sherlokiness

[sherlokiness]

“Brienne’s story is an adaptation of a traditionally male narrative, one that usually sidelines or victimises female characters. She swears fealty to a woman, as male knights swear to their liege lord, because she respects that woman’s strength, her bravery and her kindness. She goes on a quest to save the beautiful maiden, but not to marry her or benefit from the quest in any way, but to return her to her mother. Because she cares for Catelyn, and because it is the right thing to do. It is a story of a woman, rescuing a woman, for the sake of another woman. It is a rare story where the mother, the young girl and the shieldmaiden are all given equal weight and worth. Brienne, despite taking on many stereotypically male traits, is not “one of the boys” or in any way dismissive of her gender as a group. She does not fit into the role that society has assigned for her, but she does not disparage those who do. She uses her strength and her skill to respect and help other women in ways that most men in Westeros would never even think to attempt, because she understands, more than any other knight, that women are truly worth something as individuals.”

— “There Are No True Knights: Brienne of Tarth” @ Feminist Fiction

[sherlokiness]

Honey, you're familiar like my mirror years ago

[sherlokiness]

Jon x Sansa in ASOIAF

In Jon’s first chapter he call Sansa radiant

[sherlokiness]

Dany stans so far up her ass they would say she was a slave herself and never a slaver. She was part of a marriage alliance her brother, the patriarch, arranged for her. That is how marriages work in their world. To call her a slave would mean more than half of Westerosi married girls were slaves too.

[sherlokiness]

faggot

pope francis?!?!?!?!?

[sherlokiness]

The blood of Winterfell.

[sherlokiness]

Just because Dany said she didn't want to be Queen a few times doesn't mean she'll never be power hungry. That girl literally thought about usurping Viserys and used her slave's life in exchange for her dragons in agot. A villain in the making from the first book.

[sherlokiness]

You're an embarrassing 40 smth hag. Your metas are ass and u're a whole misogynistic. Who tf talks this hatefully about a 15 years old girl like even if she goes dark it warrants none of this hate. Ppl love male villains too but come Dany and u jonsas act like she's the devil. Maybe her fans are ass but try to separate ur perception of the fans from her for change. Y'all been taking the same cruel stances against her for years now.

40? Where did you get that number? It'll be quite a long while to get to that age. I could have been a teenage hater. Here comes the misogyny card again. Do you think you're a feminist when you're shaming women for aging and calling them hags? You can't have the high ground here, buddy. Dany is not real at the end of the day but you're calling actual people hags here on the internet.

She is the devil tho? Arguably, the biggest devil in the show? If we compare how many people Tywin Lannister killed compared to her... She was literally worse than Ramsay who killed people who have already surrendered. Good thing we've been taking the same stance for years so her show ending didn't surprise us. We were right in the end about her. She's just a hypocrite who was power hungry and masked her love for it under being the "rightful Queen." That mask came off real quick when she learned the truth about Jon. She's been a treasonous usurper since the first book but peple just forgave her for it because Viserys was a monster. She'll have no excuses when it comes to Jon who is neither a monster like Viserys nor a pretender like FAegon.

[sherlokiness]

will graham stepping foot into hannibal’s office for the first time

[sherlokiness]

will graham stepping foot into hannibal’s office for the first time

[sherlokiness]

As far as I know, Tyrion didn't stop being a Lannister when he killed his father. Robb didn't stop being a Stark when he refused to trade for his blood sisters. Lyanna, the patron Saintess of Starkness who never even had a direwolf, didn't stop being a Stark after running away with Rhaegar which lead to the death of her brother and father. The issue of "Starkness" is always levied against Sansa as if it's some stain on her honor when one cannot even begin to define what being a Stark means. The Kings of Winter had their enemies heads put on spike at the walls of Winterfell. Is it having wolf blood? Then Ned is the least Stark of his generation. Like father, like daughter.

why do u think grrm smiled and said "doesn't it?" when a fan asked if lady’s death meant that sansa had ceased to be a stark?

I couldn't find an official source for this quote, it popped up on Reddit in a few places, but it looks like this is the source for it:

We've had these debates before about whether Sansa's actions truly resulted in her losing her wolf and father. And whether losing Lady symbolized her ceasing to be a true Stark. In fact, we've had this debate in front of GRRM twice. The first time was in St Louis in 2001 while at dinner. GRRM let us debate, smiling and nodding here and there. He also told us why he created Sansa in the first place, because there is always someone in a family that the others don't get along with. He was a bit coy in answering our questions but in the end he did indicate that Sansa did have responsibility for Lady's and Ned's deaths. I reported this to the board and I recall it being dismissed by some. I distinctly recall someone saying, "Well what I think he really meant to say was..." The second time we had this discussion was in Indy in 2007. There was a boarder there that didn't believe that Sansa's losing Lady symbolized her not being a Stark anymore. The person said so in front of GRRM and GRRM smiled and said, "Doesn't it?" (link)

When they say he smiled, was Martin merely smiling to be nice in a social situation? Was he laughing at them for missing the point? Was he happy that one person understood what he had written? I don't think this description really tells me enough to know what to make of Martin's intent. Presenting a question to someone is about forcing them to think, not necessarily a Statement of your own beliefs, it also can be used to deflect/provide a non-answer, and that seems to be the case here. That post doesn't tell me much at all, tbh, certainly not enough to make me question what did or did not happen in the books.

Is your attention being drawn to some culpability on Sansa's part in these passages?

They were all staring at him, but it was Sansa's look that cut. "She is of the north. She deserves better than a butcher." He left the room with his eyes burning and his daughter's wails echoing in his ears, and found the direwolf pup where they chained her. Ned sat beside her for a while. "Lady," he said, tasting the name. He had never paid much attention to the names the children had picked, but looking at her now, he knew that Sansa had chosen well. She was the smallest of the litter, the prettiest, the most gentle and trusting. She looked at him with bright golden eyes, and he ruffled her thick grey fur. Shortly, Jory brought him Ice. (AGOT, Eddard III)

So he listened, and she told it all, from the fire in the library tower to Varys and the guardsmen and Littlefinger. And when she was done, Eddard Stark sat dazed beside the table, the dagger in his hand. Bran's wolf had saved the boy's life, he thought dully. What was it that Jon had said when they found the pups in the snow? Your children were meant to have these pups, my lord. And he had killed Sansa's, and for what? Was it guilt he was feeling? Or fear? If the gods had sent these wolves, what folly had he done? (AGOT, Eddard IV)

If Martin wanted to write the blame on Sansa, he could have. Instead, he emphasizes Sansa and Lady's innocence, their trusting nature, how they were betrayed:

Sansa begs for Lady as she begs for herself, but it is futile. These words: “She was the smallest of the litter, the prettiest, the most gentle and trusting” (AGOT, Eddard III) may just as easily have been written about Sansa. Lady calmly looks up at Ned never expecting that he would kill her, and Sansa believed Joffrey’s promise to spare Ned. Both Lady and Sansa’s trust was used against them: “Once she had loved Prince Joffrey with all her heart, and admired and trusted his mother, the queen. They had repaid that love and trust with her father's head. Sansa would never make that mistake again.” (ACOK, Sansa I) Ned looked into Lady’s eyes and killed her, Joffrey looked into Sansa’s eyes and took Ned’s head. Is the point that Lady was stupid for trusting Ned, or that Ned was wrong to take an innocent life, to participate in an unjust act? That Robert was wrong for commanding it? Is the point that Sansa is stupid? Or that Joffrey and Cersei wronged her? (link)

So, I don't know what to say about what that conversation with Martin, I don't know what preceded his response or followed it. I only know what he wrote in the books, and imo, it isn't what the poster believes it to be. Instead of Martin saying Sansa is less of Stark, I think he has taken pains to associate Sansa and the North, not merely through her longing to return home, her love of the cold and snow, her scene of rebuilding Winterfell, the prophecy of her returning North and exacting justice for all of LF's crimes against her family, but also through what her she endures:

People who say that need to contrast the thrill of reading this:  "The King in the North!" "The King in the North!" "THE KING IN THE NORTH!" (AGOT, Catelyn XI) with this "The gown had long sleeves to hide the bruises on her arms. Those were Joffrey's gifts as well. When they told him that Robb had been proclaimed King in the North, his rage had been a fearsome thing, and he had sent Ser Boros to beat her." (ACOK, Sansa I) The author wrote the birth of the independent North in bruises on her skin. Martin tied Sansa to the North's fate but instead of giving her the glory, he made her pay for it. While Robb and the North fight on a battlefield, it is Sansa’s body men seek to claim in order to secure the North. (link)

I think Sansa will have great importance to House Stark and the North in the future, her freedom will align with theirs, and I'm not sure why Cersei being evil and Robert being a weak, unjust king, is Sansa's fault. And, it will always fascinate me that so many fans have read this passage:

"Surely you did not think I'd forgotten about your sweet innocent, my lord? The queen most certainly has not." "No," Ned pleaded, his voice cracking. "Varys, gods have mercy, do as you like with me, but leave my daughter out of your schemes. Sansa's no more than a child." "Rhaenys was a child too. Prince Rhaegar's daughter. A precious little thing, younger than your girls. She had a small black kitten she called Balerion, did you know? I always wondered what happened to him. Rhaenys liked to pretend he was the true Balerion, the Black Dread of old, but I imagine the Lannisters taught her the difference between a kitten and a dragon quick enough, the day they broke down her door." Varys gave a long weary sigh, the sigh of a man who carried all the sadness of the world in a sack upon his shoulders. "The High Septon once told me that as we sin, so do we suffer. If that's true, Lord Eddard, tell me … why is it always the innocents who suffer most, when you high lords play your game of thrones? Ponder it, if you would, while you wait upon the queen. And spare a thought for this as well: The next visitor who calls on you could bring you bread and cheese and the milk of the poppy for your pain … or he could bring you Sansa's head. (AGOT, Eddard XV)

only to walk away from AGOT thinking that the author wants us to blame Sansa for the things she has suffered.

[sherlokiness]

Wait have I finally found and block the anon who's been sending me pro-Dany asks?👀👀 Couldn't resist to reply to my jonsa post huh. Whatchu still doing here, babe? I tagged it correctly.

[sherlokiness]

do u think "she will be kissing the Stranger, begging for his kiss" could be jonsa foreshadowing?

The actual line from Cersei's chapter is: "She is not dead . . . but before I am done with her, I promise you, she will be singing to the Stranger, begging for his kiss." (Cersei IV, AFFC)

On the surface level, of course, Cersei is suggesting that Sansa will be begging for her death by the time she gets her hands on her (and subjects her to torture). But with a series like as/oiaf there are other layers of foreshadowing happening through symbolism. Right after Cersei says this, the conversation turns towards the Northern plot with f!Arya/Jeyne and an assassination plot for Jon. Cersei refers to both Sansa and Jon being treasonous taking after Ned. At the very least, this falls under a couple of passages that suggest Sansa's and Jon's storylines will coincide. Possibly with the Grey Girl theory.

Could that symbolic meaning be stretched to something more romantic? It's possible.

The Stranger is the god of death but also the unknown. Jon's parentage being secret (even from himself) could uniquely qualify him for the Stranger. Consider how Jaime approaches the characterisation of the Stranger:

The Stranger in the shadows, his half-human face concealed beneath a hooded mantle. I thought that I was the Warrior and Cersei was the Maid, but all the time she was the Stranger, hiding her true face from my gaze. (Jaime IV, AFFC)

Of course, there are many characters who share characteristics with the Stranger. It is the Westerosi name for the Many Faced God amongst the Faceless Men so that ties it to Arya. Daavos describes the Stranger at Dragonstone to be "carved to look more animal than human", which could extend to the warging Starklings. Sansa herself plays the Stranger in King's Landing in guarding her motivations and the Vale all with a new identity.

Certainly a part of the fandom will have you believe it's about the Sandor because his horse is named Stranger even though that would defeat the purpose of his redemption arc. Sansa's arc does have the theme of Beauty and the Beast but the Hound is just one amongst many other Beasts in her story who have let her down. All of that suggests they are all foils to a final Beast in her story. And once you start thinking about Jon/Sansa as a possibility because of RLJ, it makes a lot of unresolved pieces fall into place.

[sherlokiness]

SPOILER ALERT 🚨🚨🚨DAENERYS WOULD NOT GIVE UP THE THRONE TO HER LOVER AND RIGHTFUL KING-JON SNOW. NOT FOR DUTY NOR FOR LOVE. Words are wind

Say it louder for the people in the back 🔊Her stans thought D*ny would take a back seat if she met a surviving member of her family. I mean she shouldn't have to but she should own it to herself that she wants the Iron Throne for DAENERYS TARGARYEN. It's for herself. Her reaction to Jon's secret proved she was lying to herself. All the self righteousness she used to chase the throne and the atrocities she committed to get to her goal was because she wanted it.

Hi, anon. Thanks for the ask.

Dany's hypocrisy regarding the Iron Throne and Jon was foreshadowed in the case of the rich woman.

A rich woman came, whose husband and sons had died defending the city walls. During the sack she had fled to her brother in fear. When she returned, she found her house had been turned into a brothel. The whores had bedecked themselves in her jewels and clothes. She wanted her house back, and her jewels. "They can keep the clothes," she allowed. Dany granted her the jewels but ruled the house was lost when she abandoned it.

This is a mirror of Dany's situation. If we go by Dany's standard then she has no claim to the Iron Throne anymore. The irony is unfortunately lost on her. George knew what he was doing when he made inadvertently Dany rule against herself.

A boy came, younger than Dany, slight and scarred, dressed up in a frayed grey tokar trailing silver fringe. His voice broke when he told of how two of his father's household slaves had risen up the night the gate broke. One had slain his father, the other his elder brother. Both had raped his mother before killing her as well. The boy had escaped with no more than the scar upon his face, but one of the murderers was still living in his father's house, and the other had joined the queen's soldiers as one of the Mother's Men. He wanted them both hanged.

I am queen over a city built on dust and death. Dany had no choice but to deny him. She had declared a blanket pardon for all crimes committed during the sack. Nor would she punish slaves for rising up against their masters.

It's funny how she hates Robert "the usurper" for the sack of King's Landing but then turns around and do exactly what Robert did. "Robert's sack was totally not okay! That was unfair. But mine is acceptable! That witch Mirri murdered my son!" But if we look at it from Mirri's perspective, wasn't she also a slave who rose up against her Master Dany? If one needs further convincing she will burn King's Landing for not falling at her feet then we have the scenario below.

"Grazdan went to Yunkai to deliver your terms." Ser Jorah got to his feet. "Mero fled, once he realized the Stormcrows had turned. I have men hunting him. He shouldn't escape us long."

"Very well," Dany said. "Sellsword or slave, spare all those who will pledge me their faith. If enough of the Second Sons will join us, keep the company intact."

Daenerys "the breaker of chains" Targaryen straight up said the only slaves worth keeping alive are those who will be loyal to her. They can only be freedmen if they're her freedmen.Deference to the mother of dragons is apparently more important than giving the slaves their freedom.

[sherlokiness]

I’ve been seeing a lot of “Sansa had NO reason to distrust Dany” lately and it kinda got me thinking: isn’t that quite a baseless/hypocritical argument?

Because given the context of “Game of Thrones”, the series frequently depicts temporary alliances formed out of necessity rather than genuine trust or friendship. Like trust is rarely a given in the show’s political landscape. Given the betrayals and shifting loyalties that are common in Westeros, mistrust is a survival mechanism.

A take like that can only stem from utterly ignoring how demanding to rule an independent kingdom is not a neutral stance. "You obey me now" is not a neutral sentence. Resistance, distrust and resentment are wholly natural reactions to such a demand of assuming political and legal power over others. How is that controversial?

[sherlokiness]

But why should there even be a marriage between Jon and Dany when they could be just strictly family? There shouldn't there be a need to.

Hi, nonny. Thanks for the ask.

Reference : This post.

I agree there shouldn't be a need for a Jon and Dany marriage and just stay as a family. That only works if Dany wasn't bound to be a power hungry tyrant. If she really was just chasing the IT as her rightful claim and would give it up for love like she previously mused. SPOILER ALERT 🚨🚨🚨DAENERYS WOULD NOT GIVE UP THE THRONE TO HER LOVER AND RIGHTFUL KING-JON SNOW. NOT FOR DUTY NOR FOR LOVE. Words are wind.

Most people in the fandom think they could be amiable post rlj because they don't believe in Dark!Dany and expect her to die sacrificing herself for the greater good. That is complete bull as we've seen in the show ending and I believe in the books she'll be even worse cause George certainly won't pull any punches for Dany unlike D&D. D&D didn't let Dany's burning of KL have any room for excuses and anyone who tells you it's fanfic is living in delulu land.

Someone power hungry (no less hunger) as Dany won't let Jon, a trueborn son of Rhaegar, go on his merry way. His existence is a threat to her even if he abdicates. She can justify killing Faegon for being a "pretender" but Jon? There will be no rooms left to run. She won't be happy she has a family therefore can't have her throne(which is understandable) but she should stop pretending she wants it because it's her rightful claim. She won't put her money where her mouth is. She will try to usurp him or silence him. Marriage can be a compromise but the thing is well... Jon wouldn't want to marry her. In the show it's bc of incest. In the books, it'll also be bc of incest aka Sansa.

Jon and Dany could try to be platonic family but Dany's delusions/paranoia won't let her. They could also be an arranged marriage but Jon's love for another won't let him. What's left for them is to be enemies.👀👀 Dark!Dany is a threat to Jon and Sansa which is ironic bc jonsa is what will "save" Dark!Dany in the eyes of the readers. Just imagine Jon betraying and getting rid of the woman who is a threat to the realm but also a threat to Sansa. Dany, coincidentally, is also the one preventing him from marrying the love of his life. What if he does marry Sansa after doing the deed? How will that look? Poor Dragon Queen was used by the Starks only to be discarded later. Aegonys really should thank the jonsas when it does happen bc jonsa is what will make Dark!Dany more palatable. You win some and you lose some.🤷‍♀️

[sherlokiness]

Sansa's marriage and Dany's marriage/treason both expected to be "for love" and involving Jon is so funny. It's almost like the cause and effect are all laid out. Jonsas rely on the text while blue flower truthers' is also in the text but even "etched" onto a prophecy as if there's not a Sword of Damocles hanging over its head that what we 100% sure know involves love is the treason - the betrayal. Like does the sweetness in the air indicate love between J and D? It could. But the treason? Yeah that's for love.

It's even funnier when they admit Jon could be the treason but it's for love of his family. They can't swallow that maybe, just maybe, Jon could love another. The bride of fire equal romantic love but not the treason. The double standard is frankly ridiculous.