u/Heiwashika

hello people,

I wanted to travel a bit to Nepal, but I can only go in july (mid) and the plan was to spend 2/3 days and visit Kathmandu and the surroundings, and then go on a 5 days trek to the ABC

The trek proposed by the guides is:

Pokhara -> Sinuwa

Sinuwa -> Deurali

Deurali -> ABC (through MBC)

ABC -> Sinuwa/Bamboo

Back to Pokhara.

I wanted to know if you think this is wise ? I heard it's full on monsoon season by that time. The idea was to fly to Pokhara to avoid the risk on landslide, but I wonder if the trekk in itself can be enjoyable during monsoon.

In the case where I don't do this trek, are there other things to do for a whole week in the Kathmandu area ?

thank you for your help :)

Hello everyone, I'm from France and I wanted to travel a a week or so in Ladakh, maybe do a bike tour to see the crazy landscapes and discover the culture.

So I wondered how safe it would be as a muslim ? I guess most people won't care, but since it's relatively close to Pakistan and there seem to have tensions, I wanted to ask.

thank you

I've been thinking about something in A Song of Ice and Fire and I wonder if anyone else feels this way, especially book readers.

My issue is not really about “who ends up on the throne,” but about what the story seems to imply about fantasy and romanticism itself.

To me, the Targaryens are not just another house in the story they are the main carrier of the mythic/fantasy dimension of the world.

If you remove them, a huge part of the setting becomes closer to medieval political fiction:

succession wars feudal politics diplomacy

The Targaryens, on the other hand, embody the older, more romantic side of the world:

dragons ancient bloodlines prophecy and destiny Old Valyria and its lost grandeur dragon dreams the feeling of a dying mythic civilization

Valyria in particular feels like the emotional center of fantasy in ASOIAF. Westeros constantly feels like a diminished world living among ruins of something greater (Valyria, the Wall, ancient magic, lost knowledge, Valyrian steel, etc.). The Targaryens are basically the last living bridge to that age.

My problem is that the books seem to be setting up the extinction of the Targaryens in a way that feels unique compared to every other great house.

Most major houses may suffer or decline, but they still have large family trees and continuity:

Starks still have multiple surviving heirs

Lannisters still exist

Tyrells, Martells, Arryns, etc. continue in some form

But the Targaryens are reduced to near extinction already. If Daenerys dies childless, Aegon dies, and Jon embraces a Stark identity rather than a Targaryen one, then House Targaryen effectively disappears entirely.

And because dragons seem tied to the return of magic, their disappearance also feels like the disappearance of fantasy itself.

Yes, there is still magic in the North or beyond the Wall, but to me it feels emotionally different. Northern magic feels eerie, folkloric, ancient, almost horror-like. Targaryen/Valyrian magic feels grand, romantic, imperial, tragic, and mythic.

So my fear is that the ending may essentially become:

the age of dragons endsthe mythic civilization diesmagic fades back into folklorepolitics remain

Which makes me wonder: is ASOIAF ultimately a fantasy story about the death of fantasy itself?

Or am I completely misreading what GRRM is doing here?

The more I re-read or « watch » (yes I shouldn’t) ASOIAF content, the more I compare it to « Mary Stuart » by Stefan Zweig and feel some form of melancholy. I would like to precise that this a macro reading and I’m not getting into « this house is bad this one’s good ».

Would love to read your opinions.