{"id":5062,"date":"2011-04-20T09:00:04","date_gmt":"2011-04-20T08:00:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.badreputation.org.uk\/?p=5062"},"modified":"2011-04-20T09:00:04","modified_gmt":"2011-04-20T08:00:04","slug":"a-game-of-thrones-and-sex-and-violence","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/badreputation.org.uk\/2011\/04\/20\/a-game-of-thrones-and-sex-and-violence\/","title":{"rendered":"A Game of Thrones and Sex and Violence"},"content":{"rendered":"

So, the first episode of HBO\u2019s Game of Thrones<\/strong>, adapted from the popular George R R Martin<\/strong> books (a series of gritty low-fantasy books about the battle for control of a kingdom and the threat of wintery Others from the North), has now aired. How is it? We\u2019ll get to that in a moment.<\/p>\n

What\u2019s been almost more interesting than the content of the show itself has been the response from critics. Ginia Bellafante kicked things off in the New York Times<\/strong><\/a>, labelling the show as \u201cboy-fiction\u201d, and suggesting that the standard HBO sex has been thrown in to appeal to otherwise disinterested female viewers. Because obviously boys like swords and fighting and girls like sex and drama. That\u2019s how gender works, right? Wait, no.<\/p>\n

Annalee Newitz at io9<\/strong><\/a> argues back, but instead of dismissing the whole notion of gender essentialism and stories that are \u201cfor\u201d one gender or another Newitz takes it the other way, arguing that this is clearly a tale for women. Oh, wait, perhaps it\u2019s a satirical exaggeration of the idea, to highlight the ridiculousness of Bellafante\u2019s review. Well, hopefully it is. It still doesn\u2019t get around the issue of thinking people of any particular gender are wired to want certain things from their fiction, though.<\/p>\n

Ilana Teitalbaum weighs in with a more straightforward critique of the ways in which Bellafante\u2019s review is terribly misguided over at the Huffington Post<\/strong><\/a>, and probably provides the most sensible view on the discussion. I\u2019m going to quote her here, because what she says is worth repeating for anyone too lazy to click through the links.<\/p>\n

The characterization of fantasy as “boy fiction” is offensive to the genre and offensive to women. That we for the most part will only read what Oprah has picked, and especially if a woman wrote it, is a stereotype that is not only demeaning to women — it is also untrue\u2026<\/p>\n

\u2026When we categorize books as “boy fiction” and “girl fiction” it’s just another way to promote gender stereotyping. It is predicated on the assumption that people will only read books that reflect their personal experiences, so therefore women will only deign to read about dating, shopping, and kitchen intrigues.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Okay, with that said, on to the show itself. Trying to avoid spoilers here, but apologies if any slip through. As an adaptation, it’s generally pretty damn solid. There are the inevitable minor changes that come with translating a work to screen, but there are none of the glaring alterations that make you stand up and go \u201cThey did what? But that\u2019s totally out of character! Did they even read the books?\u201d The casting is good (Harry Lloyd<\/strong> as Viserys Targaryen is palpably creepy and unpleasant), the costumes are well done, and Arya Stark and Tyrion Lannister already shine as the best characters. Arya Stark gets painfully little screen time though, which leads to the first issue with the show.<\/p>\n

\"Promotional

Danaerys Targaryen being blonder than thou.<\/p><\/div>\n

The female characters, as of the first episode, do not get much representation. Hopefully this is a temporary thing and, like the books, we\u2019ll get to see Arya, Danaerys, Catelyn etc grow into being hugely important badasses that sit firmly at the centre of key plot points. But right now they\u2019re just not there. They get scarcely any screen time, and when they are shown they\u2019re mostly cast in passive, receptive roles. Tyrion Lannister (Peter Dinklage<\/strong>) sleeps with a prostitute (because it\u2019s not a HBO show without frequent sex and nudity) who gets more lines than Cersei Lannister and Arya Stark put together.<\/p>\n

And Danaerys\u2026 Okay, this falls on the book as much as the adaptation, and it\u2019s hard to see a way they could have worked around it, but her initial role as a tool for her brother\u2019s plans, without any say in her own life, feels very awkward. Two scenes in particular are awkward enough to be uncomfortable to watch. First there\u2019s the close up of a nude Danaerys (Emilia Clarke<\/strong>) being examined by her brother (and bear in mind this is a character written as being just thirteen in the book, though thankfully HBO seem to have aged her up a bit), to make sure she\u2019s up to scratch for bartering away in exchange for an army, with oddly lingering shots of nipples and buttocks. This scene, which really should convey “look how bloody nasty and unpleasant Viserys is,” instead comes off more as “and here are some breasts, do you like them?”<\/p>\n

And then we have the consummation of the marriage to the head of said army, Khal Drogo of the Dothraki, a scene that is shown to be even more upsetting and non-consensual than it was originally written. And it was pretty damn bad to start with. The scene is at least short, and cuts away before anything graphic, but it does raise the question of why someone at HBO thought \u201cHmm, what this scene needs is to be made a bit more rapey.\u201d Seriously, there is pretty much never a time when this is a good thing for a piece of fiction. Ever.<\/p>\n

Still, as said, there is hope that the characters will develop along the same lines they did in the book, so this issue might be a passing one. The second problem, though, is less likely to improve with future episodes.<\/p>\n

\"Promotional<\/a>

Jaime Lannister (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau), doing his best Douchey Prince Charming act.<\/p><\/div>\n

The second issue, you see, is the unfortunate race failure. You could argue that it\u2019s just being faithful to the books, but honestly that\u2019s not much of an excuse. Everyone is oh so very white, and everyone we\u2019re told is attractive (Cersei, Jaime, Danaerys) is oh so very blonde to boot. The closest we get to non-white characters are the slightly-tanned Dothraki horsemen with whom Viserys is trying to forge an alliance. And, of course, they\u2019re depicted as crude savages. And I don\u2019t mean \u201cthey\u2019re a bit misunderstood\u201d – we\u2019re talking full on \u201cthese people are barbaric, they are not like us.\u201d We see two men fighting over a woman, one literally pushing the other away mid-thrust and hopping on himself (which is a whole other pile of issues), before blades are drawn and someone gets disembowelled. True to the books it may be, but there\u2019s a definite problem with a world where everyone is divided into groups of \u201cwhite people\u201d and \u201csavages\u201d.<\/p>\n

Issues aside, it\u2019s worth sticking with. If nothing else it\u2019ll be interesting to see how they handle the events that happen to Eddard Stark, what with Sean Bean<\/strong> being their big name cast member.<\/p>\n