Friday 5 April 2013

"WINTER IS COMING!"

Eddard Stark (Game Of Thrones, season 1)


I wouldn't get comfortable Sean...



Again, I appreciate that I'm behind the times, and almost everything worth saying / hearing about the Game Of Thrones TV show has already been said and heard. Still, that's never stopped me before now, so why change?

Based on the books "A Song of Fire & Ice' by George R.R Martin, blah blah blah... You already know all this so I won't bother. I'll just cut to my point and tell you about what effect Game Of Thrones has had in my household... Incidentally, Game Of Thrones is a much better title than A Song Of Ice & Fire.

Last month I was lent the first season, so in my household an episode (or two) got watched every night. I'll say this for Game Of Thrones, it's very addictive- and very well acted (mostly), special praise for Sean Bean, Peter Dinklage, Jack Gleeson and Ian Glen. I thought it was alright / watchable, but my partner got into it in a big way, and in truth it was because of her that we watched it all so damn quick. Next we borrowed season 2, and this is where things hit a snag...

For anyone who doesn't personally know me, 8 months ago my son was born. This sort of thing, I'm told, can change a man. It certainly changes a woman: my partner has become a lot more maternal, and things in films and on TV that wouldn't normally effect her so dramatically are making a bigger impact now.
So imagine, me, her, and beside us our sleeping 'bundle of joy', all tucked up in bed with Game Of Thrones season 2 playing on the lap top... Baby and child death 'in spades'. 
Never a pleasant topic at the best of times, but a little worse when this is enacted out on a city-wide scale by merciless soldiers. And did the show have the good taste to simply hint at what was taking place, or was it all up on screen, in a fairly graphic manner? Game Of Thrones is not known for it's subtlety, and as a cynic I'd say that a lot of it's success is reliant on the gratuitous and voyeuristic nature of it's content. Just for good measure, the episode ended with one of the heroic characters unable to save a new born child being sacrificed to monsters. So, it was all smiles.

This, understandably, depressed my partner. That night, I thought it best if I do a bit of reading on the topic, just to see what else we would have in store on a a similar topic. What I discovered was worse in many respects...

Big, thumping, terrible spoilers ahead. DO NOT read if you want to be surprised by the outcome of the books and / or TV show.

It's very, very morbid. Almost every likeable character meets a grisly fate, leaving just the grotesque villains fighting it out amongst themselves. So far as I can tell, Snow (who I suspected of being the overall 'leading character') is killed by the Night Watch, while the real heir to the throne, bastard son of the murdered King, is also killed (so there goes the red-herring of a positive outcome), and the 'Imp' Lannister (whose dry wit provides the only laughs in an otherwise grim-faced world) is banished after being framed for murder and is also betrayed by the woman he loves. Rob Stark (son of executed Ed Stark, and last remaining 'likeable character') is likewise assassinated. That leaves us with nothing but bastards left to root for. So, with a heavy heart, I attempted to explain to my partner that she probably wouldn't enjoy watching the TV show. She pressed me for details and reluctantly I explained to her the ins-and-outs of my research. In the end, she agreed that it was probably best to quit Game Of Thrones now, before getting too hooked- and subsequently depressed.

Now, I know that's an odd story to share on this blog. I broke perhaps the biggest rule in storytelling, I cheated and looked at the ending. I'm not proud, but it was done with good intention. Me and my partner spoke at length about how we felt about this, and I've decided to try and articulate our joint issues with this story.


1/ Far too many characters:
Season one felt epic. That's to say- there was a lot going on, and a large selection of characters to follow. I'm not a stupid person by any means, and I follow most stories, but even I struggled sometimes to differentiate the different characters and their goals. This probably wasn't helped by the fact everybody in this world is shopping for clothing at the same place, and black is this seasons must-have colour.
So imagine my surprise when, in season two, we get introduced to a bunch more people! Aside from complicating things further, this had another unwanted side effect: it meant waiting longer between all the different segments to get back to the characters that I wanted to follow.
As someone aspiring to write fiction myself, I think there comes a point when writers need to reign themselves in. Sure, it may all be exciting stuff, but one story can only support so many characters- even sprawling epics such as this. Things can easily become too unfocused. By the 5th book George Martin is writing from 31 different viewpoints with a total cast of characters that numbers over 1,000. Come on, really? Say you're a fan of all these books, surely anyone would have to admit that perhaps these characters would be better served by writing a separate story? Either way, it will be interesting to see how the TV show copes with this, I'd imagine there will be some simplifying...
Notice how I'm rarely using anybody's names in this blog? That's not to be spoiler-free, it's because so few of them stick in the mind amongst all the others.

2/ Too much back story:
Fantasy, on the whole, suffers greatly with this problem- even Tolkien, who I admire greatly, desperately needed an editor. Authors turn to history for a few different reasons; it provides a sense of time and place, creates the illusion of reality, and it fleshes out your characters. Thing is, they have a tendency to go too far. This is one such case. Almost half of the back story bought up in the TV show is meaningless, and it grows tiresome having to work out which bits are relevant and what else is just 'flavorful'. Obviously, the bigger the book, the more you can include comfortably, but, so far as adapting for the TV series, more could have easily been trimmed out.

3/ No concise storytelling:
Closely related with my nag about too many characters, far too many stories are being told. No story should ever require a cast of 1,000 characters- if you need 100 then you're doing something wrong! For every major character there is another major plot, and in the end it's easy to loose focus of what the story is actually 'about'. I know a good few people who have read these books, all have confessed to wanting to skip past large chunks of story to get back to the parts that interested them the most. No story should make you want to skip ahead- if it does then chances are it shouldn't be in there.  Christ, I felt that way in season 1, how would I feel by season 3? I'm told that by book 4 of the series the "woman with the dragons" hasn't even arrived in the same country as everybody else, another prime example that too much is going on: huge strands of the story have yet to even touch, let alone entwine into a satisfying whole, and the author is only meant to be writing one more book: it's like Lost all over again.

5/ Gratuitous:
yes it is. I've heard people argue otherwise, but answer me this then? If the sex isn't in here for cheap titillation, then why are all the female cast shaved 'down there'? Hardly a realistic choice, is it? And fine, show violence, show us how barbaric the world is, but dangling a dead blood-stained baby copse in center camera is a step too far, even for my liberal tastes.

4/ Too depressing:
Let's face it, it is. It's all drudgery and evil. So few of the characters have any redeeming traits, nobody comes out of this with clean hands. I was always taught that unless you care about the characters then you won't care what happens to them- as is true in the case of most of today's horror films. Now that most of the 'likable characters' have been written out (in one way or another) it's hard to care who succeeds and who fails. All you're left wondering is "how will this bastard get what's coming?"
If we do come into a 'hero' character, then it's unlikely to be anybody from book 1, which is another no-no in narrative terms, and further proof that this thing has got wildly out of control. An argument can be made for authenticity, that real life is devoid of 'heroes', that we are all 'wolves of different shades', but correct me if I'm wrong, but that's partly why we enjoy stories? I appreciate that's not a complete truth, but it's a good gerneralised point, and possibly one for another post. Nine hours (a typical season's running time) of torture, murder, rape and infanticide is too much. And, on top of that, there is no 'ray of light', no hope of a good outcome- for the world or any of the characters. That is the real kick of Game Of Thrones: it's a harsh world beyond saving, filled with irredeemable characters. Even the "dragon woman", whose probably one of the more sympathetic characters of the series hardly qualifies as a hero- her 'road to home' will be paved by a million bloody corpses.

5/ Originality:
There's very little that isn't rudimentary fantasy-setting here. We've seen this all before; knights, forests, mountains, tribes, etc. Martin's gifts are a good command of prose and very well rounded characters, but not his generic setting- at least in this instance. It's a mix of the English War Of The Roses and the Dark Ages, all very familiar troupes of the genre. Perhaps the only real original feature here is the inclusion of longer seasons, but that's hardly ground-breaking. I honestly struggle to see how these books became such a success, if not for the author's popularity.



Carlisle's FINAL WORD:
In the end, Game Of Thrones is easy to admire, but difficult to like. Depressing people is easy, nor is it intellectual or deep, and to think so is immature and emotionally stunted. Affirming life is the true challenge, and a challenge that Game Of Thrones / A Song Of Ice & Fire doesn't even attempt. What we're left with is a sprawling soap-opera style fantasy, a cross between Lord Of The Rings and Eastenders.
Will the TV show remain popular enough to complete its epic cycle, and if it does will it be remembered in decades to come as a classic, or as a "what were we thinking" show like Lost?
On another not, and hoping not to sound too morbid (although that would seem strangely fitting), let's hope George R.R Martin manages to finish the final book, because he ain't no 'spring chicken' and he normally keeps people waiting for about 5 years between each installment... What's worse, a disappointing and unsatisfying ending, or no ending at all?
Here's hoping that I'm wrong on all counts: the book gets finished, a heroic figure saves the land and becomes a just ruler, all the villains meet a deserved fate, and the TV show is remembered fondly as a classic, difficult to watch at times but worthwhile in the end...


Hope is a good thing, easily overlooked but absolutely necessary...








12 comments:

  1. I have enjoyed this series so far, I've found it refreshing not depressing - you seem to want a clear cut 'Stars Wars' type good and evil, replete with herioc characters dressed in white and bad guys dressed in black.

    Whilst the series might be dark, there are elements of light. Didn't you admire Ned Starks honesty and sense of honour? Varys has his own sense of honour. Tyrion steps up when needed, organising the defence of Kings Landing and rallying the defenders when Joffrey abandons them. Osha, despite being from North of the wall and having no reason to protect any of the Southerners, looks out for the crippled Bran Stark (Tyrion even gave him a design for a saddle to allow him to ride, another example of 'goodness'), when she could have just a easily walked away.

    I really have to disagree that this series is not life affirming - perhaps you're just not seeing it.

    1/ Too many characters - possibly, but watch through the first series twice, you'd be impressed where characters turn up and then turn up again. The rate at which 'main' characters seem to be bumped off really gives a sense that life is fragile and at risk.

    The idea that they all buy clothes at the same shop is a bit fatuitous, patently untrue and I would have thought better of you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lol, but they all DO look the same!

      I didn't say the show was without 'good' or 'kind' characters, only that they all meet an unfortunate ending. Yes, it enforces a feeling of fragile life, but it's a one-trick-pony, you can't just keep killing off the 'good' people or after a while it just becomes frustrating.

      Delete
  2. 2/ Too much backstory - you might have a point here, but Game of Thrones also appears to be influenced by the Wheel of Time series - most of which I read years ago. Authors/writers have a tendecy to self indulgence (what did you think of Californication 1st series? - that struck me as a writers wet dream), I get the impression that the series has trimmed things down a bit.

    3/ Lots of stories intertwine, a separate series of books telling it from each point of view might be more preferable. Seem to recollect reading something when I was younger (possibly Moorcock) where several characters all turned up, each with a different story of how they got there.

    Comic crossovers tend to get this right, but is probably a vehicle to increase sales, rather than tell a story. Comics also benefit from a monthly schedule in this - might get a bit annoyed if you had to buy and read 3 or 4 series of books just to find out the ins and outs of one overall story arc.

    5/ Gratuitous? Is this really number 5 or is your numbering system slightly awry? Sex is very prominent in this series (both in the books and on TV) - but I've tended to find it falls into the background, but this might also be due to my habit of watching something in the background as I do something else (such as painting models, making up an army list, reading rules, etc) or that your perception of events could be different to mine.

    Sex is highlighted as a motivation in the books and given the HBO link to the series this was probably going to happen as a commercial selling point regardless. As to shaving (or trimming) this is likely due to current fashion (no doubt driven by easily accessable internet porn - as an aside there was a newspaper article a few months back that 'crabs' are almost extinct in Australia due to personal grooming habits).

    Dead babies happen in times of war - check out some of the goings on in Chechnya or any other current conflict hotspot. Much easier to kill your potential enemies before they can fight back. Your liberal tastes differ from mine - I had no problem with baby killing (think of Herod), but I had to fast forward a scene between Renly and Loras as it physically turned my stomach.

    Try to read something like 'Soldaten' - some of the accounts in that book are truly horrific if you can get past all the modern psychobabble.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hadn't listed the issues in any sort of order, just as they came to me.

      It's not that I'm against seeing sex on TV, I'm not prudish or anything like that, I'm just aware when I'm seeing it unnecessarily. I don't think many of the female cast have managed to keep their clothes on. Whole conversations are had topless or naked for no apparent reason. My only point was, if this is included as a realistic reflection on the period, then they wouldn't be shaved. Seeing as they are shaved, clearly the nudity is intended to be arousing or it would not be pampering to modern tastes?

      I'm aware of the realities of war, and you're spot on with Herod (that's exactly what came to mind when I watched it). It makes perfect sense, and I wouldn't cut it from the show, I'd probably just handle it in a less explicit way. The very first shot of them taking a blade to the baby in front of the mother before cutting away did the trick, everything after just seemed tasteless and redundant.

      I agree the 'different books' ideas would be an interesting and better approach.

      What happened between Renlay and Loras? I don't even remember who they are...

      Delete
  3. 4/ Too depressing? I haven't found this depressing - but your analysis reveals a problem which is why I might have gone from an avid and voracious reader of fiction (mostly sci-fi or fantasy) to mainly a reader of historical accounts. Too many stories seem to rely on writing to a formula. We have a hero, who is likeable, who goes through the book righting wrongs - perhaps a simplistic view, but I seem to have read the same story over and over again.

    We tend to tell stories through a main character, but all those other characters that die are dead ends. The method of storytelling in Game of Thrones has plenty of dead ends - it might not be a style you are familiar with or even like, but when you read historical accounts of warefare, lots of those people whose stories are not told are dead ends.

    I was watching late at night when Ned Stark got beheaded - that was one of those 'moments' - I had a mixture of disbelief and shock at what had just happened on the screen, as up to that point I was kind of assuming the Starks would win out overall and that assumption was ripped away from me. That such a major (up to that point) character could be killed left the storytelling wide open - and I liked the way that characters could be killed with startling ease.

    Try the Fencer Trilogy by K. J. Parker - now that was depressing, it seemed to get to the point where the author bumped off most of the main characters as he was horrified by the way they turned out after 3 books...

    5/ Originality? Always hard - too much originality can kill a concept, to much familarity can do the same thing. He's got a dwarf that isn't a dwarf, he's got a low fantasy setting with elements of high fantasy. I hope the overall level of magic remains low - too much magic starts to become mundane in lots of fantasy.

    You fail to see how the books have proved popular, but the fact remains they have. I didn't pick up on this series, as I was reading the Wheel of Time when they first came out and I'm now glad I didn't as I've been enjoying the TV series greatly.

    Generally book adaptations fail to live up to my imagination, and I don't know how this story will pan out (unfortunately spoilers have been hard to avoid, so I have an inkling of what is going to happen - as I'm now only 2 episodes into season 3).

    Final Word
    I'm also concerned the TV series will last the course - I hate to get halfway through a story, only for it to get cancelled (Firefly) or cut short (Babylon 5), although it is sometimes a more merciful death than trailing off into a mediocre meandering money grabber of just one more series...

    The Wheel of Time got dragged out, and was never finished by the original author, hopefully this doesn't happen with this series, although the Game of Thrones TV series might actually finish prior to the final book being published if the anticipated schedules are kept to.

    Who knows after watching the whole TV series I might even get round to reading the books!!

    Gareth

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really admired the fact that Ned Stark was killed- it was an inspired move that cast doubt over everything that was to follow. I just think when you do this too often, and only to the likeable characters, it gets frustrating pretty quickly. You invest hours and hours into characters who come to mean nothing.
      I appreciate it's a very realistic and authentic way to write, but it's unsatisfying. It doesn't have to be as mundane as 'the hero' and 'the villain', as you suggest here by way of simplistic extreme, but I do expect a certain adherence to narrative arc.

      Delete
    2. Oh, I see what you mean, I've miss numbered the points. My bad :S

      Delete
  4. I KNOW that all the characters I'm following end up dead. I'd have followed them for hours and hours before realising this. That's pretty depressing. Worse, it seems as though I've been manipulated into liking these characters just to cause an emotional response when they are killed off, and not for any good reason. Consider the film Chinatown. For me there is a clear comparison. Chinatown is hardly an uplifting film, but a poignant one. It had a very clear message and a neat through-line. The 'hero' delivered the vulnerable granddaughter straight into the arms of the villain, the love interest was shot through the face and the incestuous pedophile murderer escapes justice entirely. The good are punished, the weak are trampled and corruption prevails... In this Chinatown and Game Of Thrones are very similar, except that this is compounded by the TV show's running time; at 2 hours Chinatown is depressing, but at 27 hours and counting, Game Of Thrones will prove even more upsetting.

    ReplyDelete
  5. My thoughts in video form ;)

    http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=X0Q93v7hGZA&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DX0Q93v7hGZA


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please skip to 2:00 for my reply to that, as delivered in style by Liam Cunningham (as also seen in Game Of Thrones).

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0092DSphF0

      Delete
  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Admittedly, I have had a rethink on my position here, and I'll concede that where I may be wrong on some counts I still have nagging issues... Another post to follow.

    Oh, and as has been pointed out to me, some of my information is wrong (again, spoilers): Snow may not actually be dead and the blacksmith / bastard heir is not killed, although he is an amalgamation of 2 different characters from the books.

    ReplyDelete