Climbing the Spitball Wall - An Unsullied's Take on A Song of Ice and Fire - Reading Complete! Now onto Rewatching the Show and Anticipating Season 6!

[Haleth]

Yeah, there was talk that Ollie was a stand in for Satin because there was a fear that the latter would be cartoonish. Unlike Loras, of course.

Edited October 20, 2015 by Haleth

[Delta1212]

Shimpy, to be clear on my end at least, I don't mind your criticism of the show. It's often coming from a somewhat different place than most of the criticisms that the rest of us have made and seen made ourselves because you're seeing it all in reverse.

I also don't begrudge anyone a rant on their favorite topic, but I do think that the rest of us who aren't you and have been living with this for a while need to be extra mindful about how far we push it, because especially during some of the more emotionally charged bits and larger cuts and changes that start cropping up after this point, the rants and/or arguments have a tendency to spin a little out of control.

For me, it's less "I've heard these arguments before and don't want to hear them again" and more "I've seen the direction this conversation usually takes and maybe we should be mindful to steer it back on track every once in a while before we veer too far out and overwhelm the thread with that argument again." And I think when it starts getting a little personal is about the time to pull back a bit lest we head down some unpleasant tangents.

[Delta1212]

I think one of the aspects of the Red Wedding that I missed from the show was the northerners actually putting up a fight. Smalljon Umber knocking people out with legs of ham, Dacey trying to take everyone on. I think that that's really the main message of the books - horrible stuff happens but that doesn't mean we can't be defiant until the end. It's about the perseverance of the human spirit in the face of adversity, whether that ends up working or not. This just flies right over the show's end and instead they just wallow in the misery of it. Right up to rigging a pregnancy just so they can have a bit more horror.

I think some of this is down to the larger problem of the missing Northern lords in Robb's storyline. Without the Greatjon and anyone else both recognizable and loyal in Robb's camp, there aren't people there we can really connect with to watch fight back.

My personal gripe with the Red Wedding on the show is actually really small and petty: I liked the line "Jaime Lannister sends his regards" as an ironic callback twisting around what Jaime actually meant from Roose Bolton. I do understand the motivation for changing it, because I could see how that might look more like an instance of implicating Jaime rather than being a callback to his parting comment, but still.

And as far as my own experience reading the chapter goes, I had a serious moment of denial where I was still trying to figure out how Robb was going to get out of the situation even after he'd had a sword out through his heart. Like, I read the words and still refused to believe what I was reading for a minute or two afterwards.

[nksarmi]

Shimpy - I am going to be really honest here - I encouraged you to read the Red Wedding to get a good understanding of who was there, who wasn't, who died, and who survived because that will all matter later and it's kind of impossible to track that from the show is I recall correctly. Like Jeyne and Blackfish not being there and therefore, living (for now) matters.  Some of the Northern deaths will matters as well as Robb had heads of families with him at the wedding.  It's kind of a logistical thing that I thought would be impossible for you to go back and track as the story moves forward if you didn't at least skim that section and telling you that would have been a spoiler!

[Mya Stone]

Shimpy - I am going to be really honest here - I encouraged you to read the Red Wedding to get a good understanding of who was there, who wasn't, who died, and who survived because that will all matter later and it's kind of impossible to track that from the show is I recall correctly. Like Jeyne and Blackfish not being there and therefore, living (for now) matters. Some of the Northern deaths will matters as well as Robb had heads of families with him at the wedding. It's kind of a logistical thing that I thought would be impossible for you to go back and track as the story moves forward if you didn't at least skim that section and telling you that would have been a spoiler!

Yes. The scope of the misdeed of the RW was completely lost on the show. Getting to know Robb's people (and losing them) is tantamount to the state of the North, and what contributes to the Bolton's usurping of it. (As depicted by the show, with a piss poor explanation, IMO.)

As much as it hurts to read, and believe me, I feel guilty for having you read it...it's importance as an event can not be explained by a "yeah, that happened, it sucked." The loss isn't just the Starks...it's the NORTH. The North bled. And...the North remembers.

[Delta1212]

Yes. The scope of the misdeed of the RW was completely lost on the show. Getting to know Robb's people (and losing them) is tantamount to the state of the North, and what contributes to the Bolton's usurping of it. (As depicted by the show, with a piss poor explanation, IMO.)

As much as it hurts to read, and believe me, I feel guilty for having you read it...it's importance as an event can not be explained by a "yeah, that happened, it sucked." The loss isn't just the Starks...it's the NORTH. The North bled. And...the North remembers.

Wyman the Pieman

may be my most regretted loss on the show, even if it's not exactly a huge cut (well...)

[Reader of Books]

Ahh the Red Wedding....

 

For the record stillshimpy Dacey Mormont is my favourite minor character that didn't make it into the show. She really only features in one page of dialogue but "She's no proper lady, that one, but I always loved her" is my favourite passage in the books. Her death was as bad for me as any of the others.

[Alayne Stone]

Yes, The Red Wedding is important to read if only because you just don't get a full scope of just how many people were lost from the show. It was not just that the Starks died at the wedding. A lot of really important Northern Lords died.

 

I am personally a glutton for punishment though, and ... I won't say I enjoy a good tear-jerking read, but I can appreciate the tragedy. Cat's line "Don't touch my hair! Ned loves my hair!" just ... kills me. Every single time.

 

For what it's worth, I still think the show did a pretty good job of bringing The Red Wedding to the screen, despite the obvious limitations involved. The one exception being the obvious emotional manipulation used where Talissa. That last chapter is almost entirely in Catelyn's head. That's not an easy thing to render on screen, and for how little I ended up caring about the show character, I thought Michelle Fairley did an amazing job. I can still hear her scream. It guts me every time.

 

And aw yes, the attack on the wall. The thing that really gets me about Ygritte's death in the books is that Jon doesn't know who's arrow killed her in the end. It could have been his, it could not have been. He'll never know.

 

Well Shimpy, at least you're past the Red Wedding. I know you were dreading it. Hopefully you can breathe easier knowing it's past now.

Edited October 20, 2015 by Alayne Stone

[stillshimpy]

Yeah, no I got it.  They killed all the loyal and decent people and liege lords of the North in one blow.  They dropped flaming, oiled tents on his foot soldiers and anyone unable to be locked into the hall with all that butchery.  

 

I got it.  They slaughtered all adherence to the rules of anything decent, or honorable in one night and they even preyed on the fact that they knew Robb Stark was too honorable, truly felt that he had unjustly dishonored Frey because he couldn't leave a girl he'd potentially knocked up ....because THAT would be dishonorable.   They used the fact that they knew he was a man of his word to slaughter him, all of his truly loyal liege lords (and ladies) and they got the foot soldiers drunk so they'd be too slow to react and would burn alive when the tent dropped on them.  

 

They even had Jon noting what Ned taught them about a commander's voice needing to be heard and he'd have Jon and Robb practicing calling to one another, in these strong voices that men will follow.....and they contrast that with the snake-like vampire hissings of Bolton. 

 

I got it.  It was a masterful way to murder all things decent, good or admirable all in one night.  

 

The depth of the evil was lost on the show, that somehow made it seem like Robb had it coming for being a selfish "I have to follow my heart " brat....instead of the entire thing riding on him being such a good and honorable young man that they could kill everything about the world that mattered to his father, his family and even his mother.  That Catelyn tries desperately to try and get Robb out of their by yelling the word "Mercy!"  at one point and begging for her son's life....and then when Roose Bolton Satan's up the joint....she fucking murdered a poor permanently developmentally delayed man, and so they managed to even kill her fucking soul in the last moments of her life.  

 

You're right.  I probably wouldn't have gotten all of that if you all had just told me "All the good people of the North died there that night, that world is spectacularly, completely and absolutely fucked."  

 

At least I know that Arya isn't really dead and she didn't have to see that horror fest and have an actual psychotic break. 

 

Oh and apparently Theon is off being tortured by Ramsay and just because Bolton had been disgusting enough, he had offered Catelyn part of his skin.  

 

 

 

Dacey Mormont is my favourite minor character that didn't make it into the show.

 

Yeah, she seemed pretty cool and decent, and kind.  

 

 

 

. It could have been his, it could not have been. He'll never know.

 

It wasn't his.  It was tipped/flocked with black duck feathers and the story makes a point of him checking and realizing it wasn't his arrow....but that it could have been, it just....wasn't. 

 

 

 

Hope that's not a spoiler. ;)

 

I genuinely don't know what that means. 

Edited October 20, 2015 by stillshimpy

[bobbybuilderton]

The necessity of reading the scene as it occurs in the book will become clearer in time. We're not just sadists hahaha. As plot points go, it's different enoughfrom the show that only knowing information the show gives you would make some things later less clear.

I also just like the written version better. It was always more creepy to me than horrifying.

[mac123x]

Also, in a weirdly uneven moment, I got to like Robert for a moment there.  I don't think children should be hit, by the way, but that Robert hit Joffrey for (pretty clearly) torturing a cat caused me to make this note in my Kindle, "yay Robert"

 

That's one of the prime examples of how GRRM writes unreliable narrators.  When we first heard that story from Stannis, it was "Joffrey cut open a pregnant cat just to see the kittens."  Basically he described one of the first steps of a psychopathic serial killer.  Next we hear it from Cercei, it was just "some silly business about a cat."  It's a good insight into just how good at self-deception Cercei is. 

Edit:  shit.  I had those recollections in the wrong order. 

Edited October 20, 2015 by mac123x

[Dev F]

And speaking of the "Oh fuck off show" I am glad that Ollie was a show construct.  I sort of ended up hating that guy. 

 

Me, I actually appreciate the dramatic thinking that went into slotting Ollie into the story, the impulse to provide an intimate, personal window into the more nebulous forces that a novel is much better suited to exploring. And I don't have any complaints about his role in season 4; it certainly was no surprise that he ends up being Ygritte's killer, but I thought it was pretty satisfying in its tragic inevitability.

 

The character certainly starts to grate in season 5, but I think it's for a reason that has little to do with the fact that he's an invented character. Instead, it's because a problem the series has struggled with in the arcs of a lot of its characters, from the invented to the most faithful and everything in between. Namely, in the desperate struggle to keep all its balls in the air, it will all too often move a character into position for an upcoming storyline ahead of schedule, and then it has to just sort of rev that character in neutral for a bunch of episodes while everyone else catches up.

 

With Ollie, the writers had a lot fewer steps to take him from "guileless steward" to "resentful assassin" than to take Jon from "popular new Lord Commander" to "hated victim of a murderous conspiracy," so while Jon was going through his jam-packed arc for the season, Ollie didn't have anything to do but repeat his "Someone said something about wildlings and it made me sad and angry" shtick over and over again. No wonder he quickly became tiresome.

 

Such artless vamping is so common on the show, especially in season 5, and it's the main reason I was so resentful that Game of Thrones won Emmys for Best Drama and Best Writing this season. The very best modern TV dramas -- shows like Mad Men and Breaking Bad and The Americans -- are carefully constructed to avoid this kind of time-wasting nonsense. Each episode has a thematic throughline that gives shape and unity to the various character arcs, and each character arc in a particular episode is a meaningful part of a larger arc for that character that stretches over the rest of the season and the series. Game of Thrones just wasn't playing at that level of ability this year; too many episodes were united only around the principle of "This is the stuff that happened in each storyline this week," and too many characters spent too many episodes spinning their wheels rather than growing and developing in any meaningful way. And maybe it makes me a snob, but it bugs me that so many Academy members thought that kind of ambitious-but-sloppy-joe storytelling deserved to be celebrated as the best television has to offer.

[Eegah]

And let's not forget the show's RW providing the crowning achievement of Robb's flaming idiocy, where he doesn't see how it could be any kind of problem at all to parade his new wife in front of the Freys and basically say "Here's the pair of tits I screwed you over for." (Because let's face it, as written that's all their relationship is).

[Reader of Books]

Dev F Great analysis of Olly. With so many characters in the books, they have to be much more efficient with characters in the show. An adaptation has to do that. Some of the amalgamated characters have really worked well. Most have suffered due to the reasons you have out layed.

 

With the Emmys, part of the issue is the new voting rules which means there is more emphasis on 'Most Popular' rather than 'Best'. The Australian TV awards are popularity based and widely considered joke as a result. In one year, the top awards went to a personality who had not even been in a TV production for that year. The following year, the award went to an actor whose role in a long running series had ended and only 2-3 episodes had aired in that year. The Emmys have done themselves a disservice by going down this path.

[Ashara Payne]

Wow, I've finally caught up, that took a while. I'm new to this forum and found it from a tweet from AngryGoT fan. It's been delightful. Shimpy, your insights are fascinating and always enjoyable to read. I wish I'd found this place years ago!

Not sure if I'll have much to contribute, but the vibe here is right up my street.

I'm wondering if, when you finish the last book, will you allow yourself to freely immerse yourself in all the internet ASOIAF fandoms? Or are you gonna try to remain spoiler-free? Watchers on the Wall is a great site for show-lovers, they tend to discourage show and D&D bashing, unlike westerns.org, hosted by Elio and the infamous Lindaaaa. It is full of filming/casting spoilers for Season 6, though.

Also, any plans to play/discuss the TellTale game? Or is there another thread for that?

Whoops, I'm on mobile & can't seem to edit my post. That should be westeros.org. Not sure if it was a typo. More likely the damnable autocorrect.

[Ashara Payne]

Ok I just checked and there is a thread for the game.

[Ashara Payne]

Regarding the Dunk and Egg novellas. The audiobooks are on YouTube. I'm getting A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms for my birthday (in a couple of weeks). I didn't buy them because I was undecided whether to go for the graphic novel or to buy the whole books that contained the stories. That indecision caused the delay, then they announced the release of them all combined, so I decided to wait.

I've tried listening to the audiobooks, they're about 4 hours long (each), but I seem to fall asleep before too long. Best to listen while you're occupied with mindless tasks or traveling, I guess.

They are fun and interesting, and even suitable for children inasmuch as there's no sex and limited violence. Looking forward to discussing them, but they are very lightweight compared with ASOIAF, and are more interesting to discuss as part of Westeros as a whole, IMHO.

[Ashara Payne]

What do people think of D&D's decision to have Cat & Ned's bedding removed from Cat's recollection of their wedding?

[Reader of Books]

What do people think of D&D's decision to have Cat & Ned's bedding removed from Cat's recollection of their wedding?

 

It was a device used to remind people of Good Honourable Lord Ned - right before killing everyone. When everything goes down that memory becomes an added layer of depth for just how dastardly the deed was.

Edited October 20, 2015 by Reader of Books

[ElizaD]

What do people think of D&D's decision to have Cat & Ned's bedding removed from Cat's recollection of their wedding?

 

It's a way to make Tyrion look good: it was in the episode after the seriously toned-down Sansa wedding that had erased Tyrion's complicity/sex drive and resulted in tons of comments that used this specific detail to argue that Tyrion is a great guy because he's just like Ned (so why is Sansa such a bitch and won't have sex with him?!). Like the changes that turned Jeyne Westerling into Talisa the sassy battlefield nurse who marries for love, it shows that the "historical accuracy" used to defend the show's sexual violence goes out of the window whenever it's convenient rather than being a consistent part of worldbuilding. Instead of the mildly challenging bit where Ned and Cat are dutiful people of their culture who accept this skeevy wedding tradition (which, like

Cersei's walk of shame

, is GRRM's edgier, nakeder version of something that sorta happened in the past), the show has modern guy Ned threatening to punch someone to prevent a bedding (hey, that's what Tyrion just did! we know who to root for!).

Edited October 20, 2015 by ElizaD

[Reader of Books]

Oh yeah - that Arya Red Wedding cliff hanger was brutal...

Edited October 20, 2015 by Reader of Books

[WindyNights]

ElizaD on point there.

[Haleth]

I've fallen behind in the reading so I picked up the book last night and skipped both the RW and Arya's RW chapters.  I just couldn't again.

 

It was fun (again) reading the passage where Tywin sends puffed up little Joff to bed, right after Joff questions his grandfather's courage.  Heh.

Edited October 20, 2015 by Haleth

[Triskan]

Okay, okay, I dont want to be the one to bring that topic back again, but I'll do just in passing...

 

Shimpy, you have heard (read) the name of a new character that is the reason we wanted to discuss Balon's death with you. I wont say anything more but perhaps that will ring a bell ! ;)

 

Oh, and yeah, you've learnt some news about Theon... hehe, you know he's most likely gonna be back in the story, but for us readers, that moment where Roose gives a piece of his skin to Cat is the first time we get any Theon whereabouts and hints that his story is not necessarly over ! ;)

[chandraReborn]

I think the thing with the arrow that kills Ygritte is that, even though Jon knows he didn't shoot it, he knows he was firing at the same group of wildlings and, had they been positioned differently, it would have been his. 

[stillshimpy]

Yes, the Red Wedding on the show and the Red Wedding in the book are very different creatures. 

 

Dev F, I have to disagree with you about Ollie for a specific reason: 

 

 

 

Me, I actually appreciate the dramatic thinking that went into slotting Ollie into the story, the impulse to provide an intimate, personal window into the more nebulous forces that a novel is much better suited to exploring. And I don't have any complaints about his role in season 4; it certainly was no surprise that he ends up being Ygritte's killer, but I thought it was pretty satisfying in its tragic inevitability.

 

There was no reason, at all, for Ollie to be let go by that Thenn.  Talk about Mwhahahahaha-Mustache-Twirling for the sake of it.  It was also part of the reason it was nigh on impossible to take the Wildlings as a threat seriously.  There appeared to be -- thanks to budgeting constraints -- two entire dozen of them.   They were supposed to be so quarrelsome that it took Mance Rayder -- and his magical exposition powers -- to bring them altogether without them killing one another.  

 

So the one smart thing they had the Show do there is keep Mance primarily far away from Jon so that he only ever has the one opportunity to kill Mance, because the answer to the problem is pretty might right there:  oh, well, then you need to kill MANCE.  Also, because it can't be said enough, they had kind of a serious miscast on Mance, which is truly unfortunate as hell.  I love Ciarian Hinds, but he just wasn't right for that part. 

 

But the manner in which Ollie is set free is ridiculous.  Villager murder everywhere and a Thenn, in dialogue worthy of a Bond Villain grabs him, explains (in some rather lurid detail) about what precisely is going to happen to Ollie's village and family and then lets him go, specifically so he can go warn people, with the actual INSTRUCTION that he do so.  Not only specifically, but that's the Thenns actual purpose. 

 

So sure, Ollie might have made for a good composite character if they hadn't included that.  If his "Oh my dad loves me and my mother does too, clearly my parents are worm food soon" moment had happened when Potato Loving Pa had spotted the raiding party, grabbed his son by the shoulders and said, "Run now, run to Castle Black and don't stop until you get there.  Follow the stream bed until Oldtown, so they can't track you as easily, but you run and tell the Old Bear, there's a Wildling army headed towards him."  

 

Instead, Ollie was plucked like the fruit of the easily-programmed-simmering-rage-tree and essentially did just what he was told.  

 

ETA:  

 

What do people think of D&D's decision to have Cat & Ned's bedding removed from Cat's recollection of their wedding?

 

You know, I don't think it actually had anything to do with making Ned even more saintly seeming.  We never do see a Bedding in the show that is anything like what the books describe.  What the books describe is essentially a form of sexual assault and whereas, once again, Martin drew from history -- to an extent -- he took it a little too far by having everyone stripped naked and pawed by all and sundry.  

 

There was a (very rarely followed) tradition of a royal marriages consummation needing to be witnessed, back when royal marriages were about political (but far more importantly) military alliances.  

 

So I think that's part of why it got dropped.  Nothing to do with Tyrion or Ned, just somebody pointing out that the only person that would be okay with what was being described would be Joffrey and that's because he's a psychopath.   

 

Also, presumably someone was also keeping track of the "Are you kidding me with this shit?  Her intended and his brother and father had just been murdered, his sister is kidnapped and everyone is off to war come the morrow." 

 

It's funny that people think it has to do with Ned's Sanctification or Tyrion's either, it's that it is a ridiculous detail to have in the books.  It's based on (and I really do mean loosely based on) a kind of tradition, but literally none of them involve sexually traumatize people and then sticking them naked in bed together.  As amusing a concept as it may be, it sounds like the HBO team thought, "Uh....that might be going a bit too far...." just in general, but that they needed to have a line that showed that Cat was thinking back happily and proudly to her own wedding vs what's in the book, which practically includes Cat's saying she thought he was plain and somber...and bad in bed at least the first time out.   I think paring that down to  "Ned wouldn't let a crowd of strangers strip us naked" was the easiest shortcut to "I think fondly of my marriage, still love my husband ....which is good....'cause I'm going to be seeing him soon."  

 

Oh...and here's one thing I can thank the show for ....since I saw the show, I know they slit Cat's throat.  In the book it reads as if they are about to scalp her.   So I was spared that damned fury.  

 

Also, hi Ashara, nice to have you here :-) 

 

 

 

you have heard (read) the name of a new character that is the reason we wanted to discuss Balon's death with you. I wont say anything more but perhaps that will ring a bell ! ;)

 

Yes, I did.  There's another Greyjoy brother of Balon.  Not the mopey priest.  The other one. Presumably about to get up to something.   Guys, seriously, the Grejoys in the book are kind of.....not interesting as of yet....so if something of interest is about to happen, it would be new and refreshing.  Here's the Grejoy's from where I sit "Balon: Cruel to his son for no other reason than he felt like it.  Now dead.  Yay.   Asha/Yara: Good warrior, tried to rescue Theon.  Gave up when all that was left of him was a mass of scars and the wits of a squirrel (that's from the show , in the book she's about as loving towards Theon as Balon, but did manage to be more interesting and is a badass warrior in both versions). 

There's some kind of overly devoted priestly Uncle who has not been in the show but is a religious zealot of some kind.  Glad they left him out of the show, we have a few too many dour religious zealots of any stripe in said show, at present. 

 

Made mention of:  Another brother of Balon, descending upon the Land Where Color (and Interest) Went to Die.   I read his name and hoped he'd have the decency to change the floor thrushes before I had to read anything more about it.  That was the entirety of my thought process on him. 

Edited October 20, 2015 by stillshimpy

[Mya Stone]

I appreciate short hand and short cuts necessary in adaptations - showing, not telling, is a big thing in adapting a book series...but not ones that reek of laziness.

See what I did there? ;)

[Dev F]

There was no reason, at all, for Ollie to be let go by that Thenn.  Talk about Mwhahahahaha-Mustache-Twirling for the sake of it.  

 

It wasn't just mustache-twirling, though. It was a deliberate component of the wildlings' plan: to attack the people of the Gift in a particularly brutal and outrageous way so as to goad the Night's Watch into leaving their castle to fight them. What better way to get the crows' "We gotta do something!" outrage pumping than to send an adorable young boy whose parents you've just murdered and eaten?

[stillshimpy]

t was a deliberate component of the wildlings' plan: to attack the people of the Gift in a particularly brutal and outrageous way so as to goad the Night's Watch into leaving their castle to fight them.

 

But they weren't going to and in fact, did not do that.  All it did, and all it could be reasonably expected to do, was to give the Watch warning to shore up all defenses at that damned gate.  They weren't going to pour forth when Thenn The Peckish explained to Ollie that they were going to kill the lot of them and crack their bones for the marrow....it was already too late to draw them out. 

 

It served no logical purpose.   If it's such a short run to Castle Black that they had time to reach The Gift with just one warning from Ollie, they'd have heard the yelps of pain from where they were anyway. 

 

Hell, they didn't even go into the village to guard the brothel where Gilly was stuck mopping floors and hiding babies.  

 

ETA:  Oh and someone asked me something about what I would say to any of the Unsullied at this juncture:  Guys, I can't ever talk to any of them again about these books, not until long after they are ready to read them.  Why?  Well, in case you've never noticed, I don't exactly pull my punches on what I believe.  I'm a prolific poster and a wordy one at that.  

 

My not saying anything gives things away and hints at things.  My saying anything at any length that isn't an outright lie would give things away.  I'm not going to outright lie to them, because they are really fun, decent human beings, who got together to play a sort of game night, in which they are reverse constructing source material.  They all know me too well for me to tell them anything without it telling them something. 

 

But here's what I'd say to them if any of them asked "Hey, do I really need to read the Red Wedding?" if they are reading:  "It would be better if you would, because there are important details in there.  It's just as upsetting, arguably more so, but it serves a purpose.  Just plan on doing something super cheerful afterward.  Pick strawberries.  Cuddle kittens.  Run 5k and watch something happy before bed.  But yes, there are things in it you will like need to know going forward.  You didn't get the full story from the series,  be aware, it's more depressing and less horrifying." 

 

I think that's what someone asked me the other day about talking to the remaining Unsullied.  Man, kind of a while back it became really obvious :Oh wow, no way can I even so much as PM about the weather with these guys any longer.  I'd give something away they know what I've thought about these stories at a minute level of detail. 

Edited October 20, 2015 by stillshimpy

[jellyroll2]

Wow, up to and past the RW already! The rest of SoS will fly by. So much happens in the last third of that book it's unbelievable. You do know most of it but there's definitely stuff you don't know. Plus the divergences from here on out between book and show become much bigger. But I agree with others about why it was important that you read the RW chapter, gut wrenching as it was. There are things in there that are important later and the show left out. I did say that was my only real issue with the RW - not the portrayal of the event itself but the follow through afterwards.

 

I actually still like the show despite its problems. Pretty much by season 3 I'd already accepted the fact that the books were the books and the show was the show and that was that. I will definitely acknowledge that some of the things they do make me scratch my head because things are changed that can't possibly have anything to do with time or budget constraints. Classic lines being tossed or changed (such as Jaime Lannister sends his regards, etc), amalgamated characters that really don't resemble any of the characters they're supposed to be, etc. Olly to me wasn't necessary. And while I get that they needed to stretch out the storyline in season 4, it took Jon one episode to get from the tower in the Gift back to CB and yet the battle doesn't happen until episode 9 the following season in what I assume is several weeks later. They're all just hanging around waiting for them to show up. Really? So they are still developing Jon's character yet stick Olly there and essentially put him in the emotional place he needs to be right away that won't pay off until 2 seasons later. Thus he becomes stagnant and annoying.  

 

As for the arrow that kills Ygritte, I think it's not just a matter that Jon knows he could have been the one to kill her since it was one big fight. It plays into the guilt in wondering if he hadn't left her, managed to do things differently would that have saved her? He feels his "betrayal" alone helped lead to her death.

 

Anyway, I can't wait until you read further. From the RW onward is what makes that book impossible to put down.

[stillshimpy]

my head because things are changed that can't possibly have anything to do with time or budget constraints. Classic lines being tossed or changed (such as Jaime Lannister sends his regards, etc)

 

I just want to point out that it's really a good thing they lost that line considering the difference from Book Jaime, to Show Jaime it just would have sounded like Jaime planned the Red Wedding if they left that in on the show.  Or rather that he'd promised Roose Bolton a fortune to kill Robb and Catelyn Stark.  

 

I'm telling you that "classic" line would have caused outrage aplenty and galore.  Show Jaime gets very little "consider him as a person" and lots of "Or think of him as a complete monster", with so little of the former that line would have sounded like the latter. 

Edited October 20, 2015 by stillshimpy

[jellyroll2]

Well I won't disagree with that. And considering a lot of other changes in the show, the line didn't have to be exactly that. More important in the book. But there are others. I think one they changed in season 5 from book 5 irked me way more than the Jaime line. Not to mention some epic speeches we didn't get for various reasons.

 

Btw, did you notice it wasn't explicitly shown that it was Roose who killed Robb? Obviously they had to show in the show and that's totally understandable. In the book, you figure it out from the pink cape. But you never see his face.

Edited October 20, 2015 by jellyroll2

[Dev F]

But they weren't going to and in fact, did not do that.  All it did, and all it could be reasonably expected to do, was to give the Watch warning to shore up all defenses at that damned gate. 

 

But the question isn't whether it's a stupid plan generally but whether, given that it was the wildlings' plan, letting Olly go was a reasonable part of that plan. I think the latter is true regardless.

 

And just to be clear, this isn't a fanwank I'm introducing to make sense of Olly's storyline; the series explicitly characterizes this as the wildlings' strategy as soon as Olly shows up at the Wall in the very next scene: "They want to draw us out, pick us off a few at a time."

 

But if the issue is whether the plan itself makes any sense, I will point out that by the time the wildlings embark upon it, they've already lost the element of surprise, since they have to assume that Jon made it back to Castle Black and told everyone they'd be coming. So attempting to draw the crows out into the open doesn't seem like that stupid an idea to me. Particularly since we see, both after the raid on Olly's village and following the attack on Mole's Town, that a fair number of the Night's Watch do argue that they should abandon the safety of their castle and take the attack to the wildlings.

Edited October 20, 2015 by Dev F

[Holmbo]

I can appreciate your position on that Holmbo, particularly because it would be old to you.  

 

It is, however, completely new to me so I actually appreciate finally being able to have a conversation with people that contrasts feelings from long time readers with the show, even when those feelings get heated or reflect disappointment.  The way I ended up in here at all was that I was just done, that's how ticked off at the show I was.  It felt like they were emotionally screwing with me on purpose and with no dramatic point at all.  

 

 

Shimpy, to be clear on my end at least, I don't mind your criticism of the show. It's often coming from a somewhat different place than most of the criticisms that the rest of us have made and seen made ourselves because you're seeing it all in reverse.

 

This is how I feel too. I will also keep in mind that the "well-known" criticism is new to you and therefore there is a point to bringing it up again.

 

"I get how the outrage is old to you, it isn't to me. I'm just glad to find out that there are areas where I can read something and say "Why in the world would they leave out the guy who is pretty clearly Dead Benjen....who HELPS SAM???" Why make it more dire and depressing?"

Hehe :)

 

Another quote: "....did you know that six hundred years ago, the commanders at Snowgate and the Nightfort went yp war against each other/ And when the Lord Commander tried to stop them, they joined forces to murder him?" 

That's essentially the same story from where Robb stood, by the nearly faceless King, on the forgotten Kingdom, on the way to The Twins.  The world makes the same mistakes over and over, and I wondered if it is part of the cycle of waking the Whitewalkers, and bringing back magic?  Do they break their societal structures, the rules that keep everything in place....the rules of man.....and when they do that and the chaos ensues, that's when magic reawakens and all the forces from both sides to try and start restoring order to that world.  I also wondered if it is why they never get a chance to progress.  Whenever they do, they just tear each other to shreds and it all starts over.

 

That is an intersting idea. I'm always a fan of concepts were the gods are affected by what happens in the human world. So the idea that chaos in the society brings out chaos in the supernatural world is appealing to me. So then Robert's rebellion would have been what set everything in motion. Though a certain amount of chaos is necessary for progress I think.

 

It's funny that people think it has to do with Ned's Sanctification or Tyrion's either, it's that it is a ridiculous detail to have in the books.  It's based on (and I really do mean loosely based on) a kind of tradition, but literally none of them involve sexually traumatize people and then sticking them naked in bed together.  As amusing a concept as it may be, it sounds like the HBO team thought, "Uh....that might be going a bit too far...." just in general, but that they needed to have a line that showed that Cat was thinking back happily and proudly to her own wedding vs what's in the book, which practically includes Cat's saying she thought he was plain and somber...and bad in bed at least the first time out.   I think paring that down to  "Ned wouldn't let a crowd of strangers strip us naked" was the easiest shortcut to "I think fondly of my marriage, still love my husband ....which is good....'cause I'm going to be seeing him soon."  

 

In my country bedding used to be a tradition among nobels. There was no oposite sex undressing and grooping though. The women would undress the bride and put her in nightroobe and the men would do the same for the groom. Then they would put them in bed and a priest would read a blessing on them. To have oposite sex undressing them seems just a very good way to create conflicts.

 

Also I'll bring up my old thoughts about Tywin and Cersei since I'm for once at a computer and can spoiler tag properly.

 

Every time people bring up Cersei loving people only as an extension of herself (which I agree with) I think about how that's my impression of Tywin aswell. That he loves his children only as assets to benefit the Lannister family, and thereby himself since he is the head of the family. I do like the interpretation that he does care but willed himself not to because he sees it as weekness, but I haven't really seen any indication of that in the text. The of course Tywin is much smarter than Cersei. But I wonder how much is nature and nurture though. Growing up as a noble lady is likely not that stimulating for the mind.

I put it in spoiler tag because my view on Cersei comes mostly from her pov. 

Edited October 20, 2015 by Holmbo

[Reader of Books]

It's funny that people think it has to do with Ned's Sanctification or Tyrion's either,

 

 

WRT Ned: Its not so much about sanctifying him. Its about putting a prompt in to tweak the audience's memory. The emotional attachment the audience has with Ned gives a certain emotional response that can then be used to set them up for the next twist.

 

Its actually something the show has executed very well on several occasion. One I like is in Season 2 where Roose says to Robb "But we aren't in The North Your Grace." 

 

In Season 3 Ramsay says to Theon "But we aren't in the Iron Isles My Lord"

 

GRRM also did it in the books. The set up was the descriptions of the "King of the Bridge" game the children of Winterfell used to play, and the importance of the word 'Mayhaps'. As soon as Walder Frey says "Mayhaps a sausage?" the layering on of dread intensifies.

 

To paraphrase a notorious movie reviewer "You may not have noticed it, but your brain did".

 

WRT Tyrion: I think that is a discussion that should be held off for a later time.

Edited October 20, 2015 by Reader of Books

[bobbybuilderton]

The reason there are people who think changing Ned's opinion on the bedding tries to make him more "saintly" is for exactly the reason you said. It's a pretty horrible tradition that you'd think only psychopaths would be cool with. But Ned participated in it, perhaps because of his whole honor/duty/whatever. It's both inconsistent with his character as established (noble, honorable, sticking to tradition/the old way), and removes a bit of the grey from him (instead of a good person complicit in a flawed system, he is righteous, totes progressive, cool dad and perfect husband).

[bobbybuilderton]

I just want to point out that it's really a good thing they lost that line considering the difference from Book Jaime, to Show Jaime it just would have sounded like Jaime planned the Red Wedding if they left that in on the show.  Or rather that he'd promised Roose Bolton a fortune to kill Robb and Catelyn Stark.  

 

I'm telling you that "classic" line would have caused outrage aplenty and galore.  Show Jaime gets very little "consider him as a person" and lots of "Or think of him as a complete monster", with so little of the former that line would have sounded like the latter. 

They could have found a way to make it clear Jaime knew nothing about it and it was just Roose being a smartass. Characterization of Jaime doesn't matter that much. It would have been confusing at first, I agree, but for a show that got popular (partially) on the basis that it didn't treat it's audience like idiots? Well, It was pretty frustrating to see them change that line because they couldn't be bothered to take ten seconds to do something like show Jaime's confusion when he sees Cersei, or some kind of disapproval when he argues with Tywin about taking Casterly Rock. When the line is uttered, yes, people would have been confused and perhaps outraged. But given that they added the entirely necessary visual of a pregnant woman stabbed in the stomach multiple times, do you think they care about avoiding outrage? They thrive on it. They love it. It is the backbone to their otherwise limp plotting efforts. 

 

I'm starting to rant soooo I'm gonna stop here lol. Although I do admit that probably 60 percent of my negativity towards the show is from reading interviews and watching videos with the producers and realizing I don't exactly have a high opinion of them....

Edited October 21, 2015 by bobbybuilderton

[magdalene]

Well, even though they cut the "Jaime Lannister sends his regards" for the show there are show only watchers who asked me whether Jaime was in on the RW. I even know some Jaime hating books readers who are convinced that he was somehow in on it.  I guess if you loathe a character enough you can bend what's on the page until you come up with 2+2=5.

 

Obviously 

I have always believed that Martin put that line into the book for UnCat later to focus her special hate-on on Jaime. Ironically and sadly her bad judgment continues as a vengeance zombie. And innocent parties pay the price.

[WindyNights]

Innnocent?

he's innocent of the RW but he still pushed Bran out the window so LS has just cause to kill him either way

Edited October 21, 2015 by WindyNights

[magdalene]

Innnocent?

he's innocent of the RW but he still pushed Bran out the window so LS has just cause to kill him either way

By innocent parties I meant Brienne and the boy - they don't deserve UnCats wrath.

[Dev F]

They could have found a way to make it clear Jaime knew nothing about it and it was just Roose being a smartass. Characterization of Jaime doesn't matter that much.

 

And keeping one line from the books that fans think is cool matters more? I can't say as I agree.

 

It would have been confusing at first, I agree, but for a show that got popular (partially) on the basis that it didn't treat it's audience like idiots?

 

But it's also a show that almost didn't get off the ground at all because nonreaders found the original pilot completely incomprehensible. So the series' success depends at least in part on the producers understanding that sometimes they do need to hand-hold the audience a little bit ("That's Jaime Lannister, the queen's brother!"), lest viewers get to the end of the first episode and wonder why it's a bad thing that the blonde lady and the blond knight are having sex.

 

When the line is uttered, yes, people would have been confused and perhaps outraged. But given that they added the entirely necessary visual of a pregnant woman stabbed in the stomach multiple times, do you think they care about avoiding outrage?

 

By that logic, it seems to me, we may as well argue, "Because the producers had no problem showing Joffrey torturing and murdering people, how could they possibly object to a scene in which Shireen strangles a puppy?" We're talking about two completely unrelated situations, and it's entirely possible for the writers to think that the Freys stabbing a pregnant woman is an appropriately horrific image to incorporate into the Red Wedding without also thinking that it's a great idea to confuse readers about Jaime's intentions just so we book fans can check off a box on our "Yay, they did the cool line!" scorecard.

Edited October 21, 2015 by Dev F

[Hecate7]

It's a way to make Tyrion look good: it was in the episode after the seriously toned-down Sansa wedding that had erased Tyrion's complicity/sex drive and resulted in tons of comments that used this specific detail to argue that Tyrion is a great guy because he's just like Ned (so why is Sansa such a bitch and won't have sex with him?!). Like the changes that turned Jeyne Westerling into Talisa the sassy battlefield nurse who marries for love, it shows that the "historical accuracy" used to defend the show's sexual violence goes out of the window whenever it's convenient rather than being a consistent part of worldbuilding. Instead of the mildly challenging bit where Ned and Cat are dutiful people of their culture who accept this skeevy wedding tradition (which, like

Cersei's walk of shame

, is GRRM's edgier, nakeder version of something that sorta happened in the past), the show has modern guy Ned threatening to punch someone to prevent a bedding (hey, that's what Tyrion just did! we know who to root for!).

 

I don't think anyone actually thinks Sansa is a bitch for not having sex with Tyrion. Certainly not Tyrion. That particular thought never crosses his mind at all. Tyrion refuses the bedding for Sansa's benefit. The show had Ned do the same thing in order that we might see that there is some similarity between the two reluctant hands of the King. Ned reluctant because he disliked the job, Tyrion reluctant because he loathed the king he served--but both serving anyway because on some level they believed they could and should do a better job than anyone else who might be chosen.

 

Tyrion refuses the bedding in both book and show. This has the effect of allowing Sansa to remain a virgin. It is a kind and protective thing to do. It is the kind of thing we would like to think of Ned Stark doing, which is why they added the backstory of Ned also refusing the bedding to the show. That backstory makes what Tyrion did less unique and less of a big deal, as well. It whitens Ned and grays Tyrion. That Ned in the books went along with the bedding just demonstrates how dutiful and honorable and rather stodgy he is--it just didn't occur to him to think there was any reason not to. Tyrion was in a situation where it was a little easier to see a reason to refuse--Sansa was obviously not looking forward to it, and Joffrey was looking forward to it a little too much. Tyrion's used to coloring outside the lines a bit, and Ned simply wasn't the type to do that, ever. I don't think that diminishes what Tyrion does, but I also don't judge Ned for not doing it.

Edited October 21, 2015 by Hecate7

[Reader of Books]

I don't think anyone actually thinks Sansa is a bitch for not having sex with Tyrion. 

 

It appears you were fortunate enough to have not seen the many, many such comments that said precisely this on Twitter.

[plurie]

Tyrion refuses the bedding in both book and show. This has the effect of allowing Sansa to remain a virgin. It is a kind and protective thing to do. It is the kind of thing we would like to think of Ned Stark doing, which is why they added the backstory of Ned also refusing the bedding to the show. That backstory makes what Tyrion did less unique and less of a big deal, as well. It whitens Ned and grays Tyrion. That Ned in the books went along with the bedding just demonstrates how dutiful and honorable and rather stodgy he is--it just didn't occur to him to think there was any reason not to. Tyrion was in a situation where it was a little easier to see a reason to refuse--Sansa was obviously not looking forward to it, and Joffrey was looking forward to it a little too much. Tyrion's used to coloring outside the lines a bit, and Ned simply wasn't the type to do that, ever. I don't think that diminishes what Tyrion does, but I also don't judge Ned for not doing it.

It was my impression that book Tyrion refused the bedding because HE didn't want to be stripped naked. Sansa was at best an afterthought or justification for him to refuse. His agreement not to consumate the marriage was far more noble and unique.

[nksarmi]

It appears you were fortunate enough to have not seen the many, many such comments that said precisely this on Twitter.

There is a crass lot out in the world and it seems like the bigger the medium, the more crass people get.  I won't read Facebook pages for any show I like for much the same reason.

[Skeeter22]

You don't have to look to Facebook and Twitter for those kinds of comments. People on TWOP were calling her a bitch as well.

[jellyroll2]

Well, even though they cut the "Jaime Lannister sends his regards" for the show there are show only watchers who asked me whether Jaime was in on the RW. I even know some Jaime hating books readers who are convinced that he was somehow in on it.  I guess if you loathe a character enough you can bend what's on the page until you come up with 2+2=5.

 

Obviously 

I have always believed that Martin put that line into the book for UnCat later to focus her special hate-on on Jaime. Ironically and sadly her bad judgment continues as a vengeance zombie. And innocent parties pay the price.

 

Your spoiler is exactly why I think that line is important in the books. Since the show changed things though...

[stillshimpy]

But the question isn't whether it's a stupid plan generally but whether, given that it was the wildlings' plan, letting Olly go was a reasonable part of that plan. I think the latter is true regardless.

 

But it does matter that it was a stupid plan, Dev F, particularly since the show really struggled with bringing across any sense of scale to the Wildlings and so it ended up feeling like there was very little peril, right up until the final  battle when Stannis practically popped up out of the tree roots to save the day. 

 

So it mattered to me and I'm going to just pretty much stick with it mattering to me.  We're just going to have to disagree on the point of whether or not it mattered that it was a silly plan.  The Show had depicted to be what appeared to be -- at most -- about 12 wildlings and made a bigger point of how they were Free Folk who did what they pleased, etc.  (impossible to command in a military setting).  So when Thenn the Peckish dispatches Olly off to Castle Black specifically to lure them out, it matters to me that "Well, presumably Jon counted them and knew -- nope  not coming out".   The same way that Ygritte ended up looking like such a rube for  thinking a broken down windmill was a castle.  It was hard to fear the Bumpkin Horde. 

 

As a viewer, losing that sense of scale made the threat from that side of the Wall seem very small indeed.  So I think it does matter that it was "well that's stupid" even if it was obviously their plan, because I really wasn't the only one who was more than a little bored by and unimpressed with the Wildlings.   I admit, I had a lot to say about it, but I was far from alone in it.  

 

It actually took someone here urging me to pay attention to the Wildling stories, because they were important to get me to do it.  

 

They could have found a way to make it clear Jaime knew nothing about it and it was just Roose being a smartass. Characterization of Jaime doesn't matter that much.

 

Sure, they could have, but they didn't choose to do a lot of things with Jaime's characterization.  I get why fans of the books wanted that line in there, but I can also see why they didn't choose to include it.  They hadn't done enough background information on Jaime to have it do anything other than cause confusion for people who hadn't read the books.  It did have to be pretty sorely disappointing though, in that the tragedy of the Red Wedding is almost entirely lost to the "let's concentrate on the horror" which is unfortunate. I can see why Jaime Lannister fans must just have felt particularly ill-done-to by the series.  

 

For one thing, yeah, I've noticed that I'm not spending a ludicrous amount of time watching poor Theon be tortured endlessly, inventively and excessively.  The only mention thus far was Roose Bolton offering Catelyn something that was deeply, deeply horrifying.  I guess I should just be glad that Catelyn got a swift death and that Bolton didn't start peeling people. 

 

So I just got to see why they decided to opt out of "Cold Hands" in the show, because of the magical gate that will only allow Crows through.  

 

What a great Bran chapter just overall.  I think that might be my favorite chapter from any of the books thus far.  The 79 Sentinels gave me the creeps, and of course I thought they were going to wake up while Bran was there.  

 

Then the story of the Night's King, falling in love with what had to be a White Walker (she's even described as a corpse bride) ....and Nan always insisting the Night's King was a Stark....so if the Others are the children of Craster, his sons, what the heck is with the Night's King being a Stark and only being able to be killed by a Stark joined with the Wildlings?  

 

Sometimes this stuff is fascinating and seems to be hinting that the Jon has to be a Stark -- and he is in pretty much any telling of the guesses at his parenthood -- "He was a Stark, the brother of the man who brought him down."  

I really do enjoy that when this story just goes to the fantasy lore place, it swings from the heels. The show really did choose to lose a lot of that "The Starks have some old time Weirwood magic in them".  Sam's entrance was much more interesting in the books and I wish they'd figured out some way to convey that only a sworn brother of the Night's watch could open that gate in some other fashion.   They did eventually just have Bran hearing the tree in his dreams, so it's a pity that they just took a pass on any sense of magical mystery in this story that isn't....tainted, you know?  

 

Like Melisandre can birth shadow assassins.  Demon forces can raise the dead.  All magic requires a blood sacrifice and a terrible price to be paid.   But any force in this story that might be perceived to be working for good is either Dany....hanging out waiting for her dragons to get larger (and mainly interested in an understandable quest for vengeance anyway) Or Bran being hauled around like a parcel, looking for a three-eyed crow and eventually meeting up with what looked like the Fae from True Blood.  

 

So now I'm wondering if the guys we saw Craster's baby being taken to are the 79 Sentinels.  

 

I'm also sort of excited that now I just get to read the story, without dreading that any longer and to me it just go a lot more interesting that there is anything that is quite clearly a Wight (and I still think that has to be Benjen, but Bran will know whether or not that's the case) , is trying to do anything that might  be construed as good.  Or helpful.  Or not....child murder, at least.   

 

So the best thing about being through the Red Wedding is I get to be excited about the story again, without living in more than a little fear of it. 

Edited October 21, 2015 by stillshimpy

[Avaleigh]

You don't have to look to Facebook and Twitter for those kinds of comments. People on TWOP were calling her a bitch as well.

They were definitely, definitely in the minority though. One of the reasons I loved that place (and now PTV) is because we have a really thoughtful and intelligent group of people for the most part. When I venture over to other places to see this show discussed I sometimes forget how crazy, creepy, and unsettling a lot of the comments are.

With Tyrion and Sansa and the wedding I remember a poster talking about how Sansa was a rude bitch for not being thankful to Tyrion. Another poster responded with something like 'Take a moment and think about what you're saying. You're saying that Sansa should thank Tyrion for not raping her.' I liked the post as did roughly 49 others.

FB and Twitter though yeah, it's mind boggling.

ETA:

I love that you made it to the story about the Night's King.

Edited October 21, 2015 by Avaleigh

[Holmbo]

Doesn't a lot of book readers hate sansa as well?

There's always gonna be people who want to view their stories in black and white.