#honestly I quite liked the asoiaf books I read

[aethersea]

another thing fantasy writers should keep track of is how much of their worldbuilding is aesthetic-based. it's not unlike the sci-fi hardness scale, which measures how closely a story holds to known, real principles of science. The Martian is extremely hard sci-fi, with nearly every detail being grounded in realistic fact as we know it; Star Trek is extremely soft sci-fi, with a vaguely plausible "space travel and no resource scarcity" premise used as a foundation for the wildest ideas the writers' room could come up with. and much as Star Trek fuckin rules, there's nothing wrong with aesthetic-based fantasy worldbuilding!

(sidenote we're not calling this 'soft fantasy' bc there's already a hard/soft divide in fantasy: hard magic follows consistent rules, like "earthbenders can always and only bend earth", and soft magic follows vague rules that often just ~feel right~, like the Force. this frankly kinda maps, but I'm not talking about just the magic, I'm talking about the worldbuilding as a whole.

actually for the purposes of this post we're calling it grounded vs airy fantasy, bc that's succinct and sounds cool.)

a great example of grounded fantasy is Dungeon Meshi: the dungeon ecosystem is meticulously thought out, the plot is driven by the very realistic need to eat well while adventuring, the story touches on both social and psychological effects of the whole 'no one dies forever down here' situation, the list goes on. the worldbuilding wants to be engaged with on a mechanical level and it rewards that engagement.

deliberately airy fantasy is less common, because in a funny way it's much harder to do. people tend to like explanations. it takes skill to pull off "the world is this way because I said so." Narnia manages: these kids fall into a magic world through the back of a wardrobe, befriend talking beavers who drink tea, get weapons from Santa Claus, dance with Bacchus and his maenads, and sail to the edge of the world, without ever breaking suspension of disbelief. it works because every new thing that happens fits the vibes. it's all just vibes! engaging with the worldbuilding on a mechanical level wouldn't just be futile, it'd be missing the point entirely.

the reason I started off calling this aesthetic-based is that an airy story will usually lean hard on an existing aesthetic, ideally one that's widely known by the target audience. Lewis was drawing on fables, fairy tales, myths, children's stories, and the vague idea of ~medieval europe~ that is to this day our most generic fantasy setting. when a prince falls in love with a fallen star, when there are giants who welcome lost children warmly and fatten them up for the feast, it all fits because these are things we'd expect to find in this story. none of this jars against what we've already seen.

and the point of it is to be wondrous and whimsical, to set the tone for the story Lewis wants to tell. and it does a great job! the airy worldbuilding serves the purposes of the story, and it's no less elegant than Ryōko Kui's elaborately grounded dungeon. neither kind of worldbuilding is better than the other.

however.

you do have to know which one you're doing.

the whole reason I'm writing this is that I saw yet another long, entertaining post dragging GRRM for absolute filth. asoiaf is a fun one because on some axes it's pretty grounded (political fuck-around-and-find-out, rumors spread farther than fact, fastest way to lose a war is to let your people starve, etc), but on others it's entirely airy (some people have magic Just Cause, the various peoples are each based on an aesthetic/stereotype/cliché with no real thought to how they influence each other as neighbors, the super-long seasons have no effect on ecology, etc).

and again! none of this is actually bad! (well ok some of those stereotypes are quite bigoted. but other than that this isn't bad.) there's nothing wrong with the season thing being there to highlight how the nobles are focused on short-sighted wars for power instead of storing up resources for the extremely dangerous and inevitable winter, that's a nice allegory, and the looming threat of many harsh years set the narrative tone. and you can always mix and match airy and grounded worldbuilding – everyone does it, frankly it's a necessity, because sooner or later the answer to every worldbuilding question is "because the author wanted it to be that way." the only completely grounded writing is nonfiction.

the problem is when you pretend that your entirely airy worldbuilding is actually super duper grounded. like, for instance, claiming that your vibes-based depiction of Medieval Europe (Gritty Edition) is completely historical, and then never even showing anyone spinning. or sniffing dismissively at Tolkien for not detailing Aragorn's tax policy, and then never addressing how a pre-industrial grain-based agricultural society is going years without harvesting any crops. (stored grain goes bad! you can't even mouse-proof your silos, how are you going to deal with mold?) and the list goes on.

the man went up on national television and invited us to engage with his worldbuilding mechanically, and then if you actually do that, it shatters like spun sugar under the pressure. doesn't he realize that's not the part of the story that's load-bearing! he should've directed our focus to the political machinations and extensive trope deconstruction, not the handwavey bit.

point is, as a fantasy writer there will always be some amount of your worldbuilding that boils down to 'because I said so,' and there's nothing wrong with that. nor is there anything wrong with making that your whole thing – airy worldbuilding can be beautiful and inspiring. but you have to be aware of what you're doing, because if you ask your readers to engage with the worldbuilding in gritty mechanical detail, you had better have some actual mechanics to show them.

[yannisdesk]

I am simultaneously reading The Iliad and The Song of Achilles. It is quite a wild trip, though I am thoroughly enjoying both; but, I want to say something...

I feel like a lot the debate surrounding TSoA is the result of people misunderstanding it's intentions.

I would understand some of the opinions towards TSoA in regards to Iliad accuracy if Madeline Miller did the thing that a lot of Greek Mythology retelling/reworking authors did back in the day, and pretended as if her version of the story was more "accurate" or the "true" version of the myth. But (as far as I can tell) that isn't the case. She's pretty upfront about the fact that this is just another version of Achilles' story using her creative license as an author to create a different take on the narrative using the knowledge she obtained while pursuing her classics degree.

I absolutely do think it's a problem when members of the TSoA fandom try to claim that is the end-all-be-all of Achilles' story, because it isn't. For example, TSoA portrays Achilles as being monogamous-leaning and pretty straightforwardly homosexual (using modern terms here for convenience, I know this is not how Ancient Greeks actually thought about sexuality.) While in mythology, Achilles is more along the lines of bisexual and non-monogamous. Though, the nature of mythology, especially Greek Mythology, is that there is no absolute canon and everything is up for interpretation, so again, that doesn't make TSoA bad by default.

I tend to look at TSoA primarily as a love story before anything else. Honestly, it's a love story about Achilles x Patroclus before it's even an Iliad retelling, half of the book takes place before the war even starts. The tropes and logic of romance novels are going to be present over others that would be expected of an Iliad narrative. I've seen a lot of criticism pointed towards TSoA because it focuses "too much" on Patrochilles and not enough on other characters, but that should be expected, because it's ultimately about the love shared between Achilles and Patroclus. It's kind of like the difference between reading a romance that takes place during medieval Europe, and reading A Song of Ice & Fire. War may happen in the romance, and ASOIAF may have elements of romance in it, but at the end of the day, you're reading them for very different reasons.

Now one thing that can and should be criticized is its treatment of female characters. Thetis and Deidamia are done so fucking dirty and its honestly infuriating. I hear Circe is done better in this regard and I hope so.

[derangedthots]

I was so surprised to read on here and the notes left on your fics that you have yet to read Fire and Blood because your characterization of Jacaerys is so book canon rather than show canon (which is very insulting to Jacaerys, we are all very lucky that Harry is stunning).

I believe your characterization of Aemond is show only right ? probably a good think, cause to be honest there’s nothing worth ish in book canon Aemond, except for: delusions, misogyny (his obsession with Rhaenyra’s vagina is ugh get a job) and cruelty.

f&b is high on my reading list bc honestly as good of a summarizing job the wiki does, it's not the same as having the whole thing for reference, but i wanna wait until i have a print copy of it just bc i feel like trying to read it online would give me a headache/make me feel like i'm reading another thing for uni (which means i'd end up zoning out on principle).

i'm glad my characterization of jace seems so in line with his book version tho!! i do adore harry's portrayal, it's not as good as what george's written of course but that's on the fault of the show writers/directors than harry himself, and i try to blend show!jace into my characterization as well. that being said, since we're still only on s1 of hotd and even that has given us confusing/contradicting/downright illogical writing choices, it just makes more sense to lean more towards how jace is described in the book. also just, book!jace is so endlessly compelling?? his clear love for his family, his devotion to rhaenyra and their cause, his ability to lead, his cunning+dutiful nature, but also his fierceness and fire (him calling vhagar a hoary old bitch is so personal to me LMAO), his relationship with the dragonseeds, the ultimate tragedy of his life fjsks i could go on and on. the fact that george gives him so many admirable traits while leaving a lot open for interpretation (since f&b isn't written with their povs like asoiaf) also just makes my job as a writer even more fun bc there's so much room to play.

anyway onto the part of your ask that's harder for me to respond to (tbh can it still be called an ask if it's not even really a question? idkidk it's in my askbox so i'm gonna refer to it as such lol)

aemond's characterization is a more complicated affair for me bc while i am heavily leaning into his show characterization (like harry, ewan offers such a stunning portrayal), i also?? don't wanna run the risk of defanging him? from what i've seen of book!aemond, like you mention he def reads as creepy+dirtbaggy (his incredibly gendered fixation on rhaenyra truly makes me want to yak) and while ctf!aemond isn't quite so unbearable, he's also not too saintlike either. bc FMF and CTF are both written from jace's pov, there's a lot that isn't being shown in general but especially with what's going on inside aemond's head and well... let's just say aemond's thought processes aren't all that pretty. in a way, bc of how FMF and CTF are told through jace's eyes and jace already has a lot on his plate to deal with, there's a lot of things he isn't noticing and certain assumptions he makes that aren't as reliable as he thinks.

still, there's a very clear line btwn aegon and aemond in my head while i'm writing (i thought i'd clear this up bc i don't wanna worry anybody and make CTF!aemond seem unlikeable and therefore uninteresting as the male lead). it's just that one of aemond's big appeals to me is how dangerous he is and how, unlike daemon, it's much easier for him to fall on the dark side of the spectrum rather than true gray. he's wrestling with a lot of demons, some he'll win against and some he'll lose, but i believe it was @everythingstucky who once aptly likened my writing of CTF jacemond as jace saying "i can fix him but i won't, if he knows better he'll do it himself and aemond knows better" and to this day, i stick by this description. ultimately, for all his flaws, my characterization of him is steeped in hope for more.

there's a lot of growing aemond's doing offscreen, and a lot of growing he'll be doing with jace, so even though i might not end up writing him as charitably as some people want, i love his character bc he has such a generous capacity for both light and dark. him canonically being kind of a loser for me just means that when he finally does learn, and things do go his way, it feels all the more earned and you can get a sense of pride abt how far he's come/improved

this was all very long and rambly of me but i hope my message came through anyway. and if it didn't, i'm always happy to clarify (barring of course, any spoilers😉)💕💕

[hamliet]

You don’t think Visenya was jealous of Rhaenys, and maybe even hated her??? Like Lysa did to Catelyn or Arya with Sansa. let’s not forget that given Visenya’s harsh and unforgiving personality, she would not stand Aegon choosing Rhaenys over her in every way possible. Aegon even choose Rhaenys’s son over his son with Visenya. He raised Aenys by himself while Maegor was raised by his mother on Dragonstone. Visenya was supposed to be Aegon’s ONLY wife and queen, the mother of his heir… but all those things were given to Rhaenys with Aegon’s love. I bet Vis did not take this slight so carelessly.

I never said this, Anon, which is the danger when you read into things I have said and make assumptions. You're coming across quite heated when a simple "why do you think" would have worked quite well.

What I did say in a short answer was:

I don’t think there was passionate love on either side like there clearly was between Aegon and Rhaenys, and I think Visenya felt lonely because of this. I don’t think she was some obsessively jealous shrew over it, and I think she loved her sister too, but I do think she wished she had that… even though I don’t think she herself felt that way for Aegon.

By "Obsessively jealous shew" I referred to the unfortunate stereotype. I did say that she experienced pain. I didn't say there was no envy. Visenya's actually quite a complex character, so let's properly expand this.

I think Visenya and Rhaenys loved each other like sisters. Love does not under any circumstances mean that you can't also envy someone: see, Cat and Lysa, and Arya and Sansa, and Tyrion and Jaime for that matter. I don't think Visenya was romantically in love with Aegon, but I do think she loved him as her brother, and certainly was envious of the bond with Rhaenys. But being envious of the bond doesn't mean she felt romantic love for Aegon, but more of a sort of "I wish I had this" type of thing. That is what I was saying, not that there was no envy, which is honestly a different, albeit related discussion.

A recurring theme in ASOIAF is duty vs love. It's even stated that "Aegon married Visenya out of duty and Rhaenys out of desire." Visenya is very, very much categorized by duty, while Rhaenys is desire and love. Aegon needed both to be successful. Visenya was effective at in her conquering, and a fairly wise ruler. She's the mind to Rhaenys's heart, in alchemy terms (another frequent allusion of ASOIAF).

I also think it's quite clear Visenya and Aegon had kind of a mutual sense of duty that bound them together, while also no passion between them. There's nothing to suggest Visenya was pining after him. Instead, while I don't doubt she may have wanted to be his only wife and queen, it was more about duty than it was about "I wish he loved me like I loved him."

She gave Aegon good--and this is key: practical--advice, but did so by cutting him. That anecdote is in the book to tell us their relationship was both of them making the other a better ruler, honestly, but not exactly filled with care.

Where Visenya does start showing feeling of extreme resentment concerns Maegor vs Aenys, not Aegon. It's one thing to be second fiddle yourself. It's another to have your son, the baby who loves you and whom you love like no other, be treated as second fiddle. So, I think Visenya resented Maegor's treatment, absolutely.

It's heavily implied Visenya poisoned Aenys so Maegor could take the throne--but notably, despite all along believing Maegor was a better fit for king, she actually did give Aenys sage advice. Only when it became clear he wasn't going to follow it did she poison him (it's implied).

The irony is that Visenya couldn't see that she was making MAegor a weak king in the exact opposite way as Aenys. Aenys was indecisive. Maegor was bullheaded and likely to stubbornly refuse compromise, and Visenya indulges this. She did this not necessarily out of duty, but out of love for her son--because Maegor was probably the one person who chose Visenya, by virtue of being her child. When it comes to Maegor, we see what Visenya is like when she loves without duty and without having to "share," and it involves her making decisions that, contrary to her other decisions, neglect wisdom (such as when it came to, like, officiating his wedding with Alys Harroway).

Plus, we see how Visenya resorted to some kind of black magic (presumably blood magic) to save Maegor's life. Here we see desperation, reaching for new measures--which was not anything she is reported to have done with Aegon.

So, yes, I think Visenya, like every person, wanted to be loved and enjoyed loving others. I don't think she romantically loved Aegon, but I do think she loved him as her brother. I think she was envious of Rhaenys, but more in a theoretical way that focused on the wrongs of duty rather than "why doesn't he love me like that."

[first-of-her-nxme]

Hello there. I've been following your blog for awhile now and quite enjoy them since I too am a Arya & Jaqen fan, as a pair and as individuals. I find Jaqen fascinating but underappreciated (i blame grrm lol not really but yes). However my pressing question to you is, where do you stand on rhaegar-elia-lyanna-robert? I'm sensing you are a shipper/supporter of rhaegar x lyanna? If so (or if not), how do you feel (perceive) about Rhaegar? About lyanna, elia & robert too, if you may. If you've written some metas or posts about this before, I'd be happy to read them if you could show me where. Thank you :)

Hello Anon!

I'm so happy you have enjoyed my content. I also blame GRRM for leaving the books unfinished. A girl can only wait this long!

Honestly, I can't remember how much I have written about the characters you've mentioned. I usually mention them in relation to what is happening to Arya and Jaqen. Unless someone asks a specific question about them and sometimes people do. Please, use tags with their names to search through my blog. Or the "asoiaf meta" tag. I haven't been active here for a while so there might not be that much to read. I will be writing more this summer though.

I acknowledge Rhaegar and Lyanna as a canon ship. I like both characters and I think their story and Robert's Rebellion would make a great Game of Thrones prequel. If done right it might be even more popular than Game of Thrones.

I believe Rhaegar was exactly how people remember him: an honorable young man, a king-to-be who cared about the realm and the people regardless of their social standing, a man who wanted to reform the kingdom, a romantic stuck in a loveless marriage. Someone who wouldn't abandon Elia and the children but rather tried to secure their rights before marrying Lyanna. Also, someone who would be mad at the rebels for what they have done to his family. Someone capable of exacting a severe punishment, especially for the crimes done to Elia and their children. A very well written character that is hardly on page.

Lyanna is the original Arya so obviously I love her. I forgive her falling for the married man. I think they both were the victims of the system.

I adore Elia. I think she is one of the most respectable women in Westeros. A wonderful, caring mother. Elia is kind and protective even towards other people's children. I believe she was the only person in the books who showed love and tenderness to baby Tyrion. Though I also think she had spirit and she might have fought for her husband like she fought for the lives of her children. I wish she had a safe way out of the marriage to Rhaegar.

As for Robert, he is the least deserving of the bunch. Actually I think he is one of the least deserving characters in the story. He had been drinking and whoring his way through Westeros long before he was betrothed to Lyanna. Yet, he had the audacity to rage when she chose someone else. He has some redeeming qualities like his sense of humor and his respect for Ned. I also like the fact that he admitted to his crimes on his deathbed. Still, he hurt too many people, including his own children, to be a respectable man.

Thank you for the question.

[gellavonhamster]

asoiaf for the ship thing too?

oh you're not going to like my answers judging by your answers, lol

otp: I'm not really passionate about any ASOIAF ship at the moment, and I don't think I was back when reading the books and watching the show either (which was quite a long time ago, I'm really racking my brain here), but there used to be some ships I found interesting - Sansa/Margaery, despite the latter kind of (if I remember correctly) manipulating the former (but then again, who in King's Landing wasn't manipulating someone else), and Sandor/Sansa - no actual relationship, no getting together when she's older or anything, just two people romanticizing/fixating on the interactions they had to the point of persuading themselves it was something more (like when Sansa ended up believing he kissed her while he actually didn't). I found that fascinating. Also, Jaime/Brienne has always made a lot of sense to me, their relationship seems like an important thing for the development of both characters.

favourite canon pairing: I remember really liking Jon/Ygritte when reading the books/watching the show and crying when she died (must've been the only time I cried while reading ASOIAF). I also remember liking to imagine how the arranged marriage of Alys Karstark and Sigorn might turn out to be actually okay based on what little of them we saw in the books. Oh, and Sam/Gilly, they're cute.

worst pairing ever: honestly, at this point I do not have ASOIAF on my mind enough to actively dislike any ship. I've heard that show!Jon/Daenerys turned out to be a disaster, but I had long stopped watching the show by that point, so I don't really have an informed opinion on that.

guilty pleasure pairing: don't have any in the sense of feeling bad for shipping it, but perhaps Davos/Stannis fits the bill a little bit - while there's certainly a lot to be said regarding their relationship in canon/in the platonic sense, in the romantic sense I don't really take it seriously, but still kind of enjoy it for shits and giggles. Literally the only ASOIAF fic I've read that has stayed with me enough to revisit it years later is an extremely funny retelling of the classic Soviet comedy Office Romance (1977) with Stavos as the main couple

a pairing you want to see more: perhaps Sigorn/Alys as well? In general, it's not the ships I want to see more of - just give me the damn next book and let me find out what happens to all these characters.

that pairing everyone likes but you’re like “lol no”: Rhaegar/Lyanna, I guess. It had an objectively big and important impact on the plot, but the relationship itself isn't interesting to me. I'm not sure the "everyone likes" part is still applicable, but I remember it being quite a popular ship in the past.  

favorite non-romantic pair: Sansa and Arya (as well as all Stark kids with each other in general), Jon and Sam, Jaime and Tyrion, the Sand Snakes and Arianne

[agentrouka-blog]

I know you said you don't watch hotd but I had to bring up how funny the general audience and the media is when they talk about anything concerning asoiaf. I've seen quite a few different news articles in the past talk about the show when season one first came out and honestly sometimes I feel like the media seriously forgets (or for some reason doesn't know) the shows are based on books. And those books are already out. /1

/2 Like some of those articles giving a recap about what happened in season one makes me laugh because they will say things like, "it's now a complete mystery what will happen in season 2" or "it's fun seeing theories of what might happen and for us fans to speculate". And it's like, um.... if y'all actually read F&B vol. 1, then you would know exactly what happens next in the dance of dragons. The whole event is laid out! We ALREADY know what the coming storylines will be! There is no mystery!

I imagine their job is not to do literary analysis or serious media analysis but to stir up some excitement for the upcoming season, especially for casual fans who have no intention of reading the books, either to avoid spoilers or because GRRM's idea of a fake biased multi-"source" fictional history book is a bit of an acquired taste. I mean, also speculation is fun!

And then there's the horrifying certainty that they will deviate from known book canon, as they have in the past. Potentially in worse ways. So... you never know!

Don't take it too seriously, it's just entertainment. :)

[alsethwisson]

what are your top 5 and bottom 5 ASOIAF characters?

Top 5:

Sansa. Like, she's the best, m'kay? It's hard not to like the sweetest, most compassionate and caring person in this whole mess.

Cat. Clever, badass in her own right, passionate and unrelenting, tragic to the core.

Robert. Yeah, I know. Problematic fave. But still he's the best of the Baratheon brothers, the most human of them. He had a lot of promise and a lot of faults and he's interesting to imagine in his youth.

Jon. Again, hard not to like him, though honestly he was kinda grating in the beginning with his grudge against his station in life. Which I can get, but others have it so much worse, but then Jon is disgruntled exactly because he has everything-but-not-quite.

Theon. I have something of a sweet spot for people who destroy themselves with their idiocy, I guess, but I liked his dynamic with Robb and loved his post-Reek resurrection.

Honorable mentions: Vissy3, Aegon2, Baelor the Blessed, Daemon B and other guys who are barely characters, but have my heart.

Bottom 5

Cersei. It's easy because she's so perfectly hateful, isn't she? But that's why she starts this list. She's a villain, and plays her part well, but that doesn't mean I somehow hate her, she's just too perfect for her role.

Daenerys. Again, a villainous character, honestly quite an engaging one, and I have nothing against villains per se. Most of my dislike is motivated by her big and active fandom, I guess?

Arya. I just...don't like her? Don't like the tropes she represents? Both? When I think about her, she's just not that interesting. When I read her POVs, I want to discipline her. She is really not well-written, to boot; I hardly can imagine a noble child so lacking any idea of social norms and customs and her behaviour is one of a modern moody teen isekai'ed into a nine years old from semi-medieval world.

Tyrion. He's just the worst. I hate him with a passion and his chapters make me cringe hard and his ego is the size of the Death Star. But then I remember that he's a villain and feel better!

Arianne. Absolute bottom of my list because she's just. So. Grating. The shallowest, most self-absorbed character in the book where Dany and Tyrion exist. Delusional like Cersei, as badly fitting into the world as Arya and has a touch of authorial racism/misogyny as a cherry on top.

Dishonorable mentions for Jorah the Slaver and Bran the Sexually Precocious.

[asilverspring]

17, 1, 2, and follow me on goodreads if u have 1

1. book you’ve reread the most times? already did this one but i remembered some more so: gone girl, sharp objects, where’d you go bernadette, me talk pretty one day, this is where i leave you.

2. top 5 books of all time? in no particular order:

1. sharp objects. i read this when i was 14 and at least once a year since and i adore it every time. i love everything about this, the creepy southern gothic atmosphere, the fucked up relationships, the narrator’s voice. my favorite genre of anything is insane dysfunctional family and this is like the pinnacle of that. amma crellin i love you.

2. when you are engulfed in flames. i’ve read all of david sedaris’s books and love all of them but this is probably my favorite, i’ve always loved the long essay about quitting smoking at the end. his books and 30 rock are honestly the basis for my sense of humor.

3. a feast for crows. it really should be the entirety of asoiaf, but i’m being literal. i don’t know if this book in and of itself is in my top five, but asoiaf has to be and this is the best of the series. it’s the jaime/brienne/cersei book, it’s the gender treatise, it’s no chance and no choice. i just love it.

4. master of the senate. this might be a little recency bias but this really is once of the best books i’ve ever read. the insanity of starting the third volume of the johnson series with 100 pages of the history of the senate in which johnson is never mentioned! it gave me a better understanding of the workings of the senate than any class i’ve ever taken and for a 1000 page book about the inner workings of the senate it’s incredibly engrossing and readable.

5. the story of a new name. again this is a stand-in for the whole series but this one is my favorite by a hair. it’s still a of a coming of age but more mature and a bit darker than the first book. and i loved the centerpiece of the soap operatic trip to ischia, something about the change in setting adds to the drama, though it’s still grounded in the neighborhood culture that makes the series.

17. top 5 children’s books?

1. mrs piggle-wiggle. never met anyone else who’s read these books but they are so special to me. it’s so important to teach your kids that if they don’t behave you will secretly give them unlicensed drugs from the lady down the street to make them behave. i think about the crybaby who nearly drowned in her own tears all the time. also all the kids have names like pergola wingsproggle which is fun.

2. the half magic books. my favorite was the first one where the kids find a coin that grants wishes but only by half so like they wish to go to a desert island and end up in the desert or wish to disappear and end up like half there, sort of incorporeal. i don’t fully remember the plot but i loved it.

3. little house on the prairie. technically not really children’s books but my mom and i read them together when i was 5 so i’m counting it. just really lovely books, taught me that bismarck was the capital of north dakota.

4. percy jackson. the original series not the spin-offs. i read it when i was 7 and that’s what got me really into mythology. it’s fun!

5. from the mixed-up files of mrs. basil e. frankweiler. this book is so fun and charming and forever made me want to live in a museum.

and i don’t have a goodreads but i do have a storygraph, idk if you do but mine is silverspringsmp3

[gameofthronedd]

It really, genuinely, confuses me how Daemyra shippers think that the showrunners are going to "ruin it". I can understand if these fans haven't read Fire & Blood. But when it comes to those who have... did we read the same book? And, heck, even just based on the show (and pre-existing knowledge of the world GRRM made) I think it's relatively easy to ascertain that they're not going to have a beautiful relationship with a happy ending?

Brief F&B spoilers below.

The idea that the showrunners are going to "ruin" this relationship is strange to me, due to the fact that it was never a fairytale relationship to start with, this is part of the world of ASOIAF and because of what happens in F&B.

The start of their relationship on screen isn't... the ideal start, right? Daemon is her uncle and quite a bit older. He's also shown to be careless & reckless about her safety; he leaves her half-naked and her exposed in a brothel without any to look after her. Then he allows Viserys to believe he had had sex with Rhaenyra. Daemon may love Rhaenyra but he is not caring. Which brings me to my next point... just because he loves her, does not mean that his "love" isn't toxic or harmful.

It's difficult to deny that Daemon loves her. I think most would agree he does. BUT loving someone doesn't always mean that it's healthy. Hence the examples up above and the instance of Daemon choking Rhaenyra. I think Daemon is a good example of someone who has a "charming" or "charismatic" personality, one that can make you forget the violence and darkness he possesses. So, yes, he loves her - but he is also Daemon, and that love isn't always healthy or good.

Like I said, this isn't a fairytale. It's ASOIAF.

Honestly, one of the healthier relationships I can recall of ASOIAF is the one between Cat and Ned. But even that relationship has its issues. They didn't love each other at first. Cat was upset about Jon. And it's not a happy ending. Most other relationships I can remember in ASOIAF have some degree of tragedy or toxicity. F&B is more of the same, and Daemyra is no exception.

In F&B, there's obviously the situation of Daemon & Rhaenyra being seperated for most of the war. Then, Daemon spends most of his time with Nettles, possibly (or likely) pursuing a relationship with her - which leads to R becoming paranoid and wanting Nettles dead. We all know what happens to both Daemon and Rhaenyra.

So honestly I don't know how this relationship can be "ruined" when it's one that implodes on its own. There's no reasonable way to avoid it being "ruined" without messing up the story and the characters.

Obviously, it's not every Daemyra shipper thinking this way. But I have seen it floating around and I have to do a double-take every single time I see someone pre-emptively get mad with the showrunners for "messing up" Daemyra in the future?? I have a few bones to pick with Daemyra & its shippers but by far the weirdest take I've seen is the idea that the showrunners are going to mess it up lmao. They don't need to do anything, really, except follow the general plot of F&B 🤫

[navree]

Is there any meaning or symbolism behind Joffery, Rhaenyra,Aerys get cut by the iron throne?

So, practically the Iron Throne cuts people because it is sharp and uncomfortable as shit because Aegon specifically designed it that way as a metaphor for how ruling isn't easy and one should never get complacent about it. And it makes sense that people likely did cut themselves on it, even Aegon himself had his blood drawn from that chair (though that's because he was apparently holding onto the chair way too hard while reading Nymor's letter and not just an accidental slip), and if we're looking at it from a purely logical perspective, that's why people get cut on that chair.

But narratively, I do think there's a meaning to who we've seen get cut with the Iron Throne. Some of the most famous occupants who were ever hurt by the Iron Throne are some of few people we're narratively informed shouldn't have been anywhere near it. Maegor is literally killed while sitting on the chair, some say even by the chair (which is a theory I like), Aerys is cut so often that he is referred to as King Scab, and Joffrey very publicly slices himself quite badly on the thing. All three of these rulers are people that anyone even giving the material a cursory glance knows were unworthy to sit on the Throne. Maegor full on usurped Aegon the Uncrowned (and was a monster), Aerys was an absolute nightmare who singlehandedly brought about the utter ruin of his House, his family, and Joffrey is a bastard borne of incest who is psychologically disturbed and nearly ruined the realm with his bad choices and definitely not the right heir. So there is some genuine merit to the idea that the Iron Throne only wounds those it rejects, the ones who sit on it who are unworthy, and Septon Eustace does claim that Rhaenyra's cuts are a sign that the Iron Throne itself is rejecting her because she's not the true monarch (though Eustace is a Green partisan and as such we should look at this a bit askance). But I do think that claim isn't to be wholly dismissed. I'm not as anti-Rhaenyra as some people, but she was not a good queen. She was a bad politician and a bad administrator and her governance of King's Landing was atrocious, and it's in King's Landing that her true downfall begins. Doing things like hiking taxes, being cruel to the populace, alienating Daemon by wanting Nettles killed (for no reason), causing the Velaryons to abandon her due to her treatment of Corlys, the way she let rumors propagate about how badly she was treating Alicent and Helaena when they were both very well loved, that's what led to not just her having to abandon the city after the Storming of the Dragonpit but her eventual death. She wasn't doing her job as queen properly and was actively contributing to more suffering and misery, and so it's not out of bounds to assume that being cut on the Iron Throne is a symbol that she just wasn't right for the job at this point. And honestly, as I've mentioned before, I'm a big fan of eldritch abomination Iron Throne that does have some sort of strange magical say in who it considers worthy and how it'll be involved dispatching the unworthy (Jaime kills Aerys and then sits on the Iron Throne, stained in Aerys's blood and yet uncorrupted by the Throne itself, hmmmmmmm). And it ties into this idea that Valyrians used literal magic to build things, like Dragonstone and potentially the base of the Hightower, which is fun.

I don't think, however, that you can chalk up anyone who gets cut on the Throne with being explicitly "unworthy" of kingship/queenship either. Viserys I in the book cut himself on the throne and in F&B there's not really much to the idea that he likely shouldn't have been king, while the show does hold that more strongly but hasn't ever brought up the concept of cuts from the Throne being considered rejection by the Throne. There are also plenty of people in ASOIAF who are also bad rulers or just not the true rulers who aren't mentioned as having ever cut themselves on the throne, Robert was a bad king and never cut himself, Aegon IV is literally called "the Unworthy" and there's no record of him cutting himself, Tommen is just as much a bastard borne of incest who has no right to be in the succession as Joffrey and he hasn't cut himself yet. So I do think the aforementioned practicality of the situation does need to be taken into account, but broadly I agree with the in-universe symbolism that the Iron Throne is capable of physically rejecting occupants who are undeserving, giving them bloody wounds like they give the crown or the land or the people, to tell them that this will never truly and rightfully be there's, they've lost it or they just straight up never had it to begin with.

[sweetestpopcorn]

You know, I don't believe that Tristan Truefyre was Viserys i's bastard but I think there's a possibility that Gaemon Palehair was in fact Aegon ii's bastard????? Given Aegon’s promiscuous nature it would not surprise me. There's also the thing about Gaemon's name. It is a targaryen name (compare that to Tristan, a common name), which makes me think he was deliberately given this name of all names. One can say that since his mother was a prostitute, she might not know it's a targaryen name and maybe randomly named him but I seriously don't think it's a coincidence. People don't just randomly give targaryen names to their children and the fact that she named her son Gaemon proves she did know some targaryen names maybe and also if the boy was really the son of some random lysene dude, I don't think even the lysene would use such names. She can still give her son a targaryen name despite her son not being half-targaryen but I just don't think so?? It might not be a coincidence that a silver haired boy with a targaryen name just claimed to be Aegon’s son during the dance. So what do think about it? I really like your answers, so I just wanted to know your opinion on it.

Hi there Anon 🤗

You know who this is a job for?

Kidding. Or am I? 😏

Two things, one, as I said some time ago and I will admit this is an Aquiles's heel of mine when reading a series like ASOIAF. I am not a fan of conspiracy theories nor do I like to lose a lot of time making theories about things. I am very much a person who likes their facts, which honestly makes me very good at my every day job, not the best at providing people with theories of what I think happened if I don’t have a lot of facts to base the theory on. I was taught not to speculate unless I have things to back it up on. Again something which is a golden rule in my job.

So, do I think it’s possible that Gaemon could have been Aegon II’s father? Given Aegon II’s track record it would be yes, as he is shown to be quite promiscuous and I am not even sure he knew all the places he had “been in”. We also know he fathered a boy on a young prostitute and a girl on one of his mother’s maids (#class) on his first year of marriage to his sister. However, do I think he was Gaemon’s father? Absolutely not.

I feel that if he was a lot more evidence would have been given to us readers. Comparing Gaemon to the "Velaryon" princes for instance, the latter are clearly shown to be the children of Harwin Strong. 

Not only is this hinted on multiple times and by multiple different sources (sorry y’all but the books is not “rumours” and it’s very clear what’s a rumour and what’s a fact), but we are also shown how close Rhaenyra and Harwin were with each other even before she married Laenor -> Harwin had been courting her. Furthermore we have this gem right here when Joffrey dies and I quote:

“Thus perished Joffrey Velaryon, Prince of Dragonstone and heir to the Iron Throne, the last of Queen Rhaenyra’s sons by Laenor Velaryon… or the last of her bastards by Harwin Strong, depending on which truth one chooses to believe.” (Fire and Blood, pg. 518).

Comparing it now to what we are told at the moment of Gaemon’s death:

“Born a bastard in a brothel, “King Cunny” had reigned briefly over his kingdom on a hill during the Moon of Madness, seen his mother put to death, and served Aegon III as a cupbearer, whipping boy, and friend. He was thought to be but nine years old upon his death.” (Fire and Blood, pg 679). 

We have a mention of all the things Gaemon was, and there’s a long list, but being a “rumoured” bastard son of Aegon II was not even amongst them. He is only mentioned in relation to Aegon III. If the evidence that he was Aegon II’s son was significant I would argue that a mention would be made here. Maybe even as a reflection over the fact that the son of the woman Aegon II put to death in such a despicable and cruel way found a friend in his bastard and forgotten son that he never cared about. Perhaps also some mention that the son he denied and ignored outlived all of the others or something, and that Alicent did not even recognised or cared about the only grandson she had left. 

The writers of Fire and Blood loved these kind of ironies. They make a reflection over the fact that Daenaera was granddaughter to Vaemond, so they would likely make one similar for Gaemon. They also don’t shy away in the slightest from speaking about the bad either about the Blacks or about the Greens. They make no mention though, which only adds to my belief that Gaemon was indeed not Aegon II’s son. 

Of course one could argue that the fact that Gaemon’s mom denied he was Aegon II’s son under torture could say something. But again her and Sylvenna do struck me as shrewd women who knew what they were doing and just took advantage of the chaos. 

In all honestly I just don’t see it personally. 

By the way a HUGE HUGE apology for how long it took me to answer you Anon!!!!! I believe you sent this a year ago 😭 SORRY! I SUCK! But I eventually answered :D I will show myself out.

All the love to you and sorry again! 

[aingeal98]

At this point it's safe to say the hotd watchers are split into teams but it's not two teams green vs black it's 4 teams. We've got:

The Normies: Mostly here for cool dragon fights. Mostly haven't read the book and aren't planning on it. Team Black but not in a fanatical way just in a fuck sexism go Rhaenyra kind of way.

The Fire and Blood Enthusiasts: Really, really into Targaryens. Fanatical team black. Daemyra stans. Furious that they're not getting the book adapted with no deviations and every line, no matter how ridiculous, thrown in. Despite complaining about how different the show and book are they also try really really hard to make show Alicent into book Alicent so they can hate her like she's s1 Cersei. Hate this show but also won't stop watching and trying to fit the square peg that is the show characters into the round hole that is the book characters.

The Succession Fans: The ones who say they're team green because the greens are more compelling and the blacks are boring because they. Have healthier love for each other I guess idk (daemon not included). Here mainly for the targtowers and how messed up they are. Did not like that Alicent tried to break the cycle by choosing Rhaenyra and Helaena over her evil sons. Honestly I think some of them would be happier rewatching succession.

The Rhaenicent Fans: Can carry traits from literally any of the three groups above but what sets them apart is that their priority is the gay love story between Rhaenyra and Alicent. The ones who predicted both characters arcs successfully since the start of S2. Also the only ones having a ball because they and the writers are on the same page regarding narrative priorities and no one expected this from a game of thrones spinoff prequel.

I was tempted to make a fifth category for asoiaf book readers but I think they're mostly part of team lesbians or team succession fans. Some f&b targ enthusiasts too, but they're not quite distinct enough when it comes to the Discourse to deserve a fifth category. Because if I divide the fan teams any further I'll eventually up with a team that's just the one fan shipping Helaena and Alys and dreaming about a modern au where they fall in love on tumblr instead of communicating via future vision powers.

[hamliet]

Hi, do you have any literary suggestions similar to asoiaf? I want the complex characters, themes, drama etc.

Honestly, ASOIAF is in some ways unparalleled in terms of complexity. I also assume you want something with a fantasy bent? If you want elsewise let me know.

That said... MXTX's three novels, which get shoved off as danmei, are pretty on par with ASOIAF in terms of complex characters, themes, and intricate writing. I genuinely think those novels are the closest. Mo Dao Zu Shi, Heaven Official's Blessing, and The Scum Villain's Self-Saving System.

Qiang Jin Jiu is another danmei that is tonally similar to ASOIAF. RWBY has the large cast and symbolism part down, even if the characters and tone are far less dark than in ASOIAF. The Witcher (the books) is its own type of fantasy deconstruction with great characters.

Elsewise, I've heard people recommend Wheel of Time, in particular alongside ASOIAF, but I've not read it so I can't say. Brandon Sanderson's works have complex worldbuilding and strong themes, but the characters aren't quite as complex as ASOIAF (though they aren't bad either!) The Poppy War is another series you might like.

[hotd-brainrot]

I'll admit I only read f&b, so my knowledge of asoiaf is somewhat limited, but even from what I know, I think more nuanced approach on his character makes sense, especially with clues hotd gave us.

Yes, thank you! I think it's pretty likely he shaped himself to be as Andal as possible and tried to avoid as many stereotypes as he could.

I usually stick with show depiction of that part of the storyline since Cole is white in the book, but I totally get how that can get even more uncomfortable with show version.

I did always think that he kills Joffrey because of triggered ptsd too! Although quite frankly, I don't quite understand why they went with that version instead of him killing him in the tourney like in the book. The chances of him not being punished in any capacity for killing a wedding guest is unrealistic imo, even with Alicent's protection.

Hmmm. I always saw it as him feeling like he owed it to her, for saving his life and in a way, restoring his honor by giving him a new purpose. Although I see where you are coming from.

I thought of it as less jealousy and more hate because Harwin and Rhaenyra tehnically broke the law and even worse(by his standards) continously ignored what is considered honorable without being punished. It could be due to jealousy ofc, but I really don't see Cole regretting his decision of not wanting to continue his rs with Rhaenyra at her terms. It would eat at him too much.

Bccjjccjjc honestly, same. I am glad I am not the only one with all these opinions on him

On really intersting implications the show made by making Cole Dornish

Okay so, I didn't yet see anyone talk about this and I really find it fascinating. So, what I managed to find on Cole's backstory is that he was a son of a Stewart of Lord Dondarrion at Blackhaven, in the Dornish Marches. Which isn't that important in the book, due to him being white and having a standard Stormlander appearance. However, in the show, they explicitly made him Dornish, which adds a cool twist to it.

This what I managed to find from Wiki of Ice and Fire: "The marcher lords of the stormlands have some of the strongest castles of the Seven Kingdoms, as they have defended against Dornish incursions for thousands of years."

Essentially, they are at constant war with Dorne, and it's implied Cole got his battle experience by fighting the Dornish. Which, with the show's choice of the actor and Alicent's "Gods he is Dormish" once Cole takes off the helmet could mean several things.

It implies that one of Cole's parents or grandparents was Dornish. I am inclined to lean more towards parents because if it was say, a grandmother, he'd have more of a chance to be white passing. Considering the fact that his father was a steward of one of the marcher lords, I think it's safe to assume he was a stormlander, or looked enough like one to pass off without suspicion.

That would mean Cole's mother was likely Dornish, or half Dornish. Which creates a possibly very uncomfortable implication. Either Cole's mother ran off with his father, or worse she was captured during a battle and later married him.

My point is, I kinda wish we knew more? I know shit ton of people really hate him, but that would be an interesting backstory. Would also explain why he acts the way he does in some scenes-and idk about you but even for characters I see as villains, I find that knowing their motivations is super satisfying

[kiefbowl]

i think people (not feminists) find reasons to hate on GoT because it's very "white lady" show about white female empowerment in that sort of culture, which can become a little white savior-y. But i personally like the books and show(s) because they use interesting metaphors to show how women gain power. Like dragons representing Daenerys' propagandized exoticism as a woman, her motherhood, and her pedigree. And how people will overlook a clearly female "messiah" for the dudes with big swords and money.

Hmmm, idk if I completely agree with what you said or even understand it all but I'll go ahead and springboard off this anon to muse a bit about the whole GoT/ASOIAF deal.

To start: I am completely neutral on what other people have to say about ASOIAF. I love those books, I think there's a lot of good stuff in there, I don't think they gotta be read. If a woman (or anyone) doesn't want to read them, totally get it. If a woman (or anyone) reads them and is like "yuck that was bad", I get it! different strokes for different folks! I am also high key critical, too, but I love to be critical. I enjoy taking apart media, whether I like it or not. I don't think there's a single thing on this planet I love unequivocally top-down. Everything has something you can raise an eyebrow at.

more under cut bc it's long....

I think a lot of people, including me, have a lot of good reasons to hate GoT. GoT was a very good adaptation for about 3 seasons, and then dropped off in quality. I'm one of the few who thinks it started getting bad in season 4, while others like to say it was good even until season 6 or whatever. idk cause I gave up on it. They made wild choices that didn't make sense, and they seemed to make choices that were just to be more shocking and violent than they needed to be. For example, the Red Wedding is already insanely brutal and shocking, but for some reason they had to write in Robb's boring love story, cutting the political intrigue of his supposed set-up with his actual wife, just to show some ass and then show a pregnant woman get stabbed in the belly. That fucking sucks so bad. That's bad adaptation, bad writing, bad tv. And that was in season 3, which I already said was still pretty good adaptation. So I got annoyed with GoT good and early, both as a lover of the books and a lover of television in general. I dropped off, but I would keep tabs on it, and delighted in the shitty fuck up it became in seasons 7&8. Still, it's infuriating to know that when it comes to the general public perceptions of some of these characters, the TV show is going to reign supreme.

Now, some feminists might be surprised at some of the female fans of ASOIAF since it's also, like, extremely brutal, violent, and full of rape. And it's true, and GRRM also has made some choices that are just blech. I hate Dany's wedding night scene with Drogo. That was a bad bad choice that hasn't aged well and never will. I guess if I had to choose that scene and a brutally violent scene, I'd choose the one we have, but honestly it would have been better if he just didn't write it. It's also such a strange choice bc in her next chapter it makes it pretty clear Drogo is rough with her going forward, so idk if the wedding scene was part editor's choice or what but it just is so uncomfortable to read. So yeah, GRRM makes some choices that I hate.

But honestly, he makes a lot choices I like. He excels at his mission, which is to write "character's in conflict with the heart." He shines there. And he's created this unbelievably detailed world and history that is really astounding. And even his exploration of misogyny and sexual violence is sometimes quite deft, it's just that it can also be clunky or oblivious a few pages later. But, he's a man, it comes as no surprise. Kinda like how Victor Hugo could write about the horrors of prostitution sympathetically and then go and be a frequent john. Men being men.

And I think ASOIAF has gotten a bit of a bad rep unfairly. Not that it doesn't deserve criticisms, cause it does, and not that women should read it or have to love it, because obviously not. But I think it has a misrepresentation that proceeds it because of 1. the show, which is just it's own mess, and 2. the popularity of calling the books "feminist" at the height of the show's popularity as a reaction to criticisms. It's not feminist, it can never be feminists: it is written by a man.

But if you enjoy fantasy, and want a long and winding series that has unbelievably detailed political intrigue (like it's crazy how the smallest actions and characters still impact the story!), with a deep lore that is surprisingly true to life (not 1, not 2, not 3, but 4 different ethnic groups land in Westeros during it's history and they all matter to the culture, story, and plot?? insane I love it), and you want to be in the heads of female characters that treats their pain and suffering as real and important as best as a man could write it, well this has got some stuff for you to like. Otherwise, if you're meh on all of that and you don't want to read about sexual violence, skip it.