[Spoilers] Episode 104 Discussion

[SeanF]

25 minutes ago, frenin said:

 

Or expect them to remember from the past show. Jaime was one of the fav characters and his vows as kingsguard were a vital part of his journey.

They should just stop with this prophecy stuff for my sake.

It's a pity that the showrunners were set on starting the Dance, the Velaryons have suffered heavily because of this.

And how many seasons for the Dance can there be honestly? It's just endless and gruesome murders, one after another. How many times can you depict a Targling dying horribly till the shock start to wear off? Even in the books i was already numbed by the time Maelor dies and it's only with the regency, which imo is the best part of the book by far,  that i got hooked again.

 

Btw, the amount of times nobles start killing each other for stupid things are getting ridiculous. If they want noble assholes killing one another so much, let there be duels.

We've still got Bitterbridge to come, where Prince Daeron locks hundreds of people in a Sept and sets fire to it.

[The Bard of Banefort]

4 minutes ago, frenin said:

 

Or expect them to remember from the past show. Jaime was one of the fav characters and his vows as kingsguard were a vital part of his journey.

They should just stop with this prophecy stuff for my sake.

It's a pity that the showrunners were set on starting the Dance, the Velaryons have suffered heavily because of this.

And how many seasons for the Dance can there be honestly? It's just endless and gruesome murders, one after another. How many times can you depict a Targling dying horribly till the shock start to wear off? Even in the books i was already numbed by the time Maelor dies and it's only with the regency, which imo is the best part of the book by far,  that i got hooked again.

 

Yeah, the story really starts to drag once Rhaenyra takes King’s Landing, and doesn’t pick up again until after Aegon II dies. The writers have quite the task ahead of them.

[Lord Varys]

12 minutes ago, LindsayLohan said:

I agree with this, 100 percent. The mass slaughter during the tournament in King’s Landing was too much to begin with. The idea of two lords baring steel in presence of the crown princess, inside Storm’s End, is ridiculous. Where is the law? Where is the King’s justice?

While it is true that the presentation of this is silly, duels among noblemen are not uncommon, even duels to the death. Although one would expect there to be more decorum there - a formal challenge, date and time, etc.

10 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I think the implication is that Daemon has an incredibly large history of sexual congruity given his descriptions of working with his brother through halotry and his mistresses. It's just that we're seeing his family is the area that causes performance anxiety.

I am curious how they will portray his wife, though.

I'm predicting she's a perfectly sweet and nice person.

There are other things you can do with (or to) a woman than fuck. Daemon seems to be a sexual sadist in the book, so one imagines he didn't just deflower a lot of maidens in the brothels. And in that context - Mysaria may have been his mistress in more than just the standard meaning of the word. That could also explain why Rhaenyra let that thing slide during her reign - because Daemon could do things with Mysaria she wasn't willing or interested to do with him.

[butterweedstrover]

10 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I mean, people write about monarchy because it's exciting. Bloodshed, death, betrayal, and intrigue.

Yeah, and a fun tale of betrayal and intrigue is not social commentary on the faults of a monarchal order.

14 hours ago, DMC said:

I find this discussion on trying to divine Martin's feelings on systems of government..odd.  Just because the wildings and the Ironborn have particularly barbaric cultures, that's hardly a comment concerning the author's feelings on democracy - in this world or his own universe.  And btw, the wildings' method of choosing does not resemble participatory democracy even in its infancy/at its most limited.  I'm also surprised there hasn't been any mention of Volantis' elections either - whose depiction was quite a bit of fun in ADWD and interestingly included the closest thing to actual political parties.

But, again, I really wouldn't read too much into any of that.  And I agree as mentioned that Martin's only real comments on feudalism are highlighted by Sandor's insightful take - just as Meribald's speech is Martin's clear statement on war.

The conversation stemmed from someone saying ASOIAF is a stand against the monarchy. 
 

And yet none of his alternative systems are portrayed as adaptable and criticism of feudalism ends where absolute monarchy begins. 
 

There are problems, but the solutions are never framed as an overthrow of the system. The solutions are framed as bad king being replaced by good king and more power to the throne. 

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

10 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

Which already suggests Daemon's lack of attraction is due to his own issues.

I guess Daemon really likes sheep, then.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Like I said earlier, they’re manchildren. Daemon much more so than Viserys, but still, they’re a pair of pouty whiners who are never satisfied (which is kind of the opposite of Viserys from the books).

There should be more about Viserys the party king, but one gets glimpses of him - at the first council session, during the opening of the tourney, when they celebrate Aegon, when he wants the royal hunt to be fun.

We get a lot of those introspective moments ... but those seem to be very rare and unusual for him. Alicent seems to be outright afraid of him in fire scene in episode 3.

One does hope he gets to enjoy himself during Rhaenyra's wedding next episode ... at least until the point things start to go to hell. Unless, of course, they just shrug this off like they usually do it when folks kill each other for no reason.

One really wonders why Viserys wants to keep the peace when actually nobody has any issues with brutal, lethal violence.

Regarding the KG issue:

I imagine it will come up again big time that they are supposed to be celibate. It was already mentioned in passing when Criston said to Rhaenyra that he could have married some commoner BEFORE he joined the KG ... but I think there could be considerable benefit from the real meaning coming up only later, since the casual viewer might, at this point, perhaps think that there is still a chance for Criston and Rhaenyra to be together.

[C.T. Phipps]

11 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Yeah, and a fun tale of betrayal and intrigue is not social commentary on the faults of a monarchal order.

No, the social commentary is the absolute lack of justice, tyranny, oppression, and arbitrary nature of it. I mean, there's no need to defend monarchy because there's no argument that could possibly justify it. The only reason that it's accepted is because it's the way it is in Westeros.

[frenin]

22 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Yeah, the story really starts to drag once Rhaenyra takes King’s Landing, and doesn’t pick up again until after Aegon II dies. The writers have quite the task ahead of them.

I need to care for this kids anyway, which i won't be able to do in 5 episodes. Perhaps if GoT had ended in a higher note, neither Hbo nor the showrunners would have felt the need to rush things so much.

I very much understand the need to keep the cow alive, they have managed to revive interest in this world which was not easy, but I have the feeling they have shot themselves in the foot by not letting themselves breeze.

I still hope that Rhaenys gets the limelight Martin didn't give her. 

[butterweedstrover]

25 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

No, the social commentary is the absolute lack of justice, tyranny, oppression, and arbitrary nature of it. I mean, there's no need to defend monarchy because there's no argument that could possibly justify it. The only reason that it's accepted is because it's the way it is in Westeros.

The oppression comes with the world and the identity of ASOIAF as a dark fantasy. 
 

In ASOIAF the misery is always ramped up, but having free folk be rapists isn’t not a plea against freedom, having the ironborn be maniacs isn’t a plea against democracy, etc. 

What it comes down to is the solution to the problems presented by evil. And the solutions are within the framework of the monarchy. Westeros is at its core a monarchy, the question is which leaders are the best to choose from, not how to dispose of the system. 
 

The solution to a bad king is always a good king, not the distribution of power away from the crown or an elective committee to control the line of succession. 
 

In fact nobility is treated as more of a genetic trait with the main families like the Starks having a long tradition of honorable lords, the Freys an endless lineage of traitors and scums, the Manderlys a collection of overweight but fundamentally good people, etc. further undermining the concept of meritocracy or liberalization in this society.

Edited September 14, 2022 by butterweedstrover

[butterweedstrover]

6 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Deleted.

Edited September 14, 2022 by butterweedstrover

[Macklunkey]

Personally, I couldn't have been bothered taking all that armour off. 

Major mood killer! 

[butterweedstrover]

15 hours ago, DMC said:

 Meribald's speech is Martin's clear statement on war.

But we’re not talking about Martin’s opinions, we are talking about the narrative and the meanings that can be deciphered from the story and language. 
 

Meribald’s speech had nothing to do with the series. It was about how bickering nobles have no real moral justification for their conflict and neither side is fundamentally different. 
 

Meanwhile in ASOIAF the war between Lannisters and Starks has very clear delineation towards one side seeking justice and the other power. Northern independence wasn’t framed as a power grab by Robb Stark while the Lannisters betrayal of the Baratheons certainly was. And for this story those differences matter. 
 

Euron vs. Oldtown is another battle where the moral differences matter, as was the battles between the slave owners and Daenerys, or the upcoming threat of the white walkers. 
 

My point is it doesn’t matter what Martin thinks, he is certainly against monarchal forms of government. But his books aren’t about criticizing them as the solutions are never framed in terms of opposition to the throne. The throne is taken for granted as a necessity for this series to exist.

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

GRRM has said that he doesn't want to illustrate his own opinion through the series and therefore has many characters with different opinions.

[butterweedstrover]

25 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

GRRM has said that he doesn't want to illustrate his own opinion through the series and therefore has many characters with different opinions.

Yeah, and I don’t see where the anti-monarchist view point is. Have there been any rebellions to overthrow the Monarchy? Have there been any serious factions or characters dedicated to opposing the throne? 
 

The faith is described as having its own seat of power and are treated as zealots when they have power so their rebellion hardly suffices. And their problem was the incest, not the part about hereditary rule. 
 

Societies like the Ironborn or Wildlings or Free cities are completely irrelevant to the issues of Westeros. 
 

Edit: and to be fair he hasn’t given a peasant perspective to the story so there is a limit to what he means by different perspectives. Highlighting especially how irrelevant Meribald’s speech is.

Edited September 14, 2022 by butterweedstrover

[RumHam]

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

We've still got Bitterbridge to come, where Prince Daeron locks hundreds of people in a Sept and sets fire to it.

I feel like this makes it sound worse than it was? I don't have the book in front of me but I don't think he hearded people in there. I think they were just seeking refuge. 

The wiki entry even makes it sound like maybe he only meant to burn the inn where Maelor was killed and the flames spread.

[C.T. Phipps]

23 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Yeah, and I don’t see where the anti-monarchist view point is. Have there been any rebellions to overthrow the Monarchy? Have there been any serious factions or characters dedicated to opposing the throne?

I'm curious, what would convince you an author has an anti-monarchist POV?

[SeanF]

3 minutes ago, RumHam said:

I feel like this makes it sound worse than it was? I don't have the book in front of me but I don't think he hearded people in there. I think they were just seeking refuge. 

The wiki entry even makes it sound like maybe he only meant to burn the inn where Maelor was killed and the flames spread.

 I thought it was very much a case of "Caedite eos, novit enim Dominus qui sunt!" but I shall reread.

[RumHam]

I could be wrong, but I think of Daeron as the good one! 

[SeanF]

3 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I'm curious, what would convince you an author has an anti-monarchist POV?

In this case, it would have to be that there was a more attractive alternative to monarchy in the tale, which the bad guys in the tale were trying to prevent from coming into existence.

I don't doubt that Martin is not a monarchist in real life.

But within this world's parameters, I find monarchy preferable to aristocratic anarchy or slaver oligarchy.

[SeanF]

1 minute ago, RumHam said:

I could be wrong, but I think of Daeron as the good one! 

Massacring the smallfolk would in no way reflect ill on a leader in this world.