Whatever. Again, I get it it’s just a show but it just really disturbed the crap out of me. Sorry. I have 4 daughters and I guess it just hit home a little too hard. I’m still sick about it.

Beside their being historical or mythological precedent for the sacrifice, fantasy has the added aspect that the magic is actually real. If someone parted an ocean in front of you, or showed you visions of the future that came to pass, or turned water into wine, or birthed a shadow demon that slew your enemies, and the only person you’ve ever seen do any kind of magic or miracle-working claims their power comes from a god, you’d do some definite re-thinking about your religious affiliation.

Stannis believes Melisandre when she tells him that if he is not on the Iron Throne when the Long Night comes, all life on Planetos will be extinguished. If you fervently believed that with all of your heart, I can’t believe there is no sacrifice you would not make, no price you would not pay to accomplish that goal. Has Stannis lost his mind? Maybe. But a rational person could still make that decision based on their beliefs. People stone their daughters to death for getting raped in the real world, and believing you are saving humanity is a better excuse than… whatever makes them think stoning your daughter to death is a good idea.

Melisandre gets a lot of shade thrown her way because she is misunderstood. It’s not difficult to misunderstand her, because she is tough to empathize with, our own experiences being so far removed from hers. She is certain that based on all her powers, personal experience, and knowledge, that mankind is going to perish if she fails. If you really believed that, you’d probably have few qualms about sacrificing as many people as were required. Could she be kinder or more empathetic about it? I suppose so. But if that’s the only way her “real” magic works, through sacrifice and blood and fire, then I’d argue she is doing the right thing. Maybe she isn’t being super friendly about it, but if you had to sacrifice a bunch of people to save the earth, you’d probably stop seeing them as human at some point as a psychological defense.

I’m not arguing that they are good or likeable people. I suppose time will be the judge of the success of their methods. It’s just that I don’t have any problems imagining that someone might do the things they have done. It doesn’t strike me as unrealistic or far-fetched in the slightest. I think people do things crazier than this without seeing proof that magic exists and is powered by blood and sacrifice.

Well, in that case, you’ll be relieved to know The Iliad and Game of Thrones never actually happened.

-Tom

Ah, right, how could I forget that one! :)

Why do you even know this, Mr. Frazer?

-Tom

I wish I had an elaborate story about discovering a love of ancient far east history back in my college days… but really it came from an amazing podcast called Hardcore History by Dan Carlin. He did a series called Wrath of the Khans, all about the history of the Mongol Empire, starting with Genghis and ending a few generations later. If you’re at all interested in that time period (even if you’re not, honestly), you should give it a try. Wrath of the Khans and Blueprint For Armageddon (about WWI, also amazing) are both free out on Apple Podcast.

Oh, I definitely know Carlin’s podcast. By the way, this the the second time today someone has told me about his Mongol series. TRUE STORY.

-Tom

I think the “problem” is that Stannis has always been an asshole, but until now, he’d been na asshole to people we either didn’t care about, or could rationalize being an asshole to. His brother? Well, can only have one king. Nameless characters we care nothing about? Don’t care. His nephew? Meh, not like the world cares for bastards anyway, he wouldn’t have much problem with it.

This time… Man, Cersei’s bad, but not THAT bad. :D

But I don’t see the story of Abraham and Isaac as similar in terms of theme or tone. But if your point is that mythology/religion is full of parents sacrificing children, well, yeah. In that case, I don’t know why you wouldn’t just go full on New Testament with your parallel. :)

That was basically my point, yeah. Mythology, religion and folklore is full of stories of parents sacrificing children to appease the gods or to stave off some fate (Hansel and Gretel anyone?). Hell, I’ve already played about five different quests in Witcher 3 that are variations on the theme. I don’t get why this use of the trope in a genre which very explicitly builds on mythology, religion and folklore would provoke such an uproar.

I thought about referencing the New Testament but I don’t think it works as well because a) God works in mysterious ways and all that, and b) I’ve never really bought the whole sacrifice angle to the crucifixion anyway.

I think part of the point of the fantasy genre and showing something like Stannis is, ok, you can actually understand someone possibly doing horrible things for what they perceive to be the greater good on the basis of magical thinking when they have manifest evidence that magic works, that reality is magical.

But if that’s the case, what are we to think of people whose magical thinking leads them to do horrible things on the basis of no evidence at all?

I think that’s the subtle - and very contemporary - take-home message here.

Well, to be fair to kentcol, I don’t think there’s any sort of uproar, is there? He’s just saying he found it disturbing. I just wanted to point out that it’s an established tradition in mythology and not just something put in for shock value. For something closer to an uproar, I think you have to go back to Sensa’s wedding night.

-Tom

Maybe uproar’s the wrong word, but I’m seeing an awful lot of “Fuck Stannis!” sentiment, here and elsewhere. Which, fair enough, but it’s not like this is the first time that he’s done shitty things at Melisandre’s behest, or just because he thinks he should be king. And I don’t recall people saying they’d stop watching the show after the Craster revelations, say. It’s more like the Ned Stark reaction and, five seasons and an indeterminate number of books in, you’d think people would be braced for this sort of thing by now.

Stannis in the books is incredibly different from Stannis in the show. Most Stannis-love comes from the books (I would think - I haven’t seen what you’ve read). The show more or less completely screwed his character, where they tell you X (that he is a stickler for justice/correctness/law), while he acts completely contrary to that (well, actually they have him act extremely inconsistently regarding that), thus ending up appearing a hypocritical zealot.

Half my army is made up of unbelievers. I will have no burnings. Pray harder.

The knight hesitated. “Your Grace, if you are dead — "
" — you will avenge my death, and seat my daughter on the Iron Throne. Or die in the attempt.”

The directors trying to cover their asses by putting this on Martin is actually incredibly spoiler-y to the books, actually, in a completely different manner, since:
a) Book Stannis would never burn his daughter
b) Book Stannis is in no position to burn his daughter

Where book Shireen is located in relation to other events and other characters…and now knowing that she’s a goner…is a big freaking deal. It’s a HUGE spoiler.

I read the first book maybe 15 years ago, and I’ve been in on the show since day one. Generally speaking I’ve agreed with Ginger Yellow. This is what the show is, this is what that world is, I’m not surprised at the grimness. But during season five I’ve had a growing sense of disappointment or dislike with the storytelling. It feels intermittently tasteless to me, in the very high-minded sense that John Gardner uses here:

To write with taste, in the highest sense, is to write with the assumption that one out of a hundred people who read one’s work may be dying, or have some loved one dying; to write so that no one commits suicide, no one despairs; to write, as Shakespeare wrote, so that people understand, sympathize, see the universality of pain, and feel strengthened, if not directly encouraged to live on. This is not to say, of course, that the writer who has no personal experience of pain and terror should try to write about pain and terror, or that one should never write lightly, humorously; it is only to say that every writer should be aware that he might be read by the desperate, by people who might be persuaded toward life or death. It does not mean, either, that writers should write moralistically, like preachers. And above all it does not mean that writers should lie. It means only that they should think, always, of what harm they might inadvertently do and not do it. If there is good to be said, the writer should remember to say it. If there is bad to be said, he should say it in a way that reflects the truth that, though we see the evil, we choose to continue among the living. The true artist is never so lost in his imaginary world that he forgets the real world, where teen-agers have a chemical propensity toward anguish, people between their thirties and forties have a tendency to get divorced, and people in their seventies have a tendency toward loneliness, poverty, self-pity, and sometimes anger. The true artist chooses never to be a bad physician.

If you had a lousy Sunday, I doubt you felt any better about it after episode nine – it wasn’t a life-affirming hour of television. ASOIAF (true of the books as it is the show) gets lost in its fictional world sometimes, and deploys really unpleasant material for a purpose as low as character development. Stannis is a ruthless, driven man; Ramsay Bolton is an ogre; Joffrey is a terrible prince. How this is proved to us is so frequently sordid and so frequently nothing more.

I admire a lot about ASOIAF, its narrative engineering in particular. This story is a big machine with a lot of moving parts, and being passed through its innards is an engrossing experience for the audience. The catastrophes are scheduled just so, the twists are somehow right on time. But for all that, it can never be my favorite like it was when I was just a kid reading the first book – I’m now dubious of its heart.

Compare Game of Thrones to another HBO show, Deadwood, to see what I mean. Deadwood had all kinds of mayhem and terrible behavior, just like GOT, but it never lost sight of its humanity. There was just a lot more mercy in that show, if that makes sense.

I would guess that the people who aren’t disturbed by Stannis’ actions don’t have any daughters. The world can burn to hell & back - there’s no way I’d ever hurt either of mine to prevent it. I’d make a reference to a certain game here but I don’t have the spoiler tag format memorized.

Of course. I’m not expecting a parent (or non-parents!) to be OK with Stannis’s actions. They’re monstrous. But again, do you stop reading fairy tales because the parents keep trying to kill their children? There’s nothing particularly out of the ordinary for GoT to present this idea, other than that it didn’t shy away from the horror of it (well, it did actually - unless I’m mistaken there was no shot with Shireen on the pyre after it was lit). And, let’s not forget, we’ve already had a character that sacrifices his sons to the White Walkers and “marries” his daughters.

If you had a lousy Sunday, I doubt you felt any better about it after episode nine – it wasn’t a life-affirming hour of television. ASOIAF (true of the books as it is the show) gets lost in its fictional world sometimes, and deploys really unpleasant material for a purpose as low as character development. Stannis is a ruthless, driven man; Ramsay Bolton is an ogre; Joffrey is a terrible prince. How this is proved to us is so frequently sordid and so frequently just that.

I admire a lot about ASOIAF, its narrative engineering in particular. This story is a big machine with a lot of moving parts, and being passed through its innards is an engrossing experience for the audience. The catastrophes are scheduled just so, the twists are somehow right on time. But for all that, it can never be my favorite like it was when I was just a kid reading the first book – I’m now dubious of its heart.

No arguments here. I liked the first few books of GoT and I’m mostly enjoying the show even now, but a lot of the time it’s grim just for the sake of being grim. That’s a handy corrective to genre norms for a while, and doubly so on American TV, but I’m not sure we need 6 books of it.

Nothing in this show really bothers me or disturbs me as it’s a show, not real, etc. Or in just about any other show or movie out there. But this particular scene just really got to me. I assume they chose to film it to make it as terribly disturbing as possible. The tender scene with Davos, then the long slow walk where Shireen clearly seemed to be the only one not in on the plan. Her sudden realization about what was happening when she saw the pyre - her frantic calls for her dad. And Stannis just stands there and watches his daughter BURN. No mercy, no milk of the poppy knockout pre-murder drink…just tie her to the pole and watch her burn, horribly. Even Mance was given the mercy of an arrow to ease the pain. A shot of her burning would have actually been less disturbing as I assume it’d look like some cheesy CGI effect.

I don’t understand why anyone would be angry about the show spoiling book events at this point. We always knew that the show would overtake Martin’s writing pace. Now that the show has caught up to the books, it’s going to all be “book spoilers” from here on out.

Might not have been too clear, but I don’t care too much about spoilers myself. That doesn’t mean it’s not a huge reveal though.

Also that it wasn’t the show spoiling things, but rather the directors outside the show spoiling things in their defense attempts that’s unusual.

Yeah, the scene was built up and executed extremely well, I thought. I don’t think it has promoted ‘Red Wedding’ levels of internet rage, but it will probably stick with me more.

In comparison (and perhaps because of), I thought the second half, though conceptually cool, was pretty crap. Jorah’s fighting choreography was back to amateur hour. It looked terrible. I appreciate this is the high level competition and all, but he looked (or was made to look) barely competent. Lost his weapon on occasion and was even saved from death by a stupid deus ex-machina. I don’t even want to talk about that stupid rolling finishing move. Ridiculous.

Then, again, the Sullied proved to be nothing more than an empty plot device to be wielded as the writers see fit, with no regard for their established reputation. Completely incompetent during the initial assault, until of course the writers need them not to be after they are encircled in the arena and heavily outnumbered by a troupe that attack individually. Just so some suspense could be built until Drogon arrived. Drogon’s arrival was and should have remained terrifying for the enemy. Adolescent or not, the thrown spears appearing to damage Drogon ran against how these creatures have been built up.

And did nobody think of the fate of those left behind? Were not all of the entourage basically consigned to death, hopelessly surrounded and outnumbered by the enemy as depicted? How can we expect any of them to escape alive?

I think in any universe you can imagine, people is going to abandon Stannis. People do egregious shit, but they don’t tolerate egregious shit on others. The soldiers of stannis are going to do a “fuck this dude”, the next time theres a opportunity.