Colorful Mess

Just adding on here but I do know that George called Ayra a psychopath in this interview.

Dwarfism is real, spinal cord injuries are real, amputations are real, PTSD is real, but Dany's infertility is fake? Do ya'll know how crazy that sounds? Some women miscarry, some women cant have kids. This is life.

I have never read a story where a woman who thought she was infertile actually wasnt because it was ONLY her nephew's magic sperm that could fix her womb right up. And while I have read stories where people lived with physical problems without a cure EXCEPT for the magical heroine, these stories usually suck. Generations of incest increase risk of infertility. I could cite stuff but thats not necessary, there's a lot out there in science journals. Charles II was infertile and scientists have linked that to his inbreeding coefficient. So went the Hapsburgs. The infertility problems seemed to increase for the Targaryens as the inbreeding coefficient increased. Dany's mom had multiple stillbirths and miscarriages. My take on this is, the author is giving the Targaryens consequences for their choices to inbreed like they did. Their Doctrine of Exceptionalism comes with a price. All incest dynasties end, usually no longer than the 300 year mark. Ironically, "breaking the wheel," Dany's own plans, doesnt involve a Targaryen restoration with a special baby who is the next Targaryen hope. Why did they write that in then? Just to have Dany look like a hypocrite in the future? If she doesn't want to do that, Dany should send her child (if she even has one) to the Citadel or Nights Watch like Aemon.

Tendency to miscarry could be a sign of infertility. Infertility can still mean ability to get pregnant. As for those scenes, there are different interpretations of what the show is setting up. Usually they set up stuff to crush peoples hopes, characters and audiences alike. And far too many people are hoping for it. These are the guys who stabbed a pregnant woman in the stomach for the shock value.

Like I said, its unclear if its a prophecy or an assessment of Dany's physical state, a figure of speech, or the author inserting a way to tell the reader this info. But if it is a prophecy, Cersei also had her fortune read by a witch and children were discussed, and that came to pass. Dany is far too magical already. Dany being fire proof is fantastical. Dany walking out of a fire unhurt is fantastical. Dany hatching and riding dragons is--you get the idea. Dany being infertile is realistic. Its realistic considering she's the child of multiple generations of incest. It is realistic in a story where everyone has physical or mental problems that cant be "fixed." I know I may be throwing cold water on everyone's baby fever but I still think this story has a reputation for gritty realism. Thats what made it stand apart in the genre and what GRRM says is the theme of his entire life's work, fantasy wrestling with reality.

It's unclear if its a prophecy or simply a figure of speech. The last part could be Mirri's assessment as a midwife. And anyway, my personal take is that she won't have a child (that lives). Bran can't use his legs. Dany can't have children. Sometimes people just have physical problems they cant overcome. This story is very brutal about things but I appreciate that harshness in a fantasy story. Dany having a child is about as fantastical as Bran walking again.

I agree, if Mel thinks she "brought ice and fire together," when its like...okay Mel is wrong as usual. She doesn't even know that Jon himself is ice and fire. Why is a special ice and fire baby necessary when there is already one, Jon, the guy we've been watching for seven seasons? One could argue that his parents fulfilled one criteria for the Pact of Ice and Fire in the books, a Targaryen/Stark marriage, so even Lyanna + Rhaegar could fit the ice and fire thing--they just caused a lot of destruction together. Which Jon and Dany will probably continue to do, if S7 is anything to go by.

I guess its just this unique case, of a parentage reveal, why Jon is singled out and the protection idea from Lyanna being emphasized. GRRM has said he doesnt write about characters being protected by their destiny, so I would imagine his destiny (whatever it is) doesn't make him safe.

Death is coming for everyrone from multiple places, including other people: "The White Walker army will notbe the only issue our characters will have to face In Season 8. They will also have to face each other." (David Nutter). The tapestry posted doesn't mention the White Walkers. And there is #forthethrone, which puts the throne front and center. I wonder why?

But shouldnt Bran be there if that was the case? I think its more about Jon's parentage reveal and what is going to happen because of that.

I think its about Stark acceptance. All of the quotes relate to Jon. He needs protection after the parentage reveal, and Bran might not play as big of a role in that as Sansa and Arya will. In fact Bran's reveal puts Jon in even more danger, hence the ominous turn at the end. I dont think it means Bran=Night King.

That's right. She also could have kept it for herself. There's a feather on her wrist in the following episode when Myranda talks to her. Its somewhat ambiguous if its the same feather.

Sansa puts the feather back in S5.

Or just ignore her for the time being.

I see what you mean. Yes that's possible if she steals the grain and Sansa. I just hate kidnapping plots. UGH please no lol

I don't think it will. Cersei said she's going to use them to "take back what is ours." Maybe ours=Casterly Rock? She could mean the North too, but she also said she'd let the zombies kill them. Seems like a waste to send sellswords up there if she expects them to die anyway? Euron betraying her and using them for his own purposes could work too I suppose, but I wouldn't most just become zombies? Also I don't see WF falling to the Golden Company with a track record like theirs. They've been defeated in Westeros every time. And yeah having it fall like it did with Theon again is pretty stupid. You kind of have to introduce sellswords, the bank, if they're going to play a role later. But I dont see them playing a major role. They're more like quick scenes to show "okay this person has power." They're treated like monopoly money.

Sansa called him "The Night King" and said there's a Wall there. Why would she say that if she thought he was Jon's imaginary friend? She also said that she's preparing Winterfell from whichever direction the threat comes. I take that to mean North or South, she's preparing for Cersei or the evil guy whom she mentioned in Episode 1 who she believes exists. Its really not a big deal. They are all shown preparing for war. Its not like they're going to stop preparing. There's no scene where the NL tell Jon that the Others are children's tales like Luwin did.

I agree with this tbh, its not a hippy speech about bringing peace and love to Westeros, its her saying to Tyrion she's going to destroy, not rebuild. She also put House Targaryen on the wheel, which I always saw more as foreshadowing for the end of her House. If the wheel means ending the game of thrones though, good luck! Lol

Critiques of Dany and ya'll jump to Maegor. Have some perspective on shades of grey. She's not Maegor the Cruel, although the showrunners have talked about her capacity for cruelty widening even as her empathy widens. She's more like Aegon I/Stannis. Stannis had his heroic moments and Aegon had his benevolent moments Neither were mad but her empathy is being lessened the more she wants the throne. Unless Dany was a conqueror but is now a soft pastel easy going queen just because Jon fucked her? Fierce women on a mission for themselves redirecting their life's goal because they hook up with a man is pretty sexist. I'd prefer if she just continue to be a dragon if that's the case.

The WW just conveniently wipe out all of Dany's obstacles or complications? Terrible writing. The show is now about the reaction to Jon's parentage as Weiss says. The WW battle is about how characters respond to an existential threat as Benioff says. Something isn't going to go smoothly in these two plotlines. My guess is there will be a fraction in the alliance, as there ALWAYS is on this show. The idea that she has them all hostage because she overpowers them is exactly why they would want to fight her. "She can easily get the Iron Throne without the Starks' help" - yes, by CONQUERING. That means melting castles and turning Winterfell and the Red Keep into new Harrenhals and cooking Lannisters and Starks in their armor. If she doesn't want to do that she has to curry favor with the Lords and actually handle their complicated issues herself. She was a fitting ruler for Essos, which she had to rule like a police state. That's her training and that's the environment she learned in. She has no practical experience with dealing with "ruling with the support of the rich" aka the lords, as Tyrion points out. Aegon the Conqueror wasn't a hero. He massacred thousands of people for his ambitions. The story ending with Dany ruling after having destroyed every house to get there isn't exactly...good.

Why don't they have the means? Otherwise all the training that Bran, Sansa, and Arya received is just to benefit Dany and put a Targaryen on the throne. All of their skills: Used for Dany's benefit instead of a defense of the North from both ice and fire. Dany's skills are conquering. She learned to rule; but she ruled by force. It's not like she learned how to rule the Lords of Westeros.

I think a key piece we're missing is Dany's reaction to events. Most theories I've read makes her too passive when she's always driven the plot. I think her loss of standing as the heir will make her "go too hard" as Cersei has been doing. As a woman she has to be 10x more merciless than any man to gain credibility and I do think she's going to become too protectionist. Not mad. Just too hard, like Stannis. It's also interesting that LOTR ended with a fight against fascism. GRRM on the Scouring of the Shire: "they went home and home was all fucked up. The evil guys had burned down some of the woods; a fascist-like tyranny had taken over." I think this is what the Stallion that Mounts the World means and why Jojen saw the "sea" at Winterfell. He saw the Ironborn, but the "Dothraki Sea" also applies. Northern Conspiracy 2.0 and guerilla warfare in the snow is right in line with this and the final battle with Dany, and fits the fight in the Shire at the end of LOTR. I do think Jon will try to keep his parentage a secret; it's in his best interest to do so. But imagine if Dany will find out about all of the lies at once? Cersei's lies, Jon's lies, and the North's lies to pretend to be loyal? That would make her the slayer of lies, meaning she tries to kill them.

My post wasn't about Torrhen. It was speculation about how I think Jon/Dany is NOT a repeat of Torrhen/Aegon. But there were Northerners who refused to kneel when Torrhen did. They just exiled themselves to Essos rather than live under Targaryen rule.

I've been thinking about a character who knelt to an unpopular monarch but his own people didn't take his lead. Kind of like a Torrhen figure who knelt but his people still rebelled anyway. Even though show Dorne was a mess, there does seem to be some truth to the idea that Doran will be betrayed for kneeling to the wrong people. In the books he makes the Sand Snakes swear on Oberyn's grave that he will serve him in his plots, and Obara in particular leaves out the part about swearing on his grave. I think she's the one who spearheads the plot to overthrow him. Dorne is important to watch because they have a lot of similarities with the North. I think Northern Independence is going to become an underground conspiracy and Jon kneeling to Dany won't mean jack.

Yes it's feudalism, but my point is that the character who wants to loyalty under the implicit threat of being burned alive isn't usually The Hero in storytelling. It creates storylines where the protagonists are given motives to resist such a character in order to be free.