After 8 years of complex and well-told stories, with characters that have impressed and captivated the audience, the series ends with sequences of illogical events that lead to an uninspired and no longer complex and interestingly told stoppage.

The first 30 minutes of the final episode were a consistent and likely continuation of the previous episode. The figure of Tyrion (Peter Dinklage) sets off in search of his siblings and is shocked by their death. Jon-Aegon (Kit Harrington) tries to prevent last mad acts in the destroyed city, but he did not succeed because he does not reveal his true identity. The figure of Grey Worm (Jacob Anderson), on the other hand, has blindly adopted his queen’s madness and one of those who has given up his identity carries out her orders mercilessly as a No-One.

Daenerys (Emilia Clarke) continues to show her true character traits as a fascist commander who calls for a ‚total war‘. Where do the many Unsullied and Dothraki fighters suddenly come from in such flocks, after being considerably decimated in both previous battles?

The figure of the Tyrion gets a little honor back when he dares to quit as the hand of the queen. Arrested and incarcerated, he can convince Jon-Aegon that the only rescue – for himself and Westeros – can come from him by keeping Daenerys from further mad deeds that would also hit him, Jon, and his sisters. No sooner said than done. Jon-Aegon stabs the mass murderer, amazingly still beloved by him. The fact that the dragon child notices this immediately and approaches it, also lies just in the logic of the previous narrative. Also, that he does not murder Jon-Aegon, but lets the throne melt away, can be believed just yet, within the logic of the previous narrative. So far so good. But then we experience a radical change in the quality of the dramaturgy, like the narrative.

From this moment on, illogical sequences of events meet a persiflage of the previous series.

The dramaturge first wonders how Grey Worm and everyone else knew that Jon-Aegon had stabbed Daenerys. There was nobody there and the dragon flew with her into the far distance before anyone could see her being murdered with their own eyes. Did Jon tell everyone what he did? Why should he? So, how does Jon get into the dungeon, and that without objection of any of the others from those characters still alive? Got Grey Worm so powerful that no one could stand up to him and stop him from threatening Jon with the death penalty? Unlikely, in the sense of the story as it got told so far. Has Arya suddenly lost all her abilities or for whatever reason has given up her trust and hopes in the brother who is now a cousin? The Arya from the episodes before would have been able to free him, for example.

Then, when it comes to appointing the new king, everyone, including Sam (John Bradley) and Bran (Isaak Hempstead Wright), have forgotten that Jon would be the rightful heir to the throne, although until a few minutes earlier everyone still assumed that he should be the one and only king of Westeros, and both did everything they could to make him and others aware of it. What happened to them? Do they resent his love for Daenerys? But he separated from her in the most drastic way imaginable. This ending presented in the last hour of the series is therefore also illogical, in the sense of the previous action. Even Tyrion has forgotten this fact, which just saved his life because he would have been cremated by the dragon by now, and now suggests Bran be the new king and Jon to stay prisoner, why? Because of the knowledge that he gathered through his spiritual abilities? If so, Sam could have been king there too. And why is Sam suddenly wearing a monk’s robe?

Who quickly rebuilt the hall that had just been destroyed and who repaired the chairs in no time in which the king’s advisers now sit together?

It is completely absurd, dramaturgically seen, that Jon returns to Castle Black, and welcomed there by Tormund Giantsbane (Kristofer Hivju) and then Jon rides further north with his old buddy, fishing and hunting? To enjoy the life as buddies?

The decision for the figure of Arya can be interpreted a little bit more positive and consistent because she got developed into a person who does not fit into the moral concept of this Westeros, behaves against the rules and carries the only blink of a reflection of feminism within the series. To move on corresponds to the activities of this character as they were shown in the course of the action. In this sense, her journey beyond the borders known so far represents a consequent end when Westeros is placed in the hands of an asexual spiritual leader who is balanced with men who are devoted to alcohol and enjoying to spend time with prostitutes, with one who is allowed to wear a monk’s robe despite having a family, and a deceived woman who nevertheless worships her lover.

Bran, the new king, prefers to go for spiritual hunting the dragon instead of discussing the matters of reconstructing and consolidating the kingdom after these disastrous events?

So much narrative effort, with gods, Satan, choice, secrets, family ties, but at the end we must listen to a discussion about the reconstruction of brothels; and that Jon is changed and not presented accepting to be not Aegon after all and although he did a few episodes back in the family crypt, but in the heartache suddenly mutated into a character who doesn’t care about anybody else? So many lives/characters sacrificed to get him, the chosen one, at the throne, and then he gets shown to have decided for fishing.

Dramaturgically speaking, this end makes little sense – in my view – except that it could in principle allow HBO the option of a sequel. From a dramaturgical point of view, this end has little to do with the plot told for over 85 hours or more. And an ingenious and surprising postmodern twist on declaring everything to be the author’s dream or imagination this end does not offer either, although the series has operated to some extent with the aesthetics of postmodern cinema. But also in postmodern movies, there is a logic in presenting such a twist, which gets prepared long before it happens, due to the fundamental rules of film dramaturgy.

A good ending is crucial. In film dramaturgy, everything is composed to drive towards the ending; and to achieve this requires a well-woven story, that is within the framework of the conventions one set for the plot as logical as possible and presenting a probably evolving progressive chain of events. In a film, unlike to a novel, the ending must be a consequence resulting from the course of the plot. The rules of the literary narrative are a little different from those of film drama, which has its roots in theatre and performing narrative. A cinematic narrative is bound to a time-space continuum, it is perceived by the audience at the moment. The film is ‚time-based‘, therefore the dramaturgy for an observing audience must be organised in such a way that the events result in an interplay of family structures and surprising twists and turns or a surprising arrangement, as well as a logical and probable development within the framework of the cosmos, presented and its rules. The crux here is that the last hour of this series does not correspond to the conventions of the imagined cosmos in which the action takes place; and thus is not in the least logical and probably a result of the action. This disappoints the really large fan-audience as well as the few academics who have followed this series with interest. This also reduces the chance for a successful sequel, as the disappointed fans will now hardly hope for a continuation.

While the „Game-of-Thrones-Dramaturgy“ has so far been spoken of with admiration, this final episode has also destroyed this enthusiasm. There are three possible theories for understanding or interpreting this end: Maybe it was the concession of the serial makers to an end, which was perhaps decided by RR Martin? That he is the less talented narrator, who weaves in many ideas, religious and occult sparkles as references like hints, but who is not always able to organise the narrative strands in an interesting way, which can easily be understood when comparing the novels to the first seasons of the series. Or was it just trying to get rid of the fans? Or, however, the authors of the series have gone upside down and wanted to create a more modern end (in sense of diversity, with the man in the wheelchair and the small adult plus all outcasts, that make it to the top jobs by scarifying the one who is most outcast of them all and designed in the tradition of the Western genre?) than their previous narrative allows. or, this is a much more speculative and – my apologies – ironic one, is it a try to reflect on contemporary politics, to see misogynists and a spiritual character who might be a reference to a TV character as the new heads of politics.

Kerstin Stutterheim

Selected bibliography for further reading:

ECO, U. 1977. The Open Work of Art, Frankfurt am Main, Suhrkamp.

KLOTZ, V. 1980. Closed and open form in drama (1969), Munich, C. Hanser.

KLOTZ, V. 1998: The dramaturgy of the audience: How stage and audience interact, especially with Raimund, Büchner, Wedekind, Horváth, Gatti and in political agitation theatre, Würzburg, Königshausen and Neumann.

RANCIÈRE, J. 2006 The aesthetic unconscious, Zurich [et al.], Diaphanes.

RANCIÈRE, J. 2011. The emancipated spectator, London, Verso.

STUTTERHEIM, K. 2015. Handbook of applied dramaturgy. Vom Geheimnis des filmischen Erzählens, Frankfurt am Main et al., Peter Lang Verlag.

STUTTERHEIM, K. 2019. Modern Film Dramaturgy, London and New York, Routledge.

STUTTERHEIM, K. & LANG, C. 2013. Come and play with us Dramaturgie und Ästhetik im postmodernen Kino, Marburg, Schüren.

In this 5th, penultimate episode, the plot is brought nearer and nearer to the central conflict over the throne and the reign over the continent. As in a good Shakespeare history play, at the end of the story there will inevitably (only) be the one left who can initiate the new phase of the story, and, if one is lucky, some of its closest associates will survive. For the sake of dramaturgical balance, at the end of the series, this would have to be primarily the second generation of the Starks. Besides, it is also necessary to conclude further secondary action strands in this episode to be able to focus on the central conflict in the last episode.

The plot of this episode „The Bells“ begins on the inhospitable island where Daenerys (Emilia Clarke) was born, which also represents her character: hard stone, merciless.

The preparations for the battle against Cersei (Lena Headey) and her troops are underway, which will mark the climax of this episode and the beginning of the resolution of the conflict, the ‚catastrophe‘. So, as expected, the two women are set as antagonists for this episode. The one, Cersei, is the queen, who sees herself as the widow of the last king as a legitimate ruler. Daenerys, on the other hand, now knows that she is, in fact, the second on the list of entitled heirs to the throne of the old monarchy, but still insists on her claim to total supremacy. With this antagonistic constellation, the intrigue Cersei’s, which has initiated this season, can also be completed. Attention spoilers!

For the dramatic development of the episode, as well as the stringency of the character of Jon/Aegon (Kit Harrington), it is necessary that Jon Daenerys‘ claim continues to be accepted, she is his queen, as the character confirms twice in dialogue in the first minutes of the episode. Once opposite Lord Varys (Conleth Hill), then again opposite Daenerys himself. In dramaturgy, such a double take serves to emphasise particularly essential aspects and to ensure that this information is not lost. However, Daenerys can no longer be his mistress as his aunt, which would undermine the previous drawing of the figure in the sense of the moral code that the authors set for the series and portray it as no longer worthy of the throne.

As in so many situations before, it is the male advisors of Daenerys, not themselves, who plan the next decisive steps to bring them closer to the throne. Now it’s the battle against Cersei, hoping to get them to give up and at the same time keep Daenerys from unwise actions and thus prevent unnecessary bloodshed. Later it will be shown how Daenerys, incited by her rage, not only destroys the fleet and all the Dragon Slayer bows but completes what her father could not do at that time – the destruction of Kingslanding – after having already won a battle. By letting this figure do this, the dramatic arc to the starting situation of the entire series, but also to that of this episode, is closed at the same time. This is done by relating several storylines to each other: this is Lord Varys and his relationship to the character of Tyrion (Peter Dinklage), whose film narrator function (cf. Stutterheim 2017) has been increasingly withdrawn since the beginning of this eighth season.
Moreover, this Tyrion is no longer shown as cynically distanced, observing and cleverly recognizing connections, but as someone who has mutated into a devotee and in return, betrays one of his few real friends. For it is the figure of Varys who – as the embodiment of a more European traditional understanding – is led as the one who places the welfare of the community before individual or family ties. He has recognized – as embedded in the plot – that Jon/Aegon will be the better, caring and wiser king. Varys carefully expresses his scepticism as to whether Daenerys‘ character has not yet fully unfolded. With this foreboding, the end of this episode gets dramaturgically prepared. Since Tyrion reveals his activities to Deanery’s, Varys gets executed by the cruel Queen, an action that causes a slightly strange reaction in the face of Jon/Aegon’s character.  And, it is a reminder of other cruel and stone-hearted executions by Daenerys that happened in earlier episodes/seasons.

The other narrative strand, which is indirectly brought to an end and also reflects on the execution of Ned Stark (Sean Bean) in the context of the codex inscribed in the series, is around the figure of Jaime (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau). He was the king’s guard and hindered the father of Daenerys from destroying the city and its inhabitants by ending his life. This he did, so it was expressed several times in some dialogues, out of responsibility towards his owe and the throne, thus an institution. Indirectly he has helped his sister to her powerful position. This moral code and the „American dramaturgy“, in which the family always takes precedence over the common good, are underlined once again, when the figure of Jaime does not, as I long assumed with my European view, stand up for the survival of the community following the tradition of ancient Greece drama. In the end, we understand that Jaime also places his family above all else. This secondary strand is ended by the figure of Jaime fighting heroically to reach his beloved sister with the last of his strength and to guide her at the very last moment towards the escape route organised by his brother. Paradoxically, it is precisely the escape arrangement that leads the two into the trap that has arisen from the blind rage of the character Daenerys. Thus, in this episode, the figure of Tyrion was further undermined as he caused the death of his only two friends and many people beyond – not by supporting Varys, but by acting loyally submissive to Daenerys. At the end of this episode, Tyrion is the only Lannister still alive, whose single living friend is Sansa (Sophie Turner). And Daenerys is also threatening Tyrion with death.

The fact that Jaime and Cersei do not die in battle but as a closely entwined couple as a result of the blind frenzy of the Daenerys, serves the moment of „noble kitsch“ (cf. Friedländer 2007). The sympathies become more and more shifted in this regard so that somebody at all cherished them in opposition to the mad Daenerys because the latter in the end set the well-being of the family over the last fight and thus approached the codex again.

The Hound (Rory McCann) and the Mountain (Hafþór Júlíus Björnsson), the two enemy brothers, are linked to this storyline in Kingslanding and around Cersei and also retire from the game in a deadly duel. Connected to the Hound is Arya’s storyline. In this case, she cannot carry out her long-cherished plan to kill Cersei, but of course, she survives the catastrophe she has fallen into. She will be able to testify from her own experience to what happened in the city.

The figure of Jon/Aegon is shown as a courageous and at the same time prudent commander, who almost succeeded in surrendering the city without much bloodshed, when the commander of the opposite side lays down his sword and many follow him. After a moment of waiting – for the sign of the bells – as a retarding moment, by showing Tyrion staring at the bell tower, Daenerys in the air on her dragon gazing down into the streets, Cersei looking at the city until it actually sounds and everything seems fixed. Cersei blinks down as a gesture of understanding and admitting defeat, Jon’s face seems to relax a little bit for a moment. The montage shows Tyrion looking at Daenerys, who in turn is looking at the tower in which Cersei is, until her face is grimacing and she flies away, watching Tyrion again, then we see Daenerys flying on her dragon towards the castle, Cersei observing her doing, looking at the city from above. People flee, the dragon spits fire into the streets. The armies still face each other in the cease-fire, but then the Grey Worm (Jacob Anderson) loyal to his queen throws his spear against the unarmed commander of the army of Kingslanding and another massacre breaks out (43 min). Grey Worm has nothing more to fight and live for than his loyalty to Daenerys, so he is situated to double the Daenerys character and extend her fight into the streets of the city as well.  Jon/Aegon can only fight his way out and order his men out of town as quickly as possible. They run to save themselves from the dragon fire, which makes Daenerys spit blindly on their enemies as well as their friends.

This chain of events contains the moment of anagnorisis and the peripeteia associated with it. With this end, our expectation, that of the audience, is directed towards the central conflict, for the last episode will be about survival and power between these two figures. With the decision then taken, the central conflict will have to be resolved. All accompanying, still living ensemble members, who are predominantly from the Starks family, will be grouped around it.

Thus, probably in the last episode, in which the now inevitable conflict between Jon/Aegon and Daenerys will take place, an end can be reached that promises hope for the continued existence of Westeros mankind. Or, if HBO cannot resist and should plan a continuation/sequel of any kind, the existing one can be maintained or a new latent conflict established.

Of course, this solution is linked to that for Winterfell, the place where the series started out from. From a dramaturgical point of view, the action should be concluded regarding the central conflict, the question of the Grail and the rescue of the country, as well as the Stark family and Winterfell, in order to possibly be rounded off with a finale.

Kerstin Stutterheim

Bibliography

Friedländer, Saul. 2007. Kitsch and death – the reappearance of Nazism. Erw. Ausg. ed. Munich: Hanser.

Stutterheim, Kerstin. 2017 Game of Thrones – dramaturgy of a TV series. Paderborn Fink Publishers / Brill

For the basic dramaturgical concepts and their explanation see: Stutterheim. 2015. Handbook of Applied Dramaturgy. Peter Lang Verlag; or: Modern Film Dramaturgy. Peter Lang Publishing,2019.

Now that the series is coming to an end, there are some comments of disappointment from fans and critics alike. The question of whether the series expresses feminist aspects or not, is a much-discussed one, as it has been in recent years already. In my opinion, it did not do so, both dramaturgically and aesthetically, even though one or other of the episodes may have played with it over and over again, and may have served such hope.

In terms of agency and empowerment of female characters in this series, in dramaturgical analysis, the figure of Arya is the only one actually allowed by the authors/directors to have a relevant influence on the plot. In order not to be misunderstood, other female figures have moments of power and strength within the events depicted and on vertical episodic plot sections in the explicit narrative, out of revenge or delusion, but not on the overall plot. In this respect, the figure of Arya is the only one, because she is established as the dramaturgical counterpart to Jon, since the second episode in old theatre tradition welded to him. (cf. Stutterheim 2019, 2017)

In the dramaturgy, in order to answer a corresponding question, one looks not only at what the respective figure is allowed to do at the moment, how powerful they might appear; but also at the influence that the authors and the director concede on the overall structure and development of the implicit theme.

Let’s take a quick look at the female characters who are still ‚in the game‘:

First of all, there is the figure of DANAERYS (Emilia Clarke). She got introduced into the overall plot via her brother, who instrumentalised her as a commodity. Her appearance is reminiscent of a Barbie doll and thus implicitly appeals to a broad group of the audience who may have played with her in childhood or have always wished to do so. On the other hand, it also reminds a little of Marilyn Monroe. Of course, the figure is blond and blue-eyed.

As at the beginning of the story, the figure of Danaerys get guided through the entire story by male companions and advisors. The only exception is Missandei (Nathalie Emmanuel), who also had to be brought out of the action in episode 8.4 in the sense of the dramaturgical balance of the overall plot. The fact that this happens brutally may not only serve the moment in which the increasing madness of the figure of Cersei (Lena Headey) has to be shown. This execution also reflects the brutality of the scenes in the context of which the character of Missandei got introduced. Also, Missandei is also classified as a sinful woman, in the sense of the moral concept that defines the series. Daenerys had an intimate advisor in her, who is now no longer needed from a dramaturgical point of view, but whose horrifying departure becomes dramatically relevant in the form of the background of Cersei’s cruelty.

The Daenerys figure was built up over the first half as a possible positive figure and future queen, but this turns in episode 4.4. From this episode on she is increasingly portrayed as unpredictable, domineering and cruel. This got prepared with the event in the tower of Undead and the encounter with the sorcerer (2.10), in which she gives up the dream of her own family for the dragons and the sorcerer, who welcomes her – albeit in a somewhat macabre way – by her dragons, kills her before he can explain himself more precisely. Since this encounter with dark magic, the character has become more and more a cruel and possessed egomaniac who would do anything to become queen without restriction. Underlining their power and position, they are carried away to use cruel violence and to declare it justice. This figure only makes good and positive decisions if one of her advisors strongly recommends this to her. The figure presents a supposed power that may be due to her qua birth, but she got guided by an intelligently staggered group of figures, which apparently only accompany her. Dramaturgically seen, these advisors let the figure act as a representative of male world view. If she does not follow the male counsellors, sooner or later it won’t end well for her.

Thus, concerning the figure of Daenerys, no independence in the sense of any current or theory of feminism is established.

SANSA. One of the favourite figures for a large part of the female audience. This figure presents all feminine qualities of the ‚good good woman‘ (cf. Gelfert 2006). This Sansa learns with ease everything a woman should know, sew and be submissive, behave, walk upright, smile. (cf. Fiedler 2017 ) Her dream was to find her place in the castle by the king’s side. She got harmed, and the figure represents all the more femininity in the sense of American conservative Christian moral. The ultimate goal is the continued existence and independence of the family. That’s what she lives for now. Winterfell must continue to exist and preserve its independence. Sansa represents the North with its moral rules and traditions (cf. Stutterheim 2017). That is what the Sansa character stands for. This figure serves a social context that is determined by fundamental Christian values and in which there is the role of the woman as the wife, princess/queen, co-director, who thinks independently but withdraws in the case of cases, but who must be protected and rescued in an emergency. Also, she gets shown as someone who takes this situation for granted.

CERSEI LANNISTER. This figure was designed from the beginning as immoral and selfish. Their only acceptable side, as Tyrion (Peter Dinklage) expresses in 8.4, is their maternal love for their children. This good nature, however, was also shown as overshadowed by her character and so she had to lose them, the children of sin. First to evil, then to an act of revenge, then to religious fanaticism.

BRIENNE of Tarth (Gwendoline Christie). This character is one of the variable characters with which the authors play with us. She is a classic secondary character who serves to better understand the character(s) of the main character(s), their motivation and actions. In particular, the figure serves to accompany Jaime and Sansa. Moreover, implicitly, it offers an identification for those in the female audience who cannot compare themselves with the beautiful girls and women figures, who are also too tall or find rather sporty or not pretty.

The fact that it get ultimately shown in detail as a relationship with Jaime (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau) has a dual function here. On the one hand, it is used to show the figure of Jaime after the court as a man still capable of love. After winning the battle side by side, in which we got shown that they had saved each other’s lives, this was only consequent. Then one had to sort Brienne into the camp of the female figures according to the overall layout in order to restore order. For this, she had to love, become jealous and even stand in the snow crying, which discriminates against the figure twice over, as I here and now boldly assume. For on the one hand, as mentioned in various critiques, as a crying abandoned woman, this Brienne is the opposite of the intrepid and capable warrior. Then, this is my hypothesis, she misjudges in her jealousy the actual reason, the true character of Jaime. She obviously didn’t listen to him. He’s not leaving for Kingslanding to save his sister blindly. The task of this character is to protect the subjects from insane actions. But on the other hand, this chracter is one of those the authors change and use as varaible, as one of the few who are arranged to install surprising and less logical elements in the narrative.

What remains is ARYA, the figure who is the only one allowed to unfold and live independently. She is the ‚Wonder Woman‘ of this series, like these ‚the Godkiller‘ (cf. Stokowski 2019). This character has worked, learned and fought to lead an independent and as far as possible self-determined life. Accordingly, she had to reject Gendry’s (Joe Demspey’s) long-awaited proposal. As mentioned above, Arya mirrors Jon, and therefore it is a dramatic necessity to keep this in dramaturgical balance to the male main character.

In this respect, it is consistent and little surprising that at the end of the series even more women from the ensemble are left behind, murdered, referred to the back seats.

bibliography

Fiedler, Leslie A. 2017 Love and death in the American novel. 3rd printing Dalkey Archive ed. Normal, IL: Dalkey Archive Press.

Gelfert, Hans-Dieter. 2006. Typically American: How Americans became what they are. 3rd, updated and supplemented by an epilogue America 2006. Aufl., original edition ed. Munich: Beck.

Stokowski, Margarete. 2019. „Wonder Woman & Hannah Arendt.“  Hanser Accents Miracles (66.1 May 2019):12-17.

Stutterheim, Kerstin. 2017 Game of Thrones – dramaturgy of a TV series. Paderborn Fink Publishers / Brill

Stutterheim, Kerstin. 2019. „Game of Thrones 8 Episode 3 – Armageddon. The Long Night.“ Glaz, 1 May 2019.

In this episode, the long-awaited battle between the people in the north and the world of Satan with his hosts was fought. According to one of the references on which the plot of the series based, one can relate it to the Battle of Armageddon in the Old Testament/Torah. This war, which is about the spiritual level, was portrayed as the bare horror for the characters involved. This was the battle of gods and faith and, accordingly, of survival and religion. A battle of daughters and sons.

Attention, even today it is not possible without spoiler. And, also for this short, weekly contribution, I must limit myself to selected aspects that are above all dramaturgically of interest and have not already been broadly discussed in reviews.

Most of the still living central characters of the series have survived this slaughter. Dramaturgically these are still needed for the last worldly struggles, the dissolution of sub-plots and the central conflict over total power, the throne.

The episode begins in the night, before dawn, in anticipation of the attack, final preparations are made. For example, we see Sam (John Bradley) getting two daggers pressed into his hand, about which it is told that he won’t spend time in the crypt with the women and children, as Jon (Kit Harrington) advised him.

Tyrion (Peter Dinklage), on the other hand, grabs a bag of wine before retreating into the crypt as ordered by Daenerys (Emilia Calrke). Bran (Isaak Hempstead Wright) and Theon (Alfie Allen) with his men pass Tyrion to wait for the Night King (Vladimir Furdik) at the red tree as lure.

The following shots show men and women waiting in tension and moving into position. The music and an associative montage of images combine these observations into a suspenseful opening sequence that familiarises us with the space in which the action will take place, according to an exposition. Even though Winterfell is generally familiar to the audience, this is about the battle formation that implements the plan from the central scene of the last episode and gives the space new dimensions and functions. Woven in are details such as the repeated reference to the cold, weapons get provided, cries of dragons heard. Excitement also arises from the sound design, which underlines the silence and does not artificially incorporate additional emotional softeners. The music takes up the motifs of the marching up and the heartbeat, whereby tension is achieved, one almost holds one’s breath.

The surprising element to be expected in this episode was the return of Melisandre (Carice van Houten) at the end of the exposition, with which the vertical dramaturgy of this episode is given an additional individual arc. The battle is central. Here again, the narrative of a personal fate is connected with the collective strand, as it is typical for an open dramaturgy. (cf. Klotz 1980) Of course, the figure of Melisandre must play a role in the decisive spiritual battle, since in the sense of the action it is also about the establishment of the new religion, the recognition of the God of Fire in this case. This is underlined by the character at least twice: once in the situation where Beric Dondarrion (Richard Dormer) finally dies, because his task will be fulfilled with the battle and „the Lord“ does not have to bring him back, and at the end of the episode, when she goes to her death, since her task is fulfilled. Through her and her work, her God helped to win this battle and also to destroy the Night King. The fire destroyed the ice.

This is of course linked to the narrative strand Arya/Jon and the confrontation with the Night King. The figure of Melisandre, in the situation she first met Arya (Maisie Williams), predicted that she would bring death to people of different eye colours. There is an echo to this dialogue in this episode when Arya says: „You said, I’d shut many eyes forever, you’re right about that too.“

Melisandre lists the colours, the last of the colours she mentions is blue eyes. This, and the question about Arya’s attitude to the God of Death, seems to be like a wake-up call to Arya. The end of this scene is composed in such a way that Arya walks past the camera, followed by a cut to the shot of the clearing where Theon stares into the dark and awaits the attack. The image composition and editing create a connection between these two situations.

The constellation Daenerys – Jon/Aegon is much discussed on the explicit level. Will she be queen? Will/will they remain a couple? I can’t answer that. I assume that, according to the introduction of the figure about her (half-)brother, she finally hands over the plot and the power to her next male relative, Aegon (Jon).

Refined but equally dramaturgically consistent is the fact that the episode ends with Arya overcoming the Night King and not Jon/Aegon.

As already mentioned in the last text, it is evident that references to the legend of the Grail are adapted in the design. Jon/Aegon is a variant of the Parzival, which is hidden by its mother in the forest, far away from the knights, far away from the royal house, has no idea of its origin, but then is responsible for the rescue of the country. He is rather the spiritual young man associated with the spiritual, higher power. This land is sick and sunk in war and misery because the king is wounded and no longer able to lead the country. In order to save the country, Parzival must find the Grail together with a very worldly knight trained in the martial arts, and only if all three together make it to the throne can the land be healed and peace restored.

Now Jon and Arya were already welded together in the second episode with a means proven in the theatre as a pair of figures, in which Jon had a valuable object made, which he presented to Arya, and they embraced on it. Gift and body contact weld figures together traditionally. In this way, these figures could also lead alternative plot strands over the course of the series, which complemented each other and related to each other. According to the object, Arya became a fighter. She has learned to handle this weapon and various others. She’s Gaiwan.

So it had to be Arya who overcame the Night King. She is trained to be the perfect fighter, has resisted the pull of evil, and she is the counterpart to Jon/Aegon. The audience got already prepared for the probability of this situation with the one in which Lyanna Mormont (Bella Ramsey) stabbed the undead giant. She hung in a similar stranglehold in front of him, like Arya in the hand of Night King, and stabbed the giant with a dagger.

Now the question arises, who or what is the Grail? Bran, maybe?

Another consideration that seems worth considering to me is that Tyrion is sent to the crypt and has to stay there. Neither about the figures of the Daenerys nor of Sansa (Sophie Turner) is he believed to have an active part or an intelligent decision in this situation. On the contrary, he is asked to face the truth that he is useless. Until now, the character had been guided in such a way that she acted as a kind of film clarifier and therefore always either had an overview and commented on developments or influenced decisions in her progress. This was still the case in the last episode, where the character was used, among other things, to convince Jaime and the audience of the positive aspects of the Daenerys and to confirm them as the future queen. Is this change preparing us for Tyrion’s departure or is it just another smart move in the game with the audience’s guesses? Perhaps this constellation only served to solve the conflict between Sansa and Tyrion through this created constellation and also to close this secondary strand.

Dramaturgy is not a format template but allows a play with models, rules and traditions, which is why a dramaturgical analysis of such an intricate work has its limits in forecasting. Mainly when, as in this series, very sophisticated operations are carried out with constant figures and variable figures. From my point of view, the only characters who seem for sure to be part of the action until the finale are Jon/Aegon and Arya.

I also assume, but of course, I can be wrong that Cersei won’t be taken out of the game in the next episode, as many critics and fans expect. The next episode will probably first bring a retarding moment before the battle for worldly power will be waged to complete the arc of Cersei intrigue, the last parent-generation figure in the game with ambitions for the throne. The characters of Cersei (green eyes) and Daenerys (blue eyes) resemble each other in the unconditional, autocratic and fanatical will to absolute power.

Kerstin Stutterheim

bibliography

Klotz, Volker. 1980: Closed and open form in drama (1969). 13 ed, literature as art. Munich: C. Hanser.