Jump to content

ummester

Members
  • Content count

    4,167
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About ummester

  • Rank
    An Other lover

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

3,430 profile views
  1. ummester

    The character assassination of Daenerys

    meh, drunken rant, didn't like it in retrospect
  2. ummester

    The Iron Throne Episode script is out

    Meh, I only skimmed it at his stage but what sticks out to me is that, as an old thread noted, the biggest problem is they are too focused on psychological/character/icon driven narrative and especially those characters the internet has warmed to - specifically, celebrity fan service. I would argue, more than GRRM not finishing and D&D being hacks, GoTs is a victim of its own popularity. Expectation (and the expectation of profit) had a bigger hand in telling the story than the story itself. It failed, as many things now do, because of corporate greed.
  3. ummester

    The character assassination of Daenerys

    Just as an aside, from the little I know about GRRMs formitive past (and I could be wrong, so please, correct me if I am) he was raised by a drunken ex soldier for a father and had a tragic love life involving a triangle of writers (reminded me of Lovecraft's, actually). To survive mentally, he escaped into fantastic tales of adventure. So it makes a kind of sense for him to see honor as a reasonable ideal to live by.
  4. ummester

    The character assassination of Daenerys

    I would agree that beyond Jon, none of the Stark children maintained and lived with honor. Sansa directly - and likely Arya and Bran indirectly, played a huge part in Dany's downfall and, I would agree with you, did this out of spite and a lack of gratitude for Dany sacrificing her quest to assist with Jon's. Of course, the flip side is that if Dany didn't help defend the north, the walkers would have (supposedly - because Episode 803 is possibly the biggest heap of shit television I have ever seen) conquered all of Westeros - and then Dany would have had nothing to rule. So, logically, Dany had no choice but to side with Jon's quest. Dany was a tragic villain, like Lucifer or Thanos or so on. I think it was a stroke of writing brilliance that GRRM made her an adorable little dragon princess with righteous, progressive ideals, as kind of a commentary on the misguided idealism that sets in when civilizations start to rot. This makes me think GRRM is really, really intelligent and understood the complicated points he was trying to make - but as I have expressed elsewhere, I think he has become afraid to finish. The only two characters I would say were truly honorable were Jon and Brienne. Jamie aspired to it and almost attained it but was too vain to see it through. Ned forsake it in his last moment for his daughters - family.
  5. ummester

    The character assassination of Daenerys

    Yes - I agree entirely - but none of that makes her a well adjusted or stable individual, or an individual that acted out of a true service to her subjects or an ideal greater than herself - which Brienne and Jon both did with honor, an ideal they held up in front of their own wants. This is why Brienne got over being rejected by Jamie and gave him (and even Cersie) some good notes in the gold cloak book - she realized the ideal of honor was more important than her feelings. And Dany was destroyed psychologically. This happened because she met and fell for someone who was not only more entitled by the system, but more loved by the people, more deserving by their actions and more able to achieve it all without the help of dragons. Her dragons start dying and then, to top it off, the person that she knows was a better ruler than she could be rejected her sexually - and her sexuality was the first method of control/balancing the playing field she learned, with Drogo, even before she even had dragons. Dany's arc was tragic - but then so was Lucifer's. Satanic Majesty is valid. If anything, I'd say GoTs/AsoIaF is pro honor - I think the overall narrative shows all other ideals/beliefs/emotional attachments such as love, self worth, entitlement, family, greed, desire (you name it) ad being more corruptible than good old fashioned honor.
  6. ummester

    The character assassination of Daenerys

    Tyrion and Sansa were also very selfish characters. For less selfish, I would suggest characters like Brienne, or perhaps Ned (though stubborn adherence to ideals can also be selfish). Re discussion above, as for whether or not a character's altruism is to make them feel good or not - that is where the entitlement comes in. Dany was designed to be overtly entitled - she was the definition of it with her long list of titles - it showed that she wholeheartedly embraced being acknowledged for her acts. In contrast, even the show made Jon out to be someone who shied away from recognition. But the bigger point is that a character like Jon (and Brienne) achieved what they did without magical fire-breathing monsters to help them. Jon achieved everything with his own strength and attitude, similar to Brienne. The only relative advantage Jon had (especially in the show) were good looks (which Brienne lacked) and this gave him some sway/power over characters sexually attracted to him, namely Ygritte and Dany. Interestingly, Dany's attraction to him (although badly written by D&D) was obviously part of what drove her to despair and corruption. Had any lover before Jon ever rejected Dany's sexual advances, ever?
  7. ummester

    How would you have ended it?

    After much thought on this, I would have ended it pretty similar to how it ended - just with better writing. Even the final peace negotiation with issues was bittersweet - it was just written by a couple of fuckwits who don't understand drama. The single thing I would have changed is the Night King. I don't mind that he was destroyed but his destruction and backstory should have tied in better to the themes of the plot - human belief and power, the NK rose up against it and failed - fine, he should have been painted somewhat sympathetic, so that his demise made us realise human arrogance has won and now we prepare for the showdown of that. I am sure GRRM knew what he was doing and just got too gutless to finish in oir modern anti Western environment. And I'm sure D&D had the outline but were too swayed by politics, their lack of ability and the fandom to stay the course. Gutless art - fuck it, doesn't;t have the balls to be what it should be.
  8. ummester

    Ned Stark’s words ring hollow.

    Yea, but for all GRRMs literal expansion of the idea (within the Stark household) what doe sit matter to the overall plot? Starks must stick together so Arya can stab a thousands of years old ice dude - fuck off. It had no bearing on the resolution. This is where the gaps are - GRRM seems deep, with all is allusion to greater meaning - but in the end he seems to have no idea how to resolve it.
  9. ummester

    The character assassination of Daenerys

    D&D are indeed jokes - writing hacks of the highest order. But let us not forget that GRRM has gone quiet after season 8, Dany was always set up as 'Her Satanic Majesty' - it is only because the modern West has recently dived into the bizarre world of victim hood and Marxist indentity crap that we can't see this simple facet of the saga for what it is. Dany was entitled, as evidenced by her ridiculous list of names. She never knew honor or accountability and thus became a force for oppression. None of it is that hard to work out if you look beyond the daft modern lens the decadent West has tried to subvert us with... Baizuo indeed. Even a communist country like China realizes when Marxism has gone nuts. Anyway, that aside, even though I think it is emotionally relevant that Dany was a woman, let's forget that and just admit her character was designed, form the onset, as a selfish shit who would always default to being mean when she didn't get her own way. Simple question - who was more selfish, Jon or Dany? If you answer Jon, I am afraid you are already lost to propaganda and there is no saving the liberation of your mind.
  10. ummester

    U.S. Politics: Trump of the Will

    We live in a popular culture culture. Just trying to find globally relatable terms. But seriously, if you try to think of what cities on Earth are the most decadent, NY and LA must be pretty close to the top of most lists. I have been to LA , way back in the 90s, and everyone I met there said the place sucked and wanted to leave.
  11. ummester

    U.S. Politics: Trump of the Will

    Yep, you can try and accuse my philosophy of that if you want but I find your argument far more totalitarian. Not once have I ever based the idea of culture on skin color - as noted previously in the threat, I am not even white. As for New York - I have never been there - always felt too much like a hive of scum and villainy form my perspective. When human cities get too big, they are always as much a home to disease bearing rats as humans. We are meant to live in smaller populations than what our cities require to subsist. All that aside, New York, like LA, is not the US, right? Both places are the cesspools of what the US represents. I mean why else would 911 have occurred? I don't know if that was Saudis or Mossad or even the CIA - what I do know is that the twin towers were symbolic of US greed across the globe. What I understand is the symbolism, without relating to the individual human details - New York has been pinged as symbolically corrupt for a very long time. I mean, given this is a GoTs forum NY and LA are basically Kings Landing, in a symbolic sense.
  12. ummester

    U.S. Politics: Trump of the Will

    So you are an advocate for some global humanity? British culture is a thing by my definition - English language and common law based on an evolution from ancient cultures, through Christianity and the enlightenment, to what Britain accepts as social convention now. I can fully accept that humanity has a common ancestry from Africa - I have no issue with the concept that all humans are genetically and potentially equal. What I argue is that, over the long run, tribes of humans spit off and both integrated and re-integrated with other sapient species across the globe. It is likely that climatic and other changes effected both sociological and civilization development during this time. It is reasonable to accept that what was a definable human culture was in a constant state of flux. Yet, as I mentioned before, culture is a snapshot, based on history and present position. British culture is as definable as Japanese culture, or Chinese culture - based on the currently (and to some extent historically) shared ideas of linguistics and belief. Yes, there will always be outliers and variations but that does not negate that there is a general middle to the normal curve about which a given cultures language and values relate.
  13. ummester

    U.S. Politics: Trump of the Will

    Re random Iranian guy in Britain - my definition would suggest he is British if he puts English common law above Islam. If he holds Islam up as a greater source of philosophical truth and social values than British common law, than he is not culturally British. Values and language - its not hard. Adopt the values and language of the culture you migrate into and all is well, do not adapt and things will turn out badly. WHEN IN ROME, DO AS THE ROMANS DO - it really is that simple. Rome will change at its own pace, You never have the right to dictate that change. As soon as you try to dictate the rate of change, you hasten the collapse of Rome. Re tracing back human history - sure it is massively complicated. The origins of the West are in the proto Indo European - this is distinct from Asian and African cultures. This does not mean there was no cross pollination of ideas and genetics before the GrecoRoman civilizations but a clear line can still be traced from the tribes of the Black Sea until the modern West.
  14. ummester

    U.S. Politics: Trump of the Will

    Yep, obviously you misunderstand what I am saying. I'm an old lefty - from back when the left actually made sense and stood for the working class of a given nation, before it was overtaken by progressive corporate zealots.
  15. ummester

    U.S. Politics: Trump of the Will

    So you live in South Africa then?
×