Odej

I don't like Oberyn either. And not just for the thing with Obara's mother, and I strongly believe that this was not an isolated case and that it's highly likely that he acted like an asshole to the mothers of the other sand snakes, but he gives me a sadistic vibe. Oberyn was widely known for poisoning his opponents through his blade, giving them a painful death. When we think that one of his victims was the Mountain we don't get upset at all, but it would be very naive to believe that all the victims of his poison were bad people or that they did him some harm. Lord Yronwood say so. I believe the three oldest sand snakes didn't fall that far from the tree.

A simple thing, I would make the story began in 300 AC. The Stark children would be older and their arcs less absurd.

The reason is quite simple. Cersei has developed misogynistic behavior since she was a child. She killed Melara, a 10-year-old girl and her companion, because she liked Jaime whom Cersei saw as her property and thought all the girls who came after Melara were snakes trying to separate her from Jaime. And none of them lasted long, which proves that even if their company was initially forced on her, Cersei could still do without them. And in the future, as queen, she would have much more autonomy for that since Robert didn't give a shit about her. And since Robert was a womanizer, he was quite likely to sleep with one of his wife's ladies-in-waiting, which would be a further source of humiliation for Cersei. See Rhaella. Furthermore, Cersei hates women and hates being a woman, because it takes her away from the power she wants so badly. Her thinking has never been that the ruling patriarchal system in Westeros is unfair. On the contrary, she accepted it and sees women as inferior beings, her hurt is being born on the wrong side because she thinks she's too smart and capable to be a woman. Even though she seems to enjoy Taena's company, she thinks of her as a whore for having premarital sex and plans to gather information about her lover to use against Taena in the future. She sexually abuses her. Cersei doesn't want women company and may reject it.

Robert isn't the smartest of men, but Cersei may had thought that it would be suspicious if she continued to have childdren, as she and Robert had less and less sex over the years. She had done her duty and given Robert three alleged heirs to whom he paid little attention. He had sex for the pleasure of sex not because he had to provide heirs. So, who knows, maybe she just didn't want more childdren. Besides pregnancy and particularly childbirth was usually the most dangerous time for a woman in a medieval world, Cersei may had thought having gone through it three times was enough. And she was a vain woman so... moon tea bro.

I always wondered why there's no mention of the Tullys at the Tourney of Harrenhal. Most of the great houses were there: Baratheon, Stark, Martell, Arryn, Tyrell. Tywin and Aerys broke up so the Lannister weren't there, but what about the Tullys? The were the Lords of the Riverlands they are supposed to be there.

Cersei planned to kill a lot of people in AFFC including Trystane Martell which was known to Doran. He tells the sand snakes that Dorne still had friends at court who tell him things he shouldn't know. As it seems that only the people directly involved in Trystane's assassination attempt knew about it, Doran's source is very good. Who would it be? The Merryweathers? Varys? Somebody else?

Any Septa Lemore theory.

I am not against Daenerys making use of violence, but using violence only which was mainly what she did in Astapor since, as you mentioned, she failed to leave any support for the council she left to rule the city. And that's what I find curious. The innocent thirteen-year-old girl knew this and yet, later, after all she had been through with the Dothraki and in Quarth, she believed there was nothing suspicious about Illyrio sending for her after she had hatched three dragons. There's still a dreamy girl in her it really should be. She's only sixteen now.

As I said, Jon did what he believed was right, just like Ned, but if were clever moves that is other question. She brought sword and fire to Astapor and didn't end up very well. The whole point of her rule in Meereen is she is to trying to prove to herself that she can rule a place without leaving a trail of destruction behind. Burning and pillaging is very easy, ruling is something else. And Dany didn't see through Illyrio Mopatis, she would have gone straight to him if Ser Jorah hadn't convinced her to change her route and get her own army.

In think Martin does very well, each of these ruling arcs serve their purposes. Between them, Tyrion is best able to rule by his intelligence and certain experience; his loose tongue and sarcasm make him fun to read and his location in the center of King's Landing government at the height of the War of the Five Kings piques the reader's obvious interest. And the Lannisters must win at this point of the story. Of course, not all is rosy, Tyrion has made many enemies as Hand and it comes back to haunt him in his judgment for Joffrey's death. Jon and Daenerys are inexperienced teenagers in power situations. Jon is on the Wall having to deal with the threat of the Others approaching, Stannis charging him for men and castles, wildlings on the other side in danger of becoming wights, his men on his side who disagree (with some reason) of his decisions. He tries to put his feelings for his sister aside, but Melisandre offers him hope of save her. Daenerys is trying to rule a city that hates her and change an ancient slave system. She tries her best to control her violent impulses and seek peace through diplomacy in a place full of people she doesn't trust, with a culture she doesn't identity with and never feels at home. She doesn't control her dragons, she doesn't control her crush on Darius. Jon does what he believes is right for the nightswatch, but in the end decides to go save his sister from Ramsay and is killed by his men. Daenerys gets the peace she wanted so much, but she doesn't like it and when the opportunity arises she leaves with Drogon. Both characters exemplify very well the idea that ruling should be uncomfortable. And I think reading these arcs be also uncomfortable is part of the experience. Cersei is crazy and evil, it's delicious to see her fall.

It isn't the subject anymore but, about the parentaging thing, it was never in Ned's plans to send his children to the capital. He didn't raise them for King's Landing intrigues but for the relatively simple life of the North, for which they received a good education. Robb and Sansa would definitely marry some Stark vassal, have a bunch of kids. The younger ones could follow a different path, the cavalry, the nightswatch, whatever. When Robert made Ned his Hand, he couldn't reset the kids' heads and brusquely push information about their new lives without scaring them off. And even though Ned and Catelyn were raised in South, they weren't raised in King's Landing. They don't lived at court.

Sorry if I wasn't clear, English is not my native language, but what I meaned was: George R R Martin said in an interview that a conflicted heart is a more interesting topic than the good guys fighting the bad guys. He likes to write stories in which his characters' great battles are against themselves and that's what he intents to do in asoiaf. The point is that in asoiaf there is a race of creatures presented as antagonists who appear to be inherently evil, without any complexity. Readers have long speculated that Asoiaf's final arc will be the remaining forces of Westeros coming together to face this common threat to all (it wasn't an idea that came up because that was what happened in the TV show) and that narrative decision falls into the cliché of good vs evil Martin said he wanted to do different. It is worth mentioning that If the war of men vs Others happens we know that the human side will not be composed of immaculate good heroes, Martin has written gray characters on the human side, but so far the Others are extremely one-dimensional characters.

?

Martin argues that the only thing worth writing about is the human heart in conflict with itself and that stories in which the plot is limited to the good guys facing the bad guys are not that interesting. Asoiaf is usually faithful to this idea, but we have a apparent exception: the Others. We know little about these creatures, but they are undeniably presented as antagonists. The final enemy to be defeated. Long before the TV show there was speculation about a possible union of the remaining forces in Westeros to defeat them, but this climax goes against what asoiaf is supposed to be. Many readers say that the Others are unnecessary to the story and that it would work best with just the conflict over the Iron Throne. We know that Martin will no longer be creating POV characters, so we won't see the story from an Other's point of view other than in a prologue or epilogue. We have five books written and the Others remain a mystery, the political plot is bloated with just two more books to sort it all out. So what's your opinion? Can the Others still become more than the evil creatures of the story? Will the conflict between them and humans and will its resolution be only by war? May there be a diplomatic resolution where Others and humans will have to coexist?

I've finally read the entire thread and now I'm laughing my ass out as I realized that everyone, literally everyone, who argues that Arya is a little psychopath murderous bitch is a Daenerys Stan.