fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2702 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2702 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

__________________________________________________

15.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 068 secrets from Secret Submission Post #386.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 1 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

The Targaryen need to fuck off and leave Westeros alone. They have already done too much damage.

I don't think the Targaryens have anything the other families don't have except dragons. Which is a big exception, but they might need those to deal with the White Walkers, so.

Except who is left who would be a less damaging ruler than her? She may not be perfect, but she's the lesser of the actually possible evils (which doesn't include any of the Starks since any of them including Jon on the throne isn't possible within the politics of that world).

Ｓｔａｎｎｉｓ．

Stannis would be an awful ruler of Westeros. I think he isn't a bad person per say, but he doesn't get Westeros politics anymore than Ned Stark did. And he has allied himself with someone who is evil and more dangerous than he is. Stannis may not burn Westeros to the ground, but Mellisandre sure will.

Meilsandre isn't evil though, and Stannis is the only competent person vying for the throne right now. He's also the only one who actually gets shit done. Don't pay any attention to his or Meli's show versions and read the damn books.

Stannis would be a fucking terrible ruler though.

Stannis is a fucking asshole, though.

Seconded. I'm not saying Stannis is perfect but he wouldn't be worse than Joffrey was.

Book!Stannis, maybe. Show!Stannis? NOPE. Nopenopenope. The show ruined his character so completely it's shameful.

SANSA FOR WESTEROS 2016

(okay it'll probably be more like 2066 by the time A Dream of Spring comes out, but you know)

I stan for Stannis, too, anon. Not only is he the rightful king, he's not part of GRRM's three-headed dragon of presumed audience proxy/self-insert/spank bank material.

He's also the only one currently focusing on The Real Threat, and if you read a lot of GRRM's other work, characters are usually severely punished for ignoring said threat and rewarded for not doing so.

...Provided he doesn't in fact go full on epic fantasy with this and have Dany swoop in to burninate the ice zombies, save the day, and rule with GRRM's Other Two Favourites at her side in the most predictable, lamest, waste of a series ending I will have ever read.

P sure the best ruler possible within the politics of Westeros is King Peasant Uprising Motherfuckers

This, holy shit.

I don't even keep up with the books or the show but I would immediately be hella interested and probably read all the books if that was what happened.

Everyone knows that Ser Pounce would be the best ruler for Westeros.

Sadly, it's really not possible that he could be worse than some of the others who are angling for it.

So this is the Westeros equivalent of the argument where William Henry Harrison was the best US President?

(no subject)

ibbity - 2014-05-28 00:04 (UTC) - Expand

sabotabby - 2014-05-28 00:07 (UTC) - Expand

ibbity - 2014-05-28 00:10 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2014-05-28 00:11 (UTC) - Expand

vethica - 2014-05-28 00:14 (UTC) - Expand

arcadiaego - 2014-05-28 21:03 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2014-05-27 23:59 (UTC) - Expand

ibbity - 2014-05-28 00:05 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2014-05-28 00:10 (UTC) - Expand

Especially since he's secretly one of Elia's dead babies warged into a cat. He has a claim to the throne!

Jon's absolutely possible within the politics of the world.

Jon would be the most cliched choice possible.

No, wait. Jon with Dany would be the most cliched choice.

ariakas - 2014-05-28 02:22 (UTC) - Expand

An illegitimate child? No. Even if he's the kid of Rhaegar rather than Ned, he's still illegitimate. If he was a Targaryen and Dany was dead, it might possibly be a question if she took the throne first and then died and he was the only Targaryen left. Otherwise not going to happen.

(Anonymous) - 2014-05-28 01:22 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2014-05-28 01:24 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2014-05-28 04:25 (UTC) - Expand

She's an usurper and is batshit insane.

I may not know everything about the fandom, but I was under the impression Danerys came from the royal family who ruled before the rebellion. That means she's less an usurper and more someone reclaiming her family's stolen throne - at least in her POV. Stannis would call her an usurper, for sure.

Also, from everything I understand, she may be young, naive, and not think through the full effects of her actions, but she's not insane.

(Anonymous) - 2014-05-28 17:53 (UTC) - Expand

mimi-sardinia.livejournal.com - 2014-05-28 18:11 (UTC) - Expand

It doesn't matter that she's an usurper if she can, in fact, succeed in usurping it. The idea that anyone has some kind of divine right to kingship, or that the blood connection to any previous king dictates who will take the throne, is clearly wrong. For one thing, who IS the true king? The Targaryens? The Baratheons? If any answer makes sense, really, it's the old patchwork of kingdoms that the Targaryens supplanted. It certainly has the benefit that you can't call anyone involved a usurper, which is clearly untrue of any claim derived from either the Targarayen and Baratheon.

But more to the point, the fact that the kings have been Targaryen and Baratheon for however many centuries it's been proves that it doesn't fucking matter what the legal status of any candidate is; what matters is the amount of power they have, and the narrative logic of what kind of power end being regarded as supreme in ASOIAF and what kind of challenges are made to potential claimants.