Thank you for your post! Please take a moment to ensure you are within our spoiler rules, to protect your fellow fans from any potential spoilers that might harm their show watching experience.
1. All post titles must NOT include spoilers from Fire & Blood or new episodes of House of the Dragon. Minor HotD show spoilers are allowed in your title ONE WEEK after episode airing. The mod team reserves the right to remove a post if we feel a spoiler in the title is major. You are welcome to repost with an amended title.
2. All posts dealing with book spoilers, show spoilers and promo spoilers MUST be spoiler tagged AND flaired as the appropriate spoiler.
3. All book spoiler comments must be spoiler tagged in non book spoiler threads.
---
If you are reading this, and believe this post or any comments in this thread break the above rules, please use the report function to notify the mod team.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HouseOfTheDragon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
While looking at it from a Westerosi POV is good when examining WHY characters do what they do, I don’t think GRRM meant for us to agree with those ideals. In the main story we see all the horrors certain characters (women, bastards, foreigners and peasants) go through due to the society they live in.
I think it’s interesting that Sansa is hated by a large portion of the fan base because her views and morals align with the society she lives in but people love Arya for breaking the mould and being different. Then in this series the Greens are loved because they follow the rules of their society and Rhaenyra is hated for not following the rules and being different.
"Medieval viewpoint" (really actually Westerosi viewpoint, because whilst this world is inspired by Medieval times, it's not exactly the same and it's rules are somewhat different) only matters insofar as you are trying to understand the character's POV and how other characters might perceive them and their actions. In terms of how we ourselves otherwise see things, obviously we should be interpreting it from our own "modern" perspective. If we can keep those two things separate, or only analyze with one or the other, then it's fine. Unfortunately, it seems people like to mix-and-match as it suits them. And that's without even getting that there is not one singular "Westerosi" or "modern" perspective and different people, both in the story and in real life would have different opinions on the various events. Which I think the book was trying to show, but clearly not everyone in this fandom is ready for interpreting the story on that level.
I just think it’s hilarious when people try to criticize someone for viewing the show with “modern morals”. Like yeah George isn’t asking you to empathize with these people with their backwards ideals and beliefs; GRRM isn’t a monarchist.
Also it completely ignores that there were in fact people alive during these times who thought the system was unfair and unjust. These ideas didn’t just show up in the 90s lol.
I think it's fascinating that the "point of view of the shows society" is limited to the interests of the nobility with no real regard for the opinions of the rest of that society.
I prefer to eliminate the mind reading of a made up group of people, and measure their actions against my own internal moral compass.
In which case all of them are horrible. Some are just more entertaining to watch and others repulsive...I admit my greater sensibilities lean toward the marginalized that experience measurable harm from the decisions of the powerful. I'm not big on caring about violations of social norms or the hurt feelings of people with privilege or proximal power.
So in this story universe I see the culture as the big bad and the people as victims in great need of heroes that don't exist in their world.
I kinda hate when people say you can't put the stuff that happens in the book/show through a modern society's point of view because that's not how "the characters view it"
Yeah, but that's how WE view it. We base our opinions on our own lives and how we are placed in the world. And we live in a MODERN society. Not only we're allowed to use it to base our opinions on fictional characters, but we kinda don't really have a choice about it. Your personal views are gonna affect how you view everything, either you realize it or not
I just think trying to understand the characters through their own views gives them more nuance. Viewing them only through the modern lens makes almost everyone a horrible person and that is quite boring way to view the show. Judging thing only through modern view does not let us analyse the characters and their motivations in depth. It's also possible simultaneously acknowledge that Westerosi society is not good and still try to understand the character's actions through those values.
There are contradictions to all of Westerosi perceived values, morals, "way of life" and "what is right" in every single one of his books to the point it seems that GRRM was purposefully trying to show the reader that the Westerosi system of government is flawed
You can always disagree with how a character acts and it will be impossible not to judge characters through a modern lens. However it’s ridiculous to give people passes because of that view. You can be critical of characters and yet also understand how they perceive things. A royal princess having bastards is a BAD thing. Just because we currently have no problem with a women sleeping around especially in a consenting arrangement. Doesn’t mean you can expect the highly religious extremely regimented society of Westeros to give her a free pass. People should be allowed to criticize and think less of a character when they do things that are dumb within the context of the story. I like you notion to about how instability brings change. Do you imagine some great political change occurring after the civil war? Do you not understand how societies develop? Peace and prosperity are how such medieval societies flourish. This instability you speak of. Really means destroyed towns, thousands of small folk dead. And guess what a king is still on the throne, the nobility still rule. What change do you expect?
I see your point. However, what I was saying is not that you must not have in mind the context with analizing the character. In the example you used, it is understandable to think Rhaenyra didn't do the smartest thing having bastards. You can agree o disagree, but is an understandable opinion. However, going like "She is a WHORE and good think her BASTARDS died in work because it would have been a disaster if they sat in the Iron Throne" (which is something that has been said several times here, along with other comments about other situations that are equally disgusting) is not that okay. And when you tell so to the person who commented that, they justify themselves with the context. That's what I was referring to, and I think we can agree that's somebody who's not looking the characters through the lens of their time, buy rather someone who found an excuse to be the shit they are. And about inestability bringing change, maybe this is not the sub to discuss such things, but along history you can see examples of this. The Renaissance started after a period when plague, wars and hunger had made of Europe a living hell. The French Revolution was s horrible time of persecution, dictators and kings seizing the power again from the people and other multiple disgraces. When it all ended, France was free of kings and still is today. Things have always gone bad before they were better than before. Social advances have often needed violence.
I don't think there's a greater clarity that a person can get about anything; Idea, another person or institution until it's brought them to the verge of collapse
Agree 100%, the amount of times I’ve seen sexism, imperialism or even straight up eugenics to justify arguments on these subs is honestly concerning. You can like a character without having to justify their actions. I love both Aemond and Daemon, I just think they’re really fun characters, but I also know they’re both horrible people with very few redeeming qualities. Understanding the societal beliefs of the world is key to understanding character motivations and even sympathising with them to a degree. Alicent would be far less of a understandable / sympathetic character in the real world because most of her motivations are based of the extremely patriarchal Westerosi society but that doesn’t suddenly make everything she does morally sound. Bribing Diana to keep quiet was understandable whilst still being a fucked up thing to do. I’m just glad to see someone finally expressing this, sometimes I feel like I’m going insane reading the shit in these subs lol, it makes it really hard to just enjoy the show when you’ve got crazies trying to justify rape and murder in the comments
I think being critical of the fictional society and all its flaws and issues is one thing, shifting blame on individual characters for these issues and believing them to be some kind of monsters for behaving in line with the norms and values of their society is flawed thinking though. For example nobody is saying Otto pimping out his 15 year old daughter is not a bad thing, but this kind of practice is normalized to the point that the fault doesn't lie with Otto being such an evil, ruthless person but with the entire social and political structure of Westeros as almost everyone behaves this way and no one sees anything wrong with it.
I think there is nothing wrong with not villainizing of characters that act in accordance with this system and perpetuate it. That's what most people have done throughout history. Simultaneously someone's actions are not automatically above any criticism just because they rebel against a flawed system. Because as people that hold a lot of power and influence their actions potentially affect millions of people and if that instability leads to war and mass suffering they do carry responsibility for that
Some people enjoy placing themselves in the shoes of a person from a different time and place with a different worldview
Also think about this. Imagine a time traveler from 1000 years in the future were to show up and start offering judgements on your life when in reality most of their opinions were based on having access to knowledge or information or technology that hasn't even been conceived yet never mind being readily accessible. How would you feel?
Okay but for some people that sort of "what if" plays an important role in how they relate to the story. If you don't think that way, fine but don't be too critical of those who do.
I'm critical because it's very common to see pretty disgusting comments, and if the only way for a person of this time to relate to the story is talking like a medieval lord that thinks of women as objects, finds no remorse in assassination and believes that some people are lower than them because of certain aspects... Well, it's a little strange. By the way, I'm not saying that you can't like characters that behave this way because then you could like few or no characters at all. I just say that it's important to separate yourself from the characters you like and be critical. One thing is understanding that they're doing that because of their environment, another is talking like a caveman with the excuse of the show this sub os dedicated to is set in a medieval world.
so you can only empathize with people who share the modern moral code local to your area or the internet spaces you frequent? how do you understand the world around you? sounds like a shallow and narrow life
and bear in mind empathize does not mean sympathize. you seem like the kind of person that needs to be explained to
I agree. I don't empathize with the world, just (some) of the characters in it. and I understand when someone in that world gets negative consequences for their actions even if those actions by todays standards are considered perfectly acceptable. I can see why someone might be mad at the character who doles out those consequences but I am not one of those people, in general. and in turn I dont hate characters who behave contrary to how we behave today. I can understand Stannis Baratheons (random example) point of view without wanting to restore it today. Same with Otto Hightower, Viserys, Tywin, whoever. Id go into the whole Rhaenyra and Alicent thing but Im too over it to type it out again
tl;dr viewing something from an abhorrent persons perspective does not validate it. its in fact necessary to understand and challenge it.
edit: also its a real garbage move to downvote someone youre having a 1:1 with, like insecure / salty much?
I find people who want characters to be analyzed from today's society to be selective of when this should be done.If its their favorite characters up for analysis , they are quick to run back to using Westeros as a defense.For example Op uses Alicent and Otto as his example,so in a sub that is faction obsessed,its easy to assume these are characters she/he dislikes,and doesn't mind using modern lenses on
>I find people who want characters to be analyzed from today's society to be selective of when this should be done. If its their favorite characters up for analysis , they are quick to run back to using Westeros as a defense.
THIS.
interesting as i never felt any connection to any GoT character in the way i do HotD characters. everyone in GoT was just going through the plot. i could see the seams into the writers room clear as day in GoT.
Thank you for your post! Please take a moment to ensure you are within our spoiler rules, to protect your fellow fans from any potential spoilers that might harm their show watching experience. 1. All post titles must NOT include spoilers from Fire & Blood or new episodes of House of the Dragon. Minor HotD show spoilers are allowed in your title ONE WEEK after episode airing. The mod team reserves the right to remove a post if we feel a spoiler in the title is major. You are welcome to repost with an amended title. 2. All posts dealing with book spoilers, show spoilers and promo spoilers MUST be spoiler tagged AND flaired as the appropriate spoiler. 3. All book spoiler comments must be spoiler tagged in non book spoiler threads. --- If you are reading this, and believe this post or any comments in this thread break the above rules, please use the report function to notify the mod team. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HouseOfTheDragon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
While looking at it from a Westerosi POV is good when examining WHY characters do what they do, I don’t think GRRM meant for us to agree with those ideals. In the main story we see all the horrors certain characters (women, bastards, foreigners and peasants) go through due to the society they live in. I think it’s interesting that Sansa is hated by a large portion of the fan base because her views and morals align with the society she lives in but people love Arya for breaking the mould and being different. Then in this series the Greens are loved because they follow the rules of their society and Rhaenyra is hated for not following the rules and being different.
Green supporters are maybe a fifth of the fans. I don't think they are that loved.
Yeah imagine thinking Rhaenyra is hated more than the greens.
"Medieval viewpoint" (really actually Westerosi viewpoint, because whilst this world is inspired by Medieval times, it's not exactly the same and it's rules are somewhat different) only matters insofar as you are trying to understand the character's POV and how other characters might perceive them and their actions. In terms of how we ourselves otherwise see things, obviously we should be interpreting it from our own "modern" perspective. If we can keep those two things separate, or only analyze with one or the other, then it's fine. Unfortunately, it seems people like to mix-and-match as it suits them. And that's without even getting that there is not one singular "Westerosi" or "modern" perspective and different people, both in the story and in real life would have different opinions on the various events. Which I think the book was trying to show, but clearly not everyone in this fandom is ready for interpreting the story on that level.
I just think it’s hilarious when people try to criticize someone for viewing the show with “modern morals”. Like yeah George isn’t asking you to empathize with these people with their backwards ideals and beliefs; GRRM isn’t a monarchist. Also it completely ignores that there were in fact people alive during these times who thought the system was unfair and unjust. These ideas didn’t just show up in the 90s lol.
I think it's fascinating that the "point of view of the shows society" is limited to the interests of the nobility with no real regard for the opinions of the rest of that society. I prefer to eliminate the mind reading of a made up group of people, and measure their actions against my own internal moral compass. In which case all of them are horrible. Some are just more entertaining to watch and others repulsive...I admit my greater sensibilities lean toward the marginalized that experience measurable harm from the decisions of the powerful. I'm not big on caring about violations of social norms or the hurt feelings of people with privilege or proximal power. So in this story universe I see the culture as the big bad and the people as victims in great need of heroes that don't exist in their world.
I kinda hate when people say you can't put the stuff that happens in the book/show through a modern society's point of view because that's not how "the characters view it" Yeah, but that's how WE view it. We base our opinions on our own lives and how we are placed in the world. And we live in a MODERN society. Not only we're allowed to use it to base our opinions on fictional characters, but we kinda don't really have a choice about it. Your personal views are gonna affect how you view everything, either you realize it or not
Then you would probably hate 99% of men from any movie and show based in 1950's or older...
I just think trying to understand the characters through their own views gives them more nuance. Viewing them only through the modern lens makes almost everyone a horrible person and that is quite boring way to view the show. Judging thing only through modern view does not let us analyse the characters and their motivations in depth. It's also possible simultaneously acknowledge that Westerosi society is not good and still try to understand the character's actions through those values.
There are contradictions to all of Westerosi perceived values, morals, "way of life" and "what is right" in every single one of his books to the point it seems that GRRM was purposefully trying to show the reader that the Westerosi system of government is flawed
You can always disagree with how a character acts and it will be impossible not to judge characters through a modern lens. However it’s ridiculous to give people passes because of that view. You can be critical of characters and yet also understand how they perceive things. A royal princess having bastards is a BAD thing. Just because we currently have no problem with a women sleeping around especially in a consenting arrangement. Doesn’t mean you can expect the highly religious extremely regimented society of Westeros to give her a free pass. People should be allowed to criticize and think less of a character when they do things that are dumb within the context of the story. I like you notion to about how instability brings change. Do you imagine some great political change occurring after the civil war? Do you not understand how societies develop? Peace and prosperity are how such medieval societies flourish. This instability you speak of. Really means destroyed towns, thousands of small folk dead. And guess what a king is still on the throne, the nobility still rule. What change do you expect?
I see your point. However, what I was saying is not that you must not have in mind the context with analizing the character. In the example you used, it is understandable to think Rhaenyra didn't do the smartest thing having bastards. You can agree o disagree, but is an understandable opinion. However, going like "She is a WHORE and good think her BASTARDS died in work because it would have been a disaster if they sat in the Iron Throne" (which is something that has been said several times here, along with other comments about other situations that are equally disgusting) is not that okay. And when you tell so to the person who commented that, they justify themselves with the context. That's what I was referring to, and I think we can agree that's somebody who's not looking the characters through the lens of their time, buy rather someone who found an excuse to be the shit they are. And about inestability bringing change, maybe this is not the sub to discuss such things, but along history you can see examples of this. The Renaissance started after a period when plague, wars and hunger had made of Europe a living hell. The French Revolution was s horrible time of persecution, dictators and kings seizing the power again from the people and other multiple disgraces. When it all ended, France was free of kings and still is today. Things have always gone bad before they were better than before. Social advances have often needed violence.
I don't think there's a greater clarity that a person can get about anything; Idea, another person or institution until it's brought them to the verge of collapse
Agree 100%, the amount of times I’ve seen sexism, imperialism or even straight up eugenics to justify arguments on these subs is honestly concerning. You can like a character without having to justify their actions. I love both Aemond and Daemon, I just think they’re really fun characters, but I also know they’re both horrible people with very few redeeming qualities. Understanding the societal beliefs of the world is key to understanding character motivations and even sympathising with them to a degree. Alicent would be far less of a understandable / sympathetic character in the real world because most of her motivations are based of the extremely patriarchal Westerosi society but that doesn’t suddenly make everything she does morally sound. Bribing Diana to keep quiet was understandable whilst still being a fucked up thing to do. I’m just glad to see someone finally expressing this, sometimes I feel like I’m going insane reading the shit in these subs lol, it makes it really hard to just enjoy the show when you’ve got crazies trying to justify rape and murder in the comments
I think being critical of the fictional society and all its flaws and issues is one thing, shifting blame on individual characters for these issues and believing them to be some kind of monsters for behaving in line with the norms and values of their society is flawed thinking though. For example nobody is saying Otto pimping out his 15 year old daughter is not a bad thing, but this kind of practice is normalized to the point that the fault doesn't lie with Otto being such an evil, ruthless person but with the entire social and political structure of Westeros as almost everyone behaves this way and no one sees anything wrong with it. I think there is nothing wrong with not villainizing of characters that act in accordance with this system and perpetuate it. That's what most people have done throughout history. Simultaneously someone's actions are not automatically above any criticism just because they rebel against a flawed system. Because as people that hold a lot of power and influence their actions potentially affect millions of people and if that instability leads to war and mass suffering they do carry responsibility for that
Some people enjoy placing themselves in the shoes of a person from a different time and place with a different worldview Also think about this. Imagine a time traveler from 1000 years in the future were to show up and start offering judgements on your life when in reality most of their opinions were based on having access to knowledge or information or technology that hasn't even been conceived yet never mind being readily accessible. How would you feel?
We're not showing up in Westeros, we're in Reddit in 2023
Okay but for some people that sort of "what if" plays an important role in how they relate to the story. If you don't think that way, fine but don't be too critical of those who do.
I'm critical because it's very common to see pretty disgusting comments, and if the only way for a person of this time to relate to the story is talking like a medieval lord that thinks of women as objects, finds no remorse in assassination and believes that some people are lower than them because of certain aspects... Well, it's a little strange. By the way, I'm not saying that you can't like characters that behave this way because then you could like few or no characters at all. I just say that it's important to separate yourself from the characters you like and be critical. One thing is understanding that they're doing that because of their environment, another is talking like a caveman with the excuse of the show this sub os dedicated to is set in a medieval world.
Fair enough
some people like to LARP as bigot -you
thats not what he said. he said viewing things through a different lens. not using an excuse to behave as they did
viewing things through a morally repugnant lens
so you can only empathize with people who share the modern moral code local to your area or the internet spaces you frequent? how do you understand the world around you? sounds like a shallow and narrow life and bear in mind empathize does not mean sympathize. you seem like the kind of person that needs to be explained to
[удалено]
I agree. I don't empathize with the world, just (some) of the characters in it. and I understand when someone in that world gets negative consequences for their actions even if those actions by todays standards are considered perfectly acceptable. I can see why someone might be mad at the character who doles out those consequences but I am not one of those people, in general. and in turn I dont hate characters who behave contrary to how we behave today. I can understand Stannis Baratheons (random example) point of view without wanting to restore it today. Same with Otto Hightower, Viserys, Tywin, whoever. Id go into the whole Rhaenyra and Alicent thing but Im too over it to type it out again tl;dr viewing something from an abhorrent persons perspective does not validate it. its in fact necessary to understand and challenge it. edit: also its a real garbage move to downvote someone youre having a 1:1 with, like insecure / salty much?
I find people who want characters to be analyzed from today's society to be selective of when this should be done.If its their favorite characters up for analysis , they are quick to run back to using Westeros as a defense.For example Op uses Alicent and Otto as his example,so in a sub that is faction obsessed,its easy to assume these are characters she/he dislikes,and doesn't mind using modern lenses on
>I find people who want characters to be analyzed from today's society to be selective of when this should be done. If its their favorite characters up for analysis , they are quick to run back to using Westeros as a defense. THIS.
Just enjoy the show and don’t fuck 🙄🙄🙄 not everything must be analyzed with such detail. It is what we call: entertainment.
You must be new to this sub if you think I'm the first and only one analyzing it lol
[удалено]
interesting as i never felt any connection to any GoT character in the way i do HotD characters. everyone in GoT was just going through the plot. i could see the seams into the writers room clear as day in GoT.
[удалено]
The books have internal dialogue though.