Jump to content



False Dragon1991

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. I just wanted to talk about the scene in Clash of Kings from a re-read where Jorah gives Dany the peach in the city of bones. Now, this is described as "small" and "over-ripe": however when Dany tastes it its so sweet it "almost makes her cry". Anyway I think there is actually a lot of symbolism and maybe a bit of foreshadowing. The other time a peach comes up in Clash of Kings is the prominent scene between Renly and Stannis. He takes it out and bites it in front of Stannis. He says this represents the richs, wealth and power of the Reach. So there is a clear correlation between land/power
  2. In Andor, its women first regardless of age. But in Cairhein, I guess it should go to the eldest which is clearly Galad from the Damodreds first marriage. So, what gives, how does Elayne have a better claim? Galad isn't a bastard and normally the first marriage has precedence over the second. Its kind of an illogical moment just because its more convenient to make it part of Elaynes story and because Galads story is about something else. So, RJ sort of acts like Cairhein has the same female only rules as Andor?
  3. True but Robert was King for a similar amount f time and Stannis was a member of his council for just as long. So he would have had similar experience to Tywin. . Plus, he has suggested things not that different from Tywins dealing with the Tyrells. He wanted Jon to be a Lord in the North to get the north on side because he knew they would follow Eddards son. This is also patronage and ties John to him. He also accepts that he might let one of his men marry this woman and acquire all of her lands if he performs this very important service to him. So Stannis understands patronage and reward
  4. One thing I don't get is how Westeros behaves completely differently towards Tywin Lannister and Stannis Baratheon. Both men are portrayed as ruthless and have committed atrocities. Tywin murders the Targ children and wipes out the Castameres. Stannis is "utterly without mercy". Both have fought in wars and should have won glory. Stannis held Storms End against the Tyrells. Tywin cowed the troublesome bannermen of the Westerlands. Both are shown as arrogant, abrasive and outright disrespectful towards their subordinates and those around them. On the TV show Tywin Lannister has quite literally
  5. I mean I thought it was strange that nobody really made the connection between the Seanchan (Raken/To-raken) apart from once when Rand sees a painter put wings on his flag. So, do you think this creature was around during the Age of Legends and thats where the image is taken from? With the raken/toraken being related to it? Or is it just simply the artist of Lews Therins flag took the wings off for artistic reasons (magic makes it fly not wings?) off a raken which he used as a point of reference?
  6. No, they should have certainly had a neutral title and used spoiler tags in thread. Fair enough I'll edit it.
  7. No, really. For the last year on that board any mention of Jorah involves people saying "he forced himself upon her". Nobody has ever objected to those terms being used even though they apparently mean rape and there is nothing in the text to suggest that. An unasked for but enjoyed advance (which I assumed was what these posters had to be referring to in derogatory language) since theres no suggestion of rape in the text but apparently people on that site don't feel the same way. So we're talking about whether Dany should hold Jorahs jealousy, his kiss and the tension between them against
  8. I just got banned from a site for saying she wasn't. How is two close friends kissing in a scene where the author notes through her POV that she kisses him back and thinks "his lips are soft" count as rape? Can somebody please explain that one to me?
  9. So the DO is part of the pattern? If the wheel is meant to balance out good and evil; and the DO is a product of said evil then that seems to contradict the notion he isn't part of the Universal Order. Wouldn't killing the DO just mean all those evil actions would eventually feed the birth of a new evil god ala Slannesh from 40k? The DO isn't part of the pattern, so I don't see how killing him, or even burning him from existence could touch the pattern since he isn't part of it. So nothing Rand does to the DO should affect the Pattern. Unless this suggests that Rand was slightly insan
  10. A big problem I had with Rand and the DO. I may be mistaken, but my understanding was that the Pattern as made by the Creator is by its nature neither good nor evil. The Dark One wants to break this system of balance. So I couldn't understand why Rand killing the DO would create a world without free will because nobody can do evil. People doing evil is part of the pattern. That could only happen if Rand also tried to alter the pattern then? Wouldn't killing the dark one still leave a world with free will and where people could do evil? It seemed to be suggesting that the DO is the source of al
  11. Been wondering about how in Wheel of Time you have Fain (Mashadar) and the Dark One as two evil beings trying to corrupt the world. I tink it might be possible that the forces of fire (Rhollor) are trying to do the exact opposite to what the others are doing, a "summer which never ends" by destroying all ice (Great Other) in the world. Those of us who have read Wheel of Time know that a never ending summer is just as bad as a never ending winter. This could very well be the agenda of Quiathe in manipulating Daenerys into fighting ice and going to Westeros as well as other rhollor worshippers.
  12. OP - Yes and No. I felt that just the sheer mental image of Mashadar pouring suddenly down into the valley and drowning these two vast armies as this unstoppable force was a very strong image. I suppose the threat wasn't embellished enough but if Matt hadn't stopped him then quite simply nothing would and he could well have killed both Rand n the Dark One. Plus, he technically did kill Matt. Just fresh from Egwenes death and having won the great battle it was not inconceivable to me that he might die with his role having been fulfilled. Especially since Perrin who had a grudge against Fain
  13. I have no idea. Maybe he thinks he is more clever than he is? The only reason for cliffhangers is to build hype for the next book. ADWD and AFFC are ALL cliffhangers. On the eve of three major battles and a swath of major and minor characters fates were left hanging precariously in the air. I can only assume that after the 11 year slog through Crows and Dragons that either Martin or the editors felt insecure about continuing interest in the series with the big gaps between publication. Really, the only reason for cliffhangers is to keep people hooked into the series.
  14. Wow, I am just gonna put down some of my initial thoughts on the book. There was a lot of good here and some bad. On the whole a satisfying end to the series. -I was STUNNED that Egwene died. I mean, really, I actually couldn't believe she was dead. Nobody dies for 13 books and then the biggest female character dies? Especially since she was a character who most strongly thought towards the future, strengthening the White Tower, reaching out to other groups of channelers, blowing away the cobwebs of the old and her promise to Tuon that she intended to live to see their evil empire fall. E
  15. Then why was it several books long if it was just to set us into a false sense of security before Caemlyns fall? If its point was to be too easy going for Elayne whilst the real threat gets ready then it doesn't require vast embellishment.
  • Create New...