makerkenzie

[makerkenzie]

If voting didn't make a difference, then voter suppression wouldn't exist.

the current electoral system is an unfairly weighted corrupt mess that will not save us, but

abstaining from voting does nothing to destabilize or replace it

participation can reduce harm and be strategically applied to your larger more revolutionary goals

(plus following electoral politics just keeps you aware of what specifically to expect from The Powers you oppose)

there is no materially revolutionary argument against voting if you are at all able.

[makerkenzie]

"Never. You will wed the king."

Okay, the title is a misdirection, as this isn't about Maggy's Prophecy. It's more on the Martells' misplaced loyalty to the Targaryens. But still! The tension between marrying the prince and marrying the king is relevant.

Prince Rhaegar was the eldest son of the king, and he married Princess Elia Martell.

Again: he was the eldest son of the king. He was next in line for the throne. When he became king, Princess Elia would have been his queen. Her son would have been the next king after that.

Who knows what kind of interactions the Targaryens had with the Martells before the rebellion? And really, who cares? That marriage joined House Martell of Dorne to the royal family. It meant their blood would become royalty. No other House in the realm could have given the Martells what they had with Prince Rhaegar.

AAAAAND then Prince Rhaegar ran off with Lyanna Stark. That was a crappy way to treat Princess Elia and their two children, but nothing could change that she was his wife and she DID have two children with him. Those children were still high up in the line of succession. King Aerys made everything worse and the realm went to war.

The rebels won the war and Prince Rhaegar never became king. Princess Elia and her children were killed in the Sack, and the lord who presented their bodies to the new king was rewarded for their murders. He was rewarded in the form of getting his daughter married to the new king.

Princess Elia would never become queen. Her children would never inherit anything. No, no, Robert Baratheon killed Prince Rhaegar and wedded the daughter of the man who orchestrated the deaths of Princess Elia and the children.

Elia Martell wedded the prince. Cersei Lannister wedded the king.

I can see how Elia's brothers would be enraged at the new regime.

In the period between Rhaegar running off with a younger lady and him dying on the Trident, Prince Doran and Prince Oberyn may have been asking themselves: IS this jackass prince coming back to his marriage to our sister?

But then after he died, they'd never know what he had intended to do regarding their sister and the children.

In the short period of time between Rhaegar's death and the Sack, Elia's brothers may have been telling themselves the Targaryens still had a chance to win the war, and if they did, then their blood was still next in line for the throne.

And then there was the Sack, and their blood ran red through the halls of Maegor's Holdfast.

Before Rhaegar died, Doran and Oberyn may have had some concerns about how he was treating their sister. After Rhaegar died, though, and after Elia and the children were killed in connection with the Targaryens' defeat, then the narrative changed. They'd never know what Rhaegar had intended to do...but from there, it wouldn't have been much of a leap for Elia's brothers to start telling themselves that of course Rhaegar was going to come back and make their sister his queen, but Robert Baratheon made that impossible.

The Martells' blood was supposed to become royalty, but Robert Baratheon killed their royal brother-in-law and joined his House to the Lannisters. Elia never had a chance to be queen, whereas Cersei went straight to queen. She got the position Elia should've had. House Lannister got the position that should have gone to House Martell.

After the losses their family suffered, I can understand how the Martells would look at the new Queen Cersei and hate her. From there, it wouldn't have been much of a leap for Doran and Oberyn to start telling themselves Tywin must have hated Elia the same way, and that's why he had to have her killed.

(I'm sure it didn't help matters that Joffrey looked like he fell straight out of the Lannister family tree, and his sorry ass became the next king.)

Now allow me a digression, on Tywin's relationship to King Robert vs. the Martells' hypothetical relationship to King Rhaegar. Tywin built up an undue level of power as the king's father-in-law...because the crown borrowed so much gold from him. That debt resulted from two factors: 1) Littlefinger was actively sabotaging the crown's finances, and 2) Tywin was the wealthiest man in the Seven Kingdoms. If Rhaegar had become king, it's highly improbable that he would've had such a toxic Master of Coin as Littlefinger. Even if he did, the Martells don't have nearly as much gold to throw around. So, even in the alternate universe where King Aerys II died peacefully and the Martells were the in-laws to the royal family, they would not have had what Tywin had with the Baratheon regime.

POINT IS. I can see how the Martells would be pissed as hell at seeing Cersei Lannister wed the new king. That doesn't mean Prince Oberyn's narrative of Tywin Lannister's motivation holds any more water than a fishnet. I can see how the Martells would come to view Prince Rhaegar as a martyr rather than a reckless philanderer. That doesn't mean the Targaryens were good to them, or that a new marriage alliance with the surviving Targs would benefit the Martells, or that restoring the Targs to the Iron Throne would provide justice.

After the war was finished and Robert became king, I can see how the Martells would start telling a certain tale. That doesn't mean their tale adds up.

#asoiaf meta #house martell #robert's rebellion #raggedy trashgaryen #robert baratheon #tywin lannister #house lannister #cersei lannister #elia martell #oberyn martell #doran martell #sack of king's landing #nobody screwed the martells harder than the targaryens #house targaryen

[makerkenzie]

Apropos of little, but I am annoyed that there's so much unknown about the tragedy at Summerhall. It's not even confirmed that Aerys was there. Da fuq?

[makerkenzie]

Viserys the Third?

More like Viserys the Turd.

[makerkenzie]

Deep Thoughts

Does anyone else get the impression that the Mad King viewed Viserys as his heir and Rhaegar as his competition? Because I think that mentality would explain his general pattern of behavior around his sons.

Then my question would be: when did he start to develop that antagonism toward Rhaegar?

#asoiaf meta #house targaryen #mad king #rhaegar targaryen

[makerkenzie]

Queen Rhaella and Prince Viserys were just as much a threat to King Robert as little Rhaenys and Aegon, and they were secure at Dragonstone for months after Robert’s coronation.

[makerkenzie]

How’s this for a What If?

If Princess Elia and the royal rugrats had been living at Dragonstone at the end of the war, how much longer would they have lived?

I guess we’ll never know, as the Mad King held them hostage at the Red Keep.

#asoiaf meta #what if #nobody screwed the martells harder than the targaryens

[makerkenzie]

That's not how any of this works.

There's this Martaryen apologia that keeps coming up. When I point out how the Targs screwed the Martells, the response is that of course the Martells don't dwell on how the Targaryens mistreated their family because the Targaryens died. Whereas the Lannisters are very much alive and benefitting from Tywin's war crimes, so they're the ones who need to be punished.

The more I think about this argument...the more nonsensical it gets.

As an explanation for the Dornish subplot, this is a non-sequitur at best. We're not reading a story in which the Martells "hate" the Lannisters and "don't hate" the Targaryens. We're reading a story in which the Martells are trying to restore the Targaryens to the position of the ruling family of the realm. They are putting themselves in mortal danger, and setting the realm to war---another war!---in order to orchestrate a regime change in favor of the Targaryens.

That requires a more positive relationship than just "we don't hate them because the ones who mistreated us are dead."

I've written on this before: the family connection either matters or it doesn't. If Tywin's been leasing castles in the Martell-Sands' heads because he got his daughter married to the king, then, what the fuck kind of sense does it make to install the Mad King's surviving children to the throne? Why would Prince Doran want to get his own children married to Prince Rhaegar's younger siblings?

Especially Arianne with Viserys! Here's to Viserys Targaryen, the third of his name, Lord of Ain't Shit Mountain, Embarrassment to the Realm. And to the gold Khal Drogo dumped on his head. Arianne is her father's heir, his only daughter, and she's gorgeous and healthy. Why the fuck would he squander her on some exiled prince who brings nothing to the table? How many times in the text does Viserys even mention the Martells?

Without his status as the Mad King's surviving son, why the fuck would Prince Oberyn be trying to rally support for Viserys as king, starting just after the rebellion when he was just eight years old? With his status as the Mad King's son, why the fuck would the Martells want anything to do with him?

Furthermore, if Aerys and Rhaegar's shittiness to the Martells doesn't matter since they died, then...why are the Lannisters still Enemy #1 after Tywin and his goons have all died? Revolting as she is, Cersei wasn't involved in the killing of Princess Elia and her children. If we're not punishing the children for the sins of the father, then what is the Martells' beef with the Lannisters now that Tywin and the relevant household knights are dead?

Shit; even the Martells wouldn't try to hide behind this "it doesn't matter what the Targs did to us 'cause they're dead now" excuse. Go to the characters and ask them to explain their support for Targaryen restoration, and they would answer that they had a great thing going with the Targs. Especially with Rhaegar. Ask them about Rhaegar being a craptastic husband to Elia and a failure of a dad to their children, and they would refuse to hear it. Rhaegar was totally their best friend! Everything was fine until Tywin ruined everything. It's all Tywin's fault! He's the bad guy! Let me tell you about 60 Unrelated Reasons why Tywin Lannister is Evil. That is, if Obara hasn't disemboweled you already.

The answer is that the family connection absolutely matters, in the same way that Family is Destiny to the entire Westerosi noble class. They want to restore the Targaryens to power because they want to restore themselves to a favored position which they never had. They want to believe the Targs love them and the Lannisters hate them. (Maybe even, the Lannisters hate them because the Targs love them.) They're not about to let some ugly facts get in the way of that beautiful story.

#asoiaf meta #in which i poke the viper's nest #a song of mischief and shit-stirring #in which i criticize the martells of sunspear #no one screwed the martells harder than the targaryens #raggedy trashgaryen #revenge is bullshit

[makerkenzie]

i think one detail everyone forgets about why the Martells "don't hate" Rh@egar and Aerys is bcs they're dead

R put her and their children in danger but he got smashed potatoed in the end, and A died like a dog. It's like a dead point to keep hating them, specially when Tywin is alive, got away with the rape and murder of Elia, and on top of that his daughter marries the new king, basically they forgave him and gave him an important position.

#i get anon messages #someone is new around here #i have written on this topic several times already #trust me comrade i haven't forgotten anything #asoiaf meta meta

[makerkenzie]

So I read your posts about the Martells and how their plans to team up with the targs are.....faulty to say the least lol and I completely agree. Your posts hit on a lot of the same issues I have had with the Martells and GRRM's handling of this plot point. We are told that the Martells in general are haughty and slow to forgive. We are introduced to Oberyn, he loved Elia more than anything, and like any overprotective brother didn't believe any of her suitors was good enough for his sister. Yet, GRRM does not allow Oberyn, and then later, Doran, to make any comments about Rhaegar's treatment of Elia. Yes, Tywin gave the order and Loch and Clegane executed those orders, but none of that would have happened had it not been for Rhaegar setting the ball in motion. This makes absolutely NO sense and gives the fandom cover to say garbage like, 'well, even the Martells don't blame Rhaegar so Rhaegar was a good guy...' Oberyn? The same man who didn't think anyone was good enough for his sister wouldn't have been enraged at her husband seemingly leaving her for another woman after she just almost died giving him a son? Seriously???

This is just....very bad writing and dropping the ball on Martin's end. On top of that, he has the Martells betroth Arianne to Viserys. Why the FUCK would any family do that after seeing how one targ man already treated their beloved sister in a previous marriage match???? It's baffling.....absolutely insane. But I can't bring myself to blame the Martells, because this is yet another area of illogical carelessness by GRRM when it comes to his handling of Rhaegar and Elia.

Parts of this fandom refuse to acknowledge that Rhaegar is significantly at fault for the rebellion and what happened to Elia and his children and it borders on gaslighting imo. The amount of times I've seen people say 'well, Rhaegar didn't start the way, it was Brandon making a mess in KL and then it was Aerys' fault for demanding Robert and Ned's heads.' Okay......but literally none of that would have occurred had Rhaegar and Lyanna not ran away. Had they not done what they did, Brandon would have had no reason to got to KL to confront the prince.

Anyway, a lot of this hits on GRRM's, imo shockingly tone deaf, handling of Rhaegar, Elia, and Lyanna. I have no doubt that back in 1996 he envisioned R and L to be some Romeo and Juliet love story with two sympathetic people that meant well, but ran into a string of bad luck 'love is the death of duty' etc. etc. Except, it's easy to romanticize Romeo and Juliet who were two capricious teens in the blush of first love. Importantly, neither of them had a spouse and two young children they abandoned to go screw their lovers in said spouse's homeland. And then had their spouse and children brutally murdered as a result of the war they started 'for loveeee' lmao. The fandom harps on the age gap between R and L and honestly that doesn't even scratch the surface as to top five worst things about this relationship. I'm not even bother getting into L's hilariously hypocritical views on fidelity and having bastards lmao. I think GRRM inadvertently had the inciting relationship of his series be, not only predatory because of the age gap, but be based on the degradation and humiliation of an innocent wife and mother, and just....like......didn't realize it??? lmao. It's very weird, very very weird. I mean, on the other hand, I do think he....kinda...gets it because if he wanted a uncomplicated romance he simply would not have had Rhaegar be married with two kids.

All that being said, I think Martin is committed to making R a tragic hero and this a tragic love story, that he refuses to allow the people who should realistically hate Rhaegar and the targs the most, the Martells, excoriate him in the text. I had a conversation with another ASOIAF fan about this and she said that one of the good things the show did was allow Oberyn to call out Rhaegar for abandoning his sister, which he doesn't do in the text. I think there's a lot of cognitive dissonance with GRRM not realizing just how bad Rhaegar, and Lyanna imo, come across to readers in the text and, tinfoil time, I think not having to explain this relationship to readers is one of the many reasons he won't finish the series. I think he now realizes just how bad it is and how much 'fixing' of that ship he's going to have to do for both of them not to be absolutely hated by the fandom.

Obviously Martin is keeping very mum on the rebellion because he doesn't want to reveal too much and obfuscates a lot so we really don't have a lot of concrete opinions on Rhaegar from non-targ sycophants.....which is good writing technique.....usually.....but when you're taking 30 plus years to finish a series and are going on year 13 of having the fandom wait on the book that should in theory answer a lot of these questions....it's not great lol.

I don't see a question here, but I'm not above poking the viper's nest when I'm bored, so: okay, I'll bite!

If GRRM is trying to write Rhaegar as a tragic hero and R/L as some epically tragic love story, then, yes, he's doing a piss-poor job of it.

I don't think that's what he's doing.

I think he's intentionally writing a deeply frustrating story around the Martells. Whatever his initial idea of the Targs was in 1996...the story he's writing now is that dragons plant no trees.

He doesn't let the Martells acknowledge the Targs' mistreatment of their family because this is not a story in which they'll be vindicated or victorious. This is a story in which they are screwing themselves over. Which isn't exactly fun to read, but the pieces add up that way. The Targs are not the heroes the Martells need for their fairytale, any more than the Lannisters are the villains they need for that tale.

Especially Rhaegar. Seven Hells, are people actually saying "clearly Rhaegar was a good guy because the Martells don't blame him"? That is really...special. Nah, the Martells' refusal to hold the Targs, and especially Rhaegar, responsible for the injury done to their family is not an argument in favor of the Targs. It's 60% or more of the way the Martells are driving themselves off a cliff.

I don't have any firm opinions on why GRRM is taking so long to finish the Winds of Waiting. It's likely the result of many contributing factors, as the series involves many, many moving parts. But I doubt very much that he intends to write the Targs as the good guys Dany seems to think they are. They're a mix of hero and villain, like many other players in the game. Meanwhile the Martells' investment in the dragon is doubly tragic because where the Targs are actually heroic, they still don't reciprocate the Martells' loyalty. They hardly even see it.

#asoiaf meta #anon ask #the winds of waiting #house martell #house targaryen #raggedy trashgaryen #robert's rebellion #nobody screwed the martells harder than the targaryens #mine is a song of mischief and shit-stirring #in which I criticize the martells of sunspear #because they are screwing themselves over #if there's a tragic hero among the targs it's aegon v #dragons plant no trees

[makerkenzie]

So, like, for the operation in general, the orders for the soldiers are "march that way and smash things," and not much beyond that, except for when a couple of the high lord's household knights scale the walls of the castle-within-a-castle, which they'd only do under specific orders?

Now we already have the discussion between Tywin and Tyrion about giving the orders to kill the children. For someone who wasn't privy to that discussion, but who does know about the bodies wrapped in red cloaks and presented to King Robert...could there be any debate about who gave the orders? Who else could have arguably given the orders, if not Tywin?

When an army's sacking a big city and doesn't intend to stay there any longer than it takes to unseat the rulers, how many layers of command are there? How complex are the soldiers' orders? About how many people could be giving those orders?

Depends on the sophistication and professionalization of the attacking enemy forces. A medieval kingdom might only have a king who is sieging the city personally, or delegating authority to a senior vassal, knight, mercenary commander, or viceroy taking charge in his absence. A professional and modern nation-state, however, might have a civilian commander-in-chief, who delegates authority to a military chief of staff, who in turn delegates authority to a service chief, who in turn delegates to a theater commander, who in turn delegates to a field grade officer, who in turn delegates to the actual unit that is charged with taking the city.

Then you go even further. How sophisticated is their junior officer corps, and their NCO corps? How large is the city, and what is the size of the attacking force that needs to conquer this city? Do you need a modern battalion-sized requirement to conquer the city, or can you make do with a regiment? In a medieval setting, is there a single senior knight that has subinfeudated vassals, a major lord like a duke? Is this a multi-national coalition force ala the Crusades or a more modern coalition operation?

And of course, then you have to factor in the very real question of who is in charge after. Do you have a local collaborator? A claimant that sought foreign aid to press their claim? A claimant at the head of a mercenary organization? It gets so complicated that it's better to factor not only technological and organizational concerns, but also local political concerns of legitimacy that a single rule-of-thumb simply cannot service the wide range of consideration that need to be examined.

So in the end, this is a question that benefits from a greater sense of clarification from the opposing army. What is the technological and bureaucratic sophistication from this particular army? Does this nation have a modern notion of the idea of a civilian head-of-state that outranks even the highest generals as a means of subordinating military power under the nation-state?

So the question really becomes "how many troops do you need to take this city?" Once you find that out, then you can answer "what is the grade of officer that would command such a force?" which then becomes "how long is the chain of command?" It's a solid question, but it is one that varies immensely given the times and the sophistication of the military forces that would be in charge.

Thanks for the question, Maker. Good to see you're still around.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King.

#asoiaf meta #sack of king's landing #robert's rebellion #i ask warsofasoiaf

[makerkenzie]

Hi, SLAL! Yeah, I'm still around.

Being more specific: I'm thinking of a medieval-esque fantasy setting with a major lord (very much comparable to a duke) commanding a regional army to sack their country's capital city. The lord is familiar with the city's geography and defenses because he was an advisor to the king for many years. There is a claimant who has not sought the lord's aid specifically, but who is expected to be appreciative of the lord's help in turfing out the king. The lord may have heard that a branch of the claimant's army is already on their way to the capital. The lord has an advantage over the claimant's allies, which is his history of serving the king, and not having participated in the rebellion up to now.

Okay, I'll confess: I'm thinking of Tywin Lannister sacking King's Landing as the final act of Robert's Rebellion. He's got his army there, knowing Robert Baratheon killed Prince Rhaegar at the Trident, and he tricks the Mad King into opening the gates. Meanwhile Ned Stark's on the way with Robert's van.

In that process, how long do you think is the chain of command in Tywin's army? How complex are the soldiers' orders? How many people could be giving those orders?

When an army's sacking a big city and doesn't intend to stay there any longer than it takes to unseat the rulers, how many layers of command are there? How complex are the soldiers' orders? About how many people could be giving those orders?

Depends on the sophistication and professionalization of the attacking enemy forces. A medieval kingdom might only have a king who is sieging the city personally, or delegating authority to a senior vassal, knight, mercenary commander, or viceroy taking charge in his absence. A professional and modern nation-state, however, might have a civilian commander-in-chief, who delegates authority to a military chief of staff, who in turn delegates authority to a service chief, who in turn delegates to a theater commander, who in turn delegates to a field grade officer, who in turn delegates to the actual unit that is charged with taking the city.

Then you go even further. How sophisticated is their junior officer corps, and their NCO corps? How large is the city, and what is the size of the attacking force that needs to conquer this city? Do you need a modern battalion-sized requirement to conquer the city, or can you make do with a regiment? In a medieval setting, is there a single senior knight that has subinfeudated vassals, a major lord like a duke? Is this a multi-national coalition force ala the Crusades or a more modern coalition operation?

And of course, then you have to factor in the very real question of who is in charge after. Do you have a local collaborator? A claimant that sought foreign aid to press their claim? A claimant at the head of a mercenary organization? It gets so complicated that it's better to factor not only technological and organizational concerns, but also local political concerns of legitimacy that a single rule-of-thumb simply cannot service the wide range of consideration that need to be examined.

So in the end, this is a question that benefits from a greater sense of clarification from the opposing army. What is the technological and bureaucratic sophistication from this particular army? Does this nation have a modern notion of the idea of a civilian head-of-state that outranks even the highest generals as a means of subordinating military power under the nation-state?

So the question really becomes "how many troops do you need to take this city?" Once you find that out, then you can answer "what is the grade of officer that would command such a force?" which then becomes "how long is the chain of command?" It's a solid question, but it is one that varies immensely given the times and the sophistication of the military forces that would be in charge.

Thanks for the question, Maker. Good to see you're still around.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King.

#asoiaf worldbuilding #sack of king's landing #robert's rebellion #i ask warsofasoiaf

[makerkenzie]

A Song of Dead Lions and Distant Dragons

I haven't written here lately, but I still have Deep Thoughts(™) and people still interact with my earlier posts, so a thing just occurred to me:

If it totally makes sense for the Martells to support a Targ restoration because Aerys and Rhaegar died in the war while Viserys and Daenerys had nothing to do with throwing the princess to the lions...

...never mind that there's a considerable difference between "I don't blame you for your dad's and big brother's actions" and "I want to put you on the throne"...

(It's totally possible for one noble family to just, not have any interest in another noble family.)

Anyway, if the Martells aren't getting into the matter of how crappily the Targs treated their family because those Targs are now dead, then that means there's no need for vengeance against the Lannisters now? Like, the Martell-Sands should agree with Ellaria when she says Tywin's dead, Gregor Clegane's dead, Amory Lorch is dead, Robert Baratheon is dead? Right? Tywin and his goons have died, his children were not involved in the Sack of King's Landing, and his grandchildren were not yet born, so, there's nothing to be gained from carrying on the blood feud with the Lannisters, right?

I'm fairly sure Robert's brothers were nowhere near the Red Keep when Elia and her children were killed, as Stannis was holding Storm's End and Renly was a small child. So, by now, vengeance is a moot point. Everyone who was involved in, or gained power from, the brutalities against the Martells' family members is gone. And it wouldn't be fair to wage war against their families, because dead is dead?

And to get more into the regime's casualties, Cersei orchestrated Robert's hunting accident. Tywin was killed by his own son after trying to execute that son in response to the death of his grandson, who fell victim to the Tyrells conspiring with Littlefinger. Robert's brothers have each waged their own bid for the throne, and Stannis is still active and still trying to oust the Lannisters. (Why don't the Martells join up with Stannis? It's not his fault his brother was grateful for the three bodies wrapped in red cloaks.) Now Cersei is sending assassins after her brother, and soon enough, the court will start whispering to each other about Cersei's other brother apparently having gone AWOL.

Oh, and also, Uncle Kevan was just murdered by Varys, so there goes someone who may have been involved in the Sack---yeah, he was probably involved in the Sack, and was a close and valuable lieutenant to his brother, so the Martells could have legitimately had a target on him, and now he's dead. Furthermore, Varys killed Kevan specifically because he was doing too good a job at holding the regime together, so...seems to me the Baratheon-Lannister regime is destroying itself.

If I were someone who bore a grudge against the Lannisters, at this point I'd just stay out of the way.

BUT REALLY. The flaws in the Dornish plot are more serious than dissociating Viserys and Daenerys from their dad's and big brother's offenses. (https://makerkenzie.tumblr.com/post/630655645636591616/a-song-of-family-matters-or-not) In order to dissociate Viserys and Dany from Aerys and Rhaegar's mistreatment of the Martells, first they would need to acknowledge Aerys and Rhaegar's mistreatment of the Martells. There's no sign of them having done that, especially with Rhaegar.

Instead, they're telling themselves the Targaryens are totally on their side and super-appreciative of their support. (https://makerkenzie.tumblr.com/post/628935997835608064/a-song-of-mischief-and-shit-stirring-she-likes) Oberyn's goal was to promote a narrative in which the Targaryens loved the Martells and the Lannisters hated them. (https://makerkenzie.tumblr.com/post/627988209708744704/mine-will-be-a-song-of-mischief-and-shit-stirring) I doubt anything would have convinced Oberyn to accept the version where King Aerys and Lord Tywin hated each other, and King Aerys put the Martells in the middle of that feud.(https://makerkenzie.tumblr.com/post/628013144945688576/who-really-needed-to-be-punished-though)

And at this point, the Targs don't even need to be as negligent as Rhaegar or as perverse as Aerys. They're simply not interested, and that imbalance has already put Quentyn through a disgusting, agonizing death.

It's a "he's just not that into you" situation from both sides. The Lannisters didn't hate the Martells and the Targs didn't love them. The Targs still don't love them. I sympathize with the Martells, and it is so frustrating to see them keep on digging themselves further into that hole. The Targs barely see them at all.

#asoiaf meta #house lannister #tywin lannister #cersei lannister #tyrion lannister #house martell #no one screwed the martells harder than the targaryens #a song of mischief and shit-stirring #revenge is bullshit #ellaria sand #why don't the martells join up with stannis? #oberyn martell #quentyn martell was three days dying #arianne martell #viserys targaryen was king of ain't shit mountain #daenerys targaryen #elia martell deserved better than rhaegar

[makerkenzie]

How do I explain to you people that interracial relationships are okay

Not every white person dating a POC is fetishizing. White people can be respectful and responsible when it comes to culture and relationships and not everyone has bad intentions.

Asian people can date Black people without you saying shit like “your kids will be so pretty” they’re not dating for pretty kids. They’re dating bc they like each other.

Someone can dress their partner in clothing from their culture if they want. Someone can take their partner to cultural events if they want.

People in relationships can share cultures, experiences and love without it being toxic or skin deep.

Their partner isn’t culturally appropriating. Their partner is being shown the ultimate form of love, bc their partner trusts them and loves them enough to share their history and heritage.

Yeah, dating someone from your culture is nice bc you automatically have similar experiences. But you’re not limited to dating people with the same experiences. Loving someone is sharing and growing and being together.

Interracial relationships aren’t always toxic, and some of y’all need to stop projecting onto other people.

[makerkenzie]

I don’t know whether Arianne was yet born when he died. She was no more than a toddler.

Why do I care about Lord Yronwood?

A while back, I wrote some posts about how Edgar Yronwood died after a trial by combat with Oberyn Martell. The controversy in the text is the question of whether Prince Oberyn poisoned his sword. I'm about 95% sure he did. Even if he just smeared shit on the sword, it counts.

As I'm fairly confident of Prince Oberyn's foul play, my big question was why he wanted the old man dead. Is there any Watsonian justification available for the prince using a poisoned blade in a fight to first blood?

I asked this question because I was giving Prince Oberyn the benefit of the doubt.

Having combed through the relevant chapters, it seems the justification isn't there. He fucked the old guy's mistress, and then put him to a slow death.

So now there's the matter of why this is a thing I need to discuss. Do I care about Edgar Yronwood? Hardly. I look forward to seeing what House Yronwood does in the last two books, but I doubt they know anything more than I do about why Prince Oberyn did whatever he did. Their perceptions are enough for a story.

I care about Oberyn Martell's fight with Edgar Yronwood because of the context it adds to the story the Martells and Sand Snakes want to tell about themselves. It's one of those Meta-Songs of Meta and Songs.

I may be indirectly poking the viper's nest. Just a little.

[makerkenzie]

he's cute ;;

insta story 2.25.2023

#he's looking really thin in these #yet also bizarrely young #damn

[makerkenzie]

I am astonished at how young he looks in these. Those skincare products he's been hawking are no joke.

insta story 2/26/23; nik who lost his voice