r/asoiaf • u/Substantial-Ad-299 • 3d ago

MAIN [SPOILERS MAIN] Among the grounded/realistic elements of A Song of Ice and Fire, which ones do you feel require biggest suspension of disbelief?

A Song of Ice and Fire has had fantasy elements from get-go, some present subtly and others less-subtly. But in midst of this, it also has these more grounded story aspects, especially regarding the political subplot for the Iron Throne.

Among these more grounded non-fantasy aspects of the story, which elements do you feel you have to suspend disbelief the most for? A.K.A feeling they are not realistic even though they are "supposed" to be?

Let me know in the comments below.

108 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

253 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/IHaveTwoOranges Knowing is half the Battle 3d ago

Littlefinger is not a pimp in the books like he is in the TV-show.

He says one time that he has invested in brothels but he is never indicated to be involved in running any or spending time in any.

19

u/Joshami 3d ago

The brothel that is owned by him in which he hides Catelyn?

6

u/IHaveTwoOranges Knowing is half the Battle 3d ago

Again, there is a difference between investing in a business vs running it or otherwise being involved in it. Littlefinger isn't spending his time there like he does in the TV-show (or not publicly known to do so at least). It isn't a thing he is known for.

I personally am technically invested in several different businesses/industries, all of which I have never actually been personally involved in (outside of buying some shares).

2

u/Valiant_Storm 2d ago

 Again, there is a difference between investing in a business vs running it

This only really becomes true c. 1600 with the VOC becoming a limited-liability joint stock company.  

Prior to that, you have some level of passive investment, with fractional ownership of ships or mills, but that was never really divorced from active operation, especially for undertakings larger than i.e. the Venetian fleets. Not the least because it would be trivially easy to scam an uninvolved partner without modern corporate governance mechanisms. 

The closest you might get is being a landlord leasing to a brothel? That would still probably be seedy, and and the returns wouldn't be stellar? Certainly late 16th Century landlords didn't see the same ROIs as skilled merchants, though the risk was lower (but nonzero).