Each week we will be bringing you an essay from author Pearson Moore that explores the major themes from that week’s episode of Game of Thrones. This week Pearson’s essay, entitled “Dark and Full of Terrors”, examines the characters and situations from the season two premiere, “The North Remembers.” Read on and then let us know your thoughts and reactions in the comments.
Dark and Full of Terrors: Game of Thrones 2.01
by Pearson Moore
She is known as the Red Priestess of the Lord of Light, First Advisor to His Grace, King Stannis Baratheon. “The night is dark and full of terrors,” she says, leading her minions in the chant favoured of her god. We do well to fear the night, its terrors, its craven desires, its thirst for the blood of innocents. “The night is dark and full of terrors, but the fire burns them all away.” Perhaps we would do well to fear the fire, too, the priestess who wields it, and the multitudes willing to see its flames consume the Seven Kingdoms.
Last season we came to know a woman immune to fire. This season we see a woman immune to poison, and a queen immune to reason. Which of these should we fear?
So Many Adventures
“It’s been a remarkable journey. I pissed off the edge of the Wall, I slept in a sky cell, I fought with the hill tribes. So many adventures. So much to be thankful for.”
These are not the words of a smug world traveller or a seasoned veteran of battle. His battle dress does not shine. His fingers carry far fewer jewels than they bore prior to his “adventures”. But he does not appear before the boy king in haste or neglectful of his less than noble appearance. Both the armour and the grit and dirt encasing it are necessary elements of the message he carries—a message intended for both the teenage king and his power-crazed mother.
Tyrion: We looked for you on the battlefield … and you were nowhere to be found.
Joffrey: I … I’ve been here, ruling the Kingdoms.
Tyrion: And what a fine job you’ve done.
Tyrion does not mean to impugn Joffrey’s bravery or interest in battles and war. He has an entirely different agenda.
Tyrion: Enjoy your name day, Your Grace. Wish I could stay and celebrate, but there is work to be done.
Joffrey: What work?
What work could there possibly be? A king does not work. A king celebrates his name day with great jousts and feasts, kills knights for sport. Work implies an effort expended for the benefit of others. But a king does not serve others, does not assist or seek their counsel or ask their permission. “A king does not ask. He commands.”
Tyrion: You brought this on yourself.
Cersei: I’ve done nothing.
Tyrion: Quite right. You did nothing—when your son called for Ned Stark’s head.
Not only has Cersei’s complacency precipitated a war that may cost the Lannisters the Iron Throne, she has allowed one of the two remaining Stark children, Arya, to disappear. Sansa, as valuable as she may be to her mother, Catelyn Tully Stark, will not deter her brother, the King in the North, from littering the South with Lannister corpses.
Tyrion is not dressed for battle. He is dressed for hard physical and mental work. His words, his demeanour, and the very clothes he wears all say the same thing: Leadership requires hard work at all times, in all places. Celebration of a name day might provide great amusement, but a ruler cannot afford to indulge pleasures or succumb to the seductions of power, “especially now, with so much excitement in the world.” If House Lannister falls, it will be because neither Cersei nor Joffrey could abide the thought of donning apron or armour to serve anything beyond their immediate whims.
Compassion
Something else was lacking in Tyrion’s sister and nephew. When Tyrion expressed to Sansa his sorrow over her father’s death, Joffrey confronted him.
Joffrey: Her father was a confessed traitor.
Tyrion: But still her father. Surely having so recently lost your own beloved father you can sympathise.
To decide the question, Joffrey turned to Sansa, who by now had been receiving daily beatings as payment for the slightest display of independent will. “My father was a traitor,” she said. “My mother and brother are traitors, too.”
Here, then, was Joffrey’s answer to Tyrion’s appeal: There is no sympathy, no compassion, nothing in Joffrey’s soul to connect him to any other human being. If he cannot show the smallest kindness to the woman he claims as his “lady” there can be no question that his is a spirit devoid of even the most inconsequential element of humanity. Only unquestioning devotion to Joffrey’s caprice would be tolerated in the realm.
We cannot know Tyrion’s feelings after his meeting with the boy king. My sense is that he exuded neither anger nor contempt, but something closer to sorrow.
Responsibility
“A king does not ask. He commands.” Or so Joffrey wishes to believe.
Bran Stark, Lord of Winterfell, listened. He was attentive, correcting the appellant lord only when he referred to Lord Bran’s older brother without title. “King Robb,” Bran said. He was no longer simply Robb Stark, but His Grace, Robb Stark, King in the North.
Bran Stark listened. We might consider that such attentiveness is unusual in a boy of ten years. His ability to concentrate on the appellants’ words was made all the more challenging by the nature of their requests. The first lord was asking Lord Bran to repair his house. A degree in medieval studies is not required to know that lords do not go about repairing knights’ and squires’ walls and roofs. The lord provides land; it is up to the knight or landholder to maintain and improve that land. When my great great great great grandfather appealed to King George for land in New Brunswick, he did not ask the King to come and repair his roof. Rather, he promised the King that he would improve the land and construct buildings. This is a normal expectation of landowners in a feudal system, and even Bran knew it.
Bran listened. When Maester Luwin told the lord that Winterfell would provide four masons for a week, Bran did not object, but he did raise questioning eyes to the Maester.
“Listening to people you’d rather not listen to is one of your responsibilities as Lord of Winterfell.”
We might well imagine that if Bran sat the Iron Throne, Maester Luwin’s counsel would not change in the slightest: Listening to people you’d rather not listen to is one of the responsibilities of a king. Any maester rendering such advice to King Joffrey would be in immediate fear for his life.
The advice is not at all foreign to Bran. He does not engage childish desires. He does not impose on others any whim intended to cause pain or discomfort. In fact, he does not even dream. He listens. He sees. He runs with wolves. He experiences life at a depth of engagement that eludes the rest of us.
Bran is responsible. He is a considerate servant of those who seek his assistance. This is the legacy of Eddard Stark, and an enduring proof of the wisdom that claims a good person cannot suffer annihilation. Goodness and mercy cannot be killed, but will follow us, all the days of our life.
Bran listens. He sees. He runs with wolves. We consider these to be distinct activities, but for Bran, they are inseparable. He sees because he runs. His wolf legs propel him because he has eyes to see (for a complete explanation of this, please see “Bran Stark: The Third Eye” in Game of Thrones Season One Essays
Integrating the priceless knowledge Bran obtains during his romps in the godswood with the information he obtains from Maester Luwin and Osha is something that as yet eludes his ten-year-old mind. The wolf in him knows the red comet is not meant for him, or Robb, or anyone in Winterfell. It heralds a phenomenon troubling to the wolf, and should therefore be troubling to Bran.
“That comet means one thing, boy: Dragons.”
Even if Osha’s words do not make sense to Bran, he would do well to heed her warning. At the very least, his unusual ability to run as fast as a wolf, to see things as they are and not as others would believe them or like them to be, means that he is acquainted with the notion of objective truth. He knows the stories of Old Nan contain greater truth than anything he or anyone else can experience with eyes, ears, or hands. He should be willing, then, to listen and hear and absorb into his being the full significance of Osha’s words.
“The dragons are all dead. They’ve been dead for centuries.”
Looking at his reflection in the godswood pool, thinking on the very different reflection he saw only hours earlier, Bran chose to dismiss Osha’s words. He committed a dangerous error. It seems quite likely he will end up having to pay for his choice of ignorance, at a time and under circumstances chosen by his enemies to most fully exploit his penchant to dismiss incongruent thoughts. We can only hope Bran will come to place greater value on information brought to him when his legs are not working, and that this will happen sooner rather than later. Bran needs to understand that he can see and run even when his legs dangle uselessly below him.
Assertion of Identity
In the movie Gladiator (Dreamworks/Universal Pictures, 2000), Proximo wished to make a bold statement for the second appearance of the “Spaniard” (former general Maximus Decimus Meridius) in the gladiatorial arena of Zucchabar. He chose to give Maximus a sword and a very small shoulder guard, called a pauldron, but provided no other armour. Virtually defenceless, the image Proximo wished Maximus to project was that of the completely confident attacker who would fend off all challengers. The idea contained in the image is that this gladiator is so powerful, so confident in himself, and so assured of his own victory, that he cannot but win, even when every aspect of the spectacle has been engineered so as to virtually assure his defeat.
To appear in the gladiatorial arena wearing only a pauldron is the strongest possible statement of tactical prowess and supremacy in battle. It is the confident assertion of the fearless warrior.
Khaleesi Daenerys could have chosen any material as a shoulder perch for her dragons. She might have had her handmaids sew ornamental towels or mats, perhaps with cute little embroidered flowers or rainbows and unicorns. Instead she chose a bare leather pauldron.
The unadorned leather did not match her hair or her eyes or her desert attire. She would win no fashion awards for her choice. But the raw strength of boiled leather communicated a message entirely in concert with her identity:
“I am Daenerys Stormborn of House Targaryen. I am the blood of the dragon.”
Fearless warrior, able to defeat all challengers. It is the boldest of all possible assertions made in the gladiatorial arena. How can an ordinary man, carrying a sword and protected by a few square centimetres of leather, take on a dozen or more determined challengers? How can an ordinary woman, carrying three feeble dragons and protected by a few dozen men, ever hope to take on an entire continent? In this game of thrones, though, I believe the smartest money is on the beautiful silken-haired woman seeking a way in the Red Waste.
“You are my last hope, blood of my blood,” she said to Rakaro. He will not fail. Not because she has placed her last and greatest hope in him, but because he is blood of her blood, and she is the blood of the dragon. She is the one feared by Osha, by House Baratheon, by the very wolves of Westeros. The essence of her is written in the sky and in the stars.
The North Remembers
The North Remembers. It’s a simple saying. In the context of Ned Stark’s death, we believe we understand the meaning of the three words. King Robb will extract revenge for his father’s death. In fact, he has been doing just this in the last three battles, the reality of Ned Stark’s brutal execution serving as potent instigator of King Robb’s martial excellence.
Robb Stark and his brother, Jon Snow, were nothing if not northerners. We understand Jon Snow’s indignation, then, when the incestuous old man, Craster, called the men of the Night’s Watch “southerners”.
“We’re not southerners,” Jon Snow said, barely able to contain his irritation with the man who had sexual relations with his own daughters.
Commander Mormont had no patience for Jon’s petty assertions of northern pride. By challenging Craster, Jon had jeopardised the entire mission. Worse, he was spending inordinate time and energy eyeing Craster’s sexual playthings. Mormont put Jon in his place as soon as the meeting with Craster ended. The intention was to force Jon to realise that his pride was inconsistent with service in the Night’s Watch, and to communicate to him the extreme danger his pride posed to every one of his brothers. But the message we take from this unpleasant confrontation is much richer.
Winterfell is not the north. Even the Wall marks the southernmost limit of the north. The north is the home of Craster’s daughters and Mance Rayder’s wildlings. It is the abode of direwolves and wights and White Walkers.
The North Remembers. If the North remembers, the red streak across the sky carries greater significance north of the Wall than anywhere else. The North remembers because the primal forces of nature do not forget, and the red comet is a call to arms. Direwolves cross the Wall. Wildlings are active. Wights and White Walkers rise from their frozen lairs and walk again the paths of women and men.
The fact that this game of thrones is played at two levels has been reinforced in our minds from the very first episode. We began our own game of thrones north of the Wall, witnessing with our own eyes the wights and White Walkers that the most learned man in Westeros, Tyrion Lannister, would later consign to the robust imaginations of wet nurses and nannies. “You’re a smart boy,” Tyrion told Jon Snow. “You don’t believe in that nonsense.”
The more dangerous part of the game of thrones is played not between armies of men, but between armies of direwolves and dragons. The name George Martin applied to this story was not “The War for the Iron Throne” but rather “A Song of Ice and Fire”. The most important players are the ones who recognise the melody of this song, who hear harmonies in the beating of wings and the howling of wolves.
The North Remembers. Indeed. Direwolves see deep in the forest, their eyes perceive things invisible to the most perceptive of human beings. Dragons fly higher than the strongest bird, their eyes perceive things invisible in the forest. Direwolves and dragons remember. It is the humans who forget, who begin to think the primal realities of the world are the fairy tales of nannies and wet nurses. But the north remembers.
Azor Ahai
“In the ancient books it’s written that a warrior will draw a burning sword from the fire.”
It wasn’t much of a sword, and the flame was sustained not more than a few seconds. I found myself wondering if King Stannis plunged the sword into the sand because the carefully choreographed ritual demanded the action, or because Stannis’ hand was burning despite the thick leather glove.
Melisandre, the Red Priestess, is one of the most compelling characters in the corpus of A Song of Ice and Fire. We have witnessed already some of the more troubling aspects of her character. She is apparently unaffected by poison, and Maester Cressen’s sudden and fatal hemorrhaging after imbibing just a sip of the poisoned wine hints at other powers she may possess. If the television series continues to hew close to the novels we can expect some interesting developments centred on Melisandre in the next few episodes. She is far too important a character to sum up in a few sentences. I plan on devoting an entire essay to this fascinating visitor from across the sea, most likely in the first of the Season Two editions of Direwolves and Dragons, tentatively scheduled for publication in early May of 2012.
Stannis is all about justice. He considered Joffrey “and the rest of them” to be usurpers of his proper authority—in Stannis’ eyes, Joffrey is a thief. “I’ve always served thieves according to their desserts, as you well know, Ser Davos.” I hope we are given more detail about this inscrutable statement; in A Clash of Kings the expansion of this idea provides excellent insight into the relationship between Stannis and Davos. Ser Davos is one of the main characters in the second novel, and he narrates several of the chapters. I will write more about Davos, Stannis, and Melisandre in future essays. For now, I think it is safe to say I believe Melisandre’s proclamation that King Stannis Baratheon is the long-promised Azor Ahai is probably more a political assertion than a religious prophesy.
Power
I enjoyed seeing Littlefinger quickly cut down to size by Cersei. He has been far too smug in his pithy exclamations of the virtues of knowledge. Knowledge is power, but only if used wisely. Those who exploit knowledge willy-nilly, without regard to the impact that knowledge may have, are more often considered fools than maesters. Littlefinger’s revelry in the public release of the Queen’s secret represented anything but wise judgment. I am open, though, to the possibility that Littlefinger’s outburst was more carefully placed than the situation seemed to indicate. Perhaps he had already made the calculation that the Queen needed his help in finding Arya.
Cersei’s response, that “power is power”, may have had relevance to Lord Baelish, especially when cold, sharp steel pressed against his throat, but it was a meaningless statement. If her younger brother had been in the vicinity, he probably would have expected words along these lines, though. Cersei was training all her energy on maintaining power, but she seemed to exhibit no understanding of the qualities that allowed the propagation of unquestioned authority over others. What were the social or political forces compelling her guards to obey her commands? Power has structure, requires firm foundations, and demands careful manoeuvring of resources, agents, and commitments. Cersei seems almost oblivious to all of this. It will be interesting to see how her younger brother deals with the intricacies of knowledge and power brokering in the Red Keep.
The Slaughter of the Innocents
“When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled: ‘A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.’” (Matthew 2:16-18)
The Slaughter of the Innocents, the penultimate scene in tonight’s episode, was powerfully done, and stronger than anything portrayed in the novels. The placement of the scene at the end of the episode begs for response, and I have no doubt that this will be provided in later episodes.
The Roman Empire could not long survive an officially sanctioned level of barbarity that provided for the slaughter of entire populations of children. The implication is that Westeros will not much longer tolerate the tyranny of King Joffrey. I have not yet seen the second or third episode, but having read the novels, I expect this scene will feed into and elevate an important development that will have bearing on several of the characters, but especially on Arya. I have rarely been this excited about an upcoming television episode, but I can say I await Episode Two with impatience and hearty anticipation.
Loading ...
102 Comments
This brings back memories of Lost…
Ted furthmanQuote Reply
Very impressive essay, while I considered a lot of these things myself seeing them explained so effortlessly was very invigorating. I look forward to future essays for the rest of the episodes. Game of Thrones is the kind of show that can spawn complex essays with a single episode, that says a lot about how deep and layered this show is.
Matt SQuote Reply
Also, why doesn’t this site have a forum? Dangit.
Matt SQuote Reply
This may well be my favorite thing I’ve read this week!
Dale RippkeQuote Reply
huh , I didn’t like the reason Mormont grabbed Jon like that.but this essay explained Mormont ‘s reasons for me.I feel better about that scene now.
negarQuote Reply
Matt S,
Probably because there is good forum, westeros.org :)
Daenerys TargaryenQuote Reply
Yeah I don’t like that site… at all.
Matt SQuote Reply
Now THIS is the kind of review/analysis I admire and enjoy, as opposed to the standard blow by blow, with a few clever quips thrown in that reflects the author’s persona. I’ve seen the episode, and don’t need to hear what happened. I want to speculate and explore the meaning of it, both in the context of Westeros, and in our own world. Thank you, WIC, for posting this!
BGAPQuote Reply
Awesome!
I look forward to future essays
AlexBaratheonQuote Reply
There’s an interview with Laura Pradelska (Quaithe) here in case anyone here reads German: http://eis-und-feuer.de/forum/index.php?page=Thread&postID=157569#post157569
MoonCoffeeQuote Reply
I did not like the actress who played melissandre… her only redeeming quality are her magnificent, but odd-looking, breasts (as seen in ep12) [definitely better than Roz's!].
MOD EDIT: Let’s hold off on discussing ep12 until Sunday, please.
HERP-DERPQuote Reply
I don’t believe Melisandre is immune to poison, she’ll have seen in her fires the plot by Cressen and would have remedied up an antidote. In ADWD she tells us about her box full of special powders.
Yeah Lightbringer was a bit disappointing but I’d imagine it would be a costly CGI affair to truely bring the sword to life.
The KingslayerQuote Reply
Better breasts than Roz you say, I find that hard to believe.
The KingslayerQuote Reply
I concur this site needs a forum !!
The KingslayerQuote Reply
The Kingslayer,
Roz 9.8/10 Mel 9.801/10.. its a close match.. They have 2 very different kinds of breasts.. so I don’t think they could be compared directly.. once you see ep 12, and you repeat that scene a few times [which I know you'll do.. even if you're a girl..] .. you’ll see what I mean.
HERP-DERPQuote Reply
Fantastic analysis and I am very thankful that the talks about the books and upcoming storylines are held deliberately vague so that people who have not read the books don’t get spoiled
flipthetruckQuote Reply
HERP-DERP,
Lol I like your honesty.
The KingslayerQuote Reply
Continue with your trolling . It’s really sad how this is the only way someone will accord attention to you .
Claudiu GherganuQuote Reply
Actually GRRM provides a subtle clue as to Melisandre’s immunity to poison. Dany receives a gem/broach in Quarth as a gift that is said to have power to burn away poisons. Mel wears a gem around her neck. hmmmmmm
Also in the book the sword Stannis pulls from the fire looks just like a sword with fire on it. Fire goes out and sword looks like nothing special..possibly even ruined. Only later do we see a sword that shines and people wonder if it is the same sword. The sword gives off no heat (Maester Aemon) so it’s a theory it’s a regular sword that Mel “glamored”.
mikeintexasQuote Reply
I enjoyed reading your insights into “The North Remembers”…..Looking forward to your analysis of future episodes!
dragonshit crazyQuote Reply
I enjoyed reading your insights into “The North Remembers”…..Looking forward to your analysis of future episodes! I was hoping the direwolf Bran saw was Arya’s…
dragonshit crazyQuote Reply
Me either. Way too many book purists for my taste.
YoshiQuote Reply
mikeintexas,
Actually, the books provide us with another clue; her POV chapter tells us that when Mel looks into the fires, the first thing she looks for is any threat to her person. She has apparently grown quite good at detecting these. It is therefore possible that she did not resist the poison by direct supernatural means. Instead, she may have used supernatural means to see the poison threat coming and then merely took the antidote. Then again, it could still be magic, who can say. Either way, forewarned is forearmed and I have no doubt that Mel saw Cressen’s assassination attempt coming.
The KingshaverQuote Reply
Claudiu Gherganu,
LOL how on earth was my comment an example of trolling to you!?!? Now I doubt you even know what trolling means!
HERP-DERPQuote Reply
HERP-DERP,
WOW. Nice commentary, bro. :|
KatieQuote Reply
When the title “The North Remembers” was first announced, many of us were uncomfortable with it, thinking that powerful line was best held in reserve for the aftermath of certain events in Book 3 . After all, who could have already forgotten Ned’s execution? I think Pearson has the best take on it. The bannermen of Winterfell may remember their murdered liege lord, but the true remembering, of White Walkers and the Old Gods and even of dragons and other magics, is kept by those who live north of the Wall. Very nice.
littlejanetQuote Reply
Katie,
lol. I had much more to say than that but the mods cut out the rest because it had to do with ep12. I am sorry if I had offended you [sounds like something Tyrion will say..]
HERP-DERPQuote Reply
Carice was fine. Dolorous Edd though, dull. I hope we just haven’t seen enough of him yet.
fafhrdQuote Reply
Very cool.
I don’t know where else to put this, but have you all seen the Game of Thrones “coloring book?”
It’s hilarious:
http://www.tv.com/news/game-of-thrones-the-coloring-book-28235/
HollyoakQuote Reply
Ted furthman,
Ted,
There are some similarities. But now that I’ve moved from the Island to the Iron Islands, I can tell you I do not miss the Dharma boxed wine. No sirree. The Merlot kept in the cellars at Pyke is much richer.
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
Thanks for this essay. It’s thoughtful but also holds off on really getting into more than what we’ve seen so far. I’m going to enjoy the discussions we have, but only if some of us can hold off derailing a conversation by talking about breasts and other off-topic and off-putting things.
I don’t agree with your take on Cersei, I think she doesn’t want the current circumstance and hasn’t adjusted to it, though I agree we’d have to hold our breath forever for her to take responsibility for it. I don’t think it arose out of complacency but insecurity. But my read on Cersei is that she wanted what she has already got, and finds the war aspect of things a stupid distraction. It’s really not her fault that she’s not able to resolve it.
SkipjackQuote Reply
Matt S,
Matt S.,
Thank you for your kind words about my essay. The material is rich enough that the essays very nearly write themselves. I shudder at the prospect of attempting an essay on CSI or House or Hawaii 5-0. Such a task would require far more skill than I possess!
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
Dale Rippke,
Dale,
What a nice thing to say! I’m glad you enjoyed the essay.
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
HERP-DERP,
You are indeed a troll. The talk about breasts is asinine enough… but your comments in another topic about how you think GoT will be cancelled because of the speed of dialogue in episodes 11 and 12 is hilariously troll-o-rific.
OKENOQuote Reply
negar,
Negar,
There’s so much to like about GoT. An aspect of storytelling we rarely experience–in any medium–is the multi-faceted complexity that GRRM brings to the world of Westeros. Everyone has not a single agenda, but multiple competing desires and objectives. Jon has always wished to assert his worth as a way of balancing his status as bastard. But he wishes to lead and uphold the dignity of the Night’s Watch. All of these virtues (or vices) coalesced into Jon’s response, “We are not southerners.” If Craster had pushed only one or two of Jon’s buttons, perhaps he would have held his tongue. But Craster has complex agendas, too, and he has to push, push, push. It was a most compelling and thought provoking scene.
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
“The Roman Empire could not long survive an officially sanctioned level of barbarity that provided for the slaughter of entire populations of children. ”
Lol?? You are kidding right? What do you mean, exactly?
1) When Herod came to power, the Roman Empire didn’t even exist yet…by then it was still a Republic. (it became an Empire during his rule or thereabouts, if I remember correctly)
2) The Roman Empire perpetrated far worse barbaric acts. For example,one of his most succesful Emperors (if not the most succesful), Hadrian, slaughtered people by the hundreds of thousands (he also was a great patron of the arts, and a very accomplished architect himself, believed to have designed the Pantheon in Rome)
For the romans, the (supposedly, see PS) massacre of children in a roman province meant absolutly nothing.
Other than that I agree Melisandre is one of the most interesting characters in the book
PS Actually, The Slaughter of the Innocents is believed to be a fictional event, as is only referenced in the bible (but I don’t want to get into a religious discussion. The other 2 points are far more important to me ;)
Pau SorianoQuote Reply
OKENO,
…. everybody is entitled to their own opinion. I personally thought that the dialogue in many scenes of both episodes was too rushed… and in many of those scenes simply adding a few pauses within the dialogue would have worked wonders..
HERP-DERPQuote Reply
OT: HuffPo readers favor GoT over Mad Men as the better Sunday show by a 7:2 margin.
Mad Men’ Vs. ‘Game Of Thrones’: Which Is The Better Sunday Night Cable Drama?
Nagga’s KinQuote Reply
Well, if Melisandre doesn’t need to eat anything, per ADWD, it’s conceivable that her body can last poison. Regarding the Lightbringer, I think the ACOK chapter made it clear that at the time of the burning it was indeed merely a sword on fire, which Stannis cast aside as soon as Mel had completed her ritual. It was only later that it started to glow.
VirtusQuote Reply
BGAP,
BGAP,
Thank you for your kind comments. In the hundreds of essays I have penned on LOST, Mad Men, Awake, and Game of Thrones, I have never written a recap. I can’t stand reading them, and I would never subject family, friends, or readers to a blow-by-blow retelling of events we’ve already seen and heard. What a horrible waste of time–for everyone! GoT gives us so much to talk about, as you said. I’ve always felt an essay is a good vehicle for putting our thoughts in order. I hope you will find in each of my essays at least one idea you disagree with. If you can identify that wayward notion, I’ve accomplished my objective, which is providing you with the fuel to construct your own ideas and theories and fusions of thought. And I hope you will share those ideas with everyone.
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
I am sure I’ll be in the minority but I found this write up simplistic and wanting. Mr. Moore I wonder what generic features allow you to call these fragmented observations an ‘essay’? Tracing symbolic signifiers and prominent themes is every viewers job, writing your observations about them in a roughly chronological order does not an essay make. Please note that I have no objection to such write ups in and of themselves, I enjoy reading the episode recaps from different sources on WIC. Here, I object to the the positioning of this ‘essay’ in juxtaposition to those presumably intellectually inferior ‘reviews.’
There is much that I could criticize in your content as well, like the artificial and tenuous connection parallel you draw between Maximus’ and Dany’s armor, to name but one example, but I will confine myself to a formal critique. Fantasy, and specifically George’s work and the show it has been translated to certainly deserve serious intellectual consideration, but the self anointed, ground-braking, criticism has to be rigorous both in form and content otherwise it undermines the larger project of legitimizing our beloved genre as a literary or visual endeavor equal to any other.
Howland ReedQuote Reply
I feel the same way about recaps. Boring and pointless, considering most readers have already watched the show. It’s a shame that so many of the online reviews are just that: recaps.
LexQuote Reply
HERP-DERP,
That’s fine… but you went on to suggest that the show would be cancelled by seasons end if this “fast dialogue” continues. Firstly, the idea that the dialogue is even a problem is a idea seemingly held by an extremely small minority, and secondly, even if it WERE a problem, it’s still hilarious to even suggest that the show’s fate rest hopelessly on the speed in which actors deliver dialogue.
Add that to a number of other things you’ve said over the past few weeks, and one can only assume that you’re a troll (at least part time). You’ve been called out for being a troll, but multiple people, multiple times. I don’t see that happening to any of the other regular posters…. just saying…
OKENOQuote Reply
I would rather see more analysis of the source material, there is a lot more to go on with that
Tytos BlackwoodQuote Reply
OKENO,
1) I get called a troll a lot because my name is ” HERP-DERP” [a name commonly used in troll comics on the internet]. If it was “Mark” or “Carolyn” no one would have ever called me that.
2) In that same post you were referring to, someone later mentioned that some of the pirated versions of ep12 were sped up. So there is a chance I watched one of the sped up versions and I may be wrong..
HERP-DERPQuote Reply
Tytos Blackwood,
here here!
Howland ReedQuote Reply
HERP-DERP,
people think you are a troll because you took over SueThePirate’s name to comment here, now why would any sane person do that?
KnurkQuote Reply
Knurk,
so you claim.
HERP-DERPQuote Reply
AlexBaratheon,
Thanks! I’m happy to hear you enjoyed it!
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
flipthetruck,
I’m deliberately not invoking the novels in my essays, for two reasons. First, I don’t want to spoil those who are not up do date in the novels, or those who will never read the novels. Second, and I think more importantly, I’ve made a decision to write on the television series, not on the novels, and the televised story is going to deviate from the written story. I would imagine that by Season Three we will be aware of several significant deviations from CoK/SoS, and if the series is approved for any seasons beyond that, we ought to see some interesting distinctions between the two stories. This is inevitable, since television is a very different medium from the novel. I do find myself tempted from time to time (see that cord around Ser Davos’ neck–bet he’s carrying an interesting set of good luck charms in there…), but I’m usually strong enough to resist. I know what Davos carries around his neck in Clash of Kings, but this little detail may have been eliminated from the television story so there’s not much use worrying about it unless we see it with our own eyes, or hear him refer to it. There are some very fine Song of Ice and Fire websites on the Internet; here at WinterIsComing, and in my books, you can count on me to discuss only the television series.
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
dragonshit crazy,
Thank you for your kind comments. I also look forward to the adventures in store for us next week.
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
littlejanet,
Thanks for your comments on “The North Remembers”. As with just about every detail in GoT, I think there are many ways to interpret the catch phrases. It seemed to me the most prominent motif of the episode was the red comet, so I find myself naturally asking what this very important comet has to do with the title of the episode. There must be a connection. To say that the episode title is unconnected to the comet, that it refers only to Winterfell’s extraction of revenge for Ned’s death, I think is narrow sighted. The comet is a proclamation of the ascendency of things mysterious and primal. The North words–”Winter is Coming” and “The North Remembers”–to my mind are nothing less than connections to the primal reality.
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
HERP-DERP,
No offence taken. Episode 2.02 is a humdinger, and worthy of some very in-depth discussion, but I won’t be discussing particulars until HBO officially releases the episode to the public. But you can always email me or send a private message. I don’t impose any limitations on my emails, so you can even engage me in a discussion of DwD if you like!
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
Pau Soriano,
Hear, hear! I was dumbstruck WTF due to all three points myself.
Other than that as always a nice read despite a tendency to overanalyze.
twincastQuote Reply
What an excellent essay, enjoyable to read and thought-provoking. I look forward to further contributions from the author.
Iskaral PustQuote Reply
Very much enjoyed the article; I found it much more enlightening than many of the other reviews/recaps I’ve read. If I have any complaints, it’s that no one has really analyzed the show through a more technical view-point (such as the use of editing, lighting, cinematography, the score). I really feel like the show has taken itself to a whole new level visually and aurally, and has begun to use these technical tools as a means to reinforce the storytelling, acting, and the writing.
For instance, during the scene at the Small Council, I found it amazingly clever that prior to everyone being booted from the meeting, everyone’s face was obscured by shadow except for Tyrion, signifying that his small stature is a positive, allowing him to “see the light” so to speak, while everyone else has their head above this ray of light shining in the room: a visual illumination of how their high esteem for themselves makes them blind to their own faults (further illuminated through the “power is power” scene).
Pastor_of_MuppetsQuote Reply
Skipjack,
Hey, thanks for adding to the discussion! Your thoughts on Cersei’s motivations are precisely the kind of thing I’m hoping to see in these comments sections. The greater the diversity of opinion, and the more we bring in observations from scenes in the episode, the better. I like what you’re saying, and in some sense I can understand the word “complacent” as not really applying to Cersei. Maybe “in over her head” is a more appropriate descriptor.
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
Pau Soriano,
Thank you for adding your thoughts to the discussion. You bring valuable ideas.
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
Lex,
Yes. I agree wholeheartedly. Recaps are easy to write, and that is one of the disadvantages of essays–they require a good deal more time to work out on paper. I’ve spent as long as 20 hours on some of my LOST essays. The 13,000 word History of Westeros that I wrote for my first GoT essay book was a three-day affair. The effort is enormous, but if GoT gives us something of value, it just seems fair and right to offer up as substantial a response as we can muster.
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
HERP-DERP,
well, so the moderators here claim.
KnurkQuote Reply
Tytos Blackwood,
You are not alone in this feeling. Tens of thousands of people worldwide are active–often daily–participants at the major ASoIaF websites. You will find kindred spirits there. I engage in dialogue at these sites from time to time, and it is a lot of fun. Enjoy!
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
I second who said this site should have a forum. And who said westeros.org has far too many book purists. Who are also always whinning about something.
ValyrianQuote Reply
Iskaral Pust,
Thank you so much for your warm comments. I’ll do my best to offer you a place to think about the events of the episode. If I can assist in stimulating new ideas, I will have achieved my goal.
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
Stannis sword is not tge true light bringer as stannis is not the true azhor ahai…
Hence why ot just looked like a crap regular sword set on fire
superkickQuote Reply
As the popularity of GoT is booming I find many pieces on it on the internet, lots of posts here on WiC also. I am a big fan but I just don’t have the time to read it all, but i will look out for these essays in the future. Very interesting read. Besides this I would also be interested in a review of the more technical aspects of the show like Pastor of muppets suggested.
DahnQuote Reply
Pastor_of_Muppets,
Excellent insight. I had to go back and take another look at the scene–I missed that whole interplay with the light the first time around. I often miss things like this, and I’ll blame my ignorance on my upbringing in the lab. There are so many talented people working on this that we are only peripherally aware of probably most of the technical elements of the final composition. But this is why it is good for us to get together afterwards and discuss our findings. Probably each of us gets out 10% or 15% of what we might be able to wring from episodes. By discussing, we can double or triple our enjoyment and understanding of the scenes.
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
Pearson, can you share a link to your Mad Men essays, if there’s an online location? I just started streaming the series this week and find it a riveting, though deeply disturbing, reflection of my parents generation.
BGAPQuote Reply
I don’t agree with everything written, but it was definitely an interesting read.
/rant on
I would like to point out that the “slaughter of the innocents” occurs only in one Gospel and is mentioned nowhere else in the bible, and is not mentioned elsewhere by any contemporary historian or even by Josephus, who lived in the same area only decades later and had no problems with relating bad things Herod did. One would think that such a horrendous event might have gained the notice of more than one person (the author of the Matthew gospel) writing after the time it supposedly occurred. I say all this to explain my use of the word “supposed” when referring to the slaughter of the innocents. That said, it is also important to note that “The Roman Empire could not long survive an officially sanctioned level of barbarity that provided for the slaughter of entire populations of children” is not entirely accurate either, since the Roman Empire began only a few decades previous to the supposed massacre (with either the dictatorship of Julius in 44 Bc or the granting of the title Augustus by the Senate to Octavian in 27 BC) and yet lasted until 476 AD (or even 1453, if one includes the Eastern Roman Empire of the Byzantines). Thus, the Empire lasted much longer after the supposed massacre than it had existed prior to it. If we include the Roman Republic, not just an official Empire, then it began in 509 BC with the overthrow of the monarchy and ended in 476. So the supposed massacre took place essentially right in the middle. In either case, “the Roman Empire could not long survive” doesn’t quite fit the timeline. It either survived nearly as long as prior to the event or much longer, depending on how one defines Roman.
/rant off
LangkardQuote Reply
Langkard
Ok I know that you want to be precise and I don’t blame you, thats History but you need to remember that when most of the people say Roman Empire they normally are talking about the whole roman history (Kingdom of Alba Longa, Roman Kingdom, Roman Republic, Roman Empire, Western Roman Empire and Eastern Roman Empire/Byzantine Empire)
And again you’re right The Slaughter of the Innocents occurs only in one Gospel and it is not the reason of the downfall of the Roman Empire, but the essay is just using it as a comparison to the penultimate scene
William 1000Quote Reply
Thank you for the essay Ser.
I noticed the pauldron is the same one that Drogo’s bloodrider Qotho used to wear when watching the season 2 trailers. He was the one who pushed Daenerys to the ground and caused her premature labour in “Baelor”. Her taking it from him has something about assuming the strength of her husband in the wake of his death no?
owen parkerQuote Reply
I think I’m one of the few people who didn’t enjoy this essay. I have to say, I didn’t really learn anything new. It still felt like a recap rather than an analytical consideration of the themes and small details of the show. But then again, I’m not a big fan of recaps in general. I usually only read the EW one because it’s just too funny to miss. But I also recently saw a recap in io9 ( http://io9.com/5898234/on-game-of-thrones-knowledge-is-power-and-truth-is-slavery ) which I think did a much better job of analyzing the show, so I will probably add that to my list too.
InkaQuote Reply
owen parker,
Excellent observation. Greatly enjoying essay and all reactions to it. Really helping me with insights pertinent to books and HBO series! Have read Pearson’s essays elsewhere on the net and always am impressed by the level of his analysis And thoughtfulness (though sometimes wonder what Mr. Martin would say about our level of obsessiveness).
patchy faceQuote Reply
The Kingslayer,
I kind of just pictured a sword like the guy who competes in the tourney who lights his sword on fire. Haven’t read second book yet, so I am kinda glad I wasn’t disappointed.
Sha-na-naQuote Reply
William 1000,
Exactly. The essay is intended as an incitement to independent thought. It is not intended to serve as a history lesson. Nevertheless, Herod’s massacre ended up helping to plant the seeds that undermined the Empire from within; the Roman Empire eventually became the Holy Roman Empire, led by a well-entrenched aristocracy that embraced the religion that had been the source of Herod’s consternation in the early days of the promised Saviour. Whether the Slaughter of the Innocents is historical fact or religious fiction is immaterial, since it influenced thought from the moment of its inception. In the same way, the people of Westeros act on the basis of legends and tales that may or may not be true, but since these legends influence the disposition and actions of leaders, the truth value of the legends is immaterial. The legends are important regardless of what certain people in Westeros may believe about them.
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
owen parker,
Fascinating! I didn’t put the two events together. I’m going to be reviewing this tonight. Thanks for alerting me to this!
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
Inka,
Thank you for contributing to the discussion! I value your input and your ideas.
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
patchy face,
Thank you for your kind words. As for what GRRM would think, he’s already expressed shock and disbelief that so many fans have figured out some of the story elements he thought he had hidden very well. But I think we’re all safe here. GRRM has no idea I even exist!
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
BGAP,
My most recent Mad Men essay:
http://www.spoilertv.com/2012/03/water-bombs-and-kidney-beans-mad-men.html
My most recent Awake essay:
http://www.spoilertv.com/2012/04/flight-402-sideways-doppelganger-in.html
In general I am posting these at Spoiler TV (http://www.spoilertv.com) but I have been posting at other sites as well. Enjoy!
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
Pearson Moore,
Great essay, I definitely have to check out your season 1 meditations. I personally love discussion like these. One of my favourite books is Rhonda Wilcox’s “Why Buffy Matters: The Art of Buffy the Vampire Slayer”. Have you read it? It’s a great read, and makes you appreciate the series even more. Regarding GoT despite being an adaptation when certain television series provoke ruminations such as this then you know people like D & D must be doing something right.
I am curious, what was your opinion of “The North Remembers”?
Joshua TaylorQuote Reply
Joshua Taylor,
Joshua,
Thank you for your kind words. I have not read any of Wilcox’s stuff. If you’re into Buffy, probably the best book on the subject is “Bite Me” by my friend and fellow LOST fanatic, Nikki Stafford. You can purchase a copy of “Bite Me” here:
http://www.amazon.com/Bite-Me-Edition-Unofficial-Vampire/dp/1550228072/
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
A most interesting observation about Dany’s protective pauldron. When I saw it, I immediately thought of the falconer’s leather gauntlet, designed to protect the handler against the bird of prey’s formidable talons. I’m not sure we’ve seen the feet of these baby dragons, but if you’ve ever had your arm grasped by the jaws of a German Shepherd Dog or a tiger cub, or the talons of even a pre-adult raptor, you will know why boiled leather rather than an “ornamental towel,” with or without embroidered embellishments (which, btw, would have required boiled thread and homespun cloth) was the logical and practical choice for a “perch.”
DH87Quote Reply
Pearson Moore,
I have Bite Me. Loved it. But Wilcox’s book is better in my opinion.
Joshua TaylorQuote Reply
Thank you Pearson ( Moore ) for the insightful thoughts and musings. In what you
mention of ” Direwolves and Dragons remember… it’s humans that forget” call to
mind a significant point in GRRM books. Certain aspects of unchanging human nature
( greed, generosity, wisdom and ignorance ) are well developed by Martin but the
persistant supernatural ( existential) elements consistently remain with their
signature on everything. I can’t wait to read your upcoming essay in May 2012!
You also made comments of political assertions and Azor Ahai and the the distinction
between ” religious prophecy” as described in the books ( re: Thoros of Myr ), what
an interesting point. Thoros described Melissandre as a false prophet ( and sorceress?).
As I’m only at the end of book 4, I am still ascertaining certain truths and demonstrations
of mystical power as represented in ASOIAF. I looking forward to develop mine own
perceptions of her ( not so much the HBO version ), so far I don’t what to think of
the HBO version except that it made for very interesting TV. Have you considered
submitting essays/ synopsis as a form of Book Discussions ? Sorry I wrote so much
I actually had more to to say but I’m getting a little sleepy (:
WildSeedQuote Reply
Pearson Moore,
I understand your point. I just don’t agree that the slaughter of the innocents had any effect whatsoever on the Roman Empire. It can’t have. Since it wasn’t a historical event, it wasn’t commonly known outside the early Christian church, and only then after it first appeared when the gospel of Matthew was written sometime near the end of the 1st Century. It certainly can’t have had an effect prior to being written down. So now we’re into the 2nd Century. At that time, the story of the massacre might have attained common knowledge in the church doctrine; but the church itself was still nascent. So, common knowledge or not, the story can’t have had an effect until the church itself had an effect, or at least became more widely followed. So we’re now into the 3rd Century, when Constantine made it the official religion. Even then, it wasn’t widely practiced. Even Samaritans were more numerous than Christians inside the Roman Empire at the time of Constantine, with numbers nearing 1 million. But the Samaritans didn’t have an effect on the Empire. They pretty much ceased to exist with 100 years, except for a small community which still exists in the Levant.
I can accept that Christianity, and thus possibly (but only possibly) a story of a non-historical slaughter, had an effect on the Roman Empire sometime after the 2nd Century, at the earliest. By then, the Empire was already in steep decline. The decline had nothing to do with the slaughter of the innocents. Constantine accepted the Nicene Creed of the 1st Council of Nicaea. That only lasted until his death. By far the majority of Christians in the Empire remained Arianist, including the ruling family. Constantine II and Valens both followed Arianism. The slaughter of the innocents just can’t have had an effect, from a purely timeline standpoint. That is the case I’m strongly over-doing here. It just isn’t possible to make the point that the slaughter of the innocents had any effect at all on the decline of the Roman Empire.
Thus the analogy that the killing of the babies in King’s Landing will lead to widespread ill-feeling toward the King and the decline of the Seven Kingdoms doesn’t fit. It makes for a nice read, but it required a complete re-writing of the history of the Roman Empire and its conflation with Christianity in order to make the analogy. The killing of Robert’s bastard children might well have a deep and profound effect, but it isn’t analogous to the slaughter of the innocents because it might have such an effect. That’s my objection, really.
I realize that the above is nothing more than nitpicking. I’m a stickler for historical accuracy, even when part of the history involved is entirely fabricated, like the slaughter of the innocents. Playing fast and loose with facts leads to people not ever learning the real facts. It tends to put a burr up my butt. Thus my inclusion of the /rant and /rant off in my initial post. I apologize for dragging the discussion off into the wilds of my rant. Can’t help myself. I’m almost as big a fan of history as I am of GRRM’s books and this TV adaption of them.
I look forward to your next essay. I can’t promise to agree with everything; but I will try to not let historical inaccuracies get under my skin.
LangkardQuote Reply
Good essay, but as mentioned your dates on the Roman Empire are a bit off.
Also, Dany and the dragon shoulder pad issue – surely she is wearing a simple leather one because she doesnt have the equipment or the materials to make anything else??
Galway GoonerQuote Reply
Pearson Moore,
“Nevertheless, Herod’s massacre ended up helping to plant the seeds that undermined the Empire from within; the Roman Empire eventually became the Holy Roman Empire, led by a well-entrenched aristocracy that embraced the religion that had been the source of Herod’s consternation in the early days of the promised Saviour.”
Are you joking or what?
If this is your knowledge of world history this is beyond embarrassing!!!
It seems that you know absolutely nothing about history of roman empire…in my country with such statements you would not pass beyond 5th grade of school!
BolognaQuote Reply
Langkard,
Thumbs up for pointing this out – overly simple, inaccurate historical statements and comparisons make my skin itch :P
JBJBQuote Reply
Even as a Catholic theologian, I have to strongly protest your misuse of the slaughter of the innocents story, which, even if it did happen, clearly did not cause the fall of the Roman Empire. A casual historical mistake thrown in with such confidence that you are making a profound point undermines everything else in your essay.
I did not particularly enjoy the rest regardless. It was all a bit obvious; no special insights. And, for all that you claim you’re analysing the show rather than the books, there are myriad comments that seem influenced by what you’ve experienced in the books, even when that’s quite different in tone to what happens in the show, or the way in which those things happen. Sansa beaten daily by Joffrey? Says who? There’s no evidence for this in the show so far. Just one example of many.
That said, even though I am being very critical, I thank you for sharing the essay with us, as clearly many people did enjoy it and I hope they will enjoy your next ones too.
Siobhan MooneyQuote Reply
WildSeed,
Thank you for your kind response to my essay. I will be releasing weekly essays during the season but I will also be writing essays, such as the one on Melisandre, to be released during and after the season in book form. The in-season essay collections are called “Direwolves and Dragons”. The Season One collection, including 21 essays spanning the entire season plus essays on the history of Westeros, major themes of the series, the series thesis, and several character essays, is called “Game of Thrones Season One Essays”. The large collection at the end of Season Two will be similarly titled. All my Game of Thrones books are available at Amazon. Enjoy!
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
“Se non è vero è ben trovato”, like the italians (most fittingly) say….
The analogies are fun to read, just not that accurate, imo ;)
Definitelly more interesting than the average recap, at least in the sense that it produced even more interesting answers from the WiC readers (specially Langkards! U explained what I wanted to say in my first post much better that I ever could). After the stupid Rosgate this restored my faith in humanity hehe
Pau SorianoQuote Reply
Langkard,
Bologna,
William 1000,
Siobhan Mooney,
The historicity of the slaughter of the innocents in the Roman Empireis not the issue, it’s the more general theme. Some famously have argue that tyranny and a decline in morals did lead to the fall of the roman empire, but even if untrue it not relevant. It is silly criticizing minor historical details to show off and sidetracks from the main point. You might as well quibble that there were no Maegi offering three gifts to a baby, it does not change that Joffrey is a tyrant, not entirely unlike Nero or Caligula, nor Cersei entirely unlike Agrippina say and that their slaughter echoes the christian story.
The roman empire is perhaps the arch historical example of tyranny, and the ultimate secular prize (not unlike a certain seat of iron). The wrangling over it led to tumult, social instability, civil war and and declines in morals; all related themes.
A specific theme like a society that tolerates tyranny and allows the slaughter of innocents will not long survive such an officially sanctioned level of barbarity, seems closer to the concern. Perhaps it’s evidence of deep internal division and instability, if you consider things like persecutions, slavery, pogroms, genocides, and warfare as better historical examples, that just weren’t the one alluded to.
litte_birdQuote Reply
Siobhan Mooney,
Peace and all things good!
I have read some of your quite well formulated apologetic at several websites. I know I’m not alone in finding a measure of comfort in the knowledge that there are people of strong faith and rigorous education, like yourself, who are able to articulate and defend our religious tradition. The Holy Father could certainly use your analytic skill at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith; have you considered studying in Rome? Certainly an education at SJP provides quite a strong foundation for future work in apologetics and theology. My own education at the Denver Catholic Biblical School of the St. John Vianney Seminary cannot even compare. And I can assure you, making it through the entire four-year programme and earning the certificate says nothing about my ability but says much about my wife’s willingness to sacrifice on a daily basis, year after year, so that her husband might indulge his at times unreasonable academic proclivities.
I cannot claim expertise in theology or ecclesial history. I can say only that I have been, for most of my life, a critical student of those generally considered to be authorities in the theological tradition of our church. In my essays, I do not attempt to represent a mainline Roman point of view, or even a religious bias. My intention is merely to act as an irritant or stimulant to thought. I hope to provide the itch that causes others to think about scenes or events or themes from a point of view they might otherwise have left unexamined. Sometimes I go to extremes. In my professional life, I am considered an authority on separations science. When I lecture on chromatography, I enjoy taking the position that chromatographic behaviour is not founded on chemical interaction. I make this bold (most would say “uninformed”!) statement only after presenting about 15 minutes of proofs of the need for chemical interaction as requisite precursor to any kind of chromatographic interaction. But then I spend the next hour showing that indeed chromatography is not based on chemistry. My students end up with their jaws wide open because they find it completely mind boggling that such a fundamental truth could have eluded them all these years.
As I said, I am no expert in theology or the history of our faith. However, I do seek to boggle the mind–provide that itch that causes readers to think. In the case of the Slaughter of the Innocents, I said this: “The Roman Empire could not long survive an officially sanctioned level of barbarity that provided for the slaughter of entire populations of children.” I did not claim that the Slaughter of the Innocents caused the fall of the Roman Empire. If you attended SJP you surely were required to read Gibbon. He was a kind of unexamined anticlericalist, but he did make a cogent argument about the rise and fall of Rome. His thesis, of course, was that Rome deteriorated from within. One of the major causes of that deterioration, according to MP Gibbon, was disregard for human rights, as exemplified especially by the excesses of the Praetorian Guard. The Slaughter of the Innocents was a story that gained currency at least in the decade or so before Paul began his journeys. It was an especially strong tradition in Judea, and thus came to be recorded in the Gospel of the Jewish apologist, Matthew. My claim is not that this story–understood literally as Gospel truth by the growing numbers of adherents to the secret society of the fisherman (i.e., the Christian faith)–single-handedly caused the fall of the Roman Empire, only that it was a contributor to the feeling of the populace that their leaders were cruel men at times bent on inhuman barbarity.
Thank you for your comments. Thank you, too, for the spirit of charity with which you offered those comments, as evidenced by the kind words in your closing statement. Perhaps you will continue to believe that my words regarding the Slaughter of the Innocents were ill-informed or misplaced. I certainly appreciate and honour the validity of your claim, and I see much good in the underpinnings of your argument. But I stand by my statements in the essay, and in particular I see value in the way I approach questions of this type in their potential for stimulation of thought. Perhaps, even if we might disagree on this small matter, there is room in our tradition for respectful and charitable entertainment of ideas at odds with our own?
Pax et totum bonum,
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
Seems like I am the only who does not like the first 2 episodes of the second season. I only read the first 223 pages of the second book and they change too much of the story. Most of the scenes feel cheap and I feel that they did them in a hurry. There aren’t many long shots. Melisandre not convincing, even Tyrion is not acted as good as in the first season. Bottomline, the first season is much better. I just hope this serie does not end up like Heroes. Thank God there’s the books.
JudasQuote Reply
Howland Reed,
Howland – i look forward to your essay. I have no doubt the sort of essay you envision in this critique would be published by Winter is Coming. I hope you are willing to put yourself out there and look forward to a good read. Regards
TCQuote Reply
Nitpick: that should be ‘desert’, not ‘dessert’.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/desert
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dessert
Good analysis.
aldeQuote Reply
Judas,
Westeros.org. Go there. I think it will be right up your alley. :-)
Keep in mind that this series is not an adaptation of each consecutive book it is an adaptation of A Song of Ice and Fire as a whole.
No long shots? So the mountains of the North or the Red Waste aerial view of Dany and her party wasn’t a long shot? Not to mention the fantastic cinematography of King’s Landing, the North, Dragonstone, the improved score, the improved Lena Headey… The sets of Craster’s keep of the Dragonstone interior, the CGI. Alan Taylor’s superb direction….cheap??? Okay to each their own.
I get why some people don’ t like Carice, I think she’s fantastic personally.
And Heroes 2? Seriously? You should read the entire series of books first before passing judgment because the storylines do not exactly occur at the same time when you translate the POV structure to television. The reason season 1 translates well is because it’s a less complex story after book 2 the threads go off into another direction entirely and it’s harder to adapt.
Sorry you couldn’t enjoy it as much as me.
Joshua TaylorQuote Reply
Pearson Moore,
Greetings and thank you for your reply. I just ordered the “GoT essays” from Amazon
but discovered that ” Direwolves and Dragons” is only available as the Kindle version.
Is a written form in the works?
WildSeedQuote Reply
I was a little surprised by the sword scene. Just checked back in the books, and this is GRRM’s exact description:
I always figured the sword Stannis pulled out was coated in wildfire, like Thoros of Myr used in the tourney in AGOT. I can’t remember if that scene was included in the show, but I believe Thoros and his famous sword were mentioned at some point. I guess they can only spend so much on wildfire CGI… Later, I think the glamour Aemon talking about is because the dragons have returned, thus bringing magic back into the world. The pyromancers ask Tyrion if he’s heard of any dragons, since their spells are suddenly much more effective in ACOK. Mel also mentions in one of her conversations with John at The Wall that her powers are much stronger there, and talks about The Wall being one of the great ‘hinges’ of the world.
wonky kittenQuote Reply
WildSeed,
Thank you for your interest in my GoT books! The Game of Thrones Season One Essays is offered in both paperback and Kindle versions. The short Direwolves and Dragons booklets–each roughly a quarter the length of the GoTS1 Essays–are offered only in Kindle version. But if you purchase GoTS1 Essays you’re getting all the essays in the two Direwolves and Dragons books, plus an additional eight or nine essays–about twice as many essays as in the two D&D books combined. The D&D books are there just to give you a low-cost taste. Enjoy!
PM
Pearson MooreQuote Reply
The last part of the above is a much better handling of the issue, little-bird. Rather than making a spurious connection between the Roman Empire and an event which more than likely never happened, you have made a much more accurate general analogy about the conditions in the Roman Empire and those in Westeros. Your second and final paragraphs make the point without glaring historical errors. While not exactly the same point as the one made by Mr. Pearson, it is a good point.
Again, I did enjoy the essay even though I objected to the final analogy using the slaughter of the innocents. The study of the thematic elements is nicely done. I just think the last one went a bit too far and was untenable due to historicity problems.
LangkardQuote Reply
Joshua Taylor,
I do enjoy the books so much. That’s why I was so disappointed on the way they did to the story and the scenes. The first season was done so well and the second, well… Anyway, thank you for your response. We’ll just see what the (other) critics say about this season. I hope I am wrong. Have a good weekend.
JudasQuote Reply
Well this is super late and will probably not be read. I rarely go to these comment threads anymore because they’re usually filled with sexism/bigotry.
Anyway, a really thoughtful essay but I think the parts about Cersei and Joffrey are a little biased. No mention at all about Joff’s dad, the one who taught him that someone else runs the country while the king gets his way? (and I’m obviously talking about Robert here – the guy who was Joff’s example of kingship). You can’t blame Joff’s actions entirely on Cersei as she hasnt been his role model.
Anywho – good thoughts over all :)
MelarraQuote Reply