#awoiaf characterization

[horizon-verizon]

Comparing Daenerys and Young Griff is so delicious because his protectors essentially raised him to be like who Daenerys is. Young Griff’s upbringing as a “nobody” was artificial. No matter how many floors he had to scrub or times somebody thought he was just a sellsword’s son, he was always promised one day he would be royalty, and was treated as such by his protectors. He never went cold, hungry. He was never a slave, a beggar or abused. He doesn’t have the authentic perspective of someone on the other side of the power scale like Daenerys does.

Daenerys had to learn everything she did for survival. She is empathetic to “small folk” because she may have been born royal but never lived that way until her dragons hatched. Young Griff learned everything he did just to fit a mold.

I think it’s also fun to think of Aegon V too. Unlike Daenerys and Young Griff, Egg knew what it was to live as a royal, he was given the full perspective of the class hierarchy. Him living as someone lowborn was what led him to deconstruct and question all the classism he had been fed. And what’s most important about this is that it was his choice to live undercover with Dunk, to temporarily give his privileges up and he got an experience that was some what in between manufactured like Young Griff and authentic like Daenerys.

As it relates to Young Griff, Egg could’ve quit his game at any moment. All it would take is pulling off his boot and calling his dad or Bloodraven, and he still always had Dunk to protect him. But undercover, he really did get an authentic experience of being low born.

And it’s so interesting how Varys took inspiration from Egg to create his own enlightened monarch by manufactured an Egg journey for Young Griff, but how much value is there in a journey like that when you know the endgame is to be king like Young Griff ?

If the last question wasn't rhetorical:

When Àegon V was walking around with Duncan the Tall, he had not been slàted as the heir nor was he even close to being the royal heir. So he was curious and concerned with how the common people lived, the poor and all that. As a child. And he was considerably more compassionate and inquisitive than Young Griff seems to be, expecting to become King. So much for that. You're bringing an important difference Varys seemingly didn't account for, which seems uncharacteristic--not the part Abt expecting to be king, I don't think that that completely devalues or destroys the mission to make at least a more compassionate monarch. You can still be a noble, not live amongst the people, and still be considerate and actionable towards commonborn or peasants, like Alysanne. It's not common, so sometimes or most of it you need to make a more extreme deed like Aegon and force the noble into that separate life depending on the person. This still goes back to Varys making a mistake--how could he trust that a rich merchant and a noble knight would put this smallfolk-first, "enlightened" king before all other sorts of education? How would one go about explaining this?

[horizon-verizon]

Important quotes:

[...] One that hasn’t been suggested, as far as I can tell, is sincere philosophical opposition. A Blackfyre victory is not only a victory for Daemon, but a massive cultural push toward this Prom King of the Seven Kingdoms “better man” ideology. It’s not hard to imagine why Brynden Rivers would want to oppose that. If the just and peaceable King Daeron II, with the might of the Iron Throne behind him, can be overthrown because he doesn’t fit the masculine ideal, what place will there be for someone whose deviation from this ideal is literally all over his face?  If hostility toward the Rhoynar proves this potent a motivation to warfare, what’s next? The Dornish at least keep the Andal faith, which is no small thing; who’s to say that this new regime won’t want a new enemy to rally people against and decide that those weirdo tree-worshippers are a convenient target? I don’t think his motivations were predominantly about principle or self-preservation, but at the same time, if you were in his shoes, wouldn’t you fight tooth and nail to resist that?

................

Bloodraven is a bastard in an era where bastardy is a social flash point, he is a warg in a world of disappearing magic, he is an albino in a world where divergence from a physical ideal is treated as a moral failing. At some point, covering (as I hypothesized that Daeron may) or trying to kick down the door into Normalcy (as Daemon and Bittersteel definitely do) becomes corrosive, self-destructive, utterly exhausting. There is nobody else like Bloodraven, and he lives like somebody who knows it.

................

Archery is thought to be below knights, supposedly because it isn’t considered to bring too much glory. As a skill, it’s literally worth less in their world[...] The more cynical explanation for this cultural attitude is that it’s bluntly classist: people can make pretty effective bows and arrows and even learn to use them on their own, they allow people to be valuable in battle even if they can’t afford expensive armor and well-kept horses, and once those same people leave the battlefield they can also use those bows and arrows to feed themselves. Brute strength is less important, which means maleness and able-bodiedness are nowhere near as much of an advantage as they are in more “honorable” fights. And what does Bloodraven use to strike down foes? A weirwood bow. Foreshadowing things to come, yes, but I suspect the character made this choice precisely because of its symbolism.

................

But the main issue is, look how much of this is scapegoating and outright dehumanization, and how little of it is based on actual events. “He killed his half-brother and nephews on the battlefield" - fair enough, if stripped of the context of Daemon’s kinslaying intent, but then - “and then he made the plague happen and killed the half-brother he was fighting for! Oh, and Baelor Breakspear, who hundreds of reputable sources saw someone else kill! Oh, yes, and somehow he did this overly-complicated magical feticide but still GOT CAUGHT doing it even though he is magical and all-powerful! Also LOOK AT HIS GROSS FACE!” As long as he lives under his own name, he’s going to be demonized. What he looks like is sufficient ammunition against him; if he starts hiding his appearance, he outs himself as a sorcerer, because the way he looked before is very memorable. This exists in dialogue with the social bias that lumps him in with his mortal enemies.

................

What’s especially impressive and engaging and above all unusual about this character is that he could, if he wants, cover more effectively than anyone else. He could disappear into the libraries with Aerys; he could either pretend not to have his affinity with ravens or choose to be one full-time. He can pass himself off as a Plumm – or for that matter, probably the Lannister or Tyrell of his choice – or any other person whose skin and hair and eye(s) don’t draw attention. His shape-shifting abilities could be read as a metaphor for the ability to cover, which is learned so well by stigmatized people. But as Melisandre tells us, glamours take a toll. Even with the means to do it, he refuses to crouch defensively and use his abilities to coddle other people’s biases and deny his own identity. He inhabits his own skin, and he throws people by forcing them to meet him on his terms. If people construe your existence as offensive, then the best defense is to give offense. This is radically different from the “wear it like armor” attitude Tyrion Lannister tries to take. Armor is defensive. Armor, like glamors, is something that you put on when necessary but is dead weight to carry when not. Bloodraven wears his difference like a set of brass knuckles. You might resent him for refusing to play by the established rules – but you’ll watch your mouth or lose some teeth.

................

When someone who is outside of society is above it and okay with it, then there’s no need to challenge ourselves on what alienation might be doing to them; when they don’t care about the system, they don’t threaten our perspective on how it’s organized. Bloodraven, though, is always playing toward some long game or another, and he always uses the most powerful tools he can get his hands on to do it. He is not a devotee of chaos. He is about order, bare and unflinching -and he stands in starkly visible contrast to what most people assume their social order to be.

................

Better Men: Bias and Bastardy in the Blackfyre Rebellion, Part 3

I tried to keep this post from turning into a general deep dive into Lord Bloodraven, the biggest greatest of bastards and the newest of my favorite characters. Given the subject matter of this series of posts and what we know about the character so far, there’s a lot to explore. I’ve tried to limit this one to the character’s relationship to his own difference and how that influences his thinking.

White as bone were the skin and hair of Brynden Rivers, and his eye - he had only the one, the other having been lost to his half brother Bittersteel at the Battle of Redgrass Field - was red as blood. On cheek and neck he bore the winestain birthmark that had given him his name. (TMK)

In some ways, the Lord Hand is a fairly straightforward exploration of the concept of stigma. His face bears a literal mark, which defines his social identity to a point where he’s publicly named for it - a name referencing an animal, no less.

Straightforward,perhaps,but far from simple.This is a complicated subject, inhabited by a very complicated character.

Keep reading

[agentrouka-blog]

What are your thoughts on Alicent Hightower?

I haven't read Fire&Blood yet, so I can't comment on the book Dance. In the show she's my favorite character but the writing is inconsistent, which really detracts from the overall messaging and characterization.

No deep thoughts. HOTD has a lot of potential but mediocre execution and I am not commiting my limited brainspace to it. Not when I am way behind on my AWOIAF project. 😁

[wulfmaed-archived]

#𝐖𝐔𝐋𝐅𝐌𝐀𝐄𝐃   ,      novel      canon           &&           headcanon      based      portrayal      of      george      rr      martin's      𝐒𝐀𝐍𝐒𝐀 𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐑𝐊.  

a study in:   crushed  dreams,   lost  childhood,   fairytale  bliss  gone  wrong,   what  happens  when  the  prince  is  not  who  he  says  he  is,   silent  grief,   a  lady's  rage,   learning  to  wield  your  words  as  a  weapon,   winning  the  game  that  has  taken  everything  from  you,   the  victim   –   martyr   –   hero  complex,   looking  like  your  mother  but  embodying  your  father;   it  matters  little   –   they're  both  dead.

mains & affiliated blogs:  @warriorfavoured , @wiedzm1n , @sunfyred , @azmenka / @tymptir , @cthoniian , @absolventiia , @loreforged , @magikbled / @pixieseer / all of lake's blogs ever ;* , @worthyheir / @king7doms , @wornkindness , @ozgog , @lvscinvs . exclusives: harry hardyng ( @loreforged ) , geralt of rivia ( @wiedzm1n ) , niklaus mikaelson ( @magikbled )

as  characterized  by  mowgli,   she/hers   –   twenty9   –   cst.   moderate  activity,   not  safe  for  work.   the  works  of  asoiaf  /  hotd  /  grrm  are  not  for  the  faint  of  heart.  if  you've  read  the  books,  you  know  that.  if  you  have  not,  and  are  still  interested  in  writing  with  me,  please  know  that  there  are  many  themes  that  may  make  you,  or  others,  uncomfortable.  generally  speaking,  this  is  only  done  in  mention  of  past  actions;  sansa  is  a  survivor  of  many  ill  actions,  reader  discretion  is  advised. crossover,   alternate  universe,   and  original  character  friendly.   anti  -  hbo,   anti  -  sophie  turner,   anti  -  creepyshipping,   anti  -  sansan,   anti  -  sansa  with  men  who  have  literally  caused  her  emotional  /  physical  trauma  and  do  not  deserve  to  breathe  her  air.  

carrd . spotify playlist . verses . prompts . commission examples . ko-fi . low - activity awoiaf multi . psd coloring , jelly donuts by pinkinnards .

𝐃͟𝐑͟𝐀͟𝐅͟𝐓͟𝐒͟: 004 . 𝐈͟𝐍͟𝐁͟𝐎͟𝐗͟: 036 . 𝐐͟𝐔͟𝐄͟𝐔͟𝐄͟: 004 .

[aegor-bamfsteel]

How long does it take to travel to King’s Landing from Dragonstone?

I wanted to focus a meta on a seemingly minor detail that, if you look into the likely circumstances surrounding it, reveals an important piece of characterization of Da3ron II that I don’t think has been discussed. AWOIAF says, regarding Da3ron’s reaction to his father’s death: “[he] departed Dragonstone within the fortnight after learning of his father's demise and was swiftly crowned by the High Septon in the Red Keep.”

If Aegon IV had died, and then Da3ron had arrived from Dragonstone and been crowned within 2 weeks (equal to a fortnight) of this death, that would’ve been understandable. However, the “and” signifies that Da3ron was crowned after the fortnight; it took within a fortnight of being told of Aegon’s death (not Aegon’s death proper, just when he heard the news) for Da3ron to pack his things and travel from Dragonstone to King’s Landing. The implication is that the journey from Dragonstone to KL takes nearly two weeks by sea. I was so puzzled at the idea that the Targaryen’s home castle was so far away from their capital (that they chose to build in that location partially because it was that close to Dragonstone) I checked the Errata of The World of Ice and Fire to see if it was a misprint in the way Myriah Martell’s name was; it was not. Da3ron took nearly two weeks after hearing of his father’s death to arrive at King’s Landing, and was “swiftly crowned” only after. Which leads me to ask, how many miles by sea does it take to travel from Dragonstone to King’s Landing?

According to a map of Westeros and assuming that it is to scale, someone worked out the distance as 420 miles/675km by sea; it is 100 miles/160km from Dragonstone to Sharp Point on the mainland, and then 320 miles/515km of traveling west along the coast to King’s Landing. It is not mentioned what type of ship Da3ron took (galley, longship, carrick, caravel, etc; all of which travel at different speeds based on how they’re built, with longships being the fastest and galleys the slowest), how experienced its crew was (although since Dragonstone is known for its navy, you’d think they would be experienced), or if the winds were favorable, so I’m going to estimate the slow, average, and fast speed of arrival from Dragonstone to KL based on the sources:

If Westeros is anything like our world and the equator is located south of Dorne, then the prevailing winds would blow from east to west (easterlies) south of the Neck and from west to east (westerlies) north of the Neck. Dragonstone and King’s Landing are located south of the Neck, so the prevailing winds would be trade winds/easterlies; in other words, Da3ron would’ve had the wind on his side leaving Dragonstone, which would’ve increased his speed by as much as 1 knot/1.15mi. Travelling at less than 4mph/3.5knots per hour generally meant a sailing ship was travelling with unfavorable winds, so we can assume Da3ron never reached below that speed.

Ideal Conditions:

Under ideal conditions (favorable winds, a skilled crew) a sailing ship could average around 6knots/6.9mph over a trip (pre-modern vessels could “sprint” up to 12 knots, but this wasn’t sustainable). This translates to 168 miles per day, assuming sailing in the day and night (which Da3ron would’ve had to do at least on the first part of his journey to Sharp Point, as he’s sailing the open ocean). 420mi/168mi/d= 2.5 days, or 60 hours at maximum speed

Assuming Da3ron took a caravel, the maximum speed of which is 9mph or 150 miles per day, it would’ve taken 420mi/150mi/d= 2.8 days, or 68 hours at maximum speed

I doubt Da3ron took a galley, considering it is a slow ship most often used for war, but non-ironborn nobility in Westeros do seem to have more of them to their name (Cersei, Stannis, Alyn Velaryon use them as flagships) than other ships, so I’ll put these numbers in to show that even at the slowest built ship Da3ron should’ve made better time. They are on average about 3/4 as fast as caravels, so at maximum might reach 6.75mph, 112mi/d, so 3.7 days or about 90 hours at maximum speed

Average conditions:

The average sailing ship could go around 5knots/5.75mph; this translates into 73 hours or 3 days 1 hour on average

Average speed for a caravel is 4.5mph or 90-100mi/day. The lower range indicates this trip would take 112 hours, or 4 days 16 hours; the upper range is 101 hours, or 4 days 7 hours on average

Average speed for a galley is about 3knots/3.45mph; this translates to about 122 hours, or about 5 days on average

Slow conditions (slowest possible with still-prevailing winds):

As explained before, going less than 3.5knots/4mph via sailing ship meant generally unfavorable winds. Assuming the absolute slowest, the ship could expect to make the trip in 105 hours or 4 days 9 hours

Using the ratio that a galley is about 3/4 the speed of a caravel, its slow speed might be 3mph, which translates into 140 hours or 5 days 20 hours

In conclusion, assuming that Da3ron did not stop at any harbors along the way and traveled at a consistent pace, he should have arrived in King’s Landing within one week, not two, of learning of Aegon’s death. Even at the slowest pace, taking the slowest method of water transport, the trip does not equal 6 full days of travel. 

It’s possible that, like Corlys Velaryon at the 101 Great Council, he brought the full Dragonstone fleet to King’s Landing to support his claim to the throne if he feared it was in danger (which makes sense in that he took so long to arrive, but was “swiftly crowned” after), but that would’ve lengthened the trip to 6 days at most (since a navy can only travel as fast as its slowest ship, the galley), and certainly not to nearly two weeks, since time is clearly of the essence in thwarting a potential coup. The idea that it took so long to prepare such a navy after hearing of Aegon’s death seems like a stretch considering the old king’s slow physical decline (see below)

A more benign argument is that after he reached Sharp Point, he did stop during the night, but assuming a night is 8 hours, that means even if he stopped every night along the journey (a ridiculously inefficient plan that practically defeats traveling by water, but to stretch out the time let’s pretend he might’ve done it) would’ve made the trip 76 hours or 3 days 4 hours at the fastest, and 172 hours or 7 days 4 hours at the slowest. Again, even at the slowest pace, with the slowest method of transportation, and now with long stops, it still would’ve taken barely more than half the time Yandel noted Da3ron actually spent to depart Dragonstone and arrive in King’s Landing. And how many days did he really need to pack his things and leave? I doubt nearly a week was really necessary...

Of course, that Da3ron might’ve taken a slower ship and stopped every night from reaching Sharp Point on ignores why he’s journeying to King’s Landing in the first place: his father just died and he is going to be crowned king, unmistakably the most important event of his life. As the crown prince, he has access to the fastest ships and most experienced crew. This is no time to stop to rest and leave the realm without a king (especially if you believe that others are plotting to take the throne, as Da3ron’s actions after arriving regarding Daemon Blackfyre and his father’s Small Council indicate). There is no technical reason why a journey that should’ve taken 3-4 days instead took nearly 2 weeks. The only possible reason for such a massive delay is a character-based one: that Da3ron did not wish to arrive in the capital so soon. Waiting that long almost undoubtedly meant he was not there for the funeral (given Aegon’s condition at death, it makes me think he was buried shortly after; in addition, the news of the death would’ve had to have reached Da3ron before he could depart, which would’ve taken 1-1.5 days by raven), which would’ve been the best opportunity to show filial piety, or at least pay respects to the old king from the perspective of a successor. Da3ron wore his father’s crown allegedly to prove his legitimacy, but the gesture seems rather empty after taking so long to come to the capital that he missed the funeral, and the coronation itself was the only event described as “swift.” It makes it seem as if he did not care for his father, purposely avoiding the capital until all mourning was done and then claiming his crown. This might have been the case given they were estranged the last years of Aegon’s life, but no matter his personal feelings, it would’ve been politically wiser if he were to come to King’s Landing as fast as he could, especially given the doubts of his legitimacy and his paranoia over claimants to the throne. The very tense succession of Viserys I to Aegon II officially took place on a single day; understandably such a short passage of time wasn’t possible in Da3ron’s case, but potential problems in a succession makes Targaryens act faster, not slower.

What makes matters worse is that Aegon’s death was obviously not sudden in the manner of Viserys II’s. TWOIAF’s description of his demise includes, “he was grossly fat, barely able to walk, and some wondered how his last mistress—Serenei of Lys, the mother of Shiera Seastar—could ever have withstood his embraces.” Serenei was Aegon’s mistress for at least a year, and undoubtedly a man who was barely able to walk does not have long to live. Toward the immediate end “his limbs [were] rotting and crawling with fleshworms”; there was even debate over this condition: “the maesters claimed they had never seen its like, whilst septons declared it a judgment of the gods” in addition to palliative care “Aegon was given milk of the poppy to dull his pain, but elsewise little could be done for him.” It seems like the final stage of Aegon’s illness could’ve taken weeks or even months, if there was time to discuss its cause and for worms to start eating his rotting limbs, or for final treatment and a damning decree to be issued. The health of the king is obviously politically important, especially to his heir, so I think it’s unlikely Da3ron wouldn’t have known about this final illness. Certainly by the time Aegon was unable to rise from his sickbed, Da3ron should’ve been able to tell the end was near; he very well could’ve reached King’s Landing before Aegon’s death, let alone before his funeral. That could have altered the course of Westerosi history if he arrived in time to contest the will that decreed all of Aegon’s illegitimate children be legitimized. 

It’s important to note that it’s never explained why Da3ron was unable to undo Aegon’s deathbed decree. The Greens were able to successfully contest Viserys I’s will that Rhaenyra succeed him and instead crown Aegon II, once they got the majority of the Small Council on their side. In real life, Henry of Blois was able to release his brother Stephen and the rest of the barons from the vows they swore to uphold Empress Matilda’s ascension to the English throne, on the grounds that her father king Henry was wrong to make them swear the oath because it would threaten the stability of the kingdom (in addition to bribing the royal steward into alleging that the old king had changed his mind about the succession and nominated Stephen instead, which at least worked for William the Conqueror regarding Edward the Confessor’s will). It would’ve been even easier for Da3ron to contest the will because Aegon was in horrific pain due to ill health and given milk of the poppy, a drug that is known to “fill one’s head with clouds”; Da3ron could’ve said that Aegon was not in his right mind when he made the will and that any deathbed decrees should be discarded. If only he had come early enough to King’s Landing to plead his case before Aegon’s death, or failing that, to try to force a reversal through the High Septon or the royal steward shortly after, things might’ve gone better for him later in his reign.

To conclude what is a much longer meta than I expected, Yandel claimed that Da3ron arrived in King’s Landing from Dragonstone within 2 weeks of hearing of his father’s death. Through estimating the speed of certain ships and the distance between the two castles, we can determine it should have taken at most 6 days and in all probability more like 3-4 days if he conducted himself with any sense of urgency. But instead, he chose to arrive so far after Aegon’s death that he probably missed his funeral, which, coupled with the haste with which he was crowned, shows a lack of respect for a deceased father that goes against the teachings of the Faith of the Seven, the moral authority of Westeros (and probably fed rumors of his illegitimacy). Even worse, the nature of Aegon’s illness was so slow that Da3ron could’ve made it to King’s Landing in time to change or contest his will if he had bothered, thus getting rid of his potential rival’s legitimization. I can only infer that Da3ron’s actions were not motivated by political necessity (and in fact could’ve hurt him politically and socially), but by hatred for his estranged father. I don’t blame Da3ron for loathing a man who abused his mother and tried to start an unprovoked war with his wife’s family. However, I don’t think the characterization of him putting political necessities above personal feelings can hold water, at least where his own are concerned (the feelings of others under his guardianship, such as those of Aerys I, and perhaps those of Princess Daenerys and Daemon Blackfyre, might be different matters). Nor do I believe that he should get a pass for making politically unwise decisions due to personal grudges when Aegor Rivers, who also had long-term vulnerabilities (disgrace at 2 weeks of age, the execution of half of his family at 6 years, invited into a court that hated his family...and that’s before the Blackfyres start getting cruelly murdered) is reduced to a one-dimensional villain for behaving similarly.

[horizon-verizon]

Also-also---

Since Dany accrues the power she needs from Viserys/Aerys/Rhaegar/Rhaego/Drogo's deaths AND needs to be queen both for her own and her people's safety, does that mean that she can never be truly "heroic"? So because monarchies are and have been patriarchal and abusive, she herself can never be a "good" ruler or a good force in this world?! You can't make the argument that the original or beginning material must be "feminist" (as in something made towards the political and ideological movement) or set that as a reason to deny how any woman gaining power from a patriarchal structure bc are we then to say she can't be a "real", altruistic ruler?

Often, that is exactly how many women & feminist groups get power back, as I already noted above, but also in real life often women use the patriarchal logic of any familiar argument against men to show how stupid that argument is or unsustainable its implications are for how we form and shape society in the broader sense. Or they have to go through and make use of or manipulate the laws/policies designed for men for their own use to gain power and then they can decide to use that in both underhanded and overt ways against men for a bigger or altruistic cause. One way this is literally embodied is how Dany obtains the Unsulllied in a more anti-slavery context; but for feminism we have that case in Australia (I think) of that artist who succeeded in making her point about those Gentlemen's clubs, made a ladies' club, was sued by a man for excluding him, but won all while still making her point (a much more overt example). She could not have made her points more salient with the effect that it had without creating her gender-exclusive ladies' club WHILE ALSO giving a safe space for (some) women from men. Dany cannot free slaves without becoming the queen that she is, which is very dependent on the already existing systems of rulership in both Essos and Westeros.

Feminism as a movement in of itself didn't exist until the 18th century, so we shouldn't care what any woman does before then or how they resisted & made use of the patriarchal narratives for themselves and/or for others? These women are no longer "heroes" or inspirations for private or public resistance/resisters? Because they used what existed for them to use?!

So it's more than "shortsighted"; it's dangerous to argue a thing. It smacks of "we shouldn't care about Rhaenyra's story or Dany's story or Rhaena the Black Bride's bec none of them were feminist"...okay...

From time to time, I see some people argue that Dany can't be Azor Ahai because Azor Ahai was a man who killed his wife and such a character can't be considered a hero. So Dany couldn't be Azor Ahai because she is a hero and because such a feminist character like Dany can't be associated with Azor Ahai.

I agree that Dany is a hero, and I agree that Azor Ahai killing his wife is not the most feminist story. But I disagree with the idea that this means Dany isn't Azor Ahai, because literally all the foreshadowing points to her, she fulfills every aspect of the prophecy. Just because we as readers might think there's a moral dissonance in Dany being Azor Ahai, doesn't mean that she isn't. Whether we as readers might not like her being Azor Ahai, whether we think it's not feminist for Dany to be Azor Ahai, it doesn't change the fact that GRRM wrote all the clues pointing to her.

Also, while some people may argue that it's not feminist for Dany to be Azor Ahai because the original Azor Ahai killed his wife, other people might argue that Dany being Azor Ahai is a feminist subversion, because everybody expects the prophesied hero to be a man.

[racefortheironthrone]

I think you've answered this question before, but I can't find where you responded. For someone who wants to write an AWOIAF fanfic and wants it to be reasonably consistent with the canonical universe and characterization, which of yours and other ASOIAF analyses would you recommend reading and/or studying?

First things first, study the text. There is so much detail, so many things to mis-remember or forget. Re-read the books, highlight stuff, have asearchoficeandfire open as you write (would also help with word choice I would imagine). 

Second, in terms of analyses to read or study, it depends what you’re looking for. I tend to focus on politics and economic policy, @warsofasoiaf is excellent on military history, @poorquentyn is excellent on character arcs and the whole magical-meta plot, @goodqueenaly is very good on House Targaryen but also minor houses and law, @nobodysuspectsthebutterfly I would always defer to on anything to do with Sansa, @joannalannister is a great resource on House Lannister. This isn’t a dispositive list (I am super-slammed today and am seriously multi-taskign), but it is a good place to start. 

[horizon-verizon]

I’m already dreading the release of “A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms”, watch Targaryens haters treat Egg as their token anti incest Targaryen boy and a contrast to tyrant mad Daenerys, as if he’s not one of Daenerys’s few ancestors who have intended parallels with her.

A bald Targaryen with a cruel and sexually abusive older brother who fancied himself a dragon and died while burning, has lived among smallfolk and beggars, has a famous Kingsguard as a close companion, showed compassion for the downtrodden and tried to pass reforms to help them, damn what the nobility say. Egg is paralleled most prominently with Daenerys but his tragedy at Summerhall contrasts against Daenerys’s triumph on the Dothraki sea.

You have now made me upset, anon. 😭

[theweirwoodfiles]

Youre welcome, although your last line in your paragraph confuses me. I reblogged you with polite disagreement and curiosity, that is why we are having this conversation. Although if you don't wan't to have this discussion, you are more than welcome to block or ignore me. I just wanted to know your thoughts on the actor's interpretations, because as I said, I do feel they hold more authority than ours. They work closely with the writers and directors, and they have to keep in mind not only their characterization, but the other character's as well in order to properly act out the scene.

I think that is very fair to trust only the writers or directors. I haven't looked too closely at what they say, since its mostly the actors who get interviewed.

Yes, most of the fanbase or general audience views Rhaenyra as the protagonist and "good side" in the show. This is where it gets tricky, because those with fandom bias are going to feel a certain way of course, and then you have general audiences who likely really only know three character's names and everyone else is "the brother" or "the son", so they are only going to pick up basic traits for characters on the side they prefer. That's another reason why I personally tend to listen closely to what those involved in the show have to say.

Now onto the mushroom debacle, I'm personally from this point in the conversation going forward only going to use show canon, as it is the most relevant and recent canon. The book and show are just completely two separate entities at this point. I'm not going to get into a who has the better morality when it comes to the tb vs tg children, you have already admitted Aegon is worse than the other kids, and it's also not where my curiosity comes from. What I am curious about and trying to understand is does the tb kids level of morality prevent you from liking them? Are you unable to get past the way they treated Aemond (again, I am only using show canon for this), or is this just a case where you simply don't click with them or care about them, because thats why I brought up the scale of morality.

There is no such thing as a "pure bean" in awoiaf, unless you are like, under the age of 10. Personally, I think your interpretations and criticisms of these 4, especially Rhaena, are a little harsh, but it is pretty impossible to be completely pure in a cruel medieval world during a time of nobility and dragons. While I can't speak for every single team black fan, I think I can safely say most team black fans see these 4 characters as fairly good, or as good as you can be, espeically in comparison to others around them. And that's why you see a firm defense over them, especially when its's in response to a take about them being evil or bratty, or awful, or however you wanna call it.

Anyways, that's why I opened the conversation, I was just curious and interested in discussion on your position is all.

Every time Team Black stans talk about Rhaenyra’s bastards and the Dragon Twins as if they’re blessings upon this earth, an angel loses its wings.

Like, okay. They’re children, I’m excusing all of them up to a certain point. But they’re some of the most vicious, aggressive, cowardly, snotty brats we’ve ever seen in this franchise and pretending that they’re not is so foul.

Lucerys is a hypocritical twat that bullied the boy he grew up with because he didn’t have a dragon, but then he’s totally okay hanging out with Rhaena who doesn’t have one either. And then he pulls out a knife and blinds Aemond for no fucking reason, after his gang attacked him first, and faces zero consequences for his actions. He eventually grows up to become an even worse person by literally laughing in his cousin’s face, whom he disabled. And then he tries to boss lord Borros around by telling him that he’s obligated to ally with Rhaenyra even if there isn’t anything in him for it.

Jacaerys is also very two faced for the exact same reasons as Lucerys, with the addition of having anger management issues. Like, remember how he beats the living shit out of his little brother when they’re training at the beach, kicks him to the ground and grabs him by the throat because he is upset their uncles are better warriors than them? That’s the good future king you’re all talking about? He is already obsessed with the idea of becoming king, to the point that his own mother has to remind him that she’s actually alive and well and he would have to wait a good fucking while before his dreams come true. That’s actually so sick on his behalf. Not to mention that he very likely married Sara Snow, betraying his fiancée, in order to gain the Starks’ help, which is very dishonourable. At least Lucerys told Borros he’s betrothed and refused to marry one of his daughters to get his support, I’ll give him that.

Baela is a deranged evil girl who was ready to throw hands on sight, too. And have we forgotten that she becomes a drunkard and whoremonger who spends her money gambling in the rat pits, the places where children fight one another in King’s Landing, once she grows up, or is it wrong only when Aegon II does it?

Rhaena is an aggressive coward who seems more preoccupied with the acquisition of a dragon than her mother’s death. She didn’t have the guts to go and claim Vhagar, but she feels powerful enough to confront Aemond when she has three people backing her up.

Finally, even without taking all of their problematic traits into account, these people are so severely uninteresting and unimpressive. Lucerys does not convince Borros to side with his mother and drops dead like a fly. Joffrey gets shrugged off by Syrax and plummets to his demise. Jacaerys is immediately killed during his embarrassing attempt to fight the Triarchy, not to mention that he was the reason his youngest half siblings were captured and nearly killed because he had the brilliant idea of sending them away. Baela loses the only dragon fight she was ever part of to Aegon II and Sunfyre who were very injured by a previous fight already! And Rhaena is just… there. Doing nothing. Never avenging her husband’s death, eventually marrying a Hightower. Yikes.

Are there much more ill behaved children in ASOIAF? Yeah, for sure, but we actually acknowledge that children like Aegon II and Joffrey Baratheon are pieces of shit. But if we could like, stop glorifying these four mediocre and borderline malicious kids solely because some of you feel the need to ride the dicks of everyone who is part of Rhaenyra’s crew, that would be great. They might be children, but they’re children with shady, putting it mildly, personalities, wielding new-clear weapons of mass destruction who actively participated in a war, especially Jacaerys and Baela. They sure were victims of the world they were raised in, but they were aggressors as well. And like, this is the ASOIAF universe, nearly all of our protagonists are children. We can’t constantly apply modern day morals and coddle them forever because “OMG, they are just babies!”, unless we are ready to apply the same logic on the Targtowers, who were basically the same age as Rhaenyra and Daemon’s children.

[horizon-verizon]

It's funny how fans prefer to see this Daenerys as eternally suffering, always raped and without achieving any kind of power or affection for the life she had to live, only harmed by the evil men in her life, the one who forced her to marry and the one she married... Wait. Isn't this the narrative that TG uses with Show Alicent?

I wouldn't care as much if it didn't seem like fans are also using Daenerys not because they care about her or their situation but to attack Daeron and Dorn to sympathize more with Daemon. Curiously, the other woman who was also exchanged was also in an unknown place, canonically we know that she lived in a racist environment after her marriage and we have no evidence that her husband loved her for anything other than her political value...Those people don't say anything.

They don't want a character with layers, they want a victimized character that allows them to hate characters they don't like. Exactly the same thing that fans of Elia, Alicent and Sansa do.

The "other woman who was also exchanged" anon talks about is Myriah, who married Daeron. Her and Daenerys were both exchanged for Dorne to be enfolded into Westeros under the Westeros throne and neither can be really said to have been put into terrible, soul crushing positions or circumstances even with the socio-political unfairness of noblewomen being used in marriages for any number of reasons in Westeros.

This anon breaks down how and why Daenerys, becoming Princess (consort) of Dorne was likely not the horror that some fans paint it as in their belief that she and Daemon were in love AND their possible affections were like, one-in-a-thousand type of love: LINK.

[horizon-verizon]

Sigh... That comparison falls apart when you consider why these marriages happened, how they were arranged, and the treatment of the women involved.

Daeron II’s marriage arrangement was part of a long-term diplomatic strategy to unite Dorne with Westeros. It was a mutual agreement between two ruling powers, reinforcing stability rather than enforcing submission. Daenerys was given an established political role as Princess of Dorne, integrating her into Dornish governance. She was not just a wife. She was a political figure in her own right. Viserys, on the other hand, wasn’t making a strategic alliance. He was making a desperate bargain for military power. His arrangement with Khal Drogo was purely transactional. He sold Dany to a warlord in exchange for an army. Unlike Daeron’s Daenerys, who held status and security, Viserys' Danys had no agency, no role, and no guaranteed protection in the Dothraki hierarchy. The treatment of both Daenerys is also completely different. Daeron’s Daenerys was respected; her marriage was a political partnership between equals, and as far as we know, she was treated with dignity. She was married to a prince, not a warlord. Meanwhile, Viserys’ Daenerys was handed over without choice and reduced to an object in a power exchange. Khal Drogo did not see her as a political figure or equal. She was simply a slavewife by Dothraki standards, with no initial support system in his khalasar. The outcomes of these marriages only reinforce the divide. Daeron’s marriage arrangement was a political success. Dorne was peacefully integrated into the 7K. Viserys, on the other hand, got nothing. He died before Dany could even fulfill the deal he brokered. The only person who truly benefited from that marriage was Dany herself, and only because she adapted, survived, and built her own path to power.

Before others say it: Daenaerys Targaryen the Dornish-married princess was a poliitcal figure in that she was both critical to two states' diplomatic connection as well as for her act of making the Water Gardens happen--forever changing class relations in Dorne up unitl the present day...esp for how and why she does it when she tell sher son to forever think about common folk.

Your points of nuance is defining, anon, and yeah; perhaps we as a fandom get too carried away with the horror of contemplating a life where political marriage means severely affecting one's autonomy.

[horizon-verizon]

I think...there’s no clear evidence about whether Daenerys was happy or unhappy in her marriage to Maron. The text never explores her personal feelings, and there are no records of her resisting the match, suffering in Dorne, or expressing resentment. Given how maesters recorded instances of forced or unhappy marriages among Targaryen women (such as Rhaena’s ordeal with Maegor), it is reasonable to assume that if Daenerys had openly opposed her marriage or faced mistreatment, it would have been noted. The absence of such records suggests that, while her personal feelings are unknown, her marriage did not result in scandal or misery. Instead, it was part of Daeron’s long-term strategy to peacefully integrate Dorne into the Seven Kingdoms, and by all accounts, it succeeded. Unlike many politically arranged unions that led to strife or eventual rebellion, Daenerys’ marriage ensured stability, reinforcing her role as a respected political figure within Dornish society rather than a foreign pawn. Now, when it comes to Daeron’s actions, he was no better or worse than other noblemen in Westeros who used family members to secure alliances. However, what set him apart was the scale of his ambition. He was not merely strengthening a noble house but unifying an entire kingdom through diplomacy. His "gamble" paid off in lasting political stability. Daenerys’ position as Princess of Dorne granted her a clear political role rather than leaving her isolated or powerless in a foreign court with no real influence. In contrast to characters like Sansa, who was repeatedly treated as a bargaining chip, Daenerys' placement in Dorne appears to have been one of integration rather than exile. Yes, she was “used” for political purposes, but she wasn’t discarded, and her role in Dorne appears to have been relatively stable. That said, the rumors linking Daenerys to Daemon likely carried social consequences. While they had no direct impact on the rebellion or her political standing, they may have subtly influenced how she was perceived at the Dornish court. Dorne had only recently joined Westeros, and some Dornish nobles remained skeptical of Targaryen influence. If whispers of a past "love" between Daenerys and Daemon persisted, it could have created social friction, making her integration more difficult. Even if there was never any real suspicion of her loyalty, perception alone could have shaped how she was treated by Dornish lords who viewed her as an outsider. While she was never politically linked to the Blackfyre cause in later years, suggesting her marriage remained secure, it is not far-fetched to consider that such rumors may have caused personal or social strain. At the same time, these rumors likely mattered more to Daemon’s legacy than to Daenery's actual life. Associating him with a tragic love story made him more than just a failed usurper. It elevated him to a romanticized figure, one whose cause carried emotional weight beyond mere ambition. Just as historical narratives tend to paint Daemon as a noble warrior rather than a warmonger, the idea of a doomed love only strengthened his mythos. His supporters would have seen it as further proof that he was the rightful king, not only in lineage but in fate, chosen by blood, battle, and even love. This rumored romance with Daenerys only added another layer reinforcing the idea that he, not Daeron, was the true Targaryen king in every way (the audacity!), and Daeron took all that from him. While this had no bearing on Daenerys’ political trajectory, it contributed to the broader framing of the Blackfyre Rebellion as more than just a military uprising; it was cast as a fight for a lost legacy, one in which even "love" was said to be on Daemon’s side 🙄.

Another anon, an earlier one, has said some of the things you have said so Iwill link my response to them bc some is what I would have said here. I basically agree.

If I sound too short with my responses and not giving all my thoughts on that first post, I am on my way home on public transportation and it's hot.

You bring up pretty great points about the consequences for Daenerys, her story of integration, and Daeron II's conditions of using her. I suspect you and the other anon are trying to argue against an uncritical lens of Daemon Blackfyre stanning / the working of more propaganda. AND ITS IMPORTANT THAT WE DO SO, especially coming off of what F&B tells us.

[horizon-verizon]

Daenerys was more than just a "lost love" in Daemon’s story. She was a key political figure in her own right, central to the unification of Dorne and Westeros. As Princess of Dorne, she held an established political role, and her legacy endured beyond the personal grievances of those who later sought to weaponize her marriage in the Blackfyre cause. Daemon himself never publicly protested Daenerys’ marriage. His supporters later framed it as another injustice against him, but if Daenerys had been truly central to his ambitions. If he had been in love with her or considered her essential to his rule, he might have protested or rejected another bride. Instead, he married Rohanne and had several sons and daughters, so we can say that Daenerys was never as crucial to him as later narratives claimed. In fact, Daemon’s rebellion came eight years after Daenerys’ marriage. The rebellion put Daemon's family at risk. His widow, Rohanne, suffered immensely, and his children were left to fight in subsequent Blackfyre rebellions, doomed to repeat the cycle of exile and conflict. Poor Rohanne lost multiple sons in the Blackfyre conflicts and was forced to flee to Tyrosh with bitchAegor.

Well, there ya go. Kinda was trying to be polite or whatever in my first post about them way back but agreed.

[horizon-verizon]

"He withdrew from courtly life, rejected personal ambition, and built his identity around faith and chastity."

In a way, Harwin too demonstrated a quiet form of devotion. As heir to Harrenhal, he was expected to marry and secure a political alliance, yet he never did. Instead, both in the book and the show, he remained devoted to Princess Rhaenyra, maintaining a visible presence in her household and staying loyal to her until his death. His decision to remain unmarried, despite the expectations, reflects a private, principled form of commitment. He did not openly challenge the political order, but he also refused to participate in its fiction. He chose to stay, to love, and to serve, without recognition, reward, or protection. Where Bonifer removed himself from court entirely, Harwin remained close, quietly accepting the risks of forbidden proximity. He just loved Rhaenyra.

Daemon Targaryen’s path was more openly defiant. Married at sixteen to Rhea, he had no say in the matter and rejected it on every level...emotionally, physically, and politically. He never consummated the union, thereby denying House Royce any chance at a Targaryen heir. While some frame his actions as arrogance, they can also be read as the only form of resistance available to a young man forced into a life he never chose. Later, Daemon reclaimed his agency by securing his own marriages, first to Laena Velaryon, then to Rhaenyra, both made on his terms. In Laena’s case, he went so far as to kill a Braavosi suitor in a duel to secure her hand. His choices reflect a man who, once given control, acted decisively and unapologetically.

Daemon Blackfyre’s story, despite its romantic framing, lacks the personal cost or emotional risk that defines the others. His supposed heartbreak was never expressed, never acted upon, and never cost him anything until it became politically useful. Unlike Bonifer, Harwin, and Daemon, who took personal and emotional risks, Daemon Blackfyre conformed until ambition, not love, drove him to rebel.

MUAH! Perfect analysis, anon!

To the storage bin, no notes.

[horizon-verizon]

ehh....Daemon "used" Daenerys, too. The Blackfyre faction used Daenerys as a symbol to enhance his image. As far as we know, she had no personal involvement in the rebellion, yet her name and supposed past with Daemon became part of the narrative surrounding his claim. She had no choice in how her image was used, no voice in the matter, and yet she was turned into a passive symbol of what Daemon had supposedly lost: his crown, his birthright, and even the woman who was “meant” for him. The Blackfyre supporters weaponized her image to serve their cause, not as an active participant, but as a tool in political warfare. Whether the rumors of their romance were true or not, they didn’t matter. What mattered was how they could be used to reinforce the idea that Daemon had been robbed of everything, further fueling the resentment against Daeron. And it worked! This made Daemon more than just a rival claimant; it turned him into a tragic figure.

Anon responds to this post.

Yes, the AWOIAF text explicitly states that Daemon's supporters "claimed" Daenerys loved Daemon and they were unduly separated. I think, anon, you're arguing against the claimed IMPOSSIBILITY of Daenerys having a "true" marriage with Maron on the basis of her having loved Daemon and Daeron was just a meanie who tore a lovestruck couple apart AND/OR PRIMARILY that we should not rely on the blanket words of the claimants in the text. I agree. That is not the "real" story, the real story is of propaganda & hypermasculinization for what another anon calls "warrior-king, strong military ruler" over a "diplomatic", "soft" one. Yes, it is true that as part of that hypermasculinization, the silent person that is Daenerys Targaryen became the figure for Daemon's forced loss of a sexual partner/heir-bringer (this a blow to his "dignity"). She is no longer real apart from Daemon and his campaign, even in the histories.

[horizon-verizon]

GRRM literally wrote that Daeron II “uses his sister to make an alliance with the prince of Dorne”. “Uses his sister”.... How is he better than Hoster Tully, Rickard Stark or Tywin Lannister in that regard ??

Nothing in F&B indicates that Daenerys was happy in her arranged marriage. How is it difficult for people to recognize that a child bride in love with another, who was forced to marry a man FIFTEEN years her senior in a FOREIGN LAND she didn’t know by her brother, the king, might have been (most likely) unhappy ? Since when a Targaryen woman forced in a marriage has ever been happy ?

Small correction: Daeron, his sister Daenerys, Maron and Mariah Martell are not in F&B. F&B ends with the end of the Red Keep's siege by some Kingsguard and Unwin Peake's people, when Aegon III and Viserys (II) were both still children.

To be fair, in AWoIaF (where you actually find the story of Daenerys, Daeron II, etc. specifically what anon is talking about), the book's passages about the Targs inner private lives or possibly true thoughts are not nearly as detailed and involved as FB, even when FB (mainly the Dance portion, the other parts except maybe the Conquerors) is clearly a document of specific biased sources.

We really only get the fewest of lines about Daenerys and it's about her marriage, possible love for Daemon Blackfyre, dancing with Maron, and her words to her son about caring for the most vulnerable after her husband but the Water Gardens for her. So there is a possibility that she managed to form a connection with said arranged husband, just as other girls and women in Westeros manage to. Not ALL, but we don't have the stats either. Most of not all noblewomen and girls are in some way "used" when they are married off, it's the name of the game. This doesn't mean that they do not form actual and even genuine relationships with those men, but it depends on other circumstances other than just having been arranged to marry them. In the case of a girl already in love with someone else, however, most likely she didn't have a "genuine" or close relationship with Maron, yes. IF she didn't, there's still be a chance she wouldn't bond with Maron very well bc of the age difference and stranger-dude of it all.