Jump to content

Daeron the Daring

Members
  • Posts

    1,530
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Daeron the Daring

  1. Hungary's Fidesz seems to be having its largest and most impactful political crisis so far. Starting in February, the whole thing has no foreseeable end.

    It all started with the presidential pardon of a vice director of a childcare facility, who was convicted for trying to pressure the victims of abuse to retract their statement against the director of said facility. The pardon was granted about a year ago, April 2023, the information leaked this February. (Big news for a small country, overall) It quickly became a sensation known as the "Pedophile scandal", which was a big hit on Fidesz's right-wing legitimacy, as it campaigned and continues to do so on protecting traditional family values, putting LGBT+ people in the same basket as pedophiles and physical/mental abuse inside the family with their legislative 'reforms'. The reaction was the probably largest protests during Fidesz' reign and eventual resignation of President Novák Katalin and Minister of Justice Varga Judith, who were both crucial mouthpieces in said campaign for protecting the model of traditional families. For example, Varga Judith was an outspoken opposer for the need of judicial reforms against violence and abuse inside the family, deeming it unnecesarry (altough Hungary ranks really high on domestic abuse index, every third family is subjected to it). (Keep in mind this is very important for later events) On the Other hand Novák Katalin was presented as the ideal conservative, yet empowered woman. Her position was a formal one, thou, as the president holds close to no true political power in Hungary (it's elected by the Parliament, hence why Orbán is the boss as prime minister), but both politicians were crucial in the sense that they were the only female MPs inside the Fidesz-KDNP coalition, and among the most likely candidates to fulfill Orbán's position as his successors, especially Novák Katalin. Overall, this scandal doesn't take a big toll on Fidesz' current popularity, but it seemingly severely undermined their future.

    It impacted the Protestant Church as well, as it was the leading figure of said church who proposed K. Endre as a candidate for the presidential pardon that was initiated primarily because of the Pope's visit. He resigned too under jnternal and external pressure. This guy, Balog Zsolt and K. Endre too are heavily associated with Fidesz, which is simply the reason why he was chosen for the presidential pardon.

    Shit goes even more south as another scandal hits about at the same time, when Varga Judith's ex-husband, Magyar Péter, lawyer, formerly important background figure for Fidesz, comes out to the public to expose the party, with no concrete evidence yet (but a lot of promises), but basically reinforcing the already widely accepted notion (in opposition circles) that Fidesz is building an oligarchic autocracy, demolishing democracy and free market competition.

    Not a new notion, as I said; in the mid 2010's, Simicska Lajos, former Fidesz member (with various positions), oligarch, former college roommate of Orbán, also came out with similar statements and claims. At the time, his grievance was that he was getting f**ked financially (6th richest person in Hungary at the time), and upon trying to oppose the tax reforms that would impact him severely, his employees in leading positions at every sector of his conservative media 'empire' resigned en masse, as a means to oppose his attempt to criticize Orbán's actions. He claimed this was organized by Fidesz, to whom the resigning employees owed loyalty. He was one of the largest beneficiaries of the Fidesz regime, but fell out of favor and his wealth and he faded into obscurity. The same is suspected of Magyar Péter, who, in ihs 'coming out', levied (indirectly, subtlely) grievances of his and his ex-wife Varga Judith as the reason he came clean as well as his own moral compass, which is devoted to democracy. Before this, he was known for two minor scandals (along with his ex wife), one in regards to buying up housing in Budapest roughly worth 500.000 euros (with the overwhelming majority coming from bank loans), and taking the special family home-creating loan created by Fidesz (called CSOK-Családi Otthonteremtő Kedvezmény) on their weekend house at Lake Balaton, which is illegal and had been repaid. This is a kind of loan that's meant to make it easier for families of at least 3 children to find housing, as such it doesn't require repayment. In reality, btw, it serves as a double scheme, insanely inflating housing prices (they go crazy-crazy), and boosts the construction industry, both of which markets are heavily owned by oligarchs associated with Fidesz.

    Either way, even in light of this knowledge, opposition voters became enthusiastic about him. He planned a large gathering at March 15 (national holiday of Hungary, always a point of political tension) in Budapest, where it was suspected that he intends to reveal his intent to form a new party. The gathering was a big success for him, and he did just that.

    Now, on a sidenote, he openly said from the beginning he is politically right-wing, and not in any way a leftist liberal, he just couldn't stand the corruption he saw at Fidesz any more. Interestingly, both in 2018 and 2022, the main opposition candidates against Fidesz and Orbán were right wing candidates, Vona Gábor (even more right than Orban/Fidesz) and Márki-Zay Péter (center-right), so him potentially becoming one as well wouldn't be out of fashion. The opposition parties are very hostile to Magyar Péter, unlike the voters (the only party with a stubborn voter basis is DK-Demokratikus Koalíció, those guys hate Magyar too).

    As the news of Magyar's intentions hit, something new arises. News come up that Rogán Antal (unpopular figure even among Fidesz and its voters, altough formerly a popular Fidesz politician even among opposition circles), second only to Orbán Viktor inside Fidesz, initiated a plan to expose the reason for Magyar's divorce (from now former Minister of Justice Varga Judith): The journalist in question claims he was asked (by associates of Rogán Antal) to write an article that claims Varga Judit was subjected to abuse inside her marriage, hence why the divorce. He was promised evidence as well, but instead exposed the whole scheme instantly. When news hit that Fidesz intends to throw mud at Magyar, pieces seemed to fall together, as Varga Judit not long before this shared a video on social media about abuse inside the family. This seemed so planned that Magyar Péter mad ea post on Facebook about it, dedicated directly to his  now ex-wife, saying that he doesn't understand why she does this to their children and him, as he was always private about his family matters and respectful of her character, and that he doesn't knoe what they (Fidesz) could be blackmailing her with. This, in any circumstance, means bad things for Fidesz too, as such a notion undermines Varga Judiths' position regarding domestic violence as former Minister of Justice, as she was subjected to domestic abuse herself, yet remained a stubborn opposer of any legislative reform in the matter.

    This led to Magyar's first television appearance, where he, with a slightly angry attitude explained his future plans: He takes certain cases to court with all he supposedly has, and only after that he intends to release his case to the public. For now, he exposed certain meetings/gatherings between oligarchic elites and Fidesz politicians (the two share a segment of each other) that he himself attended and levied the heaviest criticism against the big man Orbán Viktor (namely discrediting Orbán's talking point that he doesn't engage in business of any sort on a personal level), family members and friends of his (especially his 'successful' oligarch son-in-law Tiborcz István), and Rogán Antal. Hungary's richest man and childhood friend of Orbán from his hometown, Mészáros Lőrinc (or as we call him: Lölő) is such a well established oligarch that there's no debate around him, for example, Magyar himself barely mentioned his name.

    The opposition voters have a great hope in him as of now, despite seeing some truth to the fact that Magyar fell into his current position as a result of falling out of the inner elite circle he formerly was a part of, and that he started this campaign of his about two weeks after his ex-wife, Varga Judith resigned as Minister of Justice and stopped being the leading candidate for Fidesz on the EU parliamentary elections, which is widely considered damage control, and not a result of external pressure. The couple also intended to divorce in 2021, but it's assumed she was pressured into waiting until after the 2022 elections by Fidesz (because divorce is sinful to God, how dare they). Their separation became public knowledge about a year ago, April 2023. Honestly, it's nothing short of a soap opera. 

    Details outside this are largely unimportant. Fidesz is corrupt, everybody knows this, even my fascist uncle admits to it. (The guy, a naturalised hungarian from Romania, travels 500kms just so he can vote in Hungary at his hungarian adress. He could do the same thing from his house. Interestingly, he doesn't vote in any romanian elections, which would be a fair position if not in light of all this.)

    Edit: some additional info and corrections.

  2. 11 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

    There's nothing really for Ned to hide if it isn't Ashara. No point in naming anyone.

    The point I'm making is that he wouldn't have anything to hide, anyway. Even if it was Ashara, or he would have people believe she's Jon's mother.

    11 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

    But Ned never tells anyone (other than Robert) that it wasn't Ashara--Cat says he got really angry, told her never "to ask about Jon," demanded where she'd heard the name, and made the whole of Winterfell shut up.

    Because it doesn't matter who Jon's mother is. That much comes off clear from his attitude. He would have you believe Jon's parentage is unimportant, because the opposite of that is true. And answering a question would always just raise another one.

    Plus, you don't know how early into their marriage Catelyn asked this, and how insecure he might have seen his own, fresh marriage. It was probably not much after Eddard came back, which is when Jon's existence was a sensation for the servants and courtiers of Winterfell. He made it clear he doesn't want speculation around it and Catelyn never again raised the question, for 10+ years.

    You don't know what Ned would've said for the same question to Catelyn, if she was to ask it before he left for South, but the question wasn't raised because it didn't matter. Because he made it not matter.

    11 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

    And Cat is left thinking that Ned must have loved Jon's mother "fiercely." The opposite of the effect you note would be best. 

    Well, I don't disagree with you on facts. I'm saying you look at what Ned did do, and what he might have wanted to accomplish. That his attitude backfired in some ways is just depth to the plot, but I would say he was pretty successful about keeping Jon's parentage a secret and shut up speculations early, wouldn't you agree?

    11 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

    When Cersei mentions Ashara, Ned just says nothing. One assumes Cersei thus continues to think she's right, not that Ned didn't care for Ashara. 

    He doesn't have to. For all he cares, especially at that point, Cersei Lannister can think what she wants.

    11 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

    And Harwin suggests to Arya that Ned loved Ashara. That's the story that seems to have gotten out--the opposite of what you suggest.

    He suggests that it's not a long stretch that Ned Stark, well into his youth, could've developed feelings for Ashara or anyone else for that matter. This does not mean he had anything to do with what Ashara had gone trough at the tourney at Harrenhal and onwards.

    The people that spill the tea about their affairs is the likes for Petyr Baelish. Even if Ned was a honorable figure in a romantic novel, keeping his beloved's name a secret would fall into the idea of that style's honor, not telling it to anyone.

    11 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

    So . . . given that Ned won't talk about it, and that he won't argue with people who think it's Ashara. . . what  is the point of naming Wylla? Especially once we find out that she's a real person living with a noble house who thinks she's Jon's mother? What's the point of this? 

    It's odd.

    People are different, and different answers satisfy them. I think it's obvious Wylla's name was prepared for occasions like when it was revealed. 

    And the fact he deliberately ended the rumours at Winterfell suggests he does care about Ashara's name being brought up. Robert, for example, seems to be acting based on information he in part forgot, he doesn't speculate about the social class of Jon's mother. He seems to know it was just a commoner.

    Finally, it wasn't the right place, nor the right time to go defensive against Cersei, to whom he just revealed he knows her children aren't Robert's.

    You say it's odd, I say it all makes sense. Not because I know every miniature detail about the cover-up of Jon's identity, but because it worked. Because nobody found out who his parents are, and nobody cared either, outside of Catelyn, of course.

    Gossip and speculation of another's life is a daily habit of people. Why wouldn't the men of Winterfell engage in it, why wouldn't Robert ask his best friend about it like it's no big deal, why wouldn't Cersei get defensive in her position? Ned and the people around Jon knew this, they came up with a basic strategy and lie that required 5 minutes to fabricate.

  3. It's not a mistery.

    Not a lot of people give a single tought about Eddard Stark south of the Neck. Even less would about a bastard. Bastards are not a mistery, nor a sensation. 

    There is nothing for Eddard Stark to hide, but it's, one one hand, pointless to throw mud at the name of the woman she might have had feelings for (regardless of what she felt about him), because her pregnancy is just a speculation On the other hand, it's much more believable that Ned Stark, 'famous' for his honor would need to dump his sexual needs in a military campaign, away from his wife. After all, he's just a man as well, they'd think. If he said Jon is Ashara's son, it would imply that he pursued a relationship with another noblewoman as a married man. Implying that Jon's mother holds no relevancy for him is the best for Catelyn, the best for himself, the best for Ashara and the best for Jon as well.

  4. 18 hours ago, Corvus corone said:

    I fully agree as I had similar thoughts, but the longer I thing about it, the more I get convinced that the Last Hero/Night's King on the one hand and Azor Ahai/the Bloodstone Emperor are two independent entities and not all one and the same person. While pondering these thoughts and discussing them in the forum, I'm getting more and more convinced that the Long Night was the result of two events that coincided: A darkness that affected Planetos as a whole, and the return of the Others that affected Westeros, but probably not Essos nor Sothoryos. Tales of the Long Night are shared by different cultures across the globe, and they all agree that it was a darkness that lasted for years, if not decades. Old Nan specifically mentions that "in that darkness, the Others came for the first time", which suggests that it was already dark when they entered the scene. As for me, I'm pretty sure that this describes a unique event that is clearly distinct from a "regular" winter, which is never completely dark. What caused that darkness is up for debate, whether it was a supervolcano or a cosmic impact or something else, but I prefer the idea of a cosmic event because the Doom of Valyria, the biggest eruption in recorded history, did not cause a similar darkness, and because of several hints given in the story and the world book linking the Long Night to meteorites and/or something happening to the moon. Fun fact, when Jojen tells Bran about his green dreem of the sea flooding Winterfell, I speculated that this might be a tsunami caused by the impact of the Red Comet because that what happens in one of my favourite German fantasy book series - and that was back in 2010 or 2011.

    So, maybe we have to distinguish between two coinciding events that are remembered as the Long Night: A global darkness caused by a vulcanic or impact Winter, and the returnof the Others caused by the Andals. But how might these two events be connected, other than happening at the same time? I have a few ideas which are not fully fleshed out and certainly lack proper evidence. One is that there is no furher link and that they just coincided with Westeros at its centre, the Andals in the north and Pre-Valyrians/GEotD people in the south. In another idea, I'm thinking about the possibility that the Andals and the GEotD might have further links. TWOIAF introduces two odd details: First, it suggests that the Bloodstone Emperor founded the Church of Starry Wisdom, which is a weird detail given that this religion plays such a minor role and was only mentioned once in the main series, probably unnoticed or easily forgotten by most readers. Why mentioning this detail at all? Other people have already suggested a connection between the CoSW and the Faith of the Seven, which I consider at least possible due to the Faith's clear association with the stars (for instance, the Starry Sept in Oldtown as the historical main seat) and that it is based on the Catholic Church. But to be fair, many religions are based on or at least influenced by the stars, so this might just be a coincidence. An intriguing, but purely speculative idea is that Septon Barth found out something about that and that this was the reason why Baelor I ordered Barth's work to be destroyed, but other than this being exactly the kind of things Barth would love writing about, there is, of course, no evidence.
    Another odd detail mentioned in the world book is that it suggests out of the blue that the Andals, unlike what is believed by most, might have originated south of the Silver Sea and not in the Axe peninsula of Nortwestern Essos or in Andalos. Both claims might actually be true because that's what actually happened over and over again in our world; no human population has just one origin. I cannot really make sense of this detail, but Crowfood's Daughter suggested that Lengii and hence the Bloodstone Emperor's tiger-woman bride have ties to the Fisher Queens of the Silver Sea and the Tall Men of the same area, unfortunately based on the wrong assumption that the Silver Sea was much bigger. Maybe there is a link between the Andals and the Tall Men, since the original Andals are described as being tall as well? However, the descriptions of hair and skin colour don't match, so I'm careful.

    Gosh, luckily this is all just speculations about fiction. I really feel like a conspiracy theorist wearing an aluminum hat, but unlike in real life, there is at least the chance that some higher power (i.e. GRRM) indeed planned all this. Any thoughts, on this, evidence for or against it?

    Well, I for one, don't think all the legends actually speak of a single person, but I do think multiple ones can speak of one. As such, I'd definitely put the Bloodstone Emperor and Azor Ahai as a parallel to the Night's King and The Last Hero, with both pairs making a hero-archetype, however, I'd argue the inspiration for cementing such historical figures varies from region to region. I don't think the westerosi Last Hero was the Bloodstone Emperor or Azor Ahai even. The Prince That Was Promised falls closer to the BE and AA in nature, with both TPTWP and BE implying noble origins and AA and TPTWP being used interchangebly by, for example, Melisandre. Altough one would wonder what kind of nobles forge their own swords (Daynes?)....

    Either way, I feel like we can either speak of different historical figures or other stories being inspired by westerosi ones of the Last Hero. At this point the Wall is a heavier argument than five fortifications across a mountain range we haven't got the chance to meet or measure in scale. I prefer the former, but not based on technicalities. It's more the reaffirming feeling that every society needs its hero, not foreign ones that could still, in the established setup of Georgeworld, technically be quick enough to fight a Long Night on multiple fronts.

    Expanding on this, my view on the whole saviour hero was inspired by high school education. In literature we were taught how different cultures and religions of the Antiquity, with no communication and connection between each other formed similar views. beliefs, gods, heroic deities, etc. Mythological and religious archetypes, basically. It's honestly fascinating how often  ideas or ideas of deities/fictional figures (good and bad) and major geographical events would show immense amount of similarities despite developing entirely independently of each other. The development of the idea of something we call a/the soul. In no way I'm an expert on the topic, of course we can talk about something like a great flood, but what at the time caught me about the idea of this is how similar deities were developed, across continents.

    Anyway, the Last Hero might be something very similar to this (hello, the hero's journey?). I imagine George can consciously set up something like this in his own fiction with the idea that people develop similar ideas and fantasies. Interestingly, the development of the cold and evil spirits does seem to be a westerosi 'invention', and I'll explain why: The Long Night of Essos is said to have originated from Asshai, the Shadowlands. A place that should be having a mediterranean/tropical climate, except it's barren and dark. Never described as volcanic, as far as I'm aware, yet speculated to had been the birthplace/habitat of dragons. Interestingly, Asshai's explicitly noted for its export of dragonglass/obsidian. I wouldn't be surprised if in case of the Long Night of the (far) East was, in contrast to that of Westeros, caused by volcanic eruptions. But following these footsteps, this could've caused Westeros' Long Night and drastic decrease of temperature. On the other hand, Valyria's fall causes no such thing, altough it should in theory. Maybe it sunk first, then erupted? Not what the illustrations support, but there wasn't anybody left to describe it. Or just divine judgement shenanigans, the Gods contained the destruction for reasons (they must have, I mean).

    As a sidenote, George had worked on the fictional world of Elder Scrolls, which, If I'm not mistaken, has tiger/big cat humanoids. My knowledge on the subject is nothing more.

    I must say tho, altough I really like such speculations (It felt nostalgic reading this thread, and in particular your post. It's been long since I first drowned myself in the ASOIAF Wiki pages), my original post was focused more on Westeros because I think the story of the Night's King/Last Hero bear immense significance to Jon's story. He's ultimately meant to parallel their supposed struggles, I think, and position us, the readers, in a way we might find resurrected Jon's actions confusing, and his character's nature much greyer, achieving this with us losing Jon as a POV altogether. He might have to venture far North (accompanied by Daenerys, maybe), seek the guidance of men, children, even that of the Others, present controversial solutions, fight the battle for an unclear outcome, etc. I don't know what I mean by all that.

  5. 2 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

    I think Robert Arryn is just as likely to be the means by which the Sansa / Alayne dilemma and LF's hold over Sansa could be resolved as she decides once again to protect the innocent or helpless Robert (as with Dontos on Joffrey's birthday).

    My personal belief is that Petyr will just play his cards well, and karma won't be coming for him after all. I think it'd be a very good moral for Sansa that you'll always have puch people surround you. 

    I do believe Sansa will manage to break away from his net (unsurprisingly, not a wild take), eventually outgrowing him in political weight and wit, but there'll be no showdown, only quietly falling out of favor (and essentially trying to hold onto any influence he still has on her), regardless of what may happen to Robert Arryn. I'd be surprised if he died anytime soon, it's been told so many times it's due that it becomes less and less likely, but Sansa will be faced with Petyr's scheming nature regardless, she will realise her naive collaborativeness but seek no revenge, maybe in fear of blunder as well.

  6. On 3/17/2024 at 12:25 AM, JoyfulJoy said:

    God Dang, why is there so much people here thinking Sansa is gungho for killing Robert Arryn? Like yes she made mistakes especially as a child, but since when was that means she's going to kill a freaking child?

    At one point she becomes complicit, if she hadn't yet. Her future is clearly set out to turn on Littlefinger and stop being a puppet in his 'game'. Right now she's deepdiving into it. It's something that we expect to change, but yes, in a way, Robert is in the process of being poisoned/murdered. And if he's gonna cling onto his own life a bit too long, Petyr might have to take more effective measures.

    I'd be lying if I didn't instantly feel how morally wrong Sansa's position in this is when I read the book. She's just a child as well, ofcourse.

  7. Welcome to the board!:D Nice to see new members writing long articles.

    On 3/16/2024 at 12:31 AM, The Vanguard said:

    My theory is built on the assumption that Illyrio is fAegon's father, and Serra is definitely a Targaryen descendant. It may or may not be the case, though it very probably is.

    While it is always an itriguing quest to find an answer to the unraveled fate of the Targaryens unaccounted for, the scale of our speculation often outgrows the boundaries of probability. I myself like to engage in these discussions, but I also treat them under a different  mindset. 

    As such, it's not really likely that George would set up secret identities and generations of bloodlines on such a scale. I find in unlikely that, say, Aerion Brightflame's bastard descendants of the possible ones of Maegor Targaryen carry any sort of relevancy in case they exist. 

    On the long list of unlikely ideas, however, it's not a wild take to think Maegor Targaryen did have descendants that would fade into obscurity or never have been prominent. However, Maegor falls in line with a couple other Targaryens of the time who would have nothing noteworthy to be mentioned for, and their fate is largely up to speculation. Who did Aegon's sisters marry, or even Vaella 'the Simple'? However, these three were all women, trough the lense of a patriarchic feudal society they are significantly less important than Maegor Targaryen, the rightful king in accordance to primogeniture.

    I'd rule out the possibility that Maegor had a childless marriage with Vaella, as she was his senior by 10 years. If he had children with any level of significance (children, who, say, didn't die in infancy), I guess we'd know of it, regardless of who he married. But it's not a wild take to think that he lived a bachelor's life up to age 26, when he died at Summerhall. If he had to leave the Seven Kingdoms for political reasons, I guess we'd be informed of it, since Egg's life and reign as well documented by the sources we got on him.

    This ultimately comes down on how much George wants tor rationalise such speculations. I'm not sure if people tought Varys or Illyrio were secretly Targaryens/Blackfyres before Young Griff made his appearance, but we're left with big cliffhangers. If we knew there is something to look at, we could allow ourselves to make bolder assumptions.

  8. I feel like, for the readers, working out a precise timeline of events is practically not possible. 

    George is the kind of writer that explores its story as he writes it, but he's also the kind of writer, according to himself, who doesn't leave ambiguity for himself. I think he once said he knows every Night's Watch member by name, because fiveliners and fillers have to live and breathe a whole life for him to be able to use them, down to the most absurdly minimal roles said characters must play.

    As such, I am convinced he knows what went down, because he doesn't allow himself ambiguity, and the inconsistencies are born alongside the knowledge of the truth. But the inconsistencies that are supposed to deceive us exist, and they make it hard to distinguish between false, true, misunderstood or misrepresented history. 

    The character of the supposed ultimate villain (say: Blood Emperor, Night's King) that brough the Long Night upon the World is heavily intertwined with that of the hero that helped end it (Azor Ahai, The Last Hero. TPTWP). I feel like even if these ultimate villains and heroes aren't a single person, they are a longer list of characters who's actions often served in creating villains and heroes alike. 

    Let's not move away from Westeros: The Night's King is the 13th Commander of the Night's Watch, and the Last Hero is the last one remaining of a group of heroes of 13 individuals. These two supposedly different characters might have lived hundreds of years apart, or may have been a single one:

    • Why was the Night's King explicitly the king of the Night? Was the Long Night not over by his time? 
    • If yes, how could the Wall be built during the Long Night, sor far up north?
    • Was the Wall a final solution or a tool to victory?
    • If the Wall couldn't be built during the Long Night (I think it's obvious how impossible that would be, with every magical element in consideration), why are the Others present by the time of the 13th Lord Commander?

    It seems as tough we can construct a fairly convincing story: The Last Hero is the Night's King, who along with his 12 predecessors/companions were the first of leaders of an alliance and order of men against the Night, which would later develop into the Night's Watch we know today. It was, however, this 13th hero that becomes important, as he reaches the Children of the Forest. Interestingly, we are told the 12 other LC's/heroes give their life for the cause, and yet the Others only follow our ultimate hero, creeping up to him, closer and closer, as per Old Nan. But he does reach the Children of the Forest, who either provide a lethal weapon against the White Walkers or a means to bargain and reconcile with them, which ultimately results in the establishment of The Wall. However, our last hero either gets corrupted by the force he managed to struck by a blow so huge it had to retreat, or he fails to present his end of the bargain as something acceptable to the people of Westeros. The people of Westeros must preserve his legacy, his heroic deeds and (what they perceive) as his failure. But to make it easier to swallow and process for the generations to come, to not ruin the hope the Last Hero gave, they separate these two into a romantic hero and a romantic villain.

    If we had to make this person into a single character, it'd be Brandon the Builder, but I'm taking a long shot with this one. Brandon the Builder is also a loosely used mythical figure, but obviously the point of singularity, the one thing associated with him we don't question is when we talk of him in relation to the Wall. 

    Either way, the world, at some point, will be in need of another such hero, who fulfills his duty to the fullest and doesn't fail in the process, or gets stopped in the process. Or the original hero was always meant to create a status quo, which is meant to be replaced by a final solution.

    The Children of the Forest are an interesting bunch. They don't feel like the guilty type (which makes them look guilty) in the creation of the Others, but they do have a solution at hand, unsurprisingly.

    I feel like the parallels arise with the work of Tolkien, with the first men, Great Empire of the Dawn, proto-Valyrians or just every human in general paralleling Númenor (and it's downfall the Long Night) and the Children of the Forest paralleling the Valar. The establishment of the Realms in Exile and the victory over Sauron is defeating the Long Night, but the Ring isn't destroyed, nor are the Others gone, because of the failure of Isildur/The Last Hero. And yet, we're told by George himself: This isn't the same story, so: Will George destroy the Ring, and was it the Valar who caused the Long Night? Did Isildur's Corpse Queen sway him to the dark side? Isildur's not misunderstood, was The Last Hero different? We know there's no Ring to be destroyed, without the Ring, there's nothing to corrupt the Night's King.

  9. 8 hours ago, Potsk said:

    I see your "Illyrio is Aerion's grandson" and raise you: Illyrio is the Tattered Prince's son, and the Tattered Prince is Prince Maegor, son of Aerion.

    Hear me out: Bloodraven and Shiera had a daughter, who was the lover of Rodrik Stark, the Wandering Wolf. They had a child together, the Tattered Prince, who (obviously) is the father of Illyrio. Now the backstory of Illyrio's mother is complicated, because this woman was the granddaughter of Alys Rivers and Aemond Targaryen trough their son, who got abducted as a child by the greem men of the Isle fo Faces, but left after a hundred years on an important quest. This guy, still young (magic), married the daughter of Bittersteel and Calla Blackfyre, and the two had a daughter, Illyrio's mother, and a son. We'll return to this son soon, but let's go back to Illyrio, who as a part Targaryen, part Blackfyre and part Stark, found himself finding his long lost Blackfyre cousin Serra Blackfyre, the older sister of Vaerys Blackfyre. Their parents were Maegor Targaryen and the secret daughter of Maelys the Monstrous (quite a beauty, actually. Remember, the Blackfyre line only died out on the male line, becaus ethey forgot about his secret daughter). Anyway Illyrio is the father of Young Griff, but this line ends here, because, I hope you can follow me on this, we still have to talk about the son of the Tattered Prince, because Tattered Prince Jr. met the descendant of Bellegere Otherys and Aegon IV, who became the mother of the current Black Pearl of Bravos and Jaqen H'ghar, the faceless asassin, whose real name is Rhaevaegaerys. 

    That's it for today, I'm still figuring out what's the connection between this branch and the bastards fathered by Aerion during his exile. One of these supposed bastards, who (obviously) existed, might have been the mother of Maelys the Monstrous. Who was a Targaryen-Blackfyre hybrid, hence the two heads. The reason the two heads are exclusive to Maelys and are absent in the case of Illyrio's Targaryen-Blacfyre mother is because the son of Alys Rivers and Aemond Targaryen weren't the descendants of Aegon IV. 

  10. 1 hour ago, Alden Rothack said:

    Too far south for that given the sheer size of westeros

    The influence of byzantine architecture extended to North Africa, the Levant, and Asia Minor. (As these places were ruled by the ERE for centuries, and the RE beforehand) Especially the Levant and Asia Minor are a perfect parallel with Dorne when it comes to geography and the climate.

  11. 4 hours ago, Aldarion said:

    But in the end, people will believe what they want to believe. And while Daenerys' dragons are quite a big argument, so are Dothraki - and not in her favor. Not to mention how her behavior may change in the future:

    Well, I'm not gonna try to convince you on wether the dothraki will cross the sea or not. I, personally, simply, hope they stay in Essos.

    But to think that anyone would oppose Daenerys except those without a choice is a long shot. With Westeros' history, if there was a random ass nobody with three dragons and 3000 men, half the realm would rally behind said person. If said random person was a Targaryen, and especially one with a mildly sympathetic character, most will do. Because they did do it when it was a maniac lunatic without any dragons. Aegon will be a good demonstration of the "loyalty" the nobles of Westeros have for Targaryens.

    Speaking of whom, nobles ultimately care about themselves, it's a romantic construct for us and (very importantly) them too to believe they care about the smallfolk outside materially depending on their own portion of said population, no matter how we twist it. Even when they are decent people. (And yes, this includes Daenaerys) That the lords of Westeros would care about a dothraki rampage on the continent would only be true if their own domains were also in line for the same fate. Nobody had, would or will object to looting and pillaging the enemy, because that's what the Five Kings already did. If I was one such lord, the main thing that would bother me is that I'd have no benefit from all the looting, possible land and wealth redistribution.

    The people and factions she will have to fight is the ones she will want to take revenge on. The ball will be in her court because it will be a challenge on her character to show mercy and ultimately focus on the right thing, which is the coming winter. Aegon V got it right that the nobility wouldn't oppose his reforms if he had dragons.

  12. 1 hour ago, A Bong of Ice and Fire said:

    What I hate most is all the YouTubers saying The Winds of Winter is never coming out and the series will not be finished. I hate that negativity. My gut tells me TWoW will be out in the relatively near future, and the series will be finished.

    Goddaym, time is relative.

  13. 4 hours ago, Alester Florent said:

    The thing about "Viserys" as a name in this context is that it's not just Rhaegar who does it. The Aeg-; Vis-; Rhae- trio occurs a number of times throughout Targaryen history.

    No Targaryen has, so far as we know, ever been named after their parent, and only Rhae- names seem to be used parent-to-child (but never the same variant). But otherwise, the early Targs favour that trio of names and seem to do so within a single generation where possible:

    • Aegon I's children are ineligible.
    • Aenys names his three eldest children Aegon, Viserys and Rhanea.
    • Aegon the Uncrowned can't call his kids Aegon (not least because they're girls) but does call one daughter Rhaella, despite the mother being Rhaena. This is an anomaly.
    • Jaehaerys calls his eldest son Aegon but he dies young. He then doesn't use any of the other names, perhaps to leave them clear for the following generation.
    • Aemon names his daughter Rhaenys. Baelon names his first son Viserys; his third son would have been Aegon, making another trio in the same generation. (What's curious here is that Daemon is named first).
    • Vis-names are unavailable for Viserys I, but he uses Rhaenyra and Aegon for two of his first three children.
    • Rhaenyra can't use Rhae- names, but Daemon produces (with first Laena and then Rhaenyra) a Rhaena, Aegon and Viserys, as well as doubling up on the Vis- names with a stillborn Visenya. Again, Baela is the "anomaly", albeit she's obviously named after Daemon's father.

    Now, if the derided-but-I-think-probably-correct theory is true, that the prophecy about the dragon's having three heads dated back to the time of Aegon I, was lost during the Dance, and was subsequently rediscovered by Jaehaerys II and/or Rhaegar, this is the point at which we'd expect to see that trio of name-forms fall out of favour. While "Aegon" continues to see use, it's nowhere near as regular or frequent as it had been before the Dance (especially, I imagine, since Aegon IV put a bit of a curse on it). Rhae- names are still used, but in forms never before seen (Rhaegel, Rhae). Vis- names disappear altogether. There is a general decline in use of "traditional" Targaryen names after the Dance, but the complete absence of Vis- names is noteworthy.

    Until Aerys II brings it back. Now, I wonder if this was in itself partly motivated by the prophecy: after all, Rhaegar was mooted as "The Prince" and his birth was somewhat spectacular, being associated with the attempt to bring back the dragons. And Jaehaerys II himself seems to have learned about the prophecy, perhaps not in time to name his own son, but enough to pass on the knowledge to Aerys or recommend names to him. Rhaegar/Viserys is only the second name pairing from the "name trio" since the Dance, the first being "Aegon V/Rhae". But Aerys only has two children during his own lifetime and Rhaegar seems to have decided at some point that he isn't the Prince himself, so instead he looks to the next generation.

    So far as we can surmise, Rhaegar's whole thing seems to be trying to produce the three heads of the dragon. That seems to be why he goes off with Lyanna in the first place. His eldest child he calls Rhaenys (in defiance of the apparent tradition of not using your own name), the first such Rhaenys since the Dance. His second is a boy, Aegon. So the third will, as someone said earlier, surely be Visenya. Now, he wasn't around for Jon's birth and his being a boy would probably have thrown him for a loop. But if Lyanna is clued into Rhaegar's plan, and sincerely believes that she is giving birth to the third head of the dragon, she would surely go for the nearest available name to Visenya, which is Viserys.

    Personally, it's the only Targaryen name for Jon I think has any predictable justification for it. Sure, it might be Jaehaerys or Aemon, but why would we assume so? In-character, there seems little (or no) more reason for it than his being called Daeron or Maekar.

    However, I also think that Lyanna didn't name Jon at all. If Jon is a trueborn Targaryen, and decides to adopt that identity, I think he'll have to choose his own name, in which he might well go with Aemon as a tribute to his mentor. But that would be Jon's choice, for reasons pertinent to Jon, not the choice of his parents who seem to have no reason to use that name over any other.

    Well, Jaehaerys really is nothing but a wild guess: It would be befitting for Rhaegar to use the name, since he seemed like the guy who wants to follow the steps of his ancestors with being a great monarch. I suppose Viserys falls into that category as well, the only advantage Jaehaerys has is that it's the name of Rhaegars' grandpa.

    On the other hand, we know for sure Maester Aemon and Rhaegar were exchanging letters. There is definitely ground laid down for him to honor this old relative with whom he might have developed a lot of types of relationships. It wouldn't be a far reach to say maester Aemon was at least a mentor to him, potentially a father figure. Plus, there's the reoccuring actual pattern with Aegons having Aemons as brothers.

    Because the pattern you talk about simply doesn't exist. And there are a couple smaller reasons to that, and two majors: the first one is the legacy of Rhaenys, Aegon's wife he loved, and mother of all Targaryens basically. The name Visenya was only ever used a single time after the original: In Rhaenyra's case. Which makes the connection obvious: She saw a role model in how a female Targaryen should and can stand on its two feet, independently, with her being the first woman meant to sit on the Iron Throne.

    On the male side, there's a major reason as to why the traditional names lost popularity as well: the appearance of Daeron, which is a cool name, otherwise it wouldn't have become the second-most used male name, losing only to Aegon, despite making its first appearance at halftime. Sure, it started out with *me* getting this name, but the reason it became popular is because Aegon III's wife, Daenaera Velaryon was a Velaryon cousins' daughter, who's name was Daeron Velaryon (son of Vaemond, btw). As a sidenote, Daeron Velaryon was likely at around a decade or even more older than Daeron the Daring, so Alicent/Viserys may have been introduced to the idea of the name by him. Anyway, Daeron I, the Young Dragon was clearly named after his Velaryon grandfather, and thus a new phenomena was born, which was naming your male child Daeron.

    The legacies of Aegon III and Aegon IV also made Aegon more unpopular. The Unworthy was named by Viserys I because he really loved his brotha Aegon III, not because Aegon was trending.

    The pattern is nonexistent, not because there isn't any attempt to (re)create it (besides possibly Rhaegar, who definitely named Aegon after the conqueror, and not after Aegon V, altough that could've been the sugar on top), but it's far from plausible that this idea could survive certain generations. There isn't a single Targaryen sibling trio that would qualify for it (except maybe the first 3 children of Aenys), but I'll give you that you made Viserys a third candidate for Jon's potential name for me, a close one behind Jaehaerys.

    I really looked into the origins of the names and their patterns, when it comes to valyrians (Targaryens and Velaryons) at one point. I tell you all this by memory, yes it's an unhealthy level of knowledge.

    For example, the name Daemon was introduced at a time when there was a Lord Daemon Velaryon still alive or not too long ago deceased, a former Hand of the King and whose grandfather was also Daemon Velaryon (Lord of the Tides during the conquest and ancestor of Targaryens via Alyssa Velaryon as well btw). But there was also a Daemion Targaryen, Lord of Dragonstone before the conquest. You factor these informations in, and there's no oddity as to why our Rouge Prince was named Daemon.

    A real oddity, for example, is why the Alyssa/Alysanne names didn't stick around.

     

     

  14. We do not know when Ned arrived at the Tower of Joy. He might have been there before, or just weeks after, as we have examples of women dying of birth months and 1-2 years after birth due to complications originating from it.

    The reason this matters, in my opinion, is that it determines if Jon was given any name by his mother, valyrian or not.

    If Lyanna survived for at least 1-2 days after giving birth, I assume he must've given a name to the baby. It would significantly improve the odds for this if they talked this trough with Rhaegar, which I guess is a 50/50, they had a lot of time on their hands. 

    I personally don't buy into this "trying to give birth to the original three conquerors of Westeros" idea that Rhaegar is supposed to have had. Yes, he might have been really into the "The dragon has three heads." idea, but he named his firstborn Rhaenys. Visenya is a well remembered character, but she is infamous for her own character and that of her side of the Targaryen family. Her story, not even in relation with Aegon, was in any way romantic, so I don't know why someone would want to rekindle the memory of the original trio. On the other hand, Rhaenys and Aegon did go down in history as the king and queen who loved each other. Him naming his children after them feels nothing more than honoring the legacy of the two people all Targaryens would descend from. Who's to say he excluded Viserys from his supposed vision anyway, who was much closer in age to his own children than him.

    That Lyanna would give Jon a valyrian name is no extra hardship for Eddard in my opinion, who already has to come up with a cover for the baby, regardless of what Lyanna did, and wether or not Jon is a trueborn in any absurd way. It doesn't seem to me that Lyanna discussed the question of his future once/if she dies, I feel like it wouldn't be true to their characters for either.

    Overall, while I tend to think it's more likely that Jon was given a name by Rhaegar/Lyanna than not, I think this part of his story/past would remain largely unimportant in comparison to his heritage, which actually is supposed to matter.

    On that note, I'd say Aemon and Jaehaerys are the most likely candidates for Jon's potential actual name. However, I think he will ultimately go down in history as Jon Snow, not as Jon Stark/Targaryen or *insert valyrian name* Targaryen, simply because his real name would become important only if he was a reigning monarch of any political entity (except if it was King-beyond-the-Wall/King of the Freefolk, which would cement the name Jon Snow). 

    True, in recent years, the possibility of King Jon objectively increased, but I still find it highly unlikely.

  15. 1 hour ago, Aejohn the Conqueroo said:

    I doubt he was ever in the dungeon, fwiw. Let's not forget that JH might have been the name of some murderer he replaced. If this was royally or Varys sponsored the switch could have been made at any time. If his target was Jon, then I'm sure left to his own devices Jaqen could have made far better time getting to the Wall. It could have been Ned, if the hirer believed that Ned would make the trip north with the recruits, but then what kind of outsmarting themselves sort of game were they playing? May as well just execute the traitor as Joffrey decided.

    I suspect that we will eventually find out that he was there on his own for reasons that might not be available to us at this time. 

    Not only the idea falls short of a purpose, it doesn't feel like anyone would have no better use of a supposed sum of money it takes to hire a faceless man. I imagine Varys of all people would know ways to be more cost efficient if he wanted to kill anyone (not to mention that he is responsible for certain people's safety. If something were to happenn to important inhabitants of the Red Keep, we know who'd they suspect collaborated or failed to provide safety).

    I highly doubt Jaqen was in Westeros (or rather in the dungeons of KL) on any westerosi nobleman's account.

    It's clear the HoBaW work with an agenda. My bet is he was doing homework for them or went completely rouge, maybe even after he was freed by Arya (altough he does seem committed to the principles of the teachings we assume he received).

  16. 37 minutes ago, JoyfulJoy said:

    GRRM said he likes to take inspiration from multiple, them being first man doesn't mean that their counterpart also has to be from Scotland.

    Also I moreso think Dorne is Moorish Spain/Palestine, hence the multi ethnic group.

    It always bothered me if dornish architecture could be inspired by byzantine one in some part as well.

  17. The Vale often felt to me like Bohemia (today's Czechia): A moderately sized country, isolated from the rest of the continent with a mountain range, very densely populated for its size, surprisingly a lot of cultivable land (the Vale is supposed to be a breadbasket if we take after George).

    The Riverlands, and to some extent the Crownlands too kinda feel like the Benelux region+Ruhr-Rhineland.

    The Westerlands is a lot like Austria, Hungary, or Burgundy with its supposed high level of urbanization and gold mines and mountain ranges. Maybe Eastern Roman Empire.

    Interestingly enough, the Narrow sea is much more like the North Sea/Baltic Sea, and the Sunset sea screams off Mediterranean vibes.

  18. 6 hours ago, StarkTullies said:

    First, incest.  Jon is a Targaryen, but he wasn't raised a Targaryen and he doesn't think like a Targaryen.  It is not "in his blood" to be disgusting: Targaryen incest comes from their elitist notion that they are racially superior (Dragons did not mate with the beasts of the field, and Targaryens did not mingle their blood with that of lesser men).  Jon doesn't think like that.

    OG Jon would be romantically invested in the person he thinks is her sister by this point. Not to mention that avunculate marriages are literally a thing in the lore.

  19. I feel like this question is largely pointless. Let's not forget half the realm supported a mad monarch purely for being a Targaryen, and a person who, by pure lack of luck, happened to stumble into a group of friendly relations.

    I strongly believe that a Stark, an Arryn or Tully would've supported a "Mad King" Aerys II, if they weren't pretty much caught up on the opposing side, simply because how the Starks operated throughout history (trying to give as few fucks about the south as possible), and how much of a loyal branch the Arryns and especially the Tullys were.

    Targaryen legitimacy was very much intact. So much so that it took a series of unfortunate events and mistakes for Aerys to fail.

    If a Targaryen shows up on the shores, on top of all with 3 dragons, few people would want to challenge that, unless it's a life-death question for them.

    But it's very clear that's not the fights Daenerys would have to fight anyway.

  20. 7 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

    If they were so concerned with the moral issue they would have joined the war earlier

    We're talking about countries that consciously exploited the rest of the world or anyone not white, paying for it with hundreds of millions of lives and uncomprehensible material value. Hitler openly praised the US for how smooth it runs society with racial segregation in the 30's.

  21. On 3/6/2024 at 4:06 PM, Aldarion said:

    But you are a fool if you think that Communists are not thinking, day and night, how to export their "glorious revolution" and murder everybody who does not agree with them.

    Can confirm.

    As a socialist, I think and develop my master plan of how to eliminate my pro-capitalist surroundings on a daily basis, starting with my family and friends.

×
×
  • Create New...