Headey, Coster-Waldau on Sept Scene

[six]

Man, can't they just come out and say "we screwed up, it was not our intention, but we screwed up and we apologize for it". HOW HARD IS IT?

Besides, they are all ignoring (or misunderstanding) the bigger point: it's not rape in and of itself that bothers people, it's the fact that they shot a rape scene thinking it was consensual. That's what's fucked up: it's the fact that these people have no idea what rape is.

This is what I've been saying as well, I find the whole approach to tell the audience "you got it wrong" very annoying. No one got it wrong, they failed at conveying what they meant with that scene! It's on them.

[Mr Fixit]

No one got it wrong, they failed at conveying what they meant with that scene! It's on them.

To be honest, communication is a two-way street. :) But I get what you're saying. A bit more clarity would've been OK.

[Ilúvatar]

This is what I've been saying as well, I find the whole approach to tell the audience "you got it wrong" very annoying. No one got it wrong, they failed at conveying what they meant with that scene! It's on them.

The only thing they got wrong was overestimating the tolerance and maturity of viewers, as well as their ability to digest and fully understand a complex scene.

[six]

The only thing they got wrong was overestimating the tolerance and maturity of viewers, as well as their ability to digest and fully understand a complex scene.

I'm going to ignore you because I can't be arsed with this ignorance, but I at least have to let you know.

[Ilúvatar]

Fair enough. Ignore me and ignore everyone associated with the show. I guess sometimes it's just easier to stick your fingers in your ears and scream "lalala" when you're wrong about something.

[Ser Desmond Wine's Bane]

The only thing they got wrong was overestimating the tolerance and maturity of viewers, as well as their ability to digest and fully understand a complex scene.

If the production was unable to convey the message they wanted, then it is not the fault of the viewers.

[ridilon]

I'm not sure you understand what "magnanimous" means.

So now Lena also doesn't recognise rape when she sees it? Bad, bad girl.

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." Ha

[Annara Snow]

Nah, that's not it. I mean, sure that's what it became once everyone hopped onto the bandwagon. It started when salty tears were spilled because of what it supposedly does to Good Boy Jaime's Redemption Train. Cersei, the alleged victim here, is an afterthought in all this hubbub.

Because making a character a rapist in an adaptation when they're not in the source material is definitely character assassination, whereas no one - well, no sane person, at least - can blame someone for getting raped, so this can hardly be viewed as character assassination of Cersei - though it is typical of the way the show keeps depowering her and taking away her agency, which is a huge problem in itself, especially when she's shown not reacting to what the majority of viewers perceive as rape.

Now, if, say, the show were to randomly show Cersei sexually abusing Tommen just to spice things up or because they just happened to shoot the scene that way, fans would definitely be upset over a character assassination of Cersei. But you could still pull a Straw Man and mock the people who dare to criticise the show because of blatantly OOC behaviour of "Good Girl Cersei " and add some lesson about how Bad People Will Do Any Kind of Bad Things and That's the Only Characterization You Need .

[Annara Snow]

The only thing they got wrong was overestimating the tolerance and maturity of viewers, as well as their ability to digest and fully understand a complex scene.

If 90% of viewers, including professional critics, see a scene as rape despite you not intending it to be, it's time to consider the possibility that the problem lies with you and the way you wrote, shot and edited it, not with the viewers who reacted to what they saw on screen instead of reading your mind.

Anyway, I think this is the first time anyone has ever accused this show of being too subtle and overestimating its audience. :lol:

[Frey Pies]

I don't get why people are asking Alex Graves/D&D to apologize for the scene. They filmed what Martin wrote in the books in a less cheesy way. What people have to remember is the context of the scene- it is Jaime lashing out on his sister (who is stricken with grief but still loves him), both of whom are extremely rough with each other, as has already been established in E1S1 and another scene in Season 1, where they do the "no" thing. They are also both living in a society where things such as that barely qualify as rape. People are using modern views of morality to look at a society which is much less developed.

D&D and Alex Graves showed exactly what they'd meant to- a very disturbing scene (this has been mentioned in the Inside the Episode too). One is meant to be disturbed by the scene, and to feel a bit more hesitant about Jaime; they just weren't expecting everyone to become so outraged by it.

Also, the follow-up this week was brilliant. There was a palpable tension between Jaime and Cersei due to what had happened before ("Your Grace", "Lord Commander"), and it is clear their relationship will not be the same. B.Cogman himself admitted that there was an "undercurrent of what happened before" in this episode.

What were people expecting- Cersei straight up bringing Jaime to apologize to her? That is not how the Jaime and Cersei we know so far work, that is not how their relationship works.

And honestly, some people actually believe that Jaime will have to answer for that (in any other way than he already did by the gap between him and Cersei now)? No one else even knows about it. Plus, even some major wrongdoings in the series go unpunished, as this is Westeros, and, in the bigger picture of the villainy of the characters, this is just a minor thing. To quote Tyrion, "If it is justice you're looking for, you've come to the wrong place."

[Ilúvatar]

If the production was unable to convey the message they wanted, then it is not the fault of the viewers.

Ok, but I think we need to draw a line between not making something obvious enough for the audience and completely presenting something wrong.

If a professor gives a lecture to a bunch of students and only a few of them come away with a clear understanding of what was said, you could argue that it's the professor's fault for not dumbing things down enough for his audience (even though some fault may lie with the students not paying enough attention). What you shouldn't do argue that the information presented in the lecture is factually incorrect just because it went over peoples heads.

If 90% of viewers, including professional critics, see a scene as rape despite you not intending it to be, it's time to consider the possibility that the problem lies with you and the way you wrote, shot and edited it, not with the viewers who reacted to what they saw on screen instead of reading your mind.

You're making up a percentage based on a tiny sample of reactions from the internet. Ever heard of the term vocal minority?

You're also implying that professional critics are infallible when it comes to interpreting scenes, or perhaps that they're somehow more qualified than the rest of humanity when it comes to judging what is or isn't rape.

[Mr Fixit]

Because making a character a rapist in an adaptation when they're not in the source material is definitely character assassination, whereas no one - well, no sane person, at least - can blame someone for getting raped, so this can hardly be viewed as character assassination of Cersei - though it is typical of the way the show keeps depowering her and taking away her agency, which is a huge problem in itself, especially when she's shown not reacting to what the majority of viewers perceive as rape.

Now if only that was the point of the Great Spring Outrage of '14, I'd be with you all the way. The media, however, couldn't care less about the "character assassination" of one Jaime Lannister, colloquially known as the Kingslayer, as evidenced by nearly every single (early written) review that barely mentions it. The "scandal", at least where the wider world is concerned (we're not talking of Bookwalkers here), doesn't have anything to do with Jaime or his supposed character arc, but with an opportunity to espouse "progressive" values left and right and cry "Rape Culture! Oh, the times, the times!" as if the show was saying that rape is a-okay or was somehow romanticising and glamourising it.

Note that there were two completely separate groups of people involved in GSO'14, though their goals coincided - one I sympathise though do not agree with (the one you belong to, if that's not clear enough), while the other yearns for a nice high soapbox and a willing audience. Different worlds.

[Ser Desmond Wine's Bane]

Ok, but I think we need to draw a line between not making something obvious enough for the audience and completely presenting something wrong.

And I think we need to stop claiming that the audience was too dumb to understand what was presented to them and needed to be dumbed down. It is not the audience's fault.

[King Tyrion I]

I don't get why people are asking Alex Graves/D&D to apologize for the scene. They filmed what Martin wrote in the books in a less cheesy way. What people have to remember is the context of the scene- it is Jaime lashing out on his sister (who is stricken with grief but still loves him), both of whom are extremely rough with each other, as has already been established in E1S1 and another scene in Season 1, where they do the "no" thing. They are also both living in a society where things such as that barely qualify as rape. People are using modern views of morality to look at a society which is much less developed.

D&D and Alex Graves showed exactly what they'd meant to- a very disturbing scene (this has been mentioned in the Inside the Episode too). One is meant to be disturbed by the scene, and to feel a bit more hesitant about Jaime; they just weren't expecting everyone to become so outraged by it.

Also, the follow-up this week was brilliant. There was a palpable tension between Jaime and Cersei due to what had happened before ("Your Grace", "Lord Commander"), and it is clear their relationship will not be the same. B.Cogman himself admitted that there was an "undercurrent of what happened before" in this episode.

What were people expecting- Cersei straight up bringing Jaime to apologize to her? That is not how the Jaime and Cersei we know so far work, that is not how their relationship works.

And honestly, some people actually believe that Jaime will have to answer for that (in any other way than he already did by the gap between him and Cersei now)? No one else even knows about it. Plus, even some major wrongdoings in the series go unpunished, as this is Westeros, and, in the bigger picture of the villainy of the characters, this is just a minor thing. To quote Tyrion, "If it is justice you're looking for, you've come to the wrong place."

:agree: Not only because of that Tyrion qouote.

You're just right. Thank you for this post.

[Ran]

Annara,

If they had made Jaime into a rapist, I'd agree with you. They have not, though. The canon of the show was that was a dark moment of mutual lust/anger/grief/passion, and that's that.

You want to talk about how some people in the public now insist that their perception is all that matters to the narrative, and their perception is that he's a rapist, I think that's reasonable. But repeatedly stating that "Jaime is a rapist" does not make it so. Perception and actuality are quite different things.

[Annara Snow]

Annara,

If they had made Jaime into a rapist, I'd agree with you. They have not, though. The canon of the show was that was a dark moment of mutual lust/anger/grief/passion, and that's that.

You want to talk about how some people in the public now insist that their perception is all that matters to the narrative, and their perception is that he's a rapist, I think that's reasonable. But repeatedly stating that "Jaime is a rapist" does not make it so. Perception and actuality are quite different things.

When it comes to fictional characters and the audience's reactions to them, perception is everything. Authors' intent matters little compared to how the consumers of the fictional work perceive the events of the work. So far, I don't remember reading a single article or review of Breaker of Chains or Oathkeeper that didn't either outright state that Jamie raped Cersei in that/the previous episode, or comment about the controversy over the show/book differences and debate whether it was or wasn't rape. I wish that weren't the case, but it is.

And I didn't say that "Jamie is a rapist", I said: "Because making a character a rapist in an adaptation when they're not in the source material is definitely character assassination, whereas no one - well, no sane person, at least - can blame someone for getting raped" in response to a post that noted that the majority of the early book fans negative reactions over what was perceived as a change from consensual sex to rape were about Jamie's character rather than Cersei's. That's the answer why.

[Nami]

This is what I've been saying as well, I find the whole approach to tell the audience "you got it wrong" very annoying. No one got it wrong, they failed at conveying what they meant with that scene! It's on them.

It's even worse how they try to say that the audience got it wrong. As if rape has a grey area (aka forced but she gave in and liked? is that what they're trying to say?) and we just missed it

[Frey Pies]

Regardless of how some in the audience view it, it doesn't change Jaime's arc too much. In the grand scheme of things, Jaime is still trying to redeem himself. All the sept scene does is serve as a reminder to us that no character is black and white, that everyone is grey. Redemption is non-linear, and it's more realistic that Jaime does this one, final bad deed before fully committing himself to redemption. That is what the intention was- the entire episode, Breaker of Chains, was reminding us of the "dark side" of characters who we now love or starting to warm up to like Jaime, Sandor, Ygritte, even Dontos.

D&D do intend Jaime's act to be viewed as bad, saying "Jaime forced himself upon her", which is exactly what most people are doing. It has already been well addressed in Oathkeeper by the Jaime-Cersei split and Jaime is obviously still capable of doing good. Why aren't people moving on?

[Florina Laufeyson]

I don't get why people are asking Alex Graves/D&D to apologize for the scene. They filmed what Martin wrote in the books in a less cheesy way. What people have to remember is the context of the scene- it is Jaime lashing out on his sister (who is stricken with grief but still loves him), both of whom are extremely rough with each other, as has already been established in E1S1 and another scene in Season 1, where they do the "no" thing. They are also both living in a society where things such as that barely qualify as rape. People are using modern views of morality to look at a society which is much less developed.

D&D and Alex Graves showed exactly what they'd meant to- a very disturbing scene (this has been mentioned in the Inside the Episode too). One is meant to be disturbed by the scene, and to feel a bit more hesitant about Jaime; they just weren't expecting everyone to become so outraged by it.

Also, the follow-up this week was brilliant. There was a palpable tension between Jaime and Cersei due to what had happened before ("Your Grace", "Lord Commander"), and it is clear their relationship will not be the same. B.Cogman himself admitted that there was an "undercurrent of what happened before" in this episode.

What were people expecting- Cersei straight up bringing Jaime to apologize to her? That is not how the Jaime and Cersei we know so far work, that is not how their relationship works.

And honestly, some people actually believe that Jaime will have to answer for that (in any other way than he already did by the gap between him and Cersei now)? No one else even knows about it. Plus, even some major wrongdoings in the series go unpunished, as this is Westeros, and, in the bigger picture of the villainy of the characters, this is just a minor thing. To quote Tyrion, "If it is justice you're looking for, you've come to the wrong place."

This post. This post right here. The only issue i had was that Graves kept flip-flopping on the issue where as D&D and the actors were all "Jaime forced himself on her."

But yeah that right there.

Why aren't people moving on?

I dont know and its irritating me. The scene serves a narrative purpose and does effect how the two characters interact later. We. Need. To. Move. On.

[sj4iy]

Regardless of how some in the audience view it, it doesn't change Jaime's arc too much. In the grand scheme of things, Jaime is still trying to redeem himself. All the sept scene does is serve as a reminder to us that no character is black and white, that everyone is grey. Redemption is non-linear, and it's more realistic that Jaime does this one, final bad deed before fully committing himself to redemption. That is what the intention was- the entire episode, Breaker of Chains, was reminding us of the "dark side" of characters who we now love or starting to warm up to like Jaime, Sandor, Ygritte, even Dontos.

D&D do intend Jaime's act to be viewed as bad, saying "Jaime forced himself upon her", which is exactly what most people are doing. It has already been well addressed in Oathkeeper by the Jaime-Cersei split and Jaime is obviously still capable of doing good. Why aren't people moving on?

Probably because they can't stand the fact that someone they were cheering for did something they didn't approve of. All of this 'controversy' about what the directors, actors, and writers said is just stirring the pot when it basically boils down to that: "I thought he was becoming a good guy! Why did they do this?!" Of course, no one wanted to know their opinions about any of the other rapes that happened in the show, but that's because a character they liked wasn't involved in it.