game of Thrones. There is no rules and the strong prey the weak without restrain. There women are trade goods and war spoil. Women with child send their sons to become child soldiers and become milk provider just to gain water and food. And we have the brides, they are sex slaves and are repeatedly raped by Immortan Joe, but in the pos-apocalyptic world of Mad Max they are seeing as the best position a woman could want; they have water and food, they have protection and even have servants, they don't have to fight or work hard for food. But Furiosa was capable to sympathize with them and had compassion, even her being from a very different background, and try to flee with them. Her compassion and desire for redemption (as well the moment she crumble in tiers when she realized she failed) would be seeing as weakness.

[The Wull]

46 minutes ago, Le Cygne said:

I will miss his face. Maybe there will be a Daario spinoff.

Being a guy, I can't imagine anything worse than Dany's ridiculous boytoy having his own show.  Actually, that's not true - the last two years have exposed me to too much horror to say that.  What a sweet summer child I was to have thought a Daario spinoff could be the worst thing. 

[Le Cygne]

Yeah, the protagonist in Mad Max was strong but nice, that's someone you want to watch, someone you root for. 

Sandra is disgusting. LF is a horrible villain, you protect others from him, family, friends, strangers, because it's the right thing to do. 

[The Knight in Motley]

I like Preston's Titus references.  I very much agree with him on that.  The new audience only wants the pedigree of the first few season where the show was complex: they can claim the show still is.  But all they care about are tits, dragons, and badass revenge.

Oh, and bitching about how 'fem-nisim' is ruining the show.

 

In other news, the new Netflix Voltron is delightful, and proves that there is still quality entertainment being made.  I keep hearing good things about Outlander, I might have to try that one too.

[Neds Secret]

13 hours ago, The Ned's Little Girl said:

Spot on!

This, to me, also goes to the argument that people make about it being "just a TV show" and that it shouldn't be taken so seriously.

How do people imagine that vileness gets perpetuated, if not by dressing it up in a flashy package that distracts from and camouflages its basic vileness? This show is a nearly-perfect example of how it lowers standards of civilized behavior and it happens to most people subconsciously because they're specifically not thinking about the messages it is sending.

It brings to mind that great quote from the movie Broadcast News:

 

 

This show is so vile, it normalizes aberrant behavior, it celebrates thoughtless violence and nihilism - and I'm still stunned that so few people recognize that.

 

So true, so, so true!

[Aryya Stark]

10 hours ago, Le Cygne said:

My first thought was, what will become of Ser Pounce! I guess that says something. When Tommen in the books dies, there will be tears.

Same here...Ser Pounce was by far more interesting.

9 hours ago, DutchArya said:

Only one problem: She will fail. Her partner in crime will run off like the rat he is and leave her to face the punishment. He has framed her for murder in the past. What you're talking about her doing is Treason. She may die for that. Just like her wolf at the hands of another Stark. 

Honestly, by now I really hope she is taken out of the show. I don't care if she gets be-headed for treason. They have completely ruined Sansa's character for me. She is so uninteresting, irritating and frustrating with no real plot. Even LF has become boring. So all these games he played was because he wanted to end up on the IT with Sansa next to him. Isn't that what everyone else wants, the IT? All these years we have been wandering at LF's motives and what drives him and it turns out it's the same thing as everyone else. How boring. Somehow I don't think that's LF's end-game in the books.

[SeanF]

17 hours ago, Le Cygne said:

Interesting the didn't kill him off. He said, basically, hope you are happy with your throne. As in, you won't be.

I suppose Daario was lucky to escape with his life.

It's a scene that bears some examination.  My reaction, on watching it, and her subsequent conversation with Tyrion, was "you callous shit!".  Politically, she may be correct that marriage with Daario is out of the question, and that she'll have to marry a Westerosi lord.  But, that doesn't excuse cutting off someone from royal friendship and favour, like Falstaff and Prince Hal.  Daario has proved loyal and competent, and several times risked his life for her, and she just cuts him off like a blister.  Never mind a lover, I'd be raging if an employer treated me like that!

And it's so stupid too.  If you were Tyrion, Grey Worm, or Missandei, what conclusion would you come to except that you're working for someone who expects loyalty from her servants, but will never display it in turn?  A selfish, autocratic bastard, who only thinks of other people insofar as they serve her ambitions, and will then dismiss them the moment she thinks they're of no more use to her.

[Aryya Stark]

7 hours ago, rosehustle1 said:

Seems like you're trying a straw man argument here. When you have a universally popular show that people all over  the world watch there are some ethical responsibilities to how you portray marginalized and oppressed people. People are effected by the media they consume and consciously as well as subconsciously will make assumptions about certain societal issues based on the shows, commercials, movies, magazines they read and watch.  The writers can definitely explore the injustices that marginalized people experience within the world of Westeros but there is a big difference between depiction and endorsement. The show often endorses very sexist and often misogynistic ideas of what makes a woman strong i.e. one that gives into violence and cruelty.  Or the fact that the patriarchy conveniently exists to rape and brutalize female characters but is suddenly gone when they want Cersei to be a ruler or Olenna to be the head of House Tyrell.

And who said I wasn't disturbed by the extreme violence that is often utilized within the show's narrative to show 'strength'? it's one of my biggest issues with the series. And who the hell said I was condoning murder or genocide? Nice try, but your 'argument' didn't work.

First off I was not accusing you of anything, so there is no need to get all defensive. I was just commenting on the article which I think I am entitled to do. The problem I had with the article is that firstly, as you said :

"The show often endorses very sexist and often misogynistic ideas of what makes a woman strong i.e. one that gives into violence and cruelty."

Secondly, I know the books touch on the issues of injustices towards women but they are set in a timeframe which would be the "Middle Ages" in our world and we can't pretend that these things didn't exist. Thirdly, it is set in a fictional fantasy world that is not our world, so why are we "as a society" trying to enforce our own moral code on an imaginary world that has a different set of codes?

Finally, the books in my opinions are not so much about "just" men or "just" women. They focus on many different things, amongst them family loyalties and what these loyalties cost each character as they grow. Therefore, I ask again why are "we" as a society so hung up on the issue of feminism when there is so much more to the story to be hung about if that is the route we are taking, and enforcing our principles today on the story? Or alternatively "we" as a society can understand that this is a work of fiction that is set in an unreal world and just enjoy the story without being judgmental about it. Btw, for your information, I am extremely vocal about my distaste of the show, and you can check all my previous posts to confirm that. I am strictly speaking of the books.

[SeanF]

10 hours ago, OldGimletEye said:

I tell ya. Some of the stuff that comes out of Ms. Turner's mouth is just mind boggling. Yeah, LF wouldn't betray Sandra, because why again? Oh my god, because Sandra gave him a scolding! I mean once Sansa hands out an ass chewing, you know to go forth and fuck up no more! As somebody that has been on the receiving end of a good ol' ass chewing, I am just glad it wasn't Sandra. Ass chewer extraordinaire.

And then she says in one interview that Sansa doesn't trust LF, but now she is saying LF wouldn't screw her over because why? Because Sandra handed out an ass chewing.

And she thinks LF would be a good partner? Why again? They guy that betrayed Sansa's father? And who is responsible for much of the suffering the Starks.

What planet does she live on?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Bueller?

I wonder if LF will persuade Sansa to try and murder Jon in Season 7.

Her character has been so trashed already, that anything is possible.

[SeanF]

8 hours ago, A Ghost of Someone said:

He has a point. The show has seemingly made it clear that they love each other to a great extent and when he asked her to marry him instead of Hizdah, she looked like she was going to cry when she said "she can't". Now, when victory seems assured, she is leaving him with "cleanup" detail and says goodbye as in "forever". These on/off buttons they pull with the characters is so annoying.

 

Yet, by the end of Season 6, it's clear she doesn't give a toss about him.  Not even to the extent of being willing to reward him for the work he's done for her.

Perhaps the intention of the producers and Emilia Clarke has always been to show Daenerys changing from being a sympathetic protagonist to a cold, selfish, autocrat, who only thinks of others insofar as they are of use to her, in which case, they've done a good job.  Or maybe, they've just screwed up.  There's certainly nothing sympathetic about this character at this point.

[OldGimletEye]

14 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I wonder if LF will persuade Sansa to try and murder Jon in Season 7.

Her character has been so trashed already, that anything is possible.

Oh, I think LF would given his ambitions. He must have saw the North as a stepping stone to his quest for the IT. And now that Jon has been made KITN, that plan went down the shitter.

And yes, they have destroyed Sansa's show character. Well they have destroyed about everyone's. But, there are few characters that are in the all pro team of destroyed characters, which are Jaime, Stannis, and Sansa.

It she falls for LF's bullshit, that will be depressing. She's been through all this shit, but in the end, it will appear she has learned absolutely nothing and basically has reverted to her season 1 character. 

And what makes this worse is how Ms. Turner seems to have admiration for LF's character, who is one of the biggest scumbags in Westeros.

[Aryya Stark]

12 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Oh, I think LF would given his ambitions. He must have saw the North as a stepping stone to his quest for the IT. And now that Jon has been made KITN, that plan went down the shitter.

And yes, they have destroyed Sansa's show character. Well they have destroyed about everyone's. But, there are few characters that are in the all pro team of destroyed characters, which are Jaime, Stannis, and Sansa.

It she falls for LF's bullshit, that will be depressing. She's been through all this shit, but in the end, it will appear she has learned absolutely nothing and basically has reverted to her season 1 character. 

And what makes this worse is how Ms. Turner seems to have admiration for LF's character, who is one of the biggest scumbags in Westeros.

 I can almost see her going back to loving her singers, songs and tourneys again as though nothing had happened. It's very sad especially after she had grown so much in the Vale as a character.

With regard to the second highlighted paragraph, isn't it like the same admiration she had for Joffrey who later turned out to be the biggest psycho around at the time . At least after Joffrey killed her father and began to abuse her, she had the good sense to be terrified of him whereas she claims she doesn't trust LF, who also abused her, but always depends on him. Not only doesn't she seem to have developed as a character on the show but on the contrary she seems to be regressing.

 

 

 

[OldGimletEye]

1 hour ago, Aryya Stark said:

 I can almost see her going back to loving her singers, songs and tourneys again as though nothing had happened. It's very sad especially after she had grown so much in the Vale as a character.

With regard to the second highlighted paragraph, isn't it like the same admiration she had for Joffrey who later turned out to be the biggest psycho around at the time . At least after Joffrey killed her father and began to abuse her, she had the good sense to be terrified of him whereas she claims she doesn't trust LF, who also abused her, but always depends on him. Not only doesn't she seem to have developed as a character on the show but on the contrary she seems to be regressing.

 

 

 

Yep. And I think it was pretty shitty of D & D to write season 6 in such a manner that it wasn’t evident that Sandra had the intention of being QITN and the head of House Stark. Nope. We had to find that out from information sources outside of the show itself. That is crap writing. And it is the result of D & D's preference for melodrama and surprises over logical character progression.

Had Sandra been upfront to Jon about her expectations, I’m sure Jon would have been fine with it. He too seems to have believed that she was the official head of House Stark. For instance, when she starts complaining about Jon’s lack of consultation with her she could have told him that as the head of House Stark she expects to be consulted on all matters, if anything, as a matter of courtesy.

She had a chance to signal to everyone who was the head of House Stark. She could have avoided any random Lyanna Mormont situations.

But, nope, Sandra doesn’t say anything about being QITN or being the recognized head of House Stark. Keeps completely quiet about it. And then when shit doesn’t pan out the way she had secretly hoped, apparently all along, she gets salty about it.

And now she is going to stir up some shit, with Little Fucker, with Others set to invade the North? Not a good a time for the North to have political disunity. Does Sandra care about the people of the North?

I don’t mind that she is a bit pissed off with how things worked out. But, really, her stirring up shit at the present moment doesn’t reflect well upon her.

I think D & D and Turner are a great gift to Sansa haters.

[Chebyshov]

The Carol Awards are finally here!! Ballots are open for a week: http://www.fandomfollowing.com/season-6-carol-awards-voting-open/

[Le Cygne]

21 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Yep. And I think it was pretty shitty of D & D to write season 6 in such a manner that it wasn’t evident that Sandra had the intention of being QITN and the head of House Stark. Nope. We had to find that out from information sources outside of the show itself. That is crap writing. And it is the result of D & D's preference for melodrama and surprises over logical character progression.

Had Sandra been upfront to Jon about her expectations, I’m sure Jon would have been fine with it. He too seems to have believed that she was the official head of House Stark. For instance, when she starts complaining about Jon’s lack of consultation with her she could have told him that as the head of House Stark she expects to be consulted on all matters, if anything, as a matter of courtesy.

She had a chance to signal to everyone who was the head of House Stark. She could have avoided any random Lyanna Mormont situations.

But, nope, Sandra doesn’t say anything about being QITN or being the recognized head of House Stark. Keeps completely quiet about it. And then when shit doesn’t pan out the way she had secretly hoped, apparently all along, she gets salty about it.

And now she is going to stir up some shit, with Little Fucker, with Others set to invade the North? Not a good a time for the North to have political disunity. Does Sandra care about the people of the North?

I don’t mind that she is a bit pissed off with how things worked out. But, really, her stirring up shit at the present moment doesn’t reflect well upon her.

I think D & D and Turner are a great gift to Sansa haters.

But it doesn't work that way. Whether she wanted to be queen or not, the North bypassed her. Because they wanted Jon.

Much point was made that she married enemies. First the Lannisters, then the Boltons. She's Ramsay's widow, but she has a bad history.

What exactly has she done to earn their confidence? She wrote a letter to Littlefinger (after not trusting Jon to tell him about the troops in the first place).

Will they want her as queen when they learn about that? No, she risked a lot of lives, including those of her brothers, for her ego, and her own personal revenge.

Will they want her as queen when they find out what Jon knows, that LF "sold" Sansa to the Boltons? And she still was not honest with Jon, and allied herself with LF?

Sandra has issues. Jon is heroic, honest, loyal, faithful, Stark through and through (and yes, he's a Stark via Lyanna). He embodies what Stark means to them.

And there's not court of law where she can sue them for bypassing her claim, that's not how Westeros works. GRRM said the lords are the law. And they want Jon.

Also if Sandra ever crosses LF, it gets into mud slinging, he framed me for regicide and killed Lysa, and she chose to marry Ramsay and use me to usurp Jon, etc.

They why didn't she say so before? Why did she keep it a secret that LF framed her for regicide, killed Lysa, and sold her to the Boltons? That's not very trustworthy.

If it becomes known LF killed Ned, Sandra's piss poor instincts and judgement is further called out. She'd make a lousy queen. They don't want her. That's not going to go away.

[OldGimletEye]

8 minutes ago, Le Cygne said:

But it doesn't work that way. Whether she wanted to be queen or not, the North bypassed her. Because they wanted Jon.

Much point was made that she married enemies. First the Lannisters, then the Boltons. She's Ramsay's widow, but she has a bad history.

What exactly has she done to earn their confidence? She wrote a letter to Littlefinger (after not trusting Jon to tell him about the troops in the first place).

Will they want her as queen when they learn about that? No, she risked a lot of lives, including those of her brothers, for her ego, and her own personal revenge.

Will they want her as queen when they find out what Jon knows, that LF "sold" Sansa to the Boltons? And she still was not honest with Jon, and allied herself with LF?

Sandra has issues. Jon is heroic, honest, loyal, faithful, Stark through and through (and yes, he's a Stark via Lyanna). He embodies what Stark means to them.

And there's not court of law where she can sue them for bypassing her claim, that's not how Westeros works. GRRM said the lords are the law. And they want Jon.

And I'm not quite convinced that bastards get randomly selected by lords as king out of the blue, from a speech from a child.

Bastard status is a legitimizing norm in these kind of societies. And there is good reason why it is. If you make a marriage pact with another house, you expect the progeny of such a marriage to come to power. If that expectation is disappointed, you, as a noble lord, aren't going to be too happy about it.

The point here is that she was bypassed precisely because she did not communicate to Jon her actual intentions. Had she done so, Jon would have supported her. And with Jon's support, the hero, most likely, the situation wouldn't have gone down the way it did. Had Jon's support had been clear, to everyone, that would have signaled who was the head of House Stark.

But she didn't do that. And, apparently, left the matter of who was the head of House Stark undetermined, until Lyanna Mormont basically decided the matter. 

And while I am sure noble lords want a competent leader, let's face it: They aren't exactly interested in a meritocracy either.

[Le Cygne]

20 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

And I'm not quite convinced that bastard's get randomly selected by lords as king out of the blue, from a speech from a child.

The point here is that she was bypassed precisely because she did not communicate to Jon her actual intentions. Had she done so, Jon would have supported her. And with Jon's support, the hero, most likely, the situation wouldn't have gone down the way it did. Had Jon's support had been clear, to everyone, that would have signaled who was the head of House Stark.

No, that's not so. I'll find the quote, but GRRM says the lords are the law, when it comes down to it.

Jon wasn't randomly selected, he was very deliberately selected. Sandra was right there, they knew she was ahead of him. They knew he was a bastard. They chose Jon. They chose to bypass her.

Doesn't matter what she wants. They didn't want her. No one said, Sandra Bolton, what do you want? Jon didn't say, Sandra said she doesn't want to be queen. She never said she didn't, either.

Nor did Jon say, I want to be king. What she wants, whatever that is, has nothing to do with it.

(put the rest below)

[OldGimletEye]

11 minutes ago, Le Cygne said:

No, that's not so. I'll find the quote, but GRRM says the lords are the law, when it comes down to it.

I don't need GRRM's quote here. I know how these type of societies operated. I don't need to be told that often raw military power often decided issues. Nor do I need to be told that sometimes, actual bastards did come to power, like William the Conqueror.

That said, these lords do have certain expectations that they generally agree on. There are certain societal norms that are agreed upon. One of which is that generally bastards don't inherit.

Aerys thought he could ignore well established norms in Westeros. How did that work out for him?

11 minutes ago, Le Cygne said:

Jon wasn't randomly selected, he was very deliberately selected. Sandra was right there, they knew she was ahead of him. They knew he was a bastard. They chose Jon. They chose to bypass her.

He was? I don't recall that. What I recall is Lyanna saying he was king and then browbeating everyone and then everyone saying, "yeah, yeah, that's a great idea."

11 minutes ago, Le Cygne said:

Doesn't matter what she wants. They didn't want her. No one said, Sandra Bolton, what do you want? Jon didn't say, Sandra said she doesn't want to be queen. She never said she didn't, either.

Nor did Jon say, I want to be king. What she wants, whatever that is, has nothing to do with it.

So what you are saying here is that even if Jon had made it explicity clear that he supported her claim, no one in the North would have supported it?

[Aryya Stark]

29 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Yep. And I think it was pretty shitty of D & D to write season 6 in such a manner that it wasn’t evident that Sandra had the intention of being QITN and the head of House Stark. Nope. We had to find that out from information sources outside of the show itself. That is crap writing. And it is the result of D & D's preference for melodrama and surprises over logical character progression.

Had Sandra been upfront to Jon about her expectations, I’m sure Jon would have been fine with it. He too seems to have believed that she was the official head of House Stark. For instance, when she starts complaining about Jon’s lack of consultation with her she could have told him that as the head of House Stark she expects to be consulted on all matters, if anything, as a matter of courtesy.

She had a chance to signal to everyone who was the head of House Stark. She could have avoided any random Lyanna Mormont situations.

But, nope, Sandra doesn’t say anything about being QITN or being the recognized head of House Stark. Keeps completely quiet about it. And then when shit doesn’t pan out the way she had secretly hoped, apparently all along, she gets salty about it.

And now she is going to stir up some shit, with Little Fucker, with Others set to invade the North? Not a good a time for the North to have political disunity. Does Sandra care about the people of the North?

I don’t mind that she is a bit pissed off with how things worked out. But, really, her stirring up shit at the present moment doesn’t reflect well upon her.

I think D & D and Turner are a great gift to Sansa haters.

Tbh, I don't follow the actors and their interviews. I just read everything Dutch Arya posts on this forum lol. However, had I not been on this forum I wouldn't know of Sandra's feelings from that one look she gave LF. I would be so surprised if I watched next season and saw her conspiring with LF to have Jon removed. So yeah this is terrible writing.

With regard to the rest of the post, yes I think had Jon been made aware of what she wanted he may have intervened when Lyanna Mormont spoke up. However, I wonder if it would have mattered as Le Cygne says below, it seems the lords decide such matters.

8 minutes ago, Le Cygne said:

No, that's not so. I'll find the quote, but GRRM says the lords are the law, when it comes down to it.

Jon wasn't randomly selected, he was very deliberately selected. Sandra was right there, they knew she was ahead of him. They knew he was a bastard. They chose Jon. They chose to bypass her.

Doesn't matter what she wants. They didn't want her. No one said, Sandra Bolton, what do you want? Jon didn't say, Sandra said she doesn't want to be queen. She never said she didn't, either.

Nor did Jon say, I want to be king. What she wants, whatever that is, has nothing to do with it.

 

[Le Cygne]

1 minute ago, OldGimletEye said:

I don't need GRRM's quote here. I know how these type of societies operated. I don't need to be told that often raw military power often decided issues. Nor do I need to be told that sometimes, actual bastards did come to power, like William the Conqueror.

That said, these lords do have certain expectations that they generally agree on. There are certain societal norms that are agreed upon. One of which is that generally bastards don't inherit.

Aerys thought he could ignore well established norms in Westeros. How did that work out for him?

He was? I don't recall that. What I recall is Lyanna saying he was king and then browbeating everyone and then everyone saying, "yeah, yeah, that's a great idea."

So what you are saying here is that even if Jon had made it explicity clear that he supported her claim, no one in the North would have supported it?

They didn't have to just go along with Lyanna Mormont. They went along with her because they wanted Jon, too.

She made it clear Sandra kept marrying enemies and Jon was a bastard. She knows the two issues, everyone does. And she chose Jon. And she did not threaten the other lords. We can't presume they are mindless ninnies who just followed her choice blindly. They wanted Jon, too.

Robb chose to legitimize Jon in the books, so it's not like that's not an option, for Jon to be legitimized on the show, too. But Stannis, without the will, chose to bypass Sansa in the books. So clearly, there's a basis in this world for this. Stannis was never declared king, either.