butterweedstrover

The thing is, even if she doesn't know the implication of what she is saying we (the viewers) and the rest of dinner table do. It reminds me of my high school. We had this class integration program with the autistic students and when there was someone the class didn't like (for whatever reason) they'd use one of those special kids to make a bunch of bald face observations out loud that no one else had the guts to say. Just like how when Helaena is toasting to her brother everyone else is smirking and the people (the audience) who are aware cheer her on for outing this asshole even if she's not part of the inside joke. It might be the funniest thing, but that isn't saying much for a show with practically zero humor. And frankly I can't laugh at this stuff anymore when it's just used incessantly to destroy one side. Like the scene with King Viserys walking to the throne, everything about that was epic in how it was shot and the music playing in the background and everything. But I was just groaning to see how once again the Greens are shown to be insufferably evil with their dumb 'surprise' faces. And really, I like Alicent and Otto more than Rhaneyra and Daemon conceptually. Otto is apparently a great statesman who has served the realm loyally for decades. And Alicent is a dedicated wife and someone with great personal integrity. But that isn't what we see. We are told of Otto's noble service but all we are shown is him deceiving the council for his own gain and at the expense of the realm. We are told Alicent is dedicated wife but all we see is her sending the king away and manipulating his weakened health to put her own son on the throne. And we are told of her modesty and integrity but she raises a drunken/rapist and a psychopath while the free-spirit Rhaenyra who (supposedly) hates duty raises three honest boys who are eager to rule and committed to learning and diplomacy. I don't buy what their selling and I role my eyes each time the showrunners try to get me to cheer the blacks or laugh at the greens.

I mean, just imagine if Helaena’s sweetness was used to reflect upon Alicent’s attributes as a good mother or a positive perspective on Aegon which we are unfamiliar with. Instead she just bashes her own family and dances with the enemy, driving home how bad the greens are and how pure and nice the blacks are.

A badass is someone who’s action (or inaction) backs up their words. Aemond comes off as a sensitive prick letting Jace’s smirk get under his skin. I like the toast, but I hate how Rhaenyra had to be the first one to go. If Alicent really felt affection for Viserys his words would have moved her. Instead Rhaenyra is once more shown to be the one who breaks the ice and mends wounds because she is impenetrable to hate. Agreed. But it’s worth noting that her lovable nature, rather than be used to humanize the Greens is used to reflect on how poorly they behave by having her side with Luke against her own brother and mocking him for being an alcoholic.

How? The scene is well acted for what it’s worth, and I like the heart to heart Alicent-Rhaenyra showed. It’s just annoying how the show takes every opportunity to show the Greens being despicable trash and have the blacks constantly being the perfect idols Aegon doesn’t even want the throne, yet he is still a complete asshole. Teasing is a term of endearment, hitting on his wife to be isn’t teasing, it’s provoking.

The Slow Regard of Silent Things is not half a book. Maybe an unfinished prologue, but certainly not 50% of a full sized novel.

Rewatching the Dinner scene, it is obvious how much Alicent's children are the ones instigating conflict. It would have been a great story if two rivals who reconcile have their hatred live on through their children in the most unfortunate of ways. But they didn't write a rivalry, they wrote a one-sided hate fest on the side of Alicent that is totally illogical while Rhaenyra just ignored the blows and kept acting pleasant. So now with the children, the Strong boys are only defusing tensions whilst Aemond and Aegon are just riling them up. And there is no Daeron to balance the equation. So it's not really that their children are dooming them to war, it's that Alicent's children were taught to hate their counterparts and can't let go. And the hatred that was imbued to them by Alicent is so stupid and pointless that it turns the potential for an otherwise brilliant scene into just more Green bashing (made more obvious by how sweet innocent Helena is shown in a positive light by mocking her brother and gleefully dancing with Jace). And to make matters even more insufferable, after everything Alicent has done, Rhaenyra is the one to apologize first. She has nothing to apologize for yet this woman is so pure of heart, like literally Jesus himself, that she suffers the burden of once again turning the other cheek and giving Alicent even more opportunity to let go of her (unjustified) vendetta and make peace.

Well they do, and it is not about whether I believe it or not. It is how you selectively choose which to believe to skew your interpretation of F&B as the universal standard. A standard you're using to brush over poor writing from the show's end. In the show you're right. But it does not stop at 'problematic'. She has an inhuman calm, a lack of pettiness or vindictiveness foriegn to mankind. Rhaenyra responds to her best friend trying to get her killed by mending ties and raising her cup to the queen. She is always first to show forgiveness and has an aptitude for kindness untainted by passion or fear. And they do this to keep Rhaenyra from doing anything that might constitute poor judgment so that her opponents have zero grounds to dispute her and are left looking like mentally unbalanced psychopaths for hating her so. You talk as if your the arbiter of a book that does not disclose who bares fault for what act. The show however made it clear it was not Rhaenyra who ignored him, but Laenor who would not do his duty once again totally absolving Rhaenyra for the bastards. What do you know of their situation? A number of things could be done to depict Rhaenyra's total disregard for rules and customs which she breaks without much thought. The point is the show went out of its way to reassure viewers that Rhaenyra did everything possible to make it work and only resorted to bastards when she no longer had any other choice. It pins the blame squarely on him so even that minor flaw of Rhaenyra being even somewhat selfish is done away with. Laenor is the selfish one who drinks with his lovers and lets his princess down. He is the one made to apologize to her for letting her down. Imbuing Rhaenyra with an aspect of selfishness wouldn't have made her a bad person, but it would add ambiguity to her morality and help build a case for why she might not be the greatest queen. But the show, in its incessant desire to absolve her of any wrong doing, leaves us a person that lacks typical moral failings so much so that the Greens themselves seem to be pitted against her for totally arbitrary reasons. It wouldn't have to be an issue for them, but it would be an issue for Rhaenyra's character, giving her actual flaws that give her opponents something to potentially fear. A pure hearted princess with no emotional outbursts and an unending capacity for forgiveness isn't someone you fear. And yet the show is trying to sell us on the fact that Alicent is worried about her children (all the while destroying their lives). No, you're using it as the basis for her character just as you ignore all the slander against Rhaenyra as having any reflection upon her character. The show was suppose to add depth and motive behind Alicent's character and in that regard it completely fails. Sure, nut it could be made interesting or insightful depending on how the show framed her motivations and her rational. The show as is might not have made her into a sexual person, but it does not offer her compelling reasons to be so dedicated in seeing her best friend's downfall. Making Alicent worse than a cliché, but an incoherent character blemished with bad writing. Again, using the book as an excuse for why the characters have to be one dimensional is stupid because the book itself does not expand upon their psychological complexities. Rhaenyra might have tried to seduced a great many people and failed on account of her looks, just as she might have (as the rumors say) tried to seduce Criston Cole. But that doesn't matter. Even if the show doesn't depict her as sexual promiscuous it needs to give her some failings. There was a lot of room in the book for Rhaenyra to be shown as selfish, self-indulgent, entitled, or cruel. It was a creative decision to excise any of these attributes from her leaving a shallow stick figure in its place. Just how you made the executive decisions that all the rumors surrounding Rhaenyra are false and those surrounding Alicent are the basis for her character. But really we're talking about the show and how it was on them to give these characters depth, and how it ultimately failed in this endeavor. That's literally her entire purpose in the show for over 10 years. And she works to this end with the understanding that her husband is opposed to it but too impotent to stop her. That is Alicent's character in the show and telling us stuff off-screen only makes her look worse in comparison. And, more importantly, Viserys didn't want Luke disinherited, so no matter what angle you look at it Alicent is using Viserys impotence to get what she wants and to subvert his will. And that is the heart of their relationship in the story and plot, not the extraneous details mentioned to us beforehand. Extraneous details, which btw, make Alicent more incoherent. Some people say it would, others say it wouldn't. But we know that is what Otto and Alicent's objective is and they pursue it by trying to keep the King safely away and ignorant of their actions. Otherwise they'd consult him about their intentions. Incidentally, much like how we are told one thing about Alicent and shown another, we are given the same as regards to Otto. We are told how great a hand he has been in administering the realm, and yet all his advice is devious, destructive, and selfish. He might have been made to be on the right side of one argument relevant to the story which would give him depth, but all the story tries to reinforce is "Otto bad" which makes the attempts at giving him nuance by telling us otherwise build a stupidly bad framework for maintaining coherence and nuance. No Lord Varys, an action is not explicitly bad in every situation. The action, and by extension their faction, is given depth by fleshing out their motivations and the circumstances that led about to the execution of their goals. It was up to the show to do that, and all it did was to make them generic bad guys which didn't have to be the case. They (Alicent) could have had multifaceted reasons for doing this. Instead she puts her rapist son on the throne because she wants to be protect the son that she had just disowned to destroy her best friend putting their lives in danger. Which puts to question, why frame this narrative as a duel perspective with nuanced motives on both sides worthy of exploring. The more time we spend in the mind of Alicent, the more ridiculous her character becomes and the more the story wastes away. Well, in that case the show's own attempt to given Aegon depth failed. Which provides even more reason for Alicent to not want him on the throne. But, for sake of clarity, that is what the show is telling us. The show wants us to think Alicent's turning her children against Rhaenyra is what has destroyed them. She literally knows. She tells Daemon she needs help against the "Greens". And even if she didn't think Alicent wanted the throne, her best friend is still trying to destroy her and her children and Rhaenyra doesn't give a shit. She shows no emotions behind this traumatic betrayal which might have actually made her character more relatable and give grounds for the expansion of this rivalry. As is the rivalry makes no sense and is fueled by the irrational hatred of one side. But she does let it go, in the last episode. She raises her cup to Rhaenyra and says she would make a good queen. Alicent started her vendetta before the affair, she has been wearing green since episode 5, the bastards were just the latest excuse in a long line of them to bring Rhaenyra down. And why? Because Otto told her she (Rhaenyra) would have no choice but to kill Alicent's children if she ascends to the throne. And Alicent decides then to put her own children at risk and reject every olive branch because of an affair we are explicitly told was no fault of Rhaenyra? She would risk her own children's lives because she doesn't like the idea of Harwin Strong being the father? You can't just spitball different ideas hoping one of them stick, you have to build a coherent narrative around Alicent's intentions and motivating factors. Well, in the show she is given how much panic she had over the Valeryon succession, pleading to her half-dead father for aid. But more importantly... It doesn't matter if she is concerned, it matters that her best friend is trying to destroy her. She should have an emotional response to that not because she might think Alicent could succeed, but because of the betrayal at the heart of this rivalry. And Rhaenyra gives no reason for this rivalry to exist and seems to just keep going because the plot needs it to. That would be her becoming irrelevant to the conflict, because she would have no influence over the Greens anymore. But more importantly, it would give her moral depth by admitting she was wrong. Meaning her actual objectives were pure evil and the fact that she pursued them at all suggests the character herself was one dimensional and motivated by pure evil. The threat wouldn't have to be directly from Rhaenyra, but anyone who disapproved of Rhaenyra's rule and might use them against her. The threat also would be based on Alicent's perception, and the people Rhaenyra surrounds herself with. It is a rivalry based on fear and anticipation. But the show, in its infinite wisdom, decided to remove any possibility that Alicent could logically believe that could ever happen by having her instead destroy her own children and put them at risk anyways. The justification was that for Aegon to survive he would need to be named king. Which is even more ironic considering Alicent just disowned her own child on that same day. Your left assuming because the show is not consistent in what Alicent believes and for what reason.

And she despite that, rather than trying to distance herself from him and having Larys threaten her further, we have Alicent be the one to instigate a more official alliance in the long term. As for his usefulness, he has already proved the opposite of being useful by trying to control her. That isn’t an ally you can rely on in difficult times. They’re directly related. She is talking about this to everyone, Larys just happens, unbeknownst to her, to be a psychopath. Maybe she would be more wary who she talks to about this stuff or maybe she’d regret what she (intentionally or otherwise) did to this family a lay off a bit. But nope, she is full steam ahead. It’s made clear that the Greens are in control of KL and having been ruining Rhaenyra’s image in the city which is why their arrival is so cold and fraught.

And I’m clarifying what I meant which is that Larys doing something not only morally wrong but counter to her interests does not explain why she would return afterwards to him and solidify their alliance as if he were a useful asset. Then why does she show any horror at all if she bares no responsibility. The framing was that her private chats with Larys are what brought on his action. And if she felt partly responsible, then she would amend her behavior and give the Strong name a break. But all she does is escalate her rhetoric and return to Larys.

No, my argument is that Larys does nothing useful for her so why is she relying on him as a vital ally (besides to make the Greens look worse and more villainous). Her dedication to spreading rumors about the Strongs is what got them killed. If she had even an ounce of regret she might have tried to slow them down and give the family a break, but all that happens is they become so loud that when Rhaenyra returns that is all people are talking about. Alicent acts upset and then just keeps doing what she was doing anyways.

The thing is though the book doesn’t offer psychological motivations. It utilizes rumors and one dimensional stereotypes to fuel the conflict, but we never get the actual substance behind their position. For example, if all Alicent wanted was power the question remains what motivates her lust for power. And as for yourself you seem inclined to ignore the gossip behind Rhaenyra from the book but embrace those of Alicent as established fact. The show was always suppose to flesh out their motivations. The problem is they couldn’t find one for Alicent because they couldn’t bring it upon themselves to give the Blacks some moral deficit. You’re assuming this slander was the basis for her character in the book, which it was not. However, the show could still have made her nuanced while showing her sexual proclivities. All it needed to do was give her a decent motivation. An act is not evil or lacking in nuance in of itself. The action is given depth by the motivations underlying it. And she cares so much for him she tries to use his weakened state as an opportunity to remove his daughter from the line of succession. The show tells us a lot about Alicent, but her actions in the plot have no basis in those perceived attributes and dilute her entire faction into bad guys, removing ambiguity from the conflict. Her dedication to Viserys is not shown in her evaluation of what needs to be done. The story prioritizes her own (irrational) vendetta over whatever affection she might have for the king. Offscreen we can be told about certain dynamics to people’s relationships, but if it doesn’t affect the story or their character then it only exists to magnify how shallow and meaningless her character really is. Alicent also has a terrified reaction to her son being a rapist. But this is framed as the result of her pressuring him to become king and in response to this traumatic revelation… she names him king. Her motivations in the plot aren’t given any moral foundation by the story leaving her incessant desires to be simply evil without depth or even coherence. We’ll see what she does in the show, but if you’re going to hide a body it will decompose, they don’t have electric freezers. That’s a nice theory but it doesn’t explain why Alicent is so dedicated in seeing her friend’s downfall even at the expense of her own children. And it doesn’t explain Rhaenyra’s completely passiveness in response to this betrayal or her lack of personal flaws that might further fan tension. Alicent, for no reason at all wants, to see Rhaenyra destroyed. And Rhaenyra does not have even the slightest bit of anger, upset, or emotional crack in seeing her best friend try to ruin her. A lie ten years ago that Rhaenyra has attempted at every turn to amend. Alicent showing an endless resolve to destroy Rhaenyra over a lie ten years ago, even at the expense of her children, her husband, her friendship, and her morals doesn’t reflect upon Alicent a complexity of character. It reflects upon her an unrestrained monomania lacking in nuance or depth. Despite all the times Rhaenyra actually shows concern that the Greens might actually pose a threat (which they do) she also shows no vindictiveness, anger, or stress at her best friend trying to destroy her. She shows no emotions and is calm, rational, and collected at every turn undermining the concept that ‘friendship’ led to this rivalry because obviously Rhaenyra isn’t taking it personally. Actually, I think the show changed this with the “pretty foot” line. This is damning in of itself. If the only way for Alicent to have any moral complexity is for to lose all her agency then what is the point of developing the Greens and their potential motivations? What is the point of having a duel narrative at all. None of this is true. She is not motivated in seeing her family gain in status. Her possible motivation for sake of her family (episode 5) would be to see her family protected. And given the number of olive branches Alicent rejects, fueling a precarious war of succession, she is not behaving out of concern for her family’s well being. Neither is she acting out of affection for the king. Or the ‘friendship’ she had for Rhaenyra. Alicent is going against all these things for what exactly? And Rhaenyra’s actions were whitewashed by having it made clear that Laenor is the one that failed her marriage. So what exactly is Alicent left with? A pointless jealousy which is way too paper thin to sustain a complex war of moral ambiguity. I was speaking of Alicent. This is the same episode in which Alicent tells Aegon “you are no son of mine”. The assumption you’re running with is that Alicent always wanted Aegon on the throne and this is her ultimate excuse. But WHY? She has no moral argument to hold this position leaving the central motivation behind her character vapid and framing the other side a generic heroes.

I’d ask you for an example of the Greens being ‘whitewashed’ but appears you’re done with this conversation. I’m somewhat interested as Alicent is given zero moral arguments for denying Rhaenyra the throne but whatever, I guess your position will have to remain a mystery.

And she still goes back to him as if he would be a useful asset. The funniest part is, she has a terrified reaction then doesn’t do anything about it. She doesn’t show regret for her behavior against the Strongs, she doesn’t alter her approach to the Strongs, nor does she even try to distance herself from Larys.

Saying something doesn’t make it so. Saying the Greens have complex motivations doesn’t make it so. You can come up with excuses for why the villain is bad, just like you could say Gregor Clegane was abused as a child, but it doesn’t add nuance to their actions. Your analysis only works for the first five episodes. After the time skip Alicent does everything in her power to reject Rhaenyra’s olive branch, she puts her children’s lives in danger, promotes a rivalry not reciprocated by the other side, and never falters from her course. I can’t comprehend how you think Alicent is whitewashed when her actions have no semblance of logic and while Rhaenyra shows no emotional flaws, deflecting each of her stepmom’s cruelty with a gesture of friendship. For ten years Rhaenyra is nothing besides loyal, dedicated, and emotionally discreet. She does everything to try and assuage Alicent’s worry but for plot reasons Alicent cannot listen to reason. So she destroys her children, she aligns with a psychopath, she manipulates a dying old man against his own daughter, she stokes a rivalry and all for what? Because she is mentally unstable? Because she is jealous, greedy? The show can commit to nothing so they just throw in that BS prophecy as a cop out. The only way what you say is defensible is if you only look at the first five episodes. But in doing so you ignore how the latter episodes have deconstructed everything built up in the first five. The Greens have fundamentally no moral claims and are only given sympathy when they show deference to the Blacks. But the Greens exist under the premise of opposition to the blacks, so thereby their faction has no moral fidelity for viewers to latch onto or comprehend. As for Daemon, this conversation has been going for a while. Feel free to look back to my other posts on this thread, but just because you jump into a conversation so late in the game without reading the lead up doesn’t give me reason to repeat myself. Suffice to say Daemon has resoundingly been molded into the hero, helping both his king and the king’s daughter secure the throne against a bunch of unmotivated psychopaths. Which is why Daemon’s crimes have no emotional or political impact in the story while the Greens instigate every negative consequence on their own.

Huh, that's interesting. I thought your whole point is the show isn't allowed to give the Greens any practical reason for opposing the Blacks since (according to you) the book doesn't provide for that level of nuance. It does, but that is your justification which is useful to deflect any substantive critique of the show. And yet here you are assuming the show will change things from the book for sake of having a complex emotional relationship, something the show itself has spent three episodes undermining. edit: and what is even more hysterical is that the only possible way you can conceive of giving Alicent's character complexity is by removing all her agency. It's almost as if you know a character dedicated to doing something with no serious reason can only be redeemed by altering her actions. But the story doesn't allow for that, so you need her to become a passive Black supporter with no real affect on the plot.

There is more to the Greens than Aemond or Aegon. In fact their main character is Alicent who has (had) the potential to be a complex nuanced character, and she just isn't. She has no conflicted relationship with her 'best' friend, she doesn't even acknowledge Rhaenyra or reminisce about their friendship until a 180 at the dinner table in episode 8. She is dedicated to seeing Rhaenyra's downfall, and yet the show can offer no practical reason as to why. They do introduce the concept that Alicent should fear for her children. And that is a perception. It doesn't have to be true, it has to be something Alicent could see as a potential outcome of doing nothing. Jealousy and Power have no basis in her story because they are not set-up as motivating factors, and yet she destroys her own children trying to force them on the throne, rejects ever olive branch, and allies herself with a known psychopath for what exactly? How does killing Harwin Strong help her? It is certainly evil, since it emotionally harms Rhaenyra and her children, but it does nothing to help expose her. In fact the reason there was speculation by book readers that the Blacks or Viserys might be responsible is because it silences a central figure that might admit to fathering bastards. You think Alicent is nuanced because she shows reluctance at times in destroying the blacks. But that reluctance is not reflected in a change of course. Motivations aren't real if they don't manifest in the decision making of said character, and having someone ignore their own emotions for sake of a single goal constitutes a bout of monomania. Her objectives are given no rational besides some paper thin conceptualization of jealousy or power that are not explored in any significant way that might give these things a firm ground to hold up three seasons of war/conflict. Rhaenyra on the other hand lacks any personal attachment to her supposed best friend. She shrugs off each insult as if they were launched by a stranger. She never lashes out despite the enormous pressure, she never shows anger or the impressions of violence. She never yells at her children, she does not ever stoop to murdering her enemies or even manipulating them in some ambiguous way, she is up right, calm, and all around forgiving. Not only does it makes Rhaenyra less realistic, it cripples any possible miscommunication between her and Alicent that might be used as reason to fuel this rivalry, that from what we have seen is completely one sided. And throwing around some stuff about Jace and Luke not automatically wilting at Aemond's psychopathic nature does not make them 'grey'. Jace and Luke are not grey, they are children with a desire to be good rulers, noble husbands, they want to honor their family name and defuse tensions with the Blacks. Smirking over a pig or dancing with the guy's wife who has been trying to humiliate you isn't a sign of moral corruption, it is a sign that, unlike Rhaenyra, these boys are human beings capable of more than just niceties. But they are fundamental noble and pure children who just want to do the right thing. Having conflicted characters is interesting. Having psychopaths on one side and a woman without any practical motive versus pure hearted heroes is no basis for a conflict that should focus on the psychological substance of both sides. They, for 8(!!) episodes have tried to get us in the head of Alicent and they couldn't by episode 8 find one reason to justify her course (due to their unwillingness to tarnish the Blacks reputation) so they land on some BS prophecy as the ultimate sign of defeat.

I’ve explained why the ‘positive’ light the Greens are casted in negates their objections to Rhaenyra sitting on the throne and makes their position less tenable. What I want is for Alicent to be given a nuanced reason for opposing Rhaenyra besides a list for power or jealousy and we didn’t get it.

All of this is a creative decision on the part of the showrunners. It is a decision they made that leaves the central conflict without merit or substance and puts into to question the purpose of having a duel narrative at all. They could have taken from the concepts introduced in the first few episodes and expanded them to depict Rhaenyra as a problematic ruler. The bastards could have been portrayed as a result of Rhaenyra's infidelities rather than Laenor's lack of effort. The murders could have been shown to be the outcome of the Blacks paranoia or entitled attitude. None of these flaws are however developed leaving Alicent with no real basis for opposing Rhaenyra. There were so many ways to make this story interesting, it could have delved into Alicent's internal conflict between her best friend and loyalty to her father, her principles, and her children. We could have seen a conflicted woman try and mend the gaps in a relationship doomed to fail and see Rhaenyra's anguish at having a friend who is undermining her fraught claims. Instead the rivalry is established on nothing. For the majority of the episodes since the time skip they pretend to have never been friends. They show no real connection to each other and Alicent pursues Rhaenyra's downfall incessantly despite Rhaenyra doing everything to appease her. And that reflects poorly on Rhaenyra's character development because she is shown to not even care what Alicent thinks of her. She does not respond to Alicent's cruelty with anger, or grief, or any emotion. She takes it by the chin and shrugs it off as if it was coming from a complete stranger. What we get is an Alicent who doesn't show concern for her children, who is obsessed with seeing Rhaenyra's claim taken from her, and who is wholly unsympathetic being as her actions don't even have a modicum of sense. The book doesn't establish them having a deep seated friendship, nor does it show their conflict to be a betrayal of some preexisting trust. And their lack of communication can result into a great many interpretations as how each perceived the other. The show forces Alicent to be illogical because she is betraying all reason in seeing her friend's downfall, at the expense of the children she proclaims to love. It was a touching scene in isolation. But in context, it depicts the mending of ties that were seemingly ignored for ten plus years. They didn't act as enemies turned friends so seeing their rejoining losses all its affect and seems more a concession by the show that their conflict had no reason to exist anyway and was just artifical drama that ends at the smallest request by Viserys.

The reason why people don't care about those deaths is because the show doesn't care about those deaths. It moves on like they never happened, altering not his relationships, his demeanor, or even suggesting some emotional fallout due to them being murdered. It just happens to show what Daemon is capable of and leaves it by the wayside. The stuff that matters, like him choosing his wife instead of the unborn babe, helping his brother up onto the throne, loving Rhaenyra (the hero of the story) and aiding her battle with the Greens, this is the stuff the show puts emotional weight behind.

That is such a low bar seeing as no one else seems to be raping serving girls. Not, Daemon, not Luke, not Jace, not Viserys, etc. If it was such a meaningless thing it would be more wide spread. Alicent is the only one who has to deal with it because (as the show itself says) she put undo pressure on Aegon to be king, and this is the outcome. If all wanting her son as heir does is show the moral depravity of the Greens, no one will care about their side and put to question what the point of this conflict is in the first place. And Alicent doesn't even change course. She feels bad then shrugs it off and continues down the same path unaffected. Showing that she knows her own objective is evil doesn't add sympathy to her character because she sticks by her own objective for no apparent reason. To add nuance, they would have to explain why she is doing what she is doing, not give further examples about why it makes no sense.

Again, as I've said before. The two things are related because there is contrast between Alicent telling him "you are no son of mine" in the morning and naming him king that same night. Saying that there are other reasons why this action is immoral doesn't change the fact that her knowing he is a rapist deprives Alicent of further motivation. Take the Robert example you gave. While I don't find Cersei to be a person (in the books) who evaluates circumstances based on their moral fidelity, one could easily (if they felt so inclined) connect the abuse she received at the hands of Robert as a motivating factor behind her decision to betray him. If that was further explored, it would constitute as sympathy and provide an added layer of nuance behind her actions. Alicent who has already been suffering from a lack of rational behind her decision up until this point is now faced, not only with the consequences of her pushing Aegon to be king, but also with the knowledge that he a.) is willing to use his power to abuse other women and b.) is not a son that Alicent should want to protect The first five episodes did a good job developing some potential motives. It showed off Rhaenyra's flippancy and lack of diplomacy that might turn the realm against her. It showed her ability to lie and cheat. It impressed upon Alicent a deep love for her children, and a desire to protect them. Alicent just needed to have the perception that what she was doing would be for the safety of her children, or the betterment of the realm. And yet the last three episodes have exhaustively deprived her of reason, depicting her turning down olive branches that would offer her children protection, depicting Rhaenyra as diplomatic and level-headed, showing Alicent's relationship with her children to be self-destructive, and pinning the violence onto one side whereas the Blacks only ever attempt to defuse tensions. It all reaches a climax at the end of this episode where Alicent concedes Rhaenyra will be queen, making us question the past 10+ years of conflict which seemingly have been fueled by... what exactly? And then for the plot to admit it has failed in its task (something which it had ample opportunity to do) simply because it was unwilling to tarnish Rhaneyra's image constitutes a fundamental failure in the story. There was speculation in the book and by readers that Viserys might have had Harwin Strong killed to silence any threat to his daughter's legitimacy. That Daemon had Laenor killed so that he might wed Rhaenyra. That they executed Vaemond for speaking the truth. And yet none of that came about.

A character is based on their actions1. Their actions are based on motivation2. The book discloses the first but does not offer a definitive answer as to the second. Alicent's main purpose in both the show and the book is to undermine Rhaenyra so that Aegon might be named heir.1 In the show: a.) Alicent is a survivor of rape b.) Alicent does not wish to see other women experience rape c.) Therefore (we assume) Alicent is motivated in seeing the rapist reprimand2 This is not her only motivating factor, but it is the one we are introduced to at the beginning of the episode. Alicent's objective (read: action) is not inherently unsympathetic. Our sympathy for her objective is based on our sympathy for the motivations underpinning that action. The rub here is that motivation and action must be linked. Action cannot exist without motivation, and motivation cannot exist without action. We are provided with a sympathetic outlook in her moral clarity but this does not motivate action. She does not respond to this knowledge of wrong doing, nor does it affect her course. Her sole objective in the show (which is to see Aegon on the throne)1 comes to a head with this potential motivating factor as Aegon is determined to be rapist. Now her objective is in direct odds with the presumable motive that is meant to garner sympathy. And yet her sole objective in the show remains unchanged. Just as her actions are tied to her motives, her motives are reliant on her action. The reason this does not achieve sympathy or nuance for her character is because there is a disconnect between the motive and the action. Well I agree, but as I said before this is terrible writing as there have been 8 episodes of setup to try and develop potential reason for her actions only for the show itself to knock each one down. But seeing as they have to reach the same point as the book they offer a totally extraneous motive that had nothing to do with her character arc in the last minute. And that motivation is a lie meaning viewers can at best feel bad for her while having no scruples in wanting to see her objective fail. It is an awful premise to base the entire conflict upon but is a result of the show destroying itself in the last three episodes out of a desire to depict the Blacks as heroes. Besides the rape (which I again claim does achieve what you say it does due to a disconnect between her reaction and her response) all these examples are based on Alicent showing deference to the Blacks. If the Greens only sympathetic factor is their reluctance to oppose the Blacks, it further proves how (based on the show's framing) they have no moral stance since their existence in the narrative is based on their opposition to the Blacks. Great, so it offers further reason for us not to sympathize with Alicent's action, or her incoherent motivations.

Sympathizing with her plight as a woman is not the same thing as sympathizing with her objective. Her actions are distinctly villainous in that they are wholly unsympathetic. Alicent wanting Aegon on the throne is made less sympathetic when viewed under the lens of him being a rapist and her knowing it is wrong. If somehow, we could understand better why she puts Aegon on the throne, that would count as adding nuance towards the conflict. But this tidbit of information makes the motivating factor behind the entire conflict make even less sense. That is not to say Alicent is putting Aegon on the throne because he is a rapist, but that she is doing it anyways, making her actions less understandable. Again, if the entire Green faction has literally no basis for their pursuit of the throne, it dilutes the entire conflict which is the framework for the entire story. Alicent is to blame for putting Aegon on the throne because she is the one who makes that decision. Therefore she needs motivation, and that motivation needs to be at least partially sympathetic for the Greens to have some moral foundation. All this rape does is add less incentive to overthrow Rhaenyra, making her goals less sympathetic. What you are talking about is something different. You are saying Alicent is made more relatable because she reprimands Aegon for his actions and shows real grief. But this isn't followed through by a change in behavior. She still seeks to put him on the throne. She might say "you are no son of mine" but her actions following that prove otherwise. Therefore the character of Alicent does not actual reprimand her son despite claiming otherwise. A character who knows something is wrong but does not alter their behavior in response to that and continues down the same path is made less nuanced and less comprehensible by the audience. Her single mindedness from which she can ignore any influence onto her behavior makes her, and by extension her faction, a trivial addition to the heroes journey (the Blacks) not worthy of the psychological deep dive provided by the duel narrative. If you want a one dimensional villain, fine. But don't frame the entire show as a nuanced depiction of two factions with complex moral disagreements and focus on the internal struggles of one side.

Then the scene of marital rape is only relevant in how it further adds emotional consequences behind Aegon’s action (something Daemon and the Blacks are free of). And yet Alicent knowing her son is a rapist damages her case even more, even if there are other deficiencies to his (Aegon’s) character. It in no way makes Alicent’s position more sympathetic nor Aegon’s. All it does is further decrease the moral ambiguity between the factions and makes the conflict even more one sided.

That marital rape scene is not a deciding factor in Alicent betraying Rhaenyra. Alicent’s relationship with Viserys is shown to be a dedicated one and she does not wish to see Aegon on the throne to spite him. In fact she takes his final words as a blessing to do what needs to be done. Aegon’s rape however is a blow to any justification she might have to raise him above Rhaenyra. Already she is suffering from a deficit of motives as to her rational for committing treason and this makes her position even less tenable. Her experiencing a similar situation to that of Aegon’s victim should further disincentivize her from seeing Aegon on the throne, and the fact that she goes through with it anyways makes her position less sympathetic and less coherent.