Senioritis / Quitting-my-job-soon-ioritis Forum

[lemonparty]

it's barely noon and I've already had 4 cups of coffee... this is basically me
https://twitter.com/coffee_dad

also weasley, I'm drinking a caramel macchiato rn

[pdevastey]

jeez you guys are active in the morning

to throw my two cents in: I fully agree with Winter. You have to read the books to truly understand Jamie Lannister (and most of the character imho)

isn't that problematic because the two things are separate and different universes. I think using the books to say someone cannot fully understand an element of the show is faulty. That is either a failure of the show or they are actually two different stories that are similar with different writers.

I think its a failure of the show actually. Exhibit A being the rape scene - in the books Cersei gives in because she gets turned on and she wants him. In the show, the director or writers failed to show that (not sure if it was on purpose or an accident). I think its impossible to fit everything from the books into an hour a week, so a lot gets lost.

How is it a failure of the show when the two are different....its not a biography of someones life vs reality of someones life lets say. It is rather two different fictions delivered in two different medias by different writers just in the same universe. Plus Jamie traveled all the way to get back home and his sister and lover rebukes him... he seemed lost a lost/neutered man (no sword hand).

[WinterComing]

How exactly do you think it was completely incongruous with Jamie's character? He pushed a 10 year-old boy out of a window to what Jaime intended to be his death in the first episode. We do see a much more compassionate side of Jaime when Catelyn Stark releases him and he travels back to King's Landing with Brienne, but he does seem to me to have some serious narcissistic and sociopathic tendencies. I really wasn't that surprised at all by the rape scene.

You don't understand Jaime at all. Read the books. Or at least read the comment above that tried to explain it in the spoiler.

I did read the comment. I tried to explain my own thoughts below. The fact of the matter is that the show is based on the books. The show is not the books. I really think it is a lame argument to say that you can't just talk about the show itself and have a full dialogue about it. The show develops Jaime as a character in its own way, and the show is a piece of art that is distinct from the books. I don't see how you can refer to a different piece of art and say that my knowledge is inherently incomplete if I don't also read the books.

Stuff moves too fast in this thread, but I basically preemptively responded to this in my most recent comment above.

[suralin]

they're saying it's a failure of the show as a standalone piece of art, not that it's a failure bc it fails to sufficiently emulate the books

[GFox345]

jeez you guys are active in the morning

to throw my two cents in: I fully agree with Winter. You have to read the books to truly understand Jamie Lannister (and most of the character imho)

isn't that problematic because the two things are separate and different universes. I think using the books to say someone cannot fully understand an element of the show is faulty. That is either a failure of the show or they are actually two different stories that are similar with different writers.

I think specifically what we're saying is that it's a failure of the show.

In the books, Jaime goes through hell to get back to Cersei and they have consensual sex, but ultimately the experience is hollow for Jaime and it's a turning point in his coming to realize that Cersei is a terrible person. This serves to make Jaime one of the book's more complex characters, and this in addition to later events ultimately redeems him in the eyes of most readers (including this one).

But in the show, Jaime goes through hell to get back to Cersei and then rapes her. This makes it impossible for the development that follows in the books to follow in the shows.

I think you're really over-simplifying what happens in the show. I tried to explain what I think above. I don't think that adherence to the story line of the books can be a legitimate measure of artistic quality of the show. Saying "well the show didn't follow the books here" is not enough to say that a scene is a failure of the show in my opinion. You can't use one piece of art as an evaluation criterion for another, especially if the purpose of the latter piece is to be distinct in its own way. To me, that doesn't make any sense.

[rska884]

I really just don't understand why people get so worked up about the rape scene. I mean Game of Thrones is full beyond measure of murder, torture, and just general human suffering. Rape is awful, but in the context of Game of Thrones, it seems almost innocuous by comparison.

You're missing the point. The reason that scene was so awful wasn't just that it was a rape but that it was completely incongruous with Jaime's character and ruined what was a really a more interesting scene in the book.

I was addressing it from the perspective of the morally outraged audience - the crowd that said "I'm done with Game of Thrones" because of the rape scene. That seems ridiculous to me.

On the Jaime point:

How exactly do you think it was completely incongruous with Jamie's character? He pushed a 10 year-old boy out of a window to what Jaime intended to be his death in the first episode. We do see a much more compassionate side of Jaime when Catelyn Stark releases him and he travels back to King's Landing with Brienne, but he does seem to me to have some serious narcissistic and sociopathic tendencies. I really wasn't that surprised at all by the rape scene.

I just posted something a little more in depth on this - just my thoughts. Let me know what you think.

Also, for the morally outraged side, I think I touched on it in my post above - I think there's something to be said about the failure specifically of this scene (and of the similar one last season with two different characters) to work as world-building or character-building. For me, these two felt more specifically like shock value inclusions than other morally lacking scenes in the show/books, which I think caused part of the outrage. Also, as mentioned above, the creators claimed it wasn't rape, so that didn't help.

Apologies. This thread moves too quickly for me as well. I have not read any of the books, so your perspective is interesting. Unfortunately, I can't make much of a knowledgeable comment on it because, well, I haven't read the books.

I do think it is a bit of a stretch so say that the rape scene had no artistic merit or value, and I really feel like a robust dialogue on the subject is largely prevented by the fact that rape and sexual assault on modern "hot" (maybe a poor choice of words) topics in social discourse right now. No one can really maintain the opposite position without being immediately labeled as a monster.

I do disagree with the idea that it is grimdark for it's own sake. That scene, however you feel about it, was the breaking point for Jaime. He clearly has a very strong love for his sister and missed her very much while he was a prisoner of war and during his long journey back to King's Landing. However, he comes back to find that things have changed. Cersei is angry at him for leaving in the first place, being captured, and getting himself seriously hurt. I recall a scene in which Cersei says something like "You come back after X amount of time missing a hand and you expect everything to be the same." (I know I butchered it, but that's the gist).

I get the impression (again I haven't read the books) that the idea of getting back to Cersei is what kept Jaime going while he was a prisoner of war for months. He killed (or intended to kill) a 10 year-old boy for Cersei and murdered his own cousin in an attempt to liberate himself. He has played a role in his children's lives that is surely very far-removed from what any father would want to protect the family reputation. And after all he has done, Cersei is cold and hostile toward him.

I am not saying that I think that Jaime's decision to rape Cersei was justified. It wasn't, but to say that it didn't fit into his character arch or into the story line of the SHOW is clearly wrong in my opinion. There they are, standing over the body of their oldest son who was murdered, and their relationship has been so strained by the circumstances that I just described. Jaime is desperate for Cersei, and finally he just acted without regard for what Cersei wanted. AGAIN I am not saying that this was RIGHT or Justified. But we can at least understand Jaime's decision, even if we condemn it.

Where that takes his character, I am really not sure. His development has definitely slowed since then.

That's a fair interpretation, when taken in isolation of the show, and I'd bet it's one the show runners would agree with. As I mentioned in my last post, I don't think you need to read the books and I have no problem with you taking the show as it's own thing. I just wanted to explain where a good portion of the outrage was coming from - this is a very different character than the Jaime from the books (I would argue that even with your interpretation, he really hasn't changed over the course of five seasons), and when you combine that with the sensitive topic of rape (which isn't how this happens in the books), you get the reaction people had.

[+] Spoiler

I do disagree on one point, though - I think your interpretation really cuts out the growth we saw from Jaime while a prisoner and while with Brienne. The show did justice to the books through that storyline, including his struggles with identity after losing his sword-hand. To boil that down to "he wanted to get back to Cersei" I think really guts the purpose of that whole part of his story, and I think that would be a shame.

I think it's important to acknowledge the show runners' failure, too. If you run with your interpretation of the artistic merits (which would mean they approached the topic in a more acceptable manner), they still undermined that sensitivity by claiming this wasn't a rape scene. So I think that took what was already a sensitive situation for book readers and made it even worse from a political standpoint.

[WinterComing]

jeez you guys are active in the morning

to throw my two cents in: I fully agree with Winter. You have to read the books to truly understand Jamie Lannister (and most of the character imho)

isn't that problematic because the two things are separate and different universes. I think using the books to say someone cannot fully understand an element of the show is faulty. That is either a failure of the show or they are actually two different stories that are similar with different writers.

I think its a failure of the show actually. Exhibit A being the rape scene - in the books Cersei gives in because she gets turned on and she wants him. In the show, the director or writers failed to show that (not sure if it was on purpose or an accident). I think its impossible to fit everything from the books into an hour a week, so a lot gets lost.

How is it a failure of the show when the two are different....its not a biography of someones life vs reality of someones life lets say. It is rather two different fictions delivered in two different medias by different writers just in the same universe. Plus Jamie traveled all the way to get back home and his sister and lover rebukes him... he seemed lost a lost/neutered man (no sword hand).

The point isn't that the show should have to do the same thing as in the books. The point is that what happened in the book was more nuanced artistically and moved Jaime's character forward in a really profound and interesting way and what happened in the show didn't do any of that.

As Fox admitted above, in the shows, Jaime's character basically stalls after the rape.

[rska884]

Alright everyone, let's have more fun. Which GOT character do you share music taste with?

http://www.spotify-gameofthrones.com

I got Dany.

[GFox345]

they're saying it's a failure of the show as a standalone piece of art, not that it's a failure bc it fails to sufficiently emulate the books

I just don't see how. I already explained how Jaime's decision makes perfect sense. He has a distinct character arch in the show. Even though rape is a horrible thing, you can't just act like it doesn't have emotional significance or that it can't play a major role in a character's development. Believe it or not, all rapists are not mindless oafs. Rape is sometimes a crime of passion that results from very complex emotional situations between the two parties involved. Like murder, it is a heinous act, but it definitely has the potential to be interesting.

My frustration is due to the fact that I believe that people came out against this in droves because of modern social movements that make condemning not only rape, but any significance that rape might have in art their rights of passage. Condemning rape is definitely something that is en vogue right now. That much is undeniable.

[darkchildnana]

honestly, I wish the show was less independent from the books. that may be an unpopular opinion but w/e. I started reading the books after watching 3 seasons of the show and I think the show would benefit from adhering more closely to the books. most of the best [lotr lotr lotr] book-to-film or book-to-tv show adaptations have been the ones that simply bring the writer's vision to mind - not try to write their own story (but this is a much bigger conversation for probably another time)

[WinterComing]

You can't use one piece of art as an evaluation criterion for another, especially if the purpose of the latter piece is to be distinct in its own way. To me, that doesn't make any sense.

Again, that's not what I'm doing.

When I evaluate Jaime's arc in the books on its own merits, I think it's interesting and complex and deep.

When I evaluate Jaime's arc in the show, it basically stalls after the rape.

Evaluating them completely on their own merits, I think the show falls short in this regard.

As a professional storyteller, I thought that was some really bad storytelling on the show's part.

That's all.

[barley]

Alright everyone, let's have more fun. Which GOT character do you share music taste with?

http://www.spotify-gameofthrones.com

I got Dany.

Sansa!

[darkchildnana]

Alright everyone, let's have more fun. Which GOT character do you share music taste with?

http://www.spotify-gameofthrones.com

I got Dany.

oooh Jamie Lannister - though I might have gotten someone different had i had the patience to keep clicking "more choices". I like this quiz

[ugg]

Dany!

[suralin]

Alright everyone, let's have more fun. Which GOT character do you share music taste with?

http://www.spotify-gameofthrones.com

I got Dany.

Sansa!

same! shimmer pop 46%, indie folk 32%, rock 22%

[rska884]

Dany!

Nice! What do you listen to?

[archipm]

booo, spotify is blocked on my gov. computer

[WinterComing]

Alright everyone, let's have more fun. Which GOT character do you share music taste with?

http://www.spotify-gameofthrones.com

I got Dany.

Robb Stark! I'm very pleased with that, actually.

[lemonparty]

Alright everyone, let's have more fun. Which GOT character do you share music taste with?

http://www.spotify-gameofthrones.com

I got Dany.

Sansa!

same! shimmer pop 46%, indie folk 32%, rock 22%

Ygritte, ye know nothin' ye bunch of crows
58% classic rock, 22% alt rock, 20% folk

[lemonparty]

Robb Stark! I'm very pleased with that, actually.

finally something more in line with your 'tar

[barley]

I retook it because I didn't realize Bon Iver was an option and now I'm Theon

[suralin]

I'm always torn w this mfk: björk, st vincent, grimes

[TheKisSquared]

I don't use spotify very often so I'm skeptical about acurracy but I got Cersei

[pdevastey]

they're saying it's a failure of the show as a standalone piece of art, not that it's a failure bc it fails to sufficiently emulate the books

how can it fail as a standalone piece of art if we keep saying "when you look at the book"? his actions were "understandableish" just not as much as the book

[GFox345]

You can't use one piece of art as an evaluation criterion for another, especially if the purpose of the latter piece is to be distinct in its own way. To me, that doesn't make any sense.

Again, that's not what I'm doing.

When I evaluate Jaime's arc in the books on its own merits, I think it's interesting and complex and deep.

When I evaluate Jaime's arc in the show, it basically stalls after the rape.

Evaluating them completely on their own merits, I think the show falls short in this regard.

As a professional storyteller, I thought that was some really bad storytelling on the show's part.

That's all.

I'm sorry I keep bringing that up. The style of this forum is pretty bad for an intense conversation like this.

I think that Jaime's arch in the show is a little more complex and deep than you give it credit for, but I did and do again admit that Jaime's character stalled after the rape. I don't think this is because it had to, however. It's not as if Jaime had no where to go from there. For some reason the show writers just didn't go on from there.

I also think we've gotten the original argument a little mixed up because so much has been flying back and forth. The original question was the viability of the rape scene itself. The stunting of Jaime's development, while unfortunate, is another issue.

I think I explained adequately how the rape scene actually did make a lot of sense in the context of the show. It made sense with respect to the thoughts and feelings that Jaime was likely experiencing at the time. Moreover, I feel like the rape scene had just as much potential to take his character in an interesting direction as a consensual sexual experience that made him realize that Cersei is a terrible person (I am sorry if I am mischaracterizing it).

I do agree with you that what ensued after the rape scene - namely the stunting of Jaime's development - is bad story telling. Other the other hand, I believe that the rape was a powerful and understandable climax to the story arch that Jaime followed during the first four seasons - even if it was not intended to be a rape scene by the writers.