lerath666
Super Freak
Can he leave the knights watch, and do that, or not? Also, just becuase we didn't see him send such a letter, dosn't mean he didn't send one.
HBO's Game of Thrones
- Thread starter Batty
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
Something Sexy
Super Freak
Well a King has the power to do that if he wants. He could give him land or what not.
They are usually pretty good with continuity with the show, so my guess is they won't go down that road.
They are usually pretty good with continuity with the show, so my guess is they won't go down that road.
tomandshell
Blue Flame of the West/Mod
I have not read the books, but when they arrived on the show there was a ceremony where they ate bread and salt, and then Frey recited something to the guests along the lines of their being welcomed into his house and under his protection so that no harm would come to them. I assume there was more to it in the book, but I certainly understood what was happening on the show.
lerath666
Super Freak
it's a "guest rights" ceremony, much as was detailed earlier... and from what i understand, BECUASE of the events of the red wedding, no one ever trusts the ceremony again.
FrodoEyes
Super Freak
well, it could still happen, as in the books Stannis offers to legitimise him. The show doesn't need to do it twice.
DPrime
Super Freak
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2008
- Messages
- 5,166
- Reaction score
- 1
I realize that, but Game of Thrones is as much a criticism on medieval mores and values as it is high fantasy.
My comment was directed at Lerath's post about Daenarys; one could argue that her "divine right" is honorable as well, but from a modern point of view, it's not (or maybe it is, in her case - I don't know!).
lerath666
Super Freak
It's more the "join me, or die" that makes mer motivations seem fairly petty. The medival honor code of reclaiming her father's throne makes her more in the lawful camp.
Further, it's worth noting that MOST medival-era leaders will fall into the "evil" camp as far as alignment tends to go.
Good men are capable of evil deeds, and evil men are capable of good deeds.
It's the motivation behind the deeds, and the overal means by which the motivation is fufilled that matters.
Further, it's worth noting that MOST medival-era leaders will fall into the "evil" camp as far as alignment tends to go.
Good men are capable of evil deeds, and evil men are capable of good deeds.
It's the motivation behind the deeds, and the overal means by which the motivation is fufilled that matters.
Spartan Rex
Super Freak
- Joined
- May 26, 2006
- Messages
- 8,130
- Reaction score
- 380
Dr Daystrom
Super Freak
I realize that, but Game of Thrones is as much a criticism on medieval mores and values as it is high fantasy.
My comment was directed at Lerath's post about Daenarys; one could argue that her "divine right" is honorable as well, but from a modern point of view, it's not (or maybe it is, in her case - I don't know!).
I think Rob's motivation is more easily justified. His father, widely renowned as a good and just man is executed on trumped up and false charges, and his sister is taken as a hostage (both sisters as far as he knows)
In Dany's case, it's a little more obviously sketchy "sure, daddy was widely known as a murderous madman, and overthrown in a widespread revolt, but I'm ok, and I really should have his old job".
Out of the whole story, I'm honestly most interested in GRRM's eventual goal for Danaerys. He's too grounded and a bit too cynical to consider putting her on the Iron Throne just because of her sense of "divine right".
FrodoEyes
Super Freak
Millions of Game of Thrones fans are feeling sadness, outrage, and, sure, some perverse excitement after watching Sunday’s episode titled “The Rains of Castamere.” But for Game of Thrones author George R.R. Martin, such reactions to “The Red Wedding” are nothing new. Martin has been receiving exclamatory emails about the disastrous Tully-Frey union for more than a decade, ever since he published his Song of Ice and Fire saga’s third novel, A Storm of Swords. Below, the author reveals why Robb had to die, gives his reaction to upset readers and spills the scene’s horrifying real-life inspiration.
ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: How early in the process of writing the book series did you know you were gonna kill off Robb and Catelyn?
GEORGE R.R. MARTIN: I knew it almost from the beginning. Not the first day, but very soon. I’ve said in many interviews that I like my fiction to be unpredictable. I like there to be considerable suspense. I killed Ned in the first book and it shocked a lot of people. I killed Ned because everybody thinks he’s the hero and that, sure, he’s going to get into trouble, but then he’ll somehow get out of it. The next predictable thing is to think his eldest son is going to rise up and avenge his father. And everybody is going to expect that. So immediately [killing Robb] became the next thing I had to do.
Since Song of Ice and Fire so often subverts reader expectations and avoids traditional fantasy storytelling structures, should fans have any real hope that this tale will have a happy ending? As The Boy recently said on Thrones, “If you think this has a happy ending, you haven’t been paying attention.”
I’ve stated numerous times that I anticipate a bittersweet ending.
What sort of reactions have you received from readers over the years about the scene?
Extreme. Both positive and negative. That was the hardest scene I’ve ever had to write. It’s two-thirds of the way through the book, but I skipped over it when I came to it. So the entire book was done and there was still that one chapter left. Then I wrote it. It was like murdering two of your children. I try to make the readers feel they’ve lived the events of the book. Just as you grieve if a friend is killed, you should grieve if a fictional character is killed. You should care. If somebody dies and you just go get more popcorn, it’s a superficial experience isn’t it?
Why do you think it has such a powerful reaction? Robb wasn’t one of your “viewpoint characters” in the books and Catelyn wasn’t really a beloved personality.
[Long pause] That’s an interesting question. I don’t know if I have a good answer. Maybe the way I did it. There’s a certain amount of foreboding leading up to it. It’s a betrayal. It comes out of left field. It’s at a wedding feast. Robb has made his peace and you think the worst is over. Then it comes out of nowhere. There’s also secondary characters killed. Then outside hundreds of Stark people are killed. It’s not just two people.
To me, that Robb and Catelyn are family makes it worse. And Catelyn has suffered so much and lost so many people around her, and she actually thinks she’s lost more than she really has (since she doesn’t know for sure that Arya, Bran and Rickon are alive). Then this happens.
She also has the moment there to plead. There’s also her murdering the hostage. He’s not a son that Frey particularly values.* So in the end her bluff is empty. And she does. She carries through. There’s a certain power to that too.
ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: How early in the process of writing the book series did you know you were gonna kill off Robb and Catelyn?
GEORGE R.R. MARTIN: I knew it almost from the beginning. Not the first day, but very soon. I’ve said in many interviews that I like my fiction to be unpredictable. I like there to be considerable suspense. I killed Ned in the first book and it shocked a lot of people. I killed Ned because everybody thinks he’s the hero and that, sure, he’s going to get into trouble, but then he’ll somehow get out of it. The next predictable thing is to think his eldest son is going to rise up and avenge his father. And everybody is going to expect that. So immediately [killing Robb] became the next thing I had to do.
Since Song of Ice and Fire so often subverts reader expectations and avoids traditional fantasy storytelling structures, should fans have any real hope that this tale will have a happy ending? As The Boy recently said on Thrones, “If you think this has a happy ending, you haven’t been paying attention.”
I’ve stated numerous times that I anticipate a bittersweet ending.
What sort of reactions have you received from readers over the years about the scene?
Extreme. Both positive and negative. That was the hardest scene I’ve ever had to write. It’s two-thirds of the way through the book, but I skipped over it when I came to it. So the entire book was done and there was still that one chapter left. Then I wrote it. It was like murdering two of your children. I try to make the readers feel they’ve lived the events of the book. Just as you grieve if a friend is killed, you should grieve if a fictional character is killed. You should care. If somebody dies and you just go get more popcorn, it’s a superficial experience isn’t it?
Why do you think it has such a powerful reaction? Robb wasn’t one of your “viewpoint characters” in the books and Catelyn wasn’t really a beloved personality.
[Long pause] That’s an interesting question. I don’t know if I have a good answer. Maybe the way I did it. There’s a certain amount of foreboding leading up to it. It’s a betrayal. It comes out of left field. It’s at a wedding feast. Robb has made his peace and you think the worst is over. Then it comes out of nowhere. There’s also secondary characters killed. Then outside hundreds of Stark people are killed. It’s not just two people.
To me, that Robb and Catelyn are family makes it worse. And Catelyn has suffered so much and lost so many people around her, and she actually thinks she’s lost more than she really has (since she doesn’t know for sure that Arya, Bran and Rickon are alive). Then this happens.
She also has the moment there to plead. There’s also her murdering the hostage. He’s not a son that Frey particularly values.* So in the end her bluff is empty. And she does. She carries through. There’s a certain power to that too.
FrodoEyes
Super Freak
I’m pretty sure I know the answer to this, but: Have you ever regretted the scene?
Martin: No. Not as a writer. It’s probably the most powerful scene in the books. It cost me some readers, but gained me many more. It’s going to be hard for me to watch it [on the show]. It’s going to be a tough night. Because I love these characters too. And in a TV show you get to know the actors. You’re also ending that relationship with an actor that you have affection for. Richard Madden and Michelle Fairley have done an amazing job.
What do you say to readers who are upset about the scene?
It depends on what they say. What can you say to someone who says they’ll never read your book again? People read books for different reasons. I respect that. Some read for comfort. And some of my former readers have said their life is hard, their mother is sick, their dog died, and they read fiction to escape. They don’t want to get hit in the mouth with something horrible. And you read that certain kind of fiction where the guy will always get the girl and the good guys win and it reaffirms to you that life is fair. We all want that at times. There’s a certain vicarious release to that. So I’m not dismissive of people who want that. But that’s not the kind of fiction I write, in most cases. It’s certainly not what Ice and Fire is. It tries to be more realistic about what life is. It has joy, but it also had pain and fear. I think the best fiction captures life in all its light and darkness.
One of my favorite elements of the scene is you introduce this idea of “salt and bread.” We accept that as readers — Okay, in this fantasy world, people don’t harm each other once they eat a host’s bread and salt in their home. Then you break your own rule. It’s like you’re smacking the reader upside the head for being so dense — “Of course they’re not going to follow that silly rule ALL the time!”
It was stolen from history. Hospitality laws were real in Dark Ages society. A host and guest were not allowed to harm each other even if they were enemies. By violating that law, the phrase is, they “condemn themselves for all time.”
What about the Red Wedding itself? Is that based on history too?
The Red Wedding is based on a couple real events from Scottish history. One was a case called The Black Dinner. The king of Scotland was fighting the Black Douglas clan. He reached out to make peace. He offered the young Earl of Douglas safe passage. He came to Edinburgh Castle and had a great feast. Then at the end of the feast, [the king's men] started pounding on a single drum. They brought out a covered plate and put it in front of the Earl and revealed it was the head of a black boar — the symbol of death. And as soon as he saw it, he knew what it meant. They dragged them out and put them to death in the courtyard. The larger instance was the Glencoe Massacre. Clan MacDonald stayed with the Campbell clan overnight and the laws of hospitality supposedly applied. But the Campbells arose and started butchering every MacDonald they could get their hands on. No matter how much I make up, there’s stuff in history that’s just as bad, or worse.
Martin: No. Not as a writer. It’s probably the most powerful scene in the books. It cost me some readers, but gained me many more. It’s going to be hard for me to watch it [on the show]. It’s going to be a tough night. Because I love these characters too. And in a TV show you get to know the actors. You’re also ending that relationship with an actor that you have affection for. Richard Madden and Michelle Fairley have done an amazing job.
What do you say to readers who are upset about the scene?
It depends on what they say. What can you say to someone who says they’ll never read your book again? People read books for different reasons. I respect that. Some read for comfort. And some of my former readers have said their life is hard, their mother is sick, their dog died, and they read fiction to escape. They don’t want to get hit in the mouth with something horrible. And you read that certain kind of fiction where the guy will always get the girl and the good guys win and it reaffirms to you that life is fair. We all want that at times. There’s a certain vicarious release to that. So I’m not dismissive of people who want that. But that’s not the kind of fiction I write, in most cases. It’s certainly not what Ice and Fire is. It tries to be more realistic about what life is. It has joy, but it also had pain and fear. I think the best fiction captures life in all its light and darkness.
One of my favorite elements of the scene is you introduce this idea of “salt and bread.” We accept that as readers — Okay, in this fantasy world, people don’t harm each other once they eat a host’s bread and salt in their home. Then you break your own rule. It’s like you’re smacking the reader upside the head for being so dense — “Of course they’re not going to follow that silly rule ALL the time!”
It was stolen from history. Hospitality laws were real in Dark Ages society. A host and guest were not allowed to harm each other even if they were enemies. By violating that law, the phrase is, they “condemn themselves for all time.”
What about the Red Wedding itself? Is that based on history too?
The Red Wedding is based on a couple real events from Scottish history. One was a case called The Black Dinner. The king of Scotland was fighting the Black Douglas clan. He reached out to make peace. He offered the young Earl of Douglas safe passage. He came to Edinburgh Castle and had a great feast. Then at the end of the feast, [the king's men] started pounding on a single drum. They brought out a covered plate and put it in front of the Earl and revealed it was the head of a black boar — the symbol of death. And as soon as he saw it, he knew what it meant. They dragged them out and put them to death in the courtyard. The larger instance was the Glencoe Massacre. Clan MacDonald stayed with the Campbell clan overnight and the laws of hospitality supposedly applied. But the Campbells arose and started butchering every MacDonald they could get their hands on. No matter how much I make up, there’s stuff in history that’s just as bad, or worse.
Yeah, I remember that but there is more to it. Its completely unheard of and will shame his family and name. There's a few things they left out that I wish they put in but I get it.
The reason I said I wish they went in more depth for the non readers is because Ive read some things from viewers complaining that Robb was an idiot to think nothing would happen regardless of what Frey promised etc.
Anyone that doesn't want to read the books I still strongly suggest you guys read the RW chapter. I think the show did it well enough but the book blows it away. I can understand others being underwhelmed. Although I must admit its pretty damn hard to live up to.
Sent from my LG-E739 using Tapatalk 2
FrodoEyes
Super Freak
Yeah, it's a great piece of writing, despite what josh might think 
mikedanger
Super Freak
i have read book 1 and plan on reading 2 and 3 during the break, but i don't want to get ahead of the show
Yeah, it's a great piece of writing, despite what josh might think
It doesn't matter what I think though. I haven't read the books and you lost all faith in me so as I said it doesn't matter.
That's an interesting interview. He at least accepts and understands he's going to pass off an alienate people with his choices. He's writing more of a historical fiction than fantasy and going forward I won't personally develop much care for any story line. Ill probably stick around just to see where things end up and move on forgetting this series once its over. Ill find someone to give the books to and move on.
TheProcrastinator
Super Freak
Yeah, the lack of explanation and further developing of the "rule of hospitality" is my only major gripe with the show's potrayal of the Red Wedding (there are others, but those are mostly minor nitpics, having more to do with personal imagining of that particular scene). They had many occasions throughout the three seasons to flesh it out.
I see two reasons why that theme was important.
One - it would explain why Robb wasn't a fool to try and trust Walder. It explains why ultimately he led his guard down during the happy events of the wedding ceremony. Reading the comments from the fans who didn't read the novels, it seems like some of them think that Robb "had it coming".
Two - and this one is a bit more important in the long run. Without it, it changes the nature of the whole Red Wedding. In the show, what Walder did was simply a horrible, violent, brutal treachery. But in the books it was a little bit more than that. It represented the shredding of tradition. The law of hospitality was more than just a normal custom, it was considered a sacred rule, one that even mortal enemies, or people at war with each other, would never dare to break. To do so, would mean to be "condemned before the eyes of gods and men". Breaking the rule of hospitality in such a perfidious, horrible manner, showed that this war has got to the point were there are absolutely no rules at all, no things are hold sacred anymore, no pretense of respect is shown, and its so ugly that even the "traditions of warfare" that everyone before complied to while killing each other, are now worthless. It was one of the ways to show that the world is changing before our eyes, which is one of the recuuring themes of Martin's ASOIAF books.
The good news is that there is still a chance, that they will touch up on it later. The preview for the next episode showed Tyrion talking about the events of the wedding. Perhaps it will be a chance for the creators to put some exposition dialogue, that would further reflect on the meaning of what Walder did.
Kamandi
Super Freak
The guest rule could have foreshadowed too much if it were overplayed. I thought they struck a good balance. It was in there but it wasn't overdone.
Robb failed to marry a daughter, he appologized to try and make it right. Who would have expected such an over-reaction?
Robb failed to marry a daughter, he appologized to try and make it right. Who would have expected such an over-reaction?
Ash Housewares
Super Freak
I knew something was going to go down, because everyone has been talking about this big event in GOT. Usually I get things spoiled for me. I was NOT prepared for this. It's without a doubt the most sad, disturbing, gut wrenching tv I have ever seen. I barely slept last night thinking about it and the scene keeps playing over in my mind today. What an incredible piece of writing and acting for it to be able to do that. I've become desensitized by tv violence but it's good to know that I am still human.
Invictus Sol
No Life in the Void
Well said, Ash.
FrodoEyes: Thanks for that interview excerpt. Totally confirms my own thoughts about this complex, bittersweet show.
FrodoEyes: Thanks for that interview excerpt. Totally confirms my own thoughts about this complex, bittersweet show.
316what
The Real Vic Mackey
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2005
- Messages
- 5,277
- Reaction score
- 3
Robb failed to keep his oath made as King of the North. The outcome was not an over-reaction.
Similar threads
