Colonel Green

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Colonel Green

  • Rank
    Council Member
  • Birthday 11/18/1987

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, Canada

Recent Profile Visitors

2,744 profile views
  1. Doesn't that shift all the onus onto Daeron and assume there was something he could have done that would have nullified rebel sentiment while still pursuing his key policy goal? It's like when people used to blame Obama for not being able to get the Republicans to agree on deals when the latter transparently had no interest in being conciliated; it assumes a deal would have been possible. Daeron's Dornish reconciliation policy was the core problem, and there's no indication that he'd have substantially succeeded at ameliorating the opposition short of abandoning it entirely.
  2. We don't have numbers for battles in antiquity, but a likely candidate for the largest battle prior to the modern era would be the Battle of the Three Armies, where Garth the Goldenhand routed the combined armies of House Lannister and House Durrandon.
  3. I think it comes down to both fan misogyny (when you compare the receptions of the ladies you cite versus any number of male characters whose actions are objectively much worse, I think that's undeniable) and also some choices the author himself made. To the original post, on the whole I think GRRM does well with the female characters as individuals (the over-sexualization that some people have discussed, particularly in regard to consent issues in the case of Dany/Drogo, is definitely a real concern, though). The biggest weakness of the books, as far as female characters go, is the lack of positive female relationships. The lack of prominent female supporting characters for the main female POVs is hard to miss, and relationships between the major female POVs are also pretty limited. Sansa/Arya is the only prominent sororal relationship in the series, and while people mostly assume it's meant to eventually end in them overcoming their differences, in the series to date it's just toxic.
  4. If Tywin had hired assassins to kill the children, they would be dead.
  5. There doesn't need to be any explanation for why Rhaena didn't do that. Nobody was going to back a six-year-old girl against an almost-grown man who happened to be the beau ideal of a king. And given her age and the need to have heirs, marrying her to Jaehaerys instead of the older Alysanne wouldn't make sense either.
  6. My instinctive answer would be that the marriage doesn't happen, particularly as it's not even supposed to be happening soon, from what Littlefinger himself has said (and the issue of Sansa's marriage remains unresolved, unless Littlefinger has some secret angle to deal with that, which I guess is possible). However, a lot of that depends, I think, on where the main Sansa vs. Littlefinger drama is destined to play out. If it's going to be conducted mainly on the deliberately isolated stage of the Vale (and thus probably in the course of TWOW), then I'd say it's extremely unlikely. If, however, GRRM plans to take this show on the road (whether to Winterfell, as Littlefinger says he plans to do, or elsewhere, as many fan theorists posit), then the odds rise considerably.
  7. That wasn't my point. My point was that Ned had no problem condemning Gregor to death without giving him any opportunity to defend himself, and on very slim evidence. A custom for male rulers with martial skill. Customs change, and in this case it's making them less sexist and more egalitarian. Beyond which, I rather doubt this was followed in every case. In a more just world where Ned lived to be 80, was he still going to be trying to lift Ice with his arthritic hands to chop off heads? One tends to doubt it.
  8. Ned also condemned Gregor Clegane to death in absentia on the basis of vague eyewitness evidence, so clearly he wasn't a stickler for trial procedure. As far as the OP, the "he who passes sentence, swings the sword" maxim is very much a patriarchal construct that assumes the judge is a man trained at arms. Sansa's not a warrior, killing people herself isn't what she's trained for or consistent with how she operates.
  9. Fiddling with a person's hairnet to remove a gemstone from a fixed setting in it would be a highly noticeable action. Seeing as he's talked at some length about the younger characters being aged up, yes. Er, yes, it is a theoretical dilemma used to discuss the moral issue of preemption. I'm not sure what you're even arguing here; this is a longstanding idea used in ethical debates, including explicitly by the author, who thinks it's an interesting question. No, I'm not splitting hairs. You said he was talking about the show, and I pointed out that he was explicitly talking about the books, at which point you changed the subject. One doesn't need a steel trap mind to openly discuss something. He's not being vague, he's talking about something he presumes the reader already knows, in fact (even though, in the course of doing so, he actually gave new information -- the whole choking angle -- that nobody had guessed, and in so doing clarified certain aspects of the story considerably). On that, we agree.
  10. Whether or not you think it's definitive, he is explicitly talking about the books, which is what I was responding to.
  11. No, he isn't, because the second paragraph flows from the first, and he refers to Joffrey as "a 13-year-old boy", which is his book age. Show Joffrey was older than that.
  12. All of the Ghost of High Heart's visions did come true: 1. Stannis using a shadow baby to kill Renly (Renly's death was known for a while at that point, but the shadow baby was witnessed only by Catelyn and Brienne). 2. Balon Greyjoy dying (seemingly by a Faceless Man, going by the vision). 3. The Red Wedding, including the killing of Jinglebell, followed by Lady Stoneheart. 4. The Purple Wedding, including a maiden with poison in her hair, i.e., Sansa. 5. Another Sansa prophecy, which either refers to her destroying Robert Arryn's doll at the end of ASOS or has yet to happen and refers to Littlefinger/Gregor Clegane/whoever, depending on what you believe. Uh, no, prophetic visions are a real thing in ASOIAF. Even Melisandre is getting 100% legitimate prophetic visions, it's her interpretation of those visions that's in question. Visions caused by the glass candles, on the other hand, aren't to be trusted at all, as they're induced by another party. They don't grant a person prophetic ability, they're a form of communication. "Would you kill Hitler as a child?" is a longstanding theoretical dilemma asking to the morality of pre-emptive action, one that GRRM himself employed when explaining what he was going for in the story, so I'm not sure what you're on about here. As discussed above, we do know that the poison was in the hairnet, and we know that Olenna was the only one who touched it because when Sansa is asked about the subject Olenna is the only person.
  13. There's no "moral dilemma" at all, because it was a mistake in your telling, so Olenna never chose to kill him. A dilemma like "would you kill Hitler as a child?" requires you to actually contemplate doing that.
  14. No, he was explicitly talking about the books.
  15. Yeah, we do: - the poison was in the hairnet, confirmed by the Ghost of High Heart's vision of the maiden (Sansa) with serpents dripping poison in her hair. - Lady Olenna was the only person to touch the hairnet, and therefore the only person who could have removed the missing poison crystal. - Dontos gave Sansa the hairnet. Ergo, you have Olenna knowing the poison was in the hairnet, something that she could only have known from Littlefinger. What interview are you talkin about?