linndechir | (no subject)

Entry tags:

meme

(no subject)

Stealing another meme from

sternflammenden, yay! I'm wasting way too much time on memes lately.

Give me a pairing and I'll tell you:
1. When or if I started shipping them:
2. What I think their challenge is:
3. What makes me happy about them:
4. What makes me sad about them:
5. What moment I wish had never happened:
6. Who I'd be comfortable them ending up with, if not each other:
7. My happily ever after for them:

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I know, I just wish that hadn't happened. Tyrion's storyline at the end of ASOS felt incredibly complete to me. But I'm not the author, so who cares what I think.

Yep, I know she'll be around, and Tyrion probably to. I should just stop complaining, not like I can change anything about it if GRRM goes for the cliché ending.

I doubt Stannis would do that. He made his choice years ago, and I don't see him going back on that choice and saying, "oh, btw I was wrong back then, let's go back to the Targaryens." Also, I think Stannis has invested too much in his own campaign for kingship to stop now. He has done so much, he won't give up now. It'd feel like giving up to him, and i think he's too stubborn for that. Also, Stannis has lots of issues with women in any position of power. He'd be even less inclined to bend the knee to Daenerys than he would be to Aegon. Add to that that she's very young and inexperienced, so Stannis wouldn't even have the added incentive to think that she'd make a far better ruler than him and that he'd do the realm a favour by stepping back from his claim. But that's only details, mostly I think that once Stannis has made up his mind, he won't change his opinion again. He supported Robert and not Aerys back then, and he is Robert's heir. Why should he suddenly support Aerys' heir instead of pursuing his own claim? Stannis is also stubborn enough to die fighting rather than bend the knee just because his cause is lost.
I've seen that theory a lot, that Stannis might decide to bend the knee, but I think it would go against everything we've seen from him so far. Stannis is aware of Daenerys' existence, he has been for years. He's the one who took Dragonstone just after she and Viserys were taken away. He has always known that there ARE rightful Targaryen heirs out there, and he didn't do anything about it. When Robert died, he didn't say, "oh, maybe we should get those Targaryens back", but he said "I'm Robert's heir, I'm the heir to the throne." Stannis changing his mind just because Daenerys is suddenly there and not in Essos... it sounds very out of character to me.

are there theories that he will bend to daenerys? i haven't heard them. i only asked because stannis seems to be motivated many times by the right thing to do. nobody goes looking for a king/queen. well, most people don't so i never expected him to. as robert's brother, i understand why he feels he's next. i was curious to hear what you thought about it.

my take is if dany arrives with an army, i'm not sure if a man motivated by the right thing to do would attack. but i'm not convinced that stannis is solely motivated by duty and conscious and his attacking dany would feel like a logical step in grrm's story. however it would also prove that he is indeed after the throne because he wants it if he fights the rightful heir for it.

so i don't have a particular theory but i will admit i see stannis bending the knee as highly unlikely. he is human, at the end of the day. and humans want power.

as for cliche endings, i an not convinced dany will actually sit on the iron throne, even if she fights for it.

did tyrion's story really feel complete at the end of asos? he'd just won a major battle and saved king's landing. what reward would he get for that? he'd married sansa but hadn't slept with her. that needed to be resolved. he still has enormous guilt about his first wife. that needed to be resolved. would he be cleared of joff's death? what price would he have to pay for tyrion's death? and that's just off the top of my head. if i looked, i'm sure there's more.

Theories may be the wrong word, but I've seen it discussed elsewhere.

I think what ASOIAF shows us that this whole "rightful heir" business is highly problematic. Stannis is Robert's rightful heir, but Robert only had any right by conquest. Daenerys is Aerys' heir, and in a long line of succession Aegon the Conqueror's - whose only right was also by conquest. Technically, neither of them is more rightful than the other. They're both the heirs of people whose only "right" was having the more powerful army and killing all their rivals.
Also, IF Aegon is real, Daenerys is not the Targaryen heir to the throne, Aegon is. I really hope that Aegon is real, because I'd love for Daenerys to have to deal with NOT being the rightful heir. I'm really curious what she'd do (probably just marry him, but that'd be boring).

I don't think Stannis wants power, I don't think he wouldn't bend the knee because he's greedy for the throne. I think he wouldn't bend the knee because right now he's operating in a logic in which the Baratheons are the rightful rulers of the Seven Kingdoms, not in a logic in which the Targaryens are. Similarily, Robb Stark and the other Northerners used the logic that nobody has the "right" to rule the Seven Kingdoms, but the North belongs to the Starks.

I hope you're right. I meant by cliché ending Daenerys coming back, winning the throne and ruling. That'd be cliché.

To me the storyline felt complete: his rise to power as Hand in ACOK, his success (defending King's Landing and basically destroying Stannis' army), and then his fall from power. The short moment of hope - Oberyn offering to fight for him - but it doesn't work out and Oberyn dies. It's a classical tragic story arc, and it felt complete. Were all issues resolved? Of course not, but how many people die with all issues resolved in their lives? Robb, Renly, Ned, Viserys, Catelyn, all of these people had unresolved issues in their lives and they still died; that's not a reason. Tyrion getting away after murdering his own father and completing a really beautiful tragic story arc for which his completely unjustified death would have been an amazing ending ... it feels cheap. I think Tyrion's death would have made for a better story, and I'm saying this as someone who really liked Tyrion before ADWD and loved reading about him.

Robb, Renly, Ned, Viserys, Catelyn

of these, isn't it only catelyn that had unresolved issues with her guilt and search for her children? and look at where she is, still running around westeros. although, now that i think about it ned dying before he could talk to jon is definitely unresolved!

as for the others, robb may have a child on the way. hardly unresolved. renly died in battle. his wife and brienne moved on. all that is unresolved is how it actually happened. viserys, well, it was rather obvious that wasn't going anywhere.

as for outrageous theories, i have heard the theory that the reason ned tells jon he will tell him about his mother when next they meet is so jon will have already taken his oath and would not be able to act on the knowledge that he is a targaryen.

*ducks from linn throwing objects*

its not my theory. honest! but clearly its from a supporter of other theories that i read on another site. i will admit, it seemed interesting. i mean, what reason is there for ned not telling jon about it on his way to the wall?

what reason is there for ned not telling jon about it on his way to the wall?

i mean regardless of who his mother was, that was the opportune time, don't you think?

Ned didn't talk to Jon, he didn't clear up anything with Robert before he died, he didn't get around to telling Stannis what he meant to tell him .. that makes for lots of unresolved issues. Renly's story was just getting started when he died. I think Tyrion dying would have made sense - he got revenge on his father, which is so much more than anyone else in the series ever got. But mostly for me it's this typical classical tragedy structure in Tyrion's story that made me think, "Wait, this is where the story ENDS, it doesn't go on with a cheap deus ex machina!"

oO That's just a dumb theory. Ned isn't that kind of a schemer. I mean, ANY explanation makes more sense than honest, down-to-earth, direct Ned doing something just to manipulate his son, or nephew in this scenario. We're talking about Ned, not about Littlefinger.
Also, what the hell would Jon have done about being a Targaryen bastard, in a world in which Robert rules safely and has two legitimate sons (which is what Ned thinks by the time he decides NOT to tell Jon about it)? Except emo more about it?

honest, down-to-earth, direct Ned doing something just to manipulate his son,

i totally agree. still, i wish it was explained why he didn't talk then. of course, no one could have known that was the last time they'd see each other.

Exactly. Ned was 35ish, Jon was 15, there was no reason to think that Ned would never come back and not get another chance to tell him. Maybe it was as simple as Ned wanting Jon to grow up a little bit more before knowing the truth, whatever that truth was. And, depending on what theory you go with, Ned might not have told him for the same reasons he didn't tell him before: either he loved Jon's mother and talking about her is painful, or Jon is Lyanna's son and Ned promised to keep whatever the secret was ... both reasons would still apply even when Jon goes to the Wall.
I don't know, tbh I've never cared much about who Jon's parents are. What matters is how Jon grew up, and he grew up as a Stark. He's a Stark through and through, no matter how his mother or his father is. I know it's unlikely, but I really hope that the big mystery of Jon's parents actually won#t have a big impact on his storyline. I'd prefer the message of Jon being Ned's son because Ned raised him as his son (whether Ned is his biological father or not) to a message of "he was fathered by some guy he never even met and that's totally important now."

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only