[Book Spoilers] EP404 Discussion

[iknownothingjonsnow]

Wow, thank you for explaining the difference between watching and reading, and also saying exactly what I said but pretending to disagree with me.

:drunk:

This forum can sometimes be dark and full of __________ (fill in any number of blanks).

I've actually participated in a part of this conversation without full realizing what was being discussed. I wasn't offended by the gratuitous sex and violence displayed at Craster's, I was offended by the crappy writing. They'd have been better off wearing eye patches and signs stating "we are evil SOBs".

[tito5601]

dont know if anybody posted this yet but did anybody notice the kid in the nightswatch saying hes a very good archer, hes gonna kill ygritte forsure

[Chebyshov]

dont know if anybody posted this yet but did anybody notice the kid in the nightswatch saying hes a very good archer, hes gonna kill ygritte forsure

Ah, I figured this was a nod to him being Satin, but seeing as we never really know who killed Ygritte, these two things aren't mutually exclusive.

[Cas Stark]

:drunk:

This forum can sometimes be dark and full of __________ (fill in any number of blanks).

I've actually participated in a part of this conversation without full realizing what was being discussed. I wasn't offended by the gratuitous sex and violence displayed at Craster's, I was offended by the crappy writing. They'd have been better off wearing eye patches and signs stating "we are evil SOBs".

I'm going to have to disagree. Wearing eye patches and carrying signs is much more subtle than drinking out of a skull and then yelling rape them til they die.

[Gargarax]

I've actually participated in a part of this conversation without full realizing what was being discussed. I wasn't offended by the gratuitous sex and violence displayed at Craster's, I was offended by the crappy writing. They'd have been better off wearing eye patches and signs stating "we are evil SOBs".

Oh, we're getting there. I mean the monologue was well delivered, but could have been written by a highschool student in a creative writing course who is told to write a 30-word monologue of a guy we should totally hate. If we get Euron, he will have the eye patch, wear striped sweatshirts and say "harrr" a lot – how else will we know he is a good sailor. Oh, and Robert Strong will probably show Frankenstein-like stiches on his face.

I'm going to have to disagree. Wearing eye patches and carrying signs is much more subtle than drinking out of a skull and then yelling rape them til they die.

It is. I know this guy who can guess if a person is up to no good just by looking at his facial expression and observing how they behave. People like him might understand that the mutineers are the bad guys without either eyepatch or skulls. But then, that's just him, I would be so lost having to rely on peoples behaviour and social interaction.

Edited April 29, 2014 by Gargarax

[Gargarax]

I also have to copypaste a comment of a friend of mine with whom I'm discussing the show. Sums it up nicely:

"From the books, I remember sexual violence as a power device in relation with the characters of Cersei and Sansa, and of course Dany before her emancipation. But if it is simply spread out evenly as a narrative device indicating evil-ness and power/powerlessness, it completely ceases to be narratively convincing. It ceases to be critical but becomes a trope re-establishing sexual violence as a simple gender-power struggle. That is not what GRRM does."

[Widows_Blood]

I also have to copypaste a comment of a friend of mine with whom I'm discussing the show. Sums it up nicely:

"From the books, I remember sexual violence as a power device in relation with the characters of Cersei and Sansa, and of course Dany before her emancipation. But if it is simply spread out evenly as a narrative device indicating evil-ness and power/powerlessness, it completely ceases to be narratively convincing. It ceases to be critical but becomes a trope re-establishing sexual violence as a simple gender-power struggle. That is not what GRRM does."

Except for the whole part of the story where women are being raped in the Riverlands, mutilated by the mountain, hunted down by Ramsay, violated as corpses and even forced to perform bestiality. Other than all those parts, I agree that GRRM does not participate in using rape as a narrative device to indicate evil-ness and powerlessness.

[DarkAndFullOfTurnips]

I also have to copypaste a comment of a friend of mine with whom I'm discussing the show. Sums it up nicely:

"From the books, I remember sexual violence as a power device in relation with the characters of Cersei and Sansa, and of course Dany before her emancipation. But if it is simply spread out evenly as a narrative device indicating evil-ness and power/powerlessness, it completely ceases to be narratively convincing. It ceases to be critical but becomes a trope re-establishing sexual violence as a simple gender-power struggle. That is not what GRRM does."

There are definitely parts of the story where that's true. But he/she seem to conveniently forget all the other times it's brutal and unnecessary. People just don't seem to mind as much when they're reading apparently. To use that example again, there hasn't been a single thing close to as disturbing as someone raping a Silent Sister and literally chewing off her tits. No old lady tells Arya she's going to shove a stick up her vagina so the splinters hurt her. None of that was necessary, he could've just said this Silent Sister was raped and abused, did he have to mention fucking chewed up tits too? I'm a very visual person, when you write that down I imagine it immediately and it's fucking horrifying. He couldn't have just had the old lady say she would whack Arya with the stick? So let's just admit you prefer to read about gross brutaility rather than see it and get off this "GRRM uses violence so poignantly and never overdoes it"

Edited April 29, 2014 by DarkAndFullOfTurnips

[ViennaGirl]

People's reactions to the concept of rape in the books and the show are interesting. It seems like there are (1) people who dislike the non-book rape scenes that HBO has added to the show, (2) people who argue that any rape in the show is consistent with the books because the books are violent, and (3) people who don't want to call what happens in the show rape.

Why aren't we having this argument about non-rape violence, I wonder? No one is arguing about the 163 crucified kids. Maybe because that was exactly from the book? Or the people burned at the stake? Also in the book. Joffrey being poisoned? book. Jaime's hand? Book. Theon's torture? Book, but off-page. The rape scenes at issue aren't book rape scenes - they're the Cersei/Jaime sept scene (consensual in the book), and the Craster's scene (not in anyone's POV from the book).

It's not an issue of "oh, my delicate eyes can't take this horror," it's just people noting that HBO has added extra sexual violence scenes that weren't in the books. The reason they're doing it is because sex sells. Sexual violence sells. It's all right to point it out.

[DarkAndFullOfTurnips]

People's reactions to the concept of rape in the books and the show are interesting. It seems like there are (1) people who dislike the non-book rape scenes that HBO has added to the show, (2) people who argue that any rape in the show is consistent with the books because the books are violent, and (3) people who don't want to call what happens in the show rape.

Why aren't we having this argument about non-rape violence, I wonder? No one is arguing about the 163 crucified kids. Maybe because that was exactly from the book? Or the people burned at the stake? Also in the book. Joffrey being poisoned? book. Jaime's hand? Book. Theon's torture? Book, but off-page. The rape scenes at issue aren't book rape scenes - they're the Cersei/Jaime sept scene (consensual in the book), and the Craster's scene (not in anyone's POV from the book).

It's not an issue of "oh, my delicate eyes can't take this horror," it's just people noting that HBO has added extra sexual violence scenes that weren't in the books. The reason they're doing it is because sex sells. Sexual violence sells. It's all right to point it out.

People are much more sensitive about rape than they are about, for example, stabbing. There's also this recent fad of acting as if rape is the most offensive thing to you imaginable...Just look at the forum warning. There's a whole warning about talking about rape because it's such a sensitive topic. Look at the reaction to Jaime/Cersei.

I don't really think your assertion that rape sells is really true. Sex sells. Violence sells. I don't think rape sells.

Edited April 29, 2014 by DarkAndFullOfTurnips

[MR92]

i wonder if when jojen has his "seizure" at crasters, he is seeing what is going on with the night's king and the baby...last time jojen had one he came out of it with a vision of jon with the wildlings...jojen has a seizure and the next scene is the WWs

[Queen Ayras Lord Commander]

Yeah....this is easily the most bothersome aspect of tonight's episode. You get two hours of quality TV. Thrones and then Silicon/Veep.

To break up the second airing of Game of Thrones for another hack liberal comedian. How nauseating. I guess HBO's prioritizes it's political coverage above it's storytelling. I wonder how many people who were excited for more Game of Thrones are downloading the show from a torrent now? I know I am. What a waste of 30 minutes time for HBO.

Woah Woah Woah. Hack liberal comedian? Go cheer on Bundy some more sh!t for brains!

[Queen Ayras Lord Commander]

Well, we can either have the current state of affairs or invented material (i.e., Bran) but we cannot have both.

To give some perspective, the first half of Arya's last chapter in A Storm of Swords took place in the first episode of the season.

We also see the Titan in some of the previews, so her story line is being accelerated. People often forget that in the books Arya's first chapter after the Red Wedding ends were her taking an ax to the head (potentially leaving her dead) and then she doesn't have another chapter for a couple hundred pages.

Same is true with Bran in the sense that there are long periods of time between his chapters in the latter books. You either get fake filler or lose track of the character because they might be absent for several consecutive episodes. Idk if I love the changes, but they have got me dying for next week's episode, so to that effect, they were excellent.

[MR92]

We also see the Titan in some of the previews, so her story line is being accelerated. People often forget that in the books Arya's first chapter after the Red Wedding ends were her taking an ax to the head (potentially leaving her dead) and then she doesn't have another chapter for a couple hundred pages.

Same is true with Bran in the sense that there are long periods of time between his chapters in the latter books. You either get fake filler or lose track of the character because they might be absent for several consecutive episodes. Idk if I love the changes, but they have got me dying for next week's episode, so to that effect, they were excellent.

think thats davos and stannis seeing the titan...theres a character on IMDB for episode 10 and hes titled as the "bravosi sailor" so shell likely leave out of saltpans in the last ep.

[Queen Ayras Lord Commander]

think thats davos and stannis seeing the titan...theres a character on IMDB for episode 10 and hes titled as the "bravosi sailor" so shell likely leave out of saltpans in the last ep.

Yeah but in the books Arya is the first Character to reach Bravos. Seems like a fitting last 15 minutes of episode 10 to have (SPOILERS) a lion kill a lion, a low born bird kill a bird-by-marriage and Arya underneath the Titan.

[Queen Ayras Lord Commander]

Hey folks,

I know there has been a lot of bashing how the WW looked at the end and comparisons of what it looked like. Maybe I'm on a limb here, but to me it looked like the yellow guy from Sin City with Darth Maul's thorns. I know the look isn't dead on, but the facial expressions sure were.

[Queen Ayras Lord Commander]

I think Lancel will suffice.

Also, if they are going to have a Coldhands, this is the time to do it since it was Coldhands who killed the mutineers in the book. If there is no Coldhands, this is the perfect time to have Jon Snow demonstrate his leadership skills so he has a reason to be voted as Lord Commander.

Go back to the episode (1 or 2) where she says he took too long. She is clearly rubbing up on a different KG. But yes, I'm sad the Kettleblacks are cut. I loved the chapter where you find out they are all LF men.

[Queen Ayras Lord Commander]

Are you kidding? Everybody knows he's Lord Friendzone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVaD8rouJn0

Hell Yay! Best 5 minutes in youtube history.

[QueenSansa2]

Hey all. Just got registered for this forum... I've been waiting to be confirmed and have a lot pent up, so this is a bit long. I went through this whole topic and am surprised I didn't find what I was looking for to be discussed. So new points... and be easy on me, I've only read the books once, so I may have missed a few things.

1) Brienne and Jaime interaction. The last thing we know in the books is that Brienne was being hung for not returning the daughters to Catelyn. One of the biggest debates among fans, is whether Brienne is alive or not. Her last word was "Jaime". People think she lived because she would promise to Catelyn that she would avenge her, and kill Jaime. So the debate is - would Brienne kill Jaime? or would she not kill him and would she just be a sad woman who died with many unfulfilled oaths? I was really interested in the interaction between them on the show and watched closely. When Brienne took the sword and named it oathkeeper, did anyone else notice the eye contact language when that happened (there were several awkward seconds of it)? They both seem kind of sad and afraid of what that meant to call her sword oathkeeper. To me, that meant an understanding, that if it came to it, she would keep the oath she first kept with Catelyn. Meaning, Jaimie understood that meant that he could die by her oath. And that Brienne was sadly letting him know that. I mean that several awkward seconds of eye contact language could mean nothing, or it could mean exactly that! I was just disappointed that the show would hint to the answer of that mystery that Martin hasn't told yet.

2) Margaery and Tommen. Along the same lines. Tommen was described as a nice little boy who liked to play with his kittens, and that he got along well with Margary. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think she got him those kittens? She was using tactics in the book to appeal to a child... When Cersei wants to know who margaery is f***ing she does all that she can to find out who Marg gets alone with, and she is told that Marg is NEVER alone and always with her friends and girl friends. She wouldn't even believe that it would be Tommen that she was sleeping with. It was never implied that Marg would be sneaking around and having sexual relations with Tommen. SO that could mean, that Marg actually lost her virginity to Tommen and not anyone else, meaning she would win the trial and Cersei had it all wrong (duh). I thought the show pointing into this relationship that is secret even in the book, destroyed that mystery. Cersei will never know "their little secret" until the coming books but we do now. So that mystery untold by Martin is now destroyed. Not surprising again, and I'm not crying over it, but still disappointing that we have to find out from the show before we can read it. I was kind of intrigued at the idea that Marg had lied about being a virgin.

3) Margaery, Varys, and the children. People have been asking how did Marg get into Tommen's room. I am almost definitely certain Marg, Varys, and the orphan children are all working together. Marg appeared from the shadows and I think she came through a secret path that Varys showed her. The last sentence of the last book really had me asking questions. I had forgotten that the children were his birds. Varys is an orphan, those children are orphans. And when I was rewatching some episodes from previous GOT seasons, and watching Marg stop her cart in the streets to go talk to the children (I forgot the episode) made orphans by the war. She makes them like her and then says that if they need anything to go straight to her. Her connection with orphan children really has me suspecting she's working with Varys. When Varys in the last books says "for the children" it makes me think that he killed Kevan because he was about to start another war, making more orphans.

4) I mean we all know now who poisoned Joffrey. This was debated before this episode.

5) "sansa's not a killer, yet". ok thanks for that obvious foreshadowing.
6) you all have already talked about the Others in depth.

Is anyone else peeved about all this? Changes with the show I can grudgingly accept because they are two separate entities and they can take creative license to condense a complex story. BUT telling us what Martin hasn't told us yet? The things I listed are considerably minor, but it's only just begun. HBO is just getting started with telling us what happens in the next books.

[iknownothingjonsnow]

People's reactions to the concept of rape in the books and the show are interesting. It seems like there are (1) people who dislike the non-book rape scenes that HBO has added to the show, (2) people who argue that any rape in the show is consistent with the books because the books are violent, and (3) people who don't want to call what happens in the show rape.

Why aren't we having this argument about non-rape violence, I wonder? No one is arguing about the 163 crucified kids. Maybe because that was exactly from the book? Or the people burned at the stake? Also in the book. Joffrey being poisoned? book. Jaime's hand? Book. Theon's torture? Book, but off-page. The rape scenes at issue aren't book rape scenes - they're the Cersei/Jaime sept scene (consensual in the book), and the Craster's scene (not in anyone's POV from the book).

It's not an issue of "oh, my delicate eyes can't take this horror," it's just people noting that HBO has added extra sexual violence scenes that weren't in the books. The reason they're doing it is because sex sells. Sexual violence sells. It's all right to point it out.

There were many people, myself included, who felt that Theon's torture scenes were gratuitous and unnecessary.

I don't really understand the point you're trying to make. Death and violence are a reality of life and, therefore, have become a part of the vocabulary of most genres of entertainment. Rape and torture are not and, as such, well be held to higher levels of scrutiny.

Long story short, objectionable content presented in a reasonable context will generally be accepted, and when it has no point and/or goes to far then people tend to get upset. GRRM is far superior to D&D in terms of knowing which buttons and how hard to press. It is known.

EDT - GRRM also has the benefit of a more forgiving medium with respect to the depiction of these objectionable acts. Which is to say, GRRM both has an easier path to follow and is better at navigating it - that's why people who weren't troubled by the books get upset with the show.

Edited April 30, 2014 by iknownothingjonsnow