Game of Thrones 4.06 "The Laws of Gods and Men" 5/11/14 NO SPOILERS

[EllisDee]

We don’t really know how unfavorably Westeros views slavers anyway. When Dany’s brother asked Jorah what he did wrong, and Jorah explained the slave thing, Dany’s brother laughed and commented how when he becomes king such trivial matters won’t be an issue.

It’s possibly much of the ruling class in Westeros feels the same way Dany’s brother did, and the “slavery is bad, m’kay” idealism was limited to just a quirk of Robert Baratheon.

The Starks certainly don’t seem to have any qualms with slavery, for example. Wasn’t that wildling girl captured as a slave?

[DigitalC]

The Starks were the ones who punished Jorah for being a slaver in the first place.

[Push_You_Down]

@Angua

Its the whole if/when she gets back to Westeros question: sure Ser Jorah’s an unknown in Essos, but in Westeros, his reputation is a) highly tainted and b) that of a slaver. If Dany comes back to Westeros and it becomes known that she put him in a position of power, she’s basically tarred with the same brush.

It’s been mentioned in the show a teeny bit but… do people in Westeros REALLY care that much about slavery?

[Angua]

@Push_You_Down

It’s been mentioned in the show a teeny bit but… do people in Westeros REALLY care that much about slavery?

Given that Eddard Stark was ready to execute him, I’d say it was something of a big deal.

[MaxTheVool]

@EllisDee

The Starks certainly don’t seem to have any qualms with slavery, for example. Wasn’t that wildling girl captured as a slave?

She was captured while her party was trying to kidnap Bran Stark. She was then held as a prisoner of the Starks, but it was quite clear that (for instance) she was not raped, and when Theon got notions along those directions he was quite firmly told off by Maester Lluwin. (Later on, of course, she did go to his bed, but as part of a successful escape plan.) I don’t think we got enough information to really define her status, whether she had a predefined sentence to serve out, etc., but the fact that she was so well treated that she became fiercely loyal to and protective of the Stark boys argues against anything that could be meaningfully called “slavery”.

[alphaboi867]

@EllisDee

We don’t really know how unfavorably Westeros views slavers anyway. When Dany’s brother asked Jorah what he did wrong, and Jorah explained the slave thing, Dany’s brother laughed and commented how when he becomes king such trivial matters won’t be an issue…

I get the impression that it’s similar to Medieval Europe. Outright de jure hereditary chattel humans-as-livestock slavery is a barbaric foreign custom that the Westerosi can feel superior that they don’t practice, but at the same time stuff serfdom, indentured servitude, debt bondage, and penal enslavement are unexceptional facts of life. To sure in practice (& to a modern eye) most of this things resemble slavery (especially re Littlefinger’s prostitutes), but there subtle difference (at least in theory).

[Acsenray]

@EllisDee

The Starks certainly don’t seem to have any qualms with slavery, for example. Wasn’t that wildling girl captured as a slave?

What makes you think so? Feudal lords did think there was a distinction between feudalism and slavery.

[SciFiSam]

I really like the specualtion that the trial by combat might be between Oberyn and the Mountain. Tywin calls for the Mountain, and Tyrion calls out to see if anyone will stand for him, possibly in a sarcastic way, then starts to suit up, and Oberyn languidly folds himself out of his seat and says he’ll fight for him. Nobody could tell him he wasn’t allowed.

If that does happen, that could still be in line with what Tywin really wants.

Tywin definitely is ammoral. He has principles, but not morals. They’re not the same thing. His principles boil down to “save the family line above all else.”

The other option is that this buys Tyrion time and he simply escapes. A scar-faced dwarf on the run would have a hard time hiding, though.

Varys is playing the long game, I think. Despite his nod at the throne, he can’t possibly ever want to sit on it himself - a foreign-born eunuch as King? He’d last about a second. But he doesn’t want everyone to know he’s actually a principled person doing it all for the realm. Actually, a nod toward the throne could indicate that he’s doing it for the realm, too, even if he knew that wasn’t what Oberyn would take away from it.

“I never forget anything, sadly.” What exactly did that mean?

Theon did kill two little boys for no really good reason. Sometimes, in the real world, people wish all sorts of horrors on people who do that sort of thing. It’s interesting seeing those horrors actually come to be in a work of fiction; I doubt anyone actually likes it.

@Kobal2

True. But at the very least I think we can safely say he hates Littlefinger’s guts and wants to oppose him at every turn. Which requires him to remain the imminent grease for the time being and the foreseeable future.

Imminent grease? Was that intentional? If so, not bad.

[quote=“Acsenray, post:69, topic:688219”]

If you’ll pardon a nitpick – “whoever has the power” (it’s the subject of the clause, not the object).

Nope, it’s the object. Subject does/gives something to the object. Not that I think it’s necessary to use whom as opposed to who these days; it sometimes sounds nicer, but that’s all.

[Kobal2]

@SciFiSam

“I never forget anything, sadly.” What exactly did that mean?

I took it to mean “Yes, I know. You’re a good dude and what I’m doing is rotten. But I gotta do what I gotta do even if it makes me puke in my mouth a little. I apologize.”

Imminent grease? Was that intentional? If so, not bad.

Yes it was, and thanks

[Acsenray]

@SciFiSam

@Acsenray

If you’ll pardon a nitpick – “whoever has the power” (it’s the subject of the clause, not the object).

Nope, it’s the object. Subject does/gives something to the object.

(Tangent)

Sorry, this is wrong. The entire clause (whoever has the power) is the an object within the context of the whole sentence. But the who/whom choice is based on its role within the clause. It is the subject of “has”.

He has the power.
Who has the power.
Whoever has the power.

It remains in subjective case even when the entire clause acts as an object of an external preposition, verb, whatever.

[SciFiSam]

Actually, you’re right. I wasn’t sure when posting, and should have known that my circumspection probably meant I was wrong.

[Acsenray]

It’s all good

[Frylock]

Out of curiosity, what’s the authority on that? I don’t mean to open up the descriptive/prescriptive can of worms, I’m actually just asking, how did you guys decide which of you was right? For example, what’s the source of the premise that the case is to be determined by the word’s role in its clause rather than by its clause’s role in the sentence?

[EllisDee]

So is the classic salutation “To whom it may concern” incorrect, then?

@SciFiSam

Theon did kill two little boys for no really good reason.

I love this line to death. It carries with it the vaguest indication that there are some really good reasons for killing two little boys. To paraphrase Chris Rock: “There’s a reason to kill little boys. Just don’t do it.”

To go even further on this tangent, I’ve always felt his “Just don’t do it” was directed at the old man (in his routine) and the little boys (in this example), not the person doing the violence. As in, there’s a reason to throw an old man down the stairs, and whatever that reason is, the old man had better not do it.

[Kobal2]

@EllisDee

To paraphrase Chris Rock: “There’s a reason to kill little boys. Just don’t do it.”

I ain’t saying he was right to do it… but I understand

[Snarky_Kong]

@EllisDee

So is the classic salutation “To whom it may concern” incorrect, then?

I love this line to death. It carries with it the vaguest indication that there are some really good reasons for killing two little boys. To paraphrase Chris Rock: “There’s a reason to kill little boys. Just don’t do it.”

To go even further on this tangent, I’ve always felt his “Just don’t do it” was directed at the old man (in his routine) and the little boys (in this example), not the person doing the violence. As in, there’s a reason to throw an old man down the stairs, and whatever that reason is, the old man had better not do it.

Well, I think a defense for pushing Bran out the window is that if he lived that Cersei, Jaime, and her children would be killed. Self defense + saving three innocents by hurting one innocent. Even if you don’t agree, it’s a hell of a lot more compelling argument than anything Theon could have come up with for his act.

[Dunkelheit]

@EllisDee

So is the classic salutation “To whom it may concern” incorrect, then?

I don’t think so. “It” is the subject, “concern” is the verb, and “whom” is the object to which (to whom) the verb happens. “It concerns me” – “Me” is the object. Someone will probably correct me if I’m wrong.

[Dunkelheit]

@EllisDee

We don’t really know how unfavorably Westeros views slavers anyway. When Dany’s brother asked Jorah what he did wrong, and Jorah explained the slave thing, Dany’s brother laughed and commented how when he becomes king such trivial matters won’t be an issue.

I think that says more about what a shitheel Viserys is than what the Westerosi think about slavery as such.

[Acsenray]

@EllisDee

So is the classic salutation “To whom it may concern” incorrect, then?

On the contrary, It’s correct. “It may concern him/whom.” It’s the object.

[pancakes3]

The grammar issue can be defended from both positions.

“Kowtow to who(m)ever has power”

who(m)ever is in a prepositional phrase which makes it an object yet it’s also the subject of the X has power clause. I’d say that the prepositional phrase takes precedence and it’s correctly whomever.