[email protected] 805-875-5153
dejneris

Game of Thrones Finale: Down with the Religion, Down with the Revolution!

0 Comments
Spread the love

Today: 564

Game of Thrones Finale: Down with the Religion, Down with the Revolution!

Every cultural product has a political dimension, and all politics rests on religion to the limit. Let us prove this rule by the example of the Game of Thrones.

So the Game of Thrones ended (sorry for the hype theme). In the world of the series, there were several movements that, with more or less success, can be called religious liberation. And all of them are morally and physically merged by the scriptwriters of the series.

The Brotherhood without the Banners, sort of Robinguds and nuns, someone like the Zoroastrians. They were morally merged when they surrendered Jendry to the Red Priestess, and physically merged in the war with the King of the Night.

There was a commune of conditional “Tolstoyans,” where Dog was hiding for a short time. They did not engage in any struggle, and therefore there is no moral need to merge them (“not dangerous”). They were just cut.

My favorites are sparrows. The movement of mendicant monks, rather, even of some kind of spirituals, brothers of the apostolic life, is such a typical social religious movement, which was numerous in the Middle Ages. At the time of the political crisis, they actively began to influence power in the capital of the Seven Kingdoms. They were merged morally as follows: they pressed power with the help of sexual morality, namely, they fought with the homosexuality of the brother of the younger queen and the licentiousness of the older queen, but our contemporaries do not like this, and indeed they were clerical. Physically, they merged in the explosion of the Baylor septa.

And, of course, Daenerys, the Destroyer of the Shackles, who raised the slave revolution, wanted to “break the wheel” of oppression. Messianic (as it turned out – pseudo-messianic) figure. It is clear that from the very beginning she was prepared for the role of Stalin's “Game of Thrones”, but the final series is still too propaganda. Here are all the clichés of liberal consciousness: “Do you want a revolution? – get repressions and seas of blood! ”,“ Yes, of course, society is imperfect, but with the revolution it will be even worse ”,“ dreams of a better world lead only and exclusively to blood ”. The final series speaks directly: Cersei and the other lords were better than the revolutionary Daenerys. Daenerys is beautiful, how revolutionary dreams are beautiful, but, chu! – be prudent, it’s better to endure the usual tyrant, revolutionary tyranny is a hundred times worse. The series could show the tragedy of the revolution, but he did not show it, but the madness, harm, unnecessaryness of the revolution. That agree is not the same thing.

Daenerys is killed by another pseudo-Messianic figure and a Christlike one – the dead and risen John Snow, and this is where his role in general ends. "Christ" of the series does not save the world from the invasion of the White Walkers, does not stop the destruction of the capital, in general it does nothing useful except the murder of Daenerys. That is, the "Christ" of the series is needed only to stop the revolution.

With Cersei and Daenerys generally funny. There were those who accused the series of indulging in feminism, etc. (my favorite scene: on the royal council Daenerys, most women, among them two men – castratus and a dwarf). There is no feminism here: during a crisis and social destruction, women come to power, both tyrants. But before the crisis and after it, in “normal” times, men rule (although in the North and the Iron Islands women still sat on thrones, but Westeros is still in the hands of men). The plot with women rulers in fact turns out to be anti-feminist, the main villains of the series are the villains Cersei and Daenerys (just in case, I’ll say that any parallels with the real Middle Ages are pointless, especially in the last season: we will examine the ideological message of a modern cultural product). Moreover, Daenerys is a typical male phantasy, a hysterical, dangerous and uncontrollable one that men must stop: the triumph of the patriarchy! The series does not have a “liberating” charge, even at the level of liberal political correctness. The revolution is dangerous, women are dangerous, religion is worthless, let the smart, the smart in the sense — unbelievers in nothing, “knowing” that nothing can be changed, men rule.

And what a man wins the Game of Thrones! The final series directly contrasts Daenerys with its "future" (utopia, a better world) and Bran with its "past" (because of some magic there remembers the past of Westeros). She is obsessed with utopia, she destroys the capital in revolutionary madness, she has to be killed. Bran is a figure, if not religious, then “mystical”, certainly – “memory of the world”, he knows the past, he will not create revolutionary follies, he is made the new king. The political message of the series: do not dream of a better world, it will be worse, trust in “experience” (that is, submission, traditions, etc.: be obedient!).

"Do not rock the boat, it will be worse" – this is the moral of the series. Oh, this "experience"! What does Bran remember? How was everyone killed, raped, conquered for centuries? How is this experience useful? What is the bad future for Daenerys? Nothing, she herself is bad, for she flew off the coils and burned the city out of the blue. We note, however, that this does not happen in history: neither Cromwell, nor the Jacobins, nor the Bolsheviks, nor the Yankees in the Civil War, nor Mao killed "just like that." There is a rational explanation for everything (which does not mean “moral justification”). But the series is designed for an average not very demanding consciousness: here the revolutionaries are killing everyone. Revolution = killing.

But one must still throw a bone to the liberal consciousness. Not only negative (“revolution is very bad”), but also positive: the state system in Westeros is changing from a hereditary monarchy to an elected one. Like "the path of reform, not revolution." Reforms, which of course are unlikely to lead to anything, as long as the system has not changed in any way (the Lords are all in their places) and the “game” will continue: the violence will continue, but not being “revolutionary”, it does not frighten: in essence, “The Game Of Thrones ”didn’t end with anything at all, everything was back to square one, and why it should not be understood as a happy ending (Sam Tarley cute suggests introducing democracy, they laugh at him: and rightly so, for democracy is not“ reforms ”and“ goodwill ” introduced; liberals somehow forget that liberalism, "human rights", etc., in They came to life and blood of "madness" in English, French and other revolutions. but the show somehow removed now and its message is clear: the revolution is not necessary now).

And all this is fraught with contempt for the people. When people want to do something themselves, they lose, like the movements of Mans the Raider, sparrows or the commune of the Dog. If people are doing good, then some kind rulers like Daenerys or John Snow, and not he. The people appear as a passive mass: they either throw it to death, or it goes hungry. Its only activity is a revolt senseless and merciless. Popular politics is impossible! – Here is another maxim of the Game of Thrones.

Any cultural product has a political dimension. The final episode of Game of Thrones is an agitation against revolution. Trust your masters, do not try to change anything.

One can imagine that “Game of Thrones” is a historical film and some Western-born BadComedian would have exposed it: if it had found a sea of ​​cranberries, juggles, etc. It would have restored the good name of our blond Leader.

What is absolutely typical of all this and what is rarely understood at the same time: rejection of revolutionary politics is associated with rejection of religion.

In the “Game of Thrones” there are fanatics burning little girls (the Red Priestess), there are corrupt, depraved clerics (supreme septon to sparrows), etc. For believing in God and believing in a better world is, whatever one may say, faith there is something that is completely alien to the liberal, philistine consciousness. Another world is impossible: neither as a utopia, nor as a "different world"; justice is not and never will be.

Read Bible Revolutionary Politics

Lecture by M. Steinman “Good and Evil in the Game of Thrones”

Lecture by Y. Soldatkina “John's Kingdom”: Christian Values ​​in the World of Game of Thrones

Popular Science Conference on the Game of Thrones Universe: Winter Is Coming

Subscribe to the Predaniya.ru channel on Telegram so as not to miss interesting news and articles!

Join us on the Yandex.Zen channel!