SeanF

WRT Dany v Sansa, the big issue is “shipping” wars.

I’d say many book fans reacted very strongly against later seasons of GOT. A lot of people (myself included) loathed St.Tyrion, detested the remaining Stark siblings, found Dany a lot more sympathetic by the end of Season 8 than at the end of Season 7, and thought Jon was a weak fool. But, these characters were really flat caricatures of their book counterparts. I read the books in 2011, and joined the forum in that year. My impressions are: 1. Yes, opinions on Tyrion have nose-dived, and I’m quite sure reaction to the show is big part of that. 2. Other than the stupid shit-posting threads, the Starks remain very popular. Yet, when I started, there was a tendency to view them (apart from Catelyn) as saints. That has gone, I think, partly in response to the show. They are highly sympathetic, but also flawed. 3. Dany is *way* more popular than in 2011. No discussion about her was complete without Apple Martini and Tze weighing in about her being the child of Satan. 4. Following on, there were a lot of posts contrasting Jon’s moral purity with Dany’s evil. Most posters recognise them now as being similar people. 5. I really miss the threads on Cat the Monster. They were such fun to read.

I understand the concept of “death of the author”, but any such argument needs to have *some* basis in the text. In fact, the text must be treated as sacrosanct. It requires close reading, critical skills, and placing each character’s words, thoughts, and actions in their proper context. One can’t make things up, ignore textual evidence to the contrary, and invent bad motives, for good actions, for characters one does not like. There is simply no critical interpretation , offered in good faith, that allows one to view people like Tywin, Walder Frey, the slavers, the Boltons, as heroic, or people like Ned, Catelyn, or Jon as villainous. There is plenty of room to debate whether Ned’s, Catelyn’s, Jon’s actions were counter-productive or wise, or whether they are flawed. But, none to debate if they are villains.

I'm beginning to wonder if all the posts of this type are being generated by Chat GPT.

I don’t find Sanderson terribly gripping, but I’ve never found him an incompetent writer. And, yes, it’s a shitty article.

Within that overall system, there are still people who are better, and people who are worse, than the norm. No society switches overnight from medieval ethics to those of a modern liberal democracy (which are probably less impressive than we like to think). Progress is always incremental, but within that, there are people who try to make things better, and others who definitely try to make things worse.

ASOIAF/GOT criticism on Quora is dominated by Kelsey Hayes, who used to post here as Apple Martini, and always gives me the impression that Daenerys has wronged her personally. A lot of posters just repeat what she says. Unlike the Stark haters here, who just post rubbish, her articles do have textual backing, but almost always involve removing actions from their context, ignoring contrary evidence, and attributing the basest of motives to characters she doesn't like. So, a favourite argument of hers is "Daenerys is a slaver, and therefore a hypocrite to condemn slavery". It is trictly true that Daenerys owned slaves, but also completely misleading, when you read that she took slaves to spare them rape and murder at the Lhazareen town, and freed her slaves as soon as she was able. WRT the War of the Five Kings, I don't think Robb can be blamed for what Roose Bolton did at Harrenhall. He was out of the loop, fighting in the West. I can't believe for one moment he would sanction mass rape. But, the orders to hang collaborators (including women who lay with lions) would have come from the top. These people were hanged quite openly, with no attempt at concealment. The order would probably be "punish collaborators", and it was left to the discretion of local commanders as to how that order was interpreted. By way of comparison, I've just completed a dissertation, which deals in part with Spanish guerillas in the Peninsular War, and they had no compunction about hanging women who they deemed collaborators. Reading, as I did, an account at the National Archive, written by a British liaison officer, that Mina Y Esposa, "instantly put to death", six Spanish ladies who were captured with a French military detachment, was quite startling.

There were unquestionably horrible Starks, throughout history. Those who hung up their enemies’ entrails and raped their daughters. Nor, were the she-wolves of Winterfell likely pleasant people. But, I think my point stands. It’s individuals, not Houses, who should be judged.

I’m not convinced that any Houses are better or worse than each other. Individuals are better or worse than each other.

And, that’s a bad thing?

On this, I agree with Oscar Wilde that books aren’t moral or immoral. They’re well written or badly written.

Any leader has to be willing to sacrifice people in war. Men died in Robb’s feint, in order to achieve victory. The O/P describes a different kind of sacrifice.

The issue is, do I impose upon others, a choice I would not make for myself? Kings have to make hard choices. But, it’s easy to say “Some of you are going to die. That is a sacrifice I am willing to make.”

You want evidence? Darth Sidious & co. have no need of evidence.

Jon would lop off Slynt’s head all over again.

Yes, for all Stannis’ agonising about Edric Storm, burning him alive would cost him nothing, and would delight Selyse. Self-sacrifice OTOH, is a noble thing. Stepping onto a pyre, oneself, in an effort to save others, would be an act of very great heroism.

If Kate’s not into it, presumably she’s happy that her friend performs that particular task, in her place.

I never understood why The Meereenese Knot was such a problem. Maybe he just can’t see the wood for the trees.

Neither Robb nor Cat murdered their own soldiers. And Robb is not a vassal who gives oaths to Walder Frey.

I'm sorry, I don't give much of a toss for either Daeron or the insurance broker.

The problem with *not* executing Karstark is that you licence every lord with a grudge to murder prisoners, and their guards.

The problem was the Targaryen thread was hijacked by criticism of the moderators. The poster in question knows what he did, and why the moderators acted as they did.

If we see it in purely contractual terms then Robb entirely made good his breach of contract, by offering a lord paramount as husband. And, not even the Code of Hammurabai treatsg the murder of 3,500 as a just response to breach of contract.

Killing the Tickler and Raff, and the four bloody mummers (as Nymeria) was performing a public service.

With the exceptions of Cersei and Tywin, every major character was made either more stupid, or more nasty, than their book counterparts, sometimes both. We dodged a bullet, when HBO chose not to make “Confederate.”