[BOOK SPOILERS] Hizdahr

[C.T. Phipps]

Dany needs to learn to be able to institute change without resorting to brute force and tyranny. She's right to free the slaves. She's right (in the books) to insist they get paid for their labor. She's not right to murder.

I think Martin is making a point the world doesn't really run on fairness. Daeny would have gotten better results by just killing all of the Masters and taking their populations to Westeros. Also, confiscating all their property. It would have been grossly unfair but fairness doesn't really matter in war.

As Jorah said, Aegon didn't conquer the Seven Kingdoms because they were his right--he conquered them because he had dragons.

[jarl the climber]

How is trying to balance two opposing forces two-dimensional? You're literally the third point in a three-dimensional problem!

The problem with Hizadar in the books is that he seems like a craven, hes materialistic and venal and that whatever his personal motivations might be he is essentially a puppet being used by other actors. I agree that he is three dimensional but he is not sympathetic nor is he interesting in himself as a character.

[Ran]

I get confused when people talk about how they like a character more often seems to mean the same thing as the character becoming more likable. It's not a popularity contest. The quality of a character as a presentation by an author should be independent of whether we actually root for them or not.

Is he a craven? In what way? He went out on a limb to some degree, being a voice of compromise, and arguably faced personal danger (from Skahaz Shavepate, if no one else) in his attempt to achieve a compromise (favorable to himself, of course, but still a compromise).

[Dragon of Valyria]

I think Martin is making a point the world doesn't really run on fairness. Daeny would have gotten better results by just killing all of the Masters and taking their populations to Westeros. Also, confiscating all their property. It would have been grossly unfair but fairness doesn't really matter in war.

As Jorah said, Aegon didn't conquer the Seven Kingdoms because they were his right--he conquered them because he had dragons.

C19:

Yes, GRRM's world is harsh. But I brought up Westeros for a reason: she wants to be a Westerosi queen and sees the Essosi (particularly Ghiscari) as backwards and barbaric, yet here she is ruling as an absolute despot in a fashion that even the Westerosi would find repellant and excessive.

I don't mean that Dany should apply the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. I understand GRRM's world is a brutal one, a realistic medieval fantasy.

But I'm saying that Dany is a brutal tyrant even by the standards of that world. She thinks she's doing good -- she tries to do good -- but she lets her emotions get the best of her.

And as a backer of her and her claim, that makes me really sad.

[jarl the climber]

I get confused when people talk about how they like a character more often seems to mean the same thing as the character becoming more likable. It's not a popularity contest. The quality of a character as a presentation by an author should be independent of whether we actually root for them or not.

Is he a craven? In what way? He went out on a limb to some degree, being a voice of compromise, and arguably faced personal danger (from Skahaz Shavepate, if no one else) in his attempt to achieve a compromise (favorable to himself, of course, but still a compromise).

The general impression that I get from reading the discussions on the boards is that Hizadar is viewed as being a speed bump when people discuss Dany and that even if they are condescending enough to even admit that he exists and is married to Dany and that the marriage is legally binding and has been consumated. The general consensus is that between Skahaz, Victorian and the Dothraki he seems predestined to play the role of a victim. Certainly he is not any sort of warrior that is made very clear and that in itself does not make him a craven but his response to being arrested seemed undignified, it reinforces this impression of him, that he is an empty suit

Personally I'm unsure what happens with Mereen, I can't see Dany simply abandoning it, therefore I feel her marriage might still have some importance going forward, that this fellow is not going to just go away but I'm in a very small minority.

[Lady of the Falls]

This guy is gonna marry and fuck the woman who crucified his father.

Holy shit.

I mean, it does give him a motive to poison her, if he was indeed the one behind it. But still, he's going to "court" her, negotiate with her, marry her, get a hard on and fuck her in a completely non rape fashion.

If they stick to the book. The actor playing him is a let down, it doesn't seem plausible that she'd even be a little attracted to him. Politics or not. He doesn't stand out at all as someone important.

[P. frontalis chiripepe]

I pictured Hizdahr as an older man, kind of like an Essos version of Littlefinger, but a bit older, and less conniving. Like a stuffy middle aged man who is set in his ways regarding how things are done. But this version of Hizdahr could work too. :)

[Sun]

Just in the normal edition. Not in this one: (ok I tried to link the pop up book here but it didn't work) :lol:

I think that a lot of the people on Dany's side of the story just might come of less ambigous than the actually are sometimes in contrast to all the ones in Westeros, just because Dany is the only POV over there (up to a certain point) and we never get the "other part of the story" as we do in case of Lannister vs. Stark or Stannis vs. Iron Throne therefore seeing people on screen from a more neutral point of view almost naturally makes them more relatable or interesting just because you're not as biased from the start by the pov of the person meeting them.

:lol:

True. GRRM's choice not to give us an Essosian pov because, to paraphrase GRRM, Essos is not the story, and yet spend a big portion of the book caused that storyline to suffer in that all the inhabitants of that world became cardboard cutouts. We only see them from one point of view, a point of view I might add that is not very interested in gathering knowledge, and we know very little about them. We have an impression of them, a one sided impression, but we don't know them. Therefor any nuance and depth the show can add to that world I absolutely welcome, regardless of whether that nuance may or may not match exactly the meagre impressions we have of those characters from the books.

[Citabel]

I'm utterly confused by your question. Why would the Dothraki speak out against rape or cruelty if they're horrible people?

If you mean for reasons, because the Dothraki culture is all about being the biggest baddest warriors around. You get their mindset even if it means they are actually just a bunch of bullies torturing and murdering people for plunder.

Just like Westeros' knights and Lords system is complete [censored] and evil but you have people like Ned Stark who think it's actually a good one. There's a rationale even if its nonsensical from the outside.

In RL, every slave holding society is one of exploitation, torture, and (historically) rape so the Mereen are going to be evil no matter what but you might be able to see how they don't think themselves that way.

The dothraki are the Greyjoy's of Essos. They even have their own sea.

[trgryn-strk-lnstr-mrtell]

If they stick to the book. The actor playing him is a let down, it doesn't seem plausible that she'd even be a little attracted to him. Politics or not. He doesn't stand out at all as someone important.

very true

[trgryn-strk-lnstr-mrtell]

The dothraki are the Greyjoy's of Essos. They even have their own sea.

many of my friends think the same way too...i never considered it, but there does seem to be a lot of similarities in the way their philosophies...

[El Guapo]

C19:

Yes, GRRM's world is harsh. But I brought up Westeros for a reason: she wants to be a Westerosi queen and sees the Essosi (particularly Ghiscari) as backwards and barbaric, yet here she is ruling as an absolute despot in a fashion that even the Westerosi would find repellant and excessive.

Not really. The only reason they might find it excessive is that she did it to a bunch of nobles. Had she crucified 163 random smallfolk I doubt most of the high lords of Westeros would even care.

[Thelastactionhero]

Hizdahr isn't remotely as he's being depicted above.

He's a pretty nuanced character: a wealthy patrician who, rather than swing to extremes (Shavepate, the Harpy's Sons [no, I don't believe he is the Harpy]) tries to work the middle course of compromise, the course that's actually the most reasonable under the circumstances if you don't want the streets awash with blood. He's trying to bridge the gap between traditional Meereenese slaver society and the regime Daenerys attempts to institute. That's not remotely "paper thin" or a "mustache twirling villain." The fact that he's a pragmatist, calm and in control of himself rather than full of fire and temperament makes him more interesting, not less, because Daenerys has had plenty of the latter in her life, people who despise her or adore her but rarely stand in between the extremes.

Sure, if you think he's the Harpy, I guess you put it all as an act. But then, I don't think the Harpy is evil, per se. They are insurgents attempting to preserve the traditional culture after a new regime has terribly destabilized them politically and economically. There's a pretty thin line between what one considers a terrorist and what one considers a freedom fighter, and usually it all depends on whose side you're on.

Excellent assessment. I personally think that Hizdahr is already being colored with a more sympathetic air than he was in the books, but I can definitely see him playing this role as the pragmatic bridge between tradition and Dany's new regime going forward.

[Seneti]

I really liked him. Joel Fry is perfect.

I applaud the show's HZL being a likable character, it avoids the books' major failing of having all Dany's adversaries depicted as risible & thoroughly unpleasant.

I think the Hizdahr/Dany thing is going to be a lot more interesting than it is in the books. He's stronger and more motivated, she's getting it wrong in a lot of fundamental ways.

Agreed. So far, I prefer show HZL to book HZL. It's good to see someone finally pointing out all the flaws in Dany's actions.

I'm not sure whether I believe Hizzy about his father's innocence. But that's irrelevant: the point is that it confirms what I said two weeks ago about Dany picking 163 masters at random to crucify without any pretense of an evidentiary finding (much less even a sham trial). It's hilarious that everybody thinks oh poor Tyrion when he at least gets the pantomime of witnesses and the right to a trial by combat. Compare that to Dany's tyrannical summary murders...

I think the problem is that for the audience, slavery is such an intrinsic wrong that it justifies any action to destroy it. But that's crazy. Murder? Economic devastation? She's destroying the city she's trying to rule.

This. For all that we know, Hizdahr may be lying about everything, but that doesn't change the fact that he brings up some very good points about Dany's conquest and the morality of her actions. Let's hope we'll also get to see the parts of the book where former slaves escape to Quarth & Co., begging to be sold back into slavery, because they did fare a lot better under a benign master than under a conquerer queen who destroys their entire economy in one go.

[trgryn-strk-lnstr-mrtell]

This guy is gonna marry and fuck the woman who crucified his father.

Holy shit.

I mean, it does give him a motive to poison her, if he was indeed the one behind it. But still, he's going to "court" her, negotiate with her, marry her, get a hard on and fuck her in a completely non rape fashion.

dont recall if dany actually fuks Hizdahr...wasnt is just a marriage of convenience?

but you are right that they might show this as his motivation to poison dany...but i figure he would do that anyway to rule over meereen

[Dragon of Valyria]

Not really. The only reason they might find it excessive is that she did it to a bunch of nobles. Had she crucified 163 random smallfolk I doubt most of the high lords of Westeros would even care.

Sure, such rights to trial only apply to the highborn.

Yet Dany still fails to meet that pitifully low hurdle. What does that say about her?

[Pib_Juju]

At least it gave some humanity to the crucifictions that the books failed to provide. It also provided some background to his character that gives him more complexity than I thought the show would allow him to have. I liked it! :)

Yeah-- I actually really liked that change. Maybe they can actually make Meereen a little more interesting and a little less black/white on the show.

[PhoenixFlame]

dont recall if dany actually fuks Hizdahr...wasnt is just a marriage of convenience?

but you are right that they might show this as his motivation to poison dany...but i figure he would do that anyway to rule over meereen

Yeah they consummated but Dany was pretty bored.

I like this Hizdahr more because I actually noticed him. He was just there for me in the books. I didn't dislike him but never really gave him much thought (unlike the Green Grace). This guy had some nice polished intensity. Clearly trained in courtier ways, but if a lot of it is an act, he knew how to inject believable emotion. Speaking of the character, not the actor. The actor was great--really, really liked his voice. Pretty cute too. Damn he has nice skin. I loved Dany's "well this is awkward" face.

[Raksha 2014]

If they stick to the book. The actor playing him is a let down, it doesn't seem plausible that she'd even be a little attracted to him. Politics or not. He doesn't stand out at all as someone important.

I actually found him more attractive and interesting than TV-Daario; which surprised me, since book-Hizzy was a nonentity.

[Nictarion]

Not really. The only reason they might find it excessive is that she did it to a bunch of nobles. Had she crucified 163 random smallfolk I doubt most of the high lords of Westeros would even care.

Good point. Just look at the Riverlands right now, where women can be hung for sleeping with the wrong side.