He would have been a bad king in the sense that all of the horrible people he would have been surrounded with would chew him up and spit him up (as it so happened).
He would, however, have been fair and just and, etc. if allowed to rule in peace. That's honestly the problem with politics in general (talking real life here). Most of the people who have what it takes to make it in the political world aren't terribly nice or dedicated to the common good. They're there for their own gain. Meanwhile, people who might actually be able to make good decisions and govern fairly and properly wouldn't be able to make it unscathed through an election of any real importance.
Posts: 450 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ginol, my point is just that, if he had the ancestral right and military might to back him up, he could have ruled despite being surrounded by horrible people. He ruled the North well for almost twenty years, despite having liegemen like Roose Bolton. Because Bolton couldn't effectively remove him, and he knew it.
Again, there's no way he could have taken the Iron Throne, we're in total agreement there. I'm just saying, he could still have been a good king, and not necessarily just "in peace."
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I suppose Ned could've been a fantastic King in some theoretical version of the fictitious world known as the Seven Kingdoms. So too could Robb Stark for that matter. But...kings are responsible for more than abstract ideals, they're responsible for the actual lives and welfare of their people.
So yes, they do have to have some mastery of intrigue and the ability to wear two or more faces, at least to some extent. Because to lack those abilities means you're going to be very vulnerable to those who do have `em-and those are just who you gotta watch out for in the first place.
Takes more than just dominance over the military too. 'King' is rarely a strictly or even primarily military role, and it's certainly not in the case of the Seven Kingdoms.
quote:He would have been a bad king in the sense that all of the horrible people he would have been surrounded with would chew him up and spit him up (as it so happened).
Well, yes-this is rather like saying, "He would've been a bad king because he would've been a bad king." One of the requisites for a good king is that if there are horrible people around that are going to try and chew you up and spit you out, you've got to be able to beat `em. If you can't do it, you aren't good-king-material. It doesn't matter how carefully I study a cookbook, I can't make a bitchin' meal without the right kind of food.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it's by having a second who loves you. The honorable man needs a fiercely loyal second who does the dirty work, much like a principal needs a vice principal. The king rules, and his attitudes shape the kingdom. But it is the second tier, of a few trusted counsellors/administrators, that enforces the rules, protects the king, and plays the dirty politics where dirty politics must be played. A good king knows this, and probably learns not to ask too many questions about the exact methods used. I look to Robin Hobbs Farseer books for examples of how this works.
Posts: 3141 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Well, yes-this is rather like saying, "He would've been a bad king because he would've been a bad king." One of the requisites for a good king is that if there are horrible people around that are going to try and chew you up and spit you out, you've got to be able to beat `em. If you can't do it, you aren't good-king-material. It doesn't matter how carefully I study a cookbook, I can't make a bitchin' meal without the right kind of food.
I understand what you're saying. Realistically, sure, you have to be able to fight off your enemies and keep them from usurping your power. Unfortunately, the qualities that allow one to do that are also, in my opinion, qualities that prevent someone from truly governing from the perspective that they're the servant of the people from than the master.
So, ideally, Ned wouldn't have to worry about that junk and would have made an excellent king otherwise. Is the ideal scenario ever likely to happen? No, but is nice to think about.
Posts: 450 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Theoretically, if Ned had become king instead of Robert after the rebellion, most of the people in King's Landing that Ned would have had to worry about wouldn't have been there at all.
I have to say though, while I think Ned has all the qualities that make an excellent ruler, Starks just don't belong in King's landing.
I think Westeros is its own character. It's no accident that Martin names the area around The Twins, "The Neck." Everything above The Neck, Stark's north, is the brains of the operation. Everything below it is the body, where passions rule, especially in the nether regions where Sunspear is, and everything seems to be about heat and passion.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think he COULD have been a good ruler, but he would have had to have the opportunity of start picking his court from the beginning.
There is no doubt he would have made an excellent King of the North, and I think that one of the themes of this book is the "fish out of water" situations that are occurring.
Hell.....out of all of them, only Jon Snow is where he fits, and where he can do the most good ....so far at least.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I think Westeros is its own character. It's no accident that Martin names the area around The Twins, "The Neck." Everything above The Neck, Stark's north, is the brains of the operation. Everything below it is the body, where passions rule, especially in the nether regions where Sunspear is, and everything seems to be about heat and passion.
That's pretty awesome. Never thought of it like that.
Posts: 450 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I understand what you're saying. Realistically, sure, you have to be able to fight off your enemies and keep them from usurping your power. Unfortunately, the qualities that allow one to do that are also, in my opinion, qualities that prevent someone from truly governing from the perspective that they're the servant of the people from than the master.
This is usually one of the more better arguments against monarchies as a form of government, in my opinion.
quote:Theoretically, if Ned had become king instead of Robert after the rebellion, most of the people in King's Landing that Ned would have had to worry about wouldn't have been there at all.
Yes, that's probably true. Well, it's definitely true that they never would've arisen to such prominent minsterial and hangers-on positions around the king of Ned had been king from the start, that's for certain. Whether Ned could have whethered things against all of those antagonists arrayed against him at a distance is less certain-I just don't know. We never really get to see Ned Stark go head to head with Twyin Lannister, for example, in competing intrigues-and that would've been one of the larger competitions. And it was Tywin who was keeping things in check in many ways for Robert.
quote:Edit: I think Ned would have made a fantastic King, but of the North, not the entire seven kingdoms.
Agreed. I think it's telling (if I'm remembering correctly) that neither Robb nor Ned ever wanted kingship of the entire Seven Kingdoms, either.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
I thought the guy playing Viserys was particularly interesting. I'm looking forward to more of Bran, and Kit Harrington as Jon Snow looks to be a good fit. I didn't care for much of how they portrayed Dany and Drogo. It looks like they tried to portray it accurately, but it was robbed of any of the tenderness that I thought the novel suggested. Perhaps they'll do that later. In general, they have a lot of work to do fast in toughening up Dany.
I'll say, this has some of the most realistic, or at least, the most brutal, violence I think I've ever seen before. It's fairly seamless too, none of it looks fake.
And I wasn't particularly bothered by all the nudity. I think we're a little overly sensitive when it comes to boobs. Most of it was background noise, like watching a National Geographic special. The only time I think it really mattered was in the scene between Viserys and Dany, which was super weird. He managed to be creepy, and almost affectionate, at the same time. I'm impressed by his handling of Viserys.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lyrhawn: I don't know how to draw the distinction well, but for example when I saw The Bounty, there were tons of boobs throughout much of the movie, and yet it didn't really bother me. It was more, that's just how that culture is. In GOT people are not walking around naked, they are having their clothes removed, we are meant to see a society where apparently people dress very modestly in public, but in private they are nekkid. Does the sex with nudity along for the ride further the plot? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Tyrion seems to be the most egregious example of a useless sex scene. Did we learn anything about him from that scene, other than his and Jaime's relationship is amiable? No, we didn't. We might as well have watched a scene where he takes a dump on the chamber pot, it's just as realistic of the setting and time period.
In any case, OK we know who is intimate with who now out of all the characters who have been introduced. It is to be hoped that if we see boobs in the future, it won't feel like an end unto itself, and that they are incidental, rather than intentional.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The scene with Tyrion in the episode seemed pretty straightforward to me. The wanted to Show Tyrion Likes Prostitutes. A Lot. (More than might be expected of an ordinary nobleman-which is sort of true of Tyrion in the books, because without giving spoilers there are some not inconsiderable reasons aside from the obvious he seeks out affection among prostitutes and not elsewhere) Also that he has a good, slightly edged teasing relationship with his brother Jaime.
Man, I dislike that as a culture we're having a meta conversation about boobs. Just one of our hang-ups I guess, collectively. I just continually come back, in my head, to the Cat scene that was omitted. It really portrayed Catelyn Stark as a woman who Gets S@#t Done when the metal hits the meat, all in one neat package, but for now that is still implied.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree with you 100% about what the Tyrion scene was intended to show, Rakeesh. At the cost of a couple of nipples and a few minutes of extra footage it seems like a bargain.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kwea: Hell.....out of all of them, only Jon Snow is where he fits, and where he can do the most good ....so far at least.
I have to say, I'm pretty sure Sansa is also where she fits best. Or at least in the one place where character growth is possible.
Posts: 3932 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is great so far. I wonder how someone who'd never read the book would be able to follow it, though. It's moving pretty fast.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: [QB] The scene with Tyrion in the episode seemed pretty straightforward to me. The wanted to Show Tyrion Likes Prostitutes. A Lot.
Right, I said as much in one my lengthy post earlier.
quote:Man, I dislike that as a culture we're having a meta conversation about boobs. Just one of our hang-ups I guess, collectively.
Obviously we as a culture don't have hang ups about boobs when we can praise a show that has an abundance of them. What do you find so dis-likable about the objections I raised?
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Man, I dislike that as a culture we're having a meta conversation about boobs. Just one of our hang-ups I guess, collectively.
Obviously we as a culture don't have hang ups about boobs when we can praise a show that has an abundance of them. What do you find so dis-likable about the objections I raised? [/QB]
I thought this was funny. And apropos. A little bit.
posted
Great episode. Man I love Tyrian. That guy plays him perfectly. I can't wait for the s*%t to really hit the fan. Posts: 891 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doesn't he though? The girl who plays Arya does so perfectly as well. With the exception of the way they continued to defang Catelyn, I loved the second episode. It was enough to tip me from "well, now my curiosity as to how they'll handle element X or Y is sated, so there's probably no need to continue watching, given that I already know the story" to "damn it! I don't want to wait until next week!"
Posts: 1087 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Arya is being done really well, but while this Arya is super boyish and headstrong, the book Arya felt more mean than the show version. She was little bit bully. I don't really see that. But it doesn't matter.
And yeah, the scene between Cat and Jon was subdued, but whatever, I was never sure I liked Cat that much.
Posts: 1407 | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I added Joffrey and Viserys, I knew I was forgetting some peeps.
I decided I agree with you about Ser Jorah. I tried to think of how he could possibly play him better, and I couldn't. He's probably the strongest actor in the Dany plot.
I think I rate Brandon so high because he looks so much like the Bran in my head. He hasn't actually had to do much acting yet, so he may be demoted.
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kwea: Hell.....out of all of them, only Jon Snow is where he fits, and where he can do the most good ....so far at least.
I have to say, I'm pretty sure Sansa is also where she fits best. Or at least in the one place where character growth is possible.
Character growth? Sansa?
Sigh.
Unless I'm horribly misremembering the books, Sansa's one of two Stark children (not including Jon) who actually has undergone any character growth. Bran has developed, owing to his paralysis and subsequent ability to possess the masses, and Sansa has grown from the idealistic girl to someone who realizes that pretty people may not be good, while the unattractive can be helpful. Robb certainly didn't develop at all, and we haven't seen Rickon (who, quite frankly, can't help but develop, since he was three last time we read about him), and Arya is pretty much exactly the same, just in a different place.
So sue me. I find Sansa/Alayne interesting, and I do believe it represents character growth. (I'm also 99% confident I'd say this while sober - I needed lots of beer to get through and past the scene with Lady and Ned tonight.)
Posts: 3932 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was initially pretty upset by the Dany/Drogo dynamic from the first episode, but with this new episode, I feel like I get where they're going with it. In the books, Drogo provided a shelter that allowed Dany to come in to herself and become so powerful. But all of that required nuance and time that would be hard to do justice to in the show. So in the show, they're speeding up Dany's growth and making her demand and earn Drogo's affection. Drogo becomes tender *because* of Dany's strength rather than the other way around. I could see this working.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amanecer: I was initially pretty upset by the Dany/Drogo dynamic from the first episode, but with this new episode, I feel like I get where they're going with it. In the books, Drogo provided a shelter that allowed Dany to come in to herself and become so powerful. But all of that required nuance and time that would be hard to do justice to in the show. So in the show, they're speeding up Dany's growth and making her demand and earn Drogo's affection. Drogo becomes tender *because* of Dany's strength rather than the other way around. I could see this working.
Yeah I think I'm with you on that. It's not where I want it to be yet but it looks like it is heading in a good direction, just needs a little more time.
Posts: 891 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kwea: Hell.....out of all of them, only Jon Snow is where he fits, and where he can do the most good ....so far at least.
I have to say, I'm pretty sure Sansa is also where she fits best. Or at least in the one place where character growth is possible.
Character growth? Sansa?
Sigh.
Unless I'm horribly misremembering the books, Sansa's one of two Stark children (not including Jon) who actually has undergone any character growth. Bran has developed, owing to his paralysis and subsequent ability to possess the masses, and Sansa has grown from the idealistic girl to someone who realizes that pretty people may not be good, while the unattractive can be helpful. Robb certainly didn't develop at all, and we haven't seen Rickon (who, quite frankly, can't help but develop, since he was three last time we read about him), and Arya is pretty much exactly the same, just in a different place.
So sue me. I find Sansa/Alayne interesting, and I do believe it represents character growth. (I'm also 99% confident I'd say this while sober - I needed lots of beer to get through and past the scene with Lady and Ned tonight.)
SPOILERS!!!!!! BIG ONES!
I disagree, with a caveat.
I think Robb went through a lot of development, just not quite enough to keep him alive. He went from a kid to a king in a matter of moments, and with one exception, was wildly successful at it. He was still young, and made mistakes of youth, but he came a long way in a short while...just not far enough.
Agreed on Bran and Rickon. Not sure how much we can really expect from Rickon considering his age.
I think Arya has developed a lot. She was always a rough and tumble little kid, but she was still JUST A KID. She's seen and done things since then that have hardened and jaded her to a disturbing degree. Especially in the fourth book, the parallels between her and Sansa are some of the most interesting things in Feast.
Sansa is the most flat, boring character of the entire series until Feast. She experiences ZERO character growth until the fourth book. She's the same stupid, naive, foolish girl living in a delusional fantasyland. The Alayne/Sansa plot is interesting, though slow as molasses in terms of character development, but yes, it is interesting. It just took FOREVER to get there.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Sansa is the most flat, boring character of the entire series until Feast. She experiences ZERO character growth until the fourth book. She's the same stupid, naive, foolish girl living in a delusional fantasyland. The Alayne/Sansa plot is interesting, though slow as molasses in terms of character development, but yes, it is interesting. It just took FOREVER to get there.
I disagree. Her time with Joffrey, and then with Tyrion/Sandor changed her quite a bit. I have a poster on my wall of her building the snow Winterfell, which was the third book. She was a completely different girl at that point than the one who started the books.
It is a polite disagreement though .
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
It was two steps forward and three steps back with her every step of the way. Don't get me wrong, I WANT to like Sansa. I really do. The blog I wrote about ASOIAF had at least one mention of Sanasa per post, most of them praying for rain when it comes to Sansa. And every time they teased us with some growth, it was always matched by her doing two or three stupid childish things to negate it. Her changes were always reactionary rather than evolutionary. I question how much she actually learned and grew, and how much of it was simply responding to direct stimuli but without lasting changes. Even after two or three books of being mistreated, she was STILL waiting for a knight in shining armor to come rescue her. She just doesn't get it, and she didn't start to get it until Feast.
Maybe I'll change my mind when I go back and reread the whole thing, but I think she's insufferable for the first few thousand pages.
I think why she's so disappointing to me is that almost all of the other female characters are utterly fascinating and complex (Dany took a while to get going, but she really took off after that). Sansa is a big ball of character development potential. And I feel like with the exception of a few teases, she still refuses to open her eyes and go with it, again, until Feast, where while slow, she IS starting to do some interesting things.
To each his own though. If you like Sansa, more power to you. It's a complex enough book for two people to see the same character differently.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: The scene with Tyrion in the episode seemed pretty straightforward to me. The wanted to Show Tyrion Likes Prostitutes. A Lot. (More than might be expected of an ordinary nobleman-which is sort of true of Tyrion in the books, because without giving spoilers there are some not inconsiderable reasons aside from the obvious he seeks out affection among prostitutes and not elsewhere) Also that he has a good, slightly edged teasing relationship with his brother Jaime.
Man, I dislike that as a culture we're having a meta conversation about boobs. Just one of our hang-ups I guess, collectively. I just continually come back, in my head, to the Cat scene that was omitted. It really portrayed Catelyn Stark as a woman who Gets S@#t Done when the metal hits the meat, all in one neat package, but for now that is still implied.
I think that scene showed a lot more than just boobs. We got an idea how little Tyrion likes his father, and how little he cares for propriety, how much he likes women and how they have been a way to act out against his family, and an idea how self confident he is despite his challenges. We got a glimpse into his relationship with Jamie, and how he "looks after" Tyrion...
We also got a glimpse into what it means to be a southern lord vs a northern one.
That's a lot more than gratuitous boob shots.......although it was that as well, of course. Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read the books quite a while ago so watching the first two episodes has been more "oh yeah, I remember that..." than a critique of faithfulness to Martin.
In general, HBO just does these things right. The production value, casting, scripts - they're all usually on another level.
That said, I would chime in on some of the earlier comments on the graphic nudity and sex. This is just part of HBO's DNA. Because they can, they do. Can anyone really tell me that you couldn't convey the same trapped, humiliating despair that Dany felt in the tent scene without the 15 seconds of soft porn? Really?
I guess you just take the good, the bad and the gratuitous and be thankful that the general quality level is as high as it is.
Posts: 135 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would love to watch these...but I had all my premium channels turned off a long time ago to save money...and to pay $15 a month extra...for a show that is too sexually explicit to watch with my wife in the room is just not going to happen...oh well.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: I would love to watch these...but I had all my premium channels turned off a long time ago to save money...and to pay $15 a month extra...for a show that is too sexually explicit to watch with my wife in the room is just not going to happen...oh well.
I'd say to download it, but I look at premium channels a little bit differently than normal cable or local channels. Since there are no ads on HBO they really have no income other than their subscriber base.
I am really hoping Game of Thrones does well. I'd like to see more series like this pop up, but it is almost impossible on regular television. I'd REALLY like to see the Night's Dawn Trilogy on TV one day.
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I feel a little bad...as I watched them online...but not too bad as I own all the books...
Overall...very good, I do not like the casting/rewriting of Kat...nor the casting of Jon...but other then that the casting/writing/directing is spot on great.
Not nearly as much boobies as expected from previous posts...not complaining, just thought it would be much more gratuitous.
I agree with Ghost of Xavier about Danny/Kat.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
.![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
