Jump to content

YOVMO

Members
  • Content Count

    1,585
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About YOVMO

  • Rank
    No One

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    Array

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Array
  • Location
    Array
  • Interests
    Array

Recent Profile Visitors

7,914 profile views
  1. Chuck Lorre writes tv show about geniuses. This is gonna be GREAT!
  2. HA! This makes perfect sense. Every show with some "genius scientist" is basically a thesaurus driven ding bat convention. Fantastic!
  3. I actually heard a pretty funny and at the same time intelligent and insightful comment yesterday from a friend of mine. He said that writers simply cannot write characters which are smarter than they are. Because of this, the absolute peak of intelligence the characters can have in the show without martin's direct contribution is capped at the level of intelligence of D and D and since they are mind numbingly stupid, even the smartest of their characters are stuck at that level. It isn't that they think their audience is dumb, they are just writing what they can based on their own limited intelligence.
  4. While I do think he has the temperament to be a good king and a good maester could teach him and davos the finer points of governance, the problem with him being king is he doesn't really have any great alliances....the kind that are forged in youth. Think of Robert. The stormlands are loyal to him (with the exception of i think 3 minor loyalist houses that sided with Aerys but wound up bending the knee after the rebellion) and while the stormlords would have followed Gendry it wouldn't be the kind of blood loyalty they had for Robert. Robert was fostered in the Vale and Jon Arryn was like a father to him. He was fostered with Ned and ned was like a brother to him. Ned brings the Tully's and with them the Riverlands. Robert Married Cersei bringing in the Westerlands. The iron Islands tried and failed an uprising and were brought to heel. Just through blood, fostering, marriage and friendship Robert had the loyalty of 5 of the 7 kingdoms, the iron islands posed no threat and the tyrells were power hungry and easily bought off with honors and titles. Dorne had no love for robert, but 1 out of 7 isn't bad. Add to this that robert fought a war as its leader and as such was a fabled character to the small folk and had targaryen blood connecting him to the older dynasty. These are the kinds of relationships that take many generations to form and are absolutely required for a monarch to have. If Gendry calls the banners does he even get all the storm lords? As for Jon bringing back the style King in the North I really don't like this for a lot of reasons. The practicality of the interconnected nature of the kingdoms forged over 300 years since Aegon's conquest aside, Jon seems burned out from command. He is also, I think, technically undead at this point.
  5. I actually had a post on this the other day, not only does legit gendry become roberts heir but even if we look at pre rebellion line of succession King Aryes II Rhaegar Rhaegar's Legitamite Male issue in age order Viscyers Viscyers legitimate male issue in age order Robert ((Rhaegar's cousin and grand son of Rhaelle and great grandson of Aegon V) Robert's legitamite issue in age order Which means, with Aryes, Rhaegar, Baby Aegon, Vicsyers and Robert dead a legitimized Lord Gendry Baratheon is still in line for the throne before Dany as Targaryen primogeniture is agnatic since the great council of 101 where all male heirs were given primacy over any female. Smart danny. So the line of sucession as it stands now would be Jon as the son of Rhaegar though it looks like he has no interest in the crown and would probably rather spent his time back in the north living a life of repose. Then Gendry THEN Dany and the second Gendry knocks out a legitimate heir Dany is all through. Raising him up earlier on does have potential, but just never would have seemed practical. You can only get raised from bastardy by royal decree, same with being given a lordship (especially of a great house like Storm's End). So who would do it? A living Robert I? That would cause way more problems with cersei than he ever seemed to want to be bothered with plus would be an impossition on Tommen (assuming robert doesn't know about Joff and Tommen being bastards I am sure the plan was for Tommen to be lord of storms end when he came to majority and hold it for his brother kIng Joff). So looks like Robert wouldn't raise him. Then you have Joff. Forget it. ANd after him Tommen which cersei would have seen to never happening for one of roberts bastards. So while it would surely have been interesting to see Gendry in the ultimate rags to riches as lord of storms end, there is simply never a monarch for whom it would have made any sense to actually do it) Not sure what Martin's intention is with Storm, would love to know. Obviously with his mother being Delena Florent it would be even easier to sell it. One think I am sadly pretty sure of is that Martin will not actually release a book.
  6. Maybe Gendry....ugh....Rivers after being legitimized by Dany effectively making him higher in the line of succession than she is make the executive decision to change the meaning of the bells....a tradition dating back to 47 AC with the death of Aegon I
  7. A good topic. I am going to jump in after reading the thread, just wanted to thank you for pulling out the exceplent youtubes. i had forgotten all about that. Tyrion specifically informs Jamie that the bells mean surrender. Even if this was correct, whcih it isn't, why wouldn't jamie have figured that out in his nearly life long service as a member of the kings guard. Also, is there a different number of bells for a kings death than there is for sounder. Is it like the night's watch. People just standing around the city trying to figure out if cersei has died or called a retreat?
  8. Why did Tyrion go to Harrenhall? Because that is where Hoares Whent.
  9. It even rhymes! I couldn't resist. I'm a dork. I am so glad you like it. As for the inclusion of "rape" it may not be as disturbing as you thing if we consider the etymology of the word itself. After all, the word rape, while never positive for sure, for most of its history wasn't necessarily sexual. The root of the word is the latin word rapere. meaning simply "to snatch, to grab, to carry off" To Carry a woman off by force was considered Rape according to roman law but sexual intercourse was not necessarily implied. Think of Bernini's sculpture The Rape of Proserpina depicting Proserpina being abducted by the god pluto and taken to the underworld. Zero sex is insinuated there. The same goes with the Rape of the sabine women. There was a being carried off but it is specifically noted that Romulus gave the women free choice and no forcible sex was had. Now we can obviously say that there is consent and there is consent, but the larger point about the ancient world and the etymology is being made here. In middle English rape could refer either to kidnapping or the modern meaning of rape with the sexual connotation, but the sexual aspect wasn't implied merely in the use of the word as it is today. There is a poem called The Rape of the Lock by alexander pope where he is specifically referring to the theft or carrying away of a lock of hair. Furthermore, and maybe even more importantly for us, is that there is another word that, like rape, has its root in the latin rapere which is the word Rapture used in the bible. The rapture, of course, is when the chosen or the good or the people who paid their dues or whatever are snatched up, taken, carried off by Christ to heaven. The idea that rape specifically connoted a sexual component is an incredibly new idea and between George's love of history, love of etymology and progressive politics I think it is very easy to say that he may use this erotic trope of rape in star-crossed lovers and third-eye initiations in a way that matches the biblical use of rapture or the classic and historical use of rape....to take, to snatch, to grab, to carry away. I got very interested in the history of the word rape reading ASOIAF because there is just so much rape in the stories that I felt that looking at it should be important. Now, of course there is rape the way the modern mind sees it....the mountain and the inn keepers daughter (or indeed most of what the mountain does) but there is also this other sense of being taken whether it is bran being taken by bloodraven or even Jamie being taken by a sense of honor and duty. (I have meant to look back at the attempted rape of Brienne and the TAKING of Jamie's hand and see if I can make some kind of connection where Jamie paid the rape debt and had his hand taken and as such is rewarded but haven't done so yet.) I often wonder about grrm and whether he packs important things into very graphic and disturbing moments almost as a way to keep people from them. When something is as disturbing as rape it is often hard to poke around it and investigate it and it is doubly hard to speak about it because you never want to be a crass lout. That said, there is so much rape in this story in both the modern and in the classical/etymological/biblical sense that it almost demands a closer reading even when it seems disturbing and often times when we comb through the difficult parts we come out at the end unscathed and wiser for the journey. I don't think an orgasm is such a bad suggestion. Maybe, however, it is closer to what the French call le petite mort (often times confused with the orgasm but better explained as the moment before the moment...similar to the moment of God's finger touching adam in that painting they got over there on the ceiling of that nice church in Italy and reflects the line in the Sappho poem about being "one step short of dying"). This is also something we can discuss in terms of a taking for sure -- of course, I don't think we have to pick one or the other and rather that both is a better answer. I have never made the connection to the winterfell library fire like this and absolutely love it! There is a ton of back up for this. Right from the start in the AGOT prologue Gared says that "nothing burns like cold' and Will's description of the Other's eyes were "a blue that burned like ice" In Jon I ACOK "dead othor with burning blue eyes" One of the most interesting ones is the description of Rhaegar in Jamie VI of ASOS "Prince Rhaegar burned with a cold light, now white, now red, now dark" So yeah, the burning cold is a really big and important theme here Brandon the Burner....
  10. Oh fun @ravenous reader! In my own little way I am happy for the closed thread. As winter will lead to spring anew, so we have a new poetry thread from you. Allow me to leave this little tidbit which I believe is reminiscent of the greenseers and/or possibly Bloodraven and is from good ole Sappho He seems to me, that man, almost a god— the man, who is face to face with you, sitting close enough to you to hear your sweet whispering And your laughter, glistening, which the heart in my breast beats for. For when on you I glance, I do not, not one sound, emit. But my tongue snaps, lightly runs beneath my flesh a flame, and from my eyes no light, and rumbling comes into my ears, And my skin grows damp, and trembling all over racks me, and greener than the grass am I, and one step short of dying I seem to myself.
  11. Last season I remarked that the level of writing on this show was on par with 2 broke girls. I have to make a huge and sincere apology .... to 2 broke girls. The writing on game of thrones is much, much, much worse. At this point I have to say that this is really the poorest written show on television. The fact that they have such wonderful actors (and emilia Clarke), such a large budget, such magnificent set design, such tremendous genius in everything else that goes into the show it is truly a horrible shame that the script amounts to an enormous post taco bell turd only without the satisfying conclusion.
  12. What the hell did I watch? I swear by the black cloaks of the kingsguard that it was insane. Leaving aside all the deus ex idiota that is Cersei sitting the Iron Throne and Euron sailing the entire iron fleet for a 5 minute meeting with her...and leaving aside that in a 7 episode season we need a 5 minute montage of shit and stew with Sam and Ed Sheeran singing a song, and leaving aside the fact that despite the battle of the bastards, hard home, the fist of the first men and, ya know, freaking dying and being reborn that Jon has had zero character development, leaving aside the strange metaphysical phenomenon whereby the size of the great hall in winterfell is inversely proportionate to the size of Dany's dragons...leaving all of that and the bajillion other absurd plot inconsistencies aside.....this was just very bad writing. I mean, we are talking Three's Company level of writing here. What a train wreck. I don't believe the showrunners are capable of shame as there is no way that people with the ability to feel that emotion could write this show, but they really ought to be ashamed of themselves.
  13. @Seams I was surprised you didn't pick up on my "Where do Hoares go" topic. Figured it was right up your alley
  14. The production values (with the exception of the great hall of winterfell) were terrific. But the writing was so gastly stupid that it really ruined the whole thing for me. That said, if you enjoyed it that's great. I have no beef with anyone for their opinion just like I am sure no one has with me about mine.
×
×
  • Create New...