#being king takes up precious faffing about time

[problemswithbooks]

So, a few things:

In a monarchy, which Westeros is and has been for THOUSANDS of years the king's words is the law. Not that of his predecessors, but of the present ruling monarch. Viserys named his 8 year old daughter as his heir, he varied from custom yes, but never broke law. HE IS THE LAW.

While, yes a King/Queen is the 'law', that doesn't mean they can do anything they want. They maybe the law but if a monarch fucks up or makes choices that gets them on the bad side of their subjects, particularly their Lords, they will face consequences. Case in point, Aerys II, who fucked up so bad that he caused a huge rebellion and lost the Targaryens the Iron Throne.

Was Ned and Rober going against the 'law'--sure, but it doesn't matter. Aerys rule was so bad that he lost support of the Lords. Some stayed with him due to a mix of fear, and loyalty to his son, but in the end being the 'law' did not matter. Robert won and Aerys was killed by his own King's Guard.

Now, Viserys was not anywhere near as bad, but using the idea that because he's King he can do whatever he pleases without consequence isn't as strong of an argument as you think. Yes he can name his daughter as his Heir if he wants but that doesn't mean that won't cause issues, or that everyone will except it. Viserys was himself made King because the Lords preferred him over Rhaenys being a proxy Queen for her young son (it was never a vote between Viserys and Rhaenys, but Viserys and Laenor). Choosing Rhaenyra has Heir was always going to have some push back even before he had sons, and it does not appear Viserys did much to lessen or ease the path for her.

Viserys also broke custom by marrying Alicent, a daughter of a second son and not a ruling lord. A woman that could not give him anything of importance, not money, not a fleet, not any great allegiance. He married her simply because loved her. Being the second time he broke CUSTOM for a woman he loved. Rhaenyra and Alicent.

Viserys marrying Alicent wasn't against custom, in fact I'd argue it was actually a pretty good political move on his part. Sure, Otto was a second son, and the marriage doesn't necessarily earn him any great alliance, but the Hightowers are a rather powerful family, since they control the second most populace city in Westeros, that also has the Citadel and at the time the main house of Worship for the continents biggest religion.

On top of that Otto and Alicent have been dedicated, loyal servants of the crown since his grandfather's rule. In a way you could see this marriage as political reward for that dedication/loyalty to house Targaryen that they showed at the time.

Alicent also has a benefit that Laena didn't--her age. As much as some people hate on Viserys for remarrying and having more kids, it makes total sense. His grandfather had a many children yet none lived to actually sit the throne. If Rhaenyra died, which is always a possibility, the only back up he had was Daemon who was incredibly unpopular with the Lords and was very impulsive. Marrying someone that can have children ASAP is a smart move, which only backfired because shockingly every child he had lived (up until the Dance).

Even if Viserys allowed his 16 year old daughter to be wed to her 6 year old brother, you think that would prevent war? You people are simply stupid if you think so. Aegon (Otto & Alicent) could easily imprison Rhaenyra and simply put it out as she died, or simply even just end her life. And obviously with their children being young(if they had any, very unlikely) Aegon could crown himself as king rather than prince consort. And do you really think Alicent would let her precious son be king consort to a wanton woman? We see this with Jaehaerys' children Daenerys and Aemon.

This is the main thing I wanted to talk about--this paragraph is complete fan-fiction and is not supported by anything in the text.

Where in the story does it in anyway say that Otto, Alicent or Aegon II would have locked up and secretly killed Rhaenyra if the two had been wed? Yes, Viserys, weirdly, gets annoyed that Otto/Alicent want their 'blood' on the throne, but that doesn't mean he thought they would kill Rhaenyra if he married them. Frankly, they would have no reason to do so anyway, since any children Rhaenyra and Aegon had would also be of their 'blood', so they would get what they wanted regardless.

The whole, 'Alicent wouldn't let her son be married to a wanton woman' line doesn't make any sense either since that accusation came after Viserys turned down the idea of wedding Aegon and Rhaenyra together. If Viserys had agreed to the marriage the Hightowers might not have bothered to try and smear Rhaenyra this way since, again they were getting what they wanted, their grandchildren on the Iron Throne.

Am I saying the Hightowers would never have done this? No. But it is disingenuous to act as if it is fact that they would--as if it is said in the book this was totally their plan. I could easily say they would have simply let Rhaenyra rule and everything would have been peaceful and perfect, but that would be equally unfounded and simply something I made up.

Also, if the Hightowers had enacted this plan it does in fact not lead to war, so your first sentence is wrong. Would it have been cruel and still ended with Rhaenyra dying, yes, but it would have in fact meant the Dance didn't happen. The only thing I could see is Daemon trying to over throw Aegon, but without the support Rhaenyra brought to the table, it's unlikely he would have gotten very far. The Velaryons might have helped him, but both Rhaenys and Corlys seem hesitant to go to war unless absolutely necessary. Unless Daemon had damning proof the Hightowers killed Rhaenyra, I doubt they'd join him in such a one sided fight (since they'd lack Rhaenyra and her sons' dragons as well as access to Dragonstone to acquire more).

Right, Rhaenyra insisting for Aemond to be questioned sharply is mad but Alicent asking for a five year old's eye to be cut out is perfectly sane behaviour, yes? Be serious right now. Do you really think Viserys out of all people would let his son be tortured? Rhaenyra knew of that, she wanted Aemond to admit that his mother, Alicent has been spreading rumours abt easy as that. It wasn't just for the insults either, Luke's nose was broken, Jace was hit in the head. And Joff was thrown into dragon droppings.

Again, this is baseless. Fire and Blood is written like a history book. We do not get inside the characters heads. You have no way of knowing if Rhaenyra's threat to have Aemond tortured was just for show or not. It's also rather confusing because the rest of what you say makes it sound as if she did want him tortured to get info on Alicent spreading rumors and as revenge for Luke's broken nose, Jace getting hit in the head and Joff for being shoved in poop. So was it a bluff or wasn't it?

Also if what Rhaenyra said was a bluff, why is what Alicent said not also a bluff? Viserys would be just as unlikely to order his grandson's eye taken out. Could Alicent not have said what she did to try and defect Rhaenyra's demand for Aemond to be tortured?

As for the whole Aemond Vs. Rhaenyra's kids debacle, frankly it never made much sense to me. It doesn't make any sense that these very young children who are heirs to the throne on both sides were not being watched, and were just wandering around. Anon asked why Luke has a dagger, but the biggest question is really why any of these very young children, particularly the three year old were without supervision. They should all have nurse maids and guards. Also, why did Joff go get his brothers and not his mother, a gaurd or any adult? Why didn't his brothers?

They didn't because Martin wanted Aemond to lose an eye and cause a bigger rift between the Blacks and Greens. It's a poorly set up scene, that only happens for plot reasons. Frankly it makes everyone involved look like fools.

I don't know how fighting for something that is yours, and have been for over TWENTY YEARS is seen as entitlement rather advocating and defending her own right? There is someone who is portrayed as entitled, however. Alicent Hightower. Who thought simply because she popped out the King's son, means he should become a king. And this son who thought simply because he was a man with a cock, he was more fit to rule than a daughter without a cock.

They're literally all entitled--they're royalty. Rhaenyra is only Heir because her father said so. No one voted for her nor didn't she conquer the continent like Aegon did. Sure, the throne was hers, but again it's not as if she earned it while Aegon II didn't. Neither of them did anything that made them worthy to be Rulers. In both cases it comes down to who their father was.

Alicent probably did feel entitled to have her child on the throne, but again, it's no worse or better then Rhaenyra's entitlement. Culturally, it makes sense she felt that was what she was owed--getting your blood on the throne is why people want to marry a monarch. If Viserys had married Laena and she'd have had a son she would have felt the same, as would the Valeyrons. That is the socially accepted reward for having children (in this case sons) for a Ruler in western based cultures. That's not any weirder or more entitled then Rhaenyra considering the throne hers simply because her father named her heir and she's first born.

As for Aegon II thinking he deserved it because he had a cock, there's conflicting stories on that. It's just as likely that the story where he didn't want the throne and only took it after he was told he, his siblings and his children would be killed is true. Sure, after he got the throne he wasn't willing to give it up (few people will give up power like that once they have it) but that doesn't mean he felt he deserved it because he had a cock.

To be honest it's not necessary 100% for sure that all the Hightowers believed he deserved it because Aegon was a boy either. Did they use Aegon's gender to say he was the rightful Heir due to tradition? Yes, but that is also their only political leverage they can use to promote him over Rhaenyra. I mean, look at any modern political campaign--many candidates say things they clearly don't believe based on past actions, but have instead adopted it because it gives them more support to beat their opponent. Not saying this is how the Greens felt, just that given how the book is written there is no way to 100% be certain they felt Aegon II deserved the throne because he's man, or if they were just doing everything they could to advance their political power and that was their best avenue of attack. To be honest, if they were so power hungry, you could argue they might have usurped Rhaenyra even if all of Alicent's children had been girls.

Personally, I've always perceived Rhaenyra as an entitled brat. That was sort of how she was portrayed in the book. Daemon was pretty nasty as well, as he groomed Rhaenyra. He was teaching her "how best to touch a man to bring him pleasure," if Mushroom is to be believed.

I am inclined to believe Mushroom.

I think most of Rhaenyra's behaviors at Daemon's fault, but I do think that Rhaenyra is mad as she wanted to torture her little brother for calling her bastard children 'bastards'. That isn't sane behavior, and nothing really excuses it. Aemond really was defending himself.

Alicent should have asked for Rhaenyra's boys to be swatted on the hands wooden spoon a good few times, not an eye. (Lucerys should not have had a dagger. Why would a child need a dagger?)

I don't think anyone thought Rhaenyra was still heir after Aegon was born. Viserys literally broke the laws of the entire realm for her.

War was inevitable, and there was nothing Rhaenyra could have done aside from marrying her infant brother.

I don't know if you've been asked something like this before. I also have no idea if the background to my question makes sense, but do you think there was any way Rhaenyra could have become Queen without breaking laws, murdering kin, and or bloodshed?

Who started breaking laws? —The Greens

Who started murdering kin?—The Greens

Who started bloodshed?— The Greens

In a monarchy, which Westeros is and has been for THOUSANDS of years the king's words is the law. Not that of his predecessors, but of the present ruling monarch.

Viserys named his 8 year old daughter as his heir, he varied from custom yes, but never broke law. HE IS THE LAW.

Viserys also broke custom by marrying Alicent, a daughter of a second son and not a ruling lord. A woman that could not give him anything of importance, not money, not a fleet, not any great allegiance. He married her simply because loved her. Being the second time he broke CUSTOM for a woman he loved. Rhaenyra and Alicent.

Even if Viserys allowed his 16 year old daughter to be wed to her 6 year old brother, you think that would prevent war? You people are simply stupid if you think so. Aegon (Otto & Alicent) could easily imprison Rhaenyra and simply put it out as she died, or simply even just end her life. And obviously with their children being young(if they had any, very unlikely) Aegon could crown himself as king rather than prince consort. And do you really think Alicent would let her precious son be king consort to a wanton woman? We see this with Jaehaerys' children Daenerys and Aemon.

I don't think anyone thought Rhaenyra was still heir after Aegon was born. Viserys literally broke the laws of the entire realm for her.

The Blacks? Literally many at court more than even the Greens supported Rhaenyra as heir. Even afterwards, during the war Rhaenyra had much more supporters than Aegon, even after her death.

Rhaenyra is mad as she wanted to torture her little brother for calling her bastard children 'bastards'. That isn't sane behavior, and nothing really excuses it. Aemond really was defending himself. Alicent should have asked for Rhaenyra's boys to be swatted on the hands wooden spoon a good few times, not an eye.

Right, Rhaenyra insisting for Aemond to be questioned sharply is mad but Alicent asking for a five year old's eye to be cut out is perfectly sane behaviour, yes? Be serious right now. Do you really think Viserys out of all people would let his son be tortured? Rhaenyra knew of that, she wanted Aemond to admit that his mother, Alicent has been spreading rumours abt easy as that.

It wasn't just for the insults either, Luke's nose was broken, Jace was hit in the head. And Joff was thrown into dragon droppings.

Afraid that the boy would raise the alarm, Prince Aemond shouted at him to be quiet, then shoved him backward into a pile of dragon droppings.

Aemond fought back, breaking Luke’s nose with a punch, then wrenching the sword from Joff’s hands and cracking it across the back of Jace’s head, driving him to his knees. As the younger boys scrambled back away from him, bloody and bruised, the prince began to mock them, laughing and calling them “the Strongs.”

Jace at least was old enough to grasp the insult. He flew at Aemond once again, but the older boy began pummeling him savagely…until Luke, coming to the rescue of his brother, drew his dagger and slashed Aemond across the face, taking out his right eye.

Aemond was TEN. Jace was SIX, Luke FIVE, Joff only THREE.

A 10 year old Pummeling (= boxing, repeatedly puching) and 6 year old is a perfectly good thing to do.

Lucerys should not have had a dagger. Why would a child need a dagger?

Because this child, is a prince? Almost everyone had daggers at that time, Kings, Queens, Princes, Princesses, Ladies, Lords, Commonborn, every one had daggers. They carried it for personal protection, even Lucerys.

Не was teaching her "how best to touch a man to bring him pleasure," if Mushroom is to be believed. I am inclined to believe Mushroom.

Even then, if Rhaenyra is such an 'entitled brat' why would she want to please the son of a steward of a Lord. And that too, not even a major Lord. Why would she want to please a no-one that became a someone because of HER.

Personally, I've always perceived Rhaenyra as an entitled brat. That was sort of how she was portrayed in the book.

She was portrayed as spoiled, yes. How could she not be? She came after many miscarriages and stillbirth, many other losses in the family. To her parents she was their first daughter, both of them motherless on their own. To Baelon, she was his first granddaughter after the loss of this wife, son, aemon and the rest of his siblings. To Jaehaerys and Alysanne, she was probably the first great-grandchild they met, she came after they lost most of their children (+Jocelyn who was as good as daughter, Rhaenys and probably never met her children till the feast and tourney of 98). She was a light in a time where her family was sinking from the inside.

I don't know how fighting for something that is yours, and have been for over TWENTY YEARS is seen as entitlement rather advocating and defending her own right?

There is someone who is portrayed as entitled, however. Alicent Hightower. Who thought simply because she popped out the King's son, means he should become a king. And this son who thought simply because he was a man with a cock, he was more fit to rule than a daughter without a cock.

Why should I explain the basic of things to strangers as if they're 5 and lack comprehension? Lol😭

[vdbstore-blog]

New Post has been published on Vintage Designer Handbags Online | Vintage Preowned Chanel Luxury Designer Brands Bags & Accessories

New Post has been published on http://vintagedesignerhandbagsonline.com/like-acid-rain-the-trumps-were-hard-to-avoid-in-80s-new-york-fashion/

Like acid rain, the Trumps were hard to avoid in 80s New York | Fashion

Each time Donald Trump Jr speaks his brains on Twitter, I am reminded that you grew up in New York in the 1980s. Do you have any memories of the Trump family you could share with us?

Marina, west London

Marina from west London, you are Bill Paxton. And I am an old lady in a rocking chair, hiding a precious treasure. “Are you ready, Hadley?” you ask. “Ready … to go back to New York in the 1980s?”

“It’s been so long!” I protest. “Just tell us what you remember,” you say soothingly.

And so we leave this Titanic analogy (or is it straight-up cosplay?) and go back … back to my early encounters with la famille Trump. Paging James Cameron: stop faffing around with Avatar 17 and send us some CGI stat!

Growing up in Manhattan in the 80s meant that it was near-impossible to avoid the Trumps entirely. They were like acid rain, or Leona Helmsley – part of the 80s New York atmosphere. And for a while, I succeeded in suppressing the memory that I, for example, shared a primary school teacher with Donald Trump Jr. That’s right, Donnie and I learned our ABCs from the same blessed woman – well, one of us learned them, anyway. Because Donnie has indeed been “speaking his brain” on Twitter, and my memories have been unstaunched. But it is a decidedly unsettling experience to have not encountered someone since they were six years old and to realise they have regressed intellectually since then.

Last week, Donnie tweeted a photo of his daughter holding her Halloween candy and added the unimprovable caption: “I’m going to take half of Chloe’s candy tonight & give it to some kid who sat at home. It’s never to [sic] early to teach her about socialism.” Donnie, Donnie, Donnie. You (or one of your servants) had just taken Chloe out and literally got free handouts. Remember thinking before speaking? I’m pretty sure we learned about it between music and nap time on Monday afternoons. Also, I would like to say, for the record, that other students of the lovely teacher I’ll call Miss B learned the difference between “to” and “too”.

Fatherly advice … Donald Trump Jr. Photograph: Portland Press Herald/via Getty Images

Donnie has also been tweeting smugly about “Hollywood creeps” after the Harvey Weinstein scandal, apparently unaware that his own father was caught on tape bragging about grabbing women by the vagina. (There’s another lesson for you, Chloe: let’s listen to some of grandpa’s comments and learn all about sexual assault!) Donnie, must I be the one to break it to you that your own mother gave a sworn deposition that your father raped her? Ivana later insisted she hadn’t meant rape “in the criminal sense”, while the best spin Trump’s own special counsel could put on this last year was “[Ivana] felt raped emotionally”.

Donnie, you probably won’t be surprised to learn, was not known on the Manhattan schools network as the brightest spark in the toolbox. Indeed, I can’t say for certain that he was the inspiration for Ralph Wiggum, with Daddy-pleasing issues to boot, but I also can’t say for certain he wasn’t. Ivanka, on the other hand, who went to the school across the street from my high school, was always described to me as “actually pretty nice”, and the unspoken but heavily alluded to words at the end of that sentence were “for a Trump”, so make of that what you will.

Anyone who ever picked up a copy of Vanity Fair or Spy magazine from the 1990s will know that the blustering, self-aggrandising narcissist who currently occupies the Oval Office was a blustering, self-aggrandising narcissist and wannabe bigshot back then. My father was tasked, in 1991, with helping Galeries Lafayette, a French retailer, rent space in Trump Tower. Even though this was explained to Trump several times, he somehow didn’t understand that Galeries Lafayette was not Hermès until the store was literally in front of his face. Plus ça change, eh, Trump watchers?

My father also went to college with Trump’s older brother, Freddy, and was friendly with him. I used to love to look through my father’s college yearbook, and there he was, “Frederick Trump, from Jamaica Estates, NY”. According to my dad, Freddy was nice, really smart, easygoing, low-key. He was also, apparently, fond of his family, and he occasionally had his scrappy brother Donald, who was eight years younger, come to stay with him at Lehigh University.

Alas, Donald does not seem to have felt the same familial loyalty. Freddy, an alcoholic, died at 43, and when his father, Fred Sr, died 18 years later, it was discovered that the latter’s will, which Donald helped to draft, specifically cut Freddy’s children and descendants out of the family inheritance. Freddy had a grandchild who suffered from cerebral palsy and the Trump family had helped to pay for his care. But when Freddy’s children sued over their grandfather’s will, Donald promptly withdrew the medical benefits the baby desperately needed.

“I was angry because they sued,” Donald said to the New York Times last year, when asked about this incident, as if that was, I don’t know, justification for depriving an infant of medical care? The final outcome of this charming saga is unknown but one thing we can say for certain is the US is truly blessed to have this guy overseeing its healthcare plans.

So there we are. Those are my hot insights into the Trump family based on my ships-in-the-night relationship with them: Donnie is a fool, Ivanka can at least fake being almost normal and Donald is always worse than you think he can be. Granted, you wouldn’t exactly call any of these revelations, but one of the problems with the Trumps is that there is no depth: what you see is exactly what you get.

Post your questions to Hadley Freeman, Ask Hadley, The Guardian, Kings Place, 90 York Way, London N1 9GU. Email ask.hadley@theguardian.com.

Source link