warsofasoiaf

[warsofasoiaf]

Do you have any advice for keeping up with/staying engaged with multi-pov books that jump between plot-lines? I’m currently reading one such series now and, as interesting as I find the stories of Characters B, and C, I really just want to keep reading about what’s happening to character A, and feel myself skimming to get to another chapter about character A. How do I give storylines B and C the attention they deserve? If you have thoughts about this question from a writer’s perspective (how would you approach writing multiple POVs and plotlines in one book), I would also be very grateful. Thank you!

Well, there's no silver bullet that can keep a reader engaged in multiple POV's. Subjective preferences matter and sometimes, people simply *aren't* going to like a storyline.

My best recommendation from a reading perspective if you're feeling like you want to skim B and C in order to get to A is to take a break from reading. Often, when you want to get back to A, it's because you're really invested in what's happening with the A storyline and you don't want to dump that knowledge from your brain. I understand that - it's the hallmark of a well-written book to not want to put it down! I can only hope to write so well. But digest what happened, let the excitement simmer down a little bit.

From a writing perspective, examine why you want to write multiple POV's. If you're looking to highlight the same event from multiple perspectives, I'd recommend drawing attention to the dichotomies and contrasts each POV offers. Setting a fire might be a simple tactic from a general's POV that is simply one part of his plan, but from someone caught in the blaze it might be a life-or-death moment of thrilling escape. If instead you're trying to tell different stories, I'd focus on just emphasizing the themes and touchstones of that particular POV and focus on making that as engaging a POV as you can.

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[warsofasoiaf]

During his tenure on the small council in ASOS, did Oberyn Martell have an official position, such as Master or Laws or Master of Ships? Or was he basically just a “representative of Dorne” ?

An explicit position was not named. Traditionally, the small council has seven members, but the King can add more if desired. Suppose that makes him the Westerosi equivalent of a "minister without portfolio."

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[warsofasoiaf]

What do you think of Trump’s plans to remove mail in votes and his very ignorant and false claim that the US is the only country to do mail in votes? Seriously whoever writes this guy’s speeches needs to start checking their facts and sources.

So there's two points in there I want to touch on.

The idea that the US is not the only country that does mail-in voting is actually quite irrelevant to Trump and his speechwriters. His goal with these statements is not to specifically examine the truth or falsehood of any particular claim - it's to cast doubt on the validity of the electoral process itself. Much like in the 2020 election that he lost, actual specifics are less important than sowing distrust in the process to stir up his supporters and convince them of the idea that everything is conspiring against them. That's been the case for a while, even before the downright Orwellian term of "alternative facts" entered the lexicon right after his first inauguration. Fact-checking isn't really helpful - his supporters largely do not care, if they are not deep into the conspiracy rabbit hole themselves in the belief that all fact-checkers and all media are all biased against Trump.

The other point is that Trump's plan is to try and ensure that he does not lose control of Congress in the midterms. Almost all parties in power lose seats in US midterms, and with Trump's razor-thin majorities in both houses, the loss of one means that he would lose the ability to force legislation through the house by utilizing his considerable influence within the Republican Party to threaten members to comply. That will rob him of his momentum and force him to rely on executive power. Not that he hasn't already been relying on it, but he'll have to rely on it even more because Congress will be hostile to him.

There's another issue at play here too - If he loses control of the House, he is undoubtedly going to face renewed impeachment efforts over his actions, and if he loses the Senate as well, he's likely to get convicted at trial. The Supreme Court gave him considerable carte blanche to commit wide-ranging actions under the scope of his purview as President, and he himself asserts that impeachment is the only solution. So, he's trying to ensure that he can't be impeached by maintaining control of the House.

Thanks for the questions, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[warsofasoiaf]

Thoughts on Trump’s meeting with Putin? I think it can de described as ‘sound and fury but signifying nothing”

Honestly, Putin came out of that a big winner. Before this meeting, Trump had talked a big game about how without a ceasefire, there would be some significant consequences in terms of sanctions to pressure Putin into a deal. There was no ceasefire and yet nothing happened. After the summit, Trump publicly refused Ukrainian membership into NATO - surrendering a concession without securing anything in return - a classic failure of a negotiating strategy.

Trump continues to look stupid and feckless, desperate for Putin's praise and almost begging for a Nobel Peace Prize. He secured nothing from a strategic perspective and his push for a peace deal over a ceasefire means he is failing at his publicly-stated goal: to end the war as soon as feasible. About the only thing Ukraine received were vague notions of security commitments, which I don't expect will muster out to much. The US lost quite a bit of credibility as a security exporter, and Donnie looks to continue and accelerate the trend so he can continue fighting the culture war to own the libs.

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[warsofasoiaf]

God, SLAL, I am so mad right now. I just saw that at WorldCon, at a panel GRRM was doing, someone in the audience got up and said, to his face, that he's gonna die soon so is Brandon Sanderson gonna finish the books? And Sanderson was on the panel too! And even more infuriating, I saw people on bsky cheering that person on and saying that GRRM shouldn't have expected anything else. Thankfully the audience at the panel booed the person, but god, these entitled fuckin' bastards...

That's some serious scum-class behavior right there. Entitlement is a hell of a fucking drug.

-SLAL

[warsofasoiaf]

Was it necessary for Aegon and Rhaenys to die, in order to prevent rival claims or is there another way to solve that issue?

The Faith, Citadel, and the Wall are the place to put rival claimants to prevent restorationist claims. If Rhaenys had been placed in a remote motherhouse (probably in loyalist-controlled region to prevent secret correspondence) and Aegon shipped off to the Wall to be a black brother (Steven Attewell even suggested double-dipping, sending Aegon to the Wall's sept to become a septon and a member of the Watch), then their claims would have been stronger to reinstate, as they are supposed to be surrendered upon swearing the vows. The utility of the institutions are as such that even hardline restorationist movements would work against a significant amount of social and institutional pressure.

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[warsofasoiaf]

Why was Varys desperate to keep Robert alive? I don't think he's lying, since he's being so frank about his lack of loyalty. But Robert is the keystone of the ruling coalition. When he dies, everything goes to pot, enabling the opening for Aegon. I get he doesn't want king Stannis, who'll his head 1st thing, but he avoided Cersei & co easily enough. FFS he tried to stop Ned's death & that was another thing that killed any peace. How does Ned living further Aegon's cause? Is he secretly dumb?

Because Aegon isn't ready yet. What Varys wants is to ensure that Westeros is in disorder and can look to Aegon for salvation. If Westeros splits into factions too early, and by the time Aegon is ready to march they have coalesced behind a new leader, that makes resistance to Aegon's takeover, both for the elite and the common people, that much harder. His original plan was for Viserys to invade with the Dothraki, Robert to get killed, and then the Dothraki to be defeated at the hands of the glorious savior, the long-lost Prince Aegon, here to "bind the wounds of a war-torn realm."

He tells us this much in Arya III: “Delay you say. Make haste, I reply. Even the finest juggler cannot keep a hundred balls in the air forever.”

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[warsofasoiaf]

You ever listen to the Behind the Bastards podcast? I think you might like it.

I listened to some of it. The Beau Brummell episode was pretty interesting, but I struggled with The Great Hunger episode. Between the shoddy characterizations of protectionism and one of the people on it outright saying he couldn't have empathy for the Irish until he made it about him - kinda put me off.

-SLAL

[warsofasoiaf]

RE: If Trump arrested Putin... Does this answer change if the US was a signatory to the Rome Statute? Granted, the meeting probably won't happen in the first place if that's the case. In either case, I don't see Trump having an appetite to arrest Putin. Having Zelensky show up after promising Putin he won't would make for good TV though.

Legally speaking, if you're a signatory to the Rome Statute you're supposed to turn over the subject of ICC warrants to the Court for prosecution. As was shown in the visit to South Africa, Putin believed he would not be subject to the Court despite the legal obligation. Given how desperate Trump sounds to seek Putin's approval, I doubt even if the US was still under the ICC mandate, Putin would believe quite correctly that he would have nothing to fear.

Thanks for the question, Lord.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[warsofasoiaf]

do you think Oberyn Martell thinks lyanna went willingly rather than what the starks and Baratheons stated as she was kidnapped? And do you think non-stab people like cersei, Jaime and Varys believed lyanna was kidnapped by rhaegar?

I think that Oberyn didn't care whether Lyanna went willingly or not - any children borne of Lyanna and Rhaegar are a threat to Elia and her children. That would be his overriding concern.

I think other people simply made a guess based on what they thought of Rhaegar.

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[warsofasoiaf]

If Trump arrested Putin when he arrives in Alaska for war crimes, what would happen?

The United States isn't party to the Rome Statute to serve ICC warrants (not that it stopped South Africa from cheerfully ignoring it) and there's been no US warrant issued against Putin for his war crimes in Ukraine. So there's no real standing to hold him.

That being said, what would probably happen is that the Russian Federation would treat it as holding their head of state hostage and consider it an act of war - demanding an apology, reparations (likely in the form of immediate and unconditional sanctions relief and a stipend) and Putin's safe return - or the nukes start flying.

Thanks for the question, Cle-Guy.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[warsofasoiaf]

Sure, the text doesn't mention it, but honestly, if he just wanted to up and build a new castle and he had the right to do it, why justify it at all? Honestly, the right to slight and build, hence moving the castle's location, actually seems like something the King would want to keep under his hat. Many castles were strategically located at critical passes and served as important purpose, so to have a lord have the ability to move said castle at his leisure might run the risk of undermining greater strategic initiatives. If Lord Lefford wanted to slight and move the Tooth, that might run afoul of King Lannister's desire to keep the hill road safe and secure.

Of course, given how unlikely it is that any lord would want to slight his own keep and build another (and foot the bill), it's possible that Westerosi law didn't consider it. After all, if a lord didn't have the funds and sought to take a loan from the Crown to cover the expense, the King would then have an altogether different ability to exercise a veto over the project. Alternatively, it may be like our real-world license to crenellate - technically awarded by the King but largely rubber-stamped.

-SLAL

Say I'm a cash rich lord who has just come into possession of Harenhall. Would I be allowed by my liege to tear down some of the existing structures and just build a reasonable sized castle nearby? (this is pretending that the Harenhall curse doesn't exist etc).

The right to build a castle is not inherently given when you are awarded stewardship of a fief (as we see when Daemon is granted both lands to run and the right to build a castle upon them, rather than the two being seen as one and the same), so you'd have to sweet-talk the King into allowing it - and he isn't likely to.

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[warsofasoiaf]

I disagree that about "he didn't seem to have needed especially permission." Since he "laid the blame upon the flooded cellars..." it sounds like he actually made the case that he needed to build a new castle, rather than just up and built it.

-SLAL

Say I'm a cash rich lord who has just come into possession of Harenhall. Would I be allowed by my liege to tear down some of the existing structures and just build a reasonable sized castle nearby? (this is pretending that the Harenhall curse doesn't exist etc).

The right to build a castle is not inherently given when you are awarded stewardship of a fief (as we see when Daemon is granted both lands to run and the right to build a castle upon them, rather than the two being seen as one and the same), so you'd have to sweet-talk the King into allowing it - and he isn't likely to.

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[warsofasoiaf]

Westeros doesn't seem to have that distinction though. We never hear the term "manor" in-universe, and Summerhall is distinctly mentioned to be the only sort of "palace" we actually see, if we use the term to mean a residence built without fortification in mind, and even then it is "lightly-fortified."

-SLAL

I think they ment if their wasn't one their already

That doesn't make sense. The entire point of granting a fief is to establish stewardship of the land in feudal service to the overlord. In order to do things like collect taxes, establish patrols, etc. you'll need a base of operations to perform the functions of state. So in the event that a king grants an empty fief to a knight without granting the permission to raise a castle upon its grounds, the king is not actually allowing their infeudated vassal to do their job.

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[warsofasoiaf]

I think they ment if their wasn't one their already

That doesn't make sense. The entire point of granting a fief is to establish stewardship of the land in feudal service to the overlord. In order to do things like collect taxes, establish patrols, etc. you'll need a base of operations to perform the functions of state. So in the event that a king grants an empty fief to a knight without granting the permission to raise a castle upon its grounds, the king is not actually allowing their infeudated vassal to do their job.

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[warsofasoiaf]

So if someone is granted land without the right to build a castle, does he live in a tent or something? A peasant hut?

The castle that was already on it.

-SLAL

[warsofasoiaf]

Say I'm a cash rich lord who has just come into possession of Harenhall. Would I be allowed by my liege to tear down some of the existing structures and just build a reasonable sized castle nearby? (this is pretending that the Harenhall curse doesn't exist etc).

The right to build a castle is not inherently given when you are awarded stewardship of a fief (as we see when Daemon is granted both lands to run and the right to build a castle upon them, rather than the two being seen as one and the same), so you'd have to sweet-talk the King into allowing it - and he isn't likely to.

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King