Magnar of Skagos Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Why does nobody in the books say "Essosi?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lysara Stark Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 I think Roose isn't given enough credit for being devious. I would put him up there with varys, Illyrio, and LF. The main difference is that unlike the others he isn't very charismatic. The other three characters are likable even if you know, or suspect, that they have something nasty up their sleeve. Roose is maniacal and smart and I think that is what makes him scary. There is no charisma hiding who he really is. He seems to be very good at judging other people's positions and you know that he has to have something in mind for Ramsey. Whenever we see anything involving him I can't help but wonder what his next move is going to be, and unlike many of the others I have absolutely no idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isobel Harper Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Why does nobody in the books say "Essosi?" The -i ending is an Essos thing. They don't say Essos; they say "us." "Westerosi" is an Essos(i) thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isobel Harper Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 I think she didn't meant to but she didn't feel sorry about it either. Which is my main problem. Unless she can -literally- see the future, which I think she cannot. :dunno: No, she didn't mean to, which, I feel, means she didn't kill Rhaego. But her lack of feeling guilt over Rhaego dying is disconcerting (for the lack of a better word). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lojzelote Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 I'm of the opinion that MMD did not murder her child. First, MMD warned Dany not to enter the tent. Second, the baby could have very well already been malformed and not have survived anyway. (Reference Maegor and Rhaenyra's children.) Heck, the situation in Drogo's khalasar in AGoT might have been to Dany's benefit. How would a uber-superstitious tribe like the Dothraki react when their "Stallion Who Mounts the World" turns out to be a "monster with wings and a tail?" Not well. Drogo might have even turned on her. About what happened with Rhaego, I think this interpretation explains it well. He was alright, but the magic in the tent, eh, activated magic in Dany's blood and turned the baby into a dragon-like monster and killed it. I'm not entirely sure if this is the right thread for it, but has anybody read The Dying of the Light? Jaantony Riv Wolf high-Ironjade Vikary (yes, it's a stupid name and I had to look it up) is exactly what I imagine Rhaegar to have been like. An intelectual, gentle, powerful guy from a very martial culture, who one day finds something odd in an old, dusty book and decides to change the world. You get to meet a Loras/Sandor hybrid as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 No, she didn't mean to, which, I feel, means she didn't kill Rhaego. But her lack of feeling guilt over Rhaego dying is disconcerting (for the lack of a better word). Yeah, well that's true that MMD's lack of guilt was disconcerting. But, you know what else is disconcerting? Dany's execution of MMD, by fire, if MMD didn't intentionally murder Rhaego. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramsay's Penguins Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 I always though Ned would die. And voila.I also thought the same of Robb, but I thought it'd be at Moat Cailin, not at the Twins (until I read the Red Wedding chapter, painfully obvious). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isobel Harper Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Yeah, well that's true that MMD's lack of guilt was disconcerting. But, you know what else is disconcerting? Dany's execution of MMD, by fire, if MMD didn't intentionally murder Rhaego. Well, she blamed Drogo and Rhaego on her. MMD's lack of empathy of what happened to them didn't help either. I do think Drogo's state after his "resurrection" (or lack thereof) was MMD's doing. Although she did try to bring him back to life, he was not quite human when he came back. This is why he would eat when lead to food and like to sit in the son; he was resurrected with the mind of his horse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Well, she blamed Drogo and Rhaego on her. MMD's lack of empathy of what happened to them didn't help either. I do think Drogo's state after his "resurrection" (or lack thereof) was MMD's doing. Although she did try to bring him back to life, he was not quite human when he came back. This is why he would eat when lead to food and like to sit in the son; he was resurrected with the mind of his horse. If MMD did not intentionally kill Rhaego, then you know what? Then I think she really got the shaft by Dany, her bad thoughts notwithstanding. I mean bad thoughts are just not enough in my book to condemn someone. So, it's hugely problematic that Dany executed her, if MMD did not in fact intentionally kill Rhaego. Justifying MMD's execution on her bad acts is one thing. Justifying her execution her bad thoughts is quite another. I've always been operating under the assumption that MMD did intentionally kill Rhaego. It's interesting that some people don't think so. I am going to have to go back and re-read that whole chapter. And, I hardly blame MMD getting vengeance upon Drogo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 It's probably been said before, but my crackpot theory is that winter isn't coming at all. It's just the slow, mass proximity of White Walkers. Perhaps some significant, rare winters are due to White Walkers heading south? Jon senses this winter is "different. He could feel it in his bones" ... creepy dead zombie unseasonal atmosphere. But the Stark/First Men slogan of "Winter's coming" is uber-useful: be freaking prepared. Do more than just bring in the harvest crops :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerenee90 Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 The Sand Snakes represent the fans."DO IT NOW! FINISH NOW! WE WANT! DO SOMETHING, OLD MAN!"Doran is GRRM"You want it fast or you want it good?"That's why Doran will end up winning the game.This seriously made my night. I have the strangest obsession with Doran Martell. [emoji1] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongRider Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Pretty much that. I finally started caring whether Jon lived or died at the end of Storm and the constant "he will be the saviour and Dany's entire life journey is about him getting the stuff she earned. Oh! He also will be King because a harp will prove that Lyanna and Rhaegar made him" is ruining the fun for me. How about, he has mommy issues, might find out about his parents and will fight to the bitter end against the Others regardless of an effing prophecy because him and his loved ones are in danger of being obliterated? Thoughts I don't get why some people insist on: -comparing Sansa and Arya -put Arya down to illustrate their liking Sansa but then predicting things for Sansa that are so much more clearly aligned with Arya. -put down Sansa by saying that she is stupid or useless or has no agency. I like them both, they are so different and fulfil such different roles in the storytelling that it just seems ridiculous at this point to act like it's a competition. Yes, there have been a lot characters like Arya starts off (because I don't remember any character in a series that goes on a similar arc except maybe in Mangas where they are ok with exploring more disturbing themes but not in Western literature) and too many used lazily but if the argument is realism, there is no way there weren't people in the Middle Ages who were unhappy with their lot and made it known. "Witches" were basically women of knowledge who didn't depend on men for survival so they were under scrutiny by their communities. On the flip side, Sansa is a less explored archetype who is interesting and has such fascinating psychology that her being "inactive" wasn't an issue, there was enough brewing under the surface to keep me interested. I knew she would grow into her power (whatever form it takes). Also, she was always intelligent, I get annoyed when people act like her showing understanding of LF's schemes in the Vale was like a surprise. I was like "duh! that's her shtick dude". So yeah, I just feel like I would be missing out on the literary experience of the books if I dismissed either of them as the typical tomboy or the damsel in distress instead of enjoying the ride of their emotional, physical and moral journeys. Ned was really on point when saying they were two sides of the same coin, even if I didn't see it then. The one outcome I would very much like is them being closer and forming this complimentary team that kicks so much butt on every level. Confessions: For some reason, the cannibalism gets to me more then any of the other gory aspects of the story. It just creeps me out on a fundamental level. I find death predictions for characters so freaking dull... Can't Dany grow old and learn? It's not enough that most of her life sucked, she has to die young too? Well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumHam Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Why does nobody in the books say "Essosi?" Well nobody says Essos until The Princess and the Queen. It is mentioned in the Dance appendix before that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysfan Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Things people seem to think are impossible that I'm leaning towards!1. The others are just evil bastards who hate living things!2. Tyrion HAS to be Aerys bastard!3. Bloodraven is a good guy!4. Tyrion will teach Ghost to juggle! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthGirl Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Oh, I agree with what you are saying here. I too have a problem with murdering children because of what they might do. There is just too much uncertainty there. And in ASOIAF, the funny thing is that the murdering of children or the attempted murder of them, for what they might do in the future, often seems to backfire. Aerys wants Robert and Ned murdered and it backfires on Aerys by causing a rebellion. Tywin orders the murder of Elia's children and it creates political problems with Dorne. Robert wants Dany murdered and the attempted assassination of her person causes Drogo to change his mind about invading Westeros. I do enjoy the karmic bitch slap and it plots a big hole in my favourite stance I like to respectfully disagree on. This killing the kids business is creating one's own enemy and it quite jars with the idea that killing the kids is a horror for the sake of the longterm good. The way I see it, it's the opposite, you kill the kid now, you feel relieved thinking there's no one in your way and then you wake up 10 years later and wonder why half your country hates you when they all join up with a side you pissed off. I think Roose isn't given enough credit for being devious. I would put him up there with varys, Illyrio, and LF. The main difference is that unlike the others he isn't very charismatic. The other three characters are likable even if you know, or suspect, that they have something nasty up their sleeve. Roose is maniacal and smart and I think that is what makes him scary. There is no charisma hiding who he really is. He seems to be very good at judging other people's positions and you know that he has to have something in mind for Ramsey. Whenever we see anything involving him I can't help but wonder what his next move is going to be, and unlike many of the others I have absolutely no idea. I actually think that he is not maniacal and that is what is scary about him. He looks like he doesn't care, nothing seems to bother him. It's hard to get a read on him which means you always have to be on your toes, waiting in case he's gunning for you. Ramsay is just a mad dog that needs to be put down, his acts horrify me but he doesn't scare me. Roose, on the other hand, I would be on my best behaviour at all times just so I don't give him a reason to simply do away with me unceremoniously. He comes across to as a high functioning psychopath; intelligent, able to fool his surrounding peers into thinking he's harmless. His cruelty, and disregard for other human beings, is hidden under a veneer of civility. If MMD did not intentionally kill Rhaego, then you know what? Then I think she really got the shaft by Dany, her bad thoughts notwithstanding. I mean bad thoughts are just not enough in my book to condemn someone. So, it's hugely problematic that Dany executed her, if MMD did not in fact intentionally kill Rhaego. Justifying MMD's execution on her bad acts is one thing. Justifying her execution her bad thoughts is quite another. I've always been operating under the assumption that MMD did intentionally kill Rhaego. It's interesting that some people don't think so. I am going to have to go back and re-read that whole chapter. And, I hardly blame MMD getting vengeance upon Drogo. I'm gonna give Dany a "pass" (as in not exactly condemning nor approving/endorsing her actions) because I am pretty sure she had something like post partem psychosis. Also, the conversation they had after she found out her baby died made it seem like the sacrifice was Rhaego all along but MMD let them believe the sacrifice was the horse. Taking that into account, whether MMD was just taking credit or not, Dany certainly believed that woman killed her unborn child so yeah... Thought: Has anyone ever thought up of psychological diagnoses for certain characters? If not, I want to start a topic for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysfan Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Thought:Has anyone ever thought up of psychological diagnoses for certain characters? If not, I want to start a topic for that.Do you mean like Littlefinger is a Sociopath, Viserys is a general dick with narcissistic delusions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthGirl Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Something along those lines but with a little further analysis. I also disagree that LF is a sociopath but wouldn't it be fun to discuss why we feel differently on that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonCon's Red Beard Posted March 27, 2015 Author Share Posted March 27, 2015 The problem with a psychological analysis of any character is that we're not talking about real people but fictitious people whose behaviour is both exaggerated and representative. For example, Ned represents honour, so, his qualities are strict. Tywin is the "villain", so, he acts borderline sociopath. That doesn't mean he IS a sociopath. Also, the situations make them act in a way no normal people would be through, hence, making them to take actions many normal healthy people would be forced to do and would look crazy despite their sanity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Annarkie Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Someone posted a theory that Rhaegar had asbergers. I don't know enough about the guy, but it was interesting. Sansa is definitely on her way to PTSD. What is creepy about Roose is that Ramsay seems to be cowed by him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthGirl Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 The problem with a psychological analysis of any character is that we're not talking about real people but fictitious people whose behaviour is both exaggerated and representative. For example, Ned represents honour, so, his qualities are strict. Tywin is the "villain", so, he acts borderline sociopath. That doesn't mean he IS a sociopath. Also, the situations make them act in a way no normal people would be through, hence, making them to take actions many normal healthy people would be forced to do and would look crazy despite their sanity. Hmm... Maybe if it was another work but that's the thing about this series though, I feel like people like most of the characters exists. For every single POV, I've met people who are like that in real life. Even cartoony psychos like Ramsay (if someone can post an ad online to eat this other person, get a response and follow through on it. I am sure someone like Ramsay exists. Serial killer Robert Hansen hunted his victims and I'm pretty sure there is a diagnosis that can be thought of for him) or the Bloody Mummers (mercenaries/rebels in conflict zones pretty much do whatever and amputation certainly is not a rarity in those circumstances) can have real life equivalents. Also, in my abnormal psychology class (study of mental disorders) we made up profiles and diagnoses for fictional characters in movies as well, I diagnosed Ra's Al Ghul in Batman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.