The thing that always gets me about the idea that the violence, racism, and misogyny in Game of Thrones is expected/excusable “because that’s how things were back then” isn’t just the fact that GoT isn’t a historical novel.
If progress was a steady, linear acceleration through time, they should be way ahead of us. They should be far more enlightened in Westeros than we are in the United States or Europe. Looking at Westeros would be looking at our enlightened future, not our dismal past.
"What are you talking about? It’s medieval fantasy."
Right, but how many years of recorded human history does this “medieval” world have again?
I don’t remember the exact figure, but I can tell you this much:
By the notion that human progress in a vaguely European setting should follow some sort of script moving from more brutal and bigoted to less, they should be well out of their “medieval period” and a couple thousand years ahead of us. There’s some give or take, depending on where you try to peg the “medieval phase” as starting. If we take the invasion of the First Men to be something like the Celts reaching the British Isles and displacing/killing the indigenous people, with the Andals then being analogous to either the Saxons or the French… culturally it seems more like the Norman invasion because the Andals seem “farther along”, but that moves the timeline up even further compared to ours.
But forgetting the Andals: Celts settled in Britain no earlier than 2000 B.C., which puts them about 2,500 years before the beginning of the Ye Olde Medieval England that Westeros is supposed to be based on according to the theory of “how things were back then”. According to the mythic history of Westeros, the First Men crossed over *checks* around 12,000 years ago. If we peg that date as about 2,000 BCE in real-world terms, then the approximate start of the medieval period in Westeros (again, according to the theory that progress is a matter of counting years) would have to be 9,500 years ago. If all medieval periods are about the same—which again, is the underpinning of the theory that “things were just like that back then”—then this period would have given way to something like a renaissance about 1,000 years later, or around 8,500 years ago.
Now, our renaissance kicked off about 500 years ago, so Westeros is about 8,000 years “more advanced” than we are.
"But wait! You said ‘mythic history’! Nobody knows when the first men really arrived."
By crumb, you’re right. Nobody does know that. But you know what they do know? When the wall went up. It’s been continuously staffed and watched by the same organization for a mind-blowing 8,000 years. If we wanted to get all meta, we could even imagine that formal written history in Westeros might have grown out of the Night’s Watch need to keep records.
So the invasion of the First Men could have happened more recently than 12,000 years ago, but no sooner than 8,000 and the time it would take for them to get established across the continent. But even if we assume that they could have come over just in time to build the wall… okay, medieval period begins 2,500 years later. That’s 5,500 years ago. Renaissance begins 1,000 years after that, that’s 4,500 years ago.
Even by the most generous estimate available, Westeros still has 4,000 years of enlightened modern living on us European-descended humans.
Obviously the reason they aren’t 4,000 years more sophisticated and enlightened than we are is… well, it’s a fictional world whose author requires it to be “medieval” and brutal, but more to the point, progress doesn’t work this way. The only reason their society and history mirrors ours at all is that the author has dictated that they should. Seriously. The fact that they even count the turning of years the way we do is really bizarre. The idea that they would come up with the same sort of feudal agrarian culture that we did given the completely different growing seasons and completely different logistics of keeping the population fed is mind-boggling.
We can—we must—accept that these things happened, because they are part of the premise of the story. But the narrative doesn’t assert that the sociopolitical progress of their world is somehow in a parallel, delayed synchronization with progress in ours, and in fact, it very obviously isn’t.
The bottom line: Westeros is not in a medieval Europe phase of progress. It’s in a modern Westeros phase of it. Appealing to “things were like that back then” is no more meaningful an excuse than is saying “things are like that now” about a present situation.
I really like the perspective you’ve added here. I’ve discussed the myth of linear social progress and the projection of that many people are willing to do onto fictional worlds, including that of GoT/ASOIAF. None of this would be necessary if it wasn’t for the bone-deep conviction on the part of some fans that this particular work of fiction can excuse it flaws and some very questionable choices on the part of the author with “but, historical accuracy!”
In the end, the facts are that the books and the show are racist, misogynist, and violent because people chose to make it that way. These problems are compounded upon the insistence that these narrative choices are not only true to history or “realistic”, but the implication that the creators of the book/show are somehow fettered by or forced into these narrative choices.
Tonight on Full House
Should Cap, as Vulture suggests, be more old-fashioned in his attitudes on gender, race or sexuality? I’m inclined to think not. For one, World War II saw massive social upheaval in both the first two categories, and we’ve already seen Cap work alongside a strong, authoritarian woman, so it seems weird that he’d suddenly have a problem with that. He’s also well established as both an underdog himself and a champion of same, so it would be strange for him to suddenly take a stance against tolerance. Rogers is not a man desperate to prove himself; he remains the same kid that he was underneath, trying to do what he feels is right rather than subscribing to some outside notion of machismo that demands he also be sexist or homophobic or something. And aside from any questions of decency and responsible filmmaking, from a storytelling point of view it would be endlessly distracting if Cap suddenly started making homophobic statements or patting passing women on the butt (he wasn’t exactly a ladykiller in the ’40s; why would he suddenly turn boorish now?).
What’s important and interesting about Cap is exactly what some people dismiss as boring. It’s that decency and honesty and sense of moral authority. In a film world full of compromised characters, flawed protagonists and out-and-out anti-heroes, Steve Rogers is a breath of fresh air. Someone with no secrets, who literally wears his high ideals as a uniform and gets on with the job at hand, is far more interesting than any number of self-torturing, whiny man-children.
Increase Your Flexibility || Lower Body Stretch Routine
"Static stretching is a technique that involves holding a muscle in an elongated position for 30-90 seconds. The objective is to lengthen the muscle tissue and increase flexibility. There are various way to stretch these muscles but I chose to show you the ones that tend to be the simplest and most effective for all levels.
Flexibility is essential because it improves range of motion, reduces risk of injury, improves movement patterns, promotes healthy posture, and helps protect joints. This routine will cover the hip flexors, glutes, hamstrings, abductors, and calves”
its a metaphor, you see. you place your cursor right upon the killing thing, but you dont actually click on it.
look at this baby on his specially made baby horse
Paramore - Ain’t It Fun
TLC was not just an amazingly talented group, they were a movement, a revolution in the 90’s having as much power as the “bra burning” days of the 1960’s. TLC’s lyrics empowered young women everywhere to be strong, confident, and accountable from image to safe sex.
Page 1 of 60