Jump to content

Lord_Pepsi_Cupps

Members
  • Content count

    774
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Lord_Pepsi_Cupps

  • Rank
    doctrinaire

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

969 profile views
  1. Lord_Pepsi_Cupps

    Why was Qarth left out of TWOIAF?

    If the horn works, it works, that’s all there is. But I think the Qartheen really do hate dragons and didn’t want to have any to begin with, and this might be older than their contact with Valyria, reaching back into the Long Night or the Great empire of the dawn. We’re kind of invited/encouraged to dislike the Qartheen because they’re not great to Dany, and while I think all kinds of doubts about the Undying are fair (and they also seem to be distrusted by the other Qartheen), i’m not sure the Qartheen themselves are in the “bad camp” just because they think Dany’s dragons are “a terror, a flaming sword above the world” and want to stop her. They’re not exactly wrong, ya know? We love Dany, but dragons are unmatched monsters and they really shouldn’t exist. If the Qartheen history hides some juicy tidbits, it might well be something about how they remember that the entire Long Night and the messed up seasons is tied to dragons (either because that’s how/when they were created, or because the Long Night was caused by someone wanting to stop the original dragonlords). In either case, dragons are likely essential to the “original sin” that messed up the world. That’s what I mean by saying the Qartheen may genuinely not have wanted to bring more dragons into the world, and the Undying are now reacting to what Dany has done.
  2. Lord_Pepsi_Cupps

    Why was Qarth left out of TWOIAF?

    I think preventing spoilers is the most logical answer. What’s interesting is the fact Qarth was removed from TWOIAF completely, which suggests you can’t tell its story at all without giving major things away (unlike Asshai for example). As Lord Varys said, I think the safest bet is that they beat the dragonlords at some point (the Dornish are suspected of doing the same with Meraxes, so it’s not unthinkable). Qarth is an anomaly, a powerful ancient city the Valyrians don’t seem to have conquered. Query whether the dragonlords turned west towards the Narrow Sea and founded the Free Cities in that direction precisely because Qarth somehow barred their progress further east? The east is fabulously wealthy, unlike the comparatively undeveloped west, so it would have been the logical direction for conquest.
  3. Lord_Pepsi_Cupps

    The dragon bond - inherited memories?

    it comes down to how you interpret the ‘magic’ that in Westeros/North is referred to as skinchanging. You wouldn’t ride a wolf, a squirrel or a raven because you couldn’t ride them (for obvious reasons), but Varamyr does ride the bear he skinchanges, because it’s large enough to carry him. If you *could* skinchange a dragon, you would still ride it (I would think!) - the two aren’t mutually exclusive. “No need to ride them” isn’t the same as “wouldn’t ride them” - who would say no to flying around on a virtual unstoppable nuclear weapon, even if they could control it from a distance instead? Also, the connection between human and animal may compel behaviours that would seem unnecessary to us (the whole thing about how the human starts taking on the animal’s traits). This is based on assumptions of course, but so is saying that the dragon-link is different to skinchanging - so it’s about which assumption is more sensible to make. If we’re given a detailed explanation of the nature of a human-animal bond (skinchanging) doesn’t it make sense to assume that the most important human-animal bond of all (dragon/dragonrider) would work on the same principles?
  4. Lord_Pepsi_Cupps

    The dragon bond - inherited memories?

    There’s been speculation that the dragon bond/link is similar to skinchanging, and might even mirror it - the connection between human and animal, the way the death of one affects the other, etc. Just wondering: could it be that a dragon retains an ‘imprint’ of its dead riders, which a new rider might either have access to, or at least have some connection with, after they bond with the dragon? These may not be clear memories, or a separate personality, but maybe certain parts of previous riders survive in the dragon. More than that, if the riders could have a second life in their dragons, which might go on to bond with a new human. In fact, i bet every dragon rider would, if they could, jump inside their dragon right before they die - why wouldn’t you?? Bran can feel a long-dead CotF inside a raven, if i’m not mistaken. Same principle - a new “rider” senses an old one, at least in some way. Maybe with practice he could get more access to the imprint. Imagine bonding with Balerion, omg. May be part of why Maegor insisited on bonding with him, to get access to ‘Aegon’. And although it’s not said anywhere, i assume Visenya shaped Maegor’s ambitions and plans, and that kween knew things.
  5. Lord_Pepsi_Cupps

    R+L=J v.164

    My favourite one is from the World of Ice and Fire. You do need the background on "blue rose / chink in a wall of ice" as representing Jon, but here's the image that seals it: "And when the triumphant Prince of Dragonstone named Lyanna Stark, daughter of the Lord of Winterfell, the queen of love and beauty, placing a garland of blue roses in her lap with the tip of his lance, the lickspittle lords gathered around the king declared that further proof of his perfidy." You can almost see GRRM chortling to himself because he is as obvious as he can possible be. The "tip" of Rhaegar's "lance" -> blue roses -> Lyanna's "lap". The symbol for Rheagar's penis (tip of his lance) places the symbol for Jon (blue roses) into the symbol for Lyanna's womb (her lap). End of discussion.
  6. Lord_Pepsi_Cupps

    Targaryen Madness is an Exaggeration

    There's a couple of underlying questions that need answering: (1) is the madness related to the ability to hatch/ride dragons and do all types of "madness" have the same cause? For example, there is the kind of extreme cruelty we apparently see in Maegor, there's the paranoia of Aerys II, there's the monkey child thing etc. An obsession with dragons (believing they're a dragon, wanting to turn into a dragon) seems to be a red thread that appears after the dragons die out - which suggests that there may well be a link with dragonriding. But we shouldn't just discount the fact that stuff can happen that can "break" or warp a person who would otherwise be fine: was Rhaenyra's son Aegon "mad"? He certainly wasn't all there, but given what he'd experienced, are we surprised? And he may not be the only example: in the high-stakes world of an incestuous dragonriding royal house, the ultimate game of thrones, people are much more likely to be damaged than the average person. (3) how accurate and complete is the information we actually have on the madness of past Targs, especially going far back? If a narrative is accepted that this bloodline has some madness in it, it's quite easy to explain everything strange or disliked as madness. We have to keep in mind that there were several moments of disruption in the family story in the 300 years they were in Westeros: the Maegor succession conflict, the Dance and its aftermath, Baelor the Blessed's bookburning that followed a moment when all adult Targs (and thus the bearers of family lore) had died within a few years of each other. At each point, there's a chance that a particular spin is being put on these disruptive events that obscures something important (when wanting to delegitimise a defeated opponent in a civil war, for example). Take Maegor. Was this a case of the "special Targaryen madness"? Because there's a good chance that he died and was brought back to life in a Lady Stoneheart fashion, and his "insanity" really kicks off there. We know LS is obsessed with the revenge, defined as she is by Catelyn's final moments - could the same be true of unMeagor? Before his "return", he may have just been your run-of-the-mill brute who was obsessed with inheriting the most powerful dragon. Not madness, just a sense of entitlement. Visenya had him late in life, it seems as a sort of insurance against the disappointing Aenys and the danger that the new Targ kingdom might not survive - so she was likely to have raised him to be very focused on ensuring the continuation of the Targ line and the survival of the family. If unMeagor is basically a distilled version of this obsession, it could explain his cruelty to his wives in the singleminded search to produce heirs. We don't go "aww poor Maegor", but there's a big difference between whether this is an insane man, or whether he's not a "man" at all (in the sense that Lady Stoneheart isn't really the woman Catelyn Stark anymore, but a revenant obsessed with what had tortured the living woman while she was alive). Then, after the defeat of Maegor, his successors had no need to whitewash his legacy; on the contrary, there would have been a strong motive to dump all the negative stuff that had happened since Aegon's death on him: he was mad and evil, and we have done away with him and he was succeeded by a brilliant and good king and everyone is happy now. I guess I would say there's a good chance the madness gets overused because you tend to find what you expect to find, and also because it's a useful way to delegitimise certain people or Targs in general (so it's something that would presumably become much more talked about in the Baratheon era, especially when the memory of Aerys is still so fresh). But, I do think that there is something to the madness narrative, although it really starts after the dragons are gone. In any family, you will get mental illness, and there may be examples of that in the Targs who were "simply insane" and not "dragon insane". As was said above, it's probably that the Targs who are dragonriders feel compelled to bond to a dragon, but obviously can't find one. To me, this fits the broader principle in the story that nothing is free, and that to get power you have to sacrifice something huge and important to you. If the ability to be a dragonrider is seen as the ultimate power (which it probably is), then it makes sense for there to be a pretty big catch: it's not just an ability, but a need - a question of must, not of want. Once you tie your bloodline to dragons, your descendants will have great power, but they also will not have a choice: if they don't bond with a dragon, it will likely drive them mad.
  7. Lord_Pepsi_Cupps

    [Poll] How would you rate episode 508?

    10/10 The battle had me in knots, and that hasn't happened on the show in forever. It was just a very well-made piece of TV. I *love* how they're reminding the viewers of all the main players and how their stories relate, but are actually making an effort so it doesn't jar: Tyrion and Dany was perfect for this, and a great scene all round. Shame they felt they had to give Emilia Clarke another GRANDIOSE pompous line (you break that wheel), she is so much better when she tones it down a couple of notches. I don't blame the actress, she gets written some wooden lines. Cersei is.. coming together better than I thought. The whole thing has been rushed, which is such a shame - Cersei in Feast and Dance is just one of the juiciest storylines in the books. But then they subtly played a few bars of The Rains of Castamere, as Cersei Lannister is on her knees, sucking water off of a filthy dungeon floor. Those couple of moments approached how I've felt at certain key points while reading the books. Top marks.
  8. Lord_Pepsi_Cupps

    [Poll] How would you rate episode 507?

    Strange that we didn't see Arya in an episode called The Gift... It was a perfect episode name if Jon had settled the wildlings on the New Gift, and Arya gave the gift to someone. I was surprised neither of those happened. Dorne... at this stage, why did they even bother with this storyline? It gets so little airtime, and what it does get is so average, that it really seems the writers just thought they "had to" do Dorne, but totally didn't see the point of it. Other than Cersei, everything else was just setup, so it's really a bridge episode. I guess exposition is unavoidable in a show this size, but they don't really make a masterpiece of it... Some gripe with the Queen of Thornes. We're told she's this big schemer, but she keeps getting shown up at every turn. And those sassy lines got old with last season's "eat this food I paid for".
  9. Can't rate the episode, still processing the end. I switch between 1 and 10. The good: - Cersei finally feels like a real person, and her scenes with LF were some of their better scenes (which isn't saying much, I know) - the KL plot line in general felt a lot tighter this episode than it usually does; I'd even say they handled the Marg arrest twist well. - Arya finding the faces The bad, basically DORNE: - Dorne... oh my lord. What a disaster on every level. And Trystane!!! Did anyone else notice how they kept cutting away from closeups of his face because of his ridiculous pout?? - the Sand Snakes are just a joke. - that fight scene was appalling - why are they wearing clothes you'd wear in the desert if Dorne is apparently green with a gentle bit of sunshine (overcast too!). Which goes to how bad the settings were done. Still processing Sansa.
  10. Lord_Pepsi_Cupps

    [Poll] How would you rate episode 505

    9/10 Favourite episode this season so far. Finally some top-notch dialogue! Best bits: (1) Winterfell - very interesting to see how they're developing it. Only weird bit was Sansa talking back to the Boltons at dinner. What happened to stealth? (2) Jorah and Tyrion - very good. This show couldn't handle her another travelling odd couple, so it's nice they pulled back from that. The poem was actually quite lovely. (3) Stannis and Sam Tarly. It was a short exchange, but I thought it was nicely handled. The show would usually just plomp two characters in a scene and have them interact with no background - taking the time to establish why Stannis would acknowledge Sam at all (his father) was a nice touch. (4) No Kings Landing! I didn't think it would make that much of a difference, but it's nice to be away from Cersei's mangled plot line for a bit. I'm not sure about Dany's storyline. It could be interesting, and there were a few moments where she actually seemed like a real person, rather than a statue spewing grandiose threats. The moment when she gets off at feeding people to her dragons is certainly interesting for where they might be taking her.
  11. Lord_Pepsi_Cupps

    How would you rate episode 504?

    This was a terribly written piece of TV, and couldn't be rescued by some good performances (although a lot of the performances are part of the problem). Dorne What to say? There is no a trace of character believability in Ellaria or the Sand Snakes. They're just caricatures. Vaguely racist ones. "I want-ah my-ah revenge-ah!", lol. Why does the show keep resorting to these unnecessary exaggerated characters? They have a huge, HUGE advantage of already being provided with incredibly complex, formed characters by GRRM. They need to trim down the story for TV, but instead of trimming story, they dump all character complexity. Jon and Mel "Do we NEED to show her boob here?" "We don't "need" to do anything...". Just, I mean, is TV Mel like a legitimate sexual predator? Winterfell Aiden Gillen is difficult to watch at the best of times, but especially so when the writers change their mind about who they need Littlefinger to be this episode. Because then you're totally confused, you're like "Is this just the usual bad acting, or is it also bad writing this time??" because it's hard to say! lol. Cersei By far the weakest link in the show. The show can't seem to decide who Cersei is (or maybe Lena Heady can't deliver it consistently, I don't know - either way, the job of having a believable and interesting character is not being done).
×