Jump to content

GRRM Updates Fans on Multiple Projects


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, SeanF said:

The two D’s seem to have been utterly ignorant of politics, history, war, anything really.

Well, one hopes that the guys writing HotD have more sense than to insist that the Dance is about 'the woman vs. the man'. You cannot ignore that aspect of the story, but you can highlight the irony that Otto Hightower made Rhaenyra the Heir Apparent, that Rhaenyra being female wasn't as important for her becoming and remaining the heir than the fact that she was her father's favorite, not to mention presenting Aegon as a guy remarkably unsuited for and personally disinterested in the crown.

The whole thing is more a dynastic conflict between two branches, not whether women should or shouldn't rule. And the irony is that the Greens turn Black and the Blacks Green in the end insofar as the gender of the pretenders is concerned. Aegon II's heir and successor is his daughter Jaehaera while Rhaenyra is succeed by a man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, one hopes that the guys writing HotD have more sense than to insist that the Dance is about 'the woman vs. the man'. You cannot ignore that aspect of the story, but you can highlight the irony that Otto Hightower made Rhaenyra the Heir Apparent, that Rhaenyra being female wasn't as important for her becoming and remaining the heir than the fact that she was her father's favorite, not to mention presenting Aegon as a guy remarkably unsuited for and personally disinterested in the crown.

The whole thing is more a dynastic conflict between two branches, not whether women should or shouldn't rule. And the irony is that the Greens turn Black and the Blacks Green in the end insofar as the gender of the pretenders is concerned. Aegon II's heir and successor is his daughter Jaehaera while Rhaenyra is succeed by a man.

Salic Law was never anything more than a pretext to exclude certain individuals from the throne, in real life,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Not to mention her not turning Storm's End into another Harrenhal.

Considering that the dance was made after the first couple books came out. It wouldve been impossible for George to have storms end burnt. Since in ACOK we see it for all its glory with its curtain walls standing proud and unburnt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Salic Law was never anything more than a pretext to exclude certain individuals from the throne, in real life,

I agree, If I remember correctly the Valois were descendants of the capets through the female line which makes their claim much weaker than the Plantagenets. But since the french nobility didnt want an English king they ensured the Valois took it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

I agree, If I remember correctly the Valois were descendants of the capets through the female line which makes their claim much weaker than the Plantagenets. But since the french nobility didnt want an English king they ensured the Valois took it.

It was first used to exclude Joan of Navarre, then Edward III.

Had they accepted Joan of Navarre as Queen, then the Capet dynastry would have continued right up to 1789.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

I'm thinking, if GoT was a moderate success, (S1/S2/Westworld-level) maybe we would have had Winds by now. I know it's not a given, but still.

Eh, what could have been... :(

I know. I'm resigned to the possibility we won't get another book. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, SeanF said:

Salic Law was never anything more than a pretext to exclude certain individuals from the throne, in real life,

Maurice Druon shows that pretty well, with Mahaut actually being a peer of France and she and Philippe ignoring all that just so they can put him on the throne...

And George pretty much mimics all this 'come up with a pretext when it's convenient' with all the precendents for the Targaryen succession. Maegor says the strongest shall rule, Rogar that a man must rule until he doesn't like him anymore and wants the daughter of the elder line, Jaehaerys is so obsessed with his sons that he wants Vaegon as his heir, the lords like their men and the adult party prince ... and Viserys gets pissed by Daemon, dotes on his only child, and finds Otto's arguments convincing.

Not to mention all the ridiculous arguments the regency council brings up. 'That princess was a dragonrider.' 'But the other one has a living dragon.' 'Rhaena is more tractable.' 'Baela is stronger.' 'We need a male heir from the male line despite the fact that neither exists anymore.'

And so on.

21 hours ago, The Young Maester said:

Considering that the dance was made after the first couple books came out. It wouldve been impossible for George to have storms end burnt. Since in ACOK we see it for all its glory with its curtain walls standing proud and unburnt.

It could have come up, at least, and there could have been an attack which left the curtain wall and/or the big tower intact. Rhaenyra had a lot of dragons, but Balerion and Meraxes were long dead, and she didn't control Vhagar. There could have been an attack involving some of the younger dragons whose fires were no hot enough to melt stone.

The wooden structures of Storm's End could have burned with the wall and the big tower suffering little to no lasting damage. Think how Winterfell burns in ACoK without actually looking like a ruin when Bran looks back. Something like that would have also been possible for Storm's End.

And of course George could have included such a destruction into TWoIaF. He wrote the Dance material back when that book was made. In the main books no POV was actually inside Storm's End so far, nor did we get a detailed description or history of the place.

Edited by Lord Varys
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, The Young Maester said:

I agree, If I remember correctly the Valois were descendants of the capets through the female line which makes their claim much weaker than the Plantagenets. But since the french nobility didnt want an English king they ensured the Valois took it.

I think it's the reverse. The Valois were the descendants of Philip IV's brother and the Plantagenets Philip IV's daughter Isabella. I could be wrong tho.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Maurice Druon shows that pretty well, with Mahaut actually being a peer of France and she and Philippe ignoring all that just so they can put him on the throne...

And George pretty much mimics all this 'come up with a pretext when it's convenient' with all the precendents for the Targaryen succession. Maegor says the strongest shall rule, Rogar that a man must rule until he doesn't like him anymore and wants the daughter of the elder line, Jaehaerys is so obsessed with his sons that he wants Vaegon as his heir, the lords like their men and the adult party prince ... and Viserys is gets pissed by Daemon, dotes on his only child, and finds Otto's arguments convincing.

Not to mention all the ridiculous arguments the regency council brings up. 'That princess was a dragonrider.' 'But the other one has a living dragon.' 'Rhaena is more tractable.' 'Baela is stronger.' 'We need a male heir from the male line despite the fact that neither exists anymore.'

And so on.

It could have come up, at least, and there could have been an attack which left the curtain wall and/or the big tower intact. Rhaenyra had a lot of dragons, but Balerion and Meraxes were long dead, and she didn't control Vhagar. There could have been an attack involving some of the younger dragons whose fires were no hot enough to melt stone.

The wooden structures of Storm's End could have burned with the wall and the big tower suffering little to no lasting damage. Think how Winterfell burns in ACoK without actually looking like a ruin when Bran looks back. Something like that would have also been possible for Storm's End.

And of course George could have included such a destruction into TWoIaF. He wrote the Dance material back when that book was made. In the main books no POV was actually inside Storm's End so far, nor did we get a detailed description or history of the place.

Thank You! Certain people act like the council of 101 set an ironclad precedent that females cannot succeed to the IT. And that all monarchs after Jaehaerys I were bound by it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One interesting detail about the Dance is that the AGOT appendix says Rhaenyra was only one year older than Aegon. I think George probably originally planned on the two being full-blooded siblings, with Rhaenyra being the golden girl and Aegon being a complete loser.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sotan said:

Thank You! Certain people act like the council of 101 set an ironclad precedent that females cannot succeed to the IT. And that all monarchs after Jaehaerys I were bound by it. 

Yes, there’s no Act of Succession.  For anyone interested, I’d recommend the chapter which deals with English succession laws in Medieval Conspiracies by Ian Mortimer.

What you have are a series of precedents.  The Great Council gives a precedent that women can’t succeed.  Rhaenyra’s coronation gives a precedent that they can. 
 

Male primogeniture can be dispensed with it’s deemed convenient (eg the accession of King Alfred, or Jon, or Richard III).  Bastards are barred, unless they win (eg Athelstan)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Sotan said:

I think it's the reverse. The Valois were the descendants of Philip IV's brother and the Plantagenets Philip IV's daughter Isabella. I could be wrong tho.  

The Valois and the Bourbons after them were all male line branches of House Capet. They were just founded by younger sons of the royal family.

That France never had a ruling queen definitely has nothing to do with 'Salic Law' and more with the fact that the people in charge always found satisfying or confincing male claimant when there was no clear heir. If the dynasty had nearly died out because a succession of kings had only one surviving child then they would have settled on a woman or a male descendant through the female line rather than look for claimants among obscure commoners.

Alternatively, they may also have elected a new king.

10 hours ago, Sotan said:

Thank You! Certain people act like the council of 101 set an ironclad precedent that females cannot succeed to the IT. And that all monarchs after Jaehaerys I were bound by it. 

That is clearly not the case, although the Great Council definitely set a pretty strong precedent against female inheritance, something that made Viserys' decision for Rhaenyra more controversial than it would have been before. Back during Jaehaerys' youth Aerea and Daenerys were both the king's clear heirs in absence of a trueborn son. Thanks to the Great Council, Daemon was the heir presumptive of Viserys I in absence of a son until Rhaenyra was officially declared Heir Apparent in 105 AC.

It was also pretty clear, I think, that while Aemon yet lived, Princess Rhaenys was second in line to the Iron Throne, not Baelon.

10 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

One interesting detail about the Dance is that the AGOT appendix says Rhaenyra was only one year older than Aegon. I think George probably originally planned on the two being full-blooded siblings, with Rhaenyra being the golden girl and Aegon being a complete loser.

I'm not sure what the original plan may have been, but I think the entire construction with the Hightowers and Rhaenyra and Aegon as half-siblings was a later addition. The appendix also does not indicate that Rhaenyra was the chosen heir of her father but rather that she challenged the rise of her brother, indicating that Aegon II may have been the king's official heir.

In light of the whole incest and polygamy thing George could have taken a different route than modelling the conflict on the English Anarchy to the degree that he did.

I mean, I'm still not exactly happy with Viserys I's weirdo Hightower marriage. To highlight the prosperity and the power and arrogance of the Targaryens we should have gotten the most incestuous matches among the grandchildren of Jaehaerys I. If he had to had to have two wives but no sister-wife George should have gone with an aunt and a first cousin.

And, of course, it may have been very interesting if a big issue between the supporters of Blacks and Greens was 'purity of royal blood' vs. 'diluted royal blood'. That comes up once with Beesbury's arguments, but that's it. Once the Westerosi made their peace with their inbred royals they would have expectedtheir monarchs to be incest-born who would also marry their sisters.

And while the story about Rhaenyra's sons is fun ... it wouldn't have hurt if the alleged true father of the boys had been a Targaryen cousin himself. The issue there is not about looks but rather about the boys not being trueborn.

9 hours ago, SeanF said:

Yes, there’s no Act of Succession.  For anyone interested, I’d recommend the chapter which deals with English succession laws in Medieval Conspiracies by Ian Mortimer.

What you have are a series of precedents.  The Great Council gives a precedent that women can’t succeed.  Rhaenyra’s coronation gives a precedent that they can.

Male primogeniture can be dispensed with it’s deemed convenient (eg the accession of King Alfred, or Jon, or Richard III).  Bastards are barred, unless they win (eg Athelstan)

Yeah, another great example how, well, diverse and surprising real world successions can be when there are no laws of succession are the Romanovs prior to the introduction of a binding law of succession. There you did have female monarchs, at least two of them only consorts of previous rulers (Catherine the Great usurped her husband's throne and Peter the Great's widow succeeded him as per her husband's wishes).

In most monarchies you have the ideal about the son following the father ... but it is modernistic nonsense to assume these people would have come up with binding rules for every contingency. That way you tie your hands and create as ridiculous a scenario as there is in Westeros in 103-105 AC when the succession of the king chosen by the Great Council is unclear because there are people who insist that choosing Viserys means that Rhaenyra isn't the presumptive heir in the absence of a son.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, farerb said:

Is there any news about the Ice Dragon animated film? Is it still in production?

I think it has never been put into production, but has been in development. I think George last mentioned it explicitly in March 2021 and did not explicitly mention it in his post on March 2022. Startling Inc still lists it in its development slate, OTOh. So my guess? Still optioned but development has stalled or is in low drive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ran said:

I think it has never been put into production, but has been in development. I think George last mentioned it explicitly in March 2021 and did not explicitly mention it in his post on March 2022. Startling Inc still lists it in its development slate, OTOh. So my guess? Still optioned but development has stalled or is in low drive.

Is it based on GRRM script? I believe GRRM once mentioned he wrote a script for one of his stories, and would only option the script rather than the rights to adapt the story. Was that THE ICE DRAGON? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...