#anti daenerys targaryen in some way | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

ilargizuri · 1 year

Text

three Things in One Creature - Part 4: Wings for Food

We now know that the wings of the falcon probably represent the problem of food shortages and the hunger that people suffer in winter. So how do we know which characters represent the wings and thus save the population from hunger? Well, although we have several characters that stand for hunger, we only have a few characters that are positively connoted by the readership.

We have Petyr Baelish who buys food to sell at a high price, but this man says in the same breath that he wants to sell the food he buys at a profit. And he does not even mention the common people but only the nobility. So for Petyr Baelish, this action is just another step towards more power in Westeros.

Whereas Sansa is a more positively connotated character, through whose point of view we also observe Baelish’s actions. So she knows about this stored food, which allows her to give it to anyone who needs it once Petyr Baelish is gone.

Bran, on the other hand, has been ruling the north in Robb’s absence, which gives him an education in politics and organisation, but when he and Meera, Jojen and Hodor are on their way to Three-Eyed Crow, the group is starving. Their leader goes hunting for deserters from the Night’s Watch and returns with meat. The allusion is very clear that these four are eating human flesh. This is not a positive turn of events, this is a low point! Bran is therefore less suitable as a candidate for the character who can avert the hunger catastrophe. As Robb’s heir, he certainly has the means to do so as Lord of Winterfell, but if the broad hints in his chapters are any indication, he doesn’t know where to look for food.

This is where Sansa and Jon come into play because Sansa knows about Littlefinger’s secret supplies in the Vale, Jon has contacts at the Bank of Braavos and knows how they can get a loan that they can pay off in their lifetime. He also has contacts with a group of hunters who provide them with the furs they need to pay the Bank of Braavos and get food. The Free Folk are struggling with the problems of winter just like everyone else, but you can already see in A Dance with Dragons that the wildlings are keeping the bargain Jon demanded of them to be allowed behind the Wall. The group there gets used to life behind the Wall and one of the Thenns even marries Alys Karstark to save her from the forced marriage of her relatives. In my opinion, this is a strong indication that the Free Peoples will slowly establish themselves in the North and will be an essential part of the solution to the food problem.

We also know from the series that there will probably be two kingdoms at the end, one in the north and one in the south, but I suspect it will be structured differently from the series where two Starks are sitting on the two thrones and one of them can’t have any more children and Tyrion suggests that from now on the kings should be elected. Something we know was actually custom in the Culture of the First Men.

I rather suspect that by blowing Joramund’s horn the Wall will be shifted and thus the Two Kingdoms will be created. It is assumed that Melissandre destroyed the Horn of Winter, but I think the horn that Mance found is the Hammer of Water. As far as we know, there are only magical musical instruments in A Song of Ice and Fire, which would also fit the title. We have a horn that summons Kraken, one that brings down the Wall, one that tames dragons, why would a magical tool that controls masses of water be a hammer? The horn Mance shows Jon Snow, which he found in a glacier in the Frostfangs, is described as black and golden. Black and gold are the colours of the Greyjoys and the horn burns in green and yellow flames, which are the colours the children of the forest have, green skin and yellow eyes. So it would not be too far-fetched that George R. R. Martin chose these colours to link to these two parties with the Horn.

It would also further emphasise the fact that we have two wings, two kingdoms and two separate solutions to the food problem. I think that in the North and the Vale, the countries I suspect are behind the new Wall, Sansa and Jon are the two people who are solving the food problem in the North with Bran on the Throne as King of the North and the Vale.

So if we end up with two kingdoms separated by a wall, then we need someone in the south to solve the problem with food, here I think it will be the Tyrells that solve the food problem. Not only is Margery Tyrell with Sansa on the hunt that brought me to the idea that the Sphinx are a reference to the true heroes of these books, but her family are the High Lords of the Reach, the most fertile corner, the crop chamber, of Westeros. Their Family Words are „Growing Strong“ and although the Tyrells are allied with the Lannisters right now, that could change quickly. In addition, this was already indicated to us in the sample chapters from The Winds of Winter. There it seems that Mace Tyrell joined him instead of defeating Aegon at Storms End.

The Tyrells and the Reach are thus the one wing, in the south, which is the other, is still a mystery to me. However, I tend to think that it is Aegon, it doesn’t matter whether he really is the son of Rhaegar Targaryen or not, it is important that Varys says the following in the epilogue to the dying Kevan Lannister:

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

Varys, A Dance with Dragons epilog

I admit that the young man we get to know through the eyes of Tyrion Lannister has little to do with what Varys says. However, we should consider that Varys probably never met this young man personally and therefore will only recite the reports of his allies.

What is interesting, however, is the Varys mentioned here that Aegon knows how to fish and how to cook. That seems a little weird, considering that Varys is about to explain to his murder victim why Aegon would be the better king. So far we have never seen a king fishing, hunting has always been described as the activity which kings and nobles engage in and have to do with the procurement of food. Fishing is not mentioned as an activity of a king, not even the kings of the iron islands are mentioned as fishermen and this is a seafaring culture that is based on the Vikings! They should be able to fish and not consider it under their dignity.

That is why I believe that Aegon is the second wing to solve the problem with food in the south. It is not important whether he is Rhaegar’s son, he lived with the common people and knows about their concerns and needs, and can therefore better put himself in them.

Now some Daenerys fans might say that Daenerys also lived among the common people and knows hunger, as Varys describes it in his speech. That’s true, but just like with Bran, Daenerys has no solution to how to effectively tackle the problem with food. Daenerys‘ solution is to use a new slave class that works for food and shelter in the fields. Before this solution has any success, dying thousands of hunger and disease in her chapters. In addition, this hallucination is one of the last sentences we know from Daenerys.

»I gave you good counsel. Save your spears and swords for the Seven Kingdoms, I told you. Leave Meereen to the Meereenese and go west, I said. You would not listen. „I had to take Meereen or see my children starve along the march.“ Dany could still see the trail of corpses she had left behind her crossing the Red Waste. It was not a sight she wished to see again. „I had to take Meereen to feed my people.“ You took Meereen, he told her, yet still, you lingered. „To be a queen.“ You are a queen, her bear said. In Westeros. „It is such a long way,“ she complained. „I was tired, Jorah. I was weary of war. I wanted to rest, to laugh, to plant trees and see them grow. I am only a young girl.“ No. You are the blood of the dragon. The whispering was growing fainter as if Ser Jorah were falling farther behind. Dragons plant no trees. Remember that. Remember who you are, what you were made to be. Remember your words.« -Daenerys to a Hallucination of Jorah, Daenerys X, A Dance with Dragons.

Daenerys has the bird motif in her chapters with Daario and his storm crows, but no solution, just like Bran. The storm crows are mercenaries, unlike the crows of the Nights watch at the wall, which consists of a group of people who come from the most diverse areas of life and can therefore also present diverse knowledge, the storm crows only know the warcraft. So the difference with Bran is she has no family to support her in this matter.

Sansa and Jon will undoubtedly support their brother in his regency and use the knowledge they have for the benefit of the people. Which in our case means that they are the solution to the problem with food.

Daenerys has no close confidants, counsellors or family who will support her in her regency in such a way. Aegon wants the throne, just like Daenerys and because the daughter of Aerys the second believes that she still meets a false dragon, as she saw it in the visions in the house of the Undying, she will not join with her possible nephew for the good of all, but fight against him, whereby it is again unimportant what is true and what is not, but only what Daenerys believes! So I think if a Targaryen really is part of the Solution to the Food-Problem, it will be Aegon.

In the Next Part, we will discover that a Lion does not always Means Royalty, until then please Read My other Parts.

#my meta #asoiaf #anti daenerys targaryen in some way #Ending speculation for two Kingdoms #One in the North #one in the South #therefore there have to be 2 Wings for all of Westeros and 2 Wings for both Kingdoms #jonsa kind of

37 notes · View notes

spirit-meets-the-b0ne · 6 days

Text

The thing that Targaryen antis either don’t or can’t understand is that in spite of all the discussions, discourse and arguments (& moral conjecture): I simply love dragons and mentally ill women with great hair sorry if you can’t relate

#house targaryen #antis do not interact #house of the dragon #asiof #hotd #daenerys targaryen #rhaenyra targaryen #haelena targaryen #some of you take this shit wayyyyyyyy too seriously and way too personal #like if you wanna act like your mommy daddy grandma and grandpa were enslaved and murdered by the Targs #I am happy to report that has happened 0 times #is it really so controversial in a fantasy series to be fascinated by magic using dragon riders?#tbh wish there was more material on dragon riders and their bonds #and if your response to this post is more than 8 words know it’s NOT that serious #people are allowed to like things you don’t without it being that deep 😊

64 notes · View notes

c-sand · 2 months

Text

everywhere i go on the internet i see people celebrating Jon Show being shelved because, ‘kit killed daenerys and so he doesn’t deserve his own show — unless she comes back in it and wrongs are righted!!’’ …how unhinged can you possibly be? first off, as far as we know, kit has never killed anyone 👀 but, also, if killing another character is the stopper in who should get another chance to have a new show, than perhaps not the mass murderer who slaughtered her way through seven seasons 🧍🏽‍♀️

#random #the way some people talk about kit is just totally awful.#she spent seven (basically eight) seasons promising to slaughter everyone and then made good on that promise.#…over and over and over. until she did her grandest slaughtering yet.#someone had to kill her.#so back off kit dude.#anti daenerys targaryen

17 notes · View notes

usernamesuggestionsarefunny · 2 years

Text

Why is it that anytime Jonsas consider the possibility of Jon slaying a dragon in metas or even fics, it is always a "dragon" 😉? If Jon is going to kill any dragons in ASOIAF (Which I doubt, seems too trope-y for GRRM, but who knows?) it should be an actual dragon, not an obvious-as-hell metaphor for an unarmed calls-herself-blood-of-the-dragon woman who has her defenses down because she trusts him, that is so lame. Lame and cowardly as hell regardless of how dark D@ny gets. If he ends up doing that then his shitty show ending fits, just as lame.

Like, you guys love gushing and talking about how "feral" he is going to be after the resurrection. Let's at least headcanon some truly feral shit. Imagine him slaying a dragon to protect/save Sansa because she has been kidnapped by D for political reasons and it is one of her dragons guarding her or some similarly corny guilty-pleasure shit (like, Jon slaying a beastly fire-breathing literal dragon, not an inbred t@ rg), that would be so cool. Love this old-fashioned trope.

#jonsa #pro jonsa #dark dany #dark daenerys #political jon #anti political jon?#not really but in some ways yes #anti targaryen #not really but this is not that friendly to them I guess lol #I am talking about how cool it would be for their babies to be slaughtered #anti daenerys targaryen #just in case #pro sansa stark #jonsa prompt

26 notes · View notes

pessimisticpigeonsworld · 2 months

Text

On the "Choose a Side" Discourse

With HBO leaning veryyyy heavily into "pick a side" for their promos, the "no team" people are crawling out of the woodwork. I want to preface this post by saying that I'm not saying people shouldn't have favorite characters who aren't mine, nor that people should just be totally invested in fandom discourse.

I already made a post about the issues with the arguments of the "no team" people, so I'll just summarize my thoughts from that real quick. A majority of their arguments and metas are thinly veiled anti Rhaenyra thoughts. That's still true of this new wave of this group.

Now, one thing I will agree with them on is: GRRM did not write this story to be one of choose a side. However, that is not because the Blacks and the Greens are equally bad or the Targaryens are all evil. No, it's because the Greens were always in the wrong and GRRM makes this abundantly clear to us in F&B.

Let's look at some facts from the Dance. While male primogeniture is tradition, it's not the law; the king's word is law, something ASOIAF has established time and again. The Greens took the throne through underhanded ways. They left Viserys' body to rot for days while they prepared for Aegon's coronation to prevent Rhaenyra from learning and coming to KL. They forced the smallfolk to attend and most didn't cheer for Aegon, with some even calling for Rhaenyra while most were confused and angry.

Aemond drew first blood by killing the unarmed thirteen year old envoy, Lucerys Velaryon. A majority of the realm declared for Rhaenyra; 53 houses supported her, while only 28 supported Aegon. The Greens committed the greatest atrocities of the Dance: Aemond burning the Riverlands and Daeron massacring Tumbleton. They also committed the greater number of atrocities.

The Greens also lost the war. The Blacks weren't just fighting for Rhaenyra, they fought for her heirs as well. This is why they swore to her and Jacaerys; later for Aegon III after the deaths of his older brothers. The Black forces continued to fight after Rhaenyra's murder and took KL. Aegon was murdered by his own men when the Blacks were marching on KL; in other words, the Greens knew they were beat, so they killed Aegon in an attempt to save themselves. Since Aegon left no heirs aside from Jaehaera, Aegon III was crowned and married to Jaehaera. The Blacks won the war.

Aegon the Usurper's bloodline is destroyed with the deaths of Jaehaera and Gaemon Palehair. This is the final affirmation of the Greens being in the wrong. GRRM's books punish usurpers by wiping out their bloodlines; Maegor and Robert Baratheon being the most obvious examples. Aegon and all the Greens have no descendants, their bloodline is dead.

Rhaenyra's bloodline, on the other hand, continues all the way through to the main series. Daenerys Targaryen, the most powerful character in the series, is her descendant, as is Jon Snow (unconfirmed as of now in the books) who is another of the key five. Rhaenyra may have died, but her faction won the war and her bloodline will save the world through her two greatest descendants (alongside the rest of the key five).

The Dance of the Dragons is, ultimately, a story of the damage the patriarchy does and how misogyny is destructive to the world. The Dance caused the death of the dragons and a great loss of power for women in the realm. Queen consorts after Rhaenyra had markedly less power and there was a drop in female leaders of the great houses. The loss of the dragons caused the weakening of magic in the world as a whole.

The Dance isn't about who your favorite war criminal is, nor is it about the evil of the Targaryens. It's about misogyny; something HOTD seems to have forgotten. Even before they started pushing TB vs TG so hard, they still missed the point.

It doesn't matter that Rhaenyra isn't a perfect, or even a good, person. It doesn't matter that Rhaenyra is non-conforming, plays the political game, and exploits her father's favor. Rhaenyra could have been as pious and well-behaved as Naerys and the Greens still would have usurped her. Rhaenyra could have had children with Laenor, and still the Greens would have usurped her. HOTD tries to paint the usurpation as partially being on Rhaenyra and her choices, but nothing Rhaenyra could have done would have been good enough.

The Blacks are the protagonists of the Dance. Are they perfect? No. Are they heroes? No. GRRM loves his gray characters, the Blacks are no exception. If you people want a story with black and white morality and perfect protagonists, go read another book. Just because people aren't perfect and don't operate exclusively in what's right according to our modern standards doesn't mean they aren't the protagonists.

In conclusion: there isn't a TB vs TG discourse in the Dance because the Greens are the antagonists and completely in the wrong. The point of the Dance is that the misogyny of the Greens damaged the realm. Rhaenyra is the rightful queen, there is no actual argument for Aegon or any of his allies.

Rhaenyra is the rightful queen to Westeros, go cry to George if you don't like it.

#rhaenyra targaryen #queen rhaenyra #asoiaf #house of the dragon #team black #anti team green #anti team green stans #anti aegon ii targaryen #the blacks #dance of the dragons #hotd s2 #anti hotd

188 notes · View notes

lizzie-queenofmeigas · 1 month

Note

If TG wanna hate Targaryens and Daenerys, fine! Just stay consistent in your hatred. Stop stanning the Greens, they’re Targaryens and never once refer to themselves as Hightowers. Stop comparing your favs to Targaryens. Say goodbye to “my ship is just like Jaehaerys and Alysanne or Aemon and Naerys” and “my faves are like Aegon, Rhaenys and Visenya.” Stop wanting your faves to have dragons, I thought they’re weapons of mass destruction and nuclear bombs ? Stop giving them elements of Daenerys’ storyline, her quotes, titles and traits. No more “I’m no ordinary woman, my dreams come true” for Helaena, no “mother of dragons” titles for Alicent and Elia, no more “my fave will ride one of Daenerys’ dragons!” Stop stanning House Tully, Baratheon and Tyrell, they owe their relevance to Aegon the Colonizer, they are literally collaborators with a colonial government per your own arguments! Stop wanting Jon to be the son of Rhaegar, he was a colonizer who cheated on his Italianx wife, stop basing your arguments on Jon being Azor Ahai on the basis of being Rhaegar’s son, stop fantasizing about him riding a dragon or wielding Dark Sister. Stop wanting your favs to sit on the Iron Throne, that’s a Targaryen creation, and by the way they should not rule the Seven Kingdom’s either, this state was created by House Targaryen, let Westeros decolonize and go back to being seven backwards regions going to war under the smallest pretext! Stop stanning Young Griff, he’s a Targaryen and canonically doesn’t mention his Martell mother. Stop whining about the deaths of Jaehaera and Helaena, they’re Targaryens, shouldn’t you be happy that there’s two less ? Stop watching HOTD and don’t watch any future Targaryen centric prequels. Stop shipping Rhaenicent, one part of this ship is literally someone you consider a nazi colonizer whose ancestors genocided Westerosi, why would you want her anywhere near your pure Andal favorite ?

The truth is that the Targaryens are the coolest house in ASoIaF with some of the best characters and Targ antis know it.

"This ask is lifted from ozymalek/phoenixashes".

#house targaryen #pro targaryen #targaryen loyalist #a song of ice and fire #asoiaf

119 notes · View notes

jackoshadows · 9 months

Text

Listening to the TWoW sample chapters and Arianne literally declares Rhaegar and Daenerys as family and sees them as blood connections when Lysono Maar tries to push Aegon as Rhaegar and Elia's son.

“Prince Aegon is of your own blood, princess. Son of Prince Rhaegar Targaryen and Elia of Dorne, your father’s sister.” “Daenerys Targaryen is of our blood as well. Daughter of King Aerys, Rhaegar’s sister. And she has dragons, or so the tales would have us believe.” Fire and blood. “Where is she?” - Arianne, TWoW

The way this fandom tries to push through the wrong fanon that the Martells are anti Targaryen or anti Rhaegar is incredible when there is actual text like this in the books 😭

Dorne is not anti Rhaegar, the North is not anti-Rhaegar. We have Manderly, lord of the richest house in the North, saying that Rhaegar Frey is not worthy of the name:

“Soon I must return to the feast to toast my friends of Frey,” Manderly continued. “They watch me, ser. Day and night their eyes are on me, noses sniffing for some whiff of treachery. You saw them, the arrogant Ser Jared and his nephew Rhaegar, that smirking worm who wears a dragon’s name. Behind them both stands Symond, clinking coins.” - Davos, ADwD

Ned Stark does not hate Rhaegar in his pov chapters either. It's interesting that among the rebels it was the Martells and Starks most affected by the Mad King's actions, with dead family members, and yet they stand in stark contrast to someone like Robert Baratheon and his vitriolic hate for Rhaegar and the Targaryen babies.

#Ariannne Martell #TWoW #Rhaegar Targaryen #Daenerys Targaryen #Fandom nonsense

285 notes · View notes

lagosbratzdoll · 10 months

Text

I don’t understand Daenerys Targaryen antis.

You’ve got the show where all your theories about how the former bridal slave/revolutionary will go mad and be murdered by her lover whilst in the middle of intimacies came true.

The evolution of George R.R. Martin's stance from "only the books are canon" to "there are two different canons" should have provided some resolution to the endless fandom debates, but yet here we are.

The white revolutionary is dead, all your also white faves were able to ride off into the sunset. Every named person of colour except for Greyworm is dead and if we're being real, Greyworm is off to die offscreen. Westeros is white again, you won. Whatever winning means in this context. What more do you want?

People have spent years tirelessly attempting to draw parallels between the show's narrative and the book's trajectory, even where these parallels do not exist. You make a post about the book version of Daenerys Targaryen, and her antis scream at you in the comments about how she's a mass-murdering slaver. They never have proof to back this up.

At this point, it has become concerning. What motivates such a fervent desire to witness a 16-year-old die again on the blade of a man (preferably a relative)? It has been years and people are still writing shitty meta with haphazardly edited quotes from the books to prove that Daenerys will eventually go the way of her father.

Interestingly, Young Griff and Jon never seem to suffer this fate, even though they share a mad grandfather and prophecy-obsessed (according to the fandom) father.

Simply saying Daenerys will not die at the end of the series elicits a tremendous amount of vitriol. The show should be enough, replay the scene where Jon stabs her in the heart and savour it. For the love of all that is holy, please stop trying to impose show Dany on book Dany. They are two different characters.

#I love show Dany too #this is not an indictment against her #In the words of Emilia Clarke #I stand by Daenerys #daenerys targaryen #you will always be loved by me #She is the best Targ and no one comes close to her #even my non-Dany faves #some share similarities with her but Dany is the best of her house #but none of them come close.#also doing my reread has made my indifference to Jon less #I don't love him but I am also less annoyed by him and you know what #I'll take it.#a win is a win #asoiaf #game of thrones

134 notes · View notes

olderthannetfic · 4 months

Note

https://www.tumblr.com/olderthannetfic/740136068340482048/the-funniest-dni-i-ever-encountered-in-all-my-12?source=share

As a House Martell stan, it's been interesting to watch the evolution of that particular corner of the ASOIAF fandom over the years. For a while, because they were less present on the show (and their actual focus on the show was pretty bungled), they were mostly the favorites of superfans who'd read the books and therefore were deeply devoted to the whole ASOIAF universe, and given how much that means memorizing various types of Targaryen incest over the years, were almost never antis. A lot of people were also drawn to that they were the ~sexy, liberated house, as well as there being a fair number of POC who identified with some of the few non-white people in those books who were actually fully-realized characters (in the books, not so much in the show). IME it was usually people who were also shipping a lot of the other popular "problematic" ships in the fandom like Jaime/Cersei and Sansa/Petyr Baelish.

Then, at some point - particularly after the show ended and the fandom shrunk a lot - it got infected with a bunch of people writing long essays about how Daenerys and the entire Targaryen family were inherently "white supremacist" (previously, it had been more common for POC and other fans who focused on anti-racism to stan Daenerys, and point out that what the final season did with her was some white bullshit that tried to conflate killing oppressors like slavers with killing poor downtrodden people) and there ended up being a fandom fight between those people who saw the Targaryens as the more racist house or the Starks, but they all stanned Martells but in a very shallow sort of way just because they were the POC house. It's also worth nothing that Dorne has equal primogeniture - women can inherit, and in the books it's Doran's eldest daughter, Arianne, who is his heir, even though he has two younger sons - and it also is more accepting of LGBTQ+ people and bastards and general "sex outside of marriage" than most of the rest of Westeros, so it attracts a lot of people who are into them for that reason. I mean, I like them for that reason among others, but of course that's going to be a magnet to people who want to prove that they're extra special progressive for stanning them over like, the Lannisters.

Also, probably worth noting, the people in the second group were generally younger. Book-centric fans generally tend to be older IME in ASOIAF fandom. I feel like whenever a fandom is younger, there's more likely to be more anti behavior.

Anyway it was very weird to get back into ASOIAF when I read Fire and Blood and then when House of the Dragon started airing, and feeling like "my corner" of the fandom had become completely unrecognizable in my absence.

Also, I suspect it's probably drawing in some people who just really like Pedro Pascal. (It was better when it was drawing in the Alexander Siddig stans from DS9 fandom, snerk. Although even that fandom has had an obnoxious influx of younger purity-policing virtue-signalling types discovering it these days, writing stupid discourse about how Garak/Garashir is problematic and people should instead ship characters who don't like each other that much and don't interact much one-on-one because the combinations of them are more progressive or something.... sigh! Anyway, probably not helped by the fact that Game of Thrones completely wasted him, even though his character was one of the best ones in the books and a big one that drew me into loving House Martell. He would've been great as book!Doran, but alas....)

I'm also going to say that as others have pointed out, I'll always be mystified by the fact that ASOIAF even HAS antis. If you're that opposed to incest, age-disparate relationships, violence, etc. anything controversial, how can you stan the actual canon of that show? Or the books, which arguably have even more rape and incest and ephebephilia going on. It just seems like you'd have to have a very adversarial relationship with canon to a point that I just don't understand why you don't pick another fandom. Of course, it's probably really just that antis are hypocrites.

Hypocrites, yes. But also drawn to material that they're not comfortable being drawn to. The younger they are, the more the cognitive dissonance makes them act out.

I don't condone it, but I do understand it.

32 notes · View notes

bohemian-nights · 2 months

Note

Are we going to ignore the fact they took away what made Baela the Brave, Baela the Brave.

Where's her pet monkey? Where's her short hair? Were's her beating the shit out of squires? She literally had to be bound at some point so she wouldn't jump Aegon's ass on the way to King's Landing. (It was foul of them, before you confuse me as someone who thinks that tying a 16yo up means she's somehow a "girlboss doomed by the narrative") Where's this energy in the series?

Rhaena having little to no lines, just standing there smiling and toasting Weak Boy #2 so people praise her for how loyal she is, never getting another scene speaking of herself and her feelings except for when she's little and sullen about deadbeat Daemon ignoring her because she has no dragon.

The only scene where Baela speaks of what she ACTUALLY wants to do during the war which is fight for Missy Anne (she literally sold your inheritance and the throne you've been instructwarded for years for but pop off queen) IS CUT OFF.

I would've loved if we had like, one scene of Rhaena leaning forward to whisper in Luke's ear asking him for a dance because my girl loves dancing in ep.8, but noooo they had to make it wholly about the fight between the boys because WHHHOOOOOO CARES about the last dragonrider.

Just a note, Rhaena is not the last dragonrider. She’s the last Targaryen dragonrider before Daenerys, but the books have not stated who exactly is the last dragonrider before her is.

Fans just say that to give the middle finger to Nettles(once again proving how they only like the girls when it’s time to dunk on others), but it’s actually between her and Nettles on who is the last dragonrider for 200 years.

Other than that I agree with most of your rant, though it does seem like they are giving Baela her book spirit in S2 and Rhaena will be getting her book arc.

Let me just say that they should be as popular as their Team Green counterparts even being underdeveloped(Helaena is barely given anything as well and yet her team props her up), but they’re not because they are Blackish.

The whole reason why they are treated poorly and used as props is because they are Blackish now and everyone from the showrunners down to the demented fans that populate this cesspool of a fandom has a misogynoir problem.

Team Black in particular has an anti-Blackness problem, but pointing this out gets you gaslit to death and labeled a bully(ain’t that ironic) so I’ll leave it there.

#bnask #bnasks #rhaena targaryen #baela targaryen #hotd fandom misogynoir

22 notes · View notes

jonsaslove · 10 months

Note

What is the "core 5" that has been disputed?

There's way better posts about this out there but it's basically from a super old interview (I think?) where GRRM that said the five key characters in the series are Arya, Jon, Bran, Dany, and Tyrion.

Fans who subscribe to this use it as irrefutable proof that Sansa is irrelevant and unimportant to the story even though GRRM said things to counteract this many times. And even if those are the "key 5" that does not diminish potential importance of other characters, not just Sansa! (Catelyn & Ned, Jaime & Cersei, the Greyjoy and Martell plots, even characters who don't get POV chapters!) The books have changed so much since he said that and he's literally been writing them for like 30 years now???

Sansa's arc specifically changed significantly from original outlines where she was just meant to cause tension in the Stark family. People who hold this key 5 as gospel also often believe in a Targ restoration and even the old outline with the Jon/Arya/Tyrion love triangle...

I digress.

But also if we're looking just at chapter counts across the series...Tyrion has 49, Jon has 42, Arya has 34, Dany has 31, and Sansa and Cat are tied for fifth with 25. Bran only comes in 6th with 21.

I don't think the chapter counts are indicative of anything, but I do think the fact that GRRM likes writing Tyrion is quite obvious lmao.

All of that being said, I don't put much stock in what other people interpret to be true about characters or plot, I trust my own eyes and interpretations of things, and that tells me that the Starks (all of them) are the heart of the story and always will be. The Lannisters and the Targaryens (and the dead) are key enemies for their family and Tyrion and Daenerys are the figureheads for those conflicts, hence their chapter counts. GRRM likes a long character arc, and both Tyrion and Daenerys are on clear downward descents imo, so if people want them to be in the "key 5" that's fine, because they're there for different reasons than they assume.

To finish off, a lot of these theories anti Sansa and anti Jonsas cling to are strawman arguments that fall apart under the closest bit of inspection. I don't claim to be some all knowing GRRM prophet haha, but from my POV all these things are pretty clear.

Thanks anon :)

#jonsa #asks #anyone is free to fact check me on any of this but i feel like this gives a pretty clear gist of the situation even if i missed some detail #anti tyrion lannister #anti daenerys targaryen

39 notes · View notes

ilargizuri · 1 year

Text

Three Things in One Creature - Introduction: The Nature of Prophecy

»When the Red Star bleeds and Darkness gathers, Azor Ahai shall be born again admist smoke and salt to wake dragons out of stone« -Melissandre, Davos 3, A Storm of Swords.

Azor Ahai is a legendary and promised redemption figure in the books „A Song of Ice and Fire“ as well as the series „Game of Thrones.“ But who this figure is, has never really been enlightened. In the books, Melissandre initially thinks it’s Stannis Baratheon and later thinks it’s Jon Snow. The priests of R’hllor believe it would be Daenerys, as well as Maester Aemon. With Stannis, readers agree it’s not him, with Daenerys and Jon Snow, readers disagree. It is undisputed that both candidates, rather than Stannis, fulfilled the stated prophetic indications.

But what if both the characters in the story and the readers misinterpret the prophecy? Several times we learn from characters in the story that prophecies can be a treacherous thing. For example, the Targaryen family, seemingly waiting for the promised prince for hundreds of years, first of all out of a sense of duty. After the death of the last dragon they probably rather want to get back their lost firebreathers. After all, both in the prophecy of the promised prince and the prophecy of Azor Ahai, the return of dragons seems to be mentioned. The desire to bring dragons back into the world went so far as to require Aegon V to marry two of his grandchildren because a forest witch prophesied that the promised prince would emerge from this branch of the family. The extent to which the tragedy of Sommerhall is related to these efforts is not entirely certain, but there are rumours in Westeros that the king would have tried to hatch dragon eggs there. The tragedy led to Maester Aemon believing Rhaegar to be the promised prince, later Rhaegar believed it to be his son. In A Feast for Crows, Aemon believes Daenerys is the promised prince.

When Daenerys gets her own visions in the house of the Undying, there is also the day when her nephew Aegon was born. Here we also learn for the first time that Rhaegar believes that there is not one prophesied saviour, but three! Because the dragon has three heads. Later, Maester Aemon will speak similarly to Sam and then curse his old age because he is too old to be one of those heads himself.

»„There must be one more“, he said, though whether he was speaking to her or the woman in the bed she could not say „The Dragon has three heads“« -Rhaegar, Daenerys 4, A Clash of Kings.

Whether this is really part of the prophecy or whether it was an interpretation of Rhaegar or part of the song of ice and fire, which according to the vision belongs to the promised prince, is not entirely clear. Even if this vision does not show the historical Rhaegar, but is only an image of Daenerys‘ vision, Daenerys tries to make sense of this vision and receives an interpretation of Jorah Mormont. He points out that Daenerys‘ family coat of arms is a three-headed dragon, these heads are a symbol of the three dragon riders who conquered six of the seven kingdoms. Since Daenerys himself now has three dragons, he advises Daenerys to make it like her ancestor Aegon the Conqueror and to seek three dragon riders for their dragons. Here again, there is the question of whether Jorah interprets this correctly.

The number three occurs several times in the prophecy that Daenerys receives from the Undying.

»we know… the shape of shadows… Morrows not yet Made… Drink from the Cup of ice… Drink from the Cup of fire… Mother of Dragons… Child of Three… three Heads has the Dragon…Mother of Dragons … Child of Storm … three fires must you light: one for life and one for death and one to love… three mounts must you ride: one to bed and one to dread and one to love… three treasons will you know: once for blood and once for gold and once for love… daughter of death, slayer of lies, bride of fire…« -Undying, Daenerys 4, A Clash of Kings.

Each of these prophecies allegedly refers to a person or persons who may be related to Daenerys Targaryen. But the traitors in particular are a double-edged thing because it is actually just that she knows them or knows about them, not that she is betrayed. Treason is part of the game for the iron throne, Lord Bolton betrays the Starks to become Guardians of the North and to get Winterfell, which Tywin seems to plan to take away from them because Winterfell is the Castle he promises Tyrion to persuade him to marry Sansa and Prince Doran betrays the Lannisters behind their backs to take revenge for the death of his sister and these are just the two best-known examples. So if it is said she only KNOWS this betrayal, then betrayal does not necessarily have to happen to her.

What is also striking is that most prophecies which we learn in the books are always warnings. Visions are somewhat broader, they do not necessarily have to concern the questioner, as the visions told by the Ghost of High Heart of the brotherhood without banners. Daenerys’s first prophecy that her son was the stallion who mounts the world is not a prophecy given to Daenerys, but a prophecy of the Dothraki that existed long before. So this could be a warning to other people. Miri Maaz Duur, for example, understands the stallion who mounts the world as a warning; Since we do not know where the prophecy originally came from, we cannot claim that this is not a warning.

But Cersei’s prophecy warns her that her children all die before her, and the house of Targaryen fled from the prophesied demise of Valyria to Dragonstone. The prophecy of Azor Ahai warns against the return of others and promises that there is hope because the old hero is reborn. So we can almost certainly say, if the dragon with the three heads appears in the prophecy Daenerys receives, then it is part of a warning and if Daenerys were a part of the three-headed dragon and thus of the promised prince, then there would be no reason to warn her. Although it cannot be ruled out.

In conclusion to this part, however, we should not forget that Daenerys is addressed with titles in this part, but all of them have been fulfilled in any way at least once. She is the Mother of Dragons, a Child of Three, a Child of Storm, a daughter of death, a Slayer of lies and a Bride of Fire, although I am unsure about the last one. In my Country you are the bride of a Groom, so Fire is actually and quite literally the Groom, furthermore, a Groom is meant to give you your children, so in the most basic sense of that phrase, Daenerys became the bride of Fire when she hatched the Dragons in Drogos Funeral Fire if that Phrase is mean differently please inform me.

#anti daenerys targaryen in some way #my meta #I want to look at it from a different point of view #no beta so if you find errors their yours to take

36 notes · View notes

horizon-verizon · 8 days

Note

I don't know if this is exactly in your area of interest but do you know why the vitriol against Daeron II? Personally, I am more interested in the main story of Asoiaf and the period from the conquest to the dance, but I've seen a couple of posts that are very pro-DaemonxDaenerys and very Anti Martell and Daeron.Is it a ship problem or an anti-martell problem? Because what I remember is that Daenerys had the water gardens built to make her feel more comfortable and it is said that her husband was in love with her (I don't remember if it is said if at some point it was reciprocal or if they had a bad relationship)and I remember that we have rumors that Daemon liked Daenerys but I don't remember that it was said that it was reciprocal.

From what I have seen, these opinions seem to be qualified by a kind of anti-hatred towards the Martells, not because of them but because of the fans and the reading that they do pro-elia anti-rhaegar, which in reality Anti-dany and I really don't understand why these posts villainize Daeron as if it were his fault that the war broke out? And wasn't Daemon married? Or does that get in the way of the epic love story with Daenerys?

(AWoIaF -- "The Targaryen Kings" -- "Daeron II")

The people you refer to who hate Daeron do so because he married off a 15 year old Daenerys to much older Maron Martell to build an alliance with Dorne and bring them into the official fold and under the crown's authority. AND because they believe that DaenerysxDaemon B. had a mutual love for each other, so Daeron separated two lovers. From what is told to us, the impression is that Maron treated her well, if his allowing her to bring critique of Dorne's class divides has any indication (the Gardens). Daemon hadn't been married at this time. And we don't have proof that their feelings was reciprocated or even which side had feelings for each other and which did not, etc. They also had only 2 years between them in age, Daemon and Daenerys.

"It has been said in the years after Daemon Blackfyre proved a traitor that his hatred of Daeron began to grow early."

One, like Fire & Blood, A World of Ice & Fire is, in-world, a historical text written by a maester and its geared towards showing Robert Baratheon & the Lannisters in a more positive light with typical maester/Faith anti magic, xenophobia, & ignorance (sometimes acknowledged) of Essos at certain points.

Two, It's possible that this relationship only exists for a way Daemon's supporters to maintain Daemon's rightfulness towards his legacy, or that they exaggerate. A few of his kids survived, as we know, and would birth/sire people who'd attempt to take the throne.

On the whole, I am like you, prefer to think about and discuss pre-conquest-Dance and the main series and largely because there's dragons and there's more women in the center of the narratives told. I'm the other side of the phenomenon of men losing interest in stories with women centered more; if I see stories with little active or centered women, irdgaf.

#asoiaf asks to me #daeron ii #daenerys targaryen #daemon blackfyre #awoiaf characterization #awoiaf #asoiaf #character ages #the blackfyre rebellion #women in westeros #daemon blackfyre's characterization #daeron ii's characterization #daenerys targaryen [ii]'s characterization #daenerys targaryen (naerys' daughter)#daenerys targaryen (aegon iv's daughter)#maron martell #myriah martell

7 notes · View notes

aleksanderscult · 2 months

Note

When I think of Zoyalai, I think, my god they could have been epic. If Zoya had stayed in line with what her character was in the original trilogy to actually be an anti-heroine by taking the female lead of the duology instead of LB's plot armor to make her perfect, I would surely would have loved a romance with her and Nikolai. I always saw great potential. And if only Nikolai had also remained this great, striking character of the trilogy instead of becoming this naive and borderline incompetent king of the duology, adoring Zoya to the point of giving her his fucking crown ? Seriously, why is this ?! They could have been great together ! Oh and also if LB hadn't spent the entire duology spitting on the Darkling by blaming him for all of Ravka's problems and shoving Malina's great happiness down our throats again. Frankly, a true Nikolai duology set a few years after the events of the trilogy is always appealing. But that's not what we got. What we got was a duology about Zoya being some kind of cheap copy of Daenerys Targaryen. (Rather ironic knowing that LB doesn't like Daenerys. That + the fact that LB doesn't like Mr Rochester from Jane Eyre makes her even more unbearable in my eyes as authors. Madam, you don't understand anything about Daenerys from ASOIAF, and you didn't understand anything about Mr Rochester from Jane Eyre. But at this stage, nothing surprises me about her anymore). In any case, if I had to name a couple that is everything Zoyalai should / could have been it's basically Manorian AKA Manon & Dorian from the Throne of Glass book series (my second favorite couple from this book series by the way) from Sarah J Mass. If one day you read this series you will surely understand what I mean. All this to say that at this stage of disgust for the duology I will probably sell it. Hoping to be able to erase without problems my old notes full of anger, in pencil, on certain pages dating back quite some time now... 😅

Not gonna lie, at first I liked the idea of this ship. But it lasted less than a month when I heard of their duology counterparts and what they have done and said.

For me, Nikolai and Zoya are full of words and words but no action. They threaten, whine and curse but, in the end, they do nothing. And the narrative solves it for them.

I never heard of Bardugo not liking Daenerys. I only know that she loved Sansa's character. So send me the link where she said that if you can.

I have no problem with Leigh as a person. But I have a problem with her as an author because she just isn't good at it. Writing isn't only the talent of writing beautiful, poetic lines but also to keep a coherent story and characters that develop throughout the story.

(and if you create a persecuted group of people do not throw them to the bin afterwards. Just a friendly advice for any aspiring authors out there)

And good for you if you decide to sell these books. With the money you'll gain you can buy something more... worthy to have.

#asks #anti zoyalai #anti zoya nazyalensky #anti nikolai duology #leigh bardugo #grishaverse

18 notes · View notes

pessimisticpigeonsworld · 2 months

Text

Mad Queen Misogyny

All the mad queen Dany takes, from both D&D and the audience, are just plain misogyny. They are literally just repeats of common misogynistic ideas. D&D have given a few reasons for why they wrote the mad queen ending for Dany, and all of them are the same old misogynistic tropes of fantasy and mythology.

The Mad Queen:

I'm going to start this off by going into how the mad queen trope itself is rooted in misogyny. This is one of the oldest tropes in fantasy/fairytales. Whether it's Snow White's evil step mother or the Queen of Hearts, literature is riddled with mad queens.

The idea of the mad queen is informed by the desires of men to keep women out of power. Yes there are historical women who were horrible people and unstable when in power. However, those examples are not enough to justify the amount of times the trope occurs, especially since some of the examples occur after many stories have already been written (ie, Mary I and medieval fairytales). These fictional women were written as cautionary tales of what happens when a woman is placed in power.

By writing the mad queen Dany arc in GOT, D&D are perpetuating an old trope rather than "subverting" anything as they claim. The most powerful woman in the world turning out to be a war mongering and mass murdering tyrant isn't subversive in any way. The only reason it was surprising was because it came out of nowhere narratively.

ASOIAF fans who constantly try to justify this turn for Dany's book character are attempting to do the same thing D&D did. They want to employ an ancient trope to justify their dislike for her in name of being "subversive".

The Violent Woman:

A trope that stretches back all the way to the Ancient Greeks is that of the angry, homicidal woman in power. From Hera to Medea, the myths are full of women who commit atrocities simply because of anger. This trope isn't just about avenging a slight or retribution on the guilty; it's about a woman taking out her anger on innocent parties.

Daenerys has fallen into the role of the avenger many times throughout both the show and and book. She killed Mirri Maz Duur for the murder of her son and husband. She killed the Undying for attempting to trap/kill her. She kills Kraznys mo Nakloz and many other slavers for the atrocities they commit constantly on the people they enslaved.

In the show, she imprisoned Xaro Xhoan Daxos and Doreah in a vault for killing Irri and helping the warlocks steal her children. She killed the Khals who threatened to rape her. She kills the Tarleys for rebelling against the Tyrells, thus getting them killed, and refusing to bend the knee.

Every time Dany killed up until season eight, it was purely because those she killed harmed her or her allies/children. That is why none of her past kills justify her burning KL. The people of KL did nothing to her; it's not an established part of her character to harm innocents out of anger. She even outright condemns the killing of innocents in earlier seasons.

The inconsistencies show how D&D chose to blatantly ignore the complexities of Dany's character in favor of a sexist trope. They perpetuated the idea that a woman in power who is angered will ultimately commit injustice and atrocities.

Dany antis in the ASOIAF fandom are no different from D&D. A common argument used by Dany and Targaryen antis is that they are bound to be corrupt and tyrannical because they have dragons. Essentially saying that Dany was doomed to be the villain the moment she hatched her children.

They point to her dragons' existence and her conquest in Essos as reasons for her "villain arc", despite the fact that none of her actions reflect the things they claim. Dany is simply being condemned for being a woman with power; it's expected of her to be a tyrant for those reasons alone.

The Woman Scorned:

This reasoning given by D&D in a behind the episode interview is probably the excuse that I hate the most. They said that one of the reasons for Dany's descent into madness was because Jon Snow refused to kiss her back once he found out they were aunt and nephew. This is an insanely misogynistic trope.

Used time and again by writers (mostly male), this trope is about a woman who becomes an antagonist due to rejection, unrequited love, or betrayal from a lover. In the case of Dany and GOT, it's Jon refusing to continue their romantic relationship.

For some reason, this is seen as a breaking point for Dany. A woman who has endured poverty, homelessness, sexual slavery, a traumatic miscarriage and death of a spouse/protector, and the stresses of war was broken by a man refusing to kiss her. Doesn't that sound fucking stupid? Well that's because it is.

Dany has never felt entitled to people's love (with the exception of shitty writing from D&D) let alone someone's sexual/romantic reciprocation. It's out of character and flat out insulting to women to believe that is enough to make Dany into a mass murdering tyrant.

Once again, there are members of the fandom who espouse this reasoning into their own theories and metas. Jonsas especially are guilty of this; some claiming that Jon's rejection of Dany in favor of Sansa will be a catalyst for the "mad queen".

An offshoot of this thinking, is the idea that Dany went/will go mad because she was rejected by the realm.

In the show, the Northmen are dismissive or outright hostile to Dany when she arrives (even after she saves them). Due to this rejection by the Westerosi people, Dany decides "let it be fear" and chooses to burn KL to the ground.

Once again, this idea isn't grounded in her past actions at all. Dany has always known she needs to earn people's love and respect as a ruler, why should she change her mind the moment she steps onto Westerosi soil? The answer is simple: she's a woman, so she can't possibly be able to deal with rejection.

Fans theorize constantly that Dany is going to go mad and destroy KL and Westeros because the people will definitely reject her in favor of Young Griff/Jon Snow/any other king they can think of. This theory is simply clinging to misogynistic ideas about women and it's disgusting in every iteration (it also dismisses the fact that there are people in Westeros excited about the idea of Dany and her dragons in the books but that's a different post).

The Woman Bereft:

This argument is probably the least outright in its misogyny. The idea that a woman who has lost everything will lose her mind isn't a new one and it can be played in a non-sexist way. However, GOT played it completely in the sexist roots of the trope.

Throughout seasons seven and eight, Dany loses basically everything. All but one of her children, her closest advisor and best friend Missandei, Ser Jorah, a massive chunk of her army, her other advisors, most of her allies, and is rejected by Westeros and Jon. That's a lot of loss to endure.

However, Dany has endured severe loss before and never reacted by murdering a city full of innocents. Again, this decision and descent isn't backed up by anything else in her storyline.

The sexism of this idea, that loss produces mad women, is that it's rarely applied to men in the same situations. For example: Tyrion lost everything he cared about, yet he's never written by D&D to be in danger of becoming a mass murderer. He even outright says he wishes he'd poisoned the whole court, but is never portrayed as a mad man by D&D or fans.

Dany is expected to go insane after enduring loss because she's a woman. She's perceived as being fundamentally weaker, mentally as well as physically, so she must be more vulnerable to madness than the male characters.

The Foreign Seductress:

The idea of the foreign seductress is a xenophobic and racist stereotype. For Dany, her antis use the instances of her exercising sexual autonomy and her life in Essos as fodder for this disparaging trope.

In the books and the show, Dany pursues sexual and romantic relationships outside of marriage. This is something that doesn't fall in line with the medieval setting of the world. In Westeros and Essos, it's common for men to do that, but not women, due to systematic misogyny. Because of this, Dany's antis often feel free to argue that because she doesn't act "pure", she is wrong and evil. Dany's bound to become a villain because she isn't a chaste and "good" woman.

In the same way, Dany is painted as wrong for wanting to take her family's throne purely because she wasn't raised in Westeros. She's perceived as a foreign invader by both her antis and D&D.

D&D wrote many scenes of outright xenophobia from the Northmen, Sansa, and Arya towards Dany and her forces without ever condemning those ideas. In fact, they justify them by writing the mad queen ending. The fact that Dany isn't "one of them" is used as an excuse for her descent.

Dany antis also employ this rhetoric, especially when people compare Dany's conquest for the IT to the Starks' desire to retake Winterfell. It's good for the Starks to want to retake their throne because they were raised in Winterfell, but Dany has no right to her ancestral home because she wasn't raised in Westeros.

However, this idea is never applied to Young Griff, who was also not raised in Westeros. Despite this, people will talk about how excited they are for his story and how sad it is that he's totally going to be murdered by his evil aunt. Once again a double standard is applied to Dany.

All this is because Dany is a woman who refuses to conform to patriarchal standards and was raised in a foreign country.

Never Good Enough:

Dany antis and D&D thrive on applying a different set of standards to Dany than other characters. They do this an a way that's reminiscent of the double standards set for women even today.

No matter what Dany does, it's never good enough for them. She dealt with Viserys and his death in the wrong way. She didn't protect her people in the right way. She tried to abolish slavery in the wrong way. She saved the goddamn world wrong. Like nothing Dany does is right in their eyes.

In their minds, Dany should've died in AGOT being a perfectly passive woman. She refused to submit to those (men) around her, and for that they punish her.

She's wrong for fighting the slavers, she's wrong for trying to avenge murdered children, she's evil for killing to protect herself. D&D used each of her actions throughout the show that they seemed too aggressive as justification for what they wrote. Dany's antis do the exact same thing in their theories.

The mad queen Dany theory is rooted completely in misogyny. It has no true justification in the narrative and every argument conjured up is just as sexist as the trope they want to perpetuate.

#daenerys targaryen #asoiaf #anti got #anti jonsa #anti sansa stans #anti dany antis #anti targaryen antis #asoiaf fandom #fandom misogyny #fandom critical #anti d&d #asoiaf meta

113 notes · View notes