A Game of Thrones a tad bit Orientalist?

[Ser_not_appearing_yet]

How do you know?

And about Jorah, sure, but, and this is important, he left.

Yes - not currently, but who's to say what influence Valyria had on the Dothraki, for instance? We can't know, but not just because we lack information. That's my point. I like the down-low as well, definitely, but there is bound to be some influence from magic - take the seasons, for an obvious example.

I have a feeling things in the east will become more 'complex', less black and white in Dance of Dragons, as Dany grows up etc.

It should be noted that most of Dany's associates (excluding Jorah and Barristan) are 1. Slaves who have been trained not to have a 'personality' so to speak, and 2. Dothraki, who are, well, pretty fantastical. Illyrio is pretty much the only close associate who doesn't fall under this umbrella, and he's basically a Varys/Littlefinger fusion from what I saw.

Its not like the Dothraki are that different to the Ironborn though. We just get a closer look at the Ironborn, nothing else.

[Liadin]

How do you know?

And about Jorah, sure, but, and this is important, he left.

Uh.... because they appeared in the story prior to pledging themselves to Dany? (And of course, some of them, like Drogo's bloodriders, never did pledge themselves to her. They lack personality too.)

Also, Jorah left because Dany forced him to.

Yes - not currently, but who's to say what influence Valyria had on the Dothraki, for instance? We can't know, but not just because we lack information. That's my point. I like the down-low as well, definitely, but there is bound to be some influence from magic - take the seasons, for an obvious example.

I thought we were talking about aspects of the culture that we've seen. Sure, the Dothraki are going to have to adapt to the weird seasons like everybody else, but there's no evidence that magic is involved in their logistics, for instance.

2. Dothraki, who are, well, pretty fantastical.

The OP can correct me if I'm misinterpreting this, but I think this was the question all along. Why are the easterners so "fantastical" that they don't have personalities, while the westerners are very much grounded in realism and human psychology? Saying "the Dothraki are made-up and different" isn't an excuse--that's the problem.

And the Dothraki are very different from the Ironborn. There are probably dozens of different personalities among the Ironborn--Balon, Euron, Victarion, Aeron, Theon, Asha, Rodrik the Reader, Tristifer, Dagmar Cleftjaw.... need I go on? There's a good amount of variation in what amount of violence against random people different Ironborn think is appropriate--from Euron and his piracy-obsessed followers to Asha and the others who argue for peace. Having more Ironborn POVs may explain why their culture is more developed, but IIRC there's been at least one Dothraki character in every Dany chapter over the first three books, and they still don't get as many distinguishing characteristics as the Ironborn do.

[Ser_not_appearing_yet]

Sure, but we only really have access to one Dothraki character, who barely speaks common. If all you had to judge the Ironborn on was Victarion and a few of his boys, you'd perhaps come to the same conclusions.

[Liadin]

Sure, but we only really have access to one Dothraki character, who barely speaks common. If all you had to judge the Ironborn on was Victarion and a few of his boys, you'd perhaps come to the same conclusions.

Dany interacts with both handmaids and all three bloodriders on a daily basis. In AGOT, they communicate well enough through translators, and after that she seems fluent in Dothraki.

Plus.... I think different personalities came through pretty well in Victarion's chapters.

[oRangE]

Basically, the Dothraki are really just sloppily done characitures based of an entire "eastern" or "other" nomadic, horse-based culture that makes Westerosi society look enlightened and peaceable by comparison. Does anyone else feel this way?

IMO GRRM's world building isn't the strongest point of his series anyways. A lot of his cultures draw heavy influences from existing ones.

[Ser_not_appearing_yet]

Dany interacts with both handmaids and all three bloodriders on a daily basis. In AGOT, they communicate well enough through translators, and after that she seems fluent in Dothraki.

Plus.... I think different personalities came through pretty well in Victarion's chapters.

The handmaids are Dothraki?

I can't remember too well, but weren't they originally sex slaves or something? The bloodriders have essentially no dialogue. There's nothing to judge them on, other than what Dany is told and believes. All this really points to is the fact that this part of the world was deliberately left unfleshed out, for the (most likely) reason that it was too time-consuming and unhelpful for the plot.

Also, I suspect Martin is more of an expert on European history.

[Liadin]

The handmaids are Dothraki?

I can't remember too well, but weren't they originally sex slaves or something? The bloodriders have essentially no dialogue. There's nothing to judge them on, other than what Dany is told and believes. All this really points to is the fact that this part of the world was deliberately left unfleshed out, for the (most likely) reason that it was too time-consuming and unhelpful for the plot.

Also, I suspect Martin is more of an expert on European history.

:laugh: I think you've basically proven the point. Yes, Irri and Jhiqui are Dothraki; Doreah (the one who dies) is not. Doreah was the sex slave, Irri and Jhiqui are captives given to Dany as servants. I don't see that as a reason for them to lack personality, though; they understandably don't want to entrust their deepest secrets to Dany, but their interchangeability is still bizarre, given that she interacts with them a lot. She interacts with the bloodriders a fair bit too, although I can see why you don't remember too much about any of these characters. They're pretty bland.

I suspect Martin does know a lot more about European than Mongol history. Nothing wrong with that--but if you're going to create quasi-Mongolian characters, you ought to start with the premise that people are people and that no two people are exactly alike. There are plenty of resources out there about "writing the Other" (er... no pun intended?).

IMO GRRM's world building isn't the strongest point of his series anyways. A lot of his cultures draw heavy influences from existing ones.

I disagree with this. Nothing wrong with drawing from existing cultures, and I tend to think it makes the fantasy world more "real" (probably why I like historical fantasy). Martin's worldbuilding overall is excellent.

ETA: And the reason the problems with the Dothraki culture are so evident is that the other cultures are done so well. In a lesser fantasy book, all bodyguards/retainers/etc.--all tertiary characters period--would have about the level of personality that Jhogo, Aggo, Rakharo, Irri and Jhiqui do. The reason they are particularly glaring examples is because Martin doesn't do that. His tertiary characters in general are very well developed and some of them have narratives of their own despite little-to-no plot relevance: Mya Stone is my favorite example here. Or Tom o'Sevens. The only reason the Dothraki are an issue is because Martin is usually much better than that.

[Mandurang]

Uh.... because they appeared in the story prior to pledging themselves to Dany? (And of course, some of them, like Drogo's bloodriders, never did pledge themselves to her. They lack personality too.)

They did? Under whose POV? That's my point, really.

Also, Jorah left because Dany forced him to.

Also my point exactly. It's Dany's theme, I tell you! :)

I thought we were talking about aspects of the culture that we've seen. Sure, the Dothraki are going to have to adapt to the weird seasons like everybody else, but there's no evidence that magic is involved in their logistics, for instance.

The logistics question I have repeatedly addressed in my previous post. What I mean is that you have to make allowances when you make comparisons before you paint the whole Eastern depiction as unrealistic.

[Liadin]

They did? Under whose POV? That's my point, really.

Under Dany's. Her bloodriders didn't pledge themselves to her cause until the very end of AGOT. Before that, they were just doing the job they were appointed to do.

Also my point exactly. It's Dany's theme, I tell you!

You think the theme of Dany's storyline is that she forces out of her entourage any followers who retain their own personality after swearing her their loyalty? I imagine she'll have trouble with Ser Barristan, then....

The logistics question I have repeatedly addressed in my previous post. What I mean is that you have to make allowances when you make comparisons before you paint the whole Eastern depiction as unrealistic.

You're speaking in generalities. Name one aspect of Dothraki culture that's different from any real-life culture because of the existence of magic, then tell people what allowances they "have to make."

[Ran]

GRRM actually is a writer who has said that "people are people" as a starting premise. And in fact, he's noted he comes up with back stories for a lot of very minor characters that will never appear on the page, because that's how they feel alive when he writes them.

At a guess, he has a general sense of the stories for the handmaids and bloodriders ... but their relation to Dany is such that it just doesn't come out. They see themselves as servants, not equals, and they see themselves as servants in a particularly Dothraki sort of way which precludes any great depth in their interactions with Dany.

[Liadin]

GRRM actually is a writer who has said that "people are people" as a starting premise. And in fact, he's noted he comes up with back stories for a lot of very minor characters that will never appear on the page, because that's how they feel alive when he writes them.

I believe it, and in general he does an excellent job with it. For instance, despite all the issues we've discussed in the "does GRRM hate women" thread, he really does do a very good job of writing female characters. My feeling is that he didn't put that kind of thought into the Dothraki, though, maybe because they're just too culturally alien. Maybe he was worried that if he tried to give them personalities, they'd come out too "westernized." Or something.

At a guess, he has a general sense of the stories for the handmaids and bloodriders ... but their relation to Dany is such that it just doesn't come out. They see themselves as servants, not equals, and they see themselves as servants in a particularly Dothraki sort of way which precludes any great depth in their interactions with Dany.

I don't know. Maybe. I've never gotten a sense for hidden depths or individuality there. Depends on how much benefit of the doubt you want to give him, in the end. Since a lot of characters even less relevant to the plot than that bunch are better-developed, I don't really accept the plot-based argument. But in the end, clearly it comes down to pure opinion.

[Mandurang]

You think the theme of Dany's storyline is that she forces out of her entourage any followers who retain their own personality after swearing her their loyalty? I imagine she'll have trouble with Ser Barristan, then...

No, but you'll forgive me if I prefer not to elaborate, since you insist on misreading my posts.

You're speaking in generalities. Name one aspect of Dothraki culture that's different from any real-life culture because of the existence of magic, then tell people what allowances they "have to make."

Feel free to not allow for any influences of magic in a fantasy setting that may account for differences with real-world history. I only said that we do not know, therefore any comparison has an inherent element of uncertainty. The depiction of Quarth has lots of magical influences, however, so any discussion about the whole of the East might also be concerned with it. If you wish to not take it into account, that is your prerogative, of course.

[Liadin]

Feel free to not allow for any influences of magic in a fantasy setting that may account for differences with real-world history. I only said that we do not know, therefore any comparison has an inherent element of uncertainty. The depiction of Quarth has lots of magical influences, however, so any discussion about the whole of the East might also be concerned with it. If you wish to not take it into account, that is your prerogative, of course.

No need to act so injured. People on the thread have been criticizing specific cultural behaviors among the Dothraki--for instance, the ease with which they rape and murder, the huge groups in which they travel, etc. You seem to be arguing that the fact that their world has magic gives them some benefit of the doubt, but you're not explaining where the doubt is or why you think magic is involved. What does magic have to do with the three bloodriders having indistinguishable personalities, for instance? I'm perfectly willing to accept that magic is involved if the author shows that it's involved, but he hasn't in this case and neither have you.

[Mandurang]

No need to act so injured. People on the thread have been criticizing specific cultural behaviors among the Dothraki--for instance, the ease with which they rape and murder, the huge groups in which they travel, etc. You seem to be arguing that the fact that their world has magic gives them some benefit of the doubt, but you're not explaining where the doubt is or why you think magic is involved. What does magic have to do with the three bloodriders having indistinguishable personalities, for instance? I'm perfectly willing to accept that magic is involved if the author shows that it's involved, but he hasn't in this case and neither have you.

I'll clarify for you: No, I don't claim it gives them the benefit of the doubt, nor did I comment on their collective morality anywhere. I did compare the Dothraki to real-world cultures in previous posts, with the following reservation - the existence of magic gives every comparison with a real-world culture an inherent uncertainty, as I've said about ten times so far. I don't know of any, but it's conceivable there could be an influence, much like the seasons are an obvious effect of magic. Who's to say there aren't be more? Entertaining the possibility is what I mean by making allowances.

As for Dany's theme, which you also misunderstood - I was almost joking, when I said that Dany's theme is depersonifying anyone who she recruits to her cause. It's almost as if she has an army of faceless soldiers (which she also does have). Somebody said it's because she tends to look at things in black and white; I agree. Jorah was almost the only non-bland personality. Is it that she is a stranger in a strange land? Is it the loneliness of authority? Perhaps there are elements of those things in Dany's chapters. But they have a decidedly different tone than the rest of the POVs, and I was suggesting a few things that set it.

Hopefully this will be clear enough.

[Acid Rainbow]

Some poster also said that "humanizing" the Ghiscari slavers would be a whitewashing of slavery like Gone With the Wind. I only said that I wanted the slavers to have more character depth. Dany would still be right in her quest to destroy slavery. But the slavers, while still the villains, don't need to be the evil caricatures they were in ASOS.

Frankly, those chapters were ridiculous. The over-the-top slavers brag that they eat babies, while Dany just rants "I am Daenaerys Stormborn, the Unburnt, Breaker of Chains, Mother of Dragons, Khaleesi of the Dothraki Sea, Queen of the Seven Kingdoms"

GRRM was just being sloppy when he wrote the Dothraki. It's very annoying to read, mostly because I know he can write better than that.

[Liadin]

Some poster also said that "humanizing" the Ghiscari slavers would be a whitewashing of slavery like Gone With the Wind. I only said that I wanted the slavers to have more character depth. Dany would still be right in her quest to destroy slavery. But the slavers, while still the villains, don't need to be the evil caricatures they were in ASOS.

Frankly, those chapters were ridiculous. The over-the-top slavers brag that they eat babies, while Dany just rants "I am Daenaerys Stormborn, the Unburnt, Breaker of Chains, Mother of Dragons, Khaleesi of the Dothraki Sea, Queen of the Seven Kingdoms"

GRRM was just being sloppy when he wrote the Dothraki. It's very annoying to read, mostly because I know he can write better than that.

Hmm, no, I don't think more complex characterizations would make the slavers GWTW-like. Mitchell was actually okay with slavery, and it showed; I don't see anything Martin wrote coming off that way. So long as we get the slaves' side of the story, and their side of the story isn't about how all smart slaves prefer slavery, it's not GWTW.

I suppose I'll have to reread that bit.... the way I remember it, the Ghiscari were very minor characters. I mean, we don't know what made Gregor's men the way they are, either, and they're quite singlemindedly cruel and violent, but they don't seem over-the-top either.

[Datepalm]

As for Dany's theme, which you also misunderstood - I was almost joking, when I said that Dany's theme is depersonifying anyone who she recruits to her cause. It's almost as if she has an army of faceless soldiers (which she also does have). Somebody said it's because she tends to look at things in black and white; I agree. Jorah was almost the only non-bland personality. Is it that she is a stranger in a strange land? Is it the loneliness of authority? Perhaps there are elements of those things in Dany's chapters. But they have a decidedly different tone than the rest of the POVs, and I was suggesting a few things that set it.

But, see, that comes back round to it - (white) stranger in a strange land, surrounded by colorful (and colored) folk so different from the protagonist as to be inherently incapable of having relashionships as complex as with the other "non-natives", further alienated by a noble burden of vision and authority....yeah, not a classic orientalist story at all.

I do agree with you that there are themes of alienation and objectification of everyone in Danys chapters (including Dany herself, IMO) but one of the ways it plays out is via this extremely familiar orientalist narrative. It does in other ways too, but that dosen't diffuse the orientalism so long as the perspectives and the stories told remain 'western'. I have high hopes for the character of Grey Worm, actually - I think the freed unsullied can add something new to the themes of Dany's story, when it comes to things like exploitation, personal identity, devotion, etc.

I suppose I'll have to reread that bit.... the way I remember it, the Ghiscari were very minor characters. I mean, we don't know what made Gregor's men the way they are, either, and they're quite singlemindedly cruel and violent, but they don't seem over-the-top either.

I don't mind the Ghiscari becyuase they're extremely bit characters and, come on, they're slave traders. One expects them to be remarkably awful. They're a reflection on Jorah too, I think - he was a slave trader as well, after all. I'm far more interested, and pleased that thats the route GRRM took, in the slaves themselves. Besides, the scene with Missandei translating was hilarious.

[Liadin]

I don't mind the Ghiscari becyuase they're extremely bit characters and, come on, they're slave traders. One expects them to be remarkably awful. They're a reflection on Jorah too, I think - he was a slave trader as well, after all. I'm far more interested, and pleased that thats the route GRRM took, in the slaves themselves. Besides, the scene with Missandei translating was hilarious.

I'm really hoping that some of the Unsullied or other ex-slaves in Dany's retinue will turn out to have desires or agendas of their own--all of them simply deciding to follow Dany just seems way too convenient. She gets the moral authority of having freed lots of slaves, without the inconvenience of those slaves deciding they actually want to do something (other than kill and die for her) with that freedom.

(If they all just stick with Dany despite being freed, it would be weirdly reminiscient of Gone With the Wind in a way--except for plot convenience rather than the author making an argument about history or ideology. Seems like a set of implications a modern author would want to steer clear of.)

[Ser_not_appearing_yet]

The unsullied's past can't really be ignored. Their individuality was taken away at a very young age, and ever since then they've been dehumanized to the point where the only thing they understand are orders. Maybe things could change, but it'll take a long time.

[Liadin]

They're already beginning to gain their identities back. It would look pretty cheap if they gain only enough individuality for Dany to feel good about freeing them, but not enough for them to be inconvenient.