10 Reasons Game Of Thrones Is No Good For George R. R. Martin

10. The Title Is Still Horribly Misleading

There are three main narrative strands running throughout both A Song Of Ice And Fire and Game Of Thrones: the political machinations and warfare in the Seven Kingdoms; the rise of the Others and the fate of Jon Snow on the Wall in the far north; and the rise and fall of Daenerys Targaryen in the east. This whole massive story, offering a cast of thousands and told in huge, imposing novels is a saga €“ like the ancient poetry that make up classical myth €“ and has a name rich in metaphor, that befits this: A Song Of Ice And Fire. Game Of Thrones, by contrast, is named for the first novel in the series, which in turn is named for a euphemism for the scheming and intrigue in the Seven Kingdoms. It allows the implication that the brutality and betrayal that characterises these elements of the story are the most important in the show. But this is a fantasy epic, not historical drama. Dany€™s story is rich in eerie, resonant mythmaking, while Jon€™s has all the trappings of survivalist horror crossed with a kind of Lovecraftian dread. Both are as important to the story as €˜who ordered what murder€™ in King€™s Landing. Game Of Thrones has always been an awful and incredibly misleading title for the show, as evidenced by the fact that pretty much every show that owes its existence to HBO€™s flagship programme is a bloody tale of scheming alliances and sexy treachery. They€™ve all got the wrong idea, and this is a good part of the reason why.