First Night in "The Princess and The Queen"... disturbing?

[Forever May]

"Indeed, until the reign of King Jaehaerys and Good Queen Alysanne, the ancient law of the first night had prevailed on Dragonstone, as it did throughout Westeros, whereby it was the right of a lord to bed any maiden in his domain upon her wedding night. Though this custom was greatly resented elsewhere in the Seven Kingdoms, by men of a jealous temperament who did not grasp the honor being conferred upon them, such feelings were muted upon Dragonstone, where Targaryens were rightly regarded as being closer to gods than the common run of men. Here, brides thus blessed upon their wedding nights were envied, and the children born of such unions were esteemed above all others, for the Lords of Dragonstone oft celebrated the birth of such with lavish gifts of gold and silk and land to the mother."

The above is pulled out of the novella in Dangerous Women. Does anyone else find it a little disturbing? I am having trouble deciding whether it is just bad writing or mine own misinterpretation. The novella is written from the point of view of a maester. So technically the above is his point of view, which means he can say just about anything and it is okay, because it's just his own point of view. What disturbs me is the entire novella is generally intended to be taken as "matter of fact." It is meant to be written in neutrality. So basically, that means lords raping the commonfolk maidens on their wedding night is an honor? Disturbing that such a paragraph can be pulled out of a book titled "Dangerous Women," I wouldn't have flinched if the title was "Meek Trollops," but it isn't.

Needless to say, commoners generally do not believe the claims of divinity made by the ruling class and take offence to having their maids raped on account of divine right. It is obviously going to be forced, rape, as no woman wants another man on her wedding night, that is delusional. And I only know of a few instances in history where the first night existed, such as in Scotland where Longshanks was trying to cement English power by lacing Scots with their blood. Obviously, the Scots rebelled because of just such things. Can anyone think of an historical example where the first night was celebrated such as is claimed here?

Let me know what you all think.

It put me off the novella. It's a shame more did not go into it, as Rhaenyra is truly one of the most interesting characters in the Westeros world. I can just pass it off as the truly misogynist views of a single maester, but the "matter of fact" writing style still makes it distasteful. (And this says a lot, as I hate the "m word" - misogyny - it is the most misused word in English language parroted by fools who wouldn't recognize an insult if it slapped them across the face, but it truly belongs here where we're told rape is an honor some of us are failing to grasp).

Yours truly,

Forever May

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

You are not the only one to feel that way, trust me.

It's basically telling the smallfolk how lucky they are to be raped (or have their wives, mothers, sisters, daughters, etc. be raped) by the godly Targaryens. I also have to wonder if the "muted" response on Dragonstone came not from feeling "honored" but rather from "fear of getting straight-up murdered by dragonfire if you refused." It is extremely disgusting and I'm surprised there wasn't a stronger response to it in the readership, although I know several people who had a similar wave of disgust hit them.

I chalk it up to being an affectation of the maester, as in, this isn't GRRM's attitude but rather viewpoint of the guy writing the story down in-world, who has an interest in propagating 1. the superiority of the Targaryens and 2. their "right" to have sexual access to whomever they want.

As for whether it actually happened historically, the interesting answer is that it doesn't look like it.

[Liz Stark-Targaryen]

Rhaenyra is truly one of the most interesting characters in the Westeros world.

Totally agree!

It may be that some of what we're seeing is real (or more likely, alleged) Valyrian custom. If Valyria was based on our world's Ancient Rome, then perhaps they viewed the barbarian Westerosi as theirs to do with what they will. Not sure that Valyria had Westerosi style feudal customs. I gather that the Freehold practiced slavery, too...

[Forever May]

I chalk it up to being an affectation of the maester, as in, this isn't GRRM's attitude but rather viewpoint of the guy writing the story down in-world, who has an interest in propagating 1. the superiority of the Targaryens and 2. their "right" to have sexual access to whomever they want.

Yes, I know Martin would never think that, but still, it's sad the way it came off. The maester's point of view generally seemed to be what all level headed people simply ought to agree with, and then you get this, so totally out of place, of course it shocks. Hard to say if it is bad writing, but then yes, it makes sense for the maester to make excuses for the royals, so oh well.

[ummester]

I've not read the story that that piece of text is from - but perhaps it is that biased environment that makes the woman in the story become so dangerous?

I have not read this Novel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tandia though my wife tells me it is excellent - the protagonist in it suffers harsh, racist and sexist treatment at the start but develops into a very intellectually powerful person.

One of the most tried and tested story telling techniques is to generate emotional interest in the main character with sympathy.

[onceaskrull]

I never got the impression that GRRM was endorsing the tradition of the first night. In fact, I'm pretty confident that he agrees that the tradition was rape, but it was rape dressed up as an "honor", and this is true to life as well--male entitlement to female bodies is A Thing, and you needn't look far to uncover examples of rape being minimized, excused, or recast. The last two novellas are written from the flawed, narrow, and biased point of view of a history-teller (or tellers), and so you can expect the information presented to be...flawed, narrow, and biased. Either the maester truly believed it was an honor, or he consciously reframed the tradition in a way that placed the men in power in a favorable light. After all, that's who maesters serve. I mean, his (apparent) admiration is so clearly over-the-top: "rightly regarded as being closer to gods than the common run of men" and "Though this custom was greatly resented elsewhere in the Seven Kingdoms, by men of a jealous temperament who did not grasp the honor being conferred upon them". He is making no attempts at impartiality.

The maester's point of view generally seemed to be what all level headed people simply ought to agree with, and then you get this, so totally out of place, of course it shocks.

I disagree, I think the maester is supposed to come off as totally biased. I do not think that his opinion is meant to reflect what the "common folk" would think if they were to be subjected to such an "honor".

The style also put me off, but not because of the misogyny (I've become almost immune to the rampant misogyny in Westeros), but because I want to know what happened, I don't want to know what history goes on to say happened. It's an interesting storytelling mechanic, but it just didn't work for me. I absolutely loathed the "some say this happened, but others say this happened"; I don't want to hear what people went on to say about it, I want to know what happened. I want to know what GRRM knows. :tantrum: I want to see it unfold, not be told about it.

I skim read the PATQ and the Rogue Prince and I doubt I'll revisit them anytime soon. I would've loved a Rhaenyra POV but that's not what we got.

[Falstaff_Stark]

I'm not sure why you're hating on Martin over First Night. History is replete with sick, demented, RELIGIOUS patriarchy. A few powerful men controlled access to land, money and SEX. First night, polygamy, divine rights,

Slavery, prostitution, etc. its good sometimes to remember that we are not very far removed from barbarity, both the kind still in the world and the ones that are past.

[little spiders]

If the people on dragonstone truly thought the Targs were closer to gods than many of the women may have done it willingly or were even happy and honored. It reminds me of a cultish religion more than historical first right laws in which case it is far more common. And if the bastards were in fact benefitting from the arrangement than some families were better off financially. Im not saying it isnt terrible, Im just saying that its probably accurate for a portion of Dragonstones population. Clearly not everyone felt honored because it was outlawed but i was always under the impression that people from Dragonstone were a bit nuts.

[SeanF]

Yes, I know Martin would never think that, but still, it's sad the way it came off. The maester's point of view generally seemed to be what all level headed people simply ought to agree with, and then you get this, so totally out of place, of course it shocks. Hard to say if it is bad writing, but then yes, it makes sense for the maester to make excuses for the royals, so oh well.

Archmaester Gyldayn is highly chauvinistic. We know that some Targaryens think they're almost gods, and Gyldayn seems to have bought into that idea. We don't know much about him. Perhaps, he was related to the Targaryens, or even a "dragon seed" himself.

The idea that young women are being "honoured" by being required to bed Targaryens (and other lords) is deliberately shocking.

There's a curious echo of this idea in Dany's thoughts just before her marriage to Hizdahr. She thinks that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna at sword point, and believes it was romantic!

[Falstaff_Stark]

Archmaester Gyldayn is highly chauvinistic. We know that some Targaryens think they're almost gods, and Gyldayn seems to have bought into that idea. We don't know much about him. Perhaps, he was related to the Targaryens, or even a "dragon seed" himself.

The idea that young women are being "honoured" by being required to bed Targaryens (and other lords) is deliberately shocking.

There's a curious echo of this idea in Dany's thoughts just before her marriage to Hizdahr. She thinks that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna at sword point, and believes it was romantic!

Chauvinistic and entitled is deliberately faithful to how the world worked. Take other shows/books that somewhat try to convey reality in fiction. If anything, Outlander is more gratuitous depicting rape/attempted rape and chauvinism.

[The Wolf Lord's Daughter]

You are not the only one to feel that way, trust me.

It's basically telling the smallfolk how lucky they are to be raped (or have their wives, mothers, sisters, daughters, etc. be raped) by the godly Targaryens. I also have to wonder if the "muted" response on Dragonstone came not from feeling "honored" but rather from "fear of getting straight-up murdered by dragonfire if you refused." It is extremely disgusting and I'm surprised there wasn't a stronger response to it in the readership, although I know several people who had a similar wave of disgust hit them.

I chalk it up to being an affectation of the maester, as in, this isn't GRRM's attitude but rather viewpoint of the guy writing the story down in-world, who has an interest in propagating 1. the superiority of the Targaryens and 2. their "right" to have sexual access to whomever they want.

As for whether it actually happened historically, the interesting answer is that it doesn't look like it.

I'm sure that this is what happened. Perhaps some of the very poor would be mollified by the gifts given if a child was born but come on, why would they feel honored. As for people thinking the Targaryens were god-like, it's only been 27 years or so since the Targaryens were defeated and the only person who thinks of the Targaryens as god-like is Cersei when thinking of the handsome, crowned prince Rhaegar. Otherwise everyone else sees them as powerful people. Jorah, who loves the dragon hatching Dany, thinks of her as a beautiful woman, not as a goddess. Why would the common folk see the Targaryens as anything but darngerous, dragon riding men.

And yes, I was pretty disgusted by it but the maester was a supporter of the Targaryens. He privately might have felt very differently from what he wrote but didn't want to anger the king.

[Maia]

Totally agree!

It may be that some of what we're seeing is real (or more likely, alleged) Valyrian custom. If Valyria was based on our world's Ancient Rome, then perhaps they viewed the barbarian Westerosi as theirs to do with what they will. Not sure that Valyria had Westerosi style feudal customs. I gather that the Freehold practiced slavery, too...

Actually, it was a repulsive First Men custom that, according to Roose Bolton is still being clandestinely practiced in the North! Why are you guys hating on Targaryens when everybody was doing it - and they were the ones to eventually put an end to it, though, apparently not as completely as they would have liked?

[The Wolf Lord's Daughter]

Actually, it was a repulsive First Men custom that, according to Roose Bolton is still being clandestinely practiced in the North! Why are you guys hating on Targaryens when everybody was doing it - and they were the ones to eventually put an end to it, though, apparently not as completely as they would have liked?

No one hates just the Targs for it, I think it's repulsive no matter who does it. The OP's main issue with the Targs and first night is that it's being written as if the Targs were doing the ladies a favor when basically raping them.

[JoeyBanana]

It's only natural that you're disgusted, seems like a perfectly reasonable reaction to that quote

At the maester/custom, that is, not the author for writing it

[Lord Freypie]

Just a precision about the Scotts, them revolting because of primae nocte is Braveheart scenarists invention, to replace other humiliations that would hardly have been seen as as important by modern viewers (iirc the main one had nothing to do with any kind of oppression of the smallfolk : the english stealing and refusing to give back the Stone of Scone, that was used for scottish kings coronation, and then deciding to incorporate it unto Edward I throne, is what decided Wallace and some other nobles to start the rebellion -another big inaccuracy of Braveheart movie is how they turned the knight Wallace and his main supporters into a bunch of commoners).

Like said above primae nocte is more an urban legend born from isolate incidents than something that was really implemented as a policy anywhere, according to most historians.

Anyway back to topic we are in a fantasy world, so Martin is free to make it real in this one, and make some maester or other characters speak about that in a non-negative way. It's not like Martin isn't himself depicting this kind of things in a negative light, in many parts of the serie. That said, I agree that the amount of sexual abuse, in Asoiaf world in general, is a bit disturbing.

[Maia]

The OP's main issue with the Targs and first night is that it's being written as if the Targs were doing the ladies a favor when basically raping them.

Because the historian was writing about the Targs in a work intended for the Targs and had to address something that had come to be seen as uncivilized and repulsive.

Do you think that historians writing for the Starks back when they have been royal, criticized their use of the First Night? Or depicted it as anything other than a honor for the women so abused?

Yes, it is deplorable that the Andals and the Valyrians who moved to Westeros adopted this horrible custom, but it was a _First Men_ custom to begin with, and they are the ones who are still practicing it! So, why single out Targs for the hatred?

[Frey family reunion]

As a practical matter it certainly gave the Targaryens a number of potential "dragon seeds" to try out.

[Forever May]

One of the most tried and tested story telling techniques is to generate emotional interest in the main character with sympathy.

That is a bit of a no-brainer. I am writing a novel about a girl who gets raped at the start of the book (amongst other plots) and ends up reaping a fair swath of vengeance before the tale is through. I.e. you are sympathetic for the protagonist and resentful of the villain, for good reason, and the story unfolds with the reader thus emotionally involved. Yet I don't think that is what happens in Westeros. None of the female characters have anything to do with the "First Night." In fact, the concept of the First Night here appears to be introduced solely as a way of explaining where they might find more suitable dragon riders, because they needed Targaryen bastards for that. It could have simply be written in as this, "On such a small island as Dragonstone, the young bloods frequented the same tavern time and again and have fathered a long line of bastards on willing wenches, leaving a thick streak of dragon blood flowing through the veins of the isolated population," or such. Yet Martin went for the First Night approach instead.

The main difference between the idea of the First Night as it is written in the Princess and the Queen and the plot line I wrote just above, of a protagonist who suffers rape, is the way the maester in Wetseros told it has us believe the maids were grateful for the rape, where as in the other example where she kills the raper, it is made quite clear that women do not enjoy rape. I get it, it is written from the point of view of a maester, not Martin himself, but I think it is a clear example where Martin slipped in his writing, failing to make something clear.

What is never really explained is why the First Night exists anyway. My guess would be, the Andals introduced it to put an end to the claims that Westeros belonged to the First Men. By lacing the First Men with Andal blood, you lessen the racism exhibited in future generations, obviously, making them more sympathetic and accepting of their new rulers. This explanation neither explains why the Targaryens came to practice it nor why it has been allowed to continue for so long however. Without offering such an explanation, Martin has left "open to speculation" one of the most deplorable acts in his fantasy world. As I said, I think he let it slip a bit.

[Forever May]

I'm not sure why you're hating on Martin over First Night.

I'm not. I'm saying he handled it poorly. Martin is my favorite writer. He rules.

[Forever May]

Just a precision about the Scotts, them revolting because of primae nocte is Braveheart scenarists invention,

Oh you got me. I need to stop watching movies. Some of them are full of nonsense, I am starting to realize now.