Jump to content

Springwatch

Members
  • Content Count

    1,338
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Springwatch

  • Rank
    Council Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Array
  • Location
    Array

Recent Profile Visitors

3,677 profile views
  1. The Ironborn were based on vikings. Who invaded Britain, not the other way around. And the Romans invaded, and the Angles invaded, and the Nomans invaded, and it was all incredibly, incredibly brutal. War crimes ruled. Followed by continuing invasion plans from Spain, the French, the Germans. This was what history was like. Napoleon was lots of trouble for his neighbours, so was Kaiser Bill. All around the world there were armies and chiefs and emperors. The peace we've had is so precious. I object from my soul to this topic being treated as something for the casual insult. If you want to discuss evils of empire, do it properly, and this is not the place for it. I don't want to be making this post! But to have one country singled out as the villain in a ridiculous good and evil worldview is too toxic to pass by. The race for empires in europe was fuelled by advances in technology, by competition and fear of the neighbours, and by greed. I don't know if any human society would have done differently - I doubt it, these all seem very typically human things. But with all that, came advances in human rights, in democracy, vast increases in peace, trade and wealth. It was the gateway to the modern world. History is complicated, and painful, but it's better than the fairytale version.
  2. To be fair, you could say the same thing about the British Isles, given all the trouble they caused in world history. For the record, the British Isles don't deserve to be cursed and abandoned (liberal democracies last time I looked), and the game of thrones has been played all over the world since the beginning of humanity.
  3. Like the Boltons deserve real, honest, open resistance? Look at Roose's record. For sure. The important thing is the winning. Excuse for butting in, but imho the will be is going to be most useful before Jon is resurrected. He wanted to communicate with the dead, now he's in the spirit world, he can. With king status, he can play out the role of Tolkein's Aragorn, take on the Others in their own field. Someone has to. Alternatively, part of the bittersweet ending. No crown for twice-entitled Jon.
  4. Here's one: 92967-chapter-names I never really noticed them much before - thanks for bringing it up. I like the ideas in the thread I linked - it seems to be connected to the 'you have to remember your name' thing; these characters seem to be looking for an identity, or having an identity forced upon them. ETA This post says it nicely.
  5. Is that a joke? Do you think they've forgotten Lady Hornwood? That was not a one off episode of abuse. Every one of Ramsay's hounds is named after a girl he's hunted and I think raped and flayed. And - only the girls who give him good sport get a dog named after them. And - dogs have short lives, so they're getting replaced. That is a lot of suffering, far too much to hide. But Roose says he has a peaceful land and a quiet people, so we have to conclude that those people have are living in constant fear of their lord. You bet their neighbours know about it. No one wants the Boltons.
  6. Ok, I think I've seen it, or an earlier version. It's a clever theory, or makes some clever connections, but the evidence is sketchy. It rests heavily on Pod being the right age and maybe in the right place, and I suppose, the cruel jape being that Tyrion was unaware that he'd been given Tysha's/his son as squire (but who would do such a thing?) Clever, but probably a random artefact of so many characters and storylines. ETA link
  7. I'm more with Lord Varys so far. The only reason to respect Robb's will is loyalty to the Stark dynasty - and we've seen it, the northerners love their Starks. But that same loyalty means they will always choose the Stark before the Snow. Where there is a real possibility of rescuing Arya or Rickon, they will take it.
  8. @Mister Smikes @Hippocras - this is the best you'll get: 'Podrick Payne was so shy he was furtive.' Furtive as in, appears to be hiding something. Kudos to Hippocras for pulling that one from memory if so, because it's disappearingly small. I don't think there's anything in it personally.
  9. A bit of a diversion, but this caught me by surprise. I suddenly realise I thought true love, especially true marital love, was more a northern thing. Like Ned Stark's marriage. The fire examples all seem like passionate desire, crazy romance, sex magic and holy prostitution. And like I said, the modern red priests don't seem capable of loving another human being. But there it is: AA loved his wife, in the most fundamental legend of R'hllor.
  10. Because he thought his brothers were dead. Because he thought his sisters were captive or dead.
  11. To me, melting sounds a bit odd - I'd have expected eyes to sizzle and steam, maybe - I assume the oddness is to highlight the link. Works for me anyway. It's an assumption worth considering, because experts in both traditions think Dany is their hero. I'm not really seeing the problem with the dragons. It's just another way of saying a team isn't it? I wouldn't call them red herrings, because that says mistaken identity, but I'm going with Mel's idea of one man casting many shadows. (She only sees one AA; we see more.) Don't think Ned's a prophet. Sometimes a character makes a random remark that turns out later to come true, but there's no way of identifying it as prophetic except with hindsight. I'm saying the crones correctly saw a shadow of the Stallion in Rhaego, but his path was cut short. (Mel also says not all futures come to pass. Mel is full of helpful tips. ) But here's the thing. Dany is a long way down her path - the bleeding star, the dragons from stone. Prophets swarm round her like bees at a honeypot. If Rhaego is a red herring, Dany would be a red whale, and there's no graceful way to dispose of a dead red whale.
  12. I do recall that. What I'm trying to say is, the Others aren't that diligent in transforming every single potential wight in the area.
  13. Good reasoning, but on the other hand, none of the red priests we've seen so far are married. Marriage seems incompatible with their fanatical devotion (slave of R'hllor). Mel could sacrifice fifty husbands without feeling woe or sorrow, and if they were all red priests, they probably wouldn't care either. This is where is gets tricky. AA quenched the hot blade in a cooler liquid (we know this because the earlier blades shattered). To recreate LB, you'd have to heat up the VS steel, and why would anyone do that? [ETA it wouldn't be tempering or quenching if the steel was room temperature] If they did it, and it worked, there's another issue, which is there are lots of VS swords, and lots of devoted red priests. Why not multiple Lightbringers?
  14. It is, but it's a stretch made by grrm himself when he put it the mouth of Xaro. I'm not going to worry about it. GRRM promised that prophecies would bite you. There is another hint in the text - the eyes of a monster killed by Lightbringer melted; and so did the eyes of a slaver killed by Drogon (iirc). The dragon has three heads. That's got to come true somehow. Maybe the first AA did things differently. Maybe he didn't exist at all. If a dragon dies, the sword of dragon power will be that much weaker. You're being literal again. But who knows? GRRM will do what he likes. But he would have to do a lot of work to make a 'red herring' twist satisfying to me. I don't see it at all. Which is a literal flaming sword, yes, but there's a lot more in the prophecy. I'm not prepared to ditch any AA candidates yet - if the signs are there, they mean something. I haven't given up on Stannis yet.
  15. There's no reason to believe that prophecies will be fulfilled in a totally literal way. Remember Jojen's prophecy of the drowning of Winterfell.
×
×
  • Create New...