Proprietary Game of Thrones Post:
Posted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 5:57 am
I didn't realise Game of Thrones started last week! Watched it last night while eating icecream and crying tears of joy.
So once again, and for the last time, it's time for a crossover between the GoT universe and our own. For those who have bafflingly deprived themselves of the pleasure of reading every single one of my posts on this forum, here is what I'm referring to:
Trump is as carefully manufactured as any other politician. He is a heel. In other words, a good baddie. Good baddies are charismatic, intelligent and efficient. They get the job done without pondering about ethics and popularity (the Wall, trade wars, travel ban[?]). They are contrasted with bad baddies (rapefugees, Clintons, SJWs) and bad goodies (establishment politics in general, MSM[?], deep state, cuckservatives and disillusioned liberals who have seen the light).
The bad baddies are usually fewer in number and yet potentially very threatening; their flaws are inhuman and irredeemable and thus their demise is enjoyable. The bad goodies have more human flaws - stubborn, partial, misguided, incompetent etc. They can be sympathised with and are redeemable. The good goodies are even scarcer than the bad baddies and yet boldly await A New Hope (copyright Disney-Lucasfilm). To keep things real they require some faint flaws to adorn their natural goodness.
Returning to the good baddie/s - he always has a humane side (Trump loves his family, is somewhat avuncular even when confronting bitter enemies). He also tends to support both goodie and baddie ideas which the others consider to be incompatible with each other for various reasons (welfare but not for illegal immigrants, protectionism but low taxes). Within this resolution of *needless* delusions lies the good baddie's heart and his worldly ideal, and also the only traces of honesty in the narrative. Too much dishonesty here would ruin immersion. Anyways, the bad baddies and recalcitrant bad goodies are eventually destroyed and the remaining turn into good goodies or baddies.
All this to keep things realistic. Also, I have summarised Game of Thrones and other "brilliant" web/cable TV shows.
In marketing and showbiz, as in law, lying and illusions are literally bread and butter. Many people know this, and expect their money's worth.
It's only the first episode but the expanded moral universe for people who would feel uncomfortable burning witches or loving their enemies aka "moral grey areas" (as presented by the show) has shrunk considerably. Both the good and evil characters are, respectively, becoming more "efficiently" good and evil as described above. I don't know or care if the source material reflects this, but in a story that straddles the febrile border separating nihilism and heroism this was to be expected. There are only three possible outcomes - transcend both (greatness in art), kill all the hope, kill all the pain and doubt.
The result? I was just bored and will only watch it to the end for that very reason. To be fair the show at its best did manage to entertainingly reflect some aspects of late capitalism's performative introspection. "Romance in Dragon flat Major" is the end of "Brazil" in all but (much inferior) mien. The neoliberal/neoreactionary/neofascist serpent consuming itself, its heroes and monsters both old and new slipping back one by one into the mire that spewed them.
Our forebears scooted along forest floors, picking up and eating figs. They ate those figs day after day for hundreds of thousands of years. We are genetically predisposed to do so, and evidence can be seen by looking in a mirror. We have dainty scooting feet, tender grasping hands and little fig-eating mouths. The figs taste delicious to us no matter how many we eat. We lack the equipment or disposition to be predators. We cannot run after prey, bite them and feel orgasmic pleasure as fresh blood streams down our gullets.
Since we aren't lions or wolves we can only fake it. In the place of DNA sequences the males crafted a defective philosophy that misunderstands fundamentals, that proposes a kind of lion-ending lion. The females emulated it and added some stipulations of their own. Hence the tired charade of masculinity and femininity as order and chaos, hardness and softness, reason and passion. Two sides of the same counterfeit currency - a "balance" that itself requires constant (re)balancing.
Our myths made us into hunters two million years ago, but only to a point. Our behavior changed but not our natures. We are still fig-eating monkeys, scurrying around, pretending to be gods but falling far short. To become more godlike we must adopt a new philosophy, jettison our bankrupt culture, and learn something new rather than repeat what we already know to be false.
So once again, and for the last time, it's time for a crossover between the GoT universe and our own. For those who have bafflingly deprived themselves of the pleasure of reading every single one of my posts on this forum, here is what I'm referring to:
Trump is as carefully manufactured as any other politician. He is a heel. In other words, a good baddie. Good baddies are charismatic, intelligent and efficient. They get the job done without pondering about ethics and popularity (the Wall, trade wars, travel ban[?]). They are contrasted with bad baddies (rapefugees, Clintons, SJWs) and bad goodies (establishment politics in general, MSM[?], deep state, cuckservatives and disillusioned liberals who have seen the light).
The bad baddies are usually fewer in number and yet potentially very threatening; their flaws are inhuman and irredeemable and thus their demise is enjoyable. The bad goodies have more human flaws - stubborn, partial, misguided, incompetent etc. They can be sympathised with and are redeemable. The good goodies are even scarcer than the bad baddies and yet boldly await A New Hope (copyright Disney-Lucasfilm). To keep things real they require some faint flaws to adorn their natural goodness.
Returning to the good baddie/s - he always has a humane side (Trump loves his family, is somewhat avuncular even when confronting bitter enemies). He also tends to support both goodie and baddie ideas which the others consider to be incompatible with each other for various reasons (welfare but not for illegal immigrants, protectionism but low taxes). Within this resolution of *needless* delusions lies the good baddie's heart and his worldly ideal, and also the only traces of honesty in the narrative. Too much dishonesty here would ruin immersion. Anyways, the bad baddies and recalcitrant bad goodies are eventually destroyed and the remaining turn into good goodies or baddies.
All this to keep things realistic. Also, I have summarised Game of Thrones and other "brilliant" web/cable TV shows.
In marketing and showbiz, as in law, lying and illusions are literally bread and butter. Many people know this, and expect their money's worth.
It's only the first episode but the expanded moral universe for people who would feel uncomfortable burning witches or loving their enemies aka "moral grey areas" (as presented by the show) has shrunk considerably. Both the good and evil characters are, respectively, becoming more "efficiently" good and evil as described above. I don't know or care if the source material reflects this, but in a story that straddles the febrile border separating nihilism and heroism this was to be expected. There are only three possible outcomes - transcend both (greatness in art), kill all the hope, kill all the pain and doubt.
The result? I was just bored and will only watch it to the end for that very reason. To be fair the show at its best did manage to entertainingly reflect some aspects of late capitalism's performative introspection. "Romance in Dragon flat Major" is the end of "Brazil" in all but (much inferior) mien. The neoliberal/neoreactionary/neofascist serpent consuming itself, its heroes and monsters both old and new slipping back one by one into the mire that spewed them.
Our forebears scooted along forest floors, picking up and eating figs. They ate those figs day after day for hundreds of thousands of years. We are genetically predisposed to do so, and evidence can be seen by looking in a mirror. We have dainty scooting feet, tender grasping hands and little fig-eating mouths. The figs taste delicious to us no matter how many we eat. We lack the equipment or disposition to be predators. We cannot run after prey, bite them and feel orgasmic pleasure as fresh blood streams down our gullets.
Since we aren't lions or wolves we can only fake it. In the place of DNA sequences the males crafted a defective philosophy that misunderstands fundamentals, that proposes a kind of lion-ending lion. The females emulated it and added some stipulations of their own. Hence the tired charade of masculinity and femininity as order and chaos, hardness and softness, reason and passion. Two sides of the same counterfeit currency - a "balance" that itself requires constant (re)balancing.
Our myths made us into hunters two million years ago, but only to a point. Our behavior changed but not our natures. We are still fig-eating monkeys, scurrying around, pretending to be gods but falling far short. To become more godlike we must adopt a new philosophy, jettison our bankrupt culture, and learn something new rather than repeat what we already know to be false.