Jump to content

The Sleeper

Members
  • Posts

    3,876
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by The Sleeper

  1. I heard you the first time, no need to shout. Rhaegar died, he was never disinherited. The presumptive heir versus the chosen heir never goes uncontested. And at the time Dany was not yet born. It never became an issue, because Rhaegar's children and Aerys died at the same time and Viserys never inherited anything, but had Rhaenys and Aegon lived you can't automatically assume that Dany would have been Viserys' heir. Primogeniture favors them over Dany.
  2. So, he never disinherited Rhaegar. Rhaegar's alleged children still have a better claim than Dany.
  3. A few thoughts. It seems to me that this type of analysis would apply better to Cersei. You have the witch, the fact she is trying to emulate Tywin who is ultimately the source of her woes and the fact that her actions would lead to her fall. A tragic outcome is also relative. For instance I can totally see Tyrion dying at a later date (probably of liver failure) as the Lord of Casterly Rock with a prostitute giving him blowjob and still be utterly miserable because he is universally despised and loathed and the feeling is mutual. Regarding the essay about the Meereneese plot. I think the author makes a good case about the events themselves, however fails to address the greater context, that is that the peace involves a fundamental compromise of Dany's values, that the Yunkai'i and the Great Masters achieved it through threat of violence and that there is a greater world, the Volantene navy, that is about to fall on them and shatter it all to pieces. Consequently, peace is hung by a thread which why it fell so easily and ruinously apart. That is not to say that the issues examined were not woth examining. The consequences of violence do fall on everyone and generally speaking, the guilty are better insulated than the innocent. Which is why Dany accepted peace to begin with. Naturally, because Dany is our protagonist, the focus falls on her actions and motivations both from the perspective of the readers and the narrative. She is not the sole actor in the narrative and the moral cannot and should not fall entirely on her. Aegon has been set up to steal Dany's thunder and while he will be initially well received, he doesn't have the resources to pacify Westeros or to address its many problems. Nor would he care to, ultimately he is prop for a disparate group of people with conflicting and deeply problematic agendas.
  4. The supposition is not based on the line. It is based on what we have been shown about skinchanging people and how it pertains to Theon's state of mind and overall condition. The line was meant to cap it all off as foreshadowing for this potential development. Now that you mentioned it though, this is not a single line. The godswood is very prominent in Theon's arc and not just as a location. Theon contemplates the gods and their disposition towards him and the various events both him and they witnessed, ruminates on his fate, prays and ends up communing with Bran. This the site where his function in the events of Winterfell begins, when he is forced to bare false witness to Jeyne's marriage to Ramsay and where it ends with the spearwives forcing him to assist with Jeyne's rescue and eventually carrying out himself. While Theon is our eyes to the events there, you could say that his arc in Winterfell, revolves around the godswood. To top it all off, there is the visit to the crypts where the missing swords, associating Bran and Rickon with the restless spirits of the North, which Theon feels haunted by. Coming on top of all that, this line becomes quite poignant and relevant.
  5. It doesn't appear to work quite that way. Bran isn't aware of Hodor's thoughts nor does Varamyr seem to be aware of Thistle's. In contrast when they're warging the wolves they seem to merge with them. This could be the difference between a forced pairing and a willing one. We didn't get Varamyr's perspective with his bear or his shadowcat, so it is not really possible to tell. It could also be an issue of self awareness. Can you fit two of them? There is also the phenomenon of shared senses that Bran and Arya experience with Summer and the cat respectively, while remaining in their bodies. As far as I can tell that is not the case with Hodor. One other issue is familiarity. The Starks warg the wolves they raised as puppies. Likewise Bran has known Hodor all his life. In contrast when Bran tried to possess a random eagle nothing happened. Though maybe Bran hadn't practiced his "targeting" yet. In short there are conditions. And currently the ones who fulfill those conditions are Bran and Theon. At first, I don't think we are going to see any thought sharing, at first, at least. And Bran describes possessing Hodor as wearing a boot that doesn't fit. Theon will probably tell us what it is like to be the boot. It could get quite trippy down the line if Bran and Theon connect like Bran and Summer do.
  6. He is making an oath about things he has no control over. Probably because Doran led him to believe so. However he has no official capacity of his own. You should note that when Davos went to negotiate on Stannis behalf he had his own seal with him as his Hand as well as Stannis's seal. That is the price of the deal. More than likely her and Aegon will be enemies. Illyrio will be backing Aegon which makes him an enemy too. My bad, I forgot a "not" there. She would not want relations with Dorne to further deteriorate. I think Doran will be locked in backing Aegon and Dany in addition to her current will also have the Dothraki and the Volantene slaves. I think it will be a one-sided affair.
  7. It hasn't. Ramsay was never his victim. Bran was. There is a huge difference. He is not sorry for what he did. He is sorry for what happened to him. He killed two kids and thinks it is an excuse that they were not Bran Rickon. His suffering is not the point. It hasn't made him a better person it has just broken him.
  8. I disagree. I think there is a lot of dramatic potential in having the power dynamics from earlier in the story reversed. Both for Bran and Theon.
  9. Archibald's and Gerris's signature confirm that it was Quentyn who signed it, but since the latter had no authority and no way to prove that he was acting on Doran's behalf, this binds Quentyn. Doran is not bound by this in any way shape or form. Barristan's deal with Tatters is a separate issue entirely. It involves one different party and a different objective. Gerris and Yronwoods are simply the messengers and they are forced into it under penalty of death. For treason. Dany, showing Quentyn the dragons was her way of keeping the prospect of alliance open since her hand wasn't available and she did need more dragonriders. And though she didn't think so, Quentyn might have had a shot at it, if he attempted to ride Visetion under more controlled circumstances. Success would have forced her hand into an alliance or forced her to fight one of her own dragons. That would have pissed her off. Dany did not allow her feelings for Daario to affect major policy issues, before. She is unlikely to do it, later. If she takes Pentos it will be for different issues, as stated before. Barristan and the Dornish knights would still face consequences, though in this case they may not be irrevocable ones. Other reasons could spare them. In the case of the knights, she might wish further deterioration in the relationship with Dorne. In Barristan's case, punishing when he was acting in her name would undermine her own authority.
  10. Could be. The whole point is that a preconceived plan to overthrow the Starks seems implausible at the start of the campaign.
  11. Neither Quentyn, nor Tatters is actually a prince in terms of ruling over something. And what queen signed it? I am also sure that Dany did not mean to invite Quentyn to infiltrate her place and killed her guards in the dead of night, nor take her dragons to Dorne without her permission. Since Quentyn and Co declared themselves Dany's subjects, that makes what they did treason.
  12. This is neither here nor there. Bran controls Hodor and Nymeria's example demonstrates that distance isn't an issue. Besides Nymeria's slaughtered Arya's pursuers, fished her mother's corpse out of the river and has been following her around the Riverlands. She, at the very least, is influencing on a subconscious level. Do you mean he took over his home killed a bunch of people, but didn't really mean it? I am laying Theon's crimes at Theon's feet. He turned his cloak, attacked the North, attacked Winterfell, killed people in Winterfell, had his own men killed to cover the secret of the miller's boys and had Miken executed as a scapegoat. The subsequent fall of Winterfell is a direct result of Theon's actions. No, he made Bran vulnerable to Ramsay.
  13. Communication occurs between castles via ravens or riders, so there is considerable. For instance Roose would have sent a report via raven to the Twins and a rider would have been sent to find Robb. They would have also presumably sent ravens north. Ravens can only fly between castles and if someone is on the field they could not have been contacted directly. A further problem would arise in the case their location is unknown. In Ramsay's case, regarding him raising the Dreadfort garrison and attacking Winterfell, he was a prisoner at Winterfell after he was arrested by Rodrick Cassel and when he was released by Theon he was pretending to be Reek. The only opportunity to contact his father would have been after he had returned to the Dreadfort and then he would have had to wait for a response. There shouldn't have been enough time for that, since what prompted his release from Winterfell was that Rodrick Cassel was returning to reclaim it.
  14. So, does Hodor. It is beside the point of whether it will happen or not. Arya wargs Nymeria from another continent. If it is done once, it can be done anytime, anywhere. The speculation is that Bran would need some physical proximity or the weiwood could act as proxy. The question would then be why hasn't Bran done it already. One answer would be that there would have been no need when Theon was at Winterfell. Another could be that he hadn't come along in his powers just yet. The books also describe the process as horrendous. When forced. The direwolves clearly don't suffer when the kids warg them. It is still problematic on many levels. I don't adhere to the idea of suffering as penance. Absolving Theon from what he did, because Bran managed to survive is a bit much. Theon did slaughter Bran's guards and many of his people and forced him to flee form his home. His invasion and him freeing Ramsay is what led directly to the death of the men of his household, the enslavement of the women (I shudder to think at what they suffered at the Dreadfort) and the destruction of his home. No, Theon has not balanced the scales. What good has his suffering been to Bran? The boys he killed? The others who died and suffered because of his actions? Theon can redeem himself if he does better. And no, none of this would not justify Bran torturing him anew for his own purposes.
  15. Following that line you quoted, Tatters inquires the reason he wants them hired, is this one: “I need you to help me steal a dragon.” There is also this: “My father is a man of honor. If I put my seal to an agreement, he will fulfill its terms. You have my word on that.” I'm pretty sure Quentyn believes it. But though he is a prince, he is not the Prince of Dorne. I don't recall him acknowledged publicly as the heir apparent. He also expects Doran to become accessory to treason against Dany.
  16. Theon thought maybe he had heard something which he couldn't convince himself if it as real or not, so no. He felt Bran's attention but clearly this wasn't enough to communicate. The way Theon can serve as intermediary is being possessed and having Bran use his mouth to speak actual words. Bran can even confirm his identity through the Liddles present. It even provides a reason for Theon to keep breathing, though he might prefer not to.
  17. Barristan definitely overstepped here. Not only did he essentially committed Dany to war against a third party, he accepted a deal Dany specifically rejected. She might come around if she learns that Illyrio is backing Aegon and particularly if she learns that she was a means to support his claim all along. "My son was lead astray by those treacherous Yronwoods who have long contested my House's primacy over Dorne, even after I entrusted with my son in an effort of reconciliation". Besides the pact was about delivering Quentyn with dragons to Dorne. I do think that Quentyn's mission was planned with plausible deniability in mind. No member, beside Quentyn, had any direct link to house Martell. Let's not forget he is ostensibly already allied to the Lannisters and has even agreed to join their houses by marriage. And will most likely have a foot in yet another camp with Arianne.
  18. Yeah, this was pretty much where I got the idea myself. Besides, Bran's presence in Theon's chapters is so heavily implied that it seems inevitable for him to play a role. I also think that this was meant to be included in Dance and it would be a payoff of Varamyr's introduction to skinchanging, Theon's arc and Bran's arc in a cullination at the end of the same book. That would have been chilling. Oh well, the people who read Dance and Winds back to back will enjoy it at least. It also ups the steaks for Bran's ethical conflict. Skinchanging into someone who can articulate who awful it is to experience that would bring into perspective how much he is abusing poor Hodor whom he cares about, while at the same time he would be forced keep doing it because he needs to talk to Stannis.
  19. In Dance we were introduced to the possibility of skinchanging into people, were told it was taboo and have seen two instances of such attempts, one successful and one failed. This creates conflict in Bran's arc. His initial possession of Hodor's body begun in a case of emergency to save their lives, but has grown increasingly self-indulgent and abusive. But could it be leading up to anything more? This is such a potent plot element that seems unlikely to be limited to Bran's character development. Bran with his ability to see distant events in real time could have enormous impact in any arc, however this seems hampered by his inability to communicate with people. This could be remedied if he could possess someone to serve as his mouthpiece. We have also learned some aspects of what it takes to skinchange. Disposition toward the user and familiarity seem to play a role as well as the willpower of the target. Dogs were spefically mentioned as being the easier creatures to possess. There is a character who knows Bran very well, has lived as a dog, among dogs, unquestionably broken and present at a theater that is of immediate concern to Bran and that he has focused his undivided attention. I fear Theon was unwittingly prophetic when he said that the gods were not done with him.
  20. Not really, for most of the time there would have been no one for Roose to answer to and by the time the question was raised they bigger issues to deal with. Besides, lords looking after their own asses first and foremost is nothing new. It doesn't speak to betrayal in and of itself. ETA and Robb, Edmure and Catelyn would not have a clear picture of the composition of his forces beyond what Roose himself reported.
  21. Roose spent a lot time on the road and Ramsay spent a considerable amount of time as a captive and then I doubt that Luwin would send ravens on his behalf to Roose. They would have had trouble keeping track of each other, let alone send ravens and wait for replies. The issue with the any preconceived plan of supplanting the Starks is that it is almost impossible without the fall of Winterfell and the apparent deaths of Bran and Rickon, which could not have been anticipated. There is also another issue. Until Moat Cailin Roose would not have known that he was to be a commander and therefore have any freedom of movement. It was almost a year until Robb saw Roose in person again and then Roose blamed the debacle of Duskendale on Robett Glover. Roose probably spun the tale about the Green Fork however he wished. This is a good juxtaposition with Robb's reaction to Edmure. There is key difference, however. Roose's defeat, even though unnecessary, did serve its purpose in Robb's plan. On the other hand Edmure's victory completely derailed it. There is also the issue of what he was instructed to accomplish. It loos like initially Robb did not mind a confrontation, but then thought better of it as seen through his choice of commanders. I think that commanders are to meant to have a free rein in order to allow for adaptability in the face of lack of communication. His objectives were twofold in terms of Robb’s campaign. Keep Tywin busy long enough while also securing the route to the North. The battle did waste Tywin's time, while his own troops retreated in good order having two strong defensive positions to fall back to. So in a sense he accomplished both objectives. While he managed to get Manderly, Karstark and Hornwood captured or killed, this would not have been decisive as their fathers and brothers were with Robb. Their deaths however would allow him easier control of their own troops. Losing the battle so badly, does nothing for him. Outright betrayal, in the form of contacting either Tywin or Jaime would have been relatively simple, but gained him little. On the other hand the more damage he inflicted on Tywin the more he would have raised his stock among the North men and the better his negotiating position with Tywin. In short, I think he was playing it safe, hedging his bets and creating options for himself rather than having committed to a specific sort of action. Trying to juggle all these balls he botched the actual battle.
  22. I think the dragon egg would fit. It is his ambition to gain dragons and as it has become possible, evidently, to hatch dragons again, giving up the dragon egg in his possession would constitute a great personal sacrifice, beyond its monetary value. From what we have seen so far of him, he would value having a dragon more than being a king, so this is a contradiction. The title could have other value for him, as in acquiring kingsblood for magic purposes or he could get off on the power. An interesting question is if the Faceless Men would accept a commission for Dany or another king. In terms of their relious beliefs it seems they would have to. For me the little we know it seems the price is entirely dependent on the applicant, not the target. So, in theory, someone like, say Hazea's father could place a hit on Dany. I don't think this would apply in practice, as they are almost certainly involved in the politics of Braavos and their own agenda takes precedence. The difficulty of a target does not depend on the target's power, but on their security, nor should it matter in the price they exact. Dany's court is diverse and populous making easier to infiltrate. The difficulty would lie in getting around an individual like Varys wolho watches everyone and everything in his reach. Given their skillset and time, no one is really safe. Unless they live in complete isolation in a remote location somewhere.
  23. Well, for one he did start the civil war. His daughter took over the throne with a coup and he invaded the Riverlands. If you're asking if he could have supplanted the either the Targaryens or Robert directly and seat a Lannister king, no, not on his own and since he doesn't play well with others any other speculation is moot. As far as being the most influential house in King's Landing, the Lannisters were that for the majority of Aerys's reign and you could make an argument that they were also the most influential house during Robert's reign, though Jon Arryn held the reins.
  24. I think they might be trading in influence as much as money. For example I think that Izembaro and Brusco might be former clients or maybe failed cadets, but that's another topic. This would apply to Robert or any other king to political or economic favors, like transferring the crown's debts to the Iron Bank, or maybe that said king would anything for someone who showed him the FM coin, or adopting a policy at the behest of the FM. ETA For very important figures I suspect their own agenda would come into play more. For instance if they don't want to kill Dany, they might outright refuse. If they do want to kill her for their own purposes, they would still charge full price.
×
×
  • Create New...