talvikorppi

Members
  • Content count

    413
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About talvikorppi

  • Rank
    Landed Knight

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    The North, 60'38''

Recent Profile Visitors

625 profile views
  1. I freely admit I haven't amassed book quotes for this idea. It was just a passing thought. Such talk would be tried or be under wraps, But the truth will out. Maybe should be explored (or probably has). It's just something that sprang to my mind. I was just thinking in the common sense way. Whispers, then open talk of the "madness" of the ruling family - and it was open talk, even back in Dunk&Egg's day - undermine the central monarchy. Let's put it this way. The Targ kings were not universally loved by the lords or the smallfolk. Add a few whispers of "madness" and you can see how the central government (king) is undermined, letting local lords seem the "sane" alternative, the good ones who provide for the people etc. Whispers or royal family "madness" would tie the smallfolk even tighter to their lord, actually letting local lords keep their power, if they keep faith and provide.. And we're talking about power here, aren't we? I guess my point is that the "Targ madness" story was propagated and spread by powerful lords, because these rumors worked for them. Weakened the central goverment = let high lords have power and influence.
  2. I'd add a third reason. A big "fuck you" to his sister and the whole of Westeros. (His irritation and antagonism with JonCon is relatively minor compared to how he feels about his sister... His family... All of Westerosi society, in fact) I find your second idea (testing (f)Aegon) a refreshing one. I'll have to think about that. Thank you for providing delicious food for thought.
  3. Haha, Jaime really sucks at keeping oaths and vows. He keeps doing things for love, or for the greater good. He's our walking, talking piece of evidence that Westeros-type vows/oaths suck. (not that he thinks that way. He's now trying to keep all his vows, even rejecting Cersei's sexual advances.) I bolded that bit to highlight two things. One, the king is actually his son, not just any king. Two, he doesn't actually believe Tyrion and Sansa killed Joffrey. He doesn't know who did, but he doesn't think it was Tyrion/Sansa. Jaime is a foolish romantic compared to his smart and practical and cynical little brother. (Though Jaime can be wonderfully sarky, too, especially in his inner monologue.) Tyrion will be alligned with Dany, it'll be interesting what this means to Jaime/Cersei and Jaime/Tyrion. (Unless Jaime is dead by then, which is a possibility.)
  4. The problem with this scenario is that he is a kinslayer of the worst kind (killed his father). Even if he wins Casterly Rock through the sewers or through Dany's dragonfire, he won't be beloved or even popular in the Westerlands. Demon monkey and all that. Unfair, yes. The lords and smallfolk would prefer his tall, golden brother... Jaime doesn't want Casterly Rock, but could we see a real rift in the brotherly love developing here? (It's so pointless, Tyrion warring for something Jaime doesn't even want.)
  5. Arya will either... a) marry Dany MARRY JON. (King in the North and rightful heir to the Iron Throne (assuming RLJ)) BOOM! Arya is a queen and dragonrider and the third head of the dragon! hahaha! Sorry to be facetous, just teasing you a bit. ;-) Anyway, I like your left-field thinking in that it's not necessarily 3 Targ siblings/cousins. It opens up possibilities that we should explore. ATM, I still believe in the books expressed "fact" that you need a drop of dragonblood to befriend and perhaps ride a dragon. Think of Brown Ben Plum. Think of poor Quentyn, who was getting along just fine with Viserion before Rhaegal crisped him. Think of the "dragonseeds" during the Dance of the Dragons who claimed (untamed) dragons... Nettles maybe got her dragon by just being a good animal husbander. You see where this is going, right? Tyrion. Not necessarily having any drops of Targ blood but knowledge of dragons, husbanding one? This would get us out of the A+J=T theories that I dislike. Tyrion clearly is foreshadowed as a dragon person since AGOT. I like the idea of "unity" about the three heads of the dragon. However, in the books we're given ample evidence of three actual dragons making up that "unity". Three riders (Aegon/Balerion, Visenya/Vhagar, Rhaenys/Meraxes) but that doesn't mean it has to play out that way.
  6. I think the wonderfullness is that the text, wily GRRM, only provides a some hints. It's wide open to interpretation. The fandom has blown the hints out of all proportion, making "facts" out of their interpretations. There's enough in the text to support the "three heads of the dragon" idea. Off the top of my head: 1) The Targaryen sigil, three-headed dragon (modelled after Aegon the Conqueror and his two sisters) 2) Dany's HOTU vision, Rheagar telling her there must be a third one. 3) Dany has three dragons. She can only ride one, so... Damn, I wanted to end my argument elegantly with three points. But I'll make some further ones. I agree that the prophecy (whatever it was, we don't know, and I suspect Maester Aemon, Rheagar etc. didn't know everything) probably refers to the coming apocalyptic winter/Others. Dragons can burn wights enmasse (we know even ordinary fire destroys wights because Jon Snow burned the wight seeking to attack Jeor Mormont), even if they can't burn the Others (this is nowhere confirmed, just conjecture.) We know dragonglass/obsidian kills an Others (Hello, Sam! Hello mr Puddles!) So, dragons are a very useful weapon but maybe not the gamechanger? As to the three dragons, mayhaps three riders...It'd just be stupid to have two riderless dragons knocking about. Chekov's dragons demand the two will be ridden. Or maybe GRRM will surprise us and Rheagal and Viserion will never be tamed and ridden (Dany will ride Drogon.)
  7. Agree very much with this. Thank you, ShadowCat, well put. I'd only add the idea I expressed earlier in this thread that "Targ madness" was also a political idea, a device used by lords, who didn't want the crown to have too much power. (Crown power = power away from lords)
  8. Hey, Rhaenys, thank you for finding the SSM for me. Much appreciated. So... despite all that authorial waffle, it is a slip. Fine. I can live with that. In fact, I like it that way. Better than people growing all kinds of crackpots about this. Once again, thank you, Rhaenys, you've been very helpful. We can now consider this topic closed.
  9. WHOOAH, there. I never mentioned Targaryens or dragons, so please stop putting words in my mouth. FWIW, I'm more of a North/Stark sympathiser than a Targ fangirl. Mostly I'm a fan of all the wonderful characters GRRM has created. We are obviously reading the same text differently, and that's all right. I'm not trying to convince you, or anybody else (DutchArya, looking at you ;-) ), I'm not trying to change your mind. I'm merely offering my take on things, providing a slightly alternative view, for the benefit of others who might be reading this thread. As to the frosty crown. My reading of this work is that it's not just a description (and you agree on this). Where we disagree, seems to be the symbolic meaning of frost (=ice=winter). It seems to me that you view these things as good and "cool" (I apologise if I have misinterpreted your view.) For me, ice/winter (of which frost is a hint/symbol) is a BAD thing. Because Long Night, and just plain real world experience of winter (it's dark and cold, nothing grows). Yes, in the books the Starks (bless 'em) are associated with ice, snow, winter. In comparison to the southron houses. Fine and dandy, I like that. But their winters aren't apocalyptic Long Nights. They still have warm blood running through their veins (just as Winterfell has warm water running through the walls - ah, I love me a medieval castle with central heating!) The Stark are "icy" but they're physically warm, living human beings. That's why we love Arya and the other Starks. They're human. The real ice is the Others, the apocalypse threatening all humankind. Now, in my book, that is BAD. I dunno, maybe you're a subscriber to the theories Jon will become the next Night's King and Arya will be his "corpse queen". Somehow I don't think you are, though. I suspect you want them both to be warm, living things (apologies if I have misinterpreted your views)... though what with Jon probably mostly being dead right now, he will be the corpse king... Would you want Arya to marry somebody dead?
  10. Sorry to go O/T but Jaime saving Tyrion's life (even if Varys was going to do it anyway) is yet another example of Jaime breaking vows for love. Lord Commander of the Kingsguard releasing the prisoner convicted of regicide? Huh? Jaime really is a serial offender. 1) Kills the king (instead of his father as Aerys commanded = filial love) 2) defenestrated Bran (to save Cersei's and his own arse = their love) 3) frees convicted kingslayer Tyrion (=brotherly love). 1) and 3) have mitigating circumstances, namely saving 500.000 innocent lives and saving an innocent man. Jeez, I hope Jaime directs his love wisely in the future as he's liable to do anything for "love".
  11. I wouldn't bet on it. There's the small matter of Tyrion's beloved brother who killed Dany's daddy. (yeah, Tyrion's been angry at Jaime but it's abating, and their brotherly love goes pretty deep, not to mention Jaime helped to save Tyrion's life (Well, Varys would probably have done it anyway, but Tyrion knows Jaime wanted to save his life)) . I dunno. I think Tyrion will stick with Dany (and perhaps save his brother from becoming dragonfood, if Jaime is alive by then), BUT I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't, if circumstances change... Nah, scrap that. Tyrion is important to the end game (the real War against the Others) and so is Dany. fAegon is just a footnote in history compared to that. So Tyrion will end up on Dany's side. (He could, of course, switch sides temporarily but the real War would bring them back together, something like that.)
  12. Yes, I never imagined Bran wasn't there. My point is that it's odd that Jon, who describes everybody in the procession in some detail, never mentions Bran, a little brother he's presumably close with (cf. the first Bran chapter, Jon (not Robb) looking after him during the execution, Jon being more thoughtful as regards the direwolves etc.) I'm not saying this means anything much, I'm inclined to put it down to a slip of the author more than anything. It's just an odd little detail. I was wondering if there was a SSM or something about this.
  13. Robb. The last time Jon Snow sees his brother Robb is in the Winterfell courtyard, snowflakes melting in his hair. I think this image is repeated several times as regards Jon. Snow was melting in Sam's hair as he left Castle Black. It's shorthand for Jon missing his siblings, his relatively happy childhood, his friends, anything nice, really. It's a very sad and poignant image. Alys is someone from his past, so no wonder she evokes Robb and the happy childhood in Jon's mind. She's also a friendly new presence in the present, so the comparison with Sam is apt. As to the crown... It's frosty... ice=death... so not a very happy image.
  14. Thank you, Arya-Jon, for such a heartfelt post. And please accept my apologies for being so ratty and generalising above. It's all too easy seeing a tendency among what you imagine is a fangirl/boydom, losing sight of nuances. Now, as to Arya becoming queen... You quote the oft-quoted Ned quote. Isn't Ned here saying Brandon would have been father to queens, not Ned?
  15. Just one point about the wildfire caches. Some people seem to think they were *all* discovered and used when Cersei/Tyrion were mounting the defence of King's Landing against Stannis. Others seem to think much of it is still there and KL is a powder keg. (Jaime, you bloody, arrogant fool!)