Jump to content
Rhaenys_Targaryen

Small Questions v. 10106

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Megorova said:

That's not what I said. I said - "If she did saved Drogo, and restored his health and mind, then Drogo would have remained to be Khal of his khalasar, instead now that khalasar belongs to Rhaego, with Khal Pono as Rhaego's "regent". "

You misunderstood it as "Drogo's death = Rhaego inherites his father's khalasar", but that's not what I meant. If Drogo survived, then he would have remained to be a Khal of his khalasar, and him together with Dany would have raised their child. With his father as a Khal of khalasar in which Rhaego lived, there would have been no any danger for Rhaego, no necessity to grow up faster, no necessity to prove anything to anyone, instead he would have been protected and sheltered by his Khal-father and Drogo's bloodriders. And eventually, when he would have been in his teens, his father's people would have started to treat Rhaego as the Stallion that mounts the world, and would have went on conquest with him to seize the world under his control.

But with his father dead, Rhaego will have to grow up faster, to fight his own battles, even in his own khalasar, because Khal Pono won't be treating Rhaego same way as he would have been treated by his father. Who knows what's the real reason why Pono took Rhaego, have he done it because of his blood-pledge to Drogo, or because he is planning to use Rhaego and his status of the Stallion to gain power for himself. Seems that 10 thousands of Dothraki from Drogo's ex-khalasar decided to go with newly made Khal Pono specifically because Pono took Rhaego under his wing. They didn't joined Pono's khalasar, they joined Rhaego's khalasar. 

It's similar to the situation with the Stark family - if Ned didn't died, his children would have remained living a sheltered life for another 5 or so years. Instead - look at them now, especially Bran and Arya. Who were they before? -> just children, additions to their parents. But now they are independent individuals, now they are walking on their own life-path. Their parents were protecting and sheltering them, but at the same time - they were holding them back, preventing them from realising their potential.

It could be compared to learning to ride a bicycle without training wheels. It's easier and safer to use them, but eventually you will have to take them off and learn to ride without them. For Rhaego Drogo would have played a role of training wheels.

Rhaego is khal of khals, so he's going to lead khals, while those khals will continue to lead their khalasars.

No, I didn't.

Whaaaat? Where did I said that Drogo HAD to die, for Rhaego to get Drogo's khalasar?

Rhaego will be leading ALL khalasars, but those khalasars will remain to be ruled by their original khals. Thus there's no need for any of those khals to die, not for Drogo not for anyone else.

Example -

multinational conglomerate company LVMH Moët Hennessy – Louis Vuitton SE, with Bernard Arnault as a CEO (chief executive officer).

The company consists of dozens of other companies such as Louis Vuitton (CEO - Michael Burke), Bvlgari (CEO - Jean-Christophe Babin), Hennesy (CEO - Bernard Peillon), Givenchy (CEO - Philippe Fortunato), Christian Dior SE (CEO - Sidney Toledano, Chairman -  Bernard Arnault), etc.

Rhaego's mega-khalasar is like LVMH Moët Hennessy – Louis Vuitton SE, with multiple khalasars/companies as parts of it; Rhaego is like Bernard Arnault, who is a CEO of LVMH, and at the same time is a Chairman of the company Christian Dior SE, where CEO is Sidney Toledano. So (1.1)Khal Pono to (2.1)Rhaego and (3.1)ex-Drogo's khalasar is like (1.2)Sidney Toledano to (2.2)Bernard Arnault and (3.2)Christian Dior SE. And for Bernard Arnault to become a CEO of LVMH, none of those other CEOs, that lead all those companies, didn't had to die. If Drogo was still alive, then he would have been Rhaego's "Sidney Toledano" instead of Khal Pono. Get it? :huh:

There's A LOT of them. 10+.

For Rhaegal's life paid the life of a stallion, whose body was undernear Drogo's funeral pyre. The second egg hatched when the fire had reached under the logs and the horse's body started to burn. That's when the second egg hatched with the sound of thunder.

Drogo's life paid for Drogon, Mirri Maz Duur's life paid for Viserion, and that horse's life paid for Rhaegal. Three bodies on funeral pyre, three dragons hatched. Rhaego wasn't there.

Jorah wasn't there when Dany was giving birth to Rhaego. The man whom Dany saw as Jorah, the one who said that Rhaegar was the last dragon and then "melted" into thin air, was maester Marwyn not Jorah. (<- let's not start on it, just wait for the book).

Jorah and Mirri agreed beforehand to lie to Dany about what happened to her baby. He was ashamed to had to lie to her about that.

What for? I'll wait until the book will come out, and then there will be many threads how did readers missed that Rhaego is alive. And I will write there - "I told you so :smug:". And if I was wrong, then I will post something with lots of :crying: and :( and :bang:.

Yeah good luck with that.

I misunderstood what you meant by Rhaego getting Drogo's khalasar so I apologize for that but the premise is still the same. The Khalasar's follow strength - that's why they followed Pono after Drogo died, not because he has Rhaego. 

You're going out on some pretty far limbs here but I see you are convinced. I'll be sure to seek you out when WoW is out. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

Drogon is the stallion that mounts the world. Rhaego is dead. It is known. 

Since Drogon is just a stupid animal I'm actually reasonably confident that the dosh khaleen might conclude that they got the gender of their prophesied horse confused (the author cannot keep them straight, either) - meaning that we are talking about the Mare that Smothers the World, not the Stallion that Mounts the World (although she at least has mounted the dragon and is likely continuing to do so).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, HelenaExMachina said:

Equating dragons to “stupid animals” after what has been portrayed in the books thus far is in interesting choice. There is clearly intelligence in them beyond that of say a cow, a sheep, a dog, etc.

George himself talks about them in this fashion when comparing them to Smaug (who can talk and is actually intelligent).

I'm not sure the dragons are more intelligent than dogs or sheep, to be sure. All strange incidents involving dragons can be explained by them just behaving like animals do, including everything that happened between the Conquest and the Dance.

It is clear that there is a magical bond between dragons and riders, but that doesn't tell us anything about dragon intelligence. Aegon II drawing Sunfyre to Dragonstone (if that's what happened and the dragon didn't just fly to the safety of his birthplace) doesn't tell us anything about the beast's intelligence, etc.

And then there are straightforward animal actions like a riderless Vermithor running amok and not, say, targeting only the enemies attacking the allies of his last rider or even trying to avenge the murdered Hugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The wiki says Reek's name is Heke and it gives the source as a Bran ACOK chapter, but I cannot find the actual statement that says this. Does anyone know/have the quote this came from? Am I looking right at it! And this Reek I am talking about is the first Reek to Ramsay, not Theon (naturally ^_^).

https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Reek#cite_note-Racok46.7B.7B.7B3.7D.7D.7D-2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, The Fattest Leech said:

The wiki says Reek's name is Heke and it gives the source as a Bran ACOK chapter, but I cannot find the actual statement that says this. Does anyone know/have the quote this came from? Am I looking right at it! And this Reek I am talking about is the first Reek to Ramsay, not Theon (naturally ^_^).

https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Reek#cite_note-Racok46.7B.7B.7B3.7D.7D.7D-2

In the chapter cited, when Ramsay is impersonating Reek, he claims it is his true name to Theon:

“Haven’t  fucked  no  one since they  took  me,  m’lord.  Heke’s  me true  name.  I  was  in  service to the Bastard o’  the Dreadfort  till  the Starks  give  him  an  arrow  in  the back  for  a wedding  gift.” 

Edited by Rhaenys_Targaryen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/26/2019 at 2:33 PM, HelenaExMachina said:

Equating dragons to “stupid animals” after what has been portrayed in the books thus far is in interesting choice. There is clearly intelligence in them beyond that of say a cow, a sheep, a dog, etc.

 

On 9/27/2019 at 1:03 AM, Lord Varys said:

George himself talks about them in this fashion when comparing them to Smaug (who can talk and is actually intelligent).

I don't know if there are other reports on this, but in this 2007 Comic Con report, Martin is reported to have described the ASOIAF dragons as intelligent, despite the fact that they cannot, and never will be able to, speak, or be like the dragons of Tolkien or Le Guin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

I don't know if there are other reports on this, but in this 2007 Comic Con report, Martin is reported to have described the ASOIAF dragons as intelligent, despite the fact that they cannot, and never will be able to, speak, or be like the dragons of Tolkien or Le Guin.

He also makes it clear that his dragons are animals, and not Le Guin or Tolkien dragons - only such dragons deserve to be described as 'intelligent' in the sense I meant. Dany's dragons are never going to actively offer their advice on military strategy nor will they, on their own, make decisions to save or fry crucial characters. All they will do is consciously or unconsciously fulfill the wishes of their riders - if they ever get riders. But that's part of the dragon bond, not a sign of intelligence.

I mean, sure, George's dragons might be, in their own way, as intelligent as orcas or dolphins, but that's not going to translate well - or at all - to human intelligence.

The impression we get on the wild dragons in FaB - those who grew up with limited to no contacts to human beings - doesn't give us any indication that they were particularly intelligent animals. Grey Ghost knew how to hunt fish and stay out of side, the Cannibal how to sneak up on other dragons and the hatcheries, and Sheepstealer how to hunt down sheep. They come across as nothing but territorial top predators whose life - if they are not bothered people who presume to domesticate them - comes across as utterly animal-like, with a priority on food and a lair to sleep in.

And that a dragon like Dreamfyre may have mourned the death of her rider can be explained completely with the dragon bond - and we know that cats and dogs are also distraught when their owners die or abandon them, so this is also not a sign of particular intelligence.

Edited by Lord Varys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/28/2019 at 3:48 PM, Lord Varys said:

He also makes it clear that his dragons are animals, and not Le Guin or Tolkien dragons - only such dragons deserve to be described as 'intelligent' in the sense I meant. Dany's dragons are never going to actively offer their advice on military strategy nor will they, on their own, make decisions to save or fry crucial characters. All they will do is consciously or unconsciously fulfill the wishes of their riders - if they ever get riders. But that's part of the dragon bond, not a sign of intelligence.

I mean, sure, George's dragons might be, in their own way, as intelligent as orcas or dolphins, but that's not going to translate well - or at all - to human intelligence.

The impression we get on the wild dragons in FaB - those who grew up with limited to no contacts to human beings - doesn't give us any indication that they were particularly intelligent animals. Grey Ghost knew how to hunt fish and stay out of side, the Cannibal how to sneak up on other dragons and the hatcheries, and Sheepstealer how to hunt down sheep. They come across as nothing but territorial top predators whose life - if they are not bothered people who presume to domesticate them - comes across as utterly animal-like, with a priority on food and a lair to sleep in.

And that a dragon like Dreamfyre may have mourned the death of her rider can be explained completely with the dragon bond - and we know that cats and dogs are also distraught when their owners die or abandon them, so this is also not a sign of particular intelligence.

My point was that Martin seems to consider his dragons intelligent animals, not "stupid animals". Animals, certainly. But intelligent animals, nonetheless.

At least, that is the phrase the report uses. :)

Edited by Rhaenys_Targaryen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't the person who created and runs the Search of Ice and Fire someone who posts here? I'm having issues w/ it and would love some input/advice. 

I'll also take the opportunity to thank this person, the SoIaF is simply wonderful and I love it. :cheers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Isn't the person who created and runs the Search of Ice and Fire someone who posts here? I'm having issues w/ it and would love some input/advice. 

I'll also take the opportunity to thank this person, the SoIaF is simply wonderful and I love it. :cheers:

https://www.reddit.com/r/asoiaf/comments/3ddghq/no_spoilers_improved_search_functionality_on_a/

Not sure if /u/mrdziuban is still active...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/9/2019 at 10:51 PM, kissdbyfire said:

Isn't the person who created and runs the Search of Ice and Fire someone who posts here? I'm having issues w/ it and would love some input/advice. 

I'll also take the opportunity to thank this person, the SoIaF is simply wonderful and I love it. :cheers:

It seems he's not active now, but you can try to contact him here https://mattdziuban.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Ser Leftwich said:

Do we know what season it was during the Defiance of Duskendale?

It seems to have been Winter from 272-275 then from 280-282 with the Defiance happening in 277.  

So it could have possibly been Summer, but it's impossible to really tell, with how random the lengths are. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From ADwD - Davos II: 

Quote

It was not abandoned now. Davos could see scorpions and spitfires behind the standing stones, and crossbowmen peering between them. It must be cold up there, and wet.

What kind of weapon is a spitfire?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...