Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

[The Romulan Republic]

You're overemphasizing how good Dany really was in the show. I compared her to Aung Syun Syuu Kai for a reason

I actually said nothing about Daenery's character in that post beyond noting that there was no real evidence she'd go mad in the books. So apparently "noting the possibility that she might not be mad/evil in the books" is "overemphasizing how good she was in the show". Got it.

Yeah, I'm snide toward D&D, but frankly, they deserve it, for this and a whole bunch of other reasons.

[Darth Yan]

You're overemphasizing how good Dany really was in the show. I compared her to Aung Syun Syuu Kai for a reason

I actually said nothing about Daenery's character in that post beyond noting that there was no real evidence she'd go mad in the books. So apparently "noting the possibility that she might not be mad/evil in the books" is "overemphasizing how good she was in the show". Got it.

Yeah, I'm snide toward D&D, but frankly, they deserve it, for this and a whole bunch of other reasons.

No there are signs. Martin said that one guy who described Dany as “choosing war” was dead on. She also displays ruthlessness in the books as well. Honestly I’m pretty sure they cribbed mad Queen Dany from the books

[The Romulan Republic]

You're overemphasizing how good Dany really was in the show. I compared her to Aung Syun Syuu Kai for a reason

I actually said nothing about Daenery's character in that post beyond noting that there was no real evidence she'd go mad in the books. So apparently "noting the possibility that she might not be mad/evil in the books" is "overemphasizing how good she was in the show". Got it.

Yeah, I'm snide toward D&D, but frankly, they deserve it, for this and a whole bunch of other reasons.

No there are signs. Martin said that one guy who described Dany as “choosing war” was dead on. She also displays ruthlessness in the books as well. Honestly I’m pretty sure they cribbed mad Queen Dany from the books

"Choosing war" and "mad" are not the same thing. Stannis "chose war" in defense of what he believed was right. So did Robb. So did the Allies in WW2, and most people agree that was right, and those who don't are generally not people you'd want to associate with.

Maybe the books will go that way, I can't read GRRM's mind. But I do wonder why they wouldn't have come out and said that. If they're already spoiling the end to the series, why not say "Yeah, GRRM totally told us Danny would go mad and kill everyone, see its not our fault!" With everything D&D have been saying to try to sell this plot point in the face of massive outrage, why would they keep their mouths shut? They could even have someone else leak it if they wanted to.

[Darth Yan]

I actually said nothing about Daenery's character in that post beyond noting that there was no real evidence she'd go mad in the books. So apparently "noting the possibility that she might not be mad/evil in the books" is "overemphasizing how good she was in the show". Got it.

Yeah, I'm snide toward D&D, but frankly, they deserve it, for this and a whole bunch of other reasons.

No there are signs. Martin said that one guy who described Dany as “choosing war” was dead on. She also displays ruthlessness in the books as well. Honestly I’m pretty sure they cribbed mad Queen Dany from the books

"Choosing war" and "mad" are not the same thing. Stannis "chose war" in defense of what he believed was right. So did Robb. So did the Allies in WW2, and most people agree that was right, and those who don't are generally not people you'd want to associate with.

Maybe the books will go that way, I can't read GRRM's mind. But I do wonder why they wouldn't have come out and said that. If they're already spoiling the end to the series, why not say "Yeah, GRRM totally told us Danny would go mad and kill everyone, see its not our fault!" With everything D&D have been saying to try to sell this plot point in the face of massive outrage, why would they keep their mouths shut? They could even have someone else leak it if they wanted to.

Maybe they don't want to leak too much. And the context Martin was describing was "choosing war because it was easier". They do see themselves as fans of the books.

Again. You put Dany on a pedestal and were upset when it proved she had feet of clay. Dany going mad was ALWAYS the endgame and it's NOT out of nowhere like you like to pretend.

[The Romulan Republic]

No there are signs. Martin said that one guy who described Dany as “choosing war” was dead on. She also displays ruthlessness in the books as well. Honestly I’m pretty sure they cribbed mad Queen Dany from the books

"Choosing war" and "mad" are not the same thing. Stannis "chose war" in defense of what he believed was right. So did Robb. So did the Allies in WW2, and most people agree that was right, and those who don't are generally not people you'd want to associate with.

Maybe the books will go that way, I can't read GRRM's mind. But I do wonder why they wouldn't have come out and said that. If they're already spoiling the end to the series, why not say "Yeah, GRRM totally told us Danny would go mad and kill everyone, see its not our fault!" With everything D&D have been saying to try to sell this plot point in the face of massive outrage, why would they keep their mouths shut? They could even have someone else leak it if they wanted to.

Maybe they don't want to leak too much. And the context Martin was describing was "choosing war because it was easier". They do see themselves as fans of the books.

Again. You put Dany on a pedestal and were upset when it proved she had feet of clay. Dany going mad was ALWAYS the endgame and it's NOT out of nowhere like you like to pretend.

Here's an idea: why don't you stop putting words in my mouth and trying to armchair psychoanalize me because I don't agree with YOUR interpretation? Its also pretty arrogant of you to claim that you know how GRRM is planning to end the series, because you believe your interpretation is so self-evidently correct that no one could disagree with you.

Or are you really too stupid to see that there is a middle ground between "put Dany on a pedestal" and "thinks she is inevitably predestined to madness"?

Here's what I actually think: I think she is basically kind, well-meaning person who makes mistakes because she is inexperienced, probably has PTSD, and is forced to rely on one extremely powerful weapon which also reinforces her sense of having a special destiny and birthright. Or is that too nuanced for you?

Edit: I also think, however, that she is judged far more harshly by a certain segment of the fandom than other characters who do similar things. No one talks about how Stannis is predestined to madness* for burning people alive to gain power (Stannis is actually hands-down the most similar character to Daenerys). Nobody talks about how Tywin is mad for sacking King's Landing. An asshole, yes, but not a madman. Nobody talks about how Ned Stark is a madman for personally executing people (including in his very first scene)- no, his great fault is that he's "too honourable", and not enough of a HARD MAN. Only Daenerys, and to a lesser extent all Targaryens (because one of the many desperate excuses Danny bashers love to push is that all Targaryens are innately predestined to madness, even though that is explicitly contradicted on numerous occassions by both show and book canon).

I could speculate as to why this is. I could theorize that "madness" here is basically a euphemism for "scary woman who's too emotional/unstable to be trusted with power", and that this is simply part of a long tradition of caricaturing ambitious women as unstable, amoral harpies in the media and popular culture. Of course, if I do that half the board will no doubt rush to "call me out" for "calling everyone I disagree with sexist".


*I'd also like to have a few words with the GoT fandom about using mental illness as synonymous with "evil", while I'm at it.

[Raw Shark]

"When a Targaryen is born, the gods flip a coin," was established early on in the books and maintained throughout, especially in the prequel material. Probably the inbreeding. About half of them are as crazy as a shithouse rat. When that Targaryen is subjected to many experiences that would cause PTSD even in a normal person, including from her own brother, that's a trick coin that'll come up heads every day that ends in a Y.

[The Romulan Republic]

"When a Targaryen is born, the gods flip a coin," was established early on in the books and maintained throughout, especially in the prequel material. Probably the inbreeding. About half of them are as crazy as a shithouse rat. When that Targaryen is subjected to many experiences that would cause PTSD even in a normal person, including from her own brother, that's a trick coin that'll come up heads every day that ends in a Y.

Yeah, but half isn't all, and yet certain fans treat Targaryen madness (ie murderous pyromania) as something that every Targaryen is innately predestined to (usually as an excuse for Daenerys bashing, or sometimes Rhaegar* bashing).



*Rhaegar was arguably a dick, possibly a rapist, and probably incompetent, but I've seen no convincing evidence that he was mad (believing in prophecies doesn't count, especially not in a world with actual verifiable magic).

[Darth Yan]

"Choosing war" and "mad" are not the same thing. Stannis "chose war" in defense of what he believed was right. So did Robb. So did the Allies in WW2, and most people agree that was right, and those who don't are generally not people you'd want to associate with.

Maybe the books will go that way, I can't read GRRM's mind. But I do wonder why they wouldn't have come out and said that. If they're already spoiling the end to the series, why not say "Yeah, GRRM totally told us Danny would go mad and kill everyone, see its not our fault!" With everything D&D have been saying to try to sell this plot point in the face of massive outrage, why would they keep their mouths shut? They could even have someone else leak it if they wanted to.

Maybe they don't want to leak too much. And the context Martin was describing was "choosing war because it was easier". They do see themselves as fans of the books.

Again. You put Dany on a pedestal and were upset when it proved she had feet of clay. Dany going mad was ALWAYS the endgame and it's NOT out of nowhere like you like to pretend.

Here's an idea: why don't you stop putting words in my mouth and trying to armchair psychoanalize me because I don't agree with YOUR interpretation? Its also pretty arrogant of you to claim that you know how GRRM is planning to end the series, because you believe your interpretation is so self-evidently correct that no one could disagree with you.

Or are you really too stupid to see that there is a middle ground between "put Dany on a pedestal" and "thinks she is inevitably predestined to madness"?

Here's what I actually think: I think she is basically kind, well-meaning person who makes mistakes because she is inexperienced, probably has PTSD, and is forced to rely on one extremely powerful weapon which also reinforces her sense of having a special destiny and birthright. Or is that too nuanced for you?

Edit: I also think, however, that she is judged far more harshly by a certain segment of the fandom than other characters who do similar things. No one talks about how Stannis is predestined to madness* for burning people alive to gain power (Stannis is actually hands-down the most similar character to Daenerys). Nobody talks about how Tywin is mad for sacking King's Landing. An asshole, yes, but not a madman. Nobody talks about how Ned Stark is a madman for personally executing people (including in his very first scene)- no, his great fault is that he's "too honourable", and not enough of a HARD MAN. Only Daenerys, and to a lesser extent all Targaryens (because one of the many desperate excuses Danny bashers love to push is that all Targaryens are innately predestined to madness, even though that is explicitly contradicted on numerous occassions by both show and book canon).

I could speculate as to why this is. I could theorize that "madness" here is basically a euphemism for "scary woman who's too emotional/unstable to be trusted with power", and that this is simply part of a long tradition of caricaturing ambitious women as unstable, amoral harpies in the media and popular culture. Of course, if I do that half the board will no doubt rush to "call me out" for "calling everyone I disagree with sexist".


*I'd also like to have a few words with the GoT fandom about using mental illness as synonymous with "evil", while I'm at it.

I see Dany as someone who means well and has virtues but is also absolutely sure in her own righteousness and certainty that she is good, taking it to the point where if she deems you an enemy you will die horribly and damn the circumstances. Characters like Jon, Ned, hell even Jaime and Sansa are able to reflect and admit that maybe they're not right. Thing is Dany usually had advisors keeping her in check. Once those were gone her own absolute surety drove her over the edge.

Stannis also paid the price for his actions btw.

Rhaegar I see as someone who wasn't the evil rapist monster that Robert believed but also not the heroic shining knight that his supporters idolized. He was so utterly certain in the prophecies he was willing to jump in without considering the consequences. Lyanna eloping was understandable but at the same time it did set off a chain reaction.

[The Romulan Republic]

Maybe they don't want to leak too much. And the context Martin was describing was "choosing war because it was easier". They do see themselves as fans of the books.

Again. You put Dany on a pedestal and were upset when it proved she had feet of clay. Dany going mad was ALWAYS the endgame and it's NOT out of nowhere like you like to pretend.

Here's an idea: why don't you stop putting words in my mouth and trying to armchair psychoanalize me because I don't agree with YOUR interpretation? Its also pretty arrogant of you to claim that you know how GRRM is planning to end the series, because you believe your interpretation is so self-evidently correct that no one could disagree with you.

Or are you really too stupid to see that there is a middle ground between "put Dany on a pedestal" and "thinks she is inevitably predestined to madness"?

Here's what I actually think: I think she is basically kind, well-meaning person who makes mistakes because she is inexperienced, probably has PTSD, and is forced to rely on one extremely powerful weapon which also reinforces her sense of having a special destiny and birthright. Or is that too nuanced for you?

Edit: I also think, however, that she is judged far more harshly by a certain segment of the fandom than other characters who do similar things. No one talks about how Stannis is predestined to madness* for burning people alive to gain power (Stannis is actually hands-down the most similar character to Daenerys). Nobody talks about how Tywin is mad for sacking King's Landing. An asshole, yes, but not a madman. Nobody talks about how Ned Stark is a madman for personally executing people (including in his very first scene)- no, his great fault is that he's "too honourable", and not enough of a HARD MAN. Only Daenerys, and to a lesser extent all Targaryens (because one of the many desperate excuses Danny bashers love to push is that all Targaryens are innately predestined to madness, even though that is explicitly contradicted on numerous occassions by both show and book canon).

I could speculate as to why this is. I could theorize that "madness" here is basically a euphemism for "scary woman who's too emotional/unstable to be trusted with power", and that this is simply part of a long tradition of caricaturing ambitious women as unstable, amoral harpies in the media and popular culture. Of course, if I do that half the board will no doubt rush to "call me out" for "calling everyone I disagree with sexist".


*I'd also like to have a few words with the GoT fandom about using mental illness as synonymous with "evil", while I'm at it.

I see Dany as someone who means well and has virtues but is also absolutely sure in her own righteousness and certainty that she is good, taking it to the point where if she deems you an enemy you will die horribly and damn the circumstances. Characters like Jon, Ned, hell even Jaime and Sansa are able to reflect and admit that maybe they're not right. Thing is Dany usually had advisors keeping her in check. Once those were gone her own absolute surety drove her over the edge.

There's some truth to that, though I also recall her showing moments of doubt. I think, though, that its the consequence of her circumstances, not some inborn insanity. She was someone who was constantly denied freedom of choice (married off as a child bride, ie a legal sex slave, exiled and targeted by assassins for the family she was born into). She finally managed to build some kind of life despite that, and then had it brutally stripped away. She was shown very bluntly and cruelly that the only person she could rely on to protect her and the people she cared about was her, and that simply living a normal life in peace was not an option. Then she was handed a single source of immense supernatural power which also confirmed that she actually did have a special heritage/bloodline and destiny.

She responded exactly as I would expect most people under those circumstances to respond. If she has a mental illness, its probably PTSD.

Stannis also paid the price for his actions btw.

Stannis is actually hands-down the best parallel for Daenerys, especially in the show.

-He believes he has a right to the throne.

-He has strong moral convictions (sense of duty vs Daenerys's opposition to slavery).

-He nonetheless is capable of ruthlessness and moral flexibility to achieve his paramount goal.

-He uses fire heavily as a weapon.

-He relies on a powerful supernatural entity to overcome his lack of conventional military power.

-He challenges Westrosi cultural norms (allying with the fire god, commanding his men to put his daughter on the throne in the event of his death).

-He commands respect and loyalty in his followers.

-He relies on one or more trusted advisers to keep him in check.

-He ultimately crosses a crucial moral line (burning his daughter) in pursuit of power, and loses despite it (though not, as in Danny's case, as a direct result of it).

-His vocal fan base widely decried it as character assassination, even though you could argue that it had a basis in his prior actions (Stannis had engaged in human sacrifice and kin-slaying in pursuit of the throne before), and remained fans.

The crucial differences:

-Stannis was not built up as a symbol of empowerment for marginalized groups.

-Stannis is never portrayed, in the show or generally outside of it, as a mad man, much less innately predestined for madness, nor is he portrayed as generally evil. No, that is reserved for Daenerys. That is the double-standard.

-Edit: Stannis was allowed to die with some dignity in his final moments. Daenerys really wasn't. Hell, her murder (with Jon kissing and embracing her before killing her) could be seen as romanticizing/sexualizing her death.

Rhaegar I see as someone who wasn't the evil rapist monster that Robert believed but also not the heroic shining knight that his supporters idolized. He was so utterly certain in the prophecies he was willing to jump in without considering the consequences. Lyanna eloping was understandable but at the same time it did set off a chain reaction.

I think its pretty likely that Rhaegar either wasn't prepared for the fallout of his actions (naive) or overestimated his ability to deal with it (arrogant). Or both.

Regarding Lyanna, yeah, I don't blame her at all. Either she went with Rhaegar completely freely and un-coerced (which I'm not sure is even possible, given how limited womens' rights are in Westeros and the fact that he was the Crown Prince), or she didn't. If the former, then that's her right to choose who she she wants to sleep with, and if a woman choosing what they want to do with their vagina will cause the realm to burn, then frankly the realm deserves to burn. If, on the other hand, she did not choose to go with him freely, then she's a rape victim and blaming her is utterly monstrous.

Basically, she's either a rape victim or a girl who chose to elope to escape an arranged marriage against her will (ie legalized rape), and in either case, one hundred percent of the blame goes to Westrosi misogyny and patriarchy and feudal marriage arrangements, not Lyanna.

[Darth Yan]

Here's an idea: why don't you stop putting words in my mouth and trying to armchair psychoanalize me because I don't agree with YOUR interpretation? Its also pretty arrogant of you to claim that you know how GRRM is planning to end the series, because you believe your interpretation is so self-evidently correct that no one could disagree with you.

Or are you really too stupid to see that there is a middle ground between "put Dany on a pedestal" and "thinks she is inevitably predestined to madness"?

Here's what I actually think: I think she is basically kind, well-meaning person who makes mistakes because she is inexperienced, probably has PTSD, and is forced to rely on one extremely powerful weapon which also reinforces her sense of having a special destiny and birthright. Or is that too nuanced for you?

Edit: I also think, however, that she is judged far more harshly by a certain segment of the fandom than other characters who do similar things. No one talks about how Stannis is predestined to madness* for burning people alive to gain power (Stannis is actually hands-down the most similar character to Daenerys). Nobody talks about how Tywin is mad for sacking King's Landing. An asshole, yes, but not a madman. Nobody talks about how Ned Stark is a madman for personally executing people (including in his very first scene)- no, his great fault is that he's "too honourable", and not enough of a HARD MAN. Only Daenerys, and to a lesser extent all Targaryens (because one of the many desperate excuses Danny bashers love to push is that all Targaryens are innately predestined to madness, even though that is explicitly contradicted on numerous occassions by both show and book canon).

I could speculate as to why this is. I could theorize that "madness" here is basically a euphemism for "scary woman who's too emotional/unstable to be trusted with power", and that this is simply part of a long tradition of caricaturing ambitious women as unstable, amoral harpies in the media and popular culture. Of course, if I do that half the board will no doubt rush to "call me out" for "calling everyone I disagree with sexist".


*I'd also like to have a few words with the GoT fandom about using mental illness as synonymous with "evil", while I'm at it.

I see Dany as someone who means well and has virtues but is also absolutely sure in her own righteousness and certainty that she is good, taking it to the point where if she deems you an enemy you will die horribly and damn the circumstances. Characters like Jon, Ned, hell even Jaime and Sansa are able to reflect and admit that maybe they're not right. Thing is Dany usually had advisors keeping her in check. Once those were gone her own absolute surety drove her over the edge.

There's some truth to that, though I also recall her showing moments of doubt. I think, though, that its the consequence of her circumstances, not some inborn insanity. She was someone who was constantly denied freedom of choice (married off as a child bride, ie a legal sex slave, exiled and targeted by assassins for the family she was born into). She finally managed to build some kind of life despite that, and then had it brutally stripped away. She was shown very bluntly and cruelly that the only person she could rely on to protect her and the people she cared about was her, and that simply living a normal life in peace was not an option. Then she was handed a single source of immense supernatural power which also confirmed that she actually did have a special heritage/bloodline and destiny.

She responded exactly as I would expect most people under those circumstances to respond. If she has a mental illness, its probably PTSD.

Stannis also paid the price for his actions btw.

Stannis is actually hands-down the best parallel for Daenerys, especially in the show.

-He believes he has a right to the throne.

-He has strong moral convictions (sense of duty vs Daenerys's opposition to slavery).

-He nonetheless is capable of ruthlessness and moral flexibility to achieve his paramount goal.

-He uses fire heavily as a weapon.

-He relies on a powerful supernatural entity to overcome his lack of conventional military power.

-He challenges Westrosi cultural norms (allying with the fire god, commanding his men to put his daughter on the throne in the event of his death).

-He commands respect and loyalty in his followers.

-He relies on one or more trusted advisers to keep him in check.

-He ultimately crosses a crucial moral line (burning his daughter) in pursuit of power, and loses despite it (though not, as in Danny's case, as a direct result of it).

-His vocal fan base widely decried it as character assassination, even though you could argue that it had a basis in his prior actions (Stannis had engaged in human sacrifice and kin-slaying in pursuit of the throne before), and remained fans.

The crucial differences:

-Stannis was not built up as a symbol of empowerment for marginalized groups.

-Stannis is never portrayed, in the show or generally outside of it, as a mad man, much less innately predestined for madness, nor is he portrayed as generally evil. No, that is reserved for Daenerys. That is the double-standard.

-Edit: Stannis was allowed to die with some dignity in his final moments. Daenerys really wasn't. Hell, her murder (with Jon kissing and embracing her before killing her) could be seen as romanticizing/sexualizing her death.

Rhaegar I see as someone who wasn't the evil rapist monster that Robert believed but also not the heroic shining knight that his supporters idolized. He was so utterly certain in the prophecies he was willing to jump in without considering the consequences. Lyanna eloping was understandable but at the same time it did set off a chain reaction.

I think its pretty likely that Rhaegar either wasn't prepared for the fallout of his actions (naive) or overestimated his ability to deal with it (arrogant). Or both.

Regarding Lyanna, yeah, I don't blame her at all. Either she went with Rhaegar completely freely and un-coerced (which I'm not sure is even possible, given how limited womens' rights are in Westeros and the fact that he was the Crown Prince), or she didn't. If the former, then that's her right to choose who she she wants to sleep with, and if a woman choosing what they want to do with their vagina will cause the realm to burn, then frankly the realm deserves to burn. If, on the other hand, she did not choose to go with him freely, then she's a rape victim and blaming her is utterly monstrous.

Basically, she's either a rape victim or a girl who chose to elope to escape an arranged marriage against her will (ie legalized rape), and in either case, one hundred percent of the blame goes to Westrosi misogyny and patriarchy and feudal marriage arrangements, not Lyanna.

Thing is Dany also had the chance to walk away and settle down. She could have stayed in Meereen, but instead she went back to Westeros leaving it in the hands of a mercenary who was also angry at her. She was pushing Drogo to help her reclaim her birthright and seemed thrilled when he suggested violence to reclaim it. Even if Dany had reasons she still had an absolute sureness in her righteousness that in real life leads to disastrous actions. She didn't see herself as the villain but anyone who doesn't engage in reflection is probably going to be a bad guy eventually.

The thing about Rhaegar is that he was married and had a family. And Elia by all accounts was a perfectly nice woman. Considering that part of Lyanna's dislike for Robert was his whoring that was hypocritical on her part, and in Rhaegar's case showed a selfishness that can't be understated. Brandon's death and the rebellion was needless, so in that regard Lyanna should have thought things through.

[The Romulan Republic]

Thing is Dany also had the chance to walk away and settle down.

So did Stannis. Nothing was stopping him bending the knee to Joffrey. Nothing was stopping him simply fucking off to Essos after he failed to take King's Landing like many a failed Westrosi revolutionary before him.

And while we might criticize Daenerys' choices, or Stannis's, there is a clear double standard in how her actions are treated, which I laid out very clearly, and which you have yet to acknowledge or address. Namely that she is portrayed as "mad", and predestined to insanity/evil (which GoT and much of its fandom treats as synonymous), while Stannis is not.

She could have stayed in Meereen, but instead she went back to Westeros leaving it in the hands of a mercenary who was also angry at her.

I'd say he'd stopped being merely a mercenary for a while, at that point.

Her ruling Mereen is also something she is frequently attacked for, of course.

She was pushing Drogo to help her reclaim her birthright and seemed thrilled when he suggested violence to reclaim it.

I don't recall her being particularly obsessed with the throne at the outset. Being Khaleesi likely gave her a taste for power, though, after having been denied it all her life. But while power can certainly corrupt, context is important here- are we talking before or after Robert's assassins took a shot at her and her unborn child? I honestly don't recall, but "the King of Westeros will constantly try to murder me and my child simply for existing" is a pretty compelling reason to go to war with Westeros. Daenerys didn't choose that war- she was literally born into it. That is her "birthright"- being at war with the Throne of Westeros.

Even if Dany had reasons she still had an absolute sureness in her righteousness that in real life leads to disastrous actions. She didn't see herself as the villain but anyone who doesn't engage in reflection is probably going to be a bad guy eventually.

"Either you die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain."

Which... yeah. I'd honestly have rather Danny died fighting in the Long Night, with her character and dignity intact. Hell, even getting anti-climactically shot down by Euron in episode four would have been a better ending.

The thing about Rhaegar is that he was married and had a family. And Elia by all accounts was a perfectly nice woman.

Still a marriage that was arranged for him, not one he chose. And even leaving that aside, whether it was "selfishness", as you say, depends on whether he was doing it because he wanted to have an affair, or because he really believed it was necessary due to prophecy. If the latter, then it wasn't so much selfishness as him trying to be a HARD MAN MAKING HARD CHOICES, and failing at it.

But I do obviously feel sorry for Elia and the children, even before their horrible gratuitous murders. They were victims who suffered through no fault of their own, due to being caught in the machinations of a hideous culture and conflicting supernatural powers.

Considering that part of Lyanna's dislike for Robert was his whoring that was hypocritical on her part, and in Rhaegar's case showed a selfishness that can't be understated. Brandon's death and the rebellion was needless, so in that regard Lyanna should have thought things through.

And the problem with this, as noted above, is that implying that Lyanna is at fault for the entire rebellion because she didn't "do her duty" and compliantly bed the man she was assigned to. Never mind that the rebellion was actually kick-started by Aerys horrifically murdering a Lord Paramount and his heir, out of keeping with all Westrosi traditions and norms, and then demanding two other Lord Paramounts heads, not by the elopement itself. The situation should have been dealt with through diplomatic channels, or, worst come to worst, a trial by combat, if Aerys weren't a complete lunatic.

Making Lyanna in any way responsible for the rebellion is basically saying "Lyanna is guilty because she didn't dutifully spread for the man her father sold her to", and I really don't want a fight here, but I'll be damned if I can call that anything less than viciously misogynistic. I don't think that's your intent, but for God's sake, think through the implications here (as unpleasant as they are). Its like saying "Well, the slaves really should have thought about all the people who would die in the civil war before trying to escape." Because that's what a woman (or underage girl, as the case may be) is in a society with legally-sanctioned forced marriage- a sex slave. That it may be, for a noblewoman, a gilded cage changes that not a jot.

I'll reiterate what I said above: if a girl sleeping with the person she chooses will cause the realm to burn, then it deserves to burn.

Honestly, the lines from Abe Lincoln's Second Inaugural, with a few tweaks, will apply quite well:

"Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war will speedily pass away. But if the Seven will that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bonds-woman's millennia of sexual servitude has been sunk, and until every drop of blood spilled in the child-bed has been repayed with another drawn by the sword, as was said six thousand years ago so still it must be said today: "The Judgements of the Seven are true and righteous altogether."

[Raw Shark]

"When a Targaryen is born, the gods flip a coin," was established early on in the books and maintained throughout, especially in the prequel material. Probably the inbreeding. About half of them are as crazy as a shithouse rat. When that Targaryen is subjected to many experiences that would cause PTSD even in a normal person, including from her own brother, that's a trick coin that'll come up heads every day that ends in a Y.

Yeah, but half isn't all, and yet certain fans treat Targaryen madness (ie murderous pyromania) as something that every Targaryen is innately predestined to (usually as an excuse for Daenerys bashing, or sometimes Rhaegar* bashing).



*Rhaegar was arguably a dick, possibly a rapist, and probably incompetent, but I've seen no convincing evidence that he was mad (believing in prophecies doesn't count, especially not in a world with actual verifiable magic).

There is pretty good evidence that Rhaegar was a shit swordsman but otherwise a probably okay guy. Lyanna, by most accounts, was awesomesausauce and did fall in love with him.

[The Romulan Republic]

"When a Targaryen is born, the gods flip a coin," was established early on in the books and maintained throughout, especially in the prequel material. Probably the inbreeding. About half of them are as crazy as a shithouse rat. When that Targaryen is subjected to many experiences that would cause PTSD even in a normal person, including from her own brother, that's a trick coin that'll come up heads every day that ends in a Y.

Yeah, but half isn't all, and yet certain fans treat Targaryen madness (ie murderous pyromania) as something that every Targaryen is innately predestined to (usually as an excuse for Daenerys bashing, or sometimes Rhaegar* bashing).



*Rhaegar was arguably a dick, possibly a rapist, and probably incompetent, but I've seen no convincing evidence that he was mad (believing in prophecies doesn't count, especially not in a world with actual verifiable magic).

There is pretty good evidence that Rhaegar was a shit swordsman but otherwise a probably okay guy. Lyanna, by most accounts, was awesomesausauce and did fall in love with him.

Yeah. Its striking how everyone but Robert seems to speak well of Rhaegar. He was either a decent guy (by the admittedly shit standards of Westeros at least), or really charismatic and good at conning people. And the only real black mark on his record is the Lyanna incident, where the show strongly indicated that she loved him, and in the books there's really no way to say, with the rape charge coming from massively biased third parties (Lyanna's family, Robert).

Not sure about him being a bad swordsman. I mean, he lost to Robert at the Trident, but young Robert was pretty much the god of war incarnate by all accounts.

[Raw Shark]

Robert and Lyanna probably loved each other. They were teenagers. And she did... I mean, she was the knight of the laughing tree. Can't deny that.

[Raw Shark]

She just left, when she wanted to. Fucked who she wanted. Did what she wanted. Loved the wrong guy, but not a bad guy. A lot like me.

[Darth Yan]

I think you mean Rhaegar. And there are some Robert fanboys who do deny it on grounds of the booming voice.

[Coop D'etat]

Yeah, but half isn't all, and yet certain fans treat Targaryen madness (ie murderous pyromania) as something that every Targaryen is innately predestined to (usually as an excuse for Daenerys bashing, or sometimes Rhaegar* bashing).



*Rhaegar was arguably a dick, possibly a rapist, and probably incompetent, but I've seen no convincing evidence that he was mad (believing in prophecies doesn't count, especially not in a world with actual verifiable magic).

There is pretty good evidence that Rhaegar was a shit swordsman but otherwise a probably okay guy. Lyanna, by most accounts, was awesomesausauce and did fall in love with him.

Yeah. Its striking how everyone but Robert seems to speak well of Rhaegar. He was either a decent guy (by the admittedly shit standards of Westeros at least), or really charismatic and good at conning people. And the only real black mark on his record is the Lyanna incident, where the show strongly indicated that she loved him, and in the books there's really no way to say, with the rape charge coming from massively biased third parties (Lyanna's family, Robert).

Not sure about him being a bad swordsman. I mean, he lost to Robert at the Trident, but young Robert was pretty much the god of war incarnate by all accounts.

The black mark on Rhaegar was championing his father's cause after he started executing people without trial and creating conditions where major lords had no choice but to rebel for their own survival. Rhaegar was reckless and arrogant and the war that caused the fall of the Targaryeans was his fault more than anybody else, considering that Aerys had the excuse of severe mental illness to diminish his culpability.

[The Romulan Republic]

I expect Rhaegar was hoping to defeat the rebellion and then overthrow his father (siding with the rebels against his father wasn't really an option, as they wanted his head too). But I admit that's somewhat speculative.

At best, he clearly failed to execute his plans effectively.

[Ralin]

I expect Rhaegar was hoping to defeat the rebellion and then overthrow his father (siding with the rebels against his father wasn't really an option, as they wanted his head too). But I admit that's somewhat speculative.

It's not really speculative. It's pretty much the only rational explanation. And as much as people talk about him validating a "Targs can do whatever the fuck we want" position by siding with his father, given that Great Houses like the Tyrells stayed loyal it's implied that they understood exactly that and were electing to stay the course and hope for Rhaegar taking over afterwards.

Like...he came back to find the rebellion in full swing. Leaving aside his role in touching it all off, not sure what else he was supposed to do at that point other than try to put it down quickly, come to terms and then start cleaning house. No sense launching a coup with Robert was barreling towards King's Landing. It was probably about the best solution he could have come with under the circumstances, considering.

[Coop D'etat]

I expect Rhaegar was hoping to defeat the rebellion and then overthrow his father (siding with the rebels against his father wasn't really an option, as they wanted his head too). But I admit that's somewhat speculative.

At best, he clearly failed to execute his plans effectively.

His plains failed spectacularly in entirely predictable ways. That's not a small failing, that's a big one. He's the dude that left is crazy dad to handle a predictible political crisis entirely created by his own actions.

For all Robert's faults and they were many, he probably made a better king than that guy. Someone that uninterested in ways and means for his goals would have been bound to blunder into some giant catastrophe rather than just be relatively inert and disinterested like Bob the first.

[Raw Shark]

You're not going to hear me say this a lot, but Ralin is totally right.

[The Romulan Republic]

I expect Rhaegar was hoping to defeat the rebellion and then overthrow his father (siding with the rebels against his father wasn't really an option, as they wanted his head too). But I admit that's somewhat speculative.

At best, he clearly failed to execute his plans effectively.

His plains failed spectacularly in entirely predictable ways. That's not a small failing, that's a big one. He's the dude that left is crazy dad to handle a predictible political crisis entirely created by his own actions.

For all Robert's faults and they were many, he probably made a better king than that guy. Someone that uninterested in ways and means for his goals would have been bound to blunder into some giant catastrophe rather than just be relatively inert and disinterested like Bob the first.

Robert's disinterest meant that the realm ended up being run defacto by a Frankenstein administration of Tywin, Cersei, Littlefinger, and Varys.

I don't know if Rhaegar could have done better, but he probably wouldn't have been worse.

[Ralin]

Robert's disinterest meant that the realm ended up being run defacto by a Frankenstein administration of Tywin, Cersei, Littlefinger, and Varys.

I don't know if Rhaegar could have done better, but he probably wouldn't have been worse.

Eh. Frankenstein realm worked pretty good right up until it didn't. A decade and a half of mostly peace and prosperity is a significant accomplishment. If I remember right Tywin mainly used his influence to get honors and appointments for his people. Maybe Robert gave in more than he should there, but most of them weren't obviously bad. Varys being a traitor wasn't something Robert really could have seen coming, given that the guy who whose job it was to root out threats like Varys was...Varys. Littlefinger...Robert didn't have the knowledge of finance to understand just how badly Littlefinger was embezzling money with his investment shenanigans, and I don't think anyone else in the setting outside of the Iron Bank did either. Tyrion was an exceptionally smart person and when he went through Littlefinger's books as Master of Coin he couldn't understand that the fuck he was looking at.

I honestly can't remember how Cersei directly contributed to the mismanagement issues here.

[The Romulan Republic]

Robert's disinterest meant that the realm ended up being run defacto by a Frankenstein administration of Tywin, Cersei, Littlefinger, and Varys.

I don't know if Rhaegar could have done better, but he probably wouldn't have been worse.

Eh. Frankenstein realm worked pretty good right up until it didn't.

An utterly corrupt city watch in the capital, a bankrupt treasury with massive debt to some very nasty people, and a gigantic succession crisis ready to explode the moment the old king bought it.

Yeah, it wasn't working well at all. Although I'll give Jon Arryn credit for managing to paper over the cracks for the better part of two decades.

A decade and a half of mostly peace and prosperity is a significant accomplishment. If I remember right Tywin mainly used his influence to get honors and appointments for his people. Maybe Robert gave in more than he should there, but most of them weren't obviously bad.

They gave House Lannister outsized influence, alienating other parts of the realm, and ultimately leaving Robert dependent on a single disloyal house and open to betrayal.

I also wonder how much those appointments contributed to the declining quality of the Kingsguard.

Varys being a traitor wasn't something Robert really could have seen coming, given that the guy who whose job it was to root out threats like Varys was...Varys.

Fair enough, although the fact that he was a servant of the old regime should have raised red flags. A spymaster is the single most important position to staff with someone you absolutely trust, for the reasons you describe.

Honestly? Were I Robert, I would have made Stannis Master of Whispers instead of Master of Ships. Loyalty without toadying and ruthlessness without malice/sadism are exactly the qualities you want for that office (Ned is more trustworthy, but lacks the right mindset for a spy master. Ned is a natural second-in-command, and choosing him as Hand was one of the few good calls Robert made, albeit sadly too late to help much.)

Littlefinger...Robert didn't have the knowledge of finance to understand just how badly Littlefinger was embezzling money with his investment shenanigans, and I don't think anyone else in the setting outside of the Iron Bank did either. Tyrion was an exceptionally smart person and when he went through Littlefinger's books as Master of Coin he couldn't understand that the fuck he was looking at.

Granted, but one doesn't need to know finance to recognize that Littlefinger is sleaze incarnate.

I put that mostly on Jon Arryn, though. Robert just took his recommendation.

I honestly can't remember how Cersei directly contributed to the mismanagement issues here.

Not the mismanagement so much as outright treason, though her pressuring Robert did lead to some bad decisions including the handling of the Joffrey/Arya fight (alienating the North) and no doubt some of the Lannister appointments to the Court.

[FaxModem1]

I can't think of a worse person for Master of Whispers than Stannis. He'd thank every spy who gave him Intelligence, tuan have their tongues removed for speaking against their lords.