Thursday, June 2, 2016

Supreme Court of Westeros, ruling 132


Thursday is court day!
Welcome to the Supreme Court of Westeros! Every week, three pressing questions from the community will be answered by the esteemed judges Stefan (from your very own Nerdstream Era) and Amin (from A Podcast of Ice and Fire). The rules are simple: we take three questions, and one of us writes a measured analysis. The other one writes a shorter opinion, either concurring or dissenting. The catch is that every week a third judge from the fandom will join us and also write a dissenting or concurring opinion. So if you think you're up to the task - write us an email to stefan_sasse@gmx.de, leave a comment in the post, ask in the APOIAF-forum or contact Amin at his tumblr. Discussion is by no means limited to the court itself, though - feel free to discuss our rulings in the commentary section and ask your own questions through the channels above.
One word on spoilers: we assume that you read all the books, including the Hedge Knight short stories, and watched the current TV episodes. We don't include the spoiler chapters from various sources in the discussion, with the notable exception of Theon I, which was supposed to be in "A Dance with Dragons" anyway.
Question Call: If you have any interesting questions, please tell us!
Please note that our new ebook is up and available on Amazon, collecting the first 60 rulings and the best comments in one place. It's only 5,99$, so what are you waiting for? 
And now, up to ruling 132! Our guest judge this week is Fredrik Fisher, a member of the community.


Given that a female Other once ruled about the Watch, it seems like they can get through the Wall. What implications does this have for the narrative?

Main Opinion: Stefan
I don’t think it has that many implications. The Night-King-story is basically a legend, one of many of Old Nan’s stories, and it betrays elements of long established tropes: on the one hand, there’s the succubus, winning the soul of man by seducing him, and on the other hand, you have the vampire element, where you need to essentially invite evil to come in because it cannot cross the threshold without your express invitation. That seems what the story’s implicating: that if the Watch allows someone to pass, they can pass, somehow. Since I’m pretty convinced that the Wall will come down, big time, by blowing the horn of Joramun, I don’t see much room for a new version of the evil Other seductress.

Concurring in Part, Dissenting in Part: Amin
I don’t quite agree with the points about the Night King, as I think it more than legend and has some basis in history. However, I agree that if the Others are somehow welcomed through, then they can get through the Wall. It’s possible they can even physically get around the wall as it is, we have no way to know for sure, but it seems like their range of magic, including raising the dead, is blocked by the Wall.

Concurring opinion: Frederik Fisher
None whatsoever. As to Justice Stefan’s opinions, I haven’t much to add here besides the fact that I don’t think that the story is in any relevant way pertinent to the Night’s Watch or the Others at all. It’s your classic stick-with-your-own-kind story, which are rather obvious parts of the Northern cultural heritage, given, for instance, Northern racism towards the Wildlings over the years. 

Final Verdict: No implications. 

Note: This verdict was written before "Game of Thrones" Season 6 Episode 5 "The Door" aired, which sheds some new light on the question. 

Also, I know Stefan is a big fan of Poor Quentyn (I am as well), but what theories of his does each judge disagree with?

Main Opinion: Stefan
Funny enough, I can’t really name anything. So far, everything he put forth has made sense to me. I guess our biggest disagreement is the identity of the Harpy, which for me isn’t the Green Grace because I still give more weight to Adam Feldman in that matter. But PoorQuentyn’s points are pretty convincing here as well, so I might be wrong.

Concurring in Part, Dissenting in Part: Amin
I am not sure about the Green Grace being the Harpy. I think she did have strong enough influence on the city to stop the violence given her position, but that doesn’t mean she was the one initiating and organizing the vioelcne. However, I am open to persuasion on that point. I do think it is possible to distinguish the Green Grace from the person who set up the assassination attempt on Dany’s life with the poisoned locusts. The latter would be the Shavepate, as he was left in a bad position by the marriage and would benefit from Dany becoming a martyr and being in the set up position to avenge her dead.

Concurring in part, dissenting in part: Federik Fisher
I enjoy reading PQ’s extensive theories, especially for their cohesion and completeness. I tend to agree with him mostly, although, for instance, his theories for Jon’s arc post Hard Home seem a bit much to me. For my part, I’d think Jon’s mind would be rather more focused on the fact that he’s been brought back to life and the implications thereof than on R+L=J. Yes, the latter surely will be important to him on a very personal level, but wouldn’t having experienced death, either for the first time realizing you’re a warg in the process or simply being dead, trump whatever reasons there might have been for putting him on this Planetos in the first place? I can see both these personal crises merging, of course, but I find it hard to believe that Jon’s parentage and the implications thereof would sway him enough to almost bring him to the bringk of giving up. Rather, with Jon being a resurrected corpse, the question tormenting him might be what really separates him from a wight. That might be something to chew on.

Final Verdict: The identity of the Harpy and Jon's future arc remain a bit matters of dispute. 

To what extent, if any, is Martin guilty of orientalism in ASOIAF?

Main Opinion: Stefan
Quite a bit. While he certainly tries to avoid the most overt clichés in describing Essos, the deliberate lack of Essosi POV characters and the rather small part of the narrative spent there necessitate some abbreviations, and clichés about the strange and fascinating east play a big role here. I think Slaver’s Bay is getting the shortest end of the stick here, along with the Dothraki.

Dissenting Opinion: Amin
I think orientalism is present in the work, as it is very difficult for any fantasy writer escape the legacy of orientalism. However, Martin has done his best to avoid it and I don’t think choosing to focus on Westeros is truly a form of orientalism. I think the World of Ice and Fire shows that Martin knows there is a lot of things going on in his world, and in terms of politics, Westeros isn’t that important at all. Even in terms of the supernatural battles, there were battles going on all over the East during the Long Night at the same time Westeros had its struggles. So Martin acknowledges the width of the world while focusing on writing about what he knows best in the main series, Westeros, which is based mainly on his extensive knowledge of medieval European history and culture. It is difficult for a person to write to right well about what he does not know about. Martin’s expertise is in the European tradition of writing, not Asian. He has read many European works and travelled to European historic sites; while he has read some Asian works, the number is far lower and he has not had the opportunity to travel around most of Asia. He gave Essos a large role in A Dance with Dragons, but his focus is ultimately on Westeros. Instead of doing a mediocre job of trying to balance the entire story between the two continents, he focuses and writes on what he knows best, the setting for Westeros.

Concurring opinion: Frederik Fisher
There’s orientalism in abundance if one wants to see it. It is easily explained by the fact that this story is about Westeros and therefore,necessarily, puts Essos in the back seat. This, of course, doesn’t excuse the exoticism, although Martin at numerous times goes out of his way to address those issues.

Final Verdict: There's much of it, but that doesn't mean the quality of the story suffers. 

15 comments:

  1. Thanks for answering my Orientalism question. As a fan I'm a bit worried about the final verdict though. That Martin chooses to focus on Westeros in his story and POVs is one thing. But stereotyping people from Essos -- essentially a form of racism/discrimination -- is another. Shouldn't we, being part of the fandom, be more reserved in our admiration for the work if think it's orientalist, and possibly advocate a different approach? As an artist, Martin is free to write what he wants, of course, but shouldn't we be more critical?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For me, that's not exactly racism or discrimination. It makes perfect sense for the POV, who are all Westerosi, to experience Essos as "foreign" - in good ways and in bad. But Essos has no voice of its own, and therefore, it is "orientalized". That's intended in the structure, and I don't take issue with it. For me, it's just a fact. You can have good stories that orientalize and bad ones. And this one is certainly good.

      Delete
    2. I'm interested in this question also in terms of Yi Ti and the Jade Sea. It's basically exactly as the Europeans might have thought of the Chinese. Is it then just a historical allusion? Or something more? And will we ever see the empire first hand either in these books or a later series?

      Delete
  2. It's hard to make Robert E. Howard one of your main influences and not fall into orientalism. At some level, fantasy in the Robert E. Howard/H.P. Lovecraft vein is kind of inextricably bound to racism and fear of the other.

    Martin rejects explicit racism, but implicit racism is built into the DNA of what he's trying to accomplish. In terms of orientalism, this isn't helped by the fact that most of the story takes place in and virtually all of our POV characters come from the part of the fantasy world that Martin has explicitly created as a quasi-realistic medieval setting that is meant to contrast with the Howardian sword and sorcery stuff.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think talking of implicit racism goes too far. I know what you mean, but I'm really uncomfortable to throw that accusation around in this context.

      Delete
    2. Agree with Stefan that we should be careful labels like 'racism'. But we shouldn't dismiss it straightaway either. The common ground for a serious discussion should be that ASOIAF contains (1) hardly any Essosi perspective and (2) various Essosi stereotypes, not unlike orientalist stereotypes we know from our own history. It should be noted that (1) makes the orientalism discussion different from the 'discussion' of Martin's sexism, since he clearly offers a wide range of female perspectives (and is IMHO rightly praised for this).

      In order to assess the gravity of the orientalism, (A) we should — if possible— separate Watsonian stereotypes from in-world characters and Doylist stereotypes introduced by Martin himself. This is especially difficult in the case of Maester Gildayne, where we have no way of knowing to what extent he is biased about, say, Yi Ti and the Jade Sea. Should we give Martin the benefit of the doubt here, or blame him for holding on to the traditional narrative? Also, in order to give a fair assessment of Martin's, (B) we should not base our verdict on a handful of duplicitous/exotic/violent/cruel/savage/flat Essosi characters, but also take friendly/helpful/resourceful/civilized/deep characters into account. The paper 'Game of Tropes' by Mat Hardy could be a good starting point, but he sometimes forgets distinctions (A) and (B).

      Maybe an interesting subject for the BLAH podcast sometime?

      Delete
    3. I don't actually think saying something is "implicitly racist" is (or should be) a particularly big deal at all. Our entire society is racist to varying degrees, and we should expect that to be reflected in our art. I'm also not sure why, if we need to be incredibly careful about accusing things of being "implicitly racist," it would be okay to throw around accusations of "orientalism," which, in the Saidian/pejorative sense, is explicitly seen as a form of racism.

      I also don't think I was saying that ASOIAF is implicitly racist, exactly. I was saying that a significant portion of the DNA of ASOIAF, and particularly the stuff relating to Essos, comes straight out of the very very explicitly racist Weird Tales/H.P. Lovecraft/Robert E. Howard tradition. Lovecraft and Howard are great in a lot of ways, but their work is also very, very deeply racist, and, indeed, racism could be seen as one of the most basic premises of it. If you're going to create a world where a large portion of it is essentially a Howard pastiche, and fill the margins with Lovecraftian horrors, you're likely going to have some racism baked in.

      I don't think this is a terribly serious charge. Given that Howard and Tolkien (who was not so explicitly racist as Howard & Lovecraft, but certainly has his own problems with race) are probably the two biggest influences on modern fantasy, it's kind of all going to have some racism baked in. But we should look that in the face and not simply excuse it because of that.

      And of course it doesn't mean it's wrong to enjoy Martin's work! Martin is very clearly anti-racist, I think. We see this in particular through Dorne, which is non-white but Westerosi, and which is not exoticized the same way as Essos is. And we see it through various attempts to get through the Howardian fantasyscape, and the prejudices of our mostly Westerosi POVs, to see people from Essos as real people.

      Delete
  3. I do think racism/orientalism is a serious charge that, therefore, should not be made lightly. Also, that the fantasy genre has historically known racism/orientalism doesn't excuse any current writers who should know better (especially ones as revisionist as Martin). Also, I do think racist/orientalist elements in a story somewhat diminish my enjoyment of Martin's work -- like a fly in the soup.

    I'd be curious to know from Stephan why he seems to think orientalism is different from racism (understood broadly as various forms of discrimination based on race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, etc.). From John, I'd like to know how to distinguish explicit and implicit racism in a story that is written from a third person point of view. To give an example: Westeros is depicted as being free of slavery while Essos is rampant with it. Is this an example of Martin conforming to the image of the cruel and barbaric East? If so, is this implicit or explicit racism/orientalism?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think the East is inferior to Westeros. Look at the myriad of brutal lords, or the Ironborn.

      Delete
  4. From a DSM-IV-TR point of view, what does your esteemed panel think the differences are between Ramsay Bolton, his father, Gregor Clegane, Twyin and Euron Greyjoy. Or just Ramsay, Twin and Euron to keep it shorter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. The IV-TR refers to 4th edition 3rd revision, but I believe they are up to 5th edition now. It's a common ango-american psychiatric handbook. I believe the question would be referring to the personality disorders section and the criteria for borderline or narcissism or sociopaths etc etc. Hey play amateur shrink. It will be fun.

      Delete
  5. Hi! What do you think of the "stone beast, breathing shadow fire" Undying prophecy? Most theories (JonCon, Marwyn, literal stone dragons) fail to keep into account the "slayer of lies" part. Only guess I havem is that Daenerys will slay Melisandre's lies... but I'm hazy on the details. Thoughts?

    ReplyDelete
  6. I'm 2 1/2 months late to this party, but oh, well . . .

    I think the charges of orientalism are specious; and the absence of Essosi PoV's is blazingly irrelevant to the question. Essos and Westeros have broadly different cultures and traditions, so they will naturally seem exotic to each other. In fact, the Essosi seem to look down on Westeros, not the other way around And within Westeros, you also have broadly different cultures and traditions.

    Notably, none of the PoV characters that I can recollect express racism towards anyone from the islands or continent to the east. Cercei's bed partner is from one of the free cities. There's a summer islander hanging around the court in KL, and nobody looks down on him because of his race. Chataya does a booming business. The Summer islander sailors, with good reason, think Sam is ridiculous.

    Strife within Westeros exists, but for political reasons, not because of First Men - Adal - Rhoynish racism. The people discriminated against are the Wildings, racially near-identical to the residents of the Northern domain. Aside from contempt for the Wildings, the Westerosi are remarkably free of racism.

    The truly racist cultures are the Dothraki, the extinct Valerians, and Ghiskari-descended slavers. All residents of Essos.

    If you look hard for something, you're pretty much doomed to find it. And why would you be looking for orientlaism unless you already thought it was there?

    But, if anything, you have it backwards.

    ReplyDelete