Jump to content

EggBlue

Members
  • Posts

    1,855
  • Joined

  • Last visited

6 Followers

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    far far away

Previous Fields

  • Name
    EggBlue

Recent Profile Visitors

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

EggBlue's Achievements

Council Member

Council Member (8/8)

  1. I think the issue that irks me (and perhaps the others) about HOTD , isn't necessarily what they changed or their character choices that might differ from my interpretation of the book or the set-in-stone canon facts; rather it's that they're never bold about their choices in the show imo. which honestly leaves a confused vibe to the show and makes it more mediocre. there are deliberate "bomb"s in the show that lack the impact due to repetition. for example, Joffrey's death scene or Rhaenys's thing in Ep9. these surprises are completely pointless. They don't add to the story. they are not Ned's death that leaves the whole GoT the show as the consequence! they're not the battle of Blackwater that leaves Stannis weak and ready to delve further into sorcery! they're not the Red Wedding! they are just the crazy thing of the week! they are only as good as the Supernatural's monster of the week! this really sucks because it's obvious that they have tried to make something memorable...then there's the bigger issue. that's the lack of boldness in writing, specifically regarding characters. there's this trend in shows today that they shy away from making a character unlikeable. they're trying to avoid backlash(this one is also on the our social media culture). Alicent's character comes to mind about that. I don't mind how they have changed her age. although that puts her in a more favorable position from the get-go as she is not an adult having a feud with a 7-14-year-old! but her actions during ep 8-10 are a bit odd. She is not consistent, and worse, she comes off as stupid, which couldn't be further from the truth given the power she's gotten herself as a queen consort when the king has a fully grown heir. then there's Viserys's marked hesitation in marrying Laena because of her age. which is pretty good and in character at that (even in the book twenty-something yr old Viserys did not want to marry a 12 yr old. he wanted to marry a woman, and any woman. a woman he's chosen) . but the show completely ignores that about what they emphasised about the character two scenes ago by having him wed Alicent , a 14-15 yr old and his daughter's friend at that. all while he looks 40 at the very least. VidAngel??????? is that some sort of voluntarily censorship?!!
  2. but he "don't want it" Targaryen or Blackfyre . Aegon VI, all the way!
  3. young Griff:)) I'll support him to the bitter end!
  4. to be honest, I pretty much doubt that either GRRM/Cheesmonger/Spider had any proper plans! Even Jon Con complains about this. the only thing that can make sense to me is that Illyrio and Varys are coming up with these plans when they see opportunities. They take Aegon because there's a chance he'd be useful. They reach JonCon , starting project perfect-king when Robert becomes a disappointment, and they can predict a mess in the future. They think of the Dothraki and Viserys and Daenerys when Jon Arryn, and Stannis start asking questions. They remember Dany can be useful after she has dragons. It would be very odd if they had a plan from the beginning. Including (and especially) fAegon, Blackfyre, or Aegon the Savior plan! They seem to be rich enough just to rent a famous sellsword company for a side project too! I mean, we are given zero indication that Illyrio had any reason to give three expensive dragon eggs to Dany. But he does, and neither he nor Dany see it as any financial difficulty.
  5. No, I don't think so. I'm not surprised that Drogo did not care for Mirri's medical advice, but I was a bit surprised that there was no one but Mirri to attend to a prestigious khal who is gifted palaces and such left and right. If Mirri had poisoned Khal Drogo, I only have praise for her! Unlike Rhaego's case, it was not a debatable situation. Drogo had it coming!
  6. Read that again. You missed so many points in my post. I read a couple of your posts after that one, so I will answer all of them here. Just to be clear! the point I was trying to make in that post was solely about CERSEI. the comparison between her and Tywin and Daenerys does not mean I took up a ruler measuring if Cersei's as bad as Tywin (in Bloody Mummers episode no less!) or that Daenerys is an angel Cersei can never hope to be like. you started this thread basically claiming that Cersei was an innocent girl put in a terrible situation and forced to make terrible choices. you claimed the hatred towards Cersei is unjustified firstly because of her background and then because she is not in some 25 most evil characters list and such. that's the gist of it. In my first post, I explained why the hatred towards Cersei is more intense than someone like Gregor Clegane. and that it doesn't even matter whether she is the worst to be the most hated. obviously, you ignored that post, and from what I've skimmed through, the posts like it. never mind. then you went on emphasizing again and again and again that Cersei's backstory should count toward something. when others rightly pointed out that lowborn characters had worse backgrounds, you dismissed that too. so, in the post you clearly did not understand, I first pointed out that people like Bloody Mummers may in part be the product of rulers like Tywin , Cersei, and Roose. I don't know why you said Cersei was not involved in Tywin's campaign as that was just an example. You see, I was merely pointing out how Cersei's acts would have a bigger effect than the Goat's. If you can't see what I mean, then let's take a look at Cersei's Dwarf Hunt. god knows how many people hunted down innocent dwarfs or in some cases, children, just to have a head delivered to Cersei. In this scenario, these criminals are like Bloody Mummers, Cersei is like Tywin who not only has created a situation where they can commit murder without punishment but are also encouraged. so there's that. now we get to the Daenerys point of the post, which, again, you missed completely! Since you were reluctant to accept any comparison with lowborn characters, I thought a comparison with Daenerys, who may have very deliberately been placed in a similar situation by the author might help. Daenerys was in a similar situation with Cersei, a touch worse even. so much that her only family member did the opposite of making her feel safe. at least Cersei had Jaimie her entire life. the point is not that Daenerys is sinless. But it is that in a worse situation, she made better choices than Cersei. (If you'd like we can break down all these choices, but that needs another thread. ) therefore, Cersei's "tragic" background not only doesn't justify her actions but can hardly be so much as an excuse. Daenerys is simply the literal proof that it is possible to make different choices. Cersei tried to make the world an even worse place when she came to power as queen regent; Daenerys tried to make it better with an epiphany that king and queen's job is to bring justice. if you deny this, all I can suggest is to reread the books. Oh, and the issue of Cersei's love for her children that you've continuously noted in this thread. honestly, give me a passage, sentence, whatever in the book that we can conclude Cersei is motivated by love for her children. From what I read her biggest motivations are greed and lust for power and, more importantly, attention. her love for her children ends with her love for a part of herself. she is even emotionally extremely abusive towards Tommen, and instead of educating him for survival (which you claim to be her goal), thinks it's finally her chance and uses him for her own selfish ambitions.
  7. I can't say I disagree. The problem is "Aegon's prophecy" is a bit of a goofy theory, claiming that Aegon knew precisely what would happen and had exactly the correct conclusions as to what to do! As we've seen in the books, prophecies/dreams are vague on their own, then there is the perception of them! It is almost impossible that Aegon would get all the right answers! However, I do think the books give enough vagueness that Aegon can potentially have a dream or prophecy driving him, though not the famous "Aegon's prophecy" that HOTD used. In my opinion, that is the three-headed dragon prophecy. The thing is, Aegon was involved in Essosi affairs before his sudden and ambitious conquest. he also married both his sisters ;and during the conquest and afterward treated them as equals. all despite the fact that no Targaryen lord after Aenar had more than one wife. then he took up the three-headed dragon sigil. and it could be only a sigil, if Rhaegar and Aemon hadn't seen more to it. whatever reason Rgaegar and Aemon had to think three is a sacred number when it comes to the dragons, Aegon and his sisters must have had the same notion. my best guess is some sort of prophecy or dream.
  8. Being lowborn is not an excuse, just like having a tragic backstory in noble life is not an excuse. The lowborn villains not only have more limitations and fewer choices, but they are also pretty much the result of people like Cersei and Tywin being in charge, who, instead of mitigating the crime rate in their territory, employ people like the Bloody Mummers—enabling them in do so and frankly creating a demand in the market! Would the bloody mummers even become a "company" famed for their cruelty if influential people like Tywin did not need their services? Would Ramsey Bolton be just as evil if his father didn't find messing with him by sending Reek as his babysitter amusing?! Probably not.... but do these facts excuse the crimes of the Goat or Ramsay? No. In the same way, Cersei's upbringing and issues merely explain why she turned out the way she is; it does not justify her crimes, whether you think she had it worse than Ramsay, Goat, or Rorge. Then there's the matter of CHOICES. Pretending that Cersei had no choice in her crimes is extraordinarily absurd and sexist (as Craving Peaches aptly said). A great comparison in this regard is with Daenerys: Cersei suffered from Tywin, Daenerys suffered from Viserys Cersei lost her mother as a child, and Daenerys lost both her parents Cersei had a brother who cared about her, and Daenerys had Viserys, for god's sake Cersei received a scary prophecy as a teenager; Daenerys fucking sees the prophecies in her dreams as a teenager Cersei was married as a pawn to a brute of a husband, and so was Daenerys Cersei was raped, and so was Daenerys on top of that, Daenerys also experienced poverty by the end, you don't see the two women making the same choices, committing the same atrocities; doesn't that tell you something?
  9. First of all, Cersei hardly has any redeemable qualities. Cersei is not only selfish, cruel, manipulative, and petty, but she also fails to be a competent antagonist, which makes each of her acts even more irritating. As for the Evil List, it simply does not matter. Characters don't invoke feelings in the readers because of their morality and such; they invoke feelings due to their impact. Cersei might be a better person than Gregor Clegane; however, while Gregor's worst cruelties are only hearsay and are towards secondary characters in the books, Cersei's are alive on the page and are directed towards the protagonists. This is actually true in RL too. You don't hate some murderer you see on the news with the same intensity you hate an abusive or even cheating spouse.
  10. First of all, what two heirs?! Lyanna did not have the child yet; the consensus is that Rhaegar wanted a daughter. Whether Lyanna's child was ever going to be in the line of succession or not, we can be sure he would be younger than Aegon. I assume the trouble with Two heirs would only arise if the boys were each being raised as Rhaegar's heir in different households learning to hate each other. Besides, if anyone had thought about the problem of two heirs, they would advise Rhaegar not to sire a child or at least wouldn't help him in his very noble endeavors in the first place! There are a couple of possibilities: 1. Whatever Elia and/or Rhaegar had planned with Varys had not extended to the Martells. 2. the more plausible one: Ned gave her the option he gave to Cersei or both of those things.
  11. theory: the Kingsgaurd were not protecting Lyanna and her unborn child but were supposed to distract Ned and co. from Ashara and her princess's child she had with her. we've got some facts that we do not know what to make of: Daynes are ok with Ned, despite believing Ned's directly associated with the death of 2 of their siblings. so much so that they name their heir after him. after Lyanna's death, they find Ned holding her hand, even though Ned had stated that only two (he and Howland) left the tower. somehow, Ned and only 6 high-born companions find a secret watchtower where they face only three men. This seems like they had an appointment or something. Kingsgaurd believe they are upholding their duty to the king and House Targaryen. protecting the mistress of the dead crown prince and his unborn prince or princess from the said woman's brother in a hopeless affair, being outnumbered. this won't just do. especially when a pregnant queen and her son are in danger in Dragonstone. Ashara Dayne's death is repeated throughout the story, emphasizing her corpse never being found. the Tower is in such a poor state that Ned and Howland can tear it down. Lyanna's somewhere that can be attended to after death, and Ned can take her bones home. Unlike that of his companions, all to Barbrey's dismay. Jon Snow's wet nurse had been a loyal servant to Starfall. a mysterious, attractive woman with roughly the right age and birthing marks appears alongside a boy claiming to be Aegon Targaryen . all while prickly Jon Connington respects and trusts her, the way he doesn't trust someone like Haldon who's a hired or Varys who's a foreigner. Conclusion: I think Ashara Dayne had been in on Varys and Elia's scheme to smuggle Aegon out. she must have been on her way to Starfall , while Ned and his army were on the search for Lyanna . having communicated with Kingsgaurd , they decide to meet with Ned to stall him from going to Starfall where Lyanna would be, buying Ashara enough time to get there and hide Aegon. Ned and Kingsgaurd fight, and maybe by the end, Arthur trusts Ned with one or two of his secrets. Ned and Howland take some guards and go to Starfall afterward. Ned sees Lyanna die , promises her whatever, and lets the silent sisters or maester in Starfall attend to her corpse. he meets with lady Ashara and the lord/lady of Starfall who would know everything his/her siblings have done. gives them their sword back , apologizes for killing Arthur, claiming that he died a hero and all that noble stuff. in return for their secrecy about Lyanna's child, he promises them to cover for Ashara (whether he knows about Aegon or not), doesn't let Arthur's name sully (which would also especially work if Arthur had been Lyanna's lover, but works all the same if he was just loyal to Rhaegar's orders), and more importantly promises them that house Dayne would not be associated with Lyanna's whereabouts during the rebellion and their part in Rhaegar's plans is hidden. Something that keeps Daynes from the same fate as Darrys or Conningtons, who suffer under Robert's wrath caused by association with Rhaegar, leaving Daynes still rich and respected. Ashara takes Aegon and leaves for Essos , she'll eventually meet with Jon Connington, who, despite his clear mistrust of Varys, believes Aegon's identity because of Ashara, who would naturally be a close acquaintance knowing they both served at Dragonstone. Or something close enough to this.
  12. all the more reason that I think we should look into the possibility that Rhaegar's connection to the tower might have nothing to do with Lyanna! The possibilities are endless really. We know Rhaegar had Dornish friends and a Dornish wife, and had traveled to Dorne before (as Jon Con's pov states), all being reasons to end up in that tower long enough to name it(maybe in a song or something) and for the smallfolk to recount it. yep. and I clearly agree with that. now I feel like copy-pasting a pet theory I posted in another thread is a good idea!
  13. The question is, was Lyanna, in fact, in that tower? If she was, was she there the whole time? ... considering everything that happened, even if Martells and/or Elia had been ok with Rhaegar taking a paramour or running off with Lyanna (which is one odd consensus among RL fans), they would rightfully be pissed at Lyanna and Rhaegar during and after the war. I doubt hiding in an abandoned watchtower with a pregnant woman in Manwoody territory is more manageable than hiding in a loyalist castle.
×
×
  • Create New...