sunfyre

[obsidiansalem]

I know people talk a lot about the predatory behavior of characters like Daemon, Corlys, Alyn, etc.

but Rodrik Arryn deserves more side-eye too because what the actual fuck was this

Lord Arryn was the oldest of the three contenders, however; at six and thirty, he was twenty years older than the princess, and a father besides, with four children left him by his late first wife. Short and balding, with a kettle belly, Arryn was not the man most maidens dream of, Queen Alysanne admitted, "but he is the sort you asked for, a kind and gentle man, and he says that he has loved our little girl for years. I know he will protect her."

Sir. YEARS?

And nobody in the text blinks. Not Jaehaerys. Not Alysanne.

Now, I know someone's gonna say: "Maybe he meant platonic love. Like an uncle. Or a guardian." Even if we take the most charitable interpretation possible, it is still uncomfortable that this grown man had a long-term emotional attachment to a little girl for years and then seemingly had no issue wanting to marry her once she was considered old enough. The emotional continuity is the problem. The affection does not remain paternal or distant, it simply transitions into a marital relationship.

And Daella’s characterization makes it even worse. The narrative constantly emphasizes how timid, sheltered, innocent, and almost childlike she is, which makes the transition from “he loved our little girl for years” to marriage feel deeply uncomfortable.

I understand that some of these marriages with age gaps (though apparently not this one? idk) are just written as "well, that's how it was back then, hehe. Histotical accurac 100%!"  Even the ones with tragic or disturbing undertones. The problem is that the narrative returns to this exact dynamic so constantly that after a while it starts feeling repetitive and almost numbs the whole issue.

Or worse, others are framed as some “tragic love story” instead of what it actually is. Sometimes it even starts feeling lowkey gratuitous.

Or perhaps, within the story itself, it is not even really considered an issue at all. Who knows. Maybe I’m overthinking it.

[obsidiansalem]

Finally reading A Game of Thrones and out of everyone, I didn't expect Ned to annoy me, but here we are ... 🤡

[obsidiansalem]

Maybe Fire & Blood wasn’t actually about succession crises, dysfunctional families, power-hungry people.

Or Green/Black propaganda.

The maesters were just writing anti-incest propaganda all along!

Just desperately trying to warn Westeros that having babies with your sister/brother might, in fact, have consequences. Even for those who consider themselves "closer to gods than to men".

Because there is genuinely no other explanation for how catastrophically stupid the Targaryens became by the Dance era. They fumbled that dynasty in ways that should not have been possible.

Sorry Vizzy T. Maybe you were innocent all along. You genuinely had no idea what you were doing. Your inbred parents failed you.

And Rhaegar too. That is why George don't bash him. Don't hate Rhaegar, guys. He is a victim. Another tragic character.

[sansa-stark-is-me]

GRRM should’ve written more lowborn POV characters. The nobles are fun and all but sometimes I need to know what the random peasant in the Riverlands thinks after dragon no. 47 burns his crops for the third time this week.

[obsidiansalem]

Adding more thoughts to this, maybe I’m being a bit dramatic, but hear me out…

I genuinely think the Targaryens would’ve seemed terrifying to a lot of smallfolk, especially during the Conquest or the Dance.

Without their pov, it’s easy just to see them as cool fantasy dragon riders. But from the perspective of a deeply religious medieval society? They must have seemed genuinely uncanny.

Imagine how that looks to them (and probably even some nobles):

An uncanny appearance (being pretty or not, doesn't matter)

riding giant fire-breathing beasts

marrying brother to sister

claiming they are closer to gods than men

Wiping out entire bloodlines

Burning and wrecking places in minutes

arriving from the ruins of a civilization destroyed in an apocalypse

From inside the dynasty, dragons are heritage, pride, identity. From outside, they are weapons controlled by a family that openly violates religious taboos.

Incest is taboo in basically every culture in Westeros. I mean, even the freefolk think sleeping with close kin is a big no-no. It is an offense to the gods.

The dynasty stops looking romantic and starts looking invasive and eldritch.

Like, I would not be surprised if some smallfolk viewed the Targaryens almost like an antichrist figure. In the sense of “these people have offended the natural and divine order, and now the realm is being punished for it.”

So… could the Dance have felt more like some kind of religious horror rather than just a civil war to the smallfolk? Who knows.

Which is why I agree, more povs (or even a short novella) of random peasants during the Dance or the Conquest would’ve been fascinating and kind of funny in a dark way lol. Because the contrast would be insane.

[decomposingfungi]

cersei lannister truly the most iconic character of our time. she's the worst. she's considered one of the most beautiful women in the realm yet she wishes she wasn't a woman at all. she fucked one of her brothers and tried to kill the other. she successfully murdered her abusive husband and put her bastard on the throne. her actions started a war that killed thousands and she doesn't give a fuck. ned stark caught her in her plots and instead of deny it she tried to seduce him instead. her daddy issues are so bad they cause her narcissistic delusions. she's a multifaceted and complex character and yet she tries so hard to be the evil stepmother you can only admire the determination. her body dysmorphia is so bad she cosplays as her dead crush. she's doomed by the narrative. she became a murderer at ten years old. she fucked a woman. her right hand is a morally dubious necromancer. tyrion compared her with maegor the cruel, aegon the unworthy and mad aerys. catelyn wanted to torture her. jaime ghosted her. her own plots turned against her. she's even bald. and yet she lives while the rest of her family drop dead. who is doing it like her.

[nevilleknight]

There is something I always was afraid to say, but I just know it's the truth. GRRM only writes rape about women he doesn't care for. That's why even though Blackwood is my favorite House I still hate the bias that reaches using rape. Same thing with Rhaegar and Lyanna. I could never like them because of the way Grrm thought he could just let Elia get raped, silent narrative and all her children dead just so Rhaegar and Lyanna's love story could be seen more tragic and their son is probably the only "hero" among his siblings. Like he seriously could have just killed her.

Each author is free to have favorites but sometimes it becomes disturbing and disgusting. The thing is even though he calls his characters grey he actually hints to whom he wants you to root for.

Absolutely! George will have the most horrible things happen to characters he either dislikes or is neutral about. Like Queen Jaehaera Targaryen and Queen Daenaera Velaryon. One is a "simple minded" girl that gets a horrible death and Daenaera is a strikingly beautiful (6 year old) that everyone wants as the Queen because she's so beautiful and sociable! He also thought that Jaehaera would be too old to start having children (even thought she would have been in her 20s).

He's such a creepy nerd.

[obsidiansalem]

I’m so tired of the “well ACTUALLY Aegon/Rhaenyra would have ruled better 🤓☝️” discourse.

Like. Congrats on missing the entire point of the Dance of the Dragons.

The story is NOT about who would’ve been the Bestest Little King/Queen.

Because that argument treats the Dance like a debate prompt instead of a narrative about power destroying people. It’s about entitlement, succession, violence; a toxic, dysfunctional family detonating itself and taking the realm with them.

If this were a merit-based contest, neither of them would be touching that crown. I’d hand it to Alicent or Otto, appoint my GOAT Tyland Lannister as Hand, and call it a day.

Problem solved. Realm stable. Dragons still breathing.

Hightower supremacy 🟢✨

[obsidiansalem]

Rereading Fire and Blood and I still don’t get why Daemon Targaryen keeps getting labeled as this “morally gray” character.

Gray where.

Because from where I’m standing, his only “good qualities” are: – hot – cool dragon – cool sword

And that’s it. Which is fine! You’re allowed to like a character because he’s hot and messy and fun to read about. Fiction is not a morality test. But let’s not pretend that aesthetics = moral complexity.

And please don’t say “he fought to the death for his queen.”

He didn’t.

What he actually did was spare Nettles (which, good, but you can't call this a Redemption ) , and then he basically chose to go die dramatically while the war was still VERY MUCH happening.

There were still dragonriders on the opposing side. The conflict wasn’t over. Rhaenyra was unraveling. Daemon knew Mysaria was in her ear, actively poisoning her mind, feeding her paranoia and he just… didn’t go back.

And let’s talk about his kids. He didn’t secure their safety, didn’t remove them from danger, didn’t even seem particularly concerned about what would happen to them if he died. He just peaced out to the God’s Eye like “welp, guess this is my final arc now."

His children were still exposed, still vulnerable, still very much part of the bloodbath.

Sparing Nettles doesn’t magically balance out abandoning his wife, a still-raging war, and unprotected children.

Because what I see isn’t a man torn between right and wrong. It’s a man who consistently chooses himself (his impulses, his pride, his desires, his preferred version of honor) and forgets about everyone else

So… did I miss something? Do I have to read another book?

[hessafeelsfordayss]

YOU 👏 CAN 👏 LIKE 👏 WHAT👏 YOU 👏 LIKE 👏 WITHOUT 👏 SHITTING 👏 ON 👏 OTHER 👏 PEOPLE 👏 FOR 👏 HAVING 👏 DIFFERENT 👏 OPINIONS 👏AND/OR 👏 PREFERENCES 👏

I'm just so tired of going in the tags of my favorite ships, etc. And seeing antis starting shit just because people have different preferences and opinions. If you don't like something, that's fine. What's not fine is invalidating someone just because they don't have the same taste/ideas as you.

[obsidiansalem]

Since Fire & Blood will never give us clear answers, let's speculate for a sec.

Reading what little there is about Aemma Arryn and Helaena Targaryen, I realized they share something in common. Both were child brides.

Both became symbols of dynastic control, but in opposite directions.

Aemma’s marriage was meant to gain power, while Helaena’s was meant to reduce it. 

And guess what? In both cases, Viserys was directly involved.

There’s literally no reason to rush Aemma’s marriage to Viserys when she was eleven and he was around seventeen. The Targaryens weren’t dying out. They still had Jaehaerys, Baelon, Rhaenys, and a bunch of potential heirs.

So why the rush?

It’s hard not to see a political motive behind it.

It was about making sure Baelon’s branch looked stronger than Rhaenys’s. Rhaenys’s claim might’ve been denied, but it was still an inconvenience.

So, if Baelon’s sons and grandsons all had male heirs, then Rhaenys could be completely erased from succession talk.

Aemma’s body was just the means to that end. Her purpose was to birth heirs who would make Baelon’s legacy impossible to challenge. 

And then there’s Helaena.

Unlike Rhaenyra, who married at seventeen, Helaena was wed at thirteen. Again, there was no real rush. Viserys could have waited.

So why do it?

Because it benefited Viserys.

Because marrying Helaena early (and to Aegon) removed her as a political piece. Marrying siblings wasn't uncommon, but Helaena was a powerful match in her own right, she could’ve been used to form an alliance, give Aegon more power. But no, he bound her to a son he had no intention of empowering at all. Neither of them got lands, titles, or meaningful allies. They were kept under control, completely dependent on Viserys, and later, on Rhaenyra’s rule.

And honestly, it’s no surprise that neither Daeron nor Aemond were ever betrothed while Viserys lived. He didn’t want more pieces in play, didn’t want another ambitious marriage.

Hell, it’s even possible Viserys refused to annul Daemon’s marriage for the same reason. Because deep down, he feared history repeating itself. Viserys had seen what happened when a younger brother like Baelon built his own legacy of heirs. He wasn’t going to let Daemon do the same.  So he just… trapped Daemon in a fruitless marriage and called it a day.

In the end, Viserys wasn't lazy; he was selective in his effort. He had the brains to protect his peace by politically neutering everyone else, but he lacked the will to do more.

Apparently, that used up all his energy, because the man couldn’t be bothered to spend more than five minutes actually preparing Rhaenyra to rule. No reforms, no legal changes, no real effort to make her claim stronger.

Or to give the rest of his children at least something: a good marriage, a keep, a sense of stability.

Too much work for him, I guess. 🙃

[sansa-stark-is-me]

Book Alicent is hated not because she’s evil but because she’s ambitious

So what makes a woman unlikeable?

It’s easiest to like difficult women when their actions are shaped by survival or defense. A mother protecting her children, a widow fighting for her rights

But what kind of woman is unlikeably difficult?

A strategic, ambitious woman who will not compromise her family’s safety.

We’re mostly in the habit of accepting selfishly ambitious men. Just check the greatest rulers and antiheroes: Walter White, Don Draper, Tony Soprano, Tyrion Lannister, Frank Underwood, Tommy Shelby, Logan Roy. Their ambition is dramatic, impressive, and usually charismatic.

We’re less ready to accept ambitious women, like Alicent, who maneuvered in a male dominated court to protect her children and her claim to influence. Her ambition almost “unsexes” her in the eyes of court gossip, casting her as cold or manipulative. Can we really trust a woman who will outwit other nobles, shield her family, and insist on precedence in council?

Yet Alicent’s ambition is entirely understandable. She navigates Westeros w// lethal social rules, where any misstep can end her family. Her actions may look harsh to outsiders, but w//in the reality of her world, they are smart, and necessary.

Reading about her makes me think about how historical women had to navigate impossible systems. Their “me-me-me” drive isn’t selfishness it’s survival. Alicent’s story resonates bc it shows that difficult, ambitious women have always existed, even when society demonizes them. They are memorable bc they refuse to be erased, and they demand respect, w//out apology.

Her ambition isn’t inherently evilness it’s protective, pragmatic, and survival driven but that doesn’t stop ppl from framing her as a villain. Unlike Rhaenyra, who’s excused for reckless ambition under the guise of “rightful heir,” Alicent’s strategic thinking makes her a target for moral judgment. Ppl who want tidy “good vs evil” stories struggle with her complexity, and that’s why she gets so much hate.

[obsidiansalem]

Agree!

Was she ambitious? Yes.

But I want to add the she was also defending her son's birthright. And that, for me, was her main motivation; coupled with the undeniable need to ensure the safety of her entire family.

Yet, her actions are constantly framed as a religious fanatic, bastard hater, and misogynist monster who preferred her "super awful" son to have the throne rather than a woman. And I think the real source of the hatred is simple: how dare a woman disagree with another woman's claim to power? How dare she defend her son over Rhaenyra? The sheer audacity 🙄🙄🙄That is her unforgivable sin.

The most ironic thing is that I'm absolutely certain that if Alicent had Targaryen blood, she would be venerated as an icon or a baddie.

Visenya is a great example. She is venerated, even though she essentially pushed aside the rightful heir, to place her own son. Maegor had no claim. Aegon II, however, did have a claim , but Alicent is still framed as the usurper and the villain.

Alsoooo, it seems like many fans project Daenerys onto Rhaenyra, and by default, Alicent, her childrend , and the rest of the Hightowers are automatically cast as the villains.

[franzkafkagf]

what if you‘re alicent hightower and you gave birth to all your grief and your pain and your broken dreams and he wears your face

[obsidiansalem]

One of Rhaenyra’s tragedies is that every significant man in her life either used her, abandoned her, or failed her.

She never had someone who cared for her well being simply for her own sake. No positive figure to guide her as a girl, nor any man in adulthood who stood by her without self-interest. Instead, she was surrounded by men who saw her as a pawn, a tool, or a prize.

Her relationships with men were almost always transactional, political, or corrupted by self-interest. Lust or ambition was the constant thread woven through her story.

The only ones who truly loved her were her sons. Her children did fight and die for her, which gives their love a tragic purity.

With Viserys, The show gave more depth to that bond (kinda), but in the book I’ve always felt that Viserys treated his children as tools.

Rhaenyra was somewhat in a higher category, but as his shiny toy, his chosen heir, but beyond naming her he did nothing of importance. He never prepared her politically, militarily, or diplomatically. He knew she was at a disadvantage and still let her drift, reckless and unprepared.

His choice to name her heir always felt less like a principled stand and more like “because I said so.” And his negligence extended beyond that. When it came to her secret affair with Harwin, Viserys did nothing. He didn’t act like a father indulging a daughter; he acted like a man who simply didn’t care what happened, so long as it didn’t disturb his comfort. The same with her scandal with Daemon.

Daemon was never a man to die in bed, and he certainly wasn’t a man who lived for others.

He is often framed as her great champion, but in truth he abandoned her in the end. Some argue his last act was a noble sacrifice, but his death weakened her cause more than it helped. It looks far more like a man chasing his own doom than a husband fighting for his wife and children. His loyalty, always conditional, collapsed into self-destruction.

With Harwin... He was older, knew the dangers, and still fathered the children that would turn into the greatest liability of her claim.

Instead of grounding Rhaenyra or protecting her from scandal, he indulged (and maybe encouraged) recklessness.

And I can’t help but wonder if his father, Lyonel, played a part in that silence. As Hand of the King, he must have seen the risks, but he never put a stop to it. If anything, he benefited from the connection. It feels less like negligence and more like quiet opportunism.

Corlys loved power and legacy more than loyalty. Supporting Rhaenyra made sense when she was strong and he was gaining something for it, but once her reign began to crumble, he pivoted. His pragmatism helped secure Velaryon survival, but it could have fractured her cause.

And here lies the sad twist: betrayed and neglected at every stage, Rhaenyra internalized the same selfishness. In the end, she became like those who failed her. Her tragedy isn’t just what was done to her, but also what she became because of it.

[obsidiansalem]

Even if Daemon had played the role of the perfect prince. Dutiful, politically savvy, everything a king might want in an heir...

Viserys still wouldn’t have given him the crown.

I said what I said.

[obsidiansalem]

People often say it didn’t matter if the Strong Boys had truly been Laenor’s sons, because Rhaenyra still would have had to fight for the throne. And that’s true. Their bastardy status is ultimately irrelevant to the succession crisis itself at the end of the day.

AND YETTTT

For Corlys and Rhaenys, it did matter. And that became even clearer once the war began.

If Jace, Luke, and Joffrey had been truly accepted by them, I think Corlys and Rhaenys would have pushed for earlier and stronger marriage alliances with houses like the Lannisters or Baratheons.

Jace and Baela might still been betrothed, but Lucerys, Joffrey and Rhaena could have been used to secure other houses long before the war even started.

Because for the Velaryons, it wasn’t just about placing their name on the throne , it was about placing their blood there too.

The Greens still would have risen, just with stronger enemies waiting for them.

[obsidiansalem]

I’ve always thought it made little sense that Rhaenys (the Queen Who Never Was) and Viserys I were never married. The fact that their union never happened feels less like a logical outcome and more like pure plot convenience.

My completely unfounded theories are:

They genuinely disliked each other, or at least Rhaenys couldn’t stand him (don't blame her)

The match was indeed discussed, but once Jaehaerys hinted that Viserys would be considered heir over Rhaenys, Aemon was like "Uh, pass."

Who knows

[obsidiansalem]

I'm infuriated by the argument that Helaena's tragedy was somehow deserved because she was complicit in the "usurpation" of Rhaenyra.

Life doesn't work like that; people are often victims of circumstances they didn't create, or the consequences they face often have nothing to do with them.

Following that logic, did Jacaerys, Lucerys, and Joffrey deserved to die because they were bastards who "usurped" their trueborn siblings?

The idea that anyone's suffering is a justified consequence of their actions is a simplistic, black and white view.

And hey, since we're playing this game of karmic retribution, did Rhaena the Black Bride commit some unspeakable crime that justified her daughter being usurped and her entire line becoming extinct?