Tolkien: and then the Good King came and cast out the Evil Stewards who were corrupt because they ruled without the correct bloodline. Everything was peaceful after that and there was no more evil. There are two women in this story. Monarchy is good. The actual singular God who created everything wants you to be ruled by a 300 year old nobleman. The End.

GRRM: Feudalism is inherently destructive. Even the Noble Good Guys cause unimaginable suffering due to the structures of the system they operate within. Women are no more than brood mares under Feudalism. There is a Good King whose father was deposed. This Good King has spent his life living amongst the common people in order to become a good ruler. He is being manipulated by cynical actors and will bring devastation to the world when he begins his conquest. Thirty years ago the Hero of Prophecy acted to save the world from the Great Evil. He unleashed devastation on the land, died, and destroyed his own dynasty, possibly dooming the world. There are no gods, only powerful forces beyond our understanding that operate through the power of blood. Once upon a time there was a Good King who ruled justly. He brought peace to the land and improved the common folks' lot tremendously. Due the nature of Feudalism, the succession crisis that succeeded his reign led to the most bloodshed in 300 years. No one who wants war understands its cost.

People who dislike things because they're popular: Wow these are exactly the same!

  • Redbolshevik2 [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    “yes Westeros is a brutally backward and cruel place, but no meaningful change is really possible and efforts to make meaningful change are naive like this one naive character.”

    Daenerys has never in the books expressed a desire to end the Feudal system of Westeros because she's not a revolutionary, she's a downwardly mobile noble who experienced hardship and now is capable of understanding that other people who experience that hardship also suffer like she did. You keep bringing up the breaking the wheel thing, which was never spoken in the books.

    Moreover, depiction of failed revolution does not mean that revolution is inherently futile.

    • UlyssesT [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Daenerys has never in the books expressed a desire to end the Feudal system of Westeros because she’s not a revolutionary, she’s a downwardly mobile noble who experienced hardship and now is capable of understanding that other people who experience that hardship also suffer like she did.

      Yes, conveniently, the apparent revolutionary figure and the only one that was even presented with a plausible chance of improving society somewhat, hypocrisies and all, has the same downward trajectory as a Legend of Korra villain. It doesn't have to be a leftist revolutionary story, but because you took shots at Tolkein's status quo enforcement, I returned fire accordingly. Neither has to be a leftist work, but you made that claim for what you like, I did not.

      Moreover, depiction of failed revolution does not mean that revolution is inherently futile.

      So far, in GRRM's books, it certainly is. I'm sure lots of people are still waiting for Winds of Winter, and judging by how it's gone so far, I'm skeptical that revolutions against the status quo will be shown any differently, if they are shown at all. His focus and emphasis are elsewhere. In fact his focus does seem to be anywhere but finishing the book that so many apparently hope would fix whatever the show botched in Season 8.