Showing posts with label Game of Thrones. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Game of Thrones. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 14, 2019

Reviewing "Chivalry in Westeros"


My review is posted at an appropriate time.




Jamison, Carol Parrish. Chivalry in Westeros: The Knightly Code of a Song of Ice and Fire. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company, 2018. Pp. 217. $29.95. ISBN: 978-1-4766-7005-8.

   Reviewed by Steven Muhlberger
        Nipissing University (retired)
        Steve.Muhlberger @gmail.com 


This century's most important work of popular medievalism is without a doubt George R.R. Martin's multi-volume A Song of Ice and Fire and the 8-year-long TV series A Game of Thrones which is based upon it. (In the following review I will call this work, books and TV series both, Game of Thrones, in line with common usage). Thousands upon thousands have read the books or pirated the episodes off the internet, and "Game of Thrones" has become a catchphrase used to describe vicious, bloodthirsty politics or Machiavellian intrigue. It is now a cheap but evocative way of characterizing our current situation as "medieval," that is, "bad." 

Game of Thrones has transcended normal levels of popularity. Readers and writers and film producers have swarmed over it, not only demanding more of the story but also the opportunity to create their own versions. The desire to engage with Game of Thrones springs from the fact that having caught the imagination, the story and the setting are both familiar to the audience and capable of being added to, to suit contemporary taste. Earlier examples are Ben Hur, the book and the movies, and the Lord of the Rings and other works of J.R.R. Tolkien. Ben Hur made the Holy Land and the passion of Christ, a sacred setting and story for a 19th century audience, more accessible; Tolkien made a vast magical world by mining the aesthetics of the Middle Ages. Martin also builds on a medieval foundation. The world of Game of Thrones, the fictional continent of Westeros, is medieval enough to be familiar and unique enough to make the story fresh. 

Jamison is one of the many who find Martin's mix of real and invented medieval history fascinating. She is certainly well qualified to critique and enjoy Game of Thrones--her academic expertise includes both medieval literature and medievalism. The preface and chapter one establish the parameters for her examination. Medievalism is defined in a number of ways perhaps most usefully by Tom Shippey as "the study of responses to the Middle Ages at all periods since a sense of the medieval began to develop." [1] Of course this is a very broad definition, and Jamison narrows it down; of the many possible medievalisms, her subject is Martin's contribution to the literature of chivalry. 

Chivalry in Westeros systematically works its way through a variety of issues that arise in any discussion of chivalry. Jamison is particularly interested in "the code" of chivalry and how the ideals professed by various characters in Chivalry in Westeros and the stories those characters cite in discussions with each other shape an informal debate on the nature of chivalry and its relationship to other values supposedly held by the society at large. The way in which traditions emerge from such debates, oral and written, is the subject of two whole chapters. One suspects that this analysis may have been included for the benefit of students or teachers who have not thought much about the workings of literary tradition before picking up this book. The treatment certainly is quite extensive with discussion of many actual medieval chivalric works.

Interestingly, Jamison gives pride of place to an examination of the chivalric virtue of franchise. For the purposes of this review, franchise can be defined very briefly as nobility, though it might be equated with chivalry. Franchise, like chivalry, is multi-faceted. Here it is examined in detail because it reflects the idea that real knights are of noble birth and have such obvious attributes as provable noble descent and physical beauty. Of course, neither in our Middle Ages nor in Westeros are all knights actually noble, or in unambiguous possession of the proofs of superior status. Jamison cites many examples of "social climber" knights. Franchise is tricky--and the possession or lack of it is a matter of debate. Many people who in fact do not possess basic characteristics of knighthood take a rather cynical view of the old standards; others need to fake it if they are to be anything more than "hedge [poor] knights" scraping by on the basis of a modicum of prowess or willingness to engage in treachery. The result is that chivalry, despite the sins of many who claim to be practitioners and a recurrent skepticism about its reality, is clearly central to the culture of Westeros. The bulk of the book examines such virtues and characteristics of chivalry as loyalty, prowess, vengeance, and peace-weaving and how they actually shape behavior in Westeros.

Discussion of chivalry is a discussion of ideals versus reality. It is in the nature of such debates that they are unlikely to be resolved. In Jamison's presentation, the problems with chivalry spring not from the faults of individuals, but are inherent in the incoherence of chivalry. It is a matter of broken ideals rather than broken people. [2] Likewise, it shows that whether one consults with medieval romancers, the chroniclers of the Round Table, or George R.R. Martin on the reality of chivalry, the same themes emerge. 

Jamison states at the beginning of Chivalry in Westeros that her interest in using Martin's work was as a jumping-off point for teaching medieval literature and medievalism. In the last chapter, "Conclusions," she returns to this point--how Game of Thrones can be used to enhance (or, admittedly, serve to hinder) a non-specialist's understanding of the Middle Ages. She makes a rather convincing case for the usefulness of Game of Thrones in teaching medievalism, namely when it is done well and the students are receptive. Jamison refers to her experience in incorporating Game of Thrones in courses on medieval literature. Some students wrote papers touching on such sophisticated topics as the creation of "authenticity" in our accounts of medieval history and culture. Likewise students used Game of Thrones to shed light on modern concerns. Her descriptions of her students' accomplishments were very persuasive. This student work sounds on a par with work that has been produced by some of my better students when they get really inspired by a topic. At this point in history, Martin's vivid pseudo-medieval world can lead some students and scholars in interesting directions.


--------

Notes:
1. "Medievalisms and Why They Matter," Studies in Medievalism(s) XVII: Defining Medievalism(s), ed. Karl Fugelso (Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell & Brewer, 2009), 45-54. 

2. p. 113: "[Le Morte Darthur] is not simply a tragedy of character; it is a tragedy of ideas...chivalry is noble but fatally flawed, fatally unstable and so too must be its practitioners," quoting Kenneth Hodges, Forging Chivalric Communities in Malory's Le Morte Darthur (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), 2.

Friday, August 25, 2017

Written in Blood

Yesterday my copy of Game of Thrones versus History: Written in Blood arrived.  This is noteworthy because I wrote chapter 3, "Chivalry in Westeros."  Despite my involvement in this project (which included me being paid real money), I have always been skeptical of these attempts to teach history to the general public -- or at least the general fandom -- by drawing comparisons between the fictional treatment (there are, as you may imagine, more than one about Middle Earth) and  what we pros call "the real stuff." (No, we don't do that, we are too stuffy.)

But in this case, it works.  The "real stuff" is explained and interpreted with respect, as is the fictional environment.   The writing is good and accessible!  The scholars who wrote the various articles are really very good indeed.

I have to wonder what they are like in the classroom,  Actually the editor, Brian Pavlac, in telling how he got involved in the project gives us reason to believe that he at least knows how to enchant undergraduate students.

Must reconsider my earlier attitude.

Sunday, June 25, 2017

Rape in Game of Thrones and ISIS -- realistic medievalism?

Jeff Sypec examines in his blog the idea that rape in Game of Thrones is a positive element in George R.R. Martin's fictional version of the Middle Ages -- more realistic because more brutal. At the same time some ISIS supporters claim Islamic authenticity for their mistreatment of non-ISIS women and girls. Is there any truth to this?
Jeff, who is quite an intelligent guy, looks at this question from a number of different angles. For instance:
Even though [Amy S.]Kaufman [author of "Muscular Medievalism" in the 2016 issue of The Year’s Work in Medievalism,] isn’t blaming Game of Thrones viewers for ISIS, her article won’t sit easily with many fantasy fans. I appreciate that she isn’t just sniping on Twitter; she’s drawing a sober, thought-provoking analogy. I like her strident contrarianism, and I think she’s right to wonder what the pop-culture ubiquity of Game of Thrones actually means. Even if you’re certain the answer is “not much,” why not ponder it further anyway? As I write this, my TV is advertising “Game of Thrones Night” at Nationals Park in D.C., complete with t-shirts and a chance to “visit an authentic Iron Throne.” If someone mugs for a selfie with a TV-show prop on a fun night at the ballpark, what is it they’re trying to be a part of? Why do they need to believe so badly that fictional violence gets us closer to the “real” Middle Ages?
“The medieval era is the dumping ground of the contemporary imagination,” Kaufman writes, “rife with torture, refuse in the streets, rape, slavery, superstition, casual slaughter, and every other human vice we supposedly stopped indulging in once we became ‘enlightened.'” It’s worth asking what we miss seeing in the Middle Ages if we’re invested in only this view. Despite what George R. R. Martin believes, his dark, despairing fantasy isn’t any more “authentic” than the Disney-princess version, nor is it less harmful. Observations like Kaufman’s always bring me back around to a blunt conclusion by medievalist and Tolkien scholar Tom Shippey: “There are . . . many medievalisms in the world, and some of them are as safe as William Morris wallpaper: but not all of them.”
It might be worth reminding both Jeff and Amy that the idea of the Middle Ages was invented specifically to serve as a background for recent progress. A very large number (if not all) the depictions of the Middle Ages will always be negative in many respects.
I am pleased by the excellence of Jeff's blog post. He's a survivor of what us (habitual classifiers) will probably call the Golden Age of Blogging. (There is no Golden Age of Twitter, sorry.) Nice to have such a meaty discussion.
Image: Jeff's from Maryland, and the state flag is a welcome reminder of an earlier age of medievalism.  Jousting is, or has been, the state sport.

Monday, May 01, 2017

Busy, busy, busy

I contibuted very little to this blog in April, not because I was lazy, but because I got lots of work done on some of my projects.  (Others of course are stalled.)

My collaborator Phil Paine and I spent most of the weekend working on the Chronicle of the Good Duke and we made significant progress.  I hope we can have a draft suitable for submission by the end of the year.  A draft of the "Deeds of Arms" volume on judicial combat already sits on the desk at Freelance Academy Press.

Something that is really done:  I have a chapter in the book "Game of Thrones vs. History:  Written in blood" which volume is now out.  I haven't seen it yet, but am waiting for my contributor's copy to show up.  I want to sit down with a paper copy and enjoy reading the whole book!

I had an interesting book-related experience this weekend, and a cheerful one.  I went to an SCA event near Ottawa and while I was there I had three people come up to me and say how much they enjoyed my book.  I think each of them had read more than one, though which books was a little unclear:
"I enjoyed your book!"
"Which one?"
"The one on chivalry!"
Vague, yes, but pleasant nevertheless.  And get this:  one of my enthusiastic fans bought lunch for me and my lady!


Thursday, June 02, 2016

Sunday, November 04, 2012

Is this our fate?

I was taking part last night in a Wine Gala to raise money for the arts in North Bay. It's a regular event – and quite a bash.  These things usually have a theme, and this year's was "medieval and Renaissance."  A lot of people, both volunteers and patrons, were dressed up in costume. In fact my role was to stand around in armor, looking as impressive as possible.

What makes this occasion worthy of comment on this blog is that IT (not information technology, but "it" in appropriate all caps) seemed to be everywhere. And what was it?

Game of Thrones.

It was the music in the air – the soundtrack for the series came over the sound system. It was in smart remarks by performing comedians about "Game of Thrones wear." It was… EVERYWHERE!

Okay, I am a little paranoid and given to making wide generalizations prematurely, but be warned, medievalists, we may be stuck for the rest of our careers with the imagery of Game of Thrones. The sarcastic border guard may just be a premonition.

Be aware… Game of Thrones is coming. Has come. May refuse to go anyway again.

Sunday, May 20, 2012

Fun times crossing the border


There haven't been a lot of fun times crossing the border in ten years, but on my way to Kalamazoo for the International Congress on Medieval Studies, I shared a light-hearted moment with a border guard.

He asked me where I was going and I replied that I was attending a conference on the Middle Ages.

He asked for more detail, and I said we studied the entire Middle ages.

"So," he said, "you're going to sit around and watch Game of Thrones."

I laughed and said, "That might be an idea, because I am an episode behind."

Straightfaced, he went on: "Because the Middle Ages were exactly like Game of Thrones."  And with a look he waved me on.

Monday, April 02, 2012

An Irishman can't help himself -- scorn for Game of Thrones

John Doyle in the Globe and Mail:
A second reason is an aversion to medieval-fantasy material that is ludicrously inauthentic when compared with real history and genuine mythology and legend. I’ve no problem with the Arthurian legends because they arise from a bona fide cultural impulse. As an Irishman of a certain age, I could talk to you till your eyes fell out about the magic of An Táin BĂł CĂşailnge (The Cattle Raid at Cooley), the central story of the Ulster cycle of legends. It’s about an attempt to steal a particularity fertile bull. But it teems with warriors and magicians, dominated by the god-like warrior CĂş Chulainn. There are even ravens swirling in the mist. It shares much with Game of Thrones in surface detail but there’s a powerful, authentic poignancy to An Táin, and a rawness to the action, the work of many hands and storytellers, generation after generation. In comparison, Game of Thrones is slick and contrived.