The Bard of Banefort

We don’t know when Daeron got married or when he died, only that Vaella was born in 222. So Daeron may not have been married for very long. It’s also possible that Kiera died in childbirth. Daeron apparently contracted the pox from a whore, and there’s no mention that he gave it to his wife (nor would how he contracted it likely become public knowledge if she were still alive at the time).

Daemon II thought he didn’t need Bittersteel because of his dreams. He saw the dragon hatching and the Kingsguard (or at least Dunk) and thought he was golden. My guess is that Kiera is from a powerful Tyroshi family that has the influence to counterbalance Rohanne’s. All of Tyrosh can’t unite behind the Blackfyres if half of them are in allegiance with the Targaryens. What’s stranger is that Daeron would wed the future king to a foreigner. He saw firsthand how the Westerosi reject foreign queens. Even Alyssa Velaryon said as much a century earlier.

Fair enough, but Robert also says he would have sent assassins after them if Jon Arryn hadn’t convinced him not to, so it’s not like he was incapable of doing so. The point still stands: even if Viserys and Dany were safe, they still believed they were in danger. I hadn’t considered that, but it’s not too far out of the realm of possibility that they encouraged the rebellion. Robb and Daeron I were leading foreign military campaigns when they were 14; it’s not hard to envision a pair of 12 year olds becoming indoctrinated in their family’s cause. I think there may be a bit of a misunderstanding in the comments here. I’m not saying that Daemon should have rebelled or was even justified in doing so—it was clearly both foolish and wrong. Daemon was a traitor and a would-be usurper, full stop. What I’m suggesting is that he may have had a more sympathetic motivation than mere vanity. This is the one that I find most consistent with the themes of ASOIAF. Jaime doesn’t give a groat for any of his kids in his POV chapters, yet GRRM has always insisted in interviews that he pushed Bran in order to protect them. If we were supposed to see Daemon as a flat-out villain, I think he’d be written more like Aegon II. Instead he’s more like Rhaegar, who fans think is an idiot but whom GRRM has described as a “lovestruck prince.”

Daenerys claims that the reason why they moved from city to city her whole life was to evade Robert’s agents. It started long before AGOT.

I doubt there's anything I could say to change your mind at this point, but here goes. . . The threat cuts both ways. Cat's not thinking about how Jon's heirs will fare because she doesn't care about them. If her grandson or great-grandson turned out to be paranoid or incompetent, why wouldn't he view his cousins as a threat and try to take them out? Would Aerys have left any rival claimants to the throne alive? He barely trusted his own son. We hardly know anything about that time period so far. Everything has been left deliberately vague so it can be teased out in future stories. I don't know if my theory is correct, but that's what it is: a theory. At this point, it's just as likely as anything else. And character's acting out of a fear for their children has been a prominent theme in this story ever since "promise me, Ned" and Ned incriminating himself to prevent Sansa's possible execution--something he didn't have any proof would happen at that point either. And how could Daemon have foreseen that? He wasn't psychic.

Plus, this is the same story where Ned Stark made his seven-year-old son watch him behead someone. Podrick was serving in battle as a squire when he was 10. It’s all part of the martial training

Ran, you’ve always defended Cat for worrying that Jon’s children would endanger her grandchildren, and she had no more evidence than Daemon did. And unlike Jon, Bloodraven is a genuinely ruthless and Machiavellian person. Daenerys and Viserys were sent into exile, and Robert still sent assassins after them. Robert was a negligent drunk, but he was never considered cruel or calculating by anyone in Westeros (asides for perhaps Cersei). Everything GRRM has written about Daemon has portrayed him in a positive light (just compare his Amok description to the ones for Aegon II and Rhaenyra, who were the focus of another civil war). Nothing that we’ve read about him suggests he was particularly vain or petty.

We're told many times in the books that Daemon Blackfyre had to be "convinced" to rebel against King Daeron II and claim the crown for himself. This is very interesting phrasing on George's part, since it suggests a disinclination, or even reluctance from Daemon. Even someone like Maekar, who by all rights should despise Daemon, echoes this sentiment. TWOIAF does not give a reason for why Daemon betrayed his older half-brother, only saying that it was an impulsive decision and chalking it up to vanity. People in-universe believe it was because Daeron had forbidden him to wed Daenerys. Fans have also speculated that Daemon had become embittered by the prejudice he experienced as a bastard. But there may be an even simpler reason for why Bittersteel's "poison" took root, and it can be found all throughout ASOIAF. Daemon had seven sons, and a few daughters too. No matter how loyal he remained to Daeron or how benevolent Daeron was to him, the risk of war between their children or grandchildren would always be there, and they were both certainly aware of this. Even if the kids all managed to get along, the political factions in Westeros, which were especially volatile after the annexation of Dorne, would still seek to pit them against each other for their own gains. In real life, the last Plantagenet boy, Edward, was hardly much of a threat to the Tudors--he spent most of his life in confinement, and was likely mentally handicapped. But malcontents still sought to use him as their symbol for rebellion, so he was put to death. And the kicker is, this wasn't baseless paranoia from the Blackfyres. Bloodraven did kill three of Daemon's sons--two of whom died during the war, and were therefore sanctioned by Daeron, however implicitly. No matter how genial Daeron was, there would always be people around him who saw the danger and wanted to strike first, as Bloodraven did when he lopped off Aenys' head before the Great Council of 233. Much like Cat argued in ASOS, Robb's children would never be truly safe if Jon was legitimized, and vice versa. The great tragedy is that in trying to protect his children, Daemon instead ensured their deaths. I find this a likelier cause for Daemon's rebellion than simple vanity or long-stewing anger over being denied a second marriage. It would also explain why Bittersteel became even more adamant that Daemon rebel after his marriage to Calla, since any children they might have would be similarly marked. And it would explain why George has written Daemon in a way that consistently stresses his virtues (unlike, say, Aegon II, who is depicted as a pouty loser) and places the blame for the rebellion on the people around him. TL;DR: Daemon Blackfyre rebelled to protect his children

The Battle of the Gullet was the first battle with the dragonseeds, right? I think there’s still a very good chance the season ends with Rhaenyra taking King’s Landing then. Nothing else would cap off the season as well.

Jaehaerys. Just be a) moderately well-behaved or b) good at hiding it, and you should be fine. Jaehaerys may have been traditionalist in the sense that he wanted his daughters to marry and didn’t think the realm would accept a queen, but there’s nothing to suggest that he showed the contempt for his daughters that Tywin did for all of his children.

Yeah, those monsters who opposed their fire-breathing dragon overlords. . .

There are a prominent number of Maegor defenders. They’re mostly Rhaenyra stans who have convinced themselves that Maegor was some kind of feminist because Aerea was his heir. Never mind that Aerea was also Antichrist Jaehaerys’ heir too until he had children, or the whole, y’know, kidnapping/raping/killing his wives thing.

I mentioned this a week or two ago in the MCU thread but this might be a better place for it. I haven’t watched Secret Invasion, but I keep hearing it’s a dud. With three high profile flops in a row (Terminator, Star Wars, and now Marvel) does this make Emilia the least lucky actor alive or the most lucky? Starring in three previously unassailable franchises is genuinely incredible, yet she still keeps getting cast in them, so she must be doing something right.

I’m starting to suspect that S2 will end up getting pushed back to 2025. With the way the strike is going, they won’t be doing rewrites/reshoots anytime soon. 2024 is going to be the reality TV renaissance.

It’s kind of ironic that most (some?) of Scotland was so supportive of the Jacobites since, based on what I’ve read, they were more aggressively Protestant at the time than England.

One of the reasons why Sarah Hess received hate was how after Aegon raped that servant girl on HOTD (which he clearly believed was consensual), she made a comment asking if that really makes Aegon a villain, since other people are forgiven for murder and other crimes. And to be clear, this is a genuine question people have been puzzled by: why are murderers forgiven but not rapists? I think it makes more sense if you think of rape as a form of torture—most of us would be more freaked out to learn that the guy sitting next to us on the subway once cut open a live cat than that he committed murder, for instance. But having a character commit rape is one of the most surefire ways of solidifying their place as a villain in the audience’s mind. Tyrion is actually a rare exception—many people still like him despite what he’s done.

George recently made a Notablog post showing his support for the actors strike: https://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2023/07/22/actors-join-the-strike/ I agree that it's very cool that George, despite having to put many of his own projects on pause, is so openly supportive of the strike(s). But if I can offer just a tiny bit of criticism, if GRRM really wants to support American actors, then the best thing he can do is. . .well, hire them. He is an executive producer now, after all. Most TV shows have a mix of US/UK/AUS/CA/NZ actors, but it's very weird that a TV show produced by an American company and based on a series written by a guy from New Jersey has an entirely British cast, especially for one that's as big as HOTD's (they had two Australian actors in S1, but they were both written out mid-season). Maybe this is something he has supported behind the scenes, but still, it's probably a much more effective way of supporting the union than picketing is.

Glendon Ball holding his cup over a bowl of water is apparently a reference to the Jacobites, and their “king across the water” in France. Glendon supports the Blackfyres, who are the equivalent of the Jacobites in ASOIAF. I learned this from an Alt Shift X video lol.

Show Arya. A lot of Targ stans find it hypocritical that Arya was able to murder hundreds of people and still be considered a hero, whereas Dany became a villain.

Surprisingly, most of the Stark haters on this site are pretty milquetoast about Sansa. It’s the opposite of Twitter/Reddit. Instead they hate Arya.

For what it’s worth, I was originally going to title this thread “Which king was the least traditionally Targaryen,” but I thought people would find more ways to nitpick that lol.

Something I learned just recently that blew my mind was the story of Louis XIV’s second wife. That’s like. . . something out of a romance novel. (TL;DR She was an educated but lowborn widow—born in prison—who served as the governess to Louis’ illegitimate children before becoming close friends with the king, and then his lover. They entered a morganatic marriage when they were both middle-aged and stayed together for another 30 years. Wild.) George is such a mush that I’m surprised he hasn’t written a similar story within ASOIAF. It’s not like he hasn’t done something like this before (i.e. publicly dismissing all the stories where the prince marries a peasant girl only to then have Prince Duncan marry a peasant girl).

When was this exactly? Wasn’t the Fenian Brotherhood Catholic?

Yes, the show was massively misogynistic. It has become inextricable from its legacy.

The only reason polygamy was tolerated was because Targaryens were considered “closer to gods than men.” And that deification was based in dragon-taming, which, as far as we know, was practiced exclusively by Valyrians.