#asoiaf politics

[nobodysuspectsthebutterfly]

If a sane/politically adept blonde Joffrey won a Great Council against Stannis and Renly and convinces the realm he’s legitimate, what would happen afterwards? Would Stannis and Renly give up or keep trying for the throne? What could they do after having lost stare decisis before the whole realm?

Sorry, I don't think Joffrey would win a Great Council even if he were "sane/politically adept". He's 13, and Great Councils have shown bias against child-age candidates before, much preferring mature men who could rule with no need for a regency. See Laenor (age 7) vs Viserys (26) at the Great Council of 101 AC, or Maegor (1) and Vaella (11) vs Aegon (33) at the GC of 233 AC.

Joffrey would have to be as strong a political personality as Daeron the Young Dragon (who took the throne without a regent at age 14, though that decision may also have been from his uncle Viserys's terrible memories of Aegon III's regency), and I doubt any child of Cersei and Robert could ever approach that level. (Not a nature argument but a nurture one, alas.) Even Robert didn't accomplish his great deeds until the age of 20-21. And Joffrey's counterpart, Robb Stark, was at least 15 when he was acclaimed as king by his bannermen, and he had already won an important battle and showed his worth and maturity. And note though Robb had no legitimacy questions, he did still have to deal with his young age causing doubt among his bannermen.

Maybe in the AU of GRRM's original concept letter, where Joffrey does take the battlefield, he could prove his worth to a Great Council? Although there Joffrey (who was probably a bit older) lost in battle to Robb (and got maimed) and was likely assassinated by Jaime afterwards, so, uh, maybe not.

Anyway. I think the only way even a political/military genius young Joffrey could come close to winning a GC versus the bias is if Tywin bribed all the lords. Which he would have to do heavily, and there's enough lords with true honor (a few, but enough) to reject it and also spread the news of bribery. (Bad ending #2!)

Though either way, there's reasons Renly rejected the idea of a Great Council out of hand. Both he and Stannis would likely refuse to attend in the first place (the same way Rhaenyra refused a GC for her own succession situation). And with both Baratheons' allies also refusing to attend (including the Tyrells, Hightowers, Velaryons, all of the stormlords, etc), there would be no true Great Council to begin with. Sometimes political hypotheticals are just impossible on too many levels to speculate further, I'm afraid.

[horizon-verizon]

It might be an unpopular opinion but I REALLY REALLY REALLY hope Daenerys and Jon don’t end up together in the books. Not only because Jon’s stans viciously hate Daenerys and steal her storyline to give it to Jon, but Jonerys as a ship is very status quo heteropatriarchal, and it will only thrive through Daenerys sacrificing many aspects of herself to elevate Jon and let him thrive.

In order to be with Jon and lessen herself as a “threat” to him, Daenerys will give up her claim to the Iron Throne. She will go to his family, home, and land, to help fight for his people (rather than him going to hers). She will acclimate to his lifestyle and family, and so will her people, again rather than the other way around. He won’t have to share his sword or direwolf with her, but she’ll have to share her dragons—her children—with him. His birth is a big reason why she is exiled, and rather than him contending with it, Daenerys will be forced to make apologies for her father’s behavior and concessions for it as well. She will burn the Iron Throne, but Jon will not have to burn his own throne (and when he does give it up, it’ll be for his brother Bran, not for Daenerys). Jon has his own family, but Daenerys doesn’t.

They will be in his terrain, not hers, terrain he is far more familiar with. Daenerys will have to do more to show loyalty to his family than he will to show loyalty to her chosen/found family, especially because of the stigma surrounding her parentage. If they do get married, Daenerys’s name and status will only help legitimize Jon as a Targaryen even more, whereas Jon will give her nothing, no advantage or boon.

Jon won’t be able to win against the Others without Daenerys, whereas Daenerys doesn’t need Jon to take back her throne (in fact, he is an obstacle to her getting that throne and will be the reason she gives up on it). Choosing between love and duty to family will be harder for Daenerys than for Jon, because Jon won’t be giving anything up by being with her. If Daenerys doesn’t share and sacrifice all of these things about herself, and instead expects Jon to do so, then Daenerys will always be seen as the Mad Queen/daughter of the Mad King, and as unacceptable/unfit for Jon.

Jonerys shippers often lie and claim that they are equals, but them being equals is 1) not true and 2) actually a huge insult to Daenerys. They’re not equals because Daenerys is going to give up much more to be with Jon than the other way around, which imparts a power imbalance in the relationship and enables Jon to gain further concessions from Daenerys when the time comes (which he will do, it is guaranteed), and secondly because Daenerys in her current stage has been a queen regnant for so long. The man she marries must be her consort, not her equal.

Ruling as “equals” with a man reduces the power and autonomy Daenerys has and undermine her authority, forcing her to share with Jon, rather than her being the final authority and Jon being the consort. Westeros is a patriarchal society, a sovereign is regarded as holding supreme dominion over the state, while a husband is deemed to hold supreme dominion over his wife. Some may see this as better than her situation with Drogo or Hizdahr, but the reason Daenerys will be able to defeat Hizdahr and what freed her from Drogo and the obligation to marry is the fact that she could be THE regnant, and not have to power share with a husband. Jon is also not the type of man who wants to settle for being an obedient consort.

Jon has always wanted to rule, he wanted it even when he knew Robb would inherit Winterfell, and in his dreams of ruling Winterfell when Stannis offers it to him, Val is his consort, not his equal. Hence, this goes back to the first point too. Under the guise of “being equals,” Jon will demand more and more from Daenerys until she is the de facto consort and he the regnant/authority. Those who want Jon to be like Jaehaerys I are implicitly admitting to this as well: Jaehaerys knew Daenerys was his heir, but planned on lessening her power and making her the de facto consort to Aemon the Pale Prince, so that Aemon could be the real authority and regnant. Jonerys takes away from all the parallels and similarities GRRM has written between Daenerys and Aegon the Conqueror.

The politics in Daenerys’s arc are incredibly significant. The revolution she’s spearheaded and the changes she’s made and institutions she’s built show her potential as a queen regnant. If Daenerys married one of her queensguard or warriors like Jhogo, it would still hammer home the subversiveness and enable Daenerys to remain the sole ruler, instead of having to marry a man who is a danger to her life and political power. Jhogo is introduced by stopping Viserys from hitting Daenerys by wrapping his whip around his throat, he’s the first one to lay his arakh at her feet after she hatches three dragons and emerges unharmed from the flames and called her “blood of my blood”, and he’s utterly devoted to Daenerys, serving her as loyally as he would a man and he will do anything for her, even when it contradicts Dothraki culture.

I appreciate the comprehensive list for why Jonerys can't work, anon, I've been thinking about bk!Jon here and there recently. And much of what you say makes a lot of sense, esp:

Choosing between love and duty to family will be harder for Daenerys than for Jon, because Jon won’t be giving anything up by being with her. If Daenerys doesn’t share and sacrifice all of these things about herself, and instead expects Jon to do so, then Daenerys will always be seen as the Mad Queen/daughter of the Mad King, and as unacceptable/unfit for Jon.

And:

Daenerys will have to do more to show loyalty to his family than he will to show loyalty to her chosen/found family, especially because of the stigma surrounding her parentage.

I came to a similar conclusion but more because Dany has lived in a foreign places her entire life and all her current loved ones (except Barristan Selmy) are "Easterners" who've never lived under the Faith religion. Basically, xenophobia.

Largely, I agree on Daenerys never "sharing" power with a man because yes her regnant authority alone allows her to be able to assure both her/her people's safety AND make sure her institutional-change momentum keeps going. I just wonder why she would be seen as a threat to Jon? Is it in the event that his parentage is revealed and, similar to Daemon Blackfyre (or what's said abt him), Jon's supporters push for him to make moves to "protect" himself? Daenerys is a force onto herself, so she'd be a threat to any possible male descendant, true, but what does Jon materially have other than his maleness that could force Dany to even consider giving up her claim? Although even this would likely end-prevent all possible romances between them.

Even with all that, I have the suspicion Jon will become very...odd and threatening after his resurrection. Too much so to remain a part of any higher authority for long, so I don't think Jonerys will really stick even of there are some stirrings toward romance b/t them. Without her, I also don't think Jon could hold a position of authority for himself bc he'd be too, again, "odd" and likely very vengeful and angry...although I guess in this world this would at first be seen & misinterpreted as a positive trait for men to portray "strength", so idk. Whereas Dany is literally the Lady of Light, it feels too much like they are opposites or at least will have opposing vibes and feelings and values upon meeting. Of course, things could change on Jon's end, but WoW will appear to feature Jon's reluctance to give up any control after what happened to him in his betrayal.

I could also say that Jon wanting Val as his consort jives since Val is not a regnant Queen, but she is still a unique authority amongst her people and has her own "name"; being a Westerosi-style "consort" is not for her. However, I have the impression that Jon wanted Winterfell as his own in a sort of fantasy of power as part of his boyish desires to escape his bastardry, similar to how he admired Daeron I, which he doesn't really revisit and reinvest in again seriously as far as I remember (I haven't reread yet so I could be just talking farts right now). But again, at the same time, we don't know the exact sequence of thoughts and actions he'll have in WoW. Whether his anger and vengefulness will borrow from these early desires to justify and build into something more, and one could def make the argument to its likelihood, esp when Jon is still very much a man of his society (Myrcella, Sansa and yes I understand why he'd feel the way he did abt Sansa, more after these parentheses) and even if he does have some sort of come-to-Jesus moment with all his flaws can one in Dany's position really be expected to put all her eggs in his basket or have faith in him when the entire trend in her life is men--intentionally or not, but usually intentionally--trying to use her up? Yeah, her better bet is someone who has proven their devotion time and time again.

Still, as a romance thing, her and Jhogo specifically doesn't appeal to me emotionally, either. Mostly because I have never seen into his head or followed his experiences. He is substantive character, don't get me wrong, but he has a particular side role and I've never cared for attachment-central character romances, male-male, female-female-, nor female-male/male-female. For politics and the bigger picture sake, absolutely, he's a good choice for Dany. Or any of her Queensguard of appropriate enough age, some warrior separate enough from the Targaryen lineage. Would I swoon or wax poetic about it, though? Nah, I'd more logically appreciate such a tie, even as I worry what it might mean for any sort of court she'd create where she doesn't take a Westerosi lord husband (which again, I don't think she should really do either unless he's so low in noble status [like Cole] he nor his family can do basically nothing to her OR/AND bc, again, that xenophobia similar to what happened with Daeron II marrying Myriah Martell) which always leads me to the depressing conclusion that Westeros just isn't the ideal place for Dany even if they unknowingly need her.

Hope this was all legible and coherent, I was doing stream of conscious, writing on the fly. George needs to finish & release this damn book. Yes yes we shouldn't rush--doesn't mean I don't wish to be proven right abt some things and wrong abt others.

[nobodysuspectsthebutterfly]

#power is a shadow on the wall. these people don't have moral convictions they are driven by their relation to power (via @daenystheedreamer)

Exactly, yeah. The bastard thing is an excuse when lords want to remove them (Rhaenyra's sons or Rhaenyra herself) from power. But when they want to get close to power, it's like... “huh what? Did somebody say something?”

Note that this is exactly the same thing as with Joffrey and Tommen -- and Myrcella for that matter -- in the main books. Stannis shouts about incest and bastards until his face turns blue, but Renly doesn't give a damn, he only wants to remove Joffrey so he can be in charge. And only the hyper-religious prisoners of war are the ones who scream about it when face to face with Joffrey:

But no sooner had that one been dragged away than a knight of solemn mien with a fiery heart on his surcoat shouted out, "Stannis is the true king! A monster sits the Iron Throne, an abomination born of incest!" "Be silent," Ser Kevan Lannister bellowed. The knight raised his voice instead. "Joffrey is the black worm eating the heart of the realm! Darkness was his father, and death his mother! Destroy him before he corrupts you all! Destroy them all, queen whore and king worm, vile dwarf and whispering spider, the false flowers. Save yourselves!" One of the gold cloaks knocked the man off his feet, but he continued to shout. "The scouring fire will come! King Stannis will return!" —ACOK, Sansa VIII

But funny that Bonifer Hasty -- good ol' "Baelor Butthole" himself -- doesn't seem to have a problem working with the Lannisters, huh. Not to mention even the High Sparrow, when more power for the Faith is offered.

And then there's Doran not caring at all about Myrcella's parentage re betrothing his son Trystane to her. You'd think it would come up once (especially considering his Targaryen plans), but weirdly no. And it doesn't even cross Arianne's mind when she's doing her queenmaker thing. Sure, there's that supposed Dornish openness towards bastards, but Arianne thinks it's Daemon Sand's bastard status why her father rejected his request for her hand, that a bastard is no fit consort for a princess of Dorne. But it is for a prince of Dorne? To marry and not just take as a paramour?

It really is interesting how much these moral standards and beliefs about abominations simply... aren't, and only exist when they need to.

“the lords of westeros would never accept rhaenyra’s BASTARDS as rulers” the lords of westeros were having a wwe smackdown over who got to marry their children to them. borros b tried to peer pressure luke into breaking his lifelong betrothal and then cregan came in with the pact of ice and fire steel chair

[schcherazades]

no asoiaf posting i do will ever beat lebanese people hanging banners over highways asking god to protect jon snow when s8 premiered

“ the people of beirut support jon snow against his battle with the white walkers” “jon snow….may allah protect you” like this is so funny i love my ppl

[visenyaism]

cersei lannister had about 3-5 business days of peace at the end of a game of thrones where it’s like. plan she singlehandedly concocted to murder her abusive terrible husband THE KING goes off without a hitch literally flawless execution most successful kingslaying in westerosi history. rhaegar outfit at his funeral. anyone who suspects foul play is in the dungeon or on her side. coup d’état equally successful. her bastard son installed as ruling king. ned stark in prison about to swear fealty to the lannisters and get ransomed cutting hostilities off at the pass. one stark kid in custody and littlefinger promised to take care of the second one. annoying brothers-in-law scattered to opposite ends of the kingdom away from her away from each other not a problem. lysa arryn doing fuck all. tyrion in enemy custody and not the walls. father and brother going to war for her. also jon arryn who she never liked is dead as a freebie. and then she never came down from this high but can you blame her

[sare11aa11eras]

You walk into the Night’s Watch in 300 AC and THIS is the first thing you see, wyd?

[nobodysuspectsthebutterfly]

See the late great Steven Attewell:

Being too honorable to take up Littlefinger’s offer [...] is not the reason Ned Stark fell from power. The reason Ned Stark falls from power is his inability to understand institutional power. Instead of understanding the fiscal powers of the state as an institution that exists outside of the man who occupies the office, he sees Littlefinger as “the man who pays” and thinks that he has to use Littlefinger. In reality, Ned is Hand of the King and Lord Protector of the Realm – he doesn’t need Littlefinger to take command of the City Guard.

Via his commentary on AGOT Eddard XIII, but reiterated in all of his Ned chapters commentaries, especially this one.

like people are always whacking george for this and yeah he can be a bit handwavey with like “margaery and her cousins” “this random girl we never hear from again was alysanne’s lady for many years” or whatever, like he doesn’t single out more than two or three girls usually, their families aren’t always as politically active as you’d expect them to be but they are THERE they do EXIST like there’s a FUCKTON of tyrells in that capital, ned himself comments on the sheer number of evil blondes hanging around, All Three Baratheon Brothers Are There For A Long Time, petyr is by himself but he has an ENTIRE SPY NETWORK meanwhile ned just rolls up with nothing but a glorified intern, a mean party nun, and his two young daughters and is like “i can fix the entire government actually politics is easy” NED WHERE ARE YOUR CRONIES. THE ENTIRE NORTH IS LINING UP TO BE YOUR INSANE HENCHMAN AND YOU LEFT THEM ON READ.

[fruitsofthepalmyrah]

“Uh actually ☝️🤓 Elia knowing and accepting Rhaegar and Lyanna’s relationship gives her agency”

Oh yeah? Where? How? Is it when her place at court is being threatened and her children’s rightful claim to the throne has the very likely possibility of being challenged à la Blackfyre Rebellion? Is it when Rhaegar abandons her to run off with Lyanna and she’s taken as hostage in KL to be used against her homeland so her people fall in line and die for the mad king (her uncle included)? Does it give Elia more agency in indirectly causing her own death and her children’s? bsffr it makes NO SENSE for her to accept Rhaegar and Lyanna’s relationship.

I would argue that her being accepting of the whole relationship, even encouraging it, *removes* her agency. Like she has no opinion and should take these slights with a smile and let her husband walk all over her. Why should Elia’s agency revolve around other people and helping them to her detriment, instead of helping herself? That doesn’t sound like agency to me. It would make much more sense and give her a semblance of power if she disapproves and confronts Rhaegar about this, as an act of defiance, before he rides to battle, instead of making her a foot stool for Rhaegar and Lyanna. Her disapproval for all of those reasons I stated would show her undying love for her children and her homeland and give her more character and agency than whatever sloppy reason she would accept Rhaegar’s relationship for. Objecting your husband when society tells you to obey him, be silent about whatever he does and accept it, makes her much more interesting. THAT is agency. It gives her a voice rather than being pushed to the background. 

“But she’s dornish!!!”

Okay, and? Not every Dornish person is the same. Also, in Dorne, one takes a paramour with their spouse’s consent, and we don’t know if she approved, though it’s more likely she didn’t. If you do take a paramour, it shouldn’t threaten the position of your spouse or your trueborn children, which is clearly not the case here. Plus, in Dorne, men *and women* can have paramours which is not how it works in the rest of Westeros. A man can be unfaithful, in fact he’s expected to sleep around, whereas a woman should ever be dutiful to her husband and would be considered a whore for seeking out other men. This creates an unfair imbalance between Rhaegar and Elia, because at the end of the day they are not in Dorne, and Elia has to follow the customs of the noble court. 

[leulahart]

the alayne sample chapter from winds is actually something that can be so personal

[crimsoncold]

What is pol!Jon?

It a short form tag that stands for political jon. Essentially an explanation theorized and popularized by a number of people in asoiaf/game of thrones fandom in an attempt to explain some of the very questionable if not outright out of character choices that writer's made on game of thrones for Jon Snow in the later seasons concerning his entire storyline since encountering Daenerys.

Essentially its a theory that stands by the idea that the only way Jon's action and choices could make sense were if Jon's interactions with Daenerys and her allies were not of a genuine nature (i.e. he had no genuine loyalty, affection, love, or trust in her or her advisors/army) but rather everything he was doing and saying amounted to him "playing" the game and doing whatever was necessary to gain her help (i.e. her army and dragons) in the war against the dead, but also to keep his family members and subjects safe from Dany's wrath once he brought her north, and potentially even to maneuver/keep himself in a position where he would be close enough to take Daenerys out all together should it prove necessary to eliminate someone who had proved to be an obvious threat (i.e. before she could cause mass murder and destruction via her dragons, or attempt to greviously harm Jon himself or his "siblings"- the latter at least Jon was successful with)

Essentially it holds to the idea that Jon would have had to have clocked Daenerys as a temporarily necessary "evil" but ultimately also a likely a very dangerous person who would have to be carefully managed to keep her on track and from outright imploding and he then acted (i.e. lied) accordingly (honestly not exactly unlike how her own advisors tended to treat her... as someone useful and powerful who they hoped to influence/guide to some desired outcome/ruler while also having to offset her ever present dangerous desire to take the easy road- i.e. screw the consequences wipe out any and all of her "enemies" with dragon fire).

This theory was meant to offer a more sensible and in character explanation for him bending the knee, becoming her lover, him acting as if he believed she really was a good queen or a ruler any different than the several other violent destructive and/or fire-obsessed ones that came before her.

One that wouldn't require the audience to accept that Jon had just suddenly and without explanation had a personality transplant, becoming incredibly foolishly trusting, a exceptionally bad judge of character, and willing to follow and submit to someone who was not just personally disrespectful to him and his family but who also burned countless people alive, is intending to invade westeros, forcefully take independence away from the north, while also directly threatening Jon's own beloved family.

Support for the idea that Jon would never sincerely trust or feel affection for Dany comes from various things such as...

1. The general lack of any affection/passion/happiness being displayed by Jon when interacting with Daenerys. That feels like a very intentional and suspect choice that is unlikely to have solely been the decision of Kit Harrington or simply due to a general lack of chemistry between him and Emilia Clarke. (Storytelling is more than just the performers... other people on set had to have been involved in creating even the possibility of this political Jon narrative)

Just compare scenes of Jon with any number of characters (his Stark siblings- Sansa in particular, Sam or any of his other nightswatch friends, Tormund or even Ygritte) and it seems obvious to conclude that his interactions with Dany lack true happiness/comradery/affection.

2. How many scenes between characters were being framed in the show.. a number of which seemed to point the audience towards the conclusion that something is quite suspect with this whole dynamic between Dany and her Northern and other Westeros Allies.

Serving to foreshadow Dany as an ultimate aggressor and villain for these characters but also currently establishing a noticeable tension- both a jealousy and a sense of isolation...a lack of belonging or trust between Dany and these characters- all of which hints to the idea that Jon was always loyal to the Starks and The North while Daenerys always remained an unaccepted and untrusted outsider, someone that Jon would attempt to placate and manage but never actually endeavored to truly welcome, include, or help integrate into his family or his people (which one may typically expect a man would do for a foreigner lover that he had brought to an unfamiliar place and people to introduce her to his family, his home, his friends, his culture, and his homeland ... that is if said man were actually in love with this woman or had a even a modicum of affection for her).

For evidence see almost any scene with Jon + Sansa + Dany, Dany + Sansa, Dany + the Northerners, Jon + Greyworm.

3. Jon's book or (perhaps to a lesser degree) his established show canon personalities and familial background.

Him having been established as more intelligent and strategic than how he appeared in the later seasons, his protectiveness and nobility, him being at times ruthless, his willingness to compromise his honor when it's necessary for his own life/saftey or that of others... all of which would correspond better to a pol!jon theory than to the idea that he so quickly and inexplicably fell truly in love with, became loyal to, and strangely willingly so passive to a person like Dany.

His previous history and interactions with other villainous characters who choose to use fire for human sacrifice/execution not unlike the way Daenerys does repeatedly (think Stannis or Melisandre, he didn't like them, found their actions abhorrent, he actively worked to oppose them when he could/when it was the right thing to do),

The general history between House Targaryen and Stark (Lyanna's assumed abduction and rape by the brother Dany admires, and the horrific and brutal killing of his Grandfather and Uncle by Dany's King Father, the resulting uprising that Jon's beloved late "father" took part in to overthrow said king) which by itself is enough reason for him not to readily trust any Targaryen

That's all without even looking at Dany's own personal actions that indicate she, much like other various terrible Targ rulers/ancestors is also an incredibly dangerous individual (one unwilling to look to and learn from the past, to unlearn the sense of targaryen superiority she was raised with, or accept the reality of her family members/ancestors, a conqueror who strength lies in her military might and her willingness to kill en masse via dragon fire rather than in an interest in say labouring to earn the loyalty and acceptance of westeros, in handling the details and minutiae of ruling, or striving towards improving her general political acuity).

Lastly because his willingness and ability to infiltrate, manipulate, lie to, and otherwise feign going along with until the time is right to "strike" (while still not actually abandoning his original duty or loyalty) to the people who qualify as an enemey has already been established (including ones he- reluctantly or under coercion- engages with in a romantic or sexual relationship) through his dealings with Ygritte and the other Free Folk.

Essentially fans were unimpressed with the choices and explanations from the writers/showrunners and were trying to come up with their own more reasonable explanation for Jon's later storyline (beyond the simple fact that the show's writing quality in general had suffered in the later seasons, and that the writer's seemed to forget that several houses - including the starks you know the unofficial heart of the story- were significant and that GOT wasn't ever supposed to be the Dany & DRAGONS!!!! Show ft. everyone else) which cumulated in this jon as a political actor (i.e. a strategic manipulator who is working on the behalf of the collective good of the north, or really humanity itself) theory.

So considering all these facts (plus undoubtedly some I couldn't recall simply off the top of my head) a number of fans saw that a reasonable or even somewhat satisfying explanation for Jon's later season's arc/storyline had to be pol!jon... though people may vary on how canon they think this theory is.

Some may think it does make considerable sense and accept it as headcanon but not believe it was an intentional decision by the writers- thus it's something that is applicable in fandom spaces but is not actually a canon theory.

Others believe pol!jon was a storyline that was actually originally planned out and initiated by the writers but was one that would ultimately fall off and never be properly or explicitly addressed in the show itself- or even acknowledged behind the scenes.

Explanations for this generally are various (unconfirmed and speculative) theories that it was scrapped because the show had second thoughts because....

a) Perhaps the show wasn't interested in or able to devote enough time to properly focus on Jon's character arc in the last leg of the show (not at all unlike the treatment of several other major characters), so this storyline wasn't explicity kept up

b) Maybe because they wanted to make Dany's downfall some supposed huge exciting twist for the audience and thus could no longer have an established heroic and generally liked character explicity be shown as as treating Dany as a villain so far in advance from her downfall as it could raise questions on Dany's ultimate role in the series potentially ruining their oh so amazing twist,

C) More cynically speaking it could have been from a desire to avoid any early on backlash from the large, very invested, and profitable, dany-stan/targ centric/jonerys part of fandom who were banking on a "happy" ending with Dany successfully taking power, being accepted in westeros (and the north with Jon as her consort), making for a glorious return of the dragons and a full targ restoration in Westeros with good queen Dany who would be beloved by all (regardless of the atrocities she enacts with her wmd on those she deems her enemies or any potential Nephews whose claim to the IT would supersede hers).

Having an explict pol!jon story being properly built up over the later seasons would certainly make it harder to sell that fantasy for the die hard dany/targ fans and could have meant viewship would have suffered...(i.e. there would be enough potential backlash coming from the finale what with Dany's down fall and Jon's role in her death... why risk having any prematurely which could effect earlier ratings/reviews/viewership/etc. when instead they could scrap what remained of that storyline and keep targs stans and targ favoring HBO staff happy for a little while longer)

... or

D) perhaps pol!jon was a halfheartedly planned out and clumsily executed storyline that would become abandoned as an extension of the writer's getting cold feet around the idea of a Jonsa romantic pairing (this may seem a stretch but I find there are some compelling arguments that the show may have been in the know of a book!jonsa endgame and even considered having a show!jonsa endgame only to abandon what they deemed too unpopular a pairing.

Pol!jon is something that would have enhanced the Jonsa undertones that remained present in the show .... i.e. such a theory could amplify the canon strange tension/jealousy exhibited between the three characters as well as the canon aspect of Dany being a threat to Sansa's safety being brought up several times ultimately adding further motivation for Jon to assassinate Dany... all of which would have then been paired with the explicit fact that Jon never felt actual loyalty or love for Dany if the show had confirmed pol!jon... this might have leaned too hard in the direction of jon and sansa as a potential romantic couple an idea that the show was not exactly fully committed to exploring or implying

[nobodysuspectsthebutterfly]

so funny to me when asoiaf fans treat usurpation as a horrible crime. brother I could not give less of a shit all monarchs are usurpers as far as I'm concerned

[horizon-verizon]

Liberals threatening to end their support for Palestinians is too funny. How can they withhold something that NEVER existed in the first place ?

IDK, I was pretty confused about this...bc it was pretty clear that they never took the time to look over the BDS flyer or pages.

[fromtheseventhhell]

Arya learned the Braavosi language and culture well enough to pass as someone "born and bred" there while interacting with actual native Braavosi, but I'm supposed to think she's going to have difficulty navigating Westerosi noble life...as someone who was actually raised as a Westerosi noble? The way you can tell that people don't think before they "theorize" about Arya will always crack me up

[nobodysuspectsthebutterfly]

It's an interesting question, but tbf this argument applies to any question of monarchial legitimacy in ASOIAF. Not just Aegon and the Blackfyres, but also Jon and Dany. Stannis and Renly, Joffrey and Tommen and Myrcella. (Especially them!) Sansa and Bran and Jon and the Robb's will problem re the seat of House Stark. The whole damn Blacks vs Greens question that they literally made a tv show about, and you can see thousands of people arguing over on twitter and tumblr and reddit every damn day now.

Maybe it's getting too obsessed with a work of fiction, but I'd say it's a strength of GRRM's writing that we get drawn into these in-world political arguments, and argue using the in-world laws and customs rather than our own democratic principles and social liberalism. I have the occasional post where I note that all these arguments are truly self-deluding (always) patriarchal (almost always) classist (always and forever) nonsense, but I've also been known to engage in a bit of headache-inducing succession debate as well.

Though let's be real, a good amount of these arguments by fans are not simply academic debate, but biased out of love or hate for the characters. Or as one of my favorite posts of all time said,

my favorite thing about the "is Aegon VI a Blackfyre" argument is how it seems to really draw people into the mindset of being in the story, amidst the feudal logic.

outside of the "Varys needs a logical motivation" argument, there's plenty of discussions that range into the realm of... actual legitimacy. Are we really debating whether or not a Blackfyre is legitimate? Why do you care? Have we accidentally bought into primogeniture and monarchism, for a moment?

[balls-heheh]

“He’s kind.”

In this moment, I like to imagine that she feels pure unbridled bittersweetness.

He’s kind, there is apart of me out there that is kind.

But it could only exist without my presence.

[visenyaism]

also after walking into a pyre to die at the lowest moment of her 14 year old life and instead of burning to death enacting the miracle from her prophetic dreams that everyone in her family died and failed trying to do that brings magic back into the world for the first time in 300 years and three dragons who are loyal only to her and the next day there’s a giant red comet in the sky. what is this tenth grader supposed to do NOT suspect a little bit that she’s the messiah.