The arguments over HBO’s dark fantasy made it the signature show of an era when no one agrees on anything.

"What made “Game of Thrones” emblematic of its time is how it divided its audience from start to finish, right down to the matter of what a happy ending would even constitute. It gave its intense fandom multiple angles to debate as well as to enjoy: whether it kept faith with the popular novels it was based on; whether it reveled in brutality in the name of critiquing it; whether it well-served its female characters or exploited them; and whether it lost control of its story as it sprinted to the finish.

Half a century ago, viewers of “The Fugitive” collectively wanted Richard Kimble to catch the One-Armed Man. But what does anyone want from the end of “Game of Thrones”?
The disputes over “Game of Thrones” often served as proxies for arguments in the mundane real world. They were about how power is best won and wielded; about the portrayal of women and attitudes toward violence; about whose stories are subordinated to someone else’s hero journey; about whether ethics in leadership is a requirement, an impediment or a luxury."

READ ANALYSIS BY JAMES PONIEWOZIC