Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

TheKnightOfJests

Do the show writers hate religion?

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Are they though? In fact they are set up as a force for equalising power in westeros, taking power away from the Elite and bringing it back to the people. That is their main aim. Is that negative? I'd say it was a force for good.

Yes they also have some views on homosexuality and infidelity that don't fit into a 21st century modern interpretation, but that seems entirely consistent with the majority of religious views throughout history.

It really isn't though. The obsession some religious groups have with homosexuality is quite new. In the past (and in the books) homosexuality was seen as an embarrassing little piece of court gossip. You were expected to keep it to yourself but so long as it didn't interfere with marrying or getting an heir who cared. 

Making Loras' sexuality the focus of the Sparrow plot line is very much a modern conceit. It strikes me as anvilicious moralising. Which is incredibly galling coming from a show as unintentionally homophobic as Game of Thrones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, ummester said:

... picking on Loras for being gay....

This is the only (quick easy suitable for tv) way that Cersei could attack the Tyrells with The Faith. She could get the Faith to attack them for being Noble, rich and corrupt. She and her family are far more guilty of such things than they are.

The book version with the moon tea plot would be more difficult to tell on tv, especially when Margery and Tommen have already consumated the marriage. The idea of this story is not that the show is gay bashing, the idea is that Cersei tried to use the Faith for her own ends and it back fired badly. Cersei found a bunch of zealots and gave them power to attack the Tyrells and ended up being burnt herself.

We had Sam singing the Seven Pointed Star song last year to Gilly. We've had plenty of positive religious aspects on the show and only one storyline putting the Seven in a bad light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, protar said:

It really isn't though. The obsession some religious groups have with homosexuality is quite new. In the past (and in the books) homosexuality was seen as an embarrassing little piece of court gossip. You were expected to keep it to yourself but so long as it didn't interfere with marrying or getting an heir who cared. 

Making Loras' sexuality the focus of the Sparrow plot line is very much a modern conceit. It strikes me as anvilicious moralising. Which is incredibly galling coming from a show as unintentionally homophobic as Game of Thrones.

Except none of that is really true is it. During the late middle ages homosexuality was outlawed in many places and any sex that wasn't for procreation purposes was seen as sinful. All led by the church. Its been the churches position up until recent times. They still believe it. 

I love you throw around accusations of homophobia at something like GoT. Its mental.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, RedShirt47 said:

This is the only (quick easy suitable for tv) way that Cersei could attack the Tyrells with The Faith. She could get the Faith to attack them for being Noble, rich and corrupt. She and her family are far more guilty of such things than they are.

The book version with the moon tea plot would be more difficult to tell on tv, especially when Margery and Tommen have already consumated the marriage. The idea of this story is not that the show is gay bashing, the idea is that Cersei tried to use the Faith for her own ends and it back fired badly. Cersei found a bunch of zealots and gave them power to attack the Tyrells and ended up being burnt herself.

We had Sam singing the Seven Pointed Star song last year to Gilly. We've had plenty of positive religious aspects on the show and only one storyline putting the Seven in a bad light.

Good points. It covers the same elements and it does so in a way contemporary viewers would consider topical - so it is still reasonable adaptation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that the fanatics in the show are still a minority, but at the same time they're the only examples really being shown of the religions in the show. I'm not saying they should make up a character to just be the "good religious character", but when a lot of characters in the books were people who had faith, and now in the show most of those same characters have had an anti religious attitude, and any part of the books where they've shown a main characters religious aspect has been removed from the show, then it's not really a wonder to think that they've been being heavy handed on certain view points.

Sansa did show her faith in the first two seasons, but lost it in the third. That didn't happen in the books. This isn't about one character of course though.

Honestly as the OP I didn't expect there to be much growth to this topic....... So carry on! :hat:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheKnightOfJests said:

I understand that the fanatics in the show are still a minority, but at the same time they're the only examples really being shown of the religions in the show. I'm not saying they should make up a character to just be the "good religious character", but when a lot of characters in the books were people who had faith, and now in the show most of those same characters have had an anti religious attitude, and any part of the books where they've shown a main characters religious aspect has been removed from the show, then it's not really a wonder to think that they've been being heavy handed on certain view points.

Sansa did show her faith in the first two seasons, but lost it in the third. That didn't happen in the books. This isn't about one character of course though.

Honestly as the OP I didn't expect there to be much growth to this topic....... So carry on! :hat:

What did you expect when you start a topic about religion! :)

But really, are you actually asking for them to over compensate for showing one group of religious people in one light by altering other characters' stories? Where do you stop? 

I doubt how the show depicted religion was really a high priority on the makers minds. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Except none of that is really true is it. During the late middle ages homosexuality was outlawed in many places and any sex that wasn't for procreation purposes was seen as sinful. All led by the church. Its been the churches position up until recent times. They still believe it. 

I love you throw around accusations of homophobia at something like GoT. Its mental.

I'm not an expert on history. So perhaps I'm mistaken. But in Westeros at least, that's basically the stance towards heterosexuality - it's something to giggle at, but no one really cares. The choice to make homophobia the centre of a story which had nothing to do with it in the books is very odd.

And GoT is incredibly homophobic. Loras is reduced to a gay stereotype whose sexuality is mentioned in practically every scene he's in. Who's obsessed with fashion and will sleep with any hot guy just a few months after Renly's death, and then will spill family secrets because...he got some D. This is the show which made Renly afraid of blood as well and which had Oberyn literally live in a brothel. And had a bisexual women murdering a teenage girl in cold blood with a kiss. All of the gay and bisexual characters are reduced to promiscuous stereotypes. It's disgusting. And then they have the nerve to give us this poorly plotted, heavy handed storyline preaching about how wrong homophobia is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, protar said:

I'm not an expert on history. So perhaps I'm mistaken. But in Westeros at least, that's basically the stance towards heterosexuality - it's something to giggle at, but no one really cares. The choice to make homophobia the centre of a story which had nothing to do with it in the books is very odd.

And GoT is incredibly homophobic. Loras is reduced to a gay stereotype whose sexuality is mentioned in practically every scene he's in. Who's obsessed with fashion and will sleep with any hot guy just a few months after Renly's death, and then will spill family secrets because...he got some D. This is the show which made Renly afraid of blood as well and which had Oberyn literally live in a brothel. And had a bisexual women murdering a teenage girl in cold blood with a kiss. All of the gay and bisexual characters are reduced to promiscuous stereotypes. It's disgusting. And then they have the nerve to give us this poorly plotted, heavy handed storyline preaching about how wrong homophobia is. 

And nobody really cares about homosexuality in the show apart from the Sparrows, and thats only really used as a cover or excuse to help them achieve an end. If they really cared about homosexuality why did they just get Loras, why didn't they round up every gay guy or girl in KL and have them burnt? I think you totally missed the point of what happened. Lady O basically dismisses Loras' behaviour and doesn't care about what he does, and reflects the general attitude of the population.

Loras is in now way a gay stereotype, thats pretty offensive to say that. In fact hes a reasonably well rounded individual. I don't remember him mincing around like a 70's sitcom character, in fact he behaves exactly the same as every other character on the show. So what if he moved on after Renly's death? Tyrion walks around shagging prostitutes, Jamie shags his sister, Sam is incompetent in bed and thinks about girls.. are these hetrosexual stereotypes? People have sex lives. I'm not sure why you view Loras having sex with another man as a negative or somehow offensive to homosexuals. 

Oberyn was sexually 'liberated' on the show, he liked men and women and loved pleasure. That was his character. That wasn't a statement on homosexuality or hetrosexuality. 

Its like you are looking for offence and desperately putting pieces together to make an argument, but none of it really adds up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RedShirt47 said:

We've had plenty of positive religious aspects on the show and only one storyline putting the Seven in a bad light.

In the show, the Lord of Light followers burnt a little girl (and king's sole heir), and Arya's fallen in with a death-worshipping cult. The Dothraki were stripped of their whole cosmology, other than an episode title. 

I don't think the show has handled religion any worse than they've handled everything else, however. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TepidHands said:

In the show, the Lord of Light followers burnt a little girl (and king's sole heir), and Arya's fallen in with a death-worshipping cult. The Dothraki were stripped of their whole cosmology, other than an episode title. 

I don't think the show has handled religion any worse than they've handled everything else, however. 

The Faceless Men aren't a 'death worshipping cult', and calling them such is completely misunderstanding their role in society.  They are revered for helping those who need to be helped...their methodology is up for debate, but if they were truly a 'death worshipping cult', then people would not go to them for help.  They do not come across as religious fanatics by any stretch of the imagination- and they are not misusing their position for power.  That's the reason Arya was punished, in fact- because she used her position and training for her own ends, instead of for the good of society.

Besides, the Faceless Men are also in the books and portrayed just the same, so if you truly have a problem with them, take it up with Martin for creating them.  The show hasn't changed their role in the story at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sj4iy said:

The Faceless Men aren't a 'death worshipping cult', and calling them such is completely misunderstanding their role in society.  They are revered for helping those who need to be helped...their methodology is up for debate, but if they were truly a 'death worshipping cult', then people would not go to them for help.  They do not come across as religious fanatics by any stretch of the imagination- and they are not misusing their position for power.  That's the reason Arya was punished, in fact- because she used her position and training for her own ends, instead of for the good of society.

Besides, the Faceless Men are also in the books and portrayed just the same, so if you truly have a problem with them, take it up with Martin for creating them.  The show hasn't changed their role in the story at all.

You think the insurance guy they were hired to off was being  helped? Or in the books, Pate the acolyte? Even their words: all men must serve/all men must die, and the hall of statuary of the Planetosi death gods? That doesn't sound real benevolent. I think I understand fine what they've about. People come to them for "help" in dying, not help in paying rent. And since they're also assassins, they sometimes "help" by murder. For money.

Yeah, I think I got it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RedShirt47 said:

This is the only (quick easy suitable for tv) way that Cersei could attack the Tyrells with The Faith. She could get the Faith to attack them for being Noble, rich and corrupt. She and her family are far more guilty of such things than they are.

The book version with the moon tea plot would be more difficult to tell on tv, especially when Margery and Tommen have already consumated the marriage. The idea of this story is not that the show is gay bashing, the idea is that Cersei tried to use the Faith for her own ends and it back fired badly. Cersei found a bunch of zealots and gave them power to attack the Tyrells and ended up being burnt herself.

We had Sam singing the Seven Pointed Star song last year to Gilly. We've had plenty of positive religious aspects on the show and only one storyline putting the Seven in a bad light.

There's no reason why the moon tea plot would have been difficult to tell on TV, and it was their own decision to age up Tommen that made it impossible. We've yet to see if that age decision makes any sense in the long run but it has led to us having Margaery held on charges of perjury, which is a very different (and lower) order of wrongdoing to the treason of the books.

15 minutes ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

And nobody really cares about homosexuality in the show apart from the Sparrows, and thats only really used as a cover or excuse to help them achieve an end. If they really cared about homosexuality why did they just get Loras, why didn't they round up every gay guy or girl in KL and have them burnt? I think you totally missed the point of what happened. Lady O basically dismisses Loras' behaviour and doesn't care about what he does, and reflects the general attitude of the population.

Loras is in now way a gay stereotype, thats pretty offensive to say that. In fact hes a reasonably well rounded individual. I don't remember him mincing around like a 70's sitcom character, in fact he behaves exactly the same as every other character on the show. So what if he moved on after Renly's death? Tyrion walks around shagging prostitutes, Jamie shags his sister, Sam is incompetent in bed and thinks about girls.. are these hetrosexual stereotypes? People have sex lives. I'm not sure why you view Loras having sex with another man as a negative or somehow offensive to homosexuals. 
<>

I don't agree with your first paragraph.  If you recall, they had a scene in the brothel where the Faith Militant beat a male patron and a male prostitute, and Olyvar hid.  The show definitely sets out the Faith as anti-homosexual (amongst other things).  I have no doubt that this is used a shortcut to engage the audience against the Faith.  We also had the unedifying spectacle of Lady Olenna talking of her grandson as a 'pillow-biter' and another comment about being a 'sword swallower'.  I hardly think dialogue of that nature is supposed to sound "enlightened".

Loras in the show moves on to Olyvar without even mourning Renly.  It's completely out of character and plays to that most offensive gay stereotype: promiscuity.  This is directly at odds with his book characterisation and it is unsurprising that people will question why the show writers chose to change his characterisation so completely (even removing his prodigious fighting skills) to enable the change of a whole storyline to become primarily focused on hostility to gays that simply isn't in the book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

And nobody really cares about homosexuality in the show apart from the Sparrows, and thats only really used as a cover or excuse to help them achieve an end. If they really cared about homosexuality why did they just get Loras, why didn't they round up every gay guy or girl in KL and have them burnt? I think you totally missed the point of what happened. Lady O basically dismisses Loras' behaviour and doesn't care about what he does, and reflects the general attitude of the population.

Loras is in now way a gay stereotype, thats pretty offensive to say that. In fact hes a reasonably well rounded individual. I don't remember him mincing around like a 70's sitcom character, in fact he behaves exactly the same as every other character on the show. So what if he moved on after Renly's death? Tyrion walks around shagging prostitutes, Jamie shags his sister, Sam is incompetent in bed and thinks about girls.. are these hetrosexual stereotypes? People have sex lives. I'm not sure why you view Loras having sex with another man as a negative or somehow offensive to homosexuals. 

Oberyn was sexually 'liberated' on the show, he liked men and women and loved pleasure. That was his character. That wasn't a statement on homosexuality or hetrosexuality. 

Its like you are looking for offence and desperately putting pieces together to make an argument, but none of it really adds up.

Ah, the classic "if you point out homophobia it's you being offensive." Please stop it. I don't know if you're straight or gay or what but if you're straight, please stop silencing LGBTQIA people who are complaining about poor representation, by claiming that they're the real bigots. No one is buying it. Loras is a stereotype. His sexuality is mentioned or hinted at in virtually every scene that he is in, or in which he is mentioned. Sword-swallower this, throne of cocks that. It gets incredibly tiresome. And they turned one of Westeros' best warriors into a fop obsessed with fashion, deliberating on the difference between a pin and a brooch. 

I'm not saying that he can't move on from loss. But it cannot be more than a few months in setting after Renly's death that Loras starts sleeping around spilling family secrets to random hot squires. And we have no scene where we see Loras getting over Renly so the end result is that he looks incredibly callous and willing to jeopardise his family for some sweet D.

Oberyn is bisexual. And he's also hypersexual. And you have to understand that promiscuity and unfaithfulness is a very common stereotype of bisexuals which we get a lot of flack for. Now Oberyn is promiscuous in the books as well, but in the show he outright lives in a brothel. And on top of that every gay/bi character in the show is incredibly promiscuous. Oberyn and Ellaria have their sexuality ramped up to eleven, Loras sleeps with random squires mere months after the death of his love, Renly is mentioned as "shagging half the stable boys in Kings Landing" and Olyvar is an evil male prostitute. When you take all of GoT's gay characters together it paints an image of gay/bi people being fickle, unloyal and in some cases just straight up evil. And that doesn't even get into the casual fetishisation of lesbians. Game of Thrones is one of - if not the most - homophobic tv shows on air right now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, TepidHands said:

You think the insurance guy they were hired to off was being  helped? Or in the books, Pate the acolyte? Even their words: all men must serve/all men must die, and the hall of statuary of the Planetosi death gods? That doesn't sound real benevolent. I think I understand fine what they've about. People come to them for "help" in dying, not help in paying rent. And since they're also assassins, they sometimes "help" by murder. For money.

Yeah, I think I got it. 

I said 'society'.  I never said 'individuals'.  And in Braavos, they are revered for that 'help' that they give, because it detours people like the insurance man who was taking advantage of desperate people from doing those things for fear that their will receive their retribution.  They don't target people for money- they seek out those who are destroying society and remove them.  And when people are dying of a terrible, incurable disease, then a quick, painless death is a mercy, not a punishment.  It is benevolence.  They are completely different from the other religious fanatics like the High Sparrow or Melisandre.

Again, though, you can't blame the showrunners for their portrayal of the Faceless Men...they were written that way by Martin and that's how they have been portrayed in the show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, sj4iy said:

They don't target people for money- they seek out those who are destroying society and remove them.

Uh, where are you getting that from? They're contract killers. Sure, they most likely also kill to further their own agenda (whatever that is), but they're not exactly benevolent assassins going around killing bad guys for society's benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Ser Quork said:

There's no reason why the moon tea plot would have been difficult to tell on TV, and it was their own decision to age up Tommen that made it impossible. We've yet to see if that age decision makes any sense in the long run but it has led to us having Margaery held on charges of perjury, which is a very different (and lower) order of wrongdoing to the treason of the books.

I don't agree with your first paragraph.  If you recall, they had a scene in the brothel where the Faith Militant beat a male patron and a male prostitute, and Olyvar hid.  The show definitely sets out the Faith as anti-homosexual (amongst other things).  I have no doubt that this is used a shortcut to engage the audience against the Faith.  We also had the unedifying spectacle of Lady Olenna talking of her grandson as a 'pillow-biter' and another comment about being a 'sword swallower'.  I hardly think dialogue of that nature is supposed to sound "enlightened".

Loras in the show moves on to Olyvar without even mourning Renly.  It's completely out of character and plays to that most offensive gay stereotype: promiscuity.  This is directly at odds with his book characterisation and it is unsurprising that people will question why the show writers chose to change his characterisation so completely (even removing his prodigious fighting skills) to enable the change of a whole storyline to become primarily focused on hostility to gays that simply isn't in the book.

Yes, I was going to bring the gay men arrested in the brothel but you beat me to it. And that scene makes it perfectly clear that the accusation against Loras is not a cover or an excuse. 

 

21 minutes ago, protar said:

Ah, the classic "if you point out homophobia it's you being offensive." Please stop it. I don't know if you're straight or gay or what but if you're straight, please stop silencing LGBTQIA people who are complaining about poor representation, by claiming that they're the real bigots. No one is buying it. Loras is a stereotype. His sexuality is mentioned or hinted at in virtually every scene that he is in, or in which he is mentioned. Sword-swallower this, throne of cocks that. It gets incredibly tiresome. And they turned one of Westeros' best warriors into a fop obsessed with fashion, deliberating on the difference between a pin and a brooch. 

I'm not saying that he can't move on from loss. But it cannot be more than a few months in setting after Renly's death that Loras starts sleeping around spilling family secrets to random hot squires. And we have no scene where we see Loras getting over Renly so the end result is that he looks incredibly callous and willing to jeopardise his family for some sweet D.

Oberyn is bisexual. And he's also hypersexual. And you have to understand that promiscuity and unfaithfulness is a very common stereotype of bisexuals which we get a lot of flack for. Now Oberyn is promiscuous in the books as well, but in the show he outright lives in a brothel. And on top of that every gay/bi character in the show is incredibly promiscuous. Oberyn and Ellaria have their sexuality ramped up to eleven, Loras sleeps with random squires mere months after the death of his love, Renly is mentioned as "shagging half the stable boys in Kings Landing" and Olyvar is an evil male prostitute. When you take all of GoT's gay characters together it paints an image of gay/bi people being fickle, unloyal and in some cases just straight up evil. And that doesn't even get into the casual fetishisation of lesbians. Game of Thrones is one of - if not the most - homophobic tv shows on air right now. 

Great post, agree wholeheartedly. And I'd like to add that none of this homophobic bs needed to be included at all, let alone at the expense of a very intersting character. And then there's Olenna's jokes, which could not possibly be any more cringe-worthy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Direwight said:

Uh, where are you getting that from? They're contract killers. Sure, they most likely also kill to further their own agenda (whatever that is), but they're not exactly benevolent assassins going around killing bad guys for society's benefit.

Money isn't their motivating factor.  They won't kill someone just because someone paid them...the person has to be doing something detrimental to society.  Otherwise they would not be revered by society, and would be seen as nothing more than murderers- they are not seen that way at all, so clearly their society sees a need for their services and they are not a 'crazy cult'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

What did you expect when you start a topic about religion! :)

But really, are you actually asking for them to over compensate for showing one group of religious people in one light by altering other characters' stories? Where do you stop? 

I doubt how the show depicted religion was really a high priority on the makers minds. 

I doubt it was too, and honestly if the religious attitudes of characters weren't ever really shown I wouldn't have a problem with it, it just seems like they've gone out of their way to create negative attitudes on it. So much of the negativity of religion comes from just the show.

If there wasn't a focus on showing the good, then there shouldn't be a focus on only showing the bad either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, sj4iy said:

Money isn't their motivating factor.  They won't kill someone just because someone paid them...the person has to be doing something detrimental to society.  Otherwise they would not be revered by society, and would be seen as nothing more than murderers- they are not seen that way at all, so clearly their society sees a need for their services and they are not a 'crazy cult'.

Well, again, where are you getting that from? It's been fairly clearly stated that they will kill anyone for the right price, I don't recall it ever being said anywhere that they unilaterally decide to kill people who are "detrimental to society", and as far as I can tell, they're more like feared rather than revered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, sj4iy said:

Money isn't their motivating factor.  They won't kill someone just because someone paid them...the person has to be doing something detrimental to society.  Otherwise they would not be revered by society, and would be seen as nothing more than murderers- they are not seen that way at all, so clearly their society sees a need for their services and they are not a 'crazy cult'.

Let me just refer you to herhttp://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Faceless_Mene

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×