#why would grrm do this to me | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

sindar-princeling · 2 years

Text

The previous post made me think some more about the real life influences on LOTR, so because I’m down with a cold and have a lot of time to spare, I finally wanted to write a coherent post about those comments GRRM made about Aragorn and his tax policy.

For those who haven’t heard the actual quote, here it is:

Tolkien can say that Aragorn became king and reigned for a hundred years, and he was wise and good. But Tolkien doesn’t ask the question: What was Aragorn’s tax policy? Did he maintain a standing army? What did he do in times of flood and famine? And what about all these orcs? By the end of the war, Sauron is gone but all of the orcs aren’t gone – they’re in the mountains. Did Aragorn pursue a policy of systematic genocide and kill them? Even the little baby orcs, in their little orc cradles? In real life, real-life kings had real-life problems to deal with. Just being a good guy was not the answer.

And my god, do I have problems with this approach to Tolkien. It’s kind of like asking why Bilbo was unconscious for a lot of the battle of five armies, when we know it was a story Tolkien was telling his kids before sleep.

When looking at LOTR, I think you can’t not read it as an ultimate escapist fantasy - and what’s most important, Tolkien’s personal escapist fantasy.

He is Frodo - a man born into a middle class family, educated, well-read, with close friends coming from the same “social sphere”, like Merry and Pippin, who died in WWI. Sam is in a very literal sense the batmen Tolkien fought with, which he said he considered “so far superior to myself”.

Tolkien had a few batmen during the war, like the article from my previous post mentions. Most probably because he fought in a few different units, but also, he may have lost some of them to war.

And in LOTR, they all get a happy ending.

Of all four of them, Frodo is the only one who can’t return home, most probably mirroring Tolkien’s trauma. He’s the only one whose ending is grounded in trauma, PTSD, loss. The rest of the hobbits get happy endings - very simple and traditional in a way that after the war was nothing but good - they marry, they have kids, the kids marry each other, everyone is happy and lives long lives.

Sam, especially, gets the happiest ending of all in this sense - he marries a woman he grew up with, he has so many beautiful kids, he is mayor for like seven times and everyone loves him, the Shire thrives.

Tolkien was too traumatised after the war not to write Frodo as a mirror of his experiences. But then he took all the people who fought alongside him, who suffered alongside him, people who he lost, and gave them the happiest fairy tale endings he could think of. And it’s not that Merry, Pippin and Sam weren’t as traumatised - this ending is not meant to belittle their experiences - Tolkien is simply giving them the ending that real life didn’t give them.

Returning to the original point, to Aragorn - it’s just another version of the same mechanism. Gondor was struggling, Gongor had Mordor as their immediate neighbours and was heavily affected by the war as well. And then there came a just, good king, and everything was fine. The end. It’s a subplot of the same fantasy as the hobbits’ endings. It doesn’t matter how hard ruling is, we trust that Aragorn is a good king, because people of Gondor deserve a good king (the people of the real world deserved a good ruler who wouldn’t drag them to war), and we know that Aragorn is an honorable, just man.

Nothing about the LOTR ending - apart from Frodo’s trauma - is meant to be realistic. Why would Tolkien want to write WWI and the aftermath - this time fictional.

#flips the table eats the mic and leaves #it's mine my own my precious #meta #frodo #samwise #merry #pippin #aragorn #tolkien #the lord of the rings #lotr

2K notes · View notes

jackoshadows · 6 months

Text

A tale of two marriages.

The vast difference in how Jon Snow deals with the marriages of Arya and Sansa Stark has already been mentioned. However, I noticed there are also other differences in the overall narrative as well.

First, two Kings - Robb Stark and Stannis Baratheon - refer to and use Sansa’s marriage to Tyrion to affirm that Sansa will never get Winterfell while positing that Jon Snow should be Lord of Winterfell.

“Young, and a king,” he said. “A king must have an heir. If I should die in my next battle, the kingdom must not die with me. By law Sansa is next in line of succession, so Winterfell and the north would pass to her.” His mouth tightened. “To her, and her lord husband. Tyrion Lannister. I cannot allow that. I will not allow that. That dwarf must never have the north.” - Robb Stark, ASoS

"By right Winterfell should go to my sister Sansa."

"Lady Lannister, you mean? Are you so eager to see the Imp perched on your father's seat? I promise you, that will not happen whilst I live, Lord Snow." - Stannis Baratheon, ADwD

In contrast, two Kings - Mance Rayder and Stannis Baratheon - are trying to save Arya Stark from her marriage to Ramsay Bolton for Jon Snow.

He glanced at the letter again. I will save your sister if I can. A surprisingly tender sentiment from Stannis - Jon, ADwD

Bring her home, Mance. I saved your son from Melisandre, and now I am about to save four thousand of your free folk. You owe me this one little girl. - Jon, ADwD

It’s interesting that Stannis has this ‘tender sentiment’ while vowing that Sansa will never get Winterfell considering that Arya too is married to his enemy Ramsay Bolton. Maybe he intends for Ramsay Bolton to be dead soon which would free Arya to make other alliances. Or maybe he hates the Lannisters more than the Boltons.

Additionally there is no other mention of the Sansa/Tyrion marriage in the Northern context, no Northern houses or lords who bring it up, no secret plotting that revolves around this marriage. In contrast Arya’s marriage to Ramsay is mentioned in the four corners of the North, from the Wall to Winterfell, from Deepwood Motte to White Harbor and is a driving force for many of the characters’ actions and plotting. It’s more important in terms of ‘The North Remembers’ and Northern uprising against the Lannisters in King’s Landing, the Freys and the Boltons considering it revolves around Lady Arya Stark present in Winterfell.

This is why - as GRRM has pointed out in interviews - Arya’s marriage to Ramsay is a necessary and important book plot.

Unintentionally. A little change in a long narrative can have big changes further on. You know, when we remove Jeyne Poole from season one, then you don’t have Jeyne Poole to be the fake Arya, as happens in the book. So what do you do then? The butterfly effect has done that.

It’s not Jeyne Poole’s marriage to Ramsay Bolton that is driving all these mini subplots in the North.Yes, it’s sad that no one would care if Ramsay married Jeyne just like no one cared that Jeyne got send off to the brothels while Sansa was a high value hostage of the Lannisters. Just like no one cared about Jeyne’s story in the books until the show replaced her with Sansa and suddenly there were discussions about rape in the series.

GRRM: I was trying to set up Jeyne for her future role as the false Arya. The real Arya has escaped and is presumed dead. But this girl has been in Littlefinger's control for years, and he's been training her. She knows Winterfell, has the proper northern accent, and can pose as Arya. Who the hell knows what a little girl you met two years ago looks like? When your a lord visiting Winterfell, are you going to pay attention to the little kids running around? So she can pull off the impersonation. Not having Jeyne, they used Sansa for that. Is that better or worse? You can make your decision there. Oddly, I never got pushback for that in the book because nobody cared about Jeyne Poole that much. They care about Sansa.

In the books, it’s Arya marriage that has two kings trying to save her, the Lord Commander of the Night’s Watch breaking sworn oaths, the Mountain clans and Northern houses marching with Stannis for the Ned’s precious little girl. They all think that’s Arya Stark in Winterfell. Arya may not be physically there, but it’s the marriage of Arya Stark in Winterfell in front of the Heart Tree, being given away by kin, Theon Greyjoy, that’s being used to hold the North and lend legitimacy to Ramsay Bolton as Lord of Winterfell.

#Arya Stark #Stannis Baratheon #Robb Stark #Jon Snow #Mance Rayder #Ramsay Bolton

190 notes · View notes

gwenllian-in-the-abbey · 3 months

Note

Grrm is a good writer but fire&blood (esp the dance) are the worst stories he ever wrote.

As someone who reads a lot of history books as part of my job, I really enjoy the framing device of Fire and Blood. I love the way the book makes you read between the lines, and I think that is a lot more interesting than the story itself. I really enjoy trying to figure out what's really being said, why Gyldane chose specific quotes and sources, and what might have been left out. Gyldayn had an agenda in writing this book, and it's fun to put the statements he makes in the context of the the in-world period in which he's writing (for instance, a lot of people assume because he was a maester it was a green agenda, but I think that's not really accurate, I think Gyldane is biased towards the houses that were prominent and influential at the time he was writing). I think it's kind of instructive too. A lot of people aren't really used to reading historical texts and it's sort of a fun way to introduce the idea that just because something appears in "the book" that doesn't mean it's the whole truth or even the truth at all.

The Dance, however, as in the outline of factual events, drives me nuts for a number of reasons, mainly though it's because a lot of it just doesn't make sense. The timeline is confusing, people spend months on end just doing nothing, act in really arbitrary ways, armies come out of nowhere and decide to keep fighting or stop fighting for really contrived and sometimes inconsistent reasons. I have said this in another post, but I think it highlights the limitations of GRRM's "gardening" method of writing, because GRRM is used to building plot through characterization (how would my character react in this situation and what would that lead to-- hard to do when your characters hardly interact) and he couldn't do that here. So yeah, as a story it leaves a lot to be desired, but as a faux history book it's a lot of fun.

#asks #fire and blood #grrm #asoiaf

115 notes · View notes

longclawshilt · 3 months

Text

I do think it’s quite interesting how GRRM’s ideals of a good king are confronted and challenged in Jon’s storyline.

Jon is undoubtedly a good person. And he has the capability to be a good king. But being a good person in the world of ASOIAF is not always rewarded. And being a good king is easier said than done.

“They say the king gives justice and protects the weak.” She started to climb off the rock, awkwardly, but the ice had made it slippery and her foot went out from under her. Jon caught her before she could fall, and helped her safely down. The woman knelt on the icy ground. “M’lord, I beg you—”

“Don’t beg me anything. Go back to your hall, you shouldn’t be here. We were commanded not to speak to Craster’s women.”

“You don’t have to speak with me, m’lord. Just take me with you, when you go, that’s all I ask.”

All she asks, he thought. As if that were nothing.

“I’ll … I’ll be your wife, if you like. My father, he’s got nineteen now, one less won’t hurt him none.”

(Jon III, ACOK)

The situation with Gilly at Craster’s Keep is a perfect example of how difficult it is to give the king’s justice in certain situations. Jon wants to help Gilly, he even feels guilty and horrible for choosing not to, but he cannot so easily offer his help because he is a man of the Night’s Watch.

What’s interesting about this conversation is that Gilly addresses and appeals to Jon as she would a king. She places herself as the weak party and Jon as the king who is expected to protect the weak. She kneels to him, as one kneels to a king, and addresses him as “M’lord”; ironic because Jon is just a bastard, who is now a member of the Night’s Watch. Much has been said about this exchange, and fandom often gives Jon a lot less empathy than he deserves. The truth is that he is in a very terrible situation, notwithstanding the character development that is to come regarding his perception of the wildlings.

But I’m looking back at GRRM’s quote about how being king gives one wealth and power and ability to do something, anything. This is something that Jon absolutely lacks in this situation. He may have been symbolically positioned as the rightful king by the narrative, but that doesn’t mean he has any actual power to enact change within the narrative itself. If Jon were nearly as callous about this whole situation as this fandom wants us to believe, he wouldn’t feel so guilty about refusing to help Gilly as he does later on. P.S: I also want to note that Sam is often lauded for being the one to help the girl, “unlike Jon”…except, Sam only does so when the chaos that follows the mutiny and Craster’s death gives Gilly the opportunity to flee. Sam understood that he had no power to help Gilly early in ACOK and that’s why he sent her to Jon. But he also overestimated just how much Jon would be able to do at that moment. Jon may have been the Lord Commander’s steward, but that didn’t give him the ability to go against Mormont (especially when the LC himself was turning a blind eye to Craster’s vices).

It’s then interesting how this situation of a young girl trying to flee a precarious situation is repeated later on in ADWD and this time, Jon manages to help her. Except the difference is that Jon is the Lord Commander now, not just the LC’s steward. What he couldn’t do for Gilly in ACOK, he can do for Alys even though that too places him in a tough situation.

“Why not the king? Karhold declared for Stannis.”

“My uncle declared for Stannis, in hopes it might provoke the Lannisters to take poor Harry’s head. Should my brother die, Karhold should pass to me, but my uncles want my birthright for their own. Once Cregan gets a child by me they won’t need me anymore. He’s buried two wives already.” She rubbed away a tear angrily, the way Arya might have done it. “Will you help me?”

“Marriages and inheritance are matters for the king, my lady. I will write to Stannis on your behalf, but—”

Alys Karstark laughed, but it was the laughter of despair. “Write, but do not look for a reply. Stannis will be dead before he gets your message. My uncle will see to that.”

“What do you mean?”

“Arnolf is rushing to Winterfell, ’tis true, but only so he might put his dagger in your king’s back. He cast his lot with Roose Bolton long ago … for gold, the promise of a pardon, and poor Harry’s head. Lord Stannis is marching to a slaughter. So he cannot help me, and would not even if he could.” Alys knelt before him, clutching the black cloak. “You are my only hope, Lord Snow. In your father’s name, I beg you. Protect me.”

(Jon IX, ADWD)

We’re seeing a repeat of Gilly and Jon here. Alys is now the weak and helpless maid and Jon, who is still a brother of the Night’s Watch, is once again made to play the role of a king.

Obviously the narrative, as it was with Gilly’s situation in ACOK, is saying that Jon is the king because while Alys could’ve pinned her hopes on Stannis Baratheon (who is actually titled), she chose to flee north to Jon the bastard. And what’s interesting this time is that Jon actually helps Alys in whatever way he can. He uses his status as Lord Commander and his dealings with the Thenns to secure Alys’ marriage. He oversteps his bounds as Lord Commander, and the irony is that he starts to act more as a king would.

So it’s interesting to see how the character often marked as the true king by GRRM’s narrative handles the moral obligations that come with kingship. And GRRM is putting Jon through these tests when he doesn’t even have a crown of his own. GRRM often makes Jon prove his worth as a king despite thinking of himself only as a bastard. We see this best when Stannis comes to the Wall.

Surprisingly, Stannis smiled at that. “You’re bold enough to be a Stark. Yes, I should have come sooner. If not for my Hand, I might not have come at all. Lord Seaworth is a man of humble birth, but he reminded me of my duty, when all I could think of was my rights. I had the cart before the horse, Davos said. I was trying to win the throne to save the kingdom, when I should have been trying to save the kingdom to win the throne.” Stannis pointed north. “There is where I’ll find the foe that I was born to fight.”

(Jon XI, ASOS)

It is true that Jon and Stannis are in very different situations. Stannis is aware that he is the rightful king (as Robert’s heir), and he has also heard from Melisandre that he is the prophesied prince. Jon, on the other hand, is a bastard boy completely unaware of his royal birth or his magical destiny. Yet it’s so interesting that it’s Jon the bastard who was actually doing his duty as the king (without even knowing it) whereas Stannis had to be reminded of it. So despite his failings every now and then, Jon does live up to the author’s ideal of a great king.

#in my king jon feels again dksjsnsnsdj #this started as an introspective look at the morally difficult choices Jon has to make across the series and how that relates to kingship #and then took a turn into jonsnowdefensesquad nonsense in the middle smh #2 am thoughts #jon snow #asoiaf #valyrianscrolls #forgot to add but that last stannis bit is why I think jon will be king at the end of the story and not in twow like most jon stans #grrm legit puts my boy through the ringer #he will have to prove his worth (and make lots of morally ambiguous choices)#he needs to save the kingdom FIRST then be its king

107 notes · View notes

annes-andromeda · 2 months

Text

Long Post Incoming

——————

I don’t know who needs to hear this (*cough* TB stans *cough*) but Aegon has always had a stronger claim that Rha*nyra.

According to Andal law, a son comes before a daughter, and a niece comes before an uncle. The only time Rha*nyra had a strong claim was when she was Vis*rys’s only living child. No one wanted Da*mon on the IT because they knew that he would essentially be a second Maegor (or worse). Not only was Rha*nyra more well liked at the time, but in accordance to the law, she had a stronger claim that Da*mon.

At the end of the day, Rha*nyra being named heir had nothing to do with Rha*nyra. In the book, she was named heir so that Da*mon wouldn’t become king, and in the show, she was named heir because of Vis*rys’s guilt for killing Aemma. It was never about her. But, once Rha*nyra heard her daddy name her his successor, she rolled with it and refused to give up her claim. Which again, at the time, was at its strongest.

That is, until Vis*rys married Alicent and had Aegon.

Otto states that the succession changed the second Aegon was born, and although Otto isn’t the easiest man to like, he wasn’t wrong. As soon as Vis*rys fathered a living son, Rha*nyra was brought down from being first in line, to being second in line, with Da*mon now being third in line.

Now GRRM harkened back to Henry VIII and the succession crisis regarding his three living children (Mary, Elizabeth, and Edward), and states that Edward was third in line but was to become king first.

There’s just one problem. There was no succession crisis.

Edward, despite his age, was ALWAYS first in line for the throne. Everyone and their mother knew the second he was born, he would be Henry’s heir. Henry removed Mary and Elizabeth from the succession and denounced them as illegitimate because he annulled his marriages to his first and second wives, Catherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn.

Mary and Elizabeth were only returned to the succession through the Third Succession Act of 1543 because Henry did not father anymore sons, and he needed spares should anything happen to Edward. But Edward remained first in line nonetheless, whereas Mary and Elizabeth followed right after despite both of them being older.

Because of Aegon’s birth, Rha*nyra’s claim has weakened substantially, and while it’s still stronger than Da*mon’s, people will naturally gravitate towards Aegon due to the majority of Westeros, save for Dorne, following male primogeniture.

If Vis*ys really wanted to strengthen his daughters claim and instill her as heir, then he would’ve never remarried and had sons. He would’ve helped Rha*nyra gain allies, and teach her how to rule. But he didn’t. He just named her heir and that’s it.

Which is why Vis*rys still wanting Rha*nyra to be his successor despite having Aegon is stupid, because the law dictates that Aegon is first in line. And Vis*rys never changed the laws of succession, he only wanted his daughter to be the exception.

Now if this were Dorne, where absolute primogeniture is practiced, then Rha*nyra would most certainly be the uncontested heir. But since she’s not Dornish, Rha*nyra’s claim to the IT is weaker than Aegon’s. And it only gets weaker once Vis*rys sires two more sons following Aegon.

With the births of Aegon, Aemond, and Daeron, Rha*nyra is pushed even further down the line of succession. And when Aegon has two legitimate sons of his own (Jaehaerys and Maelor), she’s pushed even further down the line.

It’s why Da*mon groomed and married her: so he would get closer to the throne. But even with their claims combined, and despite the fact that they have Aegon III and Viserys II, Aegon’s claim is still strong.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but this is what the succession should look like:

Aegon II—>Jaehaerys—>Maelor—>Aemond—>Daeron—>Rha*nyra—>Aegon III—>Viserys II—>Helaena—>Jaehaera—>Da*mon

Fans can scream about how Rha*nyra and the Blacks had more houses supporting them during the Dance (which realistically doesn’t make a lick of sense), but it doesn’t change the fact that Aegon has always had the stronger claim.

You can say that she was usurped all you want, but it doesn’t mean that Aegon didn’t have a claim to the throne. If anything, he had the strongest claim of them all.

And not only that, but Aegon had legitimate sons as his heirs, unlike Rha*nyra, who was trying to pass off her illegitimate bastard sons as her heirs, despite it being very illegal.

People say that Jace, Luke, and Joff were fighting for their claims when… they literally had no claims to begin with. They’re illegitimate bastards who shouldn’t be anywhere near the line of succession. Just because they have the last name Velaryon and Laenor “accepted” them, doesn’t suddenly make them legitimate.

That’s like that saying that because Joffrey, Myrcella, and Tommen had the last name Baratheon, it suddenly means they were Robert’s trueborn children, when we know they weren’t.

All in all, Vis*rys was the real reason for the Dance happening, all because he couldn’t make up his mind about the succession and was politically inept. And no, him marrying Laena wouldn’t have stopped the Dance from happening because there still would’ve been a chance that Laena birthed a son (or sons).

#house of the dragon #game of thrones #pro team green #anti team black #anti viserys i targaryen #anti rhaenyra targaryen #anti daemon targaryen #neither aegon nor nyra deserved the throne #but you cant say that aegon didnt have a claim #cause yes tf he did

73 notes · View notes

melrosing · 13 days

Note

Do you have any thoughts on the Azor Ahai prophecy?

sorry this took a while, I haven't really written much about this in the past so I don't have the relevant shit to hand in the same way. but my thoughts under the cut; conscious this is a contentious issue, so whilst I'm happy to chat about it, pls be normal if engaging.

I think it’s Jon. That doesn’t really get me excited or make me feel anything tbh, I guess because Jon is my least favourite major POV and the Azor Ahai prophecy isn’t one that interests me a whole lot. But I think the only real candidates for Azor Ahai are Jon and Dany, and based on both narrative structure and evidence within the story, I feel fairly confident it’s Jon.

Ofc, the argument for Dany being AA is strong and I think that’s the point. She ticks all the boxes, indeed more than Jon currently does, and the birth of her dragons is pretty much the most fantastic event in the story. She’ll surely have a huge role in ending the Long Night too, so Dany really does fit the bill.

But imo the structure of the story, and of their own personal arcs, favours Jon. I’ll quickly go through why I don’t think it favours Dany.

First off, rules of three: I think it was GRRM’s editor who told us that he likes rules of three in his writing. He makes you think one thing is true, then appears to provide the true solution, before the real answer emerges later on and completely throws you. There are lots of examples of GRRM using this technique in ASOIAF, but let’s go for another example that directly concerns Jon himself: the question of who his mother is.

The first answer we get is a basic one: Ned got Jon on a sex worker, and that’s that. We already know that’s near certainly not the case, because consciously or subconsciously we know that’s not how stories work. Second answer, Jon was born of an affair between Ned and Ashara. This idea is more interesting, has more supporting evidence, and we come across other characters who claim it’s true, like Edric. But still, I think a lot of people (even if they didn’t know R+L=J) would think that still doesn’t feel like the end of it. The closure has come too soon, and it doesn’t have the surprise factor that we know it’s supposed to have. It’s just clean.

Then of course the true answer is one that we still haven’t learnt yet: Ned isn’t even Jon’s father, and his mother is Lyanna, and Jon is the ‘true heir to the 7K’ etc etc etc. I think we’re all extremely used to this information now, but apart from the overwhelming evidence, we accept it because narratively it makes sense. This is the secret third thing, where everything clicks into place in a surprising way and has massive implications for the rest of the story. Rule of three.

I think the same applies to Azor Ahai. First, we’re told it’s Stannis. He ticks most of the boxes, albeit in a really haphazard way, but we know it’s not Stannis because we know how stories work. Then we’re presented with Dany as the answer. This seems to add up really well: she ticks the boxes far more literally - smoke, salt, bleeding star - and characters like Aemon are convinced it’s Dany.

But I think we run into the same problem here as we do with Ashara. The closure’s come too soon, everything fits too neatly, and honestly it lacks the surprise factor. Dany may be a surprise Azor Ahai to the rest of her world, but she isn’t to the reader: we’ve seen what she’s capable of, and if we were told that Dany is going to save the world, most good faith readers would be like ‘well yeah if anyone’s gonna do it’. And so ironically, that’s how you start to get the feeling it isn’t Dany. It sounds painfully self-contradictory, yeah, but it’s the same as it works with Ashara. Consciously or subconsciously, we know how stories work.

So Jon is the third answer. Jon is intended as the surprise, where he didn’t even seem like a contender, is really just some guy. Except he isn’t. To make sense of this, you really have to forget how obvious R+L=J seems to all of us now, bc time and again GRRM has said he didn’t intend it as obvious, and actually seems a bit frustrated how many people had worked it out - even before the show got to make the reveal.

Pasting at this juncture the key details of the prophecy:

When the red star bleeds and the darkness gathers, Azor Ahai shall be born again amidst smoke and salt to wake dragons out of stone. DAVOS III, ASOS

So Jon is descended from Jaehaerys II and Shaera, as the Ghost of High Heart said TPTWP would be. He is indeed a prince, even if he doesn’t know it. When Melisandre looked for Stannis as TPTWP in the flames, she saw ‘snow’. Jon’s story is the one that most directly concerns the fight against TLN; Dany currently has the potential for the most impact, yes, but at the moment she has absolutely no idea what’s going on beyond the wall, and it’s Jon trying to unite the 7K against the Others. This makes him the strongest thematic fit for the hero who will ultimately end TLN.

Then we have the fact that there are two major things about Jon’s story that have to mean something. 1: Jon is the ‘true heir’ to the 7K, the one no one saw coming, that everyone thought was a nobody. Jon was born of the union between Rhaegar and Lyanna that only a dead man and Howland fucking Reed (likely a man with his own knowledge about the TLN, the Children and the Others) know about. Jon was the child Rhaegar somehow knew he had to have (the ethics of that aside…), that made him realise the prophecy wasn’t about him but someone else. Within the story of ASOIAF, this is seismic. It’s no good to say that Jon’s true heritage is nothing more than a political subplot, that’s not how stories work and it’s certainly not how GRRM writes.

And 2: Jon is going to be fucking resurrected. No, he’s not the first character to come back - Beric and Catelyn both got there before him. But if there’s one thing we can be sure of, Jon is coming back for a reason. We saw how ridiculous it is in the show for Jon to just come back to life and get on with everything like normal. Everyone was asking well why the fuck did he need to die in the first place then. To give him an excuse to leave the Night’s Watch? lol. Nah Jon is going to be reborn for a specific reason. Cannot emphasise enough that it is not GRRM’s style to kill Jon for nothing more than dramatic effect.

And who is going to rebirth him? Melisandre. What is the significance of Melisandre? Fucking everything. Melisandre has not been placed at the Wall to get the prophecy wrong AGAIN. She has been placed at the Wall because that is where the answer is. If Jon is the POV most focused on the TLN and the Others, Melisandre is the POV most focused on the AA prophecy. She is the one trying desperately to solve it, and whose revelation we are awaiting because once again, that’s how stories work: we know that Melisandre is wrong right now, so we anticipate the moment she will be right.

So Melisandre seeing ‘snow’ in her flames means something. Melisandre’s weird connection to Jon means something. Melisandre being the one who, seemingly without knowing it, has been preparing Jon for rebirth since about halfway through ADWD - means something also. R’hllorism and its weird connection to the AA prophecy means something. Melisandre and Ghost both having red eyes, with all the rest in mind, also seems to mean something.

Her eyes were two red stars, shining in the dark. At her throat, her ruby gleamed, a third eye glowing brighter than the others. Jon had seen Ghost's eyes blazing red the same way, when they caught the light just right. JON VI, ADWD

And right there’s the fact that Melisandre is the ‘red star of the prophecy’. Everyone thinks it’s the red comet, which we see identified in the ACOK prologue as the ‘bleeding star’ named in the AA prophecy. You know who’s also introduced in that chapter. Fuckin Melisandre. Melisandre and the ruby she wears are alternately described as ‘red’ and ‘star’ - sometimes both together:

Melisandre's ruby glowed like a red star at her throat. DAVOS VI, ASOS

So here’s Melisandre, red as hell, explaining the prophecy. Notice how much she herself seems to embody the imagery of the prophecy - red, flames, blood, burning, etc.

Melisandre was robed all in scarlet satin and blood velvet, her eyes as red as the great ruby that glistened at her throat as if it too were afire. "In ancient books of Asshai it is written that there will come a day after a long summer when the stars bleed and the cold breath of darkness falls heavy on the world. In this dread hour a warrior shall draw from the fire a burning sword. And that sword shall be Lightbringer, the Red Sword of Heroes, and he who clasps it shall be Azor Ahai come again, and the darkness shall flee before him." DAVOS I, ACOK

So we come to the ‘bleeding/red star’ aspect of the prophecy. Smoke and salt are easy enough to come by, but a star is a more specific requirement. As is a birth (or rebirth). Dany seemed to tick these boxes with the smoke of the pyre, the great salt sea, the birth of her dragons/her figurative rebirth, and the red comet.

But I think the bleeding/red star is more likely Melisandre and/or her rubies. How either end up bleeding I can’t say, but it’s not hard to imagine. Does Melisandre destroy her ruby to revive Jon, or use her own blood? Maybe she has to die to do it, leaving Jon none the fucking wiser when he awakens what her reason for reviving him even was. That would be fitting: I think Jon won't understand his own significance for some time yet.

Either way, we have our star: Melisandre has been looking everywhere for one, never knowing it was she herself. This is actually a great beat for Mel’s story - for all the times she’s appeared all knowing, she was missing the woods for the trees, and her own significance in it all. It’s tragic, too, because that revelation is perhaps also one of her own demise.

(sidenote: I also think it's more fitting [and more likely] that the decision to burn Shireen and indeed the idea to do it is Stannis' own. in desperation, he attempts to fulfil what he recalls of Melisandre's methods, but butchers everything in doing so.)

Next we need smoke and salt, and as mentioned, those are straightforward. We’ve been told the Wall has plenty of salt lol, and light a few candles and you’ve got smoke - not to mention Melisandre loves a bit of fire, so figures there will be smoke involved in Jon’s rebirth either way. So salt and smoke both sound like pretty standard ingredients for a resurrection, I don’t think it’s much worth elaborating.

Then what’s left? ‘A birth/rebirth a day after a long summer’, check, we’re told again and again through ADWD that we’re on the brink of winter. This is actually a box Jon ticks that Dany does not, because her rebirth took place during the summer. Weird technicality but the fact remains. Anyway, ‘When the cold breath of darkness falls heavy on the world’, check again - Jon is right there on the scene.

The flaming sword comes after the rebirth, but it’s a given that Jon will wield one - it’s right there in his dreams:

Jon was armored in black ice, but his blade burned red in his fist. ADWD, JON XII

(another sidenote: look, a song of ice and fire. I’m aware that GRRM has previously stated that Dany’s fire and the battle against the others are the titular ice and fire, because he’s sure not going to say ‘by the way it’s also Jon’ when he hasn’t revealed anything about Jon yet. But we know that Rhaegar anticipates a child who embodies ‘the song of ice and fire’, and you cannot associate Dany with ice. Dany IS fire.)

I think Jon probably already has Lightbringer, and it’s Longclaw - we see that Ghost is tied in with the red of it all, and who is atop the sword but Ghost. Valyrian steel obviously also has some fantastical role still to play, and it’s notable that Jaime envisions he and Brienne also wielding flaming Valyrian swords (their flames are blue, of course, and Jaime doesn’t know in the dream that the blades are Valyrian, but the point stands that there’s some connection between flaming swords and Valyrian steel going on, and that that all ties to TLN).

So all that’s really left is to wake dragons from stone. This is one where I can’t really guess what it’ll mean - my best guess is that Jon will find dragonsteel at Dragonstone, because even if he did somehow hatch further dragons they’d be damn babies for the duration of the Long Night, but really this part could point to something we can’t yet guess at, so whatever.

And finally, there’s Jon’s heritage. The Targaryens are tied to the wielding of fire, to Valyrian steel, and to dragons. The Starks are tied to winter, to the Wall, to the old gods and the North. Jon’s heritage is representative of the two forces that need to unite to overcome the Others.

I don’t want to get into how exactly Jon ties into the mythos of the Night King and what undead Jon might look like, because whilst there’s plenty in there that no doubt ALSO supports the prophecy, I freely admit I just haven’t looked into it all that much bc it’s not a passion point for me, so I'm not going to seriously try. But we do have this part from Benerro's prophecy:

death itself will bend its knee, and all those who die fighting in her [referring to Dany as TPTWP] cause shall be reborn... ADWD, TYRION VI

You can make this really figurative to get it to work for Dany, but it would make a lot more sense for Jon. He'll rise from the dead (death itself will bend the knee) and 'all those who die fighting in [TPTWP's] cause shall be reborn' - hey just like the Others are. Is Jon somehow going to have his own army of the undead? Possibly.

So, cumulatively:

Jon will unite ice and fire, armoured in ice and wielding a flaming sword

Jon’s Stark and Targaryen heritage are figuratively significant

Rhaegar foresaw the significance of Jon. Rhaegar has been wrong in a lot in all senses of the word, but I think he’s going to be right on this point - on ONE fucking point

Jon will be reborn a day after winter comes

Jon will be reborn beneath a bleeding red star

Plenty of scope for salt and smoke to be involved

Jon will wield a flaming red sword

Jon will be on the ground as darkness approaches and lead the charge against it

Jon will make death bend the knee

Jon may lead an army of the 'reborn'

Melisandre is the POV with the greatest fixation on the Azor Ahai prophecy, and Melisandre is beginning to realise the significance of Jon + will be responsible for bringing him back

Jon is the Secret Third Thing

etc etc

And finally, bc I’ve seen many, many heated arguments over this, I want to establish some things myself before signing off:

I am engaging in good faith here. I have come to these conclusions through reading the books and considering all sides, and think this is a very legitimate reading of the text

This resolution to the prophecy is not something I am invested in. Jon hardly makes my top 20 characters in ASOIAF, and Azor Ahai is not a prophecy I crave an answer for. I’m a lot more interested the southern storylines (in case you couldn't tell)

Dany, meanwhile, is a character I like about five times as much as I like Jon. I’ve not reached the conclusion I have because I think she’s not capable of being AA (currently, I think she’s a whole lot more capable than Jon). I’m only judging based on where I think the story and evidence gestures

I agree that there’s potentially problematic subtext in introducing Dany, a young girl who subverts the typical ‘chosen boy’ narrative by fighting every adversity to be a hero for the ages, [edit - forgot the other half of the sentence orz] only to say actually nah it was special boy Jon all along. It’s difficult to say exactly how egregious I’m going to find it when that comes to be because I don’t have the material to judge, but I fully understand why people find the idea of Jon Snow as AA such a deeply frustrating idea, and I may well share in that frustration when it comes to it

Again: I’m engaging in good faith, so if you want to discuss, please afford me the same. We are discussing a fantasy series

#ask #jon snow #azor ahai #asoiaf #melisandre of asshai

56 notes · View notes

gendrie · 21 days

Text

arya meeting lady stoneheart is about closure. it’s about coming full circle. its about the cycle of life and death and rebirth. it’s about family. it’s about purpose. its about mercy and justice and grief and, yes, vengeance. but i don’t think its in a “ohh arya needs to learn revenge is bad” sort of way and i seriously doubt thats the effect this meeting will have, at least from the character’s perspective.

arya already knows revenge doesn’t make her feel any better. she’s under no illusions about that. she associates the ability to kill with survival and with good reason because, for better or worse, that what it means.

Arya edged farther into the room. Joffrey's dead. She could almost see him, with his blond curls and his mean smile and his fat soft lips. Joffrey's dead! She knew it ought to make her happy, but somehow she still felt empty inside. Joffrey was dead, but if Robb was dead too, what did it matter? (Arya, ASOS)

arya is aware that joffrey dying didn’t bring robb back nor did it make her happy. she still feels empty. in her own way this is fairly similar to the comments made by catelyn and ellaria - grown women and mothers with a lot more life experience then her.

in order for arya to have a “revenge is bad” moment she would need to think it’s good to start with. she doesn’t. arya doesn’t think her actions are heroic. she actually has more self awareness on that account then most povs who run around making excuses for their actions or close their eyes to their wrongdoings.

“As I cannot be the hero, let me be the monster, and lesson them in fear in place of love.” Mercy mouthed the last lines along with him. They were better lines than hers, and apt besides. (Arya, TWOW)

she recognizes the relevancy of tyrion’s monologue in the bloody hand, literally mouthing the words about being a “monster”. arya knows that whats she’s doing is dark and dangerous. since the very beginning, arya has felt she is bad and unwanted that feeling only intensifies as the series progresses because of what she has done.

Knights were captured and ransomed all the time, and sometimes women were too. But what if Robb won't pay their price? She wasn't a famous knight, and kings were supposed to put the realm before their sisters. And her lady mother, what would she say? Would she still want her back, after all the things she'd done? Arya chewed her lip and wondered. (Arya, ASOS)

it cannot be stressed enough that arya really doesn’t think revenge and killing are good. nor has she ever prioritized it over her family. that is not why arya is at the house of black and white. arya has every reason to believe she is the last stark left and that she has no home.

A long time ago, she remembered her father saying that when the cold winds blow the lone wolf dies and the pack survives. He had it all backwards. Arya, the lone wolf, still lived, but the wolves of the pack had been taken and slain and skinned.

Winterfell is burned and fallen, Arya reminded herself. Old Nan and Maester Luwin were both dead, most like, and Sansa too. It did no good to think of them. All men must die.

There is no place here for Arya of House Stark, she was thinking. Arya's place was Winterfell, only Winterfell was gone. When the snows fall and the white winds blow, the lone wolf dies, but the pack survives. She had no pack, though. (Arya, AFFC)

"Do they frighten you, child?" asked the kindly man. "It is not too late for you to leave us. Is this truly what you want?" Arya bit her lip. She did not know what she wanted. If I leave, where will I go? (ADWD)

that could not be clearer in the text. arya’s pack has been “taken and slain” her home is “burned and fallen”. she has no one and nowhere to go. even grrm has said this:

“She’s having a very hard time letting go of those last remnants of Arya...but where else does she turn?” George R.R. Martin

arya believes she has no other options. her family is gone anyway so what is left for her? sure, she could take the kindly man’s advice and become a wife or a courtesan, but those paths are dead ends for arya of house stark. instead? she can risk the faceless men’s indoctrination in exchange for their skills; which might actually give her the power to do something.

arya’s list serves a couple functions. initially, its a way to cope with fear and self hatred.

She hated the villagers for their sheepishness, almost as much as she hated herself. (Arya, ACOK)

the only way arya can deal with the march to harrenhal - where she watched torture rape and murder day after day - is by promising herself one day she will right these wrongs. it was traumatizing for her to witness those things AND be powerless to stop it. she is filled with GUILT. in the hob&w the list does become a connection to arya’s identity. because, again, she believes it’s all that’s left to her.

but thats not true. the list is not the only thing left to her. news of the north is going to arrive in braavos sooner or later. bran is calling out to arya across thousands of leagues. her connection to nymeria doesn’t just endure but grows stronger. arya is going to return to westeros where i think her path will cross with lady stoneheart’s. the meeting of these two will close the circle. it’s only fitting arya do that. she made beric swear to reunite her with catelyn. nymeria pulled her body out of the river. beric gave her the kiss of life, ensuring that his his promise to arya would be fulfilled.

lady stoneheart isn’t catelyn, though. she had a mental breakdown at the red wedding and was dead for three days before being resurrected. her heart doesnt beat anymore.

"Lady Catelyn?" Tears filled her eyes. "They said . . . they said that you were dead." "She is," said Thoros of Myr. (Brienne, AFFC)

"She wants her son alive, or the men who killed him dead," said the big man. "She wants to feed the crows, like they did at the Red Wedding. Freys and Boltons, aye. We'll give her those, as many as she likes.” (Brienne, AFFC)

lady stoneheart is also driven by the only thing that she believes remains to her: vengeance. she turns on brienne who faithfully served catelyn even after her death. stoneheart and arya aren’t the only ones either. stoneheart has “galvanized” (as per grrm) the brotherhood down a darker path too. she hasn’t forced them. those who remain? lem, harwin, and gendry chose to do so.

but they search for arya too. in the ASOS epilogue stoneheart and the bwb are searching for arya. arya can bring out the humanity left within lady stoneheart. arya can give her a little bit of peace before she dies - regardless of how that happens. maybe even let her know bran and rickon and sansa survive. in return lady stoneheart can give arya the acceptance she needs. arya doubted that catelyn even wanted her back. arya deserves to know that she did.

that is what arya needs. not for someone to tell her “revenge is bad!!!” (she knows) but to tell her she is loved and wanted despite everything. lady stoneheart can deliver arya a new purpose too. she will entrust in arya robb’s crown - the symbol of northern sovereignty. arya can take control of the brotherhood and lead them on a different path just like she did at the stoney sept. she will always pursue justice but arya will not serve death any longer.

a meeting between arya and lady stoneheart will derail their mutual need for vengeance because in their hearts arya and catelyn value their family above all else. thats what drove catelyn in life. thats why lady stoneheart will entrust the future of their family to arya because she cannot be with them any longer. its up to arya now.

#asoiaf nonsense #in my head i am responsible for this theory lol #so you can imagine how it pains me to see the fandom get it twisted

72 notes · View notes

fromtheseventhhell · 2 months

Note

I'm not sure how to get it into people's heads that Arya is a female character. She's not a boy, not nonbinary, trans, agender, or genderless. I don't intend this in a way to be negative or wanky, but her girlhood is imbedded within her character. The problem isn't that Arya stans are missing the point by overemphasizing her femininity and wanting her to be a barefoot tradwife baby making machine, but that we're stating it exists when the majority of fandom and the show itself have gone out of the way to minimize the relevancy of her gender. I'm fully convinced there are a lot of people who think Arya would be the exact same character had GRRM created her as a male character named Arry instead, perhaps they'd do a better job at acknowledging her importance.

What's most ironic to me is how these same fans will gush and coo over the sisters being more alike than we think, but only if it involves giving Arya's characteristics to Sansa. Well acktually, Sansa likes to ride horses just as much as Arya does! They're so alike uwu! But dare acknowledge that Arya has traits and aspects commonly associated to Sansa then not only does that get accusations of wanting Arya to become Sansa, but that it's solely about showing Sansa up and wanting her to grovel in Arya's shadow and superiority 🙄 Hypocrisy and projection showing itself.

Somewhat of an aside, but I recently saw a post on reddit complaining about the fact that all four of Daemon's children survived the Dance specifically focused on the fact that both Rhaena and Baela lived. According to the OP, one of them should've died and their post-war roles in the story should've been given to only one of them. Which at its core is really the main conflict between Sansa and Arya stans, no matter how much the Stansas want to cover their ears and play dumb. It's not about Arya stans projecting their sibling squabbles onto the two of them but simply the fact that it's not possible for two characters to fulfill the same role in the story, specifically when it involves two female characters. The existence of two Stark sisters is an inconvenience for the people who want the story to revolve around Sansa.

I have to believe there's some bubbles that they don't want to admit will burst if TWOW will ever be released and that's why they cling to the idea that Arya stans are the delusional ones. They have to believe that the parts of Sansa's seasons 5-8 storyline they like came from GRRM instead of D&D or else their Jonsa and QITN fantasies will fall apart. I have no idea how someone can watch the scene where Sansa tells Arya she couldn't survive what she had while Arya can only sputter out that she was training and believe 1) it makes sense for their book characters and 2) D&D didn't blatantly favor Sansa and Sophie over Arya and Maisie.

This ask came literally seconds after I drafted a post talking about this exact topic and it's so wild to me that we were both up thinking about Arya + her girlhood and wanting to discuss it 🥹

As for this ask, you really hit the nail on the head. Arya's gender is an essential aspect of her journey but fandom ignores that because they've decided that there's only one "right" way to exist as a female character. Arya's self-esteem issues stem from her being a non-conforming Lady in a misogynistic society, she has to disguise herself as a boy in part because of the threat of sexual violence, in Harrenhal she is assigned gender-specific tasks/labor, political matches are made without her knowledge/consent, she is threatened with sexual violence multiple times, and even her role within the FM is influenced by her gender. Her being non-conforming doesn't mean she's the complete antithesis of everything feminine. The obsession with propping up Sansa has ruined people's ability to perceive complex female characters, ironically including Sansa herself. They genuinely would've respected Arya more if she had died passively rather than fight for her life and you can't tell me that isn't misogyny.

That Reddit post is a great example of how people genuinely can't (or refuse to) comprehend the idea of two female characters occupying the same space. Cause you're right, that is the root of the issue. I think the only reason they bother with the fake "Stark sisters uwu" crap is because they've backed themselves into a faux-feminist corner and they don't want to look hypocritical for disliking Arya. So instead, they pretend to care all while rewriting her to serve as Sansa's prop. This is also why so many Queen!Sansa truthers are also anti-Dany + think that Sansa becoming Queen depends on Dany's downfall. They desperately cling to the show as canon, when D&D have openly admitted they changed the story because they favored Sansa/Sophie. They're fine with how show!Arya is written because to them, that's exactly how she should be; a subservient lapdog for Sansa. TWOW is definitely going to ruin that illusion, and one of the reasons I'm optimistic about it being released is getting to see fandom's reaction.

#ask #anon #arya stark #anti sansa stans #anti d&d #anti got #this fandom is bullshit but getting asks like this is why I'm never going to leave #cause I enjoy discussing Arya's character with people who just /get it/ more then I hate seeing delusional takes about her #I will continue to celebrate her character and call out nonsense for as long as I can #also the timing of this particular ask was just perfect *chef's kiss*#honestly I'd prefer that stansas just admit they don't like Arya instead of constantly downplaying her intelligence and trying to #gaslight Arya stans every time we make book accurate posts/theories #no we aren't delusional for thinking that Arya will be a leader lol and they don't really believe it either which is why so much #of their time is spent pilfering skills and plot relevance from Arya to boost their fanon Sansa theories

65 notes · View notes

agentrouka-blog · 1 month

Note

Dany fan here: I think other Dany fans think Jonsas are over the top with Dany hate because of pol!Jon. I follow many Jonsas because I’m perfectly fine with Jonsa. It’s not for me but I see the vision. That said I’m a bit of an unusual Dany fan in the sense that I’m a big fan of the Meereenese Knot essays and think the interpretation of Dany presented there is pretty spot on. I personally think Dany has a good heart but that circumstance and experience and terrible coping mechanisms have led her to act in villainous ways and whether or not a character is a villain is determined by their actions regardless of whatever goodness is in their heart. But anyway I do not like the pol!Jon theory. I think it’s out of character for Jon and needlessly cruel to Dany. I think it’s possible that he ultimately kills her and that could be fine and I don’t reject that theory, but I think the idea of Jon deceiving and sexually abusing Dany and then killing her for the sake of Sansa is what Dany fans think of when they think of over the top hate because they assume every Jonsa shipper also believes in pol!Jon.

I do understand why people thought Jon was deceiving Dany in the show though because their relationship was just so poorly executed and Kit and Emilia had no chemistry on screen. Imagine fucking up your show’s romance so badly that people think the script confirming that the love was mutual must have been tampered with.

Hi there!

(I think Dany is a compelling tragic villain, and it's lovely seeing someone loving her for it!)

I do think that pol!Jon (under duress, esentially) is a not unreasonable theory that grew out of the way the show presented their relationship. If there was sexual abuse I think it's fair to say it was in the hands of the more powerful party, though.

That said, I don't see it happening that way in the books at all and I think all characters will be better off for it. I agree it wouldn't feel right.

Certainly not in a punitive "you thought he would love you but he really loves Sansa, now die!!!" way. That cheapens jonsa as much as it cheapens the complexity of the conflict between Dany and Jon.

It's just a deeply uninteresting way to explore their existing conflict or their respective strengths. Not to be a hater but it's not exactly riveting literature watching Dany be manipulated by Daario and it's unlikely to be more so in a repeat performance with Jon who isn't even her type. Same as watching Jon go through a repeat of the abusive Ygritte plotline would be less than compelling.

We'll have instances of romantic manipulation. Littlefinger is practically begging Sansa to use his own obsession against him, and Arya gives us a preview when she lures Raff to his death wearing "Mercy's" face. That's been set up since the first book, and it works as a satisfying response to the way everyone has been telling Sansa how weak and simple she is. It's very personal, very steeped in their respective histories, very poetic.

But for Jon and Dany I think we can expect something more universal and even-handed than that. They are both at varying points manipulative and earnest, highly clever or unexpectly outmaneuvered. And neither will be in this conflict all alone and without advice. Not to mention, we have both of their POVs and watching one just miss all the clues of the other manipulating them would be flat. This only ever works with one POV withheld. The show tried that with Jon Snow live on the screen, to disastrous results. No way is that GRRM's plan.

I'd rather watch two clever adversaries play a big game of chess. And given GRRM's love for that game, I am certain it's also what he would prefer to write.

#anti jonerys #jon snow #anti daenerys targaryen #<- for filtering #jonsa #rouka ask

56 notes · View notes

pessimisticpigeonsworld · 1 month

Note

If Nettles was white, she would be as popular as Lyanna, Brienne or Arya, and y’all know it.

She grew up a homeless orphan (which is why it’s so insulting when people try to act like she’s a freaking idiot who doesn’t know how to bathe herself yet she can tame a dragon🤦🏽‍♀️ Put most of the highborn women in her position and they wouldn’t survive a day in her shoes).

She’s the only known non-Valyrian dragonrider who claims a wild dragon. A prince who believes in Valyrian supremacy falls in love with her to the point where he’s willing to sacrifice his life for her. Nettles singlehandedly disproves the whole idea of Targaryen exceptionalism and their blood purity. She slowly earns a dragon’s trust by bringing him sheep, and gradually he lets her closer, and then forms the dragonrider bond and lets her fly. up until this point, nobody had tried a strategy like that before.

Nettles is self-made. She’s self-taught. She’s loved for herself. She survives a freaking war and becomes a fire goddess/witch. Who wouldn’t want her ? Who wouldn’t want to be her ? Unlike Rhaenyra and Alicent, she’s the final girl of F&B.

Once again, I don't understand where you got that I'm anti Nettles? I'm anti Nettles x Daemon, but other than that theory, I very much am a fan of Nettles as a character. I won't say that there isn't racism and unfairness that happen regarding Nettles' character (though I haven't seen it personally), because people can be really shitty. But me personally, again, I'm not anti Nettles, I just dislike certain groups of her stans.

Again, I don't deny that Nettles was a strong woman. She endured many things most characters in F&B don't and most likely survived the Dance. However, I do disagree with some of the ideas you're stating as fact.

For starters, we don't know if Nettles is non-Valyrian; that's one of the many theories surrounding her, but it's not confirmed, so stating it as fact is misleading. Just because she lacks traditional Valyrian features doesn't means she isn't a dragonseed.

Jace and his brothers don't look Valyrian but they very obviously are of Valyrian descent. Rhaenys, the queen who never was, had black hair; Duncan the son of Aegon V looked like his mother, Betha Blackwood; Aegor Rivers also had black hair; Baelor Breakspear had dark hair; Daeron son of Maekar had sandy brown hair; Rhaenys the daughter of Rhaegar had her mother, Elia Martell's features.

Moving on, Daemon's relationship with Nettles is ambiguous. We don't know if they were in a romantic relationship or if his attack on Aemond was purely to save her (though I'm sure that was part of his decision). Again, you are stating a theory you believe as fact, even though it's unconfirmed.

I'm not going to touch the whole thing of Targaryen exceptionalism, because, as I said earlier, Nettles' parentage is unconfirmed. But the whole blood purity thing still hasn't been disproven at any point of GRRM's works; they intermarried to preserve their magic blood, the magic blood still exists in ASOIAF due to the incest.

Nettles is an important character in the story of the Dance, but she isn't the "final girl" you claim she is, let alone of the whole book. There are several dragon riders who survived the Dance and thrived. Rhaena is the ancestor of the Tyrells in the main series. Aegon III is the ancestor of Daenerys, the Baratheons, any remaining Blackfyres, and possibly Jon Snow and Young Griff. Baela and Alyn are the ancestors of Aurane Waters and the Velaryons.

The book of F&B is so much more than the Dance of the Dragons. Saying that Nettles is the "final girl" of the book doesn't make any sense when she only appears in a few sections. That's like saying Alys Rivers is actually the main character of the book. Nettles disappears after the Dance and doesn't appear in any other event. She does nothing else after her disappearance and has relatively little impact on the history of Westeros post Dance.

I have absolutely no idea where you're getting the whole "fire goddess/witch" thing. However, you have already been throwing out theories and your personal biases as fact, so I don't think it matters. I'm not trying to control who your fav is, I totally understand wanting to be a certain book character. But that doesn't mean you can act like everyone else is wrong for not having the same fav as you.

It's that kind of entitlement, thinking you're better than everyone else that makes people not like Nettles stans. It's almost on par with stansas and Alicent stans. People like you project so hard onto your favs, you take any perceived insult, critique, or argument as a personal attack. It's exhausting interacting with people like you.

#rhaenyra targaryen #anti nettles stans #anti nettles x daemon #asoiaf #team black #anti rhaenyra antis

56 notes · View notes

nicosraf · 5 months

Note

You inspire me…. Any advice for writing books ?

!! I'm honored u get a little inspiration from me! That's very sweet of you.

I struggle with advice because I've only written about 5 books and published... two-ish. (An old fanfic and ABM, which as you know is basically fanfic). But I think I have some specific advice since I'm revising right now and have a lot of thoughts... Here is what works for me (!):

Outline. I know it sucks but... please try it. (Or you'll end up like GRRM).

Draft without going back to read what you wrote, or at least don't read your unfinished manuscript in full. You will want to edit it. Don't edit it. Yes it sounds bad; yes you used the same word 8 times in a paragraph by accident; yes you can see a major plot hole. Don't fix it yet, maybe write it down somewhere so you don't forget to fix it later. You need to avoid editing while drafting or you will never finish the draft. This is the biggest advice I can give anyone, especially if you haven't written your first book yet.

Give each character a strong backstory, even if it never shows up in the plot. Sounds obvious but sometimes I have to remind myself of this.

Give your characters friendships, not just romantic relationships. Include tender scenes with friends.

A lot of writing is tedious and boring. Drafting is hard, editing is hard. You have to be disciplined. But finding motivation is also hard. Don't motivate yourself using the dream of a fanbase or the dream of becoming famous. You're setting yourself up to be hurt. (Not because any of that is impossible but because achieving it in the way that you dream is virtually impossible.) Motivate yourself using something more personal, if you can.

Re-do your outline after you draft. Why? Because you probably changed things while you drafted, you probably made some stuff up on the spot, character dynamics changed, etc. A new outline is good because you can see the story you actually wrote, which is helpful for editing for plot cohesion, moving scenes, adding and removing stuff.

Your draft is going to be bad. Don't freak out. Drafts are always bad. You're going to want to analyze the hell out of it though. What did you plan, what did you write, what worked, what didnt work, what themes are on the page, what themes should you remove, what themes should you amplify.

When editing a scene isn't working, rewrite it entirely. Yes it's more work. You'll be much happier though, I promise.

The first to second revisions should be for plot and characters and pacing; these should take the longest and be the most difficult. The last third to fourth revision should be about prose. Don't focus on prose when you're trying to fix the plot.

Let characters fuck up unforgivably.

Consider your audience heavily when you edit, but don't consider them when you draft.

I've given this advice before but when it comes to plot devices/objects, you want to give each device a moment of introduction, a moment where it's recalled, and a moment of use. (Ex. A knife is introduced in chapter 1, its mentioned again casually in chapter 7, then it's used to kill someone in chapter 14.) This is mostly to give each object its own arc that feels satisfactory but ur the boss about what works best.

Kill all your characters, but not physically (unless you want to). Make them change so much that, by the end, they would barely recognize who they were at the start.

This is book advice for the type of books that I've written. Things are very different if you're writing, say, contemporary romance, but I think this list is pretty general !! I hope it helps. Good luck!!

#mine #ask #writing

128 notes · View notes

lemonhemlock · 4 months

Note

strange that people had the thought that sansa was gonna stay in the vale and not go back to winterfell for so long when geographically other than bran(beyond the wall having trippy visions)/jon("dead")/rickon (cannibal island skagos) sansa is way closer to winterfell than a lot of characters and the knights of the vale is pretty much a chekhov's gun especially since like you said they havent joined the war yet and somehow sansa marching to winter fell with them was unbelievable since like 2009-2018 (her story might not follow the show especially because of the diverged storylines and she has the alternative to escape the vale but who knows)

It's no secret that Sansa was a very hated character throughout GoT's run. People ~manifesting she would stay in the Vale was a way of wishful-thinking her out of the narrative. Their dislike made them ignore reason and come up with many silly theories.

Much has been said about Sansa's pawn-to-queen narrative, but the main argument for her surviving the series is that, if GRRM wanted to kill her, he had many, many opportunities to do so in five books and didn't. Sansa is physically and socially vulnerable & her POV focuses on her rich internal world, strength and endurance, yet she remains unscathed and is instead learning court politics. Why is that? It's basic bildungsroman storytelling. Denying that is just being petty at this point.

Sansa also cannot remain in the Vale as Alayne, since that is Littlefinger's plot. Only the most delulu stans will not accept that a shady person such as Littlefinger will face authorial punishment for his sins. And, when he does die, what's stopping Sansa from claiming her identity? Especially as she finds out the feared and detested Ramsay Bolton has married "Arya Stark". She will naturally want to help her sister.

Now, I need to re-read for this, but I believe it is hinted in AFFC that Myranda Royce slyly figured out who Sansa is. If you remember the prologue of AGOT, the fancy, pretentious Night's Watch ranger from the group of three that first encounter the white walkers, is Waymar Royce. He is the third son of Bronze Yohn, head of House Royce. I did a quick search to refresh my memory:

"Bronze Yohn knows me," she reminded him. "He was a guest at Winterfell when his son rode north to take the black." She had fallen wildly in love with Ser Waymar, she remembered dimly, but that was a lifetime ago, when she was a stupid little girl. "And that was not the only time. Lord Royce saw . . . he saw Sansa Stark again at King's Landing, during the Hand's tourney." Petyr put a finger under her chin. "That Royce glimpsed this pretty face I do not doubt, but it was one face in a thousand. A man fighting in a tourney has more to concern him than some child in the crowd. And at Winterfell, Sansa was a little girl with auburn hair. My daughter is a maiden tall and fair, and her hair is chestnut. Men see what they expect to see, Alayne." He kissed her nose. "Have Maddy lay a fire in the solar. I shall receive our Lords Declarant there."

(AFFC, Alayne I)

I mean... you can't be more explicit than that. The Royces know who Sansa is, but they'll just keep quiet and play out this charade?

#sansa stark #ask #anon

87 notes · View notes

jackoshadows · 5 months

Text

“Needle was Robb and Bran and Rickon, her mother and her father, even Sansa. Needle was Winterfell's grey walls, and the laughter of its people. Needle was the summer snows, Old Nan's stories, the heart tree with its red leaves and scary face, the warm earthy smell of the glass gardens, the sound of the north wind rattling the shutters of her room. Needle was Jon Snow's smile. He used to mess my hair and call me "little sister," she remembered, and suddenly there were tears in her eyes.” - Arya, AFfC

I am not sure how anyone can read this beautiful, evocative little paragraph and not be hit right in the feels by Arya's very visceral longing and love for home.

ARYA STARK WANTS TO GO HOME. She's just been on the longest adventure from hell. She has traveled, seen places and new cultures. She has met new people, learned new languages. It's been the most traumatizing, harrowing experience of her young life. She has seen what power does to people, she has seen the absolute cruelty of men, the helplessness of the smallfolk.

If Arya does end up leaving Winterfell at the end of the story, it would only happen if she's forced to do so and not by choice. There's so much Winterfell in her story, in her thoughts, her emotions, in her memories of her father, in her fondness for Winterfell's people. She's never letting that go again.

Arya has been trying to go home to Winterfell, to her brothers, right from her first chapter in King's Landing. In one of the best parts of the book, she is unable to give up Needle - which is symbolic of her home, it's people, her family and Jon Snow.

Polliver had stolen the sword from her when the Mountain's men took her captive, but when she and the Hound walked into the inn at the crossroads, there it was. The gods wanted me to have it. Not the Seven, nor Him of Many Faces, but her father's gods, the old gods of the north. The Many-Faced God can have the rest, she thought, but he can't have this. - Arya, AFfC Needle! The last link to Winterfell and Arya. The Faceless Men want her to give it up because they recognize it’s importance. - GRRM She's with the Faceless men because where else does she have to turn to? - GRRM

At the end of the series, she's going to be at the most 12/13. She has just had the worst childhood. Why in the world would she want to traverse the same path where she has experienced the worst trauma?

Would anyone suggest that after the series ends Sansa would like to do exactly as she wanted at the start of AGoT? That's nonsense right? Because Sansa has changed as a character from where she was in book one. She no longer wants any of that. Everyone acknowledges that Sansa wants to go home to Winterfell and therefore she will end up there. Why is the same not okay for Arya who also desperately wants to go home?

Arya is in a really dark and depressing place in her TWoW chapter. I want to see her get away from there and be united with family and home. And yet, again and again, we get this incomprehensible opinion that Arya is not going to be happy at home, she just wants to travel and meet new people. Makes no sense at all to me.

And then there's the whole theme of power that's explored in the series. Our main characters start off in the story as the underdogs and outcasts. They are at the mercy of an unjust and cruel society.

Jon Snow for example has to climb the ladder to the top, to effect reform and change as Lord Commander. Dany, especially as a young girl in a man's world, had to have the power to free slaves and reform Meereen for the better. Tyrion was at his craftiest as Hand of the King, involved in diplomacy and strengthening Lannister control despite being shunned by society for his disability. Same with Bran being seen as less of a person on account of being disabled. Arya is treated as being less than her sister for not conforming to Westerosi patriarchal ideals.

The point of their stories is not that they can't fit into Westeros, that they will never fit into Westeros and therefore have to fade away at the end of the story. That would be utterly nihilistic and I doubt this is what GRRM considers 'Bittersweet'.

The point of their stories is that because of who they are, because they have the empathy of understanding what it's like to be different and treated differently, because they want things to be better, because they are ambitious and reach for power and get power, they will do things different this time around and try and make Westeros a better place for all it's people.

Putting Arya and Sansa's subplots, themes, characterization and character growth side by side, the only reason someone would say that Arya's story does not vibe or resonate with leadership while Sansa's does is because of sexism.

I can't think of any other reason why readers can't visualize Arya Stark trying to help the smallfolk, as a leader with the hard power to help them, when she personally experienced and sees their suffering. What is the point of entire books of it being hammered in again and again of Arya recognizing how the kings and nobles at the top don't really care for the smallfolk?

Varys, a long term tactician, says this about an ideal king.

"Aegon has been shaped for rule since before he could walk. He has been trained in arms, as befits a knight to be, but that was not the end of his education. He reads and writes, he speaks several tongues, he has studied history and law and poetry. A septa has instructed him in the mysteries of the Faith since he was old enough to understand them. He has lived with fisherfolk, worked with his hands, swum in rivers and mended nets and learned to wash his own clothes at need. He can fish and cook and bind up a wound, he knows what it is like to be hungry, to be hunted, to be afraid. Tommen has been taught that kingship is his right. Aegon knows that kingship is his duty, that a king must put his people first, and live and rule for them."

Foremost amongst the qualities mentioned is a connection with the smallfolk. Something that is inherent and deeply embedded into Arya's 31 POV chapters. What is the point of this long story arc and characterization if at the end she's going to jump on a boat and be 'liberated' and learn new languages? She's already done all that in Braavos.

Again and again, the point is made, that a good ruler has to put the people first.

Why do the gods make kings and queens, if not to protect the ones who can’t protect themselves?” - Daenerys, ASOS

I am the shield that guards the realms of men. Those are the words. So tell me, my lord—what are these wildlings, if not men?” - Jon ADwD

I was trying to win the throne to save the kingdom, when I should have been trying to save the kingdom to win the throne.” - Stannis, ASoS

“What is the life of one bastard boy against an entire kingdom?” “Everything." - Davos, ASoS

What good is peace if it must be purchased with the blood of little children? - Daenerys, ADwD

"Wolves, she thought again. Like me. Was this her pack? How could they be Robb’s men? She wanted to hit them. She wanted to hurt them. She wanted to cry.” - Arya, ASoS

And then there's the North itself. A harsh place with tough people, who send off their old to fight because there is less food. Where Robb Stark only gains the support of Greatjon Umber because Greywind chews off his fingers! Where we already have an example of female governance in the Mormonts. Why couldn't Arya Stark - the Ned's little girl, Valiant Ned's precious little girl, for whom the North is marching now in the harshest winter - become a leader who wants to help her people in the same way they tried to help her?

One can try to cover it up by saying that Arya wants to fly free and be liberated and go sailing - she's already done all that and it's the most harrowing, traumatizing, painful experience of her young life. All she wants to do now is go home.

I really don't see how one can read a story that's chock full of Arya being a leader of her little pack, Arya being intelligent and strategic with a desire for justice, a keen understanding of right and wrong, compassion for her fellow man and say that her story does not resonate with leadership? I don't get it.

#Arya Stark #asoiaf #fandom nonsense

102 notes · View notes

gwenllian-in-the-abbey · 3 months

Note

What do you think of Grrm's portrayal of religion?

Hi anon, this is a really interesting question, and it took me awhile to put together what I hope is a coherent answer.

For context, I think GRRM's background is important to keep in mind. George is almost exactly my parents' age and belongs to the same demographic of American anti-war ex hippies who aged into broadly liberal baby-boomers. Their radicalism has largely mellowed over the years, they may not be the most up to date on the appropriate terminology, and they tend to prioritize nonviolent solutions to systemic problems (my mom often tells me the younger generation needs to do another March on Washington). One thing liberal boomers also tend have in common is that often they grew up religious but, as they entered their 20s and went to college, broke away from the churches of their childhood. My family is full of ex-Catholic liberal boomers like George. They might have dabbled in Buddhism or Hinduism in the 70s, New Age mysticism in the 80s or 90s, and ended up settling into statements like, "I'm spiritual, but not religious." Almost invariably, they have a sort of disdain for organized religion, which they associate with a kind of yokel mentality, a place for anti-Choice anti-LGBTQ traditionalists. Although they will profess "to each his own," to the average liberal boomer, the church represents regressive values and they cannot imagine why anyone would willingly return to it. Even those who did remain religious take great pains to make it known they are not like those Christians. And to be fair, liberal boomers have a good reason to feel this way. The churches of their childhoods were not fun places for people whose own ideas and values went against post-WW2 broadly white middle class values. Unsurprisingly, SFF authors tend to fit into this category.

And this sort of bleeds into a lot of 90s SFF. You see a lot of worlds that have religion, but rarely do you have characters that are religious, and even more rarely do you have sympathetic young protagonists who are religious. You might have the occasional kindly priest or nun type, but far more often these characters will be abusive, mean spirited, or narrow minded (think of Brienne's childhood septas). Religion is often treated with the same disdain by in-world characters as it is by the authors themselves. You might even have worlds that are almost entirely secular, with vague references to "The Gods," but without any real religious traditions constructed around them (Robin Hobb's Realm of the Elderlings series, which features two vague dieties, Eda and El, who seem to have no religious traditions surrounding them whatsoever). You might have cultish religions that are actively dangerous and must be stopped, or you might have Catholic church analogues, existing in opposition to everything cool and fun. Protagonists tend to be cynical non-believer types, or they might start off as true believers and lose their religion along the way. Rarely are they allowed to have sincere and abiding faith.

And you can see a lot of this in George's writing, in the way he portrays the Faith of the Seven and other religions, and the way the fandom receives them. The Faith of the Seven is Westeros' answer to the Catholic church, but there are also the Old Gods, the faith of R'hllor, and others, often presented in opposition to each other. George himself sees religion as a divisive force, and in ASOIAF, we see religions in conflict with each other, we see them weaponized to fuel vendettas, we see them used to drive prophesies and start wars. There's a clip somewhere, of George at a panel, where he's talking about religious conflict and his take is very reminiscent of George Carlin's-- you can tell he knows the bit. "Are you really going to kill all of these people because a giant invisible guy in the sky told you too? And your giant guy in the sky is different?" George asks, receiving a round of applause from the crowd. It's a very modern view on religion, which is fair, I think. He's writing for a modern audience who have modern conceptions of the church, and he is making a deliberate point about the harm religion can do. .

What I do think is missing, or at least downplayed, are the ways in which the medieval church was really a driving cultural and social force in medieval Europe. We live in a secular society, so we have the luxury of disregarding the church in a way that medieval people did not. This is one major way in which the worldbuilding of ASOIAF departs from the real world middle ages. To portray the medieval church as a primarily regressive institution that mostly drove conflict is too simplistic. The Catholic church is what culturally unified most of western Europe into what was known as "Christendom." The clergy served political functions, such as providing an important check upon the power of medieval kings, and when the power of the church declined, despotism grew. Socially, for most western Europeans, the church was also the center of day to day life. Insofar as medieval peasants had any opportunities for leisure time and celebrations, most of these revolved around the church. The church was for centuries a driving force behind art, music, literature, and architecture, and it also performed important social functions, such as operating poorhouses and leper-houses, and providing educations for children.

And all of this was just extremely normal. Most people prayed multiple times each day, and sincerely believed in heaven a hell. The state of one's soul after death was such a real concern that the sale of indulgences-- a way that you could pay to get your dead loved ones whose souls were in purgatory into heaven more quickly-- became a major racket for the Church. I've seen the HotD fandom react to Alicent Hightower's level of devotion calling her a religious "fanatic" and I cannot stress enough how absolutely normal Alicent would have been in medieval times. This is where I blame the framing of the show more than George, because it does set Alicent's faith in opposition to Rhaenyra's seemingly more modern values, but does it in a selective way. For instance, Alicent comes off as prudish, and modern audiences hate a prude, but we never see how her faith would have certainly inspired her, as queen, to take other more progressive actions such as giving alms to the poor or bestowing her patronage upon motherhouses. In another post about the fandom perception of Valyrian culture, I talked about how this modern view of devout belief, particularly Catholicism, tends to cast anything that is presented in opposition to it as an unequivocal good, and I see this sort of rhetoric slung around the fandom a lot, "why would you defend the pseudo-Catholics who hate women??" But the pseudo-Catholics are really just normal medieval people, and they didn't hate women, they simply lived in a patriarchal society and the material conditions did not yet exist which would allow them to challenge that in any meaningful way.

#asks #faith of the seven #alicent hightower #grrm #asoiaf and religion #asoiaf

97 notes · View notes