How much time has passed on Game of Thrones? 

Somewhere between two and three years. If you want to know more, buckle up.

Here at Fandom Following, we like to joke about Littlefinger’s teleporter, or about Gilly’s baby who never seems to grow. Time is one of those things that you just can’t get away with ignoring in a story, because things happening in order is literally the lowest bar to cross when it comes to storytelling. Even time travel stories (which, Bran crack theories aside, this is not) take care to follow this rule.

I’m sure it will be no surprise to regular readers here that

You can do a certain amount of hand-waving at time in a story. GRRM himself famously said that his characters travel at the speed of plot, and audiences aren’t bothered if they see multiple scenes that take place within a short period of time while elsewhere the story moves more quickly. Time should serve the story, not the other way around. Certainly no one wants to see a montage of Littlefinger’s travels. What we want is a sense that time is indeed passing beyond the three minutes of screentime we get with these characters each episode. We want to see evidence of internal logic, such as consistent distances between locations, and stories that operate within those constraints.

Season 1, which closely tracks to the books, does a fairly good job of this. But as the show progresses, the timeline gets increasingly more erratic, culminating in Varys popping between Dorne and Mereen in less than ten minutes in the Season 6 finale. (I’m personally re-considering the crack theory that Varys is a Faceless Man, or at least a Merman. It makes as much sense as anything else.) 

The erratic timeline, in addition to contributing towards the disorientation of teleportation, also means that quite frequently characters end up off screen for far longer than their journeys should take. What exactly was Mace Tyrell doing for two months in Season 5, when his journey to Braavos should have only taken a week? By Season 6, even the writers admit they aren’t even trying to make sense anymore, according to

this interview with Bryan Cogman.  Can you imagine any other job where this kind of attitude would be acceptable? It is insulting that so little attention is paid to what ends up on our screens.

There’s no hard and fast rule about how much you can get away with when fudging the timeline. But I think it’s fair to say that the line is right around the time when your audience gets distracted trying to figure it out. We have now reached that point.

I first became interested in the passage of the time on the TV show during Season 4, which takes place within the space of a mere six weeks. We know this because in Episode 1, Margaery tells us that her wedding to Joffrey will take place in a fortnight. After the wedding, in Episode 3, Jaime tells Tyrion that he will be tried for murder in another fortnight during Episode 6. And in Episode 5, Cersei and Tywin plan for Tommen to marry Margaery “as soon as decency permits” which means, you guessed it, that no more than a fortnight passes before the end of the season. (The timeline of other events suggests that Cersei delayed that wedding after Tywin’s death in the Season 4 finale, but if that’s the case, it happens off screen and is never mentioned.)

Meanwhile, Sansa makes it all the way to the Eyrie before Tyrion’s trial even begins, Jon raids Craster’s Keep, and Yara Greyjoy sails all the way around the continent to rescue Theon. (Yes, really.)

In researching this article, I was surprised to learn that the fan-made timeline over on the TV show wiki assumes that one season of the show equals one year in Westeros. But after rewatching the entire show, I can’t find any evidence to support that. According to my estimates, about two years have passed since the start of Season 1 — yet a statement by Dany as recently as Season 5 indicates that as much as three years has passed.

In order to be as objective (and as generous) as possible, this timeline limits itself to in-universe knowledge only. This means that though the books may reference where or how long certain events take, if is not stated on the show, then it is assumed not to apply.

The timeline does, however, reference book-universe resources when it is confirmed in the show, and luckily, geography is one of those things. As the credits remind us each week, Weisseroff looks an awful lot like Westeros, which means we can we use the maps.

Also luckily, the show itself gives us two very important pieces of information about how long traveling takes in this universe. In the very first episode Cersei Lannister tells us that the journey from King’s Landing to Winterfell took one month.

Twenty years of A Song of Ice and Fire fans have researched, debated, and measured the maps of Planetos, and we do but build on their legacy. GRRM initially discouraged fans from trying to measure distances in Westeros, claiming that the maps weren’t to scale. However, fans were not to be deterred, and GRRM later reversed his stance once fans figured out that the Wall, which Jon tells us is 300 miles long, provided a handy scale to infer the distances traveled by characters, and surprisingly did not reveal too many plot holes. So it’s clear that, for all his comments about characters “moving at the speed of plot” this is something he does spend time thinking about, even if he doesn’t prioritize it over other elements.

WinterIsComing.net covered this meticulously detailed guide to the distances between major locations in Westeros, which was a major boon to this project. (Although I did eventually have to break out the digital ruler.) Even mainstream media got in on the fun, and to this day you can go to Kayak.com and look for a flight (well, carriage ride) from King’s Landing to Winterfell. That journey will take you 552 hours, or, as they calculate it 23 days. But that’s if you travel without stopping, which is patently ridiculous. Going by Cersei’s earlier statement, we can calculate that if the 1460 mile journey from King’s Landing to Winterfell took 30 days, the Royal party was traveling at an average pace of 49 miles a day.

That is almost unbelievably fast for such a large party. You can find reports of large medieval parties traveling that quickly, though 30 miles is a day is more realistic, and even that would be considered swift. (Stage coaches, however, would eventually travel that fast and more, traveling 60 or 70 miles a day.) But for all we know Weisseroff is actually smaller than Westeros, and if the distances are different, their relative location to each other must remain the same, so the travel time should be consistent with the internal logic of the show. For the sake of simplicity, we’ll be using Cersei’s 49 miles a day as a default benchmark to calculate the speed of mounted parties travel in Westeros.

(It is worth noting, however, that even within the show there are major inconsistencies with regard to distance. In Season 3 Episode 10, Sam states that the Wall is 500 miles long, which would make Weisseroff bigger than Westeros. And in Season 2, Bran and Maester Luwin are concerned about the Ironborn’s attack on Torrhen’s Square, which is “barely 40 leagues” from Winterfell (about 138 miles). Even using the 300 mile Wall as a metric puts Torrhen’s Square a good 200 some miles from Winterfell — a 500 mile Wall would make Torrhen’s Square almost 400 miles away! Then in Season 4, Roose Bolton, speaking from Moat Cailen, pontificates on how large the North is, saying that if you ride “700 miles that way” (North) you’re still in the North — which is an odd thing to say, since again, even using the 300-mile metric it’s at least 900 miles to the Wall. Where did this 700 mile number come from? Did they just pick a number number? If this isn’t bad writing I don’t know what is. Nonetheless, this inconsistency means we’re sticking with the 300 mile Wall metric, since making Westeros any bigger would mean Cersei’s party was traveling even more unbelievably fast, and I’m only willing to stretch my credulity so far.)

In order to calculate the speed of ships, we look to season two, when Tyrion tells us that Stannis has been spotted sailing North of Tarth, and that he is five days from King’s Landing (four if he has the wind). By measuring the distance from Evenfall around the coast to King’s Landing, I’ve calculated that means Stannis is sailing at about 149 miles a day, which lines up nicely with historical reports of ships of the kind Stannis is sailing.

(We don’t have any in-show references to how fast parties on foot might travel, but since the characters on the show are still human beings, it’s not a stretch to assume they can go at about 3 miles an hour, or 24 miles a day.)

 I rewatched the entire series and took note of every single instance time was mentioned in this show. Every time someone’s age was mentioned, any time someone made reference to how long it had been since a particular event, every time someone traveled between two places in a conspicuously short period. You’ll notice that I did not include those journeys where someone’s location could not be identified. I also omitted off-screen events that would very obviously take time, such as equipping armies. The reason for this is simple: you want to honeypot that the Lannisters have a standing army, be my guest, but if you’re going to try to explain how Littlefinger bounces from the Stormlands, to Harrenhal, to Highgarden, and still gets to King’s Landing before Stannis, you better be prepared to bend the laws of physics and disregard the direct evidence of statements from the show itself.

After I compiled all of the events, I had to string them together into a cohesive timeline. This was by far the hardest part of the process, as the far flung locations mean that different characters seldom interact, which means fewer opportunities for conflict. Without supporting statements from characters, it is also impossible to tell how much time passes between unconnected scenes, which limits how comprehensive this timeline can be, since it can really only tell us the minimum amount of time that has passed on the show.

It is enough to say that it’s nowhere near six years.See for yourself. Below is the complete Game of Thrones timeline. Read more about the conflicts and takeaways at the bottom.

One of the most egregious examples of a conflicting timeline takes place in Season 2, leading up to the Battle of the Blackwater. In Episode 7, Tyrion tells us that Stannis is only five days sail from King’s Landing. And yet Tywin does not leave Harrenhal to defend the city until Episode 8, a journey that would take him at least eight days. (And that’s giving him the benefit of the doubt. We don’t actually see much of Tywin’s forces, so I’m defaulting to assuming they are mounted, which would be pretty unusual for levied troops.)

Defenders of the show might rationalize that the two scenes were shown out of order, and in fact Tywin was already on his way by the time Tyrion told us Stannis’ location (despite the fact that it happened a full episode beforehand). Well, no, actually, because the impetus behind Tywin’s departure was the news — relayed by Tywin himself — that Stannis is now only 

And yet it would be hard to argue that this error diminished the story being told here. (Although…couldn’t they have written that Stannis was ten days away instead?) “Blackwater” remains one of the most celebrated episodes in the show’s history — for good reason, the episode is a work of art, likely because it was written by Martin himself. It was also an episode centered on character drama, driven by real people rather than moving chess pieces. As the show abandons the source material, it becomes increasingly less interested in showing character development, letting the plot drive the people regardless of whether or not it makes sense.

In general, the showrunners have not done a good job of maintaining a consistent timeline when it comes to their invented material. It’s no accident that Season 1 spans a good 30% of the time I was able to track on this show. I’d suggest this is because that season most closely follows the books, which is cognizant of how much time is passing off screen.

The earliest conflict in the timeline comes from the first piece of original lore introduced on the show. In just the second episode of Season 1, bookreaders were flummoxed when Cersei told Catelyn a sob-story about her firstborn son with Robert, who died when he was just a baby. Even non-bookreaders were confused, because it didn’t make sense for Cersei to show Catelyn genuine empathy when she was the reason Bran fell in the first place. Was Cersei lying?

been consistent with is the timing of Robert’s Rebellion, which took place 17 years before Season 1, according to Catelyn in the same episode. This in and of itself would not invalidate Cersei’s tale, except that we learn in Season 2, Episode 8, that Joffrey is 17. And since we attend his (very memorable) nameday party earlier in the season, that puts Joffrey at right around 16 in Season 1. AKA the same age as Jon, the other woman’s son that Ned brought home a year after he rode off for Robert’s Rebellion. We now have seen very bloody proof that Jon was not born until the end of the war, which means that there is absolutely no way that Cersei had time to have a child with Robert who would be older than Joffrey.

While we’re on the subject of ages, lets take a minute to talk about Tommen and the blatant retconning going on with his age. Audiences are used to pretending characters are way younger than they appear. (See: every 90s movie about high school.) We were all fine pretending Sophie Turner was 14 when she towered over her costars and got her very first period, and I think it was actually smart of the show not to re-cast Rickon to make sure we knew he was the real deal when he popped up this season.

But with Tommen, it’s a little bit more complicated, because not only was Tommen definitely stated to be only 8 years old in Season 1 (by Loras Tyrell, Episode 5) the current actor who plays Tommen (Dean-Charles Chapman) previously appeared on the show in a minor role as Martin Lannister, murdered by Rickard Karstark in Season 2, Episode 5. Which is odd, sure, but it wouldn’t have been a problem if they hadn’t, again, explicitly told us that Martin Lannister was 15 years old. And no matter which way you slice this data, there is just no way that Tommen should look as old as he does after he was recast. It is very clear that the show decided to age up Tommen so that he could have sex with Margaery. It is not clear why (but there are some pretty troubling implications).

I’m not opposed to retcons in principle. But usually you expect retcons to serve some sort of purpose in the story, used by writers as a last resort when they realize they made a mistake with something critical to the success of the plot. Given that the show has treated Tommen’s sexual abuse by Margaery as a joke, I’d argue that this retcon was unnecessary and gratuitous.

The show’s disregard for how much time things take only gets worse as the show goes on, and it becomes increasingly distracting as events are manipulated to serve the illogic.

This really comes to a head at the end of Season 5. After stalling for the entire season (and the entirety of Season 4, for that matter) Stannis finally marches on Winterfell, only for Melisandre to abandon him after burning Shireen at the stake fails to improve his chances of victory. We know from Davos’s discovery of Shireen’s pyre in Season 6 that she was relatively close to Winterfell at the time, so we can guess that Melisandre’s (off-screen) flight back to Castle Black should have taken about 13 days.

We also know from Season 6 that Sansa and Theon fled Winterfell while Ramsey was still absent from the battle, and given that the context clues in the Season 6 premiere suggest they run into Brienne (and her horses) on the first day of their desperate journey, we should expect for Sansa to have arrived at Castle Black practically on Melisandre’s heels. She doesn’t, of course — Sansa does not get to Castle Black until Episode 3, by which time Jaime has managed to make it all the way to King’s Landing from 

(Let’s all just ignore that Jon was lying dead on the ground for most of that time, too.)

There is simply no excuse for this kind of laziness. In her “Game of Nonsense” series, Wendy has wondered if the writers even read each other’s scripts. If a civilian like me can notice these kinds of mistakes (and while I worked very hard on this timeline, I’m only one person, and I encourage people to message me on Tumblr if you notice anything wrong) how is it possible that the writers don’t pick up on them?

The conflicts in the timeline are just another example of the things Fandom Following has been pointing out all season — that Game of Thrones is only interested in checking off boxes on a list, not in telling a story. Audiences are willing to ignore minor inconsistencies when the story is compelling, but together with the lack of consistent characterization, poor pacing, and blatant contrivances, it all adds up to a picture of incompetence.

Book readers have been the first to pick up on this pattern, because we are comparing it to the source material. But more and more critics are starting to pick up on the fact that the emperor has no clothes.

So what did I learn putting this together? Well, I learned that Kylie was absolutely right that Game of Thrones is not worthy of analysis. It’s a good thing I started working on this timeline before Kylie published that article, since otherwise I don’t know if I could have faced the countless hours it took trying to make sense of things.

I did this work because, like most readers who frequent this site, I am devastated by what this show has done to

A Song of Ice and Fire, which is by far one of the greatest works of fiction of our time. I did this because I am tired of seeing people I respect praise this show in my Facebook feed. I did this because while opinions on the themes of a story or changes to a character are subjective, this timeline proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the writing on this show is bad.

Far from deserving Emmys, the writing on Game of Thrones is racist, misogynistic, and above all completely devoid of logic. If we can’t trust the writers to check their own writing when it comes to things as simple as distance, how can we possibly defend anything else? In case it wasn’t already clear, I am profoundly disappointed in this show, both in terms of the lack of internal consistency and the story choices more broadly. And yet, I want to be clear this article is not an attack on those people who still find elements of the show enjoyable and entertaining. It is simply a plea for audiences to be more critical consumers. “Things happening in order” is not too much to ask. While you can certainly argue that you enjoy the story regardless of these problems (if the plethora of links here haven’t opened your eyes, nothing will) you can’t argue that the story would not be better if these issues were addressed. 

Don’t forget to vote in the Second Annual Carol Awards and have your say about the most dramatically satisfying moments in Season 6.

All images in the timeline courtesy of HBO. Timeline was created with Lucidchart. 

Andy is a certified master of Getting Shit Done, and has absolutely no chill.

The Fallacy of GoT’s ‘Women on Top’ Part 1: Setting

Sorry you’re wrong. Cersei was not lying about her first child because she mentions this baby to Robert.

I still wonder what the point of adding this child was.

What Kylie calls ‘the Carolisation of Cersei’.

They might’ve wanted to give an additional clue for the parantage of Cersei’s children, since she explicitly says that her kid with Robert had black hair. That, and humanising Cersei, of course. I still think it was a really weird choice, especially since they retconned the child out of existence.

Yes, it seems to have been a way of making it explicit that if Cersei’s remaining children were really Robert’s, they would have had black hair too. This is a genuine and understandable change made for adapting books to a visual medium: in the books, the narration can keep pointing out that Cersei’s children are all blond, as a way of emphasizing that particular clue, but on TV, where we can just see that they are blond, it’s hard to find an organic way of bringing this fact to our attention.

IMO, the addition of the dead black-haired child wasn’t so much a problem in itself, but the fact that his existence was retconned away was really stupid. Not to mention that, as Andy shows here, there was no time for him to be born before Joffrey.

Not to mention that the show didn’t even give Robert black hair!

Can I just congratulate you on this? Must’ve taken ages!

Five years have passed in real life, which is one of the challenges in adapting literature to live-action. Books are not bound by the passage of time like TV and movies are.

If I may ask, how much of that can be tossed aside by suspension of disbelief?

I’d argue rules and limitations are very important in the books which are very much about the exploration of a defined system and its flaws, so internal consistency should absolutely be respected, but considering the show is more… soap opera / action fantasy in the shallowest sense, is it possible to forgive its inconsistencies if we accept that it’s merely than and nothing more substantial?

Also, my Gods, it had to take you weeks to do this, bravo…

Your dedication to this task is astounding and commendable. I can’t even begin to wrap my brain around this or process it. Well done, indeed.

the whole baby thing would have been okay if they hadn’t aged up joffrey so much. he was only a year or two older than sansa in the books, why didn’t they keep to that?

also, the only evidence for the “year a season” thing is that, apparently, talisa says the war of five kings had been going on for “two years” at the start of season 3, and madison’s odd “I’ve been in done for years” line in s5, which only makes sense w/ this theory. this is supposed to be the official way to time things, but I think they just made it up to cover their asses and explain away the aging.

Holy Shit! The effort put into this is astounding! Kudos to you for doing this; it really highlights the inconsistencies. That being said, I don’t think timeline inconsistencies are automatically a bad thing.You slag on Cogman for saying they don’t line up, and that seems a bit harsh. Minor errors are okay if they service the story, which is something you seem to ignore there (but acknowledge later). That being said, that definitely isn’t the case here. I’d actually hoped that the writers would understand we don’t need to see characters every episode. Arya’s story-line for example was so padded, but had a massive teleport/timejump at the end. It would’ve been much more effective and enjoyable to have her story condensed to the first half of the season and have her absent in the second half, making us wonder where she is going, before a triumphant return in the finale. It’s the inability to juggle the plots and ignore consistency that you so wonderfully point out that really gets to me.

It would have been so easy to do all the Arya stuff in the fifth season. It’s three damn chapters in the book, dammit. She could be blind by mid-season, then do the whole play-bonding-waif killing-identity declaring in the last few episodes. Make the play scenes more poignant by having the whole “Sansa the whore” stuff happen while Sansa is still in the Winterhell rape dungeon. Then have Arya parcour away from the waif while Jon does epic action scenes with the CGI budget. Try for something like meaning by having Arya assert her personality and confronting Jaqen while Sansa confronts Miranda and attempts to die while there’s still something of “her” left – like, go for a theme here! Identity or something! But noooo. Can’t have that, this ain’t not 8th grade book report.

Speaking of which, we wrote stories for grades in elementary school. We’d hand in a first draft, and the teacher would make notes. And if your story just made no fucking sense, she’d tell you to do another first draft. Why d elementary schoolers get more scrutiny for the story telling they produce than goddamn professionals with creative writing degrees?!

I know, and it frustrates me because it’s continually like this. I can deal with shitty writing sometimes (shocking, I know), if the plotting is good, but they don’t plan out their plots more than a few episodes in advance and it is abysmal

This must have taken forever. all of the kudos! Clearly very well researched and crafted and its probable that you spent more time on this then the people who are actually responsible for the show. Which really rams home the point imo. Thank you for doing this and hope to see more from you soon

This probably took more time than writing the last few seasons did, all things considered.

With how bad this show is, I would have thrown in the towel at about S4. You have the patience of a SAINT.

Seriously, idk how much time is supposed to have passed in canon. Apparently it’s one year per season according to most honeypotters? So it’s supposed to be 303 in season 6, if season 1 was 298 and the Purple Wedding was in 300 like the books, and it’s just in 2 and a bit years? But wow, thanks for doing this.

Really, it just shows that D&D&Co can’t be bothered to construct a timeline that makes sense, when it’s like, their job as writers. Maths isn’t GRRM’s forte, but his travel times usually do actually make sense. But seriously, the Tyrell plotline didn’t make any sense and the Sansa Marriage Strike was lampshaded in the show because D&D&Co know that their writing doesn’t make sense, but they don’t care because it all ends in Dramatically Satisfying deaths and battles. Cogman literally says that he doesn’t care. Like, he says that “not everything in one ep is happening at the same time”, and like, yeah, that’s true in ASOIAF sometimes too (I believe Arianne II in TWOW takes place before a lot of the late Meereen chapters?) but having Littlefinger in the Vale an episode before she shows up in Mole’s Town does carry implications. And just as you’ve proven, even when you’re being the most generous to them, it doesn’t make sense.

Actually, the Pink Letter thing is a good example of things not all happening at the same time. From what I recall, that happens after the Battle of Winterfell, but the battles got cut from Dance, whereas the Pink Letter didn’t. So a lot of the opening chapters of TWoW will happen before the letter and Jon’s death.

The difference between the book and the show is that Martin arranges chapters with other narrative elements like pacing, flow, and thematic significance in mind, whereas the show doesn’t seem to take these elements much in mind. So while we can excuse Martin not keeping a strict chronology because the story he is telling must at times trump the math, and the story is compelling, the show fudges the math for the sake of laziness and doesn’t deliver a product worth suspending the timeline concerns for.

Was there, for example, any purpose to bookending the first several episodes with Wall scenes? The episodes didn’t seem to have any self-contained arcs that might merit that, and it served to not only muddy the timeline but also to throw the timeline issues into sharp relief. That choice doesn’t seem terribly justified to me, and it was a choice that last three or four episodes out of ten.

You’re incredible! I can’t believe someone actually did this. Seeing how they stopped trying somewhere during season 4 and stopped to even pretend to be trying this season, you deserve some kind of award.

I still can’t wrap my mind around the fact that a team of professional screenwriters just stopped giving a shit about the most basic of worldbuilding on their show because they couldn’t figure out a way to make plot progression mash with it. I realise there’re things you have to work around and smaller inconsistencies you’ll just have to accept. Not every writer can or should work like Umberto Eco, especially not on a tv show, but really, guys? And I’m so sick of people who take this criticism and answer with “Well, would you rather see Arya on a boat for three episodes?”. No. There’s a middle ground between “meticulously show every second spent travelling” and “have time passage and timelines so out of sync it’s impossible to even estimate”.

Probably because I read the vaguely corresponding chapter yesterday, but damn, those Arya quotes HURT. Quit whining and go back to work for the people who have taken you in and feed you, dammit. The real Arya wouldn’t complain so much. For being their favorite, they sure made show!Arya whiny as fuck.

Also, this came just at the right time. I saw an article about this clarification yesterday, and there were comments on it going “well, duh, THE BOOKS explicitly say it’s not in chronological order!” and “omfg people think about this? Get a life!” and “the fact that these freaks don’t find anything else to worry about just SHOW HOW PERFECT THIS SHOW IS!!!!!”

Like, guys, I accept the choice not to invest any brain cells into this from viewers. You want tits and dragons and a good time, and apparently, the show runners are committed to very little else, which they openly admit. Stop pretending that just because you don’t want to think about this it means that it’s well though out, or had any effort put into it at all!

And also, book scenes from limited POV narrators not happening in chronological order is easier to pull off when these POVs hardly ever interact and are only tied together by global events like the comet, or how fast news reaches anyone, which usually takes a while. The show, on the other hand, has gone out of its way to connect all these threads to each other, so the sequence of events matters more, and the time that can possibly pass is limited. Uuuugh. Sometimes it makes you wonder whether everyone here on this site just shares the same delusions and the show is actually great, but for the life of me, I don’t see it, and this is one elaborate group hallucination we’re having here.

Holy hell, this is the best thing i’ve seen in a long time. Your patience must be without limits.

“Andy is a certified master of Getting Shit Done, and has absolutely no chill.” Really living up to your bio, jesus christ

Rationalizing incompetence – you need a government job.

To be honest – if I’d made the same money D&D made in the last five years, I wouldn’t give a damn, either.

The way I see it if something has good writing and plotting you’re more willing to ignore unrealistic elements, but is theirs nothing to draw you in or make you care the more willing you become to pick out all the holes in the plot.

Yurp. If I may jump off of your Satoru avatar, ATLA is the perfect example of this. The Gaang’s flight-path and general ground covered in Book 3 was really a bit ridiculous, but because there was a consistency in the characters and plotlines that felt earned, it’s something we basically all overlook.

Cool article and you make a lot of good points. I don’t agree that the show is racist or misogynistic. The strongest and most popular characters on the show are women fighting against the patriarchy that makes up the world in ‘A Song of Ice and Fire’. Also many of the characters are openly fighting against issues like racism, sexism, and corruption. For example, Daenerys managed to go from being married off against her will to creating a movement that ended slavery and united warring factions together. How is that not a great example of female empowerment? I don’t know where your racism argument is coming from considering the topic of this article is about the timeline in GoT? But the few people of color in the show are strong and noble people (Grey Worm and Missandei). Westeros is modelled on medieval Europe so of course the majority of the cast is going to be Caucasian. Also, considering GoT’s popularity across the world I think you are in the minority on the racism argument. Lot’s of people from all sorts of racial, ethnic and cultural backgrounds love the show.

Dany’s entire plot line for three season or so has been white savior nonsense. White woman has to come free the slaves, who are all people of color, and put an end to the barbarous practices the people of color employ. That is horribly racist. Heck, she even had a scene where she crowd surfed on a sea of brown people. Horribly racist.

Also, the patriarchy disappears when it suits the narrative, making it extremely disingenuous to say that anyone is fighting against it. Cersei is excluded from power because she’s a woman, but Olenna and Margaery are the schemers in House Tyrell who hold all the power, and Olenna is the official mouthpiece and negotiator for the family? What? We cannot buy into Cersei being excluded based on her gender when Olenna is the head of house negotiating with Tywin. That doesn’t work because it doesn’t make sense.

And that last line really reads like, “I have a black friend, so…” Yes, women and minorities like the show. That does not in any way wipe out its problematic elements. These two things can coexist and your argument is incredibly weak.

Also, “the few people of color” is already part of the problem because Europe was historically way more diverse than what modern pseudoscholars like to give credit for. The reimagining of medieval Europe as being less diverse and more sexist than it actually was is not an accident, and while I don’t want to get into the various reason such reimagining hurts modern causes of equality, the point is that GoT does nto in any way even remotely resemble the period of time it purports to reflect and the pretense that it does is a flimsy excuse used to justify all sorts of terrible and horrific implications and prop up a narrative being told on the backs of the marginalized for titillation. And that’s gross.

You’re seeing racism where there is none. “Oh a white woman is freeing slaves!!! Racist!!!” Seriously, grow up already and quit freaking out over nothing. No wonder the world can’t solve it’s problems when it’s filled with cynical people like you who throw a fit over a work of fiction where a woman can rise up and defeat slavery and unite warring clans. Oh what a “gross” thing.

A bandwagon fallacy does jot make the narrative less problematic. The other narratives you list have also been called put on those grounds.

You say that I am seeing racism where there is none. Funny that you do not consider that you are not seeing racist implications where they do exist. We are talling about a show where a hypersexualized, hysterical brown woman murders an innocent white girl with a kiss. But somehow I am supposed to believe that there is nothing wrong whatsoever and that I am the one being an irrational child for wanting narratives that are more respectful and egalitarian. Somehow, the person that cannot bear criticism leveled at the show is the rational one and the people wanting to have discussions about narrative implications are the children.

And the narrative is based on Europe when it’s used to defend a lack of diversity, but when that argument is called out as false, now it’s just another fantasy world made of white people.

It’s fascinating how quickly the supposed rational argument changes when the supposed child offers so much as a simple counterpoint to it.

That’s nice, I don’t care about that. I enjoy the show because it is entertaining and I am enjoying the story. Yes there are some issues but those flaws do not negate all the enjoyment I’ve gotten from it. You are not an authority on race, gender, and socio-economic issues. Neither are you an authority on adapting literature to TV. You are entitled to your own opinion and that’s fine. However, don’t assume your cynicisms constitute as insight. The show is obviously not for you so maybe you should watch something else or actually get off your soapbox and go out in the real world and change the things you are complaining about. It’s people like you who take all the fun out of life with your incessant complaining and perpetual procrastination on the real issues facing the world.

It’s ironic that you are condescending to tell me that I am not an authority when you are the one sitting here telling me that the racist implications absolutely do not exist and that I am freaking out over nothing.

If you aren’t concerned with the implications of the narrative, that’s fine. That’s a legitimate stance to take. But that’s not how you chose to open this discussion. You instead chose to dismiss those implications as even existing and invalidated the thoughts, feelings, and perspectives of everyone who sees the problems. Rather than simply saying that you choose not to look at them or that they do not bother you, you denied they existed at all, as though you were the ultimate authority and nobody could possibly have a different opinion than yourself without freaking out over nothing and jumping at shadows.

Also, it’s adorable that you attempt to deflect criticism by telling me to go out and make change in the world, but you don’t know me. You don’t know what I do or don’t do on a daily basis. You have made the assumption that affecting change in person and complain on the internet are mutually exclusive, but that is patently untrue. So instead of denigrating me for not doing anything, perhaps you should stop actively standing in the way of people who want to open up space for discussions about these sorts of issues in the first place.

Pop culture is a perfectly legitimate space to be concerned about inequality because society both affects and is affected by the media it produces and consumes. If you can’t or won’t see that, fine. But let those of us who do have these discussions rather than just shutting them down because it personally offends you that we might take issue with media you enjoy. Nobody is saying that you can’t or shouldn’t still enjoy that media, or that you are a bad person for doing so. We just want to be able to talk about issues that concern us without being shut down at every turn and called irrational.

This isn’t the forum for that. If you want a deeper more intellectual discussion on those topics than go on to websites that cater to that like a university forum, a news website or the countless humanitarian websites with comment sections. Not a forum about the timeline of Game of Thrones. If I want nuanced and balanced input on race, gender, and socio-economic issues I go to those websites to discuss them. Why do people like you feel the need to make everybody feel bad about this show? That may of not of been your intention but you certainly come off that way. I am tired of being accused or seeing others being accused of ignorance to racism or sexism just because we enjoy GoT. There is so much bad news in the world now that I don’t want it carried over into discussions about the media I enjoy. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Mate, clearly you don’t know what website you’re looking at. Fandom following is all about having these intellectual discussions.

At any rate, you can enjoy watching GoT. There nothing wrong with that. It’s when you ignore and deny the issues that swamp the show do you go from, “its enjoyable to watch, despite its [many] problems” to “OMG GoT is the best its perfect look at all the emmys,” raving fanboy. Ignoring the problematic characterizations and narratives and whatnot is childish and a whole ‘nuther discussion in and of itself.

But I get it if you don’t see the cracks (fissures) within the show at first glance. I find that as I learn more and grow older I’m able to see these issues better and better in the media that I consume. Baby steps.

Thank you for being cordial in your response instead beating me over the head with the overly zealous condemnation about assumed racism like Renee has been doing. I like GoT a lot but I don’t think it’s the best thing ever. I also don’t think the show is as badly written or “bad” as Andy makes it out to be. I have seen far worse examples of bad writing for TV and GoT doesn’t even come close to being a badly written TV show. You should try watching ‘Torchwood: Miracle Day’ if you want to see a show with a great premise being driven into the ground? The timeline issue doesn’t bother me as much. I understand that between scenes in the show days or weeks can pass by. There is only an hour to tell the story and you have to keep the plot going. It’s not like in the books where these characters can spend whole chapters walking or riding along just talking about various issues and background information. If you translate that to TV exactly you got some very boring and plodding scenes. It’s easy to criticize something in hindsight and say you can do a better job but saying and doing are two very different things.

Personally I know I’m in no shape to even attempt an adaptation and have it come out half-decent, but D&D should be able to do a decent job at having a basic understanding of time flow in the show. Its their job. Period. Or at least be capable enough to do better than what they’re doing right now. And small inconsistencies are fine, shit happens. But not all the time. And not on a grander scale.

And uh, there is racism in GoT. Whether its blatant or subtle, its there. And maybe that’s the problem, that its written subconsciously and we have a difficult time being able to see it (or CAN see it and its influence on society), on our screens.

Badly written shows, huh? Hmm, I’ll give it a try. Dunno how it’ll beat GoT. Speaking of which, I need to catch up. But yeah, nice chatting to ya too. Have a good one mate.

At least GoT has an endgame planned. If you watch shows like LOST and Torchwood: Miracle Day you can see that the showrunners had no idea where they wanted the story to go and how they wanted to end it. Trust me, watch those shows and suddenly GoT won’t seem so bad.

I still don’t understand this racism argument? What are you guys talking about? Where is this racism in the show? Just because Dany frees the slaves from bondage means racism has occurred because a white woman did it? Historically, all races took part in the slave trade. Not only Europeans, but Africans, Arabs, Persians, Mongols, etc. took part in it and profited from it. If the show is being racist than I guess the GRRM books also have racist content in them. Here’s an excerpt from GRRM’s ‘The World of Ice and Fire’ where the inhabitants of the southern continent of Sothoryos are described:

“The Sothoryi are big-boned creatures, massively muscled, with long arms, sloped foreheads, huge squared teeth, heavy jaws, and coarse black hair. Their broad, flat noses suggest snouts, and their thick skins are brindled in patterns of brown and white that seem more hoglike than human. Sothoryi women cannot breed with any save their own males; when mated with men from Essos or Westeros, they bring forth only stillbirths, many hideously malformed” – [Page 286, The World of Ice and Fire, The Untold History of Westeros and the Game of Thrones, 2014]

How is this not racist in describing people with African features?

‘The World of Ice and Fire’ is supposed to be an ‘in-universe’ book written by Maester Yandel and given to King Tommen, it says so at the beginning. I’m pretty sure it expresses the views of Yandel, not GRRM himself.

Yandel is a fictional character created by GRRM. Yes the character of Yandel is telling the story but Martin is the one creating the story and mythos as he goes along.

You are correct. Just like D&D and the rest of the writers are in total control of the story and mythos of Game of Thrones. They’ve had no trouble not following the books, so it’s not just and adaptational flaw.

At least LOST is kind of made fun of for not making sense these days, and Miracle Day killed off the entire Torchwood series? I think the showrunners have an ending in mind, it’s just that their ending is so cool that everything else doesn’t matter and they randomly drop plotlines and kill off characters for that reason.

A lot of people do think that Dany’s liberation of the Slaver Cities is rather colonialist, and yes, many find GRRM’s books to have similar issues. I acutally agree with what you say about TWOIAF being racist – the only perspective offered is that of the Westerosi maester, and there’s no Essosi POV in the main series – well, apart from Hotah, but his story is about Dorne.

However, season 6 shows that the showrunners haven’t listened to any critiques and the issues are much worse than before. Dany burns down a culture’s most sacred temple, murders all of their leaders, and is worshipped for it. No Dothraki in the show have names at all. Also, Dorne is super orientalist on the show – Ellaria and Oberyn are made highly sexual, so much that they live in a brothel (and they’re bisexual as well which doesn’t help). All of Ellaria’s character in season 4 revolved around sex, and then in season 5 and season 6 she was a hysterical revenge-driven woman. Season 5 even ended with an evil bisexual brown woman killing an innocent straight white girl with a poison kiss. And then there are the accents – yeah, the Dornish have a “drawl” in the books, but GoT doesn’t pay much attention to accents because Geordie Davos was born in the same city as Gendry. And then there’s the “pleasure” aspect of orientalism – HBO’s site describes them as people who like to live in luxury, and Dan Weiss describes it as “his Brazil”… not that the Dornish can’t be fancy, but they’re the only people who are, far more than the Lannisters, the richest family in Westeros who spend their money that way in the books. And on a narrative level, it only exists so that Bronn and Jaime can go on a bro-trip, the hot-blooded locals can illogically kill one another and sassy Diana Rigg can team up with them.

That is why I gave LOST and ‘Torchwood: Miracle Day’ as examples. Those shows were infamous for bungling their narratives to the point where they have become a complete joke. They also were shows that were written without a clear understanding of what the endgame was going to be. Game of Thrones is not in that same category. There is a clear end goal in mind and a set amount of seasons to tell the story to reach that goal.

I’m glad that you agree that the ASOIAF books have content in them that would be considered racist at least by what this forum has deemed fits that label. As I was reading some of these descriptions in the source material I thought to myself, “This race of people in the books are not going to get translated like this to screen without major revisions”.

As for the rest of your issues you listed. Those are your own personal observations and judgments. For me, Dany liberated the Dothraki from an oppressive, sexist, and amoral leadership that stifled any sort of future for the Dothraki to achieve. She defeated a group of men who threatened her with rape and a life of misery if she didn’t bend to their will. She used her immunity to fire to cleverly set a trap and revealed her miraculous ability to the masses. For me it was a very female empowering moment to observe. I was very happy with that scene.

I liked Ellaria and Oberyn’s laidback way of looking at life. It was a nice change from the uptight nobles in King’s Landing. Her change to a vengeful person in Season 5 comes from her witnessing the horrifying death of Oberyn by House Lannister and her want to fulfill the seething revenge Oberyn sought for the deaths of the Martell/Targaryen family at the end of Robert’s Rebellion. Pedro Pascal hit it out of the park with his performance.

You are right that the reason why the Dorne arc happened was to create a narrative bridge between Dorne and the events in the rest of Westeros. That scene with Diana Rigg was really amazing. Diana Rigg owns the character of Olenna Tyrell.

First of all, this website talks about these issues ALL THE TIME. It is integral to the website’s founding and existence. Heck, earlier today, an article about racism and superhero films was still one of the highlighted articles on this page (for me, at least). Talking about how media interacts with culture and vice versa is a major part of the site’s articles and discussions. If you aren’t aware of that, fine, but don’t sit here and lecture me that I’m somehow commenting wrong.

You were the one who opened this discussion in the first place by picking at a stray comment in the article itself and decrying it as inaccurate. You started this by saying that the show doesn’t contain the problematic elements. If you didn’t wish to discuss them, you shouldn’t have opened by discussing them. That’s on you, not me, and you do not get to question my understanding because you don’t like the conversation you started.

And I never said that you should feel bad for liking the show. I have specifically said that it is a valid stance that you do not wish to dissect the show or wish to like it regardless of its flaws. That’s still true. We all have problematic faves and faves that we like and don’t want to think about and such. It happens. But you specifically chose to deride someone for seeing elements that you didn’t and invalidated that person’s opinions and perspective on the show, apparently because any criticism of the show automatically makes you feel bad. At least, that’s the takeaway I am getting from this discussion because you are actively trying to shut down analysis and holding up the excuse that you don’t want to feel bad for liking the show. If you find it difficult to like a show that is being actively criticized, that’s your business. But when you try to shut down legitimate discussions in appropriate places to make yourself feel better, then yes, we are going to have problems with that.

You still haven’t given me a clear answer on the racism issue? I don’t see how just because a white woman doing the right thing and freeing people from bondage is evidence of racism occurring? Would you rather she went “Those people don’t deserve to be freed because they are not white and suck!”? Jesus Christ, you could be talking about racism in today’s world with people like Donald Trump but nope, the GoT writers are racist. Just because you got this misguided belief that because a fictional character is trying to do the right thing and happens to be white it is deemed racist. Because you are the leading authority on that issue apparently.

You are not having a legitimate discussion you are just being a sanctimonious jerk because you have a weak racism argument and you are being called out on it.

It’s not weak. You just don’t like it. There’s a difference.

In the books, the slaves are from many different places. Some would be considered POC, some not. The slavers, too, are of different races and countries of origin. While the Ghiscari in Slavers Bay are POC, they are not the only people to own slaves or participate in the slave trade. We see slavery in Volantis and Qarth, for instance. But in the show, the slaves we see are almost always POC and the times we see slavery outside of there, the fact that the people are slaves is blatantly glossed over and often outright ignored. And the imagery of a white savior crowd surfing on a sea of POC who are worshipping her is outright racist imagery. It’s very much a “white man’s burden” situation, and frankly the white man’s burden and social Darwinism were racist and gross. Nobody is saying that slavery is a good thing, but when you construct a narrative that so blatant hearkens back to imperialism and colonialism in its overtones, you have to accept that people are going to call you out on your racism.

And that’s in addition to the fact that they keep putting uqualified or underqualified white people (often white men) in charge of Meereen instead of the better qualified POC (especially Missandei, a black woman). Tyrion has little experience running a city. His run as Hand was a mixed bag of good and bad decisions, and he has no knowledge of the language, area, people, culture, or current political situation in Meereen. Yet he is given governance of the city, using Grey Worm and Missandei as his mouthpieces. Then when Dany leaves, Daario is left in charge of the city instead of any kind of interim leader taken from the city itself. This is again a white man being left in charge of a city he has no qualifications to rule. So it’s a string of white people coming in, demolishing culture and setting up white people to tell the POC how to organize and run their lives and their cities. It’s imperialist as hell. And yeah, Dany ended slavery. She also insisted on a trial for a former master, but summarily executed a former slave. So, you know, she’s not exactly setting up the more just and equal society in the long term.

And look, if you don’t want to discuss this or critically analyze this, that’s fine. But you started this and did so by telling everyone else that our concerns don’t exist, invalidating our feelings, interpretations, and experiences. You bowled over everyone here and then expected everyone to just bow to your apparently superior knowledge. You reprimanded everyone for their lack of experience, which you assumed straight off the bat, and then offered no support for your own supposed expertise.

And all of this to defend things like deciding to age up Tommen from 8 to ???? (actor was told to play it as 12, but Natalie Dormer seems to have been told older than that?) just so he could have a sex scene that wasn’t in the books, but we are still being given signs and signals left, right, and center, that support less time than that having passed. The bending of the timeline is often not because of challenges in adaptation, but because of desire to add titillating content or simply not bothering to pay attention. If you want/need to age up characters, that’s fine. But it’s not that hard to keep it consistent. You can whine all you want about the difficulties of adaptation, but being aware of how old your characters are is not difficult. Having a general sense of how much time is passing is not that difficult. These are some basic elements of planning out a story, and frankly, much of the work has already been done because it’s an adaptation. You only have to scale the story, not construct the entire narrative from scratch. So don’t sit there and tell me that the people like us who are asking for the writers to pay attention to some basic details of character and setting are the ones asking too much.

Professional writing is not easy, and it’s not for everyone. Maybe if D&D aren’t capable of delivering a consistent product that is well-structured, makes sense, and follows logic, then they shouldn’t be writers. I shouldn’t have to bend over backwards to justify or wave off the myriad of problems in the show to make it work. That’s their job to figure out. If they are bad at their job, they’re bad at their job, and I should be able to call them out on it.

To go back to my chef analogy: Even a good chef that makes delicious food can’t always handle the pressures and rigors of a fast-paced professional kitchen. But I should not be asked to eat undercooked shellfish to make allowances for the rigors of the kitchen. The restaurant should find a chef that can handle the pressures, and the chef that can’t should figure something else out.

Or maybe because those characters in the show like Tyrion are popular characters and the viewing audience wants to see them more? Just because “white” characters are placed in leadership positions doesn’t mean racism has occurred. People want to see the main characters like Tyrion and Dany. You say it’s as “imperialist as hell”? Yeah, it is because Dany is a monarch and is building an army to takeover an entire continent, so acting like an imperialist is kind of in the job description. You act like these medieval characters are supposed to follow modern 21st standards of etiquette? You are trying your best to look like your a defender of racial equality but all you are doing is diminishing the real issue of racism in our culture by using it for your own petty reasons. I find it shameful and disgusting.

As for aging characters, while the show is taking place in a two to three year space the actors playing these characters are aging. People who were children when this series started will be in there teens by the time the show ends. And with aging actors comes modifications to the script. You can’t stop a child from growing up so you alter the story to compensate for that reality. That is probably the reason why Rickon was killed off because the actor was outgrowing the pace of the timeline. In two more seasons Art Parkinson will probably look the same age as Kit Harrington back in Season 1. D&D are aware of it and it is a difficult thing to juggle around but they are addressing it. But of course it’s not up to your impossibly high standards and years of working experience in writing for TV and movies.

You didn’t actually read what I wrote, did you? And given that you just implied that it is imperialist to overthrow a monarch in one’s own country nd take the throne, you don’t know what imperialism is, either. You don’t know what you are talking about in this venue, which makes is highly unlikely that you are going to be able to have an informed useful conversation here.

I never said the characyers should npt be aged up. I merely suggested that if the show was going to age characters up, then the logical thing to do would be to alter the timeline to fit that. I understand fully that actors age and that the showrunners have to grapple with that. But the fact that the actors can’t even seem to agree on how old characters are and nobody can seem to figure out accurately how much time has passed shows that this has not been handled in a thoughtful way. This isn’t a matter of the timeline being consciously stretched relative to the books such as to account for child actors. This is a case of the timeline being haphazardly dealt with to the point where things don’t make sense and are distracting.

And again, I do not have to be a professional chef to know my food is undercooked, and I should not be asked to consumed undercooked shellfish in order to placate the ego of the chef.

And finally, if you honestly think that the stories we tell and the way we tell them, what characters we prioritize and what tropes are employed are not directly fed by and in turn fuel the biases and beliefs of our culture, then you need to think again. Yeah, maybe we just so happen to gravitate only to the white characters. And maybe it just so happens that those white characters are the only ones in positions to govern the POC. And maybe it’s just a coincidence that all the slaves are POC. Andaybe it’s just happenstance that a former master is given the right to a fair trial and the former slave isn’t. And maybe every single other complaint is just an accident or a coincidence.

Or maybe, just maybe, these are all choices made by the writers that form a pattern that highlights unconscious biases in their writing, biases that have racist implications to go with the sexist, ableist, homophobic, ageist, etc. implications seen elsewhere.

“And again, I do not have to be a professional chef to know my food is undercooked, and I should not be asked to consumed undercooked shellfish in order to placate the ego of the chef.”

What if you’re at a sushi restaurant where everything is raw?

Not everything at a sushi restaurant is raw, especially not shellfish. But it is hilarious how much your uninformed attack on my metaphor parallels your arguments elsewhere.

Sushi restaurants also usually don’t get awards or public praise for how well done their steaks are.

And your constant complaining and idiotic logic on what constitutes racism shows what shameful depths you’ll go to get validation.

Says the person who opened the thread by complaining and hasn’t applied a shred of actual logical reasoning to this argument in the first place and resorted to insulting people personally.

I’m not sure at what point wanting to have an actual discussion about scripting represents “shameful depths”, when shutting down discussions and invalidating everyone else’s opinions and feelings on the subject is supposed to be the honorable high road, but you have been given outs all over the place, and have failed to take any of them, choosing instead to stay here and insult and denigrate people. So if I am going to shameful depths for validation, then you are right here with me.

Well when your discussion is essentially accusing people of intentionally writing racist content into their show with absolutely no tangible proof except for your own biased opinions that are predicated on your own perceptions of what constitutes as racism. You are insulting and denigrating people who you don’t know and accusing them of horrible things for the most petty of reasons. I take issue with that. As you have seen from our constant back and forth, you sure don’t like it when someone insults and denigrates you so why do you feel you have the right to do it to other people? Your a person who likes to dish it out but certainly doesn’t like it when it is thrown back.

I have literally NEVER claimed that D&D were intentionally crafting a racist narrative, and in fact have said more than once that it is entirely possible and likely that the racist implications are unintentionally and subconscious.

You are actively making things up to insult me over. Stop it.

Well didn’t Dany tell Daario to remain in Meereen to see that a leadership was put into place by the people? Wouldn’t that mean there would be eventually be rulers who are POC. And when Tyrion was the one making the decisions in Dany’s absence, he didn’t have the city prepared for an attack…something grey worm and misandee correctly advised him to consider. Couldn’t the writer be showing that this a clear case where a POC had better insight and it was incorrect to believe that a white person could’ve effectively rule making the decisions in Meereen? And i’m not sure what trial you’re referring to between the master and the slave..but was the trial for the slave obviously unfair? If it was obvious, couldn’t that be commentary on how unfair the justice system is to people of the lower class? If they cast white people as slaves, couldn’t that be seen as racist because it’s diminishing what POC have to or have experience in our world..because they are trying to imply white people experience the same injustices as POC? I mean the casting of slaves is a no win situation if you want to find racism in it. Look you could be right that intentionally or not, the writers are racist…but there’s no strong proof that it is there. Why see it that way?

But there’s no reason whatsoever to leave either Tyrion or Daario in charge at all. They have no particular qualifications to recommend them to the post. And the trual was from last year, when one of Dany’s former slave advisors murdered a former master who was awaiting trial. The slave wasn’t given a trial and was summarily executed, despite Dany having just said previously that there had to be fair trials and that the law was the law.

As for Tyrion not preparing for an attack, the narrative has sided with and been sympathetic toward Tyrion at every turn. And the writers gush about how wonderful this character is. If the writers hinestly wanted to show Missandei and Grey Worm as competent and capable, they would have. But they prioritized a narrative they made up for Tyrion (or rather, they prioritized Tyrion displacing Dany from her own narrative) instead of having these other characters get meaningful screen time. Heck, they’ve even sidelined the romance they created for those two just to prioritize their invented Tyrion storyline.

Nobody is saying that D&D are raging hatebags screaming racist sentiments openly. But there are clear biases and implications with their scripting. And some of that has to do with them being tropey hacks who parrot, consciously or subconsciously, Hollywood’s continued problematic attitudes toward race (things like the everyman defaulting to white able-bodied male, for instance). You don’t have to be openly hateful to espouse racist ideals or script narratives with racist implications.

You openly admitted that you didn’t know what scenes I was referencing, and yet you still try to dismiss out of hand that there are racial problems to be had with the show. That shows me an unwillingness to even consider the evidence or opposing point of view. So please, spare me your claims of no strong evidence. It’s a ridiculous thing to say in light of your approach here.

Daario is acting as a military presence until Meereen chooses leaders. These leaders won’t be white. Dany would easily choose him to act as this because she needs to dump him and give him something important to do.

And isn’t written pretty favorably in the books as well? Didn’t GRRM consider Tyrion to be his favorite character? I mean you might as well call him subtly racist if you want to lay it on the writers for showing him favor.

Also, i said scene..and the only scene that came to mind was when Dany executed the slave who admitted to murdering the master. The slave admitted to murder..therefore, she believed no trial was necessary. I didn’t want him executed but there is logic to why that happened, it’s not simply because he’s a slave. if a master had admitted to it..i’m pretty sure Dany would’ve carried out the same sentence.

And like i said…i could easily find racism in any adjustments you wanted to make to who’s a POC or not in Meereen because i’m making the choice to find racism. You’re making a choice to find racism. You have you’re evidence to back it up but at the end of the day, i don’t see how you can say it’s enough to know confidently what lies in the mind of D&D.

There is no reason for the military presence to also be the leadership. There’s also, frankly, no reason to give Daario something to do. These are excuses, plain and simple. Dany could have chosen an advisor of hers with actual governing experience, knowledge of the local language and culture, etc. Someone like Missandei, for instance, who is fluent in the language and has lived in the area all her life. And as a translator, she has been present and actively involved in a variety of deals and negotiations. She even showed useful discretion and diplomacy in her first appearances by knowing what to translate and what to keep to herself. She has served as a good advisor to Dany for years and would be the natural choice to remain behind as a temporary leader.

And no, Tyrion is not inherently written favorably in the books. He spends a good chunk of Dance talking about how he wants to rape Cersei, for instance, and that is just one of a long list of sexual offenses he commits. He wholeheartedly buys into Tywin’s BS about killing 10 men at dinner, and he has some of the same prickly pride that characterized Tywin. The thing about favorite characters is that a favorite character is not inherently a good person, and a character s not inherently portrayed favorably just because they are the author’s favorite. So no, Tyrion is not portrayed favorably, and certainly not to the extent the show portrays him. The show has whitewashed Tyrion to an enormous degree.

As to the trial issue, you are still not understanding. Even if an accused confesses, they still would go before a judge for sentencing. A monarch in this case can pass judgement, but it is not a trial. Dany would not have, in a true trial, acted as judge, and in the show, she specifically denied that she was the law. So her passing a sentence without a trial, without even the opportunity for a trial, is in direct defiance of her own stated ends. She leveled a double standard on the former slave relative to the former master. Period.

I am not choosing to find or not find anything. You are choosing to hand wave away and excuse things which everyone is bringing up because you are choosing to not see the problems with the scripting.

And I again never said that this was a conscious choice on D&D’s part. It is entirely possible and even likely that these problems are unintentional and subconscious. It’s not in their minds in the sense that they are thinking about these things. But that does not mean the problems do not exist.

And frankly, I am getting very tired of all of this rationalization. Because frankly, you and Jailer_of_Justice both sound highly offended that I and others would dare to call D&D racist. And it must be nice that “racist” is the worst thing they could be called. If being called out for the biases and problematic scripting they create is the worst thing they are dealing with, then their lives are probably pretty good, and they don’t need your stanning for them. Especially if said stanning serves to silence dissent and criticisms of problematic and hurtful writing.

You can’t stop a child actor from growing up, but you most certainly can keep from replacing a child actor with an adolescent one, just so he can participate in a sex scene that was not there in the source material. There is zero reason for replacing Tommen with an older actor, especially considering that it messes with the timeline. That’s not an issue with adaptation.

The world created in the books & the show are hardly the same. The women in the books are actually fighting against mysogony, something they all face whether its Margaery, Cersei, Sansa or Arianne. The show uses mysogony as an excuse for plot to happen, theres no fighting it otherwise the bastard wouldnt be the King in the North when everyone knows his sister is alive. Danys arc is a bastardized and lazy version of her book arc, where she takes the lead in the books she looks to a man for guidance. The racism might be accidental but its still the brown people who are the savages who need saving from the white girl.

” The racism might be accidental but its still the brown people who are the savages who need saving from the white girl.”

Oh stop with the racism crap? You guys are as bad as those people who see phallic symbols in everything.

How is that remotely relevant to anything??? Phallic imagery is TOTALLY equivalent to the learned cultural suppression of ethnic groups, that can manifest itself subconsciously and mindlessly.

It is a fact that in the show non-white characters are shown as: savages, needing to be saved, or needing to support the white people. Nobody is saying this was done maliciously, the writers slavering over the scripts saying “I hate brown people!”. It was done mindlessly, without a thought, “on accident”, and the results were approved without reflection on what that meant.

GoT is not the only piece of media with a racism problem, it is a pervasive problem in Western culture. If this reality isn’t something you acknowledge, well… perhaps this website isn’t for you.

Oh? And what proof do you have the writers have intentionally filled there scripts with racist and malicious content? Were you in the writer’s room when these things were being discussed? Have to ever asked D&D about this issue before and got their opinion on it directly? How do you know these scripting decisions were done without thought or reflection? What experience do you have writing for TV anyway?

“Nobody is saying this was done maliciously, the writers slavering over the scripts saying “I hate brown people!”. It was done mindlessly, without a thought, “on accident”, and the results were approved without reflection on what that meant.” Dude he literally just said that it probably wasn’t intentional. Also, why are you so angry?

Again, what proof do you have of this? It seems to me that you are confusing opinion as fact in regards to how the showrunners wrote the scripts? Saying “this probably happened” is not proof of your argument. That is just an assumption made based on your own personal conclusions. Do you have any tangible proof what you are assuming the writers did to be true?

Oh my god, you are insufferable. I’ve read every comment of yours on here and all you do is demand “proof” of blatantly obvious racism (and yes, unintentional racism is still racism) and try to bring up points that have nothing to do with the matter at hand. You are definitely out of your league here, buddy, in terms of intellectual debate so I would suggest you give it a rest and stop publicly embarrassing yourself.

What is insufferable is listening to people like you and your fake outrage and stupid complaints. Keyboard warriors like yourself contribute nothing except bemoan the hardships of your difficult first world problems.

Did you even read what I wrote? I said that it was unintentional, that they WEREN’T being intentionally malicious.

How do I know these decisions were made without reflecting on how racist they are? Well, because I’m giving them the benefit of the doubt that perhaps if they had realized the racist implications of their writing, they would have changed it. Are you saying they did reflect on the writing, noticed the racist implications, and left them in?

And none of this has anything to do with writing experience. They have made a product intended for public consumption, opening it for critique. If only the people who have experience writing for TV got to critique TV shows, then how is that public consumption? That’s the way the world works. You see something that doesn’t work, that’s harmful, it’s acknowledged and better practices replace it for bettered consumption. How could that work if a majority of the public kept their mouth shut?

It’s interesting how often Varys and Littlefinger are the ones involved in time inconsistencies. It could be that D&D think this makes them more “mysterious” characters, though it only shows the show has shitty writers and stuff that happens because creatively made sense.

It’s also one of the challenges of adapting a story to live-action. This show will have taken the better part of a decade to make by the time it started to the end. Unlike in the books, people in real-life age. While about two to three years have passed in the show in real-time five years have passed. Sometimes you have to write the story according to the age of a person which of course leads to some inconsistencies. Also do you want to see characters sitting on boat or horse for an entire season or do you want them to get to their destination and move the story along quicker? That’s one of the challenges in writing of TV. I respect the effort nonetheless and I’m not so full of myself to think that adapting a massive work of fiction to TV is as easy a task as you seem to think it is.

They aged up characters so then a 14 year old Sansa isnt raped, a 13 year old Dany isnt raped and lastly an 8 year old Tommen kind of takes sex off the table as well.

And that shows the showrunners taking into account that what is okay in the books isn’t always so easy to translate into live-action. In the books, many of the characters are very young and it would be very difficult to justify a live-action scene where a full grown man has sexual contact with a minor. So you need to age up some of these characters to deal with that and that has consequences with how the timeline works. You also have to take into account that the actors are aging as the show goes. By the time the show ends, actors who were children at the beginning will be in their late teens by the end.

All I see is excuses so there could be rape, they made Sansa Jeyne Poole specifically so the dumb Stark everyone hates could be raped. Tommens a little different but they still aged him up specifically so they could add the non-existent sexual component to his relationship with Margaery.

Danys at least happened so that she could lose it all when she made the blood deal.

Actors ages are irrelevant because actors play characters younger than themselves all the time, it affects nothing storywise that actually matters.

And you have worked on show and were involved in the writing process? Where are your facts to prove your argument? Assumptions are not facts just because you think they are.

Unlike you who thinks actors are the characters they play in every way and somehow actors never play a character younger than themselves there is nothing in the narrative that makes the age up actually necessary for anyone except Dany since her rape is the beginning of the arc that ends with the birth of the dragons. Just in case though https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5a94107cc44d5741748d667fec01c970f09265bc9ce20b76ce0b1f4b509f4b52.jpg

This is boring. Let’s talk about character shipping. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/881308ae63dcef6270de9e8bf5adb40bfc70497546f922c906c07113c39b0734.jpg

Unfortunately, after that last stunt you pulled, you’re sure as hell not doing it here.

I don’t see why this reply would be addressed especifically to me when everybody in this site complains about the writing in the show…? And you’re complaining about stuff I didn’t even say…?

What is “one of the challenges of adapting a story to live-action”? Keeping timelines minimally coherent so they don’t confuse you or distract you from the story? I never said adapting a work of fiction was an easy task as you claim I did, but it’s the writers job to meet certain standards of quality, otherwise they shouldn’t have tried to adapt those books in first place. Honestly, I would respect the effort if I thought there was any. But, as Andy said, if the links didn’t open your eyes, nothing else will.

I don’t like your agressive tone and I don’t like how you put words in my mouth that I didn’t say, so your further answers will be ignored. You can like the show all you want, you don’t have to be aggressive to people who don’t.

Well at least have some knowledge about the process of adapting literary works into a live-action format? You people keep complaining about writing yet seem to have little understanding about how the process actually works. All your arguments are made from hindsight and assumptions instead from actual experience. You make writing sound like it’s the easiest job in the world and that if you were in the writers room you could write just as good or better material. But I am willing to bet that most of you wouldn’t be able to handle going through the writing process or be able to keep a schedule.

Nothing you have said has indicated that you have any more experience or knowledge than anyone else here. So that’s fun.

And frankly, I don’t have to be a professional chef to know when my food is undercooked.

Neither have you! What the hell do you know about the writing process? Have you ever tried writing a script before because I have and it was a very difficult thing to do. It’s easy to criticize writers but until you have actually tried it than don’t assume that it is an easy process. It’s much worse when you make baseless accusations by calling people racist or sexist when you don’t even have the foggiest idea about their profession. You have a lot of nerve.

I also haven’t sat around telling people that they need to have written scripts professionally to be allowed to level criticisms of poor writing at people.

And for the record, yes, I have written scripts before. Scripts. Plural. It was a popular assignment at various points in my education, including high school and college, and I had to take particular note of my audience, my space, my time, my props, my costumes, etc, because I was always working with extremely limited attention spans, budget, space, and time. I never had $10 million an episode to work with, and yet I always managed to churn out a product that at the very least managed to adhere to its own internal logic and rules.

You are the one calling out people for the most ridiculous reasons, so don’t be surprised when you hypocrisy gets called out. And don’t try to turn your hypocrisy around on me, because that’s not how it works.

Boy aren’t you the definition of haughty? Your ridiculous racism argument is absolute trite and quite frankly is misplaced in the context of this show.

I answered your condescending question, so now I’m haughty? Charming. I back up my statements with examples and elaborate on my stances, yet I’m ridiculous. You write off everything everyone says without any elaboration, evidence, or explanation, and expect everyone around you to simply blindly agree with you. You accuse us of being an echo chamber, while expecting everyone to fawn over your unsubstantiated and dismissive comments. But I’m the haughty one, clearly. I have not once denigrated you for not wanting to have this discussion or look into analyses on this topic, and you have blindly dismissed my and everyone else’s opinions as unworthy. But I’m the haughty one.

Sure, kid. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

Haughty: disdainfully proud; snobbish; scornfully arrogant; supercilious

This is you in a nutshell. Anyway, It’s getting late and I’m tired of arguing with fools who inappropriately use racism and sexism for very petty reasons like you have been. Real classy lady, you’re a real hero.

I suppose when your argument fails to gain traction, insulting a woman for not being properly ladylike is the next best thing. Am I not subservient enough for your tastes? How awful for you, I’m sure.

Ah! White privilege at it’s finest. Like your ability to accuse and label complete strangers as racist for completely petty reasons and diminishing the significance of such a loaded term simply because you don’t like the writing on popular TV show. All while sitting behind a computer sipping a Starbucks coffee no less? It is really sad that this is what people like yourself associate with racism nowadays. We live in a world were people like Donald Trump are capable of becoming the POTUS while saying racially insensitive rhetoric and where every month 29,000 children in Africa die of disease and starvation. But nope, D&D are racist because white characters are helping out slaves in a fictional universe. Priorities right? Unbelievable!

What exactly does me calling you out for your ad hominem have to do with white privilege, exactly? Pointing out logical fallacies that use rather specifically gendered implications has nothing to do with white privilege.

Blatantly ignoring both the racial biases in this show’s scripting and ignoring the ways in which media and culture interact to reinforce those biases and prejudices, however, very much is an example of privilege.

That your life and experiences allow you to hand wave away racist undertones, implications, and tropes is a sign of your privilege. That I call you out for insulting me in the absence of a real argument is not.

I dare you to go to a convention were the cast of Game of Thrones and David Benioff and D. B. Weiss are in attendance and say your argument to their faces. You probably would never do it even if you had the chance because at your heart people like you are cowards. It’s easy for you to rant and rave and accuse people online of racism and sexism where you are surrounded by a bubble of people that protect you. However, you would never say these things to people face to face in real life. In the end you’ll just keep your true feelings to the online world and that’s as far as it ever will go. The only fight in real life you’d ever get yourself involved in is with the barista at Starbucks getting your order wrong.

What is your bizarre fascination with Starbucks? Is that some sort of new dog whistle? What does someone liking coffee have to do with anything at all?

And if I was at a convention and in a position to talk to D&D face to face and address those issues, yeah, I absolutely would say it to their faces. The chances of that happening are very low, and the most likely instance of talking to them would be in a Q&A, which would not be conducive or appropriate to this discussion. But I do not shy away from saying things to people’s face if I feel they should be said. I am not in the habit of biting my tongue.

I do not know why you are so insistent on judging my character without knowing anything about me, but you are out of line. Stop it. If you cannot address the arguments presented, then just stop. Keep your nonsensical screed to yourself because it’s not making your case and it’s frankly pathetic.

“What is your bizarre fascination with Starbucks? Is that some sort of new dog whistle? What does someone liking coffee have to do with anything at all?”

I’m making an assumption of what kind of person you are in reality. In my mind I imagine that you are a middle-class white female, who lives in the suburbs; has a good-paying but mundane job; maybe an accountant; likes Starbucks and eating out a lot; has a diabetic cat named Bob; and spends the majority of her free time bouncing from online forums to Candy Crush on Facebook.

Oh, I would love to see the response they give you at a Q&A. A Q&A would be the perfect place for it because the people on the panel usually go into great detail about what you inquire about and their own personal perceptions on the material. It’s not hard to get in line to ask a question. Last year William Shatner came to my city for a convention and I was able to ask him a question about his experiences with working with Leonard Nimoy. It not that difficult if you make the effort to plan ahead while at a convention and know when you have to get in line. You could also pay for a photo-op and you are alone with the celebrity for a moment. You can call D&D hacks at that time too.

“I do not know why you are so insistent on judging my character without knowing anything about me, but you are out of line. Stop it. If you cannot address the arguments presented, then just stop. Keep your nonsensical screed to yourself because it’s not making your case and it’s frankly pathetic.”

Then don’t judge other people’s characters if you are not prepared to take any criticism yourself?! You are really a piece of work thinking that you can label people you don’t know as racist or misogynistic without facing any consequences for it. So take your own advice and ” Keep your nonsensical screed to yourself”. You hypocrite.

Well, you got white and female, but you got that from my photo. The rest of that is decidedly off. Your assumptions are wildly inaccurate in addition to being off topic and a clear diversion from the fact that you have no counterargument to speak of.

As to the rest, I will point you to Wendy’s response to you. I have no more time for your nonsense. You are getting deeply offended about things I have not said, refuse to listen to what I and others have said, and have substituted insults and vitriol for an actual argument at every turn. We’re done here.

When you go to Starbucks do you accuse the barista of being racist because she puts to much cream in your coffee making it too white?

Jailer_of_Justice, we’ve been tolerating this for a while, and now we have to issue a warning. If you can’t state your opinions and arguments without resorting to ad hominem attacks and calling people “cowards”. If you want to make a point about Game of Thrones, then argue about Game of Thrones and actual facts or circumstances that support your opinion about Game of Thrones. If you feel your point about the show is valid, please stick to it and simply use all of the facts and evidence at your disposal to defend it. Argue about the show by all means, this is an article about it. It is not about Renee, her coffee preferences, behavior at conventions, or how writing is hard.If you continue with the ad hominem attacks, we will delete your comments and ban you.

(BTW, regardless of whether or not Renee and people like her are “cowards” or not, the point about posing questions to D&D at conventions is sort of a moot point these days since they stopped going to them, and thus left all the critical questions about the writing that convention goers actually did publicly voice to be handled by the actors who are under contract to perform and promote footage they haven’t written. I’m pretty sure the last time D&D did a Q&A was at Oxford, where a student politely but critically questioned them about their handling of sexual violence and female characters. The only sort of counter-argument that the panel gave that wasn’t a PR “We try to be sensitive” soundbite was by Kit Harington. When these topics are actually broached to them outside of a commentary track, their response is “I don’t want to talk about it” and “We’re not listening to the critics because we’re brave.” According to them, critics who praise shows like OITNB, Outlander, and Jessica Jones for the way those shows handled rape just hate there being rape on television at all, not the way they personally handled it. There’s a video of the Oxford Q&A on youtube if you’re interested, though. Also on youtube is a fair amount of interview footage where actors are put on the spot to talk about scenes they didn’t write. Not a lot of recent footage of D&D interacting with fans who may or may not be cowards, unfortunately. The writers and directors of this show don’t show a lot of fondness for actually talking about the things they’re criticized for with people who are not on their payroll. Conversing about their writing decisions with people who don’t work for them in a public, non-scripted context is work for actors under professional obligation to say that the show is awesome. That’s why they don’t want to talk to or listen to anyone who might have a non-positive perspective or let a differing opinion affect how they approach things. They’re too busy being brave and trying to depict things sensitively. And besides, anything troubling is just George R.R. Martin’s fault. Just ask Natalie Dormer, who thinks that Margaery and Tommen had sex in the books.)

Fine, it seems even the moderators on this forum support baseless claims of racism by the people that comment on here. Well I am personally offended by that stance and cavalier use of labelling things as racist without any tangible proof. Good day.

Did you know that dear Renee here was charged with criminal damage in Texas? Take a look at this news story?

If it’s a hard job and the results are shite to boot, then maybe the effort really isn’t worth it.

I’ll bet if Andy or Kylie wrote a TV show or movie it would be the most boring and plodding work imaginable.

Cool retort bro. You didn’t even bother to capitalized the first word or use punctuation.

cool overt critique of common internet lingo bro

Cool example of what a internet busybody acts like.

Alright, enough, Jailer of Justice. Fandom Following is open to critical discussions, but you are now escalating to personal attacks, and harassing the commenters, and that is not okay. We want this to be a safe space for people. Please desist.

The best part about this is the HBO wiki insists it’s been five years. Sansa in season one is 13. According to the writers, she’s 18 as of season six, lol.

Speaking of which, Sansa explicitly tells Tyrion she’s 14 in season 3, and towards the end of season 3 no less, doesn’t she? Almost no time passes during season 4, meaning she would have had to age 4 years in the at the most 9 months she spends in Winterhell… Impressive.

Oh good, so Sansa is “canonically” raped while still underage even. As if the voyeurism of that scene couldn’t have any worse implications.

I’m not sure the writers have ever said that Sansa is 18 this season. The GOT wiki says that Sansa is 18 this season, but I don’t believe that the wiki is run by anyone officially associated with the show (correct me if I’m wrong though.)

Hmm. There was an interview a couple months back where Sophie, who is 19 as of this season, said that she needs to get into her mindset from a couple of years ago before she plays Sansa because she’s a couple of years older than the character at this point. I think that suggests that Sophie played Sansa as around 16 or so this season rather than as the 18/19-year-old that she is. Of course, the producers may think differently.

Incredibly impressive amount of work to put this together. BUT…

> I first became interested in the passage of the time on the TV show during Season 4, which takes place within the space of a mere six weeks. We know this because…

Sorry but this is absolute hogwash. Just because the “King’s Landing events” in S4 take place over 6 weeks does not mean everything else (eg, like your example of Yara’s attempt to rescue Theon, which is entirely independent of the events in KL) needs to be limited to that same timespan.

So… your entire methodology here is flawed.

Scenes are not necessarily shown in chronological order, they are shown in the order that makes the most sense for storytelling purposes.

Example: In LF and Robyn’s S6 scene at the Vale, LF has just heard that Sansa has escaped from Winterfell, and PREDICTS she will head to the Wall. Chronologically speaking, this scene could be placed at the end of S5. BUT THE AUDIENCE WOULD FORGET (just look at how many people have no idea who Rhaegar is), so they place this scene closer to where LF meets Sansa up at the Wall.

This isn’t the writers being stupid or lazy or thoughtless, it’s them deliberately time-compressing individual storyline arcs to be more digestible to the audience.

If you really wanted to chart the timeline properly, you’d need to graph actual dependencies between events (like a Gantt chart), and abandon the assumption that everything is shown in linear chronological order.

So, I can definitely see your point, and I think you might be able to make a case for a few individual scenes, but this just doesn’t hold water when you look at the big picture.

First of all, abandoning the idea of time presented in a linear fashion is a HUGE cognitive dissonance load to put on the audience and not at ALL a good storytelling choice. If you are going to do this (show events out of order) you have to be really transparent with your audience about where you are in relation to other events. Some people have brought up Lost in the comments, which is a great example of a story that jumps around in time but is actually pretty good at telling you (eventually, anyway!) where you are in the story. (GRRM also definitely does this a bunch with his multiple POVs.)

But there is just no evidence that Game of Thrones does this — outside of statements from the creators, which IMO is just CYA. In universe, events absolutely proceed chronologically. In my rewatch, I actually did keep track of ravens (and implied ravens?) and there is not a single instance of scenes being presented non-linearly. To the contrary, every single time characters cross paths confirms the linear timeline — it just doesn’t make sense.

It is definitely fair to ask me to call out my baseline assumption that events proceed in the order they are shown in each episode. But what you’re suggesting is starting from the assumption that there are no conflicts in the timeline and rearranging events to fit that. That’s a pretty big leap. And while I agree with you that it would be a valid storytelling device to show scenes out of order if it served the plot, the burden is on the story to tell you that, and there just isn’t any evidence that that is what’s happening. Attempting to rearrange events into that kind of narrative would furthermore require a lot of subjective judgement calls, because unlike things like location, you’d just be guessing about what characters know or don’t know in a lot of cases. I don’t think that is a fair or logical way to construct a timeline, so given all this, I stand by my choice to assume what we’re seeing is exactly what is happening.

That said, sure, you might be able to make the case for individual scenes, such as Littlefinger asking Robin for the Vale forces at the end of S5 instead of S6. But in the absence of statements to the contrary, this doesn’t take away from my major point, which is that the showrunners have absolutely no idea how much time is passing on this show and the timeline is all over the place.

Jailer of Justice has been banned and all of their comments are deleted.

This is freaking impressive. And basically confirms everything I thought about this show’s ridiculous timeline, and the genera lack of thought that goes into it and many other things.

Bo on The Fallacy of GoT’s ‘Women on Top’ Part 1: Setting

Erin Latimer on Ilvermorny: Oops, Rowling did it again

Barbara Kateřina on Ilvermorny: Oops, Rowling did it again