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.
