quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I just don't see any point to the character, either in the movies or the books. He's one of the more colorful side characters, sure, but I don't understand the fan appeal. It's like all the fan love for Boba Fett, which I never understood, either.
I'm not sure what you mean by "point" to him.
I don't get the fan love for Boba Fett either, for what it's worth. But that's because Boba Fett doesn't really interact with anyone in an interesting way, doesn't have interesting motivations that we can see, or really do anything interesting at all.
The same can't be said for Sandor. He has numerous interesting interactions with people, and by the end of Feast he has effected events in several POV plotlines in significant ways.
I mean, he could lift out of the story and his roles filled with other characters and events if you really wanted them to be, but that can be said of every non-POV character and most of the POV ones. Doing so would change the story, so, if that's your goal, then... yeah. Have at it, I guess.
I guess it really does just boil down to this: I'm not really sure what you mean when you say you don't see any "point" to his character. Which characters do you see a "point" to? And why? What do you mean by "point," exactly?
Sandor certainly does a lot more than Myrcella. His personality is also more complicated, in a way that I find interesting.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Heh, which characters do you like Tom? If you can't find something interesting in the inner conflict and self-loathing of the Hound, who does present enough complexity? (You can't say Tyrion, everyone likes him )
Posts: 3564 | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
New episode aired last night. According to the reviews I've read, it's the best so far. Going to watch it soon Posts: 1324 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, I'm kind of dumbfounded by Tom's take here. The Hound's little arguments with Sansa about "true knighthood" are some of the best passages in the second book.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: It's like all the fan love for Boba Fett, which I never understood, either.
series was a manufactory of iconic characters, and people like iconic badguys for the iconic goodguys
fett was in right place right time with a stone-cold attitude, cool looking armor, and actually getting away with solo prior to the conclusion of the trilogy. becomes the dark han solo. remains noteworthy.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Sandor is the Hound right? He's grown on me, especially with his PTSD moment last episode.
So was the purpose of Tywin stealing a march on Robb meant to get back to King's Landing quickly? Does this mean Robb has like all of the 7 Kingdom's to move around in unopposed?
IP: Logged |
posted
I thought the green fire moment with tyrion was great. I wish this show had more episodes. 10 just doesn't seem like enough.
Posts: 1324 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: It's like all the fan love for Boba Fett, which I never understood, either.
series was a manufactory of iconic characters, and people like iconic badguys for the iconic goodguys
fett was in right place right time with a stone-cold attitude, cool looking armor, and actually getting away with solo prior to the conclusion of the trilogy. becomes the dark han solo. remains noteworthy.
Not to mention he stands alone as the only non-imperial who doesn't take any guff from Vader.
Lando says regarding Han, "That was never a part of our agreement!" and gets "I've altered the terms of our agreement, pray I don't alter them any further."
Boba Fett says regarding Han, "What if he doesn't survive, he's worth a lot to *me*" and gets in effect, "The Empire will reimburse you." Coming from Vader that's down right nuts to hear him say. Clearly Boba Fett has a history that demands that sort of respect. Unfortunately the only history we're given is him holding his fathers severed head against his own. I still can't believe George Lucas managed to make me laugh at such an image.
posted
I say just as good. The final scene changes the balance of the books though- the Others aren't that important at this point.
I like it in this show how some things are so very much the same and some are completely different. Some characters are wonderfully played- I hated the book Sansa and she remains just as annoying in the show. Many characters are much more likeable though in the show, like Winterfell's maester. Sometimes I come to a conclusion that the second series was actually a little better than the books itself- for instance: I had a really mixed feeling about Robb getting married, it seems to me, that he married the girl to *SPOILER ALERT* get killed off. TV Robb's relationship is far more complex and it is easier to comprehend that he is willing to reject the Frey girl.
Posts: 723 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
I don't think Sansa deserves all the hate she gets, either in book or series. Her storyline is exactly paralleling Arya's.
Arya begins with romantic notions of being a warrior. She starves, is beaten, is blinded. She is coming out the other end as a mature assassin.
Sansa begins with romantic notions of being a lady at court. She is beaten, humiliated, deceived, nearly raped. Her time under Littlefinger is teaching her the game.
I think at the end of Sansa's storyline, she will be a highly accomplished schemer, along the lines of Verys and Littlefinger themselves.
Posts: 1515 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Last scene made me think that the three blows thing is psychologically wrong- it should be the other way. One blow for immediate danger, two for danger and three for allies. It is easier to blow just once in case you are under attack. And the people listening are automatically alarmed just after one blow.
Posts: 723 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
As for the rest of the episode, I thought it was great! I loved Arya's scenes. Next to Tyrion, she is quickly becoming my favorite character. John Snow is always fantastic, too, but he didn't do quite as much as I was hoping for.
Speaking of Tyrion...poor guy! I felt so bad for him. I really hope he comes out happy in the end.
Posts: 1324 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: I guess my question about one of the two permanent wounds for major characters was answered.
Negative prosthetics are rather difficult, to be fair. And blowing the CG budget for the remaining seasons would severely impede dragon awesome. Or existence, for that matter.
Posts: 3932 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jeff C.: What was the other wound?
The one we saw. Tyrion's wound. Now I have only read through book 3 though, but it played a big part in it.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
I haven't been on this forum in a long time, but when I found myself really wanting to talk to someone about Game of Thrones my first thought was to come here.
I've seen some of the scenes from the HBO show on youtube, but that's all.
In the last couple of months, though, I listened to all of the audio books, which is about 202 hours of listening time! My love/hate feelings toward the novel is pretty intense.
Lengths: Book 1 almost 34 hours Book 2 over 37 hours Book 3 almost 34 hours Book 4 almost 48 hours Book 5 almost 49 hours
Maybe since I immersed myself in that world so intensely in a short amount of time it's given me a different experience than I otherwise would have had.
Similar to OSC, the characters feel very real. You get deeply immersed in a rich, complicated world, and the story is not predictable.
There might be a better way to explain this, but it seems to me that what the GoT world lacks is a meaningful theology.
Yes, religion/belief in god(s) is a core part of the story, as are the actual supernatural goings-on. They explain how some of the events occur, and why many characters do what they do. But since it almost always explains why someone has done something naive stupid or evil.
What, in that world, would be a reason to do something good, especially if it is difficult? If you've read the books, whenever (and I mean WHENEVER) a character has a hope for something good, it won't work out for them. It often isn't the simple opposite that happens ("oh, I hope I live," but then they die). Usually something unexpected happens that takes the story another direction (which is cool,but . . .).
In fact, that's the one way George R.R. Martin's story is completely predictable. When you're reading and a character is hoping something good will happen, rest assured it will not happen. (Well, maybe 10% of the time it does.)
There is constant, intense suffering and so much devastating death among characters Martin brings you to care about that it risks pushing out any reason to hope for good and any reason to engage in moral behavior. If the character you care about doesn't die, there's a very good chance they will get grossly disfigured.
I'm not saying I wish G.R.R. Martin has written a happier book. I'm just saying that, if you were a character in his story, there is little reason to even try and do something good. There is no reason for suffering or effort. I kept hoping that there would be something, even a little, to keep hope or purpose alive as I read on.
*Spoiler Alert* It doesn't. Winter is coming.
In some ways I've liked it. It makes a point about the pointless of the plans of men, the emptiness of ambition, etc. But that's a lot of reading/listening to teach a lesson about how "life is a #%@# then you die."
It reminds me of Dream of the Red Chamber/Story of the Stone in ancient Chinese literature, where it seems that someone found a rich story (probably based on someone's real life) and wrote a chapter at the end that twisted the story into a parable about nothing in the story really mattered because it was all emptiness.
posted
Good things happen for the characters all the time; they just don't have any obvious triumphs. But not even the villains have obvious triumphs; even the death of Ned Stark was acknowledged by every "villain" (except the dummy Joffery) to be a huge disaster.
Some examples of good things happening: Arya meeting that assassin who's name I can't be bothered to google. Or Jon's successful defense of the wall. Or Jamie rescuing Brianne from Harranhal. The list goes on. People think nothing good ever happens because there is no closure.
Posts: 1515 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Foust: Good things happen for the characters all the time; they just don't have any obvious triumphs. But not even the villains have obvious triumphs; even the death of Ned Stark was acknowledged by every "villain" (except the dummy Joffery) to be a huge disaster.
Some examples of good things happening: Arya meeting that assassin who's name I can't be bothered to google. Or Jon's successful defense of the wall. Or Jamie rescuing Brianne from Harranhal. The list goes on. People think nothing good ever happens because there is no closure.
quote:Originally posted by Foust: Good things happen for the characters all the time; they just don't have any obvious triumphs. But not even the villains have obvious triumphs; even the death of Ned Stark was acknowledged by every "villain" (except the dummy Joffery) to be a huge disaster.
Some examples of good things happening: Arya meeting that assassin who's name I can't be bothered to google. Or Jon's successful defense of the wall. Or Jamie rescuing Brianne from Harranhal. The list goes on. People think nothing good ever happens because there is no closure.
Well said.
You would dare support this "Foust" from beyond the Wall?!
Posts: 1324 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the books lose their impact the further you go because you end up becoming jaded and desensitized to all the horror.
I can remember, reading the first book, being really horrified by Sandor killing the butcher's boy. And the scene where Jory dies really upset me. I empathized really well with Danaerys (I was about her age at the time) and felt a really strong connection to all the characters.
By the end of the 5th book, last year, characters were dying left and right and horrible things abounded, and I couldn't really say I felt anything at all. For better or worse, somewhere between book 3 and book 4, I lost my ability to be emotionally invested in the series. Now it's merely an intellectual fascination. (which is fine, they're still excellent books... but they'll never hold the same place that the Lord of the Rings or Ender Books do, for example, as stories I hold close to my heart)
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Foust: People think nothing good ever happens because there is no closure.
I've tried to think about this, because it's true that the lack of closure bothers me. I've tried to imagine certain threads of the story reaching some type of closure to imagine whether it would change my basic experience with the novels.
If some of the threads resolved themselves in ways that allowed for hope, or allowed the purpose a character was pursing to have meaning, then yes, it would change my experience of the book.
But if the story threads were resolved in a way that meant the extensive suffering the characters went through served no purpose, that whatever the characters had hoped for or believed in came to naught, or resulted in their failure and death, then I'd still feel like, in that world, there is little reason to try for anything good or noble.
Wait . . . that IS what happens in that book constantly. Maybe there IS a lot of closure in the books, just not the kind that supports the idea that there are things worth suffering and dying for.
quote:Originally posted by Dogbreath: For better or worse, somewhere between book 3 and book 4, I lost my ability to be emotionally invested in the series.
Thanks Dogbreath, that is exactly what I was trying to say.
Posts: 159 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Combine the long wait between books and the almost unremitting grimness for the characters in which I had an emotional investment and the addition of new characters in which I had no real investment I lost my emotional connection to the series as well. I am still buying the books when they come out but am in no hurry to read them. I hope that when they are all out I can start again to build that connection.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Foust: People think nothing good ever happens because there is no closure.
If some of the threads resolved themselves in ways that allowed for hope, or allowed the purpose a character was pursing to have meaning, then yes, it would change my experience of the book.
Not to be a Debby Downer, but real life doesn't have meaning, at least not the sort of meaning you want. There isn't ever going to be closure to the human story that makes the holocaust and sexual slavery and the second season finale of Dexter worth it.
Posts: 1515 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
[/QUOTE]Not to be a Debby Downer, but real life doesn't have meaning, at least not the sort of meaning you want. There isn't ever going to be closure to the human story that makes the holocaust and sexual slavery and the second season finale of Dexter worth it.[/QUOTE]
I've thought about this, but wasn't able to get a definitive pronouncement on it until now. Thank you, now I know!
posted
So I occasionally think about the GOT series and this brief discussion. If there really is no meaning in life, no meaning in suffering, and nothing to hope for (which I think is the case in GOT), there is no reason to do anything.
If you were in that GOT world, what would be worth working for, striving for, and suffering for?
The fact that Martin is such a great writer, and specifically that he creates absolutely amazing characters, just made the above point all the more poignant for me.
Posts: 159 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:If you were in that GOT world, what would be worth working for, striving for, and suffering for?
Reread "Ulysses." He says basically what I would say, only way better.
quote: Death closes all; but something ere the end, Some work of noble note, may yet be done, Not unbecoming men that strove with Gods. * It may be that the gulfs will wash us down: It may be we shall touch the Happy Isles, [5] And see the great Achilles, whom we knew. Tho' much is taken, much abides; and tho' We are not now that strength which in old days Moved earth and heaven; that which we are, we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts, Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
It's part of the human condition. We just keep going. We find new things that are worth working and striving and suffering for.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I will gladly concede any point made by M or Bond. Well played.
So it sounds like Don Quixote is the prototype. There is no actual meaning or purpose, but darned if we aren't going to nobly press on in our noble striving.
Posts: 159 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"There was a tale he had read once, long ago, as a small boy: the story of a traveler who had slipped down a cliff, with man-eating tigers above him and a lethal fall below him, who managed to stop his fall halfway down the side of the cliff, holding on for dear life. There was a clump of strawberries beside him, and certain death above him and below. What should he do? went the question.
And the reply was, Eat the strawberries.
The story had never made sense to him as a boy. It did now." -American Gods
So, for a year now I've been thinking about this thread, and the series in general. And I think I've been able to resolve the tension between my love of the books and the pain they cause.
I read A Storm of Swords when I was 16 years old. It was before I had ever really experienced love or romance, but I found myself incredibly moved by the doomed love story between Jon and Ygritte. And I attribute most of that to a single line that has haunted me these past 8 years:
"You're mine," she whispered. "Mine, as I'm yours. And if we die, we die. All men must die, Jon Snow. But first, we'll live.”
This is the line I've whispered under my breath when entering new relationships, and also when going through bad breakups. It's what I've thought about when hitchhiking across Iceland, backpacking through the Paria Canyon, skydiving, fastroping, and adventuring. And it's really, in a couple words, a summary of the Song of Ice and Fire trilogy.
There's so much death and sadness and evil in the world of SoIaF. To the point where sometimes it's hard to even keep going, because how can it make any sense when there is so much badness? What's the point of telling the story of Ned trying to save the Realm if he just gets his head chopped off? Of Robb becoming the King in the North if it just ends with him being betrayed and murdered? Well, because *all* stories end that way, if we're honest. Everyone dies in the end, in some way or another.
The books are also incredibly beautiful - both in the sense of literary achievement, and more importantly in the stories told. Here you have people faced with unfathomable levels of injustice and hardships, who despite all the pain and horror choose to live and love and fight, even if they know they can't win, even if they know death is the only thing waiting for them. They still keep going. And that's something beautiful indeed.
I think the show did a really phenomenal job of juxtaposing the mixture of chaos and beauty that makes up the series' worldview in the third season, especially in this scene: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giIzoOquIt4
I don't know if I'm even making sense with this. Probably not. And I don't know if I'll ever be able to reread ASoIaF. But I feel like I understand it a little better now.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
I've always loved this scene in RotK. I think that little dialogue there speaks to why I read a lot of stories, especially SOIAF.
Posts: 1407 | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
