Lyanna Stark

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Lyanna Stark

  • Rank
    My Spite Was Sharp As Broken Glass
  • Birthday 07/02/1976

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    IKEA Empire
  • Interests
    Just for the record, I would like to crush some rumours and state once and for all: no, I don't drink left over wine in the morning. At that time of day I prefer my alcohol clear.

Recent Profile Visitors

15,260 profile views
  1. September 2016 Reads

    Well, I finished Sword and omg. I think I might like it as much, if not more, than Justice. Sure, there is no epic journey or Quest, in the same way as before, because things are getting complicated, but that's also the point. Nothing is ever solved by some lone hero murdering some dude, and this is proof of that. And damn what a proof. Of course, a lot of people are probably going to not really fancy when action gets swapped out for more dialogue and big questions like "what is justice? what does that even entail? is this a benefit, and in that case, to whom?"
  2. However, what "they feel in their hearts" when it comes to politics is irrelevant, no? We cannot know that, and it doesn't really matter. What *does* matter is policy, and here there are lots of differences. Or are you arguing for a case wherein we should vote for what we think a politician thinks in their hearts (not brains? ) or what their policy stances are? I would say the latter, always, should hold precedence. EDIT: Oh as for your insistence that muslims vote right-wing. At least in Sweden they are statistically far more likely to vote left. One such source. Another such source. Clearly, muslims are voting *class* not *identity politics*.
  3. Disingenuous. She changed her position openly in 2013. This means according to your post people cannot change their views. HAS BEEN is key, and she has publicly changed those views. As did Obama, btw. Ergo: whether your think, in your own chamber/office that Clinton is actually against it doesn't really matter since her policy positions are in favour of marriage equality.
  4. UK Politics: The Overton Defenestration

    Tax credits are...bizarre. I can understand the intention behind it as a good one, but how they end up working in practice is pretty awful. For example, when we lived in the UK, due to tax credits, we would have been nearly as well off with me being a stay at home parents as me working full time and putting our child in child care. I have a university education, paid tax and was generally a productive member of society, yet for someone making only a sliver less than I did (which was over the median wage btw) because of what my SO made and how tax credits worked, it would have been a better deal for me to stay at home, pay no tax and let my degree atrophy. Not to mention the effect that Werthead mentioned that this subsidises companies that ought not be subsidised. To someone from a Scandinavian country tax credits are eyeboggling and strange and in the end, it props up a system that hinders more than it helps for the people who need it the most. I can attest that the NHS is, at least in my experience, very good. And I know live in a country where privatised health care is seen by many of our leading politicians as the end all and be all. The profit margins for these "public service" companies within the spheres of care, schools and care homes for the elderly sometimes have profit margins of up to 40-50% and no, the savings are certainly not all due to efficiency. Personally I am not ideologically completely against privatisation, but in this case, be careful what you wish for. The Swedish system was pretty good before. Not super efficient, not always the most elegant, not always the fastest or the smoothest, but it worked. Now...not so much. Take care of the NHS. It is brilliant at what it does, it is, at least in my view, often superior to the Swedish system with better doctors, less red tape and cheaper for people in need of care. It is worth fighting for.
  5. Sorry for the double post, the multi-quote/editing function is not really working at all. In any case, it was fairly apparent in the Re-reading Tyrion group effort a while ago that Tywin used this "You will never get Casterly Rock" / "Lolly is the only one anyone would consider marrying to you" as a means of putting pressure on Tyrion. After all, Tywin's main concern was the Lannister line, and even though he despised Tyrion and saw him as a last chance, it is clear he still wants him to toe the line. Which in the case of Tywin arguing with Tyrion is that Tyrion should marry Sansa, create some little Lannisters and by doing so, a strong claim to the North. Tywin is expanding his empire, and by marrying Cersei to Willas, he would position himself even better. Whether or not Tyrion gets Casterly Rock....well, as someone else pointed out, if he doesn't, he would still get a lot of other stuff. And Tywin will not live forever, so anyone willing to take a bit of a gamble could definitely bet on Tyrion. After all, Jaime is in the Kingsguard and Cersei would have, as long as Tywin had lived, married a Tyrell, or even an Ironborn. The fact that he is a dwarf is certainly not in his favour, but considering there are lords like Frey out there, it's highly unlikely nobody would have stepped forward and offered Tywin their daughters for Tyrion. Instead, we can strongly infer that Tywin is hugely picky. We know he offered Tyrion to the Martells for Elia and to the Tullys for Lysa (when Hoster Tully had most likely expected it to be Jaime, as he sat Jaime next to Lysa at the banquet). Both of those are basically "Tier 1" marriages, so this is far more about Tywin being extremely picky than him not getting any offers. Whether or not it is generally known that Tyrion will not inherit, it doesn't seem to be, since Tywin only clarifies it to Tyrion in ASOS himself, and he does so in relative privacy. Sure, Varys would have picked up on it, but apart from that, it is not generally known. At least nobody in the novels ever comment on it, and it would be an extremely interesting fact to gossip about, so someone ought to comment on it. As nobody does, we can safely assume it is not generally known. Somehow, in the context of marriage-as-tool-for-reactionary thinking (and quite often, people excuse the princess-as-prize-for-the-hero or arranged marriages in Epic Fantasy, I think, as someone *fitting*, or not in the least strange), I find the following quote from Angela Carter very appropriate.
  6. Indeed. Case in point is how Danish and Swedish royalty intermarried quite a few times, yet it did not prevent warfare.
  7. September 2016 Reads

    It seems to have a fairly YA, almost fairy tale style of address, Railsea, while as you say, the content and the concept and whatever meta levels I have certainly not interpreted correctly are most certainly not YA. I agree with you that Kraken is more accessible (albeit I think a less well held-together and executed story than Railsea). I really liked Railsea after all. For Mieville, it holds a very nice pace and rarely gets ponderous and bogged down in six syllable words of which about a fifth are most likely made up. And you know, Mieville really does love his larger than life monsters. In Railsea he channels monsters that are a cross between the largest nastiest stuff you find in Star Wars (the pit Sarlacc among others) and a nightmare Thomas the Tank Engine. It also seems he really, really likes trains. The last novel I read by Mieville was Iron Council, featuring...trains. And then The Scar, which features ships only, but in Railsea the trains are also ships, and then Perdido Street Station even says in its name that it heavily features a station, where trains run from. Perhaps he should just invest in a huge Märklin model railway set and be done with it. Regarding the Ancillary debate, we shall just have to see how I feel! Ancillary Mercy and Ancillary Sword should arrive next week.
  8. September 2016 Reads

    Yes, it hardly makes any sense until you are perhaps half way through, or more. It's an odd one. Also sometimes you sort of have to go with the flow and just continue without getting bogged down in the details, of which there are many. So, Railsea by Mieville. Either I got smarter or is Railsea some sort of almost YA-attempt or something? I've only been baffled by words maybe three or four times, haven't felt much need to grind my Thesaurus to dust, and overall I can read it twice as fast as even The Scar. Although this sentence: kinda threw me, I must admit. The word construction "nu-salvage" and it being kinda rubbish also amuses me with its nu-metal connotations, and every time I read it I keep thinking "China Mieville hates Nickelblack". I am sure I am missing something important in the meta analysis, or the symbolism of the trains. Also Railsea feels like a cross between a steampunk-train story, one about seafaring (Moby Dick is an obvious influence, of course, but also the word choices) but then it also feels a bit like a sort of Lovecraftian-touched Western, but post-apocalyptic. The there's the modernist writing, giving it a bit of a mid 20th century vibe to me (cos most modernist poets I read are mid 20th century). I feel my genre-meter is *extremely* confused.
  9. September 2016 Reads

    I posted the response over in the Guy Gavriel Kay thread after I realised I had forgotten to reply to you here (sorry, and I saw your post about it in the other thread. ) It worried me a bit to clog down this thread with too many lengthy replies on only the Sarantine mosaic. Started Railsea by Mieville and it's the first time ever I have seen the word "town" used as a verb, which made me snigger. "This is where farmers farm, next to where towns town" There's also a town called "Bollons" which I keep reading as "Bollocks", causing even more sniggers from me. I feel like I am reading this novel all wrong.
  10. Guy Gavriel Kay

    Posting this here since I thought perhaps it fit better than to get to lengthy in the September reading thread (and I have a tendency to get lengthy ) This is a reply to the eloquent post by SeanF in the other thread on the Sarantine mosaic. Very interesting of how the Byzantine history was populated by many interesting women. I had heard of a few, but not all of them, and not in detail. It makes me want to read non-fiction of the history of the area. Maybe something for next year's holiday! Regarding the comments above:
  11. Bolded. She only had that power because her father allowed it, and gave it to her, on account of being the House Patriarch. So again, you have power gained by women, that is derived directly from men. Or in case of mistresses etc, indirectly from men. Sure thing, there are mistresses etc. that could potentially have effected the outcome of various decisions, but that also depends on the King in question. Was Maegor the Cruel inspired to legislate based on the suggestions on his mistresses? Or his wife? Was Aegon the Unworthy? Or Aerys II? Regardless, Dany in this way represents a paradigm change should she ever get the throne. A woman ruling in her own right has not happened before, ever. If this actually happens, I then ASOIAF will in some ways shift towards being a more progressive story than it otherwise would, at least in this regard. Yes, as horrible as Cersei and Joffrey were, they surely did not deserve the violence they got from Robert. Tywin may not have seen anything wrong with Robert, true, but he also had no compunction to force Cersei to marry Willas Tyrell against her will. He even says it straight out, that he expects his children to marry so it benefits House Lannister. Which is a bit rich considering he married Joanna Lannister, which didn't bring him any specific benefits apart from that he really fancied her.
  12. Erhm, please do not excuse domestic violence, EVER. Just...don't go there. Also "bitchy" is sexist, do not use it. If we are going to descend into marital rape and domestic abuse apologism, then I am out of here, sorry.
  13. Hmm, is this a joke post? What formal power does a Queen have? None. Her power derives from a. her husband the King and b. her House, which is run by its Lord, who is normally her father or another male relative. A Queen, in herself, has no power. Further, she has, as we have seen, no say in whom to marry. That is dictated by generally her father, or her family. Oh, it may be like in Ned's case where that power is basically benevolent, but all the same, Cersei had no bodily autonomy at all. Neither did Rhaella, or Sansa or Lysa. Or, for that matter Lady Hornwood. Cersei is chattel in the same way Sansa and Lysa are, or Dany. The reasons their various marriages were negotiated was not because it would bring any of them any joy. In Rhaella's case, she was also a queen, same position as Cersei. As was Naerys Targaryen. This, if anything, should highlight that any power a Queen might wield is not at all her own, and is completely an utterly limited by her husband's. Both Cersei and Rhaella were subjected to spousal abuse and marital rape, and it is probably safe to say that Naerys at the very least suffered marital rape, as did Lysa and Dany. Of course, this doesn't mean that comparably to poorer women, these women aren't privileged in that they are clothed, fed and have servants, but it doesn't change the fact that they completely lack the authority over themselves. Also, I might add, if you consider marital rape, as far as I know, we have no in universe occurrence of a wife raping a husband. We do know of several instances of husbands engaging in marital rape. Further, as we know from Stannis and Tyrion's marraige to Sansa, it is possible for a husband to completely avoid his wife and sleep with other women, should he prefer it that way. The wife, on the other hand, has no right to resist her husband. Sansa does resist, but she is only able to do so because Tyrion recognises the moral wrong it would be to force her. As for the last line, well, "beggars can't be choosers" the one who was a beggar was Viserys, and he told Dany outright he didn't care if she was raped by all the khalasaar if he got his troops, so the one who "can't be a chooser" is not Dany, it is Viserys. Dany had no power and no bodily autonomy, she was sold as a slave. Something she herself points out, repeatedly, too.
  14. Guy Gavriel Kay

    It's more or less a medieval Spain sort of setting, with countries/cities/rulers emulating the muslim/christians and jewish cultures and people, more or less. I just started Railsea, but my favourite is The Scar. I think you'd like it. It takes a while for it to get going, but oh my God, it is something else. If you do read it, let me know if you love or hate the ending, or maybe lovehate it. Only Mieville novel I have read twice. It was extremely odd going from Kay's very lyrical and flowing prose, to Leckie's matter of fact, no-nonsense almost brusque writing to Mieville's modernist style, complete with made-up words and odd punctuation. It's the same language, but it actually doesn't *feel* like it. Of the three, Kay's prose is by far the most beautiful, almost like music, or poetry. @3CityApache I'm glad you think Tigana is up there with Lions! I now have hope.
  15. Guy Gavriel Kay

    I just ordered Tigana and now you make me nervous when you say you hated it. It was a used copy tho so if I end up hating it I haven't lost a lot of money! How're the vikings coming along? I read the Fionavar ages ago, and it's...long? Derivative, nicely written, some of it will probably feel very formulaic nowadays, but it's also beautiful, in its own way. A lot of mythology. Lions of Al-Rassan is 100% brilliant. If it does not tug on your heartstrings you are made of stone. The Sarantine mosaic was very good. Clever, stylised and with amazing symmetry. The setting, especially in the second novel, is amazing and second to none, I think. Sarantium is really a place, you can feel it when you read. Kay's prose is very, very good too. Beautiful, but at the same time not complicated. You don't need to sit with a thesaurus next to you to get through the text (I am looking at you China Mieville) or trudge through a bazillion songs (Tolkien) or meandering/rants about philosophy (Bakker/Erikson). More...lyrical, perhaps? Haven't got to the others yet tho, but so far they have been absolutely worth reading, despite their flaws (which are very, very few for Lions btw).