#TableOfContents | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

magic-inks · 21 days ago

Text

TALLINN UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES

Linda Tint

Authenticity as a moral source in “A Song of Ice and Fire” and video game, based on the novel series

MASTER’S THESIS

supervisor: Oliver Laas, PhD

Tallinn 2019

“I hereby confirm that I am the sole author of the thesis submitted. All the works and conceptual viewpoints by other authors that I have used, as well as, data deriving from sources have been appropriately attributed.”

Tableofcontents

Introduction

Background 4

Structure 7

Abbreviation and citations used in the thesis 9

Vocabulary of the most used terms 10

Chapter 1

Basic concepts of the research. A Song of Ice and Fire (1996) and major research questions 13

Theoretical concepts 13

I.3.Psychology of motivation and emotions by V. Vilunas (1990) and hierarchy of needs by

A. Maslow (1943) 16

A song of Ice and Fire (1996) and phenomenon of convergence culture by Henry Jenkins (2006) 22

Moral decision-making as an important theme in the series Game of Thrones 24

In the second part of this chapter, I’m going to consider construction of moral decision- making in Game of Thrones, as a part of my research question. 24

Chapter 2

Construction of moral decision-making in the Game of Thrones, according to the previous researchers 25

Practical moral wisdom in the Realm 25

Authenticity in the Game of Thrones, according to Tom Hansberg (2017) 26

Connection between moral decision-making and authenticity in the TV series of Game of Thrones: critical analysis of the idea of Tom Hansberg about connection between Taylor’s concept of authenticity and social interaction in Game of Thrones 31

Chapter 3

Construction of authenticity and moral decision-making in the Telltale video game “Game of Thrones” 32

Video games culture and studies 32

Telltale Game of Thrones: plot, origins and idea 35

Moral decision-making in the Telltale Game of Thrones 36

Paradoxical, or morally extreme situation: a term 37

Telltale Game of Thrones: playable characters and their moral decision-making 38

Construction of authenticity and decision-making in worlds of minor moral choices of the video game by Telltale 51

Chapter 4

Construction of authenticity and moral decision-making, and paradoxical situation in the Song of Ice and Fire. Semiotical model by Lubomir Dolezel as a way of explanation. 52

Construction of authenticity and moral decision-making, and social interaction in the series “A song of Ice and Fire”: analysis of characters 52

Authenticity and social process in the Game of Thrones series and video game and model of possible worlds by Lubomir Dolezel (1998) 57

Concept of Lubomir Dolezel and analysis of a character from the original fiction of Game of Thrones 59

Chapter 5

Theory of impossible worlds of Game of Thrones 61

Video Game of Thrones as a metafiction of original series 61

“Impossible” world of the impossible world of Telltale Game of Thrones, or super metafiction. 62

Chapter 6

Construction of authenticity in the Game of Thrones: two components. Practical moral wisdom and being morally good: distinction in the literature fiction and video game based on Game of Thrones 65

Chapter 7 Conclusions 70

Bibliography 75

Application 1

Telltale Game of Thrones: non-playable characters 83

Summary 87

Introduction

Background

I.1.Constructionofauthenticityasaresearchquestion

A word “authenticity” originates from Greek “autentikos” - “true, acting on its own responsibility” (Joseph, 2016). Authenticity as a concept is recognized in philosophy, and in humanistic and existentialist psychology. Focus on authenticity is considered to be a way of treatment of neurosis in humanistic psychology which was established by Carl Rodgers

(Rodgers, 1961). In existentialist psychology, based on critics of psychoanalysis, authenticity is an ideal of healthy mentality – being authentic, true to yourself and knowing yourself (Joseph, 2016). In philosophy, which I consider in works of Charles Taylor, authenticity is also an ideal – however, not of mental health, but of developed culture (Taylor, 1992).

I would like to consider how authenticity is constructed in the novel series by George Martin “A Song of Ice and Fire” (1996-2011), HBO TV show Game of Thrones (2011-2019) and video game by Telltale production based on the fiction universe (2014). I’m going to look at construction of authenticity by the way of analyzing characters of the Song of Ice and Fire from the point of view of concepts of authenticity by Charles Taylor and Carl Rodgers, and also I will look at secondary sources in which authenticity of characters of “The song of ice and fire” is analyzed.

I.2.Constructionofmoralchoice,ordecision-makingasaresearchquestion

Morality is an important direction of discovery in literature, media fiction and video games, because question of what is moral and evil goes to the heart of what it means to live the right way (Pojman, 1997). Second research question of this work is how moral choice, or decision-making, is developing for characters in the novel series by George Martin “A Song of Ice and Fire” (1996-2011), HBO TV show Game of Thrones (2011-2019) and video game by Telltale production based on the fiction universe (2014). The world of the series is full of “moral conflicts” which start from the beginning: the main twist of the plot in the novels is the conflict among the clans of the Realm pretending at the main power – Iron Throne – and the conflict began because of discovery of a secret marriage between son of a king and bride of one of subjected families in the Seven Kingdoms. It was a main reason of civil war and moral conflicts described in the novel series, and I think that it’s possible to find structure of moral decision-

making of characters there, using method of comparative analysis of existing researches on the topic (Silverman, 2017).

I.3.Methodology

I’m going to discover the research questions by method of analysis of authenticity and moral decision-making of characters of Game of Thrones, according to concept of authenticity by Charles Taylor, and concept of moral decision-making by Virginia Wallen. I will also make critical analysis of approaches to authenticity and moral decision-making in Game of Thrones including research by Christopher Leonard (2011), Tom Hansberg (2017) and Robert Thomas (2017).

By the way of comparative critics of ideas of those authors, I’m going to expand the idea of construction of authenticity and moral decision-making in the Game of Thrones and develop a separate view on how it’s built in this fantasy fiction. I’m also going to compare the ways of construction of authenticity and moral decision-making in the series of Game of Thrones with the ones that I’m going to discover in the video game based on the novel series – Telltale Video Game “Game of Thrones” (2014).

When I consider moral decision-making in the video game, I use method of statistical analysis of moral choices made by the players (Krichevetz, 2012). This method has analogy with the method of statistical analysis used in psychological studies: when a majority of choices is made while completing the experimental test, this majority is taken as the most possible probability of the choice made by population, or average person from the population. On a base of statistics, conclusions are made in experimental psychology. I would like to consider majority and minority of choices made by players in the video game based on the TV series of Game of Thrones as a statistical factor, which proves that in case of majority of choices made for a concrete character in the video game, the most possible fictional world of the game is

developing, and in case of minority of moral choices the least possible fictional world is developing. I consider moral decision-making in both of those worlds which are forming on a base of statistics of moral choices. I will talk about this method more in chapter 4, where I consider the video game.

Structure

In chapter 1 I’m introducing basic theoretical concept, the novel and TV show series of A Song of Ice and Fire, and justify construction of authenticity and moral decision-making as major research question. In chapter 2 I’m going to move to consideration of ideas of previous research on moral decision-making and authenticity in Game of Thrones. Robert Thomas was the only philosopher who applied theory of virtues of Aristotle concretely into the world of Game of Thrones, and I consider his article in a context of observation of previous research on the topic. I make my own analysis of moral decision-making of characters, as an example of how Aristotle’s theory of practical wisdom worked in the series, making a reference at Robert Thomas as the inventor of idea of such analysis. I analyze article by Tom Hansberg who claims that there is a connection between moral decision-making and authenticity in the Game of Thrones, and also that there is a connection between authenticity and social interaction. I’m going to consider the second point of Hansberg in more detail on example of characters from Game of Thrones series and will formulate an opposite statement towards the world of Game of Thrones video game. I would say that connection between authenticity and social interaction of fictional characters in the video game of Game of Thrones is different from the original series, which is connected with the structural differences of fictional worlds analyzed by Lubomir Dolezel (Dolezel, 1998). Explanation of the differences from the point of view of Dolezel would be made further in chapter 4.

In chapter 3 I make observe of research on video games and consider psychological theory as a point of view for studies of the video games. I introduce the video game by Telltale based on fiction series in more detail and consider construction of authenticity there, according to idea of its difference from the original fiction which was claimed in the previous chapter. I will consider fates of playable characters in the game and look how moral choices made by players who create the story-lines of the characters affect the fictional world of video game. I will consider concept of authenticity formulated by Charles Taylor applying to game characters and I would study their social interactions, in order to see how social interactions in the game influence moral decision-making made by characters. I will repeat idea from previous chapter that the connection between authenticity and social interaction goes in a way different from the original fiction, because a factor of participation of a player arrives in the video game.

In chapter 4 I’m going to find out the core reason of the described differences in construction of authenticity and moral decision-making in TV series and video game of Game of Thrones. I will look at the reason from the point of view of semiotic model of possible worlds by Lubomur Dolezel – a model that claims that every literature fiction has possible worlds of itself. Video game presents such a possible world towards the literature fiction of Game of Thrones. I’m going to look at the specific nature of social process in fiction which was described by Lubomir Dolezel and consider nature of social process in the video game. I will state that social process in the video game fiction is less chaotic than in the literature fiction and hence it affects construction of authenticity in a different way than in the metafiction. Nature of social process in the series and video game is the reason of difference of connection between authenticity and social interaction, and consequently – moral decision-making.

In chapter 5 I move to a minor research question and consider theory of metafiction by Lubomir Dolezel which explains specific construction of moral decision-making in the Telltale video Game of Thrones. I claim that video game as a metafiction gives rise to another possible world of Game of Thrones – world of minor moral choices made by players, and construction of moral decision-making there is identical to the world of original fiction of Game of Thrones, which confirms its status of metafiction.

In chapter 6 I make a distinction between morally wise decision-making and actual morality, or moral goodness, of characters in the Game of Thrones. I consider motivation and authenticity as sources of moral goodness of characters, constructed in the novel series and video game differently.

In chapter 7 I make conclusions and statements for further research. Application consists of the description of non-playable characters from the Telltale video game.

Abbreviationandcitationsusedinthethesis

Throughout the thesis, the quotes from episodes of Telltale game will be cited as “Telltale game, episode: name of episode”, or “Telltale game, episode”. For example:

“Asher is more dangerous to Whitehills, according to the words of one of the non- playable characters” (Telltale game, episode 6: Ice dragon). Or:

“It wasn’t too long, I was asking for you help with Margaery. And what did you do? ” (Telltale game, episode 4).

In the bibliography, I give a reference to a full list of game passes downloaded on Youtube which I considered. I make research on basis of my own game pass and game passes made by players from Youtube, which include alternative ways of playing the game.

The novels of A Song of Ice and Fire will be cited as “The author and year, chapter: sub-chapter”, or “The author and year: chapter”, or “Name of the book: chapter”, or “Name of the book, chapter: sub chapter”. For example:

“We have no crown, your Grace” (Martin 2005, chapter 39: Katelyn). Or:

“Armor yourself in it, and it will never be used to hurt you” (A Game of Thrones, Chapter 5: Jon I).

Or:

“- Noone, - she would answer, she who had been Arya Stark” (Martin 2005: Arya II).

Quotes from the HBO TV series Game of Thrones will be cited as “HBO season: episode”. For example:

“It sounds like a story that could have happened in Realm and even has similarity with Jon Snow who, like Rodrik, once came back from the dead” (HBO Season 6: Episode 2).

Vocabularyofthemostusedterms

In this part of introduction I make brief description of the terms I’m going to use in my thesis. Some of them will be considered in detail in the further text.

Moral Philosophy

I use moralphilosophyto refer to theoretical concept of morality by Aristotle. In context of moral philosophy, I often use terms such as "right”, "wrong”, "permissible”, "ought”, "good”, "evil", “vile”, “cunning”, “kind” in their moral contexts (Pojman, 2006).

Ethics

I use ethics to refer to values and moral principles of communities and characters in the fiction of Game of Thrones. In context of this term, I use such terms as “rights”, “duty”, “honor”, “heroic action”, “deeds”, “plotting”, “scheming”, “manipulation”, “planning” (Pojman, 2006).

Paradoxical,ormorallyextremesituation

I use this term when I mean a situation where a fictional character has to overcome cognitive dissonance created by the situation of moral choice and has to make a decision in order to solve the paradox in a context of social interaction and accept cognitive dissonance. I will describe the term in details in chapter 4 where I talk about the video game.

Cognitivedissonance

I use term cognitive dissonance referring to a theory of cognitive psychology of Leon Festinger, which I describe in chapter 4.

Decision-making

I use term decision-makingwhen I refer to a process of making a moral choice in a social situation.

Goodmoraldecision,orsuccessfulmoralchoice

By goodmoralchoice, or practically wise decision-making, I understand a choice which leads a character to survival and “flourishing” (Irwin 1985).

Badmoraldecision,orfailedmoral choice

By bad moral choice, or practically unwise decision-making, I mean a choice which leads a character to death and/or unhappiness.

Personalquality

I use term personal quality when I refer to a personal trait of a fictional character which is established in the story and defines most of his decisions.

Unstablepersonality

By term of unstablepersonalityI mean personality of a character who has uncertain self-knowledge.

Motivation

I use term motivation when I mean psychological term of a complex of processes – motives, thoughts, states and needs, which provide activity of a person towards realization of a purpose (Vilunas, 1990).

Egocentrism

Egocentrism is a psychological term which means disability to take into account point of view of another person (Piage, 1969)

Statisticsofdecision-making

By this term I mean statistics of decision-making of players in the Telltale video Game of Thrones. Statistics varies depending on majority of choices made by players around the world. I use statistics as a factor which shows probability of moral choices made by fictional characters in the game, according to a theory of statistics applying to humanities (Krichevetz, 2012).

Moralconflict,ormoraldilemma

By moral conflict, I mean a situation in which a character has to make a less evil moral choice out of two (Pojman, 1998). For example, moral dilemma for a video game character of Mira is to forge a letter of queen Margaery in order to help her family or not to forge on order to be loyal to Margaery. If Mira forges the letter, she betrays Maragaery, which is evil, but she helps

her family. If Mira doesn’t forge the letter, she stays faithful to her lady but doesn’t help her family, which is also evil.

Individuality

Individuality is a term of experimental psychology which means a complex of personal qualities unique for every person (Vilunas, 1960).

Creativity

By creativity, I mean decision-making based on new, non-standard way of thinking, based on yet unknown algorithm (Kondakov, 2003).

Intention

Intention is a psychological term which means activity towards goals which would help to realize a distant major goal or need (Vilunas, 1960).

Chapter 1

Basicconceptsoftheresearch.ASongofIceandFire(1996)andmajorresearch questions.

Theoreticalconcepts

Basic theoretical concepts that I consider in this work are concepts of authenticity and moral sources by Charles Taylor, concept of authenticity by Carl Rodgers, theories of motivation by V. K. Vilunas and A. Maslow, concept of practical wisdom by Aristotle and concept of multiple fiction worlds by Lubomir Dolezel. Authenticity was one of the basic ideas on which Charles Taylor established his concept of moral sources, and his idea of moral source and value is one of the main focuses in my research of literature fiction and video game based on Game of Thrones (Taylor, 1989). Authenticity was a key theoretical concept in existentialist psychology

developed by Carl Rodgers, that’s why I took it as a background concept for my thesis, which means that this concept is not in my focus but it justifies choice of research question (Rodgers, 1961). Ethical theory of Aristotle describes the idea of intelligence, or practical moral wisdom, which is in the focus of my research by itself, and also when I make distinction between moral goodness and moral decision-making of characters according to Charles Taylor, and practical wisdom and moral virtue of characters according to Aristotle (Taylor, 1989; Irwin, 1985). Lubomir Dolezel considered literature as a possibility to create so-called multiple fictional worlds, which have their own structural rules, and I found it interesting to consider novel series of A Song of Ice and Fire and video game based on the novel from the point of view of those rules, in a specter of Dolezel’s semiotical model (Dolezel, 1998).

I.1.Emergenceofauthenticityasa concept

Authenticity as a concept emerged at the time of Enlightenment, in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, when individuality became an ideal of Western world (Trilling, 1972). It displayed in literature, arts and philosophy, where personality becomes a center of attention, leading to popularity of a genre of autobiography in literature. Concept of authenticity emerged at the same time as the conception of self. Rousseau argued that orientation toward life should come from a source within, talking about self-reflection and introspection (Rousseau, 1782). For Foucault, confession—the look inward to monitor one's interior life and to tell certain “truths” about oneself — has become a part of cultural life, reaching from religious contexts to psychological therapy (Foucault 1980: 58–60). Authenticity derived from idea of autonomy - the view that each individual must decide how to act basing on his own idea of the best course of action. Authenticity as a focus on inner feelings and attitudes was put into question also in psychotherapy, which led to emergence of theories of existentialist psychology (Frankl, 1977; Rodgers, 1961).

I.2.Conceptofauthenticity inexistentialism:CarlRodgers (1961)

Carl Rodgers, author of client-centered approach to psychotherapy, started his book “On becoming a person: a therapist’s view on psychotherapy” (1961) with autobiography, in which he described his way to a client-centered, non-judgmental therapy in his career. The book has been written on a basis of 35 years of psychotherapy practice, and Carl Rodgers claimed that it resulted in conclusion that all his patients who came to him were looking for their own self- authenticity (Rodgers, 1961). Destructed, confused, traumatized self-image is the reason of neurosis, as well as of psychosis, and only client has a knowledge on how to repair it. This knowledge is based on deep, developed self-knowledge - the task of the therapist is to make this knowledge clear: “This is the client who knows what hurts, what directions to go, what problems are crucial, what experiences have been deeply buried. It began to occur to me that unless I had a need to demonstrate my own cleverness and learning, I would do better to rely upon the client for the direction of movement in the process” (Rodgers 1961: 59). Carl Rodgers emphasized the idea of importance of self-authenticity in a psychotherapeutic process: “I find that many individuals have formed themselves by trying to please others, but again, when they are free, they move away from being this person. So one professional man, looking back at some of the process he has been through, writes, toward the end of therapy: "I've always felt I had to do things because they were expected of me, or more important, to make people like me, The hell with it! I think from now on I'm going to just be me – rich or poor, good or bad, rational or irrational, logical or illogical, famous or infamous. So thanks for your part in helping me to rediscover Shakespeare's - To thine own self be mine” (Rodgers 1961: 160). In a chapter “To be that self which one truly is” it’s the main purpose of work with the client, and Carl Rodgers formulates personality as a “process”, which moves in the direction of increasing trust to himself: “It was as though he could say, "Good artists do not paint like this, but I paint like this."

Or to move to another field, Ernest Hemingway was surely aware that "good writers do not write like this." But fortunately he moved toward being Hemingway, being himself, rather than toward someone else's conception of a good writer.” (Rodgers 1961: 165). Carl Rogers discusses a moral question of being true self and being evil. He says that clients often ask themselves if by being themselves they will release immoral “monster”: “An even more common reaction to the path of life I have been describing is that to be what one truly is would mean to be bad, evil, uncontrolled, destructive” (Rodgers 1961: 176). But Rodgers answers at this question that the more his clients are able to permit destructive feelings such as fear and anger to flow and to be in them, the more those feelings “take their appropriate place in a total harmony of all feelings.

<...> His feelings, when he lives closely and acceptingly with their complexity, operate in a constructive harmony rather than sweeping him into some uncontrollably evil path” (Rodgers 1961: 177). Here Carl Rodgers shows that being self-authentic often leads to virtuous living, and this idea confirms that authenticity can be related to moral decision-making, which is important for my research question.

Carl Rodgers formulates his concept of authenticity making a reference at Kierkegaard’s term of self-authenticity, and he recalls the philosopher saying that being true to yourself means "to be that self which one truly is" (Rodgers 1961: 181). I consider ideas of Carl Rodgers as fundamental for my concept of authenticity as a moral source which I’m going to discover in the “Game of Thrones”.

Psychology of motivation and emotions by V. Vilunas (1990) and hierarchy of needs by A. Maslow (1943)

When I study decision-making of characters in the video game based on the Game of Thrones, I use term of motivation of characters referring to theory of motivation and emotions by

V. K. Vilunas and hierarchy of needs by A. Maslow. Motivation is a psychological term of a

complex of processes – motives, thoughts, states and needs, which provide activity of a person towards realization of a purpose (Vilunas, 1990). Here are a few motivations considered applying to characters of the Game of Thrones video game.

Motivation of power is a complex of processes which provide activity of a person towards reaching power or self-benefit.

Motivation of self-knowledge is a complex of processes which provide activity of a person towards development of knowledge of self.

Motivation of self-development is a complex of processes which provide activity of a person towards development of personality (Kondakov, 2003).

When I analyze characters of the novel fiction and the game, I consider their motivations and take motivation of self-development as a moral source, in terms of Charles Taylor (1989) – a source of moral values which make a character morally good. Also, I consider motivations in terms of social and individual process of Lubomir Dolezel (1998). According to theory of motivation by Abraham Maslow, needs in social belonging, social status and achievement, present social motivation - one of the basic human motivations, along with motivation of safety (Maslow, 1999). In the hierarchy of needs by Maslow, a higher level of needs creates cognitive motivation – and this is needs in knowledge and discovery. Motivation of self-development and self-knowledge can be considered as a part of cognitive motivation, which is a kind of motivation of individuality. Motivation of power is a part of social motivation, because it derives from motives of social belonging, status and achievement. I operate by terms of Lubomir Dolezel, and call motivation of power a part of social process in literature fiction, and motivation of self-development and self-knowledge – a part of individual process in the literature fiction. Roots of this idea lie in theory of motivation by Maslow (Maslow, 1999).

I.4.MoralsourcesandauthenticityinmoralontologybyCharlesTaylor(1989)

“Sources of the Self” (1989) by Charles Taylor is a book about modern Western culture and its cultural roots, which presents sort of moral ontology (Sharpe, 1992; Schweiker, 1992). A key moment in history of modern life is replacement of honor ethics by ethics of ordinary goods, such as happiness and well-being (Sharpe, 1992). In his book, Charles Taylor constructs idea of constitutive goods which are able to revive crucial human goods, or values, for humanity (Taylor 1989: 63). “Sources of the Self” is of immense significance for theologians, philosophers, social critics, historians and all those who deal with their moral lives. It provides us with account of self-knowledge and authenticity as moral sources for individual self, as well as for community. Charles Taylor was called a philosopher who reimagined morality (Calhoun, 2016). His view of self is closely associated with his analysis of moral life, which was positioned in “Sources of Self”: “Selfhood and the good, <...> or selfhood and morality, turn out to be inextricably intertwined themes” (Taylor 1989: 105).

Charles Taylor defined authenticity as “self truth” and “self-wholeness” which are “not means to be moral, but something valuable for their own sake” (Taylor 1998: 65). He also defined authenticity as ideal of moral culture. Wholeness of authenticity is different from morality, because “it engages us totally in a way that morality cannot” (Taylor 1998: 66). Taylor defines authenticity as a form of aesthetic morality, which can develop against common morality: “originality” and being against convention is what defines being authentic (Taylor 1998: 65). Authenticity involves “creation and construction as well as discovery, originality, and frequently opposition to the rules of society and even potentially to what we recognize as morality” (Taylor 1998: 67). As Taylor claimed, authenticity is connected with another moral source - freedom: it is “itself an idea of freedom; it involves my finding the design of my life myself, against the demands of external conformity” (Taylor 1998: 68). To find one’s authenticity means to define

one’s self, by the way of finding out what is significant and how one’s self is different from the others (Taylor, 1998).

For Charles Taylor, there are two kinds of moral values, or goods: ordinary values, and constitutive, or “hyper-goods”. Constitutive goods, such us freedom and wealth, are “features of universe” and “moral sources” of individual selves and whole culture (Taylor, 1989). Taylor claims that moral values are intensely personal rather than public: individuality and authenticity is a source of morality, that can be confirmed by examples of artists and poets who created and formulated values of their times. Individuals form morality of culture, according to Taylor, better than social public traditions: “As our public traditions of family, ecology, even polis are undermined or swept away, we need new languages of personal resonance to make crucial human goods alive for us again” (Taylor 1989: 63). Crucial moral goods are moral sources themselves - “the goods, reflection on which morally empowers us” (Taylor 1989: 264). They are different from life goods, or “premoral” goods which define happiness and well-being. They present goods that make us wish to act morally good. Moral source, or constitutive good, is “something the love of which empowers us to do and be good” (Taylor 1989: 93). Authenticity is considered as biggest of such “hypergoods” - a significant moral value and great source of social morality. Authenticity and self-knowledge is binded to all other constitutive goods, and this is what makes them morally empowering, because of reflection included in term of authenticity.

Reflection on what we are good and bad at, reflection on moral portrait of ourselves, in comparison with the others, and with our possible ways of moral acting, is what makes us morally empowered and what leads, at last, to good moral decision-making. It works not only for individuals, but for humanity overall: we look at the history and reevaluate its events from the moral point of view, and this reflection and reevaluation makes humanity morally empowered

and prevents it from evil, or immoral decision-making leading to war, homicide and other immoral social phenomenons, in the future. Authenticity is built up through acts of reflection and articulation, which give us a reflective picture of life and yet also provide evaluation of goods that we have held. For Taylor, our relation to the good is a matter of questioning in order to decide what kinds of selves we are and what kinds of selves we want to be. In his “Sources of the Self” (1989), Taylor describes universal sources of moral self of individuality and humanity, and authenticity as one of those sources is in detail considered in my work.

I consider not only authenticity of characters in the Game of Thrones, but also moral goodness of characters, from the point of view of Charles Taylor. Those characters who possess moral sources in their lifes, turn out to be morally good characters, and those who don’t have such sources turn out to be immoral. This thesis will be developed in the further chapters.

I.5.Conceptofmoraldecision-making,accordingtoAristotle

I would like to consider decision-making made by characters in the novel series and video game of Game of Thrones from the point of view of Aristotle, because his model of practical moral wisdom is one of the most basic and influential concepts for historical development of moral philosophy and ethics (Bradshaw, 2009). I consider moral decision- making made by fiction characters of the Game of Thrones in the paradigm of Aristotle who focused on a virtue as the most important reason of doing right or wrong and on idea of intelligence, or practical moral wisdom (Pojman, 1997; Irwin, 1985). For Aristotle, practical moral wisdom is the way to happiness, which is the aim of truly virtuous living (Irwin, 1985). John Bradshaw who based his concept of moral intelligence on Aristotle, called it ability to choose “the best, most caring alternative amid the countless circumstances that are present in every real moral choice” (Bradshaw 2009: 57). According to Aristotle, practical wisdom is a combination of our understanding of well-being and practice of the virtues (Irwin, 1985).

Practical wisdom is required in order to lead virtuous living, and Aristotle called this kind of wisdom phronesis, or intelligence: “Wisdom produces happiness, not in the way that medical science produces health, but in the way that health produces [health]. For since wisdom is a part of virtue as a whole, it makes us happy, because it is a state that we possess and activate. Further, we fulfill our function in so far as we have intelligence and virtue of character; for virtue makes the goal correct, and intelligence makes what promotes the goal [correct]” (Irwin 1985: 168). For Aristotle, practical wisdom, or intelligence, means following a middle path between not applying virtue in the situation at all and applying it too much. For example, courage is a virtue between cowardliness and recklessness. Courage, correctly applied in the situation, leads to practical wisdom. If there is too much courage in a situation of mortal danger, the decision wouldn’t lead to moral wisdom, and if there is no courage showed in the situation at all, it also doesn’t lead to moral wisdom. Correctly applied virtue of courage is a golden middle of courage, which means acting bravely, but not recklessly (Irwin, 1985). I consider decisions made by characters of fiction and video game of Game of Thrones from the point of view of practical wisdom, or intelligence, as correctly applied virtue which means a correctly made moral decision.

I consider decisions made by characters as practically wise, or unwise. As John Bradshaw said: “Practical wisdom is the ability to do the right thing, at the right time, for the right reason” (Bradshaw, 2009). Practically wise decision-making is ability to make right choices, which means that those choices lead a character to achievement of individual survival and “human flourishing”, or highest good, in terms of Aristotle – happiness (Irwin, 1985).

I.6.Conceptofpossibleworldsand metafiction

According to Lubomir Dolezel, our world is surrounded by “infinity of other possible worlds” (Dolezel, 1998). “Possible world is a way our world might have been”, as Dolezel quoted Thomas Kuhn (Dolezel 1998: 11). Any fictional world is a possible one, because it’s non-

actualized. Semantics of possible worlds doesn’t derive from prototypes, constituted by possible entities. Novel series of “Song of ice and fire” fits definition of possible world by Lubomir Dolezel: it doesn’t repeat reality, as a fantasy fiction, and has a few possible historical prototypes in its narration. I also consider video game based on the novel series as a possible world, which has the original novel series as a prototype.

AsongofIceandFire(1996)andphenomenonofconvergenceculturebyHenry Jenkins (2006)

II.1.WhatisGameof Thrones?

A Game of Thrones is the first installment in the novel series of The Song of Ice and Fire written by fantasy fiction writer George R.R. Martin (1948-until now). For 8 years on (since 2011), Martin is finishing the seventh and final installment, which was originally intended to be a trilogy (Leonard, 2011). The series has been translated into 27 languages and in 2011 was made into an award-winning television series on HBO.

II.2.Plot

Storyline in “A song of Ice and Fire”, or Game of Thrones, takes place in a fantasy Medieval-like world of The Seven Kingdoms, or Realm, in years following a devastating revolution to unseat an insane tyrant – The Mad King, Aegon Targaryen. A top aide of the new king has died under mysterious circumstances, the heirs of the deposed despot seek to raise an army to reclaim the throne, and “Winter is coming” inevitably - a cold and harsh one that threatens to last for years and bring with the snowstorm the Army of Dead (Martin, 1996).

As mysterious and horrifying forces gather in the wilderness, Lord Eddard Stark, a hand and close friend of the king Robert Baratheon, investigates the death of his aide and

uncovers a conspiracy that could tear the kingdoms apart. As families and steel clash amid a web of deception, Stark learns that when playing the game of thrones, there is one rule: “you win, or you die” (HBO Season 1: Episode 7).

II.3.Transmediastorytelling

“Game of thrones” is an example of what Henry Jenkins called transmedia storytelling - the creation of an expanding fictional universe across multiple media, such as video games, comics, animated films and fan fiction (Jenkins 2006: 3). Participatory culture is a key moment in forming of such fictional universe, which leads infinite existence because consumers are encouraged to seek new connections and plot lines within this universe. Among the mass popular universes that already established themselves and continue developing are “Harry Potter”, “The lord of the Rings”, “The Matrix”, “the Star Wars”, “The Walking Dead”, “The Batman” and series about other Marvell super-heroes.

Born far from the worlds of science fiction and fairy tale, the novel series by George Martin “A song of ice and fire” attracted attention after it was released on HBO as The Game of Thrones in 2011. TV series explored ideas that didn’t fit within a novel – such as political meaning of toughened scenes of violence. As for G. Martin, he commented it as a justified addition to his world: "To omit it [violence] from a narrative centered on war and power would have been fundamentally false and dishonest, and would have undermined one of the themes of the books: that the true horrors of human history derive not from orcs and Dark Lords, but from ourselves. We are the monsters. (And the heroes too). Each of us has within himself the capacity for great good, and great evil" (The Guardian, 2014). Television allows to explore ideas unavailable for text, and video game can explore ideas that don’t fit within a few hours TV series or movie. And this is what the Telltale video game company made with universe of the Game of Thrones – in cooperation with George Martin, they expanded a fictional world of the Song of Ice

and Fire and created computer-game story about one of episodic figures of the Realm – Telltale Game, on which I’m also focused in this thesis. I’m going to consider the game in detail in chapter four.

Moraldecision-makingasanimportantthemeintheseriesGameofThrones

In the second part of this chapter, I’m going to consider construction of moral decision- making in Game of Thrones, as a part of my research question.

Part of researchers claim that the story of Song of Ice and Fire mainly focuses on the fates of children of one of the protagonists - Eddard Stark, the hand of the king and Warden of the North – who are separated from each other because of political intrigues, but who still manage to make decisions for benefit of their family and not themselves (Leonard, 2011). Other researchers claim that the story mainly focuses on the historical discourse of civil wars, which repeats itself in a circle since the Trojan War and The Wars of Roses (Larrington, 2016). I would say that both claims are just for the series, however the raw of topics which can be considered as important for this fiction world is wider.

One of the main themes in the fiction of Game of Thrones is moral relativity. It was claimed by Christopher Leonard who made a popular “Quicklet” on Game of Thrones as the most important subject along with such subjects as Honor, Looking behind the superficial, The importance of family and Symbolism in nature: “Nearly every decision made by the honorable, loyal, good-on-the-inside character turns out to be the wrong one. Justice is almost never served, and quite often guile is rewarded handsomely» (Leonard, 2011). I would add that Game of Thrones is not only about moral relativity, but also about moral decision-making.

Unlike Fan fiction, Fan-made Wikipedia or other alternative possible worlds of fiction, personal graphical Telltale video game allows to discover moral decision-making of the

characters in the Realm in the new way. The main initiators of the alternative universe of the video game are not the author George R.R. Martin, his assistant or other creators, but consumers themselves – real players who make their own moral decisions seeing themselves in situations happening in the Seven Kingdoms. I think it’s interesting to compare construction of moral decision-making in the original fiction of Game of Thrones and in its graphical alternative version which has a factor of active participation of players.

Chapter 2

Construction of moral decision-making in the Game of Thrones, according to the previous researchers.

Practicalmoralwisdom intheRealm

Robert Thomas analyzed moral decision-making of characters in the Game of Thrones in his article “Trying to do Good with Arya, Tyrion and the Hound” (Thomas, 2017). There is a link between intelligence, or practical wisdom, and virtue in philosophy of Aristotle, and Robert Thomas considered this link in application to situations of the series.

Practical wisdom is needed in order to survive in the Seven Kingdoms for most of the characters – for Arya Stark this occurs in Season 4. Arya Stark has to choose if she would leave wounded enemy of house Starks - knight of the Crown Sandor “The Hound” Clegane – to die alone or she would kill him. The Hound was traveling with Arya in order to deliver her to King’s Landing and receive benefit for it from Cersei Lannister who wanted Ned Stark’s children as hostages. Moral choice also concerns the Hound because he doesn’t know whether he developed a compassion to a Stark’s child, or he just intents to complete the Crown’s order (HBO Season 4:

Episode 10). So for him it’s difficult to decide what is less moral – to let the girl to go free or to complete the Crown’s order.

Queen Margaery Tyrell needs right balance of virtue when she gets into prison of The High Sept. There Margaery has to make a moral choice – whether she should partly lie about her sins, escape from the prison and set her brother free, or she should accept the fact that she is a sinner and to agree to judgment and, consequently, death. As it turns out, Margaery doesn’t have a right balance of her virtues, at that moment, and her moral virtue of attempting to “be good” prevails over smartness and scheming in order to survive (HBO Season 6: Episode 10).

As Robert Thomas claims, it’s crucially important to bear practical wisdom, facing events such as those in the Seven Kingdoms. Mercy which Eddard Stark had shown to Cersei Lannister by concealing her secret of origins of her children led to the civil war, and it proved that although Ned Stark thought about himself as wise – in fact he didn’t have practical wisdom. Robert Thomas concluded that in the damaged moral world of Game if Thrones there is no moral compass which could allow the characters both to “do good” and survive: “If what makes an action right or wrong is its consequences, it’s not clear how Arya—or anyone else—could be expected to know in advance whether or not they are doing the right thing. It can involve a dangerous amount of guesswork. <...>. The quest for the moral life marked by actions promoting the good of all starts to seem like nothing more than a wild goose chase” (Silverman 2016: 311).

AuthenticityintheGameofThrones,accordingtoTomHansberg(2017)

Idea of Tom Hansberg: concept of authenticity by Charles Taylor applying to Game of Thrones

Another researcher of moral decision-making in Game of Thrones – Tom Hansberg - moves from virtue ethics of Aristotle to Charles Taylor (Hansberg, 2017). He talks about

authenticity – knowing who you are and staying “true to yourself” – as the most important factor in moral decision-making in Game of Thrones (Silverman 2016: 322). Tom Hansberg considers this idea going through analysis of the fate of Theon Greyjoy – a character who has “uncertain authenticity” and therefore dramatically fails in his moral decisions. It’s possible to apply this idea when analyzing most of characters in the series.

Analysis of characters according to the concept of authenticity by Charles Taylor and practical wisdom by Aristotle: reasonable connection

MargaeryTyrell

In the series, Margaery Tyrell becomes a queen of Seven Kingdoms and also a victim of conflict between the Crown and Faith. The Sept imprisoned Margaery in order to find out truth about her brother and also about the queen herself, and at this moment, highly manipulative Margaery decided to become a sincere person. Consequently, Margaery was sentenced to the “walk of atonement” and died during explosion of green fire in the Septa. Her death was a result of bad moral decision-making, when Margaery made a moral choice between escaping the prison and confessing her “crimes”. By choosing what Margaery thought was less evil – telling truth to the Sept, turned out to be more evil because it led to many deaths, including suicide of her husband who couldn’t bear her death. Lack of self-knowledge and authenticity is a reason of bad moral decision-making of Margaery: she suddenly believed what she was told - that she was a bad person, encouraging her brother’s sins, deserving a trial and a walk of Atonement: "I've had lots of time to think about how good I was at seeming good. All those stories I told myself about who I was and why I did the things I did. There were so many lies in those stories” (HBO Season 6: Episode 6). Margaery was, although she didn’t realize it, a loving sister and daughter of a great virtue, keeping good trusting relationship with her family, including her brother whose

homosexuality she didn’t criticize. Margaery was polite and kind, and she was loved by people in the kingdom, because of her charity deeds: «Wherever she went, the smallfolk fawned on her, and Lady Margaery did all she could to fan their ardor. She was forever giving alms to beggars, buying hot pies off bakers' carts, and reining up to speak to common tradesmen» (Martin 2005: chapter 39).

Eddard“Ned”Stark

«Ifyouwould takeaman'slife, youoweittohimto lookinto hiseyesandhearhisfinal words.And ifyou cannotbear to do that, then perhaps the man does not deserveto die» (Martin 1996, Chapter 1: Bran I).

The head of House Stark, the Lord of Winterfell, Lord Paramount and Warden of the North, and later Hand of the King to King Robert I Baratheon. In the beginning of the show, Ned Stark is shown as an honorable man, dedicated father and husband, and also a loyal friend to the king. Once he discovers that children of the King’s wife – Queen Cersei – have an illegitimate father, he confronts her with that information, but decides not to reveal the truth to the king who is mortally wounded. After the king’s death, Ned is imprisoned because he refuses to bend the knee to the new king – eldest illegitimate son of Cersei. Ned Stark is executed soon afterwards, due to successful plotting by Cersei Lannister. Ned Stark was presented as a character leading a good, virtuous life, who always acted in interests of his family, friends and the whole goodness, and his unjust and sudden death in the series seemed as a nonsense. However, death of Ned Stark was predictable, if to look at this character from the point of view of concepts of authenticity and practical wisdom.

Ned Stark is revealed in a flash from his youth in the middle of the show as a quite cunning young man (HBO Season 7: Episode 3). In a young age, he traveled to the Tower of Joy

to release his sister married to Robert Baratheon from abduction by Rhaegar Targaryen and was

said to kill one of her guards - Arthur, “the Sword of the Morning” - in single combat (Martin 1996, Chapter 4: Eddard I). However actually it was a lie affirmed by Ned Stark and his companion, the lie which was revealed in a later Season, in a vision of Brandon Stark – the youngest son of Ned Stark who had a superficial ability to see the past. Brandon saw that it was his father’s companion who killed the guard by stabbing knife into his back, while Ned Stark was disarmed (Martin, 2003). It was considered as a dishonorable moment of history, unnecessary for mentioning. Perhaps in order to seem more like a hero in a family history, Ned Stark conciliated the truth. Ned Stark had a lack of authenticity and knowledge of himself, thinking that by creating a false heroic story he followed the principle of honor. Actually he only wanted to seem honorable in the eyes of the others, his honor had a superficial nature and was not real, as well as honor of many knights from the tales of chivalry who were presented as protectors of the weak, but in reality were just killers (Carroll, 2018). That’s why Ned Stark failed in his moral choice when he didn’t give away Cersei's secret about her children to King Robert Baratheon. If he would, it could stop Cersei Lannister from her further plotting and could prevent the Civil War. But Ned Stark was sure that he was doing the right moral choice, because he had lack of self-authenticity: he thought that he did his choice thinking about himself as a good friend, merciful to dying king whose feelings he didn’t want to hurt in his last days. But if Ned Stark would know himself better and would be more authentic, he would consider himself as less honest person and would let himself to make a more evil choice in the local situation which would be less evil and practically wise in the context, because it would possibly save the kingdoms from another war, and it would save Ned Stark himself from execution.

Arya Stark

“-Whoyouare?-hewouldaskhereveryday.

-Noone,-shewouldanswer,shewhohadbeenArya Stark”

(Martin2005:AryaII)

The youngest daughter of Eddard Stark, Arya didn’t want to grow up as “a lady” in a common sense of the word: “And Arya, well... Ned's visitors would often mistake her for a stableboy if they rode into the yard unannounced. <...> I despaired of ever making a lady of her. She collected scabs as other girls collected dolls, and would say anything that came into her head” (A clash of Kings, chapter 55: Catelyn VII). Arya was trained as a warrior by a master from the Free City of Braavos, and continued her way to become an assassin after execution of her father.

In the end of her training in the House of Black and White, Arya received a task - to perform a murder of the actress from local theater. Impressed by the theater play which was devoted to events around her father’s death in King’s Landing and out of sudden mercy, Arya Stark decided not to poison the actress and tried to save her life. For that, Arya was badly injured by another assassin from the community of Faceless men, and the actress was later killed in a more painful way than poison. The moral choice of Arya led her to more evil consequences than they would be if she acted less moral in the situation. She failed in her decision-making because she had lack of self-knowledge of herself as a cold-blooded killer – she thought that she is too kind for completing the order and murder of the innocent stranger. However, unlike her father, Arya still had time to develop her authenticity, which she did in the remained time of the show.

The community of Faceless men – those whom Arya Stark joined in Braavos – had a philosophy that in order to become your true self, it’s important first to become “noone” (A Feast For Crows, Chapter 36: Arya). After Arya loses her old self and becomes noone, she realizes who she really is and what she can do. Only then Arya becomes authentic and makes her first right moral choice in her new authenticity – leaves the House of White and Black and says that she is not “noone” anymore, but “Arya of House Stark” (HBO Season 6: Episode 8).

III. Connectionbetweenmoraldecision-makingandauthenticityintheTVseries of Game of Thrones: critical analysis of the idea of Tom Hansberg about connection between Taylor’s concept of authenticity and social interaction in Game of Thrones

Greeks were aware of the link between virtue and authenticity: the words inscribed over the oracle at Delphi were “Know thyself”. Tom Hansberg claims that authenticity and virtue are not opposites, despite the fact that one focuses on the individual and the other - on society. Rather, authenticity depends on virtue— “we can only figure out who we are and be true to ourselves through interpersonal interactions” (Silverman 2017: 325). Theon Greyjoy moved to Iron Islands where society appreciated violence and theft, and social interactions in this society led Theon Greyjoy to false understanding of who he was. Theon Greyjoy used to live with family of Ned Stark, where kindness and virtue were appreciated, however he leaves Winterfell and wants to join the Iron Islands whose inhabitants he considers as his true family (A Clash of Kings, Chapter 24: Theon II). On the Iron Islands Theon met a society which appreciated violence and cruelty over virtue. It created a situation of moral and social paradox for Theon: moral one, because he was not ready for extremal moral changes. Social one, because he used to social interaction on a different level than it’s common in the family of Greyjoys.

Another character, Daenerys Targaryen, used to lead exile way of life with her brother Viserys until she married Dothraki leader in exchange for an army for her brother (A Game of Thrones, Chapter 3: Daenerys I). She had a misshapen knowledge of herself as a weak, dependent person, and this false knowledge of Daenerys about herself led her to a few bad moral decisions – making too close friendship with her maid Doreah who betrayed her when the first possibility arrived and saving the imprisoned enchantress who afterwards led husband of Daenerys to death and who sacrificed her unborn child for “blood magic”. The enchantress ruined Daenerys’ perspective of reaching the Iron Throne sooner than in the upcoming season

Eight. When Daenerys killed enchantress in a fire, performing her first murder and independent decision in life, she became more authentic and aware of her power (HBO Season 1: Episode 10). She also started seem as more strong character to a viewer. When Daenerys revealed her true self and developed her self-knowledge, she became more powerful and it led, metaphorically and literally, to the birth of dragons in a fire – magical creatures who were believed to be a legend. The dragons became weapon of Daenerys, allowing her to buy armies and make allies in order to free slaves of the South and move to Westeros for the Iron Throne.

The idea of dependency of authenticity on social interactions may work for the TV show and novels, however it doesn’t seem to display the same way in the alternative version of Game of Thrones universe - the Telltale Video Game series.

Chapter 3

Constructionofauthenticityandmoraldecision-makingintheTelltalevideogame “Game of Thrones”

Videogamescultureandstudies

Video games is a contemporary reality, which embodies some of the most important aspects of contemporary society. The phenomenon of video games has been relevant since the 1980s, afterwards they have grown, especially in the last decade or so, with the so-called ‘casual revolution’, with the expansion of video gaming to mobile devices and online social networking sites (Juul, 1999). Culture of video games is growing and consolidating, which is understood as the institutionalization of video game practices, experiences, and meanings in contemporary society, which permeates almost every corner of the social fabric (Mayra, 2008). This means that many aspects of our society can be increasingly understood in terms of video games (Muriel,

2018). Not only do video games reflect wide social issues, but they also shape social matters and drive their transformation. This can be seen in how certain areas of social reality use elements of game industry, that is, the use of video games elements applied to other fields such as, education, therapy, business, warfare and academical studies. Social reality is turned into a reality similar to video game, and, in doing so, video game culture significantly affects society as a whole. Therefore, though there might be social institutions that ignore video games as culture, the culture of video games is affecting them too.

Game studies as a new area of academical research has a special subject of studies which is computer, or games, and playing, and also has its own theories, methods and terminology (Mayra, 2008). Status of game studies as a discipline means that there is a community formed around game studies, and institutionalization of this discipline is advanced by associations, conferences and journals created in this field. As interactive and expressive media, games have been approached from a wide range of academic perspectives (Egenfeldt-Nielsen, 2013; Bogost, 2007). Egenfeldt-Nielsen suggested that games can be approached with focus on five different types of analysis: analysis of the game, the players, the culture, ontology and metrics (Egenfeldt-Nielsen, 2013). In analysis of the game, the point is to look at the structure of game. In analysis of the players, the point is to look at the activity of players and explore how players use games as a social space. In the culture analysis of games, focus is on the wider culture that games are part of. In this field of game studies, researchers analyze how games and gaming interact with culture contexts. In the ontology game studies, focus is on philosophical foundations of games. Those studies enable us to understand the relationship between rules of the game, fiction, and the player. In metrics - “quantitative measures of player behavior” - studies examine relationship between game design and player behavior, in order to help

developers to improve the game. Common methodology in metrical analysis of the game is statistical analysis of logged data.

In order to study authenticity and moral decision-making in video game based on fiction of “Game of Thrones”, I use combined type of analysis, which includes ontological and metrical analysis of the game. When I consider authenticity and decision-making in Telltale video game, I focus on philosophical and psychological foundations of the game. I use statistical analysis of game choices made by players in the game as a method for analysis of moral decision-making.

Fraska finds origins of the game studies in Greek philosophy, and, referring to Lalande, he introduces two specific terms of game studies which are also important for my research: paidea and ludus (Fraska, 1999). Paidea is a mental activity of a player, and ludus is a particular kind of paidea, defined as “activity organized under a system of rules that defines a victory or a defeat, a gain or a loss” (Fraska, 1999). Ludology is a systematic methodology for game studies, which can complement theories of other disciplines – for example, psychological theories (Jarvinen, 2007). Jarvinen considered theory of emotions in cognitive psychology applying to the video games, which meant that emotions as a part of process of playing presented “valenced reactions” at various game components (Jarvinen, 2007).

In this chapter I’m going to consider construction of authenticity and decision-making in the Telltale video game, created on a base of plot of fiction Game of Thrones. I consider authenticity and decision-making from the point of view of philosophical and psychological concepts. When I consider motivation of characters in the video game, I refer to theory of motivation by V.K. Vilunas (2010) and Maslow (1999).

II. TelltaleGameofThrones:plot,originsandidea

The Telltale Game of Thrones is a graphic adventure based on the Song of Ice and Fire which consists of 6 episodes. It’s the first video-game based on the original fiction which received game awards and acknowledgment of fan community. The story was composed in cooperation with personal assistant of George Martin, Ty Franck, and included not only characters from the original novel and TV series, but also from the corners of Martin’s universe that were disclosed in the books and the show. The action is focused on the bannermen of the House Starks – House Forresters, who are losing their position of the leader holders of the iron wood after the Red Wedding, where armies of Starks and Forresters were massacred by Boltons and Freys (Telltale game, Episode 1: Iron from Ice). Main events of the game are taking place in the Ironrath – ancient seat of house Forrester, on the edge of the largest ironwood forest in Westeros; in King’s Landing; on the Wall; and across the Narrow Sea, in Mereen.

In the video game, choices and actions of a player influence events across the 6-episode action. There are five playable characters, all of whom belong to House Forrester and attempt to save their family and survive: “For centuries the Forresters have been loyal bannermen to House Stark” (Telltale Game, Episode 2: The Lost Lords). Each episode of the game contains a few points where the player must make a significant decision choosing from one of a few possibilities. Through Telltale's servers, the game tracks how many players selected which option and it allows the player to compare their choices to the rest of the player base. I use it for statistical analysis of decision-making made by players in the game.

The game can be completed regardless of what choices are made in these situations, but the presence and behavior of the non-playable characters in later scenes is affected by the choices. The game allows the player to make multiple saves, and includes a "rewind" feature

where the player can back up and alter a previous decision, thus facilitating the exploration of alternative choices.

The House Forrester on which the action of the video game is focused was mentioned briefly in the novel “A Dance with the Dragons” – the fifth of seven planned novels in the epic fantasy series A Song of Ice and Fire (A dance with dragons, Chapter 42: The King’s Prize). House Forrester hails from Ironrath, a fortress within the Wolfswood forest in the North of Westeros, where they control the valuable Ironwood groves, coveted by many because of the wood's military importance. (Telltale Game: episode 2).

Moraldecision-makingintheTelltaleGameofThrones

Space of interpersonal interactions and amount of events in the video game is more limited than in the novel and TV show, meanwhile the amount of events depending on moral choice a character has to make in a minute is various. An example of a situation in which a character has to make a choice can be about what he is supposed to do or to say. For example, Lord Rodrick sees that there is an ambush of Whitehill soldiers in the courtyard of his castle, and he has option to react in four possible ways: 1) What’s going on? 2) Who is in charge here? 3) Stop and disperse! 4) … [silence]. Depending on his reaction, soldiers would be more or less provoked to start a fight. When it turns out that the son of lord Whitehill – Gryff Whitehill - arrived, the conflict gets intense and Gryff makes an ultimatum – whether lord Rodrick agrees to kneel in front of him and survives, or the unknown consequences may follow if he refuses. Rodrick can react in one of the four ways: 1) It may work 2) Get out of here. 3) You will do as I say! 4) … [silence]. The choice can be made without thinking, but in order to win the game it’s important to foresee the events and take into account context of a concrete character and the others.

Among the vast controversial choices that have been made, I would take some to consider how authenticity leads to right moral decision-making and practical wisdom for House Forresters and a player in the alternative universe of Game of Thrones presented in the video game. I also would like to consider how authenticity is connected with social interactions in the video game, and how this connection differs from the one in the novel and HBO show.

Paradoxical,ormorallyextremesituation:a term

As a part of investigation of authenticity and moral decision-making construction in the video game and also in the novel series, I would like to introduce a term of paradoxical, or morally extreme situations. This kind of situation takes place in the original literature fiction of Game of Thrones and also in the game series, and is key for understanding of social interactions of a fictional character. The term which I formulate here is a tool for my further research and derives from definition of a social process in fiction which Lubomir Dolezel called “paradoxical” phenomenon likening it to unpredictable force of nature (Dolezel 1998: 112) and also from idea of cognitive dissonance, theory of cognitive psychologist Leon Festinger. He formulated cognitive dissonance as a collision of two incompatible views, values or emotions in the consciousness of individual (Festinger, 1957). Some decisions can solve paradoxical situation badly for a character, and others can solve it good. For example, paradoxical situation for a character Rodrik Forrester is the one in which he has to decide whether he should sacrifice himself for his brother Asher or survive and let his brother die instead of him. The situation provokes cognitive dissonance for a player as well, because Rodrik was going through some struggle in the game and it seems morally wrong to lose this important character before he achieves at least some of his goals. Cognitive dissonance for Rodrik consists in the choice between natural motivation to live and less natural to heroically sacrifice yourself.

Another example of paradoxical social, or moral situation happens to Daenerys Targaryen in novel fiction of Game of Thrones when she has to choose whether she should let her brother Viserys be killed because he humiliates her and threatens her and Dothrakians who are her subjects, or should she show mercy because she still has good childhood memories of Viserys telling her the history of Seven Kingdom (A Game of Thrones, Chapter 8: Daenerys I).

TelltaleGameofThrones:playablecharactersandtheirmoraldecision-

making

In this sub-chapter, I’m going to describe characters of Telltale video game and analyze construction of their decision-making and authenticity.

GaredTuttle

Night’s Watch Recruit

Playing Telltale Game of Thrones is similar to playing chess, with 5 figures instead of

16. It starts with a “pawn” – Gared Tuttle, a square of the House Forrester, who becomes a keeper of the Lord Forrester’s secret message about the North Grove and soon gets into one of the most influential characters in the game.

In the Codex of the Game – a space in the game menu where player can read description of his character – Gared is described as a boy who was “raised on stories of heroism about the likes of Arthur Dayne and Symeon Star-Eyes. Though the son of a pig farmer, he has always aspired to one day become a warrior himself. With the help of his uncle Duncan, who had risen from lowborn origins to become Castellan of Ironrath, Gared found work in Lord Forrester’s stables, rising through the ranks to eventually be named his square. Gared was sent to the Wall shortly after the Red Wedding, where he will spend the rest of his life in the Night’s Watch”

(Telltale game, The codex). The description doesn’t include details of game results. Gared eventually leaves the Night’s Watch and heads beyond the Wall to find the North Grove, to complete his duty for lord Forrester.

Despite any choices made by a player, Gared survives until the end of the 6th season and unites with bastard children of the Lord Forrester who turn out to be the keepers of the North Grove – a legendary hidden area on the North, “place of a great power” (Telltale game, Season 6). The most important choices Gared has to make, because they may lead the whole game into the different paths, happen in the 6th (and for a while the last) episode – the Ice Dragon. Bastard children of lord Forrester ask Gared to sacrifice heart of his friend Cotter in order to perform black magic and strengthen warriors of the North Grove – powerful creatures when it comes to fight with the White Walkers, however not completely human. Another choice that Gared has to make is whether he and the army of the North Grove should stay to guard the Grove as a weapon against the White Walkers, or should they move inside of the Wall and protect the falling House Forrester.

Rodrik Forrester

Firstborn son

Rodrik Forrester – a lord of house Forrester after the death of his father - “was trained from an early age to shoulder the burdens of leadership”, according to the Codex. “In truth, he was built for the role: strong, charismatic, and formidable on the battlefield. When Robb Stark called his banners to war, Lord Forrester asked Rodrik to stay behind and protect Ironrath; but Rodrik would have none of it. Instead, he rode off at his father’s side and led the Forrester cavalry with such valor that his name came to be feared among the ranks of Lannister soldiers. Unfortunately, Rodrik was badly wounded at the Twins and has struggled to overcome his injuries” (Telltale game, The Codex). The first time we see Rodrik in the game is when he wakes

up in the trunk of dead bodies on the way to burial. However he is spotted on the way to Ironrath, and saved by the Maester of House Forrester. He is injured, but struggles for living and becomes the lord of the house.

Rodrik may seem a “king figure” in the chess-like version of Game of Thrones – the one who makes important decisions, yet limited in his strategic movement. Rodrik stays in the Ironrath most time of the story, except of the end of episode 5 when he goes to the Southern shore to meet his brother coming from Across the Narrow Sea. Forresters are ambushed by Gryff Whitehill, and a player has to make choice who of two brothers must stay alive and who dies. At that moment, it’s important to remember that environment of Ironrath is more familiar to Rodrik who used to live and rule here than to his brother Asher who was exiled across the Narrow Sea when he was a teenager. However, 70% of players choose to leave Asher alive. Most probably, it’s because Asher is physically stronger, although Rodrick has more strong position in the game especially taking into account his betrothal to Elena of Glenmores – a powerful northern House.

AsherForrester

Exiled second son

“Asher had always been a rebellious youth – brawling in taverns, sleeping with whores, and finding ways to raise his father’s ire. But his life took a dark turn when, at age seventeen, he fell in love with Gwyn Whitehill, the eldest daughter of his father’s bitter rival. Bloodshed ensued and Lord Forrester faced a grim choice: go to war, or exile Asher across the Narrow Sea. He chose the latter. Asher currently resides in Slaver’s Bay, where he and his uncle Malcolm are working to raise an army of sellsword” (Telltale game, The Codex). Asher finally summons the army, and on the way home makes an important alliance with Daenerys Targaryen – one of the major pretenders for Iron Throne in Game of Thrones. Asher can be considered as a “knight” of the game – a figure that makes fast steps in a unique direction.

However as his step from south to the north is made, he faces choice - to die sacrificing himself to protect the “king” – physically more vulnerable, but more strong in a familiar northern environment where he used to grow, Rodrik, or to let his brother die instead of him and become a new leader in the civil war (Telltale game: Episode 5). A player has to choose between a well- known as a leader, but physically injured, Rodrik, and strong Asher who has yet qualities of a fighter rather than of a wise leader. Choice becomes more complicated if Rodrick previously managed to settle a betrothal to Talia of house Glenmore - another strong house of the North that could become a powerful ally for House Forrester. Qualities of Asher Forrester may seem more suitable for position of the lord of the house in the situation of the war: brave and using unexpected social thinking, Asher may lead the house to victory by making unoredictable strategical steps against the Whitehills and their allies in King’s Landing.

Mira Forrester

Eldest daughter

Mira is a queen figure of the chess game which is supposed to make a few steps and get lost in the middle of the match for the benefit of her family. “Mira had always been fond of Ironrath, but Lady Forrester – wanting her eldest daughters to learn the ways of a Southorn court – arranged for Mira to serve as a handmaiden to Margaery Tyrell. To Mira’s great surprise, she enjoyed attending on Margaery at Highgarden, and followed her in King's Landing with enthusiasm. Life in the capital has not been easy for Mira, as her straightforward Northern ways are often at odds with the subtleties of court life – but she also has more guile than she realizes” (Telltale game, the Codex). Mira is the eldest daughter of the Lord Forrester, and she is serving as a maiden of Margaery Tyrell in King’s Landing. She is introduced to Cersei and Tyrion Lannister who testify her loyalty to a king, and as a “queen” of the chess game she has a possibility to make a strong step and forge a letter from Queen Margaery to Liana Glenmore

asking her to marry Rodrik Forrester (Telltale game: Episode 4). If Mira makes the choice to forge the letter for benefit of her brother and family, Liana Glenmore agrees to marry Rodrik in the game. If Mira doesn’t forge the letter, Liana refuses marriage proposal and house Forresters loses a powerful ally. Mira’s presence in the game soon loses sense for her family, because in the end of her story she is supposed to marry Lord Morgryn – an ally of Whitehills who plotted against her, or to be executed because of his plotting (Telltale game, Episode 6). This is one of the most complicated choices in the Telltale game – whether Mira should agree to die and lose along with her life her connections in King’s Landing that could help her family, or whether she should accept the marriage proposal and send at death her friend – a peasant boy Tom whose full identity is not revealed yet and who saved her life once, telling her that he was sent by “friends”. Most of the players (78%) have chosen to send Mira for death, and only 23% decided to keep her alive and betrothed to lord Morgryn.

EthanForrester

Thirdborn son

“Whereas his older brothers were natural warriors, Ethan always found himself drawn to pursuits of the mind, particularly music and books. He also bore a great love for the towering trees of Ironrath – a love he shared with his twin sister, Talia. Ethan was just a boy when House Forrester joined the War of Five Kings; but by war’s end he had been thrust into a role he was unprepared for. Sadly, his lordship did not last long: Ethan was murdered in cold blood by Ramsay Snow, the bastard son of Roose Bolton” (Telltale game, The Codex).

Another playable character and a figure of the Telltale game – a pawn played by Ethan Forrester, 10-year-old son of the Lord Forrester who was killed in the second episode despite his choices. However his choices influenced his name after death – Ethan the Wise or Ethan the

Bold. Ethan the Bold was the name given to him in case Ethan as a lord decided not to bend the

knee to Ramsay Bolton (Snow), and Ethan the Wise was given to him if he made decisions according to advices of his Sentinel (Telltale game, Episode 1).

Authenticityanddecision-makingintheTelltaleGameofThrones:analysisona base of statistics of moral choices made by players

If to consider moral decision-making in the Telltale video game, at first it seems difficult to say if moral choices depend on social interactions or authenticity. Let’s consider authenticity and social environment of winning and losing characters of the Telltale Game, in order to see how they are connected with moral decision-making. Mira and Rodrik Forrester who die in 78% and 70% of statistics of choices and Ethan who dies in 100% statistics can be considered as weak characters, meanwhile Asher Forrester who dies in 30% probability and Gared Tuttle who dies in 0% of probability can be considered as winning.

In the first episode, Mira Forrester showed up as a character with a stable self- knowledge and authenticity. She realized herself as a noble girl, proud for her house, “enjoyed her service” in the court according to the game history, unexpectedly for herself, which means her high level of adaptation. She also knew that she is not supposed to interact with a peasant who tried to talk to her in the corridors of the royal castle in King’s Landing, which was shown by prevailing options of choice to send the peasant away (Telltale game, The Codex). However, with developing of the story and arrival of new characters, Mira’s authenticity becomes less stable. She has to talk to peasant Tom anyway – there is no choice left when he saves her life from a Lannister guard, and when she kills the guard to save Tom and herself. Mira doesn’t have a knowledge of herself as a person who is not that faithful to Queen Margaery to sacrifice her life as she wants to be, and who also can murder someone in order to save a friend: “She has more guile than she realizes” (Telltale game, The Codex). However, unlike a character from original

fiction - Daenerys Targaryen who realized her power and became more authentic after her first

independent decision which also was a murder, - Mira doesn’t realize herself as powerful when she murders the Lannister guard and saves her friend, and her authenticity does not grow. On the contrary, Mira loses a part of her self-knowledge, realizes herself as even more dependent on favor of the court characters. Realization of this dependency leads Mira to more manipulative and cunning moral decision-making which doesn’t lead her to flourishing and, apparently, survival (Telltale game, Episode 2). Since then, player often receives options of telling lies for Mira and has no optimal choice to wisely leave the King’s Landing or look for good protection, which would be present in front of Mira Forrester if she was enough authentic and practically wise character. To see the dynamics of Mira’s decision-making, let’s compare a few situations from the beginning and the middle of her story.

In the very beginning, Mira’s has a conversation with another handmaid in apartment of their lady Margaery:

“Sera: Lady Margaery is still with the king. I thought you would like to know. Mira: Thank you.

Sera: I thought we were friends, Mira. When you dismissed me the other day, I wouldn’t say it didn’t hurt my feelings. We have known each other for years.

Mira: has to choose a reply – 1) It was private 2) I’m sorry 3) We are friends. 4) [Silence]”

(Telltale game, Episode 1)

In the situation from the middle of the game, amount of immoral, or cunning ways of answer in conversation with Sera, grows:

“Sera: “It wasn’t too long, I was asking for you help with Margaery. And what did you do? Now you know how it feels, being on the outside looking in. But I’m your friend Mira, always. If you want my help with Margaery, just ask.

Mira (has to choose):

1) Please help me 2) I don’t need your help 3) Don’t be so dramatic 4) [Silence]” (Telltale game, Episode 5)

And a scene from the end of story:

“Margaery: Sera says you used her to get into that party [which is true]. You’ve been with me a long time, Mira. When I’m queen, I need people I can count on. Please, tell me this isn’t true.

Sera: Please, Mira, I don’t deserve to lose this position.

Mira: has two options to answer – 1) I used Sera 2) It was all Sera’s idea”. (Telltale game, Episode 7)

If Mira chooses being manipulative and tells that it was Sera’s idea to get into the Garden party, which was not, Margaery favors Mira to continue her service and dismisses Sera. It’s the only option for Mira to stay protected in King’s Landing, or at least to postpone her status until the time Margaery would become a queen. For her survival, Mira has to make evil decision and tell lies. If she tells the truth, she is dismissed by Margaery and stays outside of court’s protection, with no chance to get rid from political enemies of Forresters. It’s possible to say that only option for Mira’s good decision-making, survival and flourishing, in terms of Aristotle, and also survival and good being of her family, is to develop her personality from honest and kind but inauthentic into highly self-authentic person who is manipulative and evil in paradoxical moral situations and also realizes it. And if Mira doesn’t go through changes, staying in the same “northern way” as she was – morally good in local situations and inauthentic - it leads her to defeats and lack of practical wisdom and unhappiness, for all playable characters of the game who are dependent on her decisions. In case of Mira’s character, knowledge of self and authenticity goes hand in hand with developing of manipulative and evil qualities and

consequently evil decision-making in paradoxical moral situations, which becomes good decision-making in the whole, bigger picture of Forresters. If it would be possible for Mira to develop her self-knowledge without becoming manipulative and making evil decisions, she would have saved herself before getting into the prison, may be on a stage when she received a suspicious anonymous letter inviting her for meeting in the garden. Manipulative self- unconcerned/or concerned and also curious Mira goes at the garden meeting making the most important mistake; not manipulative and self-authentic Mira would ignore it or report about the situation to Margaery.

Soon after the garden murder, Mira falsely trusted to Lord Morgryn who plotted the letter. Mira stays faithful to the House Forrester until the end of her story, and it gives her opportunity to make decisions very crucial for benefit of Forresters - an attempt to secure Iron Wood for house Forrester with help of Tyrion and forging the letter from Margaery. But she is successful only in the beginning, before she kills the guard. The situation of a maid who kills a government soldier and continues her service in the government can be considered as a social paradox with which Mira cannot deal, because she doesn’t have strong authenticity yet and thinks of herself as just a handmaiden. If she would have a better authenticity, she would probably be able to use the situation for her benefit – she could make a report about attempt on her life to the strongest figure in her story who favored her, queen Cersei, and present evidence – a knife. In the menu displaying statistics of moral choices made in the game, it is shown that 10% of players made a choice not to kill the Lannister guard in a situation of self-defence, which means that in a world of minority of moral choices of the game Mira dies without attempt to defend herself and her friend.

There is one dialogue in the Telltale video game in which player discovers Mira’s personal qualities through her conversation with Tyrion Lannister. Tyrion tells Mira that he is disappointed that she “doesn’t know herself” (Telltale game, Episode 6).

It’s possible to say that lack of self-knowledge and authenticity of Mira Forrester – lack of her knowledge of herself as a kind, merciful girl, who appreciates qualities of the others not according to their position in the society or words but according to their actions in the society, who is also brave, but can be “vile” and manipulative when it’s necessary for bigger moral purposes like saving her family – leads a character to false moral decisions and lack of practical wisdom, betrothal to her enemy or execution. Her growing immoral decision-making makes her weaker, not stronger, because she doesn’t include her new immoral qualities in her picture of her self – in her self-image, and it makes Mira inauthentic to her true self, unaware of it. Even if she acts immoral, like in a situation of betrayal of Sera or Tom, she doesn’t realize it as her act, thinking of herself as the same old Mira. The fact that her “straightforward northern ways are often at odds with the subtleties of court life” is shown up in the beginning of Mira’s life in King’s Landing, but as soon as she started making evil decisions for the benefit of her family gaining new personal qualities without realizing them as a part of her authenticity – her troubles proceeded.

In a thoughtful conversation in the episode 5 Tyrion Lannister tells Mira a phrase: “I’ve always admired your honesty. But I suspect there is more to you than one might imagine. <...> We both know that you have ulterior motive”. If Mira continues conversation and tells Tyrion the truth, she makes right moral choice in the situation. It allows Mira to get information from Tyrion which she needed. However if Mira chooses to lie, Tyrion says that he thought that she was “smarter” and doesn’t tell her what she needs to know. He concludes conversation in both cases by telling phrase “Be careful who you trust”. The conversation shows that Mira’s immoral

ways don’t work as long as she is not “smart” in realizing them, which means that she is not self- authentic (Telltale game, episode 5).

Bad authenticity of Mira Forrester may be connected with social interactions in her environment, but the connection goes in a way different from one in the novel and TV show. Social interactions in which Mira is included don’t allow her to realize who she is, but on the opposite, lead her to confused self-image and authenticity.

One of the morally paradoxical situations Mira Forrester meets with is a situation where she has to decide whether she should forge the letter to Glenmores from queen Margaery, or not. Only 19,2% of players have chosen to forge the letter which was morally wrong without context, but morally right in a context of situation of Mira’s family. Not to forge letter would be more evil than to forge it, because breaking ethical rule of obeying to Margaery Mira completes a highly moral motive – saving her House. However a little amount of possibility of such choices shows that in the most possible version of Telltale game fictional world of Game of Thrones Mira Forrester doesn’t have enough self-knowledge in order to solve paradoxical moral choice wisely and forge the letter.

Let’s compare fate of Mira Forrester to a winning character Gared Tuttle. He is also far away from the main stage of events and familiar environment, as he is sent to the Wall and then heads to the North Grove. However he goes through no less social encounters and decision- making than Mira. Authors of the game show the development of the character very well, and player can experience the dynamic of personality growth with Gared. Starting as a cup-bearer during the celebration of Red Wedding, modest and teased by others servants, after a few episodes Gared grows into one of the most strong characters who can distinguish friends from allies as good as living from the dead, which culminates in the episode “Ice Dragon”. It is unknown yet how last decisions of Gared are going to influence the fate of House Forrester, as

the new season of the video game wasn’t launched yet. However, it’s possible that if Gared showed up – and realized himself - as a person who is not seeking power and always stays loyal to his friends and house Forrester, his last choice not to sacrifice his friend for blood magic and decision to take North Grove to the south in order to protect the house Forrester is probably more morally wise than alternative choice to kill Cotter, to strengthen the unpredictable nonhuman warriors, and to stay with the North Grove in order to meet death in hands of White Walkers.

Social interaction of both Mira Forrester and Gared Tuttle are saturated. Mira Forrester is interacting with the court, with Sera who becomes her “best friend”, with Cersei, Margaery, allies of Whitehills, lord Morgryn and other characters. Arrival of the mysterious peasant Tom who offers her help makes her decisions chaotic, as long as more various options arrive and paradoxical social interaction occurs, with which Mira is not ready to deal due to her lack of authenticity. Offer of a dangerous and immoral deal from lord Tyrion also reveals unstable personality of Mira, showing that she can be manipulative and greedy for power as much as Cersei Lannister, but yet not enough realizes her ability in order to foresee all consequences of her decision-making in King’s Landing. Why such difference for Mira and Gared takes place?

A necessary condition of practical wisdom and right decision-making in the Telltale video game can be called absence of will for benefit for oneself, or lack of motivation for power. Mira Forrester does display this motivation. She has to manipulate in order to make good networking and literally survive in the snake’s nest of Kings-landing for her sake and her own powerful position. Gared Tuttle is more “free” in a sense that he is not a member of House Forrester, he was not born for a good powerful career perspective, his life of a pig-farmer’s son is not considered as much precious by the others and by himself. Gared often puts his life in risk for the sake of others and his actions are not ruled by blind loyalty to the house – only by his personal principle of duty to the lord Forrester who died saving Gared’s life. Lack of motivation

for power is a condition of Gared’s practical wisdom. That’s why meeting social paradoxes – such as given by Gared oath to find the North Grove which he has to complete although it’s commonly believed to be a fairy tale and search of which is also deathly dangerous - lead the character of Gared to improvement of his authenticity and to good moral decision-making. Gared has no will for power for himself, and it makes him a winning figure of the game - along with Asher Forrester.

Now let’s compare the fates of two brothers – Asher Forrester and Rodrik. Both are the sons of Lord Forrester, however one had bad social interactions in his community and was exiled, and another one is a beloved son of the Lord and first pretender for lordship. Asher had an affair with Whitehill’s daughter, and it led families to another battle. Exiled to the south, Asher became a thief and murderer. Along with his companion Beshka he took a slave master as a hostage in exchange for gold from the government, however army of another slave master ambushed them and killed the hostage. Conflicted situations in which Asher has not much power except his decision-making and luck culminate when he, Beshka and his uncle running from Braavos soldiers meet a dragon in a cave. Asher and his friends survive, however the dragon burns down all their enemies. Asher keeps a broken claw of the dragon as evidence of the fact that he met the dragon to the Queen Daenerys, and after testifying his honesty she gives him the gold. Asher successfully buys army and heads to the North, where his family is waiting for him. He also makes an allience with the Queen of Meeren, which should be helpful for future of Forresters. All that context makes Asher more dangerous to Whitehills according to the words of one of the non-playable characters who claim that “Whitehills don’t know what Asher is and are scared of him” (Telltale game, episode 6).

Paradoxical social interactions, when it came to completing the rules, followed Asher since he made his decision without taking into account his family context, according to the video

game history. But this choice allowed Asher to develop his authenticity and to learn that he is a person who would rather follow his own idea of virtue than the traditional one, which fits the concept of authenticity by Charles Taylor. It would probably allow him to fit the extreme situation in Ironrath when Forrester house was almost destroyed and a leader with a new type of decision-making was needed. A character who used to solve paradoxical moral situations is probably more fitting for situation of a war, which is a paradoxical social process itself. That’s why it’s Asher and not Rodrick who is chosen as the one who must live in 70% of choices made by players in the episode 5. Reality of Telltale Game of Thrones where Asher survives is more possible because he is more authentic at the moment, than Rodrik. Most probably, it’s Asher or Gared Tuttle who would become final “king” figures of the “chess” match between human players and world of possibilities presented in the video game. Both characters are placed out of their natural environment, so both have more chances to gain self-knowledge than Rodrik and Ethan Forrester who live according to the rules of society they are put in and hence lose possibility to discover themselves, as interactions with the others are too limited, predictable and safe for expanding the picture of self. Gared and Asher are placed in the environments where their authenticity grows through unstable and unpredictable social conflicts in unfamiliar environment, which they try to solve using new and risky ways. They also have more chances to gain self-knowledge than Mira Forrester, because unlike her they don’t have a social motivation of benefit and power, or “the guile”.

Constructionofauthenticityanddecision-makinginworldsofminormoral choices of the video game by Telltale

It’s important to notice that although the majority of choices was made as it was considered, there is also a minority of moral choices made by players in the game – and those

choices create a separate alternative world of the Telltale Game of Thrones. Appearance of this

world can also be explained from the point of view of construction of morality in Game of Thrones. If Rodrik is enough authentic about his moral strength and realizes that he had enough “death experience” (he appears in the game as coming back from almost dead) to the moment of the situation where he can sacrifice himself for his brother, he manages not to do it, in order not to give up and to take responsibility for his house, as well as partial responsibility and fault for death of Asher. Self-authentic Rodrik is able to cope with the continuing dissonance of his brother’s death instead of him in his mind and further to succeed in leading their house to triumph. If Mira’s awareness about her “guile” qualities and not sincere friendships is enough developed to the moment when she is caught for her murder, she manages to overcome cognitive dissonance of the fact that she has to sacrifice her good friend Tom for her house’s benefit (which is not such dissonance for the new cynical Mira) and agrees to marriage of convenience to lord Morgryn.

Chapter 4

Constructionofauthenticityandmoraldecision-making,andparadoxicalsituation in the Song of Ice and Fire. Semiotical model by Lubomir Dolezel as a way of explanation.

Constructionofauthenticityandmoraldecision-making,andsocialinteraction in the series “Asong of Ice and Fire”: analysis of characters

If to come back to analysis of original fiction, it’s possible to see differences between the video game and the series now. Unlike the Telltale game, in the original world of Song of Ice and Fire authenticity seems to be gained through social relationships with the others that do not entail paradoxical moral situations. The evidence of that – good moral choices and gained

authenticity of winning characters like Daenerys Targaryen and bad moral choices and lost authenticity of losing characters such as Theon Greyjoy.

Theon Greyjoy

“Theon: Lord Eddard is a second father to me. I do so swear” (A Game of Thrones, Chapter 14: Cathelyn III)

Soon after the defeat of Starks who raised Theon Greyjoy as a hostage but treated him equally with Stark children, he travels from the North to the Iron Islands in order to make alliance with his father. He also makes it because he secretly wants to reunite with his family. When Theon comes “home” - he meets unpleasant reality, in which his own sister is a violent warrior and his father is a conservative man who considers his son dressed as a “whore” and expects him to be more rough than Theon used to be after living with Starks. After he comes back to a place Theon considered natural for him, paradoxical situations follow the character – situations in which he is socially unknown and unexpected for others, and soon for himself. Social paradoxes led authenticity of Theon to destruction after a monthly torture by Ramsay Bolton (Snow), when Theon refused to leave his prison cell and tells to his sister who comes to rescue him that his name is “Reek” - the one invented for him by Ramsay Snow (HBO Season 4: Episode 6).

Theon who came from the North to the Iron Islands meets unusual mentality in which an adequate person is supposed to perform violence and theft. He wants to fit and makes violent decisions, without realizing his personality of a man raised in community of Starks, where violence without justice is not considered a virtue. Theon goes so far in trying to match his beloved family that instead of coming back with an alliance he leads an attack on Winterfell where he grew up, breaking his oath to lady Stark and becoming a traitor (A Clash of Kings,

Chapter 37: Theon III). However Theon cannot control the Winterfell and soon is approached by Ramsay Bolton who takes him as a prisoner.

Theon fails in his moral decision-making and in being morally good, because of his bad authenticity, which became worse after interaction in his new unusual community in the Iron Islands.

DaenerysTargaryen

“Mother of dragons, Daenerys thought. Mother of monsters. What have I unleashed upontheworld?AqueenIam,butmythroneismadeofburnedbones,anditrestsonquicksand. Without dragons, how could she hope to hold Meereen, much less win back Westeros? I am the bloodofthedragon,shethought.Iftheyaremonsters,soamI.”(ADancewithdragons,chapter 11: Daenerys II)

Authenticity of Daenerys Targaryen is developing as she moves from one social environment to another and makes new decisions. Living in the community of Dothrakians who considered a wedding without “at least three deaths a dull”, Daenerys spent time discovering the history of Valyrian Empire and of her name, and also investigated her wedding gift – eggs of dragons, a symbol of her ancestors Targaryens (HBO Season 1: Episode 1). She consequently becomes a leader of Dothrakian community.

Daenerys starts her way in a story of Song of Ice and Fire as an exile, a sister and slave to a will of her brother and then to her husband – leader of a clan of Dothraki, and in the last season she is a biggest threat to the most of ruling men and women in Seven Kingdoms. Growing self-knowledge and authenticity of Daenerys Targaryen is clearly formulated for everyone, including the viewers of the show: title of Daenerys gets longer with every new social position she gains and is repeated in presence of every new encounter, so that there are fan-made parodies devoted just to the title. It fully sounds as “Daenerys Stormborn of the House

Targaryen, First of Her Name, the Unburnt, Queen of the Andals and the First Men, Khaleesi of the Great Grass Sea, Breaker of Chains, and Mother of Dragons” (A dance with dragons, chapter 53: Daenerys).

In the Book 5, Dance with dragons, Daenerys is described on a feast in Yunkai – a slave city which she entered on partial terms of peace: “I hate this, thought Daenerys Targaryen. How did this happen, that I am drinking and smiling with men I’d sooner flay?”(A Dance with dragons, chapter 50: Daenerys II). Her self-identity and self-knowledge is described as developing and changing with every new extreme situation she encounters. In the last season of the show, Daenerys told to Jon Snow: "I spent my life in foreign lands. So many men have tried to kill me, I don't remember all their names. I have been sold like a broodmare. I've been chained and betrayed, raped and defiled. Do you know what kept me standing through all those years in exile? Faith. Not in any gods. Not in myths and legends. In myself. In Daenerys Targaryen. The world hadn't seen a dragon in centuries until my children were born. The Dothraki hadn't crossed the sea. Any sea. They did for me. I was born to rule the Seven Kingdoms, and I will." (HBO Season 7: Episode 3).

Social interaction of Daenerys Targaryen with the world was always taking into account her social status of the only daughter – and after death of her brother, the only child – of the Mad King, the last legitimate king of the Realm, and also of the Blood of Dragon, as Targaryens were magically connected to those legendary creatures. In other words, Daenerys was always perceived as a leader, and it made her social interactions clear and lacking paradoxes, for herself. Since Daenerys established who she was and identified herself as “A blood of dragon” and right pretender for the main power in the Realm, in her moral decision-making she was always taking into account who she was, which was made by her clear for the others and, mostly importantly, for herself: «She would rather have drifted in the fragrant pool all day, eating iced fruit off silver

trays and dreaming of a house with a red door, but a queen belongs to her people, not to herself.» (A dance with dragons, Chapter 52: Daenerys II). When Queen of Meereen was captured by Dothrakian riders long after she left their community, they did not recognize her and she didn’t remind them that she was a queen of Meereen – because she knew that it was a powerful knowledge which she didn’t want to lose (HBO Season 6: Episode 1). She further killed the Khalasar in a fire, which wasn’t able to hurt her. Dany emerged a fire trap while speaking to the Khals and looking authentically very complete – more complete than many other characters of Game of Thrones: “'None of you are fit to lead the Dothraki. But I am, so I will.' (HBO Season 3: episode 4).

In the original world of “The game of thrones”, authenticity and practical wisdom are gained or lost through social relationships with the others that may have logical paradoxes, however those paradoxes can be successfully met only by highly authentic characters. It means that authenticity of a character is a necessary condition of correct, or moral, decision-making, including situations where character meets moral paradox. In the graphical alternative universe of Game of Thrones amount of characters who can succeed meeting the paradox expands: not only highly self-authentic characters, but also those who don’t have certain authenticity yet but also lack motivation of power are successful in meeting paradoxical social situations, which allow them to develop self-knowledge and make morally wise decisions. In the literature and TV show fiction of Game of Thrones, a character with weak authenticity will lose in both cases – be he motivated by self-benefit or not.

Let’s consider, why such difference between two fictional worlds takes place, from the point of view of semiotics.

II. AuthenticityandsocialprocessintheGameofThronesseriesandvideogame and model of possible worlds by Lubomir Dolezel (1998)

“Self exists only in dynamic relation with the other” (Macmurray 1991: 17). For Macmurray, when defining self, it’s important to focus not on the individual, but on the matrix within which “individuality takes shape” (Becker 2000: 98). In multipersonal world, acting turns into interacting, as Dolezel claimed using the idea of Macmurray and calling semantics of narrative “semantics of interaction” (Dolezel 1998: 96). If to look for the reasons why authenticity and moral decision-making are constructed in The Game of thrones TV series different from the video game, the answer can be found in the semiotic nature of social processes in the TV series/novel and the game. As Dolezel claimed, “social process is a paradoxical phenomenon” - taking a social process in literature fiction (Dolezel 1998: 112). “The highest form of social organization produces uncontrollable events”, in analogy to nature forces and mind work (Dolezel 1998: 112). In a social process, individual is manipulated by “suprapersonal” forces “that he is unable to stand up, because they cannot be identified” (Dolezel 1998: 112). Lubomir Dolezel focused on narrative worlds of written fiction – he analyzed novels of Dostoevsky and Dickens, and yet didn’t consider the video games. However, it’s possible to state that semiotic nature of social processes in the video game is different from the one in the literature or TV and has less chaotic, more identifiable nature. On the contrary, semiotic nature of self-authenticity in the game fiction is more chaotic and less identifiable than in the literature fiction. Social process in the video game isn’t less “paradoxical” comparing to the literature fiction, however it makes less influence on self of characters which embodies chaotic natural force itself. Construction of authenticity in the game is inverted, comparing it to the one in the literature fiction. It’s not an agent forming according to the formula “I do [interact] therefore I exist”, as it was considered in modern Western philosophical thought, but a more personalized

subject (Becker 2000: 98). That’s why highly motivated and individual but authentically deformed character still makes right moral decisions in the video game, despite social paradoxes, and more than that – his authenticity is better when character goes through social paradoxes. At the same time, in the fiction of Game of Thrones such character would rather lose than win, and would turn out to be not practically wise.

According to the theory of Lubomir Dolezel, in action theory and decision making in any world, be it a fictional or a possible one (or a video-game), motivation is the main factor of choice (Dolezel, 1998). That’s why, direction of forming of self-authenticity and practical wisdom – towards good construction and growing, or towards unclear construction, - depends on motivation. Motivation becomes important for practical wisdom and authenticity in both literature and video game fictions of Game of Thrones: the heroes who have a motivation of self- knowledge and self-development and don’t have aim of gaining power survive and win more often, than the characters who are motivated by power for just themselves. That’s why winning characters, such as Daenerys from TV show and Gared Tuttle, who are not motivated by personal power, become the moving force of social processes in their worlds, and losing characters such as Theon Greyjoy and Mira Forrester become devoid of self-identity and intentionality, and/or dead.

It’s possible to say that in both literature and video-game fiction of Game of Thrones characters who have strong authenticity make moral decisions independently from social interaction they have to meet and become a force forming society and events rather than being influenced by them. However not all characters gain this ability. In one of the possible worlds of Game of Thrones, Asher Forrester and Gared Tuttle are the characters who achieved it.

Let’s consider the last statements in more detailed analysis of moral choices of one yet unconsidered character from A Song of Ice and Fire.

III. ConceptofLubomirDolezelandanalysisofacharacterfromtheoriginal fiction of Game of Thrones.

TyrionLannister

„Neverforgetwhatyou are,forsurelytheworldwillnot. Makeityourstrength.Thenit can never be your weakness. Armor yourself in it, and it will never be used to hurt you.“(AGame of Thrones, Chapter 5: Jon I)

This phrase may sound as a guiding formula of life success for Tyrion Lannister, who despite his physical condition of being a dwarf doesn’t forget his social benefits over tall men. If he can’t win something, he buys it, or takes it using only his mind.

Tyrion Lannister is a member of House Lannister and is the third and youngest child of Lord Tywin Lannister and Lady Joanna Lannister. His older siblings are Cersei Lannister, the wife of King Robert I Baratheon, and Ser Jaime Lannister, a knight of Robert's Kingsguard. After his birth, Tyrion’s mother had died, which became one of the reasons of irrational hatred of lord Tywin Lannister to his youngest child. Despite growing up in the unhealthy environment of sadistic and pervert older sister Cersei and deriding manners towards Tyrion from his father, he grew up into a smart intellectual man. His brother Jaime was kind and protective, and they grew up as friends (A Game of Thrones, Chapter 9: Tyrion I).

Discovery of his mind possibilities outside the King’s Landing began for Tyrion when he was accused guilty in attack at Brandon Stark – the youngest son of Ned Stark (A Game of Thrones, Chapter 28: Catelyn V). Tyrion was abducted by wife of Ned Stark, lady Catelyn, but when she found out that Tyrion was innocent it was too late for him to come back in the safe King’s Landing. His was imprisoned in a castle of Catelyn’s sister, peculiar Lysa Tully who accused him of killing her husband, Lord Jon Arryn, along with Bran's attempted murder, though he was innocent of both. Tyrion denied his trial by combat, and luckily succeeded because a

warrior who agreed to fight for him was a skillful sellsword Bronn (A Game of Thrones, Chapter 40: Catelyn VII).

After escape from Eyrie, Tyrion continues his travel back to King’s Landing, although taking into account the War of Five Kings and his physical disadvantage, it was not easy for him. However, despite very often being drunk, Tyrion is always very concentrated: he never allows his emotions to take control over him, and he always formulates who he is, what he can do and why the others should appreciate it very clearly. In other words, Tyrion is very self-authentic, which is the reason of his successful moral decisions, although they seem as a result of luck or strange circumstances. Here is just a raw of Tyrion’s quotes in which he reminds to the others who he is, formulating his identity:

“I am generous. Loyal to those who are loyal to me. I’ve proven I’m no craven. And I am cleverer than most, surely wits count for something. I can even be kind. Kindness is not a habitwithus Lannisters,Ifear,but IknowIhavesomesomewhere.Icould be… Icouldbe good to you.” (A Storm of Swords, Chapter 68: Sansa VI)

“Battle fever.I am half a man and drunkwith slaughter,let them killmeif they can!”(A Clash of Kings, Chapter 61: Tyrion XIV)

Authenticity of Tyrion Lannister was very well constructed by him while he was young and repressed in his family. His self-image developed despite the circumstances and against them, as a “weapon” (A Game of Thrones, Chapter V: Jon I).

Success and survival of Tyrion amazes not only those who believe in him, but also makes him one of the most beloved characters in the show. This success is a result not of luck but of good moral choices. Tyrion has two key elements of practical wisdom – motivation of self-improvement which is bigger than motivation of gaining power and makes him unique in his family, and good authenticity, reflective understanding of his personal limits and possibilities.

Above all other characters, hedonistic Tyrion also has unbelievable will to live. Not only Tyrion’s smart self-knowledge and motivation, but also his love to life makes his practical wisdom quite ironic and distinctive in the series:

“TyrionLannister:Dragonsdonotdowellincaptivity. Missandei: How do you know this?

TyrionLannister:That'swhatIdo.IdrinkandIknowthings.(HBOSeason6:Episode

Chapter5

TheoryofimpossibleworldsofGameof Thrones

VideoGameofThronesasametafictionoforiginalseries.

Telltale video game, as a semiotic system different from literature and TV show of Game of Thrones, can be considered as “impossible world”, in terms of Umberto Eco – the world where logic of original fiction, the Song of Ice and Fire, stops working: “Such a world can be mentioned because language can name nonexistent and inconceivable entities” (Eco 1990: 76). As Lubomir Dolezel claimed in his critics of Eco, some worlds are outside the realm of possible – but they still can be given a right of being a fiction (Dolezel, 1998). Embodiment of the video game about the Realm showed that Eco’s argument about impossibility of development of “impossible” world is not fully right: nonexistent world can be not only mentioned, but also can be developed into a separate reality, with help of a factor of a real participation of readers/viewers/players. Asher and Gared would probably never reach survival and “human flourishing” in the TV show of Game of Thrones, murdered by someone more power-motivated, as well as Daenerys Targaryen with her motivation of power would probably fail in her moral

decision-making and never cross the Narrow Sea if she would be a playable character in the graphical version of Realm.

As an “impossible” version of Game of Thrones, Telltale game presents the metafiction, which makes “impossible coexistence” of ontologically heterogeneous worlds real. One of the most important traits of metafiction, according to Dolezel, is a high level of individuation and “fictionalization”. Telltale game meets this condition, presenting a fiction where player is a reader, a viewer and a part of fiction at the same time. In a typical metafictional term, Telltale game is a story where actual author and readers (players) coexist with fictional characters. The player literally steps from the actual world into a fictional one, becoming a “fictional person” and an author of a possible story (Dolezel 1998: 165). And, because of this high level of fictionalization of a player, the playable characters of the game become less fictionalized and more individualized. They act not as the fictional characters of original Game of Thrones, who are rather artificial and live out of mind of Martin and HBO creators, but like real people – like millions of those who play the game, creating its impossible possible stories. And, as it is in real, non-fictional world, individuality of moral decision-making in paradoxical, or morally extreme, situations of the game is often more successful than socially reglamented decisions.

“Impossible” world of the impossible world of Telltale Game of Thrones, or super metafiction.

I have been considering major choices of the players made in the game, which led Mira Forrester to death in 70% and Rodrik Forrester to death and Asher Forrester to survival in 73%. It’s a choice made, in terms of metafictional world, in one of possible worlds of metafiction of the Telltale Game of Thrones. If to consider Telltale Game of Thrones as a metafiction independent from it original literature world, another impossible world of Game of Thrones

emerges – a world of possibilities created by minor moral choices made by player. It’s a world

which appears in 30% of Mira’s survival and 27% of Asher’s death and Rodrick’s survival. Let’s consider specific nature of this world, which seems impossible in the reality of metafiction of Telltale Game of Thrones and double-impossible towards the original novel series.

In case of minor moral choices made when Rodrik Forrester survives and Asher Forrester dies, Rodrik further leads the army of sellswords against Whitehills – the same way as Asher would do in case of 73%. However, there is a slight difference in roads of two characters. Surviving Asher doesn't’ have an option to kill Lord Whitehill or his son in the camp, he only has an option of poisoning Ludd at the feast, after submission to terms of peace with him. Straight after the poisoning, the fight begins, leading most of Forresters to surrender. In case Asher doesn’t kill Lord Whitehill, he kills his son Gryff, which still takes place during the battle inside of Ironrath fortress.

Unlike his brother, Rodrik doesn’t receive offer of peace from Ludd Whitehill, in his version of video game plot. Lord Whitehill comes to claim Rodrik for execution, because conflict between them is intense. This is also the reason why Rodrik and the army of sellswords from Braavos have an option which Asher didn’t have – they can kill Ludd in the camp while the major battle is going on in the Ironrath. This gives a player sense of triumph, because Rodrik was inclined in conflicted situation with Ludd in which he was not able to show power all along the way before. However the triumph is temporal, as when Rodrik comes back to the Ironrath he faces a battle going on fatally badly for Forresters and it ends with escape of a few Forresters and part of sellswords from the Ironrath.

In case of such outcome, marriage of Mira to lord Morgryn happening in 27% of her survival makes sense, as Morgryn is a noble house and Mira who developed in herself new moral qualities may use her betrothal for benefit of her house in the future. If she previously managed

to plot against Sera to stay in the court, she also has a chance to receive protection of Margaery who is going to be a queen.

In the least possible version of Telltale story Mira and Rodrik Forrester would be self- authentic and practically wise, meanwhile Asher Forrester is rather going to disappear. Why so, from the point of view of theory of metafiction?

Metafiction which allows impossible to coexist, seems to be capable of inversion of structural rules inside of its impossible “copy”. Game series in a version of majority of moral choices made by players made an inversion of construction of social processes and construction of individuality of a character in the game, which led to differences in construction of morality in the literature fiction and the game. The same way, world of minor moral choices in the game activates inversion of those constructions in the impossible world of video game series. Mira’s and Rodrick’s survival, taken as an impossible version of impossible version of Game of Thrones series, becomes in its core a fiction identical to the original story of the Song of Ice and Fire – world where Mira’s and Rodrick’s character would also survive because in the situations of moral choice influence of social process is stronger than influence of individuality and self- knowledge. Mira takes benefit of her environment and proceeds by sacrificing her “northern ways”, including friendship with Tom and previous self-identity of herself as morally good, to a practical betrothal with lord Morgryn and forming of new authenticity. It happens in analogy with surviving female characters from the novel series who leave their old self-identities behind, often becoming more cruel and strong but accepting their new self and authenticity. It happens to Daenerys Targaryen, Arya Stark, Sansa Stark, however doesn’t happen to Margaery Tyrell who doesn’t change, becomes more weak and sacrificial during the series and dies. Rodrik who fits his society in Ironrath becomes its leader, taking a partial responsibility for death of Asher. It sounds like a story that could have happened in Realm and even has similarity with Jon Snow

who, like Rodrik, once came back from the dead, and who also replaced as a King of the North older son of Ned Stark who died at the Red Wedding (HBO Season 6: Episode 2). But yet it is unknown how reality of true identity of Jon Snow as Blood of the Dragon would affect his moral choices and authenticity, and the whole outcome of the Song of Ice and Fire.

Chapter 6

Construction of authenticity in the Game of Thrones: two components. Practical moralwisdomandbeingmorallygood:distinctionintheliteraturefictionandvideogame based on Game of Thrones.

There are three fictional worlds of Game of Thrones that are described in this work: literature fiction of original TV series “Game of thrones” and novel series “A song of Ice and Fire”, metafiction of video game “Game of Thrones” and “impossible” metafiction of minor moral choices made by players in the video game.

In all three fiction worlds of Game of Thrones, motivation of self-development is a key component of authenticity for moral decision-making of a character. Authenticity is developed in characters who make decisions which lead them to survival and human flourishing, according to understanding of virtuous moral life by Aristotle (Irwin, 1985). Motivation of power, if it goes without authenticity, doesn’t lead a character to right moral decision-making, in all three fictional worlds of Game of Thrones, and it also doesn’t lead a character to being recognized as morally good.

In original fiction of Game of Thrones – novel and TV series, well formed authenticity of a character is key for practically wise decision-making and for being a morally good character, which confirms the key idea of Charles Taylor that authenticity is a universal source of morality in modern culture. The higher the level of self-knowledge and motivation of self-development –

basic elements of authenticity of a character – the more social interactions and events in the fiction depend on his, or her decision-making, and the more clear he, or she, is morally good. However, in the literature fiction of Game of Thrones nature of social process is chaotic and unpredictable, and has strong influence on the individuality of character, with accordance to idea of nature of social process in fiction described by Lubomir Dolezel (Dolezel, 1998). That’s why in the literature fiction of Game of Thrones meeting paradoxical social situation leads a character with weak authenticity to practically unwise decision-making – social process turns out to be stronger than individual process, in the fictional modality. Paradoxical situations in which a character with strong authenticity finds himself are successfully solved, leading the character to growing of authenticity, in terms of Charles Taylor, and practical moral wisdom, in terms of Aristotle.

In the video game based on the Game of Thrones, authenticity of a character is also key for morally wise decision-making and morality of a character. Only authentic characters make decisions which lead them to survival, flourishing and practical wisdom, because authenticity and self-knowledge is a source of morality for those characters. Paradoxical social situations in which character has to make a moral choice which provokes cognitive dissonance often lead a character to development of his self-knowledge and authenticity, and it leads a character to survival and practical wisdom. It works for characters with strong authenticity and includes those who have a weak authenticity, but whose self-knowledge grows through contradictory interactions because of motivation of self-growing. Characters without motivation of self- development lack social paradoxes in their story and consequently they don’t have a possibility of development of self-knowledge. They become losing figures of the game, cannot achieve survival, flourishing and consequently - “eudamonia”, or happiness.

We could see that morally wise decision-making is defined by authenticity, as a moral source for characters in the Game of Thrones. However, moral sources not only define morally wise decision-making, but they also define being good, or moral, and being bad, or immoral. “Empowering” moral values make characters want to act morally good. Being good, or moral, doesn’t necessarily lead a character to survival, however it leads him, or her, to being recognized and perceived as moral by readers, viewers or players. Two moral sources, parts of authenticity – self-knowledge and motivation of self-development – lead characters to being good in different ways, depending on fictional modality of Game of Thrones – novel and series fiction, or video game.

Authenticity is a moral source in both fiction and video game of Game of Thrones, allowing characters to act good, and it allows characters to survive, making practically wise decisions. However motivation as a moral source of characters plays a different role in the fiction and the video game. Motivation of self-development plays crucial role in the video game, where individual process is a more influential force than social one. Motivation of self-development defines ability of a character to make practically wise decisions and also to be morally good, showing up as a moral source for decision-making and also morality in the video game. Individual motivation is not a force that leads characters to survival and flourishing in the original fiction of Game of Thrones and doesn’t lead them to practical wisdom, because social process as influential force is repressing individual ones. However, individual motivation is still a moral source for moral goodness – it’s something that makes characters morally good and honorable, even though it doesn’t lead to physical prosperity. Both motivation of self- development and power can lead a characters to gaining of practical moral wisdom and survival, if it goes in hand with high level of authenticity of a character, however only motivation of self- development can lead a character in the literature fiction of Game of Thrones to being morally

good. Eddard Stark might have been dead and unauthentic character, but he is a morally good character who sacrificed himself for moral principle of honor. His motivation of self- development as an honorable man despite the circumstances, and also lack of motivation for power (he didn’t want the Iron Throne), is what makes him morally good character. Arya Stark have killed more people than Cersei Lannister, however she is considered as a morally good character, and Cersei is considered as evil. This is because Arya Stark has motivation of self- growing as her significant moral source, which allows her to act good and to kill only those who seem deserving it. Cersei Lannister doesn’t have moral sources, motivated only by social motive of power, that’s why she is perceives as immoral. Even when Cersei is killing the torturer from the Sept, acting morally good, it is not perceived as act of moral goodness, but rather as a confirmation of evil nature of the character. Although Cersei doesn’t achieve moral goodness, she acts morally wise, because she is highly authentic and also socially motivated: motivation of power, as a part of social process, leads the character to survival (Dolezel, 1998).

As a metafiction, impossible for existence along with original Song of Ice and Fire, Telltale Game of Thrones gives rise to a third – and second impossible - world of the Game of Thrones, a world of minor moral choices made by players in the video game. In this world, connection between social interactions and practical wisdom becomes identical to the connection in the original fiction. Emergence of second impossible world, which is identical to the original one, makes metafiction of Telltale Game of Thrones a possible universe coexisting in harmony with original literature fiction.

In all three fiction worlds of Game of Thrones, strong authenticity as a moral source allows characters to influence social events around them and change construction of social reality. Not every character reaches a level of authenticity required for making morally wise decisions, however it is reached when a character with strong authenticity and not motivated for

personal power goes through paradoxical social situations. In all three fiction worlds of Game of Thrones, if a character with strong authenticity goes through paradoxical social situations, it makes his authenticity stronger and moral decision-making - better. However only in the original literature fiction of Game of Thrones and its “copy” - impossible world of minority choices in the Telltale game - a character with good authenticity and motivation for power can survive through social paradoxes which don’t lead him to deconstruction of self-knowledge and/or bad moral decision-making. An example is Rodrik Forrester who survives in “impossible” world of the Telltale game when he meets a paradox – sacrifice of his stronger brother – and becomes a strong figure, because his authenticity was formed at that moment enough for becoming a force of social interactions, and because in the fiction world identical by structure to the original fiction individuality is not as influential as social context. Also an example is Mira Forrester, whose “vile” motivation of self-power wouldn't doom her if she would live in the original King’s Landing of novel series. However, despite motivation of power can make a character morally wise and flourishing, it doesn’t make him, or her, morally good: that is something that only motivation of self-development can do. Authenticity of Daenerys Targaryen, although she has motivation for power, often makes her morally good and right in the eyes of a reader in a raw of situations. Inauthentic, but highly motivated for self-development and reaching authenticity Theon Greyjoy, who refused his right to be a king of Iron Islands, is considered as a morally good character. He acted morally good, defending Starks in the battle with the Night King, and he died in the battle. However, he was very morally good and heroic, because he finally reached moral source of authenticity of himself as a part of Stark family, whom he once betrayed.

Chapter 7

Conclusions

The thesis is devoted to studies of novel series A Game of Thrones and video game based on the series, with a focus on construction of authenticity of characters as moral source, in terms of Charles Taylor (1989), and moral decision-making, practically wise or unwise, in terms of Aristotle. The aim of study is to reveal construction of authenticity of characters of Game of Thrones in its complex structure, and to describe how authenticity allows characters to make moral decisions, which distinguish them as practically wise or unwise, and morally good or bad.

The research is supported by two types of methodology: one is critical analysis of construction of authenticity in the novel series made by previous researchers, and another is statistical analysis of decisions made by players engaged in the video game. Both methods allowed to identify construction of authenticity and moral decision-making in the fiction and video game, taking into account its structural similarities and differences. I have been analyzing critical article on authenticity and morality in the Game of Thrones according to Charles Taylor by Tom Hansberg, and article on morality in the Game of Thrones according to Aristotle by Robert Thomas. After critical analysis of those articles, I proceeded to new analysis of construction of authenticity and morality in the Game of Thrones, according to Charles Taylor and Aristotle, and came to a few conclusions about its structure in the novel series and video game. There are two components of authenticity of a character in the Game of Thrones – “self truth”, or self-knowledge, and motivation of self-development, which make moral goodness a value for a character. High level of authenticity presents a universal moral source for characters of both literature fiction and video game, leading them to wise decision-making resulting in survival. Authenticity leads characters to moral wisdom but does not necessarily lead them to

being morally good, especially for those characters who have motivation of power. Motivation of

self-development as a component of authenticity is a moral source for characters in both novel series and video game of the Game of Thrones, and the only moral source for characters in the literature fiction. Authenticity of a character, if it includes motivation of self-development, leads the character of the video game to being morally good. Motivation of self-development alone leads characters to practical moral wisdom and being morally good in the video game, however it doesn’t lead to the practical wisdom in the novel series – it only leads to being morally good, as a moral source. Those differences in construction of authenticity and moral decision-making in two fictional modalities of the Game of Thrones take place because of nature of social process in the literature fiction, according to semiotical model of multiple fictional worlds by Lubomir Dolezel (1998). Social process in the modality of literature fiction is a “chaotic force”, prevailing over individual process, including motivation of self-development, that’s why it doesn’t influence moral decision-making and survival outcome of characters (Dolezel 1998: 112). However in the modality of video game, individual process is prevailing over social one, because of the factor of participation of players in the creation of fiction story-lines. That’s why, motivation of self-development of a character in the video game does influence his, or her moral decision-making, as well as being morally good. In the novel series of Game of Thrones, authentic characters with motivation of self-development and without motivation of power usually lose, but remain morally good, and in the video game inauthentic characters with motivation of self-development gain practical moral wisdom and win, and also are morally good. Motivation of power is a part of social process, that’s why it leads authentic characters of literature fiction to moral wisdom: motivation of power has social nature, unlike motivation of self-development (Maslow, 1999). In the video game, motivation of power does not has influence, because individual process in the modality of video game suppresses social one.

Statistical method of analysis of video game involved consideration of statistics of game choices made by players fixed through game services. Statistics was used as a factor of majority and minority of moral decisions made by characters of the game. Major moral choices made by players in the game were considered as a factor of most probable development of story-line of a character in a particular way. Minority of moral choices made by players in the game was considered as a factor of less possible development of story-line of characters. Considering majority and minority of moral choices, I formulated idea that participation of players in the game through identification with fiction characters causes emergence of possible fiction worlds of Game of Thrones - the world of majority of moral choices made during the game, and the world of minority of moral choices made during the game. I consider idea of possible fiction worlds of Game of Thrones according to the concept of possible worlds by Lubomir Dolezel, who claimed that metafiction is literature that includes possibility of talking about the actual fiction. World of major moral choices made during the game presents such metafiction, as players who identify with actual characters are aware of existence of original fiction of Game of Thrones, and this awareness creates the most important element of metafiction. I consider the world of minor moral choices as super-metafiction of original novel series, which is consonant with original novel series in its structure, which is proven by identical construction of authenticity and moral decision-making there. Video games allow to develop multiple versions of original fiction because they include factor of participation of players who through identification with playable characters become creators of the fiction.

Moral decision-making practiced by the players in the Telltale video game is not only the way of expanding the universe of George Martin, but also is the way of developing individual self-knowledge and moral decision-making of players, which is going in accordance with idea of practicing virtues of Aristotle (Irwin, 1985). I also think that authenticity as a moral

source can be practiced during the game, as players often have to choose which characters they want to support. It provokes identification of a player with a particular character, which leads to practicing of personal traits of the chosen character in the game, and may be in real life too.

My study of Telltale video game shows that video games can allow players to learn how to make morally wise decisions, and it also can allow practicing moral goodness, through participation and identification with characters of a game. However, it’s not clear if video games can allow players to learn how to distinguish between moral goodness and morally wise decision-making, as first doesn’t often include option of survival, which is necessary for completing the game. Players would rather choose being morally wise and immoral and winning, than morally good but unwise and losing, because this is what allows to continue the game. However, Telltale video game has shown that sometimes choice of being immoral but morally wise, in order to survive, doesn’t lead to continuation of the game, but it rather leads to the end of character’s story and also provokes guilt in players, as it was in case of Mira who sacrificed her friend in order to survive. The question of practicing morality in the games based on complex literature fictions remains unsolved.

Culture of convergence allows modern literature to create, along with world versions, multiple moral compasses that can be used depending on the context. Moral compass of the Game of Thrones as a whole universe shows to its consumers and participants multiple directions for practicing their moral wisdom, however the main focus of the compass is on motivation, reflection and searching for moral sources and values in life. As Charles Taylor said, culture of authenticity is the perfect, ideal culture, in which self-knowledge is a moral value (Taylor 1998: 70). Motivating ideal of this culture is being self-authentic, and I think that world of Telltale video game allows to lift modern culture, at least among players, up to this ideal.

Fictional worlds as human constructs cannot be completed, always staying incomplete. It’s not only because of their human nature, but also because of multiple versions which appear with construction of one fictional world. This infinite nature of fictional worlds is used by convergence culture, which makes active consumers of media its aim. Turning literature into media content allows to create impossible worlds where consumers – readers, viewers and players – become a part of this world, as creators and participants. Henry Jenkins called this phenomenon of cultural activity of creating new worlds the transmedia storytelling, Thomas Pavel called it deployment of energy of imagination and Lubomir Dolezel - metafiction on its latest stage (Jenkins, 2006; Pavel, 1986; Dolezel, 1998). Theoretical frames created for analysis of fictional modalities and understanding of the nature of practical wisdom in them, can vary. However, the only frame that stays permanent towards fictional worlds and moral practices, is the very first original metafiction – history.

Bibliography

Barnes, Jonathan. Aristotle’sethics:thecompletewritings.Princeton University Press,

2014

Barrigar, Chris. Recent introductory texts in moral philosophy. Book News, 2005 Becker, Gerhold. Themoralstatusofpersons:perspectiveonbioethics.Amsterdam:

GA, 2000

“You win, or you die”. GameofThrones: Season 1, Episode 7. Directed by David Benioff, 2011. New York: HBO channel

“Fire and blood”. Game of Thrones: Season 1, Episode 10. Directed by David Benioff, 2011. New York: HBO channel

“The oathbreaker”. Game of Thrones: Season 3, Episode 6. Directed by David Benioff, 2016. New York: HBO channel

“The swords”. Game ofThrones: season 4, episode 1. Directed by David Benioff, 2014.

New York: HBO channel

“The Laws of Gods and Men”. GameofThrones:season 4, episode 6. Directed by David Benioff, 2014. New York: HBO channel

“The Children”. GameofThrones: season 4, episode 10. Directed by David Benioff, 2014. New York: HBO channel

“The Red Woman”. Game of Thrones: season 6, episode 1. Directed by David Benioff, 2016. New York: HBO channel

“Home”. GameofThrones: season 6, episode 2. Directed by David Benioff, 2016. New

York: HBO channel

“The blood of my blood”. Game of Thrones: season 6, episode 6. Directed by David Benioff, 2016. New York: HBO channel

Bogost, Ian. Persuasive games: the expressive power of video games. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2007

Bradshaw, John. Reclaiming virtue: how we can develop the moral intelligence to dothe right thing at the right time for the right reason. Bentam Book, 2009

Buchanan, James. “In search of the modern moral identity: A Transversal Reading of Charles Taylor And the Communitarians”. Soundings: An Interdisciplinary Journal 78, no. 1 (Spring 1995): 143-168. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.tlu.ee/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=edsbl&AN=ZT001195062&site=eds-live

Calhoun, Craih. “This Philosopher Has Reimagined Identity and Morality for a Secular Age”. Huffpost, 2016. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/charles-taylor-

philosopher_b_57fd00dde4b068ecb5e1c971?ncid=engmodushpmg00000004

Calhoun, Craig. “Morality, identity, and historical explanation: Charles Taylor on the sources of the self”. Sociological Theory 9, no. 2 (Autumn 1991): 232-263. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.tlu.ee/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=edsjsr&AN=edsjsr.10.2307.202087&site=eds-live

G.E. “How Westeros is won: What is the moral compass of Game of Thrones?”. TheEconomist, 2017. https://www.economist.com/prospero/2017/07/24/what-is-the-moral-

compass-of-game-of-thrones

Dolezel, Lubomir. Heterocosmica:FictionandPossibleworlds.London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998

Eco, Umberto. ThelimitsofInterpretation.Bloomington: Indiana University Press,

1990

Egenfeldt-Nielsen, Simon. Understanding video games: essential introduction.

Routledge: 2013

Eliott, Andrew. Medievalism in A Song of Ice and Fire andGame of Thrones. United States: Arthuriana, 2018

Festinger Leon. Atheoryofcognitivedissonance. Stanford University Press, 1957

Flood, Alison. “George Martin defends Game of Thrones sexual violence”. The Guardian, 2014

Frankl, Victor. Man’ssearchformeaning.New York: Pocket books, 1977

Frankel, Valerie. WinningtheGameofThrones:thehostofcharactersandtheiragendas. Valerie Estelle Frankel, 2013. Scribd edition.

Fraska, Gonzalo. “Ludology meets narratology: similitude and difference between videogames and narrative”. Parnasso, No 3, Helsinki: 1999.

Geuss, Raymond. PhilosophyandRealPolitics.Princeton University Press, 2008.

Scribd edition.

Gurciullo, Sebastian. MakingModernIdentity:CharlesTaylor’sRetrievalofMoral Sources. Critical Horizons, 2001

Hansberg, Thomas. “Paying the Iron Price”. In: TheUltimateGameofThronesand Philosophy: you think or you die. Open court: 2017. Scribd edition.

Heckhauzen, Heinz. Motivationandactivity.Moscow, 1986

Irwin, Terence. Aristotle.NicomacheanEthics.Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1985

Jacoby, Henry. Gameofthronesandphilosophy:Logiccutsdeeperthanswords.

Hoboken: Wiley, 2012

Jarvinen, Aki. “Introducing Applied Ludology: hands-on methods for Game Studies”. Academia.Edu: 2018.

on_Methods_for_Game_Studies

Jenkins, Henry. Convergenceculture:whereoldandnewmediacollide.New York University press, 2006

Joseph, Stephen. Authentic:Howtobeyourselfandwhyitmatters. Hachette UK, 2016

Juul, Jesper. Aclashbetweengameandnarrative.M.A. Thesis. Copenhagen University: 1999. http://www.jesperjuul.dk/thesis

Kraut, Richard. "Aristotle's Ethics". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2018). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/aristotle-ethics/

Kondakov, Igor. Psychology:illustrateddictionary.Moscow: Ozon, 2003

Krichevetz, Anatoly. Mathematicalstatisticsforpsychologists.Moscow: Academia,

2012

Laas, Oliver. “Would You Kindly Bring Us the Girl and Wipe Away the Debt”, In BioShock and Philosophy: Irrational Game, Rational Book, England: Wiley Blackwell, 2015: 58-68

Larrington, Carolyne. Winter is coming: the Medieval World of Game of Thrones. I.B. Tauris, 2016. Scribd edition.

Leonard, Christopher. QuickletonAGameofThronesbyGeorgeR.R.Martin.

Hyperink, 2011

Macmurray, John. “The self as agent”. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1957. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/004057365901500413?journalCode=ttja

Macmurray, John. Persons in relation. University of Glasgow, 1991. URL: https://www.giffordlectures.org/books/persons-relation

Martin, George. A song of Ice and Fire, Book 1. A Game of Thrones.London: Harper Voyager, 2003

Martin, George. AsongofIceandFire,Book2.Aclashofkings.London: HarperCollins, 2003

Martin, George. Asong of Ice and Fire, Book 3.Astorm of Swords. New York: Bantam books, 2005

Martin, George. A song of Ice and Fire, Book 4. A feast for Crows. New York: Bantam books, 2005

Martin, George. AsongofIceandFire,Book5.ADancewithDragons.New York: Bantam books, 2012

Martin, George. Fire andBlood:300yearsbefore A GameofThrones(ATargaryen History). London: Harper Voyager, 2018

Martin, George. “When I began A game of thrones, I thought it might be a short story”.

Interview by Alison Flood. TheGuardian, 2018

Maslow, Abraham. Toward a psychology of being. New York, 1999 Mayra, France. Anintroductiontogamestudies. Sage publications: 2008

Monk, Patricia. “Tyrion Lannister: A fulcrum of balance in George R.R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire”. Mythlore 36, (2018): 5-17.

direct=true&db=edsgao&AN=edsgcl.539213005&site=eds-live

Muriel, Daniel. Video games as culture: considering the role and importance of video games in contemporary society. Routledge: 2018.

portance_of_Video_Games_in_Contemporary_Society

Noble, Denis. “Charles Taylor on teleological explanation”. Analysis 27, No. 3 (January 1967): 96-103. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.tlu.ee/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=edsjsr&AN=edsjsr.10.2307.3326802&site=eds-live

Pavel, Thomas. Fictionalworlds.Harvard University Press, 1986 Piaget, Jean. The psychology of the child. New York, 1966

Pojman, Louis. Ethics:discoveringrightandwrong.Cengage Learning, 2012

Pojman, Louis. Howshouldwelive:introductiontoethics.Cengage learning, 2012. https://books.google.ee/books/about/How_Should_We_Live_An_Introduction_to_Et.html?

id=vQzYqrVuJmIC&redir_esc=y

Sartre, Jan. TruthandExistence.University of Chicago press, 1992

Shapiro, Michael. “Charles Taylor's Moral Subject”. Political Theory 14, No. 2 (May, 1986): 311-324. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.tlu.ee/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=edsjsr&AN=edsjsr.191466&site=eds-live.

Schweiker, William. “The Good and Moral Identity: A Theological Ethical Response to Charles Taylor's "Sources of the Self"”. TheJournalofReligion 72, No. 4 (Oct., 1992): 560-572. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1204620.

Silverman, Eric. TheultimateGameofThrones:youthinkordie.Open Court, 2016.

Scribd edition.

Thomas, Robert. “Trying to do good with Arya Stark”. In: The ultimate Game of Thrones: you think or die. Open Court, 2016. Scribd Edition.

Vilunas, Vytis. Psychologicalmechanismsofmotivation.Moscow State University:

1997

Wheelwright, Wayne. 50QuickfactsaboutGameofthrones.AUK Authors, 2014.

Scribd edition.

Younkins, Edward. “Aristotle, Human flourishing, and the limited state”. Montreal, no.

133 (2003). http://www.quebecoislibre.org/031122-11.htm

“Telltale Game of Thrones: walkthrough, Episode 1 - “Iron From Ice”. Youtube. Video file. December 3, 2014. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYB9jsV-hUA

“TelltaleGameofThrones:walkthrough, Episode 2 - “The Lost Lords”. Youtube. Video file. February 4, 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ljVX_I57hw

“TelltaleGameofThrones:walkthrough, Episode 3 - “The Sword in the darkness”.

Youtube. Video file. March 25, 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GaX8fHUzas

“Telltale Gameof Thrones: walkthrough, Episode 4 - “Sons of winter”. Youtube. Video file. May 27, 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUNvjqMQRJ4

“TelltaleGameofThrones:walkthrough, Episode 5 - “A Nest of Vipers”. Youtube.

Video file. July 22, 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9VJNHU9lu4

“TelltaleGameofThrones:walkthrough, Episode 6 - “The Ice Dragon”. Youtube. Video file. November 18, 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKAXpbB46RI

“TelltaleGameofThrones:Episode 6 – All choices/Alternative choices”. Youtube.

Videofile. November 21, 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMltM3br6Qg

“TelltaleGameOfThrones|Codex| The Forrester Stories. (Bonus)”. Youtube. Video file.

November 19, 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GKxHOs_bEE