HBO's Game of Thrones

[Dr Daystrom]

Hodor isn't a hero?

To be a "hero" requires hard choices to be made. Hodor in his child-like innocence is by every appearence the soul of gentleness and loyalty, but it never is actually a "choice" for him, he just acts out his nature in a very direct manner.

 

[red4]

.....

 

[Dr Daystrom]

About Brienne; I meant she was protecting him on his way to freedom - freedom behind the protection of the evil Lannisters. Brienne was protecting an evil person on his journey to freedom where he is meant to join other free, evil people. That's where her morality deviated.

I refer you back to my example. A convicted prisoner is ordered freed on a technicality. The prison staff becomes somehow less moral by doing as their duty demands and releasing him?

 

[red4]

.....

 

[Dr Daystrom]

The laws of Westeros are morally deviant on this matter. Killing that man was excessive, despite what the laws of Westeros say.

Are they?

Or are you overlaying personal morality over the hypothetical morality of the Westeros setting?

One of the hubs upon which morality in Westeros turns is oath keeping. Men on the wall swear to serve, and are well aware of the penalty for not honoring that oath.

And in the context of the White Walkers, the Wall was a critical defense for the peoples south of the wall (at least until much of that history became obscured by myth). Deserters might very well lead to innocents south of the Wall dying in their place. Is it immoral to enforce a sworn oath in those circumstances?

We'll likely differ here, but I would not find it immoral to expect those sworn to defend the realm to do so.

I define heroism as the salvation, without evil intention behind it, of morally good people. Hodor definitely fits the definition to me.

We have a basic difference in terms here, and I'm not sure if you're applying "salvation" in the Christian sense or another context, but to me, a "hero" is one who fully understands the situation, the possible consequences, and then chooses to do right/good even where there is great danger or personal sacrifice required.

 

[devilof76]

The laws of Westeros are morally deviant on this matter. Killing that man was excessive, despite what the laws of Westeros say.

The man abandoned his post. There were other ways to communicate what he saw that did not required that he break oath. He clearly had no intention of returning, and he knew the consequences of his actions. For Ned to spare his life he would have defiled the oath of every man on the wall who honored it. It was not a moral breach.

 

[Dr Daystrom]

The man abandoned his post. There were other ways to communicate what he saw that did not required that he break oath. He clearly had no intention of returning, and he knew the consequences of his actions. For Ned to spare his life he would have defiled the oath of every man on the wall who honored it. It was not a moral breach.

Agreed, and the area of Winterfell (where he was caught) is many days travel on foot south of the Wall, and the encounter with the White Walkers occurred somewhere north of the Wall.

He somehow had to cross over/under/around the Wall (and it's sort of hard to miss as you're heading south) and then just keep running further south. He was deserting and he certainly knew that he was.

 

[devilof76]

Yup. Permission to desert would end the Black Watch, and their survival depends on the integrity of that institution. I suppose someone could argue that Westeros does not deserve to survive on account of the sins of the worst inhabitants, but the argument would fail at the point where the innocent pay for those sins.

 

[red4]

.....

 

[lerath666]

Except Ned cheated on his wife, and beheaded an innocent man who was telling the truth about White Walkers; Brienne has protected Jaime Lannister, who, despite his recent decisions, is still almost entirely evil.

This subtext is only detectable to someone who knows about it via the books. The way it plays out within the show alone, it would have to be more of an assumption by the viewer, rather than subtext.

Some things from the books.

The man whom Ned beheaded was given an opportunity to explane himself in the books by Ned. the man was unable to do so. He was "odly silent" and seemd unrepentant.

in truth, he was borderline catatonic, but Ned misreads this, and simply does what the laws of the land require him to do.
That Being, Execute someone who is ( to him) A deserter, and therefore, a traitor.

REgarding John Snow. I'm anticipating in standard TV fashion, that they're keeping his real parantage a secret for a M. Night. Shamalan-esque " what a twist!" moment later on.


On John snow's parentge

Spoiler

In the Books, NO ONE knows the truth of john snow's parrents. Whenever anyone asks Ned about John, he simply shuts up, and stares off. Robert THINKS he knows who the mother is, but Ned refuses to talk about it. NOW, whenever we're in first person persctive inside Ned's head and someone mentions Bastards, or John, Ned's thougths turn to on of a few things.

1) His sister and his deathbed promise to her
2) the butchery of the Targerian children Commited by Tywin lanaster .

so, it's VERY Heavily handed hinting that John is actualy the Son of Ned's sister and Rhaegar Targaryen. Making John the Legetimate Hier to the Iron throne, and Danyeris's nephew.

Ned was never unfaithful. It's NOT in his character.
I rescend my earlier comment. Ned Stark IS the hero of Game of thrones... and it gets him killed.

Even in the show, We are shown time and again Ned's love and devotion to Cathryine.

 

[averagejo]

When does this start? April 2014?

 

[agen_kolar]

When does this start? April 2014?

An exact date for Season 4 hasn't yet been given, but rather "early 2014." A March/April air date is expected.

 

[Fritz]

An exact date for Season 4 hasn't yet been given, but rather "early 2014." A March/April air date is expected.

I wonder if they'll try and avoid going head to head with the Walking Dead this season. Even though they got beat, I think the numbers were still pretty good for the season premiere.

 

[lerath666]

I wish they would. there is a nice empty chunk AFTER walking dead, and before True blood.

 

[quadcent]

I wish they would. there is a nice empty chunk AFTER walking dead, and before True blood.

walking dead. True Blood........ does anyone still watch that pile of poooo???

 

[Sweet Rabbit]

walking dead. True Blood........ does anyone still watch that pile of poooo???

Like walking dead is that much better

 

[red4]

.....

 

[lerath666]

I've never been into overly sexualized vampires. The last good vampire thing I've enjoyed was Blade - the first movie. Well actually, Blade and John Carpenter's Vampires.

While I agree the show has a bit to much sex...


It's a fantastic take on supernaturals.

Watch this. Also, blade was kiddie crap in comparison.

[ame]Www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiCTUbwWfCY[/ame]

 

[red4]

.....

 

[ExMem-LarjaThwei]

The Walking Dead doesn't compare to True Blood. What a boring and stupid show TWD has become.


I accidently read a spoiler about this "Lady Stoneheart" character.

All I have to say is holy ****.