That is retarded. How many main characters did Daenerys fry when she snapped near the end of GoT? The reaction of a legion of mouthbreathing girl-power watchers was OH LAWD WHY DANY I CANT EVEN!1
Civilian losses were one of a very exclusive few symboly, plotty, storytelling-like literary thingymajigs remaining in focus by the end of the show. Next showrunner: "It's game of thrones, civilians don't count!"
Bonus Narrative: Civilians are code for your European ancestors :)
Most of them. Makes me think of Tolkien. He treated death differently, but it was almost always a man dying. I think we both probably understand the male sense of honor in sacrifice that Tolkien would invoke in those moments. It's just that society doesn't treat it that way anymore. Except under special narrative conditions (for instance when an "ally" character of fodder variety dies).
I really do think that if GRRM had placed ASOIF in, say, an African kingdom setting, showrunners adapting it in modern America would be squeamish about depicting "good guys" slaughtering civilians. In the same way that, if it were set in a ridiculous exclusively female society, they wouldn't slaughter those civilians.
If you ignore the racial element of the genocide propaganda narratives, the narratives in which the one kind of person is "fodder" and treated as less-than-human, you will only get part of the picture.
That is retarded. How many main characters did Daenerys fry when she snapped near the end of GoT? The reaction of a legion of mouthbreathing girl-power watchers was OH LAWD WHY DANY I CANT EVEN!1
Civilian losses were one of a very exclusive few symboly, plotty, storytelling-like literary thingymajigs remaining in focus by the end of the show. Next showrunner: "It's game of thrones, civilians don't count!"
Bonus Narrative: Civilians are code for your European ancestors :)
It's a female writer.
Fair, Imp. I was just thinking about the setting mirroring medieval Europe. War of the roses and stuff.
I can't be bothered to watch this show, or anything like it, but I'd be curious how many fodder deaths were male.
Most of them. Makes me think of Tolkien. He treated death differently, but it was almost always a man dying. I think we both probably understand the male sense of honor in sacrifice that Tolkien would invoke in those moments. It's just that society doesn't treat it that way anymore. Except under special narrative conditions (for instance when an "ally" character of fodder variety dies).
I really do think that if GRRM had placed ASOIF in, say, an African kingdom setting, showrunners adapting it in modern America would be squeamish about depicting "good guys" slaughtering civilians. In the same way that, if it were set in a ridiculous exclusively female society, they wouldn't slaughter those civilians.
If you ignore the racial element of the genocide propaganda narratives, the narratives in which the one kind of person is "fodder" and treated as less-than-human, you will only get part of the picture.