you can’t take loved away @baeladragonrider - Tumblr Blog

Posts

bornbloodie

Anthems for a Seventeen Year-Old Girl - Debra Morgan & Harrison Morgan

lesbianboyfriend

you’ll never get away from the sound of the woman that HATES you #feminism

#nercynorn & naugastine #mercycore #also lets be real as well mercy & jod #tlt

branwinged

harrenhal, king's landing, and volantis are all metaphors for the same thing, that the structural injustices which led to the creation and maintenance of these places will eventually result in their collapse. harrenhal is a symbol of the worst of feudalism, i say 'worst' because the books do romanticise certain aspects of it, oathkeeping as fidelity is clearly intended to be beautiful and moving in brienne's storyline and "the north remembers" but what harren the black did was exploit the riverlands and the iron islands and employ slaves in its construction, thousands dead for one man's monument to power and dominion over others. it was a castle built on fear, not fealty. in a non magical sense, the curse of harrenhal is hubris. it was intended to be the height of feudual power because it was virtually impregnable - impervious to 'normal' medieval warfare, but ended up being destroyed by yet another king, this time in possession of a more fantastical means of power - dragonfire (the hubris theme is strong in the main series, the castle is awarded to scheming, ambitious, and amoral political players who either engineer their own downfall or are eventually pushed off the board by someone who can scheme better them).

but the thing that interests me is that the burning of harrenhal also positions the targaryens as capable of status quo upsetting, radical change. they can disrupt existing power structures because what are walls in front of a dragon? dragons fly. the visionary bit here is the unification of the realm, which is definitely framed as an admirable thing by the narrative because of the upcoming threat of the long night—what aegon invades westeros for. i don't think the targaryens are, like, evil for being conqueror kings, that's a disingenuous reading, but i do think this is a somewhat corrupt idea of 'unification' as it is primarily focused on the dynastic interests of this one family. because the other thing he did was make the iron throne, something that's currently the biggest obstacle to the possibility of the realm uniting in the face of a common enemy. it's significant that a fight over the throne is what kills their dragons, that's a very blunt way of saying that the the iron throne is what ultimately smothers their ability to enact any wider social change, by the end they weren't any different from the other houses. so king's landing is no longer a symbol of targaryen rule, both their dragons and their dynasty died there and any vision of radical change that they began the conquest with was consumed by the iron throne. kl as a whole is symbolic of the game of thrones, the city's geography is modeled after the iron throne with the king within the red keep on top of aegon's hill and the smallfolk left to rot at the bottom. and the inheritors of 'the game' are the lannisters, the ones who swindled the city and the throne from the targaryens. tywin continues aerys's legacy of violence, aerys would burn a city out of 'madness', tywin would do it out of pragmatism ("Lord Tywin would not have bothered with a search. He would have burned that town and every living creature in it"), so it makes sense for tywin's philosophy, that of exploitative and dehumanising violence in the pursuit of power, to be the cause of its destruction. several posts have been made about why joncon and cersei are the ones haunted by the memory of tywin's crimes with reasons to want to emulate him, so i'm not going there, but i feel it's also really important for king's landing to go out because of purposeful grasping over the iron throne and without any dragonfire (even accidental) involved. king's landing is doomed in a very apocalyptic sense because 'the game' is unsustainable. nothing new will come out of the city's destruction and dany's use of fire is always transformative, she creates life out of death. wildfire only destroys.

the city dany will bring fire and blood to is volantis, not king's landing. volantis is the final remnant of the freehold's imperial legacy. a society built on systemic evil, on the backs of slaves cannot go on. the cyclical story here is obviously that of the dragons being redefined and redeemed as symbols of liberation after they historically helped the freehold perpetuate the evil of imperial expansion and slavery. i think the error lies in assuming dany has a personal connection to king's landing but she really doesn't. it used to be their seat and then the targaryens doomed themselves in westeros because of the iron throne. dany is not here to repeat those same mistakes. where she must go instead, is harrenhal. aegon burned it on the first day of his conquest, a conquest he began because of the prophecy of the prince that was promised. the castle is left in a half ruined state so it's not allowed to, like, die. the targaryens kept returning there and got involved in events that altered course of their rule forever - the council of 101 which led to the dying of the dragons and the tourney at harrenhal that led to their line almost ending. i think the narrative 'curse' at its heart is that the castle is the site of unfinished business. it was a result of excessive feudal violence and the conquest was supposed to lead to a different, better model of governance, i do think the targaryens came close to achieving that at certain points in their history because it was a reign of both splendour and horror, but they also ended up being responsible for the perpetuation of that very feudal violence in king's landing. as the last targaryen, dany's destiny lies in unifying and protecting the realm during the long night, this is what they survived the doom for. and i think to do that she has to go to this castle that's a place of both narrative beginnings and endings but also in stasis, and finish what her ancestors began—what aegon and rhaegar wished to achieve at harrenhal but couldn't, one too motivated by conquest and the other by prophecy. because only then will the curse break and the song end.

#daenerys targaryen #asoiaf meta #asoiaf #this is sooooooooooooooooooo. ugh amazing

visenyaism

i love your bits. normal jake. cold war mccarthyism bloodraven. daemon the visenya-ling. marxist feminist aemond . woke egg-on. which is your fav or do you love all your children equally

I think I have to vote for rhaena the lesbian

baeladragonrider

CANT BELIEVE I FORGOT RHAENA THE LESBIAN

#for shame #shame shame shame!#is that..: homophobia?

teaboot

The problem with giving advice to angry and suffering people is that rather frequently the thing they need to know to improve their position is the last thing they want to hear and not something they have the capacity to internalize or accept

teaboot

Unfortunate truths you can tell people that would help if they could hear what it means and not just what it sounds like

You were the victim, and it wasn’t fair, but it’s over now. Nobody came to save you, and I’m sorry, but it’s too late for anyone to go back and do it different.

You’re suffering over something that cannot be resolved. You’re allowed to feel angry, or outraged, or betrayed, but there will eventually come a time that you don’t feel that so violently anymore, and you’re going to want to have something good left to go back to.

You can’t make anyone love you the way you need to be loved. That’s how a lot of good things end. Not with a clear sign, something blocking the road that says “do not proceed”, just a splitting of the path that’s still moving somewhat in the same direction.

You can’t fix them. Nothing you can do will fix them. And if they fix themselves, they can’t do it for you- they have to do it for themselves as well, because otherwise a day may come when they’re alone, and as long as they live, they are their only true constant. So you can support, and you can encourage, but the hardest part is up to them. And sometimes they can’t do it even with your help.

Sometimes letting go of someone feels like mourning at their funeral before they’ve died, and every time you see them after it’s like talking to a ghost that doesn’t know it’s dead. Sometimes that happens. You’ll both still wake up tomorrow anyways.

I understand that you’re afraid, and that you’re afraid for good reasons. And I understand that being brave isn’t as easy as just turning that fear off, and you would if you could in a heartbeat. But the thing is, as long as that fear is able to dictate your choices, it will have power over you. If you don’t believe you can try to fight it, if you accept that it will always be in charge, you let the frightening thing stay present in your life. It will exist as long as you stay paralyzed. And that sounds cruel, but it isn’t something anyone can fix for you.

The person you may let yourself become after experiencing the terrible thing may very well grow into a much bigger, much more terrible thing, and someday it will swallow the first terrible thing whole. And all that will be left is something far worse for someone else. And you will not be able to shrink it down by explaining where it came from, because terrible things that are dead and gone are never as terrible as terrible things that are alive right now in front of you.

No matter how much or how little I love you, I still do not have the ability to help you the way you need to be helped. I might be the helper you want, but I am not a helper you can get. If you are to be helped at all, you will need to accept that it will come from someone else.

#posts of all time #thank you

atopvisenyashill

a song of ice and fire thesis statements

I was always intensely Romantic, even when I was too young to understand what that meant. But Romanticism has its dark side, as any Romantic soon discovers . . . which is where the melancholy comes in, I suppose. But there's always been something in a twilight that moves me, and a sunset speaks to me in a way that no sunrise ever has.

#asoiaf #yeah

theoppositeofprofound

The point about the permeability of the soul is at least in part that we cannot separate love and consumption. You almost always can’t say ‘this is because of the soul juices mingling’ vs ‘this is one of the horrors of love’ and that’s the point.

Is Naberius haunting Ianthe because they grew up together, because they were trained to be two halves of the same whole, because she knew him inside out and there’s a love in that, however violent? Or is it because she’s been using him like a battery and a hand-puppet and a computer program and now he’s threaded up through her. She can’t know! She doesn’t want to know, she refuses to look.

Did Gideon v1 become more militaristic after Pyrhha’s death through osmosis? Or was it because he loved her and trusted her and his first thought in a crisis was What Would Pyrrha Do. Did he love Wake because their programming got jumbled or was it because he met a awful redhead and thought oh, my best friend would have been so stupid for you, she would have been such a wreck…

Did John make the earth angry or did the earth fill John with anger or was it both? Did the love come first or the fury? Does Mercy love her god because Cristabel did or does she do it for the sake of Cristabel? The lyctors all view themselves as living memorials to the dead, of course they’d voice the dead’s thoughts, act out their habits and carry on their infuriating quirks. How else do you remember? You can’t peel apart the analogy and make it all magic or all mundane because soul-permeability coexists with the everyday manacles of affection.

#this is horrifying thank you #the locked tomb #analysis