The first paragraph was almost impossible to read. I also find the comment at the end to be telling of the author's bias: why, of all the shows HBO has produced, are we to return to "Sex and the City"?

There is no "global warming horror story" to Martin's fantasy world. The idea is simply that seasons aren't as short or predictable as they are in our world. It's a plot device, not a political statement. And since when did "descriptive" cease being an adjective and become a noun?

The third paragraph is just one tortured attempt at expelling a single thought that I still can't really understand. Is the author trying to say that fantasy worlds are not interesting enough but Palm Beach is? Is it just that she doesn't understand what the "fuss" is about over the temperature because, unlike in Palm Beach, people shouldn't really care because they're not going to go to the beach for a nice relaxing afternoon of tanning? It's really unclear what Ms. Bellafante means.

The follow-up question: "what is this doing on HBO?", shows a clear lack of understanding of marketing and sales. The writer implies that HBO favors reality, which is frankly not something that I've ever noticed from them. Yes, they have "gritty" dramas, but is she really trying to say that "Rome" was purely historic? Oh, and wasn't this the same network that brought us "Tales from the Crypt" for something like 8 years running? Not only that, but given the PHENOMENAL success of the Academy Award-winning Lord of the Rings, HBO (which, the last time I checked is a for-profit corporation) is absolutely doing a smart thing on cashing in on a resurgent market for smart fantasy series. She also seems to think that the screenwriter somehow "debased" himself by moving from "realistic" shows to "Middle Earth proclivities". He's a screenwriter. Oh, and apparently, in addition to writing that "stunning post-9/11 meditation" called the 25th Hour, he wrote the screenplay for "Troy" and "X-Men Origins: Wolverine". Yeah, there aren't any fantastic elements in either of those...

The next part is absolutely hilarious:

“Game of Thrones,” is a costume-drama sexual hopscotch, even if it is more sophisticated than its predecessors.

She mentions the Borgias and the Tudors, but ignores HBO's own Rome or The Sopranos or, even more hilarious, the very show she mentioned in paragraph 1, Sex and the City. The only distinction is that Sex and the City's "costumes" are current fashions. Oh, and doesn't that directly contradict her weak argument about how we like our eroticism being put in the past? Oh, yeah, I guess it does. And even if her argument were true, you have to once again scream at the screen and say, "You stupid fucking bitch! The first rule of media is SEX SELLS!"

And why would she think that the sex was thrown in for the women? Is she actually trying to say that men don't think about or enjoy watching sex? Really? I mean, no, seriously, is she actually doing that? Has she suffered severe head trauma recently or something? I repeat: "You stupid fucking bitch! The first rule of media is SEX SELLS! And it doesn't matter if you're talking about women or men!"

Ultimately, her complaint seems to be that HBO is producing ANYTHING that isn't realistic:

When the network ventures away from its instincts for real-world sociology, as it has with the vampire saga “True Blood,” things start to feel cheap, and we feel as though we have been placed in the hands of cheaters. “Game of Thrones” serves up a lot of confusion in the name of no larger or really relevant idea beyond sketchily fleshed-out notions that war is ugly, families are insidious and power is hot. If you are not averse to the Dungeons & Dragons aesthetic, the series might be worth the effort. If you are nearly anyone else, you will hunger for HBO to get back to the business of languages for which we already have a dictionary.

The network will package and offer whatever sells. And it's not like it's not producing anything "realistic" right now. Aside from True Blood, HBO is showing Entourage, Boardwalk Empire and a shitload of other "realistic" programming. I'm sure one vampire show and one gritty fantasy program aren't going to ruin it.

While I generally applaud elitism, it has a proper place. If someone were to try to say Martin was "serious literature" or a "literary writer", then I would certainly contest that assertion. When someone tries to feed me a line of shit about a for-profit corporation being dedicated to some higher mission, I am not going to side with the elitists.