haxxiy said:
morenoingrato said:
Thirded.
|
There has been good characters on both sides, but the books and specially the show have always been relatively Manichean - yes, morally ambiguous next to the stuff of fantasy and fiction teenagers and young adults enjoy, but not really to standard literature. Plenty of villains like the Mountain, Ramsay, the rulers of the eastern cities etc. are just as evil and unsympathetic as some Voldemort or Sauron. The two main characters are the honor bound Jon Snow and the unexplainably progressive liberal Daenerys. Most of those we could call anti-heroes and anti-villains have always been secondary characters and are already dead, such as Stannis or the High Sparrow. No reader or viewer was ever meant to sympathize or side with Balon, Joffrey, the masters of Astapor, and so on.
The only relevant fantasy writer I've read which properly does morally ambigous conflicts with compelling anti-heroes and anti-villains on the foreground of the story is Guy Gavriel Kay.
|
For me, it's not so much that all the characters are necessarily relatable or anything like that. Sure enough, many of them have simply been deplorable human beings, some more complex than others, but regardless of their morality, they were ultimately just men (and women). They were very believable, and the fact that there were never any qualms about killing off what were undoubtedly good characters, nevermind the manner in which they did it (such as Rob at the Red Wedding), made you feel like the story, the "game of thrones," was truly unbiased in their portraying good and evil. The light didn't always have to shine through......the fantasy didn't have to coddle you with the promise of a guaranteed happy end.
Now, as the show comes to a close, and the ultimatum of the walking dead presses ever forward closer into the picture, the somewhat perfect illusion is gone. The story is no longer about who will claim the iron throne, who will prevail at the great game, and come through the bloody mess that is man's own darkness, our eternal need for conflict, greed for power, etc, etc......now it's just about who will survive the godlike, unstoppable evil, and be rewarded with a throne 5 minutes later cus we're out of time.
So while you're right that somebody like Ramsey is every bit as evil and unsympathetic as Voldermort or Sauron, there's still a world of difference between them. One of them is just a man. That's far more compelling for a variety of reasons that extend beyond the otherworldliness of powers those others posess. Chief among them, his mortality. A villain like Ramsey, even if he is evil incarnate, cruel to the bone, can die at any time. From the first moment we saw him, he could have believably gotten the end he deserved at any point. Every time you saw him you would root for the next scene to be the one where the tables are turned on him, and every time he kept keeping on it would drive you crazy. A villain like the Night King....Sauron....Voldemort.....there is no thrill like that every time they come up. You know full well that they are the ultimate end game, something so out of this world they can't possibly be defeated until the very end. There's no possibilty of surprise joy when they get theirs, there's no possibility of sudden anger and frustration cus you think they're done for but then escape death at the last second. You know they'll be there at the end. Because they must.