[Spoilers] Episode 103 Discussion

[C.T. Phipps]

11 minutes ago, Ran said:

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]

I love watching these "George Answers" on Youtube. They're always so fun and whimsical.

Thanks for sharing.

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

11 hours ago, frenin said:

In the books he's just a great knight who's really into Rhaenyra, till they fell apart. Once they part is when his characterization really starts. Ditto, I'll assume with the show.

But the show makes it seem like Rhaenyra is more into him than he's into her. There are even some viewers who think that they just have a platonic friendship.  

[RumHam]

59 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

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

Not in the books, I think it was either a so spake martin or something form one of the role playing games maybe? I remember it though. 

[C.T. Phipps]

15 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

But the show makes it seem like Rhaenyra is more into him than he's into her. There are even some viewers who think that they just have a platonic friendship.  

Oh, I've seen just about every female non-book reviewer going, "Oh yes, they're getting together."

Sadly, I see them probably climaxing their relationship (rimshot) next episode.

 

Edited September 8, 2022 by C.T. Phipps

[The Bard of Banefort]

11 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

Oh, I've seen just about every female non-book reviewer going, "Oh yes, they're getting together."

Sadly, I see them probably climaxing their relationship (rimshot) next episode.

 

So many people have been like “I really like Criston, he’s like Jon Snow” or “I bet Rhaenyra is going to marry him.” They have no idea what’s coming.

[C.T. Phipps]

5 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

So many people have been like “I really like Criston, he’s like Jon Snow” or “I bet Rhaenyra is going to marry him.” They have no idea what’s coming.

Like the romantic Red Wedding.

[zajaz]

On a more serious note, do you guys think some of the female viewers will get upset once they see how Rhaenyra's story ends, considering a good chunk of them still have a bitter taste in their mouths thanks to Daenerys' fate?

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

8 minutes ago, zajaz said:

On a more serious note, do you guys think some of the female viewers will get upset once they see how Rhaenyra's story ends, considering a good chunk of them still have a bitter taste in their mouths thanks to Daenerys' fate?

That's definitely possible, since the ending overall seems to be quite similar to GoT, with everything in ruins and a random kid ending up as king.

[C.T. Phipps]

13 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

That's definitely possible, since the ending overall seems to be quite similar to GoT, with everything in ruins and a random kid ending up as king.

Yes, it is a tragedy that is properly set up, though.

However, they should also know it'll be a bad ending by the fact that Westeros is a hellhole in Robert's era.

[EggBlue]

40 minutes ago, zajaz said:

On a more serious note, do you guys think some of the female viewers will get upset once they see how Rhaenyra's story ends, considering a good chunk of them still have a bitter taste in their mouths thanks to Daenerys' fate?

yes , but I don't think it'll have the same impact as Daenerys for the audience , regardless of gender . because :

1. the story is set to be a tragedy from the start , so I doubt anyone would assume the chosen heir in episode 1 will sit on the IT at the end .

2. Rhaenyra , while is probably set to be a decent person, will never be as much loved as Daenerys was because she lacks all the accomplishments Daenerys had.

3. Daenerys's disaster was never about not sitting on the Iron Throne , it was due to lack of a proper arc to take her from the role of the Liberator to the Mad Queen . among my personal acquaintances ,for example, many thought they could accept Dany's ending ,even like it,  if it hadn't been so rushed .

4. unlike Daenerys who's downfall was supposed to be justified , Rhaenyra will be avenged though her faction's victory will be ironic . 

 

[The Bard of Banefort]

1 hour ago, zajaz said:

On a more serious note, do you guys think some of the female viewers will get upset once they see how Rhaenyra's story ends, considering a good chunk of them still have a bitter taste in their mouths thanks to Daenerys' fate?

Absolutely. They’re already setting themselves up for it.

Published just this afternoon:  https://collider.com/house-of-the-dragon-rhaenyra-new-favorite-badass-milly-alcock/

 

Granted, most of the fan response to HOTD has appeared to mirror the critical response: many people like it, some dislike it, but few really love or hate it. Everything has been very tepid so far.

 

[C.T. Phipps]

3 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Granted, most of the fan response to HOTD has appeared to mirror the critical response: many people like it, some dislike it, but few really love or hate it. Everything has been very tepid so far

Not to my experience.

https://i.imgur.com/wAyqkVb.jpg

Re: Daenerys versus Rhanerya

I think there's some huge differences in the ending. If Daenerys had been killed fighting the Night King, no one would have been happy about it but it would have been considered to be a bold choice like killing Ned Stark and Rob Stark. It's the indignity of the belief that Daenerys had to be killed for the greater good that makes it such an awful ending and the vilification of the co-star of the show. Which is, "What if Princess Leia was the Emperor?"

Edited September 9, 2022 by C.T. Phipps

[The Bard of Banefort]

4 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

Not to my experience.

https://i.imgur.com/wAyqkVb.jpg

Re: Daenerys versus Rhanerya

I think there's some huge differences in the ending. If Daenerys had been killed fighting the Night King, no one would have been happy about it but it would have been considered to be a bold choice like killing Ned Stark and Rob Stark. It's the indignity of the belief that Daenerys had to be killed for the greater good that makes it such an awful ending and the vilification of the co-star of the show. Which is, "What if Princess Leia was the Emperor?"

That wasn’t an insult to HOTD, C.T. 

 

That said, there are a bunch of YouTube bros who spent the last three years trashing everything GOT-related—including HOTD—who have now decided to champion the show solely because they want to see it “crush” Rings of Power. I can understand being disappointed with something, but the anti-ROP vitriol is starting to rival The Last Jedi, and that’s saying something. No wonder GRRM was so disturbed by it.

[Lord Varys]

16 hours 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. 

It just looks like George had no clue that Robert's grandmother was a Targaryen princess at that point. Renly wouldn't have talked like that if his own grandmother had been a Targaryen princess and he himself the great-grandson of a king.

The impression you get there is that the Baratheons are basically like the Martells or the Penroses or the Plumms ... who last got a drop of Targaryen blood 100 years ago, and not sixty years ago.

It is equally ridiculous when Borros Baratheon honestly dismisses his own aunt - the half-sister of the Old King himself! - as some great-aunt who died long ago. These people might be assholes, but they are also noblemen whose entire lives revolve around the importance of their own bloodlines.

15 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

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

It is from a roleplaying guide which gave background on the Harrenhal houses, including House Strong.

15 hours ago, zajaz said:

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).

There is chance that George originally actually thought the Lannisters could usurp the throne in their own right. But the story certainly developed in such a manner that blood claims trump a simple desire for power. When Jaime contemplates marrying Cersei and having Tywin sit on the throne he sounds like a complete lunatic and not somebody who is actually laying out a scenario that could work in this world.

The Ned thing was often cited as possible evidence that there was some Targaryen-Stark match in the past. And to be sure, many a noble house still could have a drop of Targaryen blood somehow. The Velaryons have quite a little bit of Targaryen blood, and they must have had lots and lots of daughters in 300 years. Who did they marry? Then there are the Targaryen-Hightower girls, Elaena's Penrose children, Viserys Plumm and his descendants, the second Daenerys and her Martell descendants (who seem to have passed on the blood of the dragon to Teora Toland), whatever connections the Tarths have to the Targaryens, etc.

Although I guess if George had wanted a link with prominent houses like the Starks or Lannisters he would have included one in the family trees we got.

14 hours ago, zajaz said:

On a more serious note, do you guys think some of the female viewers will get upset once they see how Rhaenyra's story ends, considering a good chunk of them still have a bitter taste in their mouths thanks to Daenerys' fate?

Well, I'm upset by that. Rhaenyra certainly could have a better death even if she doesn't live to see her cause triumph.

That said, though, I think Aegon II got out way too easy. I always imagined Aegon III with a club beating in his crippled uncle's head to bloody pulp...

12 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I think there's some huge differences in the ending. If Daenerys had been killed fighting the Night King, no one would have been happy about it but it would have been considered to be a bold choice like killing Ned Stark and Rob Stark. It's the indignity of the belief that Daenerys had to be killed for the greater good that makes it such an awful ending and the vilification of the co-star of the show. Which is, "What if Princess Leia was the Emperor?"

Daenerys can either be a mad queen/tyrant or a key player in the fight against the Others. She cannot be both, I think, since that just doesn't work in the framework of this story. If she is to become a villain in the books she must turn her back on the Others and go to Westeros only to punish the Usurper's Dogs and whoever else raises up arms against her or tries to steal her throne. She has to abandon the idea that she doing anything for her people or for Westeros or even her dead relatives (one of which might very well be the Aegon chap).

If she goes to Westeros to help and if she ends up fighting the Others then a tyranny/mad queen scenario is not really feasible. Because she would be able to make compromises with the decent guys in Westeros ... and her crushing the villains (especially such who refuse to help against the Others) just is not going to antagonize (m)any people in Westeros. So the queen burned down a KL full of villains, cowards, and traitors? So what? They deserved it.

I mean, Stannis already did a lot of shit ... but if he actually ended up saving everybody and crushed the Others then folks certainly will forgive him a few burnings here and there, they might then even forgive him the Shireen thing.

Edited September 9, 2022 by Lord Varys

[TheValonqarThatWasAzorAhai]

On 9/7/2022 at 8:49 PM, Lord Varys said:

The only reason why Rhaenyra's descendants wouldn't count her as a queen is if she was lacking something in this regard. George could have made her another Aegon the Uncrowned, Daemon Blackfyre, Viserys, or Stannis ... but he didn't. Thus neither Rhaenyra's descendants on the throne nor the majority historians in the Realm would try to erase her short reign. That is just not how royal dynasties work. So that is kind of relevant, although certainly not the greatest of deals.

But I do find it hard to actually pretend that Aegon II reigned from 129-131 AC because that's just not true.

Some action, to be sure, but not for Aegon the Conqueror babe to grow up to have children or his own nor for his brother to be born to become a big villain at the end of the season.

The casual things that there might be action due to some stuff the Velaryons and Daemon might pull in the future, not that they both end up playing the second fiddle to a Rhaenyra who is running around with five sons at her heel.

 

Or maybe she wasn’t recognized as a legal ruler by Oldtown.  Remember, we are getting Oldtown’s and the Citidel’s version of history.

[C.T. Phipps]

Quote

It just looks like George had no clue that Robert's grandmother was a Targaryen princess at that point. Renly wouldn't have talked like that if his own grandmother had been a Targaryen princess and he himself the great-grandson of a king.

You'll have to explain how being the Great Grandson of a King and grandson of a Targaryen helps the argument that lineage doesn't matter and that force of arms is the sole determinator for who should be king or not, @Lord Varys. I mean, the argument Renly is making is an appeal to "might makes right." He's making an insult to the concept of rulership by lineage because he's making a completely illegal and utterly unsupported usurpation.

It feels like you're ignoring the context of Renly's argument and are in fact acting like he should have the exact opposite point of it. This despite the fact that arguing the opposite would make him not the ruler of Westeros but third in line after Joffrey, Stannis, and Tommen or even sixth in line.

Edited September 9, 2022 by C.T. Phipps

[SeanF]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

It just looks like George had no clue that Robert's grandmother was a Targaryen princess at that point. Renly wouldn't have talked like that if his own grandmother had been a Targaryen princess and he himself the great-grandson of a king.

The impression you get there is that the Baratheons are basically like the Martells or the Penroses or the Plumms ... who last got a drop of Targaryen blood 100 years ago, and not sixty years ago.

It is equally ridiculous when Borros Baratheon honestly dismisses his own aunt - the half-sister of the Old King himself! - as some great-aunt who died long ago. These people might be assholes, but they are also noblemen whose entire lives revolve around the importance of their own bloodlines.

It is from a roleplaying guide which gave background on the Harrenhal houses, including House Strong.

There is chance that George originally actually thought the Lannisters could usurp the throne in their own right. But the story certainly developed in such a manner that blood claims trump a simple desire for power. When Jaime contemplates marrying Cersei and having Tywin sit on the throne he sounds like a complete lunatic and not somebody who is actually laying out a scenario that could work in this world.

The Ned thing was often cited as possible evidence that there was some Targaryen-Stark match in the past. And to be sure, many a noble house still could have a drop of Targaryen blood somehow. The Velaryons have quite a little bit of Targaryen blood, and they must have had lots and lots of daughters in 300 years. Who did they marry? Then there are the Targaryen-Hightower girls, Elaena's Penrose children, Viserys Plumm and his descendants, the second Daenerys and her Martell descendants (who seem to have passed on the blood of the dragon to Teora Toland), whatever connections the Tarths have to the Targaryens, etc.

Although I guess if George had wanted a link with prominent houses like the Starks or Lannisters he would have included one in the family trees we got.

Well, I'm upset by that. Rhaenyra certainly could have a better death even if she doesn't live to see her cause triumph.

That said, though, I think Aegon II got out way too easy. I always imagined Aegon III with a club beating in his crippled uncle's head to bloody pulp...

Daenerys can either be a mad queen/tyrant or a key player in the fight against the Others. She cannot be both, I think, since that just doesn't work in the framework of this story. If she is to become a villain in the books she must turn her back on the Others and go to Westeros only to punish the Usurper's Dogs and whoever else raises up arms against her or tries to steal her throne. She has to abandon the idea that she doing anything for her people or for Westeros or even her dead relatives (one of which might very well be the Aegon chap).

If she goes to Westeros to help and if she ends up fighting the Others then a tyranny/mad queen scenario is not really feasible. Because she would be able to make compromises with the decent guys in Westeros ... and her crushing the villains (especially such who refuse to help against the Others) just is going to antagonize (m)any people in Westeros. So the queen burned down a KL full of villains, cowards, and traitors? So what? They deserved it.

I mean, Stannis already did a lot of shit ... but if he actually ended up saving everybody and crushed the Others then folks certainly will forgive him a few burning here and there, they might then even forgive him the Shireen thing.

Correct.  The burning of Kings Landing, however grim, would be small beer, compared to saving the world.  The two D’s upended the books, by making the fight against the Others less important than the fight for the iron Throne.

Had Dany, Jon, and their armies just saved Westeros from eternal enslavement, most people would just go “meh” at the sack of a city whose commander rejected quarter.

[SeanF]

3 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

Not to my experience.

https://i.imgur.com/wAyqkVb.jpg

Re: Daenerys versus Rhanerya

I think there's some huge differences in the ending. If Daenerys had been killed fighting the Night King, no one would have been happy about it but it would have been considered to be a bold choice like killing Ned Stark and Rob Stark. It's the indignity of the belief that Daenerys had to be killed for the greater good that makes it such an awful ending and the vilification of the co-star of the show. Which is, "What if Princess Leia was the Emperor?"

Worse, she was used to clear a path so that people who did not do very much, or who were actively harmful like Tyrion, could inherit the earth.

Dany was killed so that Tyrion and Bronn could josh about new brothels together.

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

10 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Absolutely. They’re already setting themselves up for it.

Published just this afternoon:  https://collider.com/house-of-the-dragon-rhaenyra-new-favorite-badass-milly-alcock/

Someone on Twitter did warn viewers not to name their children after any character before the show ends. 

[frenin]

13 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Absolutely. They’re already setting themselves up for it.

Published just this afternoon:  https://collider.com/house-of-the-dragon-rhaenyra-new-favorite-badass-milly-alcock/

Tbf, while one mad queen is passable, three is just a very bad joke. Dany's ending just made Cersei's and Rhaenyra's fates leave a very bad taste in my mouth.