House of the Dragon Series Order Announced

[Hodor the Articulate]

On 11/1/2019 at 8:30 AM, Rose of Red Lake said:

And the Stark prequel is a loss. Knowing who Brandon the Builder was as a person or what he actually built? NOPE! We don't get that. But we get to know dragon colors. Ya know...the really important stuff here. 

Dude, we get it. That dead horse is well tenderized now. At some point, you're just going to have to accept a lot more people (including the author) are interested in seeing more of the magical dragon assholes over the magical ice wolf assholes, and they aren't morally inferior for doing so. If you were actually concerned about the TV indoctrinating the kids with the facism, you'd be complaining about the whole series being largely about, and from the pov of, the noble class, and calling for a peasant revolt instead of stanning one of the most rich white girl characters of rich white girl characters in the series.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

Dude, we get it. That dead horse is well tenderized now. At some point, you're just going to have to accept a lot more people (including the author) are interested in seeing more of the magical dragon assholes over the magical ice wolf assholes, and they aren't morally inferior for doing so. If you were actually concerned about the TV indoctrinating the kids with the facism, you'd be complaining about the whole series being largely about, and from the pov of, the noble class, and calling for a peasant revolt instead of stanning one of the most rich white girl characters of rich white girl characters in the series.

Exactly, ASoIaF is, in the end, regressive fantasy literature, idealizing shitty forms of government. In fact, one can even make the case that the worst values are the aristocratic/noble values embodied and perpetrated especially by the Starks - because the common trait in Ned, Robb, Jon, and Arya (not Catelyn, Sansa, or Bran) is the idea that the most important thing is that you stay true your aristocratic ideals. You keep your aristocratic honor, avenge slights to your family and vassals (like Brandon getting angry over the Lyanna thing, or Lyanna getting angry over the treatment of Howland, Robb running amok because his father is imprisoned), risk your life/assets/get yourself killed over doing 'the right thing' as you in your limited aristocratic mindset interprets it (Ned wanting to make Stannis king, Ned telling Cersei what he found out to prevent Robert from (possibly) killing her children while forgetting that his own children and all the Seven Kingdoms were threatened by war, Robb insisting to execute Rickard Karstark, Jon putting his family before his vows repeatedly, Robb marrying Jeyne Westerling for no good reason, etc.).

If you read the unabridged version of the Westerlands history you understand Tywin's cruelty more. You can relate to the point behind that - better a cruel blow to end everything and save the lives of bystanders, than the noble thing and risk you drag another hundred thousand people into another pointless war. That is why even I - who actually think Jaime killed Aerys II just because he wanted to, not because he cared about 'the common good' - can more relate to him than to Ned's state of mind of condemning him. That's just so high horse aristocratic shit that I cannot really relate to that. He killed his enemy, the man who had his father and brother burned. He should be happy that he is dead, not be angry at his killer - even if that guy didn't act out of the goodness of his heart, either.

You can understand those decisions up to a point because we are in the head of the POVs, but these people make decisions that go completely against what we would expect a ruler or civil servant who is trained for his role to do in a modern society. You put the common good before your petty interests (including those of some royal children), you care less whether you are will be able to look at yourself in the mirror and more what making a decision will mean for the hundreds of thousands of innocent people who will be affected by your decision. You swallow your pride and do the right thing (and, yes, Ned sort of did that after they put him in his cell, but unfortunately not before - in the end, punishing the murderers of Jon Arryn or even the would-be murderers of Bran is not nearly as important as preventing the Seven Kingdoms from ripping themselves apart - and Ned did nothing to prevent that).

But, in any case, focusing on one family who actually has historically done more to save lives than kill them (although they are no way less shitty than any of the other noble families) is just silly.

[SeanF]

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Exactly, ASoIaF is, in the end, regressive fantasy literature, idealizing shitty forms of government. In fact, one can even make the case that the worst values are the aristocratic/noble values embodied and perpetrated especially by the Starks - because the common trait in Ned, Robb, Jon, and Arya (not Catelyn, Sansa, or Bran) is the idea that the most important thing is that you stay true your aristocratic ideals. You keep your aristocratic honor, avenge slights to your family and vassals (like Brandon getting angry over the Lyanna thing, or Lyanna getting angry over the treatment of Howland, Robb running amok because his father is imprisoned), risk your life/assets/get yourself killed over doing 'the right thing' as you in your limited aristocratic mindset interprets it (Ned wanting to make Stannis king, Ned telling Cersei what he found out to prevent Robert from (possibly) killing her children while forgetting that his own children and all the Seven Kingdoms were threatened by war, Robb insisting to execute Rickard Karstark, Jon putting his family before his vows repeatedly, Robb marrying Jeyne Westerling for no good reason, etc.).

If you read the unabridged version of the Westerlands history you understand Tywin's cruelty more. You can relate to the point behind that - better a cruel blow to end everything and save the lives of bystanders, than the noble thing and risk you drag another hundred thousand people into another pointless war. That is why even I - who actually think Jaime killed Aerys II just because he wanted to, not because he cared about 'the common good' - can more relate to him than to Ned's state of mind of condemning him. That's just so high horse aristocratic shit that I cannot really relate to that. He killed his enemy, the man who had his father and brother burned. He should be happy that he is dead, not be angry at his killer - even if that guy didn't act out of the goodness of his heart, either.

You can understand those decisions up to a point because we are in the head of the POVs, but these people make decisions that go completely against what we would expect a ruler or civil servant who is trained for his role to do in a modern society. You put the common good before your petty interests (including those of some royal children), you care less whether you are will be able to look at yourself in the mirror and more what making a decision will mean for the hundreds of thousands of innocent people who will be affected by your decision. You swallow your pride and do the right thing (and, yes, Ned sort of did that after they put him in his cell, but unfortunately not before - in the end, punishing the murderers of Jon Arryn or even the would-be murderers of Bran is not nearly as important as preventing the Seven Kingdoms from ripping themselves apart - and Ned did nothing to prevent that).

But, in any case, focusing on one family who actually has historically done more to save lives than kill them (although they are no way less shitty than any of the other noble families) is just silly.

An unabridged reading of the show's ending is that Westeros went backwards politically.  Six of the Seven Kingdoms are now ruled by a rotten oligarchy that thinks of the Smallfolk as livestock, and prioritises the construction of new brothels, staffed by desperate peasants.   Sansa's rule in the North is likely to be extremely weak, given her shortage of soldiers, and given the North's dependence on the South, militarily, and for food.  

What Westeros needs is a strong, centralised, monarchy, that curbs the powers of the nobility for good, before it can move on to constitutional forms of government.

WRT the Targaryens, I think that Martin fell in love with them at some point, even if he never intended to when he began writing the series.  And, why not?  They're easily the most interesting of the leading families.  A lot of criticism that gets directed against them seems to be on the basis that using dragons in warfare is somehow unsporting, like knights complaining about longbows and crossbows, or the British complaining in the Boer War about enemy snipers picking off their officers and couriers at long range.

[Panos Targaryen]

18 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Exactly, ASoIaF is, in the end, regressive fantasy literature, idealizing shitty forms of government. In fact, one can even make the case that the worst values are the aristocratic/noble values embodied and perpetrated especially by the Starks - because the common trait in Ned, Robb, Jon, and Arya (not Catelyn, Sansa, or Bran) is the idea that the most important thing is that you stay true your aristocratic ideals. You keep your aristocratic honor, avenge slights to your family and vassals (like Brandon getting angry over the Lyanna thing, or Lyanna getting angry over the treatment of Howland, Robb running amok because his father is imprisoned), risk your life/assets/get yourself killed over doing 'the right thing' as you in your limited aristocratic mindset interprets it (Ned wanting to make Stannis king, Ned telling Cersei what he found out to prevent Robert from (possibly) killing her children while forgetting that his own children and all the Seven Kingdoms were threatened by war, Robb insisting to execute Rickard Karstark, Jon putting his family before his vows repeatedly, Robb marrying Jeyne Westerling for no good reason, etc.).

If you read the unabridged version of the Westerlands history you understand Tywin's cruelty more. You can relate to the point behind that - better a cruel blow to end everything and save the lives of bystanders, than the noble thing and risk you drag another hundred thousand people into another pointless war. That is why even I - who actually think Jaime killed Aerys II just because he wanted to, not because he cared about 'the common good' - can more relate to him than to Ned's state of mind of condemning him. That's just so high horse aristocratic shit that I cannot really relate to that. He killed his enemy, the man who had his father and brother burned. He should be happy that he is dead, not be angry at his killer - even if that guy didn't act out of the goodness of his heart, either.

You can understand those decisions up to a point because we are in the head of the POVs, but these people make decisions that go completely against what we would expect a ruler or civil servant who is trained for his role to do in a modern society. You put the common good before your petty interests (including those of some royal children), you care less whether you are will be able to look at yourself in the mirror and more what making a decision will mean for the hundreds of thousands of innocent people who will be affected by your decision. You swallow your pride and do the right thing (and, yes, Ned sort of did that after they put him in his cell, but unfortunately not before - in the end, punishing the murderers of Jon Arryn or even the would-be murderers of Bran is not nearly as important as preventing the Seven Kingdoms from ripping themselves apart - and Ned did nothing to prevent that).

But, in any case, focusing on one family who actually has historically done more to save lives than kill them (although they are no way less shitty than any of the other noble families) is just silly.

Why are you here? Why do you consider yourself an ASOIAF fan?

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Panos Targaryen said:

Why are you here? Why do you consider yourself an ASOIAF fan?

I suggest you start to learn to differentiate your own political views from your artistic preferences and don't annoy other people by pretending theirs have to all be aligned.

[The Dragon Demands]

Due to popularity of Lannisters, I think they will, and should, give focus to Johanna Lannister (Westerling).

 

[Lord Varys]

14 minutes ago, The Dragon Demands said:

Due to popularity of Lannisters, I think they will, and should, give focus to Johanna Lannister (Westerling).

Well, with Tyland there really is a prominent and somewhat complex story (or at least character with some sort of development) in the plot. He and Jason would certainly need some background, but one could play with that somewhat, introducing them as the twins who were vying for Rhaenyra's hand.

But the whole Ironborn/Westermen story is completely disjointed from the main Dance. There is no interaction there, so one really could ask why bother even including that? Unlike the main series where the various plot lines are supposed to come together in the end George did everything he could to prevent things from coming together. There was no great finale there, not even to the Ironborn plot - which is a very good example of that. How satisfying would that be seeing Alyn Velaryon and Dalton Greyjoy getting a season-long buildup for their great clash, and then a commoner just cuts Dalton's throat.

That is certainly unexpected and a twist - whether this kind of thing will be successful is another thing entirely.

[The hairy bear]

On 10/31/2019 at 10:30 PM, The Dragon Demands said:

I always thought Vhagar was green.  I mean, how would you differentiate her during a big fight with Caraxes, who was red?

I think that Vhagar was orange.

The rationale: we know Meraxes had silver scales, and among the "second generation dragons" we have Quicksilver, Dreamfyre and Silverwing, that are all blueish or silver-colored. Balerion's blackness would account for the Cannibal.

That would only leave the bronze/golden/yellow Vermithor, Sunfyre, and Syrax, the reddish Melys and Caraxes, and the brownish Sheepstealer. If we were to assume that Vhagar laid the eggs for all those ones, some dark shade of orange would be a reasonable assumption IMO.

[Rose of Red Lake]

On 11/2/2019 at 5:47 PM, Hodor the Articulate said:

Dude, we get it. That dead horse is well tenderized now. At some point, you're just going to have to accept a lot more people (including the author) are interested in seeing more of the magical dragon assholes over the magical ice wolf assholes, and they aren't morally inferior for doing so. If you were actually concerned about the TV indoctrinating the kids with the facism, you'd be complaining about the whole series being largely about, and from the pov of, the noble class, and calling for a peasant revolt instead of stanning one of the most rich white girl characters of rich white girl characters in the series.

Indeed, I’m excited to watch the House that is a riff on Numenor-without-an-Aragorn lose touch with reality and morality, knowing that the moral of the story hinges on their corruption and abuse of power. After the Dance, it will be fun to watch Arrested Westeros play out on screen, "Now the story of a pompous family who lost all their dragons, and the young king who had no choice but to rule the realm without nuclear weapons” (so sad, they have to rule from the ground, just like everyone else). It’s true, Sansa Stark has fooled audiences into worshiping their class superiors, and now they want to do sinister things like, *reads hand* ...rush into a traumatic place to rescue their loved one from prison? (Somehow I think that if Dany had won after her mass murder spree, her stans would think the feudal system is just fine). The show hit on something, and it’s how Targaryens are a white supremacists’ power fantasy. I bet the costume designers will take Dany’s TargNazi attire and dress most Targaryen kings like that, or use the same Nazi imagery when they give grand speeches about war, just to break out the flash cards for people who adore the pasty white conquers who practice forced incestuous marriage just so they can ride living nuclear weapons and conquer both sides of the world. Or not. We can always sit around with family and friends, turn our brains off, and just watch dragons getting decapitated. Remember folks, the Targaryens brought peace and prosperity to Westeros!

[SeanF]

35 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Indeed, I’m excited to watch the House that is a riff on Numenor-without-an-Aragorn lose touch with reality and morality, knowing that the moral of the story hinges on their corruption and abuse of power. After the Dance, it will be fun to watch Arrested Westeros play out on screen, "Now the story of a pompous family who lost all their dragons, and the young king who had no choice but to rule the realm without nuclear weapons” (so sad, they have to rule from the ground, just like everyone else). It’s true, Sansa Stark has fooled audiences into worshiping their class superiors, and now they want to do sinister things like, *reads hand* ...rush into a traumatic place to rescue their loved one from prison? (Somehow I think that if Dany had won after her mass murder spree, her stans would think the feudal system is just fine). The show hit on something, and it’s how Targaryens are a white supremacists’ power fantasy. I bet the costume designers will take Dany’s TargNazi attire and dress most Targaryen kings like that, or use the same Nazi imagery when they give grand speeches about war, just to break out the flash cards for people who adore the pasty white conquers who practice forced incestuous marriage just so they can ride living nuclear weapons and conquer both sides of the world. Or not. We can always sit around with family and friends, turn our brains off, and just watch dragons getting decapitated. Remember folks, the Targaryens brought peace and prosperity to Westeros!

I think they were trying to give us the idea that Cersei was the reactionary dictator, Dany the radical dictator, and Tyrion and co, the sensible centrists who view the populace as livestock, and prioritise new brothels.

[Lord Varys]

I made a thread to discuss this thing further over here:

https://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?/topic/155943-how-should-house-of-the-dragon-go/&tab=comments#comment-8447800

I guess it could be interesting to discuss what one would like to see, where people see problems with the thing.

Constructively would be good, though ;-).

[Hodor the Articulate]

16 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Indeed, I’m excited to watch the House that is a riff on Numenor-without-an-Aragorn lose touch with reality and morality, knowing that the moral of the story hinges on their corruption and abuse of power. After the Dance, it will be fun to watch Arrested Westeros play out on screen, "Now the story of a pompous family who lost all their dragons, and the young king who had no choice but to rule the realm without nuclear weapons” (so sad, they have to rule from the ground, just like everyone else). It’s true, Sansa Stark has fooled audiences into worshiping their class superiors, and now they want to do sinister things like, *reads hand* ...rush into a traumatic place to rescue their loved one from prison? (Somehow I think that if Dany had won after her mass murder spree, her stans would think the feudal system is just fine). The show hit on something, and it’s how Targaryens are a white supremacists’ power fantasy. I bet the costume designers will take Dany’s TargNazi attire and dress most Targaryen kings like that, or use the same Nazi imagery when they give grand speeches about war, just to break out the flash cards for people who adore the pasty white conquers who practice forced incestuous marriage just so they can ride living nuclear weapons and conquer both sides of the world. Or not. We can always sit around with family and friends, turn our brains off, and just watch dragons getting decapitated. Remember folks, the Targaryens brought peace and prosperity to Westeros!

Yes, yes... your rich white girl is better than that other rich white girl. We got the memo. You've cured us of our immoral desire to be entertained by fantasy creatures. We should storm HBO and petition GRRM - demand that they stop romanticising feudalism and unjust power structures by cancelling this show and replacing it with one about a ginger queen and her surveillance state brother instead #lemoncakeFeminism

[BlackLightning]

On 10/31/2019 at 5:18 PM, Bittersweet Distractor said:

I'm very much looking forward to this, my only hope though is it starts with the conquest not the dance.

Agreed.

I'd rather this show start with the pre-Conquest days of Aegon and his sisters and ends with Summerhall or perhaps the Defiance of Duskendale.

[Krishtotter]

On 11/8/2019 at 3:08 PM, Jabar of House Titan said:

Agreed.

I'd rather this show start with the pre-Conquest days of Aegon and his sisters and ends with Summerhall or perhaps the Defiance of Duskendale.

My most favoured setting, out of all the possible avenues for adaption, would have been the Valyrian Freehold, pre-Doom (on the cusp of the apocalypse of this civilization and empire in Essos) leading up to the Targaryen noble family fleeing to Dragonstone after Daenys the Dreamer receives portents of the looming catasrophe, followed by the Century of Blood with Aurion's attempt to re-establish the Freehold and the brutal wars between Valyria's "Children" - the Free Cities, especially Volantis and all the intrigue involving the two political factions of the Tigers and the Elephants.

I still think its a bit of a missed opportunity that a Doom series never managed to get optioned for a pilot or series order - especially since it could have shown viewers Sothoryos, through the angle of Valyrian imperialism -  but I do understand the reasons (budget would be through the roof, with high fantasy on full display - dragon-riders everywhere, volcanic lava flowing through the capital, abundant blood magic and the fact that the source material on Valyria is quite thin on the ground, compared with the Dance, although not so meagre as the Age of Heroes).

It would have followed a similar arc to GoT (noble families all competing for power and hegemony, heedless of an existential, supernatural threat to their existence that some far-sighted person is trying to warn them about) but with a different realm to that of Westeros and a different magical threat. So the stakes would have been every bit as high.

(On the bright side, the Doom of Valyria is basically the ASoIaF universe's version of the fall of Númenor in LotR - derived from the same historical sources, ancient Rome and the Atlantis myth, only with fire/volcanic ash replacing water/tidal wave. So Amazon is basically covering this ground, I guess, sans the dragonlords but with the extinction-level event, human sacrifices and colonialism all there too. The great mountain of the Meneltarma, in the Akallabeth, even bursts with volcanic smoke fumes and earthquakes before Númenor sinks down into the deep. Very Doom-esque.).

Next in order of priority, I'd have been most excited to begin with the Conquest - as I do like a bit of William the Conqueror and Norman-castle/keep-builders rampaging over a continental-sized version of England on the backs of Dragons - so I do! 

That said, the Dance of the Dragons is very fruitful source material for a TV show with a strong focus upon political drama in a medieval fantasy setting....and it has dragons. So I'm intrigued by the premise for the series.

I would like to see the subplot of Daemon's war in the Stepstones, as it brings in an interesting new location, politics and international dynamics with the Triarchy/Kingdom of the Three Daughters (Myr, Lys and Tyrosh). Even though he is genuinely an awful person, I find Daemon - aka the "Rogue Prince" - to be a compelling character.

[Rose of Red Lake]

On 11/6/2019 at 5:41 PM, Hodor the Articulate said:

Yes, yes... your rich white girl is better than that other rich white girl. We got the memo. You've cured us of our immoral desire to be entertained by fantasy creatures. We should storm HBO and petition GRRM - demand that they stop romanticising feudalism and unjust power structures by cancelling this show and replacing it with one about a ginger queen and her surveillance state brother instead #lemoncakeFeminism

Fire and Blood + ASOIAF explores issues like how the Targaryens only have one form of power, how they can only threaten/kill people, and how that isn't sufficient to achieve their goals. I'm expecting more revelations on this theme, so please, don't petition the show, keep it going. 

[The Dragon Demands]

Odd.   Very odd.  Video clip came out of HBO Drama head and professional yes-man Casey Bloys at the HBO Max upfront event last week, officially announcing “House of the Dragon” for the first time.  It was strange:

- His tone lacks any enthusiasm whatsoever, and you can tell he’s reading off a cue card verbatim - even WITHOUT knowledge that yes, this is how their initial press release was worded.

- We know this is a man who bet his career, and doubled down HARD, on the Long Night prequel.  How many times in the past...15 months, has this rubber stamp been hyping up Long Night? While saying NOTHING about its contents?  So the lack of enthusiasm...is his career on the line?

- we already knew that the press release says “300 years ago” - apparently just reading off the back cover blurb.  But it’s strange to see him saying that during an official presentation.  Martin’s blog post all but stated it’s just about the Dance of the Dragons, 170 years ago.  What’s going on?  Was their public relations unit really that unprepared?

 

[Lord Bored]

For those of us who are optimistic about HOTD, which characters from the Dance of the Dragons are we most excited to see explored? Personally I'm hoping we get to really delve into Nettle given she's so mysterious as a character (her past and her motivations). 

[The Dragon Demands]

Martin just updated his blog, announcing the writing staff: http://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2019/11/10/a-tip-o-the-crown/

TWO female writers?!

also....strange, he brings up Rhaenys and Visenya....is this about the Conquest or the Dance?  Last blog post focused on the prequel novellas about the Dance.

[Lord Varys]

20 minutes ago, The Dragon Demands said:

Martin just updated his blog, announcing the writing staff: http://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2019/11/10/a-tip-o-the-crown/

TWO female writers?!

also....strange, he brings up Rhaenys and Visenya....is this about the Conquest or the Dance?  Last blog post focused on the prequel novellas about the Dance.

I'd expect that's just a commentary that's not necessarily in relation to the project as such - bringing up Rhaenyra wouldn't have meant a woman in that active a role, unless he was trying to say they were in the depressed and/or cake-eating department... But Rhaenys and Visenya are the co-conquerors and co-rulers of Westeros.

3 hours ago, Lord Bored said:

For those of us who are optimistic about HOTD, which characters from the Dance of the Dragons are we most excited to see explored? Personally I'm hoping we get to really delve into Nettle given she's so mysterious as a character (her past and her motivations). 

Check out the other thread on HotD I made in the general GoT forum.

Nettles certainly should be a prominent role, especially since she would be the only prominent person of color on the show (unless they do change other characters), but insofar as the story is concerned she only features in a major capacity during a very short time window (from the Sowing until she and Daemon part ways).

If they make her Daemon's daughter - which I think she is also supposed to be in FaB - and they take time with building up the Dance by depicting Viserys I's reign in much detail, they could show us how Daemon had an affair with her mother and how she was conceived and then, one assumes, abandoned. She could be a variation of the character of Obara Sand (the one from the books, not the travesty), but one who is discovered by her father only very late - or rather: he only realizes he cares or should care when she has been through a lot.

Her description has her suffering through a lot of shit in her early life (one description we have claims that her nose was cut), which could be depicted up to a point. And then there could be some background as to why and how she decides to try to beocme a dragonrider.

Afterwards one would have to focus a lot on conversations and talks between her and Daemon to sell the audience why and how this warmongering ambitious prick suddenly decides to no longer care about any of that - to the point of him throwing away his life in a pointless gesture and abandoning his daughter/lover yet again.

I guess a good writer could make this both about him regretting that he wasn't there for his daughter before - and that Nettles having being through a lot of shit shows him that power and wealth and thrones are in the end just as meaningless as his pointless pursuit of those things in the last couple of decades.

A great focus on Nettles as a character in her own right doesn't seem very likely - for that she is too insignificant and leaves the story far too early.

But I'd have no issue whatsoever if she returned from the Mountains of the Moon after Rhaenyra's death - as possible half-sister of Aegon III and/or lover of her father she certainly could have a large role in later affairs.

[The Dragon Demands]

So you’re still convinced it’s skipping the conquest?