Jump to content

Agnessa Schizoid

Members
  • Content count

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Agnessa Schizoid

  1. Agnessa  Schizoid

    What if Robb was the sole survivor of RW?

    Belgariad was infantile, badly written POS. I've actually had a misfortune of trying to read this derivative crap.
  2. Agnessa  Schizoid

    Martin confirms Dany's coin lands good.

    Heh, he also thought women are obviously inferior to men, so yeah.
  3. Agnessa  Schizoid

    Martin confirms Dany's coin lands good.

    But you like slavery better? Because that's what it sounds like. It's pretty funny to judge harshly a person for not respecting Dothraki superstition (and that's what it is) when you don't like them trying to stop a form of slavery where children are killed routinely and openly as means of production or just for fun. Putting an end to something like that should be anyone's top goal, by any means necessary. Those are weird priorities, I am just saying.
  4. Agnessa  Schizoid

    Toxic aristocratic values

    Exactly) Besides, dying from hunger is grosser still. It is one of the most painful and horrible ways to die, and if anyone thinks they would be above it they are most likely mistaken. It's like wadding through a ditch filled with shitwater, disgusting and even unimaginable in normal state, but if the bear is running after you, you won't even think twice. Even if I accept that cruel medieval laws would be unforgivable on this (that's pretty realistic), there is no call to execute these people in such a sadistic fashion. Stannis takes harsh laws of Westeros and turns them crueller still. Besides, you have to set up fires in specific way for people to burn alive rather than choke on hot air beforehand, common cause of death during burnings, and it seems like it was done. Even Mirri died faster, even though it was still cruel. After her head was on fire (it was covered in oil IIRC), she wouldn't last long. These people were basically burned to crisp. I'm not sure if they chose to be soldiers, either. Probably conscripted.
  5. Agnessa  Schizoid

    Does Asoiaf Have a True Protagonist? *SPOILERS*

    I agree. To me it just killed any sympathy I had for Tyrion. I understand how he would want to kill Tywin to avenge Tysha, but I would think, after realizing that you've raped and discarded the only person who loved you romantically, you would be filled with shame and remorse and humility. The last thing I would be likely to do is to go and brutalize YET ANOTHER woman for being a "dirty ho". Last time he did it it was to Tysha. He should be filled realization of enormity of his crime* and colossal regret, instead of judging other people, especially relatively helpless women. Yes, fine, Tywin pushed him into it, but still Tyrion did rape her, and I'd expect him to be his own harshest judge.
  6. Agnessa  Schizoid

    Toxic aristocratic values

    I know, it was irony. I am there for deep exploration of class structures and how they developed and affected history, it's just not this particular book. GRRM has richly developed history of his world, but it's still story of individual monarchs and how their particular vices and goodness affected the world, not about development of class structures, means of production and economic factors and how they affected everything - in this regard the book is pretty simplistic. Even FaB read more like soap opera about dramatic lives of particular people. He doesn't sugar coat most things - it's not in his style - but that's just sense of realism. It would be hard to have gritty and realistic medieval fantasy with rosy picture of feudalism, especially during the times of civil war. And do we really need to be taught that feudalism isn't all that great? Most people, if anything, demonize middle ages overmuch rather that idealize it.
  7. Agnessa  Schizoid

    Toxic aristocratic values

    Class values didn't demand that Tywin burn Riverlands, his pride did. They demanded for him to bring the matter to the king. His pride is aristocratic pride, but he clearly takes it to another level. and I've seen this type of "I don't even love my kid and won't spend time raising him properly but I'll push him to succeed and attack viciously anyone who criticizes him, because it's reflection on ME" in modern society as well, with less horrifying results admittedly. anyway, I guarantee that Martin doesn't think that there is little practical difference between Tywin and Ned. One way or another, some (usually priviledged) men will end up making decisions for many, and their choices and personal values will matter very much. I don't think Martin even shows us history in marxist view of it, it all goes down to personal decisions rather than movement of masses, his biggest attempt to show this would be Little Sparrows, in my opinion - societal movement based on new realities of the world, otherwise we're back to the fate of the world resting on decisions of Dany or Jon Snow, for example, so Ned's decision to save him (just one person) ends up being vitally important, rather than irrelevant subnote in story about inevitable movement of history which any single human can do little to change. I just don't see in him much interest in analyzing history in this way. We hear very little about middle class, clergy only now starts raising its head in any relevant way, we don't know much about economy, or even smaller matters of governing (who represents the Crown in the North?), etc, from that point of view world building is very sparse. It's almost as if GRRM is more interested in moral dilemmas of his powerful aristocratic protagonists.
  8. Agnessa  Schizoid

    Toxic aristocratic values

    I suspect GRRM is more interested in criticizing the human nature itself. Isn't it obvious to anyone with half a brain that feudal society is far from perfect? anyone with any illusions about the knights must have missed school on the days they talked about Crusades. It's not awfully relevant and important to shatter our nonexistant illusions. Human nature however changed little, and we still have to deal with hard choices between selfish passions, desires and ambisions and the good of all of humanity. The aristocrats have more freedom of choice and so the story focuses on them most often, but the smallfolk aren't that different, we see if for example with BwwB, where the noble mission is overshadowed by (very understandable) anger and desire for revenge, not only from UnCat, but from people like Lem Lemoncloack, as well. Smallfolk rarely get much choice in their lives but if they did few wouldn't take opportunity to avenge their loved ones, enrich themselves, et cetera, even if it goes against greater good. For northerners to accept the wildlings, for Starks to work alongside Lannisters if need be, for endless cycle of revenge and war to end everyone has to rise above their base nature. People would have to be better than they are (even the good ones) to be able to fight existential threat together with their enemies. Modern society is equally divided, and WWI would leave us as badly prepared for invasion of Others as any medieval conflict, perhaps less so.
  9. Let's say Aerys had proof of some sort of northern conspiracy. I don't think the story supports it yet, but let's say there was some sort of rebellion in planning. In this case, Aerys should have had given Rikard and his accomplices fair public trial where he would present the evidence of their treason. Like the one that was given to Tyrion. Yes, Tyrion is unhappy with his trial and we know he's innocent, however, he was given a trial, could present his witnesses, the accusing side presented evidence of motive and opportunity as well as character witnesses. And in the end he had an option of trial by combat. So while the trial was conducted with bias it was legal trial by standards of Westeros. If Rikard was given proper trial with strong evidence presented, innocent people could observe it and think: Okay, I am innocent, so there would be no such evidence against me. If King calls me to court I will go and defend my innocence. If strong evidence agains Rikard was presented and he was then executed, people again could say: Okay, that's what happens to treasonous lords, serves him right, would not happen to me. Some could still rebel, of course. However, Aerys could keep Rikard and Brandon as hostages for Ned's good behavior and make him lord in the north. However, if you start killing your most powerful vassals willy-nilly, without any proof of their treason, other vassals naturally decide that you can kill them as well at any given moment simply on a whim. So even if there was some plot, Aerys was still in the wrong. As for marriage plans, there is nothing strange about them. It is literally what aristocrats were always doing - marrying among each other. If Aerys wanted to prevent that, he could issue decree that all marriages among Great Houses require special permission from the crown, otherwise they are illegal. These would be mostly a formality, but he could also put a stop to some marriage he doesn't want. I believe there are historical precedents for that. I am not saying this decree would go over very well, but it would be harder to use some decree as pretext to start a bloody rebellion instead of "Crazy king is killing most important nobles for no obvious reason".
  10. Agnessa  Schizoid

    Sansa's betrayal consequences partly overestimated?

    It seems completely insane to me that Cersei wouldn't put her spies to spy on Ned and his household after he confessed her his plans. Why wouldn't she? At very least LF, who decided to betray Ned, would, and would inform Cersei on everything. Why wouldn't Cersei leave instructions that Ned and his people aren't allowed to leave to same people she used to massacre his household eventually? Why wouldn't she order to secure Ned's children without Sansa's intel when it's in her best interests? ETA: We could separate empathy and sympathy, perhaps? Some excellent manipulators feel your emotions and use it for their own means. Some people are bad at reading emotions yet the thought of other's suffering affects them greatly.
  11. Agnessa  Schizoid

    Who got the most screwed over

    An overdone quote, but in the end it really was a tale "told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing". (Almost) every time writers stepped off the Martin's (imperfect) script, they ended up with something nonsensical and stupid. And the last seasons gave impression of couple of raging morons who had overheard another person tell a good story and tried to re-tell it in their own words, but forgot half of it and understood even less. You can guess that the plotpoints themselves are probably from Martin (Daenerys becomes unhinged and ruthless and needs to be stopped; in desperate situation Stannis feels like he has no other resort but to sacrifice his only daughter, probably to try to save the world; Tyrion is torn between loyalty to Daenerys and unexpectedly awoken feelings for his family; the Others have particular interest in Bran) but the set up is so dumb, rushed, or simply non-existent, that it's as if some sugar-high tween had read extremely abridged summary of War and Peace (in 500 words) and then tried to write their own version based off that. You can imagine how you COULD arrive to same broad points in intelligent and believable fashion, but instead you got THIS. As to who got screwed the worst... 1. Daenerys, from impossible Mary Sue in first 7 season, who succeeded at everything and was somehow going to change the world for the better, but never specified HOW exactly, and nobody asked her, not even freakin Tyrion, to impossible Anti-Mary Sue who goes from ruthless defender of innocents into mass-murdering the innocents against her own damn interests, just for shits and giggles (she destroyed her own city, turned Westeros and half of her allies against her and gave Cersei enough time to almost get away). Dany's arc is like spending 7 seasons with season 1 Walter White and then in last couple of episodes he becomes last season Walter White. If that was the case, Breaking Bad would be pointless shit. The whole POINT of the story like this is to see gradual process where the character goes down the wrong path and gets darker and darker, as we can see and almost understand the decisions that led to this. 2. Tyrion. Tyrion is not much of a fighter, has no magical abilities, and not that good a person (he does good things sometimes, but compared to Brienne or Davos he's certainly not that nice). The ONLY thing he has going for him is his brains, his intelligence. And that was taken away from him, making him into completely pointless character. 3. Bran. Again, pointless to the end. Jon gets honorable mention, he was probably brought back to life as a kind of trolling from universe, because everything he touches he makes worse.
×