|
|
Post by Aj_June on Sept 25, 2018 13:36:21 GMT
Much like all of you, I understand the relevance and importance of protecting individual rights. A healthy society needs to protect rights of its citizens although what rights citizens have is a matter of subjective ethics of a society.
But I believe that in today's world we give lot more importance to discussion of our rights as compared to our duties. I am talking of duties in a broader sense as in moral duties/responsibilities and not just legal duties.
I am not one of those people who romanticise the history or believe we as human beings are becoming morally worse in the current times. No, collectively human society has progressed for the most part in last 5500 years with periods of dark ages. But today we are better than we ever were in terms of different measures. That said there are certain things in which we are not as good as we were once upon a time. Take the concept of family. Broken or dysfunctional families are very common today. To some extent it is because people do not care about their duties. People are not able to adjust by making little sacrifices because they expect everything to go their own way.
I think certain people in the Game of Thrones place a lot more emphasis on duty in relative terms than many do in our world. Not saying that all of those characters in the GOT world do the same. Even with all their faults, the characters of GOT often hold on to their responsibility or duty. I am not saying those characters are correct judge of right vs wrong. Nope. But many of them believe in what should be their duty or responsibility. For example, Torrhen Stark submitted to Aegon Targaryen because he valued the lives of his people. The Knights show a sense of duty they have when they fight even when knowing that they stand very little chance of victory. Similarly, Lords see it as a duty to protect their subjects. Lord Tywin thought he owed duty to protect his family name. And so on and on...
|
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 25, 2018 14:04:19 GMT
Well Cat owes a similar duty to Bran and she actually loved her kid.
|
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 25, 2018 14:29:15 GMT
Typical considerations of a collectivist society.
Lannisters do not ask any of this. They make the deals they want. They honour them so they can be trusted to making further deals. They want no stinking Starks to tell them what is someone's right or duty.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nightman on Sept 26, 2018 5:03:25 GMT
Some characters value duty more than others, no more or less often than people in our world. Torrhen Stark bent the knee; most of the other kingdoms didn't without a fight or getting something in return.
Knights are over-glorified, as has been proven time and again in the series. Few of the lords genuinely care about their subjects. Edmure did, and let them come into Riverrun when they were becoming victims of Catelyn's poor decisions. Cat's response was to think of those subjects as "useless mouths to feed". Tywin cared about his family name because of his ego; he cared little for them as people.
Westeros cares very little about duties, but the nobles go on endlessly about their rights. If anything, they are worse than real societies from that era. A Dornish princess's paramour wanted to start their version of the VA to take care of the war wounded. Everybody thought she was crazy. IRL, the Romans -- and I want to say somebody else -- took good care of veterans.
|
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 26, 2018 6:19:12 GMT
Westeros cares very little about duties, but the nobles go on endlessly about their rights. If anything, they are worse than real societies from that era. A Dornish princess's paramour wanted to start their version of the VA to take care of the war wounded. Everybody thought she was crazy. IRL, the Romans -- and I want to say somebody else -- took good care of veterans. GRRM makes everything worse than anything. That's his trademark, his way of getting attention. Everything is ridiculously big, high (the wall), cruel (Varys cuts the tongues of his little birds and teaches them to write) or whatever can be exaggerated. I don't recall the nobles going on "about their rights". They don't in the show. Feudalism was a complex regulation of the use of force, essentially a military government in which protection as well as allowance to exert power over an area and control its resources was granted in exchange for loyalty and support in war (of which taxes were a part). The rights of the nobles were the rules of the game within that construct and their duties were to none else but their superior in the hierarchy. |
|
|
|
Post by Nightman on Sept 26, 2018 6:33:19 GMT
Westeros cares very little about duties, but the nobles go on endlessly about their rights. If anything, they are worse than real societies from that era. A Dornish princess's paramour wanted to start their version of the VA to take care of the war wounded. Everybody thought she was crazy. IRL, the Romans -- and I want to say somebody else -- took good care of veterans. GRRM makes everything worse than anything. That's his trademark, his way of getting attention. Everything is ridiculously big, high (the wall), cruel (Varys cuts the tongues of his little birds and teaches them to write) or whatever can be exaggerated. I don't recall the nobles going on "about their rights". They don't in the show. Feudalism was a complex regulation of the use of force, essentially a military government in which protection as well as allowance to exert power over an area and control its resources was granted in exchange for loyalty and support in war (of which taxes were a part). The rights of the nobles were the rules of the game within that construct and their duties were to none else but their superior in the hierarchy. I think the size of some structures (the Wall and Harrenhal in particular) is a clue to whom those structures were built for. Giants, Deep Ones, dragons, etc. But it is true he likes things of a more impressive size than in reality. I heard that's one of the reasons he wrote his story as books, so budgets could not restrict him. The stuff about Varys I always took as rumors. I had not realized the show did not have the characters speaking of their rights, who or what is rightfully theirs, etc, as often as in the books. Dany's POV in particular is replete with it, although she is correct. |
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 26, 2018 7:04:16 GMT
GRRM makes everything worse than anything. That's his trademark, his way of getting attention. Everything is ridiculously big, high (the wall), cruel (Varys cuts the tongues of his little birds and teaches them to write) or whatever can be exaggerated. I don't recall the nobles going on "about their rights". They don't in the show. Feudalism was a complex regulation of the use of force, essentially a military government in which protection as well as allowance to exert power over an area and control its resources was granted in exchange for loyalty and support in war (of which taxes were a part). The rights of the nobles were the rules of the game within that construct and their duties were to none else but their superior in the hierarchy. I think the size of some structures (the Wall and Harrenhal in particular) is a clue to whom those structures were built for. Giants, Deep Ones, dragons, etc. But it is true he likes things of a more impressive size than in reality. I heard that's one of the reasons he wrote his story as books, so budgets could not restrict him. The stuff about Varys I always took as rumors. I had not realized the show did not have the characters speaking of their rights, who or what is rightfully theirs, etc, as often as in the books. Dany's POV in particular is replete with it, although she is correct. Rumours or not, GRRM paints a world in which they are realistic enough to exist. The same goes for the man Tyrion has killed at some point and readers are told he would end up in a "bowl of brown", as if any medieval society had ever eaten their dead. If right of succession is what you mean then it is limited to a few characters, basically Stannis and Daenerys, although there is a bit about Cat' fearing that Jon Snow might want to have a claim on something when it comes to Robb's will. All Daenerys is indeed based on her perceived right to steal again what her ancestors stole after it was taken from her father. Her claim has no real validity. Dynasties do not come back this way. As Robert tells Cersei in S1E05: "How long do the people of the Seven Kingdoms stand behind their absentee king, their cowardly king hiding behind high walls? When do the people decide that Viserys Targaryen is the rightful monarch after all?" Right is a flexible notion, the result of a decision, not something cast in stone. The "rightful" king is the one that suits those best who can support and enforce that decision. And of course it is not "the people of the Seven Kingdoms" who decide but what can you do when the story is written by modern fools? Those who decide are the likes or Randyll Tarly, deciding to back Cersei in S7, or Greatjon Umber making a new King in the North in S1, not "the people". |
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 26, 2018 8:21:31 GMT
I had not realized the show did not have the characters speaking of their rights, who or what is rightfully theirs, etc, as often as in the books. Dany's POV in particular is replete with it, although she is correct. There is indeed a significant difference here between book and show. Daenerys does say a couple of times that she wants to take what is hers but more time is spent showing how Jorah, Varys or Tyrion hope she will bring a fantasised change for the better (don't know about S7, though). I suppose it makes her less entitled and so more sympathetic to the audience while the show does care about counterbalancing the views of her supporters. When Jorah says she has a gentle heart, she first denies it in S1, then stays silent when he repeats it in S2, merely accepting his much needed help. She never admits it and her actions confirm that Jorah is wrong. When Varys brings the idea to Tyrion, the latter remains sceptical, mocking Varys at first in S5E01 ("where the castles are made of gingerbread, and the moats are filled with blackberry wine") then saying "every pile of shit has a ruler" a little later. He will equally challenge Jorah's belief when they discuss the matter in S5E06. In S6, Daario tells her she is a conqueror, not a ruler. Everything is done to demystify her intents and competence but this is not placed in the viewer's face, they have to pay attention and be willing to consider a critical view. |
|
|
|
Post by jon snow loves sansa on Sept 26, 2018 11:49:51 GMT
Much like all of you, I understand the relevance and importance of protecting individual rights. A healthy society needs to protect rights of its citizens although what rights citizens have is a matter of subjective ethics of a society. But I believe that in today's world we give lot more importance to discussion of our rights as compared to our duties. I am talking of duties in a broader sense as in moral duties/responsibilities and not just legal duties. I am not one of those people who romanticise the history or believe we as human beings are becoming morally worse in the current times. No, collectively human society has progressed for the most part in last 5500 years with periods of dark ages. But today we are better than we ever were in terms of different measures. That said there are certain things in which we are not as good as we were once upon a time. Take the concept of family. Broken or dysfunctional families are very common today. To some extent it is because people do not care about their duties. People are not able to adjust by making little sacrifices because they expect everything to go their own way. I think certain people in the Game of Thrones place a lot more emphasis on duty in relative terms than many do in our world. Not saying that all of those characters in the GOT world do the same. Even with all their faults, the characters of GOT often hold on to their responsibility or duty. I am not saying those characters are correct judge of right vs wrong. Nope. But many of them believe in what should be their duty or responsibility. For example, Torrhen Stark submitted to Aegon Targaryen because he valued the lives of his people. The Knights show a sense of duty they have when they fight even when knowing that they stand very little chance of victory. Similarly, Lords see it as a duty to protect their subjects. Lord Tywin thought he owed duty to protect his family name. And so on and on... when i think of the word duty i always think of starks for some reason and jon snow..LOL of all the families on GOT they have gone out of their way i think to make them stand out as noble and responsible |
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Sept 26, 2018 12:05:52 GMT
Much like all of you, I understand the relevance and importance of protecting individual rights. A healthy society needs to protect rights of its citizens although what rights citizens have is a matter of subjective ethics of a society. But I believe that in today's world we give lot more importance to discussion of our rights as compared to our duties. I am talking of duties in a broader sense as in moral duties/responsibilities and not just legal duties. I am not one of those people who romanticise the history or believe we as human beings are becoming morally worse in the current times. No, collectively human society has progressed for the most part in last 5500 years with periods of dark ages. But today we are better than we ever were in terms of different measures. That said there are certain things in which we are not as good as we were once upon a time. Take the concept of family. Broken or dysfunctional families are very common today. To some extent it is because people do not care about their duties. People are not able to adjust by making little sacrifices because they expect everything to go their own way. I think certain people in the Game of Thrones place a lot more emphasis on duty in relative terms than many do in our world. Not saying that all of those characters in the GOT world do the same. Even with all their faults, the characters of GOT often hold on to their responsibility or duty. I am not saying those characters are correct judge of right vs wrong. Nope. But many of them believe in what should be their duty or responsibility. For example, Torrhen Stark submitted to Aegon Targaryen because he valued the lives of his people. The Knights show a sense of duty they have when they fight even when knowing that they stand very little chance of victory. Similarly, Lords see it as a duty to protect their subjects. Lord Tywin thought he owed duty to protect his family name. And so on and on... when i think of the word duty i always think of starks for some reason and jon snow..LOL of all the families on GOT they have gone out of their way i think to make them stand out as noble and responsible Jon Snow is all about duty as are the brothers of Night's watch. Who rules the continent is of no value to them. Family is of no value to them. Their duty is defined as protecting the people from wildlings and other mysterious elements from beyond the wall. With exceptions of course in case mysterious elements are so dangerous that even wildlings seem like being an ally. |
|
