Disdain for the targs?

[The Dragon King]

Why should this be so? Should owning Stuka Dive Bombers and conquering Poland give "bragging rights"? I always thought conquering was a morally dubious proposition

Finally, I think I have more respect for the average dog faced foot soldier than I do for most of the Dragon riding chumps.

1 - Of course the Stuka pilots wouldn't have bragging rights, their side lost. American pilots that bombed Germany though, BIG bragging rights.

2 - Everyone has foot soldiers, that doesn't make you cool. OTOH, Dragons are freaking amazing, being the lone people with dragons gives you bragging rights.

[Roose The Weddingcrasher]

I bet the people who like Targaryens also cheered for Sauron Melkor :D

[TalalOfDorne]

Eh, they arent that bad. We just know about them more than we know about the other Houses, since they were more prominent in Westeros than any other family, and that the author wrote novellas centering around them. So naturally we can see more than one side of the family.

I think if the other Great Houses got the same amount of exposure, we would see something more or less similar to the Targaryens (Whom I like a lot of).

[Bennis of the Brown Shield]

I bet the people who like Targaryens also cheered for Sauron Melkor :D

Melkor liked big warhammers.

Melkor = Robert Baratheon.

[Jô Maltese]

In part, the racial purity angle: Targ-Aryans.

Now this is something very new to me, simply brilliant and enlightening ! How could I not see it before?

EDIT: And I am not being sarcastic, I really mean it. :bang:

[Roose The Weddingcrasher]

Eh, they arent that bad. We just know about them more than we know about the other Houses, since they were more prominent in Westeros than any other family, and that the author wrote novellas centering around them. So naturally we can see more than one side of the family.

I think if the other Great Houses got the same amount of exposure, we would see something more or less similar to the Targaryens (Whom I like a lot of).

Which is why they should not rule over the other houses. At least not after they lost their dragons!

Melkor liked big warhammers.

Melkor = Robert Baratheon.

No way. Tulkas = Robert Baratheon.

Melkor had Dragons and wanted to subjugate the free people of Middle-Earth. Targs had Dragons and wanted to subjugate the free houses of Westeros.

[kiasyd]

Guys guys, I do agree here. But you can't deny how cool Hawke is. Or well ths avatar and trailer from which it comes. :lol:

Yes, that trailer was the best part of DA2. <_<

[Roddy the Ruin]

Yes, that trailer was the best part of DA2. <_<

:lmao: :agree:

[Bennis of the Brown Shield]

Which is why they should not rule over the other houses. At least not after they lost their dragons!

No way. Tulkas = Robert Baratheon.

Melkor had Dragons and wanted to subjugate the free people of Middle-Earth. Targs had Dragons and wanted to subjugate the free houses of Westeros.

Lol. Poor free houses.

[TheCrannogDweller]

A fucked up bunch of power hungry assholes.

Which makes them different from the others how exactly? Do you think the Starks, Arryns and Lannisters became Kings by being really, really nice?

And, if we're going to make assumptions about whole Houses, how about this: Baratheons were kin-betraying assholes.

Lord Borros Baratheon not only disregarded his own kin, he also allowed his nephew to be slaughtered by Aemond.

Then there is Renly, who tried to take his nephew's and then his brother's Crown.

So from 4 Baratheons, who actually had speaking parts in the story, 2 betrayed their own kin.

Does that make them a treacherous House?

From fighting and killing vast amounts of people with dragonfire...

But that fight was pretty bloodless compared to whole armies getting roasted by dragons.

Gee wizz, I dunno, how can I possibly tell if the slaughter of countless thousands via dragon

Where did you see entire armies of countless of thousands of men being baked by dragons?

I never really get the Targaryen hatred of pure StanStans. King Maekar I is the precursor of Stannis in so many ways, not surprising since Maekar is Stannis direct ancestor (great-great grandfather IIRC).

Yes, I went there :P Outside of the Baratheon looks, Stannis is more Targaryen then Baratheon.

There is a lot of that going around. Apart from the Stannis/Maekar thing, there is also a clear parallel between Robert/AegonIV and Renly/Daemon Blackfyre.

Baratheons are related to the Targaryens.

Not only that, the Baratheons wouldn't have even existed if it wasn't for Aegon's conquest.

And the baratheons took westeros without dragons, thats way more awesome imo.

Oh, come on. Robert was just a figurehead and you know it.

If it wasn't for Jon Arryn, there wouldn't have been a Rebellion.

And if it wasn't for Ned Stark, Robert would've either died at Stoney Sept or got smashed at the Trident.

No, not much. Among 300 years of their rulership, there are bound to be some madmen (Aerys), some utter fools (Aerion) or some complete jerks (Aegon IV). But Targaryens are neither worse nor better than anyone else in that regard. I'll bet if you took any 300 years of history of any noble family, you find people with similar traits to e.g. Aerys or Maegor. Who's to say that Robert's or Ned's great-grandfather wasn't some kind of horrible vicious axe-crazy lunatic?

I agree.

But of all the noble familes we dont hear of any madmen. And many of them have been around for longer then the targs, none of the other families preach about superior blood either. You wont ever hear an arryn say they are blood of the falcon.

The disdain for the lower-born is pretty ubiquitous, actually - and not just about them.

Tywin openly protests when his father married Genna to a Frey - and they are the strongest bannermen of the Tullys.

Then you have the Gulltown Arryns and the disdain the main branch feels for them because they marry lowly merchants. Rich lowly merchants, mind you.

Orys was ok though, he had that girl cloaked when she was presented to him...

...right after he had killed her father.

Also how is threatening to kill your banners if they dont join you treachery? ITs treachery on the part of your banners because they are supposed to support you, not the other way around.

That's debatable. All power flows from the Iron Throne, so the bannermen had a tough choice to make - a choice with which even Stannis struggled.

Meh, every house has their bad apples. The Fossoways more than others.

Still one of my favourite quotes from the stories:

"A pity he wasn't born a Fossoway, then he'd think himself an apple and we'd all be a deal safer." :D

I guess I'm one of the few Baratheon fans who doesn't hate Targaryens. I actually like a decent amount of Targaryens. Maekar, Bloodraven, Baelor, and Aegon V are among my favorites. Aemon was a good man. Yeah, they've got their shit family members, but so does every other house.

I'm only opposed to them becuase if they win, then House Baratheon is gone(an outcome I'm positive will happen). That's just fanboyism though.

It's a rare thing - to see a reasonable, rational post from a Stannis-fan. Thank you.

It's not like Jamie/Cersei that are a isoletad case in the Lannister family.

Tywin and Joanna were first cousins - meaning that their parents were siblings. So yeah, Jaime/Cersei wasn't an isolated case.

Incredibly telling about you, then, isn't it?

It is. It's telling that she apparently can accept people with different opinions than her own. Unlike some other posters.

Especially when all those families have interbred with each other...

Pretty much this. Just because the stories about incest are focused on the Targaryens doesn't mean that the other families aren't interbred as well.

In a feudal society everybody is related to everybody. Tywin and Joanna were first cousins. I don't see anyone pointing fingers at them.

Plus, the Targaryens weren't as incestuous as we've all been led to believe. From Aegon to Aerys, at least a third of the Kings married outside of the family. And that's not counting the various princes.

I bet the people who like Targaryens also cheered for Sauron Melkor :D

I believe you meant Morgoth.

No way. Tulkas = Robert Baratheon.

Nah, Robert is too angry for that part.

The Laughing Storm, on the other hand, is pretty much Tulkas in human form.

[OldGimletEye]

1 - Of course the Stuka pilots wouldn't have bragging rights, their side lost. American pilots that bombed Germany though, BIG bragging rights.

I think you are really missing the point I am trying to make here. Go back an re-read what I wrote and comtemplate the point I am making. Consider if the Nazis had won.

2 - Everyone has foot soldiers, that doesn't make you cool. OTOH, Dragons are freaking amazing, being the lone people with dragons gives you bragging rights.

Why do owning Dragons make you cool? Why should I view somebody "amazing" because they have Dragons? Would Aerys II have been cool if he had a Dragon? Or would Gregor Clegane be cool if he had a Dragon? How about Ramsay Bolton?

Did you ever consider that owning a Dragon might make an asshole just a bigger one?

[butterbumps!]

I should add, this thread was inspired by the lemoncake, I saw a post of hers and it just sort of clicked with me. This post right here Honestly im shocked at what a high quality post it was, considering how most of her other stuff is garbage. Anyway, moving on from that.

Abolishing the right of first night means nothing when you still go around raping smallfolk whenever the fuck you want and then saying "dragonseed is a blessing" I agree that great houses are proud, but none of the other great houses preach about how much better their blood is then everyone elses.

Inner plots? Roberts hammer and the victory at the trident is hardly an inner plot.

Taking westeros with a hammer>taking it with dragons.

Oh wow, E Ro, of all the usual "garbage" I write, this is what you chose as inspiration?

I guess I pre-emptively answered by the post you linked, but I guess in the spirit of catharsis I'll keep going, lol. I generally don't form strong opinions on Houses categorically (except for the angelic Boltons, of course), and I typically see each character separately. But for some reason, the Targs are the irrational exception to that rule for me. I mean, there's even some Targs I'm neutral to reasonably positive on-- I'm ok with Rhaegar, Aemon, Egg, Baelor, Alysanne and Jahaerys, undecided about Bloodraven-- so it's not as though I don't recognize some decent ones individually.

I'm not fully sure why I have such a negative reaction to "Targaryen" as opposed to other identities; it's something I definitely recognize as irrational, and go out of my way to keep in check for the purposes of writing here. The Ubermensch propaganda nonsense is one easily identified reason with some rational basis; I tend to see appeal by other Houses to their sigils and identity to be appeals to strength, not necessarily blood superiority over the others the way the Targs go about this (how the dragon is above mating with lesser beasts and the like, which apparently doesn't matter in terms of raping blessing the smallfolk with their magical seed on occasion). If I'm being thoroughly honest, though, it's not merely that they self-propagate the superiority thing that offends me; it's that others seem to drink the Kool-Aid about it, which gives these nonsensical views power.

The dragons are the other fairly rationally-based sticking point for me. I find absolutely nothing great or interesting about these things. That they can be used as efficient aircraft is the only positive quality I can see; otherwise, they are merely instruments of death and destruction, and not the subtle sort I tend to find interesting. That they are typically seen as being enviable and awesome in-universe makes me see red. I saw much red in Clash, as Dany walks through the waste with the obvious presence of dragon bones out there, telling us that these dead cities are dead because Valyrians rode out to enslave their people, dragons are apparently still super awesome. More precisely, I resent the fact that dragons were the tools of oppression and slavery for ages, and yet, these goddam things are still hailed as blessed miracles, coveted by all (except for Braavos, which is part of why I love Braavos). Though I recognize that the Targs did not use their dragons to enslave Westeros, I am deeply turned off by the fact they continued to use these death machines as the deified source of their power, and worse, claimed to be gods themselves by their monopoly on these slavery tools.

Though in terms of the dynasty, I wouldn't condemn them as any more incompetent than other Houses in such a position, I do find their legacy extremely disappointing. I think their claims of supremacy and domination would be slightly easier to stomach if they ushered in some sort of advancements architecturally, scientifically, politically, etc. Not that there isn't a certain charm to the Kingsroad, but I can't help but think there should have been more public works going on to make the unification and tax centralization a bit more meaningful. Despite some good rulers, and the fact that there are benefits to unification in and of itself, I find their overall rule underwhelming. Maybe that's unfair, but given their belief that they are gods, I wish there was some further benefit here to be seen.

I have the impression-- which may be unfair, admittedly-- that they are broadly navel-gazing prophesy-obsessed people, distracted from many practical matters due to preoccupation with destiny (even Aemon and Rhaegar had the prophesy bug, Dany's dwelling on visions, and god only knows what Bloodraven's deal is). To be fair, this is a series where prophesy is a real thing, so existence of prophesies and believing in them isn't what I'm criticizing. It's moreso the delusion of cosmic self importance combined with obsession I find off-putting. I'm not sure how rational that impression is, but it's part of what contributed to my impression on why they didn't accomplish more during their rule.

So, to bring this full circle, I already struggle with maintaining a rational view of the Targs, so when I got a few pages into their shenanigans in PatQ, I put it down and didn't finish. It was making them look so bad (imo), and reinforcing my negative views that I felt the "responsible" thing was in not continuing. I guess additionally, I just wasn't finding the story very interesting either; I kept thinking that I'd really like to learn more about the Braavosi and Faceless Men rather than the petty antics of the bullies who had once enslaved them.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Oh wow, E Ro, of all the usual "garbage" I write, this is what you chose as inspiration?

I guess I pre-emptively answered by the post you linked, but I guess in the spirit of catharsis I'll keep going, lol. I generally don't form strong opinions on Houses categorically (except for the angelic Boltons, of course), and I typically see each character separately. But for some reason, the Targs are the irrational exception to that rule for me. I mean, there's even some Targs I'm neutral to reasonably positive on-- I'm ok with Rhaegar, Aemon, Egg, Baelor, Alysanne and Jahaerys, undecided about Bloodraven-- so it's not as though I don't recognize some decent ones individually.

I'm not fully sure why I have such a negative reaction to "Targaryen" as opposed to other identities; it's something I definitely recognize as irrational, and go out of my way to keep in check for the purposes of writing here. The Ubermensch propaganda nonsense is one easily identified reason with some rational basis; I tend to see appeal by other Houses to their sigils and identity to be appeals to strength, not necessarily blood superiority over the others the way the Targs go about this (how the dragon is above mating with lesser beasts and the like, which apparently doesn't matter in terms of raping blessing the smallfolk with their magical seed on occasion). If I'm being thoroughly honest, though, it's not merely that they self-propagate the superiority thing that offends me; it's that others seem to drink the Kool-Aid about it, which gives these nonsensical views power.

The dragons are the other fairly rationally-based sticking point for me. I find absolutely nothing great or interesting about these things. That they can be used as efficient aircraft is the only positive quality I can see; otherwise, they are merely instruments of death and destruction, and not the subtle sort I tend to find interesting. That they are typically seen as being enviable and awesome in-universe makes me see red. I saw much red in Clash, as Dany walks through the waste with the obvious presence of dragon bones out there, telling us that these dead cities are dead because Valyrians rode out to enslave their people, dragons are apparently still super awesome. More precisely, I resent the fact that dragons were the tools of oppression and slavery for ages, and yet, these goddam things are still hailed as blessed miracles, coveted by all (except for Braavos, which is part of why I love Braavos). Though I recognize that the Targs did not use their dragons to enslave Westeros, I am deeply turned off by the fact they continued to use these death machines as the deified source of their power, and worse, claimed to be gods themselves by their monopoly on these slavery tools.

Though in terms of the dynasty, I wouldn't condemn them as any more incompetent than other Houses in such a position, I do find their legacy extremely disappointing. I think their claims of supremacy and domination would be slightly easier to stomach if they ushered in some sort of advancements architecturally, scientifically, politically, etc. Not that there isn't a certain charm to the Kingsroad, but I can't help but think there should have been more public works going on to make the unification and tax centralization a bit more meaningful. Despite some good rulers, and the fact that there are benefits to unification in and of itself, I find their overall rule underwhelming. Maybe that's unfair, but given their belief that they are gods, I wish there was some further benefit here to be seen.

I have the impression-- which may be unfair, admittedly-- that they are broadly navel-gazing prophesy-obsessed people, distracted from many practical matters due to preoccupation with destiny (even Aemon and Rhaegar had the prophesy bug, Dany's dwelling on visions, and god only knows what Bloodraven's deal is). To be fair, this is a series where prophesy is a real thing, so existence of prophesies and believing in them isn't what I'm criticizing. It's moreso the delusion of cosmic self importance combined with obsession I find off-putting. I'm not sure how rational that impression is, but it's part of what contributed to my impression on why they didn't accomplish more during their rule.

So, to bring this full circle, I already struggle with maintaining a rational view of the Targs, so when I got a few pages into their shenanigans in PatQ, I put it down and didn't finish. It was making them look so bad (imo), and reinforcing my negative views that I felt the "responsible" thing was in not continuing. I guess additionally, I just wasn't finding the story very interesting either; I kept thinking that I'd really like to learn more about the Braavosi and Faceless Men rather than the petty antics of the bullies who had once enslaved them.

I think you really hit the nail on the head here, namely it's the in-story Kool-Aid drinking that gets especially grating. These people should know better by now, and they don't. And the "seed" thing, I found pretty disgusting and I can only hope that that was the intended reaction. I can admire the dragons as animals, but I've seen enough to know that they are not positive things or forces for good and it just reinforces my belief that Dany's will and must be destroyed too.

As for the fixation on prophecy and the unearned sense of cosmic self-importance, this is part of why Jon's fulfillment of the prophecy, if he does fulfill it, is the ultimate "fuck you" to the Targs: the PtwP is of their line, yes, but only incidentally, and identifies as a Stark.

[Jô Maltese]

I think you really hit the nail on the head here, namely it's the in-story Kool-Aid drinking that gets especially grating. These people should know better by now, and they don't. And the "seed" thing, I found pretty disgusting and I can only hope that that was the intended reaction. I can admire the dragons as animals, but I've seen enough to know that they are not positive things or forces for good and it just reinforces my belief that Dany's will and must be destroyed too.

As for the fixation on prophecy and the unearned sense of cosmic self-importance, this is part of why Jon's fulfillment of the prophecy, if he does fulfill it, is the ultimate "fuck you" to the Targs: the PtwP is of their line, yes, but only incidentally, and identifies as a Stark.

For the once, until he discovers his parentage? Who knows. I think one of his main flaws as LC of the NW is to give too much importance to his Stark blood and therefore thinks he is superior to his brothers. That could be a Targ trait more than a Stark's one IMO and therefore lead to his doom as for the other Targs, even after fulfilling the PtWP/AA prophecy?

[May1992]

First cousins is not considered incest in Westerosi society.

Plus brother/sister = cousin/cousin (no it's not, brother and sister is disgusting)

[Fat Mac]

Because Westeros is doing so great now on the brink of complete and utter destruction that they haven't seen for 8,000yrs

Uh, I'm pretty sure the Others were going to return regardless of who was King. And actually, the one force thats meant to stop the Others was weakened severely during Targaryen reign. Can't blame the current regime on the Others.

I mean the Targaryens are gone for a couple of years and look what awesome job the fools and murderers have done.

Again, nothing to do with their leadership. The Baratheons are a less established regime, so of course will have more trouble. Remember when Aegon the Conqueror died? A civil war erupted too. And these people fought against people with dragons. Then of course, several more devastating wars followed.

Look what awesome great things the Baratheon dynasty have done for Westeros besides bring in corrupt monsters into court and give them absolute power that has caused a massive civil war that has weakened the realm and help to push Westeros closer to complete destruction.

So, the Game of Thrones started during the Baratheon regime? Never mind all the political backstabbing that went on during the Dance With Dragons, or Daemon Blackfyre's claim for the throne, or the fact Tywin basically ruled Aerys' court. Because all the stuff with the Baratheon dynasty is happening closer to the invasion of the others, which no one BUT a Baratheon is doing anything about, their dynasty should take the blame?

Imagine if the Dance With Dragons was fought, then ended. Most of the dragons were *spoilers* dead, and then the Others randomly attacked. Should the Targaryens be logically blamed for taking out their political squabbles so close to an invasion they didn't know was coming? Probably not.

[RoamingRonin]

The Nazi comparison is unfair. We know the Targaryens believed in the "blood of the dragon"... and everyone else did too. The Targaryens didn't force this belief on people, they capitalized on it. Most Houses and people have a reputation that precedes them. Is it their fault people compared them to gods?

We know they married outside of the family even though they wanted to keep their blood pure. There's also the Iron Throne to think of. It wasn't even that long after the conquest that a Targ married a non-Targ. "Targ-aryan" is a funny way to describe them but lacks any real thought.

Can I also point out it was the First Men and Andals that came over with slaughtering natives and their gods. The Targaryens at least integrated themselves among the population. I know, I know, but Maegor the Cruel, right? But it only took a generation to solve that.

As for the fixation on prophecy and the unearned sense of cosmic self-importance, this is part of why Jon's fulfillment of the prophecy, if he does fulfill it, is the ultimate "fuck you" to the Targs: the PtwP is of their line, yes, but only incidentally, and identifies as a Stark.

See what I mean? Jon is a Targaryen, practically designed and constructed by Targaryens, but in the end... it doesn't count.

[Jô Maltese]

The Nazi comparison is unfair. We know the Targaryens believed in the "blood of the dragon"... and everyone else did too. The Targaryens didn't force this belief on people, they capitalized on it. Most Houses and people have a reputation that precedes them. Is it their fault people compared them to gods?

We know they married outside of the family even though they wanted to keep their blood pure. There's also the Iron Throne to think of. It wasn't even that long after the conquest that a Targ married a non-Targ. "Targ-aryan" is a funny way to describe them but lacks any real thought.

Can I also point out it was the First Men and Andals that came over with slaughtering natives and their gods. The Targaryens at least integrated themselves among the population. I know, I know, but Maegor the Cruel, right? But it only took a generation to solve that.

See what I mean? Jon is a Targaryen, practically designed and constructed by Targaryens, but in the end... it doesn't count.

As I said above, we don't know yet: it may do count?

[butterbumps!]

I think you really hit the nail on the head here, namely it's the in-story Kool-Aid drinking that gets especially grating. These people should know better by now, and they don't.

Yea, and I hasten to add that my ire isn't just contained to the propaganda-spewing Targs on these occasions, but also those drinking it, or alternatively, those getting all wistful about the awesomeness of dragons (yes, I even had a brief urge to smack Jon when he wanted a dragon at the Wall as a furnace, and was secretly pleased when the Braavosi chastened him.)

Objectively speaking, I'm really not sure how much worse the Targs are in comparison to every other House. For me, it's their branding of being actual gods that harms my opinion on them rather singularly. And more so than any other House, I think they're the ones most fundamentally branded at all, based on the information we have. I'm not really sure what "Starkness" means, but everyone seems to understand "Targaryen" as someone who is more special than the rest of you because they are gods (or some such variation on this, at least in my impression).

And even this I could potentially be neutral about; I mean, there's other Houses out there with delusions of grandeur, nearly universally detestable people (Freys come to mind), or cruel moral midgets (I'm thinking Boltons here). But I think the Targs opened themselves up to additional scrutiny and judgment when they chose to make themselves overlords of everyone. This puts our expectations of them higher, as well as highlights them fairly singular subjects for such interrogation. I know that bias is part of what contributes to my poor opinion, but I also think it may be fair to judge them with more scrutiny and set them apart because that's exactly what they did when they conquered and became overlords, and especially as they claimed such strong superiority for themselves.

[Light a wight tonight]

The Nazi comparison is unfair. We know the Targaryens believed in the "blood of the dragon"... and everyone else did too. The Targaryens didn't force this belief on people, they capitalized on it. Most Houses and people have a reputation that precedes them. Is it their fault people compared them to gods?

We know they married outside of the family even though they wanted to keep their blood pure. There's also the Iron Throne to think of. It wasn't even that long after the conquest that a Targ married a non-Targ. "Targ-aryan" is a funny way to describe them but lacks any real thought.

Can I also point out it was the First Men and Andals that came over with slaughtering natives and their gods. The Targaryens at least integrated themselves among the population. I know, I know, but Maegor the Cruel, right? But it only took a generation to solve that.

See what I mean? Jon is a Targaryen, practically designed and constructed by Targaryens, but in the end... it doesn't count.

It would seem that some of the best Targs are actually "mongrels". Baelor Breakspear was half Dornish, for instance. And who insists on pure blood? Characters like the exile Viserys. Likening the Targs to Nazis is over the top, but despising them for their avowed racial purity mania is legitimate, IMO.

ETA, if Jon is the Westerosi Messiah and simultaneously the son of Rhaegar he's another mongrel, a quarter half First Man and a quarter whatever the Tullys are (Andal?).

Re-edit to correct a brain fart.