4 ms·
In my view, the linked article, and the series it is a part of, utterly demolishes the argument that the Dothraki are based on real cultures with a dash of fant
by Lazare 6y ago
In my view, the linked article, and the series it is a part of, utterly demolishes the argument that the Dothraki are based on real cultures with a dash of fantasy. If it doesn't convince you, I suspect nothing will.
- Angostura 6y agoI look forward to your critique of dragon biology. It never even occurred to me reading the books that they were anything other than fantasy.
- Mauricebranagh 6y agoThat was my though and when I read the original books, I thought ok these are inside baseball books for trufans and not for civilians. By that I mean some one widely read in the relevant cannon ie not just read the hobbit LOTR, HP etc, You had read Dunsany, Mort De Authur, Homer
- Lazare 6y agoI don't know anyone who has a problem with books that contain a dash of fantasy, or indeed, nothing but fantasy. A fantasy book with dragons is enjoyable. A book that claimed that dragons really existed historically and were instrumental in William the Conqueror's victory at the Battle of Hastings is not enjoyable, it's just weird. ASoIaF (and Martin) is quite clear that his dragons are fantasy, so they're unobjectionable. The problem is that Martin has been equally clear that he intends some other elements of the world to have been historically accurate.