User blog comment:LakenB/Game of Thrones through my eyes/@comment-5014364-20140404143933

...no, it's the opposite of that.

One of George R.R. Martin's main points was a deconstruction of the standard stereotypical plot elements of Fantasy stories.

People do not "die randomly" in Game of Thrones, they do die because this is what would realistically happen. It isn't like a fairy tale with designated heroes who win despite all the odds being against them.

Robb Stark doesn't overcome terrible hardships by finding a way to prevail. Nor does he "die randomly" due to cruel writing. Robb's a terrible politician. He's a deconstruction of the entire "plucky boy-king prevailing against impossible odds" stereotype. He's a good fighter but if you pay attention, every political decision he makes is a disaster. At the end, even in the TV series he admits he should have listened to Catelyn more than he did.

Ned Stark didn't prevail against impossible odds. The Lannisters and Littlefinger had bribed or manipulated control over so many forces in King's Landing that he could not undo Cersei's plan to put Joffrey on the throne.

If anything, we see the Lannisters consistently prevail against difficult odds, such as when they thought they'd lose the Battle of the Blackwater.

Did the Tyrells "prevail against hardship" by siding with the Starks, the weaker faction? No, as soon as Renly was dead, knowing that Stannis would never forgive them, they sided with the Lannisters as the sure winners.

And this brings up a major point: most armies don't fight against impossible odds and hardships. As soon as it looks like they're probably not going to win, fair-weather allies will abandon them:

The Boltons and Freys might have stayed loyal to the Starks and Tullys, to a point (at least, the Freys would have stopped helping after Robb married but wouldn't have actively betrayed him)...but after the Battle of the Blackwater it became obvious that the Lannisters would win, so they went with the sure thing and switched sides. They don't prevail against hardships, they back a winner. That's how real politics works.

The small handful who don't "back a winner" are those who know that the winners would never have them, i.e. Stannis's few remaining followers are those so close to him (mostly the Florents) that they know the Lannisters would execute them if they surrender. Robb's bannermen were united under him at first due to outrage at Ned's death, true, but also because they thought they could win. This then fell apart.

And the Night's Watch expedition beyond the Wall? They didn't prevail against great hardships and impossible odds against ice demons and zombies. The entire expedition was wiped out save for a handful of men.

Do you understand that this is a deconstruction of typical plot stereotypes?