Your Unpopular ASOIAF Opinions/Hot Takes

[Maegor_the_Cool]

7 minutes ago, KingAerys_II said:

Brandon of the bloody blade slaughtered the children of the forest and created a field soaked of their blood, Nymeria was an invader too, but "TaRgArYeN BaD Becuzz InVaDeHhhh!!!" has no sense in Asoiaf. 

I understand you are fan of some Westerosi house, Targaryens invaded for the dream, the content in Hotd is not invented by the producer, Shield of his people refers to the fact that dragons are the only creatures, able to reject the Others

I understand you want to keep glazing the Targaryens and are blind to logic, but you can’t seem to wrap your head around the fact that show and book canon are seperate. Nymeria immediately assimilated with the Dornish and their cultures melded. You also don’t acknowledge that Nymeria and her people were refugees fleeing from the Targaryens and Valyrians.

Brandon was a genocidal maniac just like Aegon and his sisters lol, you invented that to cope. And it absolutely does. The Shield of the People title was invented by Visenya and Aegon as a PR move to make him sound better. And the 7K beat the Others once without dragons and they can again.

 

But let’s entertain the idea that Aegon was purely selflessly motivated. He invaded sovereign kingdoms to fight the Others. What did he do afterwards to help prepare? What? He didn’t tell anyone except his heir. And they did the same. They never strengthened the Night’s Watch. The North. In fact at almost every opportunity they spit in the Northerners faces. If Aegon’s dream is true then Aegon, and his sisters and all the descendants, are fucking morons as well as genocidal maniacs.

[Maegor_the_Cool]

3 minutes ago, KingAerys_II said:

If Aegon hadn't invaded, Argella would have been a Hoare's salt wife

Without their dragons, Aegon would be slave and his sister would be Harrens Salt Wives

[Craving Peaches]

4 minutes ago, Lord Domeric Bolton said:

Without their dragons, Aegon would be slave and his sister would be Harrens Salt Wives

Also if the Hoares could have taken the Stormlands they would have done so already. I think they were on the verge of being overextended to be honest. And if they tried to invade the Stormlands, neighbours would have intervened to protect the balance of power. That is what happens all the time in real life, and the reason there had been Seven Kingdoms for thousands of years.

Edited August 12, 2023 by Craving Peaches

[Maegor_the_Cool]

2 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Also if the Hoares could have taken the Stormlands they would have done so already. I think they were on the verge of being overextended to be honest. And if they tried to invade the Stormlands, neighbours would have intervened to protect the balance of power. That is what happens all the time in real life.

The reason the Hoares could take the the Riverlands and hold them so well was BECAUSE OF THE RIVERS. It’s why they had trouble expanding beyond. They wouldn’t expand into the Stormlands naturally. The Reach would be their most likely target. It has rivers, and is on the western coast of Westeros. It’s also larger and would be harder for the Gardeners to defend.

[csuszka1948]

Honestly, it should be pretty clear by this point that Aegon invaded because he wanted Westeros united when the threat he saw came and that uniting the continent had positive effects on the 6 kingdoms (king's peace, better trading connections and roads etc.).

Still, his actions in Dorne aren't defensible, not even if Rhaenys was tortured (of which we have no evidence). The Dornish people clearly resisted the Targaryens with all their might.

Edited August 12, 2023 by csuszka1948

[Craving Peaches]

Just now, Lord Domeric Bolton said:

The Reach would be their most likely target. It has rivers, and is on the western coast of Westeros. It’s also larger and would be harder for the Gardeners to defend.

I don't think they could hold more territory than they already had long-term. Especially with what Harren was up to, it was only a matter of time before the Riverlands rose up again and kicked them out with someone else's support.

[Craving Peaches]

2 minutes ago, csuszka1948 said:

Honestly, it should be pretty clear by this point that Aegon invaded because he wanted Westeros united when the threat he saw came

Well it's not pretty clear because a 'threat' is never hinted at in the books as being foreseen by Aegon. The person who is implied to have seen a 'threat' is Rhaegar.

Edited August 12, 2023 by Craving Peaches

[Maegor_the_Cool]

2 minutes ago, csuszka1948 said:

Honestly, it should be pretty clear by this point that Aegon invaded because he wanted Westeros united when the threat he saw came and that uniting the continent had positive effects on the 6 kingdoms (king's peace, better trading connections and roads etc.).

Still, his actions in Dorne aren't defensible, not even if Rhaenys was tortured (of which we have no evidence). The Dornish people clearly resisted the Targaryens with all their might.

It’s not. It’s not once hinted in the books. 

[csuszka1948]

Besides, acting on a dream or prophecy doesn't mean that you can avoid scrutiny.

The story of Stannis is an example of that.

[csuszka1948]

Just now, Lord Domeric Bolton said:

It’s not. It’s not once hinted in the books. 

The HOTD show runners revealed that it came from GRRM and the author himself has talked about it 

There are quite a few hints in the books - about the prophecy that Rhaegar (and Aerys I) read, the 'song of ice and fire' he talked about and the mystery of the 3-headed dragon sigil.

[Maegor_the_Cool]

1 minute ago, csuszka1948 said:

Besides, acting on a dream or prophecy doesn't mean that you can avoid scrutiny.

The story of Stannis is an example of that.

My problems with the dream is that it’s never been hinted at in the books, and the fact it makes The Targaryens look like morons.

[Craving Peaches]

8 minutes ago, Lord Domeric Bolton said:

It’s not. It’s not once hinted in the books. 

No hints in F&B either. There is actually evidence to the contrary.

• Wastes time roasting innocent Dornish peasants alive
• Refuses marriage alliance which would have given him a good shot at taking the Stormlands bloodlessly or with a lot less bloodshed
• Limited/No attempts to actually defend the Realm from anything beyond initial unification - no spree of fortification building, magic education, attempt to acquire magical artefacts, train troops, bring in experts from abroad, failure to inspect the borders (never goes to the Wall as Alysanne is seemingly the first Targaryen to do so years later)
• Fails to establish concrete succession rules to ensure long-term stability of dynasty after it should become clear that whatever threat is not showing up during his lifetime
• No standing army attemped, Westeros continues to rely on feudal levies

Even if there was something, it means that Aegon seemingly told no one. Which makes him an idiot. This is inconsistent with the rest of his characterisation.

Edited August 12, 2023 by Craving Peaches

[Craving Peaches]

5 minutes ago, csuszka1948 said:

about the prophecy that Rhaegar (and Aerys I) read,

Those two read it. Nothing suggests Aegon I read it.

[SeanF]

3 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think about it in that way at all, in the same way I don't, for example, think about chess in that way.

In fact, I've never seen White v Black magic presented in racist terms at all.  Everyone knows it to mean helpful v harmful magic.

If one prefers, one could use terms like Natural Magic v Maleficium, or High Art v  Dark Art.

The creation of the shadow babies was certainly viewed as evil by Davos.  Right across Martin's world, there are plenty of people who view the practice of human sacrifice (unambiguously bad to most readers) as legitimate, and the argument then turns on whether the end justifies the means.

I think it highly likely that Gilly's child will be burned alive to revive Jon.  And, I think the author will leave it open-ended as to whether that was a necessary evil, or just plain evil. 

 

Edited August 12, 2023 by SeanF

[Craving Peaches]

6 minutes ago, SeanF said:

In fact, I've never seen White v Black magic presented in racist terms at all.  Everyone knows it to mean helpful v harmful magic.

I haven't either, and the term 'Black Magic' appears to have been coined before all the racial supremacist pseudoscience was made up...

[KingAerys_II]

Harren was nearing completion of his massive castle, Harrenhal, and was said to be looking for more conquests. Argilac had grown afraid of Harren and so proposed an alliance with Aegon. It is believed he wanted to create a buffer zone between his kingdom and Harren's. He offered the hand of his maiden daughter, Argella, in marriage as well as dowry lands, though, much of the lands were in fact in the possession of Harren the Black. (dowry lands located in the Crownlands).

According to semi-canon sources, their banner depicted per saltire and with two heavy silver chains crossing between a gold longship on black, a dark green pine on white, a cluster of red grapes on gold, and a black raven flying in a blue sky (clockwise). The sigil represented the distant lands that had been under the rule of the house: the longship for the Iron Islands, the green pine for Bear Island, the grape cluster for the Arbor, and the black raven for the maesters of Oldtown; all bound by the iron chains of the Iron men.

If Aegon hadn't conquered Westeros, the Hoares would have become kings, the kingdoms were not united, before the Conquest Argillac rejected a dornish invasion and killed a Gardener King, the Harrenhal was the most solid stronghold.

Anyway Nymeria crowned her husband and sterted the Nymeria wars against the petty kings in Dorne, she escaped dozen assassination attempts, she was considered an invader

[James Steller]

1 hour ago, KingAerys_II said:

If Aegon hadn't invaded, Argella would have been a Hoare's salt wife

I find it hard to believe that the Hoares would have been able to hold three kingdoms without stretching their forces. The Iron Islands do not have a population big enough to that. The Stormlords would have put up a furious fight on their home turf, the Ironborn would have suffered setbacks, and various riverlords would have seized the opportunity to overthrow their tyrannical masters. They were itching to break free, so even without Aegon, the Hoares would have eventually gotten in trouble.

[KingAerys_II]

They could hire sellswords, a small population is not able to conquer the Riverlands and the Crownlands, so the population and the armies were not so small, the largest fleet, the most solid stronghold, I think House Hoare had the power to conquer the 7 Kingdoms, the divisions in the continent are another point in favour to him, Dorne, Stormlands, Reach were always at war, the yellow toad offered to Aegon an alliance against Argillac, the same would have happened if Harren had tried to take the Stormlands 

[Craving Peaches]

2 hours ago, sifth said:

Stannis wont burn Shireen

Didn't GRRM confirm this would happen though?

[Alester Florent]

I don't think anything really points to House Hoare having the ability to conquer the Seven Kingdoms. As pointed out above, the Ironborn were only able to take the Riverlands in the first place because the rivers permitted their ships convenient access. Away from the rivers, the ironborn lose much of their strength. Their numbers are relatively low and their cavalry is poor, so they will struggle to stand against any of the other kingdoms with just their own men. The Riverlands had always been the weakest of the mainland kingdoms and the riverlords hated Harren, so it's a poor starting-point for launching a continent-spanning campaign.

Harren's immediate predecessors did launch attacks on the Stormlands, the Westerlands and the Vale. They all failed, some disastrously. Far from being in a position to kick on and take over the rest of the continent, I think the Hoares were at the peak of their attainable power and were probably only a generation or two from being evicted from the Riverlands by the next cab off the rank - the Reach, a native riverlord uprising, or Argilac himself - any of whom would probably be supported by the riverlords as they had supported Harwyn when he conquered the area from Arrec.

As to the Targs, I have nothing against them collectively. Even Aegon and his Dornish campaign I'm inclined to take an "all's fair" attitude for the most part. But I'm equally not keen to see their reputation whitewashed on the basis of a prophecy that isn't even in the books, especially given that "doing it for the prophecy" is not a particularly attractive justification anyway.

As to the criticism that - if the prophecy is real - they flunked it by not supporting the Watch, I suspect it will be revealed that knowledge of the prophecy was lost during the Dance. Jaehaerys and Alysanne (who probably learned of the prophecy from Visenya after she realised Maegor wasn't going to have children) made a concerted effort to strengthen the Watch, as we know, but I also suspect that the Targaryens believed that the real hope of defeating the Others lay in dragons, with the Watch being essentially a first line of defence/early warning system. Hence the programme of breeding dragons, which was highly successful until the Dance and the slaughter of dragons that followed, with later generations seeing dragons merely as a means to political power and not a vital weapon in the battle of ice and fire, and therefore not devoting enough resources to the project early enough.

But that is entirely speculative because, as has been said repeatedly, the prophecy doesn't as yet exist in the books.