joepinetree

About

Username
joepinetree
Joined
Visits
2,519
Last Active
Roles
Supporter
Points
645
Badges
0
  • 806 - The Iron Throne

    chrisk said:
    Anominal said:
    chrisk said:
    I don't see any reason to think the Iron Islands are in any position to bargain. They had already pretty easily submitted to Dany's demands in changing their whole culture (which is a separate writing problem). If Euron were in charge then ok, but Yara seems pretty well inclined to settle things down based on what we've seen. 

    I'm not sure why people are convinced that Dorne would want independence, or what it would do for them. In the books they're trying to help restore Targaryen rule in the Seven Kingdoms, and in the show Doran is trying to ally with the Lannisters through marriage and the Sand Snakes are all killed by Cersei who is now dead.

    I just don't see any reason the North's independence should inspire anyone else to do the same. It seems like people are just taking that for granted. Why would they want it? I understand why Sansa wants it.


    Anominal said:
    Yeah, the benefits of being a united kingdom and the practicality of not being able to pillage forever ignores the fact that the Iron Islands were able to do that for decades? Centuries? before the Seven Kingdoms was a thing, and ignores the fact that Iron Islands rebelled for independence twice in recent history.
    I think if the show invented the Iron Islands, people would say it makes no sense and they exist because D&D think they're cool. In this case, that's all on GRRM. They're the worst part of the books and don't make any logical sense. Maybe if they were in Essos. 
    So what you're saying is that the Iron Islands make no sense, and so completely changing their personality and motivations in the finale to make them make sense is okay. That they should have never tried to declare independence in show, so retconning them makes sense. But based on what we've seen, Yara went to Dany because she needed help killing her uncle so she could gain control of the Iron Islands. She only hesitantly agreed to give up her way of life in exchange for that. She has no such promise with anyone else, and her whole character has been to show how much of an Iron Islander she is than Theon, with the one exception of actually caring for her brother unlike their father.

    But at the same time, you're agreeing that Sansa declaring independence makes sense because she's been declaring it in the show. That all the benefits of united kingdom don't apply to her. That all the North wanted was someone from the North to rule them, and now that Bran is declared king of everything... now it makes the most sense for the North to rule independently even though now they have someone on the Iron Throne who not only is a Stark, but was demonstrated to be so immensely powerful the Night King wanted him dead.

    I feel like you're wanting things both ways and applying opposite logic to the same scenario.
    Sansa wanting independence makes sense because of what's happened to her and her family. I think she wanted independence no matter what would've happened. At some point Bran won't be king and they'll have to deal with that person. 

    I'm saying the Iron Islands are impossible to write for in a way that makes logical sense. They don't, in my opinion, work in the books or on the show. I think in real life they'd have been brought to heel hundreds of years ago and they'd be like any other house after 300 years under Targaryen rule. So whatever they choose to do with them in the show is fine enough by me.

    I just disagree on her reluctance with Dany. She made a token protest, Dany said "no more" and then Yara and Theon look at each other and nod. Something like that. No concern at all for how they'd sell that back home, which I think is either a writing mistake or a bad omission. Having said that, the Iron Islands were already cowed by Robert, which is why Balon's protestations against Theon were so ludicrous way back in S2. So -  I think the whole storyline is a hot mess. 

     EDIT - i guess i had forgotten that they asked Dany for independence or sovereignty. I was thinking they'd pledged loyalty to her, but that changes things and I agree it doesn't make sense. 


    To quote the episode specifically:
    Theon:
    "Your ancestors defeated ours, and took the Iron Islands. We ask you to give them back."

    To which Tyrion replies:
    "What if everyone starts demanding their independence?"

    And Dany says"
    "She's not demanding, she's asking. The others are free to ask as well."

    So they explicitly discussed independence, and Dany agreed to their demands provided that they stopped reaving and plundering. They even shake on it.
    Giovanni
  • Chernobyl: Episode 3. Open Wide, O Earth

    Just a side note here about some of the things that we are seeing on screen: it's not a feature of communism or capitalism, but a feature of organizations.
    Two "iron laws" to consider:
    The iron law of oligarchy:
    and the iron law of bureaucracy:

    Because of the complexity of decision making, we delegate power to key decision makers. Key decision makers can then use that power to benefit themselves and the organization itself, instead of the mission of the organization. People are then too apathetic, uniformed or powerless to do anything about it.

    We can see this again and again in the US:
    School and college administrators are paid more and more while teachers and professors are squeezed. We give out ambassadorships to donors and politically aligned people with 0 foreign policy experience. If you want more dramatic examples:

    -Hugh Thompson Jr was a legit hero who stopped the My Lai massacre. He was ostracized and condemned for making the military look bad despite the fact that what he did was much more in line with the values that the military claimed to defend. Those who helped cover up and hide the massacre were rewarded.
    - Michael Brown was in charge of FEMA during Katrina despite the fact that most of his experience had been as a disgraced commissioner for the International Arabian Horse Association.
    - The 2008 financial crisis is a perfect example of the people who screwed up being in charge of cleaning up their screw ups, with the results that instead of jail sentences and help for home owners, we had bail outs and support for those who screwed up even when they defrauded home owners.

    As a college professor, I see this again and again in academia. The administrators that get the big paychecks and the big rewards are not those who quietly and efficiently improve the education of the students and the work conditions of the professors. The ones who get the big paychecks are the ones who build the big buildings, mollify the big donors and hide the big scandals.


    MarciJamesGiovannibenbox
  • 806 - The Iron Throne

    awookiee said:
    chrisk said:
    I think the complaints about the North being independent and nobody else are a bit overblown. 

    Theres a a lot of benefit to being part of the Six or Seven Kingdoms. Trade, currency, travel, etc... It’s the same reason countries have joined the EU today.

    You give up some self determination and I suppose you can say they should have debated it more but all these kingdoms have been unified for generations. So being affiliated is the default for everyone already. Sansa’s the only one we know of who’s been making noise about leaving. 

    Also - Master of Whisperers is just the spy chief right? That’s the way I read it. Whatever Bran is capable of, the position needs to exist, no?

    That goes against everything the show has shown us. Robb declaring independence was depicted as a big deal. A big deal that upset not only the Lannisters, but Renly, Stannis and Dany. And then not only do they get independence by just saying so, but the Iron Islands, who have wanted to be independent for just as long, go "you go ahead and do you, we'll stay."
    I 100% understand your argument here as the Iron Islands have pushed for Independence in the show but I want to know how the Iron Islands declares Independence and live on their own without the support of others? Surely in this new Westeros they can't go back to reaving, raping, and pillaging and while it's possible they can survive on fish and food from the sea alone, I highly doubt that's what they want to do. There's tons of benefits being united that I think the Iron Islanders would benefit from.  
      As someone else mentioned, that is fine, if it is something that is even hinted at on screen. Instead, what we got was Yara making an alliance with Daenerys back in the "Battle of the Bastards" episode where Yara explicitly asked for Dany's recognition of the independence of the Iron Islands. And the particular scenario that you mentioned is explicitly discussed: Dany specifically says that she will support the independence of the Iron Islands if they agree to stop reaping and plundering the north, and Yara agrees.So we go from " we will support Dany and even agree to stop plundering in exchange for our independence" to "we're totally fine staying in under the monarchy of the brother who killed Dany and who we explicitly attacked before."
    Giovanni
  • 806 - The Iron Throne

    You feel bummed out that they didn't like it? Fine. People start calling them cunts, saying that they are just critics who risk nothing (they risk more on this podcast than anyone involved in creating game of thrones), or trying to dismiss their view as some psychological disturbance? Not fine.
    I'll take "Things that aren't actually happening here" for $800, Joe.
    "A. Ron really turned into a C U next Tuesday"
    " Criticism is like a lamprey.  "
    Not to be armchair psychologist but I think many critics are going through a big deal having to process that their host creator is now gone."

    All these things have been said in the last couple of pages. 


    I'm really focusing in on the idea of anyone calling them "cunts" or anyone saying that they are critics who risk nothing, since I'm not even sure what the "psychological disturbance" part means.

    Those examples you listed don't really play into anything you listed as things that are "not fine." Also, and again I have no idea if this is what you mean by the psychological part, but to pretend that critics aren't humans who have all of the same psychological pitfalls as every other human that paints their opinions, both positively or negatively, that's just not facing the reality of both fandom and criticism. Critics aren't robots, and many (especially TV show podcasters) are just as emotionally invested in the material as the fans are.
    What do you think "c u next Tuesday" refers to? Do you know what a lamprey is? Did you read the quote that was posted last page?
    alexander.klassenBloodyTaco
  • 806 - The Iron Throne

    You feel bummed out that they didn't like it? Fine. People start calling them cunts, saying that they are just critics who risk nothing (they risk more on this podcast than anyone involved in creating game of thrones), or trying to dismiss their view as some psychological disturbance? Not fine.
    I'll take "Things that aren't actually happening here" for $800, Joe.
    "A. Ron really turned into a C U next Tuesday"
    " Criticism is like a lamprey.  "
    Not to be armchair psychologist but I think many critics are going through a big deal having to process that their host creator is now gone."

    All these things have been said in the last couple of pages. 


    GiovanniBloodyTaco