On June 06 2013 06:49 Jophess wrote: Got bored and made a big list of characters that are either commonly misspelled or just common characters and (hopefully) spelled them correctly: + Show Spoiler +
By the way, I believe Tormund's last name is Giantsbane. When we met Mance and Tormund for the first time with Jon, Mance says something along the lines of "You thought this chicken eater was the king beyond the wall? That's Tormund Giantsbane..."
Also I was going to say that Gendry's last name would be Baratheon, but since he is a bastard it would be something else. Didn't we learn what the names of bastards are in season 2? Snow if born in the north and... I don't remember the others. But if somebody does, you can apply it to Gendry.
On June 07 2013 01:20 Jockmcplop wrote: Yeah Dany's got one thing that Robb/Ned never had. The girl is pure badass.
(dragons too)
She's a lot more ruthless and not as naive.
I actually think this is one of the real signs of mastery about this show immersing us in ancient culture: that people still root for Dany. She massacred every defenseless adult (male? maybe females too?) in Astapoor and we're not even asking what happened to "every man who holds the whip" in Yunkai are we? And yet, after both scenes, we were seriously rooting for her. Hell, we cheered when she burned a witch and locked her favorite handmaiden in a vault to die of thirst. Why?
Because we see a world of pain--which is the world as it really is--and we buy into the theory of retributive justice (often corporate) without so much as a thought. Notice how many people are asking for Lannister or Tyrell blood after this... not necessarily the perpetrators; just someone to pay, blood for blood.
Given that most of us are Christians or humanists to whom such ethical theories are anathema, it is really cool that this has been done and done well.
Whoah what are you guys talking about? I don't recall Dany having innocent people killed in Astapor. Only the people who kept them as slaves. That's fucking awesome. Same for Yunkai, the hell is the problem with what she did there? The other two examples you have conveniently left out that they betrayed her trust first (iirc).
There's nothing wrong with someone who takes literally zero bullshit from people, as long as when they have no reason to, they don't inflict suffering and pain (ie Joffrey). The fact that she frees slaves and then offers them either to join her or to be free and leave is not a 'clever trick' to make simple people like her. It's one of the only genuinely virtuous actions performed in this entire story. Jaime killing the king and the Hound saving Sansa are the other major ones (though I've probably forgotten something else).
Not only does Dany have the conscience to make her admirable, she also has one hell of a set of balls. Not only is she virtuous, she is also not a weakling and is not a doormat.
On June 07 2013 02:13 Yoav wrote:
On June 07 2013 02:02 Redox wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:52 Yoav wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:24 Dreamer.T wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:20 Jockmcplop wrote: Yeah Dany's got one thing that Robb/Ned never had. The girl is pure badass.
(dragons too)
She's a lot more ruthless and not as naive.
I actually think this is one of the real signs of mastery about this show immersing us in ancient culture: that people still root for Dany. She massacred every defenseless adult (male? maybe females too?) in Astapoor and we're not even asking what happened to "every man who holds the whip" in Yunkai are we? And yet, after both scenes, we were seriously rooting for her. Hell, we cheered when she burned a witch and locked her favorite handmaiden in a vault to die of thirst. Why?
Because we see a world of pain--which is the world as it really is--and we buy into the theory of retributive justice (often corporate) without so much as a thought. Notice how many people are asking for Lannister or Tyrell blood after this... not necessarily the perpetrators; just someone to pay, blood for blood.
Given that most of us are Christians or humanists to whom such ethical theories are anathema, it is really cool that this has been done and done well.
Well not everybody is rooting for her. Nikolaj Coster-Waldau was asked which GoT character scares him the most.
Answer: "Melisandre the Red priestess—she's a scary woman. There's also something about that type of power that Daenerys has. Most people believe she's doing the right thing, but she's burning people alive. She's got a chip on her shoulder. I don't want her to come across the Narrow Sea. She's going to burn thousands and thousands and thousands of people and have that self-righteous smirk on her face the whole time."
He's right, of course. Note however that my point stands... he himself notes she's a fan favorite. It's this paradox that's good storytelling. When we watched the Astapoor scene the first time, everybody in the room I was in was cheering for her (we repeated it for good measure). It's only after, when you think about the implications, that you realize how really scary she is.
I cannot understand your ethics. How is it morally wrong to allow slaves who have been imprisoned by people from birth, forced into an army and FORCED to kill a baby in front of its mother in order to prove they have been imbued with the necessary level of dispassionate cruelty to be part of its unpaid slave army, to get revenge on their captors???
I didn't say innocent. I said defenseless. And slaveholding is (historically) a communal sin. Do you really think it morally justifiable in real life to massacre the entire adult population of 100 CE Rome or 1850 Savannah, Georgia? And yet we root for her. Most of us are probably even against the death penalty... and all against execution by fire... and yet Dany burned a witch and attacked a city with dragons... hell, she was complicit in her brother's execution by molten gold.
All I'm saying is it's cool that the show gets us in-universe enough to think as people in ancient times did about these things. In the BCEs, annihilating the adult population of a city for its sins was more or less accepted and practiced. It's amazing, and a feat of storytelling, that they got us on board with it.
Edit: Oh, for what she should have done? Gone to the UN and asked nicely?
On June 07 2013 01:20 Jockmcplop wrote: Yeah Dany's got one thing that Robb/Ned never had. The girl is pure badass.
(dragons too)
She's a lot more ruthless and not as naive.
I actually think this is one of the real signs of mastery about this show immersing us in ancient culture: that people still root for Dany. She massacred every defenseless adult (male? maybe females too?) in Astapoor and we're not even asking what happened to "every man who holds the whip" in Yunkai are we? And yet, after both scenes, we were seriously rooting for her. Hell, we cheered when she burned a witch and locked her favorite handmaiden in a vault to die of thirst. Why?
Because we see a world of pain--which is the world as it really is--and we buy into the theory of retributive justice (often corporate) without so much as a thought. Notice how many people are asking for Lannister or Tyrell blood after this... not necessarily the perpetrators; just someone to pay, blood for blood.
Given that most of us are Christians or humanists to whom such ethical theories are anathema, it is really cool that this has been done and done well.
Whoah what are you guys talking about? I don't recall Dany having innocent people killed in Astapor. Only the people who kept them as slaves. That's fucking awesome. Same for Yunkai, the hell is the problem with what she did there? The other two examples you have conveniently left out that they betrayed her trust first (iirc).
There's nothing wrong with someone who takes literally zero bullshit from people, as long as when they have no reason to, they don't inflict suffering and pain (ie Joffrey). The fact that she frees slaves and then offers them either to join her or to be free and leave is not a 'clever trick' to make simple people like her. It's one of the only genuinely virtuous actions performed in this entire story. Jaime killing the king and the Hound saving Sansa are the other major ones (though I've probably forgotten something else).
Not only does Dany have the conscience to make her admirable, she also has one hell of a set of balls. Not only is she virtuous, she is also not a weakling and is not a doormat.
On June 07 2013 02:13 Yoav wrote:
On June 07 2013 02:02 Redox wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:52 Yoav wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:24 Dreamer.T wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:20 Jockmcplop wrote: Yeah Dany's got one thing that Robb/Ned never had. The girl is pure badass.
(dragons too)
She's a lot more ruthless and not as naive.
I actually think this is one of the real signs of mastery about this show immersing us in ancient culture: that people still root for Dany. She massacred every defenseless adult (male? maybe females too?) in Astapoor and we're not even asking what happened to "every man who holds the whip" in Yunkai are we? And yet, after both scenes, we were seriously rooting for her. Hell, we cheered when she burned a witch and locked her favorite handmaiden in a vault to die of thirst. Why?
Because we see a world of pain--which is the world as it really is--and we buy into the theory of retributive justice (often corporate) without so much as a thought. Notice how many people are asking for Lannister or Tyrell blood after this... not necessarily the perpetrators; just someone to pay, blood for blood.
Given that most of us are Christians or humanists to whom such ethical theories are anathema, it is really cool that this has been done and done well.
Well not everybody is rooting for her. Nikolaj Coster-Waldau was asked which GoT character scares him the most.
Answer: "Melisandre the Red priestess—she's a scary woman. There's also something about that type of power that Daenerys has. Most people believe she's doing the right thing, but she's burning people alive. She's got a chip on her shoulder. I don't want her to come across the Narrow Sea. She's going to burn thousands and thousands and thousands of people and have that self-righteous smirk on her face the whole time."
He's right, of course. Note however that my point stands... he himself notes she's a fan favorite. It's this paradox that's good storytelling. When we watched the Astapoor scene the first time, everybody in the room I was in was cheering for her (we repeated it for good measure). It's only after, when you think about the implications, that you realize how really scary she is.
I cannot understand your ethics. How is it morally wrong to allow slaves who have been imprisoned by people from birth, forced into an army and FORCED to kill a baby in front of its mother in order to prove they have been imbued with the necessary level of dispassionate cruelty to be part of its unpaid slave army, to get revenge on their captors???
It would be morally wrong to walk past Astapor and do nothing. Or comply with the dragon trade. If you suggest she should have allowed the slavers to continue raising their slave army, I consider you morally dubious.
You sir took the words right out of my mouth. I just hope she doesn't change... Right now she has a genuine sense of compassion; and while I like to think that she couldn't become too power hungry or experience some major character shift, I've given up thinking I know exactly how someone will turn out in this series...
For now though, Team Dany all the way. She honestly is one of the most moral characters in the show right now with some exceptions. Her strong hand is only a trait of a great ruler if you ask me.
Hey, I'm rooting for her too. It's a harsh world, and she's taking it by the balls. But not because she's exactly "compassionate." It's that she burns for justice, and there are worse faults to have.
"I am Daenerys Stormborn of the Blood of Old Valyria, and I will take what is mine. With fire and blood I will take it." - Daenerys Targaryen from the entirety of season 2.
Sure, it may not be hers, but she sure as hell is taking it.
On June 06 2013 06:49 Jophess wrote: Got bored and made a big list of characters that are either commonly misspelled or just common characters and (hopefully) spelled them correctly: + Show Spoiler +
By the way, I believe Tormund's last name is Giantsbane. When we met Mance and Tormund for the first time with Jon, Mance says something along the lines of "You thought this chicken eater was the king beyond the wall? That's Tormund Giantsbane..."
Also I was going to say that Gendry's last name would be Baratheon, but since he is a bastard it would be something else. Didn't we learn what the names of bastards are in season 2? Snow if born in the north and... I don't remember the others. But if somebody does, you can apply it to Gendry.
Actually, it seems that bastards (and low-borns in general) usually don't have surnames at all. They only get the Snow/Flowers/Waters surname if they are recognized formally by their high-born fathers. Gendry is pretty unlikely to be formally recognized by his father at this point, so he remains surname deprived. Incidentally, the same is true of Joffrey. I'm curious if Stannis could theoretically recognize him, as Robert's heir and the current master of House Baratheon. Not gonna happen, but I'm curious as to the legalities.
On June 07 2013 01:20 Jockmcplop wrote: Yeah Dany's got one thing that Robb/Ned never had. The girl is pure badass.
(dragons too)
She's a lot more ruthless and not as naive.
I actually think this is one of the real signs of mastery about this show immersing us in ancient culture: that people still root for Dany. She massacred every defenseless adult (male? maybe females too?) in Astapoor and we're not even asking what happened to "every man who holds the whip" in Yunkai are we? And yet, after both scenes, we were seriously rooting for her. Hell, we cheered when she burned a witch and locked her favorite handmaiden in a vault to die of thirst. Why?
Because we see a world of pain--which is the world as it really is--and we buy into the theory of retributive justice (often corporate) without so much as a thought. Notice how many people are asking for Lannister or Tyrell blood after this... not necessarily the perpetrators; just someone to pay, blood for blood.
Given that most of us are Christians or humanists to whom such ethical theories are anathema, it is really cool that this has been done and done well.
Whoah what are you guys talking about? I don't recall Dany having innocent people killed in Astapor. Only the people who kept them as slaves. That's fucking awesome. Same for Yunkai, the hell is the problem with what she did there? The other two examples you have conveniently left out that they betrayed her trust first (iirc).
There's nothing wrong with someone who takes literally zero bullshit from people, as long as when they have no reason to, they don't inflict suffering and pain (ie Joffrey). The fact that she frees slaves and then offers them either to join her or to be free and leave is not a 'clever trick' to make simple people like her. It's one of the only genuinely virtuous actions performed in this entire story. Jaime killing the king and the Hound saving Sansa are the other major ones (though I've probably forgotten something else).
Not only does Dany have the conscience to make her admirable, she also has one hell of a set of balls. Not only is she virtuous, she is also not a weakling and is not a doormat.
On June 07 2013 02:13 Yoav wrote:
On June 07 2013 02:02 Redox wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:52 Yoav wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:24 Dreamer.T wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:20 Jockmcplop wrote: Yeah Dany's got one thing that Robb/Ned never had. The girl is pure badass.
(dragons too)
She's a lot more ruthless and not as naive.
I actually think this is one of the real signs of mastery about this show immersing us in ancient culture: that people still root for Dany. She massacred every defenseless adult (male? maybe females too?) in Astapoor and we're not even asking what happened to "every man who holds the whip" in Yunkai are we? And yet, after both scenes, we were seriously rooting for her. Hell, we cheered when she burned a witch and locked her favorite handmaiden in a vault to die of thirst. Why?
Because we see a world of pain--which is the world as it really is--and we buy into the theory of retributive justice (often corporate) without so much as a thought. Notice how many people are asking for Lannister or Tyrell blood after this... not necessarily the perpetrators; just someone to pay, blood for blood.
Given that most of us are Christians or humanists to whom such ethical theories are anathema, it is really cool that this has been done and done well.
Well not everybody is rooting for her. Nikolaj Coster-Waldau was asked which GoT character scares him the most.
Answer: "Melisandre the Red priestess—she's a scary woman. There's also something about that type of power that Daenerys has. Most people believe she's doing the right thing, but she's burning people alive. She's got a chip on her shoulder. I don't want her to come across the Narrow Sea. She's going to burn thousands and thousands and thousands of people and have that self-righteous smirk on her face the whole time."
He's right, of course. Note however that my point stands... he himself notes she's a fan favorite. It's this paradox that's good storytelling. When we watched the Astapoor scene the first time, everybody in the room I was in was cheering for her (we repeated it for good measure). It's only after, when you think about the implications, that you realize how really scary she is.
I cannot understand your ethics. How is it morally wrong to allow slaves who have been imprisoned by people from birth, forced into an army and FORCED to kill a baby in front of its mother in order to prove they have been imbued with the necessary level of dispassionate cruelty to be part of its unpaid slave army, to get revenge on their captors???
I didn't say innocent. I said defenseless. And slaveholding is (historically) a communal sin. Do you really think it morally justifiable in real life to massacre the entire adult population of 100 CE Rome or 1850 Savannah, Georgia? And yet we root for her. Most of us are probably even against the death penalty... and all against execution by fire... and yet Dany burned a witch and attacked a city with dragons... hell, she was complicit in her brother's execution by molten gold.
All I'm saying is it's cool that the show gets us in-universe enough to think as people in ancient times did about these things. In the BCEs, annihilating the adult population of a city for its sins was more or less accepted and practiced. It's amazing, and a feat of storytelling, that they got us on board with it.
Edit: Oh, for what she should have done? Gone to the UN and asked nicely?
Hey, the old way got shit done, no denying that.
Edit 2:
On June 07 2013 02:25 Noro wrote:
On June 07 2013 02:15 sc4k wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:52 Yoav wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:24 Dreamer.T wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:20 Jockmcplop wrote: Yeah Dany's got one thing that Robb/Ned never had. The girl is pure badass.
(dragons too)
She's a lot more ruthless and not as naive.
I actually think this is one of the real signs of mastery about this show immersing us in ancient culture: that people still root for Dany. She massacred every defenseless adult (male? maybe females too?) in Astapoor and we're not even asking what happened to "every man who holds the whip" in Yunkai are we? And yet, after both scenes, we were seriously rooting for her. Hell, we cheered when she burned a witch and locked her favorite handmaiden in a vault to die of thirst. Why?
Because we see a world of pain--which is the world as it really is--and we buy into the theory of retributive justice (often corporate) without so much as a thought. Notice how many people are asking for Lannister or Tyrell blood after this... not necessarily the perpetrators; just someone to pay, blood for blood.
Given that most of us are Christians or humanists to whom such ethical theories are anathema, it is really cool that this has been done and done well.
Whoah what are you guys talking about? I don't recall Dany having innocent people killed in Astapor. Only the people who kept them as slaves. That's fucking awesome. Same for Yunkai, the hell is the problem with what she did there? The other two examples you have conveniently left out that they betrayed her trust first (iirc).
There's nothing wrong with someone who takes literally zero bullshit from people, as long as when they have no reason to, they don't inflict suffering and pain (ie Joffrey). The fact that she frees slaves and then offers them either to join her or to be free and leave is not a 'clever trick' to make simple people like her. It's one of the only genuinely virtuous actions performed in this entire story. Jaime killing the king and the Hound saving Sansa are the other major ones (though I've probably forgotten something else).
Not only does Dany have the conscience to make her admirable, she also has one hell of a set of balls. Not only is she virtuous, she is also not a weakling and is not a doormat.
On June 07 2013 02:13 Yoav wrote:
On June 07 2013 02:02 Redox wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:52 Yoav wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:24 Dreamer.T wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:20 Jockmcplop wrote: Yeah Dany's got one thing that Robb/Ned never had. The girl is pure badass.
(dragons too)
She's a lot more ruthless and not as naive.
I actually think this is one of the real signs of mastery about this show immersing us in ancient culture: that people still root for Dany. She massacred every defenseless adult (male? maybe females too?) in Astapoor and we're not even asking what happened to "every man who holds the whip" in Yunkai are we? And yet, after both scenes, we were seriously rooting for her. Hell, we cheered when she burned a witch and locked her favorite handmaiden in a vault to die of thirst. Why?
Because we see a world of pain--which is the world as it really is--and we buy into the theory of retributive justice (often corporate) without so much as a thought. Notice how many people are asking for Lannister or Tyrell blood after this... not necessarily the perpetrators; just someone to pay, blood for blood.
Given that most of us are Christians or humanists to whom such ethical theories are anathema, it is really cool that this has been done and done well.
Well not everybody is rooting for her. Nikolaj Coster-Waldau was asked which GoT character scares him the most.
Answer: "Melisandre the Red priestess—she's a scary woman. There's also something about that type of power that Daenerys has. Most people believe she's doing the right thing, but she's burning people alive. She's got a chip on her shoulder. I don't want her to come across the Narrow Sea. She's going to burn thousands and thousands and thousands of people and have that self-righteous smirk on her face the whole time."
He's right, of course. Note however that my point stands... he himself notes she's a fan favorite. It's this paradox that's good storytelling. When we watched the Astapoor scene the first time, everybody in the room I was in was cheering for her (we repeated it for good measure). It's only after, when you think about the implications, that you realize how really scary she is.
I cannot understand your ethics. How is it morally wrong to allow slaves who have been imprisoned by people from birth, forced into an army and FORCED to kill a baby in front of its mother in order to prove they have been imbued with the necessary level of dispassionate cruelty to be part of its unpaid slave army, to get revenge on their captors???
It would be morally wrong to walk past Astapor and do nothing. Or comply with the dragon trade. If you suggest she should have allowed the slavers to continue raising their slave army, I consider you morally dubious.
You sir took the words right out of my mouth. I just hope she doesn't change... Right now she has a genuine sense of compassion; and while I like to think that she couldn't become too power hungry or experience some major character shift, I've given up thinking I know exactly how someone will turn out in this series...
For now though, Team Dany all the way. She honestly is one of the most moral characters in the show right now with some exceptions. Her strong hand is only a trait of a great ruler if you ask me.
Hey, I'm rooting for her too. It's a harsh world, and she's taking it by the balls. But not because she's exactly "compassionate." It's that she burns for justice, and there are worse faults to have.
"I am Daenerys Stormborn of the Blood of Old Valyria, and I will take what is mine. With fire and blood I will take it." - Daenerys Targaryen from the entirety of season 2.
Sure, it may not be hers, but she sure as hell is taking it.
Damn straight. I mean, she's the obvious hero in a universe set up to demolish fantasy archetypes, so she's obviously doomed, but I hope she has a really good run. Ideally putting some serious smack down on the Lannisters.
According to that Gendry would be "Waters", but one has to be acknowledged bastard to earn the surname. If i understood correctly, only noble bastards get the surname, because commoners have no surnames at all.
On June 07 2013 01:20 Jockmcplop wrote: Yeah Dany's got one thing that Robb/Ned never had. The girl is pure badass.
(dragons too)
She's a lot more ruthless and not as naive.
I actually think this is one of the real signs of mastery about this show immersing us in ancient culture: that people still root for Dany. She massacred every defenseless adult (male? maybe females too?) in Astapoor and we're not even asking what happened to "every man who holds the whip" in Yunkai are we? And yet, after both scenes, we were seriously rooting for her. Hell, we cheered when she burned a witch and locked her favorite handmaiden in a vault to die of thirst. Why?
Because we see a world of pain--which is the world as it really is--and we buy into the theory of retributive justice (often corporate) without so much as a thought. Notice how many people are asking for Lannister or Tyrell blood after this... not necessarily the perpetrators; just someone to pay, blood for blood.
Given that most of us are Christians or humanists to whom such ethical theories are anathema, it is really cool that this has been done and done well.
Whoah what are you guys talking about? I don't recall Dany having innocent people killed in Astapor. Only the people who kept them as slaves. That's fucking awesome. Same for Yunkai, the hell is the problem with what she did there? The other two examples you have conveniently left out that they betrayed her trust first (iirc).
There's nothing wrong with someone who takes literally zero bullshit from people, as long as when they have no reason to, they don't inflict suffering and pain (ie Joffrey). The fact that she frees slaves and then offers them either to join her or to be free and leave is not a 'clever trick' to make simple people like her. It's one of the only genuinely virtuous actions performed in this entire story. Jaime killing the king and the Hound saving Sansa are the other major ones (though I've probably forgotten something else).
Not only does Dany have the conscience to make her admirable, she also has one hell of a set of balls. Not only is she virtuous, she is also not a weakling and is not a doormat.
But why would that be awesome? Would it have been awesome if every slaveholder in the South was lynched in the aftermath of the Civil War?
Consider that not every slaveholder is going to be a harsh, abusive cunt. Some might treat their slaves well, some may be advocating for reform towards more humane slave practices, many will likely have families. All of them grew up in an society and culture where slavery is an acceptable practice, and where there was likely no active movement or critique for the abolition of slavery.
And in comes Dany one day, and she reneges a trade and turns your entire army against you, massacring all slaveholding families (save the children), in addition to setting your city on fire with dragons. And without insomuch as an attempt at discourse and understanding. Sociologically speaking, her actions are equivalent to an even worse Russian Revolution/French Revolution (Reign of Terror phase), albeit on a far smaller scale (though dependent on how prevalent slavery is in these cities) in terms of consequences.
Now was she justified in doing so? Subjective (though pretty much everyone cheers for her actions when it happens), but the show's done a great job immersing the viewer in the medieval morality/mindset.
On June 06 2013 14:35 Itsmedudeman wrote: I have to say, despite the Stark's being "responsible" for their own fate, they're unbelievably unlucky. Ned Stark apologizes for treason yet still gets executed in the most heinous way even though he was supposed to be spared. Robb Stark is betrayed despite taking reasonable measures to make up for his mistakes in the past. Arya almost reaches her family and they all die right before she makes it there (although I guess you could argue this is lucky for her), and Sansa almost makes it off the island and marries a person she wants to marry until Tywin gets involved at the last moment.
On the other hand you have Jaime who miraculously escapes some dead end situations multiple times, and Tyrion survives an axe to the face.
Also, I'm really looking forward to how the Jaime storyline evolves. After all, he's supposed to keep his word and return the girls to the Stark family, right? Well, now they're dead so what does he do now? Surely he won't just do nothing about it, but how could he ever possibly make it up to the Starks for sparing his life?
I don't know if it is entirely a matter of luck. IMO the Starks make a lot of strategical mistakes in their decision making due to their values about wrong and right. These values work when you are the supreme ruler in the north far removed from King's Landing but not when you play the game of thrones. In fact I find that most of the Starks are rather naive.
Ned should have known that non of the people from the small council were to be trusted. He also could have decided not go and investigate into Joffrey's heritage. He should have known Joffrey was a total dick. He should have just gone directly to Robert instead of telling Cersei first etc.
By constantly doing 'the right thing' he puts himself in a disadvantageous position over and over again because the other players do not have any such moral constraints. This has to end badly at some point. It is inevitable.
It's not even the "right thing" though. Robb didn't do the "right thing" by marrying Talisa and breaking his vows to the Freys. He didn't do right by his family, nor his kingdom. People were out there bleeding and dying for him, and he throws it all away on some romance?
Same with Ned Stark. It wasn't the right thing to go to Cersei. According to the laws and societal norms of Westeros, he should have gone to Robert Baratheon. By going to Cersei first, he was scheming and not doing his duties as a loyal Hand. Catelyn seizing Tyrion was not lawful either. She did it solely due to emotional reasons.
In fact, if you look at what the Starks have done so far, very few of their decisions have been rational, dutiful, or lawful. They've simply been emotional.
On June 06 2013 06:49 Jophess wrote: Got bored and made a big list of characters that are either commonly misspelled or just common characters and (hopefully) spelled them correctly: + Show Spoiler +
By the way, I believe Tormund's last name is Giantsbane. When we met Mance and Tormund for the first time with Jon, Mance says something along the lines of "You thought this chicken eater was the king beyond the wall? That's Tormund Giantsbane..."
Also I was going to say that Gendry's last name would be Baratheon, but since he is a bastard it would be something else. Didn't we learn what the names of bastards are in season 2? Snow if born in the north and... I don't remember the others. But if somebody does, you can apply it to Gendry.
My first thought would be Gendry Storm, as the Baratheons come from the Stormlands. But he was born in Kings Landing, so he's a Waters. Sucks to have the same last name as Joffrey!
On June 07 2013 02:53 killa_robot wrote: Why would commoners have no surname? They have them, they just don't matter enough to be brought up, unlike the large house names.
Given Joffery's father is supposed to be Robert, his last name is Baratheon, not waters lol.
~4:20, Davos notes that upon being en-nobled by Stannis, he changed from Davos of Fleabottom to Davos of House Seaworth. Interesting food for thought.
On June 07 2013 02:53 killa_robot wrote: Why would commoners have no surname? They have them, they just don't matter enough to be brought up, unlike the large house names.
Given Joffery's father is supposed to be Robert, his last name is Baratheon, not waters lol.
SPOILER ALERT: Joffrey's dad isn't actually Robert. It's actually [REDACTED]
And the wiki page quoted above says commoners have no surnames. [shrugs] History is written by/about the nobility after all.
On June 07 2013 01:20 Jockmcplop wrote: Yeah Dany's got one thing that Robb/Ned never had. The girl is pure badass.
(dragons too)
She's a lot more ruthless and not as naive.
I actually think this is one of the real signs of mastery about this show immersing us in ancient culture: that people still root for Dany. She massacred every defenseless adult (male? maybe females too?) in Astapoor and we're not even asking what happened to "every man who holds the whip" in Yunkai are we? And yet, after both scenes, we were seriously rooting for her. Hell, we cheered when she burned a witch and locked her favorite handmaiden in a vault to die of thirst. Why?
Because we see a world of pain--which is the world as it really is--and we buy into the theory of retributive justice (often corporate) without so much as a thought. Notice how many people are asking for Lannister or Tyrell blood after this... not necessarily the perpetrators; just someone to pay, blood for blood.
Given that most of us are Christians or humanists to whom such ethical theories are anathema, it is really cool that this has been done and done well.
Whoah what are you guys talking about? I don't recall Dany having innocent people killed in Astapor. Only the people who kept them as slaves. That's fucking awesome. Same for Yunkai, the hell is the problem with what she did there? The other two examples you have conveniently left out that they betrayed her trust first (iirc).
There's nothing wrong with someone who takes literally zero bullshit from people, as long as when they have no reason to, they don't inflict suffering and pain (ie Joffrey). The fact that she frees slaves and then offers them either to join her or to be free and leave is not a 'clever trick' to make simple people like her. It's one of the only genuinely virtuous actions performed in this entire story. Jaime killing the king and the Hound saving Sansa are the other major ones (though I've probably forgotten something else).
Not only does Dany have the conscience to make her admirable, she also has one hell of a set of balls. Not only is she virtuous, she is also not a weakling and is not a doormat.
On June 07 2013 02:13 Yoav wrote:
On June 07 2013 02:02 Redox wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:52 Yoav wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:24 Dreamer.T wrote:
On June 07 2013 01:20 Jockmcplop wrote: Yeah Dany's got one thing that Robb/Ned never had. The girl is pure badass.
(dragons too)
She's a lot more ruthless and not as naive.
I actually think this is one of the real signs of mastery about this show immersing us in ancient culture: that people still root for Dany. She massacred every defenseless adult (male? maybe females too?) in Astapoor and we're not even asking what happened to "every man who holds the whip" in Yunkai are we? And yet, after both scenes, we were seriously rooting for her. Hell, we cheered when she burned a witch and locked her favorite handmaiden in a vault to die of thirst. Why?
Because we see a world of pain--which is the world as it really is--and we buy into the theory of retributive justice (often corporate) without so much as a thought. Notice how many people are asking for Lannister or Tyrell blood after this... not necessarily the perpetrators; just someone to pay, blood for blood.
Given that most of us are Christians or humanists to whom such ethical theories are anathema, it is really cool that this has been done and done well.
Well not everybody is rooting for her. Nikolaj Coster-Waldau was asked which GoT character scares him the most.
Answer: "Melisandre the Red priestess—she's a scary woman. There's also something about that type of power that Daenerys has. Most people believe she's doing the right thing, but she's burning people alive. She's got a chip on her shoulder. I don't want her to come across the Narrow Sea. She's going to burn thousands and thousands and thousands of people and have that self-righteous smirk on her face the whole time."
He's right, of course. Note however that my point stands... he himself notes she's a fan favorite. It's this paradox that's good storytelling. When we watched the Astapoor scene the first time, everybody in the room I was in was cheering for her (we repeated it for good measure). It's only after, when you think about the implications, that you realize how really scary she is.
I cannot understand your ethics. How is it morally wrong to allow slaves who have been imprisoned by people from birth, forced into an army and FORCED to kill a baby in front of its mother in order to prove they have been imbued with the necessary level of dispassionate cruelty to be part of its unpaid slave army, to get revenge on their captors???
I didn't say innocent. I said defenseless. And slaveholding is (historically) a communal sin. Do you really think it morally justifiable in real life to massacre the entire adult population of 100 CE Rome or 1850 Savannah, Georgia? And yet we root for her. Most of us are probably even against the death penalty... and all against execution by fire... and yet Dany burned a witch and attacked a city with dragons... hell, she was complicit in her brother's execution by molten gold.
All I'm saying is it's cool that the show gets us in-universe enough to think as people in ancient times did about these things. In the BCEs, annihilating the adult population of a city for its sins was more or less accepted and practiced. It's amazing, and a feat of storytelling, that they got us on board with it.
How is this any different from us cheering on Bruce Willis for shooting up criminals? Are you usually offended when some big screen action hero uses violence? That our feelings towards movies mirror the declaration of human rights would be news to me.
Viserys by the way was threatening to cut Danaeris' baby out of her. Using violence against him was well justified as defense of others. Not to mention he sold his sister and would have her raped by hundreds and men plus horses for his selfish needs. So I wouldn't expect many to rush to his defense even in this universe. Being against the death penalty doesn't preclude or forbid to feel that someone had it coming.
On June 07 2013 03:03 SpikeStarcraft wrote: I cant wait until ive finished the last book so i can leave this thread forever and can hang in the other one without being spoiled. 2/3 left.
Good luck reading, bro I really wish I had the will to read them.
On June 06 2013 14:35 Itsmedudeman wrote: I have to say, despite the Stark's being "responsible" for their own fate, they're unbelievably unlucky. Ned Stark apologizes for treason yet still gets executed in the most heinous way even though he was supposed to be spared. Robb Stark is betrayed despite taking reasonable measures to make up for his mistakes in the past. Arya almost reaches her family and they all die right before she makes it there (although I guess you could argue this is lucky for her), and Sansa almost makes it off the island and marries a person she wants to marry until Tywin gets involved at the last moment.
On the other hand you have Jaime who miraculously escapes some dead end situations multiple times, and Tyrion survives an axe to the face.
Also, I'm really looking forward to how the Jaime storyline evolves. After all, he's supposed to keep his word and return the girls to the Stark family, right? Well, now they're dead so what does he do now? Surely he won't just do nothing about it, but how could he ever possibly make it up to the Starks for sparing his life?
I don't know if it is entirely a matter of luck. IMO the Starks make a lot of strategical mistakes in their decision making due to their values about wrong and right. These values work when you are the supreme ruler in the north far removed from King's Landing but not when you play the game of thrones. In fact I find that most of the Starks are rather naive.
Ned should have known that non of the people from the small council were to be trusted. He also could have decided not go and investigate into Joffrey's heritage. He should have known Joffrey was a total dick. He should have just gone directly to Robert instead of telling Cersei first etc.
By constantly doing 'the right thing' he puts himself in a disadvantageous position over and over again because the other players do not have any such moral constraints. This has to end badly at some point. It is inevitable.
It's not even the "right thing" though. Robb didn't do the "right thing" by marrying Talisa and breaking his vows to the Freys. He didn't do right by his family, nor his kingdom. People were out there bleeding and dying for him, and he throws it all away on some romance?
Same with Ned Stark. It wasn't the right thing to go to Cersei. According to the laws and societal norms of Westeros, he should have gone to Robert Baratheon. By going to Cersei first, he was scheming and not doing his duties as a loyal Hand. Catelyn seizing Tyrion was not lawful either. She did it solely due to emotional reasons.
In fact, if you look at what the Starks have done so far, very few of their decisions have been rational, dutiful, or lawful. They've simply been emotional.
At least for Ned I'd say that he mostly did what he believed to be right and his duty. Most of all, insisting that Stannis as the "rightful heir" should be king just because to him, the rightful heir was the rightful heir. It had nothing to do with his feelings toward Stannis.
So honor does mean a lot to the Starks, but they also tend to be naive and impulsive. An example of this for Ned is Jon Snow. Bedding another woman (impulsive), but then making no excuses about it, not hiding it and caring well for the child (honorable).
On June 06 2013 14:35 Itsmedudeman wrote: I have to say, despite the Stark's being "responsible" for their own fate, they're unbelievably unlucky. Ned Stark apologizes for treason yet still gets executed in the most heinous way even though he was supposed to be spared. Robb Stark is betrayed despite taking reasonable measures to make up for his mistakes in the past. Arya almost reaches her family and they all die right before she makes it there (although I guess you could argue this is lucky for her), and Sansa almost makes it off the island and marries a person she wants to marry until Tywin gets involved at the last moment.
On the other hand you have Jaime who miraculously escapes some dead end situations multiple times, and Tyrion survives an axe to the face.
Also, I'm really looking forward to how the Jaime storyline evolves. After all, he's supposed to keep his word and return the girls to the Stark family, right? Well, now they're dead so what does he do now? Surely he won't just do nothing about it, but how could he ever possibly make it up to the Starks for sparing his life?
I wouldn't consider Jaime lucky, he lost his sword hand.
On June 07 2013 02:53 killa_robot wrote: Why would commoners have no surname? They have them, they just don't matter enough to be brought up, unlike the large house names.
Given Joffery's father is supposed to be Robert, his last name is Baratheon, not waters lol.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfNv2VPxv0Y ~4:20, Davos notes that upon being en-nobled by Stannis, he changed from Davos of Fleabottom to Davos of House Seaworth. Interesting food for thought.
Flaebottom is the place he lived, it's the poorest of the poorest of King's Landing (Where Margaery took care of the orphans). I think it's just a reference where he comes from.
you misunderstand, i'm not saying ned is better or even as good. what i'm saying is that you are overestimating the difference in their abilities based on nothing but conjecture
i did rewatch the fight. jaime is also grunting and gritting his teeth. i watched closely and saw jaime smile once when he dodged a close slash to his face. obviously he's more likely to smile than ned, as he just ganged up on ned and killed his guards (who were his friends iirc)
Jaime smiles, because Jaimie loves fighting. Jaime is at his happiest when he is doing what he does best. Ned doesn't love fighting, he fights only when he must. And while I think Jaime is a better 1v1 swordsman than Ned, if I were planning a war, I'd rather have Ned on my side than Jaime. A good commander is better than a hundred good swordsmen and Ned is a flat out better commander. Ned is a better strategist and tactician. He inspires true loyalty from the troops under his command. Whatever loyalty Jaime inspires is derived out of fear of Jaime's father. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't even matter who the better swordsman is. They're fighting a war, not a 1v1 tournament. The Game of Thrones is not a contest of steel, but a contest of wits. Robb Stark is probably a better swordsman than Tywin Lannister, yet Tywin defeated Robb. Littlefinger is one of the worst swordsmen in the entire show, yet he's becoming a major player in the Game of Thrones anyway. Dany has never so much as lifted a sword in the show, yet she commands dragons and an ever increasing army. Being a great swordsman isn't that big a deal on this show, it's not going to keep you safe. This isn't Dragonball Z where the fate of the world is decided by which fighter has a higher power level. This is a game of power where as Varys says even "a very small man can cast a very large shadow."
It isn't indicated in TV series in any way that Ned Stark is even mediocre tactician and commander. He is respected by his closest and definitely is pictured as wise, experienced and calm man but he may be very crappy war leader. His crappy approach to politics in Kings' Landing indicate that he is no genius which is also a cap on his tactical skill. He is netiher NApoleon nor Alexander.
Also Jaime is at his happiest when he is doing his sister
The lore regarding Roberts Rebellion (you can watch these on youtube) regard him as a very skilled swordsmen as well as tactician. It becomes more obvious when Ser Barristan comments on how he slayed a dozen knights at the battle of the trident.
You have to understand, Robert and Ned were outnumbered during the rebellion by a solid chunk yet they were victorious; even without Tywin supporting either side the rebellion was out numbered and if they began losing even slightly then Tywin would have pledged to the King rather then sack the city.
Again due to the lore and the spoilers im not sure what I'm allowed to say. Ill just make the case that it could be argued that Ned was actually one of the best fighters ever, but underestimated, certainly prowess to match ser jamie, if you know the events of the rebellion and his sister.
GoT Wiki is allowed provided you don't cite the "In the Books" section, while the History and Lore of Westeros series put out by HBO every DVD season (and found on Youtube) is also acceptable, from what I can tell.
This is only acceptable if you specifically link to where you get your information from. Just saying "this is in the HBO lore videos" will get you banned just as fast as posting book content.
In general I would really like to have you, TSORG, and other book readers to just take your discussion elsewhere. You guys make moderating this thread really, really difficult.
im reading to keep up with the show, where else can i go? the other thread discusses more than just book 3 :S and whenever im not sure what i can post ive asked the mods (except for the first post i made here when i hadnt read the rules yet)
Updated the list again, up to 127 people now. Also made a Google Doc Spreadsheet to make it easier to update. Public editing is disabled to prevent assholes from spoiling. + Show Spoiler +
Aerys II "Mad King" Targaryen Hot Pie Missandei Shae Alliser Thorne Illyrio Mopatis Mord Shagga Amory Lorch Ilyn Payne Myrcella Baratheon (Lannister) Shireen Baratheon Anguy Irri Old Nan Stannis Baratheon Arya Stark Jaime "Kingslayer" Lannister Olenna Tyrell (Redwyne) Syrio Forel Balon Greyjoy Janos Slynt Orell Talisa Stark (Maegyr) Barristan Selmy Jaqen H'ghar Osha Theon Greyjoy Benjen Stark Jeor Mormont Petyr "Littlefinger" Baelish Thoros of Myr Beric Dondarrion Jhiqui Podrick Payne Timett Boros Blount Joffrey Baratheon (Lannister) Polliver Tommen Baratheon (Lannister) Boy (Theon's torturer) Jojen Reed Pyat Pree Tormund "Giantsbane" Bran Stark Jon Arryn Pyp Tyrion Lannister "The Imp" Brienne of Tarth Jon Snow Qhorin Halfhand Tywin Lannister Bronn Jorah Mormont Quaithe Ulf Brynden "Blackfish" Tully Jory Cassell Qyburn Vardis Egen Catelyn Stark (Tully) Kevan Lannister Rakharo Varys Cersei Lannister Khal Drogo Randyll Tarly Viserys Targaryen Chella Lancel Lannister Rast Walder Frey Craster Locke Renly Baratheon Xaro Xhoan Daxos Daario Naharis Lommy Greenhands Rhaegar Targaryen Yara Greyjoy Daenerys Targaryen Loras Tyrell "The Knight of Flowers" Rickard Karstark Ygritte Dagmer Cleftjaw Lyanna Stark Rickon Stark Yoren Davos Seaworth Lysa Arryn (Tully) Robb Stark Doreah Mace Tyrell Robert Baratheon Eddard "Ned" Stark Maester Aemon Targaryen Robin Arryn Eddison Tollet "Dolorous Edd" Maester Luwin Rodrik Cassell Edmure Tully Maester Pycelle Roose Bolton Gendry Mance Rayder Ros Gilly Margaery Tyrell Roslin Frey Greatjon Umber Marillion Salladhor Saan Gregor "The Mountain" Clegane Mathos Seaworth Samwell Tarly Grenn Meera Reed Sandor "The Hound" Clegane Grey Worm Melisandre Sansa Stark Hallyne Meryn Trant Selyse Baratheon (Florent) Hodor Mirri Maz Duur Septa Mordane
EPT
I really wish I had the will to read them. 
