Jump to content

Archived

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

Hodor's Dragon

"Bittersweet" can't happen in the show

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, MinscS2 said:

A person who searches for and expects a memorable tragedy will enjoy said tragedy, if written well. There are many great Shakespearean pieces of literature and fiction who are memorable, but they never pretended to be something they're not.

1

He killed off the main heroic character in the first book. You haven't been paying attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, House Cambodia said:

He killed off the main heroic character in the first book. You haven't been paying attention.

Ah yes, of course. That automatically means that every perceived protagonist or remotely good character in the following books/seasons where ultimately destined to fail and die pointlessly right?

Please... :rolleyes:

Ned's death was tragic, but ultimately served a purpose and furthered the narrative. 
There was nothing nihilistic about it, quite the opposite. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, snow is the man said:

Robert ran up debt to an insane degree for no real reason. He gave tywin far more power since tywin owned alot of the debt.  However what was his worst crime was that due to him ignoring everything it allowed corruption to fester on a scale that was rarely seen. Robert  knew things were going bad and just ignored it. He knew his heir (the books specifically show this and I think the show hinted at it) was gonna be a screw up and was twisted but did nothing to try and change him. Even if ned hadn't been killed and cersei's children were actually roberts he set the kingdom up for war. It may not have been as bad as what happened but he dropped the ball and if you didn't have a really good ruler come after him it was gonna turn to crap.

 

Robert is not someone you want to hold up and say "yeah he is a good king"

As I said, it's better than going into a war or torturing and killing innocent people.

Robert is a good ruler in comparison with Aerys, Joffrey, Cersei or Dany.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, MinscS2 said:

Ah yes, of course. That automatically means that every perceived protagonist or remotely good character in the following books/seasons where ultimately destined to fail and die pointlessly right?

Please... :rolleyes:

Ned's death was tragic, but ultimately served a purpose and furthered the narrative. 
There was nothing nihilistic about it, quite the opposite. 

If the Spoilers are correct, this series will have been about as bittersweet as Titus Andronicus, or 'Tis Pity She's a Whore.

Share this post


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

:crying: A “powerful sadness” at the very end is GRRM's stated goal

The word bittersweet keeps being used as a shorthand for the sentiment that Martin has said he hopes to leave people with. This is causing a disconnect with viewers. That's because by repeating that simple word and seeing how it matches up with what you're seeing, you become disappointed and feel that he has misled you.

He has not, because what he has said is actually significantly different from a simple word. You've lost the context and nuance of his far, far more complex viewpoint by compressing  it all down to a single word, particularly one whose meaning is so hard to pin down.

Reading Martin's more detailed description of his goal banishes all confusion to produce a clear vision: he is deliberately trying to create a tremendous sadness at the end because he feels that that sadness has a power that makes the tale a lasting and memorable one that people will read and reread for a long time to come. 

In Martin's in-depth 2016-06-13 Rolling Stone interview, we read him saying all this and more:

As I read Return of the King, I didn’t want it to be over. That last book blew my mind, particularly the scouring of the Shire. I didn’t like that when I was in high school. The story’s over, and they destroyed the ring — but he didn’t write “and now they lived happily ever after.” Instead, they went home and home was all fucked up. The evil guys had burned down some of the woods; a fascist-like tyranny had taken over. That seemed anticlimactic to me. Frodo didn’t live happily ever after or marry a nice girl hobbit. He was permanently wounded; he was damaged. As a 13 year old, I couldn’t grasp that. Now, every time I re-read The Lord of the Rings — which I do, every few years — I appreciate the brilliance of the scouring of the Shire. That’s part of what lifts the book from all its imitators. There was a real cost to Tolkien’s world. There’s a tremendous sadness at the end of Lord of the Rings, and it has a power. I think that’s partly why people are still reading and re-reading these books.
[...]
There are some people who read and want to believe in a world where the good guys win and the bad guys lose, and at the end they live happily ever after. That’s not the kind of fiction that I write. Tolkien was not that. The scouring of the Shire proved that. Frodo’s sadness – that was a bittersweet ending, which to my mind was far more powerful than the ending of Star Wars, where all the happy Ewoks are jumping around, and the ghosts of all the dead people appear, waving happily. [Laughs] But I understand where the other people are coming from. There are a lot of books out there. Let everyone find the kind of book that speaks to them, and speaks to what they need emotionally.

You hate to lose any reader, but it is going to happen, regardless. In a long series, readers who loved the early books may envision the story going in certain directions. Often those directions are wildly divergent. When the later books actually come out, some of those readers are inevitably going to be upset, because the story on the page does not correspond with the one in their heads. Others may be delighted. I have lost readers with every book, I am sure… but I’ve gained a lot more. The fifth volume, A Dance with Dragons, was far and away the most popular in the series. In any case, no, it’s not something I worry about. When this question came up on my Not A Blog a few years ago, I embedded a clip from Rick Nelson singing “Garden Party. “You can’t please everyone, so you’ve got to please yourself. Truer words were seldom sung.

That's his goal and his reasoning behind it: to create a tremendous sadness at the end, and more. All those things seem to be coming to pass, do they not?  Therefore when considered in the light of his real goal here, it looks very much like Martin will have succeeded very well indeed.

So please stop saying bittersweet as though it were some mantra and then going off the rails when you see things happening that you think the word does not encompass. The word itself is not what he's trying to create.  Rather, a tremendous sadness is what he's trying to create because he believes that this kind of ending is so powerful that it makes an unforgettable story that will be long remembered and reread/rewatched.

Do you think he'll have created a powerful sadness? 

If so then good: mission accomplished. :crying:

 

Yes, right :lmao:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Erkan12 said:

As I said, it's better than going into a war or torturing and killing innocent people.

Robert is a good ruler in comparison with Aerys, Joffrey, Cersei or Dany.

You mean fake dany. Real dany died when she was hit by a ballista in episode four. There is a dany imposter running around.  As for robert being a good ruler in any way... no not really. Aegon the unworthy was one example of this. He didn't have a war through his entire reign if I remember correctly. However he let the realm fall apart and that led to war. If the following king hadn't have been so good and then the first aerys (who came right after) didn't have the political genius and skill of blood raven as his hand who was really the true king during that time then you would have had something like the war of five kings back then. However you didn't have a great king coming after robert you had joffrey who even if things had been perfect would have caused alot of trouble. Part of the job of the king is to make your kingdom safe and prosperous even after you die or at least have some sort of foundation made for it. Robert spent fourteen or fifteen years (according to the book since jon was born during the war and he was only fourteen when the first book started) essentially drinking and sleeping with any women who he could see and running up a MASSIVE debt and allowing people like little finger to further their self interest at the cost of the realm. The damn holding the sh**show that was the war of five kings and what came afterwards may have broken AFTER roberts death but he  had made it crack and made it have a record rainfall for years (okay a little forced but you get my meaning) which led to the dam breaking in the first place.

Share this post


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

Yes, right :lmao:

I don't understand what you mean?

 

 Also Maybe I am missing something but didn't GRRM himself say that the ending to ASOIAF would be bitter sweet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MinscS2 said:

Ah yes, of course. That automatically means that every perceived protagonist or remotely good character in the following books/seasons where ultimately destined to fail and die pointlessly right?

Please... :rolleyes:

Ned's death was tragic, but ultimately served a purpose and furthered the narrative. 
There was nothing nihilistic about it, quite the opposite. 

Well to me it was partly a statement that noone is completly safe in the "game of thrones". However that was only a very small part of the reason and it was done mainly because it was used to make the north decide to rebel against any ruler besides their own and also because ned made more then a few mistakes and while I was sad to see him die I think it was good to show that even the big hero didn't have plot armor. Granted plot armor made a big comeback later on that wasn't GRRM doing that.

 

There is a big difference between something sad happening and making the whole story completly depressing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, snow is the man said:

I don't understand what you mean?

 

 Also Maybe I am missing something but didn't GRRM himself say that the ending to ASOIAF would be bitter sweet?

GRRM can say whatever he wants, the point is he hasn’t even written it. So why bother with that he says about a book he never wrote? Intentions are not proof. 

As for the show’s ending, i’ve said before that it doesn’t matter what you think, or what I think or the producers or the writer thinks, apparently the end will be judged by the mass audience in general. And if for the most of the people the ending isn’t bittersweet, then it’s not bittersweet. 

And a last point: the writers, authors, producers or creators in general shouldn’t be the ones judging their work and telling the public what to think or what they should think. Because that’s arrogant. They should publish their work and then let the people judge it. At least in this way they can never be wrong about their work. 

So bittersweet or not, it’s the public’s opinion that counts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Nightwish said:

GRRM can say whatever he wants, the point is he hasn’t even written it. So why bother with that he says about a book he never wrote? Intentions are not proof. 

As for the show’s ending, i’ve said before that it doesn’t matter what you think, or what I think or the producers or the writer thinks, apparently the end will be judged by the mass audience in general. And if for the most of the people the ending isn’t bittersweet, then it’s not bittersweet. 

And a last point: the writers, authors, producers or creators in general shouldn’t be the ones judging their work and telling the public what to think or what they should think. Because that’s arrogant. They should publish their work and then let the people judge it. At least in this way they can never be wrong about their work. 

So bittersweet or not, it’s the public’s opinion that counts. 

Wow relax. I don't see it as happy either. However I was talking about GRRM talking about the BOOKS ending not the shows. Despite  the "it's the same ending thing" people keep saying I don't see it being like this.  Also the writers or creators should be able to say what they meant to say. However it may have turned out completly different and instead of being a happy ending like they see because their favorite character had a good ending. While the rest of us see the horror of everything else. Think of it like that parent who says their kid is a little angel when they are really a twisted mean little brat and the parents just don't want to admit it or are completly blind to the kids faults.

Believe me after last episode I am only watching this one because it's the last one and I might as well finish it. If there was another season I would just quit watching because last weeks episode went above and beyond what bad writing could even imagine being. Multiple characters acting completly different then usual. Believe me I am as mad as everyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, CrypticWeirwood said:

That's his goal and his reasoning behind it: to create a tremendous sadness at the end, and more.

....

 

Do you think he'll have created a powerful sadness? 

If so then good: mission accomplished. :crying:

 

If this is his goal, he is a sadistic petty and small  man, whose only contribution on this earth was to make life worse for some of his fellow human beings.  

I believe that he'll have created a powerful disgust, and a healthy advise for many people to stay far away from anything related to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LucyMormont said:

If this is his goal, he is a sadistic petty and small  man, whose only contribution on this earth was to make life worse for some of his fellow human beings.  

I believe that he'll have created a powerful disgust, and a healthy advise for many people to stay far away from anything related to him.

Oh I see, is that what Tolkien did too when he did the same thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, snow is the man said:

Wow relax. I don't see it as happy either. However I was talking about GRRM talking about the BOOKS ending not the shows. Despite  the "it's the same ending thing" people keep saying I don't see it being like this.  Also the writers or creators should be able to say what they meant to say. However it may have turned out completly different and instead of being a happy ending like they see because their favorite character had a good ending. While the rest of us see the horror of everything else. Think of it like that parent who says their kid is a little angel when they are really a twisted mean little brat and the parents just don't want to admit it or are completly blind to the kids faults.

Believe me after last episode I am only watching this one because it's the last one and I might as well finish it. If there was another season I would just quit watching because last weeks episode went above and beyond what bad writing could even imagine being. Multiple characters acting completly different then usual. Believe me I am as mad as everyone else.

I don’t agree because the author himself had said that the ending will be the same, not the readers. 

If he can’t know how the ending of his work will be portrayed at the end (because he hasn’t reached that point there in paper) it is better not to state it at all. In this way he cannot  be accused later on for leading the audience and also targeting a group (Tolkien, bittersweet) which he never intended to pay off. That’s misdirection to earn audience. 

Of course they can say whatever they want, but If they are wise they are going to let the audience judge it and they will do it after publishing their work so the public can also judge how the writer reflects his job in relation to the public’s opinion. 

Share this post


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

Oh I see, is that what Tolkien did too when he did the same thing?

Tolkien did not do the same thing. I don't care how GRRM describes Tolkien's work, it's not "a powerful sadness" for me and for many millions of people. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, CrypticWeirwood said:

Oh I see, is that what Tolkien did too when he did the same thing?

Oh please don’t compare this soap opera that GOT turned to be with an epic writer as Tolkien. Tolkien didn’t kill his characters. What are you even comparing? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Nightwish said:

I don’t agree because the author himself had said that the ending will be the same, not the readers. 

If he can’t know how the ending of his work will be portrayed at the end (because he hasn’t reached that point there in paper) it is better not to state it at all. In this way he cannot  be accused later on for leading the audience and also targeting a group (Tolkien, bittersweet) which he never intended to pay off. That’s misdirection to earn audience. 

Of course they can say whatever they want, but If they are wise they are going to let the audience judge it and they will do it after publishing their work so the public can also judge how the writer reflects his job in relation to the public’s opinion. 

Few writers say they hate the tv or movie version of their books. It has no real gain to it and the show version always brings in money. Also with HBO adding a game of thrones spin off he can't afford to alienate them. Maybe I am wrong and it will be exactly the same but I don't think it will be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Nightwish said:

Oh please don’t compare this soap opera that GOT turned to be with an epic writer as Tolkien. Tolkien didn’t kill his characters. What are you even comparing? 

Well technically he did kill some characters however I believe your refrencing how the GOT writers have destroyed severel characters personalities, images, and everything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, LucyMormont said:

Tolkien did not do the same thing. I don't care how GRRM describes Tolkien's work, it's not "a powerful sadness" for me and for many millions of people. 

Tolkiens work was actually a pretty clear cut "good triumphs over evil" story. Yeah there were sad parts but the ending was more uplifting and happy. Think about it. Frodo found a way to survive when he was going to die. Sam ended up being happy and having kids and a wife he loved. There was some sadness in tolkiens work however the ending was far more happy then sad.

If that article or whatever was actually real then it makes no sense since he has said several times that the lord of the rings was happy despite the fact there was no gurantee that aragon would be a good and effective king and the orc problem (what would happen to them) and several others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, snow is the man said:

Well technically he did kill some characters however I believe your refrencing how the GOT writers have destroyed severel characters personalities, images, and everything else.

Tolkien can’t be more straightforward in his books. It is a classical good evil story with the good guys ALL surviving after accomplishing a very difficult task and the bad guys lose. To be honest I don’t know what GM means in the quote above. People remember LOTR for the epic journey it offered, the meaningful messages it had and the satisfaction it delivered. 

If he judges that people remember the sadness he judges it wrong. Perhaps he does but already his book is filled with death and crimes and betrayal. I don’t understand how he can think of his own end being bittersweet after all the tragedy he offers? 

Bittesweet stood in LOTR because it was overall  happy and a little sadness in the end just made it more real and balanced the story. 

here you have the opposite: a bitter sad story which is balanced with what? A more sad, depressed and nihilistic closure? :bang::bang:

What I am reading? 

 

 

Share this post


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

Oh please don’t compare this soap opera that GOT turned to be with an epic writer as Tolkien. Tolkien didn’t kill his characters. What are you even comparing? 

Tolkien didn't kill his characters? Really? In what version of the Legendarium did he not kill

  • King Thorin Oakenshield, his nephews Fíli and Kíli, his friends Balin and Ori?
  • King Théoden and his son Theodred? 
  • Boromir and his father Denethor?
  • Béren and his father Barahir, incestuous Túrin and his sister-wife Niënna?
  • King Thingol and his son Díor? 
  • King Finwë and his son Fëanor?
  • Fëanor's sons Amras and Amrod, whom Fëanor by accident burnt in their sleep when he put his ships to the flame?
  • King Fingolfin and his son King Turgon and daughter Aredhel?
  • Every single one of Galadriel's brothers, including King Finrod?

I could go on and on. 

Please send me this Disney version of Tolkien where he didn't kill his characters!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...