|
Post by Balon Blackbriar on Dec 31, 2019 19:09:41 GMT 1
I wasn't suggesting handing the Peake's a Valyrian sword. More like the interesting little changes here and there. Iirc, the Hightower's Valyrian sword was lost in the storming of the Dragon Pit but now it doesn't seem to be the case.
|
|
|
Post by Roland Cordwayner on Dec 31, 2019 19:13:59 GMT 1
Up to us to alter various things too by seizing swords and killing various characters before their time or saving them!
|
|
|
Post by Davos Dayne on Dec 31, 2019 19:18:18 GMT 1
I got a copy for christmas last year, but haven't read it all (or all that much of it, really) yet. It's been rather a while since I've poked my nose in; I think I left off around the time of the disbanding of the Warrior's Sons.
I have heard that Archmaester Gyldane should be considered an unreliable narrator (one of GRRMs favorite narrative tools, I think), though probably not about something like that. It could have been ransomed back or returned for some other reason at some point. House Peake seems to have passed into the hands of Unwin's daughter Myrielle, so it might have been exchanged as part of a deal to support her against a rival or something.
I'm a sucker for speculation about the gaps in Westerosi history...
|
|
|
Post by Balon Blackbriar on Dec 31, 2019 19:23:42 GMT 1
I was thinking of House Royce's VS in the Dragon Pit.
As to Roland's point, alt history is fun. Does House Lowther really need a VS? I mean they named it Seabreeze ffs. Wasn't that a fruity alcohol drink from the late 90s?
|
|
|
Post by Addam Velaryon on Dec 31, 2019 19:33:59 GMT 1
So the book sets up a Unwin Peake - Aegon III conflict for the next Fire and Blood book so Widow-maker will probably be returned to the Roxtons as part of the resolution to that conflict since Gorman doesn’t have the sword in The Mystery knight.
|
|
|
Post by Father on Dec 31, 2019 19:45:52 GMT 1
Just about anything about Unwin Peake (and children) in Fire&Blood doesn't mesh well with how I extrapolated my House Peake from the mentions of him in Princess and the Queen, or at least the image I had in my head. Although aside from the part where only Myrielle lived past the dance among his children, most of that might not be very noticeable.
My Gormon doesn't really fit well with the one in mystery knight either, but I de-aged his portrait after re-reading and figured that having bet on the wrong dragon and lost two castles and wallowing in bitterness about it for a decade or so should suffice to explain the difference.
|
|
|
Post by Balon Blackbriar on Dec 31, 2019 19:53:05 GMT 1
Does this guy look bitter to you? Lol
|
|
|
Post by Davos Dayne on Dec 31, 2019 20:02:52 GMT 1
I do see a bit of a resemblance.
|
|
|
Post by Roland Cordwayner on Jan 1, 2020 22:22:22 GMT 1
I bough my copy of Fire and Blood in Hong Kong as I was travelling for work when it came out! This account for the entertainingly high price tag in the picture attached - $400! I've read it through once for fun, intend to do another read through soon taking notes on character histories and potential stats for RPG purposes. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Davos Dayne on Feb 21, 2020 17:25:06 GMT 1
RIP American Democracy.
|
|
|
Post by Balon Blackbriar on Feb 21, 2020 18:25:57 GMT 1
It'll be fine. Even after Trump leaves office in 2024.
|
|
|
Post by Davos Dayne on Feb 21, 2020 19:20:16 GMT 1
Regardless of how anyone feels about the current US president, the election process has been damaged (at numerous times over the past few decades, it's just coming to a head now), and that is what I am referring to.
No matter who wins in November, a significant portion of the US population is going to feel that the result is invalid or unjust for some reason or another. Democracy requires confidence in the system. If too much confidence is lost, democracy dies.
|
|
|
Post by Father on Feb 22, 2020 14:35:23 GMT 1
Trump is mostly just a symptom, it's not like a Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio wouldn't enact tax cuts and target Obamacara, butcher the environment legislation and happily play along with Mitch McConnell.
However, the nomination process needs to change as Trump in 2016 and Sanders now gets a monstrous advantage out of having 15-20% of the electorate as hardcore fans while the rest of the bunch split the vote. Though Trump got a lot more out of it because of winner takes all setup. I don't think either of those two would have a chance if they did ranked voting and delegates being transferred accordingly once people bows out.
Also, democrats wasting their time on Iowa and New Hampshire while Trump is carpet bombing the battleground states is just stupid.
It won't be magically solved with Trump going out of the White House either, USA has a major problem with a highly uneducated population, and that means that democracy can be captured by people selling populism and outright lies.
|
|
|
Post by Davos Dayne on Feb 22, 2020 15:07:59 GMT 1
Completely agree, though in terms of the Democrats in Iowa/NH it makes more sense when you consider that the Dem. candidates are fighting a battle on two fronts - they have to win the nomination before they can win the general. Given the out-size effect that the early voting states have on the contest (thanks to the effects of framing and agenda setting), it makes sense for them to put more attention there than would be warranted just on the basis of delegate count or electoral college seats. Also, with the way Trump is following them around (he had rallies in NH and Nevada around the same time the Dem. candidates were there) I'm not sure he's getting all that big of a leg up from it.
The biggest thing I was reacting to was Trump firing yet another intel chief for telling congress about Russian interference in elections, this time for conveying intel that Russia is already active in tampering with the 2020 election.
|
|
|
Post by Laena Pyre on Feb 22, 2020 15:28:51 GMT 1
However, the nomination process needs to change as Trump in 2016 and Sanders now gets a monstrous advantage out of having 15-20% of the electorate as hardcore fans while the rest of the bunch split the vote. While I agree with some of what you said, and disagree with others, this is provably false. The population does not vote 'Oh, the centrist/corporatist I wanted has dropped out, I'm definitely voting for another' - 33% of Biden supporters have Sanders as their second choice ( source), who is the highest individual beneficiary. 20% of *Bloomberg* supporters have Sanders as their second choice, which makes even *less* sense (he's joint second greatest beneficiary, after Biden). The plan, long-suspected, and recently confirmed by the Bloomberg campaign in a Politico piece is to keep enough candidates in the race that Sanders cannot reach an outright majority at the convention, so the party can roll out the superdelegates in the second ballot, who will once again vote overwhelmingly against Sanders, ensuring anyone *except* Sanders victory. The crowded field is an overwhelming *disadvantage* for Senator Sanders, not an advantage.
|
|