Jump to content

[Spoilers] Episode 103 Discussion


Ran
 Share

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

Frankly, the fact Cregan Stark continued to march despite his king being a hostage is shocking.

Not only Cregan tho, Jeyne Arryn and the Lads all march while Aegon is hostage. The lads defeat the Greens's last army while he was hostage.

Then again, Alicent insisted on destroying the Black faction, so there's that.

 

Back to the show, they better explain and show the dragons of House Velaryon. 

Loved Jason Lannister anyway, he just exudes the Lannisters douchebag aura. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Yeah, that's why I said that we were surprised by Rhaenyra ever sitting the Iron Throne when TPatQ came out. 'Contested' kind of plays her role/success done, does it not? Stannis also 'contests' the rise of Joffrey/Tommen, but he never got really close to the throne.

Which makes the fact that Stannis calls her a usurper all the more interesting. Maybe she was initially supposed to be a straightforward (failed) usurper, before GRRM decided to add more complexity to the situation by having Viserys name her his heir?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

Aegon III is a valuable hostage and I'm honestly surprised you don't see the benefit. It's the same benefit that Bloodraven gets for the fact that he has Daemon II as a prisoner. Aegon II keeping Aegon III as a prisoner means that the Blacks can't crown another king in his place and they have an immensely valuable hostage to negotiate with. Its just when Alicent suggests cutting him up and Aegon II agrees that his surviving allies turn on him because they realize he's insane.

Frankly, the fact Cregan Stark continued to march despite his king being a hostage is shocking.

Rhaenyra herself would also have been a valuable hostage, no?

The second Daemon is no real danger, and King Aerys doesn't want to add to the whole kinslayer thing by killing - but Aegon II did kill his sister, so what's the point in sparing her son?

The Blacks couldn't crown another king if Aegon was dead because he was Rhaenyra's last son and the last male Targaryen aside from Aegon II himself.

At best they could crown another queen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

Which makes the fact that Stannis calls her a usurper all the more interesting. Maybe she was initially supposed to be a straightforward (failed) usurper, before GRRM decided to add more complexity to the situation by having Viserys name her his heir?

That is the impression one has, yes. Now the appendix would actually read better if the roles were reserved Aegon II was 'contesting' Rhaenyra's right to the throne, considering she was the named heir and all that.

It seems clear that by writing ASoS George hadn't worked out the details for the Dance yet. Ran told us that earlier Targaryen family trees actually had Rhaenyra's (first) husband as a Lannister - which might actually be part of the reason why they made a bigger deal out of Lord Jason Lannister asking for her hand than many of her other suitors.

A pity that we will most likely never see Forrest 'Fool' Frey asking her directly 'Marry me!' or something along those lines.

Edited by Lord Varys
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

Which makes the fact that Stannis calls her a usurper all the more interesting. Maybe she was initially supposed to be a straightforward (failed) usurper, before GRRM decided to add more complexity to the situation by having Viserys name her his heir?

I feel like a lot of people are attributing it to Martin's error when he's always clear that Rhaenyra gets a ridiculous amount of slander and libel in the histories.

Frankly, I reject any claims that Martin didn't know what he was doing.

The story is how Martin wanted it to be.

Edited by C.T. Phipps
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Rhaenyra herself would also have been a valuable hostage, no?

The second Daemon is no real danger, and King Aerys doesn't want to add to the whole kinslayer thing by killing - but Aegon II did kill his sister, so what's the point in sparing her son?

The Blacks couldn't crown another king if Aegon was dead because he was Rhaenyra's last son and the last male Targaryen aside from Aegon II himself.

At best they could crown another queen.

They could crown a Velaryon King, though that would certainly make Corlys look like a fool.

The Blacks, unlike the Greens, absolutely accept the maternal lineage after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I feel like a lot of people are attributing it to Martin's error when he's always clear that Rhaenyra gets a ridiculous amount of slander and libel in the histories.

Frankly, I reject any claims that Martin didn't know what he was doing.

The story is how Martin wanted it to be.

But she doesn't. Gyldayn doesn't vilify her, nor do any of the characters in the books aside from Stannis. Who may be kind of biased there due to his house supporting the Greens and paying a rather steep price for it. Could very well be that Lyonel Baratheon was the first Baratheon to be favored by the Iron Throne again.

2 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

They could crown a Velaryon King, though that would certainly make Corlys look like a fool.

The Blacks, unlike the Greens, absolutely accept the maternal lineage after all.

But Corlys was a hostage/prisoner of the Greens at that point, too. He couldn't crown anyone. And Alyn was still of a bastard birth and a minor with a commoner for a mother ... even if folks bought the 'Laenor Velaryon was his father' story. Trying to push his claim is 'Moon of Madness' or Two Betrayers territory.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lord Varys said:

But she doesn't. Gyldayn doesn't vilify her, nor do any of the characters in the books aside from Stannis. Who may be kind of biased there due to his house supporting the Greens and paying a rather steep price for it. Could very well be that Lyonel Baratheon was the first Baratheon to be favored by the Iron Throne again.

But Corlys was a hostage/prisoner of the Greens at that point, too. He couldn't crown anyone. And Alyn was still of a bastard birth and a minor with a commoner for a mother ... even if folks bought the 'Laenor Velaryon was his father' story. Trying to push his claim is 'Moon of Madness' or Two Betrayers territory.

 

Arianne is very sympathetic to Rhaenyra, although she has her own reasons for this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

That is the impression one has, yes. Now the appendix would actually read better if the roles were reserved Aegon II was 'contesting' Rhaenyra's right to the throne, considering she was the named heir and all that.

It seems clear that by writing ASoS George hadn't worked out the details for the Dance yet. Ran told us that earlier Targaryen family trees actually had Rhaenyra (first) husband as a Lannister - which might actually be part of the reason why they made a bigger deal out of Lord Jason Lannister asking for her hand than many of her other suitors.

"Earlier" as in pre-ASOS?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Arianne is very sympathetic to Rhaenyra, although she has her own reasons for this.

During the writing process of AFfC/ADwD some Dance details seemed to have been already pinned down - Criston Cole, Syrax, the Baratheons as supporters of Aegon II, Vhagar as Aemond's mount. I don't think Cole existed at a time when Rhaenyra was only a year older than Aegon and we didn't have the half-siblings setting.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

"Earlier" as in pre-ASOS?

Writing process of ASoS, I think. Late 1990s.

George kind of fleshed out the Targaryens backward. The kings he had pinned down to a point, but their families were only fleshed out starting with Dunk & Egg and from there back through the generations. There was a point when he only had the details for Aegon III/Viserys II and their respective children.

Alyn Velaryon's bastard ancestry was a later addition/change, and at some point Rhaenyra's first husband was Viserys' Hand, Lord Lyonel Strong, and they had three Strong sons together who all died in the Dance.

It was kind of a surprise then when we found out that Lyonel Strong remained a thing, just not as Rhaenyra's husband but as Lord of Harrenhal and Hand of the King.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We see another sign of GRRM not always having a clear idea of his characters' family trees when, back in ACoK, Renly kinda shrugs Robert's claim to the throne saying it was something about second sons marrying elder daughters a hundred of years past (and Catelyn, who knows quite a bit about the lineages of noble Houses, does not correct him), as if the blood ties between the Baratheons and the Targaryens were something more removed from the present time that it ended up being the case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, frenin said:

Not only Cregan tho, Jeyne Arryn and the Lads all march while Aegon is hostage. The lads defeat the Greens's last army while he was hostage.

Then again, Alicent insisted on destroying the Black faction, so there's that.

 

Back to the show, they better explain and show the dragons of House Velaryon. 

Loved Jason Lannister anyway, he just exudes the Lannisters douchebag aura. 

Yeah, there are some tactical decisions that don’t make a lot of sense under further inspection. Hopefully the show writers try to think of an explanation for this.

1 hour ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

Which makes the fact that Stannis calls her a usurper all the more interesting. Maybe she was initially supposed to be a straightforward (failed) usurper, before GRRM decided to add more complexity to the situation by having Viserys name her his heir?

It could just be that, while Stannis is smart, he’s not particularly invested in the intricacies of history. The average person remembers Richard Nixon as a sleaze and a crook, but there are historians who will defend him for all of his accomplishments prior to Watergate, which have been largely forgotten.

17 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Writing process of ASoS, I think. Late 1990s.

George kind of fleshed out the Targaryens backward. The kings he had pinned down to a point, but their families were only fleshed out starting with Dunk & Egg and from there back through the generations. There was a point when he only had the details for Aegon III/Viserys II and their respective children.

Alyn Velaryon's bastard ancestry was a later addition/change, and at some point Rhaenyra's first husband was Viserys' Hand, Lord Lyonel Strong, and they had three Strong sons together who all died in the Dance.

It was kind of a surprise then when we found out that Lyonel Strong remained a thing, just not as Rhaenyra's husband but as Lord of Harrenhal and Hand of the King.

When was it said that Lyonel Strong was Rhaenyra’s first husband? I don’t remember that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, zajaz said:

We see another sign of GRRM not always having a clear idea of his characters' family trees when, back in ACoK, Renly kinda shrugs Robert's claim to the throne saying it was something about second sons marrying elder daughters a hundred of years past (and Catelyn, who knows quite a bit about the lineages of noble Houses, does not correct him), as if the blood ties between the Baratheons and the Targaryens were something more removed from the present time that it ended up being the case. 

There was also Ned telling Robert that he had “more Targaryen blood” when Robert told Ned he should have been king, which implies that Ned also had a Targ ancestor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

There was also Ned telling Robert that he had “more Targaryen blood” when Robert told Ned he should have been king, which implies that Ned also had a Targ ancestor.

I do believe Ned actually says Robert had 'the better claim' (making no mention of Targaryen blood whatsoever), which is not quite the same thing. Still, this does remind me of the original outline that had Jaime becoming king 'by virtue of killing everyone ahead of him in the line of succession', which, IMO, would only be possible if the OG Lannisters had some distant Targaryen blood. Either that, or GRRM had no idea at the time about how the 'line of succession' thing actually worked (which I doubt).

Edited by zajaz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, zajaz said:

We see another sign of GRRM not always having a clear idea of his characters' family trees when, back in ACoK, Renly kinda shrugs Robert's claim to the throne saying it was something about second sons marrying elder daughters a hundred of years past (and Catelyn, who knows quite a bit about the lineages of noble Houses, does not correct him), as if the blood ties between the Baratheons and the Targaryens were something more removed from the present time that it ended up being the case. 

I feel like it's a fault of fantasy readers that they take every character as speaking literal fact when we know that people don't do that in real life (and shouldn't in fiction). Especially when Renly is making explicit that he's mocking the idea of Robert claiming the throne based on his relationship to the house he just overthrew.

This is a bit like Henry Bollingbrook claiming the throne of England based on his relationship to John of Gaunt when he overthrew Richard II. It happened but even during the time period, people thought it was ridiculous.

Edited by C.T. Phipps
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

Especially when Renly is making explicit that he's mocking the idea of Robert claiming the throne based on his relationship to the house he just overthrew.

Indeed, George specifically told someone who asked about Renly's claim that he was trying to show that Renly was a careless spirit who didn't actually give much regard to such things. [Someone = me]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I feel like it's a fault of fantasy readers that they take every character as speaking literal fact when we know that people don't do that in real life (and shouldn't in fiction). Especially when Renly is making explicit that he's mocking the idea of Robert claiming the throne based on his relationship to the house he just overthrew.

This is a bit like Henry Bollingbrook claiming the throne of England based on his relationship to John of Gaunt when he overthrew Richard II. It happened but even during the time period, people thought it was ridiculous.

If that were to be the case, one would think that Catelyn's internal narration would admit that, while Renly was technically right (Viserys, Daenerys and Rhaella had a better claim than Robert), the fact that he was being so eager to shurg the fact that his own grandmother was a Targaryen princess was quite odd.

Edited by zajaz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, zajaz said:

If that were to be the case, one would think that Catelyn's internal narration would admit that, while Renly was technically right (Viserys, Daenerys and Rhaella had a better claim than Robert), the fact that he was being so eager to shurg the fact that his own grandmother was a Targaryen princess was quite odd.

While true, there's an even bigger element at play that Renly is claiming to be King of Westeros when his OLDER BROTHER is about twenty yards away.

(He also doesn't know that Robert's children are all bastards and, in his mind, is Maegoring the process)

Renly knows his only appeal is to force and mockery of succession rules.

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...