#don’t get me wrong cersei is very interesting as a character but there is a massive revisionist history happening here | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

atopvisenyashill · 5 months

Note

Thoughts on the Alysanne is Maegor's daughter AU? I feel like it has some interesting potential, and it vastly recontextualizes different parts of Jaehaehae (I do not like him sjsjsjs) and Alysanne's relationship (such as Jaehaehae's treatment of their daughters) but I wanna hear what you think about it!

I’ve touched on this a bit before but since you actually want to hear my thoughts, allow me to present to you my Jaehaerys Is The Goddamn Worst, And Alysanne Annoys Me Too: An Essay lmao but my answer is basically “yeah all of what you just said.”

I think it makes Alysanne much more palatable (to me) as a character because as she stands, she just fixates on forcing her daughters through these fucked up marriages at too young an age bc it traumatized her to be married and pregnant at 15 too but she’d never admit that being a willing participant in her own kidnapping by her brother-husband was the single worst thing that ever happened to her, and because Alysanne doesn’t want to admit it (and Jaehaerys would never see it as wrong or a mistake) F&B really shies away from delving into the fact that Alysanne is as deranged of a mother as Cersei is. So as she stands, she’s very flat to me because she’s presented very flatly and inconsistently. She’s so in love with Jaehaerys, she’s maritally raped by Jaehaerys, she’s a loving and doting mother, she forces her daughters into marriages when they’re the same too young age she was, she accuses her teenage girls of being scheming whores then gets angry when her husband accuses their teenage girls of being scheming whores, and worst of all we are just told “Maegelle tells them to make up so they do” so we don’t know why Alysanne gets over all of this. What is the point of riding a dragon when you never use that dragon to protect your daughters from unwanted teen marriages? We’re just not given a good enough justification for why her behavior is so weird and frustrating towards her daughters.

Make her Maegor’s daughter though…most of her behavior as an adult makes more sense. Like a worse version of Rhaenyra’s childhood almost - a father desperate for a son, but lowkey obsessed with his daughter, who makes all his hang ups about his parents the problems of every woman around him, except Maegor is out here blood sacrificing and torturing and starting wars and forcing babies on wives he discards quickly and brutally. Then here comes Jaehaerys on a white horse green dragon to save her from the horror her life has become, and he loves her so much he runs away with her even though Alyssa says they shouldn’t marry because people won’t like it. And they have beautiful children, and a beautiful marriage, and build a beautiful kingdom.

Then her pregnancies start getting dangerous. Gaemon, then Valerion, die. Alysanne thinks of the shriveled up mutants she called brothers, if Maegor’s taint has passed to her. Her perfect husband ignores her no, and forces Gael on her. Alysanne remembers that he said nothing to Rogar when Alyssa died, merely wept. Then her daughters start to die. Daella, Alyssa, Viserra, all within a few years. Then Jaehaerys makes Saera watch as he murders her boyfriend, calls her a whore, and says Alysanne cannot follow Saera to Lys. Alysanne thinks of Maegor torturing the Harroways over Alys’ presumed infidelity. Jaehaerys says he’s sorry, and her daughter badgers her into forgiving him, and she remembers how she helped Jaehaerys badger Alyssa into forgiving Rogar. Not two years later, Jaehaerys passes over Rhaenys. Alysanne thinks of how she was never enough for her father, how she felt so superior to Rhaena banished to Dragonstone and resented by Aerea, yet there she is dragging Gael away from court because she can’t stand to be with Jaehaerys. How her father was surrounded by dead women and dead babies and how Jaehaerys is surrounded by his own dead daughters, but surely she did the right thing, surely Maegor was worse, surely the realm is better off? Is he right to pass over Rhaenys? Is she enabling a man just as monstrous as her father? She will never decide, because Maegelle will guilt her about keeping Gael isolated at Dragonstone, and Alysanne will do as she’s told, just like Rhaena, and Alyssa, and Jeyne, Elinor, Ceryse, Alys, and Tyanna, just like every one of her daughters.

I do get why Alysanne is Alyssa & Aenys’ and not Maegor’s. The weird Targ babies, the line not descending from Visenya, Jaehaerys and Alysanne being held up as the perfect Targaryen couple specifically because they are brother and sister and dragon riders. I do even think canon Alysanne is likely traumatized by her time as a hostage on Dragonstone, and the ensuing war, and the trauma bond that caused with Jaehaerys, and it makes her idolize Jaehaerys, and then he isolates her at Dragonstone so he can swiftly and safely marry, groom, and knock her up. It’s not like,,,, a fun time, and it’s enough to make anyone crazy and weird about their daughters, but I think having her father be Maegor makes Alysanne herself much deeper because it gives her, as the most beloved Targaryen queen, a blood tie to the most hated Targaryen king, and a marriage to the most beloved Targaryen king. It fits better with a lot of the themes of the main series (again, imo) - forcing the spotlight on the outsiders to see how the affect the story from behind the scenes. The fall of Aegon’s sons, and The Long Reign, not told from the PoV or to serve the PoV of any of the kings or princes, but of the queen that tied them all together.

#anti jaehaerys i targaryen #f&b critical #fire and blood critical #asks #thesadboy #like he kind of does this with aenys & maegor by focusing on alyssa and rhaena and the wives and visenya.#but the Moment jaehaerys enters the scene he completely dominates it. the same way daemon and aemond do actually.#but this is not. it should not!! be their story. that’s not how the main series is told anyway!!#if f&b isn’t told by a dornish maester than it should have been written by a septa!!!#nuns wrote books!!!!!#rich noblewomen wrote novels and poetry!!!!!!!#GEORGE DO YOU READ WOMEN. I AM NO LONGER ASKING POLITELY.#i went to look for her mother and apparently this was just a mistake elio made and i’m even more depressed. i can’t believe i’m saying this #but elio damn your mind.#i bet he saw that and went ‘wait which one is her fucjing mother’ and george was like what in the goddamn hell are you talking about.#idk who would be her mother in this au. if we want to keep her within 3 ish years of jaehaerys it Has to be alys or ceryse. ceryse hightowe #is the hilarious and obvious choice. but don’t count out alys harroway second wife here either.#then there’s rhaena as her mother which with the canon timeline makes him 12 years older and isn’t THAT horrible let’s stop here actually.

131 notes · View notes

littledollll · 1 year

Note

Can be requested NSFW Brienne of Tarth x fem Lannister virgin reader (19-20 y.o)

The reader is the daughter of Cersei and Jaime. When Jaime and Brienne arrive in the Kings Landing, Jaime introduces Brienne to her daughter. And it's love at first sight. But Cersei thinks Brienne is in love with Jaime. One night, Cersei was walking through Brienne's chambers and heard moans and thought Brienne was having sex with Jaime, but when she breaks out into Brienne's chambers, she sees her daughter under Brienne. And then the next day, they have a conversation with Cersei and Jaime.

Happy Ending

This is my request

Oh no big deal, you can write this in your own style and change the characters, I don't mind that. I trust you completely! And if you write, I'll be glad to read! Honestly, I give you my word.

And I want to add that you are an incredible writer, and I really like your work! 🖤🖤

Love (and lust) at first sight

Brienne of Tarth x Lannister!reader

Warning: smut but it’s not that long, caught in the act, cool dad Jamie, disappointed mom Cersei, big warning over the fact I know nothing about these characters

A/n: this was one hell of a brainstorm and i dont like this that much but I rly hate rejecting requests so here it is!

You were called down to the entrance by your mother, announcing your father was finally home, only he wasn’t alone, there was a woman with him, Tall, blond hair, beautiful blue eyes, you couldn’t focus on anything they were saying as you looked at her, only snapping back to reality when you heard her voice as she introduced herself. How did your father have the absolute honor to journey with her- you hurried to greet her and introduce yourself.

You could’ve sworn you keep meeting her gaze through the conversation you were paying no attention to, you weren’t making this up, Brienne was also staring at you. However your mother was convinced it was Jamie she was looking at, deciding not to make a fuss out of it, she simply observed Brienne.

——————

Over the next few days you continued looking for excuses to be around her, most of the time Brienne simply allowed you to accompany her, though you noticed she wasn’t one to talk much, though she was a damn good listener and occasionally contributed to your usually one sided conversations.

“Why do you insist on following me around?” It was the first time Brienne initiated the conversation. You weren’t really prepared for her to question that, or talk at all really. “Well- I mean I don’t know-“ She cut you off when you seemed to be stalling to answer. “it seems I’ve caught you off guard, I apologize my lady.” “No no! I just think you’re beyond beautiful- and I’ve heard so much about you I’d like to get to know you myself and not just what everyone says of you.”

Brienne seemed shocked for a moment then furrowed her brows. “And what is it you’ve head about me?” A lot. Like a lot. People love talking shit about anyone and anything. “Well for starters, rumor has it you’re very cold. But I have a feeling that’s wrong- and that you’re a strong, one of the strongest swordsmen was it? Apparently despite that coldness you are protective and loyal.”

She only hummed and you chuckled. “What? you’re gonna leave me guessing?” A small smile reached her face as she looked away from you to keep walking. “I thought you said you wanted to get to know me yourself, my lady.” She said, making you blush. “Challenge accepted, ser.”

——————

Both you and your mother hated how much time she spent with Jamie, for wildly different reasons of course, but neither of you were of aware of the other. For you it meant you couldn’t continue your endless playful flirting that had started after you confessed your interest in Brienne, in your fathers presence, to Cersei it was because she swore Brienne was pinning after him.

“So, what do you think of her?” Your mother nodded Brienne’s way as she and your father were talking about God knows what, you were busy looking at her. “I think she’s lovely, why do you ask?” You said with a smile on your lips. Cersei looked at you questioningly. “No particular reason, thought I’d ask since she’s living here, I’d hate it if you didn’t like her presence.” You didn’t question her reasoning, only nodded. “Well you’re in luck, I quite like her, happens to make great company too.”

——————

“Are you going to continue staring daggers into my back or do you plan on talking?” Brienne asked. After a day of little to no interaction between the two off you, you decided to join her back to her room. “I quite like your back, so I’ll take you up on that offer” she froze for a second before a smirk grazed her face. “oh do you now? Tell me, what plays on your mind while you’re busy staring, my lady?”

“Why do you insist on calling me that” changing the subject while she crawled over you, making you whimper. “Because I like seeing the look on your face whenever I do.” Her eyes trailed down to your lips before snapping back to your own. “Please-“ you didn’t even have time to ask property before her lips were on yours. It was intoxicating, needy, messy. You were both waiting for this since the moment you met.

When you parted you looked drunk off the kiss, you giggled when Brienne laid kisses down your jaw and neck. “Brienne-“ voice was barely above a whisper, afraid to ruin the moment. “Are you alright, my lady?” you felt hot all over and you were sure your face was red. “I’ve never really done this before-“ “would you like to stop?” You shook your head. “Just thought you should know.” Brienne kissed your temple and moved back down. “Thank you my lady, just say the word and we can stop or slow down, okay?” She made you feel so safe then. You breathed out an “okay”.

Brienne undressed you carefully, kissing every inch of skin she revealed until you were completely naked. Two of her fingers trailed down to your entrance, gathering your wetness and moving up to rub your clit. You were so sensitive and responsive, loud, though Brienne adored it she couldn’t risk you being caught. “Darling, you need to be quiet.” Hips bucking against her hand and hole clenching around nothing, you whined.

“Inside. please, I need you.” Sure you’ve touched yourself before, but her hand felt so much better. Brienne didn’t say anything, only complied with your request, two fingers slipping into your soaked entrance while keeping her thumb on your clit. “Oh fuck!-“ you practically screamed when she started thrusting into you.

Outside, your mother was walking past Brienne’s room when she heard this, she assumed it was Brienne with Jamie. She turned and walked back to the door, putting her ear against the door to confirm what she heard.

Brienne slapped her free hand over your mouth, big mistake. Your moans, however muffled, were louder. “By gods, you need to control yourself.” Brienne scolded you quietly, although amusement was clear in her voice. To be honest, you really didn’t care, not in the moment anyways.

Just as you were about to tip over the edge the door slammed open making you jump and attempt to hide yourself, thankfully your body was mostly covered by Brienne on top of you. It was so quiet you could almost hear the cogs turning in your mothers head. Brienne just hid herself in your neck, thankful she didn’t decide to undress.

Apparently, she did not have the energy to explode in anger right now, only sighing and muttering out “I will be talking to the both of you in the morning. Your father will be told about this.” Before she slammed the door and walked off.

Brienne could barely contain her laugh. “Fuck. Breakfast is going to be interesting.” you slapped her shoulder. “It is not the time to joke about this! they are going to kill you. And me. And you again!”

——————

Breakfast was quiet, you arrived late since you had to run back to you room in the morning to get ready and come down. Your father and Brienne seemed to be talking a lot softer than they usually did while your mother was practically seething in quiet anger.

As you went to sit on the table you greeted your father and Brienne with a kiss on the cheek which made her stop functioning for a few seconds. Then walked to your mother and kissed her head, when you turned to walk away she gripped your wrist. “You stay right there.” You nodded.

“You come into my home, with my husband after he has been missing for months. To add to that, get caught fucking my daughter. And you have the audacity to act like it’s a completely normal morning.”

“I apologize but- would you rather I shrink and turn into a pathetic apologizing mess like a coward or we talk like adults and make things clear.” Brienne stated plainly, like she didn’t really care for an argument. “What’s done is done, after all.”

“Personally I think Brienne is a great fit for our girl, and you know very well she’s going to be protected and cared for.” Your father said, more at your mother than anyone else. “I don’t care for what the girl decides. She’s an adult, the problem here is that this happened behind my back. If you’d at least have the decency to come to me this wouldn’t be an issue.”

“In that case, I apologize, truly nothing was meant to happen last night, if it was in my plans for everything to go down as it did you would’ve been made aware. I was under the impression Jamie talked to you about us though.” Your mother breathe in and looked at your father, seething with anger. “So you were aware and chose not to tell me?”

You stepped in. “Hi, me again, you know the whole cause of this conversation. You’ve been talking like I’m not right here, fight with father later. I’d like to continue seeing Brienne. Will that be an issue?” You really just wanted to go to sleep.

“No, my dear, it won’t. Now both of you get out of here I have to have a serious discussion with Jamie.”

#gwendoline christie #ser brienne #brienne of tarth #brienne of tarth x reader #brienne of tarth smut #brienne x reader #brienne x jaime

502 notes · View notes

esther-dot · 2 years

Note

apologies in advance for the length. like grrm, i need a good editor.

hi there,

i just read your answer to another anon about abuse victims. it was dm’d to me by someone who admired your answer. i admired it too, but i must admit, when you said something along the lines of, "despite their abuse, nothing is going to change the fact that they've done things that make me think badly of them," i let out a huff of exasperation, not directed specifically at you but at the whole situation, because what you said is exactly how i feel about cersei. yet, i've been jumped on, and lectured, and had aspersions cast on my character because i admitted that yes she was abused and it was horrible, but i still hate her for the things she's done and am not interested in feeling sorry for her or talking about her hardships.

i know you truly believe the sansa fandom cares about all abuse victims. i’m a sansa fan myself and i wish i could agree with you. but from what i've seen with my own eyes, time and again, it simply isn't true. i think the sansa and cersei fandoms care about a certain type of abuse victim, specifically "the beautiful woman who's suffered because of the patriarchy." i’m not knocking that in itself; those women are deserving of sympathy and understanding. but it doesn’t change the fact that there are some noteworthy differences in the sympathy extended by cersei fans to cersei, and the lack of sympathy they extend to other types of abuse-victims-turned-villains. (i speak of the sansa fandom and the cersei fandom interchangeably here, not because i think sansa is a villain, but because there's such a huge overlap between the two fandoms; there are exceptions, but for the most part, it's mostly all the same people)

an example: cersei, the beautiful able-bodied woman, can wish rape and torture on the septas who abused her, and that's okay, that's forgivable, yes it was bad but according to her fans they can still enjoy her as a character and feel sympathy for her because the patriarchy has been so, so mean to her. but, according to those same fans, when the disabled man wishes rape on the sister who abused him, well that's beyond the pale, that's repulsive, that's a bridge too far, he's forfeited any right to compassion and they don't care about the abuse he's suffered and neither should anyone else! that’s just one example of many that i could give.

don’t get me wrong, it's very fair to say, "i recognize that tyrion was abused and it's horrible, but i still hate him for what he's done and don't want to talk about his hardships." i feel that way, too. please don’t mistake anything i say here as me being a tyrion fan because hell no lmao. but if you’re going to say that, then you also have to accept that others are going to feel the same way about the villains you do like, and those people shouldn’t be shamed for it or automatically have bad motives assigned to them. not everyone who hates cersei is a misogynist. many of us are simply people who rightly hate cruel, selfish, abusive rapists, which she is, and her sad past doesn’t change how we feel about her.

my point - and i do have one - is that there are huge double standards from all parties involved, and if cersei's fans and defenders truly think they’re not just as guilty as everyone else of being hypocritical, they’re demonstrably wrong.

i anticipate that there will be many who read my comments and protest "well, this person needs to understand that we're defensive of cersei because she gets so much hate from the fandom" and so i’ll say upfront that, one, i already know and understand that, and two, i still think it's a poor excuse. do you honestly think dany fans aren't defensive of her because of the very vocal, relentless hate she gets from some parts of the fandom? do you think tyrion fans aren't defensive of him because of the ableism he receives? and besides, since when did other people being hypocritical and behaving badly make it okay for us to be hypocritical and behave badly? it doesn't. other people behaving badly doesn’t mean we’re not responsible for controlling our own behavior. we’re not children.

I am so sorry that people hopped on your posts and called you that, anon! I think it’s the nature of the internet that we all feel much freer to be jerks, but the ASOIAF fandom always dials things up to eleven. I understand your frustration that people didn’t give you the benefit of the doubt and try to understand what you were saying. I appreciate the fact that your anger didn’t override all your humor when writing this ask. I did LOL over Martin needing an editor because I have said many times that I wish he’d worked with one he trusted from the beginning so he’d have told them his endgame and they could have helped him prune things before he let certain branches grow out of control. Alas!

I am at a loss as to how to respond to this ask though because while I believe you that individuals have treated you badly, agree that not liking certain villains says nothing about your character and that harassing other fans is wrong, I still strongly disagree with your conclusion about the Sansa fandom.

I understand if this was more of an opportunity to vent your feelings rather than an opening for a conversation, but I went back and forth on posting this at all, because implications of this ask could be so deeply offensive, but I finally decided I would only if I pushed back against some of this. Not with the expectation of changing your mind, I think an experience like yours would prevent anything I can say from altering it, but all the same, I will share my perspective.

Let’s begin where we agree.

it's very fair to say, "i recognize that tyrion was abused and it's horrible, but i still hate him for what he's done and don't want to talk about his hardships."

This is a good statement. Sansa fans in my corner of the fandom rarely write meta on Tyrion, but I did say this a year ago when asked about our fandom double standard/not being sympathetic/talking about his abuse:

If I ever were to write about Tyrion, I would have to write about the abuse he suffered. Typically, I only mention him when writing about Sansa, so I’m focusing on the threat he is to her/the North, rather than considering his perspective. So, yes, it’s all very one note, but that’s because I’m not even trying to represent his side. And of course, there’s the fact that the fandom as a whole habitually faulted Sansa for not being happy with her fate, rather than acknowledge her perspective. But, I agree that (just as I do for Cersei), we are intended to feel sympathy for him. (link)

So, I feel like you’re trying to argue that my fandom is bad because we don’t do something that I, and several in my circle, have previously said is part of writing about Tyrion. In fact, reading your ask and then my old post, I think I’m probably more sympathetic to him than you are? I don’t judge you for it, I don’t care if you like Tyrion or if you like Cersei, I’m just pointing out that my experience in the Sansa fandom and the conclusions I have come to based on that experience are very different from yours. The linked post was received very well by my circle, so you’re trying to use something against us that has little merit in my eyes.

Martin writes his villains with the intention of explaining why they function as they do rather than leaving them as one-dimensional caricatures. The other day I tried to explain to another anon with similar feelings to yours why it is easier for me (and I’m guessing many Sansa fans) to engage with content sympathetic to Cersei even though we can’t do the same for other villains:

When I think about what I’ve seen written about Cersei and Lysa, it’s trying to push against the fandom, and even against the author at times, and say, “these women deserve sympathy too. It doesn’t change who they are, but their past should allow us to see their humanity.” Sympathy is the end goal. My issue with the fandom at large is that they go further and want to use sympathy to argue something else, want to move, say, the Hound from one role and shift him into another. Suddenly, sympathy means pretending he didn’t assault Sansa, he wasn’t a threat, she didn’t think he might kill her. I don’t feel like it’s more important to sympathize with Cersei than the Hound, I just don’t have an issue with sympathizing with her when that’s all anyone asks, but I do have a problem that half the fandom rewrote who the Hound is because they sympathized. (link)

It isn’t so much that I care more about pretty women than disfigured men that makes me happily read about Cersei and not other villains (I don’t really write about her either), but that, discussion of her is always with the underlying understanding that she is a villain. However, the Hound, Tyrion, and many other characters are removed from that category by the fandom. To speak of them as such is deemed controversial even though the author himself has designated them as such. I don’t consider this a tit for tat with the rest of the fandom, I try to ignore them, I say this because my fandom and the ASOIAF fandom at large are functioning in two different worlds, doing two totally different things when talking about these characters, in pursuit of two radically different goals.

I can sympathize with villains, that is what I am doing when I talk about Lysa, Cersei etc. The context (our understanding of their roles and what the author is doing with these characters) and the goal of our posts matters, so you can understand why in this fandom, I don’t feel free to engage with Tyrion or Hound sympathetic content because that is typically coming from people who romanticize them and their actions, even assault. We can argue about the wisdom of Martin making Tyrion a villain, but recognizing that I am someone who operates with the understanding that he chose to do that, while the fandom actively denies it, goes a long way in explaining the disparity in treatment you’ve found. And yet, in spite of this disagreement, I don’t harass those fans, that’s a gross thing to do. I simply choose to stay in my own corner and not talk about him except when he comes up in relation to Sansa. If any Sansa fan wants to do more, great! But I’m happy with my choice there.

I don’t remember the specific phrase, but there’s an idea of charitable reading in which, instead of jumping on things and misinterpreting them, we really try to understand what was said and view it in the most sympathetic light possible. That is what my first anon was wishing we would practice more of in regard to the series, and you are asking that we also practice this with our fellow fans. I think you both have a good point, and I will try to do that. I can have my strong negative reaction, set it aside, and then try to focus on the writer’s intent as a distinct thing from which of my buttons they pushed. This too is something we would agree on because it’s the treatment you are asking for. Sansa fans in the past didn’t read your thoughts charitably and you suffered harassment for it. Instead of understanding that Cersei is an awful person and you don’t like awful people, they said you are an awful person and that’s why you don’t like her. Of course you object! Unless you were being misogynistic in your criticism of her, that’s unfounded.

However, this is where I take exception to your ask. Just as you do not wish to be called a misogynist for hating Cersei, I do not wish to be called ableist for reaching my limit with Tyrion.

Now, you didn’t outright call me ableist, and maybe you didn’t even mean to imply it, but you indicated something was off about us sympathizing with Cersei, not Tyrion, by first saying we like a “type” of victim, and then the way you juxtaposed able-bodied and disabled here:

“cersei, the beautiful able-bodied woman, can wish rape and torture on the septas who abused her, and that's okay, that's forgivable, yes it was bad but according to her fans they can still enjoy her as a character and feel sympathy for her because the patriarchy has been so, so mean to her. but, according to those same fans, when the disabled man wishes rape on the sister who abused him...”

I wouldn’t even say I truly hate Tyrion (some fans do), but I certainly emotionally disengaged with him in ADWD, and it really feels to me that you’re saying that although you’re not a Tyrion fan either, the way we aren’t Tyrion fans is worse. Obviously I object to that. You know before I say anything else what I’m going to say, as you too are a Sansa fan, but I’m still gonna say it because I can’t let this sit in the ether unchallenged and I am baffled by the insinuation (that I feel you made, perhaps that was not your intention?)

It is only rational for a Sansa fan to read ASOIAF and think,

“Well, I don’t like that this little girl was forced into a marriage with an adult and he wants to have sex with her”

“I don’t like the fact that if Sansa were to have sex with him she’d likely get pregnant and then be killed but he hates her for not returning his sexual interest even though he knows she is way too young”

“I don’t like the fact that he resents her even though anyone would have a hard time coming to love a family member of someone who killed their family--he knows this--and yet!”

… you get the idea. If any other man was in that position we’d be pissed about it too. It’s normal for fans to view everything in terms of how it impacts their fav, and Tyrion is a specific threat to her. Not because he is particularly evil, but because marrying Sansa to a Lannister was an attempt to use her body against her family, her people, against herself. I’ve mentioned this many times before. Not having sex with Tyrion is a way to protect the North and her own life; therefore, Tyrion’s sexual interest in her is a threat. As a Sansa fan, I get angry.

It is part of the story that other characters are ableist and view Tyrion as far worse than he is (although Sansa recognizes that he treated her better than others), and it’s a dark kind of joke to have Lysa talking about how awful he is although we know that Tyrion intervened to protect Sansa, didn’t have sex with her because he knew she didn’t want to even when she was prepared to do so, and that it is Lysa herself who later tries to kill Sansa! Clearly, the formerly beautiful victim of the patriarchy is painted as far worse than the man their society vilifies. I’m definitely sensible to this. As a Sansa fan, I take that to heart.

And yet, I hardly think it means anything bad about a person that they say, “you know what, Tyrion wanted Sansa’s birthright, he wants to have sex with this little girl, I don’t like that.” It has nothing to do with ableism, everything to do with making a moral judgment on the very reasonable grounds of objecting to kid x adult relationships. Do we like this behavior or not? Obviously how he is treated by his family explains things from his perspective, and we can feel for the man who wants love, that moves me, but it does nothing to change what his wants mean for Sansa.

Also, maybe part of the reason why your ask seems totally disconnected from my experience with Sansa fans is that, I’m not in the Sansa fandom at large. I’m in a little corner of the Sansa fandom that dislikes adult men who lust after little girls. That means I don’t interact with BNFs (except that stumpy fucker, you know the one 😉) as they are or support those shippers, I have all those ship tags filtered, and I’m repulsed that the fandom has so normalized this behavior that objecting to it is what gets you ostracized, not the other way around. This isn’t Tyrion specific. I don’t like the Hound, Jorah, Rhaegar, Littlefinger, Drogo...there are too many to list, basically, I don’t like it when adult men have a sexual interest in little girls. Cersei was never presented as a sexual predator for Sansa, making her villainy easier for me to stomach. Maybe that is insufficient explanation for you, but I think it is very understandable why my reaction to her is distinct. And, I would ask, grant me (us) the fairness you want for yourself. Read our feelings with the same openness to understanding you deserve. Because, if you deserve it (and you do), we deserve it too.

If I can understand that you can’t emotionally engage with Cersei because of the awful things she does, you can understand why I can’t engage with Tyrion because of the dark point he reached when he, not only did the above, not only wished for Cersei to be raped, but said he wanted to rape her. "And the only reward I ask is I might be allowed to rape and kill my sister." (ADWD, Tyrion VII). I’ve said before this villain arc isn’t something I would have ever written, but Martin did, and fans are allowed to dislike villains based on their villainy. You agree with me there! And yet...there was an implication that your hatred of Cersei was pure, where my disinterest in Tyrion is flawed. I think that’s silly.

If we’re both willing to recognize that we can hate these characters for their actions, that we have reasons other than being crappy people for disliking specific villains, we can then take that understanding and recognize that we have different triggers, and we can simply disengage with each other’s content without fabricating reasons for why the other person feels what they feel when the reason is right there.

Of course, perhaps you didn’t mean to imply we’re ableist, maybe you meant to say that we don’t care about male victims, only the plight of ASOIAF women. I wrote this the other day too:

But something for people who share your concerns to remember is that, the discussion of how women are treated in Westeros interests a lot of us so we hone in on that more than specific acts of violence. It isn’t that we think their trauma is more important exactly, it’s part of a discussion overall that we’re interested in. The series is quite violent, most characters have suffered violence, but I think our corner likes to talk about the suffering of women, specifically, likely as an extension of our real life concerns. I don’t talk about the physical abuse Sansa suffered as much as I do her forced marriage. That’s objectively weird if I were interested in weighing suffering against suffering, and deciding who has the greatest trauma, but it’s a specific kind of terror for women to lose bodily autonomy, to be married off or forced to have children or forced to undergo an abortion on the whim of the man who happens to be in charge of you at the time. I’m guessing that’s why certain forms of abuse/trauma preoccupy us. We’re interested in a larger conversation that drives some of what we’re examining in ASOIAF. (link)

So...it isn’t that I don’t care about the male characters or the abuse they suffered, but the discussion about these victims fits into different themes and one theme is something I’m drawn to. My fandom has talked about how certain women have sexually abused men, so it isn’t the case that our interest has impacted our ability to recognize their wrongs or that we have neglected them altogether. And we have also talked about age differences and power imbalances in relationships in which a man is the victim. We’ve actually been called misogynistic because we’ve condemned certain female characters for how they abuse others, so truly, this isn’t something we’ve ignored! It’s just for some of us, Martin’s discussion of how women are used and abused by Westeros is of particular interest so we write about it more.

I realize I may have honed in on the specific word choice rather than grasping the whole picture. Perhaps your intention was to point to all these things about Cersei as a way of describing Cersei’s privilege? The privilege of certain villains in-world, and to suggest that we fans have unwittingly been suckered with some combo of superficiality, reverse sexism, and ableism? Well, if this is truly a matter of privilege, and that is actually what we’re looking to, then why must I sympathize with Dany rather than her victim? In comparison to Mirri, she is privileged. And if that is what is “right” according to the fandom, to prioritize Dany’s feelings over Mirri’s life, why mustn’t I do the same for Cersei? Trick question! I’m not doing that with Cersei. I do sympathize with Tyrion (her victim), so the real question is, why is it fine to do that with Dany?

I only mention Dany because of this:

"well, this person needs to understand that we're defensive of cersei because she gets so much hate from the fandom" and so i’ll say upfront that, one, i already know and understand that, and two, i still think it's a poor excuse. do you honestly think dany fans aren't defensive of her because of the very vocal, relentless hate she gets from some parts of the fandom?

And I take exception to this because we accept that Cersei is a villain and acknowledge her crimes. The fandom isn’t doing that for Dany and have conveniently labeled criticism of her as hate. To me, this is the same thing as labeling my statement that the Hound assaulted Sansa as hate. Sure, his fans don’t want me to, but he put a fucking knife to her throat and threatened to kill her. He did. So when show fans call Dany a monster, a mass murderer, they’re saying that because she is. D&D made her do that, made that comparison. And if we’re talkin strictly bookly, it isn’t hate to say,

“hey, when this white woman burned alive a rape victim whom her husband enslaved, idk fam, maybe that means she’s not a hero”

“ya know, we all say Martin is a pacifist, maybe he doesn’t want us to support Dany’s war campaign that leads to the rape/death of numerous people and is funded by slavery.”

Yes, of course people who don’t want to believe Martin will write Dany as a villain dislike us for saying this and call everything we say “hate,” but isn’t this us refusing to be blinded by her pain, blinded by her beauty, blinded by her privilege and saying, nah, this is bad. And, what is objectively worse, an author who says that shit is part of a hero’s journey, or an author who says, this is the descent into darkness? Is it actually hate to insist he didn’t intend us to defend her actions?

Confession, I sympathize with Dany too, but I don’t need to write about that because everyone does. What people don’t do is admit that burning people alive is bad, that overseeing the slaughter of children is bad, that making money off of slavery is bad...I mean, I could be missing the forest for the trees, but I just don’t buy that the rest of the fandom’s attitude is about treating these characters fairly based on any sort of objective standard.

It seems to me the issue is that how we (my part of the fandom) treat these characters is not based on how the fandom values them. It seems to me that the fandom is upset that some of us don’t fall in line and condone or condemn these characters the same way everyone else does. But seeing as I’m not claiming villains aren’t villains or redefining morality in order to insist certain actions are heroic, I’m not the one who doesn’t have a clear standard here. And I say that because I think you’re the anomaly by actually viewing Cersei and Tyrion as both villains and hating them both. When I was roaming the wilds it looked to me as if most of the fandom actively defends and sympathizers with villain behavior (without acknowledging it as such) except when it comes to Cersei. Hence the rise of people interested in saying, uh, maybe there’s humanity here too?

I’m not saying that’s your stance on Dany btw, I have no idea if that was your feeling about what we say regarding Dany or you were just quoting others, but making the comparison with what we do with Cersei and what they do with Dany doesn’t work for me. Cersei is a villain, I sympathize with her. Dany is a villain, I sympathize with her. I don’t like the fandom because they say Cersei is and don’t, and Dany isn’t and they do. It isn’t hate for me to say, oh, her dad wanted to turn KL into a funeral pyre to become a dragon and Dany ended book one walking into a funeral pyre to get dragons. Wonder if that means something. I know what that means. Neat! 🫣 If Dany fans are receiving sexist hate the way Sansa or Cersei or Cat fans do, I condemn that wholeheartedly, that’s disgusting. I’ve blocked hundreds of accounts and still get messages taunting me about Sansa getting raped. This fandom can be horrifying, but reasonable interpretations, even if the conclusion is something you disagree with, aren’t the same thing at all as harassing other fans or needless character hate.

On a personal note, I had a very strong negative reaction to this ask because while I do want people to be free to present alternative interpretations of characters and scenes, and I invited my previous anon to talk about other villains more sympathetically than some in our fandom, I did not intend to say it is open season on Sansa fans. I had to ignore the ask for a while because I realized, it probably wasn’t intended the way I took it, but even when I finally wrote a response, I had to delete it. I had to do that a few times. 😂 My point is, I did make an effort to actually engage here rather than dismiss your point out of hand. But I have to say, I feel so strongly about this issue, if I saw the Sansa fandom the way it sounds like you do, I wouldn’t be part of it. Perhaps I have done too good a job of curating my experience (something I’m dedicated to), but from my perspective, this is the corner of the fandom that does take the issue of abuse seriously, to the point that we will condemn fandom favorites (Dany, Tyrion too--he is a favorite. I still consider myself a show fan because I got into GoT first so I had to squint at this ask and wonder if this is a “valyrian scroll” side of the fandom issue because the GoT fandom adores him, even Sansa fans like him!) in order to fairly apply those standards. I can’t demand people like who I like or hate who I hate. (The character I hate the most is Rhaegar--loathe him.) All we can ask is some consistent standard, and my part of the Sansa fandom has it. Saying that likely makes me part of the problem in your eyes, but it is what I believe is true. In my eyes, it seems like you’re equating things that can’t really be compared. Our context and goals when talking about these characters are totally different.

If this is a conversation you think there is anything to gain from continuing, please DM me so you can explain more about you thoughts on the disparity between how we treat victims in the story, or, if you write a take on a scene or character, send me a link and I’ll share it. Even if I don’t agree with your conclusion, I assure you, I have tried to resist the urge to hurl insults at people online in the past, and your message certainly reemphasizes the need to continue to avoid doing that. It is easy to assume the worst, and this is an good reminder for us not to.

Again, I'm sorry you had a horrible experience with Sansa fans, and that it left you with such a negative impression of the fandom. I hope you’ve found a little circle of the fandom (as I have) that is safe, caring, and fun. <3

in reference to this post

#ask dot #long post #fandom critical #< tag to filter

46 notes · View notes

hellsbellschime · 2 years

Note

The show’s treatment of Laena will really come back to bite them if they aren’t careful with how they treat the Jace/Sara Snow stuff and Baela as a character as well. I guess there’s the fact that on the show J and B have just been berjrotjed and B had been living in Driftmark for 6 years so they probably don’t have any romantic feelings for each other but still give Baela and Rhaena more to do and treat them as actual characters instead of plot devices. There’s also the issue with Nettles and how it can go horribly wrong if the writers are heck’s who can’t write WOC properly plus there’s a Kraft the fandom being super racist towards her. I swear this fandom has normalised and fetishised incest in HOTD to such an extent they want potentially interesting characters like Netty and Alys cut because they get in the way of their incest fantasies. It didn’t used to be like that with Jaime/Cersei bit because it’s the Targs it’s idolised and all this talk of blood purity makes me 😬🤢

It's very, very, very weird to me how many people stan the Valyrian "blood purity" thing, like do you not understand GRRM is very clearly referencing Nazi ideology there? And yes, I am not looking forward to many of these things because while I get that they might have a limited time/budget to make the show happen, wars in the world of ice and fire are kind of inherently exclusionary towards women which translates to a lot of really shoddily realized characters in a show that is just trying to hit all of the most important Cliff's notes of the Dance of the Dragons.

#hotd for ts

5 notes · View notes

lyriumflames · 1 year

Text

dw lads I’m done now, final x-files thoughts!

Re: finale, I knew two things going in, there aren’t any more episodes and skinner dies. But to a certain extent neither of those things are true? last month chris carter announced they’re in the works for another season but it’ll basically be a spin-off cause no mulder and scully which I’m neutral about BUT what I’m NOT neutral about is that skinner’s “death” was ambiguous, they left it open in case there was another (at least proper) season.

now this may just be me living in denial but mitch said in an interview if they do continue it he would come back in a heartbeat THEREFORE in my LOGIC BRAIN he’ll survive it yes I am deciding that is canon.

I’m sad about Reyes. Ppl tried saying her death was ambiguous but I mean, she was shot square in the head. I’ll also assume it was some elaborate ploy that didn’t work out because otherwise talk about character assassination. Would also have liked a doggett update but apparently it was scheduling conflicts so I guess we’re left to wonder.

I actually don’t have any strong feelings about the final itself I’d assumed it was a big send-off finale but it wasn’t so I was just like “oh! alright then :)”

For the first time I did something very purposefully. I didn’t watch bloopers, behind the scenes, interviews, reddit discussions, tumblr tags I did NONE OF IT (okay apart from that one mitch interview) and it was the absolute best way to do it.

How do people feel about different seasons? different characters? different plotlines? when did people think it fell off? what happened between gillian and david? I have no idea and I like it. I have my own little bubble and it’s great. It’s a very big and long-standing fandom and I just know if I dug too deep (which I have done with a certain other supernatural show) all I’d do is end up hurting myself so I didn’t. The x-files is a fictional show full of fictional people and I know nothing of the outside world around it.

I also watched it wrong lol. By season 3 I just ended up getting really attached to skinner who is in maybe half the episodes and I was clawing my eyes out wanting more episodes with him in lmao, I don’t know what happened!

At first I was like “Oh it’s Samuel from spn! weird I didn’t know he had a bit part” then I noticed he was sticking around so I assumed he would die soon cause again my blueprint was basically spn and everyone around the protags die, then by season 3 I was like “wow it looks like you’re here to stay!” growing more and more fond of him and then I just fell off basically and was looking at the credits every episode to see if he’s in it (when he got a main title credit it was really annoying cause he wasn’t in any more episodes than usual, I just then didn’t know)

No clue if any others felt that way but I doubt it, but yeah there was just something about him man idk

oh also I just straight-up didn’t believe the lone gunmen died to the point where I still kinda don’t believe it even though they definitely did whoops

one thing I really really liked was the longevity of the villains. Once again blueprint was spn with the big bad every season, but nope! smoking man and Krycek (rip babygirl) are pretty much always under the surface, with things like the syndicate and other things also there.

I also seem to have an issue in that I rarely dislike villains, I watched all of GOT not realising that people HATED cersei, she was objectively a bad person but I didn’t dislike seeing her like I did, say, joffrey? So yeah I didn’t dislike smoking man (I did get more and more creeped out) or Krycek, I found them interesting. I didn’t even dislike Kersh! But that might just be bcause I’ve watched most of Grey’s so I’m just like lol it’s richard webber love you man

final thoughts, I will definitely watch it again because it was hard to keep sitting through the filler episodes (we need a better name than “filler”) because I just kept wondering about the storyline, so a second rewatch with the knowledge will be waaay more enjoyable, I had a good time!

#xposting

0 notes

cappymightwrite · 3 years

Note

What draws you to incest ?

*sighs* Ok, here we go. I'm a real card carrying Jonsa now aren't I?

Anon, listen. I know this is an anti question that gets bandied about a lot, aimed at provoking, etc, when we all know no Jonsa is out here being all you know what, it really is the incest, and the incest alone, that draws me in. I mean, come on now. Grow up.

If I was "drawn" to incest I'd be a fan of Cersei x Jaime, Lucrezia x Cesare, hell Oedipus x Jocasta etc... but I haven't displayed any interest in them now, have I? So, huh, it can't be that.

Frankly, it's a derivitive question that is really missing the mark. I'm not "drawn" to it, though yeah, it is an unavoidable element of Jonsa. The real question you should be asking though, is what draws GRRM to it? Because he obviously is drawn to it, specifically what is termed the "incest motif" in academic and literary scholarship. That is a far more worthwhile avenue of thinking and questioning, compared with asking me. Luckily for you though anon, I sort of anticipated getting this kind of question so had something in my drafts on standby...

You really don't have to look far, or that deeply, to be hit over the head by the connection between GRRM's literary influences and the incest motif. I mean, let's start with the big cheese himself, Tolkein:

Tolkein + Quenta Silmarillion

We know for definite that GRRM has been influenced by Tolkein, and in The Silmarillion you notably have a case of unintentional incest in Quenta Silmarillion, where Túrin Turambar, under the power of a curse, unwittingly murders his friend, as well as marries and impregnates his sister, Nienor Níniel, who herself had lost her memory due to an enchantment.

Mr Tolkein, "what draws you to incest?"

Old Norse + Völsunga saga

Tolkein, as a professor of Anglo-Saxon, was hugely influenced by Old English and Old Norse literature. The story of the ring Andvaranaut, told in Völsunga saga, is strongly thought to have been a key influence behind The Lord of the Rings. Also featured within this legendary saga is the relationship between the twins Signy and Sigmund — at one point in the saga, Signy tricks her brother into sleeping with her, which produces a son, Sinfjotli, of pure Völsung blood, raised with the singular purpose of enacting vengence.

Anonymous Norse saga writer, "what draws you to incest?"

Medieval Literature as a whole

A lot is made of how "true" to the storied past ASOIAF is, how reflective it is of medieval society (and earlier), its power structures, its ideals and martial values etc. ASOIAF, however, is not attempting historical accuracy, and should not be read as such. Yet it is clearly drawing from a version of the past, as depicted in medieval romances and pre-Christian mythology for instance, as well as dusty tomes on warfare strategy. As noted by Elizabeth Archibald in her article Incest in Medieval Literature and Society (1989):

Of course the Middle Ages inherited and retold a number of incest stories from the classical world. Through Statius they knew Oedipus, through Ovid they knew the stories of Canace, Byblis, Myrrha and Phaedra. All these stories end more or less tragically: the main characters either die or suffer metamorphosis. Medieval readers also knew the classical tradition of incest as a polemical accusation,* for instance the charges against Caligula and Nero. – p. 2

The word "polemic" is connected to controversy, to debate and dispute, therefore these classical texts were exploring the incest motif in order to create discussion on a controversial topic. In a way, your question of "what draws you to incest?" has a whiff of polemical accusation to it, but as I stated, you're missing the bigger question.

Moving back to the Middle Ages, however, it is interesting that we do see a trend of more incest stories appearing within new narratives between the 11th and 13th centuries, according to Archibald:

The texts I am thinking of include the legend of Judas, which makes him commit patricide and then incest before betraying Christ; the legend of Gregorius, product of sibling incest who marries his own mother, but after years of rigorous penance finally becomes a much respected pope; the legend of St Albanus, product of father-daughter incest, who marries his mother, does penance with both his parents but kills them when they relapse into sin, and after further penance dies a holy man; the exemplary stories about women who sleep with their sons, and bear children (whom they sometimes kill), but refuse to confess until the Virgin intervenes to save them; the legends of the incestuous begetting of Roland by Charlemagne and of Mordred by Arthur; and finally the Incestuous Father romances about calumniated wives, which resemble Chaucer's Man of Law's Tale except that the heroine's adventures begin when she runs away from home to escape her father's unwelcome advances. – p. 2

I mean... that last bit sounds eerily quite close to what we have going on with Petyr Baelish and Sansa Stark. But I digress. What I'm trying to say is that from a medieval and classical standpoint... GRRM is not unique in his exploration of the incest motif, far from it.

Sophocles, Ovid, Hartmann von Aue, Thomas Malory, etc., "what draws you to incest?"

Faulkner + The Sound and the Fury, and more!

Moving on to more modern influences though, when talking about the writing ethos at the heart of his work, GRRM has famously quoted William Faulker:

His mantra has always been William Faulkner’s comment in his Nobel prize acceptance speech, that only the “human heart in conflict with itself… is worth writing about”. [source]

I’ve never read any Faulker, so I did just a quick search on “Faulkner and incest” and I pulled up this article on JSTOR, called Faulkner and the Politics of Incest (1998). Apparently, Faulkner explores the incest motif in at least five novels, therefore it was enough of a distinctive theme in his work to warrant academic analysis. In this journal article, Karl F. Zender notes that:

[...] incest for Faulkner always remains tragic [...] – p. 746

Ah, we can see a bit of running theme here, can't we? But obviously, GRRM (one would hope) doesn’t just appreciate Faulkner’s writing for his extensive exploration of incest. This quote possibly sums up the potential artistic crossover between the two:

Beyond each level of achieved empathy in Faulkner's fiction stands a further level of exclusion and marginalization. – pp. 759–60

To me, the above parallels somewhat GRRM’s own interest in outcasts, in personal struggle (which incest also fits into):

I am attracted to bastards, cripples and broken things as is reflected in the book. Outcasts, second-class citizens for whatever reason. There’s more drama in characters like that, more to struggle with. [source]

Interestingly, however, this essay on Faulkner also connects his interest in the incest motif with the romantic poets, such as Percy Bysshe Shelley and Lord Byron:

As Peter Thorslev says in an important study of romantic representations of incest, " [p]arent-child incest is universally condemned in Romantic literature...; sibling incest, on the other hand, is invariably made sympathetic, is sometimes exonerated, and, in Byron's and Shelley's works, is definitely idealized.” – p. 741

Faulkner, "what draws you to incest?" ... I mean, that article gives some good explanations, actually.

Lord Byron, Manfred + The Bride of Abydos

Which brings us onto GRRM interest in the Romantics:

I was always intensely Romantic, even when I was too young to understand what that meant. But Romanticism has its dark side, as any Romantic soon discovers... which is where the melancholy comes in, I suppose. I don't know if this is a matter of artistic influences so much as it is of temperament. But there's always been something in a twilight that moves me, and a sunset speaks to me in a way that no sunrise ever has. [source]

I'm already in the process of writing a long meta about the influence of Lord Byron in ASOIAF, specifically examining this quote by GRRM:

The character I’m probably most like in real life is Samwell Tarly. Good old Sam. And the character I’d want to be? Well who wouldn’t want to be Jon Snow — the brooding, Byronic, romantic hero whom all the girls love. Theon [Greyjoy] is the one I’d fear becoming. Theon wants to be Jon Snow, but he can’t do it. He keeps making the wrong decisions. He keeps giving into his own selfish, worst impulses. [source]

Lord Byron, "what draws you to—", oh, um, right. Nevermind.

I'm not going to repeat myself here, but it's worth noting that there is a clear through line between GRRM and the Romantic writers, besides perhaps melancholic "temperament"... and it's incest.

But look, is choosing to explore the incest motif...well, a choice? Yeah, and an uncomfortable one at that, but it’s obvious that that is what GRRM is doing. I think it’s frankly a bit naive of some people to argue that GRRM would never do Jonsa because it’s pseudo-incest and therefore morally repugnant, no ifs, no buts. I’m sorry, as icky as it may be to our modern eyes, GRRM has set the president for it in his writing with the Targaryens and the Lannister twins.

The difference with them is that they knowingly commit incest, basing it in their own sense of exceptionalism, and there are/will be bad consequences — this arguably parallels the medieval narratives in which incest always ends badly, unless some kind of real penance is involved. For Jon and Sansa, however, the Jonsa argument is that they will choose not to commit incest, despite a confused attraction, and then will be rewarded in the narrative through the parentage reveal, a la Byron’s The Bride of Abydos. The Targaryens and Lannisters, in several ways excluding the incest (geez the amount of times I’ve written incest in this post), are foils for the Starks, and in particular, Jon and Sansa. Exploring the incest motif has been on the cards since the very beginning — just look at that infamous "original" outline — regardless of whether we personally consider that an interesting writing choice, or a morally inexcusable one.

Word of advice, or rather, warning... don't think you can catch me out with these kinds of questions. I have access to a university database, so if I feel like procrastinating my real academic work, I can and will pull out highly researched articles to school you, lmao.

But you know, thanks for the ask anyway, I guess.

#cappy's thoughts #I'm still on my break/hiatus #i just had some of this already written #jonsa #jon x sansa #anti bs #grrm and medieval literature #grrm and william faulkner #grrm and the romantics #grrm and tolkein #grrm and old norse literature #grrm and his literary influences #was this petty lmao?

181 notes · View notes

kellyvela · 3 years

Note

Carrie White is a tragic character and readers can sympathize with her even acknowledging her mass murdering people was wrong. While Dany is a straight up villain and have chances to improve but knowingly choose violence. Plus her self righteous and hypocrisy is annoying.

Oh I agree with the other anon when they say: "I think Carrie is much more sympathetic than Dany." Sorry I didn't mentioned.

But I don't think "Dany is a straight up villain". As George said she started as a scared little girl but suddenly she got an extremely dangerous magic power = the dragons.

If you combine these quotes:

When civilizations clash in your books, instead of Guns, Germs, and Steel, maybe it’s more like Dragons, Magic, and Steel (and also Germs).

There is magic in my universe, but it’s pretty low magic compared to other fantasies.

Dragons are the nuclear deterrent, and only Dany has them, which in some ways makes her the most powerful person in the world. But is that sufficient? These are the kind of issues I’m trying to explore. The United States right now has the ability to destroy the world with our nuclear arsenal, but that doesn’t mean we can achieve specific geopolitical goals.

Power is more subtle than that. You can have the power to destroy, but it doesn’t give you the power to reform, or improve, or build.

—GRRM - Vulture - 2011

* * *

“I mean battles and wars interest me too - and medieval feasts interest me. And you know I’m creating a whole world here and every facet of it. As I get to it I try to approach it as realistically as I can, but ultimately as I said before, it’s it’s the human heart in conflict with itself. It’s what makes Cersei Lannister the way she is, and is she capable of learning and changing? What drives Dany? With Dany I’m particularly looking at the… what effect great power has upon a person. She’s the mother of dragons, and she controls what is in effect the only three nuclear weapons in the entire world that I’ve created. What does it do to you when you control the only three nuclear weapons in the world and you can destroy entire cities or cultures if you choose to? Should you choose to, should you not choose to? These are the issues that fascinate me. I don’t necessarily claim to have answers to these. I think exploring the questions is far more interesting than just me giving an answer and saying to the reader, here’s the answer, here’s the truth. Now think about it for yourself, look at the dilemmas, look at the contradictions, look at the problems, and the unintended consequences. That’s what fascinates me.”

—“Interview exclusive de George R R Martin, l'auteur de Game Of Thrones” de -Le Mouv’- 2014 - [Transcription]

[...] Fantasy needs magic in it, but I try to control the magic very strictly. You can have too much magic in fantasy very easily, and then it overwhelms everything and you lose all sense of realism. And I try to keep the magic magical — something mysterious and dark and dangerous, and something never completely understood. I don’t want to go down the route of having magic schools and classes where, if you say these six words, something will reliably happen. Magic doesn’t work that way. Magic is playing with forces you don’t completely understand. And perhaps with beings or deities you don’t completely understand. It should have a sense of peril about it.

—GRRM - Meduza - 2017

* * *

GRRM: “People read fantasy to see the colours again,” he says. “We live our lives and I think there’s something in us that yearns for something more, more intense experiences. There are men and women out there who live their lives seeking those intense experiences, who go to the bottom of the sea and climb the highest mountains or get shot into space. Only a few people are privileged to live those experiences but I think all of us want to, somewhere in our heart of hearts we don’t want to live the lives of quiet desperation Thoreau spoke about, and fantasy allows us to do those things. Fantasy takes us to amazing places and shows us wonders, and that fulfils a need in the human heart.”

The Guardian: And the dragons?

GRRM: “Oh sure, dragons are cool too,” he chuckles. “But maybe not on our doorstep”.

—The Guardian - November 2018

* * *

Esquire: How will Fire & Blood deepen our understanding of Daenerys and her dragons?

GRRM: This is a book that Daenerys might actually benefit from reading, but she has no access to Archermaester Gyldayn’s crumbling manuscripts. So she’s operating on her own there. Maybe if she understood a few things more about dragons and her own history in Essos, things would have gone a little differently.

—Esquire - November 2018

* * *

Sitting down with news.com.au in New York City, Martin dropped dark hints to the suffering awaiting the war-torn world of Westeros as the battle for the Iron Throne reaches its peak.

“I have tried to make it explicit in the novels that the dragons are destructive forces, and Dany (Daenerys Targaryen) has found that out as she tried to rule the city of Meereen and be queen there.

‘THE POWER TO DESTROY’

“She has the power to destroy, she can wipe out entire cities, and we certainly see that in ‘Fire and Blood,’ we see the dragons wiping out entire armies, wiping out towns and cities, destroying them, but that doesn’t necessarily enable you to rule — it just enables you to destroy.”

—GRRM - Fox News Channel - November 2018

* * *

[…] The role of Daenerys is a difficult role, particularly in the pilot, because Daenerys begins as a frightened little girl. She’s thoroughly dominated by her brother, who humiliates her and sexually assaults her. He’s selling her to this fierce guy and she’s frightened but during the course of that comes into her own power. She suddenly grows from a girl to a woman and starts to realize that she does have power and authority. There’s a transformation that’s incredible the entire course of the show. You have to find an actress who can do both parts, who can be very convincing as the scared little girl in the beginning, but also very convincing as the “I’m gonna kick your ass and burn your city to cinders” woman that she becomes by the end. It’s challenging and it was a hard part to cast.

—GRRM - Tinderbox: HBO’s Ruthless Pursuit of New Frontiers by James Andrew Miller (NOVEMBER 23, 2021). Full quote here.

You get an old as time story: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

about this post

#anon asks #stephen king #carrie #carrie white #grrm #asoiaf #daenerys targaryen

27 notes · View notes

15step · 3 years

Text

Alongside the Hated Teenage Girl of the Week, Tyrion is one of the most volatile characters in terms of fandom opinion of him. Opinions seem to range from “he’s a realistic and troubled character who has done some heinous things, but in the end is a person struggling to get by in a world full of people who hate him for the way he was born” all the way to “Tyrion is a misogynistic monster who is going to Meereen to corrupt Dany and deserves everything he’s going to get”. You can probably guess which of these opinions I hold. Something I find interesting about this is that Tyrion is probably the most hated Lannister sibling - sure, most people don’t like Cersei for the things she’s done in the story, but they don’t hate her; they tend to enjoy her chapters and find her fun and interesting. With people that hate Tyrion, though, the hate is more a meta hatred rather than a dislike of his actions but an appreciation of his character. What is the most interesting to me is the lack of Jaime hate in a vast majority of people that despise Tyrion.

Jaime has done a lot of bad things: he fucked his twin sister, pushed Bran out of a tower, and threatened to murder a baby, just to name a few. And the thing is, these three things in particular are memes within the fandom. That’s not to say they necessarily shouldn’t be - I can admit the humorous absurdity in threatening to trebuchet a newborn. However, if Tyrion had said and done these things…the reaction would not be the same. If I were to phrase some of Tyrion’s crimes in the same absurd and funny way people phrase the things Jaime did, they might sound funny too! But people don’t joke about the things Tyrion did wrong; they take them really seriously, sometimes overstating them to make him out to be a monster he very much is not. Tyrion was 13 when he was forced to rape Tysha. Jaime was 16 when he stood by as Aerys burned Brandon Stark alive. Both of these people were minors in situations where they could do nothing but what they were told, and yet I’ve seen Tyrion vilified more times than I can count for the sexual assault he endured, and yet I’ve seen nothing but sympathy offered to Jaime for what he went through.

To put it plainly - Tyrion is vilified in the fandom because of his dwarfism and physical appearance. He’s criticized so much more than other characters for comparatively similar offenses and it’s not a coincidence. I mean, people woobify Jaime to the point where his fanon character is completely unrecognizable, even though his and Tyrion’s characters are actually at a pretty similar midway point in their arcs. Not shockingly, a conventionally attractive character receives more sympathy than one who is disabled and considered to be ugly. Even Jaime’s disability gets more sympathy than Tyrion’s! The difference in the ways these two characters are treated despite their similarities is so pronounced and disappointing.

To clarify - it’s completely okay to dislike Tyrion as a character. He’s done some bad shit! But if you dislike him but love characters who have done similarly awful thing, you really need to think about why you like those characters but hate Tyrion.

#i love tyrion #gonna write a second tyrion-related meta and a jaime one soon too #i’ve been having Thoughts lol #i normally try to avoid that #asoiaf #valyrianscrolls #tyrion lannister #asoiaf meta #meta

142 notes · View notes

iheartbookbran · 3 years

Note

I think the whole Daenerys burning KL thing has a lot less to do with her than it does several other plot threads and themes in the story. Unfortunately I think GRRM is going to use Daenerys to confront the concept of paying for your ancestors crimes, her father put that wildfire there, her legacy (as a Targaryen, not as Daenerys herself) is literally built on fire and blood. The Targaryens might have united the 7 Kingdoms, but they did so with a lot of unnecessary bloodshed, and there was almost never a time in their history of reigning where there wasn't war. Daenerys as an individual is not responsible for any of this, and I wholeheartedly agree with you that she doesn't need to be taught a lesson about abuse of power, but unfortunately I think GRRM is going in this direction anyways, because he's going to use her as a climax for the entire Targaryen reign. It's a cruel sort of irony, that the place her ancestors built from the ground up will be the cause of her "downfall" and probably turn her into a morally ambiguous historical figure in the future, regardless of what she does to save Westeros from the others.

And there's the fact that the wildfire beneath KL is a huge chekov's gun. Someone *has* to ignite it, and if it's not Daenerys, I'm not entirely sure who it could be. Cersei is definitely a contender, but seeing as she doesn't know about the wildfire yet, it's a little bit of a reach. I think it would be a very tragic way to wrap up Daenery's storyline, but it seems like that's the direction GRRM is headed in :/

Hey there! Ok, a little disclaimer before I start: today I got my first covid vaccine shot and I’m a little dizzy as a result so I might not make much sense right now. Sorry in advance.

While I completely get the whole ‘paying for the crimes of your ancestors’ concept you’re bringing up, and that’s a theme GRRM is definitely fond of exploring, to me it would be like holding Dany at completely different standards than the rest of the characters. Because it’s one thing for Dany to be in conflict with her father’s legacy—which tbh I would say she already kinda is?—and another entirely to punish Dany for every bad thing the Targaryens ever did because Monarchies=Bad and therefore Targaryens=Bad. I mean we wouldn’t be getting anything similar from the other major POVs. For example, I don’t believe a house like that of the Starks could rule for literally thousands of years without a little blood in their hands, it’s just GRRM doesn’t focus as much on them (and they didn’t have dragons, but I already explained why I believe Dany doesn’t need a lesson on how her dragons can be dangerous in the first place).

I think when it comes to fathers and legacies characters like Dany, Tyrion and Jon are very similar because a part of their stories is about showcasing how they’re not like their fathers. Tyrion has to confront his father… and kill him so he can move on with his life, which in turn kickstarts the downfall of House Lannister, but that was something Tyrion was alive to see, and to question and to know that it wasn’t as glorious as his family wanted to believe it was, but instead shallow and rotten; Dany on the other hand never got to see her family in full power and reap the benefits of that; in fact, she was actively a target for most of her childhood because of her name. With Jon I think he will be confronted with the legacies of his biological Father (Rhaegar) and his adopted one (Ned), and try and decide which one he wants to honor, or that maybe he ought to forge his own path entirely.

Now with Dany, again she’s already starting to question Viserys’ narrative about their father, we see it in her conversations with Ser Barristan and her fears of ‘turning mad’ like Aerys (and tbh that’s all the reasons I need to know why she wouldn’t go mad) for me not to believe she’s going to try to distance herself from what her father represented. The destruction of KL and the knowledge of her father’s role in it would just solidify that in Dany’s head plus the internal emotional conflict that would come with it but without the extra steps of the author needlessly lecturing Dany (and us) about the dangers of unchecked power or that a throne is not all there is in life; I would argue Dany already knows that. She doesn’t need a reason or an excuse to be a rescuer, she already is one, as Tyrion (GRRM) said for several paragraphs in ADWD.

The part that you mention about the destruction of KL giving Dany bad PR? I believe she already has it lmao. Just remember how she was talked about during Quentyn and Tyrion’s POVs, while a lot of people love her, many others hate her guts to a hilarious degree and demonize her for what she’s done to the poor defenseless slave masters. Such are the woes of women who rise to power and then go like “hey… maybe owning people is wrong?” but I digress. As you said, there are currently many contenders for the honor of getting to burn KL, and who knows, maybe it will be a group effort! I suspect the dragons will be involved one way or another, but the stolen ones (idk if Euron will steal more than one dragon) so adding Dany to the mix wouldn’t make much sense except to make way for her showdown with Aegon VI, that at this point honestly I’m not that interested in. I think Dany has more important stuff going on for her. Like, there’s a lot of confrontations I would like to happen that I believe the narrative as it currently stands doesn’t have much room to allow to breathe properly, like Jaime/Tyrion, Cercei/Tyrion, Arianne/her family in general. At the end of the day those dragons are her dragons, her children, and she will blame herself strongly for whatever they do (and others will too, enthusiastically, I’m sure), just remember how much guilt she feels over Drogon killing that little girl, and no one was controlling him then, not even Dany.

So basically what I was trying to convey during this mess of a response is that I’m not saying Daenerys has no buisness in the KL conflict, but rather that making her the one responsible for its destruction would feel way too contrived for me, it would require the plot to stay on hold for god knows how long until she’s done with her business in Essos and it would do absolutely nothing for her character or development but rather serve as some kind of twisted double-standard in which only Dany has to atone for the sins of her ancestors, as if living exiled and destitude all her life wasn’t enough.

#again sorry for my rambling and not making any sense i swear i’m dying a little here and my arm hurts like hell #Anonymous #ask #ask pam #daenerys targaryen #stormborn #asoiaf #asoiaf meta #a song of ice and fire #valyrianscrolls #pro daenerys #meta #my meta

47 notes · View notes

borisbubbles · 3 years

Text

Character analysis: Vivienne de Fer (Dragon Age Inquisition)

So, if you’ve wondered where I popped off to the past two months or so, I’m going to give you an answer - I finally bought Dragon Age Inquisition (legit on my gaming wishlist since its 2014 release) and I’ve been obsessed with it ever since.

The main draw to this game however, isn’t so much the gameplay (if you want a game that feels similar but has better gameplay - Assassin’s Creed Odyssey is what you’d want instead), but the storytelling and particularly the character development are top notch. All nine companions are fascinating and fleshed out in such a realistic manner I’m still gasping in awe on my fifth playthrough. Thus, a post on it is in order. It’s a bit different from my usual content, but don’t let that discourage you - clearing my head from Dragon Age will allow me to let Eurovision back in and continue my unfinished 2020 ranking. In this post, I will be analyzing one of DAI’s most interesting characters - none other than Madame de Fer herself, Vivienne. Now, I’m under the impression that this is a rather unpopular opinion but I absolutely love Vivienne. And no, I won’t apologize for it. As a Templar-thumping elitist with a icy, sardonic demeanor the sheer ‘Idea Of A Vivienne’ is meant to make your head spin. Dragon Age has always been a franchise in which mages are a socially surpressed group and to be confronted with a socially confident enchantress who likes Templars and seemingly supports the social shunning out of her own ambition is the walking embodiment of flippancy.

and yet, I feel a lot of sympathy for Vivienne.

Yes, she’s a bitch. She knows she’s one and she’s a-ok with it. I won’t argue with that. Sadly, the “Vivienne is a bitch” rhetoric also drastically sells her short. Vivienne is highly complex and her real personality is as tragic as it is twisted.

Madame de Fer

So let’s start with what we are shown on the surface. Vivienne is a high-ranking courtier from an empire notable for its deadly, acid-laced political game. She seemingly joins the Inquisition for personal gain, to acrue reputation and power, and eventually be elected Divine (= female pope) at the end of the game. She presents herself as a despicable blend of Real Housewife, Disney Villain, and Tory Politician, all rolled into one ball of sickening, unctuous smarm. Worse, the Inquisitor has no way to rebuke Vivienne’s absurd policies and ideas. You can’t argue with her, convince her to listen to your differing viewpoints or even kick her out the Inquisition. She has a way with words where she can twist arguments around in such a fashion that she lands on top and makes the other person look like the irrational party.

“Thus speaks the Inquisitor who has made so many mature and level-headed choices so far. Such as releasion malcontents upon the population without safeguards to protect them should they turn into abominations. Very wise. I rearranged some furniture. Lives aren’t thrown into jeopardy by my actions. Perhaps a little perspective is needed.”

She’s Cersei Lannister on creatine, Dolores Umbridge on motherfucking roids. If you look at merely the surface, then yes, Vivienne looks like the worst person ever created. I love a good anti-villainess however, and she’s definitely one.

Yet, she never actually does anything ‘evil’? Yes, she is ‘a tyrant’ as a Divine, but 1) the person saying this is Cassandra, whose dislike for mage freedom is only matched by her dislike of being sidelined 2) Divine Vivienne isn’t bad to mages either? (hold that thought, I’ll get to it). She never actually sabotages the Inquisition, no matter how low her approval with the Inquisitor gets. She never attempts to stop them, no matter how annoyed she is. She’s one of the most brutally honest companions in the cast, in fact. (It always surprises me people call her a ‘hypocrite’ - you keep using that word and it doesn’t mean what you think it means.) The ‘worst’ display of character is when she attempts to break up Sera and the Inquisitor and even then - are we going to pretend Sera isn’t a toxic, controlling girlfriend with a huge chip on her shoulder? I love Sera, but come on.

Vivienne is a character where the storytelling rule of Show, Don’t Tell is of vital importance. The Orlesian empire is an empire built around posturing and reputation. Nobody really shows their true motivations or character, and instead builds a public façade. It’s like how the Hanar (the Jellyfish people) in Mass Effect have a Public name they use in day-to-day life, and a Personal Name for their loved-ones and inner circle. Vivienne’s ‘Public Visage’ is that of Madame de Fer - this is the Vivienne who openly relishes in power, publicly humiliates grasping anklebiters with passive-aggressive retorts, the woman who is feared and loathed by all of Orlais, and this is the Face you see for most of the game.

The real beauty of Vivienne’s character and the reason why I love her as much as I do (which is to say - a LOT) are the few moments when - what’s the phrase DigitalSpy love so much - Her Mask Slips, and you get a glimpse of the real woman underneath the hennin.

This is the Vivienne who stands by you during the Siege of Haven and approves of you when you save the villagers from Corypheus’s horde.

This is the Vivienne who comforts you when you lament the losses you suffered.

This is the Vivienne who admires you for setting an example as a mage for the rest of Thedas.

This is the Vivienne who worries about Cole’s well-being during his personal quest, momentarily forgetting who or what he is.

This is the Vivienne who, when her approval for the Inquisitor reaches rock bottom, desperately reminds him of the suffering mages go through on a day-to-day basis because of the fear and hatred non-mages are bred to feel towards them and how this can spiral into more bloodshed without safeguards.

This is the Vivienne who shows how deep her affection for Bastien de Ghislain truly is, by bringing you along during his dying moments. I love this scene btw. This is the only moment in the entire game where Vivienne is actually herself in the presence of the Inquisitor - needless to say, I consider anyone who deliberately spikes her potion a motherfucking psychopath ^_^)

“There is nothing here now” fuck I *almost* cried at Vivienne, get out of my head BioWare, this is WRONG -- people who delude themselves this is an irredeemable character.

So, who is Vivienne really?

Understanding Vivienne requires recognizing that the mask and the real woman aren’t the same person. I think her relationship with Dorian is the prime example of this. I love the Vivienne/Dorian banter train, obviously - an unstoppable force of sass colliding with an unmovable wall of smarm is nothing short of a spectacle. However, there’s more to it than their highly entertaining snipes. As the incredibly gifted son of a magister, Dorian represents everything Vivienne should despise, and should be a natural enemy to her. And yet, she doesn’t and he isn’t.. Their gilded japes at each other are nothing more than verbal sparring, not dissimilar to how Krem and Iron Bull call each other names when they beat each other with sticks. In what I think is one of the most brilliantly written interactions between characters in DAI, I present Vivienne’s reaction when the Inquisitor enters a romance with Dorian:

Vivienne: I received a letter the other day, Dorian. Dorian: Truly? It's nice to know you have friends. 🙄 Vivienne: It was from an acquaintance in Tevinter expressing his shock at the disturbing rumors about your... relationship with the Inquisitor. Dorian: Rumors you were only too happy to verify, I assume. 🙃 Vivienne: I informed him the only disturbing thing in evidence was his penmanship. 🙂 Dorian: ...Oh. Thank you. 😳 Vivienne: I am not so quick to judge, darling. See that you give me no reason to feel otherwise.

Madame de Fer can never be seen directly expressing approval to a relationship between the Herald of Andraste and an ‘Evil’ Tevinter ’Magister’. By this subtle, subtle conversation, Vivienne indirectly tells Dorian that she considers him a good match for the Inquisitor and approves of the romance. It’s one of those reasons why I could never truly dislike Vivienne - between the layers of elegant poison lies a somewhat decent woman who never loses sight of the bigger picture. Not a good person maybe, but not one without some redeeming qualities.

The crux of Vivienne’s personality is that she, like all DAI companions, is a social outcast. She’s a mage in a fantasy setting where mages are psionically linked to demons, and grew up in a country where the majority religion has openly advocated the shunning and leashing of mages (’Magic exists to serve man’ - the Chantry is so, so vile in this game.). Vivienne’s “gift” was discovered so early in her life that she can barely remember her parents. Vivienne grew up in a squalid boarding school, learning from a young age that she’s dangerous and her talents need to be tamed and curbed. She is also terrified of demons, as her banters with Cole point out:

Cole: You're afraid. You don't have to be. Vivienne: My dear Inquisitor, please restrain your pet demon. I do not want it addressing me. Inquisitor: He's not doing any harm, Vivienne. Vivienne: It's a demon, darling. All it can do is harm. Cole: Everything bright, roar of anger as the demon rears. No, I will not fall. No one will control me ever again. Cole: Flash of white as the world comes back. Shaking, hollow, Harrowed, but smiling at templars to show them I'm me. Cole: I am not like that. I can protect you. If Templars come for you, I will kill them. Vivienne: Delightful. 😑

Vivienne’s Harrowing is implied to have been such a traumatizing event to her that she’s developed a pavlovian fear of demons ever since. (Hence her hostility towards Cole.). Vivienne is fully aware of the inherent dangers of magic, and projects this onto all other mages.

Besides, given how Dragon Age has a history with mages doing all sorts of fucked up shit, ranging from blood magic, murder, demonic possession and actual terrorism (yes, *ElthinaBITCH* had it coming, but let’s not pretend like Anders/Justice was anything other than a terrorist), Vivienne’s policies of controlled monitoring and vigilance are actually significantly more sensible than the options of ‘unconditionally freeing every mage all over Thedas’ and ‘reverting back to the status quo before the rebellion’. They’re flawed policies, obviously. When Vivienne says “mages” she pictures faceless silhouettes foremost and not herself. Regardless, unlike Cassandra and Leliana, Vivienne is aware of the fear others harbour for her kind, and how hard it is to overcome such perceptions.

Additionally, Vivienne’s a foreigner. She is an ethnic Rivaini, a culture associated with smugglers and pirates (Isabela from DAO and DA2 is half-Rivaini). This adds an additional social stigma, again pointed out by Cole:

Cole: Stepping into the parlor, hem of my gown snagged, no, adjust before I go in, must look perfect. Vivienne: My dear, your pet is speaking again. Do silence it. Cole: Voices inside. Marquis Alphonse. Cole: "I do hope Duke Bastien puts out the lights before he touches her. But then, she must disappear in the dark." Cole: Gown tight between my fingers, cold all over. Unacceptable. Wheels turn, strings pull. Cole: He hurt you. You left a letter, let out a lie so he would do something foolish against the Inquisition. A trap. Vivienne: Inquisitor, as your demon lacks manners, perhaps you could get Solas to train it.

This is the only palpable example of the casual racism Vivienne has to endure on a daily basis - Marquis Alphonse is a stupid, bigoted pillowhead who sucks at The Game, but remember - Vivienne only kills him if the Inquisitor decides to be a butthurt thug. She is aware that for every Alphonse, there are dozens of greasy sycophants who think exactly like he does, and will keep it under wraps just to remain in her good graces.

Finally, there’s the social position Vivienne manufactured for herself, which is the weak point towards her character imo. Remember, this woman is a commoner by birth. She doesn’t even have a surname. Through apparently sheer dumb luck (or satanic intervention) she basically fell into the position of Personal Mage to the Duke of Ghislain. Regardless, ‘Personal mages’ were the rage in Orlesian nobility, and the prestigious families owned by them like one may own a pet or personal property. By somehow becoming Bastien de Ghislain’s mistress and using his influence, "Madame de Fer” liberated herself from all the social stigmata which should have pinned her down into a lowly courtier rank and turned the largely ceremonial office of “Court Enchanter” into a position of respect and power. This is huge move towards mage emancipation by the way, in a society where, again, Mages are feared and shunned and are constantly bullied, emasculated and taught to hate their talents. Vivienne is a shining example of what mages can become at the height of their power. Power she has, mind you, never actually abused before her Divine election. Vivienne’s actions will forever be under scrutiny not because of who she is, but because of what she is. The Grand Game can spit her out at any moment, which will likely result in her death.

Inquisitor: “You seem to be enjoying yourself, Vivienne?” Vivienne: “It’s The Game, darling. If I didn’t enjoy it, I’d be dead by now.”

Whether Vivienne was using Bastien for her own gain or whether she truly loved him isn’t a case of or/or. It’s a case of and/and. The perception that she was using Bastien makes Vivienne more fearsome and improves her position in the Grand Game, but deep down, I have no doubts truly loved him. Remember, Vivienne’s position at the Orlesian court was secure. She had nothing to gain by saving Bastien’s life, but she attempted to anyway. That Bastien’s sister is a High Cleric doesn’t matter - Vivienne can be elected Divine regardless of her personal quest’s resolution. She loved him, period.

No, I don’t think Vivienne is a good person. She treats those she deems beneath her poorly, like Sera, Solas, Cole and Blackwall (characters I like less than Vivienne), which I think is the #1 indicator for a Bad Personality. But I don’t think she qualifies as ‘Evil’ either and I refuse to dismiss the beautiful layering of her character. I genuinely believe Vivienne joined the Inquisition not just for her personal gain, but also out of idealism, similar to Dorian (again, Cole is 100% correct in pointing out the similarities between Dorian’s and Vivienne’s motivations for joining, as discomforting it is to her).

In her mind, Vivienne sees herself as the only person who can emancipate the mages without bloodshed - her personal accomplishments at the Orlesian court speak for themselves. Vivienne isn’t opposed to mage freedom - she worries for the consequences of radical change, as she believes Orlesian society unprepared for the consequences. Hence why she’s perfectly fine with a Divine Cassandra. Hence why her fellow mages immediately elect her Grand Enchanter of the new Circle.

Hence why Vivienne is so terrified by the Inquisitor’s actions if her disapproval gets too low. The Inquisitor has the power to completely destroy everything she has built and fought for during her lifetime. Remember: Vivienne’s biggest fear is irrelevance - there’s no greater irrelevance than having your life achievements reverse-engineered by the accidental stumbling of some upstart nobody. This is the real reason why she joins, risks her life and gets her hands dirty - the only person whose competence Vivienne trusts, is Vivienne’s own.

Even as Divine Victoria, I’d say she’s not bad, at all actually. Vivienne has the trappings of an an Enlightened Despot, maintaining full control, while simultaneously granting mages more responsibility and freedom, slowly laying the foundations to make mages more accepted and less persecuted in southern Thedas. Given that Ferelden is a feudal fiefdom and Orlais is an absolute monarchy, this is a fucking improvement are you kidding me. (Wait did he just imply Vivienne is secretly the best Divine - hmm, probably not because Cass/Leliana have better epilogues - but realistically speaking, yes, Viv should be the best Divine and it’s bullshit that the story disagrees.)

Underneath the countless layers of smarm, frost and seeming callousness, lies a fiercely intelligent and brave woman, whose ideals have been twisted into perversion by the cruel, ungrateful world around her. Envy her for her ability to control her destiny, but know that envy is what it is.

The flaw in Vivienne’s character isn’t so much the ‘tyranny’ or the ‘bitchiness’ or the 'smarm’. Her flaw is her false belief that she is what the mages need the most. Her belief that her competence gives her the prerogative to serve the unwashed mage masses... by ruling over them. For all intents and purposes, Vivienne is an Orlesian Magister and this will forever be the brilliant tragedy of her character. She was created by a corrupt institution that should, by all accounts fear and loathe her but instead embraced her. It’s that delirious irony that makes Vivienne de Fer one of the best fictional characters in RPG history. the next post will be Eurovision-related. :-)

#RPG #Dragon Age #Dragon Age Inquisition #Vivienne #Vivienne de Fer #Madame de Fer #DAI #Dragon Age 3 #BioWare

177 notes · View notes

atopvisenyashill · 5 months

Note

I don’t get how you’re a Rhaenyra fan but a Dany hater 🤨 like Rhaenyra committed a lot of atrocities in the end.

I don’t hate Dany! She’s smart, she’s funny, she’s got some of the best magical scenes in the series - she’s got some of the best scenes in the series, period, her last dragon fever dream in agot is like top 10 for me easy - and she’s a character that is conceptually similar to like, theon or ned or cersei in that she is really firmly rooted and informed by her past traumas, and I love characters like that from a writing standpoint. I have definitely talked more negatively about her bc it’s basically impossible to not be constantly inundated with takes i feel are just the most vapid or deranged or whatever takes in the world, but you can say that for anyone who feels anything at all about dany bc she is a very polarizing character! i think some of her narrative is frustratingly written, i do not mesh well with a large section of her fanbase, and i actively hate her show counterpart, but show dany is a vastly different character than book dany is (i mean just age alone, like with robb and jon, some of your sympathy evaporates bc they are too damn old to be acting this stupid). ultimately, a lot of the "hate" people think i feel for her is directed at what i feel are stupid opinions on her character or her show counter part's place in pop culture, or just like, normal analysis and critique that i do of every character in this series.

i will acknowledge that i tend to describe myself as "pro stark, pro blacks, pro smallfolk" so people know the general gist of what they're signing up for when they start interacting with me, but that is such a simple way of diluting all of my feelings for all of these characters. like "pro stark" in the sense that they are the most rational of the leaders we get in the main series, and have a connection to the land, people, and culture that is important, but i've pointed out plenty of times that robb's war is harmful to the people of the riverlands, regardless of whether he's justified or not, and i've been posting about how ned and cat fail to properly prepare their children (and the north in general) for Real World Politics, to the detriment of their kids. "pro stark" in the sense that i thought show dany wasn't just deranged from season 1 she was also wildly unlikable and nauseatingly stupid, you could see her "dark dany" turn coming from a mile away because these were not subtle writers interested in exploring why dany would decide "dragons plant no trees" and instead focused on her looking hot while she set shit on fire (same way they were less interested in looking at why jon failed as lord commander and had him be the action hero fighting at hardhome). definitely most of my aggravation at "dany" is at the show version, and while i do get why people feel that if you're a proponent of the "dark dany" theory that you're "anti" dany, but I am not anti book dany! i just think like rickon stark, shireen baratheon, jojen reed, aegon vi, etc she is very much doomed to die a very tragic death.

and i do not like characters based on how little atrocities they commit lmao, like, if i were to list my top 10 favorites, probably half of them have committed some extreme war crime. theon is a rapist! jaime is a shitty ass partner to cersei, a deadbeat dad despite living in the same building as his kids, and a failed child murderer! bran is mind raping hodor, understands on some level that what he's doing is morally repugnant, and keeps doing it anyway! pretty much every targaryen i like has committed some sex crime heinous enough to get them life + 25!! bobby b raised joffrey!!! i know i facetiously say shit like "rhaenyra did nothing wrong" but i'm well aware she's out here torturing people, same as like 75% of the characters we interact with in the whole series. so "rhaenyra commits atrocities" or "dany commits atrocities" is just not how i look at these characters (and not to get into stan wars here, but good lord, "rhaenyra commits atrocities" she is not the only or even the worst person in the dance! like 85% of these people suck and the ones who don't - which is limited to like, helaena, jace, nettles, and addam almost exclusively - either die or disappear because That's The Point. also, i was raised SDA alright, you gotta be a really compelling character for me to get past being super catholic, it's in my dna to be a spiteful hater of catholics!! catelyn stark is my one exception to this rule folks!!!!).

as to why i like rhaenyra - for one thing, saying that emma d'arcy is a better actor than emilia clarke is like saying cillian murphy is better than bradley cooper. they are just not on the same level lol. i definitely have my critiques of show!rhaenyra's writing but i also think she's miles better written than show!dany and her story is also more interesting because her writing is much less nonsensical. for another, i think book rhaenyra and book dany are wildly similar characters (for a reason!) meant to be in conversation with each other, and i very much enjoy what that conversation is saying about power, nobility, gender, sex, war, and identity. on a more technical level, while fire and blood is a mess writing and world building wise, the one thing it does better than the essos chapters (because it doesn't take place in essos, it takes place in westeros, and george struggles much less fleshing out "western poc" than he does "eastern poc" ya know) is that rhaenyra is not the only insight we get into the conflict. the people she loves, the people she rules, the people she harms, they all have a pov and a voice in a way that missandei, irri, jhiqui, rakharo, jhogo, grey worm, on and on, do not, the way that basically every single character that isn't westerosi except mmd (who was killed in book one) is not afforded. it's just a lot easier (as of right now) to talk about rhaenyra as a character because we have her beginning, middle, and end and the povs of people who hated her vs dany, we have the beginning and middle, a lot of arguing over what her end will be, and no one in the narrative as of yet who has even the barest criticism of her decisions besides cardboard cut out villainous slavers.

so like...no i do not hate dany, and i don't feel it's necessary to asterisk every post about rhaenyra with "i know putting a hit out on nettles and addam, locking the smallfolk into KL without easing their burdens of the war, positing herself as an exception to male line primogeniture instead of pushing for absolute primogeniture, and using torture on tyland and vaemond's family was fucked up, i acknowledge that she's flawed" when i talk about her, nor do i feel the need to defend my position on dany on the off chance one of her more annoying stans finds my posts and decides i hate women because i said i didn't like her sexual relationship with irri.

#asks #anons #anti daenerys targaryen #i tag 'anti x' so people can filter the posts out. like i have 'anti x' tags blocked bc some of the opinions of my moots annoy me alkjdfs #but i otherwise love and cherish those moots ya know!! with very few exceptions i don't actually hate any of the characters.#they're deep! they're well written! they feel very real! it's not 'anti' to think a character who burns people alive is a villain tho!!#grrm critical #fire and blood critical #f&b critical #i can't remember what i tag that as #i hope this rant makes sense #anti game of thrones

14 notes · View notes

aboveallarescuer · 3 years

Note

I know you've gotten anons about the YMBQ prophecy recently but I was wondering in what context could it be obvious for the reader that Daenerys is the YMBQ if Cersei is most likely to die or leave KL once Aegon arrives and not Daenerys. Even if Daenerys takes KL later on wouldn't he technically be the one to take all she holds dear (her power as regent)?

First of all, Anon, I think it’s interesting that you say that Young Griff (rather than Arianne) would take all that Cersei holds dear in this hypothetical scenario (that most people assume will come to pass). asoiaf tumblr fandom loved (loves?) to take for granted that Arianne would be YMBQ (after all, it was/is taken for granted that she would marry Young Griff and become his queen consort) years ago. At the same time, though, I’m not sure if you’re implying that Young Griff might actually be the one to fulfill the YMB(Q) prophecy in this ask. I actually saw this theory before. So I’m going to make counterarguments to this theory first and then address your question about how and when Dany might be revealed as the YMBQ (and if that’s what you were specifically looking for, just skip to the end, though you might be disappointed by the fact that I'm not really providing definitive answers because I have a lot of doubts myself).

In a way, it makes more sense for Young Griff to fulfill the prophecy rather than Arianne. Let’s remember what Cersei wants the most, which is shown in the beginning of her very first chapter:

She dreamt she sat the Iron Throne, high above them all. (AFFC Cersei I)

Unfortunately for Cersei, she can’t ever actually sit the Iron Throne, which is pointed out several times:

Cersei shifted in her seat as he went on, wondering how long she must endure his hectoring. Behind her loomed the Iron Throne, its barbs and blades throwing twisted shadows across the floor. Only the king or his Hand could sit upon the throne itself. Cersei sat by its foot, in a seat of gilded wood piled with crimson cushions. (AFFC Cersei V)

Seated on her gold-and-crimson high seat beneath the Iron Throne, Cersei could feel a growing tightness in her neck. (AFFC Cersei VII)

Cersei sat beneath the Iron Throne, clad in green silk and golden lace. (AFFC Cersei X)

As the first quote states, only the king or the Hand can sit the Iron Throne, which is what Cersei wants the most, since, to her, it symbolizes almost unlimited power ("high above them all"). Indeed, I would argue that what Cersei holds dear is the chance to reign supreme (“The rule was hers; Cersei did not mean to give it up until Tommen came of age. [...] If Margaery Tyrell thinks to cheat me of my hour in the sun, she had bloody well think again.”), not “her power as regent” (as you put it), which is limited by nature. After all, the king’s wife and mother can’t sit the Iron Throne. This means three things to me:

Queen consorts like Margaery or Arianne (if she actually marries Young Griff, which is far from certain) can’t take all that Cersei holds dear.

Queens claiming power in their own right but who have no claim to the Iron Throne are excluded too. In other words, Asha or QitN!Sansa (another fan theory that’s far from certain and that’s accepted as future canon) can’t take all that Cersei holds dear.

Only a she-king (that is, a queen regnant) with a claim to the Iron Throne can take all that Cersei holds dear - that’s Dany.

But then, we have Young Griff. He is a king with a claim to the Iron Throne, so he could, in theory, take what Cersei holds dear and fulfill the prophecy. However, I find that very unlikely for a number of reasons:

GRRM doesn’t highlight men’s physical appearances or objectify them in the same way that he does with women, as a lot of people have already criticized him for. He makes a point of mentioning women’s accomplishments along with overpraise for their physical appearances (though one might be generous and chalk that up to social commentary about how their society objectifies women instead of giving them their due praise for what they do). He encourages his fans to speculate about who is the YMB(Q) and pit his female characters against each other based on their physical appearances (e.g., people have criticized how Sansa stans often mention the number of times the word “beautiful” appears in Sansa’s chapters to back up their belief that she’s the YMB(Q), but the way GRRM himself wrote the prophecy lends itself to this sort of analysis) because he uses certain tropes uncritically. He portrays fat women negatively in comparison to thin women (see: Cersei (who’s said to be gaining weight throughout AFFC as she becomes more unstable) vs Dany, Lysa vs Cat, Barba Bracken vs Melissa Blackwood, arguably Rhaenyra vs Alicent). He takes an almost voyeuristic pleasure in describing women’s bodies and women having sex with women (see how Dany and Irri’s or Cersei and Taena’s sexual encounters don’t give any depth to Dany’s, Irri’s and Taena’s characters and, as far as I can tell, are mostly written to fetishize them). Consider, for instance, how 13- to 16-year-old Dany is the most sexualized character of the book series, while I’m not even sure if her male counterpart Jon is supposed to be considered attractive or not (on the one hand, he’s attracted women like Ygritte and Val; on the other hand, he’s meant to look a lot like Ned, who’s regarded as plain in appearance, especially in comparison to the hot-blooded Brandon). All of this is to say that I doubt that a man will fulfill a prophecy that remarks upon the person’s physical appearance (“younger and more beautiful”). Considering GRRM’s writing problems, a woman is much more likely to do so.

Young Griff is supposed to represent a lesser version of Dany (note that I’m talking about Young Griff as a fictional character, not as a person). After all, unlike Dany, Young Griff didn’t get to have lived experience of poverty, he didn’t get to have his skills tested, he didn’t get to apply the lessons he learned along the way, he didn’t get to take action and make mistakes and gain valuable experience and wisdom, he didn’t get to choose to stay in Slaver’s Bay solely to help marginalized people who aren’t connected to him by neither blood nor lands (which would emphasize how he doesn’t view his birthright merely as something owed to him, but rather as a means to “protect the ones who can’t protect themselves”). He could have had this sort of character development if GRRM wanted him to, but he has a different role in the narrative: he’s a tertiary character who we’re not meant to know all that much as a person or about how he would fare as king because he serves as a foil to Dany. With all of that in mind, what would be the point of having this minor character, who was introduced in the fifth book of a seven-book series, fulfill this prophecy rather than the one protagonist who the author said was deliberately written as Cersei’s foil multiple times (more on that below)?

Which brings me to a point that @rainhadaenerys made in our upcoming Dany/Cersei meta... Cersei views women with contempt because she thinks that they can only attain political influence with “tears” and with what’s “between [their] legs” (as she tells Sansa). This informs why, for example, she projects the unfounded idea that a widow must have lovers on Margaery or why she herself uses money and sex to keep her men loyal (which ultimately backfires on her). Unfortunately, it’s true that “[Cersei’s] strength relies on her beauty, birth and riches”. Because of her internalized misogyny, Cersei can’t conceive of a woman who might rise to power primarily because of her intelligence and shrewdness… Except that there is a woman who successfully conquered three cities and ruled the third and freed thousands of slaves relying primarily on her actual wit, political savviness and leadership skills rather than on sex, birthright or money… Dany. Dany is the competent, selfless ruler who could overcome many of the patriarchal limitations that Cersei couldn’t (hence why Cersei is a tragic figure). If Young Griff were to be the YMB(Q), he would simply be one of the many men (along with Robert, her brother, her father and the other Hands) who Cersei thinks wronged her and prevented her from staying in power. If Daenerys were to be the YMBQ, she would challenge Cersei’s toxic beliefs about women, which prevented Cersei from even imagining that a she-king might be the one foreshadowed to defeat her or that a woman (that isn’t her, of course) could actually be able to earn her accomplishments (just like she can’t imagine that Jaime might actually betray and kill her). Now, someone might argue that GRRM is not “woke” enough to do this, but I would disagree in this particular case. There are valid critiques to be made about how he wrote his female characters (I’ve made some points myself on the first item), but it’s still true that Dany’s character arc was written with awareness of how her gender affects her experiences. If that hadn’t been the case, AGOT wouldn’t have initially set up several men (Viserys, Rhaego, Drogo) to be claimant to the Iron Throne/SWMTW/the protagonist only to reveal that these roles are actually meant to be fulfilled by Dany, a woman. If that hadn’t been the case, he wouldn’t have had Maester Aemon acknowledge that “no one had ever looked for a girl” when they pondered on who might be AA/PTWP. So I don’t put it past GRRM to make Dany the YMBQ as a way of challenging Cersei’s entire worldview.

Indeed, I actually think that’s likely to be what he’ll write. GRRM has stated multiple times that Dany and Cersei are meant to be compared and contrasted because they were consciously written by him (specially in AFFC/ADWD) as narrative foils:

George regrets that Cersei and Dany will not be contrasted directly. (x)

His biggest lament in splitting A Feast for Crows from A Dance with Dragons is the parallels he was drawing between Circe and Daenerys. (x)

Cersei and Daenerys are intended as parallel characters --each exploring a different approach to how a woman would rule in a male dominated, medieval-inspired fantasy world. (x)

While discussing how he writes his female characters, he also mentioned that splitting the books as he did this time meant we didn't get the parallel between how Danaerys and Cersei both approach the task of leadership, which is a bit of a shame. (x)

And that one of the things he regrets losing from the POV split is that he was doing point and counterpoint with the Dany and Cersei scenes--showing how each was ruling in their turn. (x)

I think Young Griff as the YMB(Q) is very, very unlikely. If it’s not Dany, then I think Brienne (who at least is a viewpoint character that we know intimately) as the YMBQ (though I doubt it because she can only take Jaime away from Cersei and, as we saw in AFFC, Cersei was willing to separate herself from Jaime once she realized that he would question and disagree with her decisions and, in her mind, threaten her influence and power, i.e., what she wants the most) or even Cersei herself (the basis of this theory is that a younger Cersei caused her own downfall by making the choices she made. It’s not impossible considering that Cersei’s unreliable viewpoint prevents her from ever taking responsibility for her actions. Still, I think it’s unlikely because she’s been positioned as a passive participant in these prophecies - someone/some people kills her children, some person takes away everything she holds dear, some person murders her. Just like there’s a valonqar to kill Cersei, I think there’ll be a YMBQ to defeat her) are more plausible candidates. However, as I said in previous answers, Dany and Cersei have lots of clearly intended parallels and anti parallels (hence why GRRM mentioned them at least five times publicly) that people don’t often appreciate (but that I don’t want to mention here because I’m saving them for edits and that long meta). I find it hard to believe that GRRM would lay all this groundwork to contrast these two queens only to reveal that a minor character is the actual YMB(Q).

Now, the question about “in what context could it be obvious for the reader that Daenerys is the YMBQ” is difficult because, IMO, I don’t feel like there’s enough information to give you a reliable answer. First, let’s recap the most common theories, which, while I don’t think should be accepted as canon just yet, are popular for logical reasons. Here’s what GRRM said about the future events in the initial outline and interviews:

While the lion of Lannister and the direwolf of Stark snarl and scrap, however, a second and greater threat takes shape across the narrow sea, where the Dothraki horselords mass their barbarian hordes for a great invasion of the Seven Kingdoms, led by the fierce and beautiful Daenerys Stormborn, the last of the Targaryen dragonlords. The Dothraki invasion will be the central story of my second volume, A Dance with Dragons. (x)

GRRM: Yes, three more volumes remain. The series could almost be considered as two linked trilogies, although I tend to think of it more as one long story. The next book, A Dance With Dragons, will focus on the return of Daenerys Targaryen to Westeros, and the conflicts that creates. After that comes The Winds of Winter. I have been calling the final volume A Time For Wolves, but I am not happy with that title and will probably change it if I can come up with one that I like better. (x)

He said that in his original plan (when he wanted to write a trilogy) the Red Wedding would take place in book one, and Dany’s landing in Westeros in book two. Now he says that Dany’s arrival in Westeros will take place in book 5, A Dance with Dragons. (x)

From there he started to plan a trilogy, since there were 3 main conflicts (Starks/Lannisters; Dany; and the Others) it felt it would neatly fit into a trilogy (ah!), but like Tolkien said, the tale grew in the telling. (x)

“Well, Tyrion and Dany will intersect, in a way, but for much of the book they’re still apart,” he says. “They both have quite large roles to play here. Tyrion has decided that he actually would like to live, for one thing, which he wasn’t entirely sure of during the last book, and he’s now working toward that end—if he can survive the battle that’s breaking out all around him. And Dany has embraced her heritage as a Targaryen and embraced the Targaryen words. So they’re both coming home.” (x)

GRRM’s words seem to indicate that Dany will go to Dragonstone ("they're both coming home") and then King’s Landing in her campaign to take back the Seven Kingdoms before she goes to the Wall to fight against the Others.

And it is quite possible that she will clash with Young Griff. For one:

Hi, short question. Will we find out more about the Dance of the Dragons in future books?

The first dance or the second?

The second will be the subject of a book. The first will be mentioned from time to time, I'm sure. (x)

For two:

"It is dragons."

"Dragons?" said her mother. "Teora, don't be mad."

"I'm not. They're coming."

"How could you possibly know that?" her sister asked, with a note of scorn in her voice. "One of your little dreams?"

Teora gave a tiny nod, chin trembling. "They were dancing. In my dream. And everywhere the dragons danced the people died." (TWOW Arianne I)

For three:

Glowing like sunset, a red sword was raised in the hand of a blue-eyed king who cast no shadow. A cloth dragon swayed on poles amidst a cheering crowd. From a smoking tower, a great stone beast took wing, breathing shadow fire ... mother of dragons, slayer of lies … (ACOK Daenerys IV)

Now, here are my observations/questions/doubts:

The “cloth dragon” receiving a round of cheers from the crowd seems to indicate that a) Tommen will indeed fall from power when Young Griff (who’s already in Westeros almost ready to attack) invades King’s Landing and that b) Young Griff will inspire love from the population.

The more obvious possibility is that the second dance of dragons refers to a Dany versus Young Griff confrontation, especially since she’s prophesied to slay the lie that he represents (that he’s not Rhaegar Targaryen's son, but actually Illyrio’s son and a Blackfyre). However, since Victarion is currently in Meereen with a dragonbinder, it’s very likely that Dany will lose control of one of her dragons to a Greyjoy (either Victarion or Euron Greyjoy himself) and then will arrive in Westeros with only two of her three dragons. Or maybe Euron will use one of the dragons to attack Young Griff and that will be the second dance (though I find that unlikely since, again, Dany is prophesied to slay Young Griff’s lie). Or the second dance could actually refer to Dany versus Euron.

There are alternative speculations to consider. Right now, the consensus in the Dany fandom seems to be that there’s already too much in Dany’s plate for her (uniting all the khalasars and being hailed as the SWMTW; going back to Meereen; meeting Tyrion, Jorah, Moqorro and other characters; maybe going to Yunkai; going to Volantis; etc) to go to King’s Landing, which led to people assuming that only Cersei and JonCon will be involved in the city’s burning. It’s even theorized that Dany might actually skip King’s Landing and go to the Wall instead. These theories make a lot of sense and aren’t implausible, but it’s hard to reconcile them with GRRM’s initial intention with Dany (though it’s also been argued that he may have given part of her initial role to Young Griff). Additionally, I don’t think timeline issues are necessarily a guarantee of what GRRM will do with Dany. He made Tyrion travel much faster than reasonable back in AGOT to have him meet Catelyn in the inn at the crossroads and to be taken captive by her. So I wouldn't put it past GRRM to do something similar with Dany by having her arrive earlier in King’s Landing than she reasonably would just because he wants it to happen. And, as much as I don’t want it to happen and even though I criticized the theory before, I don’t think it’s impossible (though it’s not guaranteed either) for Dany to be accidentally involved in the burning of King’s Landing (though there is a recent counter-theory to that as well).

Re: Cersei, a lot of people tend to assume that she’s going to die when Young Griff takes King’s Landing, but I am not really sure. I do think that her parallels with Aerys II will pay off and reflect her ending. But that doesn’t prevent Cersei from surviving Young Griff’s invasion and meeting Dany later. Cersei could escape to Casterly Rock and they could meet there. Or Cersei could later attempt to retake the capital again in another impractical plan of hers, which then leads to King’s Landing burning. I don’t know.

Does Dany have to meet everyone to fulfill these prophecies? I’m not sure. Does Dany necessarily need to meet Young Griff and Stannis to slay their lies? Does she necessarily need to meet Cersei so that the readership finds out that she’s the YMBQ? Will there even be an actual moment that makes it “obvious for the reader that Daenerys is the YMBQ”? I don’t know, Anon. It may end up being up for people’s interpretation. Dany might end up burning the Iron Throne, if the theory about her accidentally burning King’s Landing actually happens. Dany might willingly melt the Iron Throne and install a new form of government that gives the smallfolk more political influence. Both of these possibilities could symbolize the end of Cersei’s desire for absolute power, even if Cersei and Dany don’t actually meet. I’m not even sure that there will be a moment that outright reveals that Dany is AA/PTWP/SWMTW (even though, IMO, the foreshadowing is way too overwhelming for it not to be her).

Speculating about Dany being the YMBQ is fun for me because it requires delving into her characterization, her parallels with Cersei and canon material in general. On the other hand, speculating about how this would actually happen is, IMO, less interesting (though I still enjoy reading what other people have to say) because it’s hard to accurately predict future plot points with the current information that we have (and I resent how fandom already accepts so many theories as unpublished canon). Dany has too many places to be and too many things to do and it’s not certain that she’ll be in King’s Landing when it burns (though I tend to think she will for the aforementioned reasons), the second dance of dragons can refer to different confrontations, it’s not certain that Dany needs to meet Cersei (or Young Griff or Stannis) to fulfill all these prophecies and it’s not certain that Dany is going to be explicitly revealed as the person who fulfills all these prophecies. We still have two books worth of plot development, so I really don’t think it’s possible to predict how the actual events will unfold. Sorry about not being able to give more definitive answers... I actually ended up making more questions. But that's kind of the point for now.

#daenerys targaryen #young griff #cersei lannister #asoiaf meta #asoiaf speculation #answered

50 notes · View notes

esther-dot · 3 years

Note

Whenever I read the arguments that Sansa may lose her beauty as punishment for being vAiN, I get angry. But then there is Jeyne who made fun of Ary@ looks and stated that she was more beautiful than her(rather childish) has scars on her back and her nose get frostbite. Then there is Myrcella who was described beautiful got scars. It seems like Jeyne suffered for being mean to ary@. I don't trust grrm in this matter.

It's just very confusing, anon! It's weird to start the novels with such an emphasis on the deceitfulness of beauty, how Cersei and Joffrey are beautiful but evil, and then turn around and use taking away someone's beauty as punishment because then it's...uh, self-contradictory? He’s placing a great value on appearances? Wanting to match the character of a person to their appearance? I don’t think that’s his intent.

I worry about it in regard to Jeyne because what he is doing with her confuses me so, but as I’ve been thinking about it because of the recent asks, I remembered that Brienne was described as having a horsey face, and even though she is one of the best characters (morally), she is scarred as well. She is bitten, and Jeyne was also bitten. Brienne says her face was never pretty before, and before she is married to Ramsay, Jeyne mentions being pretty. So, while it feels wrong for Jeyne to have nothing and then her beauty taken away, we don’t have to conclude it’s a moral judgment of her or a punishment because Brienne certainly didn’t deserve to be disfigured and yet, she was too.

I still am confused because Jaime losing a hand matters (he has to struggle with his identity), but Myrcella and Jeyne are just victims. They don't have their own stories, not really. Myrcella's injury works into Arianne's story, and I am sure her grief over it will play forward into her future decisions, but I can't even "justify" Jeyne's that way because it seems unnecessary to me. Rescuing her is important in Theon’s story, saving a non Stark after he convinced himself killing two innocents wasn’t that bad because they weren’t actually Starks…I get the connection, but the abuse Jeyne endures seems excessive.

As for Sansa, I'm pretty sure Martin has written her as a tribute to romantic heroines, but fleshed out, with fears and desires that are often denied them. Her haters can hope something awful happens to her, but I don't worry about disfigurement. Her beauty thus far has only brought her suffering, her naivete in believing that she would be loved for herself is gone, giving up hope of that is a low point. There isn't a need to take her beauty away to respond to anything. She no longer thinks it will bring her anything good. Actually, her feelings need to be answered by someone not being interested in her claim. Her appearance to that is irrelevant. The response to this issue is for her to be loved by a man who has nothing to gain by loving her (someone who stands to inherit the North by other means...someone who has already refused to take it from her perhaps 🤔 ), but loves her anyway. She doesn’t need to be humbled or be ugly to know that a person loves her for her.

Right now, I do think Martin's treatment of Jeyne feels...uncharacteristically careless? Because of those troubling implications? But Sansa is someone he takes great care in writing, and I think if you aren't a Sansa hater, you can feel the tonal difference he has in her scenes. IMO, he loves her and what she represents. I don't think he's going to randomly scar her.

#ask dot

45 notes · View notes

jackoshadows · 3 years

Note

Do you agree with the idea that GRRM wrote the "traditionally feminine" girls (Sansa, Catelyn, Dany, Arianne) as "more flawed" than the warrior girls (Arya, Brienne, asha)? Basically, this person said that Sansa makes actual mistakes that hurt people but Arya and Brienne do nothing wrong and don't make mistakes that hurt people around them, so they're bad characters. What do you think? do you agree that Brienne and Arya are lesser than the superior Sansa because Sansa has flaws unlike the flawless Arya?

Honestly, I think that Sansa, Catelyn, Dany, Arianne, Arya, Brienne, Asha etc. are all very different, flawed characters in their own way. I don't think you can put them into these boxes like you have done.

For ex. Arya is also traditionally feminine and partakes in traditionally feminine activities like cooking, cleaning, picking flowers, gossiping in the kitchens, playing with babies, taking care of those younger than her etc. She is not a 'warrior'. Brienne can also be nurturing. Dany can hold her own as a military leader on par with any of the men on her council or army.

For example, I think that Arya and Dany have more in common than Sansa and Dany despite Sansa and Dany being grouped together as being 'traditionally feminine' and therefore more flawed.

Asha and Brienne are warriors, and yet very different in terms of personality, personal ethics and story arcs.

I think GRRM has many different kinds of female characters and has not written his 'traditionally feminine' characters to be more flawed or anything like that.

In fact, Catelyn Stark is my favorite female character in the series. She's just so human and real. She's unique in fantasy. She's a mother. She's a leader. She's a councillor and adviser. She's intelligent. Makes human mistakes. Gives into emotions. She's jealous, she's proud, she loves deeply, she's angry and bitter. She embodies the House Tully words of 'Family, duty and honor'. Family comes first, above all.

I had already mentioned this in another post, but maybe Jon Snow and Catelyn Stark having a lot in common despite hating each other is the reason for why I love both characters. They are both loyal to a fault and would do anything if they love deeply enough. Catelyn releasing Jaime Lannister for her daughters, Jon breaking his sworn oaths for Arya.

Arianne Martell is smart and ambitious. She knows what she is capable of, what she deserves and will work to see that she gets it. Dany is powerful, smart and ambitious. Is she flawed? Yes, just like all leaders and because all leaders are human and humans make mistakes. Margaery Tyrell is calculating, manipulative and knows well how to play the game.

As for Sansa and Arya - well, these two characters were deliberately written that way because Sansa was created as a literary foil for Arya, to highlight Arya's personality and characterization. That's what literary foils are meant to do and that's why Sansa came about as the complete opposite. So while Arya mingles with the small folk and befriends them, Sansa is snobby and looks down on the small folk with derision. While Sansa is vain and self-centered, Arya has self-esteem issues and thinks she is ugly due to being mocked and bullied over her appearance.

I do think that GRRM went a bit too far with Sansa in the first book. I get why he did it - The Starks were getting along too much and families are not like that and she’s there to create confict. But still, it feels like Sansa is living in a separate reality compared to the rest of the Starks. There’s being naive and then there is Sansa.

This is a girl who grew up in the harsh North where she would heard stories of her aunt being kidnapped and raped to death by prince Rhaegar. This is a world in which 10 year olds become Lord Commanders and Ned is taking his 7 year old to beheadings and wants his toddler to play with a direwolf because 'Winter is coming'. Sansa’s naivety is incomprehensible in our modern world let alone the medieval setting of Westeros.

For ex. Sansa tattling all of Ned's plans to Cersei after Cersei ordered her pet wolf killed! Like which child would trust, let alone like, an adult who has their pet puppy killed?! Or when she sees Joffrey sadistically mutilate another child and try to harm her sister and still thinks of him as her sweet, beautiful prince. Like, how? I get what GRRM was trying to do with the character, but IMO it was a bit extreme and the character came off as his version of the cliche 'dumb, blonde' stereotype that I dislike so much.

I also find disloyalty to be an unattractive trait, and the fact that Sansa keeps throwing her family under the bus again and again and again in the first book, is what prevents me from being interested in her as a character. Not because she's traditionally feminine or is a girly girl - like her fans want everyone to think as they deliberately misconstrue any criticism of the character and equate it to misogynistic hate. In this, Sansa is the total opposite of Catelyn who lives and breathes family loyalty.

Anyways, I do hope that Sansa eventually gets smarter, is able to connect the dots with all the information she currently has, outwits and outplays Littlefinger at his own game and avenges house Stark for everything he did to her and her family.

#asks

51 notes · View notes

hellsbellschime · 3 years

Text

Why Will Dany Burn King’s Landing?

youtube

Although most fans of A Song of Ice and Fire and Game of Thrones understandably aren't keen on revisiting the sloppy final season of the TV series, season 8 of the show is actually home to some of the most interesting indications of where the book series may or may not be going.

Season 8 was largely so confusing because the series was attempting to get across the finish line as fast as possible, but many of the messier aspects of the show were also clearly driven by the fact that Game of Thrones had already significantly deviated from the story that George RR Martin was trying to tell. So, when the time came for the TV series to end, the show had to push its characters into their decided endgames despite the fact that many alterations to their prior arcs now made those endings somewhat nonsensical.

George has already directly stated that the broad strokes of the ending will be the same in the books, but I think it stands to reason that the most controversial aspect of the series end, Daenerys' decision to burn King's Landing, will likely be significantly different within the books.

There are a lot of theories about how Dany's dark, or at least slightly darker, turn is going to go in the novels. Many fans unsuprisingly have come up with speculations that alleviate most of Dany's responsibility for the destruction of the city, but I think the notion that someone else will burn King's Landing or that Daenerys will burn the capitol by accident are extremely unlikely.

I can't envision a world where George RR Martin lets any of his main characters off the hook for the most destructive choice in the entire series, and frankly it has always been completely in character for Daenerys to justify any amount of devastation and destruction if it's in service of reclaiming the Iron Throne. And honestly, despite the fact that Game of Thrones retconned most of Dany's darkest book decisions and characteristics, even within the TV series itself, burning King's Landing was largely a logical extension of Dany's habit of killing anybody who gives even the slightest indication that they might not follow her.

However, it also seems undeniable that the burning of King's Landing is almost certainly going to come about due to different circumstances. And, it seems extremely likely that the omission of one significant character in the books, Young Griff, will be one of the key differences in the destruction of King's Landing and the entire Targaryen dynasty.

While I don't think Young Griff's non-Targaryen heritage is nearly as undeniable as many other fans do, one thing that seems very probable is that regardless of whether or not Aegon is really Aegon Targaryen, Daenerys will not believe that he is the long lost son of Rhaegar Targaryen.

Cersei becoming Dany's greatest rival never really made sense considering how few legitimate supporters she had. But on the other hand, someone like Young Griff, who has spent his entire life training to become the best king possible, seems like the kind of person who will likely win at least a significant amount of support among the lords of Westeros and the common people, who at this point would honestly prefer anyone other than Cersei anyway.

But, if Dany arrives in Westeros and there is a Targaryen who she doesn't believe is a Targaryen already sitting on the Iron Throne with the backing of a multitude of kingdoms as well as the common people, clearly she's going to be pissed. And obviously she's going to have a huge axe to grind with the boy who she believes has usurped her throne.

Dany has always been prone to violence to begin with, but now that she seems to have decided to go full fire and blood, it's not that difficult to figure out how she is likely going to handle Aegon the Sixth. But, I think that the penultimate episode of Game of Thrones may have already explained exactly how that is going to happen.

Like most fans, as soon as any information about the final season of Game of Thrones was released, I thought about what it could possibly be referring to or what it would mean. And one aspect of season 8 that seemed to not quite fit into anything within the rest of the series was the title of the episode "The Bells".

What initially interested me about that name was that not only was it the title for arguably the most important episode in the entire show, but that it referred to something that has a lot of thematic relevance within the books but that has been barely mentioned within the TV series. Bells are mentioned constantly in A Song of Ice and Fire, but they've only gotten a few nods within Game of Thrones. And I was even more surprised that, when the show actually aired, the ringing of the bells didn't seem to be hugely relevant to the episode itself either.

Yes, the bells do seem to trigger Dany's decision to burn the entire city down, but they aren't important before or after that, and when there are so many possible titles that are more connected to the series and the story, it still seems strange that "The Bells" was called "The Bells".

However, while bells are a bit of a perennial theme within A Song of Ice and Fire, I think one particular bell-themed subplot might be the exact history that is going to repeat itself when King's Landing burns to the ground, and I think that Daenerys might defeat Aegon in the second Battle of the Bells.

Jon Connington is another fantastic character who was completely omitted from the TV series, but it's interesting that the most fervent supporter of House Targaryen who was on the front lines fighting for Rhaegar in Robert's Rebellion seems to believe that the war wasn't actually lost in the Trident, but in Stoney Sept when Jon failed to root out Robert Baratheon.

JonCon's perspective on Rhaegar and on the entire war is undeniably warped, and in retrospect House Targaryen's dynasty was always destined to fail. Rhaegar may not have had the violent impulses of Aerys, but a dude who lets the entire realm devolve into chaos because he really needs to impregnate a teenager who is dubiously consenting at best was not going to bring peace and prosperity back to the realm. And in a broader sense, the Targaryen values of isolationism, superiority, subjugation, and consolidation of power seem to indicate that no matter what happened, as long as the Targaryens stuck to their beliefs then they were never going to hold on to the Seven Kingdoms.

But still, it seems incredibly important that Jon Connington believed that the Targaryens lost the Iron Throne in the Battle of the Bells, and it's even more important that he's almost certainly wrong. A Song of Ice and Fire has been pretty consistent in its portrayal of brutality. It has proven to be an effective tool in the short term, but it seems to have disastrous results in the long run. And, given that George RR Martin is an ardent pacifist, it's obvious that JonCon's belief that if he had only been crueler and more violent in Stoney Sept then the war would have been won for House Targaryen is a belief that is bound to be undermined.

The fact that Prince Aegon's greatest Westerosi supporter is so strong in this belief though seems to be an obvious setup for a clash in the future. It seems unlikely that the boy who Varys wanted to be the perfect king would be as brutal as someone like Tywin Lannister, and honestly, most people are not that violent nor do they believe that the only goal is winning no matter the cost.

But, it also seems to be a setup for a clash between Young Griff and Daenerys. After all, while most people wouldn't do absolutely anything to get what they believed was their birthright, Dany absolutely would. She internally justifies every action that she takes in service of getting the Iron Throne, and there doesn't seem to be a limit to the violence that she would excuse if it meant taking what she believes is rightfully hers.

The descriptions of the Battle of the Bells in Jon Connington's POV chapters are all very interesting, and it's telling that even in these few glimpses into his mind, this battle is so vitally important. But, Jon's memories are at their most interesting in the chapter "The Griffin Reborn," when he discusses his failings with Myles Toyne.

Jon tells himself that even Tywin Lannister couldn't have done anything more than what he did, but Toyne disagrees. Blackheart says “Lord Tywin would not have bothered with a search. He would have burned that town and every living creature in it. Men and boys, babes at the breast, noble knights and holy septons, pigs and whores, rats and rebels, he would have burned them all. When the fires guttered out and only ash and cinders remained, he would have sent his men in to find the bones of Robert Baratheon."

And while Myles is undoubtedly right that this is exactly what Tywin Lannister would have done, the particular description of the violence sounds undeniably Targaryen in nature. It literally sounds like fire and blood. And frankly, it sounds pretty close to what Daenerys did in Game of Thrones and is likely to do in King's Landing in A Song of Ice and Fire.

Conceptually, it's actually quite simple. Jon Connington will fight the Battle of the Bells once again, except this time he's going to be on the side of the new Robert Baratheon. If Young Griff is a remotely capable ruler who wins the hearts of the people, then it's entirely believable that the citizens of King's Landing would give him quarter when the dragon queen comes looking for him. And given Daenerys' typical patience level, it seems incredibly likely that Dany would just burn the traitors and find the bones of the usurper in the ashes.

Jon Connington has returned to Westeros operating under the belief that he is going to have to be tougher and more brutal to ensure that Young Griff ascends to the Iron Throne like Rhaegar never did, and to ensure that he's never overthrown like the Mad King was. So then, it would be a pretty perfect twist of fate if everything that Jon believes now winds up being proven wrong and he finds himself and the boy who he has vowed to defend to his last breath relying on the kindness of strangers to hide them from the Targaryen ruler and her armies who are searching for them.

And ironically, Jon will not do what he has set out to do, succeed for the son where he failed for the father, precisely because the enemy that he's facing now will be ready and willing to use the brutality that JonCon originally shied away from in Stoney Sept. If Young Griff and the elder Griffon were actually dealing with a rival who was similar to the younger Jon Connington, someone who wasn't willing to wreak havoc and destruction in order to find their enemy at all costs, then they might have a chance at at least surviving.

But, because Dany is the type of person who serves up fire and blood to anyone she thinks even might be her enemy, any of King Aegon's protectors will be treated with the brutality that Jon currently believes is necessary to win, and Young Griff will be killed anyway. And of course, while Daenerys will almost certainly win the battle against Aegon the Sixth, her decision to be as violent and swift as possible in order to root out her enemies will also lead to her ultimate downfall and a truly irrevocable end to the Targaryen dynasty.

Thematically, the repetition of past mistakes, the false belief that great violence in service of a supposedly greater good is worthwhile, and the false belief that brutality is strength, all fits in well with A Song of Ice and Fire and George RR Martin's political point of view. But obviously, given that Aegon Targaryen, Jon Connington, and their entire branch of the story was omitted in Game of Thrones, none of this could have ever happened in the TV series. And perhaps the title of the penultimate episode was a subtle nod to the climax that the writers know will be coming in the books.

#got #asoiaf #anti daenerys targaryen #aegon targaryen #young griff #jon connington #asoiaf meta #got meta #my videos

154 notes · View notes