Jump to content

Your Random ASOIAF/TWOIAF/D&E Opinions, Confessions and Dirty Secrets, TEN-POCALYPSE


JonCon's Red Beard

Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...

I used to think A Dream of Spring was a somewhat hopeful title. Dream and Spring are very lovely words and the mention of Spring implies it’s near.

But after a very bad winter, I realized that this was all wrong. You only dream of spring when winter is very bad and seems endless. If spring is really near, you have no need to dream of it: you enjoy the moments of the odd slightly less cold day, the air smelling a little less like winter, the sun being a little stronger or realizing that you're seeing the sun truly shine for the first time in a month, the odd crocus, that sunset is now well into the evening rather than late afternoon like it used to be. I’ve only ever dreamed of spring when winter felt like a real world equivalent of the Long Night.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Lollygag said:

I used to think A Dream of Spring was a somewhat hopeful title. Dream and Spring are very lovely words and the mention of Spring implies it’s near.

 

But after a very bad winter, I realized that this was all wrong. You only dream of spring when winter is very bad and seems endless. If spring is really near, you have no need to dream of it: you enjoy the moments of the odd slightly less cold day, the air smelling a little less like winter, the sun being a little stronger or realizing that you're seeing the sun truly shine for the first time in a month, the odd crocus, that sunset is now well into the evening rather than late afternoon like it used to be. I’ve only ever dreamed of spring when winter felt like a real world equivalent of the Long Night.

 

 

 

Yes, I've always interpreted it like that. The title is bittersweet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Lollygag said:

I used to think A Dream of Spring was a somewhat hopeful title. Dream and Spring are very lovely words and the mention of Spring implies it’s near.

 

But after a very bad winter, I realized that this was all wrong.

Agree.   I feel the same way about the other speculated title of the last (?) novel, A Time for Wolves.    Sounds optimistic and hopeful until you get to...

Quote

"Gone down into the earth," she answered. "Into the stones, into the trees. Before the First Men came all this land that you call Westeros was home to us, yet even in those days we were few. The gods gave us long lives but not great numbers, lest we overrun the world as deer will overrun a wood where there are no wolves to hunt them. That was in the dawn of days, when our sun was rising. Now it sinks, and this is our long dwindling. The giants are almost gone as well, they who were our bane and our brothers. The great lions of the western hills have been slain, the unicorns are all but gone, the mammoths down to a few hundred. The direwolves will outlast us all, but their time will come as well. In the world that men have made, there is no room for them, or us."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Lady Anna said:

I like how all three Lannister siblings have those dark comedic moments in their chapters. And that they share more things with each other than they realize.

I suspect the reason the Lannisters are my favorite family is simply the fact that they're the ones who spend the most time interacting with each other.

They're also the ones who spend the biggest amount of time thinking about each other. The Lannisters are far more obsessed about their family members than the Starks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

My confession: I cant understand the obsession with daenerys, or targaryens in general. People get upset that the throne was taken from them, but how do you think aegon conquered westeros? Dany just seems like a terrible person to me, only concerned with her "birthright" and vengeance. 

Just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Dmann said:

My confession: I cant understand the obsession with daenerys, or targaryens in general. People get upset that the throne was taken from them, but how do you think aegon conquered westeros? Dany just seems like a terrible person to me, only concerned with her "birthright" and vengeance. 

Just my opinion.

There is a lot of switching back and forth between conqueror's right and blood right on this forum depending on who you support without realizing that blood right had to start with conqueror's right at one point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Dmann said:

My confession: I cant understand the obsession with daenerys, or targaryens in general. People get upset that the throne was taken from them, but how do you think aegon conquered westeros? Dany just seems like a terrible person to me, only concerned with her "birthright" and vengeance. 

Just my opinion.

It's not just your opinion. Daenerys has serious behavioral issues. I can barely stand her illogical, irrational and infantile way of thinking. 

Targaryens are incestuous, which is a reason why there are so many idiots among them in history. Aerys, Maegor, Aerion, Viserys are some of them. To make it even worse, they inspired other morons with their insanity and stupidity, such as Cersei Lannister or Joffrey "Baratheon". 

Following Westerosi way of doing things, Daenerys still has a right to the throne. Then again, I agree that there is no reason for people to be upset about Targs losing the throne they invented. They did next to nothing significant for the continent in 300 years of ruling. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if this is a popular opinion or not, but people at least don't talk about it much. Anyways, I think GRRM's portrayal of the Dothraki is racist. They are obviously suppossed to be Mongols (With Khal Drogo's murder of Viserys being pulled straigbt from history with Genghis Khan using silver instead), but the mongols were not primitive like the Dothraki are.  I love that GRRM loves history and writes essentially fun almost history, but sadly he seems to also have included racist stereotypes from european historians. The Mongols were seen exactly like the Dothraki were for a long time by European historians, and only recently is their history being more accurately depicted. So, examples : Mongols (especially under Ghengis and his decedents) were using the most recent military technology available to them. This included armor and advanced crossbows, and later incidienary devices and primitive guns/cannons. As well, much like historians, the Dothraki are shown having huge numbers and outnumbering their opponents, something that almost never happened with the Mongols. They were consistently outnumbered, but had superior battle commanders, fighting techniques, and better trained soldiers. Some of the most famous battles involved odds that were seemingly impossible for them to win against. Going back to strategy, the Dothraki are shown as basically brutes, but that is again far from true. One of the most famous leaders, Kublai Khan was as cultured as any other world leader of his time, perhaps even more so. As well, one general, Tsubadai, is regarded as perhaps one of the greatest generals of all time. (Given that Ogedei Khan hadn't have died at a very inconvenient/covenient time, European history might have a section under Mongol rule as Tsubadai was sweeping away every army sent at him like ants). 

Anways, the Dothraki are just one example, the Ghiscari also presented in a rather negative light. I just want GRRM to have some redeeming characters or viewpoints like he did with the Wildlings, at the very least. I always dreamed that Jhogo (or Rakharo or Aggo) would get a PoV and actually be quite intelligent (and only their lemits in the common tongue kept them from showing it). But the problems run deep in his pertrayal of the Dothraki, so even if that did happen it still would not be enough. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

I don't know if this is a popular opinion or not, but people at least don't talk about it much. Anyways, I think GRRM's portrayal of the Dothraki is racist. They are obviously suppossed to be Mongols

The Dothraki are not based just on the mongols but also the Huns and others.  Obviously the Mongols were way too advanced in weaponry and culture to be compared directly to Dothraki. I feel like the Huns are a closer comparison. 

GRRM on Dothraki

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is interesting about the Mongols/Huns. But honestly, the golden/ silver haired people don’t come off looking good, either.

I don’t think we are supposed to feel comfortable rooting for anyone in particular. People’s choices are made everyday, every minute.

I confess to hoping the underdogs, whoever they are, redeem themselves in some cool way. I enjoy how our perception of characters either flips, or we end up defending the indefensible, or we are forced to see characters as fallible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My ancestors were probably Vikings/Picts, so there you are:) Could have been slavers or slaves or both. Vikings also had their civilized side. I have never thrown an axe, though. Metaphorically, perhaps.

Gosh, and lots of cultures have human sacrifices one way or another. Didn’t Martin say Melisandre was misunderstood?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Ralphis Baratheon said:

The Dothraki are not based just on the mongols but also the Huns and others.  Obviously the Mongols were way too advanced in weaponry and culture to be compared directly to Dothraki. I feel like the Huns are a closer comparison. 

GRRM on Dothraki

 

Many of my arguments are still valid for Huns, so I am not sure your point. However, even if you are saying the Huns are not as technolgically advanced : War of the Roses - 1400's. The Mongols rise to dominance - Starting in the 1200's. The Huns, for example Attila - 400 (1000 years earlier than the approximate technology of Westeros). So, if anything, you made my point more valid. If GRRM is having the europeanish people use 15th century technology and the asianish characters use 5th century technology, that is even worse than I thought it was. I just want to point out though - The Huns wore armor (they preferred lighter scale or llamaller armor vs. mail) and they were not just barbarians. Attila himself is comsidered again, a great military strategist, unlike the way Khal Drogo is protrayed as a mindless barbarian. And again, the Huns were often outnumbered by those they were fighting, just like I said for the Mongols. You only made my arguments stronger, so thanks I guess

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...