Jump to content

GyantSpyder

Members
  • Content count

    202
  • Joined

  • Last visited

4 Followers

About GyantSpyder

  • Rank
    Squire

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. When people wrestle with the idea of gods and what they mean, and when I recognize the urge to insist on concrete certainty for stories that are deliberately mysterious, especially in their relationship between humans and nature, this section from Wallace Stevens's "Notes Toward a Supreme Fiction" comes to mind. It would be good advice to a Red Priest looking for someone to burn alive: It Must Be Abstract I Begin, ephebe, by perceiving the idea Of this invention, this invented world, The inconceivable idea of the sun. You must become an ignorant man again And see the sun again with an ignorant eye And see it clearly in the idea of it. Never suppose an inventing mind as source Of this idea nor for that mind compose A voluminous master folded in his fire. How clean the sun when seen in its idea, Washed in the remotest cleanliness of a heaven That has expelled us and our images . . . The death of one god is the death of all. Let purple Phoebus lie in umber harvest, Let Phoebus slumber and die in autumn umber, Phoebus is dead, ephebe. But Phoebus was A name for something that never could be named. There was a project for the sun and is. There is a project for the sun. The sun Must bear no name, gold flourisher, but be In the difficulty of what it is to be.
  2. GyantSpyder

    Why do people hate Sansa?

    Audiences in general tend to root for competence, technique, and courage, and root against incompetence, cheating, and unfair advantages. This is the classic "face" vs. "heel" conflict in wrestling - either the underdog or the triumphant hero who has superior skill beating the mean cheater who is a bigger, stronger freak of nature. Loyalty plays into this as well. Faces tend to be loyal to their friends, until their friends double-cross them. Heels tend to show no loyalty at all. So, Sansa has two problems in terms of being likeable: She is not competent. She has very few skills of her own to do relevant things in the world. This is because she is a child, but it compared unfavorably with her siblings who often have supernatural/unrealistic capability at things like combat, magic or leadership. This is why people hope so much that Sansa is learning from Littlefinger how to play politics and will someday be really good at it - though she's not there yet. Sansa never gets her revenge on Joffrey. At least, not yet. She offers him a ton of loyalty, and he betrays her for it, multiple times. If she were a face character, she would realize her loyalty was in the wrong place, and she'd get right with her loyalty - by picking the right side and getting on it. Interestingly, this is what people think Sansa has done, when they think she has teamed up with Tyrion to kill Joffrey. It's what people would expect from her. But this is a case where the expected narrative has been confounded a bit, and Sansa has, more realistically, focused on what she needs to do to survive rather than getting right with where she stands with respect to the white hats and black hats. I think these are features, rather than bugs, and I think a lot of people who intuit that these things might change later in the story for good reason. But for now, Sansa is straight-up not likeable on purpose. And it shows that whether someone is likeable or not, especially on a mass scale, often has not much to do with the reality of their situation. To the common people, as we see time and again, Joffrey was likeable - the beautiful blonde boy king who took bold action to execute traitors, with all this potential, poisoned by his evil uncle. The gap between perception and reality is huge. I suspect this is at work on almost all levels in the story, especially with respect to Azor Ahai and the larger-scale narrative of the Others and R'hllor and all that stuff - villains and heroes not really matching up 1 to 1 with good and bad.
  3. GyantSpyder

    Orphans of the Greenblood Conspiracy

    Well, Young Griff is being transported by Orphans pushing a poleboat. They don't necessarily stand for their whole people, but it's interesting to consider the relationships between Doran, Arianne, Aegon/JonCon, and the Orphans. Because you would assume Doran and the Orphans are on the same side, and the Orphans seem to be on Team Aegon. But then Arianne isn't really on Team Aegon, at least not yet, and is going to meet them with some doubt and trepidation. This puts Arianne and the Orphans on different sides. That then raises the question of whether Doran is on the same side as his daughter, or the side of the Orphans. But if he was on Team Aegon, why did he sent Quentyn to try to marry Daenerys? What does that say about Illyrio Mopatis and his two different plans with Daenerys and Aegon? Are Doran and Illyrio on the same side, or different sides? What does this have to do with the election in Volantis? It's part of the larger body of evidence that shows that Doran isn't telling Arianne the whole truth about what he wants and that she isn't aware of the true role she is playing in his plans.
  4. GyantSpyder

    lust or love regarding R+L

    Add a little dose of "Harrenhal Fever" to the mix, as well.
  5. GyantSpyder

    Do you believe Preston Jacobs' explanation for dragon riding?

    I definitely believe that through the Dance of the Dragons and other actions over a long period of time, an Oldtown-oriented bloc of some kind (some combination of the Hightowers, the Maesters, the Faith, or segments thereof) influenced which Targaryan descendants would inherit power, live, die, or have children based on observed heredity around the ability hatch or ride dragons. We certainly have precedent in the books for families secretly manipulating the bloodlines of royal children in their own interests, and of the Maesters having very thorough records of the inheritance of what we would call phenotypical characteristics. It's the center of the main plot of A Game of Thrones. It wouldn't be that surprising for other similar efforts to have happened before or be happening now. I'm not quite as convinced that the X chromosome explanation is 100% on the nose (like how the "black of hair" doesn't quite behave like a real inherited phenotype, but it's close), but I don't think I need to be. You don't need to believe that specifically to think that somebody is identifying specific people in the Targaryan dynasties or other Valyrian lines had dragons and which didn't, tracked that, and planned wars, provocations, marriages or whatever around it with the goal of, over the course of generations, eventually stripping the Targaryans of their dragons.
×