Hodor the Articulate

Members
  • Content count

    1,150
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Hodor the Articulate

  • Rank
    Council Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female

Recent Profile Visitors

808 profile views
  1. Are you seriously trying present the decision to impregnate an already betrothed daughter of a prominent lord as reasonable? Luckily GRRM has proven to have a better understanding of human behaviour than that. And you seem to have shifted the goal post once again. Before, Rhaegar was trying to make the PtwP with Lyanna, now you claim he was doing it to make the third head of the dragon (because you can't explain why he'd change his mind about Aegon being the Prince). I absolutely hate using timelines and WoIaF as evidence of anything, because both are full of errors. Most authors don't do the math, and GRRM, who doesn't meticulously plan out his stories, is no exception. But since you insist on relying on the World book and the timeline, here are some problems with your assumptions: - The winter during the Year of the False Spring wasn't strange and unusual. Tyrion was born in a winter that lasted three years, which suggests there's nothing special about a winter that had only been going on for not even two years at that point. No one would compare it to the Long Night, which lasted a generation. - The Long Night is connected to the Prophecy for the readers, but it's not at all apparent that that's true in-universe. - WoIaF says R was MIA sometime during the month that Aerys lit wildfire around the Red Keep. Could mean he left before that, or any time during. If I can't make inferences about the time Aegon was born and and R left, neither can you. - Immediate means immediate. Like, the maestar says "Lyanna's too sick to have another baby" and Rhaegar fucks off. I mean, you're suggesting R was laser focused on the prophecy, which was top priority, so why dawdle? - If we're to take everything in the Worldbook as fact, we must also take in the implication that R and L's meeting was a chance encounter, and not planned. - In fact, if it was planned, why on earth did he take 6 men with him?
  2. According to the wiki, Aegon was born months before the rebellion. It doesn't even make sense that Rhaegar would leave to make a prophecy baby so soon after Aegon's birth, considering he was sure Aegon was the PtwP. But if you do indeed have evidence that Rhaegar left immediately, by all means, let's see it. I don't know how much faith we can put in the WoIaF, but there it's implied that it was a spur of the moment thing. If it's correct, Rhaegar and Lyanna were traveling to different places, bumped into each other somewhere in the Riverlands, and then disappeared together. But WoIaF is full of mistakes, so take that with a grain of salt.
  3. You know what else isn't in the book? Rhaegar running off with Lyanna because Elia wasn't fit to have more children. That Elia couldn't handle another birth was presumably established not long after Aegon's birth. So if you take issue with the time between Rhaegar and Lyanna's interactions, then you have to also accept that it makes no sense to link Elia's inability to produce more children and Rhaegar running off, given there was months between the two events. Because the prophecy stipulates that the father of the PtwP must whisper the mother of the PtwP before he dies??? That's not what you claimed before: "He probably admires and loves Lyanna, but this is not the reason he ran off with her." What you've written is all speculation, and full of holes. When did Rhaegar decide Aegon wasn't the PtwP anymore? Where is it even hinted that Rhaegar believed the PtwP must be sired by him? Why did GRRM bother to tell us over and over again that actively engaging in prophesied events is foolhardy, only to have a character be successful in doing just that?
  4. Rhaegar's last act was going into battle, so I can say, without question, that prophecy played no role in his final action. I've never known GRRM to straight-up lie when it comes to spoilery plot points, which is what he would be doing if Rhaegar wasn't "love-struck". Usually, in those situations, he gets a big vague, and often says something that hints at the truth.
  5. Rich people are always doing weird shit. I bet Illyrio routinely drops molten gold into his spiced wine.
  6. It's one of those things that people say is important, but is given low priority in practice. Gatehouse Ami is hot property right now, after all, despite her reputation.
  7. Well, it was bastard that started House Baratheon. It would make a nice call back to the beginning if the series ends with another bastard ruling Storm's End. Why would he need that though? To Stannis, Storm's End is already his by rights. A bastard son of his brother's has no claim to it. He would consider it an insult to his station and a waste of resource to marry Shireen to a bastard. A betrothal to another House, one with $$$ and/or military might, would be infinitely more favourable for him.
  8. I agree with all of this, but it doesn't disprove the fAegon theory. The argument for that theory is not that the GC would never ally with a Targ (they were waiting for Dany AND Aegon, after all), but that their following Young Griff symbolically hints at either YG's true heritage or Varys' true loyalties.
  9. What is symbolism?
  10. It's not just the sex scenes and overly detailed descriptions of nipples, his idea of what straight women find attractive is also hilariously off. Drogo, I'll give a past for, because there, I can imagine Jason Momoa at least, but I cannot, in my mind, make Daario and his three-pronged beard into the sex-god GRRM seems to think he is. Someone needs to tell GRRM (and comicbook artists) that male power fantasies =/= female fantasies. Also, it's kinda gross that there's any "male gaze" at Dany at all. She's 13 yrs old at the start of the series, and 16 yrs old now. At least Arianne's gigantic nipples are of age. lol. I'm pretty sure we've got GRRM's whole "type" down - petite skinny chicks with heart shaped faces and swollen nipples.
  11. Would Petyr have had sex with Lysa were he not high and hallucinating?
  12. Yeah, but that's not what TDC was arguing.
  13. Are people (or one person, rather) really arguing that the Targs didn't follow the faith? Baelor the Blessed was so pious he walked into a literal pit of vipers, thinking the Gods would protect him.
  14. That's what I said, he chose the NW over Val. He chose duty over base desires (becoming lord of Winterfell, having a trophy wife, etc). Of course, he later chooses love again (Arya), and gets stabbed for it. Don't take this the wrong way, but you're a puzzle. Every conversation I've had with you, on this thread, we seem to be in agreement on a lot of things, but somehow end up at opposite conclusions. I've seen it, yes. I'm not convinced Val has has anything to do with Nym, nor do I think her role in the series is as that. As I see it, Nymeria's parallels are two of our main characters, Jon and Dany. I have a gut feeling Arya ties into it as well, but I'm not sure how, yet. Something to do with the pack of wolves Nymeria (the dire wolf) is leading. No, I think Dany and Jon are destined for grand heroic deaths (although, Jon dying again might be...er, overkill, so maybe he lives). Maybe they'll get together before that, maybe they won't - I don't really have an opinion on them, and I'm not against either paths. I'm just not feeling Val as the endgame ship, in the same way that I don't feel Daario is the ultimate love in Dany's storyline. Both characters were important in ADWD, representing the same thing to Dany and Jon - temptation from duty. They're what Dany and Jon really want at that time, but are forced to give up for duty (ho ho! There's that love vs duty theme popping up again). Out of that context, though, Daario and Val seem rather useless, thematically. They'd just be pretty faces (well, pretty in GRRM's mind, anyway), serving as nothing but love interests. Perhaps I'll feel differently if GRRM fleshes out Val's character in the next book. Right now, she's just this empty canvas that you can project pretty much whatever personality or motivation onto as you please. She's basically the love interest in every male-lead action film - the reason, I suspect, it's so easy to see her with our hero, Jon.
  15. I agree with all this (except the notion that Jon choose Val - he actually chose the NW over her & Winterfell). What I'm not getting is how all of that lead you to conclude that Val has any sort of political value to the Wildlings. You say that they will follow her because she is Jon's "Queen", but that means her power is derived from Jon; she has no power over the Wildlings by herself. So that brings us back to my original question: why does Jon need her to ally with, and ensure good behaviour from the Wildlings? He can achieve that by himself. This contradicts what you said further up, about how Wildlings choose Kings. They didn't follow Dalla, and they're not following Val. If they did want familiar face, Val isn't the only notable Wildling. There's Tormund and the other guys who are friendly with Jon, for example. I'm sure hanging around Jon a lot would get you noticed. Besides, there aren't that many Wildings left. They probably all know each other. Is this not the same situation as the kneeling? I get the sense that this obedience might only be temporary, and a means of survival. Who knows if they'll truly assimilate once they get off the Wall? And if they have already truly assimilated, then there's no need for Jon to control them, let alone Val. Yes, because they think Val has power over the Wildings, which is, as Jon notes, baloney. The Wildlings don't consider Val as anything but Dalla's sister, and her marriage to whomever won't guarantee their allegiance or co-operation. I may not remember every little detail, but I know the general gist of how things went, and I don't recall ever encountering, in any of my re-reads, an indication that Val is or will become the next King Beyond the Wall, or that a union between her and Jon would symbolize unity between the Wildlings and the rest of Westeros. If anything, the thing that will bind the two groups is Jon, himself. He already has started, sort of, by bringing them over the Wall. A political marriage between a Wildling and a "kneeler", and full assimilation of the Wildlings into Westeros society, is not proper unity and equality. It is the Wildlings losing their identity and accepting and adopting Westerosi customs over their own. That people won't spread anti-Wildling propaganda means very little, because it still isn't "true" Wildlings, with all their culture and ideologies, that they're accepting into their society. Westeros doesn't have to change at all. Compare this to Dorne and Rhoyne, a case of proper unity and equality. Nymeria's people settled into Dorne, adopting much of the Westerosi's way of life, but Dorne was also, in turn, influenced by Rhoynar culture. (And yes, I know Nym married into Dorne, but it's not comparable to Wildlings/Winterfell because Rhoyne was a monarchy, so political marriages were presumably already part of their culture).