Jump to content

Reekazoid

Members
  • Content Count

    185
  • Joined

  • Last visited

3 Followers

About Reekazoid

  • Rank
    Squire
  • Birthday 03/05/1974

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Array
  • Location
    Array

Recent Profile Visitors

1,166 profile views
  1. I think you have a strong case for that, because the parallels are compelling. I would even go one step further and suggest that the Galladon/Maiden/Just Maid story and the Azor Ahai/Nissa Nissa/Lightbringer story are both echoes of earlier stories such as the Blood Betrayal - Maiden Made of Light - Lion of Night stories. In my opinion all of these point to some cataclysmic event or series of events that left such a profound impact on its survivors that it became written into the cultural DNA of multiple civilizations all across Planetos- like the pervasive Flood myths in our own world. Nice writeup, when I am home from work I will take another look and maybe provide a response more worthy of the effort you put into your theory.
  2. Say what you want about Robert Baratheon in other areas of his life, but when it came to these types of political gestures the man had great instincts. Pardoning Barristan is a shrewd move that lets Selmy save face and eases his integration into a Kingsguard made up primarily of people that would have been his enemies during the rebellion. A pardon acknowledges that Selmy was a Targaryen loyalist, and thus an enemy of the new King. This lets Selmy's peers that were also Targaryen loyalists interact with him without being able to say he was a turncloak. Turncloaks don't need pardon from the side they switched to, but Selmy was no turncloak. Likewise, Barristan's peers who supported Robert can't say "he's a traitor and a loyalist, we want nothing to do with him!" because he is now pardoned, and the king himself has forgiven any previous treachery and wiped that slate clean going forward. An oath of fealty alone would have been enough, but this gesture helps Barristan out socially.
  3. The talking heads of Clarence Crabb's fallen foes, at the Whispers. Echoes of Faceless Men masks there, as well as fossilized CoTF from Arianne spoiler chapter.
  4. You said what I said only you said it sooner, more concisely, and with better grammar. Not sure how I missed your post, must have scrolled right past it by mistake. Agree.
  5. I see it like this: You take your Night's Watch oath for life. Oaths are more or less sacred throughout the various intersecting cultures of Westeros. And yes, Jamie, all the oaths are confusing and they conflict, but in general they are held in high regard by other people. You can judge a person based on how well they uphold their oaths in public. No one likes an oath-breaker. Night's Watch deserters are automatically despised for abandoning their oaths to serve for life. I believe the Ned summed it up when explaining the execution of Will to Bran. When you take the Black you leave behind your own life. All binding legality (if there is such a thing) aside, the social convention between the Night's Watch and "the realms of men" is basically: Send us your people, we will take them, and give them a new life, and their past is erased, so even if you would otherwise execute them, once they are with us they are untouchable. Conversely if any of our guys desert us and re-enter the "realms of men" then please execute them on sight. Now the Iron Throne's authority is certainly paramount throughout the 7 kingdoms and therefore if a King were to say, Alister Thorne, I release you from your Night's Watch vows, and welcome you back to the realms of men, well then all the king's subjects had better not execute the guy. But in reality what the King has done is just choose to ignore the realms' half of the social contract, and force his subjects to do the same. If the deserter ever showed his face at the Wall again, or beyond it, I would assume that the Nights' Watch would be within their rights to execute the guy at that point. I don't actually thin the King has the authority to release anyone from a vow that was not made to the king or to a predecessor or to someone under the King's authority, which the NIght's Watch is not. Like it was said above, you can pick your answer regarding what the actual legality of the Watch vs Iron Throne is, but in practical terms all the King can really do is protect a deserter from execution. And that only technically. King's Landing is a long way from the Wall. I would not give Alister Thorne or any other deserter high chances of survival if they were to chance upon a party of Wulls, Flints, or Norreys.
  6. Brilliant! This is the best single-sentence character analysis I’ve ever come across.
  7. This was my thought too when I read the thread title, lol. If sweetrobin is indeed not his own son as has been theorized, then the metaphor gains fits even more.
  8. Any Dothraki present for the funeral of Khal Drogo and the subsequent transformation of the Khaleesi Daenerys Targaryen into the Mother of Dragons seem to have become loyal followers with an almost religious devotion. In my opinion the access they have to her and the complete trust she places in them is its own currency. I think they view themselves more like family than servants.
  9. I award this thread 4 out of a possible 5 fat pink masts.
  10. Point of Order: Jamie Lannister briefly sat on the Iron Throne after the sack of King’s Landing , and while he has been called many things I don’t think “rapist” is one of them. Also Ned Stark sat on the throne while dispensing the King’s justice while acting as Hand. I don’t think he would also be called a rapist in any serious argument. If we presume that Jon Arryn also sat the throne while acting as Hand, that is yet a third individual hard to label a rapist in a serious argument. I know the OP meant actual recognized and crowned rulers, but this type of topic always brings out the hair-splitters and modern moralists in force so this kind of moving goalpost definition seems fair game.
  11. Reading this has me agreeing with you and laughing as I realize that some of the hypocrites who like argue that Winterfell belongs to the Boltons because they took it over and occupy it are the same people that call Robert Baratheon a “usurper”. And on a different but related note , Wyman Manderly is safe from guest rights violations. He enpied his Freys after giving them guest gifts and observing all the customs above-board. And he brought the provisions to Winterfell to feed everyone, not just his own men. He also brought his own horses , so when the time came to eat horse or perish, no one can really say that he ate only food from Bolton’s stable. No way in hell your horses belong to the Lord of the house while you’re his guest.
×
×
  • Create New...