#ch 34

[captainobviois]

Hey remember when I said that Eden were probably the good guys? Put that post underwater. I don’t care what else is true, I’m on Camilla Hect’s side. Augustine and Mercy and God can go die in a hole

[every-panel-of-gokuraku]

[akutagawa-daily]

Akutagawa daily 1499/★

[everypanelofshiba]

[every-temari]

Temari's first appearance in the manga

[kikyocaps]

[evespearl]

Circling back to ch 34, I wanted to better explain the narrative decisions I made and what they mean for the story overall.

When Aemond and the Greens retake King's Landing, Daeron scorches the Shepherd's mob and prevents them from reaching the Dragonpit. For the Greens and the Targaryens, this is a victorious moment because 1) the dragons survive and 2) ultimate Targaryen power persists. This is, from Aemond's perspective, a triumph — but what does it mean for the smallfolk?

The smallfolk have been suffering for months (years, if we're being honest). They are starving, having lived under both Aegon's and Rhaenyra's unstable, tyrannical regimes, and were forced to give up their safety and hard-earned coin to the crown's greed. While the dragons are not "evil" and didn't "deserve" to be killed in Fire & Blood, as a narrative tool, they represent Targaryen supremacy. In canon, their death therefore symbolises the corrosion of that power, which is necessary for the world of asoiaf as well as Daenerys's (objectively the most important Targaryen) personal arc.

The mob had an understandable reason for acting as they did. So why did I choose to prevent the Storming in my story? The reason is selfish: I wanted the Greens to win, and I want their regime to be as stable as possible moving forward. That means they need dragons, repute, and order. Daeron and Aemond quelling the mob demonstrates their strength as Targaryens while inspiring terror and awe among the smallfolk. The death of the Shepherd and his followers further symbolises this ultimate Targaryen power, exercised through destruction and dragonfire. The fact that Aemond "prevented the worst" will make him seem more reliable to some, thus legitimising the Greens' return to power. And in such an unstable political situation, improving his reputation is imperative.

I have plans to delve deeper into the lives of the smallfolk in future chapters. I don't want the people to appear as a crazed, single-minded mob; I want them to have agency, thoughts, and lives of their own. My plan is to include more characters of a lower class. This is an intention I've had for a while, but previous chapters haven't allowed much room for it.

I've tried to show the struggles of the smallfolk in a few different ways already. First, in chapter 1, when Cordelia observes sailors and workers from the balcony of her chambers, forced to labour through a storm so her father's ships can sail. Second, in ch 10, when a starved man cuts Cordelia with a shard of glass. There have been other minor encounters in White Harbor, Tumbleton, and the riverlands (Cordelia's attackers on the way to Riverrun are also technically smallfolk, with the exception of Jonos Rivers (who is, however, a bastard)).

I've noticed that many of these encounters are negative. The "violent mob" in King's Landing seems like a continuation of "angry people" who wish ill on the nobility. I hope I haven't painted them too simplistically. Just because Cordelia's encounters have been traumatic doesn't mean the smallfolk are wrong for wanting change or being angry at their circumstances. They do deserve better: food, safety, and rights. Even if their anger is sometimes misdirected, it comes from a place of desperation that the nobility have driven them into.

Cordelia is not the root of all evil. Despite being part of an oppressive class (nobility) she did not set that system up. She is oppressed in her own way — as a noblewoman whose worth is tied to her biological function (to produce heirs for a man) and appearance. While she is far wealthier than her male attackers, that doesn't stop them from harming her or using misogynistic slurs. So there are layers to the abuse depicted here.

Aemond, on the other hand, is part of the most violent dynasty Westeros has ever seen. Even if he doesn't sit the Iron Throne, he is leagues away from Cordelia's (and even Alicent's) position. He's at the top of the food chain, and his motivations? To preserve the status quo, uphold patriarchal power, and ensure his house remains dominant. I'm not saying he isn't disadvantaged in his own ways, but he and his brothers are clearly the primary beneficiaries of preventing the Storming.

Aemond does, at least, seem to have a sliver of a conscience; he doesn't relish the smallfolk's (misdirected) worship. But it's not like he intends to change the system, either; he simply wants to ensure power returns to the "right" hands. And those hands just happen to belong to Targaryen males...

[frandomly-trash]

Im gonna fight thsi stupid fantasy guy and his fuckass hoodie