wendynerdwrites:

racefortheironthrone:

Game of Thrones Season 7 Premiere Live Blog!

Hey folks! Many of you have been asking me about my plans to cover Season 7 of the show – which I plan to do with some blog posts, nothing fancy like in previous seasons.

Our roster shall include:

@racefortheironthrone

@poorquentyn

@goodqueenaly

@turtle-paced 

@ladycarolinemikaelson and

@wendynerdwrites!

Join us! (Drink while joining us!)

Quick reminder that the live-blog goes live at 9!

pretenderoftheeast:

doublehex:

poorquentyn:

wendynerdwrites:

racefortheironthrone:

Game of Thrones Season 7 Premiere Live Blog!

Hey folks! Many of you have been asking me about my plans to cover Season 7 of the show – which I plan to do with some blog posts, nothing fancy like in previous seasons.

Our roster shall include:

@racefortheironthrone

@poorquentyn

@goodqueenaly

@turtle-paced 

@ladycarolinemikaelson and

@wendynerdwrites!

Join us! (Drink while joining us!)

Me: CAN WE TALK ABOUT WHAT THEY DID TO STANNIS

Everyone else: Emmett there are things happening on screen

Me: NOT STANNIS THINGS THO

PQ, that was two years ago. Maybe you should see a therapist.

If Stannis can grouse about being unaccredited with his contributions during Robert’s Rebellion for 15 years, his fans can grouse about his character assassination for 2 years!

😎

I’m still pissed about that too. 

aftselakhis

(noun) An untranslatable Yiddish word, aftselakhis is defined as a deep desire to execute a certain deed, because somebody else doesn’t want you to or told you, you’re unable to accomplish it.  (via wordsnquotes)

This is wrong; aftzelakhis isn’t a noun, it’s an adjective or adverb, and it means “so as to anger/annoy” (i.e., so as to anger or annoy the person who forbade you to do it).

(via animatedamerican)

It’s not identical in meaning and doesn’t capture all of the nuances, but I feel like “spite-fueled” would be a decent rough translation.

(via shinyhappygoth)

well, now i know the most jewish possible word

(via jewishdragon)

Ah, so there is a word to describe my dominant motivation. I wish high school age me had known this. 

So…. There’s going to be a liveblog of the Season 7 premiere.

wendynerdwrites:

It will be myself, @racefortheironthrone, and @ladycarolinemikaelson, and it will likely be on racefortheironthrone.wordpress.com, with more details tomorrow night. No, I haven’t talked them into bingo yet. But it should be awesome. Also, for my Jonsa people, yes, I may be (drunkenly) looking for hints with Lady Caroline.

Well, Season 7 is starting! 

So hopefully between us, there’s one tank, one healer, and one dps…

In intrigued about your latest comment in the Gardeners looking for independence after the dead of the dragons, had they survived the conquest. Is this really possible? If the king can summon the other 6 kingdoms, they could pretty much lose everything. If it was just the dragons stopping kingdoms from returning to their pre-conquest state, why didn’t the Lannisters tried to regain their Independence then?

Of course it’s possible, it depends on the circumstances – I don’t think the Gardeners would be stupid enough to do it on their own, at a time when there was a strong monarch who commanded the support of the other six kingdoms, especially since even Mern IX was smart enough to ally with the Lannisters before confronting Aegon.

Rather, I think the Gardeners might well try to seize on instances in which the Iron Throne was weak and preferably already in the midst of a civil war to try to gain more autonomy within the system, or gain their independence if they think they could manage it. 

Had a Gardener heir survived the Field of Fire, how would that have reshaped the power dynamics in ASOIAF?

This is an interesting question, because huge chunks of Westerosi history change as a result, as discussed here and here. In terms of power dynamics, the Gardeners would be far more secure in their rule over the Reach than the Tyrells have been, as like the Starks and Lannisters, they have been kings for all of recorded history, and even more so than either of those, they have the whole succession of Garth Greenhand to reinforce loyalty from almost all the major houses of the Reach.

So as I’ve said before, you’re going to see a far more unified Reach when it comes to national politics, so if it gets involved in civil wars and rebellions, it’s not going to split. Which is going to make the Reach have much more weight in those conflicts, because whoever they side with is getting 100,000 men, a huge fleet, and a LOT of the food in Westeros. 

Moreover, the Gardeners are not going to have the same status anxieties as the Tyrells, and thus will be less eager for royal favor – which means they might be less willing to contribute so many tens of thousands of men for ruinous invasions of Dorne, or to fight for the Mad King Aerys. Indeed, given how Mern IX acted during the Conquest, it could well be that once the dragons die out, the Gardeners might start challenging the Targaryens in an attempt to regain their independence. 

I feel like this might be in the weeds, but do you think the Tyrells (particularly Willas and Garlan) are trying to build their own coalition of the Reach, Westerlands, and Dorne? Willas maintained a friendly relationship with Oberyn Martell who was an influential figure in Dorne. While Garlan, and maybe this is just Martin’s writing, appears to be trying to cultivate a friendship with Tyrion, who could influence Jaime if Tywin’s plans to make him his heir again worked. Am I overthinking this?

I think you are, because however friendly Willas is personally, the rest of the family hates the Martells on a Capulet vs. Montegue level, and while Garlan is pleasant to Tyrion, Loras is perfectly willing to testify against him at his show trial.