• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About WSmith84

  • Rank
    King of the Potato People
  • Birthday 05/17/1992

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

2,473 profile views
  1. I have to agree. If GRRM wanted to show Drogo's tender side and (over the course of the book) show Dany's increasing bravery and so on, he could have had Drogo simply sit with Daenerys that night and have their first night of sex together in a later date with Daenerys initiating it. It's also very strange that Drogo then proceeds to clearly rape Dany the next few weeks. It makes the romance rather hard to swallow.
  2. Aerys mentions that Rhaenys 'smells Dornish' presumably because of her looks (she didn't have the Targ looks). I'm not sure he believed that she wasn't Rhaegar's, just too Dornish.
  3. If Arya is unreasonably angry with Sansa next episode I'm going to be pissed. Anyone with half a brain cell could work out that she was coerced into writing it in an attempt to save her father. Arya can be mad, but if she doesn't put this behind her she's a moron.
  4. But this isn't a case of Ned not saying anything (or saying something very neutral). He actually tells Bran that Arthur Dayne was the finest knight he ever saw. That's active praise. A little different from the Rhaegar situation, at least imo. I agree with you though. It is theoretically possible that they could be someone else's kids, I just think it's incredibly unlikely and has zero evidence to support it. Still, I've been on these boards long enough to know that that won't stop people.
  5. I don't know why people think that the modern results of annulment are somehow more likely to apply than the examples from the historical period on which ASOIAF is primarily based. Even if the annulment didn't bastardise Elia's children, marrying Lyanna Stark was still a supremely stupid move on Rhaegar's behalf. Legitimate children of two different sets of parents rarely ends well. Just look at Aegon the Conqueror's children or the Dance of the Dragons. And that's not even counting all the political strife you'd create among your own lords. Also, and I'm going to keep repeating this, Elia's son Aegon had Targaryen features. Therefore, Lewyn Martell almost certainly cannot be the father (plus, as purple-eyes pointed out, his paramour is supposedly still alive). Ned Stark considers Arthur to be the finest knight he ever saw (his actual words); I somehow doubt that he'd consider him so if he had knocked up Rhaegar's wife. Plus, Elia and Rhaegar lived on Dragonstone, so they had minimal chance to interact with Kingsguard, particularly Elia (who was bed-ridden for a long time after birthing each child).
  6. Personally, I hate the phrase 'break the wheel'. It's such an empty, vague phrase with nothing behind it. What wheel is Dany going to break? Feudalism? And replace it with what? An absolute monarchy? Great! Much better! Aerys Targaryen with a dragon would have been so much better for everyone.
  7. George might have it happen that Jon decides to use a wight to prove the existence of the Others. Fortunately, he doesn't need to go on a wight hunt. Because Jon put those two dead bodies in an ice cell under guard so that he could learn from them if they did rise. Which they could have put in the show in S5 (literally have a single line where Jon commands it to be done) and it would have paid off now, showing that Jon had foresight as a leader.
  8. The birth of a silver-haired, purple-eyed child would rather preclude Lewyn Martell as the father, no? I'd also rule out Arthur Dayne as Ned called him 'the finest knight I ever saw' - not words I'd expect Ned to use to describe a man who betrayed his Prince by sleeping with and impregnating his wife. An important fact to remember: Rhaegar and Elia lived on Dragonstone, not King's Landing. So time to interact with members of the Kingsguard would be pretty minimal for a woman who spent a lot of time bed-ridden.
  9. Not to mention that naming Jon after the dead son of the woman who you replaced as wife would be monumentally bad taste on behalf of Lyanna.
  10. This might be book only, but didn't Ned name Jon? After Jon Arryn? I had assumed that Rhaegar had picked out some Targaryen name; Aemon, perhaps.
  11. Where is that link from? Is that modern annulment? Because the most famous case of annulment involving royalty that I can think of is Henry VIII whose children did indeed become illegitimate. Medieval and modern law cannot be assumed to be the same.
  12. I refuse to not criticise D&D for their poor writing. Yes, they no longer have George's work to guide them. But so many of the complaints I have about the show come from basic writing mistakes and sloppy attention to detail. That the show is not as good as it once was when it had the books to guide it was probably a given. That the quality nosedived so completely (and this actually started when there were 2 books left!) cannot simply be put down to not having a script.
  13. My major problem with the show is that the characters are so inconsistently written that I can no longer care about them. This is particularly true of minor characters, whose motivations and behaviour flip-flop in the extreme (Royce is a clear example of this) but it's also true of the main characters. Characters behave reasonably until they don't, and there is rarely a good explanation as to why this person is behaving outside the norm. Jon and Sansa, for example. Jon was murdered by his own men for making unpopular decisions. Sansa has spent years in King's Landing and the Vale learning to play the game. Davos is advising them; a man who spent years as Hand of the King. All of these characters should be more than intelligent enough to air out their differences privately so that they can provide a united front in public. But they don't. Why? Because the show needs some tension. I now watch the show because it's basically impossible to escape it and I just want to know how it ends. I've long lost hope of avoiding spoilers till the books come out (if they ever do) so I'd like to have the spoilers on my own terms.
  14. To be honest, I doubt the show will ever mention whether the annulment made Elia's children into bastards or not, because they died and so, who cares? (We do of course, because we're trying to establish a dead character's motivations, but 99% of the audience and probably even the writers don't give a shit). I would think that it did make them bastards, as an annulment makes it so that the marriage was never even a thing. How can you have legitimate children if you were never married? I think those fans who think Elia was on board with this are looking at her potential motivations with far too modern a view. Her concerns would likely be the legitimacy and safety of her children first, not if the arranged marriage between her and her husband was romantic and happy. Rhaegar marrying again means her own children, whether bastards or not, will always be in danger. Those are the primary concerns of people in this world. Plus, we already have a Show-Rhaegar parallel in the form of Show-Robb.
  15. Why would Jon not head to Winterfell whilst Davos and Tyrion went to King's Landing? So he could, you know, inform his Lords of what was going on, make sure Sansa was handling everything OK and, oh yeah, visiting his sister and brother who he was convinced were dead?!