Jump to content

[Spoilers] Episode 102 Discussion


Ran
 Share

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

She doesn't have to love Harwin, she just thinks of herself as above the rules and can do whatever she wants (and get away with it). 

the point is , she has 3 sons with him that the likes of Alicent look down upon for not having Targaryen features . yet, Rhaenyra keeps having an affair with Harwin of all people and elevates his sons as true heirs to the throne , although she's got real Targaryen sons. it's evident that she doesn't see Harwin or her sons as lesser . and if she doesn't look down upon Strongs , I don't see what's there to say she looks down upon the rest of them . mind you , we never hear her complaining about her half brothers for being half-Hightowers . 

34 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

The rest of the nobility at leas have a shared culture even if they are out of touch with the peasants and Alicent doesn't want to break from that mold. 

errr....no .Alicent doesn't want to stick to Westerosi culture.  she and Otto want their blood on the throne , that's all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, EggBlue said:

the point is , she has 3 sons with him that the likes of Alicent look down upon for not having Targaryen features . yet, Rhaenyra keeps having an affair with Harwin of all people and elevates his sons as true heirs to the throne , although she's got real Targaryen sons. it's evident that she doesn't see Harwin or her sons as lesser . and if she doesn't look down upon Strongs , I don't see what's there to say she looks down upon the rest of them . mind you , we never hear her complaining about her half brothers for being half-Hightowers .  

I find it more that they are her kids and she can do whatever she wants. If she wants to rise illegitimate children to the throne she gets to do that and anyone who disagrees gets their heads chopped off. 

13 minutes ago, EggBlue said:

errr....no .Alicent doesn't want to stick to Westerosi culture.  she and Otto want their blood on the throne , that's all.

So does Rhaenyra. But Alicent at least is part of Westeros society and would rule as such. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the books at least, I think it’s pretty clear that Rhaenyra loves Harwin. If it were just about sex or having an heir, then she could have found a Lyseni for that, or at least a blond. She wasn’t getting any emotional fulfillment out of her marriage to Laenor either—they spent most of their time apart, whereas she and Harwin were together every day. 

There’s also Harwin’s perspective, which most usually don’t consider. He’s the heir to Harrenhal and the son of the Hand. He’s one of the most eligible bachelors in Westeros. Yet he becomes a sworn shield to Rhaenyra, declining to marry or live it up as a single man. How many lordlings choose to take on the thankless job of being a sworn shield to someone else when they have much better options at home? There’s no reason to unless he was in a relationship with Rhaenyra.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I read somewhere that George originally intended for Viserys II to be Aegon III’s son, but how would that work? Wouldn’t he have come before Daeron and Baelor then, and therefore neither of them would have ever been king?

That's the thing, the timeline didn't work. GRRM didn't notice it until Elio and Linda pointed it out to him, and he shuffled around the Targaryen family tree.

He said that he originally simply came up with names and very brief histories for the Targaryen kings as a decoration for the main story, without thinking too much about it himself.

Edited by Takiedevushkikakzvezdy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

That's the thing, the timeline didn't work. GRRM didn't notice it until Elio and Linda pointed it out to him, and he shuffled around the Targaryen family tree.

But wouldn’t this have made Viserys the eldest son then? Was Aegon IV originally supposed to be Baelor’s son?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

But wouldn’t this have made Viserys the eldest son then? Was Aegon IV originally supposed to be Baelor’s son?

He said that after seeing the inconsistencies, "someone who was previously a son now became a younger brother", so I assumed he meant Viserys II. I could be wrong, though.

Edit: In the 1997 version of AGoT, Viserys II is said to be the fourth son of Aegon III.

Edited by Takiedevushkikakzvezdy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

He said that after seeing the inconsistencies, "someone who was previously a son now became a younger brother", so I assumed he meant Viserys II. I could be wrong, though.

Edit: In the 1997 version of AGoT, Viserys II is said to be the fourth son of Aegon III.

Ah okay. I wonder who the third son was then?

This is also better because it makes the Aegon the Unlikely situation less repetitive. In the original scenario, both Viserys and Maekar would have been fourth-born sons with an older brother named Baelor.

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

55 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

I find it more that they are her kids and she can do whatever she wants. If she wants to rise illegitimate children to the throne she gets to do that and anyone who disagrees gets their heads chopped off. 

if she looked down upon Westerosi nobility the way you suggest , she wouldn't have seen Harwin as worthy to go to so much trouble for . she could change her paramour as soon as Jace was born or take a man with valyrian blood as paramour . perhaps , Daemon who wasn't married to Laena at that point , another Velaryon or she could downright have her father order Laenor to do his duty as a husband . 

55 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

So does Rhaenyra. But Alicent at least is part of Westeros society and would rule as such. 

by that view , we should despise every Targaryen who sought rulership over Westeros. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I mean, the Velayrons aren't dragon lords until fairly late into the business so it was, in fact, them marrying the Velaryons just because they're the only other Roman family in the neighborhood.

Kind of. There were Valyrians in the Free Cities, after all.

I don't think it's just that "Oh, these aren't dragonlords, why bother?" but rather that, "If you are of Valyrian stock, there's probably some dragonlord in your bloodline somewhere." The Velaryons are an ancient family, we're told, one with a "storied lineage", and almost certainly have had younger daughters and the like of dragonlords (and bloodmages, I guess we should start noting!) families mixing into their lineage over the centuries before the Doom.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, DMC said:

Fair enough.  But it's entirely possible Alyssa (and Valaena) could have been black; Aenys and Jaehaerys and Alysanne could have been white; Laena, Laenor, Baela, and Rhaena could be more mixed (until you mentioned it I wasn't even aware of the casting for the latter two).  That explanation would be fine to me - albeit I do kinda like the idea of some recent Lord of the Tides marrying a Summer Islander.  The black/mixed race Velaryons already all still have the white/silver hair (whatever you wanna call those wigs), so who gives a shit?

I honestly don't see why it'd be an issue.  Maybe you could make some of Aenys and Alyssa's other children darker to even out the odds - Rhaena sounds like an interesting candidate - but frankly I don't see why this show should delve into the skin color of ancestors so much.  The entire point is it doesn't really matter.

The issue is that the whole incest thing should make it pretty much impossible for there being only light-skinned offspring from such unions, even more so when you have first Aerion-Valaena, sibling incest, Aenys-Alyssa, sibling incest, sibling incest, Viserys/Daemon.

This just doesn't go well together. That's why this issue comes up again and again. If the Hightowers or Strongs were black nobody would discuss earlier marriages and the looks of other main characters because we know nothing about earlier Hightower/Strong marriages that led to issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The issue is that the whole incest thing should make it pretty much impossible for there being only light-skinned offspring from such unions, even more so when you have first Aerion-Valaena, sibling incest, Aenys-Alyssa, sibling incest, sibling incest, Viserys/Daemon.

I get what you're saying - it's incredibly unlikely that Aegon I's generation, and then both Jaehaery's generation and his childrens' would all end up white.  Not denying that - that's why I proposed making some of Aenys' other kids darker skinned (as well as, perhaps, some of Jaehaerys' other children).  By the same token, it's unlikely that all of Corlys & Rhaenys' descendants would be darker skinned as apparently will be depicted in the show.

My point is the genetics-as-magic approach is already so heavily ingrained in the universe anyway that if they wanted to explain it away like that, I don't really care nor see a problem with it.

You're right that using the Hightowers or the Strongs would be a more expedient/easier alternative to explain the lineage all the up to the beginning of ASOIAF.  However, using the Hightowers as the black family would be quite dicey considering their role in the events - it's very understandable why the show wanted to steer clear there.  And using the Strongs (1) would lessen the exposure of the characters as - at least in the first season - I don't think we're gonna get much of them; and (2) would not be a good look if the greens' employment of the "Strong" attack on Rhaenyra's kids was focused on their skin color.  The latter is a can of worms I'm sure HBO and even the showrunners didn't wanna touch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EggBlue said:

if she looked down upon Westerosi nobility the way you suggest , she wouldn't have seen Harwin as worthy to go to so much trouble for . she could change her paramour as soon as Jace was born or take a man with valyrian blood as paramour . perhaps , Daemon who wasn't married to Laena at that point , another Velaryon or she could downright have her father order Laenor to do his duty as a husband . 

To be fair a lot of this is speculation since F&B doesn’t disclose the actual psychological factors but Rhaenyra always rubbed me the wrong way. She had this entitled energy with the delusions of grandeur that drove her insane. 
 

Alicent may have wanted power or she may have actually feared for her children but she was more levelheaded, and attracted a more colorful following. 
 

Criston outright rejected Rhaenyra and made her seek whomever she could get her hands on (at the expense of her own husband) and thought of it as my way or the highway.  
 

Ser Cole siding with Alicent was just a sign of how much more pleasant and charismatic the greens were rather than hardcore Targaryen zealots.

Rhaenyra didn’t want to work with other people like Jaehaerys did, she saw herself as the Targaryen queen all must love (which to be fair was how she was raised).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Ser Cole siding with Alicent was just a sign of how much more pleasant and charismatic the greens were rather than hardcore Targaryen zealots.

Rhaenyra didn’t want to work with other people like Jaehaerys did, she saw herself as the Targaryen queen all must love (which to be fair was how she was raised).

It's a Targ civil war, they're all Targaryens zealots ! The problem is with the gender in relation to power, not the family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

To be fair a lot of this is speculation since F&B doesn’t disclose the actual psychological factors but Rhaenyra always rubbed me the wrong way. She had this entitled energy with the delusions of grandeur that drove her insane.

Rhaenyra was neither insane nor particularly ambitious to our knowledge. She was named heir by her father at the age of seven and it was her duty as the daughter of the king to obey him and defend her rights. There is nothing entitled or grasping or overreaching actually in the text.

And the Hightower-Targaryens weren't different from the other Targaryens in any way. They got dragons, too, and Aegon and Helaena were pushed into an incestuous sibling match.

1 hour ago, Ran said:

Kind of. There were Valyrians in the Free Cities, after all.

I don't think it's just that "Oh, these aren't dragonlords, why bother?" but rather that, "If you are of Valyrian stock, there's probably some dragonlord in your bloodline somewhere." The Velaryons are an ancient family, we're told, one with a "storied lineage", and almost certainly have had younger daughters and the like of dragonlords (and bloodmages, I guess we should start noting!) families mixing into their lineage over the centuries before the Doom.

I think TWoIaF's account of the Rhoynish wars makes it pretty clear how the Valyrian nobility spread out. The rulers of Volantis are referred to as 'cousins and kin' of the dragonlords, so it seems clear that most of the lesser Valyrian nobility were basically founded by dragonless descendants of the dragonlord houses, either by illegitimate scions or younger sons/daughters who couldn't claim dragons of their own. In the earlier days such people went out into the world as adventurers and founded Volantis and some of the other colonies.

Ditto with the Rogares - there was apparently no dragonlord house of Rogare back in Valyria ... but the Rogares most likely do have dragonlord blood to no small degree since Lys was founded as a pleasure retreat for the dragonlords.

George starting to talk more about the Valyrian sorcerers is intriguing - I guess the talk about 'the sorcerer princes' being the ones who occasionally practiced polygamy and his revelation in the recent interview that there was some overlap between the class of the dragonlords and the class of the mages (which was always to be expected) could actually kind of confirm that the Targaryens were a noble houses which produced both dragonlords and sorcerers since Aenar Targaryen is said to have had multiple wives. It may actually be that the whole prophetic dream thing isn't so much a dragonlord legacy but rather something that comes from the fact that they are also descended from some powerful mages.

But it wasn't just blood mages but also fire mages in light of the whole fires of the Fourteen Flames fueling the magic of the pyromancers. One would also imagine that the most powerful sorcerers were the actual rulers/most powerful faction in Valyria, since they were the ones controlling the Fourteen Flames.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

Ser Cole siding with Alicent was just a sign of how much more pleasant and charismatic the greens were rather than hardcore Targaryen zealots.

Seriously, Ser Cole helped in treason and murder purely because he was pissy at his ex-girlfriend not wanting to move to California with him in a van.

Criston is notable for the fact that, of all the Greens, he is by FAR the pettiest.

Edited by C.T. Phipps
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...