Jump to content

lAPPYc

Members
  • Content count

    101
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About lAPPYc

  • Rank
    Sellsword

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. If I tell you to think about the guy in ASoIaF that splits the fandom, that one half of the fandom thinks that that guy has the sun shining out of his every orifice, and the other half thinks that he is a mad fanatic, who would you think of? GRRM is known for his parallels, and his abilities aren't just constrained to the books. The description above fits two princes, both Princes of Dragonstone. Both Stannis and Rhaegar each have a worshipper club, and a hater club. Only GRRM can affect parallels outside of the books. But for some reason, these respective camps don't coincide. No one immediately thinks of Stannis while thinking of Rhaegar, or vice versa. For me though, the stories of Stannis and Rhaegar are as similar as they could get without becoming redundant. Just consider this quote, which has Ser Barristan describing Rhaegar to Daenerys, but could just as well be applied to Stannis: And then here's GRRM literally declaring it in the first book itself: Only, it was Stannis at Dragonstone, and it was his brother's throne he meant to claim. In fact, when Tywin is thinking about Stannis at Dragonstone, Tyrion tells him to take heart from the fact that at least Rhaegar is still dead. Yet the fact is missed by most. I believe, on the other hand, that the stories of these two characters are supposed to run parallel and along the same theme: Rulers making hard choices for their Kingdom. Moreover, I believe that the stories of Stannis and Rhaegar don't just run parallel, but they compliment each other, and will each be used to explain the other, in multiple areas. But before we get there, let me list the parallels they share: Stannis and Rhagear both were Princes of Dragonstone. Both dabbled in prophecy and sorcery. Both had fiery, and dragoney, associations. The comet heralded both of them. (Okay the second comet could have heralded a multitude of people, and even Dany's dragons) The both of them probably had a supernatural mentor; Stannis has Melisandre, Rhaegar most likely had the Ghost of High Heart, according to a theory by u/cantuse on Reddit. The both of them were politically active against the establishment in their time; Stannis against Joffrey and other pretenders, and Rhaegar against Aerys, albeit secretly. The both of them ignored their duties and hid from the realm in an important time, something the realm dearly paid for; Stannis when he wasn't made Hand by Robert, and Rhaegar at the Tower of Joy during the war. Both were thought to be figures from prophecy; Stannis the Azor Ahai, and Rhaegar the Prince that was Promised. And both were later found out to be not the prophecy figurines; Rhaegar later believed that his son/s was the Prince that was Promised, and Dany is supposed to slay the lie that Stannis is the Azor Ahai. For both of them, the majority of their story time was concerned with political struggle, with a backdrop of a supernatural struggle, until the political struggle went out the window and they died for the supernatural struggle; Rhaegar studied prophecy and sired children to fulfill them, but by the time Jaime was given the white cloak, he was full on focused on working against his father, but then Lyanna happened - the political got supplanted by the supernatural. For Stannis, his battles against the Lannisters and Boltons are happening now, but soon he is supposed to burn Shireen to help against the Others (yes, I believe Stannis doesn't burn Shireen for a win in a fight against the Boltons. It doesn't fit his character, or the current logistics, or the story. Stannis has a huge chance of winning against the Boltons, and Melisendre burning Shireen to save Jon or something takes away everything from the Stannis's Edric arc. It is Stannis's story to burn Shireen). And lastly, both did something (or are supposed to do) to a girl that doesn't go down well for them. Rhaegar died in that war, and Stannis most people think Stannis will die after burning Shireen. As I've said, I believe that the stories of Stannis and Rhaegar are supposed to reinforce the understanding of each other's stories. So if Stannis burns Shireen to get a win over the Others, what does it tell us about what Rhaegar did to Lyanna? The love story scenario doesn't make sense to me, at least not politically. And the rape story fits in the supernatural story as well. Given the parallels between Stannis and Rhaegar, Rhaegar made a sacrifice mirroring that of Stannis's. As I outlined in the aforementioned post, Lyanna said no to carrying Rhaegar's child, and Rhaegar made the difficult choice for the good of his realm. That was the case of Stannis's choice explaining Rhaegar's. The reverse happens when we consider the outcome of these sacrifices. Many in the fandom think that Stannis' sacrifice won't work, and that he will die in the backlash that follows the burning of his daughter (the Northmen and King's Men vs. Queen's men divide?). But what happened when Rhaegar's actions generated a backlash? Despite whether Rhaegar did really rape Lyanna Stark or not, he got accused of it all the same and lost his kingdom, half his family, and his life. (That Stannis gets a backlash for something he did do reinforces the idea that Rhaegar got the backlash for something he did do. Namely, kidnapping and raping Lyanna Stark). And yet, something emerged from this sacrifice: Jon Snow, a direct link to the endgame. And so it will be for Stannis' sacrifice. Burning Shireen will be the 'bitter end'. Stannis will lose support and favor. But he will still fight, and so the 'then some' will be Stannis riding to his doom in his last fight, whatever that may be, just like Rhaegar rode to his doom after his sacrifice was complete. But just as Rhaegar's sacrificed worked, something will emerge from Stannis' sacrifice. In the end, both the Princes of Dragonstone will have lost everything and died, their houses nearly destroyed (or living through a bastard or two, because Dany probably can't conceive) and both will have made a brutal sacrifice that will affect the endgame, but won't be looked upon by the majority of characters, and indeed, by many in the fandom, in a favorable light.
  2. Parallels don't have to be perfect. Stannis may be hard and Rhaegar may display more empathy, but in the end, what matters is whether he can let go of that empathy when necessary. In that, they both seem the same to me. This goes against what Barristan said of him being single-minded and deliberate. And Barristan knew him more intimately than you do. Barristan's account is a first-hand account, and yours is the one vastly based on rumors and fan opinions. The reason why GRRM gives seemingly conflicting accounts is reflected here. To cause confusion. I said dutiful to the realm. What are a few marriage vows against all the men in the world. What is the life of a few thousand people that would die in Robert's Rebellion against all the people to come? You clearly subscribe to the Rhaegar is 'an entitled asshole obsessed with prophecy' camp. I belong to the other, 'The sun shines out of Rhaegar's every orifice' one. Regardless, the parallel is that Stannis has a similar fan divide. And when Stannis burns his daughter, I think GRRM is going to reveal that Rhaegar raped Lyanna, and whoever still loves Stannis will then have to love Rhaegar as well, and whoever loves Rhaegar will have to love Stannis, no matter their earlier affiliations. Or they will hate them both and not accept what they did as a good thing. As I said, I think the reason why the arcs are running parallel is that he is going to help each arc with the help of the other. I never said the two were conquerors. I said the both are going to seemingly fail in their political campaigns and die. Question: Did Aerys choose Viserys as his heir over Rhaegar or Rhaegar son Aegon? I think I read that in AWoIaF, but I can't seem to find that again. Can you clarify? This will put some twists for the Aegon that is currently invading Westeros.
  3. Throughout the story, there are two characters that start their journey from Dragonstone and have a huge impact on the events of ASoIaF. But there are so many more parallels between Rhaegar and Stannis than just the starting point. IMO, the entirety of Stannis' story is supposed to mirror that of Rhaegar's, and that these two stories are going to be used to reinforce each other and give legitimacy to the choices made by these two characters. For both of these arcs run along the same theme: Rulers making hard choices for the good of their kingdom. This quote has Ser Barristan describing Rhaegar to his sister. But it could easily be describing Stannis. And before you use Stannis' running away to Dragonstone in anger after Ned Stark was appointed Hand to call him not-dutiful, remember when Rhaegar was working against his father? The parallel between the two is that they are dutiful to the Kingdom. But this is only the start. As I said, both were the Princes of Dragonstone. Both were politically active and against the establishment. Both dabbled in prophecy and sorcery. Both had most likely had a supernatural mentor; Stannis has Melisandre, and Rhaegar probably was influenced by the Ghost of High Heart, according to a theory by /u/cautuse on reddit. Both were thought to be prophecized figures; Stannis the AA, and Rhaegar the Prince that was Promised. And both were later considered wrong; Rhaegar decides the prophecy talks about his children, and Stannis' lie is supposed to be slain by Dany (Slayer lies = slays the lie that says Stannis is AA, that is to say, proves that someone else is AA). For both of them, the majority of their life struggle was political, against the backdrop of the supernatural; the Rhaegar-Aerys divide in KL that reminded Pycelle about the days of Viserys I, and Stannis' quest for his throne. And for both of them, this political struggle gets supplanted by the supernatural; for Rhaegar it is getting Lyanna pregnant to extract Jon, and for Stannis, it will be burning Shireen to get... god knows what. As I said, I believe that the stories of Stannis and Rhaegar are supposed to reinforce the understanding of each other's stories. So if Stannis burns Shireen to get a win over the Others, what does it tell us about what Rhaegar did to Lyanna? Previously, I made a post about the political reasons why the 'love story' scenario is improbable. But that was the political part, and this is the supernatural part: Given the parallels between Stannis and Rhaegar, Rhaegar made a sacrifice mirroring that of Stannis'. The love story scenario also has Lyanna die, but that is not a sacrifice. That's a birth gone wrong. Shireen is going to be sacrificed, and for Lyanna's death to be a sacrifice, it needs to be against Lyanna's wishes. Now Lyanna probably never knew that she will die in childbirth, so the death wasn't a sacrifice. The sacrifice was the rape. As I outlined in the aforementioned post, Lyanna said no to carrying Rhaegar's child, and Rhaegar made the difficult choice for the good of his realm. This was the case of Stannis' choice reinforcing that of Rhaegar's. The reverse happens when we consider the outcome of these sacrifices. Many in the fandom think that Stannis' sacrifice won't work, and that he will die in the backlash that follows the burning of his daughter (the Northmen and King's Men vs. Queen's men divide?). But what happened when Rhaegar's actions generated a backlash? Despite whether Rhaegar did really rape Lyanna Stark or not, he got accused of it all the same and lost his kingdom, half his family, and his life. And yet, something emerged from this sacrifice, like, literally emerged, from Lyanna Stark's womb: A direct link to the endgame. And so it will be for Stannis' sacrifice. Burning Shireen will be the 'bitter end', and the 'then some' will be Stannis making riding to his doom in his last fight, whatever that may be, just like Rhaegar rode to his doom after his sacrifice was complete. But just as Rhaegar's sacrificed worked, something will emerge from Stannis' sacrifice. In the end, both the Princes of Dragonstone will have lost everything and died, their houses nearly destroyed (or living through a bastard or two) and both will have made a brutal sacrifice that will affect the endgame, but won't be looked upon by the majority of characters, and indeed, by many in the fandom. (Only GRRM can create parallels outside the books. Rhaegar and Stannis both have a fan base that thinks the sun shines out of their every orifice, and a hater base that thinks they are both entitled assholes obsessed with prophecies).
  4. The problem with this is, why not simply marry him? It will subvert an unnecessary war. Due to Jorah, Dany knows what the smallfolk care about. And it's not like she will be ceding the throne to him. She still has the dragons, she will be the more powerful of the pair.
  5. True. Nothing on the surface heralds a conflict between Dany and Aegon, but as you may know, the Mummer's Dragon prophecy doesn't only come from Quaith, but from the House of the Undying as well. We have no cause to think that Aegon is not a Mummer's Dragon, but all the reasons to be skeptical that that will be a problem. The way I anticipate events, however, is that Dany is going to go deeper and deeper into the Targaryen sorcery. She already has motivations; Barristan's accounts of her brother's meddling with prophecies, The Song of Ice and Fire, so many prophecies surrounding her, and she might also be going to Valyria. Most of the fandom seems to think that Aegon is going to do something childish and stupid to draw Dany's ire, like marrying Arianne. But that simply fits into none of the character profiles or motivations for me. Dany has dragons, and a history of demolishing her enemies to dust. How in the name of R'hllor will two princelings be so stupid to make her mad? I think, rather, that Dany will simply proclaim Aegon's status as the Mummer's Dragon, because she has come to believe the prophecies, and her dragons will then do the rest. For what reason Quaith is leading these two characters down this path, we may never know!
  6. lAPPYc

    Are the Starks Going to Get Their Valyrian Steel Back?

    My headcanon is that the reforging of the two swords marks a split in the house Stark. I want Stark on the Iron Throne, hopefully Bran. Rickon will take care of Winterfell, but the North is too remote to rule the entire Seven Kingdoms. So I think there will be a new House Stark, at least in name, in the South. Jon-Arianne pairing seems good enough, as it will unite the weakest kingdoms in Westeros to augment the Stark on the Iron Throne. Bran gets the Widow's Wail, Rickon Oathkeeper. And Jon and his descendants keep Longclaw.
  7. This is my point. What makes you think he is gonna die during the second dance? Now there was the bit of foreshadowing given earlier about the dragon-puppet-show, but there are also the things I pointed out, Aegon V and VI's similarities, and the fact that they can hatch post birth, and GRRM's interesting word choice of the third head not necessarily being a Targaryen, a wording that introduces ambiguity the kind of which only exists for Aegon (since as said that Jon's parentage will be revealed by the end). Which of the foreshadowings you choose, the dragon-puppet one or the dragon hatching one, is up to you, of course, since I can't find any fault in it. But I just think another king breaking an alliance for a girl and losing his life out of it will be redundant. We already had that with Robb. Her answer to anybody's claim is going to be her blood. She is bringing war to the kingdom, and if someone asks her why she's doing it, she can't say it's because she has dragons and dothraki, she has to say it's because the throne is held by an usurper. The scene is same whether it's Aegon or any other claimant on the Iron Throne. As long as the ruler was good, the people will hate her. And what's this with Jon claiming the throne from her? From where do we know this? And how do we know that people will believe the story of R+L=J when Dany can just claim him as another imposter/usurper? Why will dany believe such a story? How do we know that she will or won't? And why do they have to fight? Why not marry? Hell, how do we even know that both of them will be alive and in condition to demand the throne from each other? Mind you, all this may happen, but none of it requires a dead Aegon. We don't even know if the Dance 2.0 won't happen between Dany and Jon. (The chances of Aegon getting a dragon are small, whereas Jon is a warg who has been foreshadowed to ride Viserion, and Dance is first and foremost a fight between dragonriders).
  8. Not sure what your point is, since this post wasn't about whether Aegon will/will not fight Daenerys (your assumption of her killing him in order for people to hate her is unnecessary, since they will hate her just as much for bringing back dragons, the dothraki, and starting another war in the midst of winter). The post was about how Aegon might be the third head of the dragon, and a historical precedent. It was about his hatching, which can happen in either scenarios of whether he fights her or not. I'm of the opinion that he will hatch during his fights against her, since I'm proposing that he will hatch because of some of her actions. But to suppose that Aegon existed only to give Dany someone to fight is wrong. Tommen, Myrcella, Stannis, Jon, even Sansa as regent, could have fulfilled the purpose of a popular ruler that Dany will fight. Sure, you might say GRRM had other plans for them, but nothing in your argument of why Aegon was constructed says that that alone is his purpose. The story arc doesn't stop at the start of the fight. It carriers until the end, and might even go beyond.
  9. Aegon the Conqueror never had any support in Dorne, not of smallfolk, nor political. We're talking about the title of King, and his powers and meanings. Smallfolk support does mean something. Hell, I don't think even that much is needed, since Stannis has none of them but he is still a King. And I did talk the bit about Aegon needing outside support to actually conquer KL in the first place. I simply cannot imagine a scenario where Aegon doesn't have the support of at least Dorne before he takes KL, not to mention 'friends in the Reach' and the conquered Stormlands (That is, if he only directly goes to KL after Stormlands). There are a shitload of other people in Westeros. Davos would never have made it past Sisterton if people didn't take Stannis seriously. Frankly, I don't think anyone, can convince you, bro. Your arguments about the Kingship, imho, are simply ludicrous and you are only making them only to find any excuse to not change your convictions from impossible to even a small benefit of the doubt.
  10. KL has half a million residents, that's a significant support. He took a huge city, that needed outside support. That adds even more support. I'm not even sure how a scenario will arise where Aegon won't be a king when he takes KL. This is the first time I've encountered this idea. You think people don't take Stannis seriously? What's wrong with being King only in the name? I'm asking this as a fan of Stannis. Does it impede him from being King in practice? That is to say, conquer the realm? I'm saying he is the wrong one. He thinks he is a dragon, and he is, in fact, a Mummer's Dragon. But I'm arguing that he can be a real dragon. Moreover, I'm sure Aegon V thought of himself as a dragon before he hatched, and he wasn't a wrong one.
  11. Balon wasn't acknowledged King outside his islands, but he was still king. Robb wasn't acknowledged King outside his two kingdoms, but he was still king. At a point, Joffrey didn't have the support of his own smallfolk, and literally only the Westerlands follwed him, but he was still king. Stannis has no support, he is still a king. Even if he has only the support of KL people, why can't he be the King of KL? That's more people that were supporting Stannis when he was at the Wall. None of this, also, prevent him from hatching into a dragon. Prince Baelor was a dragon who was still a prince.
  12. slightly disagree, but okay, so when Aegon becomes a King then... The Mummer's Dragon vision literally shows the crowd cheering at him. I think it's clear he will be becoming a King.
  13. Had, I said, not has. Dunk fought with Aerion Brightflame, and Jon Con was exiled by Aerys. Ser Rolly Duckfield now wears a white cloak. He will be King by the time he takes KL, which we know he will take with utmost certainty.
  14. I don't know this. I was responding to your question of where I see the struggle. Not in that vision. But the speculation is based on the reasoning: He will hatch(this is the theory), that means he will become a dragon from the image of mummer's dragon, the mummers probably won't like it, hence the struggle. The struggle could come before he conquers KL and he fails in that struggle, but that means he didn't hatch. So if the struggle isn't in the vision, and it isn't before the vision, it has to come after. Roamed around in secret. Squired for a knight that had a feud with his family. Trained by a knight that would later on become a White Sword. Same names. Unlikely kings (Ageon V was the fifth son of the fifth, and Aegon VI was supposed to be dead/is a member of almost extinct Blackfyre lineage)
  15. I never said he was trying to break free of those strings in that vision. I said he was Mummer's Dragon in that vision. His struggle will come after, and his struggle is not at all related to the vision Dany saw. I never made such a claim. Again, that vision wasn't about his struggle. That vision was about his status at the time of his conquest of KL, at that time, the strings were real, and most probably invisible to him. I'm not basing my argument that he might hatch on that vision at all. In that vision, I'm only challenging the popular interpretation of the phrase "Slayer of Lies" that she has to kill Aegon to slay the lie. My argument for his hatching is based on his parallels with Aegon V and that dragons can hatch through their actions.
×