The Role of Compromise in Game of Thrones

[The following contains spoilers for both the Watchmen series and Game of Thrones (Season 1 and Novels)] In the heralded graphic novel, Watchmen, Rorschach stands as a gritty beacon of absolute justice in a rapidly decaying society. And, by the end of the story, his unwavering determination to do what is “right” leads to his demise. It is Rorschach’s unyielding desire to punish all wrongdoing that prevents him from understanding the utilitarian perspective of his allies-cum-adversaries Ozymandias and Dr. Manhattan. Unfortunately, Rorschach’s inability to compromise for the greater good, literally destroys him, and he can no longer do good in the world.

The ethical twists and turns of Watchmen transpire in a modern world under an organized political and social system. However, the convoluted machinations depicted in Game of Thrones multiply under a feudal system fueled by filial allegiances. The dynastic struggles for the Iron Throne of Westeros stand alone as alluring depictions of intrigue and drama but also appear to have a central message: Turmoil necessitates compromise. In the world of Game of Thrones, all those who will not bend, are broken or killed.

Within this dramatic allegory (described as “The Sopranos of middle-earth”) Lord Eddard Stark acts as a type of medieval Rorschach, a principled hero in an era of moral chaos. And he too stands as an example of the need for compromise. Ned’s unflinching support of incumbent king and friend, Robert, blinds him to the ruler’s ethical and intellectual flaws. As Ned slowly comes to realize his friend’s shortcomings, he still refuses to engage in the political maneuverings of those surrounding the throne and finds himself ill-prepared to meet the threat of a coup when it inevitably comes. As a result, Ned suffers a fate similar to Rorschach’s.

However, by no means is Lord Stark the only example of destruction from an inability to compromise. Other plotlines of Throne attest to the bend or break climate of Westeros as well. Viserys Targaryen pursues the Iron Throne single-mindedly, and his unwillingness to deviate from his original scheme ends with his execution. Conversely, his sister, Daenerys overcomes being sold to an alien culture precisely because she willingly embraces the dissimilarities of KhalDrogo’s horde. Because she adapts, Daenerys transforms from a mere political asset to an independent power as a fireproof dragon tamer.

Further, the success stories in Game of Thrones are a perfect models of social Darwinism—adaptation for survival. For example, Ned’s bastard son, Jon Snow, joins the Night’s Watch at the northern wall as an entitled braggart. Though he initially falters, Jon adapts to his new station by shedding his identity of pseudo-nobility, which enables him to learn the skills necessary to combat the supernatural White Walkers.

Whether these are an intentional critique of real-world events or simply the byproducts of a well-told story, the parallels to current events are too relevant to be ignored. In today’s world, congressional deadlocks split along party lines, citizen protestors focus on the extremes in order to get attention, and even the U.S. military presence abroad appears to be stubbornly set in its ways.

Remaining aloof from the ethical ramifications of a “soft” moral stance, the message from the Westeros’ free-for-all is clear: Compromise, adapt, and concede, or yours will be the next head on a spike.

James Ged is a writer and sci-fi/fantasy geek who watches too much cable TV. Most of the time he blogs for CableTV.com, but you can also follow his TV musings at TV Buzzer.