Reposting This From Twitter Bc It's Making Me Lose My Mind

GAME OF THRONES

Has the best fucking writing I’ve ever seen if you know anything and I mean anything even if you haven’t read the books but just watched the show then you know how George R.R Martin is when it comes to writing which he helps in part with on the show.. “ they’ve ruined the show” like is anyone even watching? Honestly I feel like everyone’s just been skimming the fucking episodes because it’s a popular show but haven’t paid attention to shit! Whats wrong with Danny’s arch? She was a weak girl who hasn’t been taken seriously for the most part of the show and she proves them wrong but how does that then justify her as a proper ruler?? The more she loses the more mad she becomes and shes begins to get a tunnel vision but if you haven’t been following her or if your a human how would that not fuck someone up???? Every time she finds something borderline normal she becomes powerless and loses it to things beyond her control! She had armies of slaves she saved and watched them die in a battle for a man who could take it all from her if his truth surfaces! Oh and don get me started on the thing about the knight king and people being annoyed that he was killed easily like no he wasn’t?? They lost more than half of their army to him and he wasn’t even the real threat it was always Cersei and has always been cersi. How is that not amazing writing?? The whole time they had you thinking that the thing to end everything was the knight king, death itself, and it worked because you never looked at cerise and what she was truly all about. No matter the consequences she had to be in power or die she said it to ned stark! COME ON! How is that not perfect! And here you are on the fourth episode saying it’s all gone to hell and not watching anymore which is fine. Better off, if you didn’t understand it make no comment on it. If you actually had been watching the show you’d know that whoever wants power dies and those who don’t end up having to carry its weight. This show was beautifully written and anyone who try’s to argue can fucking fight me

I can’t wait for the final books to come out and everyone will realize this was George R.R. Martin’s plan the entire time. 

Hey I’m as mad as anyone about Dany going crazy… but if you read the books and watch the show you can see this is NOT something completely out of left field for her. She sees herself going mad. She asks the people she trusts to watch her. She tells herself she’s not her father or brother. Now take her baseline and add 2 dead kids and a dead best friend. This is what Dany was going to become.

I need closure, so I’m going to write about this one last time.

It boils down to admitting that I was completely wrong in interpreting what the story is about. I have to admit that I have been duped into thinking that Jonsa was the main story. I mean, of course the first reaction that I have when I saw the leaks and witness that the leak was real was denial. This can’t be the ending.

But now I think acceptance is coming.

I thought I had GoT (and by extension ASOIAF) figured out. GRRM hides his true protagonist underneath other characters and their stories. First we thought Ned Stark was the detective that was going to solve Jon Arryn’s murder. He died, we were shock. Jon Arryn’s murder was also not that important. Then Robb Stark rises, we root for him and it seems that he is winning. Then the Red Wedding happened. We were shocked. The War of Five Kings falter.

Then season 6 happened and Jon becomes the King in the North, his true identity is a Targaryen prince and an heir to the throne, he’s got hot sexual tension with his redhead Stark sister Sansa who after the parentage reveal will become his cousin. A Targaryen hidden prince and a Stark girl who is a queen material. Poetry. Fairytale. Perfection.

At that time, it suddenly clicks to me, well of course Ned must die and of course Robb must die, otherwise how will Jon the true hidden protagonist can rise and become king? So we expect the story will come to the conclusion for Jon to become the king and marries his love interest and solve all the political issues in the Seven Kingdoms. Because he is the true hidden protagonist, right?

Gosh, I really should have known better.

(I know that I am oversimplifying things with the whole “one true protagonist” thing but I’m just trying to make this make sense somehow. Also this is not to say that Jonsa is not important to the story. It is important, but in the same way Ned and Robb’s story is important but it is just not endgame)

When I took that conclusion I forgot about Brandon Stark. The character that Jojen Reed claims as the only thing that matters. The first character that GRRM made when he started ASOIAF. The fairytale that is Jonsa turns out to be just another layer of a very intricate and elaborate red herring to cover up GRRM’s true protagonist Brandon Stark (and to some extent Arya Stark, because she killed the Night King). So of course Jonsa must fall and that fall was brought upon by one Daenerys Targaryen.

I have to laugh to my own argument about Jonsa being the main endgame couple because the very first shot of the Starks was Jon Snow with his brother Bran followed by Sansa Stark with his sister Arya. 

It’s the other way around. It’s a shot of Bran Stark with his secret prince adoptive brother Jon followed by Arya Stark with her sister Sansa.

I had a tiny bit suspicion when I was working on my jonsa parallel series. They have always been clever with the episode titles. One title that stood out to me was 4x05 - First of His Name. At that episode, King Tommen was crowned and that was the first reference to this episode title. But the jonsa parallel in that episode relates heavily to Bran, and specifically Lysa Arryn brought up Sansa’s uncle Brandon Stark. And of course Bran the Builder is the founder of House Stark. This should have been a clue to how big Bran’s role is, but who would’ve guess if they only give us cryptic clues like this?

Then there was 2x08 - The Prince of Winterfell. Bran along with Rickon was the the Stark princes that still stayed at Winterfell. Bran as the oldest is the one who has authority towards Winterfell. Theon took Winterfell from Bran.

The other brilliant one is 3x08 - Second Sons which refers to Daario Naharis’ company, but it also revolves around Sansa’s marriage to Tyrion Lannister, who is the second son of the Lannister family. Who else is a second son? Yes, Jon (Aegon) who is Rhaegar’s second son and also… Bran. Bran is Ned Stark’s second son.

So I believe that the Starks at the end are where GRRM wanted them to be. I remember a leak that takes the form of five questions and that leak state that Jon’s last scene is the Wall. It also ties in very nicely with the first scene in GoT with Waymar Royce. Yes, this was always to be his ending. Jonsa must dissolves by making Jon a traitor, queenslayer and kinslayer and to be exiled to the Wall.

But does this story with Jonsa as the final and biggest red herring works? As it is now with the show, the answer is a definitive no for me for several reasons.

First the build up time. Ned’s story was given ample time to build up with enough focus, 9 episodes until his death. And Robb’s story was given even more, a whole of season 2 and large part of season 3 until the red wedding. Jonsa was built up in season 6 with their fall starting on episode 3 of season 7. But when did Bran ever became focus of the story. We always thought, he MUST be important, but how, when, why? Bran Stark never rises, he’s always in the background until suddenly in the very last episode, he’s king…. It also doesn’t help at all that he’s becoming this emotionally detached being that we find hard to empathize with. It is just a sad sad irony that jonsa as the red herring is a much more emotionally compelling story, with characters played by actors that happens to spark chemistry to the roof, rather than the true hidden Prince Bran. (And I’m not even going to try to address the cult personality of Daenerys Targaryen that add a complex layer of red herring)

Second, Jonsa never truly happened in the show. We were given subtext after subtext and the culmination never happened. I am inclined to think that in the books Jonsa will happen and pol!Jon is real. The betrayal towards Daenerys Targaryen will be full blown Jon having an incest affair with his sister and he will father a bastard with her (Yes, I am still holding on to that theory because it only make sense given all the clues. And think about it, Bran’s fall was brought by an incest couple Jaime/Cersei and later his rise will be brought by Jonsa).  I think the show just didn’t have the balls to fully materialize that betrayal and either way, the ending would still be the same, Jon exiled at the Wall for killing Dany and Sansa stayed in Winterfell ruling (in my version, with a bastard son named Snow).

The third and most important aspect of why Bran doesn’t work is because his power is supernatural and so his kingship does not feel earned at all. I really don’t know why GRRM is going with this…like….at all, or if he even going with this in the books? But I believe this is the ending that he wanted: Aegon Targaryen kneeling before Brandon Stark.

“You were exactly where you were supposed to be” 

In the end this deceit got me hurt, heartbroken, sad, unfulfilled. But I will never regret to be a part of this lovely fandom that has taught me so much. Seriously, I learn so so much from everyone’s meta and I am forever thankful for that. I wouldn’t have reach this conclusion without reading all of your wonderful meta and I wouldn’t have been able to write shit without you setting the example. So again, thank you and I hope everybody will recover soon!

On a scale of one to Jon Snow, how badly do you regret your recent life choices?

Jenny would dance with her ghosts, with the ones she had lost and those she had found and the ones who loved her the most…They spun her around on the damn cold stone, spun away all her s o r r o w and pa i n 

And She n e v er wanted to leave.

                     She never wanted to l e a ve.

                                     Never wanted to leave. 

Movie Reflections: Swept Away

This reflection is about the 1974 film, Swept Away, directed by Lina Wertmüller. It is not about the 2002 remake of this movie, which stars Madonna.    

The volatile, isolated relationship between Gennarino and Raffaella made me very uncomfortable as I witnessed the two individuals bicker about a variety of issues from democracy to taxes. Then, they eventually start to enjoy each other’s companies, or it at least appears that they are starting to become fond of each other. Gennarino and Raffaella even start to have sex. They communicated by surviving on an ideal island void of yachts, champagne, and spouses. After suffering an extended period with no luxuries, the hostility between Gennarino and Raffaella evolves into a negotiation of lifestyles. Gennarino quickly roasts meals and lives in shelters as Raffaella eventually gives in to his order and command. I did not know how to respond to their acceptance of each other after witnessing the two characters cuss at each other and viciously fight on a desert shore. I was even more stunned by the brooding power of class or economic status that controlled Raffaella. Her power is inevitable once Gennarino and Raffaella leave their twisted form of paradise. She returns to her bourgeois lifestyle leaving Gennarino stuck with his struggling third-world culture. I was anticipating that Raffaella would have a change of heart towards her servant. Then, it dawned on me why Wertmüller would build up and tear down Gennarino.

There is the sense that Wertmüller wants her audience to feel shocked, disturbed or even frustrated with how distant the servant and the socialite truly are. Their class controls a specific character. It is as if power and selfishness manipulates every move that Raffaella makes once she is back home. It makes more sense now why Wertmüller mentioned Caligula while talking with Ernest Ferlita since he was consumed with the same ideals revealed in Raffaella. She never felt true, intimate concern for Gennarino. She thinks according to her husband and their democratic principles. Her adamant contradiction towards third-world classes is why I was so shocked by the heartless ending. She never had a heart in the first place. She personifies the materialism associated with the bourgeois class. Wertmüller paints her as a victim privileged by her class. Yet, I only recognize her as a victim on the island, not on the dock. She receives back her identity once they are rescued. A scene that was pivotal in the relationship between Gennarino and Raffaella was when Gennarino skinned and roasted the rabbit. Raffaella realized that she was nothing without her democracy and wealth. She even cried to Gennarino that she felt like that rabbit. She is metaphorically being stripped of customs that spoil her. I even felt sympathy for Raffaella as the medium shot unflinchingly focused on her desperate, hurt expression. Then, the tension between the two main characters adheres to how Wertmüller thinks. She feels that men and women should not be separated, according to an interview with Ferlita.

As Gennarino and Raffaella are stranded, the island is representative of  society, but the isolated desert also does not have the luxuries that allow Raffaella to feel like that she is above everyone else. The dominance of each role becomes reversed once they are stranded on the island. It is also through the freedom of the isolation that Gennarino and Raffaella confront their difference. Although they start helping each other, there is always some distance between the characters. Bird’s eye angle showed Gennarino and Raffaella fighting with each other. There are no close-ups or sudden cutting. It is just an abandoned atmosphere stained by a ridiculous feud. I do not feel a part of the feud, for it is their problem or circumstances. They are fighting, but there is no one to help Raffaella from her impoverished conditions. The extreme long shot amidst the desert only makes the bird’s eye angle more effective according to the mood of the ridiculous argument. No one is listening or paying attention to them. They have to deal with each other. The camera follows each individual around with the presence of classical cutting in order to develop his or her search for identity. It ranges from Gennarino reminding himself of his masculine traits or Raffaella helplessly wandering around the island. I think the island also symbolizes people who are built by the power of disorder because Gennarino and Raffaella are still the same people dictated by their class and country. They think everything is fine once they get to make love or make a necklace of flowers. The impending doom of betrayal only awaits them once they leave their illusion of harmony. I feel that Wertmüller made us uncomfortable as a means to think more critically about society.

After half-an-hour the Duke came forth and was accompanied to the Queen’s Chamber, where were also the Princess Mary and many attendants.The Queen (Catherine Parr) danced first with her brother very gracefully; and then the Princess Mary, the Princess of Scotland (Margaret Douglas) danced with other gentlemen and many other ladies also danced. A Venetian of the King’s household danced some gallards with extraordinary agility. After dancing had lasted several hours the Queen returned to her chamber, first causing one of the noblemen who spoke Spanish to offer some presents to the Duke, who kissed her hand. He would have likewise kissed the Princess Mary’s hand, but she offered her lips; and so he saluted her and all the other ladies. The King is said to be a man of great authority and beauty. The Queen has a lively and pleasing appearance and is praised as a virtuous woman. Describes her dress and that of the Princess Mary, who has a pleasing countenance and person and who knows how to conceal her acquirements. She is adored throughout the kingdom.

The Duke of Nagera’s Visit to England, 17th February 1544   (via queenmarytudor)

“He would have likewise kissed the Princess Mary’s hand, but she offered her lips; and so he saluted her and all the other ladies.”

Princess Mary, hoping for some action!

when talking about sansa supposedly not being a sympatheic character in AGOT, I don't think antis really understand they're not making the point they think are (like those who think sansa is only kind because of courtesy rather than it being like Ned's "lord face" and seperate from her kindness as a person) a sympatheic character isn't necessarily someone who is good or to root for - one example is Tyrion. His backstory makes him a sympatheic but that doesn't make him a hero.

Yes, exactly. Sympathetic isn’t defined by whether or not you are a nice person, but by whether you are attracting the liking of others (in this case: The readers).

Tyrion is a villain, but he is clearly written for people to find him sympathetic in spite of this. My favourite example of is Glokta from Joe Abercrombie’s First Law who is a horrible, horrible person, but readers still sympathise with him because of his backstory, his painful disabilities and his dry sense of humor (... that sounded like a description of Tyrion too, actually).

If Sansa isn’t sympathetic in AGoT, it’s because GRRM didn’t write her to be someone the readers sympathize with - And he did that very deliberately by POV trapping her and pitting her against other characters that he clearly wrote to be immediately liked, and by giving her flaws that people don’t usually associate with fantasy protagonists (or really it’s just one of her flaws; the touch of snobbery).

The thing is, though, that GRRM seems to have taken great pains to write her in a way that doesn’t make most readers immediately fall for her, while at the same time never making her not nice. He didn’t have to use a POV trap in Arya I; he could have just made Sansa behave badly towards her. He could have included Sansa when Arya thinks of Jeyne calling her “horseface”. He didn’t have to make such an effort to show the Arya-Sansa conflict as so clearly rooted in society’s expectations and the teachings of Septa Mordane. He could have written Sansa taking Joffrey’s side at Darry Castle instead of having her pretend she forgot to avoid taking sides. He didn’t have to spend literally all of Sansa’s chapters dropping hint after hint about how nobody ever answers her critical questions, or how Ned’s interactions with Arya was teaching Sansa the lesson that disobedience wasn’t as big an offence as she thought.

He might have overdone it a bit, because even after 3 more books of Sansa clearly being written to be sympathetic, people are still refusing to believe that they were initially fooled, and are looking for signs that she was a horrible person all along, blowing every flaw that she has out of proportion to be right.

But the point is that GRRM might not have tried to write AGoT Sansa as sympathetic, but he never wrote her as not a nice person, or with any irredeemable flaws; clearly intending to develop her further in the following books.

The fact that a lot of us still found her sympathetic in AGoT in spite of this, I suppose says something about how much you related to her, or how much effort was put into analyzing the text and understanding Sansa’s motivations on the first read. I know that a lot more people who initially didn’t care for her found her sympathetic when they went back to read AGoT again, looking at Sansa with different eyes and trying to see past GRRM’s smoke screen.

So, no. They really aren’t making the point they think they are making. I also don’t really know why they are trying to make it in the first place tbh. Their point seems to be the usual stuff; that Sansa isn’t nice, isn’t a main character, is supposed to become a villain. But as I recall that quote, GRRM even goes on to say that Sansa becomes more sympathetic as the story progresses.

So I suppose I don’t really see how the point they are trying to make would get them what they want either.

Perfect casting!

🄼🄰🅁🅈 🅃🅄🄳🄾🅁 🌹

“Known in her youth as one of the most beautiful princesses in Europe, Erasmus said of her that "nature never formed anything more beautiful.” (18 March 1496 – 25 June 1533)

“the Queen [Mary] was to cross over to Boulogne, and the King of France would come as far as Abbeville, it was said, to meet her, and there consummate his marriage with this “nymph from heaven” her beauty and affability warranting the expression. ”

[Calendar of State Papers Relating To English Affairs in the Archives of Venice, Volume 2, 1509-1519. ]

Mary Tudor ( 1495- 1533) was an English princess who was briefly Queen of France and later progenitor of a family that claimed the English throne. The younger surviving daughter of Henry VII, King of England and Elizabeth of York, Mary became the third wife of Louis XII of France, more than 30 years her senior. Following his death, she married Charles Brandon, 1st Duke of Suffolk. The marriage, which was performed secretly in France, took place during the reign of her brother Henry VIII and without his consent. This necessitated the intervention of Thomas Wolsey, and although Henry eventually pardoned the couple, they were forced to pay a large fine.

“Mary died before Charles, Henry and her remaining sister. Mary Rose was the beautiful Tudor Princess, who lived a fairytale life in a nightmare era.”

The face of a man who let a million people burn so he could be king

Bran knew that he would be picked to be king.

So when Bran spent the end of season 7 and the first part of season 8 constantly saying how important it was for Jon to know who his parents are… it was so Jon would break up with Daenerys, she would go mad, burn a million people, and Jon would kill her; leaving the throne open for… Bran.

I mean if the show had made Bran an intentional villain or morally grey; acknowledge that he knew a city would be destroyed, and didn’t do anything to stop it, rather did his part to set up the pieces to make it happen, that would be a great twist. But the writers don’t seem to be aware of the implications of Brans psychic abilities and the choices he made ¯\_(ツ)_/¯