MARVEL / LIVEBLOGGING THE 90s / CELEBRITY FACTS / MINDHOLE BLOWERS / NETFLIX



To the Book Readers Spoiling "Game of Thrones" Plots for Everyone Else: Shut Up

By Sarah Carlson | Miscellaneous | April 26, 2013 | Comments ()


Olenna_Spoilers.png

Let me preface this by saying it is not directed at all readers of George R.R. Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire" series. This also isn't a rant based on hurt feelings; I've managed to avoid spoilers when it comes to the HBO TV series "Game of Thrones," based on Martin's books. But avoiding spoilers isn't easy, and that's the problem.

"Game of Thrones" is not only the most-pirated TV series these days, it is the show that can be the most easily spoiled -- by those who have read the source material. Spoilers can be hard to avoid these days; look how quickly the Season Three finale of "Downton Abbey," for example, was ruined thanks to fans' reactions on social media. And "Thrones" is a world that is ripe for spoiling -- main characters die and someone is always double-crossing someone else and, you know, dragons! Compressed into 10-episode seasons, a lot happens. Some fans may want to know ahead of time, but most don't. However, in the cases of shows such as "Downton" or any other series not based on previously published material, the fans having plots spoiled for them are the ones who did not watch a show live (or who didn't avoid Twitter or Facebook before catching up). Not that that's OK, but the "Game of Thrones" problem is different. For this show, which I quite like, it is some of the fans of the books that are spoiling the fun, giving away outcomes to events not yet depicted on screen based on their knowledge of Martin's world. There is no accident in their a**holery.

Comment threads are notorious for spoilers, and people like TK in his weekly episode recaps here and our Joanna Robinson along with /Film's Dave Chen for the "A Cast of Kings" weekly podcast police them, but it can't be easy. (FYI, Joanna runs a spoiler-friendly post every week for those who know/want to know what happens.) I still avoid the comments on TK's recaps and those left on /Film, trusting only a few friends to answer my "Game of Thrones" questions. Listening to the latest podcast episode this week made me glad for my spoiler-wary ways: I learned that spoiler-whores are doing their best to be sneaky. Apparently, comments are popping up that accurately state exactly what will take place in future episodes, all under the guise of some random commenter's "guess."

Really? You, you certain "A Song of Ice and Fire" fan, have so little going for you in life that you get your kicks spoiling the plot of a fantasy story to fans of its TV series? You can't not ruin a storyline -- you have to exert your imagined power somehow, so it may as well be anonymously and online? That's pathetic.

To the spoiler-happy book-readers: Shut up. Shut. Up. Now.

One of the more absurd lines of reasoning in defense of spoilers is not that fans of the books should be allowed to spoil their contents, but that those who haven't read the books deserve to be spoiled because they haven't read the books. I'd never heard of the book series until I began to see teaser trailers on HBO for the upcoming series back in 2010. When the show premiered in spring 2011, tons of viewers rushed out to buy copies of the books. Others, like me, maybe considered reading them but haven't gotten around to them yet. Or perhaps we just don't want to read them. Is that a problem for you, you spoiler jags? Are you to be congratulated for having read books that even fans admit have a tendency to drag and disappoint thanks to Martin's meandering style? Or should we be impressed you read something at all?

The main and very poor argument seems to be that because the books have been out for years -- the first volume, "A Game of Thrones," was released in 1991 -- its plot is fair game. Is there a cut-off date for spoilers I somehow missed? Just how copyright expires, so too does the notion that someone who is "in the know" regarding a piece of art should keep it to themselves lest they ruin another's enjoyment of said art? The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, the first installment in Peter Jackson's trilogy adapting J.R.R. Tolkien's classic fantasy novel, was released in 2001, 46 years after the novel was first published. Naturally, I can only assume those who had read it first ran through lobbies of countless movie theaters during the years Jackson's films were out, telling all who couldn't avoid listening just what happens with that damn ring. Or for Harry Potter fans: The final film in the adaptation series, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2, was released only four years after J.K. Rowling's novel "Deathly Hallows" hit bookshelves. You, you puppy-kickers, posted Facebook status revealing the ending and which characters died, didn't you? When Baz Luhrmann's The Great Gatsby is released May 10, will you leave comments in various reviews or posts on the film revealing Gatsby's fate? No, not everyone has read even classics such as "The Great Gatsby," published in 1925.

It's true, some stories are so widely told that they can become common knowledge to those who haven't read or seen them. I'd wager Shakespeare's "Romeo & Juliet" is a plot most people can describe, at least in terms of star-crossed lovers and a tragic ending. But the goings on in "A Song of Ice and Fire" does not qualify as common pop culture knowledge, nerds. I don't recall any book readers of Tolkien or Rowling's works being so mean-spirited when the film adaptations were released. What is it about you, rabid Martin-lovers, that causes you to be so petty? You know you shouldn't actually act like a Lannister, right?

At work just yesterday morning, as co-workers discussed summer movies, a friend said she is excited to see the new Gatsby, starring Leonardo DiCaprio in the title role. "Have you read the book?," I asked her. "I read half of it and stopped," she said. "Well I recommend giving it another try; it's one of my favorites," I replied. And then I stopped talking. Because I don't represent what is wrong with humanity, only like you, you turd-eating neckbeards. I hope critics reviewing the film or others writing features on it don't spoil the ending, either. If my friend only really comes to know Luhrmann's adaptation of the story, that's OK. I'm glad she's experiencing it in some way, and isn't that what matters? Besides, we're talking about two different forms of media. They don't go hand in hand. If one wants to feel superior for having read the book before they saw its movie, or TV show, then fine. Feel superior. Just feel so inwardly, and leave the rest of us the hell alone.

Sarah Carlson is a TV Critic for Pajiba. She lives in San Antonio. You can find her on Twitter. She appreciates Joanna, who always answers her "GoT" questions and made the lovely header pic for this post, and TK, who believes those who spoil the show should "be subjected to 1,000 papercuts, have acid sprayed in the cuts [and be] buried neck deep in lampreys."



Are you following Pajiba on Facebook or Twitter? Because every time you do an angel does the Paul Rudd dance

Around the Web


Leading Men Age But Their Leading Ladies Stay The Same, Plus Alec Baldwin's Head Explodes | 'Pain & Gain,' A Movie About Muscle-Bound Troglodytes with Erectile Dysfunction, Is a Personal One for Michael Bay





Comments Are Welcome, Jerks Will Be Banned


  • asdf

    Joffrey dies.

  • Stephen May

    It's the ones that go out of their way to spoil something. If I told someone "oh, I love Game of Thrones and I am looking forward to the next episode. Oh and I never read". Someone well say "oh well ___ Dies and it's your fault you didn't read the books. They've been out for 10 years" That's bullshit. And people go out of their way on Facebook. I was reading about the new Game of Thrones watch and their were comments about the watch and then some ass placed a comment "___ dies next episode." These are the people the article talks about. The ones that know you haven't read it, so they purposely tell you what happens. And I noticed that they do it during what's supposed to be the biggest shocker event of the season. And they make sure they do it about a week ahead. I can understand if someone slips, but the spoiler I caught, was put there for people like myself for shits and giggles. BTW, I do read the books, but I read them after the season is over with as I do enjoy the excitement the anticipation brings.

  • Phrasing

    Selective memory much? Snape kills Dumbledore is a goddamn meme for fucks sake.

  • ObserversDickIsAFatwa

    Spoiler alert for the Military Channel watchers....

    Hitler dies....but he was kind of a dick....so he deserved it...

  • aidan

    "Tragic Fate" in Romeo and Juilet? Oh, well, I'm assuming someone dies then! SPOILERSSSS

  • F'mal DeHyde

    I've read the first three books (before it was cool) but that doesn't mean I have a clue what's going to happen in the show. And since I'm one of those cheap bastards that doesn't even have cable, I have to stay away from ALL discussions of the latest season until nearly a year after it airs and it gets released on DVD. I don't pirate.

    But yeah, the first book is 18 (?) years old. Get a grip.

  • Three_nineteen

    "The final film in the adaptation series, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2,
    was released only four years after J.K. Rowling’s novel “Deathly
    Hallows” hit bookshelves. You, you puppy-kickers, posted Facebook status
    revealing the ending and which characters died, didn’t you?"

    You're fucking kidding, right? People were on the internet talking about that stuff the day the BOOK came out. It was common knowledge to most interested people by the time the movie came out. When the book Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince came out, there were news articles about how people who had read the book in one day were on the internet the next day intentionally posting spoilers about Dumbledore's death just to be assholes.

    Bottom line, if you're on the internet, you are going to get spoiled for stuff, both intentionally by assholes and unintentionally by enthusiastic people who make mistakes. I learned that years ago. If you don't want to be spoiled, stay off the internet. Or, you know, read the books. That's why I read them.

  • clancys_daddy

    Don't care, don't watch, haven't read, spoil away.

  • protoformX

    WARNING HARRY POTTER SPOILERS AHEAD
    DANGER WILL ROBINSON DANGER

    At some point in the months leading up to Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince movie release my girlfriend and I were hanging out with some friends. I had just recently convinced her to get into the the series... in anticipation for the previous movie. We had started with the movies to get her caught up initially, and then she started reading the books. And it was common knowledge she was reading them amongst our friends. At some point in her conversation with a friend of hers they got into a mock argument about something, and kept upping the ante with each barb. I started making my way toward them to calm them down a bit as they were starting to get a little too loud... and just started to open my mouth, when her friend picks up the book from the counter and said "Oh yeah, well Dumbledore dies!" And in slow motion I of course "NNNOOOOOOO!"ed. And hilariously she turned to me with a pleading look, "Is-is-is that true?" "Of course not, why would he ever die? C'mon he's Dumbledore." And I just looked at her friend and shook my head as we walked away. In that moment it was shocking for her, with all the energy of the situation that it actually probably had more impact than it would have on its own.

  • Van Balen

    You know there are several options here.
    1 - Learn to read. It isn't that hard. It requires neither magic nor high birth.
    2 - Stay away from unmoderated fora.
    3 - Suck it up if you get spoiled.
    4 -Whine.

    I guess most non-readers go for (4). And by the way, most spoiler troll are non-readers who wiki the books, your article should be addressed to them.

  • manting

    I dot really get the reasoing - Once an episode airs then it is free for discusson/spoilers but whe talking about books the no discussing statute of limtations is forever? A man detects hipocicy.
    No one likes it when people give up the ending of something but what about discussing "theories?" Is J the son of L and R? That is given up season one and in book one. Is that a spoiler?
    Either way, this site has a book readers post once a week which should satisfy us book readers.
    Valar Morgulis

  • Plop

    read the books and stop whining like a 8 years old girl.

  • John W

    No one tells me not to spoil anything! Here it goes:

    1. Sansa is actually Syrio Forel in disguise!

    2. Ned Stark returns as a wight!

    3. There are two characters in A Feast For Crows that were the inspiration for Walter White and Jesse Pinkman! That right bitches.

    4. The Dragons and the Direwolves mate and give birth to Dragonwolves!

    5. Melisandre is currently on her way to grow back Jamie's hand!

    6. There is a dragon underneath Winterfell and it's name is Vermithrax Perjorative.

    7. It will soon be revealed that Joffrey has a sadistic passion for baking.

    8. Jon and Ygritte get married and run off to Skagos

    9. Khal Drogo has a twin brother named Kajagoogoo

    10. The Brotherhood Without Banners decide to break up once Thoros starts seeing Lady Yoko.

  • John W

    Oh I forgot, Arya loses the coin Jaqen H' Ghar gave when she uses it in a vending machine to buy a lemon cake.

  • manting

    wait a minute . . .Its Sana who likes lemon cakes! Ha! I needlessly corrected a minor mistake by a person. Internet validation here I come!

  • TheGreatUnstainer

    I don't get why people get miserable about 'spoilers'. Are television programmes so dull that people can only enjoy them if they don't know what happens? Lame.

  • For people who invite themselves into GOT discussions and then clamp their hands over their ears and go, "LA LA LA LA": shut up.

    This happened earlier today at work and there was nearly an incident where a simple bitch got slapped upside the head. She was bragging how she read "the book" and I asked if she'd read all five, because her theory about Theon was way off base. "I DON'T WANT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENS," she said. Simple bitches, man.

    Also, the spoilery people described in the article sound like complete dicks. The only time I get a wild hair up my ass about it all is when those who don't want to be spoiled start skipping around the border of spoiler lands. It's like, well what did you expect, especially when "SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER" didn't stop you. Plus, the material's nearly twenty years old.

  • stryker1121

    I hate spoilers myself, although I thought Sarah was going to discuss people accidentally spoiling things or making innocuous comments the more, uh, sensitive readers among us deem spoilers. I made a comment on another site about a certain character not having much happen to him for most of the book series, and got absolutely flayed by folks who thought I was spoiling things..was I spoiling the fact that this character didn't die or that nothing of substance happened to him? It's a minefield, friends and neighborhoods, so careful where you step or shut your freakin' mouth all-together.

  • F'mal DeHyde

    That's the truth... mention how much you liked someone's shoes and the spoiler police start screeching.

  • ChuggaWasTaken

    While I wouldn't go out of my way to spoil something for someone, I feel that after about 6 months of something being in the public domain, people who care enough about spoilers should already have read/watched the material, and the onus is on them to avoid spoilers. While I applaud what a lot of sites are doing splitting posts (AV Club is doing this well), I still feel the default position should be that spoilers are fine, probably as long as they're prefaced by a spoiler alert.

  • competitivenonfiction

    I completely agree with a statue of limitations on spoilers, BUT it's hard when it comes out in two different formats. Given that I have read the books and wouldn't necessarily recommend them to everyone, but I'd recommend the show to anyone, I get wanting to not spoil the TV show by using spoilers from the books. But if you don't know that Ned Stark dies yet, that's on you.

  • Brooke Michelle

    I'm actually afraid to scroll down through the comments, for fear of spoilerage.

  • Bea Pants

    I'm going through a similar situation with The Walking Dead. I'm well into the graphic novels my friends haven't read them at all. Even though the show has strayed pretty far from the original content I refuse to disclose actual book plot lines to anyone lest they get used out of order or for different characters.

    Otherwise I am a MAJOR spoilerphobe. Seriously, I am envious of people who got to see Psycho when it was first released and had absolutely no idea what was coming.

  • Strtwise

    Dumbledore dies in the end. FYI.

  • pfeiffer87

    I still haven't forgiven the person who told me Dumbledore dies.

    SPOILER ALERT.

  • stryker1121

    After Deathly Hollows came out, my local paper wrote fake obituaries about the characters who died. I had just started reading the series and was NOT HAPPY.

  • Lee

    Revenge spoilling is quite fun. If you've asked a person not to spoil you and they do so anyway, they are a dick.

    I stay spoiler free by avoiding articles and not opening links on Twitter. The beauty of the internet is the instant communication and the multiple viewpoints. Now we are supposed to censor ourselves by waiting days/weeks/years so everyone can catch up?

    If there is source material people should be able to speculate on what will happen in an adaptation. I mean I can't imagine tiptoeing around a Hannibal article with people who have not read the books or seen the movies.
    Why can't we talk about what is shown and what we think will be shown?

    Spoiler: Hemlock Grove (Netflix series) was worse than I could have imagined.

  • Jezzer

    You discuss shows in the context of the medium of that show. In the case of "Hannibal," unless you are in a thread dedicated to people who have read Thomas Harris' books or seen the movies, you stick to what has been shown so far on the show.

  • manting

    really?

  • Lee

    Yeah I know all the edicts of tv show posting and follow them. I swear it's more strict than formal education.

    Hannibal has some neat imagery but they seem too inspired by BBCs Sherlock so I keep connecting the shows. There was a scene in episode three that was a straight ripoff of the scene between Donovan and Sherlock from ASiP.

  • From what I've read, the show is so far from the books that there's no real way to spoil anything for anyone in terms of cross-material. There's always a "Hey, did you know [blank] happened on last week's episode?!" chance, of course. Not only that, the books, not to mention the movies themselves, are all over ten years old. (Hannibal with Julianne Moore was 2001. Red Dragon with Edward Norton was 2002. The dreadful Hannibal Rising with Gaspard Ulliel is only six years old.)

  • Wasn't there some study that showed that being "spoiled" doesn't ACTUALLY ruin your enjoyment of the story? I'm too lazy to look for it, but it WAS brought up on the Slashfilmcast, despite their strict adherence to a "no spoilers" policy.

    I use to be MILITANT about that, but now I don't care, as long as the thing being "spoiled" is a quality product, it will STILL be good. Get over it people, get over it.

  • Phrasing

    I vaguely recall what you're referencing. It had something to do with people responding more favorably to stories they already knew (something that could easily explain convention). I also recall them suggesting that knowing the end would allow people to appreciate the story more fully--noticing things like dramatic irony more readily, and not being focused solely on the destination. I imagine the benefit of such things is largely dependent upon the quality of the work, however.

    I've always been of the mind that spoilers have little to no affect on my overall enjoyment of a work. I try to avoid them, sure, because it's something you can't get back (whereas you can always re-experience a story), but I've never lost my mind over learning too much. I tend to enjoy the elements of a story more than strictly its plot, though, so I guess I'm sort of primed for that kind of response.

  • stryker1121

    It doesn't ruin the show for good and all, but it takes something away when you KNOW something's coming up. I was spoiled on a couple of deaths of characters from two extremely popular HBO shows, and it kind of deflated things knowing their fate when the show finally got around to it.

  • F'mal DeHyde

    One of the major deaths on Boardwalk Empire was discussed in an article I inadvertently read before seeing that season but the scene was still extraordinary for me. I think I'm kind of immune but it does piss me off when someone is obviously being an asshole by showing off their insider knowledge.

  • Jezzer

    Oh, thank God there was a STUDY! Now I know how silly I was being about spoilers! What else can this study tell me about myself? What does it say about my favorite foods? Can it do my horoscope?

  • Phrasing

    Chances are if you're losing your mind about spoilers you are being a bit silly about the whole thing. If the condescending tone of your response is any indication, you might be prone to overreaction, but maybe your terrifyingly energetic avatar is coloring my judgement.

    A lot of this article is nonsense. Not only is it factually inaccurate about GoT being some kind of unique phenomenon (it even provides the most obvious counter-example in the article by mentioning Harry Potter), but it reads more like a journal entry than a serious consideration of the topic. "Dear Diary, Today my co-worker spoiled Scarface for me. What a dickbag."

    Most people know spoiler etiquette. It isn't a new concept, even though the rapidity and visibility of the internet has brought it to the forefront. This blame/rant article isn't going to change the mind of "dicks," and if you're being spoiled by "non-dicks" then it was either an accident, or, most likely, you put yourself in a prime position to be spoiled. The latter gets deserves no sympathy.

  • foolsage

    I think it varies a lot from one person to the next. I generally seek out spoilers, because to me, they don't really spoil anything meaningful. I'm generally more interested in HOW the plot gets to a certain point, than I am in the summary outline of the plot. That's why I can reread beloved books, even though I know all of the plot details.

    I do however respect the rights of others not to be spoiled if they don't wish to be.

  • Dan

    SPOILER: Game of Thrones was published in 1996, not 1991.

  • F'mal DeHyde

    Is that a spoiler? Maybe I should preface all my comments with *SPOILER* just in case.

  • manting

    I noticed that too but I feared to correct someone who refers to themselves as an "overlord."

  • DehydrationStation

    In ten years' time, all this fine Internet whinery about TV and movie spoilers will seem so outrageously self-absorbed. "I demand the right to browse discussion forums concerning my favourite show with zero risk of possibly learning future plot points." Really? Is this what the helicopter parents have spawned?

  • Pawesl

    No there is a huge difference between talking about something that just happened on the show and talking about something that wont happen until season 4. Which tons of assholes seem to love to do. I've ever read the books and thanks to just browsing the internet (not even going to GOT forums) I already know about the 'wedding' and Sansa's fate.

  • Pray tell, what do you know about Sansa's fate, since the series itself is far from over.

  • Pawesl

    Tyrion. That is all I'm going to say and even that I shouldn't know.

  • Then you're in for a long ride.

  • DehydrationStation

    Ya browse the interwebs, ya takes your chances. If you want to avoid GOT spoilers completely, yank out your CAT5 cable and read the books. If you choose to stay online instead, please stop whining if you learn something you didn't mean to learn.

  • Jezzer

    Or, you know, people could stop being spoilery twats -- or at the very least use spoiler warnings and spoiler tags -- instead of insisting everyone else live in a cave because their right to be a selfish asshole trumps the right of people to remain unspoiled.

  • Phrasing

    I will never understand how people think that this discussion is about dicks bags posting spoilers and innocent idiots stumbling upon them. The most common occurrence of spoilers I see (and the harshest negative reactions) tend to happen on forums--on places where the discussion of the topic being spoiled is the driving reason for its existence. A bad example: the other day I watched some jackass lose their mind over a GoT "spoiler" on IMDB that was in the topic of the post (you know, that line that's sole purpose is to identify that which is being discussed so that others can accurately gauge their interest). This spoiler, mind you, is not only a well known plot point for book readers, but it occurred on the show THREE weeks ago. What the fuck was a that person doing on that forum when they hadn't caught up yet? Being an idiot, and blaming everyone else for it.

    I get that a lot of instances of spoilers aren't that cut and dry, but at some point the line is drawn, and you need to deal with it. Most people know to avoid Twitter and Facebook because the attention seeking idiots that gravitate towards such mediums could give a shit about spoiling you, but then those same people will march into open discussions and just assume that everyone is on the same page. In those instances, calling the people engaged in a discussion selfish is nonsense. They aren't actively seeking to spoil you (in fact, that aren't involving you at all), but they can't stop you from spoiling yourself, either.

    People really need to stop framing this bullshit based on the few assholes who actively seek to spoil people, because it really is the minority (and, you know, they could give a fuck what you think). You certainly need to stop calling a bunch of people selfish because they are doing something unrelated to you, and yet YOU see it as a direct slight to your person. This is about the misguided belief that the actions that protect you from spoilers in reality are the same that do virtually: that "no, no, shhh, I haven't seen that yet" is a reasonable and appropriate approach to the internet.

  • Jezzer

    That's all well and good, but bottom line: the site or forum in question defines what is or isn't considered a spoiler, and you need to abide by the rules of the site you're on. In the case of Game of Thrones, the books have been out forever, but the episodes are new. The GoT recaps on Pajiba are very clear about their stance on the books: you do not discuss future events based on what has happened in the books in the regular recap; there is a second recap specifically for book readers to talk about the books in relation to the show.

    What this means is that you do not talk about spoilers in the regular recap. You do not hint about spoilers. You do not bust out the "MWAHAHAHAHA" when someone in the general recap says they hope Character A ends up with Character B or that Character C lives a long, healthy life. The PtB have set up a safe place for people to discuss the show without being spoiled, and everyone needs to respect that.

  • DehydrationStation

    I agree completely! Oh. Except there is no "right to remain unspoiled," and saying that only qualifies you for the 'outrageously self-absorbed' descriptor I mentioned earlier.

  • Jezzer

    You're not exactly making great strides to get past the "selfish asshole" moniker yourself.

  • DehydrationStation

    Calling people "spoilerly twats" and "selfish assholes" seems to be your way of making sense of an oft unjust and treacherous world. Why don't you grow a sack (or some ovaries) and accept how the world is without, you know, making other people the scapegoats of your existential dissatisfaction?

  • Jezzer

    Or, you know, people could try not to be assholes instead of throwing their hands up and saying "That's just how the world is, LOL!" At any rate, if Pajiba says spoilers aren't allowed in a particular thread, I beg you to defy it openly. It'll be funny.

  • DehydrationStation

    Pssst! Being creepily threatening on behalf of Pajiba makes you look like a tool. But looking is probably the least of your problems.

  • Jezzer

    No, seriously, if you think your "right" to be an asshole to people who don't want to be spoiled is that bloody important, then go test it. Do it now.

  • DehydrationStation

    There is no "right to spoil" just as there is no "right to remain unspoiled." But you keep building that Straw Man; it's pretty much the only hope your argument has.

  • John W

    Honest I haven't said a word!

  • BBB40

    Could the kind writers of Pajiba also be a little more careful with their article titles and screenshots? Several shows I watch have been spoiled the day after they aired by our overlords themselves. I don't click on any of the articles concerning shows I haven't seen yet but I've been alerted to character deaths or Pete Campbell punchings through no fault of my own (other than being unable to watch a show live).

  • Tinkerville

    Here, here. If the header pictures were put up long after it aired then it'd be understandable but we're talking about the very next morning. I can't afford cable so I rely on hulu and such to watch shows, which don't post new episodes until the next day anyway. Obviously I avoid posts that might contain spoilers but I can't exactly avoid header photos unless I stay off the site altogether.

    The proposal on Parks and Rec was completely ruined for me that way and I know there were issues with Game of Thrones header pics in the past as well. Just think about the pictures before you post them please.

  • F'mal DeHyde

    Yeah, the P&R one pissed me off.

  • Elfrieda

    Yes, I was thinking about this while reading this. I hadn't seen that Parks & Rec episode yet and Pajiba totally spoiled the surprise. BAD PAJIBA!

  • BBB40

    Oh man, I forgot about the proposal. I was overjoyed to know that Ben proposed but it did take away what would have been a really nice surprise.

  • foolsage

    Fair point.

  • janetfaust

    I agree with this and I don't know why you're getting downvoted. There are plenty of screenshots to choose from when creating a post header; I would think it is easy to be sensitive to those who don't watch the show the day it airs and pick one that is neutral rather than spoilery. I can avoid not clicking on a link to a post but it's hard to avoid reading the headlines and seeing the pictures automatically when scrolling.

  • Honestly, so much big shit happens in those books, I can't see anyone seriously spoiling the whole thing unless you let them talk in great detail for 10 or so minutes. It's not like it's The Sixth Sense or something.

    The non-book-reading, spoiler-fearing crowd also needs to remember that the book series isn't even finished yet, so all the biggest issues are still mysteries for the people who have read ahead.

  • foolsage

    I'm sorry, but I strongly disagree. I could spoil entire seasons of the show with a few sentences. I won't, because I don't take joy in being an asshat, but it's not difficult. To most people, learning any significant plot points is "spoiling" the show; it's not necessary to learn the entire story with all details, in order to be spoiled.

  • No kidding. There are so many characters and plotlines it practically takes a spreadsheet and some serious genealogy notes to keep things straight. Some characters in the show don't exist in the books; the books have characters not in the show. Some whole plotlines in the show were pulled completely from thin air.

    Especially if you're farther along (stuck in A Feast for Crows, personally) it can be hard to remember what has and hasn't happened yet. That's why I only really started posting once we got a place for book readers. But there are tons of things still out there that only GRRM knows, and at the pace he's writing them, my daughter will probably be in her mid-thirties on whatever replaces forums like this wondering what the bloody hell is up with Theon Greyjoy.)

  • JJ

    But there's a difference between spoiling something that happens to an inconsequential member of a minor house and say the significant event that happens at the end of season one, right? Given all the different threads, of course there isn't one simple spoiler for all, but major events/deaths/betrayals/etc can be easily given away.

  • You're totally right. There's just so many major events/deaths/betrayals/etc.

    Anyways, I still don't think anyone should go out of their way to spoil anything. I'm just trying to let people who've had things "spoiled" for them, that there's still plenty more on the way.

  • True. And I'm certainly not saying "please, be a total jerk about this and spoil stuff" either.

    And the thing about this universe is that you never know when that "inconsequential" character is going to come back and mean something, and the person who seems most important no longer is.

    Add in all the back story, all the stuff that happened in the Rebellion, all the places we haven't even seen yet in the show, or that have only been hinted at. There is just so much, it can be hard to talk about it without touching on something that someone else might find spoilerish.

    Maybe I'm not appropriately "into" this kind of thing, I just don't get all the anger.

  • JJ

    It may that you're assuming anger and rage where there is maybe only annoyance or frustration. These aren't personal attacks on anyone, and people are free to disagree as well as agree. Unless it has anything to do with Joffrey, in which case fuck that douche.

  • the other courtney

    Um. Yeah... so I'm one of those people who likes spoilers. I don't go out of my way to spoil unto others as I have spoiled unto myself, though. If you want to know I'll tell you. If I ask, tell me. My husband cannot comprehend this need of mine to know what's going to happen. The best I can describe it is that I don't like suspense and once I am familiar with the outcome, I can pay closer attention to the detail.
    But yes, the smarmy deliberate spoiler douches need to cut it out. You still don't get to sit at the cool table because you read a freaking book.

  • stryker1121

    I honestly did not know there was this faction of GRRM book snobs spoiling things for people b/c they didn't read the books. Did I just connect to the Internet yesterday, or what?

  • Agreed. I don't spoil things for people, but I love to have them spoiled. When you watch a movie with a big twist, people say: "You need to go back and watch it again once you know what happens!" I personally get some enjoyment out of knowing. Still, purposely ruining it for people who don't want it ruined is a real shitty move.

  • So... I'm not going to spoil things for other people, but I guess I don't get all the indignation. I mean, the worst thing that happens to you is someone gets spoilery in the comments of a pop-culture blog on an HBO show based on a series of fantasy books?

    I mean, I may be injecting a little too much reality into this thing, but I hardly classify that as general a**holery, or *ahem* "turd-eating neckbeards" - if you do it in a non-spoiler format (like Pajiba reviews are generally classified) sure you're a jerk, but I guess I don't get the venom.

    I'm not trying to Jesus Juke (see Jon Acuff) your rant, because lord only knows I love a good rant from time to time, but I guess in light of recent events, it seems a little silly and a little shallow to jump off the deep end over spoilers.

  • jollies

    In the scheme of the universe, yes, spoilers are a small thing. But the notion that someone takes the effort to make a spoilerish comment means they went out of their way to be a dick. That is worth a rant, even in light of recent events in Boston.

    The fact that there are bigger problems (and bigger dicks) in the world, doesn't make me less angry at the smaller problems (and smaller dicks).

  • koko temur

    I agree. Small dicks are indeed a problem.

  • God Of Bal-Sagoth

    Truth.

  • God Of Bal-Sagoth

    This.

  • God Of Bal-Sagoth

    "in light of recent events"

    What the hell does that mean? Like, because there was a tragedy we can't talk about TV show spoilers now? That's... dumb.

    It's a big deal because it's something that people enjoy, and other people are taking away from that enjoyment. And worse, it takes a minimal amount of effort to NOT ruin it, and yet people do it anyway.

    And don't be ridiculous and make the article's attempts at hyperbole into something more than it is. Use a little goddamn perspective. Obviously she's not decrying this as a war crime, but this is an entertainment website and she's - omigod! - writing about entertainment, and so within that framework, yeah, people are being assholes. If this was a website about preventing deforestation or stopping slant-drilling, yeah, it would be silly. But each thing has its place.

  • Wow.

    I'm not saying we can't talk about that kind of thing, and I'm not saying it cannot be important to you personally, I just do not understand going on profanity-laden rants about whether or not someone tells you the ending to Old Yeller.

    And yes, I do feel a little silly when I let something like that bother me, and I look up to see the ticker on CNN talking about a funeral for the victims of an explosion, or a building collapse in Bangladesh, or a hurricane, or someone pulling a gun on someone else in the parking lot of a mall...

    I think it does provide perspective. That's the point I was trying to make. We all have our own, and I recognize my perspective is only right for me. (Heaven forbid someone share a dissenting opinion.)

  • TheGreatUnstainer

    Your response was a lot nicer than mine would have been. Wow, indeed.

  • Lisa

    It's pretty cool that you never ever get overly mad about small things.

  • BendinIntheWind

    Yes, it's all frivolous, but this is a pop culture blog, not a news site. If you want perspective, by all means, that's what news sites are for.

    Weren't you on the GoT thread earlier describing how much you dislike the Jeyne/Talisa switchup? Why is it OK for you to vent your frustrations about something frivolous (like a minor plot point in a book series/show), but other people can't be annoyed about something equally frivolous (like having that show spoiled for them)? That's what this place is for.

  • God Of Bal-Sagoth

    One might make the argument that if you aren't able to be affected by the little things - negatively or positively - then you're letting the bad things in the world overtake your life.

    Just because we use a little harsh language and complain about something doesn't mean it's our greatest cause. People are prone to hyperbole and complaining. I don't know that they should be judged for that.

  • Steph

    I've noticed that in every article about this series there are a bunch of comments ominously hinting at something really awful that'll be happening soon. Stop doing this.

  • stryker1121

    The most awful thing I fear w/ the series is GRRM dying at the end.

  • pfeiffer87

    To be fair really awful things happen every episode, so I don't think those ominous comments really count as spoilers. Unless you really think everyone's gonna get be friends and live happily ever after In Westeros.

  • There are five really long books in this series. I think it's hardly a spoiler that something really awful will be happening soon. (Spoiler alert: judging from the books so far, I am inclined to believe things will get worse for our ever-growing band of castaways on Westeros Isle before they get better.)

  • Steph

    I meant people have been alluding to a specific thing happening soon and I have a vague idea of what it might be now, so I wish people would cut it out before it's spoiled completely. People hinting that this massive thing is coming out of left field kind of ruins the impact, you know?

  • Bert_McGurt

    These kind of super-vague spoilers I really don't mind. I've gotten used to assuming that something really awful is going to happen on the show sooner or later. As long as they don't mention specifics I'm not too peeved.

  • Aaron Schulz

    Thats why i just went to the wiki and read everything that has happened so far, at least the major plot points, now i can read the books at my leisure and watch the show. I have never had spoilers be a thing i worried about. I get some people care, and i wont wreck anything for others, but i personally get more enjoyment out of the story being told in full then just knowing that Kong dies.

  • foolsage

    A Wiki of Ice and Fire is marvelous for this purpose; not sure if that's the wiki to which you were referring.

  • Aaron Schulz

    I did, its handy, also i like it telling me the differences between the show and the books

  • QueeferSutherland

    I agree with the sentiment. However, it's really, really difficult for book readers to have discussions about the TV series without flirting with spoilers. We know what happens. We have answers to confusing plot points. We want to discuss comparisons between the books and the show. If outlets don't offer two threads, then it puts us literate types (cleans monocle, adjusts top hat) in a sticky pickle.

    I've just tried to avoid talking about it altogether, which is kind of a shame.

  • Lisa

    There are plenty of places for readers to discuss the show-including this site.

  • koko temur

    Well, First, its all nice and indignant, but you non-readers aren't ashamed running to us asking for explanations every time something slightly confusing happens. You cant have the both of two worlds. Either read the books, or dont ask and avoid the internets.

    and second, i dont think its a dickish behaviour specific to spoliers. We as humans simply cannot help ourselfs from over sharing ( i dont include the assholes that do it by purpose). I happen to find solace in that, this is how i know for sure that the CIA didnt killed michael jackson to distract us from the war in iraq. We suck at keeping information and opinions to ourselves. Guess what, that is what internet is.

  • God Of Bal-Sagoth

    You're right, it's totally unreasonable to expect people with common interests to be decent human beings and refrain from ruining your enjoyment of something you love.

    WHY, exactly, can't we have it both ways? If I ask you to explain something to me (and why, exactly, is that shameful?), you therefore have the right to give away the ending? That makes sense in your selfish little world? Can't you just give me the explanation and, I dunno, go on with your damn life? Jesus, I hope your friends never need a favor from you.

  • koko temur

    Take a breath, will you? i hope YOUR riends are not barried in your garden after they dared to express an opinion.

    Because game of thrones is rather big and complex, with many plots intervined. Its really hard to answer, say, why "that guy returned theon back" without spoiling something.

blog comments powered by Disqus



film / tv / lists / guides / box-office / news / love / celeb / video / think pieces / staff / TV Podcast / books / cbr




Trending


Follow Us



Related Posts




Viral Hits
Celebrity Facts

The Best TV & Movie Quotes

The Walking Dead

How I Met Your Mother

True Detective

Parks and Recreation

Cosmos

Hannibal

30 Practical Tips About the Horrors of Raising Children

25 Practical Tips About the Horrors of Raising Twins