Im Not Into The Whole Jon Snow And Who Hed Date, Im More Into The Lannister Or Past Targs. I Read Some

I’m not into the whole Jon snow and who he’d date, I’m more into the Lannister or past targs. I read some good posts on mediaeval queens expressing their soft power in a clever way but was surprised to see you don’t feel that way. As someone who enjoys your posts I was hoping you’d elaborate on your no soft power comment regard asoiaf and mediaeval if that’s alright.

Soft power was coined as a concept in the 1990s and relates to the way modern day nation states use cultural mores, media power, and foreign policy to coerce other nations into agreeing to their demands.

It’s about economic strength, rather than military power. For example, the USA wields immense soft power via its films, TV, and music, all of which dominate globally.

Soft power doesn’t really have a place in discussion of medieval monarchy or queens.

Most women who ruled in their own right during the Middle Ages relied enormously on hard power to uphold their place at the top of the feudal system.

This does not mean they were never diplomatic, and they certainly used religion and arts to their advantage as well, but ‘soft power’ is generally misused in discussions about ASOIAF.

To enact change on the level that Dany does, for example, you must use military might. The threat of violence is necessary to prevent the former slavers from revolting, unless you intend to kill them all to begin with.

How do you people who are on reddit, keep your blood pressure from rising. Stupid thread defending stupid writers, almost worshipping the choice of putting Tywin at Harrenhal as peak TV, "chaos is a ladder" is apparently not a sign of hack writing. Look, look at this shit down below. I hate, absolutely hate those neutral readers and dudebros who are in the fandom.

I will forever standby my observation that most fans ( both of books and of show) wouldn't have minded the adaptation, had Jon and Dany been given their dues. And this isn't me bitching about these two characters, not at all, but this fandom always had the propensity to shoo away nuance and to reduce many of the other characters ( yes I am talking about my fave) to mere tropes, rather than to sit and reflect. Which is why the show didn't get called stupid this resoundingly before season 8. Had it ended the way it was predicted to be, the influence of the show would have been carried on into book discussions even by those who are as of now hardcore show antis ( before season 8, I had heard things like "yeah well even though Arya is one of the big fives, she isn't really the main character of the series, why would the details matter" :) )

This is the reason why there are still polls where Jaqen and Sandor are given more importance than Ned or Jon in Arya's storyline.

What the fuck kind of drugs is r/asoiaf on???

So, this is pretty cool.

Someone on Reddit did some math wizardry on just how much trouble do Targareyen women have in having a healthy pregnancy and birth. MaesterLies had a few requirments for what would count against a healthy pregnancy:

no miscarriage,

stillbirth,

infant death or mother dying from childbearing complications in the 1st year after birth.

For twin pregnancies, both twins must be born alive and live past infancy for it to be considered successful (Naerys' 171 birth of Princess Daenerys and stillborn son is not "successful" since one of the twins died). Pretty much, no death for anyone involved.

So there are plenty of ways for a pregnancy to be listed as failure. Even then, Tagraryen women had a 76% success rate!

Rhaella is by and far the anomaly here (that and Aemma Arryn). I am gonna be biased here and say that the maesters were involved. Something footy is afoot. Both times a Targaryen queen suffers from a huge amount of pregnancy complications precedes a huge civil war?

Anyway, this definitely puts to rest the idea that the Targaryens suffered from a higher than normal amount of pregnancy complications.

I’m not into the whole Jon snow and who he’d date, I’m more into the Lannister or past targs. I read some good posts on mediaeval queens expressing their soft power in a clever way but was surprised to see you don’t feel that way. As someone who enjoys your posts I was hoping you’d elaborate on your no soft power comment regard asoiaf and mediaeval if that’s alright.

Soft power was coined as a concept in the 1990s and relates to the way modern day nation states use cultural mores, media power, and foreign policy to coerce other nations into agreeing to their demands.

It’s about economic strength, rather than military power. For example, the USA wields immense soft power via its films, TV, and music, all of which dominate globally.

Soft power doesn’t really have a place in discussion of medieval monarchy or queens.

Most women who ruled in their own right during the Middle Ages relied enormously on hard power to uphold their place at the top of the feudal system.

This does not mean they were never diplomatic, and they certainly used religion and arts to their advantage as well, but ‘soft power’ is generally misused in discussions about ASOIAF.

To enact change on the level that Dany does, for example, you must use military might. The threat of violence is necessary to prevent the former slavers from revolting, unless you intend to kill them all to begin with.

it's wild to see people say stuff like "sansa is a politician, arya is a warrior" while not being able to point out a single political act sansa has achieved, and not being able point out any of arya's "warrior skills" that isn't the handful of fencing lessons with syrio she received for like five months max lol

Politician!Sansa and Warrior!Arya are two fascinating ends of a fanon ouroboros; Neither concept exists outside of the other and neither concepts are based on the books. This fandom is just so attached to the idea of Sansa being this incredible politician, with intelligence above every other character, that her having nothing in her own chapters to support that idea doesn't stop them. That's why Arya's intelligence, skills, and entire character arc get reduced to her being nothing but a walking, talking weapon. Like you said, her "warrior" capabilities are essentially the handful of lessons she had with Syrio where her most important + relevant lesson was how to observe her surroundings. Her only "combat" training with the FM was her defending herself with a staff when she lost her eyesight. There's nothing to suggest that she's going to be a warrior, in fact we get the exact opposite. We get constant reminders of Arya's small stature and lack of strength that prevent her from fighting/defending herself in certain situations. All her kills rely on sneak attacks/stealth and she's never been in an outright swordfight with anyone. George even refrains from calling her a warrior like Robb and Jon. Brienne and Asha are examples of female characters who are actual fighters and if you compare their chapters, you can see the difference.

But then Arya's entire existence is antithetical to fanon!Sansa's. Her Harrenhal arc is what people pretend Sansa was doing in KL, her relevance to the North gets transferred to Sansa, and her intelligence and political activeness are erased so that Sansa can shine. They'll write essays on how Sansa is the most intelligent, politically savvy character and how Dany/Jon/Tyrion's arcs only exist to highlight her own ruling arc but the second someone asks them for evidence from the books, it's crickets. I don't understand why their enjoyment of her character hinges on her being the most important/intelligent one. No Arya stan is under the illusion that she's going to be the political character or outclass Dany, Jon, or Tyrion. It's just part of her story so we acknowledge it. Arya is going to have her political arc in Braavos and Sansa is going to have her political arc in the Vale, they aren't mutually exclusive. The only issue is that some people want Sansa to be the only one with a political arc and that's not the story that George is telling.