Jump to content

New Peek at House of the Dragon


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Just go back to GoT and check what past events were referenced or talked about in that show. If we start 200 years earlier the most recent history is the reign of the Conciliator and then Maegor and Aenys and the Conqueror. They should all be mentioned, just as other famous Velaryons would be talked about - the famous other Corlys Velaryon, first Lord Commander of the Kingsguard, Corlys' grandfather, the second Daemon Velaryon, who served as Hand of the King for some time, and then, of course, Queen Alyssa Velaryon, mother of Jaehaerys and Alysanne, great-grandmother of Rhaenys, Viserys, Daemon, and Aemma, and grandaunt of Corlys Velaryon.

I'm not saying they should tell the entire history of the Targaryen reign up to that point - but when introducing the Velaryons the way to go would be to point out, you know, how important they were for the Targaryens in the past. And to introduce the Targaryens you also have to situate Viserys I and his family in the larger world, point out who exactly they are, what they want, etc.

This is not going to work without history.

Mentioning the complex web of Targaryen/Velaryon family tree would serve no purpose and confuse the average viewer. The historical event preceding GOT was Robert's Rebellion, so talking about that especially in the first season made sense. The audience also had to understand who Dany and Viserys were in relation to the rest of the characters. The relevant historical event for HOTD is the Great Council of 101, which they look to be covering. It will be more than enough if they explore Jaehaerys' children and grandchildren.  You already have named like characters Daeron, Daemon, Aemond, Rhaneys, Rhaena, Rhaenyra, Laena, Helaena and Baela in the story, and the audience will have a tough time trying to discern who is who and how they are related. Mentioning Alyssa Velaryon, when they could be focusing on Aemon and Baelon who are the fathers of main characters? I don't see the point tbh. They can simply say Velaryons are a long time ally of the Targaryens and leave it at that. 

Listing the names above, I can see why they decided to make the Velaryons visually distinct. I do hope they come up with a cool explanation that adds to the lore of the show, but it won't hurt the story if they don't. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sotan said:

Mentioning the complex web of Targaryen/Velaryon family tree would serve no purpose and confuse the average viewer.

It would, if you tried to dump all that lore on the audience in just a couple of episodes. But they will have seasons for all that, just like they did with GoT and just like George has entire novels to slowly reveal the historical tidbits he wants to include in ASoIaF. I mean, what do you think Rhaenyra or Aegon II or Daemon is going to talk about in a quiet dialogue scene in, say, season 3. Harrenhal will be a big place, so one imagines the show is going to reference the Battle Beneath the Gods Eye and the demise of Aegon the Uncrowned just as well as Rhaena Targaryen once ruling the place effectively as Lady of Harrenhal. When Corlys' fleet is depicted, we won't just hear talk about his voyages but also how that navy was important for the Conquest, etc.

And of course we are going to get lot of that stuff. They will have to introduce the various dragons, establish who rode them before their present riders if they are old dragons. We won't get Vermithor and Silverwing and Dreamfyre and Vhagar in that show without folks talking about the old days. Presumably, we are to learn that Viserys I either once rode Balerion or is still riding him during the show (they could change the year in which the dragon died). If the dragon comes up, they could reference earlier events he was involved in, perhaps even touching upon Aerea's flight to Valyria.

1 hour ago, Sotan said:

The relevant historical event for HOTD is the Great Council of 101, which they look to be covering.

That they seem to include directly, but it is just the second iteration of the succession struggle in the Old King's days. The first one, which they are likely to only reference in dialogue, will be Aemon's death in 92 AC. But since that's a story about a succession war they might or should reference Maegor's usurpation and Jaehaerys I's rise to the throne as well, considering that back then Aerea and Rhaena were passed over as well.

They could all do that without mentioning any Velaryons, of course, but Jaehaerys' mother was Queen Regent for two years. It would be kind of hard to ignore her if this ever comes up. Also, Boremund Baratheon who is in the show is a half-brother of the Old King through their mother, Alyssa Velaryon.

1 hour ago, Sotan said:

It will be more than enough if they explore Jaehaerys' children and grandchildren.

Most of the children you can ignore. They are either dead or not relevant (e.g. Vaegon or Saera). The grandchildren should all be in the show, so they will be depicted rather than talked about.

1 hour ago, Sotan said:

Mentioning Alyssa Velaryon, when they could be focusing on Aemon and Baelon who are the fathers of main characters? I don't see the point tbh. They can simply say Velaryons are a long time ally of the Targaryens and leave it at that. 

But Corlys and his family clearly are new characters and a new house that has to be properly established. They seem to play up the house anyway, with Vaemond Velaryon apparently playing a larger role than he did in the book.

Ditto with the Hightowers and the Strongs. We should, for instance, get a name for both Otto Hightower's brother, the Lord of Oldtown, as well as for Otto Hightower's wife - Alicent's mother - who actually was at court with them when Otto first became Hand.

I'd expect that we also learn some things about Aemon and Baelon and Alyssa - and we might even see Rhaenys' mother Jocelyn Baratheon about whose death we don't know anything - since they are the parents of crucial characters ... but they are more easily ignored that the people who shaped the history of Westeros.

1 hour ago, Sotan said:

Listing the names above, I can see why they decided to make the Velaryons visually distinct. I do hope they come up with a cool explanation that adds to the lore of the show, but it won't hurt the story if they don't. 

Oh, well, it is disrespectful to the audience to pretend they cannot keep a bunch of inbred blondes apart. You can also use props for that kind of thing. Blonde crown guy is the king, blond guy with the captain's hat is the admiral with the large fleet, little blond girl is the princess, and so on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Oh, well, it is disrespectful to the audience to pretend they cannot keep a bunch of inbred blondes apart. You can also use props for that kind of thing. Blonde crown guy is the king, blond guy with the captain's hat is the admiral with the large fleet, little blond girl is the princess, and so on.

I don't think it's being disrespectful, its accepting reality. We saw in GOT a sizable portion of casual viewers to this day think Dany's name is Khaleesi and think she's Jon Snow's sister. 

At the end of the day, I trust that Condal and GRRM have this in hand. Like I said earlier, I'd love a cool explanation to add to the lore of the show, but the story of the Dance won't suffer if its not explained. There is already far too much going on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

Anyone know what the trailer qoute “history dosent remember blood it remembers names” mean. Like I’ve been thinking about it for a while now and still can’t wrap my head around the meaning or if it has any meaning whatsoever.

it means if Jace ever became king Jacerys , history wouldn't have remembered he was a Strong by blood but that he was Laenor Velaryon's son by name and Rhaenys/Corlys's grandson .. that's how I think Velaryons were on Rhaenyra's side. and isn't it Corlys's narration on the trailor?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Young Maester said:

Anyone know what the trailer qoute “history dosent remember blood it remembers names” mean. Like I’ve been thinking about it for a while now and still can’t wrap my head around the meaning or if it has any meaning whatsoever.

Corlys Velaryon is the speaker of both lines (both the opening and finish). In the first, he speaks about the idea that the purpose of life is to pursue leaving behind a legacy. So I can see two readings:

If the purpose of life is to pursue a legacy, the failure to make one essentially leaves you a footnote, because just having the blood of a "famous" family isn't enough to make you famous. You need to achieve something of your own to have your own name remembered. (This sounds a little weird in the context of the show in that Corlys is already widely famed and definitely a figure for historic rememberance as the Sea Snake by the time the show starts.)

Or (and maybe this is the likelier one)

In the pursuit of a legacy, the blood you spill doesn't necessarily get remembered -- but your name certainly will (if your legacy is built on victory and success). (This one sounds like justifying his joining Daemon in the war over the Stepstones, IMO, or possibly wrestling with the idea of taking up arms over his wife's and children's claim to the Iron Throne?)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Hey, remember in season 8 when King’s Landing was transported to a desert:P

I agree that most viewers won’t care about the plot holes concerning Targ/Velaryon marriages. But just going off of what I’m seeing online, there are definitely a lot of people confused as to how there are suddenly black Westerosi. Most people will probably get over it; those who don’t will stop watching.

I rewatched the animated Dance featurette, and it definitely portrays Rhaenyra in an almost saintly light. What annoyed me, though, was how it completely skipped over Jace’s importance; he basically led the Blacks in place of his mother for the first year of the war.

I thought it was a Siberian steppe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m curious if they’ll try portraying Corlys as a tragic figure—his ambition was too great and it cost him everything. He still had three grandchildren (Baela, Rhaena, and Alyn), but he lost his wife, kids, three grandsons, castle, and most of  his wealth.

I was already disinclined to believe that Daemon killed Laenor, but I doubt Corlys and Rhaenys would have stayed close with Daemon if they thought he had. That doesn’t completely clear his name (lots of people still think the CIA whacked JFK, even though the Kennedys themselves don’t) but it’s another reason why I doubt it was Daemon. I personally favor the Hightowers as the culprits. 

Edited by The Bard of Banefort
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I was already disinclined to believe that Daemon killed Laenor, but I doubt Corlys and Rhaenys would have stayed close with Daemon if they thought he had. That doesn’t completely clear his name (lots of people still think the CIA whacked JFK, even though the Kennedys themselves don’t) but it’s another reason why I doubt it was Daemon. I personally favor the Hightowers as the culprits. 

Daemon is everyone's #1 suspect because he directly benefits (marries the heir). If Daemon is Laenor's killer it makes Corlys and Rhaenys look like fools allying with him. I'm partial to the theory it was Vaemond (now Corlys brother instead of nepwhew) and the Hightowers orchestrating it. Vaemond gets one step closer to becoming heir of Driftmark (if he can get rid of Rhaenyra's bastards) and the Hightowers get rid of the man claiming and legitimizing said bastards (Laenor) while throwing a bomb of suspicion and mistrust in the rival camp. Or it really was a lovers quarrel which turned deadly and had massive repercussions. 

Edited by Sotan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

adding to the above for why it is likely that Hightowers were directly or indirectly responsible for Laenor's death: in 120 , Aegon the Elder turned 13 which although is not a normal age to marry in Westeros, it apparently is the start of marriable age. the Greens had tried to reach Iron Throne by marring Aegon to Rhaenyra before, there's nothing to say they didn't decide it was time to get rid of Laenor then and think of something for "Strongs" later . of course that plan was smashed with Aemond/Lucerys incident and Rhaenyra's secret marriage. 

said that , I think the show will either go with Vaemond being independently from the Greens  responsible for his nephew's death or a quarrel between lovers .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Young Maester said:

Anyone know what the trailer qoute “history dosent remember blood it remembers names” mean. Like I’ve been thinking about it for a while now and still can’t wrap my head around the meaning or if it has any meaning whatsoever.

I still think that's mostly generic weirdo fantasy dialogue the writers came up with - like the weirdo dialogue you got in GoT all the time when they run out of lines written by George.

It is a kind of silly thing for an aristocrat of the highest birth to pretend that blood isn't important. That's just modernist crap that doesn't really belong into such a setting. If anything is true in the world they live in that names mean nothing and blood - dynasties and families - mean everything. An individual Velaryon or Targaryen is nothing, but the seahorse and the dragon are everything. That's what they live for and kill for and die for. And the older a family is, the more important is to follow family tradition, to live up to what it means to be of that particular bloodline.

We know our Westerosi history books, and family names (i.e. blood) are massively more important than individual lords or kings.

3 hours ago, EggBlue said:

it means if Jace ever became king Jacerys , history wouldn't have remembered he was a Strong by blood but that he was Laenor Velaryon's son by name and Rhaenys/Corlys's grandson .. that's how I think Velaryons were on Rhaenyra's side. and isn't it Corlys's narration on the trailor?

That is indeed how you can interpret parts of it if we assume this is actually something Corlys Velaryon actually says in the show - which I hope he doesn't because it just feels weird and sounds badly written.

2 hours ago, Ran said:

If the purpose of life is to pursue a legacy, the failure to make one essentially leaves you a footnote, because just having the blood of a "famous" family isn't enough to make you famous. You need to achieve something of your own to have your own name remembered. (This sounds a little weird in the context of the show in that Corlys is already widely famed and definitely a figure for historic rememberance as the Sea Snake by the time the show starts.)

In context I thing that line could only make sense in a scene where Corlys and Rhaenys discuss their own marriage and what they wanted to achieve by that - to seat her or their child on the Iron Throne. That would have been the legacy they wanted to build.

Because as you say - Corlys Velaryon already was the most famous man in Westeros when he married Rhaenys. He had personally won a fortune greater than anything House Velaryon had before, so if there is a man who already made a great legacy for himself it is Corlys.

Rather, one would assume that Laenor and Laena would want to make a legacy for themselves to get our of the shadow of their super famous father.

2 hours ago, Ran said:

Or (and maybe this is the likelier one)

In the pursuit of a legacy, the blood you spill doesn't necessarily get remembered -- but your name certainly will (if your legacy is built on victory and success). (This one sounds like justifying his joining Daemon in the war over the Stepstones, IMO, or possibly wrestling with the idea of taking up arms over his wife's and children's claim to the Iron Throne?)

While that's possible, I think it would be something like 'history doesn't remember corpses/spilled blood' if that was the message they are trying to get across there.

52 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I’m curious if they’ll try portraying Corlys as a tragic figure—his ambition was too great and it cost him everything. He still had three grandchildren (Baela, Rhaena, and Alyn), but he lost his wife, kids, three grandsons, castle, and most of  his wealth.

While Corlys is also tragic, he is also kind of soft. After Rhaenys' death he just wrings his hands all the time and wants to have peace. I hope the show gives him more depth than that. And it is actually a pity that Rhaenys dies this early in the war. If they expand her role I'd prefer it if they didn't kill her off that early. They can still kill Meleys, though, and have a riderless Rhaenys live longer. Wouldn't change the story all that much.

52 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I was already disinclined to believe that Daemon killed Laenor, but I doubt Corlys and Rhaenys would have stayed close with Daemon if they thought he had. That doesn’t completely clear his name (lots of people still think the CIA whacked JFK, even though the Kennedys themselves don’t) but it’s another reason why I doubt it was Daemon. I personally favor the Hightowers as the culprits. 

I think the show might go with Vaemond Velaryon instead. If we have an open marriage there with Rhaenyra and Laenor, then the Velaryon family would be most aware of that, and Vaemond is clearly after the lordship of Driftmark. In context, it would also make more sense the rumors originated with people close to Rhaenyra and Laenor, and not the Hightowers as such. It could also help to build up the hatred slowly if Alicent herself wasn't the one first coming up with this thing ... rather that she merely picked it up and tried to exploit it when her friendship with Rhaenyra was over for good.

Alternatively, it could have been Qarl Correy on his own, and the Velaryons made him disappear in the wake of the Vhagar incident, fearing that a trial might shed further doubt on the parentage of Laenor's sons.

5 minutes ago, EggBlue said:

adding to the above for why it is likely that Hightowers were directly or indirectly responsible for Laenor's death: in 120 , Aegon the Elder turned 13 which although is not a normal age to marry in Westeros, it apparently is the start of marriable age. the Greens had tried to reach Iron Throne by marring Aegon to Rhaenyra before, there's nothing to say they didn't decide it was time to get rid of Laenor then and think of something for "Strongs" later . of course that plan was smashed with Aemond/Lucerys incident and Rhaenyra's secret marriage. 

said that , I think the show will either go with Vaemond being independently from the Greens  responsible for his nephew's death or a quarrel between lovers .

I think the chances are pretty good that the Aegon-Rhaenyra match is going to come up in the show only after Laenor's death, as an attempt to get Rhaenyra under the thumb of a man who is controlled by Alicent/Otto - and the Rhaenyra-Daemon match will be how Rhaenyra thwarts that.

The show could make such an offer as part of a larger reconciliation attempt in the wake of the Vhagar incident.

After all, it seems rather likely that Aegon the Elder is either not born yet or still an infant when Laenor and Rhaenyra marry. The actress is still young Rhaenyra, after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

It is a kind of silly thing for an aristocrat of the highest birth to pretend that blood isn't important. That's just modernist crap that doesn't really belong into such a setting. If anything is true in the world they live in that names mean nothing and blood - dynasties and families - mean everything.

I think you are taking it wrong. In this context, "name" equals to "dynasties and families". I'm convinced Corly's intent behind this quote will be precisely that families mean everything.

I'm sure that the quote will be part of a conversation between Corlys and Laenor where the later is worried about how Rhaenys is trying to pass her sons as his. When Corlys says that "blood is not important, the name is" he is just advocating for pragmatism. He is only trying to convince Laenor to acknowlege them, since that's in the family's best interests.

I think it's not out of character, and I can imagine Corlys from the books giving that kind of advise to his son.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The hairy bear said:

I think you are taking it wrong. In this context, "name" equals to "dynasties and families". I'm convinced Corly's intent behind this quote will be precisely that families mean everything.

Nice. Yeah, that is an even better read of the line. Interesting.

Though it does seem slightly discordant with his then arranging the marriages of the boys to Laena's daughters -- blood does matter, after all.

Edited by Ran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess it helps one to understand this:

Quote

“Our uncle calls us Strongs, but when the lords see us on dragonback they will know that for a lie. Only Targaryens ride dragons.” Mushroom tells us that the Sea Snake grumbled at this, insisting that the three boys were Velaryons, yet he smiled as he said it, with pride in his voice.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ran said:

Nice. Yeah, that is an even better read of the line. Interesting.

Though it does seem slightly discordant with his then arranging the marriages of the boys to Laena's daughters -- blood does matter, after all.

didn't Rhaenyra and Laena arrange those betrothals, though? it sure would have been in Corlys and Rhaenys's best interests but I don't remember any indication that any of them were behind that arrangement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, EggBlue said:

didn't Rhaenyra and Laena arrange those betrothals, though? it sure would have been in Corlys and Rhaenys's best interests but I don't remember any indication that any of them were behind that arrangement.

I remember Rhaenyra arranging the betrothals as well. But we could be wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...