Jump to content

Daeron the Daring

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Daeron the Daring

  1. If there was a conspiracy, it wasn't an anti-Targaryen one. Instead, anti-Aerys, or something. There was no benefit for Hoster Tully and Rickard Stark from overthrowing an entire dynasty, assuming it was them who started all these things. You also forget that Rickard pushed only Brandon's marriage, not Lyanna's. You also forget that doesn't everyone has to marry into the other families. If Rickard and Hoster decide something, along with Hoster comes Tywin (if the Jaime-Lysa marriage would've happened), and even Dorne would benefit from overthroeing Aerys II, Rhaegar inheriting. The problematic kingdoms were the Vale, the Stormlands and the Reach. The Crownlands would've chosen Rhaegar, for sure, the Vale would've been secured by Ned growing up there (likely), and the Stormlands would've been secured for the exact same reasons the Vale would've been. At this point, everyone would've supported Rhaegar over Aerys, except for the Reach, and we do know the Reach easily can be divided. But honestly, who would support a madman? In RR, it was the Targaryens the people supported, not directly Aerys. People also forget that Aerys executed Jon Arryn's heir. We don't even know if he was so anti-Targaryen before that, but considering that the Arryns married into House Targaryen twice, I don't think so. Either way, a marriage between Lyanna and Robert would've been unnecesarry for the Conspiracy. Robert Baratheon by that time had no reason to favorize mad Aerys over his future heir. Edit: You can't even say that Hoster and Rickard had a candidate for the Throne with Robert. It was right before the Trident when the Lords of Westeros decided to put him on the IT once/if they'll win. And also, too much open betrothals and marriages would've made the king suspicious, especially a mad one.
  2. You're now talking like you don't know where this exceptionalist and elitist ideals ended. I was also refering to Jaehaerys in the case of Rhaena. He was over her every way. How couldn't the king tell his sister what to do? Especially if the things she does contradicts what you believe in. It's because it was easier than hating on each other until one of them dies. Simple. In any case, Rhaena wasn't more exceptional than King Jaehaerys. Also. You are refering to how female homosexuality was whitewashed, while it's not the case. We are given so many hints about Rhaena, that we can't miss she was into women too. You're saying that involving the parts when Rhaena is portrayed having interest in men too is to counter what he wrote about her sexual orientation. But again, if Glygayn wants to wash out Rhaena's sexuality, he would've done it properly. Nobody would've given a damn about it 200+ years later. Also, I don't know who pointed it out, but if Rhaenyra was so fond of Laena that way, why did he marry Daemon just months after her death? It's understandable if it was a close friendship. And note that Rhaenyra wouldn't have married him if she didn't love him.
  3. Nor was I refering to you believing such a thing. What I meant is that the song of Ice and Fire isn't just Jon's. Just as the Conquest isn't just Aegon's. Altough it's called Aegon's conquest, the people who know who Aegon was surely know Visenya and Rhaenys too, even if Aegon is the story's main character. They're part of the story, right after Aegon.
  4. I mean, it's what one can expect from a medieval historical book. Not openly writing down things, but refering to it often enough so people easily could solve the puzzle. It was the discrete way to do it, and the right way to do it in the 3rd century AC. Again, if someone wants to wash history clean, he does it properly. Just look at TWOIAF, where Ser Amory or Ser Gregor aren't even mentioned, when the death of Elia, Rhaenys and Aegon comes into discussion (suggesting bullshit, but nothing close to what actually happened). Again, Jaehaerys and Alysanne being open to homosexuality is just a big contradiction to all we know about them. I mean, homosexuality is adultery either way, and we've seen how they treat that. And we didn't even count in the homosexual part. They were pretty devoted and dogmatic. I'm sticking to my idea that they simply avoided such a scandal.
  5. If maester Glydayn really wanted to erase female homosexuality, he would've done it properly, not saying how fond she was of other women. On the other hand, we know how religious and devoted to the Faith Jaehaerys and Alysanne were. It's like impossible that they didn't know about Rhaena's 'fond of women'. They likely just wanted to avoid a scandal about all this, but it's interesting, considering how they treated their sinful children (but then again, pretty much let people like Daemon grow into what he became, not that it wasn't Baelon's responsibility too).
  6. I can't give you any quote, nor am I sure about this, but I think I read somewhere that people eventually tried to grow weirwoods in Essos, but the seeds didn't grow at all.
  7. These examples hardly prove anything. Instead I rather see northern soldiers more competent than southern ones. Especially the ones who live next to the Gift, due to wildling raids. If you're trying to prove such a thing, find relevant examples.
  8. Yeah, I know. I mean, a lot of readers do like him, but from the moment he did that thingy with the leeches, I can't see him or Melisandre as good characters. Even if it didn't work, it's one of the most amoral things I've reaf in the books. On the other hand, he's clearly the murderer of his own brother, even if he was his usurper. Nor the North gives him any credit for anything. Lord Manderly thinks he is the way trough to Stark restauration, but that's all. They don't like him, nor does anyone south of Moat Cailin. Nor the wildlings. Only the mountain clans (or so does it seem). Simply because he's a dick. Always been, and is pretty responsible for what happened in KL. Edit: Characters doing good does not make them good. Tho I don't hate the character at all, I feel no simpathy to him (not that way).
  9. Depends on how his story ends, I believe. And I don't see any brightness in his future, honestly.
  10. Not exactly. Back when Aegon had no dragon, he often flew with Rhaena, altough Rhaena most of the time had a girl companion too. It's been a while since I read F&B, honestly, but I remember how close Rhaena and Aegon were too, the girl even standing out for him. And I don't know who pointed it out to Aenys that he might have a bastard grandchild if he doesn't marry off his children, but the guy referred to Aegon and Rhaena. It was pointed out when Rhaena was along with Aegon, when people mocked Aegon not having a dragon yet. Also, one can imagine friendship, kinship and dutifulness will not fit into a relationship. If Rhaena would've been totally uninterested in men, but still would've been close to his brother, you can imagine how dutifulness does not fit into the picture. And yes, Aenys was aware how people will take Rhaena and Aegon, but many at court weren't, and this is told to us in F&B. On the other hand, I can agree with you that Rhaenyra and Laena might have had some kind of relation, but not likely, since it is only said that Rhaenyra grow fond of Laena, back when he was married to Daemon (and eventually was pregnant with his child), and Ser Harwin was still a close companion to Rhaenyra.
  11. I mean, princess Rhaena was more than dutiful to Aegon the Uncrowned. Aenys was afraid to wed the 2 earlier, but they said to him to do something already with her, because one day he might find his daughter with a bastard in her belly (Aegon's). So even if Rhaena was into girls, that does not exclude men being in her interest. I always tought that Rhaenyra finally found a friend in Laena, tho, but there might be more in that. Tho I can't imagine Rhaenyra into this, and Laena was 12 and adventurous when people said about her that he gives a damn about men. That's normal, I think.
  12. Altough I think Jon is Azor Ahai, I don't think the Song of Ice and Fire is his. Or any single individuals'. It's the song of the living and the dead. Rhaegar was kinda wrong about many things, I think. He might be seen as one of the most important characters of this 'song', maybe even the most important, but we can't ignore people like Bran, Daenerys, Arya or Tyrion (not being a secret Targaryen bastard). These people are all important, in the order I presented them (I think). If there ever be a tale or a song about this, these people will likely be included. Maybe Young Griff and Jaime too.
  13. If people woud knew that Lyanna was kidnapped, they wouldn't believe other crazy things. Never it was made clear that he kidnapped her, st least not for us in the text. That's why we still don't know. We know that Lyanna was somewhere in the Riverlands, and Rhaegar was there with his companions. That's all we knew. But it's understandable why majority thinks he kidnapped her. Seems illogical from the crown prince to run away. Seems illogical from a betrothed lady to run away, again. But we are told many hints that might point to what exactly happened. Remember that Rhaegar and his companions were wandering, adventuring for months everywhere when he 'found' Lyanna.
  14. We can't expect free education. Nor can everyone be educated so that people should chose the best out of themselves.
  15. But this isn't about wealth, it's about the position you receive for your given skills. That means that you had that position because you were worthy to hold it, but your descendants might not be, so they wouldn't inherit your position, but your wealth is your own property, while your position isn't. This can be imaginable within guilds and such things, but there's nothing like that currently. Remember that Aegon V tried to give several rights to the smallfolk, and got called a tyrant. Currently, Westeros is far from being able to counter its feudal overlords, and the entire culture is built on how much blood is worth (several thousand years old houses anf dynasties). But there are offices that's system are built on a meritocratic idea. Such as the Small Council (or at least it's supposed to be working that way), and the Citadel.
  16. The fact that the whereabouts of Rhaegar and Lyanna was so big of a dead end might imply that neither they knew about what happened in KL, only months after. If they've been in love, they might not have given a damn about what people think, nor thinking about the consequences of both of them dissapearing. Neither it was a logical move from Brandon to demand Lyanna back from Aerys, so it was likely unexpected from their pov. Also, it is stated that Rhaegar was wandering along with his companions for months when he finally kidnapped her, and we know nothing about the 'kidnapping'. But if it was on the street, during the day, with people seeing it, we would know that, I imagine. Then again, we don't know for sure how they felt to each other, but we can suspect (as readers) that it was more than their families tought by that time.
  17. So I just watched Kingdom of Heaven (Director's cut) on the weekend, and it's just one of my favorites, still. I recommend it. Anyone have seen the extended cut already?
  18. And what kind of cosntitutionalism would be able to get an Aerys down the throne? I mean, he was mad. Insane. What, they'll get a constitution that if a mentally sick dude sits on the throne next time they can overthrow him? Who will decide he's mad? A great council? What if he has no heirs? What if his entire dynasty has no heirs? Who can give a diagnosis in Westeros? These are pretty big problems. The cure for this was pretty simple. Kill the man already, or let him die on the throne. I don't get why people of Westeros chose none of these two solutions. I mean, if anyone would've gave a damn about the realm, they would've killed him, honestly. Isn't it better than getting into a plot that is as big as the continent? And of course later into war too.
  19. It might be hipocrisy, tho. What we are told to believe is that Lyanna had feelings to him before he "kidnapped" her (Harrenhall). We know Lyanna became so emoitional when he was singing a sad song. But this isn't doubtless, for now. But then we know for sure Rhaegar loved her, even if she didn't love him, for two reasons: -He gave her the crown of winter roses. -Daenerys saw a vision where Rhaegar, with his last breath, whispered a woman's name. One can imagine it wasn't Elia or Rhaella. But it might not be hipocrisy. Lyanna might have believed in the Targaryen poligamy thing, and a betrothal was a betrothal, not a consumed marriage. Or he was just so in love with him that she didn't even bother with such things as marriage and betrothal (But I don't believe this can be fit into the story, given the nature of the 2 characters).
  20. They broke their contract once, but Harry Strickland did not want to do it the second time (when there was an idea to get to Daenerys under a contract with the Yunkish). I doubt they'll do it for a second time ever, I expect them to leave Aegon's cause if he dies or they get wiped out heavily. Other than that, we don't really know enough about any other sellsword companies that might have any good reputation for being so reliable and not abandoning a cause quickly.
  21. Altough Maegor was passed over by the Great Council, they did it because the boy was an infant, only few months old. Then of couse, Aerion naming him Maegor gave matter to the folk to talk about Maegor I and how bad a name Maegor is, but the Great Council gave a damn about it, they knew Aerion was insane and meant it a joke (proof that he was insane). They passed over him after all for two reasons: -Being only a few months old (noone wanted a child king) -They were afraid the boy inherited his father's insanity. (And people, one can imagine not the smarter ones, started talking about Maegor I and how the boy shouldn't be king for having such a name, but his name didn't really influence the outcome, if it did at all). Also, the fact that such a thing happened (I mean passing over the rightful heir), and later nothing bad came out of it (Like a rebellion or usurpation) makes me believe that the boy didn't live long enough to want to push his claims.
  22. I wasn't saying it's impossible. But it never happened for a reason. That's it. One can imagine such people in Dorne (a parallel to Spain), but not around the northern part of the Narrow-Sea (I'd say southern baltic regions). Not to mention that Summer Islander culture is pretty isolated. But I'm not arguing, because it could've happened the way you say. The problem is that HotD's not colorblind casting. Colorblind casting would've been if anyone could play any character, or even no matter the bloodrelations (brothers being from different races, just as children and their parents). That's not what HBO is doing with HotD. They are making characters parts of other races on purpose. That means that white people can't get the role of Corlys and black people still can't get other roles. This type of casting isn't the same to what Netflix used on The Witcher or Bridgerton. If it would've been colorblind casting, I wouldn't complain here. Then give a chance to everyone to play anyone, no matter how different the person is from the character he's playing, but don't go with what HotD is doing. Of course I'm a book fan and I'd be the most satisfied with the most accurate adaptation, but colorblind casting wouldn't ruin the show for me. This does, in a way.
  23. I agree with you, tho, it has to be pointed out that The Witcher pretty much had colorblind casting, while HotD's casting isn't that. They cast people from different races on purpose. Or at least, that's what we think at this point. I would have much less problems (I'd be totally fine) with an entire colorblind casting than making certain characters parts of other races.
  24. How did I earn that? Please, explain to me, I'm just too dumb to see it. The main issue with this is that Corlys was the first big adventurer Velaryon, altough his ancestors always been men at sea. It would make more sense for him to get married to a Summer Islander than being the child of one. You're just hilarious, man. I've just said a couple times before that I'm not having problem with all this because House Velaryon loses their Valyrian traits. Thanks for paying attention, I guess. I originally pointed out that Corlys will not fit into the picture because Westerosi society is based on medieval Europe, and I pointed out Corlys originally having valyrian traits as another layer on this matter. It pretty much fits. There are examples for black people portraying originally white characters in films related to IRL history, so yea. Anyway, I feel like I'm gonna stop arguing because I achieve nothing with all this, but getting called racist. So, avoiding conflict, I will be.
  25. But that won't be the case in HoTD. I mean, in GoT there were like 2 dialogs about the Doom, about the Conquest and how Daenerys is the last Targaryen (which most people interpreted as being the last Valyrian too). This time people will learn about entire cities filled with valyrian-looking people, and another significant valyrian house, the Velaryons. Are you trying to tell me that it is the right way to portray the second valyrian house the fans will get to know as black people? I'm sure it's not. And I'm sure the showrunners know how D&D fucked GoT up, and they don't want to get into the same trap. Corlys being black is just simply the result of 2020, and how Hollywood got influenced by that dark year. If someone would post out that he wants to see white people as enslaved africans in America people would call him mad. Or that he wants a white man to play Black Panther, or a chief of an african tribe. It's just about respecting cultural differences to me. I don't want to see only white people in the cinema, and I don't want to see white people playing such roles I mentioned above, as I don't want black people to play characters that are essentially white. I think IGN Hungary (simply the hungarian version of IGN) answered this question pretty well, pointing out that it ruins the experience for many people. This surely does it to me. Of course this doesn't ruin it to most people by now, but as I said, once this thing will be widely known, and 7-8 out of 10 people doesn't like the direction HBO is taking with HotD and Corlys' casting, and these people hsven't read the books, but know a little bit about the lore. And as you pointed out, it'll be about getting to know the valyrians. How will they get to know them, once they're not portrayed as one? And don't get me wrong, it's not the visual traits that make you valyrian, but that's not how someone watching it will interpret the whole thing.
  • Create New...