Jump to content

How do you feel about the return of the targaryens?


Future Null Infinity

Recommended Posts

So, Daenerys is in her way to Westeros and Jon is a confirmed targaryen, how do you feel about it?

I'm happy for Jon because he's on the verge of knowing his real parentage because all his life he didn't like be a bastard but on the other hand I don't like to see a targaryen on the iron throne, they were the foreign invaders of Westeros for 300 years and another invasion or ruler from the same people is too much (pretty much like real life, no one wants to see his land occupied and re-occupied by the same invaders)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm...not sure we can say Jon is a "confirmed" Targaryen...yet;)  Also, though I believe both Dany and Jon will play important roles in the upcoming Battle for the Dawn, I sincerely doubt either of them will rule the Seven Kingdoms.  Or, in Dany's case, if she does obtain the Iron Throne I doubt she'll hold it long.

No, the way things are going, I feel it's more likely that a select few will make very large sacrifices defeating the current threat from the Others just so that the rest of the "realms of men" can go on with their petty "game of thrones" blissfully unaware of their true danger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Prince of the North said:

Hmm...not sure we can say Jon is a "confirmed" Targaryen...yet;)  Also, though I believe both Dany and Jon will play important roles in the upcoming Battle for the Dawn, I sincerely doubt either of them will rule the Seven Kingdoms.  Or, in Dany's case, if she does obtain the Iron Throne I doubt she'll hold it long.

No, the way things are going, I feel it's more likely that a select few will make very large sacrifices defeating the current threat from the Others just so that the rest of the "realms of men" can go on with their petty "game of thrones" blissfully unaware of their true danger.

It seems likely that the Battle for Dawn will result in the death of her Dragons, leaving her just one of several contenders in the aftermath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm Team Targ all day so I for one am excited for their rise or rebirth if you will.

Though Jon and/or Dany is most likely gonna die in the battle against the others. Or they'll spin it on our head and Jon will beat the others by himself  this upcoming season  and then season 8 we'll have a Targ civil war (I know wishful thinking on my part)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Larger than Average Finger said:

I agree.  Nothing we have seen in GOT thus far would make it a given that Danni would accept Jon as a friend rather than a rival when she learns of his true heritage.

If its true he is a Targaryan, it makes them less likely to be allies, not more.

I've always felt this way. If he is truly Rhaegar's son he has a better claim than her, especially if he is trueborn. I just feel like she won't be cool with that, especially since the only other Targ she has known all her life is her brother. And now she's found out her father was pretty much Viserys just with shit tons of wildfire. She still doesn't even know Jon exists yet, I doubt she'll trust him at all when they meet, especially if his true parentage comes out before they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything points to Jon ruling. I hate it. I have no love for the targs, I am not a fan of Dragons in any media, and I hate the special blood trope. My best hope for the series was to have Stannis and Daenerys marry, because they would both be horribly miserable together. It would be Robert and Cersei, except opposite and both fandoms would literally whine about it for years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jon is a Northerner. Even if he finds out Rhaegar is his father, he's not going to suddenly identify with them at all. They're still going to be foreigners with suspect morals at best. He's a Stark no matter what his last name is. His bannermen made that declaration for all the world to hear last episode.

Dany, I can't say I feel too sympathetic towards. She pays lip service to not wanting to commit the atrocities her father did, yet her first instinct is always to do just that. She wanted to raze entire cities to the ground just two episodes absent Tyrion's intervention. She fed potentially innocent people to her dragons just because she was trying to flush out the Harpy and she freaking crucified people virtually at random regardless of what they had or hadn't done as some sort of statement that crucifying people is bad. And with all that, knowing full well who her father was, she presses forward to claim her family's legacy of conquest, literally with fire and blood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

Jon is a Northerner. Even if he finds out Rhaegar is his father, he's not going to suddenly identify with them at all. They're still going to be foreigners with suspect morals at best. He's a Stark no matter what his last name is. His bannermen made that declaration for all the world to hear last episode.

Dany, I can't say I feel too sympathetic towards. She pays lip service to not wanting to commit the atrocities her father did, yet her first instinct is always to do just that. She wanted to raze entire cities to the ground just two episodes absent Tyrion's intervention. She fed potentially innocent people to her dragons just because she was trying to flush out the Harpy and she freaking crucified people virtually at random regardless of what they had or hadn't done as some sort of statement that crucifying people is bad. And with all that, knowing full well who her father was, she presses forward to claim her family's legacy of conquest, literally with fire and blood.

Which is why I don't think Jon and Dany are going to become allies just because there is the WW threat and because they are related. (Hence my constant prediction of a conflict between them) Good chance that happens in the show, but in the books? No way, she still can't differentiate between the Lannisters and Starks in the books even with Selmy by her side telling her first hand accounts of what happened. I don't even think she knows what her father truly was even.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have disliked Dany since she fell in love with the genocidal Drogo, hated her since she got Drogo riled up and slaughtered the Lhazareen, knew she was going down the mad path since book two.  Dany downplays the rules she breaks and books readers (show watchers more so) give her a pass because she's a young, pretty, magical, princess with dragons.  Listen to people in the books talk about the arms length of war crimes and hospitality rules she broken and you see why Essos hates her and why she'll only bring fire and blood to Westeros.

Really disappointed Jon is part of the Targaryen incest cult (though it's always been obvious) and now has an excellent chance of passing on Targaryen madness if he actually becomes King in the North, luckily I don't think he'll have kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Future Null Infinity said:

So, Daenerys is in her way to Westeros and Jon is a confirmed targaryen, how do you feel about it?

I'm happy for Jon because he's on the verge of knowing his real parentage because all his life he didn't like be a bastard but on the other hand I don't like to see a targaryen on the iron throne, they were the foreign invaders of Westeros for 300 years and another invasion or ruler from the same people is too much (pretty much like real life, no one wants to see his land occupied and re-occupied by the same invaders)

first men are invaders, too.  So are the Andals.  Can't really just point the finger at the Targs.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Adam_Up_Bxtch said:

Which is why I don't think Jon and Dany are going to become allies just because there is the WW threat and because they are related. (Hence my constant prediction of a conflict between them) Good chance that happens in the show, but in the books? No way, she still can't differentiate between the Lannisters and Starks in the books even with Selmy by her side telling her first hand accounts of what happened. I don't even think she knows what her father truly was even.

Well the show and the books are definitely separate animals. But since this is the show forum, season 7 seems to being set up to have the North fight the White Walkers(still always thought Others sounded more mysterious and threatening but I digress) and the war of the mad queens in the South. Tyrion and Sansa would seem to have the ear of their respective monarchs and were at least civil toward one another during their union, so presumably they facilitate an alliance in season 8.

Which is way too simple for the books. Show Dany seems to at least have partially inherited (f)Aegon's role, and Jon taking over for Stannis. We're getting a lot of watered down content from HBO, but given the constraints they have, that's not surprising. I just find myself shaking my head knowing that the climax of the series could conceivably be dragons vs white walkers, both of which I find to be among the least interesting parts of the universe. The political intrigue and character dynamics among all the noble houses was what always hooked me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

Well the show and the books are definitely separate animals. But since this is the show forum, season 7 seems to being set up to have the North fight the White Walkers(still always thought Others sounded more mysterious and threatening but I digress) and the war of the mad queens in the South. Tyrion and Sansa would seem to have the ear of their respective monarchs and were at least civil toward one another during their union, so presumably they facilitate an alliance in season 8.

Which is way too simple for the books. Show Dany seems to at least have partially inherited (f)Aegon's role, and Jon taking over for Stannis. We're getting a lot of watered down content from HBO, but given the constraints they have, that's not surprising. I just find myself shaking my head knowing that the climax of the series could conceivably be dragons vs white walkers, both of which I find to be among the least interesting parts of the universe. The political intrigue and character dynamics among all the noble houses was what always hooked me.

This was always going to be the case in the books, ultimately.  Eventually someone has to kill the unstoppable zombie horde.  Yes, that's not really the interesting part - the human characters and their interactions are., but for any of this to matter, it has to happen at some point.  And no, I don't believe that the books are gonna reveal that the WW are really swell guys working for the betterment of humanity, or Jon is going to join them because dragons are even worse, or some crap.  That's just fanwankery.  

But actually in the show I see a lot of potential for the political stuff to go right up to the end.  Season 7 will be basically all politics.  Though I think keeping things interesting in the North will have to involve a lot of littlefinger.  Otherwise it's just counting turnips and dragonglass arrowheads.  Dany will finally wrest control of the south from Cersei by the end of the season, but that still leaves most of season 8 for the North and South to come to terms, and there will probably be a hiccup or two.  Why?  Because both sides are poised to be made up of ragtag bands of former enemies, former friends, and people with a lot of baggage - all mixed up.  So you'll end up with a lot of really interesting alliances within alliances to explore.

Like let's assume that Jaime and Tyrion make up and they are on the same side.  Well then Jaime will meet up with the Starks, and Bran who he tried to kill.  Sansa and Tyrion were married not long ago that could be akward and interesting to explore.  Etc.  Ther'es a lot that could be done even if the "ultimate climax" if there is such a thing doens't involve Dany and Jon trying to kill each other.  

Honestly I would find such an ending to be the ultimate in annoying stupidity.  Really, we want two characters who are the main leaders in the series to be trying to kill each other, while what the world and all the people in it need is to unite and to have peace so they can finally heal?  I wonder why so many people think this would be anything other than deeply frustrating to read.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, A spoon of knife and fork said:

first men are invaders, too.  So are the Andals.  Can't really just point the finger at the Targs.  

You are right but I didn't point the finger at the targs, we know what happened when the humans attacked the children on the forest : the night's king happened and the invasion of the targs ended with war and blood with Robert's rebellion so for me : every invasion of westeros ends up with lot of problems, I just don't see something good coming from another targaryen invasion :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Future Null Infinity said:

You are right but I didn't point the finger at the targs, we know what happened when the humans attacked the children on the forest : the night's king happened and the invasion of the targs ended with war and blood with Robert's rebellion so for me : every invasion of westeros ends up with lot of problems, I just don't see something good coming from another targaryen invasion :D

I mean you kinda did point your fingers at them when you said "they were the foreign invaders of Westeros for 300 years and another invasion or ruler from the same people is too much".  You'er implying that the Andals and the first men are "natives" and the Targs are the only foreigners when really they aren't.  The Andals brutally murdered / oppressed / exiled the first men when they came.  Before them the First men wiped out the CotF for the most part.  And yet somehow the Targeryens are disqualified from leadership because they happen to be part of a slightly more recent wave of invaders?  Isn't that fairly arbitrary? 

In the end, they're all just people who have been squabbling over land for decades, centuries and millennia.  One of the big themes of the series is that all of this fighting and dynasty creation and such is basically a bunch of self-justifying nonsense.  What I'm getting around to is who cares if the person at the end happens to be a Targaryen or a First man or an Andal?  Or some combination, which actually everyone in Westeros is by now (even Dany - her grandmother was a Blackwood who are supposedly first men). What's the difference - if they are the right person for the job?  

Jon becoming king by virtue of his Targaryen blood would basically be a coincidence, since he became a leader of a large part of Westeros without even knowing about it (although being Ned Stark's son certainly didn't hurt his ability to unite the North behind him).  Same goes with Dany.  She woke dragons from stone, united a significant force of people behind her, and became a dragon rider because of who she is, not because of her name.  Viserys got exactly nowhere with the very same name.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9 August 2016 at 4:31 PM, Future Null Infinity said:

So, Daenerys is in her way to Westeros and Jon is a confirmed targaryen, how do you feel about it?

I'm happy for Jon because he's on the verge of knowing his real parentage because all his life he didn't like be a bastard but on the other hand I don't like to see a targaryen on the iron throne, they were the foreign invaders of Westeros for 300 years and another invasion or ruler from the same people is too much (pretty much like real life, no one wants to see his land occupied and re-occupied by the same invaders)

The Targ invaders took it from Andal invaders, so its not like the people that were invaded were the rightful inhabitants. The only guys in Westeros who can feel bothered by it, are the guys in the north who preserved the first men line.

As for the topic question itself, i like it, somebody has to bring everybody into the fold again. And Dany with 3 dragons and a good hand of the queen in Tyrion is the right person for the job.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, A spoon of knife and fork said:

I mean you kinda did point your fingers at them when you said "they were the foreign invaders of Westeros for 300 years and another invasion or ruler from the same people is too much".  You'er implying that the Andals and the first men are "natives" and the Targs are the only foreigners when really they aren't.  The Andals brutally murdered / oppressed / exiled the first men when they came.  Before them the First men wiped out the CotF for the most part.  And yet somehow the Targeryens are disqualified from leadership because they happen to be part of a slightly more recent wave of invaders?  Isn't that fairly arbitrary? 

In the end, they're all just people who have been squabbling over land for decades, centuries and millennia.  One of the big themes of the series is that all of this fighting and dynasty creation and such is basically a bunch of self-justifying nonsense.  What I'm getting around to is who cares if the person at the end happens to be a Targaryen or a First man or an Andal?  Or some combination, which actually everyone in Westeros is by now (even Dany - her grandmother was a Blackwood who are supposedly first men). What's the difference - if they are the right person for the job?  

Jon becoming king by virtue of his Targaryen blood would basically be a coincidence, since he became a leader of a large part of Westeros without even knowing about it (although being Ned Stark's son certainly didn't hurt his ability to unite the North behind him).  Same goes with Dany.  She woke dragons from stone, united a significant force of people behind her, and became a dragon rider because of who she is, not because of her name.  Viserys got exactly nowhere with the very same name.  

 

12 minutes ago, A spoon of knife and fork said:

I mean you kinda did point your fingers at them when you said "they were the foreign invaders of Westeros for 300 years and another invasion or ruler from the same people is too much".  You'er implying that the Andals and the first men are "natives" and the Targs are the only foreigners when really they aren't.  The Andals brutally murdered / oppressed / exiled the first men when they came.  Before them the First men wiped out the CotF for the most part.  And yet somehow the Targeryens are disqualified from leadership because they happen to be part of a slightly more recent wave of invaders?  Isn't that fairly arbitrary? 

In the end, they're all just people who have been squabbling over land for decades, centuries and millennia.  One of the big themes of the series is that all of this fighting and dynasty creation and such is basically a bunch of self-justifying nonsense.  What I'm getting around to is who cares if the person at the end happens to be a Targaryen or a First man or an Andal?  Or some combination, which actually everyone in Westeros is by now (even Dany - her grandmother was a Blackwood who are supposedly first men). What's the difference - if they are the right person for the job?  

Jon becoming king by virtue of his Targaryen blood would basically be a coincidence, since he became a leader of a large part of Westeros without even knowing about it (although being Ned Stark's son certainly didn't hurt his ability to unite the North behind him).  Same goes with Dany.  She woke dragons from stone, united a significant force of people behind her, and became a dragon rider because of who she is, not because of her name.  Viserys got exactly nowhere with the very same name.  

For being ruthless invaders they didn't erase an entire race or made westeros adopt their culture but they converted to westerosi culture..

They didnt cut or burn down any heart trees ..they didnt bring rhllor to westeros and tried to remove seven .

By uniting the westeros they practically stopped westerosi from getting enslaved at harrenhall..

Now people may speak about wars ..if anyone expects a continent in medival age without having wars then this books may not be for them.

The wars have been fought before targs came and it happened when they gone and it will keep happening even if all targs are dead ...singling out them is just ridiculous

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's pretty much guaranteed that a Targaryen will sit the iron throne by the end, which annoys me as in the books there are other contenders but in the show we all know Cersei is screwed. I would like Jon to be King but I don't really like Daenerys. If only my boy Bobby B never died he would still be king :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to look forward to Dany coming back to Westeros, but her time in Meeren has made me dislike her. I don't think she is a good leader. On the show, she seems to have given up on Meeren. I wish she had never stayed there and had just gone straight to Westeros. I like the dragons, but I don't really like her. She does seem to be a foreign invader. I guess if I had to choose between the two  I would  choose Jon. However, I don't think he will be happy to learn he is a Targ. I think he really wants to be a Stark. He will probably be devastated and angry when he learns the truth. Bran shouldn't really tell him unless it is necessary. I am not really impressed with Targs anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...