Game of Thrones begins....

[Martinus]

So Drogo dies in 10, Ned in 9, 8 Araya Escapes, 7 Robert dies, 6 Viserys dies, Ned and Jamie Fight.

Lame having Ned die so late, won't give us much of the war starting up.

Does the war happen in book 1?

I'm sure there's some bits  of it, the deal with the Freys, the battle in the forest where Jamie gets caught, king of the north, etc...

That synapsis I linked makes it look we'll see that battle in episode 9.

[Josquius]

So Drogo dies in 10, Ned in 9, 8 Araya Escapes, 7 Robert dies, 6 Viserys dies, Ned and Jamie Fight.

Lame having Ned die so late, won't give us much of the war starting up.

That's what the second season is for...

They're not going to cover the whole of GoT?
hmm....makes sense....

  Okay, at this point I have no idea what you're asking.  They are covering the entirety of GoT (the first novel in the Song of Ice and Fire series).  The entire series is not being stuffed into 10 episodes.  There wasn't an incredibly large amount of the war (in fact, just a series of early skirmishes and one important battle) in the first book, all of which can easily be covered in the last 3 episodes of the season.

But if Ned is being killed in the 9th episode then that just leaves one episode for the war.
It seemed you were saying they were splitting GoT and having the second series not purely as the second book but the end of GoT too. This would let them go out on what they think is more of a cliffhanger and solve the problem of 'what if things catch up with George?'

[jimmy olsen]

Pay attention, that main battle from Game of Thrones happens in episode 9.

As a note, whenever a Brit say "series" instead of season I'm overcome with rage and the desire to punch him in the face.

[Ed Anger]

Pay attention, that main battle from Game of Thrones happens in episode 9.

As a note, whenever a Brit say "series" instead of season I'm overcome with rage and the desire to punch him in the face.

Both of you need a good beating with a slapjack.

[The Minsky Moment]

Perhaps it IS crude. Does that make it incorrect?

Yes, because it misses many essential aspects of the phenomenon and exaggerates one particular dimension.

What value does a code of social conduct have other than as a tool to safeguard existing social hierarchies in a manner that keeps bloodshed on an acceptable and predictable level?

First of all, you've just changed your characterization.  Second "feudalism" is far more than just a code of social conduct.  Third, codes of social conduct can serve many potential values or purposes.  Fourth - posing the question in terms of "value" artificially narrows the inquiry - I would think that would be particularly apparent for someone claiming to be a moral relativist.

[Slargos]

Perhaps it IS crude. Does that make it incorrect?

Yes, because it misses many essential aspects of the phenomenon and exaggerates one particular dimension.

What value does a code of social conduct have other than as a tool to safeguard existing social hierarchies in a manner that keeps bloodshed on an acceptable and predictable level?

First of all, you've just changed your characterization.  Second "feudalism" is far more than just a code of social conduct.  Third, codes of social conduct can serve many potential values or purposes.  Fourth - posing the question in terms of "value" artificially narrows the inquiry - I would think that would be particularly apparent for someone claiming to be a moral relativist.

I would try to reason with you, but I doubt we'd get anywhere.

I'd love to hear you explain how Feudalism (or any political system you can think of) is anything more than a tool to enforce the rule of one individual or group of individuals over others. In essence the establishment of, and safeguarding of, a social hierarchy.

You can bitch all you like about the complexity of a modern car, but ultimately it shares the fundamental purpose of legs, that which is transportation from point A to point B.

[grumbler]

I'd love to hear you explain how Feudalism (or any political system you can think of) is anything more than a tool to enforce the rule of one individual or group of individuals over others.

Well, there's my Languish "WTF????  " moment for the day! 

[Slargos]

Nevermind.

[jimmy olsen]

I thought the Sword of Morning was the best knight that Bran Stark knew?  No melee unfortunately, but that was to be expected I suppose.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzM_TQqlY3w

[Habbaku]

I thought the Sword of Morning was the best knight that Bran Stark knew?  No melee unfortunately, but that was to be expected I suppose.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzM_TQqlY3w

Brandon Stark isn't Ned's dad--he was his brother.  I don't believe Rickard (his father) is on record anywhere saying who he thought the best was.

[jimmy olsen]

You are correct, it's been too long since I've read the books.

[Viking]

Ive been speculating that Rhaegar might still be alive and he might be hiding as mance rayder, this is the argument that I made for it. The best argument against is of course Martin saying that Rhaegars body was cremated after the Trident. Assuming that Rhaegar has his Patrocolus and is alive after the battle, is there anything wrong with my reasoning?

I'd like to suggest an alternative for Rhaegar being alive. I'd like to start, not with Rhaegar himself, or some imposter/confederate donning his armor at the trident and dying in his place. I'd like to start with the three heads of the Dragon. Assuming R+L=J is true then I'd like to suggest some common features for Jon and Dany.

- Mother dead in childbirth.
- Birth happens during a Baratheon attack.
- Life saved by honourable man.
- Raised in exile.
- Mentored by a Mormont.
- Special relationship with house Symbol.
- Earning great success on own merit from nothing.

I'd like to suggest that the son of Mance Rayder is ready to fill all these steps as well.

- Mother dead in childbirth.
- Birth happens during a Baratheon attack.
- Life saved by Jon Snow.
- To be raised in exile from homeland.
- Still no Mormont mentor
- What is the free folk Symbol?
- No great deeds yet

Mance Rayders son fits the pattern set by Dany and Jon when they were at the same stage.

Then there is the issue of Mance and Rhaegar, they don't look similar. Rhaegar has a striking look with silver hair and purple eyes, while Mance is described as looking unremarkable. However, I think this might either be explained by living 15 years north of the wall or a use for the plot device of the Faceless men introduced with Jaqen H'ghar.

The other issue is the origin story given to Mance Rayder by the Halfhand. The Halfhand does say that Mance was the best Raider they ever had, which fits with the stories of Rhaegars ability to excel at anything he did. The Halfhand might have been mis-informed by Mance or even Lord Commander Mormont (in collusion with Jorah and even Ned Stark to preserve the targaryen blood).

Then there is the personality. Both Mance and Rhaegar are of the same age, both lovers of music and lore rather than great fighters, both jacks of all trades.

The babe is still too young to have done anything, but why is the babe in the book at all? To provide a source of kings blood at the wall? If the kid has kings blood, then so does mance, so this seems a hollow plot point. To provide Sam with a bastard to get gilly to the south? Gilly's own kid serves this purpose just as well.

Naturally this is just speculation. But if you find Maege Mormont or Jorah Mormont anywhere close to the Tarley Holdfast of Horn Hill where Gilly and Mance's heir are then you can take this idea more seriously.

[Josquius]

Nah.
Would be rather crappy for him to be still alive only to then die as he tries to attack the wall (he did die right? Or is he still a prisoner? Cannot recall)

[Viking]

You're getting very boorish lately. I expect you have a better explanation, then?

To suggest that an entire complex social system can be reduced to a simple mechanism for exploitation by a ruling class is the very definition of a crude Marxist analysis. Your are correct that I could have put it more politely. 

As to the second question, I think we would have to define the parameters of the feudal system that is being addressed.  The one that appears in the Martin novels is too poorly specified to really discuss.  AFAIK there are some suggestions concerning how it works -- landed property seems to be main source of wealth for the "lords" other than Lannisters and their mines and a few others that collect tolls and customs; there are feudal rights (eg hunting); and the land appears to be tilled by a mix of free peasants and yeomanry.  But the details are missing - the precise nature of noble status - what it denotes and how one acheives it is unclear, as is the precise nature of peasant tenure and their frequencies.  It does appear there is considerable opportunity for both upward and downward mobility.

In "A Clash of Kings" Bran and Maester Luwyn hold court where they get reports and discuss harvests being set aside for winter not only for winterfell but for all the bannermen in their holdfasts. They comment on the ammounts set aside and in a few cases order some lord to set aside more. So obviously the lords do have rights to portions of the harvest, which is just like feudal lords did have. Peasants (either individually or as commons) would be allowed to work land and then pay either a portion or a fixed ammount of their produce to the lord holding the land.

[Viking]

Nah.
Would be rather crappy for him to be still alive only to then die as he tries to attack the wall (he did die right? Or is he still a prisoner? Cannot recall)

Stannis holds Rayder as a hostage while the Night Watch want to execute him as a deserter. Stannis might still kill Mance for blood for Melisandre's blood magic (the royal blood of edric storm being used earlier to cast a spell on Robb Stark, Joffrey Baratheon and Balon Greyjoy, which was followed shortly by the death of all three). That is why Jon smuggles Mance's son (in my theory, his half brother) to Horn Hill with Gilly and Samwell Tarly. Mance styles himself "The King Beyond the Wall" and thus his blood might count for royal blood in blood magic.