#Edric stark x Serena stark | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

vicleesi · 5 years

Text

About GoT Episode 4:

First of all, I’m completely exhausted from turning a blind eye to the multiple flaws in the D & D scripts (and it was they who wrote this episode). The strength of Game of Thrones came right from the details thanks to the incredible world that George R. R. Martin created and D & D destroyed. So no, I will not spare you them.

- The beginning was good. I just do not understand why Jon made his speech without looking at the survivors of Winterfell.

- The party dinner was generally good. In these last seasons, Game of Thrones has managed to maintain a good quality in the interaction between characthers. Episode 2 was basically all that and it was good for me. The problem is when GoT starts off for the story - which is already lost.

- Daenerys’s loneliness was well portrayed. Too bad the series prematurely killed Selmy Barristan, did not it?

- First failure of attention to detail that detracts from the series’ worldbuilding: Gendry Rivers, what? Is he from the Riverlands, by any chance? Bastard born and raised in King’s Landing is named after Waters. His name was Gendry Waters (actually it was just Gendry, since Robert never recognized him as his bastard son). Why change that, D & D? To be different?

- I wish Gendry good luck trying to persuade the Storm lords to bend over to a bastard who does not understand a thing about ruling a castle. But of course the series will not talk about that. At least they did not give Storm’s to Brienne or to Davos (by the way, when the Davos family will show up?)

- Leaving a bit out of order, but taking advantage of feudal politics, what’s going on in Dorne?” D & D mentioned a new Prince of Dorne who swore loyalty to Daenerys. Hi? What? When? Who? WHY??? D & D had the brilliant idea of making the Martells exterminate each other and still reap the rewards of their genius. Dorne remains the worst arc in the series and quite possibly one of the worst book-media visual adaptations ever.

- They also mentioned Riverrun again. What happened to the Riverlands after the Freys all died? Where is Edmure Tully? Who controls Riverrun?

- Writers creating a whole scene by saying that Brienne is a virgin. Not necessary.

- There was not a crippled nephew of Daeron Targaryen. D & D creating Targaryens whenever they want, although there is a well-defined story in the books. (FIRE AND BLOOD)

- There was finally a scene between Sandor and Sansa. It only took 4 episodes to happen. Once again they put Sansa as the product of her suffering, justifying the idiot choices D & D made for her character. Nothing new, otherwise it was a totally forgettable dialogue (I already forgot).

- The Bronn Paradox: If Bronn is not serving Daenerys while the war is rolling, who guarantees that he will receive his castle in the end? Especially considering he was utterly disillusioned with the promises of the Lannisters to the point of being ready to kill his two best friends? In fact, did D & D forget that Jaime himself had offered Highgarden to the Bronn last season?

- Again, as for Gendry, I wish Bronn good luck in trying to establish his feudal dominion over the proud lords of Highgarden who did not even tolerate the right Tyrells, and the Tyrells were an old family and had already been entrenched in there for centuries. Of course, D & D do not care.

- The Paradox of the Wildlings: Why were they known as wildlings? Because they tried to conquer the Wall from time to time and were always looting the North in search of resources and riches. Because their land was a shit, where nothing grew and it was always winter, basically. Now the they finally made it through the Wall and gain access to the best lands, even more with the support of the Winterfell and Starks. What do they do? That’s right: they go back to their shit place because D & D have that same shit on their heads.

- What else is north of Winterfell and south of the Wall are lands with no one, thanks to the King of the Night.“ But the wildlings choose to go back to Castle Black and, by all means, beyond the Wall. Seven Hells.

- I will not even comment on Jon’s scene sending Ghost away.” If it was for him to appear that way, it was better for the wolf to have been m.i.a as before.

- Sam Tarly is a Night’s Watch man. Men of Night’s Watch should not have children. When will anyone say that? Did not Jon even mention it? What happened to Night’s Watch? Why is Sam still dressed in black? If he’s out, why did not he become Lord Tarly?

- The arc of Night’s Watch is going to be without conclusion anyway? Are they gone?

- The army of the living has lost only half its men? It was not what it looked like in episode 3. But okay, D & D create and describe armies whenever they think it’s valid - just like Night’s Watch, apparently.

- As they are doing this season, D & D cut important dialogue scenes because they do not know what to write. In the first episode they cut off Daenerys before she finished threatening Sansa. In the second episode they cut their scene together before Dany could answer the question “What about the North?”. At the end of it cut the scene Jon x Dany in the crypts. Now they cut the scene of Sansa and Arya discovering that Jon is not their brother. Why, man? What is the reason? I’m shocked that D & D did not cut Jon’s reaction to finding out that he’s a bastard of Rhaegar and Lyanna (yes, he’s a bastard, D & D, no matter how many fanfics they write).

- Arya in the first moment: we are a family! Arya in 2nd moment: left King’s Landing, goodbye Winterfell, until never again! and yes she left for good, she said she ain’t coming back!

That was the good part of the episode. Let’s go to the bad part!!

- So you want to tell me that Euron can hit three harpoons in a dragon in mid-flight?“

- So you want to tell me that Daenerys from the sky was unable to see the Greyjoy fleet hidden behind an islet?”

- So you want to tell me that Daenerys never considered the possibility that it was a bad idea to sail to Dragonstone as they knew Euron controlled the seas there?“

- So you want to tell me that Rhaegal was not killed by the zombie dragon brother in the apocalyptic Battle of the long night fighting for the fate of the men’s kingdom only to die in the next episode in a few seconds for Euron Greyjoy’s magical harpoons?

-So you want to tell me how easy it is to kill dragons like that?” It amazes me that Aegon conquered Westeros three hundred years ago.

- Daenerys should have flown directly to King’s Landing and fired at everything after the Rhaegal’s death. Fire and Blood!!

- Jaime returning to Cersei: hi? What the fuck? If it is to join her and not kill her right away, Jaime will be the greatest example of character assassination that D & D has committed since Stannis Baratheon.

- How did Team Dany know that Missandei had been captured? Euron made propaganda, sent in the email?

- Is Varys loyal to Jon Snow? REALLY? What does Varys know about Jon Snow? When did he meet Jon Snow? When did they share at least one scene together? They never talked. Varys never saw him rule. Where do the writers get these crazy ideas?

- Nonsense to be creating intrigue over the marriage between Jon and Daenerys. She will need to get married to have children and continue the dynasty. Who is she getting married to, Hot Pie?

- By the way, there have been marriages between uncles and nieces among the Starks. Brothers Jonnel and Edric Stark married their nieces Serena and Sansa Stark some 150 years ago to try to end a crisis of succession, since their father, Rickon, heir to Winterfell, had been killed in the conquest of Dorne. It would not surprise me if GRRM specifically placed these marriages in history just for this situation that was raised in the conversation between Tyrion and Varys. In fact, marriages between uncles and nieces were not exactly uncommon in our own history. In Brasil, Dom Pedro I was grandson of D. Maria I of Portugal, who was married to his uncle, D. Pedro III, precisely to avoid a dynastic crisis.

- Again the bullshit that Robert’s Rebellion was built on a lie. I imagine the Crazy King burning the Lord of Winterfell and his heir and begging for Ned and Robert’s head did not influence that at all.

- Dany is an emotional woman who’s going crazy. So we need a rational man to help her.

- Dany is an emotional woman who’s going crazy. So we need a rational man to help her!!

- Oh, excuse me if I repeated myself, but this nonsense does not go down. They disrespected Daenerys, disrespected her journey, disrespected even the “girl power” they tried to do last season (Dany, Olenna Tyrell, Cersei and the Martells). The mysoginism of these so-called D & D appearing once more to claim another innocent victim.

- Why did Cersei not kill Tyrion?

- Why did Cersei not kill Daenerys?

- Euron does not suspect anything after Tyrion reveals he knew Cersei was pregnant?“ Since Euron himelf knew only minutes ago?

- D & D really put an end to the apocalypse so we can have Cersei grinning in the last three episodes? Is this serious?

- Euron is Cersei’s puppy. Euron in the series is another completely character , they should have changed his name in the adaptation as they did with the Asha (Yara).

- No turning back with the Night King. D & D make us muggles.

- Finally: where’s the winter ??? It seems King’s Landing is in the tropics.

- Cancel this and the next two episodes. Let GoT finish in episode 3, at least so we would have something minimally satisfying. D & D continue to insult the viewer’s intelligence.

"At least the show’s songs never fails to please.”

*this analysis is not mine I translated from a brazilian friend

#game of thrones #jonerys #daenerys targaryen #jon snow #aegon targaryen #targaryen #jonsnow #got s8 e4 #got season 8 #got spoilers #Euron Greyjoy #Cersei Lannister #Tyrion Lannister #Gendry Baratheon #Gendry Waters #ser bronn #asoiaf spoilers #Kit Harington #emilia clarke

283 notes · View notes

aryas · 7 years

Text

Targ Restoration Rant (aka I made the mistake of venturing into the pro -Targaryen tag & discourse)

"You know nothing, Jon Snow. A true man steals a woman from afar, t'strengthen the clan. Women who bed brothers or fathers or clan kin offend the gods, and are cursed with weak and sickly children. Even monsters." --- Ygritte, ASOS

Clearly, GRRM has never painted Cersei x Jaime or Craster x his daughters in a very favourable light. But suddenly, incest between the 2 good and heroic guys (though the jury is still out on Daenerys) of the story is a-ok? Is it because they are a couple of magic übermenschen and are thus above morality and law of nature? Am I supposed to think GRRM now advocates for incest? But only under certain conditions, only when it involves the special and God-like Targaryens? Why do fans suddenly rejoice about this and wish for a Targ restoration? What kind of fresh hell has this fandom turned into?

[Cut for length]

Their main argument seems to be

Jon and Dany are nephew/aunt which is not considered incest in Westeros so it's all good! No one would bat an eye because even outside the Targs, there are cases of avunculate marriages.

And then they bring up the two known cases; Jonnel x Sansa Stark and Edric x Serena Stark. The former was (probably) a purely political union without issue. The latter did yield heirs but Serena was the daughter of Edric's half brother, so they weren't as closely related (same goes for Sansa, who was Serena's sister and Jonnel's half brother's daughter). Both probably happened for political/practical reasons and to solve major succession issues as Rickon Stark & Jeyne Manderly had two daughters but no male heir.

This comparison is not a very pertinent one because a marriage between Jon & Daenerys would be neither purely political nor practical as they are already involved and supposedly in love. Additionally, what kind of political gain would there be for either of them if we assume Jon's true parentage will be revealed publicly, combined with his ostensible betrayal of bending the knee and falling for a "foreign whore woman" (from the Northern lords' viewpoint), resulting in the loss of his already tenuous hold over the North or the election of another KitN or QitN? Over the last few seasons, the show dropped numerous anvil sized hints about how unwelcome foreign leaders are in the North, especially Targaryens. The Northern lords were already ready to unname Jon because they deemed he'd been away too long. It makes little sense that a Jon x Daenerys marriage would placate them post R+L=J unless they inexplicably decide to suddenly support what would essentially be the restoration of a dynasty they despise. It would also mean R+L=J and Jon's actions in season 7 (i.e bending the knee to a Targaryen, consorting with said Targaryen while being a secret Targaryen himself) would have little to no long-lasting effect and any conflict it caused would be resolved by a marriage that would have happened anyway if Jon had remained Ned's natural son.

Jon wouldn't need Daenerys if he decides to pursue the Iron Throne since his claim trumps hers. What's more, the people of Westeros are more likely to accept him as king of the 7 kingdoms over Daenerys given his Stark blood and the fact that he was raised and groomed for leadership in Westeros. He could potentially have the loyalty and allegiance of the Starks and their bannermen, the Wildlings, the Reach (through Sam), the Iron Islands (through Theon), the Vale (through Sansa and Sweetrobin) and possibly the Riverlands (through his Stark cousins' Tully heritage), in contrast to Dany whose sole remaining Westerosi ally is Jon. If they were to support a Targaryen candidate for the Iron Throne, I think they would favour Jon alone (or you know, married to someone who isn't a Targaryen conqueror).

And while Daenerys could absorb Jon's claim (and potential allies- though again, why would they support Jon x Daenerys over Jon on his own?) and make hers stronger by marrying him, she doesn't need him to lay claim to the 7 kingdoms either, what with her dragons and huge armies. Moreover, an "alliance" - if you can call giving up your kingdom as such - already exists with Jon seemingly having pledged himself to her and Daenerys naming him Warden of the North. She would have been better off marrying someone else to extend or strengthen her control over other regions and territories if there weren't so few candidates left on the show. The most logical way to strike an alliance would have been to marry Jon while he was KitN, pre parentage reveal, but for some obscure reason, the show completely bypassed this option.

But R+L=J turns everything upside down and Jon, once revealed as a trueborn Targaryen, would need to marry into a Northern house if he wants to keep/take back his kingship of the North. Marrying Daenerys would only strengthen his ties to the South and house Targaryen, which would be counterproductive and work against the desired outcome- uniting North & South or two major Houses.

In short, neither party would truly benefit politically from a marriage if Jon's parentage is made public and/or he ultimately loses the North, which is very likely. This is particularly true for Jon. Only Daenerys could somewhat profit from a political union but it would be at the risk of becoming Jon's queen consort in practice if not on paper (something I doubt she would accept) and, more importantly, it would be opening a whole can of worms given the stigma of Targaryen x Targaryen unions.

Because no matter of how (un)common and (un)acceptable avunculate marriages are in the universe of Westeros, Targ restoration fans usually ignore the fact that it wouldn't be just any nephew/aunt, it would be a full Targaryen union, which would have wholly different connotations for the people of Westeros given the fairly recent trauma of their reign. A reign that ended with a mad king whose madness is believed to be hereditary and blamed on generations of close interbreeding. I doubt the people of Westeros would readily accept a Targ power couple back at the helm if they have any say in it.

Plus, Daenerys' first impression didn't exactly help matters: a Targaryen conqueror with huge armies and grown dragons in tow who roasted a father and a son of a prominent House alive and destroyed the last harvest of the Reach in the beginning of winter and unwittingly handed over the greatest weapon of all times to their greatest enemy of all times and indirectly caused the Wall to fall and wants to marry her only other living Targaryen relative, of all people? The sense of déjà vu would be pretty disconcerting, to say the least.

These Pro-Targ fans also tend to dismiss the fact Jon & Daenerys are genetically closer to full siblings than aunts/nephews by claiming modern notions such as DNA conveniently have no bearing in a medieval-fantasy setting such as ASOIAF. In other words, people in-universe wouldn't realise or be bothered that Jon & Daenerys are more closely related (44-47%) than typical nephew/aunt (25%). I think they must have an inkling of the notion and dangers of consanguinity, however basic it may be, if cousin marriages are considered quite normal for the highborn while anything involving more closely related people is frowned upon or downright forbidden. As mentioned previously, even the two known cases of avunculate unions were between uncles and their half nieces, their degree of consanguinity being thus less than that of full uncle/niece and comparable to first cousins (12,5%). So people could at least vaguely understand that Jon & Daenerys share a higher degree of consanguinity than their relatedness would suggest.

All this begs the question; if GRRM wants the restoration of this dynasty and wants us to perceive this as a positive development, wouldn't he aim to improve it and stop the perpetuation of the very proclivity that precipitated their downfall and was at the root of so much suffering in Westeros? Would he "reward" an incestuous and destructive house by having it win out while others are extinct/on the brink of extinction?

If there is supposed to be a Targaryen reinstatement, there has to be a clean break from this dynasty's nefarious characteristics and habits i.e. imperialism, tyranny and incest. What would otherwise be the narrative point of Robert's (very justifiable) Rebellion and everything that unfolded in its aftermath? There should be some kind of progress. Jon & Daenerys, if they decide to take back the IT and get married after the R+L=J reveal, would mean regression. It would be synonymous with more incest, more super inbred and possibly cray-cray Targ heirs and more political (and genetic) isolationism. And with 2 grown dragons/WoMD (if they survive), their reign would equal more subjugation, intimidation and fear for the people of Westeros, even if Jon & Daenerys' initial intentions would be to create a new and better world. In other words, a repeat of everything that was toxic and problematic about the Targaryen dynasty. This scenario seems particularly unlikely when you take the author's personal anti-war/WoMD stance into account.

And lastly, this is what GRRM said about Targcest:

"The Targaryens have heavily interbred, like the Ptolemys of Egypt. As any horse or dog breeder can tell you, interbreeding accentuates both flaws and virtues, and pushes a lineage toward the extremes."

ASOIAF is a meditation on war, power and corruption but it's also a story about extremes --- wights/WW/Ice vs Fire/Daenerys/dragons, the inevitable clash and destruction they bring about and the importance of seeking balance, moderation and finding a middle ground in all things: justice instead of vengeance, sovereignty instead of oppression etc. Even Jon himself is the embodiment of the metaphorical balance between ice and fire. As such, the Targaryens/Targcest can be viewed as another extreme to be avoided. It's the antithesis of "balanced". What he says about accentuating both flaws and virtues is evocative of this famous passage:

"King Jaehaerys once told me that madness and greatness are two sides of the same coin. Every time a new Targaryen is born, he said, the gods toss the coin in the air and the world holds its breath to see how it will land."

Some Targaryen fans like to think what the coin metaphor refers to is nothing but a myth but I would think the fact the author alludes to it in the above quote kind of refutes this theory. I also happen to think Jon & Daenerys each represent one facet of the coin. This analogy also effectively illustrates how unstable and inconsistent Targaryen rule truly was and could be again. Even if Jon & Daenerys end up being fair and progressive monarchs, what of their inbred children? On which side will the coin land for them? If there is anything Westeros needs after years of war waging, power struggles, political instability and the probably disastrous aftermath of the battle against the Others, it's consistency and stability.

Furthermore, the fact GRRM compares them to the Ptolemaic dynasty is not exactly a ringing endorsement. The Ptolemys were originally from Macedonia/Greece and ruled for close to 300 years over Egypt. Because they never deigned to mix their blood with outsiders and only wed brother/sister and occasionally uncle/niece and cousins, they never actually became Egyptian. Even Cleopatra was genetically Greek. They didn't assimilate with the local people, culture or language (Cleopatra being the only one who bothered to learn the language) and justified their incest by drawing comparison to Greek mythology and thus perceived themselves as Gods. The intermarriages also exacerbated feelings of jealousy and rivalry. Complot and murder within the family were a common occurrence. Aside from a couple of exceptions, they were quite inept rulers and the last +/- 200 years of their reign kind of sucked.

Sounds familiar? In broad strokes, this is pretty much a copy/paste of the history of the Targaryens. Does this sound like something we're supposed to root for? Their reign ended when Egypt submitted to Roman rule. And no, there was no Ptolemaic restoration.

#anti targaryen #anti targaryen restoration #aegony #anti jonerys #incest in asoiaf #anti targcest #fandom wank #jon snow #daenerys targaryen #an aegony political marriage #pre parentage reveal? sure. post parentage reveal? nope #got politics #got meta #parallels with irl history #*mine

266 notes · View notes