Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Chebyshov

  • Rank
    Purveyor of moon tea

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

6,292 profile views
  1. Hahahahhahahh. It's entirely off the rails and delivers the exact opposite meaning of the books at every turn, but sure, they're duty-bound. To the OP's point, I think it's quite a inaccurate to paint this series as one that's "meant to deceive." Martin will turn conventional storytelling tropes on their head, and takes a certain delight in that (Quentyn serving as an inversion of the hero's monomyth is a nice microcosm of that), but he really doesn't actively deceive. In fact, the "shocks" are so obvious and born of the narrative that on reread, you smack yourself for not seeing the writing on the wall (the Red Wedding's heavy foreshadowing may be the most accessible example to that point). Each time I reread ASOIAF, I find R+L=J more convincing. It's quite easy to "disprove" or poke holes in the "evidence," but it's important to remember that this isn't a CSI episode either. It's a constructive narrative with thematic meanings. The biggest complaint levied against the theory I've seen is that it's too "obvious", right? But you have to consider what it does and what point it serves in the story. In the case of this theory...it's the entire scaffolding that makes Ned's arc work. You take it away, then suddenly his struggles with internal and external honor and his specific hangups fail to make sense. Add to that what we know of Ned's nature, and you kind of wonder, "what would any of these other options actually do for the story, on a thematic level?" Not much, honestly. There's hand-waving "people aren't what they seem!" that I see tossed out, but that's not particularly meaningful, and it definitely doesn't make stuff like when Ned links Sansa begging for Lady's life to his sister make a modicum of sense. The thing is, people treat R+L=J as this super-guarded mystery reveal, and it's just...not. It's a texture to Ned's story. And it is something that could have plot-consequences later given the stations of R+L and what that might mean for Jon's position within this society, sure. But it's not this twist-to-end-all-twists.
  2. Chebyshov

    Board Issues 4

    Sorry, just saw this. Clearing cache worked great, thanks!
  3. Chebyshov

    Board Issues 4

    A bit of an oddity (I'm in chrome); the gear wheel button is the hyperlink option. The "center text" button is "quote." The smiley face is "code," the hyperlink brings up the emoticon list, the "left alight" functions as spoiler. The bullets, numbering, and indent buttons are functioning fine. But then left align is a flag facing right, center align is a flag facing left, and right align is yet another hyperlink button. Sorry if this has been mentioned already. I took a screenshot of me hovering over the smiley face to show you:
  4. Chebyshov

    Board Issues 4

    Probably been reported already, but tapatalk notifications aren't working.
  5. You told me to be sanguine about those Dornish things

  6. Chebyshov

    Board Issues 4

    Yikes...still, here's hoping that goes well. Thank you for all the hard work!
  7. Chebyshov

    Board Issues 4

    Is there any news on restoring the lost content? Basically every single conversation/reread/essay before July is just completely destroyed. (That is, it just cuts off at the first quote or spoiler code).
  8. I mean even Cream of Wheat has lumps.

  9. It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in need of a bad pussy

  10. I gave it a 2. Aside from the WoS there was literally nothing I could call "good," and a lot I would call outright "bad" (usually meaning illogical). And for the walk I was just super projecting the books onto it anyway. Actually, the Players gave a truer depiction I think. If nothing else at least their cartoonish characterizations were consistent.
  11. Don't even dignify it. The rape of a character vs a joke written about penis sizes for something that didn't happen and we know won't. Like this is probably some of the sickest apology I've seen yet. Sorry I kind of vomited that and then left for vacation. I dunno if someone answered you but I'm gotgifsandmusings and she's theculturalvacuum. But our blogs are a bit co-dependent.
  12. Right, I think articles like that are born of the misunderstanding that we're upset that there was a depiction of rape at all. And like so many people still think that's what this is about. And it's not like we're sitting here thinking "god, we just would rather Jeyne was raped" as if these are two real girls and we care about one but not the other. The issue with this was that it was a rape without any sense: plot-wise, character-wise. Like...we know that it was all for shock-value because it's exactly what Cogman's quote about it said: "you go with the girl the audience knows." Because that would horrify us. And that's exactly what the rape-victim's piece is getting at too. Jeyne's rape is handled with sensitivity, not because the depiction of the scene is better for the feint of heart (far, far from it), but because Martin dealt with it intimately. He didn't toss it in so Jeyne could "rise from the ashes" or any hackneyed trope. He dealt with her brutalization with respect to her character and never, ever let us forget the damning consequences. But again, Sansa isn't Jeyne. You can't blithely swap Girl A for Girl B and act as if it's going to have the same point or result. It utterly, utterly destroys the narrative. And frankly the fact that the writers thought these two women would be interchangeable and "service the plot" in the same way? That's outright offensive. Then there's the major, major issues about the lack of sense this entire set-up had. No one has yet to explain how Sansa marrying Ramsay is a good idea. Because it isn't. Because when you're the "last remaining Stark" whose "maidenhood" is of value, marrying the family that slaughtered yours and "giving up" your "virginity"...which does inherently come with the expectation of children...that does absolutely nothing to strengthen your position. "Make him yours." Why? So she can rule Winterfell in the name of the Boltons? Fuck, she wasn't even marrying Roose to gain a position of power. And the fact is, the writers sat down and thought to themselves "we think it will be better [for Ramsay, for Theon] to have Sansa be the girl getting raped" without bothering to even think of a logical reason why this would come to pass. This idiotic idea that we should "wait and see" where it goes...what, because they've been so fucking respectful to Sansa's character? When we know the entire set-up was for truly gratuitous (aka uncalled for; lacking good reason; unwarranted) reasons, then the aftermath is irredeemable. Also, what are our best case scenarios here? Sansa will rise harder and stronger from this? Because her abuse in King's Landing wasn't for that exact purpose, and there's no quote about her skin hardening or anything as she's reflecting on her time there. And the suggestion that she needs a raping to become tougher or to want revenge against the Boltons is just outright sexist. I think the funniest part (if there's any humor to be drawn from this at all) to me is that they think they're doing Theon's storyline a service here by giving us "buy-in" with someone we care about, when this undercuts his character too. Of course he'd want to save Sansa, the girl he had a crush on growing up. And of course there's other people around who would want to help Sansa. She's "worth" saving because she's a Stark. Jeyne wasn't, which was the whole point. And a point that D&D apparently agreed with too. Assholes.
  • Create New...