Critiquing the Critics

[uberstellar]

What do you think? Do you think most female critics will bash this because it:

1. might appeal more to the fantasy/sci-fi crowd (which is more skewed toward men).

2. does have some seemingly "women are weaker" moments? For example, in the trailer, "poison is usually a woman's tool."

I think there has been a trope of "weak females" in fantasy/ sci-fi material that women resent and colors their views on the entire genre. And asoiaf seems to live up to a lot of cliches at the beginning: Cersei and Dany are essentially sold into marriages as brood mares for the political machinations of their male relatives, Sansa is naive, Catelyn seems a rustic homebody, etc.

Where asoiaf differs from a lot of genre, and this is with all the characters, is of course that it presents you with archetypes that feel familiar, but takes them on unexpected and complex journeys. For new readers or uninitiated viewers, you just have to hope they invest enough time to find that out.

One thing that does bother me is people who are offended that the women would be presented in subservient positions from the get-go. Um, of course they are, that's what happened in actual human history, and makes perfect sense in a fantasy setting with a similar middle-aged time frame. It's much more involving to see how the women in the story take control of their lives within the bounds society places on them. Complain about science fiction that takes place far in the future featuring woman stereotypes, maybe, but not this.

[Inglorious Pencil]

2. does have some seemingly "women are weaker" moments? For example, in the trailer, "poison is usually a woman's tool."

I don't know, historical drama often deals with similar scenarios, and I suspect that that's a genre more skewed towards the female audience/readership, so I'm not sure that really is the problem. Personally, I never felt ASoIaF was a "guys only!!!1!" series (sure there are instances that leave no doubt that it's a straight man writing - heeyyy gratuitous Dany lesbian moments! - but never to the extent it felt jarring), either. I think the Cultural Learnings post hits the nail on the head though, when it highlights how taglines like “Beheadings, barbarians, bastards & boobs. Why We F***ing Love Game of Thrones” don't really help the cause (also I'd say they aren't really accurate), and many female viewers - or hey, even males that aren't into the genre! They exist! Lots of them! - might not even bother.

Lastly, I don't think that highlighting the powerlessness of women is the problem - it's making their stories secondary and not important that is, imo. Think of a show like Mad Men, which doesn't negate the misogyny of the society it describes - yet it has very well written female characters and most of all, makes their stories just as relevant as those of the men in the series. I think ASoIaF (the books) goes in the same direction, now let's see if the show keeps up with that or rolls with the "it's a man's world" view for the sake of providing more familiar tropes (see stuff like Badass Ned which makes me cringe a little, ngl).

[ZombieWife]

Paidraig wrote:

There's also been some very positive comments from female reviewers. OTOH, as you say, fantasy readership is still skewed towards males, so I suppose it is always more likely that women will find issues with the story.

I'd love to see some positive female reviews. If you come across any links, can you post or PM with them?

I think there has been a trope of "weak females" in fantasy/ sci-fi material that women resent and colors their views on the entire genre. And asoiaf seems to live up to a lot of cliches at the beginning: Cersei and Dany are essentially sold into marriages as brood mares for the political machinations of their male relatives, Sansa is naive, Catelyn seems a rustic homebody, etc.

Where asoiaf differs from a lot of genre, and this is with all the characters, is of course that it presents you with archetypes that feel familiar, but takes them on unexpected and complex journeys. For new readers or uninitiated viewers, you just have to hope they invest enough time to find that out.

One thing that does bother me is people who are offended that the women would be presented in subservient positions from the get-go. Um, of course they are, that's what happened in actual human history, and makes perfect sense in a fantasy setting with a similar middle-aged time frame. It's much more involving to see how the women in the story take control of their lives within the bounds society places on them. Complain about science fiction that takes place far in the future featuring woman stereotypes, maybe, but not this.

Great post and I agree. If you're going to have a fantasy setting that is medieval based in any way, then you're going to run into this, I think.

I do think that Martin addresses the female tropes in a very interesting manner. First, we get into Cersei's mind on what it's like to be a woman in her position.

For example, Tywin immediately begins to consider who he'll marry Cersei off to in order to cement the Lannister name in the grand scheme of things.

We have Cersei fantasizing about being a man (dressing up like Jaime).

Then there is Arya who is a bit of a tomboy, but Martin takes her on such an amazing journey, one worthy of any male hero you can find in a novel.

I'm tempted to try and apply some of these characters to a "heroine's journey" of sorts. It would be interesting to see how they stack up.

[smegma]

Maureen "Mo" Ryan has been following the series since the rumors started - she is a fan of the books and has met with GRRM a few times, even taking the opportunity to visit the set, I think. She is a pretty well-known tv critic and I'm sure her reviews will be pretty high (like Poniewozik she isn't releasing her official critique until closer to the air date). I will be shocked if it isn't high praise.

[ZombieWife]

Maureen "Mo" Ryan has been following the series since the rumors started - she is a fan of the books and has met with GRRM a few times, even taking the opportunity to visit the set, I think. She is a pretty well-known tv critic and I'm sure her reviews will be pretty high (like Poniewozik she isn't releasing her official critique until closer to the air date). I will be shocked if it isn't high praise.

I'll look her up.

I'm also interested in women reviewers who:

1. Haven't identified themselves as genre-geeks.

and/or

2. Haven't read the books.

Just interested to see what they say, too.

[uberstellar]

I personally love Cersei's character development, while hating her specifically, if that makes sense? My personal philosophies and moralities are totally different, but she is fascinating for her positions and how she manages to maintain them.

As a woman, sold into marriage in that kind of society, her fate should have been completely spelled out and obvious from the beginning: produce the heirs, influence in her family's favor, all the kind of minor moves you would think a woman is capable of in such circumstance.

Instead, and this becomes a major plot point, she decides she is so radically supporting her family and self-interests above anything else she

even makes sure that her children are from Jaime only!

I don't agree with the morality of that, or a million other things that she does, but I have to give props to a woman with priorities that can go to extreme lengths, utilizing every asset available

most often her body, but yes, sometimes the "woman's weapon" of poison and intrigue

to achieve them.

I adore Catelyn for her strategy, Sansa for her strength, Arya for her adaptive skills, and Daenerys for her determination. Margaery's grandmother is a personal favorite of mine also. The women in this series embody the advice Tyrion gave to Jon Snow; be aware of your limitations and expectations, and rise above to meet your goals any way possible. And that distinction makes it superior fantasy, an exciting prospect for television, and a proud representative of the concept of femininity in general.

[Snowy89]

2. does have some seemingly "women are weaker" moments? For example, in the trailer, "poison is usually a woman's tool."

[offtopic]

But it is...

At least the average woman doesn't have the strength to kil the avergae man I should think, and poison is less riskier anyway :thumbsup:

[/offtopic]

[Kat]

What do you think? Do you think most female critics will bash this because it:

1. might appeal more to the fantasy/sci-fi crowd (which is more skewed toward men).

2. does have some seemingly "women are weaker" moments? For example, in the trailer, "poison is usually a woman's tool."

I think there are going to be some people who dislike it immediately because it reminds them of feminine tropes that come up again and again, and in some cases it does take a while for those tropes to be stood on their heads. Others will have different reactions. It's hard to lump all female critics together because...well, they're all going to be taking different approaches. Some might be feminists. Others might be pop culture geeks. Others might be both.

More generally:

There are feminists critiques of the books, and there will be more of the show once it becomes more popular. I know there are a number of posters on this forum, including some moderators, who are feminists, but at least in my experience the board as a whole does not always react favorably to such criticism. It's going to be really difficult for me, I think, to avoid threads that react to someone's criticism of the show with some of the following:

1) In the books X happens which negates opinion Y

2) In some interview, GRRM said A which negates opinion B

I already foresee this being a problem: some boarders and other fans getting pissed off at critics, bloggers, etc talking about some aspect of the show and reacting as if they should be considering the books and everything GRRM has ever written or said. Some reactions on both sides will be knee-jerk. It will not be pretty. Such is the stuff of pop culture criticism, especially on the web. But I just think it's going to be especially bad when some fans think they have more cards in their hand when they critique the whole of ASOIAF while a critic is commenting only on the show, and it's going to be even worse when some fans take it personally when someone writes, say, a feminist criticism of Game of Thrones. Because it seems like every time someone writes a feminist criticism of anything, and it's read by a general audience (but fans are especially bad because they're so protective of their favorite thing) the author gets accused of being a hater, a snob, a bitch, misleading, cherry-picking examples, etc.

But it could be worse. This could be HBO's production of Prince of Nothing. :P

ETA: I'm looking forward to seeing the show because it could possibly improve upon some of the things that I found annoyingly "this is so obviously a straight man writing the book", such as the aforementioned Hot Dany Lesbian Sex. I mean, already rumors of Renly and Loras getting it on on-screen to balance that out. And the casting department has made a pretty balanced cast with eye candy all around. There's going to be stuff that bugs me, as a feminist, but you know, we're a humorless bunch-- we could find something to bug us anywhere, amirite? ;)

[Ran]

Gail Pennington said she devoured all six and already wants more -- hasn't read the books. No formal review yet. The Surf Report's Diane Gordon tweeted she had just seen two episodes when she tweeted that she really knew nothing about it and was hooked.

[Kat]

Gail Pennington said she devoured all sex and already wants more -- hasn't read the books. No formal review yet. The Surf Report's Diane Gordon tweeted she had just seen two episodes when she tweeted that she really knew nothing about it and was hooked.

Oh, I see we have more to look forward to in this series beyond the pilot.... ;)

[Ran]

Ugh. Maybe I woke up after too few hours of sleep...

[AquariumDrinker]

here is the Metacritic page:

Metacritic GoT page

2 reviews up so far, the WSG and Hollywood Reporter.

[ZombieWife]

Thanks for all the links, folks. I will check them out soon.

Feminism is kind of a tricky deal. On one hand, aren't we all feminists in that most people believe in equality for a woman? That a woman deserves the same pay, the right to vote, etc.?

Unfortunately, feminism has been turned into such a negative word over time.

At the heart, I think it's safe to say that on some level, most of us on a board such as this have a piece of feminism within us.

But, I know there's a difference between the idea and the extreme critical theories that are out there.

[Brienne the Beauty]

2 reviews up so far, the WSG and Hollywood Reporter.

The WSG seems to be under the impression that the Dothraki are a fantasy centaur race. :rolleyes:

As for the critics, most of them seem to have a great antipathy for "nerdy" genres like Sci-fi or Fantasy. This holds for movies too, and it doesn't stop sci-fi movies being the biggest moneyspinners out there. Viewers like different things than jaded critics. The plentiful blood, violence, and sex is unlikely to turn viewers off the show.

As for feminist issues with the show, I'd say they are valid and interesting to discuss. The story is set in a profoundly misogynistic world. Critics who watch the show superficially will only see this. Those who like it will look a little deeper. The story is not perfectly feminist by any means - if the story has a philosophical message it is that morality is grey and ambiguous, which precludes a clear feminist message (or indeed any clear message of morality.) I hope some feminist critics will analyse the show in an interesting way.

[smegma]

The Atlantic is doing a special five part critique for GOT, featuring five different opinions on the show. The first is glowing and compares the show quite favorably to The Wire. It's by a woman, btw :)

http://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2011/04/game-of-thrones-hbo-shows-the-ugly-edge-of-fantasy/237033/

[TerraPrime]

The WSG seems to be under the impression that the Dothraki are a fantasy centaur race. :rolleyes:

Eh? I actually think it's the opposite. The line is "...a scary race called the Dothraki, whose men look like centaurs who have lost their extra legs." My impression is that it's meant to be tongue-in-cheek type of dismissal. Overall, Smith seems to be rather dismissive of the series because it seems to cater to the adolescent male's appetite for boobs, thongs, blood, and gore.

[Brienne the Beauty]

Eh? I actually think it's the opposite. The line is "...a scary race called the Dothraki, whose men look like centaurs who have lost their extra legs." My impression is that it's meant to be tongue-in-cheek type of dismissal.

I could not parse that line at all. Journalism these days, eh, tsk, tsk, etc.

[Axon]

Eh? I actually think it's the opposite. The line is "...a scary race called the Dothraki, whose men look like centaurs who have lost their extra legs." My impression is that it's meant to be tongue-in-cheek type of dismissal. Overall, Smith seems to be rather dismissive of the series because it seems to cater to the adolescent male's appetite for boobs, thongs, blood, and gore.

Yeah, I agree. Was meant to be tongue in cheek. The fantasy genre isn't for everyone, and most of the three negative reviews reflect that. Further, not everyone is going to love the show just because it has a large fan following.

The one thing I too issue with, and I can't remember which one of the critics said this, but there was a point about how ASOIAF isn't grounded in reality, unlike other shows, like Star Trek? Whaaaa? Star Trek's very PREMISE is currently impossible and looks to remain impossible, and it also features other staggeringly fictional gadgets like lasers and instant teleporters. You either suspend disbelief or you do not. But to suggest ASOIAF isn't somehow real enough, when it's actually one of the more grounded human stories around, is nuts. GRRM's universe makes sense, save for, perhaps, the fact that the Andals have seasons and nothing from the Eastern cities indicates things are the same there.

[Theano]

I adore Catelyn for her strategy, Sansa for her strength, Arya for her adaptive skills, and Daenerys for her determination. Margaery's grandmother is a personal favorite of mine also. The women in this series embody the advice Tyrion gave to Jon Snow; be aware of your limitations and expectations, and rise above to meet your goals any way possible. And that distinction makes it superior fantasy, an exciting prospect for television, and a proud representative of the concept of femininity in general.

:agree:

Yes, definitely! As a woman, although I like warrior women and love seeing "strong" women buckling their swashes with the guys, it does sometimes get tiring. There's more to being a strong woman than being able to swing a sword with the boys. Game of Thrones women are wonderful for their strength both within their cultural limitations and by trampling all over those limitations. There are at least as many variations on what it means to be a woman in ASoIaF as there are on what it means to be a man.

[smegma]

After reading a lot of the reviews, I think a portion of the criticism is at least as much due to the hype than what is actually presented, if that makes sense. You hear about how amazing something is so many times and you tend to go into it with unrealistic expectations for it to wow you immediately. The Wire didn't wow me right away, and I was like - what's the big friggen deal, why do so many people praise this show so highly (especially with an unlikable lead in McNulty). But towards the end of the first season I was like, yeah....I'm getting it (not that I didn't really like what I had seen already, just that I didn't get the hype). And then bam. I was all in. I kinda see this working the same way.