The Bard of Banefort

Aside from Jorah being Dany's oldest friend, he's also the only adviser whose opinion, as of this point in time, Dany truly respects. Dany recognizes that Barristan is a great knight, but she doesn't think he's all that perceptive (and to be fair, Barristan doesn't think of himself as all that smart either). She treats with the Meereenese, but at this point she's tired of assimilating, and she doesn't trust that any of them have her best interests at heart. Jorah has made a lot of questionable personal decisions, but he's also intelligent, tactical, and very devoted to Dany. Even if you think his feelings for Dany are inappropriate, there's no denying that the two of them had a close bond, and that she took a lot of comfort in being able to confide in him. Dany's desire to be loved and adored is something that I think is going to play a huge role in her path going forward. I don't know if we're allowed to talk about the show in this thread, but I interpreted her actions at the end of the series as being the result of feeling unloved. There's a very good chance that, with Aegon presumably beating her to King's Landing, Dany will be painted as a foreign invader, which will shatter her notion of Westeros being her one true home.

I don't think there is any cut-and-dry answer to how to best deal with rebellious lords. As Hoster Blackwood pointed out, dead lords often have angry sons looking to avenge them. You could kill off the entire family then, and maybe you'll end up like Tywin. . . . or maybe you'll end up like Maegor, assassinated on your own throne. (Not to mention that one of the reasons why Tywin got away with so many atrocities is because he was dealing with men like Doran Martell, who wanted to avoid further bloodshed. If Doran were more like Bittersteel or Lyonel Baratheon, things probably wouldn't have gone over as smoothly for him). There's also Daeron II, who was much harder on the Blackfyre rebels than expected (and Bloodraven, who was harsher still), and whose heirs still had to deal with four more rebellions afterwards. On the flip side, you've got Bobby B's relatively forgiving treatment of Balon. Balon didn't rebel again at any point in Robert's reign, but he seceded as soon as Robert died (granted, I'm not sure if Balon would have tried that had Robb, Stannis, and Renly not jumped in first). It really does seem to depend on the circumstances. In a way, the American Revolution did set a troublesome precedent that came back to haunt us less than a century later. The Civil War was essentially a failed rebellion (and our bloodiest war to date), and the Confederacy used the Revolutionary War as one of their justifications for seceding from the Union.

She essentially agreed to spend her life serving her brother's whims when she joined him in his conquest of Westeros, placed a crown on his head, and remained at his side for 20+ years. Even if it was unusual for Aegon to take a second wife, Rhaenys' line got the crown solely because she gave birth to his first son. The method of succession for the Iron Throne was the same one that was already being used everywhere except Dorne (and even in Dorne, the crown passes to the ruler's eldest child, not their brother). As far as we know, that was also the standard on Dragonstone prior to the Conquest.

Among ASOIAF fans, there's often a lot of talk about whether readers are too hard on certain characters (particularly female ones), but after re-reading the material on Aenys and Maegor, I've come to wonder if Visenya should be viewed in a more critical light, both on a Doylist and a Watsonian level. Even if she didn't kill Aenys, she committed treason by supplanting the rightful heir to the throne--Aegon the Uncrowned--with her own son, and in doing so, helped subject the realm to six years of terror on behalf of Maegor the Cruel. This puts her in the company of Renly Baratheon, who tried to take the Iron Throne simply because he wanted it, and would have therefore set a precedent that laws of inheritance didn't matter, permitting anyone with a following to wage war against the lawful heir. We're not even given any real argument for why Visenya thought Maegor should rule instead of Aegon, aside from nepotism. (Although Aenys was rumored to have been a bastard at birth, it's never brought up again in Fire and Blood, and it wasn't until after Aenys' death that Maegor moved to take the throne).

Eustace definitely does seem to be uncomfortable with the portrayal of Rhaenyra as a "wanton whore." He doesn't entertain the rumors about threesomes with Laenor and Qarl, and he portrays Daemon as having taken advantage of her, rather than her seeking him out. His claim that Criston Cole was a spurned suitor, and that Rhaenyra was the pragmatic one, might have been GRRM's signal to us that Cole was the real villain here.

This has always bothered me as well. Daeron II made the connection that making marriage alliances with Dorne would quell their antagonism, yet no one ever thought to try that with the Iron Islands apparently. The lack of marriage alliances between the Iron Islands and the North is also odd. The Ironborn live very difficult lives, so trying to do something to help would have probably gone a long way in forging a greater sense of loyalty to the Iron Throne. You would think this would have been right up Alysanne's alley, but again, for some reason she never did. (Then again, the complete lack of female Ironborn outside of Asha has always annoyed me).

Hello, m'lords and ladies. For anyone interested, Fire & Blood was selected as a nominee in the fantasy category for this year's 2019 Goodreads Choice Awards. If you have a Goodreads account (or want to make one now), you can vote here: https://www.goodreads.com/choiceawards/best-fantasy-books-2019 I don't know how people here feel about online/fan awards, but I figured I'd share it for anyone who thinks this book is phenomenal, like I do. Cheers

After re-reading the Dance, one of the biggest mistakes from that war was the decision to to arrest the dragonseeds. It alienated Daemon and Corlys from Rhaenyra, and cost her three dragon-riders. I believe that decision sealed her fate.

Exactly. When I first started the show, before I read the books, I kept getting Robb and Theon confused. Judging by the Targs featured on GOT, they're all going to be wearing the same white wig, so it'll be easy to mix them up. It's also pretty common for TV shows to only have one woman per hair color. When there's more than one, there's something else physically differentiating them. Take GOT, which has a huge cast. There are four important red-haired women: Sansa, Cat, Ygritte, and Ros. Sansa is much younger than the others, and Cat is much older. Ygritte and Ros are then contrasted by their vastly different wardrobes, with Ros wearing revealing silk dresses, and Ygritte wearing bulky snow suits. I fully believe the cast and crew will be able to make the characters visually stand apart, I'm just curious as to how they go about it. (I'm also looking forward to the costumes. One thing I liked about season six was that it had a different costume designer). * * * Fire and Blood has plenty of great material for a show, but I also think that there's a lot of great material where George left out. The post-Regency period could make for a really entertaining, chaotic family drama. You start at the end of Aegon III's reign, then carry through Daeron's conquest, Baelor and his sisters, Aegon IV as a Henry VIII-type figure (and judging by all the Tudors' superfans I know, I think that could really sell), and ending during Daeron II's reign, before Dunk and Egg starts. (I also think George could easily release make F&B a trilogy, with this period making up the second volume, but that's another conversation). Viserys II could be portrayed as a cross between Ned and Tywin: the long-suffering patriarch who spends his whole life preventing his family from implosion.

I honestly love the idea of this being an anthology show. There are so many stories to tell, and it would also allow them to possibly sign-on some high profile actors, since they'd only be around for a season or two. It's kind of funny how George suggested buying Rogues and Dangerous Women in addition to Fire and Blood, seeing as F&B has the complete Dance. But hey, royalties, right? ;-) Fire and Blood being a history rather than a traditional novel also gives the showrunners more flexibility. They can make more changes without sacrificing the overall story. The one thing I'm curious about is how they're going to differentiate the characters on a visual level. With the exception of two or three characters, all the Targs look the same. People already had a hard time keeping the GOT characters straight; this time, they won't even be able to use House arms to differentiate them.

So this is likely about Aegon's Conquest, right? It seems weird that they'd be going forward with both this show and the Dance at the same time, since I imagine they're both going to be marketed around the dragons-riding-into-war aspect. Maybe they're going to make two different series pilots, but then only pursue one?

The crazy thing about Bill's son is that that crime was also based on a true story: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/little/readings/crucifixion.html I think we're beginning to see how this line of work really takes a toll on the personal lives of the team. I do feel a lot of sympathy for Bill, and although I understand why his wife left him, I think she should have at least told him she was doing so, even if it was over the phone. She told him repeatedly that she needed help, but at the same time, it's hard to argue against the deaths of 28 children, especially when the only other person qualified to do your job is still recovering from a mental break-down. If anything, I think Bill's big mistake was not being more open with Nancy; as far as we know, she didn't know about what happened to Holden, or the politics going on behind the Atlanta case. Maybe he just didn't want to burden her, but it might have helped save their relationship. I know I'm in the minority, but I actually liked Debbie and missed having her around this season. As for Wendy, while I didn't care much for Kay, I thought Wendy was unreasonably harsh towards her. The woman just wanted to see her son. You don't need to be a mother yourself to understand that. Something that I thought this season did really well was show how so many cases are botched by bureaucracy and not having properly-trained staff (the crosses for the march, not getting permission to hang flyers, the police not bagging the evidence from Williams' car, etc.). I read an interview the other day that John Douglas (the inspiration for Holden) did, and you can see how annoyed he is that the Wichita police weren't able to solve the BTK murders sooner: https://www.vulture.com/2019/09/mindhunter-john-douglas-atlanta-child-murders.html?utm_source=undefined&utm_medium=undefined&utm_campaign=feed-part&fbclid=IwAR32zj_pFhzIAqpRjiuE0XVoxlFQUiNxlOCYDjb31Grydu241HWPFOBLelA#comments

I get your point, but there have been other shows that have managed to consistently tackle troubling topics while also maintaining a degree of humor and levity. Six Feet Under is good example of that.

Even though they finally made the movie, Deadwood will always be a loss. They needed at least one more full season to wrap up the show properly. I recently watched a cancelled CW show from the early 2010s called The Secret Circle, and it was terrible, but terrible in a really amusing kind of way. I feel like they could have just gone completely bonkers for another season or two, and it would have been fun to watch.

Modern Family - "Connection Lost" (6.16) Boy Meets World - "And Then There Was Shawn" (5.17) These are both each show's top-rated episode on IMDb, and they're the episodes that most stick out in my mind. Now time for the hardest question. . . . what's the best episode of The Golden Girls?