?

I agree with your analysis of the TV show... but the books? c'mon they are pretty damn good.

Hmm... Horrible secularised modernised crap full of gratuitious sex and minority groups in unrealistic positions of power you say?

Gotta watch it.

I love the show, especially the gratuitous sex.

My favorite actress of the series turns out to have been a porn actress in a previous life.

@Steephie. Yes. See it. Now.

The depiction of prostitutes as fun-loving sexually liberated women was particularly insulting and crude

Yeah guys. Don't call SYnapse a fun-loving sexually liberated woman. That's crude.

He's a proud prostitute!

Why? Don''t like to see your mom in that light?

He=She.

@Synapse: it turns out the criminalisation of prostitution dis-empowers prostitutes, who'd have thought it?

Seriously though, SYnapse, if you think none of them just happen to love sex and money, there's no arguing with you.

what minority in unrealistic positions of power are we talking about?

Steephie I'm not taking advice on prostitution from a virgin who has never even met one. You're confusing porn stars with prostitutes. Prostitutes are the girls flagging down cars in South Africa. They are the ones living under corrugate iron in Bangladesh. Please do not trivalise this.

It's a TV show, SYnapse. Lighten up. If you don't like it, don't watch it.

What do you mean by secularised? Is it not religious enough?

By secularised, I mean that it's very liberal in it's approach to women, races, the dwarf guy, children - people that in the real kind of world that this is set had absolutely no role. Not the TV "I'm a stay at home woman but really I tell my husband what to do". I mean NOTHING, ZERO.

I know it's fantasy but I just can't shake off that it's a bunch of modern people with modern values in fancy dress. It doesn't feel like an authentic world that they have created.

In contrast look at something epic like Braveheart or Gladiator. The films are dominated by men, not because of the film industry but because it's accurate. There are strong independant women in these movies, but they are much more subject to the rules of the world - they work in secrecy and don't run around bossing men around too often. You would rarely see the kind of modern character types (some of them are straight out of shows like Sex and the City) involved in these epic battles.

"like Braveheart or Gladiator" "but because it's accurate."

Bahahahahaha

Come to England or Italy and tell people those movies are accurate and they'll slap you in the face. Seriously though, at least in the books they treat Tyrion like absolute shit and only avoid mocking him too much because he's the son of the richest bastard in the land. Nobody ever takes the lady of Tarth seriously either, and Rob just basically ignores every piece of advice his mom gives him and does whatever the fuck he wants.

I am in England

Also a criticism I have of GoT is that the characters are, well... too INTERESTING. I mean, the majority of people are not.

I hate GRRM for making his characters too interesting. How dare he write a book that people want to read. We should all be reading Jane Austen.

Just wait until she gets to book 2

@SYnapse: Ah... So only the prostitutes in bad conditions are prostitutes... The ones in good conditions are not prostitutes but just people fucking for money? Is that what you're saying?

"INTERESTING. I mean, the majority of people are not."

*COUGH* SYnapse *COUGH*.

I'm pretty sure that our mediaeval world isn't the only possible permutation of values and social norms for such an environment. Then there's the fact that the books are set in a fictional world and as such provided it is internally consistent (which GRRM manages rather well in my opinion) what's the problem with powerful dwarfs and racial minorities?

I'd also question that such groups had 'absolutely no role'. That seems like something of a very sweeping statement.

Going back to the comment that opened the thread...

I actually enjoy watching how Martin is re-writing the story for TV. You're right in saying that it's not entirely the same, and right in being frustrated that some story lines that were pleasant in the books are not making it to the screen. That said, I find that Martin is an average writer at best, and his biggest flaw is not to know how to avoid opening cans of worms. Books 4 and 5 open onto way too many stories for the plot to remain as captivating as it was in the earlier books. And while some of the characters are, yes, still quite entertaining, the narrative suffers from it and you can tell Martin is having a hard time getting back on the saddle, so to speak. So in a sense, I appreciate the changes brought to the show because they allow us to focus more on the narrative and the great families. It's not exactly the same story anymore (so your wife is wrong about that --- though, to her credit, the first 2 books are generally well represented, especially the first), but both "works" share the same essence, if you will, and cast different but equally valuable perspectives on the same world.

Had it not been Martin behind the writing of the show, this comment would have likely been quite different... and the show as well! Don't forget that Martin has made his life writing for TV and cinema. He knows what the medium needs to tell a good story.

Women could wield immense power in the medieval world, Elanor of Aquitaine was probably the most powerful person of her time although she did not wear a crown, same with Isabel of Castile and countless other queens. GoT is only unrealistic when you are ignorant of medieval History...

And I don't even know what minorities you are talking about still... There are no real minorities in power in the Game of Thrones books besides maybe religious minorities. And that makes sense when you realize the world of GRRM is alot more liberal than the medieval world

"@SYnapse: Ah... So only the prostitutes in bad conditions are prostitutes... The ones in good conditions are not prostitutes but just people fucking for money? Is that what you're saying?"

There are no prostitutes in good conditions, you fucking child.

You get the difference between fiction and depictions of reality, yes? And while I will grant that our moral evaluation of art works or fictions plays a part in our evaluation of their quality as artworks or as fictions, I just can't see how you can legitimately reduce your evaluation of GoT to it's Attitude towards real moral issues