A Song of Ice and Fire/Game of Thrones and it's relevance to modern political issues

One of the things that really hooks me into this story is how the issues in this imaginary medieval world echo many of the issues in our real world. I’m not necessarily just talking about historical events. Obviously the Targaryen/Baratheon/Stark struggles echo real-life historical periods such as the War of the Roses, something which many people have written of. Other plot points echo real-world historical events as well—sometimes it seems that GRRM has taken all of the most interesting stories from European (especially British) history and put them all into one grand story. It’s fun to find connections and echoes.

But what does it say about the modern world?

I think there are quite a lot of ways in which modern life in Western society(and maybe other societies as well) has influenced the story and characters in Westeros.

First of all, consider GRRM in the context of his times and his country, the USA. George Martin was born in 1948, and was very much an enthusiastic member of the ‘baby boomer’ generation that came of age in the late sixties, when the Vietnam war was in full swing and many young people were questioning the reasons behind it and the position of the USA in its self-proclaimed ‘white knight’ and Chief Protector of the World against Communism. Not the fight against communism itself per se-- few Westerners will defend the Stalinist regimes that held sway in most of the Eastern bloc during the Cold War--but there were questions to be asked about the moral rectitude of many of the methods and goals of the USA at that time.

Honor and Duty and the Conflict with Morality

GRRM, drafted into the army, listed himself as a ‘conscientious objector’ i.e, someone who refuses to fight on moral or religious grounds. Clearly he thought that the Vietnam was morally wrong. Of course in that turbulent time there would have been great pressure on him to do otherwise; and this forced himself to do a lot of thinking about the nature of patriotism and how far one should take it? Is there ever a time when disobeying one’s patriotic duty is the morally right thing to do? This is one of the major issues of that time in the USA, when there was still a draft and many young men were forced to join the armed forces to fight for something that many of them didn’t really have much of an opinon about—or even thought were morally wrong.

The obvious exemplar of this issue is Jaime Lannister; Jaime Lannister, the prodigy knight who was named to the King’s Guard at 15; and broke his vows when he slit the throat of the king he had sworn an oath to protect—in order to save both his family and all of the innocent lives in King’s Landing. Arguably this heroic and difficult action cost him his reputation, forever stained the office of King’s Guard and lost him the respect of most of the Lords, high and low, in Westeros, who forevermore have referred to him derogatorily  only as ‘the Kingslayer.

But he’s not the only one who goes through this issue. Jon Snow’s storyline explores this theme in depth as well, albeit in many different ways. For Jon, too, is an oathbreaker. But, other than his brief selfish lapse at the end of Game of Thrones, most of Jon’s choices are justifiable and skirt the line between oathkeeping and oathbreaking; and even his final decision to lead a host of Wildlings against the Warden of the North in Winterfell has some very valid justifications behind it. Yet history would not look kindly upon yet another rogue Lord Commander “invading the North” and making for Winterfell. Particularly if he lost, as in every similar instance past.

Tywin Lannister’s methods: the War in the Riverlands and the Vietnam War

Also reminiscent of the Vietnam War(and I think inspired of them) are the methods that Tywin Lannister uses when he sets loose his ‘dogs’ of war: Gregor Clegane, Amory Lorch, and the sellsword company of the Brave Companions. His orders, given to his brother and lieutenant Kevan Lannister to ‘set the Riverlands alight from here to the God’s Eye’ seem a bit more extreme than typical medieval warfare. These people kill and torture everything.”If it could be move, they killed it. If it could be eaten they’d taken it. If they couldn’t kill it or take it, they’d burned it.” Arya’s terrifying experience the Mountain that Rides’ force of vile child-killers and torturers reminds me of nothing so much as stories of ‘death squads’ in the Vietnam War like the Tiger Force. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_Force

All sides in all wars commit atrocities, I suppose. But some wars are worse than others at this kind of thing.

Slaver’s Bay and the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq

In a more contemporary parallel, I think that DAenery’s issues as Conqueror of the three cities in Slaver’s Bay also have some echoes in more recent American conflicts—namely, Afghanistan and Iraq.

It’s unclear how intentional this is. The Afghanistan war started in 2001 the year A STorm of Swords was published, Iraq in 2003. A Dance with Dragons was published(finally!) in 2011 in 2011, but some of the events and chapters were probably written before these wars; and others after the invasion. But GRRM has to be aware of the parallels, in my opinion. This man is not an idiot. And it’s hard not to see some of the same issues that Daenerys faces as parallels to that which the NATO forces in Afghanistan and the ‘Coalition of the Willing’ forces—the insurgency of the Sons of the Harpy; the bewildering alignment and non-alignment of various local forces, the impossible to fathom web of loyalties and enmities; the Clash of Cultures and the resulting confusion stemming from that; the initial bloody conquering followed by an attempt at government building. Of course one to one parallels are not really possible(they never really are in this series) but there is an exploration of all these issues in A Dance with Dragons. And like the real world in which the power vacuum created by the ousting of Saddam Hussein and the disarming of the Iraqi armed forces has helped spread  chaos and the rising of the Islamic State, so has ridding the Slaver Cities of their economy and stealing their army spread chaos and conflict though the entire region of Slaver’s Bay—with repercussions felt as far away as the slaving Free Cities.

Conflict and the War on—or for—the truth

In his depiction of the vast War of the Five Kings from various points of view on both sides of the conflict GRRM presents a very modern view of conflict that I think has a lot to say about how we process information that is handed to us. During war and conflict, so many narratives of good vs. evil, right vs. wrong, legality vs legality exist, many of them at conflict with each other. The players of Game of Thrones realize that it doesn’t really matter whether Joffrey is the rightful king or Stannis; what ultimately matters is who wins; and the victor will very much write the history. With the birds’ eye view of the conflict enfolding before our eyes, we can choose sides. A hundred years hence, it will not be so easy. In the wake of a total Lannister victory, for example, Stannis’ letter calling out the Baratheon children’s bastardy might be completely forgotten, or might be considered no more than an evil footnote of a rumor of questionable veritude.

, I have only to look at the complex conflict of Syria to find a contemporary example. In Syria, a corrupt leader struggles to hold onto his country against a force of many non-aligned factions. Empires (or pseudo-empires) such as NATO(especially the USA, Turkey, France and the UK) and Russia(with help from Hezbollah, Iranian factions) are playing in the conflict and not necessarily with the same aims. Look only to what the Western ‘truth’ of the matter and the Russian ‘truth’ of the matter(i.e., Russian and American/European propanda) to find a example of truths that oppose. Which truth will end up victorious? Will the ‘lawful ruler’ of Syria, Assad, prove victorious over the evil forces of terrorism; or will the a new order come into being, post-tyrannical, democractic and opposed to terrorist forces of ISIL, staunch allies of the Free West;; or will Da’Esh, the Islamic State conquer the forces of infidel evil and bring about their stated aims…? Only time will tell which ‘truth’ will win out. And maybe there will always be two or more truths if the ending is definitive enough.

No matter whose propaganda you choose to believe: Russia/Putin's or USA/NATO's, it's clear that neither side is being completely honest. They are warring for the truth itself. Because the Truth in these matters, ultimately, is relative. It's malleable. It's not absolute. 

The Threat of the Others and Global Climate Change

And finally,  we the readers and most of the characters focus on the issues before them, the War of the Five Kings and it’s aftermath; while north of the Wall  destructive force of demonic Ice Demons prepare to invade a land already weakened by war, about to be further weakened by what promises to be a nasty and brutal winter bringing starvation in it’s wake; and across the narrow sea Daenerys prepares an army of foreigners and highly destructive death machines(dragons) to invade at the same time.

It’s not as if the powers that be in Westeros don’t have rumors or warnings of the impending castastrophes….especially the one in the North. There have been plenty of warnings from Castle Black. But the realm’s inability to take it seriously, but aside the lesser conflict and act can be seen as a comment on our own present time and our own inability to see the impending disaster of Global Climate Change and take meaningful action against it.

There are  other issues of modern life which A Song of Ice and Fire explores; more personal issues, issues of families and relationships; love and wealth. This is only exploring the bigger, political issues, the issues that affect millions at once. But that will have to be addressed another post.