A review of “The Dance of Dragons,” the ninth episode of the fifth season of “Game of Thrones”
by Miodrag Zarković
In case there was anyone left unconvinced that “Game of Thrones” is the most unfaithful adaptation ever, the penultimate episode of the fifth season definitely cleared any doubts. After realizing there are no more human characters or animals or beasts they haven’t already changed beyond recognition, David Benioff and Dan Weiss, the two showrunners, finally turned to the deities in said episode. So now we have book R’hllor, that exists in the “A Song of Ice and Fire” series by George R. R. Martin, and TV R’hllor, that operates in a somewhat different manner.
And it’s only fair. What makes the gods so special? Why should they be spared from Benioff and Weiss’ famous creativity?
On first impression, the new R’hllor isn’t too unlike TV Meryn Trant, in that they share this penchant for young girls. And both got what they wanted in this episode, though not before some trouble, of course, because this is “Game of Thrones” after all: nothing is easy in this world, not even for seasoned knights and supernatural forces.
Poor Meryn had to sit through what was arguably the most shocking sequence Benioff and Weiss treated their audience to: a multitude of prostitutes parading onscreen without a single sight of nudity. TV R’hllor, on the other hand, was forced to wait until TV Ramsay, channeling Chuck Norris, set the supplies of TV Stannis Baratheon’s army ablaze, and only then his demand could ultimately be met with.
(From the scene of the Boltons’ attack on Stannis camp, keep in mind that poor horse on fire. It’ll be helpful later on.)
The demand was to sacrifice Shireen Baratheon, Stannis’ only child, by burning her alive. And yes, it arguably means that the girl acquired by Meryn Trant was actually the luckier one. O tempora, o mores!
It also means that “Game of Thrones” is like a car without an engine, or a restaurant with no food, or a bank with no money, or practically any other entity that’s failing to fulfill its basic purpose. Yes, the “anyone can be killed” show actually sucks at killing its characters.
That’s hardly news. It’s been like that ever since the pilot episode, which in its very first scene stripped Ser Waymar Royce’s death of any heroism. It was like that this entire season, as evidenced by TV Barristan’s death. But the burning of Shireen was a whole new level. Opposite to many other of Benioff and Weiss’ interventions, this one wasn’t exactly illogical (not because it’s logical but because there’s no criteria the act can be measured against in regards to logic), as much as it was the very definition of unearned moment. Even though the showrunners packed it with Shireen’s screams and the soldiers’ horrified looks and Selyse’s late tears, the scene just couldn’t operate beyond the pure spectacle aspect. If you’re generally disturbed by the image of a child burned at the stake, or, even more, by her agonizing cries for help, chances are the sacrifice of Shireen was not an emotionless viewing. But it hardly reached something deeper.
It simply couldn’t, because a) none of the characters involved, almighty R’hllor included, was ever properly established or developed, and b) the context it shapes is, typically for Benioff and Weiss, contradicting any realistic take on the setting.
TV Stannis is exactly what Benioff and Weiss want him to be: a fanatic devoid of any humanity, a driven sociopath, nature’s cruel joke that never made anyone laugh. How can such an individual ever inspire any loyalty or devotion, is among the numerous questions Benioff and Weiss wouldn’t know how to even begin answering. TV Selyse is someone who keeps dead fetuses in jars; whoever thought that can lead to a relatable character, probably watched too many movies with dead fetuses in jars. TV Shireen was a kid borrowed from some fairy tale, too perfect for her own storytelling good: characters of that type are written either by authors at odds with realism, or as an exercise in some cheap manipulation aimed at breaking the hearts of the audience at some point; or, as it’s sadly often the case with GOT, both. TV Melisandre is out of character every time she appears dressed, and, speaking of her dress, R’hllor isn’t The Red God anymore, if the fifth season is anything to judge by. If those are the characters that occupy a particular storyline, well, don’t expect that anything that happens to them will actually matter. The audience may be instinctively affected by this horrific sight or that one, but that’s where any intellectual and/or emotional connection stops. Honestly, the only remotely relatable element in that scene was those shocked soldiers, hence the point number two. In a world that is entirely built around the institution of family, a character that burns his own daughter just because his supplies and horses were destroyed is perhaps possible, but definitely not useful in a storytelling sense, unless the sacrifice itself isn’t the very climax and practically point of his arc. Since the episode aired, many critics and commenters compared Shireen’s death to the sacrifice of Iphigenia committed by Agamemnon ahead of the Trojan War, but it’s just wrong for a number of reasons. First, Agamemnon doesn’t even have a family name. He is not Agamemnon of the House Whatever. He’s just Agamemnon, because that entire society is built of quite a different fabric from Westeros. Second, in Greek mythology deities really are everywhere and involved in everything. When Agamemnon’s fleet can’t sail because the wind stopped, there is no shadow of a doubt in the mind of any soldier or subject of his that the gods are behind the obstacle—just like they actually are. So, Agamemnon is forced to appease, one way or the other, the deity he insulted.
ASOIAF is a completely different story, set in a fundamentally different culture. One of the most important aspects of the saga is that supernatural forces are coming back to the world. In effect, that means Westeros, at the beginning of ASOIAF, is a place governed by rationality, simply because it didn’t witness any magic for ages. There is faith, of course, because the Westerosi don’t delude themselves into thinking they can control the rain and the snow and the storms and whatnot. They never mistake themselves for gods. They are aware some things will always escape their reasoning, and therefore they do place their faith in the deities of the religion they happen to belong to. But they are a pretty rational society. Primitive compared to modern societies on 21st century Earth, but very rational. The traditions and rules they follow are established by centuries and centuries of human experience, and not because this divine authority or that one issued an order. One could say that even their faith in higher powers is somewhat rational at its core.
That delicate balance between reason and faith is what enables the culture that commands the political and social system in Westeros. And in such a culture, a king who sacrifices his daughter just because that’s how he interpreted the order form the deity he worships is a freak, an abomination, a lunatic that nobody would follow anywhere, let alone into war.
And it’s not that the Westerosi never heard of the concept of sacrifice. In fact, in the early stages of Stannis’ arc in the books, we’re told the story of Azor Ahai and his beloved Nissa Nissa, whom he had to kill in order to save the human race. But that’s exactly the point: Nissa Nissa died so the world would be saved, and not for a victory in a dynastic war. With that legend, the author makes us understand what kind of sacrifice is possible in the world he created, which, by extension, renders some other types unacceptable.
And in the books everyone’s aware of that. Whatever feelings Stannis has for his daughter, he’d never even think about sacrificing her for the Iron Throne. Melisandre would never even mention such a suggestion to Stannis, nor does she herself ever entertain the idea, it seems. Even R’hllor looks pretty uninterested in Shireen at this stage, although Stannis at the end of ADWD (and beginning of TWOW) is arguably in a worse situation than his TV namesake—if for nothing else, because that TV blizzard is a joke compared to the one Martin described in the book.
Have to say, I was unpleasantly surprised by a number of people that reacted to TV Shireen’s death with the notion that Stannis in the book would never burn his daughter like that, but Mel totally would. I really can’t say where that interpretation of Melisandre is coming from, but Martin’s famous statement that Mel’s probably the most misunderstood character in ASOIAF only makes more sense now. There undoubtedly is a fanatical and merciless side to Melisandre, but she’s not all evil. Far from it. In the very chapter she’s introduced in, when Maester Cressen approaches her with a poisoned wine, she openly warns him against the deed, signaling him to abandon the attempt on her life. Many readers seem to forget or overlook that detail, but it’s quite a telling one. It doesn’t mean she’s some kind angel, of course not; some of her acts are clearly repulsive and unforgivable; but, just like the vast majority of ASOIAF characters, she’s nuanced and layered. And no, not in any moment so far she even thinks about burning Shireen or indicates that it has to be done.
But David Benioff actually claims Shireen will be sacrificed in the books, too. In “Inside the episode” video, this is what he said:
“When George first told us about this, it was one of those moments where I remember looking at Dan, it was just like, `God, that’s so, it’s so horrible, and so good in a story sense, because it all comes together.`”
At face value, this may look like Benioff’s storytelling talent finally came through. At long last, he produced a line that is subtle, mysterious, intriguing, open to various, though not necessarily illogical, interpretations, and worthy of a serious analysis. And, most importantly, it didn’t happen by chance; no, he obviously intended it that way.
And that’s it. That is really the full extent of Benioff’s talent, because in the very next sentence he managed to embarrass himself and deliver a factually wrong recollection of his own work:
“You know, from the beginning, from the very first time we saw Stannis and Melisandre, they were sacrificing people, they were burning people alive on the beaches of Dragonstone. And it’s really all come to this. There’s been so much talk about king’s blood and the power of king’s blood, and that all leads ultimately, fatally, to Shireen’s sacrifice.”
Beg your pardon, Mr. Benioff, but what the hell are you talking about? What people were they burning alive on the beaches of Dragonstone? Those were statues of the Seven, not people, Mr. Benioff! If you want to leave the impression you’re in command of Martin’s yet-untold story, you shouldn’t be misremembering parts of the story you yourself already told. But let’s get back to the beginning first line: “When George first told us about this . . .” What does this “this” of yours stand for, Mr. Benioff? If you’re trying to say that George told you Stannis will allow Mel to burn Shireen after Ramsay destroyed his army’s supplies, you’re either lying or once again misremembering vital parts of the story. Melisandre and Shireen aren’t even with Stannis on his march to Winterfell in the books. Ramsay doesn’t perform some miraculous commando mission in the books. And George did write those books, all five of them so far. So he theoretically couldn’t have told you about “this”!
What he possibly did tell you, is that Shireen will indeed be sacrificed, maybe even by Stannis himself. But many a reader speculated about that possibility for years and years. I guess you and Mr. Weiss were busy reading online theories about Jon Snow’s mother, so perhaps you didn’t have the time to go through other predictions dedicated readers keep posting, because otherwise you wouldn’t be too surprised when George first told you about “this.”
Yes, Shireen’s sacrifice has for long been hinted at in the novels, and since Martin didn’t rebut your statement, it’s now as good as proven that it’s going to happen in the remaining two installments. But it’s even more certain Martin isn’t going to do it in such a shallow and gratuitous way as you two did.
(Gratuitous! What a word. It was in every GOT-related article these past weeks, but now, when TV Stannis gratuitously burns his daughter, it’s nowhere to be seen, it seems. It’s as if this kind of violence doesn’t particularly disturb mainstream media, because it’s not politically bankable.)
Your scene, Mr. Benioff, lacked the gravity ASOIAF scenes are famous for. It happens a lot in this “adaptation” of yours, because things that fascinate you two apparently confuse you too. For example, you also managed to misunderstand patricide, as evidenced last year when you omitted the most important part of Tyrion’s decision to abandon his escape from prison and go look for some explanations from Tywin. This season, a sacrificial murder of a man’s own child was obviously too much for your comprehension, even though you couldn’t resist putting it in the show.
And yes, you also failed to properly interpret Ramsay, although you evidently adore the guy. And allow me to show you what I mean, by asking you a simple question: When did you discover you’re in love with Ramsay’s shenanigans?
Here’s my guess: only when you read “A Dance with Dragons,” e.g. by the time you already scripted the entire second season of your show. Was it humiliating, Mr. Benioff, to read in awe those Winterfell chapters in that book, while all the time thinking about the huge mistake of cutting Ramsay out of your “adaptation”? Yeah, in the third season you managed to bring Ramsay in (and ever since you waited for the opportunity to add a burning horse, which is a book scene associated with Ramsay material you skipped in Season 2), because by that time you became obsessed with him and his cruelty. But you were still mad at yourselves, and possibly at George, for omitting Roose’s bastard from the second season, which resulted in the mess that was the TV Winterfell storyline that year. Was it then when you finally made George tell you the endgame for ASOIAF, so you could avoid similar missteps in the future?
Was it then when you also found out about Shireen’s ultimate fate? Because neither Shireen nor Selyse appeared in Season 2, which indicates that when you were writing the scripts you probably still didn’t know about that “this” thing you referred to in the latest “Inside the episode” video.
Seeing how fascinated you obviously are with both Ramsay’s sadism and Shireen’s sacrifice, I’m positive you’d have included both in Season 2, had you known back then what Martin had in store for them. Not that Ramsay’s or Shireen’s TV arc would benefit from it. I mean, just look at what you did to the Daznak’s Pit scene, which, in the same “Inside the episode” video, you described like this, Mr. Benioff:
“Even before we put it in paper, I remember reading this scene in the book and saying ‘Holy shit.’ And, actually, I remember e-mailing George right after I read the scene, even before I finished the book, just after reading this scene, and saying: `That’s one of the best scenes in any of your books and I have no idea how we’re gonna do it`.” Well, looks like eventually you got some idea. This is how you “did it” in the end: you made it even more complicated, though in a completely ridiculous way that inevitably removed every quality the scene possessed in the book and replaced it with some silly action the ultimate purpose of which was, yes, to feed Peter Dinklage with what you probably recognize as award material. You even failed to reward your man Jorah with a badass moment: when he hits that Son of the Harpy with a spear, it looks impressive at first, but then one realizes Jorah couldn’t miss actually, because the Sons of the Harpy were everywhere. In whichever direction he sent that spear, he’d kill one of them!
But all of that is small potatoes compared to your biggest, meanest, vilest gesture ever, Mr. Benioff. Let’s get back to “Inside the episode” video and your “When George first told us about this” line.
Asking you what right did you have to spoil the future books that way, would definitely be futile. Earning a right to do something is, clearly, one more concept you see no problem rejecting. I also doubt you ever think about comeuppance, seeing how dismissively you look at the very idea of higher justice. Just like I’m sure the next time you need to cover your unparalleled incompetence, you’re again not going to hesitate to put the responsibility on Martin, and spoil the coming novels in the process. But don’t fool yourself, that’s sort of kinslaying what you do. And you are on ASOIAF ground. And you’re about to lose all your supplies, because scripts for the next season you’ll have to turn in any day now, and “The Winds of Winter” is still not out.
And, after the last episode, I think you two have a very clear idea how strong and mind-corroding is the despair that falls on self-entitled, under-equipped fanatics caught on hostile, unfamiliar territory.
miladyofyork said:
Looks like we’ve got to welcome another large group to the fandom misery corner after this episode. Not to belittle the pain of the other fans that also had to see their favourites undergo this, but it’s amazing how the showrunners have managed to alienate beyond repair the two fandoms known for their size, organisation, passion and combativeness all in just one season. What an achievement! I should be impressed if nothing else, because . . . is there even a precedent of a big show alienating its hardcore fanbase so thoroughly like GOT has done? Miodrag, you’re in the know about the entertainment business, do chime in.
Being a lifelong fan of Homer and Greek mythology (those were my first books), I appreciate that you tackled the Agamemnon-Iphigenia/Stannis-Shireen parallel so many are so hastily drawing, some of which do so in a manner that makes me wonder just what version they were reading or if at all. I completely agree with your take, the Greek statu quo surrounding the sacrifice of Iphigenia is so completely different to ASOIAF to make for a truly appropriate comparison. Another one they’re using is Abraham’s near-sacrifice of Isaac, but then that also poses similar issues, not least of all the fact that for the Biblical patriarch it was a test of faith. A faith Stannis doesn’t have in the books, and that as his motivation in the show D&D were quick to dispel by ascribing the sacrifice to ambition.
Continuing with what I’d noted last week about D&D’s cowardice with regard to facing the fandom’s wrath over their decisions, this one is new and as you pointed it’s frankly the most disrespectful yet. So now we’re to shut up with our criticisms because this is something Martin told them? That, besides what you pointed, just highlights a fundamental misunderstanding of what our problem is, because he’s essentially saying that since it’ll be in the future book, then they’re not to blame for the rubbish thing they’ve done. When are people going to understand that the problem never was whether something is in the books or not per se? And now the showrunners join the chorus that sings this strawman.
Just more utter cowardice on their part. Looking at their track record with the most controversial episodes to date, their pattern is so consistent that their reaction has become predictable:
– For Dany’s rape, Benioff nonchalantly admitted what they’d done and why, not knowing he’d uttered some pearls of wisdom for posterity in the process.
– For Jaime/Cersei, they engaged in such a contradiction fest and then sent the director and the actors to do some ‘splainin’.
– For Sansa, they were silent, they hid behind the ITE videos, and released some featurette where they said a good deal of pearls of wisdom for posterity again, then they had Cogman, Iwan and Sophie go to do damage-control interviews.
– For Shireen, they blamed the author, it’s all his idea, of course.
Even if Martin told them that really, just look at what they’ve done with published material, so why exactly should we think they’ve been any more careful with unpublished material? I don’t see any reason why we should trust their word at all. Besides, Martin answers for the books, and if he were to do something as stupid, we’ll deal with him when we read it. This is their show and they have to answer for it.
So that’s D&D’s crisis management approach, ladies and gentlemen: avoidance, dishonesty, damage control, washing their hands of responsibility because the author said it was so, sending other people to face the media and the fans, release some videos. It’s just too much to take from them.
LikeLiked by 6 people
Trinuviel said:
This is really why I find it impossible to respect D&D as “artists” – that fact that they seem to be afraid to engage with criticism. I don’t find i exactly fun to get my work critized either. However, whn you put your work out into the world then you’re going to get feedback, both negative and positive. In terms of very negative feedback you can either try to explain your reasoning or strive to do better the next time. But complete avoidance is just cowardly and getting others to defend your creative decisions is frankly despicable.
I don’t think I’ll be able to watch this episode. There are things that I just don’t enjoy watching as entertainment – unless it says something profoundly about the human condition. Frankly, I can really dispel the cognitive dissonance between Stannis telling the story of how he desperately battled for Shireen’s life when she got greyscale and him cavalierly burning his daughter alive to win a battle.
I’ve already said that I don’t mind watching something horrible if it has a narrative purpose (beyond moving a story forward), if it says something about the human condition. In this case, I’m thinking of the opening scene in Shekar Kapur’s Elizabeth: The Virgin Queen. Here, a young Protestant woman has her head shaved brutally in preparation for her death at the stake. Her scalp is bleeding from the rough shaving while she continually says her prayers in order to have the strength to face her horrible death for the sake of her religious belief. It is shot in a way that keeps the focus on her, not the people preparing her for death – and it is a a scene with a profound emotional effect. The subsequent burning actually has a lesser emotional impact because that scene is about a woman ready to face a horrific death rather than renounce her deep felt beliefs.
I’m really loosing my enthusiam for the show this season. The story is slow and doesn’t seem to move much and then only towards big, shocking moments and moments of visual spectacle such as Sansa’s rape, the battle of Hardhome, Shireen’s burning and Dany flying away on Drogon. That is simply not enough – it feels like they use the narrative to build up to big spectacular and/or shocking moments instead of letting those grow out of the story.
In fact, the show feels more and more like and endless track through a more and more depraved theatre of horror with no hope of things getting better. It is depressing and at some point you have to ask yourself “why am I watching this?”. To me, GoT is skirting dangerously close towards the trope of Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy, especially since I severly doubt that any of the most horrific storylines (especially the Winterfell one, which Stannis is part of) wil achieve any kind of resolution this season.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DarknessInducedAudienceApathy
PS.
Rachel Swiersky has written a wonderful short story about the sacrifice of Iphigenia. It is well worth a read.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Miodrag Zarković said:
@miladyofyork
Not a single show in the history treated its characters the way GOT does. In effect, they are D&D’s characters positioned in ASOIAF roles and put through what’s very loosely Martin’s plot, and that could never make any sense whatsoever. Because of that, the show was inevitable to become a TV abomination that challenges basic logic in every single scene. And such an outcome simply can not satisfy any devoted fan of any ASOIAF character.
But the lengths D&D went in mistreating certain characters is even more remarkable. Stannis and Sansa are perfect examples and, as a pair, they are the hardest piece of evidence of D&D’s incompetence: it takes serious anti-talent to misinterpret and misuse Sansa and Stannis BOTH! Their respective arcs and roles in the story are so different, it takes quite a range in incompetence to write so terribly both of them. And before, I wouldn’t think it’s possible to dislike both. Not so few fans (myself included) love them both, but I don’t think any true fan can not care about either of them two. And D&D, intelligent as they are, obviously are such a case. For four seasons they didn’t really know what to do with Sansa, until they finally came up with a brilliant idea to shoehorn her into the Jeyne Poole role (yeah, I absolutely don’t buy their ‘splainin’ – great word! – that they thought about it as early as season two). As for Stannis, at first they didn’t know what to do with him so in Season Two they used him mostly as a vehicle for Mel’s boobs and some bloodbath at the end, but once they found out about Shireen’s burning they started leading his arc to this point by systematically portraying him in the evidently unfavorable light.
Whatever hate D&D get for their mistreatment of Stannis and Sansa (and not only that it’s already unparalleled, but I expect the hate to grow even stronger with each passing day), I’m positive it’s well deserved and fully earned.
As for their crisis management, which you described perfectly, I wouldn’t mind their silence about sensitive issues if D&D were some generally shy authors that keep away from the spotlight, like David Chase (“The Sopranos”) or writers like Cormac McCarthy for example. But they are people who can talk all day long about how hard their jobs and lives are, and how good their work really is. When it suits them, they are possibly the most talkative individuals in the industry ever. I didn’t count, but it’s my strong impression that when you add up all their interviews and panels and round tables and whatnot, they’re second to none among TV authors when it comes to the sheer presence in public. But, when things get tricky, they disappear completely and let Cogman or whoever handle the storm. That’s some remarkable cowardice, combined with good old hypocrisy at its earnest.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Elba said:
I admit that I am one who thinks that if Shireen is sacrificed to fire in the books that it would be at Melisandre’s doing, not Stannis’, but if I may explain just a little bit more about that reasoning, I will add that I can only see that happening if their situation becomes much, much more dire than what we were given here. There is just no way that any of those characters would be in favor of burning Stannis’ only heir just to win a preliminary battle at Winterfell. I mean from the preview for the next episode where they show the weather thawing out a bit, it basically makes it seem like they sacrificed Shireen so that they could get a favorable change in the weather! And if they win at Winterfell, what then? Who are they going to burn next if the weather turns bad again in the North as it surely will?
Which brings me to two other points. First, why would any of Stannis soldiers want to follow him now? Watching the reaction of that one horrified soldier I was thinking that it would be understandable if half his army desserts him now. Second, just who exactly are we to root for to win the battle at Winterfell? As Ghostlovesinger so adeptly put it in his review at Tower of the Hand, this act puts Stannis firmly into villain territory. So now we have one villain, Stannis, fighting another villain, Ramsay/Roose for Winterfell and I could not care less except for the fact that I only want it to end in whatever way is best for Sansa as she is the only one I am concerned about at Winterfell that has any stake in the outcome. I had assumed that Sansa would be much safer with Stannis than Ramsay but now I wonder. If Sansa is from a long line of Kings in the North, if she ends up with Stannis will he try to burn her alive the next time he needs a favorable change in the weather?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Miodrag Zarković said:
@Elba
Just to make myself clear, I have no doubt that Mel will be instrumental in the burning of Shireen in the books, if it comes to that. She’s probably going to hate it, but she is obedient to R’hllor and willing to do for him things she possibly dislikes intimately. To tell you the truth, I expect Stannis to be involved too, because if they do it behind his back, it won’t be a sacrifice exactly. But in the review, I only wanted to say that not even Mel would burn the girl for the reasons presented in the show. No way. Just like R’hllor wouldn’t even signal Mel to burn Shireen without a damn good reason (assuming there might be a good reason to burn a child on stake). Which actually means that even the gods are made stupider and/or more cruel in the show.
You’re spot on with this question: “Who are they going to burn next if the weather turns bad again in the North as it surely will?” It sums up nicely everything that is terrible in the show version of Shireen’s sacrifice.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Lord Bronn Stokeworth said:
I just want to say great review.
But Martin has commented.
http://grrm.livejournal.com/428790.html?thread=21734390#t21734390
If it is even going to happen in the books (honestly, the way they behave I have no reason to trust them entirely, they did try to confuse Martin’s word with their work), it’s not written yet. So, it will be a while.
Milady: Being a member of both fandoms, I feel the pain and pretty much take it personally. They even screw up Bronn. “Hey, instead of him gaining power and building his own forces, let’s put him in some lame fight scenes and have him see some boobies!”
LikeLiked by 2 people
Lisa S Murphy said:
Excellent work again and much appreciated.
The anger is strong in you, young Jedi. 😀
LikeLike
ArabellaVidal said:
Holy guacamole! You’ve called it. The lack of Ramsay/Reek and Selyse/Shireen in the second season makes sense now.
LikeLike
The Weeping Knight said:
Another excellent review, Miodrag. Do you have any intentions to do a reflection on season 5 as a whole and looking forth to season 6 expectations after reviewing episode 10?
LikeLike
Miodrag Zarković said:
About the season’s review, ladies that run this site made me an offer I couldn’t refuse. Their basic idea is so interesting and refreshing, I don’t think anyone did it before. Hopefully, you all will see it the same way.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Weeping Knight said:
I look forward to it. That is of course when you aren’t being brutalised and victimised as a journalist by these vile despots.
LikeLike
Houndbird said:
D & D are cowards. To now blame Martin saying he told them so is rich. They had his superb books on hand and chose to ignore them and do their own fan fiction, which is a complete disaster.
Maybe Shireen will be burnt, but it will have a context and reason and not just out of the blue for shock value and dislike of Stannis
LikeLiked by 1 person
Notafan said:
I have to say, ever since I saw someone post a reference to this blog on a comment in youtube, I have been quite avidly reading your entries. I have disagreed with most of them, as I am a fan of the show and interiorised from the first episode that this would end up not being a faithful adaptation. I wholeheartedly believe that given the demands of a TV show, with more immediate entertainment being required at the expense of nuance and content, that I had to forget the books and take the show for what it was: An entertaining way to spend my time in a familiar setting. I did feel it was not worth commenting on your blog, for I see most commenters agree with you and are fans, and whilst discussion is a positive thing, I’m definitely not here to engage in what could be construed as an argument (the internet does seem to make these interactions binary: agree or disagree, without nuance). My stance is not however a criticism in itself, your enthusiasm and effort here is much to your credit and the reader’s benefit.
So, why am I commenting now? I felt that I should offer a different perspective than the one that D&D are incompetent and disrespectful of ASOIAF. I read the books when they came out, already as an avid fan of fantasy, and much older (now particularly) than the majority of fantasy fans. I have had the pleasure, living in Oxfordshire, to converse with many Tolkien students and would have loved to have met the man in person (I’m not that old!). I have also had the pleasure of meeting and conversing with GRRM on more than one occasion, as he is not an unfamiliar face in some academic circles. Whilst I respect your opinions, and feel very happy to see such passion and loyalty to the source material, I would say that there is a tendency to discount GRRM’s contribution to the show. I am convinced that he knows full well what D&D are up to, enables them, and understands that there is a balance between the ‘disruption’ to his legacy that GoT imposes, and the fame and recognition he gains from it. Although you have every right to dislike the work, do keep in mind that nothing like this would be happening without GRRM giving his approval. I personally don’t like it, but he made his choice. Now that the book is entering into the unknown part of the ASOIAF world, GRRM has to take some responsibility for that.
Thank you for your time, and please do keep posting these opinions, they are well structured and well worth the visit.
LikeLike
Miodrag Zarković said:
@Notafan
I’d politely ask you to remain civilized – even if we have different opinions on certain things, we don’t have to be rude to each other.
Kidding, of course. Seriously now: this post of yours may very well be the most respectful disagreement with myself I ever encountered, and there’s been quite a few of those (which shouldn’t be surprising, I guess, given I’m a political journalist). So honestly, thanks for reading and posting, and even for disagreeing, if you don’t mind.
However, we’ll remain in disagreement about GRRM. His only responsibility, in my eyes, lies in the fact that he let those two adapt his masterpiece. And that’s not a small responsibility, truth be told: literally everything stems from that decision of his. But, there’s nothing about it that can be analyzed or put under scrutiny. He made a decision which you or I can approve or not, but that’s it. Consequences of that decision are, on the other hand, something we consume ten Sundays a year, which is naturally the focus of my reviews. And also, while I honestly think he made a very wrong decision in trusting D&D of all people, it’s not like I have no understanding for him in that situation: like, who among us would suspect people that say they love our work? It’s against human nature to be too doubtful when faced with admirers, genuine or not.
That being said, I’m positive GRRM’s responsibility does end there. He has no authority over the choices D&D make about the show. There are numerous examples that confirm this, even as early as season 1, when he started warning them about “butterfly effect”. By now, he’s probably very displeased. There is no shadow of a doubt in my mind that he was furious when he found out what Benioff said about Shireen’s burning. Who wouldn’t be in his shoes? I’d be out of my mind, literally. Just imagine building something for books and books, and years and years, just to have some Benioff guy go on TV and blab it to the whole world. That would infuriate any author, and justly so. So it’s as good as proven that GRRM is much more angry at D&D than he shows.
But, during the first season or three, the opposite was probably true: those days, GRRM was much happier with the show than I expected. His enthusiasm was very obvious back then. But, let me just say that GRRM’s taste and mine don’t always agree perfectly. There are books he says he adores, that I found comically bad. There are movies he loves, I find terrible. If he were to analyze my favorite books and movies, it’d probably be the same, he’d hate some of my choices. Having that in mind, I had no problem with him loving the show early on. It changed my opinion neither of the show nor about him. I still think ASOIAF is a literary classic in the making, and I still think the show is terrible, not just as an adaptation, but also as a show on its own.
And, just to repeat, that is not the reflection of my opinion of people that like the show. My critique of GOT is meant to be personal only for D&D (and few other members of the crew), but not for genuine fans of the show. Just like I don’t take it personal when someone criticizes, even very harshly, something I like and enjoy. God knows I encountered not so few readers who think ASOIAF is more-less typical fantasy fairy tale that isn’t worthy of a serious analytical discussion, but, although I couldn’t disagree more with that attitude, I never take it personally. That’s why, again, your post was a good surprise. Hope you’ll keep coming here. And disagreeing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Trinuviel said:
I honestly think that Martin’s biggest mistake was in accepting a tv deal before the series was finished.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Houndbird said:
No mention of Patchface. It seems he has an important role to play I.t.o. Shireen. Whatever Martin has in store for Shireen, Patches will surely have a role.
LikeLike
spanielpatter14 said:
I don’t remember any foreshadowing of Shireen being burned by her father in the books. She did mention a nightmare where dragons came to eat her – but what does that have to do with Rh’llor/Melisandre/sacrifice to benefit Stannis’ campaign? I had thought that the nightmare meant she would be killed, accidentally or deliberately, by Targaryen adherents or even Daenerys herself.
In any case, it was a horrifying and well-acted scene. But I have to wonder whether the show is trying too hard to present a collection of horrifying, violent or sexy moments rather than a coherent story.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Miodrag Zarković said:
The whole Nissa Nissa story kinda implies that someone has to be sacrificed, though not to benefit anyone’s campaign, but to save the human race. If Stannis is the one doing the sacrifice, there aren’t too many people he truly loves: Shireen and Davos, and that’s probably it. Before ADWD, I thought Davos more likely to be sacrificed, but Val’s reaction to Shireen was very eerie and indicative of something horrifying that awaits the girl.
So, when I said there are some hints, that’s what I meant: Stannis believing he’s the hero who in previous incarnation had to sacrifice his love (Nissa Nissa), plus Val’s reaction to Shireen, plus the entire concept of sacrificial burning that is heavily connected to Stannis/Melisandre. That made people speculate. Of course, people speculate about any number of things in ASOIAF, so nobody knew for sure before Benioff spoiled it, which is why Martin should introduce a minor character named Benioff in TWOW, a dimwit and a lowlife, and have him tortured and maimed and ultimately burned in agony – that would be a statement.
LikeLiked by 2 people
House of Zebra said:
Hello, Miodrag.
I only discovered your website a few weeks ago and have to say that I absolutely love your critiques and point of view. I only wish I discovered them much earlier.
You offer insights that very few other reviewers do.
I look forward to reading everything you publish.
LikeLike
astudyinmidnight said:
Well, it’s not QUITE true that Agamemnon has no House– he’s famously part of the “House of Atreus”, although the House of Atreus is also cursed in the male line, so there’s another reason he’d be put in an impossible position like he was with Iphigenia. The other thing people seem to forget, though, is that the story of Agamemnon does not end with Iphigenia’s death; he returned from the Trojan War (mistress in tow, no less), and is slaughtered by his wife and her lover.
Yes, people loved forgetting about Clytemnestra when they made the parallels this season. But Clytemnestra got her revenge for her daughter, and I was hoping they would at least bother to do the same with Selyse, but obviously, that might have empowered her, and you can’t have that. Instead she dies of Having Motherly Feelings, which of course she has never once expressed until they became useful to the plot. She was cheated of her earned revenge, and frankly they fucked up Brienne badly by having her be so focused on revenge. (You ever notice how much D&D just love revenge as a theme? Every single goddamn character is focused around revenge.)
Anyway, other than that, fantastic post. People trying to come for reasons this made sense never quite got it.
LikeLike