Ser Greguh

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ser Greguh

  • Rank
    Avatarless Wonder
  • Birthday 04/24/1978

Contact Methods

  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Middle of Somewhere
  1. Scott Lynch’s The Republic of Thieves.. SPOILERS

    Straight from the horse's mouth, Lynch provided an annotated set of a few of the chapters from Red Seas Under Red Skies on his website that answers the question directly.
  2. Scott Lynch’s The Republic of Thieves.. SPOILERS

    Yeah, the gang is, what, 16-17 in TROT and the primary timeline of TLOLL starts when they're 25? Quite a bit happened in those intervening 8-9 years, and I wouldn't be surprised if Lynch continued to give flashbacks to Camorr in every other book, in the pattern he's established thusfar, giving us two more flashback chunks. As a wild-assed guess I'd say the next would deal with the gang's elevation of the confidence scheme to an art form, and the second would deal with their pulling off the early scores mentioned in TLOLL, maybe? I'm not sure on the timeline of Chains' death, Sabetha and Locke's breakup, and the acquisition of Bug as their newest member, so I'm not sure where they would fit in, though presumably those would be significant plot points as well.
  3. Scott Lynch’s The Republic of Thieves.. SPOILERS

    Blasted through it in two days. Enjoyed the hell out of it, just like everything I've read of Lynch's. Not as good as TLOLL but very few books are. I put it about on par with RSURS, which I enjoyed, though they're very different sorts of books. Re. Locke's Identity: Probably true, but probably not that meaningful in the grand scheme of things, at least in the details. If Locke can't really remember anything about his past identity, apart from the name he thought was his, then it's not really as though much is different from Locke just being normal. I expect the most meaningful element of that reveal will be that Locke's "red name" is truly lost, likely an important asset against the Bondsmagi, and thus, most critically (it appears), the Falconer. Re. the redhead from Patience's painting, my suspicion isn't that there's anything truly that weird about the reveal, just that Locke's fixation on redheads, and thus, his latching onto the first redhead he met, is some sort of artifact from his previous consciousness. That is the sort of thing that would likely drive Sabetha away, at least temporarily. All told I loved it. Loved Lynch's characters, love that he seems constitutionally incapable of writing a non-wiseass (that might sound like a critique, but it's really really not), really liked the Locke/Sabetha relationship, and really liked the flashback storyline in particular (far more cohesive with the previous books' Interludes / Reminiscences). The details behind the election rigging weren't really that interesting (probably the weakest point of the book, just a factor of "rigging an election" being a fundamentally less interesting topic than the one-sentence descriptions of the first two books). But of course the election was just window dressing for the Locke/Sabetha interaction, which to me was a hell of a lot more interesting and believable than the conflict between Locke and Jean that permeated Book 2. Another thing that seemed to be slipped from relevance was any sort of real dealing with Jean's loss of Ezri past the first act. This probably bugged me more than anything. I know that Jean's different from Locke particularly in how he deals with grief (RSURS proved that since the loss of Calo, Galdo, and Bug was as much Jean's as Locke's), but I felt like Lynch set up that Jean was going to be off his game in Karthain, and then never really followed through. Anyway, so it looks like the new-and-improved Falconer is going to be the Big Bad, though I wouldn't put it past Lynch to make that a high-level misdirection. Still very interested to see where he takes us. Off to Emberlain!
  4. This. He's just not particularly interested in sex. His ability to perceive visceral pleasure is limited entirely to his ability to serve his sadism. The degree to which that involves sex is probably only limited to his ability to use sex to deliver pain. He's probably more interested in raping Sansa than he is in having sex with his completely willing fiancee.
  5. Um, no. This is kind of insane, really. First off the only action that can realistically be laid at Catelyn's doing that helped cause the war was her kidnapping of Tyrion. The degree to which that was a true seminal moment versus an action that sped up the inevitable is debatable. Littlefinger was plotting to cause chaos in any case, and had already set the Starks and Lannisters at each others' throats via the killing of Jon Arryn and the letter sent to Catelyn. Cersei was already plotting against Robert. And Tywin Lannister's reaction to Tyrion's arrest, while possibly predictable, wasn't lawful. His son is accused of an assassination attempt, and so, quite naturally, he launches a fucking invasion of the Riverlands in response. This much I agree with. If R+L=J, Ned's cover story to protect Jon from Robert's wrath is quite flimsy, and only really held in place because nobody has bothered (in-universe) to ask the right questions. Catelyn's enmity lends credance to the story.
  6. Depends on the medieval setting. In some locations / timeframes, a prediliction toward homosexual affairs, particularly among the nobility, was viewed as more of a personal quirk or vice than a punishable-by-death offense. In others, it was viewed as much worse. Westeros appears to view it closer to the former; Renly and Loras's affair, while common knowledge, appears to be seen by most as fodder for jokes and innuendo, but without much in the way of consequences beyond that. Loras is still revered for his abilities as a jouster, and Renly is crowned king and amasses the largest army of any of the five kings. Joffrey's proposed law would very much be an outlier. Even Stannis doesn't go anywhere near that far, and Stannis is prudish to the extreme. "Homophobia" is still probably the wrong word, though. Joffrey wanting to put homosexuals to death is, oddly, not particularly indicative of particular hatred toward them. He just doesn't need much of an excuse to have people killed.
  7. I think Joffrey may honestly believe that Margaery may not know about Loras being Renly's lover. His contempt for women is severe enough that he actually may believe he's tricking her when saying that, and that's about consistent with Joffrey's level of cunning.
  8. Yeah, those scenes in particular have been more of a writers' extrapolation rather than invention. The Margaery they have presented in the series so far is a bit different from how she's portrayed in the books, but how she's portrayed in the books is presented largely through the lens of highly subjective POV characters. Sansa thinks very highly of her and sees her as a true friend, though she does note that she seemed more alert and worldly than her handmaidens. Tyrion, the only other major POV in King's Landing in Book 3, doesn't think much of her at all. Her charity and popularity with the commoners certainly comes through, but any pre-wedding interaction she had with Joffrey was not revealed. What David & Dan have come up with is not far off from what a lot of fan consensus regarding what her true nature must be; a highly intelligent player and very much her grandmother's protege, whose primary talent is acting. This is made more clear in the books in Book 4, where she plays Cersei as thoroughly and easily as the show has her playing Joffrey here. As far as Renly's character, it hasn't been changed at all with this scene. With regard to the "backdoor incident", Margaery was lying. With Renly she was frank and overtly not concerned with decorum in private, to the point where she was (to Renly's shock) suggesting that they have a threesome involving her brother, if that's what it took to get him started. It's highly unlikely that she would have turned down an offer for any form of intercourse with Renly. But with Joffrey, the speed and ease with which she throws Renly under the bus is remarkable. She invents a scene that plays up both her "innocence" and Renly's "perversion", knowing full well that it will play to Joffrey's inclinations and worm her way into his good graces, which of course is her intent from the start.
  9. Well, she's in a better spot than Sansa in S2 for certain, but "the full power of her family" is still a finite thing, which makes her situation precarious. Their betrothal is the lynchpin of the Tully/Lannister alliance and so, if she played Joffrey wrong, she still might find herself in a position of Joffrey abusing her and of her not having much she can do to prevent it.
  10. It's an attraction to violence in which he is specifically in control. The second he loses that control (as he has shown over and over), his cowardice takes over. It's a very different sort of sadism than that of, say, The Hound.
  11. I don't think that it could be clearer that Margaery is playing up a role that is calculated to get into Joffrey's good graces and that paints her as a potential accomplice, which is far preferable to being what Sansa was, a victim. She's playing him. There's more than a hint of direct attempted seduction in the scene, but Joffrey doesn't bite (he's completely uninterested in sex for its own sake) and so she adjusts. It's a particular aspect of her character that the writers are obviously pushing very hard. She's fearless, and draws that fearlessness from a confidence in her ability to project whatever her audience wants to see. That was as true with the orphanage scene as it was with her scene with Joffrey. Joffrey was petrified of getting out of his palanquin in Flea Bottom, just as Sansa was petrified of being around Joffrey. Margaery can do either, and so far hasn't blinked. She's a player for real.
  12. [Book Spoilers] EP 209 Discussion

    Holy fuck. They weren't kidding when they said they went all-out.
  13. D&D have said on more than one occasion that they would love to have more episodes per season from a storytelling standpoint (although 10 episodes was about right for S1, I think), but that they are physically unable to produce more than 10 episodes per year. This is understandable given the rather extreme variety of locations, and the enormous scope of the production (horses, costumes, extras, and at least this season the promise of a rather epic battle sequence).
  14. [Book Spoilers] Ep 202 Discussion

    People really didn't get that Stannis fucked Melisandre in the books? I didn't think it could possibly be more clear. WTF. Seriously.
  15. The ASOIAF wiki thread

    Quick note: we're considering Varys = Rugen as still just a theory? I rewrote much of the Varys page this morning and was a bit surprised by that (the page had a ton of information, but was pretty inconsistent in tone and focus). I'd thought Varys = Rugen had been confirmed beyond the shadow of a doubt (Jaime's POV in aFfC if I remember correctly) and was tempted to change it, but left it as it was for the time being. I know it's a constant struggle to put only fact, and not theory, on the wiki pages; has this particular one been discussed?