• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Maxxine

  • Rank
    Council Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  1. To answer the original question I really really hope she was not pregnant by now Daario just because I can't stand Daario and will never understand Dany's infatuation with him. But if Dany was pregnant and was in fact having a miscarriage, the baby would have to be Daario or Hizdahr's. More likely Daario due to timing. I do think it's likely she was having a miscarriage, but I think it's very premature to state it as fact as some on this thread have done. It could be miscarriage, the bloody flux or she could just be having a really heavy period. We don't know at this point and it's definitely clear. With that said I really like @Ygrain's thought about the berries causing the miscarriage by acting as abortive. I never thought about that. I also like the poster who had the figurative interpretation of Mirri's prophecy.
  2. I don't understand why people want Dany to someone else so bad. 1) The lemon tree thing is not really as big an issue as people try to make it out to be. Why a lemon tree is in Braavos is adequately explained twice (i think) in Feast. Yes there are no trees in Braavos except in the yards of the rich people that can afford them. So it just means the house with the red door was the house of a rich person in Braavos probably the Sea Lord that signed as a witness on the Viserys/Arianne betrothal. They were more than likely thrown out when that Sea Lord died. Even if this is not the case it could just mean Dany was a little kid at the time who moved around a lot and misremembers where exactly the house with the red door was. GRRM does a lot of nonreliable narrators. So without more the whole lemon tree thing, without more, doesn't indicate some big conspiracy to me. 2) Not really. I know Barristan says something along those lines, but by physical description just seems like the similarities are that they both have purple eyes, 3) The first Daenerys was a Targaryen princess who married a Dornish prince becoming a Dornish princess, but she was still Targ first so it's not weird that another Targ would use the name. Also, Daenerys is presumably derived from Daenys who was a veryimportant figure in Targ history so another reason why the name is not a stretch. 4) True, Quaithe is a mystery, but unless she turns out to be Ashara her presence with Dany doesn't indicate Dany is not Rhaella's. At this point Quaithe could be anyone: Rhaella, Shiera Seastar, maybe even just Quaithe. And as I always say on these threads, if Dany is not Rhaella's where is Rhaella's baby. There seems to be no question Rhaella was pregnant. Maybe she miscarried, but then how did anyone explain a baby popping up. Maybe she had a stillborn. Same thing then, where did the baby come from. For the timeline to work Dany had to have already been at Dragonstone or had to have been smuggled in before Viserys and Dany were smuggled out of DS.
  3. I've always wondered about this. Assuming for a moment that the Grand Northern Conspiracy is true and almost everyone is working to crown Jon, it has always bothered the Northerners were just cool with him betraying his vows even if Robb did release him especially considering how important the NW is supposedly to the North. Seems like there would at least be some muttering about it even if they accepted it. To the OP, Jon is really the only one who makes sense. He thought all his brothers and sisters were dead so no point in willing it to them. If there is a baby, WF would go to the baby anyway by law so no point in willing it to the baby. Edmure was already Lord to Riverrun and he had no Stark blood. He wasn't going to will to a random Vale lord. And Karstark was definitely out since he had just killed Rickard. Cat maybe, but then you a problem later on because she eventually going to die with no children (for what Robb knew) and even if she had more children, they wouldn't be Starks.
  4. The issue with this discussion is I think we're looking at from the view. I don't think it's about what's legal vs. illegal. The "rules" in Westeros don't seem to turn on what is legal and what is illegal, but more what is accepted and what is not accepted. For instance, rape is illegal, but it is accepted in certain situations. When there is a battle or the sacking of a town women are expected to be raped and very few are punished for it during these situations (with the exception of people with Stannis). Sure people lament it, but it seems to be an expected and accepted part of war. Conversely, polygamy may not be explicitly illegal, but it doesn't seem to be an accepted practice as shown by the reaction to Maegor doing it and from no other Targs doing afterward even when it could have beneficial (had Duncan been able to do it maybe they could've avoided the Baratheon rebellion). I can't count Aegon as precedent for three reasons. 1) He was married to Visenya and Rhaenys before he came to Westeros. 2) Who was going to be the septon to tell Aegon he was going to have to give up one of his wives right after he conquered almost all of Westeros and Harrenhal and the Field of Fire had just happened. At that point they almost had no choice but to accept it. 3) Rhaenys died pretty early in the reign so he only had one wife for most of his life. There may have been a bigger to do if he took another wife after Rhaenys's death. So yeah I think Jon was born a bastard even if there was some wedding between him and Lyanna because by the standards of Westeros at the time polygamy was not an accepted practice. Even in Dorne, Lyanna would've been considered a paramour and Jon would still be a bastard. With that said, I think it is possible by the end Jon might be accepted as legitimate if for no other reason than he is the best option or they have to accept him because he has a dragon (this thought is not even counting that Robb may have legitimized him anyway). I don't want to be king but I could see it for these reasons regardless of whether he's a bastard
  5. GRRM doesn't use hair color to prove parentage. It really only applied in the Baratheon-Lannister scenario. When a Baratheon procreates with a Lannister the black hair wins. But it doesn't apply in the Stark-Tully marriage. All the kids except Arya got Tully hair and no one questions who Robb, Sansa, Bran & Rickon's father is. Also, as someone on this site pointed out a while ago (I'm sorry I don't remember who), when Targs marry outside their own the first child tends to have the features of the other parent and the other children tend to have Targ features. So assuming RLJ is true Jon looks would follow that pattern.
  6. I don't it matters whether Tyrion believes Aegon to be the real thing. That's really not important. Whats important is that another "Targaryen" is making a claim. And Tyrion knows that.
  7. I wonder about this. News in Meereen is traveling to Westeros but news doesn't seem to be going the opposite direction. Maybe I'm forgetting so if I am let me know but Dany seems to have no clue what's going on with Westeros. I feel like the last news she acknowledged was Ned & Robert dying. Stannis, Renly, Red & Purple Weddings, Iron Islands - does she know about any of this? News of Westeros seemingly not getting to her make me think she won't know about Aegon unless Tyrion tells her (which I think he will, though not immediately) until she gets closer to Westeros, probably Pentos.
  8. I thinking lying is wrong word. I believe Robb when he said he had plans. Robb left before Renly died but he wasn't in some remote location where he could not receive messages. He was more than likely up to date with the news of the war. Thinking Stannis would attack KL is not a big jump, Cersei & Tyrion knew he would attack too. He made the guess Tywin would come west bc he figured Tywin wouldn't allow his own lands to be savaged the RL were. The Tyrells were the wildcard. No one knew what they were going to do until they made the deal with Tywin, which was able to happen bc Tywin could not get past stone mill. IMO it's more accurate to say at most he was unduly harsh on Edmure bc he needed to guilt Edmure into marrying a Frey to make amends for his own mistake, which was bigger than Edmure's. However, I still haven't made up my mind about whether I'm on Edmure's side in this. A commander doesn't have to give everyone the plan. Edmure was given orders & he didn't follow them. Not knowing the full plan doesn't excuse that to me. I think Edmure's best excuse is that "hold Riverrun" is open to interpretation. But even that is suspect when you consider Edmure's motives. Seems to me he didn't do it bc he thought he was "holding Riverrun" he did it because he want to gain some glory the way Robb was especially since he had a bad showing the first time around with getting captured & having to be rescued by his young nephew.
  9. Part of the job is your co-workers. Liking or disliking your job is more than just about the work. If your boss comes in and screams at you everyday or you co-workers continually throws you under the bus, you're telling me that's not going to affect how you feel about your job?
  10. Being committed to fighting the Others & being committed to the NW are two different things. I'm only only talking about the latter. He can fight Others without being in the NW. Arguably he could do a better job. Along those same lines he can stay committed to killing others but he can change how he goes about it i.e. by not being concerned about his vows & leaving the NW. People trying to kill you no matter how few it is is a big deal. So yeah I'd say to hell with it. Reminder I'm talking about being a part of the NW not the broader issue of fighting the others. The fact is neither we nor Jon know how many people are actually involved. Only a few did the actual stabbing but how many knew it was going to happen & did nothing. Hes not going to know who he can trust. The few people he could probably trust 100% he sent away.
  11. One leads to the other. It's very difficult to enjoy your job and thus be dedicated to it if you don't like the people you work with. For Jon I would think it would be even worse. It's not even that he dislikes them, he can't trust them.
  12. While it's possible he won't take advantage I think you're ignoring two things with this argument. 1) People are supposed to come back changed when they're resurrected. Just because he was dedicated before doesn't mean he's going to come back with the same dedication. 2) Even taking out of consideration the groundwork that's been built for changed personalities upon resurrection. The guy just got stabbed in the back by people he believed to be his brothers. That has got to make him jaded and have an effect. I can have all the dedication in the world to my job, but if people at my job screw me over that's no doubt going to have an effect on my dedication to the job.
  13. This has always been my thoughts on Jon. Yeah it's a loophole but I've always felt like Jon has to leave the Watch/Wall at some point. He's seemingly too important of a character to stay so geographically removed from everyone else. I do think he's going to come back to the Wall eventually to fight the Others. Also, for everyone saying it's not in Jon's character to use this loophole is forgetting that when he's resurrected he's more than likely going to come back with a different personality. That groundwork has already been set with Beric & Stoneheart.
  14. So I'm on my fourth reread of the books and I just got to the beginning of Feast. Feast is by far my least favorite, but I can't bring myself to just skip it. Even though I don't like it, I recognize important things happen. I know there are a lot of people on here who name Feast as their favorite book. So I'm asking specifically those people, what are the things you like? What should I be on the lookout for this time around? There's almost 0 plot movement in Feast and half the characters are missing, so what is it that makes it stand out to you? I'm not necessarily looking to have my mind changed as in I don't foresee Feast ever becoming my favorite. But, I really want to go into this reread with a somewhat open mind so I don't miss anything just because I'm trying to rush through it. So if I can at least be on the look out for things that make it more enjoyable, I want to give it a try.
  15. I understand why people want Joffrey to not be behind trying to kill Bran. It is an underwhelming conclusion, but it's the one were given. LF logistically doesn't work. The only way it does is if LF just gave the command for the assassin to kill a Stark kid if he got a chance. Mance is an interesting theory I haven't heard before and is more of a possibility than LF. But I can't see Mance killing a little kid just for the sake of killing a little kid and even if he would he wouldn't send someone else to do it. The other thing that works against Joffrey being behind it is what would be the point of another reveal at this point. What effect could it have on the story. Everyone involved is either dead or move on to bigger issues. Maybe LSH could be an issue for someone, but even she is more pressed about Robb's death and Bran's and Rickon's supposed deaths.