Having done some Shakespeare before, I tend to approach the show versus the books the way I approach Shakespeare's plays versus their source materials. The historical Macbeth was totally different from Shakespeare's Macbeth. HBO-Shae is very different from book-Shae. Even HBO-Theon, much as I ADORE the character, is sorta different from book-Theon in a lot of ways. But both source and adaptation tell good stories about interesting characters. Just as Shakespeare would take a pre-existing chronicle and tweak it (often to a degree historical 'purists' would consider outrageous) to make it into fine drama, so D&D are taking ASOIAF and tweaking it to make fine television. And while in the back of my mind I know that the tweaks are not canon, are not 'historical' in the context of the history of Westeros as outlined by GRRM, I just don't think in terms of blind adherence to fact when approaching an adaptation of anything anymore. I guess I've already sort of come to terms with the fact that inaccurate adaptations can also simultaneously be rollicking good ones - and compared to Shakespeare, this show hardly qualifies as inaccurate to begin with. A slight tangent, but I just thought I'd throw my two cents in.