Here is Pearson Moore’s essay on episode 16, “The Old Gods and the New”.
Spoiler Note: This essay contains some backstory elements that have not yet been addressed on the show but are covered in the books.
Something Borrowed, Something Blue: A Second Look at Game of Thrones 2.06
by Pearson Moore
Some god old,
Some god new,
Some god borrowed,
Some god blue.
A boy, a girl, and the desire that binds them. These are the only necessary elements in any good romance. The single thing keeping lovers apart is their misunderstanding of each other. Roxanne doesn’t know of Cyrano’s love because he believes his nose repulses her, but love is not a function of physical beauty, and with his dying breath Roxanne discovers Cyrano’s deep and enduring affection. Love conquers all, they say, and even someone with as large a nose as Cyrano de Bergerac’s can discover enchantments of the heart.
Would that this were so. Romeo and Juliet’s love is not pure or true, and never will be. Neither the House of Montague nor the House of Capulet is to blame for two deaths in a crypt. If we believe the Bard wishes us to understand that the two houses share in the blame we are missing the point of this greatest of tragedies.
Three people, not two, are required at every wedding. Tonight we saw couplings strange and awkward, lusty and chivalrous, borrowed and blue. But every one of these couples looked up, sometimes as if startled, to see the third person standing in their midst.
Something Borrowed
“I’ve taken your castle. I’ve taken Winterfell. I took it. I’m occupying it. I sent men over the walls with grappling claws and …”
If not for Bran’s interruption, Theon would probably still be droning on about having taken the Stark castle. (“I stormed your castle, I triumphed over your guards, I own Winterfell, the castle belongs to me now, I own this land by right of conquest, Winterfell is mine, really, I took it, my men took it at my command, everything here is mine and …”)
The reason for Theon’s strange monologue should have been clear to us from the beginning, but the underlying cause became evident in subsequent scenes. Theon Greyjoy, we realised, was not responsible for the victory at Winterfell. That distinction belonged entirely to his capable lieutenant, Dagmer Cleftjaw. Theon borrowed from Cleftjaw the command to attack Winterfell, as we saw in earlier episodes.
When Ser Rodrik spit in Theon’s face, Cleftjaw informed Theon of the command he would have to give. “He must pay the iron price,” Cleftjaw said. Of course. Theon had half a mind to put Rodrik in shackles, but the problem with Theon is not drive or ambition, it’s the fact that he is not whole, that in fact he applies half a mind or less to the problems he confronts, and he is obliged to rely on those with fully expressed personalities to make decisions for him. He capitulates on every half-baked command or scheme his rudderless mind devises.
Theon acquiesces to Cleftjaw’s logic that nothing short of Rodrik’s death will re-establish the Iron Islander’s respect for him after Rodrik’s impudent challenge to Theon’s authority. Anything that anyone says that might be interpreted as casting doubt on any masculine quality Theon wishes to project will be interpreted in precisely that way. So it is that when Cleftjaw is ready to swing the blade to sever Rodrik’s head, for instance, Ser Rodrik reframes Theon’s authority in northern terms: “He who passes sentence should swing the sword, coward.” Theon understands this proclamation as a challenge, and he borrows Rodrik’s command, pushing Cleftjaw away and drawing his own sword.
The butchery that follows is not so much a result of Theon’s inability to maintain control as his inability to project a consistent message from a position of stability. He is unable to control not because he has some innate disability but because he lacks identity. He is neither Stark nor Greyjoy, neither leader nor follower, he bows neither to old gods nor to new. He is neither studied nor self-made. He is nothing, an empty shell, who must therefore yield to others’ commands and absorb them, borrow them, pretend they are his creations.
Osha came to Theon, not at his bidding, but at her insistence. “There are other ways to serve, my Lord,” she told him. “We know things, we free people. Other things. Savage things.”
The entire evening conformed to the plan she developed. As with every other situation calling for a decision or command from Theon, he allowed others—this time Osha—to make the commands for him. He merely borrowed them as his own:
“It comes at a price.”
“What do you want, then, other than your miserable life?”
“What all free people want: my freedom.”
“Well you shall have it then.”
He is not capable of his own decisions, even when it comes to something as simple as whether or not to sleep with someone. He knows only his desires. He suffers the illusion that when he dismisses the guard he is alone in the room with the woman he happens to desire at that moment. A third person occupies the room, though, whether he understands this or not. But without identity, he is not only incapable of rendering decisions, he is incapable of seeing. Blind to the third person, he plucks desired fruit from a tree he believes was planted for his pleasure.
Theon searched for ways to tell Bran that the castle was his not because he had taken it, but because he hadn’t. The castle doesn’t belong to Theon. He borrowed it.
Tonight’s episode was breathtaking. Plotting was fast, tight, and even. Every moment that might have been offered as a single-dimensional exposition of facts was instead masterfully converted into a multi-faceted feast of high drama. The most important scene came near the end, when Ygritte and Jon were alone, and she began grinding her hips, calling to Jon with the most ancient of temptations. They were not alone, though, and this time they both knew it. Nor was the grinding of hips an ancient temptation. Rather, it was a cultural statement, a matter open to discussion. Three people attended this meeting on the tundra. Tonight we will listen to what they said.
Something Blue
Her dress may be blue, but in discussing the “something blue” between King Robb and Lady Talisa Maegyr I am not thinking of her wardrobe choices.
“Lady Talisa.”
“I’m not sure I’m a lady; Westerosi customs are a still a bit foreign to me.”
“… A woman of noble birth is always called a lady.”
“Why are you so sure I am of noble birth?”
“Because it’s obvious.”
She wears royal blue—the bleu royal of the French tricolore—not outside, but inside, where it becomes obvious. It is the colour Robb Stark should be able to see. Not the red colour of ordinary nobility, but the blue of highest nobility. He is, after all, a king, and kings perceive and understand truths that evade ordinary mortals.
GRRM is calling Robb to the blue, but the young wolf is missing the mark in this scene. Someone like Theon Greyjoy will never be truly noble, because he cannot even see the colours of his own heart, let alone the colours inside another’s heart. Robb sees the royal blue inside Talisa, but a king is called to something more important than the mere ability to perceive. He must be able to wear the blue, it must fit him perfectly, if he is truly king.
Perhaps sometime this season we will hear tell of a “blue-eyed king” who casts no shadow but carries a red sword. We might imagine words such as these formed by Melisandre’s lips, for instance, but probably because of that “red sword”. What of the blue eyes?
Many characters have blue eyes, of course, but Stannis’ eyes, at least in the HBO adaptation, are more hazel than they are blue. Or does he wear royal blue inside, as Talisa does?
Blue is not ordinary, but in a sense exalted, especially in the world built by GRRM. We can look to the backstory of ASoIaF to understand something of the importance of the colour. This information has not yet been made a part of Game of Thrones, and perhaps it will never be incorporated into the story. But the idea of blue as sign of something extraordinary will help in building the case I am attempting to make in this essay, so I am going to spend a few paragraphs discussing its importance.
Probably most fans of the novels would say that the part of the backstory most relevant to current events concerns Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark. We learned a little of the story with Robert Baratheon and Ned Stark, in the Winterfell crypt at Lyanna’s statue. It was Rhaegar’s abduction of Lyanna, and her subsequent death at the hands of the Targaryens, that drove Robert into such a state of fury that he raised armies, killed Rhaegar with his own hands, destroyed the entire Targaryen family, and took the Iron Throne.
The backstory really began at a tournament called by King Aerys. Prince Rhaegar was expected to deliver into the hands of the prettiest girl at the tournament a garland of blue winter roses.
Wearing the black and red armour of House Targaryen, his breastplate encrusted with rubies, everyone expected Rhaegar to present the garland of blue winter roses to his wife, Elia Martell. Instead, he rode past the Targaryen stand without even giving his wife a glance. He stopped at the Stark seats, where he presented Lyanna Stark, Ned ’s young sister, with the blue wreath that designated her “queen of love and beauty” at the tournament.
This single incident, relayed in a sparing handful of short vignettes throughout the first novel of the series, carries enormous significance to fans of the novels. I doubt that my way of looking at those roses is in any way unique, but I will say that despite a couple dozen hours of research on this scene I have yet to read a single interpretation that comes close to the spin I’m about to put on the event.
I see the blue colour of the roses, the blue of Lyanna’s dress, and the blue blood of kings and queens in ASoIaF not as something exalted in the sense of being elevated above other things, but in the sense of being outside of, greater than, or foundational of lesser things. The distinction, I believe, is essential to the fullest understanding of ASoIaF and Game of Thrones.
We have already made the acquaintance of a blue-eyed man carrying a sword. In fact, we’ve seen him twice so far in GoT, north of the Wall on both occasions.
I don’t feel the blue eyes of White Walkers are coincidental, accidental, or arbitrary. I think the colour was chosen quite intentionally, and I believe the significance is the same as the meaning contained in the blue winter roses that Rhaegar presented to his beloved Lyanna.
I believe the significance George Martin wishes to attach to the colour blue is not the idea of exaltation or royalty necessarily, but an idea that, at least in Game of Thrones, transcends even royalty: Blue is a revelation of that which is primal. Blue is that which is at the periphery of the story, because it is foundational and not something to which we are normally allowed access. The colour appears most forcefully in the backstory—at the Tournament of Harrenhal, inside the Tower of Joy—because this is the foundation of the present story. The colour makes split-second appearances north of the Wall because the White Walkers (“Others” in the novels) somehow express another necessary primal aspect of the greater story.
When I hear of a blue-eyed man carrying a sword, then, I don’t first think of Stannis and his flaming sword and Melisandre’s proclamation that Stannis is the divine messiah, Azor Ahai, sent by the Red God himself. The first image I see on hearing these words is an apparition that goes beyond anything I can relate to past experience, and yet seems necessary to the story—in other words, the imagery is primal.
If Robb Stark is truly king he will of course be able to discern the truth of Talisa Maegyr’s nobility, “because it’s obvious.” Yes. But he must be able to move beyond that, to discern that which is necessarily primal. That’s always the objective in Game of Thrones, and those who play without catching sight of the necessary and the primal will never have a chance of winning the game.
So, the questions King Robb really should be asking centre on the true nature of Talisa. Who is she, really? Why is she here? How can this particular person help Robb become a better king?
Catelyn knows immediately, even without hearing any of the woman’s history, that Robb has lost focus, he is not posing the proper questions.
“I’ve missed you,” Robb said to his mother.
“Yes, you look positively forlorn.” [She didn’t even attempt to hide the sarcasm!]
“You surprised me, that’s all. I’m glad I could see you today.”
“I wish that you were free to follow your heart.”
“I know.”
“You’ve inherited your father’s responsibilities. I’m afraid they come at a cost. You are promised to another—a debt that must be paid.”
“I haven’t forgotten.”
I have said a few times that a third person is present in each situation involving would-be lovers. Based on Catelyn’s words of wisdom to her son, we might understand her to mean that Walder Frey was the third party whose needs had to be considered—he was the third person. After all, Robb had promised to marry one of Lord Walder’s daughters in exchange for the use of his bridge. But I don’t think Walder Frey is the third person in this case. If we wish to understand the danger of Robb’s amorous overtures toward Lady Talisa, we should consider the case of Joffrey Baratheon and his impending union with Sansa Stark.
Something New
Ah, the happy couple. The young lovebirds.
We know this marriage will never be. We know Sansa is tolerated at court only to the extent that she serves as reciprocal payment for the life of Ser Jaime Lannister, currently enduring the rain and cruel elements every evening in the cell just outside King Robb’s tent. But even if she were not Ser Jaime’s ransom, even if she could become Joffrey’s wife, we know they could never be happy. Joffrey is a jerk, of course. But why is he a jerk?
He is not noble, one might say. He can’t be noble because “he’s a bastard,” as one of his subjects yelled during the courtyard riot scene. But we ought to recognise immediately the faulty nature of this assessment. Much of the story so far has focussed on the necessary and exalted nature—the primal nature, if you will—of cripples, bastards, and broken things. Jon Snow has a noble heart and noble bearing despite (or maybe because of) his identity as a bastard. Tyrion Lannister is a bastard because “all dwarfs are bastards in their fathers’ eyes,” yet Tyrion has a noble heart and noble bearing, too.
We understand the need to refine the connection between the primal and the broken, though. Viserys Targaryen, Daenerys’ older brother, was a cruel and selfish jerk much in the mold of Joffrey Baratheon, yet he was in many ways a member of the Sisterhood of the Damned, as Daenerys was. What set these two boys apart? Why did they not claim full membership in the humble association of cripples, bastards, and broken things? Why must Joffrey receive his humility in the form of accurately aimed horse apples?
[Tyrion said the facial wound to Joffrey’s pride was inflicted by a cow pie. I hate to differ with someone as well educated at Lord Tyrion Lannister, but the object that hit King Joffrey was not a cow pie. It may have been a horse apple—a very fresh horse apple—but it definitely was not a cow pie!]
I believe the problem is simply that Joffrey and Viserys did not wish to acknowledge their humble nature. Viserys insisted on a golden crown, and he got it. Joffrey insists on being above other people, and I have to believe his vision of himself will likewise be given full expression by those around him. The courtyard riot was a definite sign of the people’s true feelings toward their king, and if they have their way, his head will surely end up adorning the end of a pike; he will, in the end, find himself elevated above other people.
The problem began three generations ago, as we learned this evening. Tytos Lannister, Tywin’s father, “was good, but weak. He nearly destroyed the Lannister house and name. He loved us.” But love, in Tywin’s estimation, was not enough. Rather than loving his children, then, Tywin taught them strength. Be strong, keep House Lannister strong, he taught them. Cersei and Jaime did as they were told, and when their father wasn’t looking they sought love between themselves. The result of that twisted love and focus on keeping the house strong was the two-legged monster currently occupying the Iron Throne.
I don’t believe Joffrey’s inability to become intimate is a result of any lack of love. The problem is an inability to recognise his humble state. All human beings share the ability to see themselves as dependent, contingent creatures, but much of this ability was removed from Joffrey at an early age, with daily instruction in bending others’ desires, needs, and even perceptions to whatever whim he conceived at that moment. In Episode 1.03, for example, Cersei taught Joffrey to see reality creatively:
Cersei: You killed the beast. You only spared the girl because of the love your father bears her father.
Joffrey: I didn’t.
Cersei: When Aerys Targaryen sat on the Iron Throne your father was a rebel and a traitor. Someday you’ll sit on the throne and the truth will be what you make it.
That is, Joffrey could tell the world that he had killed Arya’s direwolf because as the king’s son he was entitled to make history conform to his vision. Robert Baratheon was the same man before and after the fall of Aerys Targaryen. Before the fall, Robert was traitor. After the fall, Robert was king. Truth is a matter of royal decree. Joffrey had only to conform to the superficial expectations of his people.
Joffrey: Do I have to marry her?
Cersei: Yes. She’s very beautiful, and young. And if you don’t like her you only need to see her on formal occasions.
Joffrey heard fifteen years of this kind of talk from his mother, every day, whenever they shared time together. Not only would Joffrey never have a sense of himself as an ordinary, humble person, he would not even enjoy the privilege of understanding what reality was. The only reality he need ever concern himself with was whatever fantasy world he wished to construct for himself.
The characteristic shared in common among the wretched members of the Sisterhood of the Damned is that they not only have a keen sense of harsh reality, they have at least fleeting insight into the profound underpinnings of life. By his upbringing, Joffrey will be forever ignorant of these insights. Viserys missed out on these insights, too, though in this case his pride seems to have been the primary cause of his blindness.
Something Promised
There are always three people at any valid wedding. This is true regardless of the religious tradition to which one adheres. It is true in every culture, in every place, in every time. Even if you skip over the religious mumbo-jumbo and just go to the courthouse, fill out a form, and pay a fee (Presto! You’re married!), you’re still appearing before a third person.
In the tradition I try to maintain in my life, the bride and groom are called the ministers of the sacrament. They are the “active principles” of the wedding ceremony. The guy standing between them—a priest or deacon in my faith tradition—is not the presider. He does not officiate. All he does is read the prayers, ask questions, and ensure some adherence to ritual. He does have one other very important function, though.
One can be validly married in many religious traditions without any formal ritual at all. People have been officially and validly married over the phone. If this is true, why must that third person be there at all? Even if some formal ritual were required, couldn’t the bride and groom learn the ritual and then carry it out themselves? Why invite some guy with a bad haircut to stand between the two lovers and read from some old book?
The key statement the guy with the bad haircut gets to make is this:
“If anyone knows of any reason why these two should not be wed, speak now or forever hold your peace.”
The idea is that marriage is not free. There are valid reasons why two people should not be wed. The two people deciding to spend their lives together as one must pay a minimum price. They owe the community, represented by the priest or deacon or justice of the peace, a commitment. They must demonstrate responsibility toward the greater community. This responsibility can be understood in terms of service, but for the purposes of this essay I’m going to frame the idea as humility. Marriage is not a means of setting apart, but a means of embedding into the greater community. It is an acknowledgement of contingency, humility, dependence on other human beings. The guy with the bad haircut is there, most of all, to ensure that the couple understand they are not alone, that they are supported, and that the community expects certain things of them, too. The bride and groom make promises to each other, but they make a promise to the community, too.
In the context of GoT, the idea of humility is transformed into the notion of awareness. A union might be valid without deep awareness of the primal nature of life, but the most effective unions will be based on this profound insight into the ways of the world.
Something Primal
I have to confess to a bit of foolishness. I am from northern lands similar to those Jon Snow grew up in, but for several decades I have chosen to take my vacations in the very far north, in darkest winter, in a tent. I have pedaled my bicycle through fifteen centimetres of fresh fallen snow in the wilderness of Northwestern Ontario. I have ventured onto the thick ice of Great Slave Lake in Northwest Territories, and meandered farther north. I have pitched my nylon hovel on the treeless tundra and endured gales I was sure would rip my tent to shreds. I spent an especially brutal night inside a double sleeping bag rated to -40 degrees, and could not sleep through the cold.
I felt a kinship tonight with Qhorin Halfhand when he lectured Jon on the trail of Mance Rayder’s scouts. I feel on some of those cold, northern nights, struggling to keep my blood pumping under conditions close to the limits of human survival, I might have gained a glimpse into some of Halfhand’s trials.
“You can’t tame a wild thing,” Halfhand said. “Can’t trust a wild thing. Wild creatures have their own rules, their own reasons, and you’ll never know them. Start thinking you know this place and it will kill you. We’re at war. We’ve always been at war. It’s never going to end, because we’re not fighting an enemy—we’re fighting the north, and it’s not going anywhere.”
That is, Jon is joining a battle against a condition (the north), not an enemy. The north is not an enemy, but a nasty condition, a brutal environment to be endured. But the north is full of creatures—wild things—that are a kind of animated version of the primal brutality of the elements. When you pitch your tent north of treeline, you have a good bag, plenty of fuel for your stove, and plenty of bullets for your rifle. You set little cans and strings around your tent, because you need time to get that rifle out and shoot the polar bear before she makes a meal of you.
Primal reality is not an enemy. It’s just reality. It’s the deepest reality there is. When I see the White Walkers, I’m guessing I look at them in a way that is probably different than the way most people see them. To me, they’re kind of like those polar bears. Polar bears are not inherently evil. There’s nothing evil about a polar bear wanting to eat me for dinner. That’s just the way she is, the way she was built. It’s the way of life and death and survival in the very far north.
I have a keen sense, then, of this idea that Jon Snow is fighting a condition of which “wild things” are merely an animated manifestation. “Start thinking you know this place and it will kill you.” If you do some of the things I’ve done you need to cultivate an attitude of vigilant respect for the extreme possibilities of the environment. If you lose that respect, you’ll probably die.
Why fight it?
I think this is the question Jon Snow posed tonight. There are several possible responses. It’s hard to imagine camping on the tundra without a rifle. You just can’t walk up to a polar bear and work out a peace treaty. She might be amused for a few seconds, but she’s still going to eat you for dinner. Reality is what it is. You can’t spin it as Joffrey’s mother taught him.
But there is a certain sense in which Jon’s question has enormous merit. The wildlings are not fighting the north, not in the same way that the men of the Night’s Watch fight. And if you give some thought to the question, you realise it can be seen in the light of common knowledge. We all understand the truth that we can die at any moment. The heart can stop, the brain can suffer an embolism, you can fall in the shower or get hit by a car. Life can end without warning, or it can be the final result of years of unrelenting, inhuman suffering. The reality undergirding all this is that cruel, primal nature surrounds us at all times, not only in environments akin to those north of the Wall.
The question is worth exploring. I believe Jon first posed the question when he raised Longclaw over Ygritte’s neck—and brought the blade down onto the rock in front of her.
Something Old
She moved her hips to and fro. The movement was obvious, instinctual, tantalising. But it was the most meaningful event we witnessed this evening.
The movement was not intended to seduce or tease. That was not its purpose, and that is not the way Jon understood it. When Ygritte moved her hips she was inviting Jon, but she was merely continuing the dialogue he had initiated when he chose to spare her life. She was inviting him into conversation. She was making a playful statement of the truth that had first attracted Jon and caused him to put the question.
Why fight it?
The wildlings did not fight. They went with the flow of life and death and survival, they didn’t put themselves in opposition to it. Could it be that the Free People have knowledge of “savage things” that has eluded the “civilised” people south of the Wall? What did they understand about the North that Jon did not?
The wildling culture, we already know, could be considered in many ways superior to the society built by the Night’s Watch. Halfhand disparaged the wildlings as “girl f—ers”, but these words were definitely sour grapes, especially coming from the man who laughed at his own pearls of wisdom as “Just words … to keep us a little warmer in the night … make us feel like we got a purpose.” Wildlings existed comfortably at the very frontiers of human survival. With cold and dark forces surrounding them, they lived on. How could they exist in easy harmony with such forces? Clearly they were not fighting, but they were as human as Jon and therefore subject to the same undesirable outcomes that are the necessary result of losing deep-felt respect for the harsh north.
More than mere humanity and susceptibility to nature unite Jon and Ygritte. The wildlings, we know from Osha, worship the same gods. The Old Gods. That’s the “something old” these people from very different cultures share.
I know Jon felt temptation, and perhaps he will at some point yield to the thoughts that surely filled his mind as soon as Ygritte began her hip gyrations. But the greater questions will continue to fill his mind, and will not be satisfied by any sexual act.
Here, on a rock slab protected from the wind by a wall of stone, is the beginnings of an answer to Jon Snow’s question. “We’ll stay warmer if we stay close.” It’s a statement of basic human necessity. In the south, where people can live by pretense and dreams, societies can pretend there are heroes and self-made men, that one can live in solitude. In the far north men in solitude will not live, but die.
There is only one god, Syrio Forel said. Here, on the tundra, it would be tempting indeed to believe Syrio was correct, that the one true god is death. But the true god is not death, not the God of Light proposed by Melisandre, not the Drowned God of the Iron Islands, not the Seven Gods of the southern kingdoms. The one true god is that entity which sits even now with Jon and Ygritte, the same god that sits in judgment of King Robb and Lady Talisa. We have not been given a name for this god, but we know its demand. The single demand is to drop down on bended knee and acknowledge dependence. Humility is the only route to the enlightenment enjoyed by those abased creatures of the Sisterhood of the Damned. Humility, as I said two sections ago, can be understood as service—a promise to self, spouse, and community. Humility is a promise to this unnamed, unseen god who determines the height and width and depth of brutal, primal reality.
Robb’s promise then, first of all, is not to Walder Frey, but to the primal god—to the forces that determine his place in GRRM’s world. Out of that humble awareness must derive the lesser promise he makes to the Lord of the Twins (Frey’s bridge). Jon’s first promise must be to this primal god. His commitment to the Night’s Watch, after all, was made only after he bowed down on bended knee before the Old Gods at the weirwood north of the Wall.
Tonight’s episode was the most dynamic, exciting sixty minutes of television I have seen since last season. I can’t wait until next week!
An Announcement from Winter Is Coming
Pearson Moore has graciously decided to withdraw his essays from WinterIsComing.net. Pearson felt (and I agree) that the discussion generated from his essays was not a positive one and we both agreed that it would be best if we part ways. For those who are fans of Moore’s work, you can continue to read his Game of Thrones essays on his own website, WinterfellKeep.com.
We may not have an essay feature for the last four episodes of this season, unless I can find someone to step in immediately. If anyone wishes to try their hand at a thematic analysis of episodes of Game of Thrones, send your request via our Contact page and include in the request an essay on episode 16 as a sample of your work. I will evaluate all the submissions and decide whether to bring on a new essayist.
I thank Pearson for his contributions to the site and wish him the best. And thanks to all who responded to his essays, whether in criticism or praise, in a reasoned and polite manner. We continue to strive to make this the best Game of Thrones site on the web and highly value the input and feedback from our readers. Thank you.
Loading ...
191 Comments
blah
ChristyQuote Reply
Your opening line killed it for me. Maybe 2 people that love each other is all that is needed for a “good” romance. As a gay man I couldn’t disagree more with your wording.
JonQuote Reply
Lots and lots of words. A point was a bit harder to locate.
MikeQuote Reply
Not to hate on these, but I fail to see why WiC is giving up blog space to Mr Moore’s essays. Is Mr Moore the official essayist of WiC? I hope not. I would rather have more editorial material from WiC, FaBio and the others, or by some new guy or gal they recruit. Moore’s work simply doesn’t fit into the style or feel of this site, IMHO. I’d rather have hundred indigo rants than one more Moore. And yes, I know I can simply skip these essays.
Ser LurkalotQuote Reply
Nice essay. Loved the discussion on the color blue and it’s connections to royalty. It’s a shame the violet eyes of the Targaryan’s didn’t work on screen. GRRM does put a lot of clues in eye color. I’ve read a couple times where he regrets this because now it’s hard to keep track of with side characters where eye color isn’t important, but he must keep track of them as well so he doesn’t contradict himself.
It continues to baffle me how book readers get Ygritte’s motivations wrong. It was not Jon’s sparing of her life that attracts Ygritte to Jon. We see it as noble, but to a wildling it is a sign of weakness. Wildlings value bravery and strength. She is attracted to Jon because in her mind Jon stole her. Without knowing it, Jon did the equivalent of giving her an engagement ring by chasing her down and tying her up. He is brave and strong enough to keep her captive, that is what attracts her and is the key stone motivator going forward for this character.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
Jon,
Why do some LGBT people insist on interpreting absolutely everything as a personal insult toward them? *Facepalm*
VirtusQuote Reply
I enjoy your essays Mr Pearson Moore, keep up the good work. Some people only criticise but fail to provide anything to the community. If you don’t like it just skip it.
daprosinikQuote Reply
I’m not quite sure whether this is true.
HuckQuote Reply
Huck,
It isn’t true, even in Christian tradition. But what does history matter when one has a point one wishes to make?
CarolQuote Reply
For the sake of anyone who has not read the books, someone please put a warning on this- it refers in detail to things that have not been mentioned on the show.
ShinyteapotQuote Reply
Ser Lurkalot,
I completely agree.
daprosinik,
I don’t skip them because I am an eternal optimist. I comment because I seek improvement (damn that optimism!). I agree, however, that substantive criticism, like fuelpagan, provided above, provokes a more interesting discussion.
AssuntaQuote Reply
Ser Lurkalot, it’s just another way to engage with the show and stoke discussion. Neither myself nor FaB or any of the others really have the time to write in-depth analysis of each episode, so when Pearson offered his essays, I thought it would be something worthwhile to publish here.
Shinyteapot, thanks for the heads up. I added a spoiler note to the post.
Winter Is ComingQuote Reply
Targaryens did not subsequently kill Lyanna…
Yeah noQuote Reply
Assunta,
*blushes*
Thanks.
If PM had just gotten Ygritte’s motivation correct, it would have tied in beautifully with the other points of the section.
Like:
And the section where he discusses the harsh realities of the Northern environment.
The essay was working so well to make this great point about the Ygritte character and just fumbled it.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
As with anything in life, there are those things that are worthwhile to some and not to others. The secret is to look for the worthwhile nuggets and be humble enough to accept those nuggets as a revelation to oneself as an opportunity for self improvement, or means of self awareness.
So, by instantly disregarding Mr. Moore’s essay as blah, or too wordy or anti-gay, you have each cast yourselves into the same catagory as Viserys,Joffery and Theon; unwilling to become self-aware and humble as a means of self-improvement.
Open up your hearts and minds, maybe you’ll learn something.
The Mourning StarQuote Reply
What a load of crap.
Too long, too boring and no real insights.
If these ramblings (I dont class them as essays) are to continue can we at least condense them down a bit so they can be at least be consumed in a single sitting? I swear that by the time I got to the end of the piece I actually forgot where I was!
I’m all for debate and alternative insights into the books/tv show but really these pieces simply reek (it rhymes with meek) of someone who loves to hear themself talk!
like the White Walkers have blue eyes – big f@%king deal!! They come from the cold so blue eyes makes sense to me. Let’s not have a few thousand word on it!
And I know I dont have to read them but that shouldnt mean I can’t comment.
Enough already!!!!
Galway GoonerQuote Reply
Indeed and thanks for the reminder. While I found the work, on whole, to be nothing special, his exposition of Theon’s inner struggle was as accurate and well stated as any I’ve seen.
MikeQuote Reply
The Mourning Star,
Fair do’s, I was just “blahing” to discourage “firstery”, which really gets my goat.
I personally don’t like these essays (so I don’t read them) but I wasn’t intending to label Mr Moore’s work as “Blah”. Sorry if that’s how it was taken.
His ramblings are as valid as anyone else’s at the end of the day.
Peace to all, (seems like a foreign concept around here these days)
ChristyQuote Reply
Lovely essay. Totally agree with @fuelpagan.
On a side note- my friends have created their own panel show celebrating Game of Thrones, called Talk of Thrones, it’s hilarious. This edition is dedicated to the very episode in question
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GiZA0AFD6co
anspringgirlQuote Reply
Can we please just comment on the content of this essay? You’ve had six weeks now to decide whether these essays are for you. If they are not, then please move on and let those who would like to discuss the points that Pearson has raised do so in peace. Thank you.
Winter Is ComingQuote Reply
Yes. What’s so difficult about writing “two people and the love that binds them.”
Yellow DogQuote Reply
I don’t usually feel like I “get” these essays- I think the organization and length is a barrier), or maybe just because I’m a scientist and have always struggled with literature and interpretation. However I do appreciate the effort in the essays and will continue to read them.
For the sake of backing up my criticism, a few specific points:
- I don’t agree that the purpose of a wedding officiator is to ensure that the wedding will benefit the community. That’s one possible purpose for asking
but surely another main reason is solely for the individuals getting married?
- Even if every marriage required 3 people to be present, I think the author contradicts himself with who the third person is for Robb/Talisa. He concludes that it’s the primal god of dependence on another person or on society, and thus humility. But doesn’t that bring us back to Walder Frey? Robb has been and continues to depend on Walder Frey’s support, so from this build-up IMO, Walder Frey fits better than the unknown primal god.
- It’s not clear how Theon fits in with the conclusions. It threw me off to start off with Theon/Dagmer and Theon/Osha, and not to tie in the “primal god” and humility back to that storyline.
LadyBrienneQuote Reply
Because in defining “love” as “boy and girl” it is, indeed, a personal insult.
And I say that as a proud hetero.
Yellow DogQuote Reply
I would love to buy into the essay but find his efforts to make his points fit the cliche’ saying to be stretching it beyond reason. So, I tried, gave up. A good essay keeps the focus on point and with minimum verbiage to make his point. If that makes me Joffrey, so be it. Off with his head. ;)
denise:)Quote Reply
Pretty sure he says “goat f—ers”.
BillowedQuote Reply
It’s nice to have some essays that critically examine the show.
It’s also nice when those essays come from a background of deep familiarity with the source material.
It’s really nice when they’re not garbage.
This essay was largely garbage.
Don’t ramble. Tie your observations together with a theme that you can stick to; the author helps nobody when he tries to accomplish too much in scope and content.
If we’re going to have essays posted that provide a critical and in-depth analysis of GoT episodes, we’re going to be dealing with something that is produced under-the-gun. Two days is not enough time to produce anything of note that could not be found browsing the nitpicking posts by the “pros” at the asoiaf.westeros.org GoT forums.
Either we resign ourselves to waiting, perhaps, a week for an edited, streamlined essay, or we find others with the requisite time, expertise, and talent to produce something of which we can be proud.
As I’ve written: the effort and dedication is appreciated. The end result is less-than-stellar and smells slightly of pretension, just like my comment.
Just some thoughts.
Kof-PieQuote Reply
I wish these essays were more like the GoT essays on the Atlantic. Those are fantastic. And brief. Alyssa Rosenberg’s essays are perhaps even radical because she analyzes the power structures within Westeros. It’s very realpolitik, and I love it. PM’s essays are waaaay too psychoanalytical, indulgent, and laden with conservatism for my tastes. His attitudes about heterosexual marriage don’t really belong in an essay like this, especially when his whole thesis is based on the scenes where three people talked to one another.
MegQuote Reply
I want to like these essays, but I have to agree with the naysayers here: these essays are too long and too scattered. Too often the author looks too deep into something and finds something that really isn’t there.. or makes connections that don’t make a whole lot of sense. Worse yet, he seems to overlook some really great parallels or themes that are presented in the episode. At the end of the day it just feels like the author is trying to hard. I commend the effort though and I don’t think WiC should take them down.
Honestly, I’d like to take a crack at a GoT essay. I like to think of myself as a fairly competent writer, though I don’t think I’d have the time or desire to do an essay for each episode.
VanderhookQuote Reply
I don’t mind that the essays are largely much ado about nothing, simply because there are several valid and well-written points strewn throughout. Again, I made this observation earlier, but perhaps more focus on how the technical aspects of the production inform the themes and motivations of the characters and the writers & directors might be something worth attempting.
As for the criticisms’ of the article; everyone has given clear reasoning and provided alternatives, so I won’t say that they aren’t valid or don’t deserve to be heard, but these essays more than likely take a decent amount of work, so if your only point in commenting is to be derisive of the article then maybe it’s best that nothing be said at all. Or, you know, you guys could write your own analysis and show Pearson Moore the error of his ways…
Another nice article, P.M. Again, my main criticism is that you don’t touch upon how the lighting, framing, or mise en scène (etc.) are used as a tool to help visually strengthen the thematic undercurrent of the story or the players within it. That may not, however, be something you’re overly familiar with and/or comfortable writing about, which is understandable.
Pastor_of_MuppetsQuote Reply
We need to find Larry Williams
T-GoodQuote Reply
” it’s the fact that he is not whole” “He is nothing, an empty shell” ,”He knows only his desires”
Nice way to put Theon into words. He really knows nothing but his desires. Poor brainless Theon.
andreaQuote Reply
Yup.
LexQuote Reply
Yet again another brilliant essay. The comments on this site are beginning to gain notoriety as the worst “fan” base ever next to the Star Wars community in terms of sour attitudes.
The Onion KnightQuote Reply
Like seeing the Virgin Mary in burnt toast. I don’t really agree with most of the allegories and connections in this essay. I’m trying to be positive, but somehow this essay makes me long for Haiku Hodor.
purplejillyQuote Reply
I admit, I’m a little puzzled by some behaviors. If you don’t like something, don’t read it. “Space” is pretty infinite on blogs, so this essay is preventing something else from appearing. Not that feedback and rebuttals aren’t interesting or welcome, but if his style is not to your taste, I don’t see the point in reiterating that every single week.
Ours is the FuryQuote Reply
Winter is deleting critical comments. Very nice.
Mr. Bob DobalinaQuote Reply
No, actually, I deleted your post not because it was critical but because it crossed a line. Since there are many critical comments in this posting, I think it’s clear we’re not deleting comments that are merely critical. Let’s keep it civil. Thanks.
Ours is the FuryQuote Reply
What crossed the line exactly?
Mr. Bob DobalinaQuote Reply
It seems my comment was deleted too. All I did was post the definition of the word “turgid,” for obvious reasons. (Look it up everyone, I’m not allowed to post it).
Sir PounceQuote Reply
Did no one else notice that Ygritte was probably moving in an attempt to loosen the ropes around her legs, while perhaps taking advantage of the fact that the seemingly seductive nature of the motion would distract Jon from its true purpose?
John MarquisQuote Reply
There have been many, many faiths and cultural practices throughout history that required only two people to marry themselves. Two dear friends of mine are marrying themselves this weekend in a Quaker ceremony. Your opinions are your own, but at least get your facts correct.
CanaryQuote Reply
John Marquis,
Yes, absolutely. I thought the scene was shot in a way that drew attention to that detail. I don’t understand how anyone could miss it.
Sir PounceQuote Reply
Ours is the Fury,
To me, I find it embarrassing that the blog is giving voice to this kind of empty blather. It makes me not want to visit here. I have already stopped following this blog via my own because my eyes roll out of my head every time this guy’s posts show up, uncut, on my reader. “Don’t like it, don’t read” is fine and all, but you should realize you’re alienating visitors by giving this kind of empty content a stage.
CanaryQuote Reply
OOOORR sometimes it’s just crap. One can have an open mind AND admit something is crap. The two aren’t mutually exclusive.
EdQuote Reply
Canary,
And censoring people who call it out for being awful.
Sir PounceQuote Reply
Canary,
And yet they allow your “empty content” to be posted here just the same…
Pastor_of_MuppetsQuote Reply
Pastor_of_Muppets,
You want to point to the essay I’ve written that’s been given pride of place on this blog? Go on. I’ll wait.
CanaryQuote Reply
For those defenders of Mr. Moore who say that instead of criticizing the essays those who dislike them should stop commenting or reading let me offer an alternative:
WIC Fires PM. PM Continues writing his ‘essays’ and posting them on his website and those who like them can go read them there.
My criticism at this point is directed at WIC and not Mr. Moore whom I believe to be beyond redemption as a writer based on his inability to listen to several very constructive bits of criticism.
I care about this website a lot. For me, it has been a source of daily enjoyment for a while now. The problem then arises out of the fact that PM’s content is so sharply divergent in quality from everything else on this site. PM’s essays bring down the value and the cultural cache of this site and that makes me sad. If the New York Times started publishing regular essays by inept writers I would say the same. OF COURSE I have the freedom not to read but there is a degree to which this site is a totality and having to break it up into acceptable and unacceptable content in terms of quality is frustrating and colors the entire experience of the the site negatively. I am fighting for the quality of my beloved WIC even if WIC himself has gone lax in his quality control. I sympathize with WIC’s desire to grow the cite and produce more content, as evident in his excellent additions of Fabio and others, and I appreciate that there is no time to do in-depth essays by yourself, but in this one instance I believe it is time to admit that a mistake was made. PM does not match the standards of quality established by this site. Let’s terminate this engagement. Perhaps WIC could reach out to Myles McNutt or others who could, and do, produce quality essays and parterre with them. It would increase everyone’s readership. Pearson Moore’s sub par amateur efforts have the opposite effect.
Oh and RE: the ‘labor intensive’ argument: a nonsense if I ever heard it. Making McDonald’s burgers is labor intensive, AND a lot of people like them, but they are still poison for your body.
Howland ReedQuote Reply
Howland Reed,
THIS. Exactly what you said. This is the point. These essays are terrible and have no place on a site that generally has fairly good content.
Sir PounceQuote Reply
god these essays are so full of tgemselves.. GRRM should smack you upside tge head for your verbose nonsense thouroughly lacking in points. Please stop posting these
superkickQuote Reply
Dear WiC.net,
Please host an essay writing event where people can write their own essays with their ‘superior’ writing styles and lack of turgidity, then open them up for public disembowelment.
Perhaps some of you need to understand the idea that just because you can comment doesn’t mean you have to comment. Having a disagreement with a particular point made (or not made) is different than pointing out your distain for a writing style.
Argue the content, not the method.
The Mourning StarQuote Reply
Thanks for your thoughts, folks. I will take them under consideration.
Winter Is ComingQuote Reply
You mean like, THIS content:
“Perhaps sometime this season we will hear tell of a “blue-eyed king” who casts no shadow but carries a red sword. We might imagine words such as these formed by Melisandre’s lips, for instance, but probably because of that “red sword”. What of the blue eyes?
Many characters have blue eyes, of course, but Stannis’ eyes, at least in the HBO adaptation, are more hazel than they are blue. Or does he wear royal blue inside, as Talisa does?”
EdQuote Reply
If this is not mental masturbation, than I don’t know what is. Ponderous is an understatement.
LanaQuote Reply
Jon,
As a straight woman, I could not agree with you more. My feathers ruffled at that (and many others featured in this “essay”) assertion.
LanaQuote Reply
Howland Reed,
So WiC.net is your site that you need to fight for the quality thereof? Umm, before you start criticizing the quality of work one does, you should probably consider using a spell check or at least a dictionary prior to posting.
One other thing, some of you seem intent on criticizing Mr. Moore’s mental capacity to write an essay; perhaps you should try using your snappy wit and critical creativity to produce something better, I’m sure that if WiC.net thinks it’s good enough they will post it…I’m thinking it won’t happen…because it wouldn’t be good enough.
The Mourning StarQuote Reply
Canary,
I didn’t say anything about you writing an essay, but rather your comments in this talk-back (and mine, and everyone elses’). Little slow on the up-take, I gather.
This place has slowly turned into one of the rudest, most self-centered places I’ve ever visited with regards to fandom. Winter, whether or not a select group of people like Pearson’s essays or not, I don’t think it de-values this site to continue to post them here any more than some of the people in the comments section de-value this site through their ignorance and lack of tact. We all know members of the production and cast visit here occasionally, and personally it’s a bit embaressing to even be included among the hardcore fan-base of this show (and ergo, the books) who don’t have any respect for the work someone puts into something (whether they like it and/or agree with it, or not), which I am simply by virtue of posting here.
Perhaps it’s time to require some form of registration in order to comment. I don’t know that I’d really like a forum, as this place would lose some of its charm if the comments were segregated between a forum and these talk-back sections, but at least then there’d be a clear place to employ a Terms of Service agreement.
I’m not saying criticism and complaints don’t need to be heard, because they clearly do and should, but I don’t want to see this place degenerate into… Well, whatever it’ll degenerate into. Regardless, I hardly feel as if these essays are “poison” for our bodies, and are very obviously an optional read, so this fuss seems about as over-blown as the majority of the complaints I’ve seen on here lately.
…everybody’s a fucking critic… Too bad most of the posters here clearly aren’t familiar with constructive criticism (or not saying anything at all not when they don’t have anything nice to say, but when they have nothing worthwhile to say – such as the definition of ‘turgid’).
Pastor_of_MuppetsQuote Reply
In this episode all romantic or semi-romantic encounters were between a men and women. The essay dealt with this episode. So how is stating facts insulting?
VirtusQuote Reply
Howland Reed,
What is wrong with you that you KEEP coming back and reading (I assume?) Mr. Moore’s essay and then feeling obliged to post comments about crap like the style or the verbosity when you have been repeatedly asked not to do so and the style doesn’t change?!? What sort of a person does that?
I enjoy Mr. Moore’s essays greatly. Some of you clearly don’t. Why do the people who don’t like this style continue to read them? Why do you think your “valid criticisms” should be listened to by PM or anyone else? You are not “fighting for the quality of (your) beloved WIC”, you are trying to force your opinions down my throat and I hate it when anyone does that to me.
All of the bulls#*t criticizing the style of PM’s essay drowns out ANY discussion of the content of the essay!
No Raven For You!Quote Reply
hey these are great insights. You have a very perceptive attitude toward the text and show that is wrought from thought and experience. It is very rare that I comment on criticism, but bravo. i shall have to look through your backlog.
waiting for the next
b-
BrianQuote Reply
No Raven For You!,
I’ve seen plenty of people criticizing the content of his essay. Frankly, there isn’t much.
BrianQuote Reply
I agree, No Raven For You, I also hate having things forced down my throat.
The Mourning StarQuote Reply
If only those people could post their own essays so we can all witness their amazing writing and analysis skills…
daprosinikQuote Reply
This man could find depth and nuance in The Care Bears.
zerowolfQuote Reply
Ed,
Yes, that content. You can talk about how the author is reaching for connections that just aren’t there. You can talk about how silly and elitist it is to think there is actually something special about nobility.
My favorite is:
I think he is trying to touch on the idea of there being magic power in kings blood that does play a factor in the story. But this statement is so far off base it is silly. For if kings could perceive truth from false there is no way Vary’s and Littlefinger would still have their heads.
All I’m saying is that to come on here and throw a blanket statement about it being “crap” doesn’t help the discussion. Some essays are better than others. Pick one issue and hammer away.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
Ser Lurkalot,
I 100% agree with you. I was really looking forward to these essays this season, but….they really haven’t delivered as I had hoped.
And one more thing, that was certainly a cow pie Joffrey got hit with. Apples, even rotten ones, aren’t big enough to make that kind of splat on his face.
constQuote Reply
daprosinik,
I don’t have to demonstrate my own writing ability to know that this guy is awful.
Sir PounceQuote Reply
I enjoy the “mood” of this essay. Loved the Theon points in the beginning. I feel like the show did a better job than Clash in showing where his motivation comes from and truly demonstrate the disparity between how Theon sees himself and how he is viewed by others.
On a side note- pretty shocked to see all these hateful comments. Especially the ones trying to sound like “real criticism”. Here’s a thought- why don’t you (yes, you) create your own essay and submit it to the website instead of wasting your time shitting on someone else’s work.
MyDreamsComeTrueQuote Reply
He’s talking about Horse Apples, not real apples. Horse Apples are what horses leave behind, Cow Pies are what cows leave behind. All I know is it is shit and I could care less where it came from.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
fuelpagan,
His point is that kings THINK that they preceive and understand truths that ordinary people just can’t process. He’s using a technique often times used in writing called sarcasim. Of course kings don’t think they themselves are wrong, after all they are kings. They must have the gift of knowledge and discernment, because they are a king. Which was one of his points about self awareness and humility.
Const,
FYI the poster was refering to a horse apple, AKA horse shit. Not a real apple. And yes, they do get that big.
The Mourning StarQuote Reply
Would this be horse shit or cow shit or some other form of shit?
The Mourning StarQuote Reply
SCORE!!!!
fuelpaganQuote Reply
My point was that this essay IS the definition of “turgid.” Literally. I wasn’t being flippant.
Sir PounceQuote Reply
I think that that was his point in making that statement; kings THINK that they preceive and understand truths that ordinary people just can’t process. Of course kings don’t think they themselves are wrong, after all they are kings. They ‘must’ have the gift of knowledge and discernment, because they are a king. Which was one of his points about self awareness and humility.
I’m reminded of a scene in “The Lion King” after Scar kills Mufasa and exiles Simba (sorry, no spoiler alert), he makes the comment, “I’m the King, I can do whatever I want”. Kings tend to think that their thoughts and opinions are more valid, insightful and perhaps magical…us common folk wouldn’t understand.
The Mourning StarQuote Reply
Even to this day, the critics haven’t evolved one bit. :D
PepiQuote Reply
“Would that be horse shit or cow shit?”
And the whole discussion reaches its zenith.
Fine work sir, fine work.
ChristyQuote Reply
Then the problem is an inconsistency in tone. He is pedantic and hyper-serious throughout, making sarcasm very hard to read (if it actually was sarcasm, and I am not convinced of that).
Sir PounceQuote Reply
fuelpagan,
Thank you kind ser.
The Mourning StarQuote Reply
Sir Pounce,
I thought I withdrew that comment, you are too fast for me. It sounded too snarky. I agree the usage seemed a bit out of place, but I think it was his intention.
Maybe we need to read these essays in a sarcastic tone?
The Mourning StarQuote Reply
Christy,
Thank you (with a friendly hat-tip)
The Mourning StarQuote Reply
Howland Reed,
Your argument is complete bullshit. Comments like yours are what’s poisoning this site, not PM’s essays. I’m not even a fan of the essays, but you know what I do? I skip over them. In fact, I skip over a fair number of WiC’s posts, whenever I’m uninterested. God forbid you have to “break up” the “totality” of the content. LOL, grow up.
LexQuote Reply
Yeah, I mean… who knows? He’s not a very good writer. I even have evidence of this in the form of a quote from his own website:
“I enjoy a challenge whose solution requires physical action and conceptual understanding.”
If I need to explain why this is incorrect, you might like PM’s writing.
Sir PounceQuote Reply
I would agree. At first I read it as sarcasm and was waiting on the counter point and didn’t see it or may have missed it.
But in previous essays he has touched on there being something special about being a king. Almost magical. Which may be true in a fantasy story, but logic must still have some say in the matter. And to apply this idea to all those that now call themselves king that where not before Roberts death, just doesn’t fit.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
The Mourning Star,
Do you think it’s the source of the shit that keeps the peace in this thread? It’s Fire and Blood!!
MyDreamsComeTrueQuote Reply
Not to be an ass, but I find these to be incredibly pretentious and devoid of interesting points.
TheNedQuote Reply
TheNed,
That does not make you an ass, it makes you observant.
Sir PounceQuote Reply
Though I very much Enjoy the essays of Pearson and even though this one has some interesting parts as well, I like this one least of the season 2 essays so far.
But, regarding Pearson’s writing. He has stated many times before that he doesn’t consider himself an accomplished writer nor does he claim that his essays have academic value. Even so he has published 2 of his own novels and he is considering quiting his job to fully focus and writing cause he is able to live off his many writings on Lost.
The guy must be doing something right
Joël LingerQuote Reply
Joël Linger,
Larry the Cable Guy is able to make a living off his ‘comedy.’ He must be doing something right.
Sir PounceQuote Reply
TheNed,
There is nothing pretentious or devoid of point when discussing the source of shit that splattered on our magical king that may or may-not have blue eyes and may or may-not have a shadow, or a red sword. But I’ll tell you one thing that clearly is not devoid of point…the Ygritte-wiggle!
The Mourning StarQuote Reply
The writer makes some valid points and brings up some interesting sub-themes that exist in the show. However, sometimes bringing the points together to make some sense at the end seems to be missing. One does not have to agree with a premise to enjoy reading another’s concept, so I will not go point-by-point through the essay. Some concepts held water, others were leaky. This is meant to be constructive criticism, as this one is not a judge of writing talent as a profession.
Mrs. H’gharQuote Reply
Sir Pounce,
I forgot to add that succes doesn’t necessecarily equal quality. So, point taken. But I still think PM is a much better writer than some make him out to be.
Joël LingerQuote Reply
I began reading PM’s work for insight into this particular episode. I enjoy a new POV and he certainly has them.
So I’d say a good 4/5 of the essay zipped right over my head, much too erudite for me. I was unable to make sense of much of it, or missed the point, assuming there was one.
I’m sorry about this. I love this site and find it enhances my love of Martin’s and D&D’s wonderful work. These essays are another bit of perspective that I like to consider. I’m feeling a bit dunderheaded because I don’t get more out of this writer’s efforts. I assume I’m in the minority.
But here’s the thing: I love the bit about BLUE! Hadn’t considered it. It has possibilities. I’ll pay more attention in future as I read George and watch GoT. Actually, I would have liked more of his thoughts on this issue.
So thanks, WiC and Mr. Moore, for this bit of new skew on my favorite entertainment. I applaud your attention to detail and your sincerity.
Also, thanks for the fine quality and variety of work I see every single blessed day on this site!!
I appreciate the opportunity to peruse and pick over the daily offerings, like the fresh produce at a fine market.
I don’t have to read everything. And I don’t believe it necessary to disparage the rest. Who the blazes cares?
Arya DunyettQuote Reply
Lex,
Really, Lex? ‘Bullshit” and ‘Grow up’? That explicitly rude! I find it ironic that the critics get accused of ‘hate’ and then the responses to criticism breach basic decorum.
Regarding the ‘totality’ comment which you mock: a point about the totality, a uniformity, of QUALITY is most certainly a valid one. Again I will use the NYT analogy, if the new your times started publishing Rush Limbaugh, I would likely disagree with the content of his writing but I would NOT demand that the NYT stopped publishing him, based on an ideological difference. BUT if NYT hired an incompetent writer, one who quite simply struggled with the rudiments of structure and clarity, a writer who consistently made wild and tenuous claims, I would object precisely on the grounds of poor quality.
A desire for uniformity of quality is perfectly valid. And terrible form will always obscure content, since they are fundamentally related. Mr. Moore’s poor form renders his already lean content indigestible.
And to those that are bashing criticism in general I say this: If you believe that Roger Ebert can’t comment on films because he himself does not make films, a conversation between us is impossible.
Howland ReedQuote Reply
Howland Reed,
Right on all points.
Sir PounceQuote Reply
OK, let’s take a look at this paragraph from the essay:
“I see the blue colour of the roses, the blue of Lyanna’s dress, and the blue blood of kings and queens in ASoIaF not as something exalted in the sense of being elevated above other things, but in the sense of being outside of, greater than, or foundational of lesser things. The distinction, I believe, is essential to the fullest understanding of ASoIaF and Game of Thrones.”
I fail to get this distinction and how it is essential to the fullest understanding of ASoIaF and Game of Thrones. Could someone please clarify?
Ser LurkalotQuote Reply
Ser Lurkalot,
No. No one can clarify. PM himself can’t clarify. This is the “foundational” problem with his essays.
Sir PounceQuote Reply
Howland Reed,
I don’t think that anyone disagrees with your parable of the NYT, the point is, if you don’t like the author, then don’t waste your or our time commenting on it. I hate to break it to you Mr. Reed (if that truely is your name, which I doubt it is) WiC.net’s content is not up to you. No one is saying love it or leave it, just don’t shit all over someone (sorry, I can’t seem to break my facination with shit today) just because you don’t like their style.
Are you sure you aren’t just jealous because he writes better than you?
One thing about Mr. Moore, he at least has the courage to attach his real name to his work, not like us chicken shits (now we have horse, cow and chicken shit).
The Mourning StarQuote Reply
lol, the comments on these essays are always a good laugh. Keep posting Pearson Moore’s essays please!
corbob10Quote Reply
I enjoy these essays, to an extent. Sometimes they are great to read through, other times they are just too long and sometimes go off on a tangent to something totally unrelated to ASOIAF/GoT.
Moore brings up good connections a lot of times, like the one for episode 3 with Arya being like Ned, and someday might forget his face in her revenge on those who did her and her family wrong.
I say, don’t stop posting them. I read them every week, even if some are a little too long, but they are good and sometimes make me consider things I would never have thought of otherwise. This essay was a tad on the boring side, but I nonetheless read it and saw what PM was trying to get at.
If you don’t like it, don’t read it. I know it’s been stated numerous times above, but some of us here do like to read these, and just because you don’t doesn’t mean the feature should be cut altogether. I’d rather have my GoT material all on one site than having to jump to different sites.
LordEddardStarkQuote Reply
I agree, I haven’t wasted this much time argueing whether or not a blogger has the street cred to post an essay on a fan-boy website or not for a long time.
The Mourning StarQuote Reply
Yeah uh, this is pretty awful. Still, I say keep posting ‘em. It’s fun reading different folks pick them apart.
BanditoQuote Reply
I agree as long as all the people who criticize the books and the HBO show are required to present proof of their abilities to write an epic fantasy series and produce a multimillion dollar production.
WinterComingQuote Reply
For me, what’s frustrating about these “essays” is the fact that they’re unnecessary. Every week WiC posts dozens of recaps/reviews which are by and large more interesting, entertaining, and to the point than PM’s. This site garners a LOT of attention, and its long-time followers might feel that the truly interesting/appropriate posts are being diluted by these weekly long winded essays. Yes, we could simply pass them over, but we’re all fans. We eat this shit up. And when someone’s polarizing writing is gathering him/her much unwarranted recognition, they might end up being a target. This guy somehow landed ass-backwards into a situation where his stuff is being read by thousands of people on a weekly basis, which is an opportunity most writers would die for. Lucky him.
People are assholes and everyone’s a critic. Welcome to the internet.
james yarQuote Reply
Just a small point, but it isn’t true that marriage in all traditions requires a third party. In 9 states in the USA and in the DC, there is the legal concept of common law marriage. In Texas, for example, if two people live together as a married couple for 6 months or more, then they are considered legally married. No ceremony, no third party, just two people living together for 6 or more months. Similar laws exist in most of Canada, Australia, Israel and some other countries.
The law varies from place to place. Some have conditions such as “habit and repute” and others have practically no restrictions at all. In Scotland, for example, merely consummating the common law marriage makes it valid and marriages can be valid when merely contracted between two people by mail.
LangkardQuote Reply
Langkard,
Oh crap! I think I might be married to a certain rather tasty bit in Scotland!
AssuntaQuote Reply
I believe that Mr Moore’s thoughts are as valid as anyone else’s and he does go to the trouble to put them in some cognizant manner so that all can comment (or attack as the case may be) them. But – could someone please, please, PLEASE explain something to me in this last episode? Why did Osha have to sleep with Theon to escape? What am I missing? Did he have her thrown in a dungeon or something? Do not get this other than more gratuitous HBO nudity. Help…
patchy faceQuote Reply
patchy face,
If Osha hadn’t slept with Theon, she would have been locked up somewhere outside the castle and unable to get to Bran and Rickon. She truly took one for the team.
sukeynaQuote Reply
Cognizant manner? I think I see why people love these essays
WinterComingQuote Reply
I think Howland Reed’s comments bring down the value and the cultural cache of this site and that makes me sad.
DanQuote Reply
I think she slept with Theon to make sure he was good and tired to give them more time to escape. By the time he woke up and noticed them missing they would have a good head start. I’m going to have to watch it several more times to see if there may be additional reasons for the scene.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
I agree that you should keep posting these for the fact that it adds balance to the site. But there are many different kinds of essays, and some fans like the philosophical musings of this style, some don’t. I can’t speak for anyone else, but I prefer political essays about Thrones. If other people do too, you might consider finding a scholar of medieval history/political science, like they have on Race for the Iron Throne. People who are experts in cultural studies might be able to offer different insights as well, especially those who can compare the series to other classic dramas. Or maybe even someone who does feminist analysis, since there is something to say about gender in the show every week. You guys pulled from some great voices when you put together that Q&A panel before Season 2 aired; maybe one of them would like to write for WiC.
MegQuote Reply
This:
http://xkcd.com/386/
Howland ReedQuote Reply
That’s brave of you, it’s a hard thing to admit. I accept your apology. ;)
LexQuote Reply
fuelpagan,
Thanks for the extra research :). If you figure out something more, please post!
patchy faceQuote Reply
LadyBrienne,
I am an English grad student and I don’t “get” them either, usually because I feel a lot of the insight is simply wrong, based on incorrect quotes and poor information gathered outside of the essay. I don’t really blame Mr. Moore for this… the show itself is thin in places, and in an effort to make some things more obvious to non-book-readers, pieces information together in unusual ways, and it can lead to poor analysis.
I think also Mr. Moore gives GRRM (and the showrunners) a bit too much credit. GRRM is very adept at absorbing the horrors of feudal (a problematic word) history and turning them into gripping, sprawling stories. He is not so good at embedding more than the most obvious of symbols; thus I think a link between royal blue, in a land where house colors trump any idea we have of royal colors, and anything else is bound to fail.
In short, I don’t believe an understanding, or a tracking, of the use of the color blue in the series is fundamental to any deeper investigation here. I think it’s more a piecing together of thin connections, some based on things that are absolutely not important to GRRM’s world.
That said, I do think Mr. Moore’s insight on Theon here is quite good, and on point. Theon has no identity. He tries to move between worlds and as such, has no self beyond a love of indulgence and a desire to believe he’s terribly important (a symptom of that indulgence). But it’s okay. He’ll get his.
oh-bbQuote Reply
Langkard,
In all technicality, using Mr. Moore’s logic, it requires a third party to make that law that ends in common law marriages, so yes, there is a third party in that example.
oh-bbQuote Reply
Mr Moore obviously puts a lot of time and effort into these essays. I would be disappointed if the critics succeeded in the essays being dropped. I do not necessarily agree with his analysis of each episode, but I still look forward to reading them. If I have a different perspective on events, then I analyse my own ideas and decide if I want to change thoughts or not. I am reasonably certain that at this stage Ygritte is just trying to distract Jon so she can kill him or at least escape. The Wildling Way. Those of us who have read the books know what happens in the long run, and the ultimate tragedy of their relationship.
Pearson, please keep writing the essays. To everyone else how about constructive criticism? If you disagree with any or all of an essay, then tell us your reasons. If you think it is going too far to analyse the story to these lengths, then just don’t read it. The Internet is already awash with simple recaps of the episodes and simple interpretations.
:)
GregEQuote Reply
Taking one for the team. It was a rough few hours of watch, rewind, watch again. Lol.
I think it was important for Theon to be distracted as he is familiar with the standard operation of the castle having grown up there. In order for Bran, Hodor and Rickon to be ready to leave the moment she called for them suggests Maester Luwin was in on the plan. It fell to Osha to keep Theon busy while preparations were made.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
Good sir if you put these essays into one published book I would happily buy it! Fantastic work, as usual, I really enjoy your well researched and profound insights into each episode every week. I loved the metaphor of the ‘third person’ and the significance of colour. Thank you for putting in the effort of writing these week by week, don’t worry about the (frankly uneducated and incredibly nasty) people who express their dissatisfaction. Thank you mr Moore :) can’t wait for episode 7!!
Cal Van HamacekQuote Reply
Lex,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sv4Gui9hKCM ;)
Howland ReedQuote Reply
These ‘essay’s are like car accidents…you just have to drive past and have a quick glance at the carnage.
HildegardeQuote Reply
Hildegarde,
To quote the late great George Carlin: I think I see a rib cage sticking out of the glove compartment.
Howland ReedQuote Reply
I have been getting a sneaking suspicion that Mr Moore is actually a writer for The Onion or something like that and he’s having us all on with these horribly sincere, awfully over-the-top pretentious write-ups and waiting for someone to figure out we’ve all been had.
HildegardeQuote Reply
The essays are dreary and dull, but the *comments* never fail to entertain.
JamesQuote Reply
Oh man the comment rage is back. Thought everyone just ignored these ‘essays’ now, just as I do. Agree that they’re kinda dragging this site down though. Keep up the quality folks, GoT is a 5-star product, it deserves a 5-star site.
JBJBQuote Reply
I would LOVE LOVE LOVE to see a weekly essay about gender politics and the role of women in that particular episode, especially since this is such a hotly debated topic. I’d love any kind of essay on this, from straight out academia to personal opinons to a a “Jezebel” style snark post :) In fact I think it would make PM’s essays easier to take if there were more of a balance of different opinions around. It’s an extremely prestigious place to be able to headline your own essay thread at WiC, and it would be nice to have more than only PM doing it.
And I know Westeros.org seems to have the monopoly on moaning about changes of book vs show, but I would also love to see an essay specifically highlighting the differences about book vs show in that episode, along with actual POLITE discussion about implications for the future storyline, and did it hurt or help the show, etc. Like an actual, susbtance filled, polite ‘changes’ essay, not just an “oh god, they have totally ruined Catelyn/Arya/Sansa/LF/Gendry/Tyrion forever” post.
purplejillyQuote Reply
“The key statement the guy with the bad haircut gets to make is this:
‘If anyone knows of any reason why these two should not be wed, speak now or forever hold your peace.’ ”
This wasn’t said at my wedding. Which I think is relevant, because–as others above me have noted–Moore’s tendency to look outside the text for inspiration is very hit-or-miss. He has a tendency to universalize things which are either cultural (like his “analysis” of weddings), or historical, or both.
Censorship sucks so I would hate to see these essays go away. However, they need editing. They need SERIOUS editing. This is fine – every writer needs an editor. Again, as others have noted, he has a tendency to go off on extended tangents, he has a tendency to repeat himself, and–perhaps most importantly–he has a tendency to miss which of his arguments really benefit his larger insights, and which detract from his insights..
So, in the above essay, the two major explanatory/analytical points are about Theon’s identity, and about Jon and Ygritte’s ‘meet cute’. Everyone jumped on the Theon analysis as an example of “good Moore” because he doesn’t load it down with stuff – he describes it, he supports it, and he moves on. The Jon/Ygritte analysis gets quite bogged down; we don’t need a lot of this stuff to understand it, and Moore doesn’t need it to argue the point. In fact, he injures his point when he tries to make too many connections. Fuelpagan’s analysis of the Jon/Ygritte meeting (in comments above) is dead on, and also has the virtue of being succinct.
So. Moore has good insights and despite my complaints in the past I’d like these to continue. However, he needs to find a way to foreground the good insights and lose the extraneous stuff. WiC folk, a man needs an editor…
Doughnut HoleQuote Reply
Virtus,
Yeah it is a shame that some people in the gay community get insulted by many things, but saying everything is a bit of a stretch though. I wasn’t insulted at all. I’m a lot thicker skinned than that. There’s a big difference between disagreeing with what someone writes in a public forum and replying to it, than being offended by it. Your comment is borderline offensive (to me) in the way you generalised some LGBT people.
Sure, that would work fine if Moore said that these are the only elements needed for a good romance in this episode of Game of Thrones, but he didn’t. If the only romance on screen happened to be between Renly and Loras, I would disagree if he said something along the lines of ‘A man, and another man, the love that binds them. It is all that’s needed for a good romance.’. I would disagree with that just as strongly. But I would feel less compelled to comment on it here because there would be loads of comments and negative feedback – perhaps even people feeling insulted – that my voice would not be necessary. I definitely would not write asking why some straight people are offended by everything, because I completely understand where they would be coming from. This situation, of course, is completely hypothetical and would never happen because nobody, straight or gay, believes that two men (or two women) who love each other is all that is needed for a good romance. That’s just stupid.
The only reason I stated my sexuality is because it directly related to why I disagreed with that opening line, and in particular, the wording of a ‘good romance’.
I noticed other people reply to you in agreeance with my views, yet you don’t seem to feel the need to specify that some straight people, or some women (or any other personal information they gave that can be used to profile them) seem to take offense to everything.
So yeah, I hope that cleared up where I’m coming from, and changed your mind about some people in the LGBT community. And I also hope you didn’t hit your head too hard!
JonQuote Reply
purplejilly,
did you read this one?
KnurkQuote Reply
Pearson Moore has graciously decided to withdraw his essays from WinterIsComing.net. Pearson felt (and I agree) that the discussion generated from his essays was not a positive one and we both agreed that it would be best if we part ways. For those who are fans of Moore’s work, you can continue to read his Game of Thrones essays on his own website, WinterfellKeep.com.
We may not have an essay feature for the last four episodes of this season, unless I can find someone to step in immediately. If anyone wishes to try their hand at a thematic analysis of episodes of Game of Thrones, send your request via our Contact page and include in the request an essay on episode 16 as a sample of your work. I will evaluate all the submissions and decide whether to bring on a new essayist.
I thank Pearson for his contributions to the site and wish him the best. And thanks to all who responded to his essays, whether in criticism or praise, in a reasoned and polite manner. We continue to strive to make this the best Game of Thrones site on the web and highly value the input and feedback from our readers. Thank you.
Winter Is ComingQuote Reply
Wow, people are really split over these essays. I feel a bit sorry for PM having to read all these people shooting down his hard work. The first essay of his i read was a few weeks ago, admittedly i ignored all previous ones, and i didn’t like it. However, the following 2 essays were insightful and enjoyable to read. This one is not his best but i’m willing to give him a chance to rectify himself next week.
Although, saying that, there were some points in this essay that were quite good. The analysis of Theons psyche was spot on, and i know that i’m not the only one to see the significance of the colour blue in GRRM’s novels. The Mystery of Lyanna and Rhaegar is integral to the story as a whole and i believe that when we are given the revelation L+R=JS the colour blue will be there. I actually believe that Jon Snow is the representation of blue/Ice in the story and that Dany is representing red/Fire.
But that is me going off on a tangent, with regards to these essays i think that people need to be more relaxed in their approach. Saying that PM’s efforts are ‘bringing down the quality of WiC.net’ is ludicrous. This website is fantastic, and thats down to the efforts of WiC, FaBio and all the others that contribute. PM gets one post a week people, stop stressing about it. And seriously, if you don’t like his essays, just don’t read them. It really is that simple.
you-know-nothingQuote Reply
That is just a real shame. Maybe some of the people who have been carping about Mr. Pearson’s writing abilities and style rather than discussing the content of his essays should put their skills where their mouths are and post their own essays so we can pick them apart.
LangkardQuote Reply
I skipped some parts of this, such as the section about Robb and Talisa (as I don’t really care for what’s being done with that in the show), but I did enjoy the part about Joffrey. It was good to be reminded of Cersei’s words to Joffrey after he was wounded by Nymeria, which give us just one example of her pandering to his ego and leading him to believe that the world would be whatever he wanted. That’s just the upbringing that has made him such a terrible king and person.
EstelindisQuote Reply
I posted my previous comment before I saw WiC’s post about this being the last of PM’s essays. I may not have enjoyed every aspect of the essays, but I felt that parts of them, at least, had good analysis. I feel sorry for PM having to read this backlash! Well at least his essays will still be available at his site for those who wish to read them.
EstelindisQuote Reply
This is such a ridiculous statement. So in order to criticize, you need to post a sample of your own work? I guess Roger Ebert should hang it up.
If he can’t handle being criticized, he shouldn’t submit his essays. Grow up.
BrianQuote Reply
Thanks, that was a good link! I liked it : )
purplejillyQuote Reply
Woohoo, a contest! Go, all writers with spare time and something to say!
I also thank Pearson for his efforts, and wish him well at his Winterfell Blog!
purplejillyQuote Reply
Wow. Larry Williams and now Pearson Moore.
While I find the idea intriguing, I don’t think I could live up to Howland Reeds high standards.
The highest respect for both Pearson Moore and Winter Is Coming for handling the situation with class.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
It’s for the best, I think.
RemaalQuote Reply
Winter Is Coming,
Can the essay be on any thematic topic present in Episode 16?
AssuntaQuote Reply
Assunta, sure! Any thing you think is worth a more detailed analysis. The essay doesn’t need to cover all of the themes or all of the scenes in an episode.
Winter Is ComingQuote Reply
I’m looking forward to reading Mr. Howland Reed’s essay next week. What an internet tough guy.
Thank you Mr. Moore for your kind efforts.
JapieQQuote Reply
Since it is my opinion that Mr. Moore’s essays are of dubious quality, I think that it is appropriate that they now lose the special status given to them by being posted here as editorial material. WiC.net often provides links to various material concerning GoT, so why not let a link suffice here as well, perhaps in the recap round-up posts. For those ranting about censorship, get a grip! No one is stopping PM to write what he likes and publish it on his own site. It is not a universal right to be published on WiC.net. For those feeling sorry for PM, well, this is the internet. If you take comments written by anonymous people on the net too seriously then its your own fault. You know, the “if you don’t like them, don’t read them” argument applies to the comments as well as the material being commented. And to quote (or possibly paraphrase) a very wise man who hates indigo: “There is no such thing as a verbal attack”. If you feel that a commenter is offensive you can simply disregard that person as a troll. Trolls should not be fed under any circumstances. Feeding a troll is more futile than being a troll. Well, these are basic internet truths that are eternally ignored (yes, by me as well) so why do I even bother.
Ser LurkalotQuote Reply
Roger Ebert understands that reviewing a low budget independent movie must be evaluated differently than a big budget studio production. Pearson Moore was an amateur writer. He never claimed to being a professional.
This site is a labor of love. Not a money making powerhouse with funds to hire a Myles McNutt. Winter may strike gold and find a professional who wants to get noticed, but likely it will just be another amateur doing it because they want to. Try keeping that in mind when you offer your criticism, I know Roger Ebert would.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
oh-bb,
That makes sense that sometimes the lack of content leads to poor analysis. You perfectly explained why the whole color analysis went over my head- because there really is no royal color in GRRM’s Westeros. There are Targaryen colors, then Baratheon colors, and now Lannister colors. If anything, gold is a royal color since it’s part of both Baratheon and Lannister house colors. Blue is conspicuously absent, and I can’t really think of a reason to emphasize it except for the name of the particular shade called “royal” blue.
LadyBrienneQuote Reply
How about essays during the offseason on some of the themes that cross multiple episodes?
Then The Mourning Star and I can collaborate on an essay about the importance of fecal matter in ASOIAF.
Horse Apples, Cow Pies and Sheep Pellets, Oh My.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
He’s selling his book of essays online. Maybe that’s not “professional” by some people’s definition but he is making a little money off his writing.
Hell, I thought some of his earlier essays weren’t that bad but the whole section on the color blue this week just drove me over the edge.
WinterComingQuote Reply
Good Luck to Mr. Moore. Since no one was ever suggesting that he should stop writing altogether, I agree that including links to his essays in the recaps list might be a good alternative to featuring him on WIC.
This is a great, great website, and though WIC may have started it as an amateur he has surely managed its growth and development with shrewd professionalism.
Howland ReedQuote Reply
That’s a hobby that brings in a little extra cash. I don’t see writing essay books about TV shows turning into a career that pays the bills.
He had his own writing style, but I would have liked to see him be a little more open to suggestions on how to improve. There were some excellent suggestions made in the past that would have helped him.
The concept of color blue I thought had promise. There were aspects of it that I did like, but he did take it way beyond the point of any realistic connections. But it did force me to think about some things in a different light. And that was what I liked about the essays. There were usually 3 or more issues I had with any essay, I would just pick the one that bugged me the most to talk about.
Thank you so much. <3
But my wife keeps telling me that direct and too the point isn't always a good thing.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
Trolls 1, Creativity 0.
*sigh*
No Raven For You!Quote Reply
Fun Fact: The term “Blue Blood” comes from the Christian Reconquista of Spain. Much of the Spanish nobility at the time was of Visigothic descent, and would raise their sword arms to display their pale white wrists and the “blue blood” that flowed within as a point of pride, in order to demonstrate that they had not been “contaminated” by the dark-skinned Moorish occupiers (see: Limpieza de Sangre).
So, really, it’s a racist thing… and always has been.
Varamyr FourskinsQuote Reply
I’m sorry to see that the hate has driven him off, but I can’t blame him for leaving after seeing how he was treated by those here. The internet is a place of cowards and cravens, who will say things through the power of anonymity that they would never say if they were face to face with someone. Not for fear of retribution… but because they know that saying such things is rude.
Nigel BradleyQuote Reply
Well, kind of, but then I think of The Daily Raven, which was panned just as hard when it started. The difference is Simone and FaB took note of the constructive criticisms and suggestions offered by the visitors here, and bit by bit adjusted it, and now I think The Daily Raven fits the site very well. It was a creative endeavor which was able to adjust to the input from the regulars here, and the PM essays never really showed any adjustment. Which is perfectly fine for PM; as an author, he has the right to create his essays the way he wants, and he doesn’t need to change them, but in the end that probably made them better suited for his site, than here at WiC.
purplejillyQuote Reply
Great essay. Fun points to consider until…
… the “Look at me and my opinion wah wah” people ruin it for everyone yet again. WiC needs to stop associating with intelligent commentary because of the crabby internet naysayers? Seems like, in the realm of intelligent discourse, the intelligent have to keep giving up ground because the crybabies are louder. What does it accomplish if WiC breaks up with Pearson? Do the owners of WiC not think enough of Mr. Moore’s essays? They do, but they’re afraid of offending people? The discussions were too emotional?
What’s the point of any of this then? If you’re afraid of what people think or say, just retweet and repost everything from everywhere else. That’s not why people come to WiC though is it? They come for the flavor the site brings to their Song of Ice and Fire news. Mr. Moore’s essays were just one flavor of many.
WiC could very easily just say, “Look stay out of the essay comments if you’re going to be a miscreant and make trouble for the sake of making trouble. Mr. Moore spends a lot of time writing these up, and we feel that it makes for fun stuff to think and talk about.”
Instead, the vocal minority of internet boogers yet again finds away to shut down higher level discussion.
Weaksauce.
BuddyQuote Reply
Mr. Moore’s defenders would have made a better job defending him if, instead of constantly reacting to us “miscreants”, they would have actually engaged in intelligent discussion about the essay’s contents. Instead of repeatedly whining and complaining about how this comment thread has gone done the drain, they could have shown, by example, what they would rather have had. If Mr. Moore’s essay is indeed an intelligent piece of writing, please discuss it and don’t mind us “haters”. It’s not that we are stealing space here. Plenty of room for comments. The fact that intelligent discussion didn’t, in the end, occur, is ultimately the fault of the essay and not the people commenting.
Ser LurkalotQuote Reply
And the khalasar continues to rip itself apart. Some people just cannot stand success; instead of everyone being happy GoT is a big hit, now they turn on each other.
I didn’t like Mr. Moore’s writing style, but the feeding frenzy is appalling. So let’s check the scoreboard:
Guy 1 from Sci-Fi Christian
Guy 2 from Sci-Fi Christian
Larry Williams
Pearson Moore
KEEP IT UP! KEEP THIS SITE PURE FOR THE RIGHT-THINKING MEMBERS!
Hey … how come the ratings aren’t going up anymore?
KGQuote Reply
Ser Lurkalot,
“Mr. Moore’s haters would have made a better job attacking him if, instead of constantly reacting to his style or perceived verbosity, they would have actually engaged in intelligent discussion about the essay’s contents. Instead of repeatedly whining and complaining about how this essay somehow dragged this website down the drain, they could have shown, by example, what they would rather have had. If Mr. Moore’s essay is indeed as bad as they thought, the could have skipped it and don’t mind people who liked it. It’s not that we are stealing space here. There should be plenty of room for multiple viewpoints, but apparently not. The fact that intelligent discussion didn’t, in the end, occur, is ultimately the fault of the critics commenting, for I saw 10 comments on style or if it “belonged” on the sacred WiC (and replys defending the same) for every one appropriately discussing content, which breaks any intelligent discussion up to the point that it is useless.”
Easy! Haters gonna hate…
No Raven For You!Quote Reply
KG,
Do you actually believe that Larry has shut down his entire operation (of which GoT reviews is a small part) for a week because of the evil trolls among the GoT fandom said bad things to him? That is too funny.
Larry is sorely missed by many fans, me included. Hopes he returns soon from whatever is keeping him. Hope it is nothing serious.
Ser LurkalotQuote Reply
Ser Lurkalot,
I wonder where Larry is – was there no note, no nothing? he just vanished from his facebook and the internet?
purplejillyQuote Reply
No, but I believe he has stopped watching/reviewing the show. And that is a BAD thing, chasing away formerly dedicated viewers.
KGQuote Reply
That’s not true man.
If you check Wiki in english is what it says, but the spanish version, wich should be more on point here, explains a totally different version. Yes, it comes from spanish, yes, it’s because the nobles have white skin, hence blue blood, but it’s because the nobles didnt do hard labour, so their skin was white in contrast to the lower clases, wich had brown skin.
The moors were not much more dark skinned than a christian peasant or soldier of the time, so I think the second theory is more plausible.
But this things are very hard to know for certain so who knows
Pau SorianoQuote Reply
Is there not room for people to just read and enjoy his essays without “commenting” on everything? I would guess that the majority of people that read and enjoy his essays do just that. Not everyone feels as though they have to run out and tell the world exactly what they’re thinking.
There’s a difference between appreciating the time and energy that someone puts into something while at the same time objectively disagreeing with some of the points and conclusions; and posting critiques of his writing style because you can. That’s the way he writes. So what? Less ad hominem and more intelligence would go a long way on the internet in general, and in comment sections in particular. Look at all the ad hominem that Larry had/has to deal with. It’s ridiculous.
It’s a shame that all of the negativity towards Mr. Moore is taking away from the creativity that WiC used to help promote. It’s particularly sad that WiC is taking the easy road. (IMO)
BuddyQuote Reply
Yes, clearly the fan base of ASOIAF on WIC.net has made the ratings not go up……are you for real man?
RegardingLlarry, somone posted a video-review the other day by 2 non-reader, africanamerican, anime fanatic dudes that were so much better…let me find it..
here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3cLO5O81ho
Pau SorianoQuote Reply
You give WiC too little credit. I just don’t see him letting the hate of internet trolls dictating his actions. The success and overall quality of this site is proof of that.
Ser LurkalotQuote Reply
Check his youtube channel, his twitter, his face book page. All silence. This cannot have anything to do with GoT. I really hope nothing bad has happened to him or his loved ones (knock on wood). Larry is a tough’un. Don’t think he is fazed by internet stupidity. Besides, the love outweighs the hate I think.
Ser LurkalotQuote Reply
This says it all. It’s not hating for the sake of hate, we just want to have a say, and see that our opinions mean something to Winter (and anyone else) who makes the decisions as to what content is part of the site. He’s doing a great job of listening, and tweaking and that’s great to see.
ChristyQuote Reply
Whether he makes a living out of it is beside the point. He’s charging for his writing and IIRC has been doing so well before GoT. I just checked, he has 7 books on amazon right now 2 of them on GoT. That doesn’t make him Malcolm Gladwell but it definitely makes him more than just a guy writing in his freetime.
In any case writing an essay in your freetime is nowhere near as difficult as making an independent film. Assuming the writing talent is similar the only advantage a fully professional writer has over an amateur is time and an editor – I think I found Mr. Moore’s problem :)
KG
We should hope that Larry Williams just got pissed as GoT fans. He hasn’t updated any of his reviews and that makes me think that it may be something more serious than internet haters.
WinterComingQuote Reply
WinterComing,
I charge to tutor math. That doesn’t make me a math teacher.
Larry Williams could be focus on finals. Hoping that is all it is.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
Goodbye.
No Raven For You!Quote Reply
People critique the writing style because style and execution is just as important as the ideas you’re trying to convey. If you could travel back in time with nothin but the outline of ASOIAF and had the choice to give it to any writer would you still give it to GRRM or to someone like Kevin J. Anderson and Brian Herbert? Just because PM’s writing an essay instead of a story doesn’t mean he’s exempt from that sort of criticism and there has been a lot of constructive ones at least in the earlier episodes.
fuelpagan,
Teaching professionally and writing professionally are two different things. You don’t need a certification to write. I guess you’re making a distinction between getting paid by a third party to write something as opposed to putting work up on the net and asking to be paid for it. Fair enough, but I still don’t think it’s as big a difference as your indie film/hollywood blockbuster analogy.
WinterComingQuote Reply
I feel compelled to point out that the blue motif holds no water. Blue is a royal color sometimes. In Imperial China it was yellow, for instance–and in Rome it was purple. More to the point, in Westeros, red and black were the royal colors, then black and yellow. On Pyke the kings wore gray before the Greyjoys became rulers there, then black and gold. In the north it was white and gray, in Dorne, the Princes wore red and orange. The Lannister regime touts red and gold, as does Stannis. Of the great houses of Westeros, only Houses Arryn and Tully use blue, and at the moment, no great houses do LESS for the story than Arryn and Tully. (Tully more than Arryn, granted.) Also, there is no evidence of there ever being an Arryn or Tully ass polishing the Iron Throne. The color blue simply has no significance in Westerosi political culture
Furthermore, if I might address the wailing commenters: writing and publishing an essay by definition opens one to criticism. What we have here is a misapplication of themes and a powerful desire to write poetry on the part of Mr. Moore. I would advise him put down his essayist’s pen and pick up the poet’s, because here he is not so much analyzing as musing, and musing with metaphor. Such things have their place, but that place is not in every line of a discussion of literature and television.
As a matter of interest, Mr. Moore, if you would like actual, serious motifs to discuss: try “ice” and “fire.”
Christopher RuocchioQuote Reply
WinterComing,
I wasn’t commenting on what it takes to create a film vs writing an essay. I was commenting on people comparing their criticism of the essay to that of Roger Ebert criticizing a film.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
Reading doesn’t appear to be your strong suit. I specifically stated that those who criticized the writing abilities and style rather than the content should post examples of their own work. I have no problem with people criticizing the contents, like Roger Ebert. Most of what was happening here was internet bullies crapping all over the essays because of how they were written, not what they actually said. Criticizing style and writing ability rather than content is being nothing more than a glorified grammar Nazi.
So, I must ask that you be the one to grow up, or at the very least, learn to understand what you read.
LangkardQuote Reply
fuelpagan,
And the original point was that Ebert can criticize a film even if he hasn’t made a good movie himself. Which was only brought up because people were daring critics to write better essays.
And my point is that the indie/hollywood film distinction isn’t the same as amateur/pro writer. Students can write good essays and paid professionals can write horrible ones (just check your local sports columnist). It makes no sense to evaluate them differently.
Langkard,
What exactly is wrong with criticizing style? I’m pretty sure film critics don’t just list the themes and plot points of movies and write their reviews based on that.
WinterComingQuote Reply
you´re practically a saint. I don´t envy you.
andreaQuote Reply
It wasn’t just criticizing style in most of the posts. It was viciously attacking the author for vapid reasons like writing ability instead of content. Since you’re trying to conflate movie criticism with criticizing these essays, what was done here was the equivalent of Roger Ebert giving a thumbs down to “Citizen Kane” because it was filmed in black and white instead of color. Go back and read the posts. Some of the crap spewed in this thread was no different than that.
Not all of the criticisms fell into that category, but a good portion of them did. Those are the ones to which I objected and for which I suggested that the cretins making those childish criticisms be forced to post examples of their own writing so it could be similarly picked apart for silly things like grammar and style instead of content. Do you understand the distinction I’m making?
I had no problem with people criticizing the content of the essays. I pointed out things in the content too. But most people seemed intent on focusing solely on what they perceived as Mr. Pearson’s lack of writing ability and lack of polish. Which is just asinine when Mr. Pearson stated openly that he’s an amateur. These essays were presented as nothing more than his opinions. They weren’t put forward as some kind of scholarly review by a distinguished professor of whatever. But the lackwits decided to go into attack mode and picked the essays apart for non-content reasons. Want to argue about content, fine. Arguing about style and writing ability? That’s no different than being a grammar Nazi.
I’d love to see examples of writing by some of those who engaged in such behavior in this thread. I can guarantee that they are unlikely to be any better than Mr. Pearson in style or writing ability. That was my point. If people wish to continue erecting straw men to argue against instead of what I clearly stated, they are free to do so.
LangkardQuote Reply
Langkard,
I’m sorry that some people expect an essayist to write well. Apparently I shouldn’t expect him to adhere to rules of grammar as well :)
(I don’t mind people hating on grammar nazis on forums and comment sections but for an essay? Really?)
With the Citizen Kane bit I’m assuming that you’re comparing them to people who would refuse to see a film just because it’s black and white but if the decision to not use color in a movie is a stylistic one then it should be fair game for criticism.
I understand your distinction between the types of comments but what I have a hard time grasping is why you’re so against a criticism against style. If an amateur writer decides to write a ASOIAF type series, should criticism be limited to the book’s content (premise, plot etc.) and not his ability to write? If you think Pearson Moore writes well then more power to you but to say that people shouldn’t be allowed to criticize a writer’s writing style is insane. Since Pearson Moore is just an amateur with an opinion then his ability to convey his thoughts/opinions through his writing, IMO, is just as important as his content because all of us here are just amateurs with opinions.
WinterComingQuote Reply
I’ve always preferred the imperial purple to royal blue.
Shock MeQuote Reply
That in itself is a ridiculous comparison. Ebert is a paid professional who’s job is being a movie critic. To even compare writing an essay to making a movie is absurd. Now if it was a book critic who hasn’t written a book, well there may be one out there, but the ones I know of have a book of some sort.
Yet I would still agree with the idea that to be critical of something does not mean you have to be able to produce it. My point was simply that Ebert adjusts how he views a film of a first time director (usually an indie film, but not always) vs a seasoned veteran director. (The indie/hollywood was a bad choice on my part, as I was oversimplifying the idea.) Just because there are obvious flaws, doesn’t mean the work doesn’t contain something worthwhile.
While I agree that amature does not mean bad and professional does not mean good, I would disagree that you should evaluate them the same. You can’t evaluate even a good sports writer the same as Hemingway.
Let’s stick with the film idea to illustrate my point. I’ll compare the Triplets of Belleville to the move Shrek.
The Triplets of Belleville was the first feature length film by Sylvain Chomet. The animation is meh, It’s weird with hardly any dialogue, and it forces the viewer to really work at understanding what the hell is going on.
Shrek was cutting edge animation when it came out. Had a cute and fresh take on the idea of a fairytale story. Great voice acting by big name stars and just a lot of fun.
Now I loved the first Shrek film, but if asked which I thought was the better film, I would pick The Triplets of Belleville without a second thought. As a whole the film truly is a work of art. Only by accepting the flaws can one see the beauty. Then you realise that even though the animation is meh, it is what makes the film great. The film would actually hurt itself if it tried to use a pixar or dreamworks animation style. Something about it being an indie film allowed me to be more open to it than I would have if Disney had created it in 2003.
Please understand I am not saying these essays were good, only that I thought they had worth. Every criticism of them being verbose, pretentious and yes, even turgid, I totally agree. Pearson claims in the comments of episode 2.05 to be going for some artistic style that I really have no clue about. Whether he is achieving his artistic goal is above my comprehension. But overlooking the stylistic issues I had with the essays, they did make me think about connections I would never have thought of. Most were stretched way to thin, but I enjoyed the effort anyway. And there was so much to criticise in the content, the complaints about style just became redundant and more annoying than the essay style itself.
In my first comment to any of his essays I tried to say something positive and negative about the essay. I just feel that was polite since I doubted he was getting paid to produce these. There is a reason my positive comment was usually pretty weak.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
That is not at all what I’m saying. I’m saying a critique of Citizen Kane which complains solely that it looks bad because it’s in black and white instead of color is absurd. That was essentially all we got in many of the negative posts about Mr. Pearson’s essays. No argument about content. No argument about points agreed with or not. Just childish rants about his writing abilities. That isn’t critiquing an essay; it’s being a tool. Alas, we had a whole parade of tools in this thread and previous weeks’ threads. That is my concern.
Of course discussing style is valid. As long as it is part of a reasoned criticism. What we got instead from many in this thread was akin to a child making a sour face and refusing to eat his peas because he doesn’t like the color green. There was no attempt by some to even do any real criticism at all. It was just screaming, “I don’t like it, Mommy!” and throwing the plate of peas across the room in a tantrum.
It was disgusting behavior on the part of some in this thread and I reiterate my call for the people in question to post their own essays so they can be treated with the derision they so richly deserve.
LangkardQuote Reply
While I understand your use of the word “tool” in this instance, I feel the word “shit” would have given the comment a more stylistic flow with other comments in the thread. Thus allowing for a consistant connection of theme in the comments as a whole.
;p (Sorry couldn’t help myself.)
fuelpaganQuote Reply
Langkard,
So it’s unfair to criticize a writer for his ability (or lack thereof) to write? Interesting point of view.
Sir PounceQuote Reply
Since this is the last Pearson Moore post maybe we should go all the way and make it 200 comments ;)
fuelpagan,
You’re extending the Ebert comparisons too far. For me one of the reasons he’s such a good example is because he actually wrote a couple of horrible “cult classics” but despite that nobody calls his ability to criticize film into question. The fact that he writes well probably helps.
Langkard,
Thinking a movie is bad solely because it’s black and white and refusing to see a film because it’s black and white are essentially the same to me.
Again, if the black and white is a stylistic choice it’s fair game even though I don’t think the B&W comparison is apt. The negative posts here are more like people complaining about a bad script or amateurish directing. If a filmmaker undermines a key dramatic moment in a movie by using MTV style quick cuts then that choice has affected the content. In the same way if a writer’s pretentious writing style obscures the points he’s making then that’s his fault and it should be his responsibility to simplify his style to better convey his ideas.
WinterComingQuote Reply
WinterComing,
Wait, I am getting confused, is the poster WinterComing the same person as WinterISComing? Aka the site owner?
purplejillyQuote Reply
purplejilly,
No.
Ours is the FuryQuote Reply
Ours is the Fury,
Thanks for the clarification!
purplejillyQuote Reply
I hope the haters are happy. Dammnit! I enjoyed these!
Pearson Moore we will miss you, keep on writing!
Kneeling KnightQuote Reply
Yup I’m not him. I completely forgot the name I was using last year so I just used the first thing that came to mind. In hindsight I should have picked a less confusing nickname :(
WinterComingQuote Reply
So it is okay to use Ebert as an example of why it is okay to criticize, but it is wrong to use Ebert as an example of how to criticize. Gotcha!
fuelpaganQuote Reply
Speaking of essays, Abigail Nussbaum has an article on GoT and female actresses:
http://wrongquestions.blogspot.com.au/2012/05/women-and-horses.html
Zigzag7Quote Reply
a pity the essays won’t be here anymore. I’ll probably forget to check Moore’s page =/
Thiago SlashQuote Reply