Jump to content
Westeros

House of the Dragon Series Order Announced

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Daemon of the Blacks said:

But Daeron its the plot and the boy's general reputation both signaling him to be very noble and his actions saying different.

I'm not sure they say all that different, accepting the fact that one sack he directly approved of was revenge for the brutal murder of an infant nephew, the second sack was one he explicitly did not take direct part in and attempted to put to a stop, and the assassination was basically getting rid of someone who had revealed himself traitorous with his pretensions to a crown. Harsh stuff, to be sure, but within the constraints of Westeros culture some of the contexts are sufficiently mitigating.

1 hour ago, Daemon of the Blacks said:

Daemon acts exactly like his poor reputation says he should and that's why I like him. Daeron acts opposite to his noble reputation and that's why I think he's a little weirdly written. 

Again, consider the contemporaneous reputation of the Black Prince, Edward,  widely considered the most noble prince in Christendom contrasted with his leading the brutal raid across France including the sack of Limoges and other towns where thousands were said to have been killed without mercy. Froissart posthumously called him "the Flower of Chivalry in all the world" while at the same time reproaching him for the massacre at Limoges in his Chronicle.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ran said:

I'm not sure they say all that different, accepting the fact that one sack he directly approved of was revenge for the brutal murder of an infant nephew, the second sack was one he explicitly did not take direct part in and attempted to put to a stop, and the assassination was basically getting rid of someone who had revealed himself traitorous with his pretensions to a crown. Harsh stuff, to be sure, but within the constraints of Westeros culture some of the contexts are sufficiently mitigating.

I'd say that sacking a city to avenge simply one dead child is, by what we know about Westeros, is exactly not within the constrains of Westerosi culture.

Or do you recall any other instance where an entire town - entire town, not just a noble family and their retainers and servants - had to pay for the crimes of a couple of people? I mean, Lady Caswell did not authorize the thing, did punish the guilty parties to the best of her knowledge and offered not resistance to Lord Ormund whatsoever.

Killing everyone in the town under those circumstances is just wrong. There is no way to put that into perspective.

In my opinion, that thing is worse than Duskendale and Castamere, considering that in both cases people who were either throwing their lot in with the guilty noble families or people that were really connected to them did suffer. But the folk of Bitterbridge did not choose any side in the Dance, nor did they (aside from the guilty parties) have anything to do with the murder of Prince Maelor.

As for dealing with the Two Betrayers:

One can say that Hugh definitely was a traitor there, crowning himself (although one certainly cannot say that the knights there did know who the rightful king at that point was, crowning Daeron after the death of Aemond definitely would have been treason from the POV of the still living Aegon II), but Ulf had no such pretensions when Daeron signed off on his murder. Nor did Daeron make common cause with good men accomplishing this - Roxton and Peake were hardly better than the Two Betrayers.

2 minutes ago, Ran said:

Again, consider the contemporaneous reputation of the Black Prince, Edward,  widely considered the most noble prince in Christendom contrasted with his leading the brutal raid across France including the sack of Limoges and other towns where thousands were said to have been killed without mercy. Froissart posthumously called him "the Flower of Chivalry in all the world" while at the same time reproaching him for the massacre at Limoges in his Chronicle.

But Edward was the heir to the throne, a man who lived to a pretty old age and who did many things besides those raids in France. Daeron the Daring's only accomplishments of note took place during the Dance of the Dragons - and there he failed. Both as a general and a knight.

Now, if the image Gyldayn had been painting of him had been 'the son of Queen Alicent who showed the most promise' or 'a youth who very much tried to emulate the great knights of the past' then this would, perhaps, be a better description for what we are getting (it could also have helped to make him a Loras-like knight at the outset of the war). But the guy we get in the book is heavily involved in very questionable things and doesn't really has anything on his record insofar as deeds are concerned that would balance the scale there.

Insofar as the show is concerned this should be rectified. We should see and not guess at how Daeron was a good and noble lad so that his involvement in questionable actions can be seen in perspective. The way George portrayed the boy we have to imagine or believe he was some kind of good guy, but we don't see it. We only see and hear about the bad things he does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Daemon of the Blacks said:

Uuuum.....like, I get it. I have the username but I don't recall ever roleplaying AS Daemon.  

Daemon and Daeron are also a little different.  Daemon is a very villainous character and is often openly vile and malicious. Neither the narrative nor Daemon pretend he's a good guy. 

But Daeron its the plot and the boy's general reputation both signaling him to be very noble and his actions saying different. Daemon acts exactly like his poor reputation says he should and that's why I like him. Daeron acts opposite to his noble reputation and that's why I think he's a little weirdly written. 

My presumption was since for your preference for that character you would be more forgiving toward bad moral judgment, if I am mistaken I apologize.

Why I am more lenient toward   Daeron is his age (16) when he is involved in civil war compared to Daemon (49) .

His actions are to me understandable, when getting information that his cousin was torn to pieces by mob in nearby Town:

Quote

He had come so far, and surely knew that safety lay only thirty leagues farther on, where Lord Hightower sat encamped beneath the walls of Longtable.

                                                                                            about Ser Rickard Thorne 

 He also wasn't commander of forces, but scout-dragonrider so he didn't account for orders given to men on ground, though he certainly burned lot of people mostly wounded left or trapped in houses and he shared sentiment of no quarter. 

I don't think people recall but Aegon, Rhaenys , Visenya all did much worse with less of a justification, yet most people  are much harder on people during this period, mostly because they support opposing force and paint other side darker.

Edited by Eltharion21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Eltharion21 said:

My presumption was since for your preference for that character you would be more forgiving toward bad moral judgment, if I am mistaken I apologize.

Why I am more lenient toward   Daeron is his age (16) when he is involved in civil war compared to Daemon (49) .

The issue here is that there is a discrepancy between Daeron's decription as a noble person and his actions as given in the story.

Daemon Targaryen is never described as anything but a controversial - although I'd agree that he has pretty much no positive traits. Not trying to kill your brother doesn't make you sympathetic in my book. Perhaps one could say he was an effective commander of the City Watch, but he didn't serve very long in that office.

But let's assess the quotes from FaB on Daeron:

Quote

His little brother, Prince Daeron, was the most popular of the queen’s sons, as clever as he was courteous, and most comely as well. When he turned twelve in 126 AC, Daeron was sent to Oldtown to serve as cupbearer and squire to Lord Hightower.

Dawn was breaking over the city before Queen Alicent dispatched the Kingsguard to bring her sons Aegon and Aemond to the council. (Prince Daeron, the youngest and gentlest of her children, was in Oldtown, serving as Lord Hightower’s squire.)

The last was the quote which originally said Daeron wept when he heard his father was dead.

Quote

Prince Daeron’s dragon was Tessarion, with her wings dark as cobalt and her claws and crest and belly scales as bright as beaten copper.

Defeat seemed imminent…until a shadow swept across the battlefield, and a terrible roar resounded overhead, slicing through the sound of steel on steel. A dragon had come.

The dragon was Tessarion, the Blue Queen, cobalt and copper. On her back rode the youngest of Queen Alicent’s three sons, Daeron Targaryen, fifteen, Lord Ormund’s squire, that same gentle and soft-spoken lad who had once been milk brother to Prince Jacaerys.

The arrival of Prince Daeron and his dragon reversed the tide of battle.

As wolves and ravens fed upon the bodies of the slain, Ormund Hightower feasted Prince Daeron on aurochs and strongwine, and dubbed him a knight with the storied Valyrian longsword Vigilance, naming him “Ser Daeron the Daring.” The prince modestly replied, “My lord is kind to say so, but the victory belongs to Tessarion.”

In the Reach, Lord Hightower and his ward, Prince Daeron the Daring, continued to win victories, enforcing the submission of the Rowans of Goldengrove, the Oakhearts of Old Oak, and the Lords of the Shield Islands, for none dared face Tessarion, the Blue Queen.

When Lady Caswell appeared on the ramparts of her castle to ask for the same terms Lady Merryweather had received [she had to give up only wealth, provisions and animals], Hightower let Prince Daeron give the answer: “You shall receive the same terms you gave my nephew Maelor.” Her ladyship could only watch as Bitterbridge was sacked. The Hogs Head was the first building put to the torch. Inns, guild halls, storehouses, the homes of the mean and the mighty, dragonflame consumed them all. Even the sept was burned, with hundreds of wounded still within. Only the bridge remained untouched, as it was required to cross the Mander. The people of the town were put to the sword if they tried to fight or flee, or were driven into the river to drown.

I'm again surprised by the brutality and cruelty that's evident in those passages. Despite being the guy who is making the case I had forgotten how drastic the description is and how personally involved Prince Daeron was in the destruction. I had forgotten that he, on Tessarion, burned down the entire town.

This makes the whole thing much worse.

In fact, if we were to get this scene in the series we are talking about here, we would essentially get another scene with Emilia Clarke burning innocent people - people who already had surrendered and never offered any resistance (which would make this thing actually worse than the brutalty we got in GoT).

Quote

Flying Tessarion ahead of the main column, Prince Daeron had proved invaluable as a scout, warning Lord Ormund of enemy movements. Oft as not, the queen’s men would melt away at the first glimpse of the Blue Queen’s wings.

Outside the walls, Prince Daeron swooped down upon Tessarion. [During First Tumbleton, meaning Daeron actually participated in the fire storm of the Two Betrayers albeit outside the castle.]

And whilst Lord Ormund had dubbed Daeron Targaryen “Daeron the Daring” and praised his courage in battle, the prince was still a boy. The youngest of Queen Alicent’s sons, he had grown up in the shadow of his elder brothers, and was more used to following commands than giving them.

Establishing that Daeron isn't a leader, nor able to restore/keep order in the camp.

Quote

Septon Eustace and Grand Maester Munkun both assert that Prince Daeron was sickened by all he saw and commanded Ser Hobert Hightower to put a stop to it, but Hightower’s efforts proved as ineffectual as the man himself. It is in the nature of smallfolk to follow where their lords lead, and Lord Ormund’s would-be successors had themselves fallen victim to avarice, bloodlust, and pride. Bold Jon Roxton became enamored of the beautiful Lady Sharis Footly, the wife of the Lord of Tumbleton, and claimed her as a “prize of war.” When her lord husband protested, Ser Jon cut him nigh in two with Orphan-Maker, saying, “She can make widows too,” as he tore the gown from the weeping Lady Sharis. Only two days later, Lord Peake and Lord Bourney argued bitterly at a war council, until Peake drew his dagger and stabbed Bourney through the eye, declaring, “Once a turncloak, ever a turncloak,” as Prince Daeron and Ser Hobert looked on, horror-struck.

This shows that Daeron and Hobert both actually continued to work with scum like Peake and Roxton even after they openly murdered and raped highborn prisoners/allies. However sickened Daeron was, he was not sickened enough to distance himself from these two.

Quote

These conflicts came to a boil when Tumbleton learned belatedly of Aemond Targaryen’s death at Harrenhal. King Aegon II had not been seen nor heard from since the fall of King’s Landing to his half-sister Rhaenyra, and there were many who feared that the queen had put him secretly to death, concealing the corpse so as not to be condemned as a kinslayer. With his brother Aemond slain as well, the greens found themselves kingless and leaderless. Prince Daeron stood next in the line of succession. Lord Peake declared that the boy should be proclaimed as Prince of Dragonstone at once; others, believing Aegon II dead, wished to crown him king.

The Two Betrayers felt the need of a king as well…but Daeron Targaryen was not the king they wanted. “We need a strong man to lead us, not a boy,” declared Hard Hugh Hammer. “The throne should be mine.” (...) Vermithor was thrice the size of Prince Daeron’s she-dragon Tessarion. No man who glimpsed them together could fail to see that Vermithor was a far more fearsome beast.

The lords and knights of Oldtown and the Reach were offended by the arrogance of the Betrayer’s claim, however, and none more so than Prince Daeron Targaryen himself, who grew so wroth that he threw a cup of wine into Hard Hugh’s face. Whilst Lord White shrugged this off as a waste of good wine, Lord Hammer said, “Little boys should be more mannerly when men are speaking. I think your father did not beat you often enough. Take care I do not make up for his lack.” The Two Betrayers took their leave together, and began to make plans for Hammer’s coronation. When seen the next day, Hard Hugh was wearing a crown of black iron, to the fury of Prince Daeron and his trueborn lords and knights.

Though Prince Daeron was not present at the council, the Caltrops (as the conspirators became known) were loath to proceed without his consent and blessing. Owen Fossoway, Lord of Cider Hall, was dispatched under cover of darkness to wake the prince and bring him to the cellar, that the plotters might inform him of their plans. Nor did the once-gentle prince hesitate when Lord Unwin Peake presented him with warrants for the execution of Hard Hugh Hammer and Ulf White, but eagerly affixed his seal.

The bold here makes very clear that George did not want to give the impression that Daeron the Daring died as a gentle prince. He devolved to the same level of treachery/corruption as his peers (hardly a surprise considering with whom he continued to associate himself).

He did not die a paragon of virtue nor a youth which had done anything brave or remarkable. Instead we can say that he just did what every dragonrider could do and did do who fought in war - he rained fire down on people who were pretty ill equipped to fight back/escape from the dragonfire.

Quote

Three conflicting accounts exist as to the manner of death of Prince Daeron Targaryen. The best known claims that the prince stumbled from his pavilion with his nightclothes afire, only to be cut down by the Myrish sellsword Black Trombo, who smashed his face in with a swing of his spiked morningstar. This version was the one preferred by Black Trombo, who told it far and wide. The second version is more or less the same, save that the prince was killed with a sword, not a morningstar, and his slayer was not Black Trombo, but some unknown man-at-arms who like as not did not even realize whom he had killed. In the third alternative, the brave boy known as Daeron the Daring did not even make it out at all, but died when his burning pavilion collapsed upon him. That is the version preferred by Munkun’s True Telling, and by us.*

That's it. Not that much, is it? I did not include a couple of quotes where Daeron is mentioned to have been with the Hightower army or that he is still out there or when the Hightower army is mentioned as 'Daeron's army'.

I daresay the impression of people believing Daeron the Daring was a nice guy is more a fantasy or image in their heads - wishful-thinking, to be honest - than anything that can be justified by actually reading the works of George R. R. Martin.

And frankly, considering that George actually made the repeated mistake of making Daeron the Daring a son rather than the younger brother of Aegon II in the manuscript (evident in the TPatQ) also sort of hammers home the fact that this character was never actually on the forefront of his mind while he was writing.

If he wanted to salvage the character he could decide to make one of the Daeron pretenders the actual Daeron. That could be an interesting story. Have him actually a blow to the head which caused amnesia and some serious burns which made him unrecognizable for a time and took care of his Valyrian hair. And then put Aegon III and Viserys in a real moral dilemma how to deal with this real uncle of theirs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Daemon Targaryen is never described as anything but a controversial - although I'd agree that he has pretty much no positive traits. Not trying to kill your brother doesn't make you sympathetic in my book. Perhaps one could say he was an effective commander of the City Watch, but he didn't serve very long in that office.

On that at least we agree :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That really depends on the plots they want to include. And that would also depend on the amount of back story they were to give or how far the story would go.

I mean, honestly, if they were to end the show with Aegon II and the announcement that Aegon III would be king now, they could actually cut Cregan Stark (because he only shows up after the death of Aegon II.

Most characters in the Dance material of FaB don't really are proper characters. They get name-dropped, and can thus be rather easily cut with little to no effect on the plot.

Edited by Lord Varys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/30/2019 at 7:18 AM, Krishtotter said:

I would be happy with either the Conquest or the Targaryen civil war.

I agree. Obviously with the Conquest there would be the issue (not necessarily a bad one) of rotating characters coming and going, while with the Dance’s civil war, one would be able to emotionally invest in a particular character since his or her screen time would be more extensive.

Is asking for a Blackfyre Rebellion television series too much?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hbo really needs to cast great actors to play Corlys Velaryon and Larys Strong. They are very important to the story and are going to be in the show from the start until the ending. 

I think Stellan Skargaard could be a perfect Corlys Velaryon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/27/2019 at 2:20 AM, #1dolFAN said:

I agree. Obviously with the Conquest there would be the issue (not necessarily a bad one) of rotating characters coming and going, while with the Dance’s civil war, one would be able to emotionally invest in a particular character since his or her screen time would be more extensive.

Is asking for a Blackfyre Rebellion television series too much?

It probably is, due in part to the time issue, like there was four rebellions spread over four generations. Like how many seasons before they have to replace the entire cast?

Plus it would probably be quite boring, scheming and whispering in dark rooms taking up the 98% of time that isn't battle. Also the only magic we get to see is (maybe) Bloodraven and Daemon-dreams, no dragons or giants or Others. Its a pretty hard sell. But then I thought the Long Night was a crap idea too and it plainly was interesting enough for HBO to make a pilot off so... :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/31/2019 at 6:19 PM, DisneyDoc2425 said:

Dragon colors:

Balerion: King Aegon I, of course black  (died in 94 AC)

Meraxes: Queen Rhaenys (Aegon I  sister/wife), silver scales, golden eyes

Vhager: Queen Visenya (Aegon I sister/wife), unknown

Sunfrye: Aegon II, golden scales 

Vermathor: King Jaeharys I (initially), bronze

Caraxes: Prince Daemon Targaryen, red scales

Syrax: Queen Rhaenyra, yellow scales

Meleys: Princess Rhaenys, scarlet scales, pink wings

My best guess for Vhager is green (no specific reason)

Daemon refers to Vhagar as a "hoary old bitch", which could hint at her being grey. 

 

Though hoary also means age...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/21/2019 at 8:50 AM, Lord Varys said:

I'm again surprised by the brutality and cruelty that's evident in those passages. Despite being the guy who is making the case I had forgotten how drastic the description is and how personally involved Prince Daeron was in the destruction. I had forgotten that he, on Tessarion, burned down the entire town.

This makes the whole thing much worse.

In fact, if we were to get this scene in the series we are talking about here, we would essentially get another scene with Emilia Clarke burning innocent people - people who already had surrendered and never offered any resistance (which would make this thing actually worse than the brutalty we got in GoT).

I mean this is basically every scene when dragons are let loose as war machines. F&B is filled with these examples. It's why I anticipate that the show would be paying homage to Dany's tyrannical side in multiple scenes and illustrating where she got it from. 

For the folks who don't care about cgi dragon porn or Targaryen self absorption, they might be interested to see the post-dance stuff on screen, Abelon's "When Women Ruled" sounds like it could be something different from the usual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HBO Drama head Casey Bloys at winter TCA panel today:  "I would guess" that House of the Dragon won't premiere until "2022"

https://deadline.com/2020/01/game-of-thrones-prequel-house-of-the-dragon-premiere-date-2022-hbo-boss-more-got-pilot-naomi-watts-1202831792/

I think this is good news.  It means that they won't compound the mistake of wasting time on a Long Night pilot, by then rushing the House of the Dragon prequel through production to meet an arbitrary deadline.  

I also like to think it gives us more time for memory to fade of the...."hype period" when Benioff and Weiss could do no wrong, and give people more time to settle into the aftermath of "maybe those guys didn't know what they were doing" - obviously book fans know that, but millions of casual TV viewers are still in the dark due to lack of information. 

I think there's a decent chance we might even get Winds of Winter out before this thing airs (not that it would directly affect it, it's a prequel - but it would be coming after a boost to book fandom again).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It bubbled up to mainstream news:  it just popped up on the MSN homepage when you log in to Windows (sourced from TheWrap):

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/game-of-thrones-prequel-house-of-the-dragon-to-premiere-in-2022/ar-BBYZFAJ?ocid=spartandhp

@Ran - I hope the front page can get a formal news post update on 1 - Bloys' remarks about 2022 at TCA, and if possible 2 - Peterson's comments about three prequels he knew of.  They're the only news we've had since, well, October.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, The Dragon Demands said:

I also like to think it gives us more time for memory to fade of the...."hype period" when Benioff and Weiss could do no wrong, and give people more time to settle into the aftermath of "maybe those guys didn't know what they were doing" - obviously book fans know that, but millions of casual TV viewers are still in the dark due to lack of information. 

Yeah my knee-jerk reaction is they probably want to take some time in order to get the bad taste out of the public's mouth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×