Game of Thrones [Potential Book Spoilers]

If you consider the fact that every single one of the conflicts in this entire goddamn series has its catalyst with either psychotic cold zombie creatures that want to kill you and the nobility squabbling over land and basically wrecking the land, why can't the peasants be in charge? Can't be worse than having the feudal nobility in charge considering that there's about a 1/10 ratio of non-assholes versus assholes.

Even if Dany or Stannis are put in charge, nothing changes. The nobles are still going to abuse their power, and the commonfolk are still going to get dicked over. At least if they lop all their heads off, that won't be a problem.

edited 28th Sep '12 3:44:54 PM by math792d

Then we just find out the commonfolk have the same ratio of dicks versus decent people the aristocracy has, and the dicks in power abuse that power in slightly different, but equally dickish ways.

A revolution will only make things worse somehow.

Yeah, it would be like Astapor all over again.

edited 29th Sep '12 5:21:41 AM by Patty

I'd say that any revolution of the sort would be like the French Revolution. It would be brutal and quickly revert to the original system, but worse.

I don't know about any of you guys, but I've never actually read the end of a Martin story, so I have no idea what his endings are like. The ends of the individual books are just cliffhangers in an ongoing story.

I know he has written a couple of other things, how did those end? (Broadly, I mean. I might still read them someday.)

The Armageddon Rag had a decent ending. That book's main problem was the predictability of the plot twists, but everything worked out well. Fevre Dream's ending was pretty damn satisfying in a bittersweet sort of way, though there was one element in the book's structure that I didn't like. Hunter's Run, if you want to count that, had a great ending, but it's hard to tell how much of that can be attributed to GRRM and how much to his co-authors.

edited 30th Sep '12 6:27:15 AM by BornIn1142

Pretty much the theme of Martin's work is "Good wins but isn't very happy about it,"

Here's a site with a lot of production stills from season 2.

Also, it confirms that Doreah killed Irri. Sigh. I thought I was over my feelings for Irri.

... Damnit. Character Derailment, much? Seemed particularily gratuitous to have her pull off such a radical Face–Heel Turn without any Foreshadowing whatsoever, especially since she was always depicted as extremely sweet, extremely loyal, and serving Dany faithfully. The whole "sleeping with Xaro" thing? She ordered her to sleep with men in order to get intel when they were 'happy'... I know we were supposed to get this as her Going Native in desperation, but I didn't really buy it.

edited 1st Oct '12 10:06:46 PM by karasu91

Why couldn't they have let Doreah die in the Red Wastes like in the books? That was actually a rather touching scene that served to show that Dany really is a decent person.

Also, I wish that they would have Other Darrined Rakharo instead of killing him off and replacing him with Kovarro. TV!Rakharo was awesome and didn't deserve that Bridge Dropping. Hell, there's even a small scene in Dance which seems to lampshade Rakharo's transformation into an Ensemble Dark Horse.

Lastly, Xaro should have been a Karma Houdini. The writers actually turned him into an interesting character and I would have liked to see him again.

Agree with all of those points. As much as I was amused by crazy!Dany, they kind of wasted some good plot elements there. Particularly with Xaro who would have been really perfect as the antagonist in the show's adaptation of the Mereen hijinks- I guess he could still show up (with the reveal that there was a secret door in the vault) but I doubt it.

I can sort of understand the Doreah Face–Heel Turn- it gives a good basis for Dany's paranoia later on.

That's one of the reasons that I felt this season was "meh" for me. So many wasted opportunities, so many what ifs. Also if Xaro escaped via a secret door it would just look cartoony silly

Well, in their defense book 2 wasn't all that as well. I mean, you have some interesting things going around but it's mostly setting up book three where every little piece of shit hits every fan in the seven kingdoms. I honestly think S3 is going to be even better than the first.

I blame the books. No, really. I watched the first season in a marathon run and fell in love with it. Then I read the books and was just blown by how good it was. Then season 2 came and was just itching to see how it could top the first season roller-coaster. Unlike the first season, I was more "meh, this was good" rather than "wow, I can't believe this is happening!" because I have read the books and watching every episode was like just some really, really good actors remaking the scenes from the books rather than bringing it alive. Its all a matter of subjective perspective. Plenty of others have enjoyed it.

Don't get me wrong, its still quality television and I was pleasantly surprised on how much I enjoyed the Tywin/ Arya mouth off scenes. Rereading the 2nd book a few months ago made me realize just how boring Dany's chapters were.

edited 2nd Oct '12 4:35:41 AM by Exterminatus

I think the books can be compared to relationships. because I'm sexist like that.

A Go T is your first girlfriend: you're both young and inexperianced but you have a lot of fun together. There are a lot of new things to remembers, new tricks to discover and practice and you're both still rough around the edges. Throughout the relationship you're not quite sure what you're doing and how much of it is a part of every relationship or just this one, but you're pretty sure you're getting the hang of this women thing.

A Co K is the one you're not sure if she's a rebound or you're in love again. You compare everything to the first relationship you had and you're not sure if it's the same, better or just different. Nothing is worse and you're still having fun but just when you think you know what to do in a relationship you find out you didn't know half of what you should. You found her because you were looking for a women to fulfill the needs the first one couldn't fill, but you're still not sure if this relationship could have lasted if you didn't have the first girl in the first place.

A So S is the mythological ex, the one you compare all of your relationships to. She takes your expectations and give them a 180 spin that's more than everything you've ever hoped for. Your relationship is a wild ride, you're having a ton of fun and she makes you feel like you know everything there is to know about relationships and you feel like you've found the one. Even though you end up drifting apart it's more because of circumstances rather than a fight or something and you're still friends.

AFFC is the rebound. You've spent a long time as a single man and she just showed up and she reminds you a lot of girlfriend number two so why not. As the months pass you realize you're two different people who want different things from a relationship and you're not really 100% compatible for each other. You break apart after a heartfelt talk and remain Facebook friends, ocasionally liking each other's status. In hindsight you realize she had a lot to offer and it wasn't such a bad relationship, you were just in a different place and had needs she couldn't fulfill and vice versa.

A Dw D is the one you meet right when you start thinking love is a myth. She reminds you a lot of girl #3 even though you're still a bit sore about your relationship with girl #4 so it takes a while for the relationship to really bloom. Everyone says how good you two look together and you feel like you've found the one - she's not perfect, but you realize you're not looking for perfect so she'll have to do.

Only time will tell who girls no. 6 and 7 would be.

Death P Ige ON, do you know anything about the French Revolution?

Because it doesn't seem like it, so stop talking about things you don't understand.

I was referring to Napoleon, aka one of the direct consequences of the French Revolution, which was the same sort of Absolute Ruler that the French Revolution disposed, but he was worse since he was more competent than the King that was disposed.

How about that; was that trolling, or being a dickhole? It's so hard to tell.

That was me being a jerkhole.

Thanks for clarifying!

I'm not sure, Sock. The third book was definitely better than 2, and 2 was arguably worse than 1, but I think what people are worried about is that the adaptation of S2 was worse than the adaptation of S1, and that this trend might continue. But given that the source material is better to begin with, maybe they'll keep S3 closer to the source.

(Incidentally, love the relationship analogy.)

edited 2nd Oct '12 8:53:30 AM by johnnye

Actually, false; a lot changed under Napoleon, and actual French democracy could only have existed once he swept away the last vestiges of the Ancien Regime. It's worth noting that all kings after Napoleon (there were three, and all three were The Scrappy to the French eventually) only ruled as constitutional monarchs. Napoleon wasn't really much of a sustainable force, anyway — he spent the majority of his rule at war with all of Europe. Once he was gone, the conservative monarchies that defeated him had a tough time preventing reforms from Napoleon and the French Revolution from seeping into their own countries.

edited 2nd Oct '12 3:10:19 PM by CrimsonZephyr

Napoleon was effectively an absolute monarch who ruled with an iron fist, sort of like the French Kings that were overthrown. He was even crowned by the Pope.

Nope. He told the Pope to come to the ceremony and then crowned himself. Because when you're powerful enough you can be a dick to the pope.

Right. Sorry for the mistake. However, that makes him more absolutist than the French Monarchs before him. At least they were nominally beneath the Pope. He put no one above himself.