This is all Jon’s fault

[Vanadis]

"This is all Jon's fault"

Nah, it was all Dany's fault.
What she should have done when Jon told her about his parentage was pour melting gold over his head.
This way she could have proven beyond doubt whether his claim was true or not.
If he died, oh well, he wasn't a real dragon. She could have shrugged and been on her merry way.
If he survived, she should have insisted on marrying him and turning him into a co-ruler whether he wanted to or not, because Targaryen. She was never opposed to her brother ruling after all, until she deemed him not worthy, so why worry about Jon?

Just kidding. Mostly. Please continue your discussion.

 

[Ellimental]

26 minutes ago, Nowy Tends said:

You must have watched a different series.

Why do you think the Dumb&Dumber suddenly and ridiculously transformed the Starks and the Northerners into a bunch of ungrateful and hateful xenophobes, with a Lannister-like arrogance?

 

That doesn't explain why Dany torched an entire city and just about everyone in it. The Northerners are cold toward outsiders. Lots of places are a bit tetchy around outsiders. That has little to no bearing on Dany going ape.

[King Jon Snow Stark]

56 minutes ago, Damon_Tor said:

Eddard's parents were first cousins.

But are they in the show?

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

27 minutes ago, King Jon Snow Stark said:

But are they in the show?

Not sure but Tywin & Joanna were first cousins also werent they? I know u guys are talking about Starks but saw a semi-heated argument earlier in the thread relating to relatives marrying & wondered if this was in the show too. 

[Sigella]

15 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Not sure but Tywin & Joanna were first cousins also werent they? I know u guys are talking about Starks but saw a semi-heated argument earlier in the thread relating to relatives marrying & wondered if this was in the show too. 

Yup.

[Jarl Halstein]

On 5/14/2019 at 1:16 PM, MinscS2 said:

It is Jon's fault just as much as it is society's fault today when a troubled person with mental issues doesn't get the medical help he/she needs and instead goes on a killing spree because of it.

"society's fault" Yes, it's society's fault when you commit crimes. And of course, oppression!!!

 

Quote

Ultimately it is Daenerys' fault because she did the deed, but you can make a list of factors that contributed to her downward spiral into darkness, and the combination of these factors, all in a short spawn of time, was what finally caused her to snap: 

- Jon's unrequited love, and being rejected for the second time.
- Cersei's cruelty and treachery.
- The loss of 2(3) of her children.
- The loss of her closest friend (Missandei) in a very cruel manner.
- The loss of her oldest friend, adviser and protector (Jorah).
- The open defiance Sansa and several northerners. 
- The ungrateful response by the northerners when she just bled and fought for them.
- The "loss" of loyalty from her advisers.
- The general feeling of betrayal from people she considers to be on her team (Jon, Sansa, Tyrion, Varys)
- Even her destiny and rightful claim was taken away from her with the revelation of Aejon, leading her to question herself.
 

Yes, totally understandable then that she'd go on a killing spree and massacre thousands of innocent people, instead of going for the person who was actually the cause of the war, and who was right there in the Red Keep in front of her. Totally believable. Especially when it comes to a character whose driving force has been a sense of justice - taking back the throne for her family, and risking her life to free slaves.

Soldiers see their fellow soldiers die in war. Friends of theirs. That doesn't mean they take a machine gun and mow down other people on their side, who have nothing to do with it, instead of attacking the enemy. No, there is nothing to justify this lousy writing.

Most likely the next novel - if GRRM bothers to write it after seven years of ditching the project - will see King's Landing burn through another route. Probably Cersei's wildfire igniting when Daenerys attacks. We saw a homage to that in the show with the green fire here and there, but here it wasn't the cause of the city burning. I'm betting it will be in the novel. A much better route than this one, which is completely inexplicable. Dany has been one of the most moral characters in the whole series. Often boring, I'd say. But moral.

[Jarl Halstein]

4 hours ago, Vanadis said:

"This is all Jon's fault"

Nah, it was all Dany's fault.
What she should have done when Jon told her about his parentage was pour melting gold over his head.
This way she could have proven beyond doubt whether his claim was true or not.

No, she should have said, "You don't have DNA evidence so who's gonna believe you?"

His "proof" is that his brother and best friend say it. In other words, he has no proof.

Ned Stark, who raised him, told people Jon was his son. He left no writing saying otherwise. He never told anyone otherwise. Neither did Catelyn. Neither did any other nobility or commoner.

And he has black hair. Targaryens have had blond hair for centuries. Yes, it was because of his mother. The thing is, he doesn't even have the looks to speak for him.

Plus, Targaryens aren't exactly popular in a nation that fought a war against the Mad King.

The whole thing about Dany being nervous about his claim is nonsense. She could have just ignored it. If people would follow Jon instead of her, it wouldn't be because of his wild claim.

[of man and wolf]

48 minutes ago, Jarl Halstein said:

No, she should have said, "You don't have DNA evidence so who's gonna believe you?"

His "proof" is that his brother and best friend say it. In other words, he has no proof.

Ned Stark, who raised him, told people Jon was his son. He left no writing saying otherwise. He never told anyone otherwise. Neither did Catelyn. Neither did any other nobility or commoner.

And he has black hair. Targaryens have had blond hair for centuries. Yes, it was because of his mother. The thing is, he doesn't even have the looks to speak for him.

Plus, Targaryens aren't exactly popular in a nation that fought a war against the Mad King.

The whole thing about Dany being nervous about his claim is nonsense. She could have just ignored it. If people would follow Jon instead of her, it wouldn't be because of his wild claim.

He rode a dragon and they took to him immediately.

[SansaJonRule]

22 hours ago, Nami said:

Tyrion knows shit.
Dany never wanted to destroy KL. THAT'S THE CAPITAL AND WHERE SHE WOULD RULE. People are actually making shit up to explain the bad writing.

If she had took the city as she planned first (yes a few casualties would happen but that's war for you) the city would surrender eventually, much faster actually with three dragons on sight, she wouldn't have targeted civillians and destroyed the whole city just like the last shitsode, AND:

1-the NK wouldn't get Viserion
2-the bells of death wouldn't flip her madness switch to on
3-she wouldn't have lost half her army
4-Cersei would be out
 

All logic spoken here. Aside from Saint Tyrion.

 

I am referring to this scene, of course. We don't see the beginning of this conversation, so we don't know specifically what Dany said, but she must have said something that prompted his pleas. Even though he does not seem to be as intelligent as he was once portrayed, he's not so stupid as to say things to his queen unprovoked. Later in the conversation she mentions "mercy to future generations", but says nothing about mercy to the current generation.

And of course, it doesn't make sense for her to burn KL, but neither does her statement about mercy to "future" generations only. That's why I think she had already started losing it, even before the bells rang.

 

And what is the sudden obsession with "Saint Tyrion"? I've never heard anyone who is a fan of Tyrion say they think he's a saint.

[MinscS2]

1 hour ago, SansaJonRule said:

And what is the sudden obsession with "Saint Tyrion"? I've never heard anyone who is a fan of Tyrion say they think he's a saint.

It's just a way to make fun of him for going from being a clever witty person who's having no qualms about killing in general (be it self-defense, blowing people up with wildfire, strangling your ex with a chain or wishing he'd let Stannis kill everyone in King's Landing...lul) to essentially becoming a full-blown idiot pacifist who makes one stupid mistake after the other, all in the name of trying to save people (mostly his siblings, but still).
 

[Tywin Tytosson]

15 hours ago, Red Dragon10 said:

The rest of my post says exactly that...if you read it.  The full responsibility for burning KL is on Daenerys' shoulders alone.  But there were other things that Jon contributed to, that HE has responsibility for.  His men were raping and pillaging - that's on him.  HE took his men down there.  HE supported Daenerys and ignored signs of what she would do to take "her power".  He absolutely does have some responsibility as a leader and as someone who supported Daenerys unconditionally.  But the burning of KL is not on him.  And he certainly had no responsibility to return Daenerys' physical affection, as the OP suggests. 

You know, I didn't really read the rest of your post in any depth.  Sorry about that.

I'm glad I found your post.  16 pages is bit much to look through.

[Tywin Tytosson]

3 hours ago, Jarl Halstein said:

No, she should have said, "You don't have DNA evidence so who's gonna believe you?"

His "proof" is that his brother and best friend say it. In other words, he has no proof.

Ned Stark, who raised him, told people Jon was his son. He left no writing saying otherwise. He never told anyone otherwise. Neither did Catelyn. Neither did any other nobility or commoner.

And he has black hair. Targaryens have had blond hair for centuries. Yes, it was because of his mother. The thing is, he doesn't even have the looks to speak for him.

Plus, Targaryens aren't exactly popular in a nation that fought a war against the Mad King.

The whole thing about Dany being nervous about his claim is nonsense. She could have just ignored it. If people would follow Jon instead of her, it wouldn't be because of his wild claim.

Au contraire.  The "wild claim" provides a reason for the nobility to support somebody other than Daenarys.   Jon beomes the focal point of opposition to Daenarys, now that Cersei is gone.  She may face constant rebellions in Jon's name.  Dany really cannot ignore it.  Her best bet is to kill or exile Jon and deal with any consequences.

Don't forget that their is one nobleman who can corroborate Jon's clain - Howland Reed.

 

[MinscS2]

7 minutes ago, Tywin Tytosson said:

Don't forget that their is one nobleman who can corroborate Jon's clain - Howland Reed.

He died off-screen long ago. Only D&D kinda forgot to tell us about it.

[Tywin Tytosson]

10 minutes ago, MinscS2 said:

He died off-screen long ago. Only D&D kinda forgot to tell us about it.

Well, crap!  So much for corroboration of Jon's claim.

Would that make Meera the Lady of Greywater Watch?

[Ilissa]

19 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

I actually cited a religious head of the Faith protesting against such a marriage.

No, you don't. It is not about protesting against an avunculate marriage. You maybe don't now what "cited" mean?

19 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

And it is up to you to prove your assertion that it is common on mainland westeros and the North.

No, I should not. If you say that the inhabitants of Westeros have problems with eating watermelons, should I have to bring proofs against it?

19 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

I simply disagree with your claim that it is "normal" or "common", and instead put forward that the evidence we have clearly makes it a "rare" event and "problematic" in the North and the Faith regions.

So what? Such marriages were also rare in the real Middle Ages. I say that Jon in the books has no reason to be against the bed with his aunt. If Jon was a son of Aerys II, he would have to reject Dany, no doubt. He could be against the bed with his sister, but this is not a problem with his aunt. There must be very good reason for rejecting the woman you love. If marriages were rare it is not a reason to reject the woman you love, do you understand? Rare is just rare, it is not the same as banned. I say that the book will not be such a problem as in the show. I think the book will discuss the problems of succession, not "incest." "A good guy is not sleeping with his aunt" - it is argument for the show, but it is not so easy in the books. They came up with a primitive explanation of the problem between Jon and Dany.

 

[Gala]

22 hours ago, Kajjo said:

Yes, not reciprocating her affections is one building block of her "going over the edge". But not the only one. But yes, it was the last one, the decisive on: Alright then, let it be fear. 

This moment she made her decision to go berserk.

 

 

I doubt that, since the conversation with Grey Worm was earlier and I think they were planning to destroy the city all along (between burning the collar and the nod in the throne room after "you know when it's time"). Grey Worm acted as if Jon was an enemy already, when he came in the chamber to talk to Dany. She was already ready to go berserk.

And even earlier she actually told Tyrion that Jon has betrayed her. I have no doubts that the fates of Tyrion (after Jaime release), Jon and Sansa are already decided in Dany's head. We will know soon.

[Sir Hedge of Hog]

17 hours ago, Wsc48 said:

I am baffled as to exactly why R'hllor brought Jon back from death. 

check out the nissa nissa prophecy...jon IS azor ahai...he will get his chance in the last ep.

[Wolfking007]

1 hour ago, Ilissa said:

So what? Such marriages were also rare in the real Middle Ages. I say that Jon in the books has no reason to be against the bed with his aunt. If Jon was a son of Aerys II, he would have to reject Dany, no doubt. He could be against the bed with his sister, but this is not a problem with his aunt. There must be very good reason for rejecting the woman you love. If marriages were rare it is not a reason to reject the woman you love, do you understand? Rare is just rare, it is not the same as banned. I say that the book will not be such a problem as in the show. I think the book will discuss the problems of succession, not "incest." "A good guy is not sleeping with his aunt" - it is argument for the show, but it is not so easy in the books. They came up with a primitive explanation of the problem between Jon and Dany.

 

I agree! I don't see incest being problem in this scene, especially  if you considere the last episode where Jon was the the one who tried to have some sexy time with Dany (but then she pulled away and started ranting about him having the better claim).

Only reason for him pulling away in this scene that makes sense to me is that after Varys execution he is starting to realise in what kind of danger his sisters are at the moment. Because he must have realised that Dany knows who told Varys about  who his real parents are. 

[darmody]

8 hours ago, Jarl Halstein said:

No, she should have said, "You don't have DNA evidence so who's gonna believe you?"

His "proof" is that his brother and best friend say it. In other words, he has no proof.

Ned Stark, who raised him, told people Jon was his son. He left no writing saying otherwise. He never told anyone otherwise. Neither did Catelyn. Neither did any other nobility or commoner.

And he has black hair. Targaryens have had blond hair for centuries. Yes, it was because of his mother. The thing is, he doesn't even have the looks to speak for him.

Plus, Targaryens aren't exactly popular in a nation that fought a war against the Mad King.

The whole thing about Dany being nervous about his claim is nonsense. She could have just ignored it. If people would follow Jon instead of her, it wouldn't be because of his wild claim.

More importantly, Jon is not pressing his claim. But she appears to think the mere idea of his having the right to rule getting out would undermine her. Like the people of Westeros are looking for an excuse to crown him. 

[darmody]

1 hour ago, Ilissa said:

 

So what? Such marriages were also rare in the real Middle Ages. I say that Jon in the books has no reason to be against the bed with his aunt. If Jon was a son of Aerys II, he would have to reject Dany, no doubt. He could be against the bed with his sister, but this is not a problem with his aunt. There must be very good reason for rejecting the woman you love. If marriages were rare it is not a reason to reject the woman you love, do you understand? Rare is just rare, it is not the same as banned. I say that the book will not be such a problem as in the show. I think the book will discuss the problems of succession, not "incest." "A good guy is not sleeping with his aunt" - it is argument for the show, but it is not so easy in the books. They came up with a primitive explanation of the problem between Jon and Dany.

 

No reason? How about it's icky. Entirely apart from genetic concerns. 

But as long as we're on the subject, you share 1/4 of your genes with your aunt/uncle. Which is the same relationship he thought he had with Sansa and Arya. He didn't grow up with Danny, admittedly. But what if he sees Arya's face when he kisses her? Eww. 

As for not the same as banned, marrying your first cousin is legal in some U.S. states. If I lived in one of them (which I don't, actually), would I be allowed to be grossed out by the idea?

 "A good guy doesn't sleep with his aunt" isn't a good argument for the books, either, by the way. There's absolutely no reason such little mention has been made of the prospect of marriage, especially before they knew about Jon's mommy and daddy. But it is enough of a reason for Jon not to sleep with her. In the middle of all this. It hasn't even been that long.