Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Maryland, USA

Recent Profile Visitors

3,968 profile views

StarkTullies's Achievements

Hedge Knight

Hedge Knight (5/8)

  1. What other theories? I can think of only one logical explanation and three other far-fetched theories: a) Jon is Rhaegar and Lyanna's son b) Rhaegar inexplicably lied to the kingsguards claiming that Lyanna's child was his son but he actually wasn't c) Rhaegar and Lyanna's child that the kingsgguards were protecting was someone other than Jon Snow d) The three kingsguards were part of a conspiracy to pose a false Targaryen heir, but their conspiracy died with them During a civil war against the Targaryens when the original heir and king were already dead, there is 0% likelihood that all three remaining Targaryen kingsguards were protecting anybody other than whom they believed to be the Targaryen heir. Explanation A is the only one that isn't a convoluted storytelling mess.
  2. When before have the Others ever raised a person on the other side of the Wall? When before has an Other-raised wight been anything other than a mindless, speechless zombie that one must "be ready for"? Nah, Ghost is a good boy. It is the fire-demon weapons of mass destruction who are eating small children and setting fire to Meereen that should be gotten rid of. Just FYI, not once are the Others ever referred to as "White Walkers" (capitalized) in the entire book series, and only a few times are they called "white walkers" (lower case). "White Walkers" is show terminology. It's almost like all these Daenerys-worshipping anti-Stark theories and predictions are not based on the actual books.
  3. I agree with all of this: I was responding to another post referring to historical figures of Westeros, but confined to the main ASOIAF story, there aren't many stellar examples of great female leaders so far. (Of course there are plenty of posters in this forum who claim that Dany is the absolute best of the best, but to that I strongly disagree.) Some of this bias is due to George Martin's stance that he will never write the POV of a king, but apparently he doesn't have that caveat for queens. So we see Dany's inner thoughts but not Stannis's, who are somewhat morally equivalent. And Cersei's thoughts but not Euron's, who are both reprehensible. I don't agree about Catelyn. She wasn't at her best immediately after Bran's fall but she hadn't slept for days. As soon as she did sleep, she was perfectly rational. Catelyn is a much-hated character for reasons I never understood (I disliked her treatment of Jon, but that's not the main reason for anti-Catelyn resentment). I find her one of the most thoughtful and insightful characters in the series: her train of thoughts before arresting Tryion- as poor as that decision might seem retrospectively- was very well-thought out and completely rational. Of course Catelyn went berserk at the Red Wedding after her son was murdered right in front of her. I'll allow her five seconds of insanity; the test is how she would have coped 5 days later, but she never got more than 5 seconds before she was murdered. Lady Stoneheart is not Catelyn Stark. The "Tully Madness" thread is absolute crap. I also agree that the story has been a little excessive with the mad mothers, but with Lysa, I largely blame her mental illness on the lifetime of a manipulative psychopath gaslighting her. I don't think Dany is mad or will go mad (hallucinogenic conversations with blades of grass aside), and I don't think any of her perceived "madness" has anything to do with her lost child; Dany willingly sacrificed Rhaego to save her husband and showed little remorse about Rhaego's death. Cersei was "consistently heinous" long before motherhood. Cersei's "great love for her children" is show-fabricated, and I don't think any of her evil actions are rooted in concern for her children's well-being. But... Theon and Asha's mother is still in a constant state of despair and mourning 10 years after the Greyjoy Rebellion, and there were multiple counts of Targaryen queens "going mad" after their children passed that did not impact the fathers in the same way. And maybe Catelyn would have become permanently mad after Robb's death: we don't know since she's dead (and Lady Stoneheart doesn't count). I don't give Jaime too much credit for his words of wisdom about motherhood. He doesn't understand the concept of a mother loving her children (he didn't love any of his own), so he sees all of that as a form of madness. And Cersei is his measuring stick for motherhood/womanhood, which gives him an extremely tainted view. I agree so far... but the story isn't over yet. Brienne is considered by almost everybody (myself included) as the "truest of knights" despite not being an actual knight. She's one of the most dutiful and moral characters in the story, so she is certainly a role model if not an actual ruler... yet. Though it is not often stressed, Brienne is the heir of Tarth. That said, I find it a little unlikely that ruling Tarth is in Brienne's future. I may be completely wrong, but I expect that Sansa will become the great ruler of ASOIAF. She is the most improved POV character by far, going from a bratty spoiled child to become very compassionate and wise. Even after telling herself that she must hate all Lannisters, she still felt compassion for Lancel during the Battle of Blackwater. Formerly snobby about her "bastard half-brother", she is now living as a bastard and becoming much more empathetic. Her thoughts are intentionally obscured by George Martin: at this point we don't know if she believes Lysa's claims about Petyr's crimes or not so that we will be "surprised" when she does whatever she does... but I think it is very unlikely that she is going to become Petyr's mini-me as Petyr hopes. I think her great power will be to become a great player of the game of thrones while being the one player who isn't evil by playing it. But obviously this is just my speculation, and we'll never know unless the next books finally come out.
  4. I sort of agree that there aren't a surplus of great female rulers in the story... but are there many good male rulers either? No. Maybe the lesson- in Westeros at least- is that rulers are bad in general. Most of the queens of Westeros were consorts to the king with no real power, but of the relatively few who had some sort of real power, I definitely think that Queen Alysanne was the best Targaryen ruler of Westeros, by far. No matter what I think of Dany as a character or what I expect her future in Westeros will be, I can still say that she is a better khaleesi than any of the khals we've seen, and we can assume that she is a better ruler than most if not all previous rulers of Meereen (though we know little about Meereen's history). Greyjoys aren't noted for their excellent ruling abilities, but if Asha ever ends up ruling the Iron Islands (which I think is a dim possibility), she will likely be the best ruler the Iron Islands ever had. Cersei is an evil, incompetent blubbering fool (back to the topic of this thread!), but so is her son Joffrey and I expect he would have only gotten worse if he reached adulthood. Her father Tywin may be more competent but he is diabolically evil, and Tyrion is on the path to be nearly as bad. Seems to be a Lannister thing rather than a woman thing. Arianne is not a role model, but if she sits on the Iron Throne for a brief moment (and I think she will), I think she will be more powerful and a better ruler than her presumed husband Aegon, and she will be above average in regard to competence and benevolence compared to her peers (which I admit, isn't a high bar). Since you brought up Lysa as ruling regents or heads of great houses, obviously she is unhinged and a bad ruler. Her sister Catelyn only had the role regent of Winterfell for a brief moment before she left, but she would have been a good one. I think there were several ruling women during the Dance of the Dragons (NOT including Rhaenyra) who were far better than their male counterparts. I'm not going to discuss the show here, but I don't think the show is an accurate blueprint of Dany or Sansa's futures. But in regard to "treacherous schemer", I think that is what the showrunners actually intended to portray as being a "great ruler", and I think George Martin disagrees what it means to be a great ruler (as do I). And again, there aren't many role model male rulers to point to. I'm a big fan of Robb Stark who I think was as best as you expect for a wartime ruler in this world and I think he would have been a great peacetime ruler, and Aegon V and Dareon II seemed like good kings, but there were more bad Targaryen kings than good ones. And there are far more male rulers to choose from, so I don't think the moral of the story is that men make better rulers than women.
  5. From what I've observed, 100% of Frey sympathizers are TargaryenFanatics, and 100% of Frey sympathizers also blame the Rebels for betraying the Targaryens during Robert's Rebellion. But if the entire Stark family "deserves" to be exterminated because Robb broke a vow to marry a woman he never met, wouldn't the entire Targaryen family also "deserve" to be exterminated for Rhaegar breaking his vow to his actual wife? Rhaegar's "deplorable conduct" was far worse than Robb's. This is the least of my disagreements I have with the original post, but it is a repeated contradictory stance I see amongst all the Targaryen+Frey enthusiasts.
  6. While I agree that the North will suffer the most from the "Long Night" because of their proximity to the Wall, it is most likely "the North" that will save the southern realms from similar suffering by ending the threat before it gets to them.
  7. The last three remaining Targaryen kingsguard disagreed. After Rhaegar was dead, after Mad King Aerys was dead, the Targaryen kingsguards stood guard for Lyanna's son... not Viserys. I love Jon Snow, and I strongly dislike the Targaryens; I don't want Jon to be the Targaryen heir, but the proof is there. Not that it matters who the "Targaryen heir" is; the Targaryens no longer have a claim to the Iron Throne.
  8. Fans will often think that their favorite story has the most good/most evil/greatest/worst whatever. And while some people might like to compare different stories, most people want to talk about ASOIAF and other Westeros/Essos-related stories on ASOIAF forums. If we are going to compare Ramsay to other evil characters, there are plenty of other evil ASOIAF characters to compare him to. Gregor Clegane, for example, is arguably as bad or worse than Ramsay. Why bring other stories into this? We aren't allowed to talk about the Game of Thrones tv show in this part of the forum, so why would we talk about Gravity Falls... not only a tv show, but apparently a tv show for children? If someone posts their opinions on this page, it is considered just that: an opinion. Constantly copying and pasting opinions from various "evil Wikis" doesn't change opinions into fact, and pasting other people's opinions doesn't prove your point. I also think the need to categorize everyone by throwing them in buckets of "pure evil, inconsistently evil, pure good, inconsistently good", etc. etc. is completely pointless, and it insults the story that George Martin is trying to write. Finally, just re-bump your previous threads if you think they are worth discussing. I see no need to keep recreating nearly identical threads again and again.
  9. This thread is about the chaos of Robert's Rebellion. And the only requirement for that was a mad Targaryen king. What oaths did the Starks break leading up to Robert's Rebellion? Lyanna's broken "oath" to serial cheater Robert? No, she wasn't married to Robert yet; it was Rhaegar Targaryen who broke his oath to Elia by getting involved with Lyanna (if it was consensual), and he is guilty of far more than just oath-breaking if it wasn't consensual. Robert's Rebellion did not start specifically because Rhaegar "kidnapped" Lyanna, or because Mad King Aerys burned Rickard Stark alive, but because Mad King Aerys then called for Robert and Ned's execution as well. Ned Stark was hardly "lusting for revenge" by not offering himself up to a tyrant for an unjust execution. What do the Greyjoys have to do with Robert's Rebellion? Jaime has done many stupid and evil things, but his only "stupidity" in regard to Robert's Rebellion was remaining loyal to Mad King Aerys for as long as he did before finally doing the right thing and saving Kings Landing from that vile maniac. Yes, Lannister ambition is a recurring problem throughout Westeros history, including during Robert's Rebellion. They didn't start the chaos of Robert's Rebellion (the topic of this thread), however. They chose sides after the winning side was determined. They would have eagerly fought for the Targaryens if they hadn't lost at the Trident. There is only one explanation for the three remaining Targaryen kingsgaurds guarding Lyanna's infant son rather than Prince Viserys... and the explanation is not that Mance Rayder is Jon's father. Why would they guard Mance Rayder's son? (Answer: they wouldn't.)
  10. Among the small but vocal fandom who believes that Targaryens have a divine right to rule because of their racial superiority and they are the champions of the world who nobly practiced incest for generations so they could wisely and knowingly resurrect a pure-blooded Azor Ahai, fulfilled by the birth of the perfect Emperess Daenerys Targaryen conceived by sibling-rape whose birth brought forth the worst storm in known history, I don't see much criticism of the Lannisters because they weren't part of the conspiracy theory "STAB Alliance". The exception is Jaime, the worst of all Lannisters, because he was way out of line for stopping his Targaryen superior from setting fire to a city he had a right to burn because Kings Landing and all of Westeros belonged to him. I would say that Lannisters generally getting a pass is odd because Tywin Lannister betrayed Mad King Targaryen... except Tywin more than made up for it by murdering a lot of Starks. And this same fanbase apparently thinks that George is writing 4 of the 6 main characters- the Starks- as the story's ultra-villains whom Daenerys will heroically defeat. It's absolutely ridiculous.
  11. Of your 6 examples, 2 of them are dreams. Cersei has 12 POV chapters and if "loving her children" is her defining attribute, we shouldn't have to resort to dreams to prove her loving nature. 5 of the 6 examples you gave (dream or not) is Cersei being saddened over Joffrey's death or hoping that Tommen doesn't die. That's not a strong case. And she cried a few times. Well, Margaery also cried when Joffrey died; did she love him? No. Tears do not equate love. "Her overall reaction when Joffrey dies is to cry, beg others to save her son" is not entirely true. She was screaming at people to save her son while he was dying, but the instant he was dead, her first reaction was cold vengeance, not sorrow. See below: The "text" didn't say her tears were genuine, Cersei's thoughts said that. Cersei thoughts also said it was Margaery's fault that Cersei tortured and mutilated the Blue Bard into madness, and Melara's fault that Cersei murdered her. Cersei has no self-awareness. More importantly, Cersei likely would have cried if she was allowed to see Olenna Tyrell at that point... anything to get her out of the black cells. Crying to be able to see Tommen is not proof of love. Your repeated argument in your countless pro-Cersei threads is that all of Cersei's villainous actions are to stop the prophecy... but your own argument works against you in proving her love for her children. In the prophecy, her children die and she gets displaced by someone younger/more beautiful, and then she is strangled by the valonqar. Cersei's death comes after the death of her children, so the death of her children brings her one step closer to her own death, according to the prophecy. Which isn't to say she isn't sad that Joffrey is dead on his own merit. Joffrey was her favorite child because he was her psychopathic mini-me, and she loved the reflection of herself in him. Her treatment of Tommen (other than relief that he isn't dead... not a high hurdle to jump over) is abysmal. Her ridicule of him for being sad over his grandfather's death and her beating Pate bloody to teach Tommen a lesson for having the audacity to have affection for his wife are not the traits of a loving mother. I think you do. None of the examples you gave are convincing. Not wanting her children to be dead are the only examples I saw, and if that's the best you can do, that proves there aren't many demonstrations of love to point to.
  12. Nothing about this multi-thousand-year-old prophecy is "clear". When Melisandre went on and on about Azor Ahai in A Clash of Kings, dragons were not mentioned. "Waking dragons from stone" wasn't mentioned until A Storm of Swords. Is this because George Martin gardened the dragon part of the prophecy into the story later on, or because Melisandre keeps desperately changing the prophecy as it fits her purposes to "prove" that Stannis is Azor Ahai? We don't know, but it sure isn't clear. Personally, I think "the prince that was promised" is real: it is a more recent prophecy stated by reputable sources (the Ghost of High Heart seems legit). Azor Ahai is an ancient legend that has been changed so many times over the years that we don't know what the "real" story is, or if he even existed. I don't think he did, and I don't think there will be an Azor Ahai Reborn in this story. I think the purpose of Azor Ahai's inclusion in the story is for Benerro, Melisandre, etc. to desperately look for their prophesied hero and these prophesied heroes get a superiority complex as a result (it already happened for Stannis, and it may happen for Daenerys and/or Jon Snow too if they eventually believe it). According to legend, Azor Ahai murdered his wife to make a flaming sword (and dragons were not part of that legend). Azor Ahai is not a good guy. Daenerys Targaryen performed human sacrifices to resurrect fire-demon weapons of mass destruction to bring fire and blood to the world. I doubt Dany will stand as a hero when the story is over. Dany being Azor Ahai Reborn would not be a good thing... but it doesn't matter, because I don't think she (or anybody else) is.
  13. Years ago, I watched some of GrayArea's videos (the linked video in the original post), and I enjoyed her content until her irritational hatred of Catelyn and Sansa became so annoying I gave up on her. Comparing Cersei to Catelyn is absolutely absurd, but the point in the video isn't "Cersei is as good Catelyn", but that she hates Catelyn so much that she is saying "Catelyn is as bad as Cersei". A claim I wildly disagree with, but the brief portion of the video is not pro-Cersei but anti-Catelyn.
  14. Most of mine have already been stated, but I'll restate them anyway. Character A is secretly Character B. Exceptions for characters we are supposed to question their identities, such as Coldhands, Lemore, Alleras. All the claims the Targaryens have made about themselves are true: only Targaryens can ride dragons (disproven by Nettles), Targaryens never get sick (disproven by many dead Targaryens), incest isn't disgusting when Targaryens do it because they are "god-like and better than lesser men". Related to the top two: person X, Y, Z is a secret Targaryen! Seemingly contradicting my previous point: any claim of Jon's parentage other than Rhaegar and Lyanna. "Jojen Paste". Jojen foresaw his death and I don't think he willingly made that long journey only to be willingly cannibalized "for the greater good". There is one single protagonist. There may be a single "prince that was promised" (there may not be), but the whole story isn't backdrop to hold up one single character as a hero. Cersei is tragic and sympathetic and she loves her children. Anything regarding time travel or people from the future controlling events of the past. Assuming events in the tv shows are canon to the books. No elaboration since that topic is rightfully forbidden here, but it doesn't stop people from freely discussing those "theories" anyway. Fire and everything that represents it is pure good, and ice and anything that represents it is pure evil. Any "theory" from the small but vocal Stark-hating DanyFanatics regarding "all Starks are evil" and "Dany is descended from the gods and/or a goddess herself" that are too ludicrous to further elaborate on.
  15. A better DanyFanatacism argument would be "Dany is so amazing that she grew up to be the greatest person ever despite being raised by such a horrible person." Viserys was a terrible person, a terrible brother, and he did a terrible job at raising Dany. Keep in mind that THIS is the man you are praising:
  • Create New...