No. No they should not, at least according to the people who voted in our poll.
Stay the course, guys.
If you’re just joining us, this poll was inspired by comments made by Game of Thrones director Jeremy Podeswa (“The Gift,” “Hardhome”). He said that the show’s producers were “responsive” to the intense fan reaction following Sansa Stark’s rape by Ramsay Bolton in Season 5 and had changed “a couple of things” about Season 6 as a result. Most people didn’t think this was the right call.
Mind you, not everyone agreed. This is a slippery question, and one that I was happy to see inspired a lot of discussion. Plenty of people, including myself, thought that there may be times when heeding fan complaints is warranted. The producers shouldn’t try to please everyone—that’s impossible—but being sensitive to the fan base in select circumstances can help ground the show.
This debate played out in the comments. Take this argument from commenter KK, who stumped for the “They shouldn’t change anything” side of the debate:
"No, they should absolutely NOT change anything. As we all know, often the people who are happiest with something; they are the most quiet — so… just because (arguably) the minority of viewers that can’t handle the violence have a louder voice, doesn’t mean there are more of them or that their opinion should be one of which the producers should cater. The death of Shireen bothered me far more than Sansa’s wedding rape (both harsh) but I wouldn’t want the show to pull back on ANY of the violence. It moves the story forward, makes it a more powerful and heart gripping show (why I think it’s so popular) and it’s a massive part of the GoT world — and a mirror of our own world in many ways."
At the same time, commenters like Jaqen is Q didn’t think there was anything wrong with the producers using the resources available to them, including fan criticism, to craft the best story they can.
"If the producers do something on the show and lots of people say it’s wrong, offensive, etc. and the producers look at it and go ‘Yeah, those people might have a point’ and change it or do something in response, they have every right to do so. It’s not censorship, it’s not backpedaling, it’s not a violation of free speech or free expression; it’s just a change of perspective based on interactions with other people, which is how life works."
But back on the other hand, Nathan made a good point about the authors of a show, in this case David Benioff and Dan Weiss, relying on their storytelling instincts and not giving into the whims of people who may not be thinking very far ahead.
"I’d argue that the author, and the ones creating the show, have artistic merits and an understanding of literature higher than the average person. Therefore, they shouldn’t placate the average viewer who may not have an adequate understanding of fiction writing, cultural context, and characterization etc. to have a fully vetted opinion on the story as it stands, nor where it intends to go. In other words, let the artists create, then judge their contribution to our culture after the story is finished, when we can critique the story thoroughly, intellectually, and as a whole."
Then again, the people who make Game of Thrones don’t do so in a vacuum. The ideal of the artist sitting alone in a room and creating a masterpiece is appealing, but it’s not very realistic in this day in age, especially when it comes to something as popular as Game of Thrones. Benioff and Weiss probably can’t help but be influenced by fan reaction a little bit. The best we can hope for, I think, is that they exercise wisdom and restraint when deciding how to handle those reactions.
Then again (I’m saying that a lot—it’s that kind of debate), Benioff and Weiss may have ways of insulating themselves from criticism if they really wanted to. As commenter SF Bluestocking said:
"I, personally, think that the show would benefit from, if not necessarily more engagement with criticism on the part of the showrunners, definitely more eyes on things. It’s a show with a pretty small writing room and very few people in positions of actual decision-making power. The good news is that this means we basically always know where to point fingers when things are bad. The bad news about this is that, with so few cooks in the kitchen, so to speak, and all with so much power and control over the process (and with basically free rein as far as HBO is concerned because $$$), there’s really no accountability unless D&D choose to be accountable. So far, that hasn’t been their style. This would be helped by just having more (and more diverse) people in the decision-making room."
And then there are people like MF, who’s normally in favor of an author sticking to her vision but might make an exception in the case of Benioff and Weiss, who are supposed to be channeling someone else’s vision (that’s the idea, anyway).
"I’d normally say no to this, but the things viewers have reacted negatively to were not things that were in the actual books, but made up by the writers of the show. I felt like last season went out of the way to make everything lurid and unpleasant…I HOPE, anyway, that this backlash against some of last season’s events might make them question their assumptions about why people are watching the show."
I don’t think these questions are going to be solved anytime soon. There are too many competing views. For the moment, all we can do is sit back and see if the decision bears fruit come Season 6.