To catch a Lannister Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 When they claimed that they adopted the Seven and they committed a monstrous sin (by the old gods and the new) when they didn't make any attempt to be a part of a land claim as theirs, when their incest prodused kings that were mad and caused thousands of people to die when they believed thet they were better than everyone else and acted like Gods its a big effing deal. Also, that shit is gross. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormland's Fury Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 Also, that shit is gross. Or can lead to civil wars when another family is doing it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Eric Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 When they claimed that they adopted the Seven and they committed a monstrous sin (by the old gods and the new) when they didn't make any attempt to be a part of a land claim as theirs, when their incest prodused kings that were mad and caused thousands of people to die when they believed thet they were better than everyone else and acted like Gods its a big effing deal. What nonsense. They had some of their own customs before they came to Westeros and stuck to it. What would have been a big deal is if they had forced the others to follow their customs and rules which they never did. Most of Westeros were allowed to go on about their life as they did even after the conquest. They had 3/4 mad kings at best, so again complete nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chatty Duelist Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 So what if they married if they married their siblings? big fucking deal! So yeah! They make insane children with superiority complex that kill everything they don't like, they create instability and shit! What's the big deal?! . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingelheim Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 What nonsense. They had some of their own customs before they came to Westeros and stuck to it. What would have been a big deal is if they had forced the others to follow their customs and rules which they never did. Most of Westeros were allowed to go on about their life as they did even after the conquest. They had 3/4 mad kings at best, so again complete nonsense. 3-4? I could name 5-6 MAD Kings and a few more BAD Kings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 Also, that shit is gross. ^Truth. What nonsense. They had some of their own customs before they came to Westeros and stuck to it. What would have been a big deal is if they had forced the others to follow their customs and rules which they never did. Most of Westeros were allowed to go on about their life as they did even after the conquest. They had 3/4 mad kings at best, so again complete nonsense. I am calling it :bs: Also do you have the next books already to be so sure to say that only 3/4 were mad? How about the mad sons and daughters who caused wars, or simply chaos? 3-4? I could name 5-6 MAD Kings and a few more BAD Kings. Truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaosImprisonateMe Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 What nonsense. They had some of their own customs before they came to Westeros and stuck to it. What would have been a big deal is if they had forced the others to follow their customs and rules which they never did. Most of Westeros were allowed to go on about their life as they did even after the conquest. They had 3/4 mad kings at best, so again complete nonsense. Its kind of hard to argue they had a bad succession. They don't go into much detail as to why, but I think we can make very certain it was due to incest. At least in perspective this idea of Incest has been displayed in the series to show how some families think they are superior to other people. Cersei definitely had that mentality, and I think its safe to say that even though the Targaryens made the appearence to look Westeros like, they definitely lived higher than everybody and pretty much looked down on their people. I don't feel the same way about Rhaegar, and certainily it wasn't ALL of them. But certainly brings legitimate question on whether simply being a Targaryen and being on the Iron Throne is bad for Westeros. I personally feel that Westeros and its families work much more like a confederacy, even though Cersei and Joffrey tried contrary. The Targaryen's including Dany seem to try to make complete control over their domains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veltigar Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 All Kings exploit their people. This is a feudal system, even the Starks do it, because exploiting peasants is part of the system. The Targaryens have done more good than bad in Westeros. 1) By uniting the Kingdoms they reduced the ammount of wars. Sure, coflicts since the unification have been bigger but there were a lot less of them. So in general Westeros has become a safer place. 2) They founded a new city 3) They broke the might of the Faith 4) They built the Kingsroad and because they united the different Realms they improved trade 5) They abolished the Right of the First night Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Eric Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 3-4? I could name 5-6 MAD Kings and a few more BAD Kings. What does bad kings have to do with anything? Every fucking dynasty has good kings and bad kings. The Targaryens are no different. And please do name the 5-6 mad kings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panos Targaryen Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 3-4? I could name 5-6 MAD Kings and a few more BAD Kings. Go on, name them. I bet it's gonna be like those people who consider Rhaegar a raping, melancholic lunatic with obsessive compulsive/narcissistic/bipolar/whatever disorder, clinical depression, Messiah Complex, and a little schizophrenia too. And let's not forget that he deliberately abducted Lyanna because he's a Targaryen who believes the dragon "takes what it wants". AND he knew of his father's atrocities, but he didn't do anything to stop them cos he was a sadist too. He IS a Targ, after all. Go on, name 5-6 certifiably MAD (not evil) Targ kings. Everybody's a fucking psychiatrist now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolves Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 So yeah! They make insane children with superiority complex that kill everything they don't like, they create instability and shit! What's the big deal?!.Than they fit right in with the rest of Westeros. The Targaryens are no worse than the other nobles in Westeros. Let's take note that some of the most heinous crimes were not committed by the Targaryens and the worse war in Westeros history(TWot5Ks)did not involve any Targaryens. And everybody and their mother literally seem unstable not just some Targaryens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaosImprisonateMe Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 All Kings exploit their people. This is a feudal system, even the Starks do it, because exploiting peasants is part of the system. The Targaryens have done more good than bad in Westeros. 1) By uniting the Kingdoms they reduced the ammount of wars. Sure, coflicts since the unification have been bigger but there were a lot less of them. So in general Westeros has become a safer place. 2) They founded a new city 3) They broke the might of the Faith 4) They built the Kingsroad and because they united the different Realms they improved trade 5) They abolished the Right of the First night I think a debate can be made though. I feel the unification of the kingdoms was very superficial. It could also be said that many of the wars that resulted afterwards were the result of the tensions between the families overtime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Eric Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 So yeah! They make insane children with superiority complex that kill everything they don't like, they create instability and shit! What's the big deal?! . And of course the Targaryen children are the only with a sense of entitlement in the entire continent of Westeros. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonisHenryTudor Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 Yeah, I have more problems with the recent Targs then with the whole family in general. Dany doesn't real belong in Westeros and it just happens that she's a Targaryen, so that's a reason not the cause. Vyserys was more understandable. :agree: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaosImprisonateMe Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 I think Tywin and Cersei's view of the North is a good example of how no family really believes they can truly control Westeros. Sure Tywin wanted an alliance through marriage but I don't think neither really expected the North to ever submit. I always remember the idea that Cersei brought up that everyone was an enemy to her and the family even though they may have been "allies." I believe Cersei expected the same superficial control that the Targaryens had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uldra I Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 Especially in any position of leadership? Does might make right? Geographical reasons aside it seems that the Targaryens had no motive for being in Westeros aside from a desire to exploit the native first men and the 'native' Andals. I call the Andals native because living somewhere for 7,700 years gives you significantly more claim to being there than ruling for 300. I don't know if any of you read Martins recent extract from TWOIAF about Aegons conquest but it seems increasingly clear to me that the Targaryens were merely more advanced people with a feeling of moral superiority than people who deserve any part in Westerosi politics. The Valyrians relied on Dragons to subdue the Westerosi in the same way that the British, the French and the other European powers used firearms. From the Aegon the Conqueror extract we see that Aegon had visited the Citadel, the city of Lannisport, was in contact with Argilac the Arrogant. In short he had realised that Westeros had its own culture(s) all whilst sitting pretty on Dragonstone for years. This makes for a worse form of colonialism than the one that existed in our universe because the Targaryens were aware of the existence of other cultures and therefore did not even have the paper-shield excuse of a 'civilizing mission' to use as justification. They even adopted the gods of the people they subdued! I suppose I'm asking if being a supporter of a Targaryen Monarchy means being an advocate or, at the very least, an apologist for Colonialism. Does Britain having ruled over chunks of Africa for several hundred years make them more legitimate rulers of African countries than the descendants of those who ruled beforehand ? Once expelled from the continent should any descendant from the Hanoverian or the Windsor line be able to claim Egypt or Kenya? :agree: It just like the whites running roughshod over all the peoples of the planet to exploit and plunder. Not too different from the way the US and Europe cloaked in their moral superiority and exceptionality treat others today. Just like the conquerors/deciders/destroyers of our world today, the Targs had the ultimate weapons (dragons in their case, nukes in ours). No one dared challenge them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Eric Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 Also, that shit is gross. Who on earth does that have to do with anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingelheim Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 What does bad kings have to do with anything? Every fucking dynasty has good kings and bad kings. The Targaryens are no different. And please do name the 5-6 mad kings Go on, name them. I bet it's gonna be like those people who consider Rhaegar a raping, melancholic lunatic with obsessive compulsive/narcissistic/bipolar/whatever disorder, clinical depression, Messiah Complex, and a little schizophrenia too. And let's not forget that he deliberately abducted Lyanna because he's a Targaryen who believes the dragon "takes what it wants". AND he knew of his father's atrocities, but he didn't do anything to stop them cos he was a sadist too. He IS a Targ, after all. Go on, name 5-6 certifiably MAD (not evil) Targ kings. Everybody's a fucking psychiatrist now. Maegor I, Baelor, Aegon IV, Aerys II and, IMO, Daeron the I showed certifiably mad characteristics in their personalities, although if you don't think the boy King was half mad, as I do, you can put Aegon II or Viserys to that list. And I'm not even counting the other mad Targaryen who were not Kings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panos Targaryen Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 :agree: It just like the whites running roughshod over all the peoples of the planet to exploit and plunder. Not too different from the way the US and Europe cloaked in their moral superiority and exceptionality treat others today. Just like the conquerors/deciders/destroyers of our world today, the Targs had the ultimate weapons (dragons in their case, nukes in ours). No one dared challenge them. Dude, don't, just don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaosImprisonateMe Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 Who on earth does that have to do with anything? Yoda would say.... "EVERYTHING! Incest if the path to the dark side!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.