Not A Big Fan Of Targs...

[Elrick]

I hate to say, although I love dragons I find myself not liking the Targaryens all that much. For one they seem so arrogant and have this high and mighty opinion about themselves that makes me dislike them even more than the Lannisters. Also they were nothing more than invaders that conquered through tyranny, Aegon was no better than Robert really. ALso I find myself surprised that Dany doesn't realize that or perhaps that it should be brought to her attention.

Anyway am I the only one who feels this way or what?

[Chyttering]

Jaeherys II once said that the gods flip a coin each time a Targayen is born to decide whether the new Targ is destined for greatness or madness... and this seems to really be the case.

There don't really appear to be any middle-of-the-road Targayens - they're either brilliant, compassionate, skilled rulers or completely terrible tyrants. On the one hand you've got a slew of Targ kings who appear to have ruled well, you have Dany, who isn't half bad, and you have Rhaegar, who by all appearances was beyond reproach. On the other hand you have Maegor the Cruel, Aerys II, and Viserys III.

Really I think you just have to take the good with the bad. While the Targs were not always the kindest of rulers, I don't think any of them botched things nearly as bad as did the Usurper or those who came after him.

[Yougottawanna]

Aerys botched things worse than Robert ever did I think.

[diabloblanco18]

I wouldn't exactly say that. Aerys certainly did more himself to screw up everything, but the mess that Robert let everyone around him - the Lannisters in particular - make was far worse. Aerys was an active fuck-up, while Robert was a passive one.

[Mutethunder]

What did Jon Arryn do when he saw that Robert became surrounded by Lannisters? Arryn and Ned should've knocked more sense into Robert, and Ned should've told Robert that he had no trueborn sons before Robert died. But yes Robert was very passiv in his doom.

[blackwater]

Before Targs came there were kings in Westeros.Some of them have been good,some bad.They had wars-it's not like there was peace before Targs

And look at the history of european royalties - we had mad ones,sick ones,evil ones ,reformators,great warriors and bad ones,obssesed with religion ,adulterers,...

[Yana]

I think it's cool that Targs were conquerors and that they refused to have any closer connections with other big houses (they were marrying into them just occasionally). We have seen what happened when someone from the big houses tried to rule instead. Robert had 15 good years, but they all led to catastrophy. Many believe that Ned had as much right to the throne as Robert did. All the big houses have the same rang, so how to choose? Everyone feels they have the right to the throne. Targs were above them all, that's why they were quite succesful. Yes, there were some really bad kings among them, but the system itself worked.

[Greyman]

I really REALLY don't like the Targs. When Dany comes, I will be rooting against her with every fiber of my being. I don't know...I just hate her. She's a facinating character though.

As for the other Targs, they all seem so distant to me. Just like arrogant pricks I can't relate to.

[Caligula_K]

The only aspect of the Targs I dislike are the dragons. And based on the ADWD preview chapter, my dislike is increasing. As for the Targs themselves, a lot of them are so awesomely cool and nice (Egg, Baelor Breakspear, Daeron II) and the others are just so loveably insane (Aerion, Aerys II, Maegor the Cruel) that they just might be the best disfunctional family ever.

[The Blueseer]

The Targaryeans are not my favourite lot . I always skip them a little. So I never know much in detail about them. Madmen and dragonflyers . All those names Jaherys I and II, Aerys I and II or Raeynar or something like that. I call them the A and Erys family and no, I don't like them.

And I don't like Daenerys either, no personal feelings for her at all, but I like the stuff that is spun around her. That crazy world of hoootchie cootchie fancy folks and names and unsullied and coloured hairdoes that must be litteraly outstanding. And the names. The Dothraki world. the City of Mereen. Exentrics and exotics. I love the whole setting. Not the family.

The dragons, I don't know. I wouldn't mind if they had never been rehatched. Once they will be grown they will be too freaking devastating huge.

Like nuclear bombs. Blast everything away. Superfast meltdown of the Wall, flooding of the North. (Think of all the cute little crannogmen going down the drain with it) Yet , the frogs will be well off for a while.

[The Spider]

"Like nuclear bombs. Blast everything away. Superfast meltdown of the Wall, flooding of the North. (Think of all the cute little crannogmen going down the drain with it) Yet , the frogs will be well off for a while."

[The Marquis de Leech]

I sometimes think that the whole mad and evil aspect of the Targaryen family is over-exaggerated. Of the Targaryens we know about, only two (Aerion Brightflame and Aerys II) definitely have a really potential dynasty-destroying type of madness. Maegor was cruel, yes, but as an actual King he seems to have been quite effective (what with his building projects, his measures to suppress religious fanaticism, and his undisputed ability as a warrior - at one point Dany reminds herself proudly that he is one of her "great" relatives). Viserys III had mad tendencies and would have made a bad King, but whether he would have necessarily been another Aerys is questionable (the poor guy says that all he ever wanted was a crown, and with having to be in fear of his life since his boyhood, he has some reason to be a tad unhinged). Viserys would have made a better King than Joffrey at any rate.

Of the others, Aegon IV was a terrible King - but there is so far no evidence of any madness about him. Ditto Aenys I. Baelor was mad, but he wasn't cruel.

[Kat]

I have to say I was thinking about the same thing last night. I really like Dany, and Rhaegar is growing on everyone, but all the same I don't want the series to end with the Targs in charge again. It seems disappointing, not to mention I'm not a big fan of this not-intermarrying-with-locals thing that they do, which seems a lot like "we're Valyrian, and above the rest of you."

Not to mention all the madness. Incest has pretty much taken its toll on them, seems like a 50% chance of madness is real crappy.

[Enoch]

I have to say I was thinking about the same thing last night. I really like Dany, and Rhaegar is growing on everyone, but all the same I don't want the series to end with the Targs in charge again.

I very much doubt that the series will end that way. I like Dany a lot, but somehow I've always suspected that her arc ultimately ends in tragedy. For one thing, she's a pretty clear "chosen one," with her name all but spoken by a dozen different prophecies - in GRRM's world, that inclines me to expect the worst for her. For another, her whole story seems to be building towards something, and it would be very silly for the climax of all that to be a swimming success where she backhands all potential threats and crowns herself in a giant fiesta with eight courses and a dancing bear.

[Kingslayer]

I hate to say, although I love dragons I find myself not liking the Targaryens all that much. For one they seem so arrogant and have this high and mighty opinion about themselves that makes me dislike them even more than the Lannisters. Also they were nothing more than invaders that conquered through tyranny, Aegon was no better than Robert really. ALso I find myself surprised that Dany doesn't realize that or perhaps that it should be brought to her attention.

Anyway am I the only one who feels this way or what?

As others have pointed out, there was constant warfare in the Seven Kingdoms before Aegon came. He stopped the ironborn reaving, gave the riverlands back to their rightful owners, allowed those who bent the knee to continue ruling in their respective domains, and gave peace to the realm. That's hardly tyrannical.

I would much prefer a Targaryen on the Iron Throne over a drunken, oafish usurper and the queen's bastard sons.

[Grant Dempsey]

There don't really appear to be any middle-of-the-road Targayens - they're either brilliant, compassionate, skilled rulers or completely terrible tyrants.

How about Aerys I? What was said of him in The Sworn Sword indicated that he neglected the realm throughout his reign, keeping himself locked away to read more often than not, yet I don't recall it being said that he was extremely brilliant either. Bloodraven (Brynden Rivers), the power behind the throne at the time, was suggested to have been a tyrant of sorts, but Aerys I himself was not.

[Devil Hanzo]

ALso I find myself surprised that Dany doesn't realize that or perhaps that it should be brought to her attention.

Anyway am I the only one who feels this way or what?

that is the basis of my mislike for dany. She see's her bloodline as superior.

But if you look at the descriptions of most targs, they seem to OFTEN(not always) Be described as frail and skinny and sickly.

I mean the ancient egyption royalty was inbred, and after years of inbreeding, the defects were ''erased''

HOWEVER: Their was no new blood introduceed into thier bloodline.

They were sickly.

THey were sTUPID, because intellegence is afected by both surroundings AND genetics.

[Must_Not_Be_Named]

Gold Dragon,

I agree that the Targaryens were simply invaders, obviously, with superior firepower, much like Cortez in the new world. Their army was miniscule, yet Balerion and company were very effective. Incest (besides being fun) was probably necessary to insure blood-control over the dragons, when the dragons existed. Otherwise, it's the Golden Rule, 'the one with the gold (or steel, or cunning brain) rules.'

What I dislike are Viserys' and Dany's assertions that they have the right to rule, that they possess some sort of divine dispensation to reign. And the attitude that that engenders is absolutely repulsive.

Dany would simply be another teen whore (which is nice, very nice, in and of itself) without Ilyrio giving her the eggs, or Varys working behind the scenes in King's Landing, or any number of other factors. Her scheme to take the Unsullied had merit, as did her actions in the 'house of the undying', but her reaction to Jorah's 'betrayal' or Ser Barristan's 'betrayal' are the spastic knee-jerks of a silly little girl who should still be playing with her dolls.

Hopefully, in ADwD, Daenerys will learn Stannis' lesson that putting the good of the realm before one's petty, personal desires - feeding the hungry, protecting the weak, real justice - is the only thing that qualifies one to rule, if anything.

[Grant Dempsey]

that is the basis of my mislike for dany. She see's her bloodline as superior.

How much did Daenerys even really know about her family line's history? She's only recently beginning to hear details about Rhaegar and about Aerys' madness. She was raised with and by Viserys, who was himself rather obsessed with its greatness. It's hard for me to imagine him painting a negative picture of his ancestors to his sister while raising her.

[Bran's Muffin]

Why has no one mentioned how good Maester Aemon was?

The end of Hedge Knight which I just reread today, Dunk insists that if he's going to take Egg, then Egg has to live like a hedge knight's squire and says that his two brothers were treated with ever courtesy and didn't turn out so good.

I definately think there is madness in the Targaryens, after seeing Aerys's behavior through Jaime's eyes there is just no way to deny it, but I also think their behavior often has to do with simply being king/princes. Joffrey reminds me a great deal of Aerion Brightflame and he's got no Targaryen blood.