Jump to content

Lord Varys

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Lord Varys

  1. The it is even more simplified than I remembered. For the German dubbing we changed 'son Aerys' to 'grandson Aerys', ('Enkel Aerys' in German) so Jaehaerys II is not erased genealogically. What I meant was that the exact uncle/nephew constellations don't come up. Aemon starts with Maekar, moves to his brother Aegon V, and then down the line. In the book it is the same although Aemon doesn't bother with the names, merely implying that the poor grandson of his brother was the Mad King. It is the Old Bear who later tells us and Jon in detail how exactly Aemon fits into the Targaryen family tree.
  2. As I said above, this doesn't even come up in the dialogue of book or show. Aemon talks about his brother being King Aegon V and then he jumps down to his brother's poor grandson (Aerys II), his son (Rhaegar), and the little children (Rhaenys & Aegon) all being killed. We don't get any talk about uncles and nephews there, simply talk about a brother and the grandchildren of that brother.
  3. Jaehaerys II was never deleted from 'show canon' insofar as I'm aware of ... although they may have cut him from promo material kings lists or family trees and such. They did change Aerys II into Aegon V's son rather than Jaehaerys II's. But that wouldn't have to mean that Jaehaerys II doesn't exist. They could have kept him as an elder brother of Aerys II if they ever made stuff set in that era. But, of course, this was a stupid move and it is good that they do away with that. For all I care, folks who still watch GoT can pretend that Aemon was senile in that scene.
  4. I kind of got him back in for the German version of the show. It was very easy to replace 'son' with 'grandson', even more so since the German 'Enkel' (short for grandson) really doesn't have more syllables than 'son'. If they actually used such justification it is just nonsense. It has been a while since I watched the show, but Aemon talks about Aerys II as son of his brother ... and in the book he just said grandson. And then it is the son of his Egg's grandson (Rhaegar) and even the little children (Rhaegar's son and daughter). Jaehaerys II's name doesn't come up there at all. They wanted to pointlessly simplify things ... which really makes no sense in light of the fact that Aemon is imagined as being a really, really old guy. But then - I really think we should pretend 'the show universe' doesn't exist. I kind of left that universe when Tywin rambled on about 'King Orys'. And wasn't there another King Maegor in the show?
  5. That boar thing is really ... well, one would wonder if they stole that from 'Becoming Elizabeth' if that were not very impossible due to the writing process being around the same. They have a hunting scene there where she savagely kills a stag. I think if they wanted to go with animal symbolism go make it about something that involves the dragons. If they stick to the material then Rhaenyra is never going to be 'a tyrant' - she won't be depicted as such, although the whole financial measures may well make appear be like one (think how they apparently change or rather depict 'the heir for a day' line as Daemon giving an honest toast to his short-lived nephew which is then perceived by court, council, and king as mockery). Objectively, Rhaenyra's story makes only a tragic figure starting with the riots, the Storming of the Dragonpit, and her subsequent flight to Dragonstone. Things like the very looks of people who are actually described in the book are the basis for any illustration. For Targaryen illustrations in the future the standard take on them should be to draw faces and the like almost identitcal. Maegor and Aenys could look more or less identitical, aside from build, or their (facial) hair preferences. These people are so inbred that there is Well, there it might have been much easier to change the text claiming that Jaehaerys wasn't there. Sort of like it made sense with the execution of Triarch Horonno in TWoIaF - yes, as per ADwD the guy was ripped apart by only two war elephants, but the illustration depicts four. One could change that picture ... or one just amends the text to not specificy the number of war elephants so that there is no contradiction between text and illustration. After all, even in ADwD Horonno's fate is just a historical anecdote told to Tyrion by Haldon - if he may be wrong about Dance details, he may also be wrong about the number of elephants. I mean, unless George told you who the Lord Strong was in 101 AC (we don't know) you replaced a character who may have been there, after all, with a guy we may not even know. Lyonel could have been the Lord of Harrenhal at that time ... or not. And thinking about descriptions: Did you guys ever check with George how Alicent looks like? All depictions we have seen of her so far have her as dark-haired - which is well enough, I guess, although not that great a decision since all her four children seem to have inherited distinct Valyrian looks. Guess the Lynesse woman could end up being Daeron's betrothed.
  6. Peake didn't really 'fall' ... he himself was stupid enough to offer his resignation as Hand, and the regents accepted it. He miscalculated there. In turn, though, his power only began to erode because Alyn Velaryon had success in the west, was able to return Viserys to court, and Baela and Rhaena were able to install Daenaera Velaryon as the new queen. If Peake had successfully installed Myrielle as the new queen, Aegon may have never gotten out of his clutches, not even as an adult. Aegon III tried to involve himself more in the government of the Realm, attending the council sessions, etc. ... but when Peake showed his disapproval he didn't put his foot down. He just didn't come back again. Aegon III can lead and command when he has to, but it is clear that he has to be surrounded by people he trusts and who care for him to develop that strength. This is a rather striking mistake, though. You don't have to be deep in the matter to know that Larra's brother should look like her rather than some exotic foreigner who isn't related to her at all ... and who looks like a clich├ęd oriental. That is basically how love among women was considered is patriarchal cultures. Once it messes with traditional gender roles it is a problem, but sexual acts or sexual/romantic attraction as such were not vilified. They were rather ignored, not even seen, etc. We see this kind of thing with George's depiction of Rhaena and her circle. The issue is not so much that she has sex with women, but her mother disapproves of the favors and signs of public affection she grants her close friends, Elissa's brother disapproves of the notion that she would refuse to marry and thus not do her duty as a noblewoman. Rhaena herself had no problem with her family when she married Aegon because she did her duty and thus they apparently allowed her to do what she liked if it didn't defy convention too much. In general, though, I think we should also not construe knights as 'gay' who might use a squire to get a handjob in camp when there are no female camp followers around. This would be men exploiting servants - like kind of did with Irri - not a sign of erotic or sexual attraction. In our modern world we don't have body slaves or servants who obey our every whim ... but in a society where this is the case there are considerable differences between 'real people/human beings' and commoditites you use and abuse as you see fit. I'm personally looking forward to how Jon and Satin's relationship is going to develop in this regard. I could see them ending up in a kind closer relationship if Satin were the guy caring for Jon's body and, especially, him after body and spirit have been reunited and the guy is more wolf than man for a time. In the book context it is not surprising that a Targaryen fanboy maester historian is not going to cover their more esoteric/superstitious mad beliefs ... even if he had access to documents indicating that they believed in stuff like the Others. If you check the books then the weirdo prophetic/magical beliefs of certain characters also mostly take behind closed doors. Even the king with a sorceress as mistress/closest advisor doesn't talk prophecy and magic all the time with all his other advisors/supporters. Rhaegar's prophetic beliefs aren't things many people talk about openly and it is not clear to the informed public to what degree his decisions were influenced by prophetic beliefs. The way to look at this wouldn't be 'there being a secret kept among the core members of House Targaryen' but rather a weirdo prophetic belief only being shared with those members of House Targaryen who were considered to be willing to take such matters seriously. The leaks indicate that Daemon isn't kept in the dark because it would only be shared with the heir ... but that he wasn't considered to be serious enough to be trusted with such a knowledge - because he wouldn't believe or care about it, anyway. If we go back to Aegon the Conqueror - he would have shared his dream with both his sister-wives and, perhaps, with other close advisors as well (Orys Baratheon, Daemon Velaryon). Once Aegon had two sons and a growing number of grandchildren he would have shared this information with them as well, especially the elder grandchildren who would succeed Aenys one day. If Aegon had conquered Westeros to prepare the continent for the Others then it would have greatly mattered to him that his successors understood this. Jaehaerys and Alysanne may have had slightly different priorities, considering that there were little to no developments at that front, but one would imagine they would have also shared this knowledge with their immediate heirs. As did Viserys later on. Realistically one would assume that Aegon may have thought that this danger from the north would come in his lifetime, or in the lifetime of his immediate successors. When nothing at all happened in that regard during the reign of Jaehaerys the prospect of this danger may have been pushed further and further into the background. In fact, in an odd way the way Viserys in the show might deal with this is akin to how Westeros as a whole views the NW and the Wall. They kind of maintain both out of tradition and a supersitious fear ... but it isn't exactly the most important thing in their life. For Viserys it seems to boil down to the political guideline of keeping the Realm intact so they can take on this danger together if the need arises. It isn't more than that.
  7. On his own Aegon III would have easily 'chosen' Myrielle considering she was the girl he talked to the most. Sadly enough, Aegon III himself would have likely never freed himself from Peake. He has no quick or smart political mind, nor does he ever truly want to rule. If Viserys hadn't come back things may have gone very bad for him. His sisters would have tried to help him, but they were women and Alyn was away more often than not. But it is quite ridiculous to assume that Daenaera would be chosen if the girls hadn't arranged that before. She was a preteen child ... and whatever he beauty was, it was the beauty of a six-year-old which is literally no beauty at all. The girls give their brother a clue when they tell him that have brought him his wife ... and Aegon was clearly happy that the ordeal was finally over. That Peake - as the most powerful regent, the Hand, and the Protector of the Realm couldn't undo this shows that there were powerful factions at court who pushed this through. The same people earlier stopped the Myrielle Peake match, one assumes, and then teamed up with the half-sisters and their husbands to find a better suited bride. And there Daenaera's stunning Valyrian looks likely were what made her the lucky one rather than another Velaryon girl or a Celtigar, etc. because a Targaryen king needs a Targaryen queen ... if if none is available than at least who looks the part. Oh, I think they are playing this up. They will be friends, close friends, who also happen to touch and care for each other. To dress and laugh and bathe together, etc. Although it would fit Rhaenyra's character if she was also attracted to Alicent sexually or romantically since there is this hint that she was 'more than fond' of Laena, meaning she may have had a thing for women as well we men. And about Alicent's sexual and romantic preferences we know nothing - the fact that she seems to have never loved Viserys in the book tells us only that ... not whether she liked or disliked men in general. In a context where sexual attraction and desire is not framed and styled as an 'identity' but rather as something that can happen (which is how those things were seen in a medieval context) especially love and affection among women wasn't much of an issue. George does this have in the books with Cersei and Margaery having companions sleeping with them in their bed, with Dany's 'assisted masturbation scene' with Irri - which doesn't mean Dany is 'gay' or 'bisexual' but rather that she had a servant help her masturbate while fantasizing about a man.
  8. Gyldayn tells us about Jaehaerys' own doubts about his Doctrine ... but he doesn't say he agrees with his assessment, or does he? He could also have gleefully talked about every Targaryen child dying in the cradle or being stillborn or about every Targaryen dying of a disease (he says Aegon III died of consumption which would mean tuberculosis, Visenya seems to have died of a cancer-like disease, Viserys I of cardiovascular disease, the Conqueror had a stroke, Aenys some stomach disease, Rhaena died early of something as well, Maegelle caught greyscale, etc.). The whole 'Targaryens don't get sick' routine was never true. But Gyldayn glosses this over insofar as he doesn't cite this as proof the Doctrine is bogus. The reader can take away that the Doctrine is invented nonsense, just like real world medieval concepts about special royal or noble blood and the mysticism of divine kingship ... but the author doesn't say this. And to be clear - Daenaera is just beautiful, no Targaryen. And Alyn even less so, considering his maternal parentage. He is a larger-than-life figure, though, the second most famous Velaryon, and that creeps into the description of his early exploits.
  9. They are not besties in the book as far as we know, but they are friends and try to remain friends after the wedding. Their relationship slowly deteriorates. Rhaenyra didn't view Alicent as 'an evil stepmother' who tried to steal her father away from her or anything like that. Nor did Alicent start with the agenda to push Rhaenyra out of her father's heart to replace her with her own children. Going with a more antagonistic or even neutral setting would give the entire remarriage of Viserys I a different spin. It would either never happen/very difficult to explain why it happens, and the relationship between the parties involved would be very bad much earlier. Larys-Alicent never so much as interact in the book up until Aegon II is restored to the throne at the end of the Dance, so we have no idea what kind of relationship they had. That is certainly an addition, but something that can work. The dynamic in the first season certainly seems to be that Alicent kind of dominates and exploits Larys ... but we know that this is going to change overtime. Not only does Larys not save Alicent from Rhaenyra's forces (he only gets Aegon II and his children out of the Red Keep), he also puts his own puppet on the throne for a time and eventually plots the death of Aegon II and has Alicent imprisoned.
  10. I think there George-Gyldayn really go to you. That's definitely Gyldayn's voice there. And I think it is completely wrong in context there to go with the general reading that the king chose his bride at the ball, being stunned by her beauty. That's the author following the standard narrative spread by the many people who were at the ball. The truth likely is that Baela and Alyn decided that they would marry Aegon to Daenaera ... and arranged that marriage with Rhaena's and Corwyn's help behind the scenes. Before the ball actually took place. Aegon III was told by his half-sisters who to marry ... he didn't make that choice himself (although I imagine he must have liked Daenaera well enough - but the ones he pleased with his 'choice' wasn't the little girl but his half-sisters). Also, and in context, this certainly was a successful power grab on the side of Baela/Alyn - they ensured that Aegon III would only be able to father an heir nearly ten years later ... meaning the throne got a lot closer to Baela and Rhaena and whatever sons they might have. Sure enough, Alyn shows that he isn't truly after the throne when he brings Viserys back ... but it he certainly wants to strengthen his and Baela's position by making the new queen a Velaryon. Gyldayn has little issue with 'Targaryen specialness' considering he writes a book about then ... and his condenscending tone is also present when the bastard dragonseeds are discussed, especially Hugh and Ulf. They are bad because they are commoners who overreach themselves ... never mind that the mighty Conqueror was a foreigner with a ragged army who had no claim at all to Westeros. Unwin Peake certainly is a piece of work but he just plays the same game as the other lords and the royals. What makes him deplorable in the eyes of the author there is that he is overreaching himself. He wasn't actually a bad ruler - after all, even after the whole Secret Siege thing did pretty big portion of the lords at the informal Great Council support the idea that he should return as Hand. George also deconstructs the specialness of the Targaryens by giving us the enmity towards the Rogares in great detail ... who are basically just Targaryens speaking Lysene Valyrian. The xenophobia there (I'd say Manderly's condemnation of one Larra's banker brothers borders on medieval antisemitism - you get punished for the crime of being a Jew Lyseni) and superstition towards Larra's religion is nearly unbearable ... but if you imagine that they would have have all looked the same it is the utmost hypocrisy. In context it is quite telling that the FaB illustrations did not depict Larra's brothers as prototypical Valyrians - which they are - but as dark-haired, foreign looking men. Like slimy Jewish or Italian bankers.
  11. Oh, the way it might be going certainly would include him specifying who to kill. If the last scene is any indication then Rhaenyra is very angry now, so she might command that Luke be avenged. Daemon will promise her to see to it that it happens. He then will contact Mysaria, possibly through a messenger because he cannot go to KL personally (that would be a way to use Baela - she could fly across Blackwater Bay on Moondancer to meet with some representative of Mysaria's). Mysaria is then going to have to figure out a way how to get to the Green royal family and exact this revenge. She will be the one picking Blood and Cheese for that job ... and her commands might not be the same Rhaenyra gave to Daemon nor the same Daemon gave to Mysaria via messenger or letter. Finally, there is the problem how to exact this revenge inside the Red Keep. They can get in but as FaB stated they could not get to Aegon II directly and then switched to another target. The show could have this all play out ... have them first trying to get to Aemond, then to Aegon, and then - once Mysaria starts to pressure them for results - decide to target Helaena and the children because while they were trying to get to Aegon/Aemond they picked up on Helaena's routines and realized that she and the children happened to be very easy targets. That this whole thing wasn't exactly well-planned and that neither Blood and Cheese nor Mysaria checked back with Daemon or Rhaenyra once they had access to the castle is pretty clear. They could have taken out Alicent, Helaena, the children, and Otto Hightower ... but they just killed one innocent child. In the show context we can be sure that Rhaenyra and Daemon both would have preferred it if Otto and Alicent had been killed or abducted rather than Helaena traumatized and one of her children murdered. Because that could just continue to escalate the war ... while not really giving them an advantage. Doing something else with this exclusive access they had there could have given them a massive advantage, possibly even deciding the war.
  12. It is not just that - one could also imagine them being too occupied with other things, no longer believing into that stuff all that much because nothing happens and/or they don't have any personal (prophetic) dreams about that stuff. Aegon III wouldn't have cared much about that, even if he had known ... because he was too depressed. Viserys II too grounded in real world politics, Daeron I too obsessed with war and glory, Baelor too pious, Aegon IV too self-absorbed, etc. But in context, though, we must say how well-prepared Westeros still was for the Others in the beginning of AGoT. Sure enough, the Targaryens were gone, but there was still a working centralist monarchy, and people were proud of their warrior king and his rule. For all his shortcomings, Ser Waymar Royce dies a good death beyond the Wall. He is courageous and brave. And if you imagine Ned informing Robert in time about the threat beyond the Wall, if you imagine them having time and opportunity to raise a vast army from all the kingdoms ... then they should be more than a challenge to the Others and their wights. They might not win in the end because there is magic and stuff to consider ... but they should fare pretty well. If you think how the Realm looked during the dragonriding Targaryen kings and ... and even later during the more powerful/impressive dragonless kings ... say, Daeron II or Maekar - then they might even be more effective then. The kings knowing/believing in a threat beyond the Wall might have felt justified to have done enough to be prepared for such a threat simply by keeping the peace. That is likely also going to be the trigger for her depression in the show, one imagines. But it makes her actually a more complex character if she has prophetic dreams or visions than she would be if she was just a woman who has a couple of unremarkable lines and then ends up being the mad woman imprisoned in the attic her chambers. It could be a rather interesting plot for her to fall in a deep depression after what she had to suffer ... and have this be a catalyst for her having more (detailed) dreams about the future, pertaining not so much to distant future stuff but rather some events during the Dance itself. Her bad mental state could contribute to her talk not being taken all that seriously ... which could, in turn, worsen her depression and mental health. For instance, in the wake of Blood and Cheese she could foresee Aegon's own fall and disfigurement at Rook's Rest. She could try to warn and he could misunderstand her completely. Then there is the Harrenhal ruse, the betrayal of the City Watch and, under Rhaenyra's rule, Maelor's death, First and Second Tumbleton, Daemon-Aemond, and, most importantly, the Storming of the Dragonpit and Rhaenyra's death on Dragonstone. If they like to explore things like that - which would only right and proper for ASoIaF content since GoT cut almost all the prophetic dreams and visions - they could even have Helaena's warnings stopping certain characters from doing something which then ends up causing the foreseen event. Having Helaena as figure similar to book Jojen fits very well with the spirit of George's work.
  13. If Aegon and his sisters were motivated (to a degree) by dreams and prophecies ... then Maegor's reign certainly sets the stage for Jaehaerys and Alysanne being kind of cut off from that tradition. Rhaena and Alyssa may have told them some things, but it would have been second hand stuff, which never become as important to them as it could have been. Although it is pretty much implied that Alysanne's visit to the Wall did get her and, presumably, also Jaehaerys thinking - but Gyldayn glosses this over or never knew about it. And go back to Bran's dream about the youth with the three weirwood arrows. We have often thought it may have been Brandon Snow preparing to slay three dragons. If so, why didn't it come to that? Think about the fact that Torrhen knelt without even trying to fight back. If he and Aegon talked about the Others and prophecies and how handy some gigantic dragons might be if they ever came back ... then the submission of the Starks suddenly makes much more sense, doesn't it? The Starks get the promise of dragon support against the Others ... and in exchange pretty much nothing changes for them, aside from a nominal submission and the loss of royal title and a crown. If Torrhen was a man who believed in the Others then he could have been the kind of man for whom something like that was acceptable ... some of his sons apparently didn't see it that way, though. Which is also understandable. It is not necessary for the plot to work, of course, but it could be a background element we know pretty much nothing about ... because the Starks and the Targaryens were in pretty big trouble in the last centuries. Rickard and Brandon may have known much more than they ever told Ned ... just as Ned knew a lot of stuff he never told Robb (or Jon). It is definitely the case that the sorcerer court of Aerys I (and perhaps also of the late Daeron II - Aerys would have done his magical research for years while his father was still alive) got something going there ... but Egg ended up focusing more on the return of the dragons for political reasons, not because it was a part of some ancient prophecy. His son Jaehaerys believed in the promised prince. But Egg either thought he was that guy because he though he could hatch dragon eggs ... or he thought he knew and understood things better than ancient prophecy, that dragonlore was a kind of magical science you could make work even if prophecy and destiny weren't favoring you. At this point it is still just speculation that Egg's throwaway line in TMK about his uncle reading a prophecy about the return of the dragons refers to the promised prince prophecy. It could be, of course, but it could also be a different prophecy. It would make sense that the dragonless Targaryens would have jumped on any prophetic fragment promising or predicting the return of the dragons under certain conditions ... but it is also clear that the return of the dragons isn't exactly a core feature of the promised prince prophecy in the Targaryen version, because then they would have known that they would lose the dragons one day and may have taken precautions to try to prevent that. So far Rhaegar's belief about the promised prince revolves around a special destiny/fight this person has go through ... not so much that he is going to bring the dragons back. In the end, though, we should not judge the characters by their actions. Maester Aemon knew and believed in the prophecy for a very long time ... yet nothing indicates that he sent weekly letters to the kings living throughout his reign - especially during the decades he spent at the Wall - to urge them to prepare for the War of the Dawn (which he also knows about). It would thus not be an outlandish that Jaehaerys I or Viserys I or Daeron II also knew about this stuff ... and behaved the way they did. It also strikes me as kind of ingenious for symmetry reasons to have Aegon be concerned with the same problem Dany and Jon have to deal with now. Marwyn is presumably going to play a considerable role in convincing Dany that she should go to Westeros ... and that would work much better as an argument if she also realized that those issues, her issues were issues her most prominent ancestors also were concerned with. If Dany understands why Aenar and Aegon went west rather than east, it might convince her to go there, too. If she doesn't get such information then what's going to stop her from going east or staying in the Dothraki Sea to be Stallion Who Mounts the World?
  14. I think there we have to differentiate between background stuff for the Aegon and the Conquest ... and the reign of Viserys I. I'm completely with you that George didn't come up with the idea of Aegon and the Conquest as being something that influenced the prelude to the Dance in George's mind when writing FaB ... but the prophecy stuff about the promised prince and the War for the Dawn, etc. might very well have influenced Aegon I. And it might also be something his descendants knew or heard about ... although it doesn't really seem as if this was something they very much believed in or cared about all that much.
  15. In light of all that one could easily enough assume Aegon himself told Aegon and Viserys considering he died telling them stories about the Conquest. Aegon and his sisters would have told all their children and grandchildren about something as pivotal as this ... while Jaehaerys and Alysanne may have restricted such information to the more crucial branches of the family ... but it seems to be pretty obvious that they would have told Baelon long before Aemon's death. In the show it seems as if Viserys actually wants to confide in Daemon about the prophecy and dream stuff ... but then doesn't because the man ridicules such things. One might also imagine that documents might exist which are handed down from king to king who discuss such matters. But there we enter into territory whether they would read such things, etc.
  16. Certainly could be, though that would lay a lot of prophetic baggage at Daenys' feet - not just the Doom of Valyria but also future Targaryen stuff - where they would go after they settled on Dragonstone, etc. Marwyn indicates that the prophecy Aemon and Rhaegar believed in is certainly very old. But there must be a more recent addendum to this more generic prophecy making it about 'a promised prince (of the Targaryen dynasty)', or else the Targaryens are all mad entitled brats who for no good reason believe that they are connected to or destined to fulfill a prophecy that was actually never connected to their bloodline in any of the prophecies they knew. I mean - pretend to be Jaehaerys II for a moment, and having the dwarf woman tell you that your children marrying each other will produce the promised prince: Why would you care about that, why would it concern you if you didn't care about this prophesied figure in the first place? Would you even ask her about this kind of thing if you didn't care about it before? Would the concept even mean something to you? The link there certainly could be a more recent Targaryen - Aegon I, his father, one of his sisters, etc. - having a prophetic dream/insight causing them to link the more ancient generic savior prophecy to the bloodline of House Targaryen. It is also quite clear that Melisandre and Benerro are lacking crucial bits of information linking the prophecy to (specific branches of) House Targaryen. Benerro seems to declare Dany the savior more or less because she brought the dragons back. That could be a simplification for show purposes, of course - but Aegon, etc. being motivated by such things and this kind of knowledge being passed down to the next generations, being garbled and eventually lost as the years went by is certainly something that could make sense in the books. I mean, it is actually quite striking how crucial (political) decisions of Targaryens and Blackfyres both are shaped by dreams. Dany's egg hatching and other decisions are also influenced by such things - it would actually fit quite well if various historical Targaryens were motivated or influenced by similar things.
  17. Maegor was a usurper. Could be his mother knew and she may have told him ... or not, we don't know. Jaehaerys could easily enough have learned the truth from his mother who was there when his father Aenys died and who he may have told so that she could pass the knowledge on to his heir Aegon who was far away at that point. Visenya could also have told Jaehaerys considering he was there on Dragonstone when she died. Jaehaerys I supposedly also visited the Wall as per the stories we get in ASoS. But one has to keep in mind that the Targaryens are under no obligation to think the Watch or the Wall are *that important* just because there is a threat beyond the Wall they are destined to take care of. The point of unified Westeros kind of is that you no longer need a Night's Watch.
  18. I expect that's too hard of a reading of those leaks. On the basis of dreams and prophecy, Aegon would have believed that there was something going on north of the Wall, something he and/or his descendants would have to deal with eventually. Aegon concluded that this savage Westeros had to be unified if it were to stand a chance against this threat. There is nothing in the books contradicting this, nor anything that would make this unlikely. Especially not if we imagine it wasn't passed down unaltered to Aerys II but rather lost and partially regained overtime. In the Dunk & Egg era it is pretty much implied that the promised prince prophecy was lost and just recently been rediscovered by King Aerys I. HOTD could easily enough depict how Rhaenyra and Daemon fail to tell Aegon III about this. That popular histories written by maesters don't talk about the mad magical beliefs of some members of the Targaryen dynasty, especially not histories who effectively glossed over the reign of Conqueror as well as the reign of Viserys I or most of Jaehaerys' reign (which could included multiple visits to Wall during his later reign), is hardly surprising. Nor is it surprising that even the Targaryens who believed in the Others - or at least in 'some evil threat in the far north' - wouldn't talk about that often in public. Nobody believes in the Others anymore, so a Targaryen saying that he did would make only make himself into a laughingstock ... especially a king who admitted to his advisers that his political decisions hinge on his superstitious beliefs. Oh, I like the Dark Tower, too ... I just don't think Roland as a character is internally consistent throughout the series. I certainly agree that an adaptation of the first book would have to include that core element ... but an adaptation of the entire series would have to get it straight why exactly Rolands looks for the Tower and, more importantly, how exactly reality is in danger and how important is it that he gets there. This has to be done both for the internal consistency of the character and his motivations and the consistency of the fictional universe. If they have Daemon arbitrarily decide to murder one of Aegon's kids for Luke's murder ... then the guy would become a clear villain. Blood and Cheese is the most horrible deed during the entire war ... and it doesn't seem as if they want to go with Daemon being a monster. We won't get characters who are 'half-insane' in that show, either. Angry and furious, yes, but not half-mad and rambling. At least I hope that's not where they are going. Helaena might become 'mad' in a more conventional sense, but I guess that will be a result of her having so many bad prophetic dreams that she ends up being unable to differentiate between reality and dream. As things go from bad to worse they might even model her in part on Cassandra, being unable to convince Aegon, Rhaenyra, etc. what's going to happen. I'm especially thinking about the Storming of the Dragonpit there, but also the death of Maelor, Rhaenyra's own death, etc. There is no indication that this would be a retcon. Instead this fits pretty well with the whole promised prince stuff. It was always kind of ridiculous why smart Rhaegar should have thought this ancient shit was (1) relevant at all, and (2) relevant for his own life and the lives of his children. Only if his entire family was obsessed with stuff like that since the Doom of Valyria does it really make sense he would feel this was his cup of tea, too. The guy was always dutiful, so he must have felt it was his duty to believe in prophetic shenanigans, too. In fact, only if Aenar and Aegon I thought in such categories would it make sense that their distant descendants continue to think in such categories - they were the reason why they were stuck on Dragonstone and eventually in Westeros, so they would feel they had to continue in their footsteps. If just weirdo kings like Baelor or Aerys I and Aerys II had believed in prophecy and magic then the less insane Targaryens would have shrugged that stuff off, and continued to be guided by sanity and rationality.
  19. I don't think the plot nor the characters of the Dark Tower series are internally consistent, so that's a very bad example for that kind of thing. They are going to create Daemon the character, George just created Daemon the historical figure. They certainly are free to make Daemon the character about Daemon the guy who wants to kill Aemond's nephew to avenge Daemon's stepson ... but that isn't even a thing for Daemon the historical figure. He arranged a revenge plot, but the history makes it clear that it is not understood who the original target was ... and it is pretty much implied that Blood and Cheese decided on their own to target Helaena and the children because they were the ones they could actually get to very easily. Jaime trying to kill Bran does make sense. He is a danger to him, his sister-lover, and their children ... but Helaena and her children are neither Daemon's enemies nor a danger to him or Rhaenyra or their children. And while the guy has a dark side, it strikes me as very odd that he would actually want anyone to target them to get revenge on Aemond. I mean, they are not going to be as stupid as to not assume that this was Aemond's payback for the loss of his eye ... nor does Daemon's later killing of Aemond imply he doesn't understand this. I don't think we are going to get mass rapes of women in brothels in that show in any scenario, much less in a scenario where Rhaenyra commands this to be done to a half-sister she has literally no quarrel with nor to Alicent who was once her best friend. That is not something this show is going to do. There are apparently people who really need something to be confirmed explicitly to consider it plausible or likely. There are also still people who think only Rhaegar believed in the prophecy about the promised prince, claiming his parents had nothing to do with his belief into that esoteric stuff, never mind that they themselves were forced to marry because their father believed in it, too. So far we don't know what kind of prophetic knowledge the early Targaryen kings had ... but do know that Aenar the Exile left Valyria because of a prophetic dream his daughter had, and we do know that the people believed that Visenya and Rhaena practiced sorcery. And we do know that by the time of Dunk & Egg there were multiple Targaryens and some Blackfyres who believed in prophecy and practiced magic and made crucial decisions on the basis of both. Thus it is actually quite ridiculous to assume that Aegon the Conqueror and his sister-wives were not also, in part, motivated by magic and dreams and prophecies. If that is the case, though, then George is subtle about this and intends to explore this plot only as he reveals the exact meaning and origins of the promised prince prophecy in the book series. This is clearly not something he wants to explore in history books. So far that's not part of any leaks that I'm aware of ... Viserys I supposedly dreamed about a son of his being crowned king with the crown of Aegon the Conqueror. Viserys confusing his own daughter with Daenerys in a dream would be kind of weird - not only looks Syrax much different than Drogon, but inbreeding or not - Dany and Rhaenyra do not look identitcal.
  20. I think there is a decent enough chance that show is going to slow things down somewhat in season 2. They have to introduce whatever secondary players they want to use in the future (Starks, Arryns, Riverlords, Ironborn, Westermen), and they have to introduce the new core players - Daeron the Daring and Ormund Hightower and their entire entourage, the Hull boys, their mother, and the other dragonseeds, Alys Rivers, etc. In addition, season 2 would be the last opportunity to focus somewhat on family moments - Aegon and Viserys are still together, and their father is still on Dragonstone, young Jaehaerys is still alive and his mother still mostly sane. Not sure how much we are going to see of Helaena's children in season 1, but it is likely not that much, so they should give us some scenes to properly introduce them before Blood and Cheese. I definitely think Blood and Cheese is going to be a rather convoluted thing with Rhaenyra/Daemon not actually wanting to target Aegon's irrelevant kids, but rather Aemond, the actual perpetrator, and/or Aegon so that they don't just avenge themselves but also kind of end the war before it escalates any further. I think we'll get a kind of butterfly effect there, both within the chain Rhaenyra-Daemon-Mysaria-in-betweens ... as well as Blood and Cheese themselves. It could be rather interesting to see them trying to kill various members of the Green royal family before they end up settling on Helaena and the children because nothing else appears promising or even possible. One also imagines that the show is not exactly keen to lose Rhaenys all that early, so they might deliberately postpone that. If Jace were to end up marrying Sara Snow, bringing her back to Dragonstone, and if the search for additional dragonriders turns up the Hull boys while Rhaenys is still alive, there would be interesting potential for domestic drama on Dragonstone ... which could then be partially resolved if one of the quarreling people is very crucial in saving one of Erryk Cargyll's intended victims during the infiltration. While Arryk and Erryk will kill each other, Erryk might not have arrived alone, nor is it a given that Arryk confronts Erryk all by himself after a chance meeting. We could easily get more suspense if a character sees Erryk shortly after talking to Arryk, realizing that something is amiss and being dragged into the entire affair. In KL I think they will also have to allow Blood and Cheese and its aftermath to breathe ... not to mention that the domestic quarrels there also have to play, the events leading up to Otto's dismissal and Criston's rise to the Handship. Depending how prominent a character Otto Hightower is in the show he cannot or shouldn't just disappear after he is fired for good ... but still interact with Alicent and whoever else still wants to talk to him. He could also continue his plans to defeat the Blacks behind Aegon's and Criston's back, etc. The early Riverlands campaigns could be glossed over easily enough ... but I actually think they should show how common people and lowly knights, etc. rise for Rhaenyra, and having the Blackwood-Bracken feud play out in detail wouldn't be bad at all. The show might also be well-advised to move Daemon's conquest of Harrenhal to a (much) later point because he cannot sit there for nearly an entire year of the war (or one or more than one season). While I think Daemon could and should be the most mobile of the dragonriders, the show might work better if Harrenhal will only be captured as part of the strategy to take KL, i.e. when they have already very concrete plans and how and when to draw the Green dragonriders away from KL. It could be a plan they make only after they have found the dragonseeds - the search for them could also be a longer process in the show than in the book. Hugh and Ulf also need to be pretty complex and believable characters in the show. We must understand where they are coming from, how riding two of the largest dragons alive changes them, how they are treated thereafter by our characters, and what they actually want for themselves. Especially, of course, the betrayal of Tumbleton must be understood by the audience. There is a lot of potential there, especially if those two have no idea about their backgrounds at all before they are asked to mount a dragon ... we could easily like and understand them throughout most - or the entirety - of their stories.
  21. Considering how great those comics are, and that they were written by the creators, there is little chance that they would want to discard them. Jumping ahead into adult territory would mean to go with a changed status quo - like we also get with Korra's era - and folks who want to know how they got there would have to read the comics or wait until/if they are adapted. Not to mention that more must have happened in the meantime that has been covered by the comics so far.
  22. There would be enough material for 5-6 seasons, I guess, if they expand and deepen certain plots. It would make sense to expand more on the Baratheons and Stormlands, add conflicts taking place in the North and the Vale, actually depict what's going on at the western coast with the Ironborn. Also, I think there is a lot of potential with many of the characters we meet in the Riverlands. It also strikes one as imperative to stay with the main characters throughout the entire show, meaning we could see what Viserys does in Lys, what Aegon does while he is hiding, etc. And while I think it is crucial that Alicent is captured by Rhaenyra and in her power for some time ... it could make sense to have her flee the city eventually, go to Storm's End and come back with Borros to clean up the city. The personal stories would also be pretty important. Addam Velaryon needs a proper arc, we have to be with him when he decides to raise another army to destroy Rhaenyra's enemies to prove his loyalty. Originally I thought season 2 could end with Rhaenyra taking the Iron Throne. But they could do it slower and focus more on forging alliances and having the assassin plots play out, especially Blood and Cheese and subsequently the attempted assassination by Erryk Cargyll at Dragonstone. If they move certain plots around somewhat, focusing more on the Riverlands and the fighting there, they could move Rook's Rest to the end of season 2, playing up the Black Lords of the Crownlands as an actual threat to Aegon's reign because the main Hightower and Lannister troops are very far away and the Darklyn, Rosbys, Stokeworths, and Stauntons band together actually make trouble for the Greens. We could get Criston Cole as a kind of great strategist who actually uses very small military resources to win multiple victories over those Blacks, culminating in the fall of Duskendale and the siege of Rook's Rest. Dragonriders from Dragonstone could help with that - it would be easily possible to have Jace and Baela make hit-and-run attacks on the mainland, a stratagem the Greens have trouble to counter due their lack of dragons. The Rook's Rest confrontation could be the culmination of that development. In addition, the dragonriders are not necessarily glued to Dragonstone and KL, so we could see various dragonriders flying across Westeros to support various armies in the Riverlands and the Reach. While Rhaenyra might not meet with Daemon all that often at Harrenhal, Baela and Jace could visit him often enough, etc. If Baela, Rhaena, and Alyn work as characters, the Regency could be game. Unwin Peake would have to work, too. I guess they would rearrange and streamline some things - have Viserys return earlier, increase the role of the Rogares, etc. I guess that would have worked better if they had started with the Conqueror rather than with Viserys I. Going back to Aegon I, his sons, or Jaehaerys I after the Dance would be really weird. If they were to do that they would either change the title of the show or at least make a mild rebranding by adding a subtle, say, 'House of the Dragon - The Reign of the Conqueror' or something along those lines.
  23. And, guys - this isn't a GoT/D&D thread. I guess one can touch upon the other show occasionally, but we shouldn't discuss it here in great(er) detail.
  24. You make the mistake of assuming Corwyn, Jorgen, and Victor were Daemon Velaryon's only sons. But that is never said. They are merely the sons who show Jaehaerys the ships and visit with him on Dragonstone. Daemon could have had elder sons who don't bother with Jaehaerys at all and who aren't even on Driftmark at that time but rather with their father in KL. Daemon is already pretty old at that time, so his eldest son could have gotten him plenty of granddaughters already - we just know that Corlys is the eldest son of the eldest son. It is the same with Larissa Velaryon - it kind of makes sense to imagine her as a daughter of Daemon but she could just as well also be a daughter of one of his brothers.
  25. Sure enough - in the book the dynamics might be different. If we go with a Criston who really had the hots for Rhaenyra and worked towards the goal to seduce her one day ... for which have no indication. Insofar as age and authority are concerned the 14-year-old dragonriding Heir Apparent is no small girl. She is a young woman like Daenerys at the end of AGoT. She can have authority and she can wield it. Rhaenyra was clearly manipulated and seduced by Daemon in both detailed accounts we get in FaB ... but not by Criston Cole. Criston is a man from a very humble background so his attitude towards a woman like Rhaenyra would be more akin to how Gendry starts to treat Arya after he knows who she is. The class distinction there would very much beat his seniority in age. To the point that you can have a Criston as a man being twice Rhaenyra's age being lectured by her about the hard realities of life and his place in it. Criston Cole might have been a naive fool believing he could run away with a royal princess and marry her ... while something like that would have always been ridiculous for Rhaenyra because of the way she was brought up. It is the same kind of silly dream Littlefinger seems to have dreamed. That living with the Tullys would make him one of them. That Cat would love him like he loved her and that this love would have the power to change the world. This is the kind of Pretty Woman fairy-tale nonsense. What do you guys think about the Harrold Westerling change: I don't like it that Criston isn't Lord Commander when Viserys dies ... but the idea to have an old guard loyal Lord Commander of the Kingsguard standing up for Viserys' wishes and Rhaenyra seems like a very promising addition. Even more since it explands the importance of the Kingsguard - which were really glossed over by GoT. I guess Criston will then succeed Harrold as Aegon's Lord Commander, while Westerling is going to die at a later point during the war
  • Create New...