- This topic has 72 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Well, the thing about these fantasy worlds is progress is never made no matter how many eons pass. It’s certainly true of Tolkien’s world and of George R Martin’s. Developmentally from a technological, political and cultural standpoint, the worlds are stagnant – stuck in a continuous midieval rut. So newer, more enlightened forms of government never develop. If you moved through time on one of these worlds everything would be the same no matter how far back or how far forward in time you traveled. So don’t expect anyone to come along with any new fangled ideas about democracy or the redistribution of wealth and power.
In my latest novel — which is almost ready to go — I have characters discussing this, but with regard to our Super Hero stories. Comic Books have these amazingly powerful “heroes,” but they never really change ultimate realities. They don’t go after “systems” of oppression, for instance. They don’t solve problems like inequality, hunger, the concentrations of extreme wealth, power, privilege and access. They don’t seem to worry about the absence of democracy. Instead, they defeat certain villains, even all-powerful villains from other worlds . . . . but our status quo ante lives on.
Perhaps this is because so many comic book authors are propertarians, ideologically. That’s just a guess of mine. I have zero proof. But you’ll notice how often the “good guys” are lone billionaires, and it’s either explicit or implicit that no one but the super-rich has the means to fight “evil.” But, again, what does the world look like after they’ve done this?
How many comic book heroes actually fight for greater equality, democracy, the environment, etc. etc.? How many fight to topple wealth, privilege, hierarchies and so on?
.. If you moved through time on one of these worlds everything would be the same no matter how far back or how far forward in time you traveled. So don’t expect anyone to come along with any new fangled ideas about democracy or the redistribution of wealth and power.
===================
Well, my complaint stands. Capitalist-Fantasy-writers write stories
about feudalism-worship and monarchy-worship. And they dont have to.
They just do.w
vAnd my response stands.
There IS an element of socialist/communitarian thought in the story. One key representative of that is the group called the Brotherhood Without Banners.
In this scene, the orphaned smith Gendry decides to stay with the brotherhood. Or at this point that’s what he wants. He is speaking to a young daughter of a noble house travelling incognito and in great danger (which is why she is not acting “ladylike” here—she is in disguise as a commoner). See what Gendry says.
Restarting the series. Have watched the pilot and the second episode so far. It holds up really well on second viewing. Weird, but the killing of the direwolf “Lady” has impacted me more than several of the human deaths.
Beautiful animals. Not sure the breed, though I’m guessing WV would know. If I had a nice big yard with a fence, I’d definitely want to have one or more. The closest breed to an actual wolf would be preferable. Perhaps huskies or malamutes. Though I love golden retrievers too, as well as German shepherds.
As you know, all dogs are descended from wolves but the breed closest to the wolf genetically is the shi-tzu, followed by chows and other northern Asian breeds. So the dogs that look like wolves aren’t necessarily the closest related to them. I like all dogs but my wife and I prefer German Shepherds for many reasons with their wolf-like appearance being one of them.
BTW, the dire wolves in GOT did actually exist in the Pleistocene. They weren’t nearly as large as they are depicted to be on the show (they are about the same size as the modern grey wolf) but they had larger teeth and a stronger bite force.
You’re not alone in rooting for animals to live over humans. I’ll root for the animal every single time.
In fact in GOT class and gender inequities are constant themes and issues. They are not stable things the way they are in Tolkien.
I should say that they are not ideologically stable things the way they are in Tolkien.
That is, GOT is not a story about progress toward democracy and social democracy.
But the ideological stability of feudal beliefs and belief in its social structures is often very shakey. That is there are characters and types who do not buy in. GOT being GOT, that’s not even “one thing.” It can lead to appalling brutality on the part of lowborns who simply resent highborns. (For those who know the show, see Karl the Mutineer and Locke.) It can lead to ideological rejection of the system too (again see Gendry saying “I am done serving.” Though of course that’s complicated because Gendry the bastard doesn’t even know he has a highborn father.) In Tolkien, class and gender are never questioned–they are simply stable. Not in GOT. They are much more complicated and variable things.
Well, you have a much more detailed knowledge of the show than I do and I won’t argue with the idea that certain individuals question social structures and their place in them. But there is no large group or movement that is trying to create change towards a more benevolent system (Kaleesee’s rule would be more benevolent but it wouldn’t represent a move towards democracy). There is nothing currently happening that would suggest that if you visited Westeros 100 years from now anything would be significantly different.
But there is no large group or movement that is trying to create change towards a more benevolent system
That’s true and it too is triple-edged.
First, this is basically supposed to be the era of the War of Roses, or around the 15th century. How much of what you describe in terms of social/political visions of an alternative system was there in the actual 15th century? It was basically nothing. There’s more of that in Martin/the show than in the real 15th century.
Second, but then, why the interest in and attraction to the 15th century on the part of Martin, the show, and readers/viewers?
Third, to counter THAT, why do we demand that stories like that fit OUR visions? Which puts us in a weird place. On the one hand, IMO it’s negligent to not critique that kind of ideological investment in feudal worlds. On the other hand, it would be neo-stalinist of us to simply reject stories like that because they don’t have the “right” politics. Quite a balancing act, to serve both those things. In fact it’s kind of like being a socially aware football fan.
I’ve now completed the first two seasons, and am well into Season Three. The ability to watch back to back episodes is addictive — and really bad for my time management.
Just finished an episode with one of the best dialogues between Littlefinger and Varys. Video of scene follows. Trigger warning, just in case: One of the images especially is very graphic and unsettling:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRS8a8HjqFs
Lord Varys: I did what I did for the good of the realm.
Petyr ‘Littlefinger’ Baelish: The realm. Do you know what the realm is? It’s the thousand blades of Aegon’s enemies, a story we agree to tell each other over and over, until we forget that it’s a lie.
Lord Varys: But what do we have left, once we abandon the lie? Chaos? A gaping pit waiting to swallow us all.
Petyr ‘Littlefinger’ Baelish: Chaos isn’t a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some, are given a chance to climb. They refuse, they cling to the realm or the gods or love. Illusions. Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
