By Chris Wright, aka James Rivers, with Petra
We’re onto Part 3 of our Game of Thrones survey results, in which we learn that of two formerly Essos-dwelling female characters, only one’s lethal acts are consistently seen as justified.
We’ll review nearly four dozen events on the show – various beheadings, imprisonments and mass killings – to see which got a nod of moral approval from respondents. On a different topic entirely, we’ll see which houses are most favored.
For Part 1 of the survey results, which includes survey basics and ratings of plot elements and seasons (and were presented at Con of Thrones last month), click here. Part 2, which has ratings regarding characters, is available here. Part 4 is yet to come!
Justifying Actions…or Not
We asked respondents the following:
“Below is a list of certain plot developments. For each, please choose how justified you feel the action taken was (as opposed to how justified the character taking the action felt). Please consider mainly the show depiction, if you also have read the books.”
Per usual, we had a five-point scale ranging from Very Unjustified (1) to Very Justified (5).
We listed 45 actions/events – nearly all of them involving attempted or successful murder – presented in three relatively random groups of 15. The three groups showed up in a random order, as did the 15 events within each of them. The actions were phrased in “active voice” as much as possible (example: “Olenna poisons Joffrey,” not “Joffrey is poisoned”) so it was clear who was performing the action/event.
Here were the nine most-justified character actions.
There’s a lot of Arya way up here; respondents were largely OK with her actions. Of course, many of them have been “rah rah” retributive moments.
Here’s the second group of nine.
To be clear, just because one found an action justified doesn’t mean they were pleased with the end result. For instance, as shown above, more than two-thirds of respondents said Tyrion’s use of wildfire during the Blackwater battle was justified. But as shown back in Part 1 of our results, only a third were pleased that Stannis lost that battle.
And the middle group of nine, though all but one fell on the “justified” side, however slightly.
Here we have three beheadings rated very closely together (those of Will, Rickard Karstark and Mossador), and also very close to neutral. What, if anything, does that say about the moral universe, and justice system, on Thrones?
Our second to last grouping…
I was pleased from a data-validity standpoint that the High Sparrow’s related arrests of Loras and Margaery, despite their being in different groups (remember these were split into three groups of 15), wound up with nearly identical scores. We also have three actions involving Melisandre rated relatively closely together. Though there’s one more that is rated much lower…
And the final one.
To paraphrase Petra in an earlier article, it’s not surprising that the murder of children would be seen as very unjustified. Though I wonder: Suppose Stannis had defeated Ramsay at Winterfell, even taken over that northern capital. Would the burning of Shireen have been seen as more justified?
Petra: It’s interesting that the most-justified action wasn’t committed by an unambiguous fan favorite, like Jon, but by Sansa, who was among the top favorite and least favorite characters (see Part 2). Fans are able to acknowledge that her action was justified even if some of them also don’t like her as a character.
(Note: I included it for the record, but the “Robert’s bastards are ordered killed” item was not asked clearly on the survey; the question said Joffrey had ordered them killed. That’s in the show only. In the books, it was Cersei.)
Speaking of killing people, two female characters who do a fair amount of that are heading in opposite directions when it comes to their actions’ justifiability, according to our results. Here are results, on the one to five scale, regarding actions Arya and Dany have taken over the years.
Arya’s acts, which are generally more retributive in nature, are seen as more justified, with each scoring at least a 4.0 out of 5. Dany’s results hew closer to a 3.0 neutral score.
Petra: I can’t help but cite sexism as one reason why Daenerys’ actions have grown increasingly unjustified in their perception (my views on her character are complicated, but I don’t want to get sidetracked). But I’m forced to check my assumptions as Daenerys’ declining justified ratings contrast with Arya’s rising ones. It’s odd that they have changed, because their motivations and methodology haven’t. Perhaps it’s the changing context: watching Arya grow in independence and agency makes it hard not to root for her when she defeats adversaries, yet seeing Daenerys’ rise in power makes it a little … scarier when she uses that power to take out her enemies.
Justified-ness by Viewer Type
In Part 1 we explained the three “viewer types” – those who read at least one book before seeing the show; those who were exposed to the show, then decided to try the books; and those who’ve never read the books (either because of an edict from Sue the Fury or not). Let’s see how their opinions varied, or didn’t, for the above 45 actions.
For simplicity’s sake, we’re showing only either “justified” or “unjustified” stats below, whichever had the bigger difference (remember, neutral was a category too). We’ve lumped together the “very” and “slightly/somewhat” responses from above.
First up, here’s actions involving Dany or Arya. Those of you less into data dumps should keep an eye out for the red bars, which note actions with at least a nine-point difference across the groups.
The killing of the Tarlys registered the biggest split among all 45 events – a striking 16-point difference. And when there are big differences, it’s the show-only viewers seeing actions as more justified or less unjustified. The only exception above is Arya’s murder of Polliver, which book readers were more down with. Why would that reaction be different?
Tyrion’s twin slayings at the end of Season 4 engender differing reactions by nearly the same margin (12 points for Tywin, 13 for Shae), as do a couple of Cersei’s endeavors, be they mass slaughter or a simple poisoning. At least three of the four can be seen as retributive; again, I wonder why it’s vengeful events that seem to result in differences between book readers and show-onlys. (Meanwhile, though the difference is only five points, book-first respondents were less likely to find Ned’s beheading unjustified.)
In this group is the only event that book-firsts more saw as justified by a big margin: Robb’s beheading of Rickard Karstark. Just below it we see something similar with Ned beheading Will, though by only seven points, and at top right, Jon beheading Janos, by five points. Do book readers more approve of the Westerosi justice system than show-onlys? Or do they just like seeing northerners cut off others’ heads?
Kings, Houses and Bureaucracy
Elsewhere in the survey, we asked a question involving the undergirding of the early seasons and, in a sort of mock public opinion poll, probed for attitudes about varied Westerosi organizations.
The War of the Five Kings was the backdrop for the early seasons of Thrones, made clear by the cruel lampoonery at the center of the Joffrey-Margaery nuptials. We asked respondents to rank their preferred winner, from most preferred to least. These were the results. The number at right was the character’s average rank, with 1.00 being the best possible score (one only attainable if virtually every respondent ranked them 1st).
- Robb Stark – 1.32
- Renly Baratheon – 2.36
- Stannis Baratheon – 2.48
- Balon Greyjoy – 4.15
- Joffrey Baratheon – 4.67
Petra: No surprises here. Efficacy at leading was a little ambiguous for all five kings (we could have a looong conversation about that) but in terms of likability, Robb and Renly are the obvious winners and Joffrey was guaranteed to be at the bottom.
We also asked respondents to rank ten great, or at least greatish, houses from favorite to least favorite. These were those results. The number at right is, as above, the average ranking.
- Stark – 1.59
- Targaryen – 3.52
- Tyrell – 4.43
- Baratheon – 4.95
- Martell – 5.06
- Tully – 5.11
- Lannister – 5.16
- Greyjoy – 7.03
- Bolton – 8.8
- Frey – 9.05
Petra: Ranking houses is tricky because, well, what are you assessing? Their words? Their sigil? The likability of each individual member can vary wildly. Is it the house’s overall feel? Or perhaps the likeability of certain iconic members tints people’s view of the whole family. The Starks were/are all pretty likable, so their place at No. 1 is understandable. But the Targaryens’ rank may be due to the popularity of individual members – Daenerys and Egg, for instance – rather than an overall belief that they make the best leaders.
We also asked a broader question that’s somewhat similar:
“Below are ‘Houses’ and groups or other institutions that appear on the show and in the books. What is your overall opinion of each?”
This had, you guessed it, a five-point scale, going from Very Negative to Very Positive. And keep in mind, as we’ve seen elsewhere in this survey, something can be a “favorite” even if folks have a negative opinion of it (see Lannister, Cersei, on the good/evil and favorite character lists).
Note that, despite being No.2 in the 1-to-10 rankings above, House Targaryen has the fourth-most-positive image, with the Tyrells and Tullys above it.
Whew. That’s three sets of results down, one to go. We’ll be back with episode ratings (Hint: The bottom five episodes are all from the same season; another season of the show placed three episodes in the top ten) and more!
Weird, Polliver is killed by Sandor in the books then Arya retrieves Needle; so I don’t why readers might think Arya’s killing act is unjustified? Polliver is a evil shit in the books too so it can’t be that. Perhaps it was the ice cold way Arya did it rather than being in the heat of the moment as it were, but then her book killing of the Tickler and the Squire is pretty savage and heartless.
Why a quick kill it would be less justified than the method of killing of Show!Trant is a bit anomalous?
This poll shows how bias this fandom is.
Daenerys’ actions are considered bad and unjustifiable, but when Starks execute someone, or someone who has harmed Starks gets murdered in a horrible way, it is perfectly fine. 🙄
How exactly is one execution/murder any better than other?
Mossador was executed because he murdered someone. Fans think this is unjustifiable.
Jon executes Slynt, because he didn’t want to obey his commands. And this is considered justifiable..
So according to fans, murder is fine, but disobeying Jon’s orders are not?
And please, spare me of the speech, about what Janos did to Starks in King’s Landing. That has nothing to do with him disobeying Jon’s orders.
I find the middling placements for the executions of Rickard Karstark and Mossador very strange. It almost seems to me like many people were confusing justification with the wisdom of the action, because while you can query whether those were politically sensible, Lord Rickard and Mossador were unquestionably guilty of the charges against them (indeed, both admitted and were proud of it) and the charges (identical in both cases, the murder of prisoners) absolutely merited execution (assuming you believe in execution as a punishment, but clearly from other results in this survey most do not have a problem with that in principle). Lord Rickard, especially, was a straight-up war criminal who murdered two boys not much older than Shireen (an action that draws, deservedly, near-universal disapproval), and without any conviction that he’d achieve some cosmic good by doing so (he served no cause higher than his own thirst for revenge).
Incidentally, I find it kind of funny how Robb and Dany in the above instances get faulted for delivering justice, perhaps at the expense of their own political situation, even though much of the fandom condemns Robert Baratheon for not doing that regarding the murders of Elia, Aegon and Rhaenys. Robert was more callous about it in that he legitimately didn’t care, but the choices faced (whether to punish criminals at the cost to one’s own political position, since Robert would have had to forfeit the Lannister alliance) are the same.
I can’t speak for anyone else, just myself. When we’re talking about these two separate incidents I personally think both were justified. The main difference for me was that Dany handled that execution rather poorly whereas Jon played it just right.
Dany badly misunderstood how her constituency would react to a public execution of someone who was formerly a slave and struck back against a former master. Simply put, the criminal act evoked more sympathy, which Dany probably should’ve had a better read on. There really wasn’t anything sympathetic about what happened to Slynt and his situation was far less complicated. It’s the equivalent of a soldier refusing a commanders orders during war time. Perhaps that has some influence on the fandom. I don’t know.
Nina,
Daenerys burned men who refused to bend the knee, the Starks executed; people who actually betrayed and had part in murdering their families… There’s a ‘stark’ difference.
Anyway Daenerys is starting to mirror Cersei more with the ‘bend the knee or die’ talk. While the Starks have never changed, you hurt me and my family, you die.
Disobeying Jon’s orders is considered treason, also if you recall Slynt had played his fair role in Ned Starks death and Sansas abuse… So he was a bad man all around.
Mossandor was executed because he did indeed murder, but who did he murder?
It’s all in the victims name and position.
While I agreed with Daenerys, Mossandor did nothing more than murder someone who wanted to force him and the others back into slavery…
Nina,
Agree very much
Cersei blowing up the sept is the most horrific, evil action ever done on this show.
And yet … I was unapologetically cheering and laughing when I saw it.
The Starks reconquered the North in Season 6 using armies comprised almost entirely of foreign soldiers (Wildlings and Valemen; the Northern troops involved were insignificant in number) and then demanded that the North swear allegiance to them. The only reason they didn’t have to execute anybody (other than Ramsay) was because Karstark and Umber died in battle and nobody else refused to submit.
Nina:
I understand why she did it because she feels only she should be able to condemn to death but Dany had all the slavers crucified so obviously Mossador believed she would not be too mad with his act of revenge on the captured master. And what was Jon supposed to do to with man who challenged and rose to fight his authority, couldn’t send him to the wall his already there. Jon couldn’t simply leave the man to foment an uprising against him. There is difference in the “victim’s” mindsets. One was innocent young man who thought was doing his queen’s work and the other an older man who was outright defiant as someone who should have known you take risk when you call your leader foul names and refuse to go away when he send you.
I can only speak for my “show only” self, but I ranked most of Dany’s actions as less justified because many do not fit into the Westerosi justice system. In real life I do not condone capital punishment, but I can suspend by own abhorrence by accepting that the show is based in a culture very different from our own. If it is accepted by the Night’s Watch that the punishment for desertion or mutiny is execution, then the deserters and mutineers know what they could expect as result of their actions. Crucifying the Grand Masters without benefit of a trial was more of a knee-jerk reaction and show of power than actual justice.
HelloThere,
we are horrible people HAHA
Interesting. I thought it could be due to Will, Mossador and Rickard being pretty minor characters, so respondents’ reactions were on the whole less extreme (those three events and Jaime poisoning Olenna had the least number of “very” responses among the 45 measured). Their close overall scores intrigues me. Slynt on the other hand was a much more known quantity and clearly portrayed as a villain and a pathetic one at that.
I found both Robb and Danny’s reasons justifiable, just not politically wise.
Danny could had set a trial date for Mossodor, and Robb; well he should had listen to his family members.
Your entire comment pretty much summs up the bias attitude of this fandom.
Tarly’s butchered the people of Highgarden. They weren’t exactly innocent. They betrayed their vows to house Tyrell.
Mossador murdered a man, who was waiting on a trial. He also deliberately went against Daenerys’ commands.
However, since they didn’t attack any member of house Stark, they get a free pass of everything they did.
Tarly’s were given a choice (just like Slynt), but they refused (just like Slynt).
Jon killed Slynt, and it’s okay to fans, because it was Jon, and because Slynt was a bad guy, but somehow Daenerys gets all the crap, because she had a murderer executed, and then killed Tarly’s, who refused to obey her command.
I see no difference between Daenerys’ and Jon’s decisions of executing Slynt/Mossador/Tarly’s, but Jon gets cherished for his decision, while Daenerys gets dragged through the mud.
HelloThere,
It’s no worse than Daenerys and Vaes Dorthrak..
Grail King,
What exactly would a trial for Mossador have changed? He openly confessed to being guilty. The issue was that he and many of the freedmen didn’t think what he did was wrong.
Nina,
THANK YOU..so tired of the Dany bashing
Ha, totally guilty, though I don’t particularly “give crap” to Dany. I rather like her.
But yes, I fit exactly where you put me. I’ll tell you why though. I expect much, much more from Dany. The broody bastard is not sitting any throne as far as I’m concerned and won’t want anyway, I bet. And frankly he was a mediocre leader of the Night’s Watch and no king material. Just like Ned. Too honorable and completely horrendous in politics by half. All heart and justice, crappy leading. Good heroic man though. Dany is something else entirely for me, I require all of Jon’s good features and qualities and about 100 things more of her. Sure, there are common features and good streak in both but way different expectations from them.
If killing someone (waif) who’s chasing you (Arya) the Terminator style to kill you and even almost succeeded, if that’s not 100% justified, then there’s a problem. But Hey! There’re at least 12% who believe murdering children (Robert bastards) is justified or neutral.
You could see clearly from the show that Dany had difficult time executing Mossandor, she understood his motives but she promised to deliver freedom and justice, meaning that, how bad is SoH doesn’t justify killing him by someone who doesn’t have the right to do so. It’s the same situation with Robb/Karstark.
Nina,
I tend to agree. We debated a bit on this a few weeks back. I don’t think Dany killing Mossador was any more/less justified than Jon killing Slynt.
Nina,
Again, I tend to agree. Dany and Jon are my favorite characters and I love the Dany/Jon ‘ship, but I do feel there’s a bit of a difference in judgment of them by some portions of the fandom. I still stand by my assessment that neither of them would be better rulers than someone like Tyrion (or possibly Varys), and that the governing system for Westeros is pretty crappy overall.
In the specific case of Jon vs. Dany’s decisions here, I think the poll really reflects the end result of their decisions rather than the decisions themselves.
It’s easier to second-guess Dany’s decision to execute Mossador because the Meereneese didn’t approve of her decision, whereas no one really second guessed or had a reason to second guess Jon’s decision to execute Slynt.
It reminds me of when a coach makes a controversial or unconventional call in a football game. If it works out, then the coach is viewed as a genius, whereas if it doesn’t work, somehow the same decision is viewed forever as a terrible one.
I love these survey results, and how in-depth and detailed they are! They sure stimulate some interesting discussions.
On that note, the comparison between Arya and Dany is quite interesting really. Even though they’re both female characters who have quite a few kills on their resume, their contexts are completely different. Dany is, and has been, in a position of power for quite some time whereas Arya obviously is not, and I think people in power delivering justice/punishment has a very different emotional response in many of us than an “underdog” getting revenge.
Part of what endears Arya to so many people is that she taps into something in us that represents fighting back. Most people have an inherent urge to fight back if they’re abused, insulted, humiliated, manipulated, taken advantage of, harmed, etc. We don’t want to put up with that crap! In Dany’s case, she wasn’t meting out justice to people who had done her terrible harm or caused her huge trauma. People generally have more inherent distrust for people in her position. Particularly as a female in power, as Petra alludes to in the article.
Having said that, I do agree that some of Dany’s actions were just as justified as those of Arya or Jon, but it’s very difficult for people (myself included) to completely ignore our emotional bias as opposed to being totally objective.
ygritte,
“….what was Jon supposed to do to with man who challenged and rose to fight his authority…”
What Mossador did was a direct challenge to Dany’s authority, and the results of that challenge were just as open/defiant as Slynt. I liked Mossador way more than I liked Slynt, but that doesn’t change the fact that what he did was an open challenge to her authority. Dany and Jon both are no less/more culpable than the other for not finding a different way to resolve those situations.
krupke,
I think both executions were absolutely justifiable. The difference for me is that, in Dany’s case, she seemed completely surprised that the Meereneese did not like her decision. In my eyes, it made her look kinda dumb, even if for only a moment. Like really? You couldn’t tell that your constituency of former slaves wouldn’t approve of publicly killing another former slave who killed a former master? Again, I don’t think she made the wrong decision to have him executed, but she misread how it would play out pretty badly. To be fair, her situation was more complicated than Jon’s was. If you are a member of the NW and tell your LC to “stick your order up your bastard ass” then you’ve basically signed your death warrant.
Mr Derp,
I can see this, and think that there have been times when Jon has misread situations as well. I just feel that certain parts of fandom castigate her more than they do him for similar decisions.
Nina,
“A ruler who kills those devoted to her is not a ruler who inspires devotion” – Tyrion 5×08
This is the key distinction. Dany killed someone that was loyal to her but disobeyed her command. Jon killed someone that was disloyal to him and disobeyed his command. Both had the right to execute but in Dany’s case it would have been wiser to pardon Mossador with a warning, whereas in Jon’s case it was wiser to eliminate the threat as soon as possible.
Yeah, everybody thought that the execution of the baby-killing coward was more justified than the execution of the freed slave, who defied a foreign law to himself execute a slaver presumed to be a member of a murderous insurgency, because they just hate Dany for no reason at all.
Good one.
Nina,
I mean, the fandom is biased in regards to female characters, just fact. Unless you’re Arya, the female character who rejects femininity completely. The rest of the female characters are judged harshly, their mistakes are frequently blown out of proportion and never forgiven or forgotten, if they don’t make mistakes they’re accused of being Mary Sues.
Sadly this happens in every fandom.
anon,
That’s a horrible suggestion. Dany is trying to establish the rule of law, which means delivering justice for all. What you’re suggesting would be widely interpreted as an implicit endorsement of Mossador’s actions, and would inspire others to disobey her instructions in the future.
Ramsay’s 20th Good Man,
It wasn’t “a foreign law”. Mossador swore himself to Dany’s government.
krupke,
I can’t speak on behalf of other fans. I assume some of the hate Dany gets is because of sexism, but I doubt that’s where the majority of fans are coming from. I can only speak for myself though. Personally, I like Dany, but it’s hard to go “all in” on someone who’s goal in life is to rule over you with authority. I think that’s where a lot of the divide over Dany comes from. Jon has no interest in ruling over anyone whereas that’s Dany’s primary ambition.
Sean C.,
I don’t know what exactly Mossador swore to Dany. But it’s made pretty clear that the concept of a “fair trial” is alien to the Meereenese. He and the other former slaves pursued justice the way the Meereenese were used to.
Which may contribute to a more sympathetic interpretation of his actions than Slynt’s open and deliberate defiance of laws that he’s clearly familiar with and used to subject people to himself (and no doubt abused) when he was in a position of authority.
So women who show ambition to be authoritative and are interested in power are hated, yet men who want the same thing, like Stannis, are not. That’s sexism. It’s generally the same thing, when a woman is authoritative and has power she’s a bitch, she’s condescending and untrustworthy, when a man is the same, he’s a bad ass boss.
Not sure if you’ve seen the movie Gladiator or not but there’s a scene where the Emperor Commodus wants to kill the gladiator Maximus, but he’s unable to because the crowd is chanting “live”. So he’s forced to let his enemy go because it was wiser not to antagonise an entire city of his subjects. In Dany’s case the crowd was chanting for mercy, but she killed Mossador anyway, and makes the common folk her enemies. You could argue that Dany is just but she definitely isn’t wise. And as for prerogative: that execution didn’t establish the rule of law, it weakened it and sent the message that she needed to be overthrown.
anon,
The point of the rule of law is that there’s one law for everybody. Letting Mossador live because he claimed to be supporting her would violate that.
I still find it a curious decision by D&D to change Mossador from Missandei’s Unsullied brother into a former slave of Meereen and have her order his execution, which isn’t in the books. (Book!Mossador was killed while being attacked by Sons of the Harpy.) Was their choice simply to provide a better visual as to why there would be so many against Daenerys and heighten the tension within the city?
That’s a rather vague generality you’re throwing out there. Is this supposed to be a reply that’s claiming what I said was sexist or are you claiming to speak on behalf of everyone who voted as to why Dany’s decisions have not been met with full approval?
My previous post was clarifying why, in my opinion, some show watchers do not like Dany. The show does not take place in 2018, but the people who watch the show do live in 2018, and most people in this day and age do not look favorably upon someone who’s primary ambition in life is to rule over others. Psychologically, it’s much easier to root against someone like that than cheer them on. Even when you take that into consideration, she’s still rather popular among the fandom, and, as I already stated earlier, I generally like her too.
Again, as you yourself admit, this is a vague generality. I have no doubt plenty of people out there in the world feel that way, but I also believe there’s plenty of people who don’t, so you’re not really making any point with that. To be honest, the only times I’ve heard the phrase “bad ass boss” in recent memory was to describe both Sansa and Dany. I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone call Jon or Stannis a “bad ass boss”, but then again, neither you nor myself can speak for everyone now can we?
By the way, I fucking hate Stannis.
Mr Derp,
I’m not talking about you, I’m saying that Stannis also wanted to rule everyone yet he was admired while Dany is hated for the same thing.
I think also to parallel Jon’s storyline and his own beheading moment
Clob,
I don’t think they changed the character so much as they created a different character and snagged the name from an unused book character for him.
Who are you talking about then? Who admired Stannis and who hated Dany for the same thing? There’s plenty of Dany lovers/haters as well as Stannis lovers/haters, so it all depends on who you’re talking about. Besides, according to the WOTW poll, Dany is miles ahead of Stannis when it comes to popularity.
Enharmony1625,
Arya trounced Daenerys in the Killer Queen fanwars, and it wasn’t me who brought it up.
#ASNAWP
Really? That’s pretty fucked up.
Grail King,
Yeah, esp re breaking marriage promise to Frey. Bad move, really bad
Kartack beheading made me think of Theon’s beheading of Rodrick. What that included among the events?
Mr Derp,
Yeah, like Robb, another case of not following the advice of advisors. If you are not going to listen to them or consider their reasoning, why bother having them. (like many of the other characters, I do give consideration for decisions made when very very young. But thats even more reason for them to listen!)
Oh forgot to add – once again, really loving this summary of the survey. Wish I had thought of making a copy of the way I responded (not sure I could have) because I don’t remember some and would like to compare to what others said (tho on the important ones i definitely remember, but there were some that were very hard to answer) Very interesting comparison betwee n certain characters and how their actions were rated. Really interesting that in most cases it didnt seem to matter that much if people were book only or show onlyl (tho I could be wrong) Looking forward to part 4!
ash,
Enharmony1625,
Thanks! It’s been fun to do. And I’ve learned more than I ever thought I’d need to know about Google Sheets and Slides!
James Rivers,
Oh man, you should teach me! We use Google drive at my work, and I can’t keep track of what goes in sheets, docs or slides. At least Ive gotten better at Excel…..
I am having real issues with the burning of Randyyl and Dickon Tarly. I think that the people taking the survey got caught up in their emotions rather than just answering the questions. How could Danerys right to execute the two Tarley’s be in question? She is asserting her claim to the throne, and the soverign makes the laws. Not only does she have every right to say ‘i convict you of treason. off with your head.’ But she does not even require her seargent at arms to man handle them into place. They walk there willingly. I mean it is a mass acknowledgement of her right to declare two people enemies of the throne and have them put to death. As sad as it might have been to see Dickon stand at his fathers side, that can not be allowed to factor in whether it was justified or not. She gave everyone on that field the opportunity to get off that field alive. All they had to do was symbolically make a stand on which side of the fence they stood. This side; if you felt that you were coerced to be here by the Lannisters. That side; if you actually wanted to be here to support them. And they chose (that side) And of all the people on that field who could have claimed legitimately to have been coerced Randyll was the foremost, as he had copped no end of badgering by Jaime, to make sure that he presented himself for the Lannisters.
Not realy. You just push all your emotions to one side and make like Spock “this is not rational.’
Or, maybe dany’s driven by a need to show the entire world that “we are not all like dad, and i have an opportunity to set the Targaryen ship right.’
Malkavian Knight,
She not a real person. Don’t get too upset over “bashing” of TV character 🙂
Mr Derp,
That resonates, for me at least.
Nariman,
Many people have different expectations from women vs men. It is a lot of how we each were brought up maybe. We know from history that men were the protectors, hunters and fighters where women were the nurturers, comforters and healers. Women had inherent desire for a strong alpha male likewise men wanted someone with those feminine traits maybe feisty yet gentle spirit who didn’t try to have what were known as manly traits of being agressive or wanting power over people. As we see the old natural order of things has been challenged/changing in modern era.
anon,
Good example
The survey is not asking whether it was a wise course of action or not. It is asking whether it is just or not. Just = justice. There were many good reasons for why she shouldn’t, and many good reasons for why she should. And I am sure that all of those could be debated ad nauseam in the senate until everyone dies of old age. Was Daenerys justified in making that decision? of course she was. I would have thought that our own earthly example of what happens when ordinary folk set out on their vigilante excursions to seek out and lynch anyone that they ‘felt’ that they were justified in doing so, was made quite clear to us when Orson Wells jumped on the radio all those years ago and orated The War Of The Worlds.
This is exactly why ‘authority’ must secure its’ autonomy in matters of justice. Not to salve someone’s ego.
Pigeon,
Come on… there is a perverse delight you get when seeing someone incinerate all their enemies in one blow… with a glass of wine and a smirk on their face, lol. (only in fiction obviously 😉 )
One of my topper most highlights of the entire show was LF biting the dust and worstest traumas was *lip wobbles* Shireen. Boo! to the 3% who thought it was justified, not sharing my sweeties with you! I’m sure that’s statistically valid in some way, perhaps I am the averaged out GoT fan in human form.
For anyone else having an existential crisis (again!) after watching Westworld S2, I doubt they’d need 10,000 lines of code for me if that’s the case, more like 10 o_0
Or maybe the common folk have no need to be used as pawns because someone else has a “need” to show the entire world something.
I don’t think Dany is a tyrant at all, but your post sounds like the excuse that every tyrant in history makes as to why they should be in charge.
Dany can still be different from her father without conquering the world.
This kind of reminds me of a scene in the movie “Master & Commander” where the captain and the doctor are arguing over the power of authority and how it’s necessary, yet it’s also corrupt in nature. It’s an interesting debate.
Also, how does Arya killing the Waif not score a perfect 5 in justifiable-ness? Of all the actions surveyed, it is literally the only one that is in self defence. Even in our more civilized society this is a totally justifiable action.
Enharmony1625,
I was confused by that one too. Not as much in that it wasn’t 100% very justified, but with the 3% for very unjustified. *shrug*
Enharmony1625,
Clob,
Ha, I too was a bit curious about that. I assume there’s a 3% margin of assholes filling in random answers just for the fuck of it.
Same goes with the burning of Shireen. It’s hard to tell the exact percentages, but it looks like around 3% thought burning her alive was somewhat justified.
Yeah, that’s what they did. The name wasn’t really important for me to mention, even if it was strange to use Missandei’s book brother’s name for a character they did that to. My main curiosity regarding their writing decision was that they had Daenerys do a public beheading of one of her followers. I just wonder what their thoughts were to have her do that act that wasn’t in the books.
Enharmony1625,
Obviously those voters are Amish.
Sean C.,
I thought something seemed a little.. amish[amiss].
Ugh, terrible. So sorry..
Mr Derp,
I don’t fault Dany for her ambition to “break the wheel.” It’s a good ambition to have. She really wants to make things more equitable. I don’t even fault her to a certain extent for her ruthlessness. As with most ambitious people it comes down to whether the ends justify the means and does the end goal get lost during the pursuit of that goal? This, and the fact that as a viewer I feel the governing system for Westeros is extremely flawed, makes me not really want anyone to sit on the iron throne if/when the AotD is defeated. But do I think that a significant portion of the fandom is harder on Dany b/c she’s an ambitious woman and that her actions/decisions though similar to Jon’s during key moments get more scrutiny and critique? Yes. (And I’ll continue to comment when I think this phenomenon is occurring. )
Of course that’s a possibility, but it’s hard to substantiate a claim like that without backing it up. So far, I haven’t seen anyone back up that claim. It’s just a lot of assumptions and generalizing. It’s easy to make such a claim, but not so easy to back it up with evidence. It’s not that I don’t believe it. I just get tired of people making such claims without evidence.
The only evidence that’s been presented so far is that Dany’s decisions have become less popular the closer she gets to the throne, however, that’s not evidence that shows sexism. It simply shows that certain people are not supportive of her recent decisions, which may or may not have anything to do with gender.
For what it’s worth, I believe that some fans probably want Dany on the throne simply because she’s a woman, just like some fans do not want her on the throne because she’s a woman. It goes both ways.
Provide me with evidence and I will believe you 100%.
Mr Derp,
I think you’re spot on here, and with everything you’ve said about Dany in this thread. I’m sure there is some sexism towards her out there, but to make that generalization about the entire fandom’s Dany critiques? C’mon.
There isn’t any male character in this show that is like Dany, so it is impossible to really tell whether the dislike towards her character stems from sexism or not. You can’t compare her to Jon, Stannis, or any other ruler in this story, not truly. They all just have completely different personalities and are faced with different decisions. It’s part of what makes the story so damn good.
Mr Derp,
Will not be doing a deep dive into this right now b/c I’m about to devote alot more online/offline energy to political things. However, when I do return to it- What evidence do you want? Statistics from fanboard comments? Academic critiques? My and other people’s experience in this and other fandoms?
Well, I’d say it depends on whether or not you’re trying to convince me that you’re right. If not, then it’s all good. You can feel how you feel and save the time doing funner things than researching stats 🙂 Besides, 69% of statistics are misleading. 87% of people know that 😉
However, if you are trying to convince me then anything more than “I think a significant portion of the fandom is harder on Dany because she’s an ambitious woman” would be a good start.
Dany was likable to some viewers in seasons 1 through 3, when she was most vulnerable. Once Dany began her ascension to power, that’s when I started to notice the ‘shift’ in viewers perception of her, online you can read comments like Dany’s a total “Mary Sue” character or her arc is too boring.
Then by the time Daenerys began exercising authority or has shown some sort of dominance by her actions, the hate or what I like to call “unjust vilification,” became the norm. Mad Queen theories were spreading out of nowhere and this survey kind of confirm my suspicion. Why else would Cersei blowing up the Sept be considered as slightly more justified than Dany burning the Tarlys?
The Tarlys betrayed Olenna, one of Dany’s allies, they’re at war and they were trying to starve Dany and her armies. Plus Dany gave them a choice while Cersei blew the Sept without any hesitation, killing Margaery and an awful lot of civilians in the process and yet that is slightly more justifiable than Dany burning the Tarlys?
Female characters with power like Dany and Sansa are polarizing because some viewers prefer that they have less power, I reiterate some not most, might be casual sexism or other factors to consider here, I’m not sure which ones though. I will say that I have faith in this fandom, GoT has some of the well-written female characters in fantasy, and most fans appreciate that.
That’s interesting, you expect more from Dany than Jon because Jon does not want the throne while Daenerys aspires to be Queen. Dany is a politician and to be able to lead effectively, you must be able to handle making tough, unpopular decisions, Robb Stark knew this as well and Dany on her time in Meereen, learned of the push back that comes with standing by the decisions you’ve made. I can see Dany ruling with Tyrion as her advisor, but not on her own, she needs someone to guide her, she is still learning.
Danaerys is turning into a lecher, and it appears to me that it is the power that she now possesses, twisting her personality. But, you go from the blubbering virgin being deflowered by Khal Drogo. To the scene in s4e7, where she tells Daario Naharis to get it off, and something within her has definitely changed. Now, I feel certain that if the scene was turned around and it was a man telling a woman to get it off, there would be a huge hue and cry! I feel that she is becoming a sexual predator, whether we like the idea of that or not. It is born out to me in her own comments in an earlier post on this board.
from this article http://watchersonthewall.com/emilia-clarke-has-already-shot-daeneryss-final-game-of-thrones-scene-ever/#more-163631
I think this character arc is what she is alluding to. Who knows what she will be capable of in season 8. But I do know that it doesn’t sound healthy to me. And, I think that people knowing this, if only at a subconscious level is what makes them judge her harshly.
This poll really illustrates peoples inability to objectively judge a situation. The overall results indicate people do not make a distinction between “that action was justified” and “I enjoyed seeing that”.
precisely.
QueenofThrones,
I don’t know, it’s also hard to judge every action perfectly because most all of the actions shown here were also reactions to other horrible actions. Take the Sept explosion, for example. Now I don’t remember how I voted for this, but I could definitely see myself voting for some sort of justified. Is blowing up a ton of people a justified act? Probably not. But, when thinking about all of the horrible subjugations that Cersei was put through by the Faith Militant, then I could also see it as justified. It all depends on the person, and their interpretation of the act.
Sometimes you also have to take into account the outcome of the action. Now, this will be controversial, but lets take the burning of Shireen. Burning a young girl, or anyone for that matter, is a very unjustifiable act, even in Westeros. But what if Stannis was the PtwP? What if this was the only way to take Winterfell, rally the North and save humanity from the White Walkers? Is taking one innocent life justified when it is necessary to save the human race? Obviously it didn’t play out this way, but it is just something interesting to think about. The outcome of an action definitely has an impact on how justifiable it is.
I think this question is much more deep and messy than you think. That is why it is in the survey, after all, and why we all didn’t have the same answers. It isn’t just because people can’t look at a situation objectively. It is because we’re all different people with different minds and different ideas.
Cersei burning the sept was my most favorite moment from GOT and personally my most fav ep so far… justifiable or not
I’m not 100% sure that Emilia can be trusted, she might be throwing the fans off the scent by giving bold statements like that. I believe Daenerys would welcome Jon as a true Targaryen, after her brother died in season 1, she has been under the impression that she’s alone and the last Targaryen. I go back to Maester Aemon saying “a Targaryen, alone in the world, is a terrible thing.”
I understand the distrust, at this point, only Jon Snow, Brienne, Sam and Gilly, are the truly noble characters left on this show. The others are untrustworthy, even Tyrion had that ominous thing going on in the season 7 finale. But the showrunners have repeatedly said that Dany is a hero, “I think Dany’s been becoming a Targaryen ever since the beginning of Season 1,” said David Benioff, with D.B. Weiss adding, “She’s not her father and she’s not insane and she’s not a sadist, but there’s a Targaryen ruthlessness that comes with even the good Targaryens.”
She along with Sansa continues to be unjustly vilified, and one thing these two women have in common is their ambition to rule, Sansa used to want to be queen when she was younger and still might want to.
I do not have any problem with saying ‘No! we wont give up the life of one of our little ones even if it amounts to a sacrifice with all of mankind in the balance. Tough titties to mankind if it can’t overcome its’ challenges without making sacrifice of our little ones. If we do start sacrificing our little ones to prolong our existence, then as far as I am concerned we have sold out and gone over to the dark side and the future would be better off without us in any case.
When you say, her life /for/ iron clad guarantee of eventual victory over aotd. there really isn’t any such thing until after the event./ If you were to say, go ahead and burn shireen and go on to win over the aotd, who is to say that if you hadn’t stuck to your guns and not sacrificed her that you wouldn’t have won anyway. And, as a further extension of that, say you went on to lose against the aotd after burning shireen, what’s to stop you after the event from thinking, (as which happened in the case of Stanis) well what if we hadn’t burned shireen, could we have gone on to win anyway, with the army feeling better about themselves and more purposeful in their actions?
Nah! leave me out of that one. If you start burning little ones to perpetuate mankind, leave me out of it please. i will go fight whatever it is bare knuckles till i expire. kinda like benjen.
Nina,
Fans will always be biased. Most of them you could just read “Jon kills…” and know people will vote “justified”. The show also makes sure that everyone is on the same boat too, by making everything as black and white as possible (like making Meryn Trant a pedophile, so everyone would be fine with Arya killing him).
They seem to want to avoid any possible debate on what actions are good, what actions are bad, who the “good guys” are, who the “bad guys” are. I think the only exception to that in the last 2-3 season (because yes, in early seasons it wasn’t like that at all) is the death of Randyll and Dickon, where – justified or not – they wanted us to feel sad or uneasy when Daenerys kills them.
Game of thrones differs with ASOIAF in many ways, but the most important one is that they don’t want people to choose side, so they put everyone in the good team or the bad team, and make sure there’s no confusion. While in ASOIAF everything is grey, not black and white like the show. It’s all thought decisions that are often explained by their situations. But on the books they want everyone to be happy when the bad guys dies, with no ambiguity.
Just an example, the Frey murder scene… Arya murdered every single Frey male. Where are the women? Where are the children? Walder himself has DOZENS of children, and probably a hundred descendant. Plus the wives and all… Where are they?
Well, they don’t exist. You can’t have them at the feast, because Arya killing them would make people like Arya less, and that’s unacceptable. So every single male Frey is at the Twins, but every single female or children Frey is away. Just magical.
the unburdened,
And that’s totally fine! I’m not so sure I’d risk the life of one to save the many, although who knows what I’d choose in the moment. All I’m saying is that things aren’t so cut and dry with this question of actions being justified; there are no right or wrong answers.
I disagree. I don’t think it is quite as simple as you are declaring it to be. Arya does not need to kill the women and the children simply because of the social structure. Only the males on frey’s line can continue the family dynasty. The women will all go off in different directions and be assimilated into other families. Take the males out and there is no frey dynasty to perpetuate. From time in memorium on our own planet ‘earth’ we have seen this. One tribe goes in and conquers the other, kills all the men, takes the women to wives, and raises the children as their own. The children grow up with their allegiances to the family that they remember (the current one). Most of those women will go on to marry all over the seven kingdoms, and lets be honest, not a one of them will ever have a nice word to say to their children about their biological father.
the unburdened,
I think you may have missed the poster’s point, but then again, maybe I did too, so I guess we’ll see 🙂 I was under the impression the statement was saying that the writers have eliminated the grey areas from Arya’s killings to make her less controversial than her killings should have been.
I personally didnt really have any major problem with any of it, but I do see the poster’s point. It’s rather coincidental that all of the Freys gathered in that room just happened to be all of the Freys that were involved with the Red Wedding while no one was there who wasn’t involved. It wouldve been more realistic to have some collateral damage during such a mass poisoning of a family.
And the Trant killing was really over the top brutal, but we as an audience seemed to be ok with it because it was thrown out there just prior that Trant was a pedophile of the highest order.
aiad,
Personally, I think the show does this to all of our main protagonists. Even Cersei, for that matter (mostly). None of these characters kill those who don’t rightly deserve it. The only exception I’d add is Cersei with killing Pycelle (but, fuck that guy anyway). Literally everybody that our main characters kill deserves it in one way or another (besides all of the innocent soldiers that die during battles, but that is just war. And I am sort of considering those who died in the Sept as casualties of war as well).
But it isn’t just Arya.
aiad,
Strongly disagree here! And I think you’re completely missing subtleties of the show. You say that the show makes it very black and white by making Meryn Trant a pedophile so we can root for Arya killing him, making her the good guy and Trant the obvious bad guy. But that’s not at all the point. Yes, Meryn is a piece of sh*t and Arya is a good person, but it’s the extent she goes to that is concerning. How is this young girl capable of such brutal violence? Is she justified in going to such lengths? And that goes for most of her killings. We’re supposed to feel a sense of satisfaction that she’s getting revenge on all these vile people that have done her and her family harm, but the savagery of it speaks to that inner darkness in her.
Oh, and there were women at The Twins when Arya poisoned all the men. One was standing right next to her (presumably Walder’s new wife), whom she spared by ordering her not to drink the wine. There was at least another one in the room serving the wine as well. Again, it’s satisfying to see the Freys go down for their betrayal of the Starks and breaking Guest Right, she did just kill ~50 people, and we start seeing the effects this is having on her when she meets Hot Pie. He even asks her, “What happened to you, Arry?”
What about the Field of Fire 2.0, which is notable for pitting two main characters against one another where neither one is considered good or bad. Most fans (from what I’ve read and seen) did not know who to root for, or were very conflicted about it.
All of the servers were female but none of them were feasting and drinking. Everyone at the tables toasting with WArya were Frey men. Women to Walder were only useful for certain things…
the unburdened,
Ursula Le Guin is now smiling from whatever afterlife there might be. (read her short story The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas) I And I totally agree with you.
I also agree that many of these events can be looked at with different eyes – certainly its justified to Cersei, but to many the cost of innocent lives cannot justify it. Thats what makes this who survey interesting – if the wording of the questions had been different or more specific, we likely would have gotten some very different answers.
ash,
sorry, in second paragraph, I was referring to the sept explosion. That got deleted somehow
Clob,
True, except Walder’s new wife looked like she would have taken part in the feasting had Arya not stopped her. Besides, they made of point her saying that she invited all the male Freys who meant a damn thing, which as you rightly pointed out excludes the females and children. So I don’t know what the point of the original poster asking where the women and children were.
Just a few general thoughts…
-Olenna killing Joffrey is justified, how? “I don’t like him!” does not justify murder. Was Olenna avenging someone? What other justification is there… None. “The scene felt good and I’m glad he’s gone!” does not make it justified.
Lots of rankings seem to follow this path.
-On the other hand, only 61% of the voters think Arya killing the Waif is “very justified”. You do realize that the Waif was trying to kill her, right? How is self defense not 100% justified? This not being 100% makes me think a lot of people did not really answer on whether it was justified or not, but rather on whether they liked the scene or not, or liked the characters involved.
-Surprised only 70% think Tyrion use of Wildfire against Stannis was justified… How is using the weapons you have at your disposal not justified? He didn’t use them on civilians or anything, only on invading enemies. Stannis is my favorite (book) character, and I think it was perfectly justified for Tyrion to use wildfire, even though I wish Stannis would’ve won.
-Brienne executing Stannis was so poorly done I don’t even know what to say… She executed him for Renly, who’s not even a king, and was NEVER a king either; Brienne knows how rule of succession works. She knows Renly isn’t King, she only follows him because he was nice to him. So killing Stannis in the name of King Renly, that’s not justified. Just kill him for revenge if you must…
-Tyrion strangle Shae : Same comment as Arya/Waif… Shae not only accused him (this can be forgiven from the readers POV, because she might have been forced into it or at least feel threatened if she supported him), but she also tried to murder him, when he came to her she grabbed a knife… Tyrion defended himself. Major difference compared to the books, where Shae was just laying in bed and thought Tyrion was Tywin, then he killed her. Book was a passion crime, Tyrion was (understandably) angry, and hated her. Tough to really justify it. But the show was self defense. 100% justified.
-Dany crucifying the masters : Some people will go “Slavery is bad, so they’re all guilty” but they’re thinking with a 2018 mindset. Thing is (and it’s emphasised more in the books) Dany killed 163 RANDOM masters. So she let a bunch of them alive. Either killing these 163 is not justified, or letting some alive is monstrous. On the show they tried to explain this somewhat by having someone who argued against cruel slavery and all, but I’m not sure the message passed. But anyway, bottom line is, killin random people is never justified. Killing all masters would’ve been more justified than 163 random ones. But Dany needed the masters to keep the city going, so she kept lots alive. But drawing names out of a hat to kill them…
-Robb behead Karstark : This is the kind of kills that are more fun to debate on, to ponder about how justified(and reasonable) they are, and there are more of those in the books. Rare moment on the show, usually it’s all black and white, good vs evil. The votes quite reflect that.
-Killing Renly for usurping is 100% justified, anyone would do it. Killing him with magic is no different than killing him with a sword. Renly also wanted Stannis dead. He only didn’t want his corpse desecrated.
-High sparrow emprisonning people for crimes is 100% justified. People again think with 2018 mindsets… Just because you don’t like the law, doesn’t make it non-justified. Killing someone who fled in terror after he saw ice demons isn’t very nice either, but that was the law so Eddard did it, yet everyone still consider him a “good guy” and not a crazed murderer.
-Stannis burning Mance well for one it doesn’t happen in the books, but even if it did… In the books, the wildlings wanted to fight and invade the south, not “protect their people”. When Mance saw Stannis, he rode to him to fight, he did not command them to drop their weapon. So in the books, it would’ve been killing your enemy. On the show, they butchered it so it looked more like burning a refugee begging for help/shelter. That’s part of the “We hate Stannis so make him as unlikable as possible” campaign by the showrunners.
-Jaime killing cousin : 100% non-justified. How does anyone think it’s “neutral” or justified? Because he was a character that didn’t matter? Even if you justify it with “Jaime just tried to escape”… He should’ve asked his cousin to just help. Like he said he would… Killing him was really stupid. But (like with Stannis) it was just the showrunners showing Jaime as a horrible person, much worse than he actually is.
-Just a note on Payne killing Eddard… From Joffrey’s point of view, Eddard IS a traitor. And from Payne’s point of view, he’s just doing his job by executing said traitor. Cersei knew what’s up, so she can take the blame, but from Joffrey/Payne’s perspective, it’s fully justified.
-The thing about the Night’s Watch killing Jon is that on the show they whitewashed the hell out of Jon to make him more likeable, make him look more just and always right… So it looks like they’re just mutineers, no better than those who killed Jeor Mormont at Craster’s keep. But in the books, Jon’s murder is justified. He betrayed all his NW vows, and was about to break pretty much the most important one, by taking part in the wars of the realms. And as he repeatedly ignored his officers concerns and didn’t explain his actions, they were more than justified into killing him. From their perspective, he was a wildling traitor and a deserter. Hell, attacking the Bolton armies is wrong even for the reader who have the context. What he should’ve done is just to fortify Castle Black as much as he could and prepare a defense against the Bolton. The only reason to attack him is to save his sister (who he believed was their captive), which goes against his NW vows and is punishable by death. Bottom line, in the books Jon’s murder is perfectly justified. On the show they basically took out all the reasons for the murder as to not taint Jon, then murdered him anyway.
It was my understanding that Olenna killed Joffrey to protect Margarey after hearing about Joffrey’s abuse from Sansa.
Young Dragon,
That’s the “official” reason (the actual reason is probably more that the scheming Tyrells wanted an easier king to manipulate, like Tommen) but even if that was it… I sure hope you need more justification for murders than “he was mean to Sansa, better kill him or he’ll be mean to Margaery too”.
And even if WE know Joffrey was a piece of shit, the Tyrell didn’t, not to that extent anyway; Sansa is the daughter of a traitor. Margaery is the daughter of their savior (the tyrells) there’s not much reason for them to believe Margaery would be abused just because Sansa was.
Or why not also believe that Mace Tyrell would be beheaded like Eddard was? Well, because one is a traitor and the other isn’t. Just like Sansa is a “traitor’s daughter” and Margaery isn’t.
aiad,
Alright, it appears to me that you obviously think your opinions are the only correct ones. No sense in arguing. These are your views on the actions, and I’m just trying to say that we are all different people with different ideas of what just is.
I’ll just take one example to illustrate my point: Tyrion using wildfire to defeat Stannis. Yes, this can definitely be seen as a justifiable act; Stannis was trying to sack the city and would’ve killed many of the Lannisters and innocent soldiers. Tyrion prevented this with his wildfire. But, on the other hand, many people don’t believe using a weapon comparable to a heavy bomb is just; many people believe this is overdone, and as a modern example, it is why the United Nations has cracked down on the production of nukes. Some weapons are just too powerful and unfair, and people believe that war shouldn’t be waged in these ways.
I am not saying either side is correct, I am just pointing out that everyone has their own opinion on what just is. And to touch on what Young Dragon said above, Olenna murdering Joeffrey can be seen as just as well, since her grand daughter was about to marry this monster and he has done very terrible things in the past. Just because they weren’t done to House Tyrell doesn’t make them any less horrible. But yes, your opinion of Olenna killing Joeffrey is also correct; it is an opinion, after all.
I don’t believe this. Nothing happens in a court bristling with intrigue that does not spread like wildfire. Particularly a matriarch of intrigue such as Olenna. When Tyrion organized the two prostitutes for him, the result of that grizzly evenings work of joffery’s would have been known throughout the entire palace the next day. I think in the show that you could see that even Cersei was visibly shaken by the news, and she would not ever have cared about the fate of two prostitutes, but she would have cared that she gave birth to such a monster. In her mind it is fine to indulge in violence if you have a motive, such as rooting for the Lannisters. But there is no way that she could get her head around him tarnishing his crown just for the sake if being monsterish.
I’ve got off track, but, what I’m saying is that the show does not show you everything. Just because you haven’t seen it in the show don’t assume that it hasn’t happened. I leave an excerpt.
Enharmony1625,
They also made a point of saying the invitees were “the men who helped me [Walder] slaughter the Starks at the Red Wedding.” And they all cheered.
Then Arya/Walder essentially announced the allegations against them.
They were all complicit.
Enharmony1625,
One other thing that should be kept in mind: In the GoT universe, violation of Guest Right is unforgivable. It’s worse than murder. Those who transgress get the death penalty. Period.
Ten Bears,
Precisely! It’s been well-established in her character that she won’t kill those who don’t deserve it. That’s never been the “shades of grey” in her story or character arc. It’s more about the brutality of her killings, what she’s become capable of, and what effect that has or will have on her going forward.
aiad,
I’d liken it to killing a young hitler if someone time traveling happened to be available. Otherwise I agree with all the rest of your points. Esp the use of wildfire on Stannis et all – all is fair in love and war…..Stannis if he had wf would have used it no doubt.
True. which is why Ramsey wasn’t known about, at least in the north.
the unburdened,
“
this was my frustration with season 6 and esp 7 – there were so many scenes that would have made sense (or at least more sense) had we had some background moments. I could see this frustrating the actors, let alone watchers. I understand them wanting to end at 8 seasons, but for gods sakes don’t shorten them! (long past its time rant, sorry)
the unburdened,
Wat
Yes, exactly. Arya spent a week or two (“two feasts within a single fortnight”) at the Twins figuring out who was responsible, and she specifically invited them to the feast/execution. She was also very clearly and explicitly accusing them of not just mass murder of her family, but also violation of guest right. Her speech at the feast mentioned inviting them in and then killing them, and the Frey pie she served to Walder was a clear reference to the Rat Cook story about violation of guest right being the most unforgivable crime of all.
In the books, some of Arya’s killings are a bit less justified (she did poison the dishonest insurance salesman in the books), but in the show, every one of her killings has had a reasonable justification, and she has refrained from killing and even put herself at great risk to avoid killings that she didn’t feel were justified.
Stable boy: self defense.
Tickler: she had personally witnessed him torturing people to death. Executed for war crimes
Amory Lorch: self defense in war time. Also punishment for his role in the killing of Yoren and other Night’s Watch recruits, and his interference with the Night’s Watch
Harrenhal guards killed by Jaquen to help her escape: legitimate war time action.
Frey soldier: In the immediate aftermath of the mass murder of her family and their allies, he was bragging to his buddies about his role in it, in particular his role in mutilating and desecrating her brother’s corpse. Definitely justified.
Polliver: He killed Lommy. He was leading a band of war criminals raping and pillaging their way across the countryside. He had just expressed an interest in raping her (and/or allowing his friends to do so). Definitely justified.
Rorge: Threatened her on several occasions. Was (ineffectively) threatening her with a sword when she killed him.
Meryn Trant: Plenty of reasons
Lady Crane: Despite being ordered to kill her, Arya risked her own life to try to protect her.
Walder & the Red Wedding participants: clearly justified, as discussed above.
Lannister soldiers in the Riverlands: Arya seemed to be considering killing them because they were enemy soldiers, but then decided not to when it becamse clear that killing them wasn’t justified.
I generally like Daenerys as well, but I can definitely see valid reasons why people sometimes find her actions less justified. For example, her crucifixion of the Masters was a form of collective punishment, without any apparent effort to determine individual guilt.
While they were all “guilty” of being slave owners, that doens’t mean that collectively punishing them without weighing their individual actions is justified. The system of slavery certainly needed to be torn down, but in the context of a society in which it was the norm, the just thing to do would be to grant some leniency to those who had not been excessively abusive, and who were willing to accept the abolition of the institution and make reparations.
Instead Daenerys crucified them as punishment for killing the slave children, without making any effort to determine whether each individual one had supported or opposed that crime. Daenerys also fed one of the masters to her dragons without any specific knowledge about his guilt or innocence.
She consistently treats “the Masters” as one unified group with shared culpability for the crimes of the whole group. This sort of collective punishment seems to me to be contrary to the concept of justice.
It’s also quite different from Arya’s rather careful judgment. Arya’s punishments can be brutal, and she sometimes seems to enjoy them a bit too much, but it’s clear that she spends a lot of time thinking about exactly who needs to die, and why they deserve to die. It’s kind of an obsession for her.
Also, something else I thought was very interesting about this survey:
Of all the major religious institutions included on the “organizations” survey, the one with the most favorable rating is literally a death cult of assassins for hire. You know your world has some bad churches when the god of death is the most likable.
I love this xD , but it’s true. I still love it all the same. Jon is that most rarefied of creatures (a Targaryen raised under the guidance of the most noble of Starks) And with guidance like that in your formative years and on into your adolescence, so long as you sprinkle it with Tyrion’s political worldliness you pretty much can’t go wrong. How much would Danerys benefit from being raised in Ned’s household? She would not suffer any of the indecision and indecisiveness that she does. She would just know what is the right thing to do, and do it. Just like Jon, Rob, Arya and to a lesser extent Sansa. They are always saying ‘this is what dad would have done’, ‘this is what dad would have expected.’ To be in a position of having been able to learn from the man all your life and objectively learn from his mistakes, you basically can’t go wrong. But, to have Targaryen blood coursing through your veins and Ned’s upbringing as your basic template for life, you have just been anointed with the “greatness” wand.
Please don’t get me wrong. I do not suggest for a second that I condone not answering the questions in the survey honestly. If the survey asks for “justifiable” and not “what did you like more” then you must answer to justifiable and nothing else, or not even take the survey. It’s just that aiad’s quote
stuck out as the funniest thing I had read all week.
Daenerys and Arya have been two strong favorites of mine from the start, and I’ve found almost all of their actions easily justified (and usually what/how I imagine I’d have done in their situations.) Arya’s levels of brutality are generally, I think, just right.
The ranking of the five kings is good; I had Stannis & Renly swapped, but they’re close anyway. And the house ranking probably isn’t too far off of what I submitted…that is extremely difficult because we know so many different people within each, and then there’s just the overall feel, the sigils, the words.
I didn’t find Cersei’s sept explosion justified (come to think of it, have I approved of anything she’s done? Hmm, lemme think…) Didn’t let the fact that I was glad to see the Sparrows go sway that.
Unsurprising that the sacrifice of Shireen would be in the bottom…especially because it was for naught. Had it worked, would we need to view it as one of those sad necessities (resulting in sweet little Shireen being taken into the warm embrace of the LoL?) :~\
I don’t like Sansa, but of course she did the right thing ordering Littlefinger’s execution. I attribute that more to Arya, though…have a feeling she’d have wound up getting him one way or another. Honestly, the whole messy and confusing Season-7 Winterfell plotline got dragged out and could’ve been: Bran tells his sisters the truth, they immediately do what they need to do. ><
Good. I’m glad that you said that. Feels just about right to me also.
Excellent. 😉
I think that Ned would be surprised that Arya has taken to it like a duck to water, but I also think that he would approve. I am sure that he would not approve of her getting her training from the faceless men. That aside, I am sure that he would approve of her sticking the pointy end of needle (or thumbs as case may be) into all of her antagonists.
As for Arya getting her training from the faceless men, he would put his hand up and say ‘that’s my fault for being so stupid as to get myself out maneuvered by Cersei, leaving her isolated, un-fed, un-cloathed, surrounded by hostiles, terrified for her life. She was always going to go feral for a while before she resurfaced.’ I am pretty sure that he would be practical about it even though he wouldn’t have liked it.
I think that would be bad story telling. That sounds like the kind of thing a two bit readers digest story teller would do.
XD
Casso,
Thank you for that cogent summary articulating the rationale for each execution by future Queen Arya “The Just”, first of her name.
to be cont… keyboard freezing
the unburdened,
It’s not very dramatic storytelling, but having the characters behave in contrived ways and ignoring the characters’ abilities for the sake of drama (especially in the case of Bran) is also bad writing.
Bran really is the single-biggest issue with the Season 7 Winterfell plot. I’ve tried to rewrite the Sansa/Arya stuff to make it actually work, but it’s impossible to generate real intrigue in a plotline without just ignoring that Bran is there and should be able to easily solve everything.
“…Bran is there and should be able to easily solve everything.”
Which was especially egregious after Bran read Littlefinger’s tag line back to him, over the very same Valyrian Steel dagger which started the War of the Five Kings. Having Bran tell the audience he knows all about Littlefinger, and then having little to nothing come of it, was really sloppy writing.
Worse yet was having Bran tell Littlefinger, “I’m totally onto you,” and then do absolutely nothing to obtain protection from him, in the very fortress where Bran had already been crippled for life and then nearly killed.
Except that he just does not want to yet. He is too busy experiencing all his visions and trying to get a really strong grasp on all this new found knowledge at this stage to be bugged by a lot of questions. tbh, if i walked out to the godswood and saw bran in his solitude (just leave me alone) aura, I would turn around and leave him be. When I see Arya and Sansa go out to speak with him, I think “leave him alone. He will come inside when he is ready.” Just my perception.
^ I totally get that, I just couldn’t quite get past letting the Littlefinger thing go for so long, until Sansa and/or Arya apparently consulted him and found out…did seem more dramatic than logical…
Never suggested in the show. His knowledge isn’t brought up at all. Moreover, it would take five minutes.
And the girls both know that he can see everything, yet neither ever thinks to use this until Sansa at the very last minute. This is particularly glaring when Arya starts her surveillance of Littlefinger, when she could just get everything from Bran.
If we’re supposed to think that Bran is deliberately being unhelpful, the series would have to dramatize that.
umm, i’m not suggesting that bran is intentionally meaning to be “unhelpful” as in ‘piss off and leave me alone, i’m not interested in your world anymore.’ I mean not wanting to be interrupted. It takes time to sift through all the visions, and it is an extremely emotional process because you are picking up on what everyone in the vision is feeling and thinking, not just seeing and hearing. You need the ‘thinking and feeling’ to put into context all the cause and effect that is going on. And, quite often this is too much for a normal ego to bare (it would send most insane who tried to endure it) This is usually when the alter ego steps in to act as a buffer against madness. In Bran’s case he has simply just turned into the three eyed raven. I don’t think that the series needs to do anything for you or i, I think that it just ‘is what it is’.
Totally agree here. The writers did have a scene where they were going to have the sisters visit with him. I don’t get why it was cut, would have solved so many issues with that whole arc. And while I agree he perhaps was still working through all that he knew, he obviously was aware enough to be able to help when called upon later.
^ Yeppers. Exactly. Especially after the “chaos is a ladder” bit that was just forgotten about…I keep wondering why in the world that scene was removed.
I just don’t think that you people here understand what Bran is going through. He is going through sensory overload, and hovering on the very precipice of sanity. This is the best depiction of it that I have come across yet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMThz7eQ6K0 and it is interesting how eerily three eyed ravenish his depictions at 2.17 and finally at the end 3.23 are, (with input tubes tapped into his suit). How utterly drained and empty he is left by his experience is an even better depiction than max von sydow. They get into a virtual autism state (get away from me, leave me be, don’t touch me!) And someone just saying “would you?” is enough to send them over the edge. He just needed some alone time with the god in the tree, and you are right he did come in eventually and started trying to help. But the visions don’t stop at the grove, they are constant, and he can only do so much. He does what he can, but you don’t push someone like that. You let them contribute what they can when they can, and when they are feeling able to contribute more, they will put their hand up.
As for the cut scenes… Well, who knows what the story tellers have planned in the future :).
Mr Derp,
This is nonsense. Prove that men are sexist? That’s not hard just take a look how women have been treated across history. It’s also a little telling that you get so defensive when anyone mentions sexism? If it had nothing to do with your choices then why mentioned it? Oh and let’s not forget the post above where someone describes sexism perfectly but calls it how they were raised? You can’t fix a problem until you admit it exists.
I feel there is a simple answer to that, the Starks are largely viewed as “good guys” those we traditionally root for, Dany on the other hand began as a “good” character has followed the path to a much more grey moral compass.
I think a lot worse was done in the story to be honest (Red Wedding anyone?) however I was also cheering for Cersei at that point even if I regretted the death of Margery.
Heh, I wasn’t cheering for Cersei…was glad enough to lose the Sparrows, but that was about it. ;3
In my opinion it just illustrates the excellent acting from Lena that Cersei is a character that you can hate, support and sympathise with at different points through this story.
Oh, she’s definitely done a great job! I love to loathe that lady…moments of sympathy or support from me may have been rare and brief, yet she’s not a comic villain. She comes across as an actual person, like almost all the characters we’ve gotten to know.
^^^^^ I absolutely agree with this post. No idea where sexism comes into it (I’m sure there is a minority) but to me it’s about the behaviour of the two and inparticular Dany’s lust for power.
I would say Stannis is just as unlikeable as Dany in that regard.
But I’d counter argue Stannis isn’t admired. He’s a secondary character generally not liked (especially since the Shireen burning) albeit he does have a small and very vocal element of the fan base that cheer for him and couldn’t accept his death.
the unburdened,
I do not think that emotions took the overhand here. Randyl Tarly is generally an unliked charcacter, and deservedly so. Dickon is another matter but he is not a character that we were particularly attached to, since he got very little screen time.
To be honest I think that in this case modern sensibilities predominate. From the p.o.v. of a 21st century audience her actions constitute a war crime. Executing prisoners of war goes against the Geneva convention.
Moreover I noticed that commentators regularly refer to the World Wars to explain why they disagreed with Daenerys’ decision, which is logical, because – certainly in Europe – these wars remain our main frame of reference when it comes to invasions.
If you do that then you end with roughly the following scenario: The Germans invade a country, a local officer (a real asshole) fighting against them is taken prisoner after a battle. As a POW the soldier should be brought to a POW camp but instead the Germans give him an ultimatum: either join the Germans, which would mean betraying his country and helping a foreign army (with a very bad reputation when it comes to civilians) invade the land where his wife and children live, or die.
If you follow that line of thinking then it is not difficult to understand why so many people disagree with Daenerys’ actions.