Você está na página 1de 7

9/4/2014

Game of Thrones as Theory | Foreign Affairs

Hom e

In t er n a t ion a l Edit ion s

Dig it a l New sst a n d

Job Boa r d

A ccou n t Ma n a g em en t

RSS

New slet t er s
SEARCH

Log in

Reg ist er

(0 ) My Ca r t

Part of Th e Bes t of W eb in 2 01 2

Game of Thrones as Theory


Its Not as Realist as It Seems -- And Thats Good
By Charli Carpenter
MARC H 29, 2012

Commentary by foreign policy analysts on the first season of HBO's Game of Thrones stressed its supposed underlying theme of political realism. Thus one writer claimed that the TV show and the George R.R. Martin novels on which it is based "clearly demonstrate the power of might over right," and another agreed: "In this kind of harsh relative gains world, realpolitik should be the expected pattern of behavior." But a closer look of Game of Thrones suggests a different take. To be sure, life in Westeros is poor, nasty, brutish and short, and Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire series and David Benioff and D.B. Weiss' television program are laced with Hobbesian metaphors, Machiavellian intrigues, and Carr-like calculations of power. But the deeper message is that realism alone is unsatisfying and unsuccessful -- that leaders disregard ethical norms, the needs of their small-folk, and the natural world at their own peril. Jockeying for power by self-interested actors produces not a stable balance but suboptimal chaos; gamesmanship and the pursuit of short-term objectives distracts players from the truly pressing issues of human survival and stability. On the surface, ethical norms and honor receive short shrift in the series. Norms -collective beliefs about the proper behavior of actors -- are sometimes invoked, but usually only to foreshadow or bemoan their violation. [Spoiler Alert] Thus the first book, and season, begins with Ned Stark explaining to his son the proper rules governing executions -- and ends with Stark being executed improperly for his naivet. But much of the characters' behavior is in fact rule-bound: Catelyn could not have captured Tyrion without her father's banner-men following norms of fealty, and Tyrion could not have escaped her grasp had norms of the "kings' justice" not trumped Lysa's desire for an execution (and Catelyn's desire to retain a hostage). Even powerful characters sometimes follow rules to their own short-term detriment and frustration. Social relations in Westeros are sustained as much through bread-breaking rituals, arranged marriages, and promise-keeping as through backstabbing and treachery, and the power of such rules is only highlighted by their occasional breach. Lords and kings no less than oath-breakers are punished for violating custom and agreement -either explicitly or through the inability to convert their hard power into material successes. Contrary to Cersei's assertion, kings cannot always "do as they like": Ned and the chivalry he represented may appear to have been the loser at the end of book and season one, but Joffrey's disregard for basic standards of justice will return to haunt him as it did his predecessors. The true moral of the story is that when good rules are disregarded, disorder and ruin follow -- just as Thucydides' story of Melos,
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137360/charli-carpenter/game-of-thrones-as-theory?cid=soc-facebook-in-snapshots-game_of_thrones_as_theory-040914 1/7

9/4/2014

Game of Thrones as Theory | Foreign Affairs

some argue , when paired with his description of Pericles' death and Athens' fall, is meant to suggest that the gains that power achieves without justice cannot endure.

The true moral of the story is that when good rules are disregarded, disorder and ruin follow.
In Westeros, as in our world, norms exert power both by creating incentives for certain behaviors and by defining identities -- which in turn shape people's motivations, interests, and strategies. By following the rules and norms of the Night's Watch, ordinary criminals are reconstituted as protectors of the realm. Distinctive cultural norms surrounding death, sex, cuisine, and travel are what distinguish the Dothraki from Westerosi, not simply ethnicity. Power and norms together are what determine outcomes, in short, and the wisest actors are those who understand how to use both. Discarding realism's exclusive focus on the powerful, Game of Thrones pays attention to all sectors of society, including those at the bottom. Martin uses many plot devices to force viewers to see the world of the elites through the eyes of stewards, prostitutes, bastards, and dwarfs. Even seemingly marginalized characters are forced to reflect on their own relative privilege, as when Tyrion calls Jon out for whining over his illegitimacy and Bran for sulking about his disability when they have been bred in castles. Perhaps the most marginalized viewpoint in war literature, and political narrative more generally, is that of the enemy itself. Yet in Game of Thrones, even the despots, king-slayers, executioners, and slave-traders are humanized and contextualized. As Adam Serwer notes , "Tolkien's monsters are literally monsters ... [but] most of Martin's monsters are people. Just when you've decided to hate them, [Martin] writes a chapter from their perspective, forcing you to consider their point of view." Martin shows how gender, race, class, age, and disability combine to produce multiple gradients and forms of power in Westerosi society, just as much as differences in material capabilities. By mixing things up, moreover, he reminds the audience that these categories are often constructed rather than fixed: the strong and handsome find themselves crippled; princes become slaves; noblewomen turn into stable hands; bastards grow to be commanders. Indeed, the riddle of power from Clash of Kings, highlighted in one of the trailers for Season 2 , suggests as much: "In a room sit three great men: a king, a priest, and a rich man with his gold. Between them stands a sell-sword, a little man of common birth, and no great mind. Each of the great ones bids him slay the other two. 'Do it,' says the king, 'for I am your lawful ruler.' 'Do it,' says the priest, 'for I command you in the names of the gods.' 'Do it,' says the rich man, 'and all this gold shall be yours.' So tell me -- who lives and who dies?" The answer from the book -- "that is up to the sell-sword" -- outlines the underacknowledged power of the lower orders. Peasants, infantry, sailors, stewards, camp followers, smiths, millers, and the like are the social foundations on which the elites stand and through whose allegiance they ultimately rise or fall. Today's academic realism has no such sophisticated social theory, whereas alternative, critical approaches put it at the center of their framework. Perhaps nothing underscores this more than the portrayal of gender relations on the show. Westeros and surrounding lands are of course deeply misogynistic societies, but this hardly makes the show and novels sexist, as some have claimed . Rather, they force the audience to confront the violent reality of feudal gender relations. Martin's in-your-face depictions of debauchery, sexual assault, trafficking, forced marriage, and illegitimacy refute the gendered myth that knights and armies exist to protect women and children, just as they refute the political myth that states exist to
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137360/charli-carpenter/game-of-thrones-as-theory?cid=soc-facebook-in-snapshots-game_of_thrones_as_theory-040914 2/7

9/4/2014

Game of Thrones as Theory | Foreign Affairs

protect nations from serious external threats. In standard fantasy, female characters who fail to play along with these myths tend to be punished (compare Eowyn to Arwen in Lord of the Rings). Not so in Martin's realm: Sansa, the only character who appears to buy into notions of chivalry, is painted as pitiably naive. The stronger female characters of Martin's world are indeed constrained by gender norms, but rather than embody them they chafe at and try to maneuver around their circumstances, each representing different feminist ripostes to the gender-blind realist narrative of statecraft and world politics. Catelyn draws on her maternal power to guide her son's army. Daenerys, buoyed by the soft-power tactics she learned from her handmaid, seizes power in the wake of her husband's death, using it to, among other things, advance a feminist liberation policy in the lands across the Narrow Sea. Cersei uses her beauty and family connections ruthlessly, but constantly risks ensnarement by the very gender scripts she has so cleverly manipulated. Osha the wildling toys with Westerosi class and gender norms in conversations with Theon, then playfully throws them away in favor of a blunt ecolibertarianism. Arya refuses the roles society has set for her as a girl; warriors Brienne and Asha (whose name has been changed for the TV series) follow different paths to power on masculine terms. Finally, Game of Thrones suggests a critique of the myopic focus on national security over the needs of individuals and the collective good -- a theme more consistent with human security doctrine than with classic political realism. Consider the foreign policy of Daenerys, the slave bride turned Bedouin queen of Dothrak. Newly bedragoned, but with husband and child dead, few followers, and no territory, she begins season two with little but soft power, ambition, and a concern for the oppressed. Tribal lords mistrust her, but refugees and former slaves flock to her banner, and her moral standing is crucial to helping her gain increasing power in the lands beyond the Narrow Sea. Daenerys faces hard choices and embodies contradictions, and she ends up grappling with all-too-familiar challenges and limits of humanitarian intervention and liberal imperialism. But she tries to balance the demands of power and principle rather than retreat into cynicism or indifference -hardly the standard realist response. Environmental disaster, meanwhile, threatens all even as it is ignored by most. Far from being an allegory for immigration reform , the story of the Northern Wall and the forces it holds at bay is about the mistaken belief that industrial civilization can stand against the changing forces of nature. The slogan "Winter is coming" is meant literally as well as metaphorically: planetary forces are moving slowly but inexorably toward climatic catastrophe as the infighting among kings and queens distracts them from the bigger picture. This is a collective action story, with the Night's Watch issuing increasingly desperate alarms yet receiving indifferent shrugs. The wight menace gives the term "human security" a new meaning, presenting Westeros with a common threat against which it might ally, but even so cooperation is difficult. The answer will eventually come from alliances with northern barbarian hordes, fringe populations who are the first victims of environmental change, and with these alliances will come dramatic tradeoffs in political culture, as newcomers bring with them distinct ideas about politics, society, and religion. The argument seems clear: if existing governance structures cannot manage emerging global threats, expect them to evolve or fall by the wayside. As a foreign policy story, Martin's tale is far less conservative and far more transformative than meets the eye. A parable about the consequences of unchecked realpolitik, it does not celebrate power and the powerful but challenges and interrogates them. Society is complex, roles and identities are varied and contingent, and division risks disaster. Hic sunt dracones indeed.

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137360/charli-carpenter/game-of-thrones-as-theory?cid=soc-facebook-in-snapshots-game_of_thrones_as_theory-040914

3/7

9/4/2014

Game of Thrones as Theory | Foreign Affairs

ON THIS TOPIC
ESSAY, SEP/OCT 2004 ESSAY, SPRING 1983

Why Democracies Excel


Joseph T. Siegle, Michael M. Weinstein , a n d Morton H. Halperin

Reconsiderations: Periods of Peril: The Window of Vulnerability and Other Myths


Robert H. Johnson

DISPELLING A MYTH "Economic development makes democracy possible" asserts the U.S. State Department's Web site, subscribing to a highly influential argument: that poor countries must develop economically before they can democratize. But the historical data prove otherwise. Poor democracies have ...

Mankind has a pressing psychological need to explain the world; it has no such need to see it explained correctly. Patrick M. Morgan In the post-World War II era Americans have had a pressing need to come to terms with two critical international uncertainties: the future character of Soviet ...

COMMENT, JAN/FEB 2012

The Future of History


Francis Fukuyama

Something strange is going on in the world today. The global financial crisis that began in 2008 and the ongoing crisis of the euro are both products of the model of lightly regulated financial capitalism that emerged over the past three decades. Yet despite widespread anger at Wall Street ...

LATEST COMMENTARY & NEWS ANALYSIS

More from the publisher of Foreign Affairs

Newsletters
E-mail (example: johndoe@foreignaffairs.com): *Get the latest commentary and analysis delivered straight to your inbox.
Email

SIGN UP

19 Comments
Sort by Best

Foreign Affairs
Share

Login
Favorite

Join the discussion


Guest

4 days ago

Daenerys and soft power in the same sentence? This doesn't sound right. The girl has dragons which are basically WMD.
6
Reply Share

Michael Cugley

Guest 4 days ago

Not when she started out. To begin with, all she had were small kitten-sized lizards she didn't even know how to feed. They weren't actually *useful* as anything other than symbols or curiosities until the House of the Undying.
3
Reply Share

Juan Rodriguez

Michael Cugley 4 days ago

Y es but her source of power was always resting on the potential of those lizards. There is no Mutually Assured Destruction as no other kingdoms posses this weapon. This an extra narrative that complements the complexity of her character. She uses soft power but her WMD gives her credibility.
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137360/charli-carpenter/game-of-thrones-as-theory?cid=soc-facebook-in-snapshots-game_of_thrones_as_theory-040914
4
Reply Share

4/7

9/4/2014
4 AJ_Olding

Game of Thrones as Theory | Foreign Affairs


Reply Share

Guest 2 days ago

In the beginning her power was certainly soft power.


Reply Share

Me 6

a year ago
Reply Share

Great article, thank you for writing it.

Branimir Kuntek

a year ago

I have to disagree with this article's secondary thesis. I think Martin very much writes to the benefit of the 'realpolitik' theories. Take the example of Daenerys: much of her troubles comes from her inability, or unwillingness, to radicalise her revolution. Someone suggested (Daario?) to massacre the 'old nobility', and she refused. She had, in trying to achieve peace and acceptance (they will never accept her), made the error of leaving them diminished but with much of their power intact. Had she slaughtered them, divided their properties to the freedmen and a class of smallholders, she would have won the love and loyalty of the greatest part of the population (as well as revitalising the economy). Y et, her morality came in her way, and this left her in the bad place. Same script with Robb Stark, and so many others.
5
Reply Share

Branimir Kuntek

Branimir Kuntek a year ago

I should have added: "Appearing just, but being a pr*ck", that's the definition of realpolitik (I'm basically quoting Machiavelli here :D). Joffrey's mistakes are that he LOOKS like a ... well.
1 jebozwell
Reply Share

Branimir Kuntek 2 days ago

There is an assumption in your analysis that I think should be examined...."Had she slaughtered them, divided their properties to the freedmen and a class of smallholders....(as well as revitalizingthe economy)... Is this really true? She would have won "some" love and loyalty, but what about the economy part? Has any past Marxist type effort to divide the riches left a country with an improved economy? Have any similar efforts improved the lives of the poor? Look at recent history for answers, China, Russia, North Korea, South Africa, Iraq. What all of these revolutionary instances have in common is that the people who ran the country and managed the economy (no matter how corrupt and inefficient) were fundamentally and logrithmically better at it than the revolutionaries. Revolution and re-distribution have invarioubly hurt the poor and powerless more than any others. All the revolutionary act really accomplishes is substituting one set of masters for another, everything else is just the fantasies of the hopeful.
Reply Share

Anastasia Caramanis

4 days ago

Eowyn punished? Her consolation prize was the lovely Faramir. How is that punishment? :-)
2 Strac5

Reply Share

2 days ago

And it was supposedly Y OU CFR PEOPLE who were secretly ruling? Y ou are idiots, and this vacuous essay proves it. That "when good rules are disregarded, disorder and ruin follow" is a platitude, obvious even to a mediocrity like Leo Strauss. Y ou haven't even figured out yet who will take the throne and why it had to be so. Spare us the
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137360/charli-carpenter/game-of-thrones-as-theory?cid=soc-facebook-in-snapshots-game_of_thrones_as_theory-040914 5/7

9/4/2014

Game of Thrones as Theory | Foreign Affairs

phony nuance of claiming that villainy is an artificial Kantian category. A piece of $h!t is a piece of $h!t, whether or not he is persecuted by others. And there will be persecution.
Reply Share

jebozwell

2 days ago

How is soft power and concern for citizens working out vis-a-vis Russia and the Ukraine. Soft power is only useful, when hard power backs it up. Can the west respond to Russia with concern for our own citizens and their rights and freedoms? Will income-equality mean anything to Putin? Doubtful, soft power is about the self-restraint of a nation's interests based on institutional rules of interaction. Self restraint is based on what? Either the desire to continue to participate in the institutions from which one benefits, or the fear of the national power of other countries. Ukraine is great example of a leader who has determined that he has more to fear from a Democratic revolution in a neighboring country than he has to fear from either the institutions of the liberal world order, or the only major superpower on the planet. What Putin really fears is that a major segment of the Russian speaking world will establish a functional representative democracy. Once this happens the rule of the oligarchs in Russia can be measured in months. What is destabilizing Russia is the West's liberal, egalitarian, humanism, not realpolitik. The author's mixing up social diatribe against "conservatism" and capitalist economic theory, with international relations theory, the two don't really mix well.
Reply Share

DAMLA ALTINIIK

2 days ago

this is so great article.DAMLA ALTINIIK


Reply Share

Not My Name

3 months ago

Amazing article. I love the part about "Winter is Coming"; it was like a light bulb went off in my head.
Reply Share

SUSAN WEBER

a year ago

i think i already knew this...i dont look to HBO for political theory...does anyone?
Reply Share

Farah M. Hage Ali

a year ago

Absolutely, Spellar is right. Fictions cannot be applied on reality. Heroes and heroins in fictions represent the good leader that cannot be found in real life and can never exist. Unfortunately, nations are affected by direct and indirect decisions enforced by some powers, thus creating puppets rather than true leaders. They turn to be following instead of making their own decisions that should emerge from the needs of their people. Different threats affect their decisions and in turn their people has to bear the undesirable and aloof decisions so that their private and business interests are not affected by any political decision that they try to make. All these realities are not found in fictions, because in fictions the hero sacrifices everything he owns in order to save his people. The good overwhelms the bad at the end whereas in reality the bad is the good and the good has no place at all because he is a total dummy.
Reply Share

Javed Mir

a year ago

--The true moral of the story is that when good rules are disregarded, disorder and ruin follow -So those nations/societies which want to survive need to have good rules having universal appeal and not to impose their own thinking only serving their interests.
Reply Share

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137360/charli-carpenter/game-of-thrones-as-theory?cid=soc-facebook-in-snapshots-game_of_thrones_as_theory-040914

6/7

9/4/2014

Game of Thrones as Theory | Foreign Affairs


Levon Petrossian
Javed Mir 4 days ago

I don't think he means the "moral good." Maybe just "good" in terms of efficiency and the rule of law?
Reply Share

Jason Keays

a year ago

Power resides only where men believe it resides. It's a trick. A shadow on the wall. George R.R. Martin
Reply Share

spellar

a year ago

Fiction is best left on the shelf of fiction , but there is a huge flaw in books of today that speak on the topic of politics , and that is nature has nothing to do with politics as the engine behind a movement that is based on a core nature of a group , tribe , region , nation , or a people in the hundred of millions will act not on the bases of poltics but rather a belief system that is the core of their being . So as Nations consider politics internally , they are blind to the outer forces of non based political parties , but rather these are forces threaded together by a nature and not a religion . Politics of today is not aware of the real threat to stable growth and development , considering the fact that the USA has crippled its economic growth through foreign policy missions that has cost trillions in the last decade with ongoing debt of today going to many programs the cover everything from care of Vets to missions funds in the Billions each year to boost up failing Govs . I find it more than questionable when Americans have great concern for internal economics and less concern for foreign policy , when infact foreign policy has chewed far more out of the economic stability of the Nation . While the politics point to internal factors , the external factors of a gathering of people in the hundreds of Millions world wide of a common nature and not religion is uniting
see more
Reply Share

Subscribe

Add Disqus to your site

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137360/charli-carpenter/game-of-thrones-as-theory?cid=soc-facebook-in-snapshots-game_of_thrones_as_theory-040914

7/7