Daenerys Should Sack Volantis, or require its Triarchs to do her Homage and bend the knee.

[House Selmy]

On 9/20/2021 at 12:46 PM, Hrulj said:

They can be descended for beggars for all it matters, they preserved the Valyrian blood purity where others have all failed.

The fact that they rejected Rhegar, Aerys etc shows their genius. Why tie yourself to madmen who aren't even Valyrian.

Conquered and failed. Life is about improving living standards, not conquests. Old bloods have saved more lives than Targaryens ever ruled by not pushing for wars in Essos. 

I agree and disagree

I always questioned there decision to spur Rhegars offer. If the mad king wasn't mad, that would have been a successful alliance with a powerful Valyrian house. Your telling me among the many houses behind the black walls, there wasn't a single house willing to part ways with a daughter that . could one day be the queen of a vast, powerful, fertile realm? But in the end I guess the old blood was right. 

As for your claim on there saving countless lives, I remind you of the century of blood, where the old blood largely making up the tiger faction of Volintne politics that started the wars that left Volantis 'depopulated and broke'. There hunger to be Valyria's natural successor beggared that city and indirectly led to Agons decision to conquer the 7 kingdoms. Simply put the old blood is respected for what they are, not for anything they have done. 

I understand Denies conquest of the salver cities has lead to chaos and short term suffering due to destabilization, but for the salves she freed and the unborn million who wont be slaves, her choices mean the world to them, and it will be the same for the millions of slaves in Volantis.  

[ATaleofSalt&Onions]

On 9/25/2021 at 5:42 PM, Hrulj said:

Hardly. Show also confirmed Aegon doesn't exist, the Sand Snakes murder Doran, Bron becomes the most important lord of Westeros, Jorah gets greyscale, not Jon Con, some Miranda is lover of Ramsay, Roose gets killed by Ramsay and his wife and baby fed to the dogs, Jon refuses legitimizations, engaging in wars south etc forever then suddenly goes all in on that entire thing once he gets killed just so he can needlesly kneel to Daenarys, Drogon burns the Iron throne as root of all evil rather than Jon who murdered his mom, the Dothraki are massacred by White Walkers but also regenerate like "The Thing" and respawn with full HP afterwards while Unsullied decide to commit a mass suicide by going to Nath to die of butterfly disease. Shows idiotic, R+L=J is a theory that if true would demean and ruin the books unless it was a product of rape. 

The showrunners haven't said that they won the rights to the show by correctly guessing any of those things (which Martin has confirmed) or explicitly said "yes" when asked if it's the same in the books, as they have regarding the identity of Jon's mother (technically speaking the question GRRM asked didn't cover Jon's father, but every theory involving Lyanna being Jon's mother and anyone besides Rhaegar being the father is baseless tinfoil).

 

There's also this quote from Martin, which makes perfect sense if the answer is R + L = J and doesn't make any sense it's something else.

Quote

“The internet affects all this to a degree it was never affected before,” Martin said. “Like Jon Snow’s parentage. There were early hints about [who Snow’s parents were] in the books, but only one reader in 100 put it together. And before the internet that was fine — for 99 readers out of 100 when Jon Snow’s parentage gets revealed it would be, ‘Oh, that’s a great twist!’ But in the age of the internet, even if only one person in 100 figures it out then that one person posts it online and the other 99 people read it and go, ‘Oh, that makes sense.’ Suddenly the twist you’re building towards is out there.”

 

On 9/25/2021 at 5:42 PM, Hrulj said:

R+L=J is a theory that if true would demean and ruin the books unless it was a product of rape. 

How exactly does it ruin the books?

[Hrulj]

On 10/12/2021 at 10:50 AM, House Selmy said:

I agree and disagree

I always questioned there decision to spur Rhegars offer. If the mad king wasn't mad, that would have been a successful alliance with a powerful Valyrian house. Your telling me among the many houses behind the black walls, there wasn't a single house willing to part ways with a daughter that . could one day be the queen of a vast, powerful, fertile realm? But in the end I guess the old blood was right. 

As for your claim on there saving countless lives, I remind you of the century of blood, where the old blood largely making up the tiger faction of Volintne politics that started the wars that left Volantis 'depopulated and broke'. There hunger to be Valyria's natural successor beggared that city and indirectly led to Agons decision to conquer the 7 kingdoms. Simply put the old blood is respected for what they are, not for anything they have done. 

I understand Denies conquest of the salver cities has lead to chaos and short term suffering due to destabilization, but for the salves she freed and the unborn million who wont be slaves, her choices mean the world to them, and it will be the same for the millions of slaves in Volantis.  

What does being a Queen give them actually? Can that queen go and declare war on Lys? Or Tyrosh? Just to give it to Volantis? Will Iron Throne give funds to the family or ask for the opposite? Their concern is stability, peace and prosperity. That is done by marriage and ties to other old bloods. 

Century of blood is a chaotic pariod with Dothraki invasions, fall of Sarnor and numerous other colonies and was driven by absolute terror others will be next. Being isolationist then could have spelled doom for not just Volantis but Essos as a whole. They pushed for war to reunite the freehold and stop the barbarian invasions. Sure as heck no one would kneel willingly. Another show of genius. 

That freedom depends on her conquering entirety of Westeros. And considering she didn't go east to Asshai she won't do that. Once she is gone slaves will be reinslaved, only difference being millions starving to death, economy forever ruined and cities that prospered for milenia being ruined forever. 

 

On 10/12/2021 at 11:39 AM, ATaleofSalt&Onions said:

The showrunners haven't said that they won the rights to the show by correctly guessing any of those things (which Martin has confirmed) or explicitly said "yes" when asked if it's the same in the books, as they have regarding the identity of Jon's mother (technically speaking the question GRRM asked didn't cover Jon's father, but every theory involving Lyanna being Jon's mother and anyone besides Rhaegar being the father is baseless tinfoil).

 

There's also this quote from Martin, which makes perfect sense if the answer is R + L = J and doesn't make any sense it's something else.

 

How exactly does it ruin the books?

Guessing doesn't mean implementing it. 

 

It ruins the books by making it all about genetically predisposed superhuman superhero given power by superior breeding done on certain time among salt and smoke of someones campfire and rhegars nutsack after 3 days of riding. 

[BlackLightning]

On 10/24/2021 at 12:33 PM, Hrulj said:

It ruins the books by making it all about genetically predisposed superhuman superhero given power by superior breeding done on certain time among salt and smoke of someones campfire and rhegars nutsack after 3 days of riding. 

Wait what?

[SeanF]

On 10/24/2021 at 6:33 PM, Hrulj said:

What does being a Queen give them actually? Can that queen go and declare war on Lys? Or Tyrosh? Just to give it to Volantis? Will Iron Throne give funds to the family or ask for the opposite? Their concern is stability, peace and prosperity. That is done by marriage and ties to other old bloods. 

Century of blood is a chaotic pariod with Dothraki invasions, fall of Sarnor and numerous other colonies and was driven by absolute terror others will be next. Being isolationist then could have spelled doom for not just Volantis but Essos as a whole. They pushed for war to reunite the freehold and stop the barbarian invasions. Sure as heck no one would kneel willingly. Another show of genius. 

That freedom depends on her conquering entirety of Westeros. And considering she didn't go east to Asshai she won't do that. Once she is gone slaves will be reinslaved, only difference being millions starving to death, economy forever ruined and cities that prospered for milenia being ruined forever. 

 

Guessing doesn't mean implementing it. 

 

It ruins the books by making it all about genetically predisposed superhuman superhero given power by superior breeding done on certain time among salt and smoke of someones campfire and rhegars nutsack after 3 days of riding. 

I don’t think people like Master Kraznys, the Green Grace, Xaro, the Selhorys customs officer, Illyrio, who justify slavery are actually speaking for the author.

[Walda]

On 10/30/2021 at 5:12 AM, SeanF said:

I don’t think people like Master Kraznys, the Green Grace, Xaro, the Selhorys customs officer, Illyrio, who justify slavery are actually speaking for the author.

What about Tyrion?

Quote

“Us slaves?” said the brown woman. “You wear a collar too.”

“Ghazdor’s collar,” the old man boasted. “Known him since we was born. I’m almost like a brother to him. Slaves like you, sweepings out of Astapor and Yunkai, you whine about being free, but I wouldn’t give the dragon queen my collar if she offered to suck my cock for it. Man has the right master, that’s better.”

Tyrion did not dispute him. The most insidious thing about bondage was how easy it was to grow accustomed to it. The life of most slaves was not all that different from the life of a serving man at Casterly Rock, it seemed to him. True, some slaveowners and their overseers were brutal and cruel, but the same was true of some Westerosi lords and their stewards and bailiffs. Most of the Yunkai’i treated their chattels decently enough, so long as they did their jobs and caused no trouble … and this old man in his rusted collar, with his fierce loyalty to Lord Wobblecheeks, his owner, was not at all atypical.

(ADwD, Ch 57 Tyrion XI)

[SeanF]

4 hours ago, Walda said:

What about Tyrion?

(ADwD, Ch 57 Tyrion XI)

Had Tyrion known that his master was willing to feed him and Penny to lions, to amuse his colleagues, he might have revised his views.  And he, and the rest, are “privileged”, household slaves, not fieldhands, or mine or quarry slaves, or people sold into brothels.

I think too, his internal comment says nothing good about the life of a servant at Casterly Rock.
 

[Walda]

On 10/31/2021 at 4:11 PM, SeanF said:

Had Tyrion known that his master was willing to feed him and Penny to lions, to amuse his colleagues, he might have revised his views.
 

Later in the same chapter Turion makes it clear he does in fact know this

Quote

Lions. They were going to set lions on us.

(ADwD, Ch 57 Tyrion XI)

On 10/31/2021 at 4:11 PM, SeanF said:

says nothing good about the life of a servant at Casterly Rock.

Yes.  Totally agree there. Although I am not convinced it is as bad as being a chatel by law.

I'm inclined to doubt Littlefinger's casual claim that Cersei sold a servant of Casterly Rock who had twins to King Robert into slavery (AGoT, Ch 35 Eddard IX), and Jaime's one about putting the Tullys in oubliettes (AFfC, Ch 44 Jaime VII).

I remember the times Tyrion displays a complete ignorance of what servants actually do, and the confidence in the superiority of his judgement when it comes to how much pepper his cook Morec puts into the rabbit stew, or when he applies it to winning his master some gold at cyvasse in his life as a slave, or decides the problem is more slaves like Nurse than masters like Yezzen,  even while he despises Penny for accepting the yoke of slavery so well.

It  reminds me that Tyrion despised Penny before she was a slave, for caring how her audience reacted to her act, and for her efforts to placate and ingratiate herself to "big people" in self-effacing and self-deprecating ways.

Tyrion has been brought up to comport himself as one of the biggest of the big people, in a family where effacing and deprication were what Lannisters should do to anyone they caught disrespecting them. He is as thin-skinned as Cersei or Tywin when it comes to being mocked,  and as constantly on guard ready to attack the first hint of an insult with his own corrosive mockery. It isn't the kind of background that gives him an appreciation of humility and what it can get you.

But yeah, those are not qualities that make the Lannisters great masters. Although, family pride does seem to be the reason Tywin and Tyrion make good Hands of the King, why Jaime is a brilliant battle commander, and how Cersei excels at queening for King Robert (when we see her through the eyes of Sansa, Eddard, Jaime, and occasionally even Tyrion can rsee Cersei doing a good job. Her own view seems more designed to show the reader how completely wrong she is at everything and about everything.)

Anyway, if I was a waiter, I would be booking the Lannisters into someone else's section, no matter how ridiculously big they tip.

Still, Tyrion's apologetics for slavery do read like the author is trying to convince us there is a lens through which slavery would seem an acceptable institution from a slave's perspective. 

Like the misogyny that Cersei ventilates, I find it very difficult to believe that somebody actually serving as a slave would be able to except themselves and despise all the other slaves for being so content to 'chose' to serve the man.

A person in that situation would not be quick to overlook the violence and coercion that their masters so dishonestly dissemble and so easily gloss over, and would have a better understanding of why slaves might 'chose' to live in these degrading situations.

But GRRM at the very least wants us to accept that Tyrion can see that there are slaves that would rather be slaves, even when he is a slave. And Tyrion's complaints while in slavery are often things like his cramping legs, which is a thing that afflicts him even when he climbs onto the Iron Throne.

And there's that very problematic niggle that maybe GRRM does believe that that most slave owners "treated their chattels decently enough".

I am not sure.

There's also Dany's "breaker of chains" thing - like it really does seem that these slave revolts are all thanks to her coming along and commanding armies of house elves to revolt for her. That the Unsullied and her freedman companies ( or at least the Mother's Men) and key people like Missandei would rather be her slaves than be free.

But you know, this is an author that uses shock value to engage the reader. Give him a metaphorical puppy and he'll hold a metaphorical knife to its throat just to get your attention. And don't think he won't use it even when you give him what he demands. Nobody is safe.

Controversial, unpalatable and 'wrong' points of view engage readers much faster than ones like "torture is bad" or "human rights are universal even when they are violated, even in times when violation of human rights was the law".

So maybe he gives outrageously wrong opinions rather than adopt a preachy, dogmatic, boring tone because it gets us to the same point with better effect. Except, I am not sure it does, or that it is GRRM's intention when he employs apologetics like this.

In interviews he often talks about grey characters, and how villians don't see themselves as evil. He doesn't often point out that sometimes the truth is all on one side, and nobody knows that better than the side whose ends are served by promoting blatent lies.

We know he is an athiest, but we don't know if the gods he has created in the book are intervenionist. Even when he claims in interviews they are not

When Davos ends up on the Merling's spear,, or Drogo mounts his steed to ride into the heavens, when a shadow-baby chucks Penrose over the parapet at Storm's End, it is hard to tell if we are supposed to accept the supernatural as real, or have a skeptical look for more human causes (like we do when the Weirwood knows Theon's name. As if Bran communicating with Theon through the weirnet is somehow less preternatural than the Old Gods knowing Theon's name.)

He often identifies as a liberal. Sometimes he speaks as if that was a pluralistic choice between liberal and conservative world views. But sometimes he writes as if it was a pluralistic choice between libralism and radicalism. Or as if liberalism was a 'sensible centre' between conservatism and radicalism.

I'll stop before I get too far off-topic.

 

[SeanF]

6 hours ago, Walda said:

Later in the same chapter Turion makes it clear he does in fact know this

(ADwD, Ch 57 Tyrion XI)

Yes.  Totally agree there. Although I am not convinced it is as bad as being a chatel by law.

I'm inclined to doubt Littlefinger's casual claim that Cersei sold a servant of Casterly Rock who had twins to King Robert into slavery (AGoT, Ch 35 Eddard IX), and Jaime's one about putting the Tullys in oubliettes (AFfC, Ch 44 Jaime VII).

I remember the times Tyrion displays a complete ignorance of what servants actually do, and the confidence in the superiority of his judgement when it comes to how much pepper his cook Morec puts into the rabbit stew, or when he applies it to winning his master some gold at cyvasse in his life as a slave, or decides the problem is more slaves like Nurse than masters like Yezzen,  even while he despises Penny for accepting the yoke of slavery so well.

It  reminds me that Tyrion despised Penny before she was a slave, for caring how her audience reacted to her act, and for her efforts to placate and ingratiate herself to "big people" in self-effacing and self-deprecating ways.

Tyrion has been brought up to comport himself as one of the biggest of the big people, in a family where effacing and deprication were what Lannisters should do to anyone they caught disrespecting them. He is as thin-skinned as Cersei or Tywin when it comes to being mocked,  and as constantly on guard ready to attack the first hint of an insult with his own corrosive mockery. It isn't the kind of background that gives him an appreciation of humility and what it can get you.

But yeah, those are not qualities that make the Lannisters great masters. Although, family pride does seem to be the reason Tywin and Tyrion make good Hands of the King, why Jaime is a brilliant battle commander, and how Cersei excels at queening for King Robert (when we see her through the eyes of Sansa, Eddard, Jaime, and occasionally even Tyrion can rsee Cersei doing a good job. Her own view seems more designed to show the reader how completely wrong she is at everything and about everything.)

Anyway, if I was a waiter, I would be booking the Lannisters into someone else's section, no matter how ridiculously big they tip.

Still, Tyrion's apologetics for slavery do read like the author is trying to convince us there is a lens through which slavery would seem an acceptable institution from a slave's perspective. 

Like the misogyny that Cersei ventilates, I find it very difficult to believe that somebody actually serving as a slave would be able to except themselves and despise all the other slaves for being so content to 'chose' to serve the man.

A person in that situation would not be quick to overlook the violence and coercion that their masters so dishonestly dissemble and so easily gloss over, and would have a better understanding of why slaves might 'chose' to live in these degrading situations.

But GRRM at the very least wants us to accept that Tyrion can see that there are slaves that would rather be slaves, even when he is a slave. And Tyrion's complaints while in slavery are often things like his cramping legs, which is a thing that afflicts him even when he climbs onto the Iron Throne.

And there's that very problematic niggle that maybe GRRM does believe that that most slave owners "treated their chattels decently enough".

I am not sure.

There's also Dany's "breaker of chains" thing - like it really does seem that these slave revolts are all thanks to her coming along and commanding armies of house elves to revolt for her. That the Unsullied and her freedman companies ( or at least the Mother's Men) and key people like Missandei would rather be her slaves than be free.

But you know, this is an author that uses shock value to engage the reader. Give him a metaphorical puppy and he'll hold a metaphorical knife to its throat just to get your attention. And don't think he won't use it even when you give him what he demands. Nobody is safe.

Controversial, unpalatable and 'wrong' points of view engage readers much faster than ones like "torture is bad" or "human rights are universal even when they are violated, even in times when violation of human rights was the law".

So maybe he gives outrageously wrong opinions rather than adopt a preachy, dogmatic, boring tone because it gets us to the same point with better effect. Except, I am not sure it does, or that it is GRRM's intention when he employs apologetics like this.

In interviews he often talks about grey characters, and how villians don't see themselves as evil. He doesn't often point out that sometimes the truth is all on one side, and nobody knows that better than the side whose ends are served by promoting blatent lies.

We know he is an athiest, but we don't know if the gods he has created in the book are intervenionist. Even when he claims in interviews they are not

When Davos ends up on the Merling's spear,, or Drogo mounts his steed to ride into the heavens, when a shadow-baby chucks Penrose over the parapet at Storm's End, it is hard to tell if we are supposed to accept the supernatural as real, or have a skeptical look for more human causes (like we do when the Weirwood knows Theon's name. As if Bran communicating with Theon through the weirnet is somehow less preternatural than the Old Gods knowing Theon's name.)

He often identifies as a liberal. Sometimes he speaks as if that was a pluralistic choice between liberal and conservative world views. But sometimes he writes as if it was a pluralistic choice between libralism and radicalism. Or as if liberalism was a 'sensible centre' between conservatism and radicalism.

I'll stop before I get too far off-topic.

 

Thanks.  The fact that Tyrion knew he narrowly avoided being eaten makes his internal comment .....odd.  Generally speaking, in Westeros, only people like Ramsay Bolton would subject the smallfolk to such "amusements", and Ramsay's behaviour is certainly not normative among the upper classes of Westeros.  Also, rereading the chapter, I see three slaves were being smashed apart by slingers, and another whipped raw.

Things may not be much different for servants at Casterly Rock.  I expect they would be rather different for servants at Winterfell, Riverrun, Highgarden, Dragonstone or Sunspear.   

I think Tyrion has an almost complete lack of empathy for the lower classes, yet, his story does reveal something of their plight in Essos.  He thinks nothing of threatening one of Illyrio's bedslaves with rape, and isn't that bothered about raping the Sunset Girl.  He hears what the Widow on the Waterfront says, but it seems not to register.  His story shows how wretched it is to be forced into prostitution, even if he cares little about such people.

All the available evidence is that the majority of slaves in the Yunkish camp have it very bad.  They may not have it worse than Lannister civilian captives at Harrenhall, but it's still very bad.  Sweets is terrified (not without reason) that they'll all be killed when The Yellow Whale dies.  Apparently, some masters require slaves to accompany them to the next world. 

I can't rule out the possibility that Martin does see nothing much wrong with the practice of slavery in this world, although I would think the worse of him were that the case. I do find that very hard to reconcile with the huge amount of  evidence of extreme cruelty being visited on slaves both casually, and institutionally, If the Good Masters were to graduate 2,000 Unsullied a year, for example, that would mean 60,000 children being killed per decade, at Astapor. 

I think that what's being expressed, through Tyrion,  is the opinion of a small number of household slaves, who have valuable skills, or who are overseers, like Nurse.  They are a good deal more privileged than the vast majority, and may one day be freed, if they do their jobs well.  If say, you were Tiro, or a slave employed in Roman imperial bureaucracy, well, you probably lived a good deal better than most of the free poor.  But, your life was completely different to that of the vast majority of Roman slaves, who were simply worked till they died. And, the Ghiscari masters seem to lack even the humanity of the Romans.