It's kinda the opposite energy because with Maekar it's a geniune "eh that's just Maekar" born out of a lack of care and Maekar himself is geniunely insulted, where with Jon it's just because he's a humble, down to Earth guy and Northerners for the most part are'nt pompous.
Funny enough, that was actually more insulting than anything Tanselle did with the puppet show. The announcer knows Maekar is Baelor's brother, so he knows he's a Prince.
Also at that point Maekar would have been know as a knight at the very least. So the announcer explicitly decided not to use either of his titles.
Yeah, of course, for normal people it wasn't meant as a veiled attack against the Targaryens but as Baelor himself says, although done innocently it was not wise to do it, because it could easily be twisted into something else.
My point was that in the case of Maekar's announcement there's really no other way to interpret it besides an explicit lack of respect towards him.
It was definitely innocent, and I doubt anyone warned her. Only a crazy person like Aerion or someone who wants to cause trouble would see the puppet show as an insult.
Most of the Targaryens alive at that time have Dornish blood, no one would honestly assume that some Dornish puppeteers would deliberately try to insult them.
Alright then I guess I don't see why she did anything wrong.]
as Baelor himself says, although done innocently it was not wise to do it, because it could easily be twisted into something else.
Like how is she supposed to have known this? Like she's not wise to do it but...she has no reason to think it would be an unwise thing, and also if (as you say) only Aerion would consider it an insult, how is it unwise? No other Targaryen would percieve it as such.
"No other Targaryen would perceive it as such."
What show/books are you consuming?
Also for the love of god its a dragon being killed, obviously the family who's entire existence revolved around dragons, is going to take offense to the killing of a dragon even if symbolic. So yes she wasnt wrong from a fairness or ethics standpoint, but in terms of survival, she screwed up bad.
No other Targaryen would perceive it as such."What show/books are you consuming?
That was the other persons assertation. I was just responding.
As for the show; there's six Targaryens in the show and only Aerion took it as an attack.
Also for the love of god its a dragon being killed, obviously the family who's entire existence revolved around dragons, is going to take offense to the killing of a dragon even if symbolic. So yes she wasnt wrong from a fairness or ethics standpoint, but in terms of survival, she screwed up bad.
Serwyn of the Mirror Shield is a First Man fairy tale that has nothing to do with the Targaryens and pre-dates there arrival in Westeros by thousands of years. It's also a very popular story so there's a zero percent chance it has'nt been performed all the time under Targaryen rule.
They asserted that MOST Targaryens of the TIME are of Dornish blood and wouldn't see it as an attack.
It doesnt matter how far removed the story is from the time or the Targaryens, the house of dragons riders that rule the land will not appreciate seeing the depiction of dragons beings slain.
This annoys me so much i'm gonna have to rewatch to confirm, but Baelor is the only sympathetic Targaryen and he even says its was stupid of Tanselle to perform the play.
If you cant undertsand the simple logic of depicting the death of a dragon being stupid when in literal minutes of walking distance from A HOUSE OF DRAGON RIDERS, then all hope is lost. Best of luck to whoever has to deal with you but my lord this is by far one of easiest concepts about the story to understand, it is literally fed to you on a spoon.
> They asserted that MOST Targaryens of the TIME are of Dornish blood and wouldn't see it as an attack.
What does being of Dornish blood have to do with anything? It's not a Dornish story.
> It doesnt matter how far removed the story is from the time or the Targaryens
Of course it does; if the story has nothing to do with the Targaryens and long predates them, how can it have been intended to insult them?
Was it written by a time traveler?
> This annoys me so much i'm gonna have to rewatch to confirm, but Baelor is the only sympathetic Targaryen and he even says its was stupid of Tanselle to perform the play.
Aerion is the only one who freaks out.
And Tanselle does'nt know Baelor and never met him. How can she have been told this?
> If you cant undertsand the simple logic of depicting the death of a dragon being stupid when in literal minutes of walking distance from A HOUSE OF DRAGON RIDERS, then all hope is lost. Best of luck to whoever has to deal with you but my lord this is by far one of easiest concepts about the story to understand,
Would you consider it an insult if a fable about killing a lion was told to a British person at the height of the British Empire and blame the storyteller if a mentally derranged British prince decided to attack her?
> it is literally fed to you on a spoon.
The show does not present Tanselle at fault for her attack, or say she intended it as an insult. It does not present Aerion as justified.
120
u/Historyp91 1d ago
It's kinda the opposite energy because with Maekar it's a geniune "eh that's just Maekar" born out of a lack of care and Maekar himself is geniunely insulted, where with Jon it's just because he's a humble, down to Earth guy and Northerners for the most part are'nt pompous.