Rhaegar Targaryen

[Metopheles]

Indeed, veggies and crims, makes the juxtaposition interesting.

I reread that line of yours thrice before continuing. I thought it might have been a misspelling, but wow.

I can tell you that: If today this would be done, there would be riots.

Fucking brilliant. Making a beauty pageant with veggies and murderers.

[Deadwood]

It would certainly be very inclusive.

----------------------

That's the brute who raped my country, Thrace!

He raped Thrace?

And then he came and did it again! And then again!

He raped Thrace thrice?

[Lady Blizzardborn]

It would certainly be very inclusive.

----------------------

That's the brute who raped my country, Thrace!

He raped Thrace?

And then he came and did it again! And then again!

He raped Thrace thrice?

Hey! I reference I recognize! :D

[voodooqueen126]

you know, Jude Law and Michael Fassbender would be way too handsome to play Rhaegar.

If you think about Targaryens are generally described as delicate looking (which is very pretty in women but excruciatingly ugly in men). Which makes sense: traits like square jaws are linked to health in adolence, health is linked a a strong immune system, a strong immune system is not linked to several generations of incest.

[Metopheles]

John Goodman and Jay Leno do not look that healthy to me..

Hilarious post though.

[Newstar]

you know, Jude Law and Michael Fassbender would be way too handsome to play Rhaegar.

If you think about Targaryens are generally described as delicate looking (which is very pretty in women but excruciatingly ugly in men). Which makes sense: traits like square jaws are linked to health in adolence, health is linked a a strong immune system, a strong immune system is not linked to several generations of incest.

LOL, it doesn't get much stronger as jaws goes than the infamous Habsburg jaw, which was the result of "several generations of incest."

As for your comment that delicate features and beauty in men are mutually exclusive, and that men with delicate features are "excruciatingly ugly," Rhaegar, a Targ, is described as beautiful, even superlatively so, by GRRM. If indeed the male Targs are supposed to have delicate features, he doesn't share your opinion on the two being mutually exclusive.

[Annara Snow]

you know, Jude Law and Michael Fassbender would be way too handsome to play Rhaegar.

If you think about Targaryens are generally described as delicate looking (which is very pretty in women but excruciatingly ugly in men). Which makes sense: traits like square jaws are linked to health in adolence, health is linked a a strong immune system, a strong immune system is not linked to several generations of incest.

I don't remember Targaryens being called "delicate", only beautiful in an "otherwordly" way (which was probably largely because they looked "exotic" to the Westerosi; in old Valyria they probably didn't particularly stand out). Not that all of them were beautiful, either (Aegon II and Haelena were not, for instance). And anyway, I don't think anyone can make any generalizations about what can or can't be beautiful or attractive. Not only is it true that tastes differ, but beauty comes in all shapes and sizes and different types of features.

And a square jaw has nothing to do with health - and as for incest, nobody had bigger jaws than the super-inbred Habsburgs.

Rhaegar was obviously considered exceptionally attractive, that much is certain.

I also want to say that I despise all attempts at "scientifically" explain beauty, physical attractiveness and/or sex appeal, such as the stuff mentioned in the last couple of pages of this thread. IMO it's all quasi-scientific bullshit. People aren't thinking what kind of genes their children will have when they first meet someone and find them attractive, or whether their prospective partner can catch a mammoth :lol: It's a bunch of nonsense. We're not cave people, and most people don't plan on having kids with people they're going with on the first date, or celebrities they'll never meet.

And explaining beauty through symmetry is silly. Some faces that look super-symmetrical and have "regular" features can look incredibly bland and unappealing (I remember one silly picture posted in a magazine that was supposed to show what a "perfectly" "scientifically" symmetrically beautiful female face would look like... and it was totally bland and forgettable), while some people with very unusual features are incredibly striking, attractive and/or sexy. And if symmetry was that important, then every face would look more beautiful if you photoshoped the mirror image of one side of the face to the same side of the face... I don't think that's the case.

Not to mention that the concept "regular" features and "classical beauty" are heavily influenced by typically white, European features.

I also don't think one can make generalizations what men or women like or don't like in terms of the opposite sex looks - because people have different tastes. Also, some people can be androgynous and very attractive, others are very "masculine" or "feminine" and attractive.

However, I still maintain that I can't see Andrej Pejic as someone who is attractive to women; I've never heard of a woman finding him attractive, maybe there are some, but generally, it's not a widespread reaction. The thing with 1970s David Bowie or Grace Jones is that they had an "androgynous" look in the true sense of the word: an interesting mix of masculine and feminine characteristics (Bowie could look more masculine when he wanted to, e.g. after his glamrock phase, i.e. 1980-present) - and they were also very striking, charismatic, intriguing-looking people. Pejic, on the other hand, just looks like a pretty woman, with no masculine characteristic in his appearance and presentation at all.

Regarding terms such as "beautiful", "handsome" etc., I don't think they are necessarily linked with masculinity or femininity. Men can be called "beautiful" but look masculine and women can be "handsome" and feminine - I've heard Greta Garbo called "not just beautiful but also handsome", for instance. "Handsome woman" may not be used much nowadays, but is more commonly found in older literature. My understanding of what different terms for attractiveness mean:

Pretty - good-looking in a way that implies the air of loveliness, sweetness, youthfulness.

Handsome - good-looking in a way that implies the air of strength, health, but also a certain refinement (since people, especially men, can be attractive in a more robust, coarse way, without being considered 'handsome'); if the look is a bit rougher, the term "ruggedly handsome" may be used. Although "handsome" is often just used as interchangeable with "good-looking" in men.

Beautiful - good-looking in a way that implies a certain refinement and magnificence - possibly even a certain mysterious and 'otherwordly' quality - that elevates it as aesthetically pleasing and breath-taking in a way that "pretty" and (probably) "handsome" is not. It doesn't mean that it's necessarily more sexually alluring.

Striking - a look that is very distinctive (in a good way), eye-catching and (sometimes strangely) appealing; a person who is striking may not necessarily even be conventionally beautiful/pretty/handsome (though they also may be exceptionally beautiful/handsome), but you'd pay more attention to them than someone who is conventionally good-looking but bland.

(Physically) Attractive - all-encompassing term for physical attractiveness of any kind.

Good-looking - another all-encompassing term, but I think that "good-looking" is more objective, while "attractive" is more subjective - the latter implies you actually think this person is appealing, while the former just means they fit certain standards of beauty.

Sexy - someone who is sexy may or not be good-looking. Someone who is good-looking may or may not be sexy. A lot goes into sex appeal - looks, voice, mannerisms, personality...

That's at least how I see it. Now, different people don't have to agree which is which (as seen in this thread with the discussion on whether Chris Hemsworth is handsome or pretty).

[Lady Blizzardborn]

I don't remember Targaryens being called "delicate", only beautiful in an "otherwordly" way (which was probably largely because they looked "exotic" to the Westerosi; in old Valyria they probably didn't particularly stand out). Not that all of them were beautiful, either (Aegon II and Haelena were not, for instance). And anyway, I don't think anyone can make any generalizations about what can or can't be beautiful or attractive. Not only is it true that tastes differ, but beauty comes in all shapes and sizes and different types of features.

<snipped for space reasons

:agree: Excellent post!

[The Dragon King]

Handsome - good-looking in a way that implies the air of strength, health, but also a certain refinement (since people, especially men, can be attractive in a more robust, coarse way, without being considered 'handsome'); if the look is a bit rougher, the term "ruggedly handsome" may be used. Although "handsome" is often just used as interchangeable with "good-looking" in men.

Beautiful - good-looking in a way that implies a certain refinement and magnificence - possibly even a certain mysterious and 'otherwordly' quality - that elevates it as aesthetically pleasing and breath-taking in a way that "pretty" and (probably) "handsome" is not. It doesn't mean that it's necessarily more sexually alluring.

Beautiful = a handsome male with long flowing hair.

[Metopheles]

Beautiful = a handsome male with long flowing hair.

wait...weren't we two having the discussion about androgyny and you were all about it being feminine and that a man must be masculine to be attractive and beautiful?

Now you say he has to have long flowing hair?

[JonCon's Red Beard]

Ever seen the Targaryen portraits by Amok?

There is nothing delicate of feminine about Aegon the Dragonbane, for instance, but there is something that simply appeals the eye. I guess he's quite the "average" Targaryen: http://en.amokanet.ru/gallery/martin/targaryens_1209.html

Then, there is Dareon who was actually very young. http://en.amokanet.ru/gallery/martin/targaryens_1227.html

And then, there is this guy. http://en.amokanet.ru/gallery/martin/targaryens_1979.html?popup=1&template=82

[Metopheles]

Aren't they too northern looking? They look kinda like Scandinavians or Germans.

They look like Caesar described the clansmen he fought in the wars against the germans.

I thought the jaw thing is a typical Stark feature, and thus the complete opposite of Targs.

The Dareon pic looks like the average Targ to me. A hint of Alexander the Great in it.

[Annara Snow]

Aren't they too northern looking? They look kinda like Scandinavians or Germans.

They look like Caesar described the clansmen he fought in the wars against the germans.

I thought the jaw thing is a typical Stark feature, and thus the complete opposite of Targs.

The Dareon pic looks like the average Targ to me. A hint of Alexander the Great in it.

Long face is supposed to be a Stark feature. I don't remember any mention of jaw?

And Targaryens/Valyrians in general don't exactly look like any ethnic group in real life, do they?

[Modesty Lannister]

I still think he would be the best choice. Pity he is too old.

http://insidetrekker.blogspot.com/2012/08/ciaran-hinds-cast-as-mance-rayder-on.html

[Metopheles]

Long face is supposed to be a Stark feature. I don't remember any mention of jaw?

And Targaryens/Valyrians in general don't exactly look like any ethnic group in real life, do they?

Maybe I am show canon here, because LF made that line about Brandon Stark having a jaw like an anvil like a proper Northener and that Eddard was an even finer and more impressing specimen.

[Metopheles]

I still think he would be the best choice. Pity he is too old.

http://insidetrekker.blogspot.com/2012/08/ciaran-hinds-cast-as-mance-rayder-on.html

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[Annara Snow]

Maybe I am show canon here, because LF made that line about Brandon Stark having a jaw like an anvil like a proper Northener and that Eddard was an even finer and more impressing specimen.

Yeah, that's just the show. They love those angry high school nerd/square-jawed jock/friendzone etc. stereotypes.

[Metopheles]

Yeah, that's just the show. They love those angry high school nerd/square-jawed jock/friendzone etc. stereotypes.

But it kinda fits well.

The characters are obviously based on real life features whatever.

Targaryens and Valyrians as the greek/etruscan/roman body with egyptian like culture and the Ghiscary as the turkish and ottoman thing with the culture mix and then the Martells as the spaniards and Northeners as old Germans and Scandinavians.

[Annara Snow]

But it kinda fits well.

The characters are obviously based on real life features whatever.

Targaryens and Valyrians as the greek/etruscan/roman body with egyptian like culture and the Ghiscary as the turkish and ottoman thing with the culture mix and then the Martells as the spaniards and Northeners as old Germans and Scandinavians.

I don't see what Valyrians have to do with Greeks or Romans. Valyrians most definitely don't look Mediterrenean. No ethnic group in real life is characterized by silver hair and purple eyes. The closest you can get to silver hair are very fair haired Nordic children.

The Northerners, with their physical descriptions (e.g. the Starks with their brown hair and grey eyes), don't look particularly Nordic or German. And culture-wise, they don't seem to have that many similarities, either.

I can't think of a single similarity between the Ghiscari and the Turks/Ottoman Turks. Where does that come from?

[raegal_targaryen]

I always pictured that guy from sons of anarchy as rhaegar targaryen dunno why but think he fits the bill