[Spoilers] Episode 106 Discussion

[The Bard of Banefort]

20 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

After rewatching the episode:

Olivia actually has naked feet in the scene, at least that's what I think you can see in the scene where the servant enters.

One also imagines that the symbology there was kind of botched by the cut. Larys having a bee as his personal sigil and showing of the blossom in the end kind of implies that he lusts for Alicent's honey - something she has so far denied him but which he expects to claim eventually. One imagines the cut feet scene was to imply that Alicent was still keeping him at arm's length.

How this version of Larys is going to choose a beheading in the end is quite odd. It is also odd in the book, of course, but in the book it wasn't clear that Larys was behind the fire ... nor had we reason to believe he would be willing to murder a father and a brother he had no issues with that we know of. In the show he did that, setting him on a pretty clear villain's path, whereas in the book he could have better motives if he actually did it.

Although in the book he is pretty much a hero in the end, doing away with the crippled pretender and installing Aegon III in his place. Larys Strong more or less singlehandedly ended the Dance. Corlys would have neither survived Aegon II's restoration nor been able to rid the Realm of the king without Larys whispering in his ear and convincing him that poison was queen.

I’m now imagining a love triangle next season where Alicent starts sleeping with Cole and Larys, consumed with jealously, alerts the blacks to his movements, thus getting him ingloriously killed.

[Lord Varys]

3 minutes ago, HOTDfresher said:

Based on your discussion it seems that any succession conflict happened before the heir was named, not after it before Viserys I. The only exception to that is Maegor the cruel who killed the ruling King & became an usurper King. 

Maegor did kill his half-brother Aenys, the ruling king, but his mother may have. He just ended up usurping the place of the absent rightful heir, Aegon the Uncrowned, who was stuck in the Westerlands, besieged by the Faith Militant at Crakehall (and was quite dragonless).

3 minutes ago, HOTDfresher said:

As per what has been shown in the show, the Hightowers themselves are propogating the installation of Aegon II over Rhaenyra amongst the lords since his birth. It has nothing to do with Rhaenyra's capabilities as a ruler but about her not being male. So this faction didn't start due to discontent of the lords but with the backing of the Queen's family. That is why Otto is sure that realm would not accept her as a Queen. Because their faction is actively working against the King's decision.

I think it is twofold - they definitely prop up Aegon as the rightful heir and future king from the start, Otto's brother does this even before Otto himself. But Otto also seems to genuinely believe that the Realm wouldn't accept Rhaenyra as queen instead of any trueborn brother she may or may not have.

There he is kind of mistaken, of course, as with the notion that Rhaenyra must kill all her half-brothers to secure her crown. It is quite clear that Alicent is not really afraid for Aegon when she uses this argument to push him to his role as rival pretender - she is angry that he doesn't want to be king, that he wants to get along with Rhaenyra and his nephews (who clearly seems to like more than Aemond at this point).

3 minutes ago, HOTDfresher said:

It is just ironic that Otto who castigated Daemon for being like Maegor the cruel, himself ended up being instrumental for fighting against the rightful heir & supporting an usurper. 

It is even more ironic in the sense that Otto creates an even worse king that Maegor with Aegon II - and a much worse spare heir with Aemond. Hopefully the show takes that irony to the very end, namely depicting Otto being virtually destroyed by when Aegon and Aemond and Criston take the reins of power in their hands. We don't know what the guy does after Aegon II dismisses him, but it could be great to see him as a broken man in his chambers, realizing that he put monsters into power and is now quite powerless to stop or even advise them.

In fact, considering his arc I think the show could and should give him a similar final arc as Alicent gets in the Regency material - him realizing that all his efforts were for nought, that he failed everyone - Viserys, his king, who he genuinely seems to have liked, the Realm he professed to serve, his daughter who he pushed into an impossible situation, and in the end also his family and house because they are going to suffer greatly for the mistakes he made.

3 minutes ago, HOTDfresher said:

The biggest failure for Green faction was that they couldn't prove to Viserys that Aegon II was a worthy heir over Rhaenyra. It isn't as if Rhaenyra is not giving them chances with her lapses. But she is still better than Aegon II on her merits. Also by later marrying Daemon & having legitimate heirs which couldn't be contested she somehow nullified the damage caused by her bastard sons. Plus her family seems to have been a tight supporting unit for Jace.  Frankly if the same Rhaenyra was a boy, would there even be a conflict?  

In the show a male Rhaenyra would have faced no problems at all, one imagines, unless her father's second wife really had issues with him - and he was not getting along at all with his younger half-brother(s). But it would have been more a Blackfyre Rebellion thing then, not some all-out succession war.

In the book it is a tidbit more complex since we don't really know what ambition/motives drove Otto and Alicent.

I think the rushed things in the show really make it hard to understand Aegon's story there. We should have seen why and how he didn't grow into decent rulership material despite the fact that Otto commanded Alicent to see to it ... and despite the fact that she seems to have the power to actually do it. Even more so now that Otto is being recalled.

[Lord Varys]

1 minute ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I’m now imagining a love triangle next season where Alicent starts sleeping with Cole and Larys, consumed with jealously, alerts the blacks to his movements, thus getting him ingloriously killed.

Well, your imagination definitely wanders. The moment between Criston and Alicent could also foreshadow or hint at something hidden going on there. However, I'm not sure Criston Cole could possible fuck another slutty royal woman. He cannot possibly marry a widowed Alicent ... and neither he nor she are going to run away.

Larys might target the Queen Dowager then, though, asking for her hand. Although Alicent being visible distraught about Larys' actions could also lead to her distancing herself from him.

Spoiler

The spoilers seem to imply that Larys ingratiates himself with Otto rather than Alicent. And there also are supposed to be basically two Green factions when Viserys dies - Otto leading the hawks who demand the death of Rhaenyra and her family, and Alicent who wants to see Aegon crowned without bloodshed. She wins out in the end, at least until everything goes to hell.

 

[C.T. Phipps]

23 minutes ago, HOTDfresher said:

The biggest failure for Green faction was that they couldn't prove to Viserys that Aegon II was a worthy heir over Rhaenyra. It isn't as if Rhaenyra is not giving them chances with her lapses. But she is still better than Aegon II on her merits. Also by later marrying Daemon & having legitimate heirs which couldn't be contested she somehow nullified the damage caused by her bastard sons. Plus her family seems to have been a tight supporting unit for Jace.  Frankly if the same Rhaenyra was a boy, would there even be a conflict?  

I mean the problem is the Green faction keep seeming that their argument is sound but it turns out a large chunk of the Kingdom doesn't accept their logic. Otto takes it as fait accompli that no one will accept Rhaenyra as the Queen of Westeros and that everyone will rally to Aegon II's side.

And...they don't.

At all.

The North, being sticklers for honor, stick to their oaths and so does most of the rest of the kingdom. Which automatically invalidates most of Otto's argument. All of his claims about being bastards' mother don't seem to have convinced anyone either.

Either because they don't believe it (not having seen the children) or don't care.

I think the latter is more likely because of different reasons than morality. Most of the Lords and Ladies of Westeros are motivated by self-interest and their own concerns that are uninterested in the grievances of House Hightower.

[Lord Varys]

By the way - can anyone explain the new opening credits to me?

The three guys in the end are Rhaenyra's elder sons, of course, but who else is in the credits and how do we know it?

[HOTDfresher]

@Lord Varys @C.T. Phipps

 

So the Green factions core reason for claiming Aegon II as the rightful heir because realm wouldn't support the female heir ends up being nothing more than a fasle self-created boogey man to serve their own ambitions. The mere fact that they had to keep Viserys death a secret & secretly install Aegon II as heir proves that their claims were false. The realm was endangered just so that the Hightowers could fulfill their ambition. It was not as if the realm was suffering under Targaryen rule. That is why I can never support the Greens. 

 

Aegon II is nothing but a spoilt prince. As much as Allicent seems to resent Rhaenyra's privilege, Allicent's kids are spoilt as well. In fact worse because they are the males. Plus Allicent is constantly feeding the you are the rightful heir bullshit into Aegon's mind at an impressionable age. No wonder he would end up being a monster. 

 

I would definitely like to see both Allicent & Otto regretting their actions & how it led to their own children's downfall. The hatred that they are funnelling in their kids morphing them into despicable humans who would not hesitate to even harm them is the karma that they rightfully deserve. 

[SeanF]

23 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I mean the problem is the Green faction keep seeming that their argument is sound but it turns out a large chunk of the Kingdom doesn't accept their logic. Otto takes it as fait accompli that no one will accept Rhaenyra as the Queen of Westeros and that everyone will rally to Aegon II's side.

And...they don't.

At all.

The North, being sticklers for honor, stick to their oaths and so does most of the rest of the kingdom. Which automatically invalidates most of Otto's argument. All of his claims about being bastards' mother don't seem to have convinced anyone either.

Either because they don't believe it (not having seen the children) or don't care.

I think the latter is more likely because of different reasons than morality. Most of the Lords and Ladies of Westeros are motivated by self-interest and their own concerns that are uninterested in the grievances of House Hightower.

Yes, substantially more of the magnates supported the Blacks than the Greens.  There is no real argument that the magnates will not tolerate a woman as ruler.

[C.T. Phipps]

31 minutes ago, HOTDfresher said:

@Lord Varys @C.T. Phipps

So the Green factions core reason for claiming Aegon II as the rightful heir because realm wouldn't support the female heir ends up being nothing more than a fasle self-created boogey man to serve their own ambitions. The mere fact that they had to keep Viserys death a secret & secretly install Aegon II as heir proves that their claims were false. The realm was endangered just so that the Hightowers could fulfill their ambition. It was not as if the realm was suffering under Targaryen rule. That is why I can never support the Greens.

Aegon II is nothing but a spoilt prince. As much as Allicent seems to resent Rhaenyra's privilege, Allicent's kids are spoilt as well. In fact worse because they are the males. Plus Allicent is constantly feeding the you are the rightful heir bullshit into Aegon's mind at an impressionable age. No wonder he would end up being a monster.

I think there's also a good argument that Otto was blindsided by how unpopular Aegon II actually turned out to be. There's a very real possibility the show will present Otto and Alicent as finding out that they don't have the "silent majority" behind them but have grossly underestimated how popular Rhaenyra is. It took a decade or two for them to get used to the idea that she was the heir but it seems well-established in the public's mind by then.

Quote

I would definitely like to see both Allicent & Otto regretting their actions & how it led to their own children's downfall. The hatred that they are funnelling in their kids morphing them into despicable humans who would not hesitate to even harm them is the karma that they rightfully deserve. 

I think that's definitely implied with Alicent's hatred of the color green and imprisonment in Maegor's holdfast. Still, she remained bitter to the end, encouraging the murder of Aegon III multiple times. Mind you, after Blood and Cheese, I can understand Alicent's hatred. It's just she hated them well before. I also feel Cristin Cole's death is too good for him.

Edited September 27, 2022 by C.T. Phipps

[C.T. Phipps]

24 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Yes, substantially more of the magnates supported the Blacks than the Greens.  There is no real argument that the magnates will not tolerate a woman as ruler.

I actually find the reverse fascinating as well because the Greens are pretty much made of people with a personal investment or bribery by Otto.

House Lannister is their biggest supporter for reasons implied to be resentment and Barthaeon a somewhat fair weather friend bought by a marriage decree.

 

Edited September 27, 2022 by C.T. Phipps

[Cashless Society]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

By the way - can anyone explain the new opening credits to me?

The three guys in the end are Rhaenyra's elder sons, of course, but who else is in the credits and how do we know it?

Daemon, represented by his dragon-styled helmet, Laena, although I'm not quite sure what her symbol is supposed to mean, and the dragon twins, represented by dragon eggs.

On the walls, we also see what I interpret as the rivalry between Alicent and Rhaenyra's children (3 dragons and 4 watchtowers)

[Ran]

5 hours ago, StarksInTheNorth said:

@Ran now that we're all caught up with you, can you please confirm who you meant when you said the following:

• "we think there’s maybe a risk that this particular character will come off in a too-positive light compared to Fire and Blood’s duelling accounts, and consequently place her opposite number in too-negative a light for some in the audience. We’ll have to say how that plays out."

Rhaenyra was the character we were referring to. Her good counsel at the small council, and more significantly her attempt to patch up the break between the two by proposing the marriage (which is something they've invented). To us, this episode mostly cast Alicent in a bad light and mostly cast Rhaenyra in a positive light, which we think isn't what those who want the conflict to be more "equal" will want. That said, there's 4 episodes left, plenty of enormities yet to come, and it's never easy to predict how people will feel about characters.

5 hours ago, StarksInTheNorth said:

• "Not all the changes can be explained as purely a matter of getting the material translated to the screen, of course, and one in particular regarding a male character feels so oddly unnecessary that we wonder if there were external reasons for the change (i.e. the writers did it for fear of criticism, because of something similar Game of Thrones did with one of its secondary characters)."

That's Laenor. We discussed it in our Youtube video, that they turned him intoo a wastrel and fop who was knighted only because it seemed politic when he got married to a true warrior and knight. GoT got some stick from fans who complained about the depiction of Renly and Loras as "metrosexual", with the former being terrified at blood and so on rather than a capable knight who rode in tourneys and was bold in action, so we wonder if they flipped the narrative on Laenor in part as a reaction to that.

5 hours ago, StarksInTheNorth said:

And also, if you don't mind extrapolating, what details of the history of the Targaryens have been adjusted to minimize the knock-on effect of the Velaryons being black? I haven't been able to notice anything, afaik.

I've discussed this here and elsewhere, but most recently in episode 5  they yet again talk of the Targaryens and Velaryons not having been "united" in any recent time, and this goes back to Laena talking about it not having been the case since the Doom. This should have implications for the Targaryen tree, if Aegon and his sisters did not have a Velaryon mother or Jaehaerys did not have a Velaryon mother.

That said, we talked about this specific thing with Condal in our interview that I hope to publish tonight.

 

[C.T. Phipps]

I'm eager to find out his answer.

[frenin]

6 hours ago, Winterfell is Burning said:

Considering that Rhaenys lost 20-1 just a few years later, I very much doubt it.

Society accepts child rulers but when it came  to Great Coulncils, they outvoted them for adults.

Edited September 27, 2022 by frenin

[Farerb]

2 hours ago, Ran said:

Rhaenyra was the character we were referring to. Her good counsel at the small council, and more significantly her attempt to patch up the break between the two by proposing the marriage (which is something they've invented). To us, this episode mostly cast Alicent in a bad light and mostly cast Rhaenyra in a positive light, which we think isn't what those who want the conflict to be more "equal" will want. That said, there's 4 episodes left, plenty of enormities yet to come, and it's never easy to predict how people will feel about characters.

If they remove her suggestion that Aemond should be sharply interrogated next episode, then we will have our answer.

[EggBlue]

7 hours ago, Winterfell is Burning said:

Considering that Rhaenys lost 20-1 just a few years later, I very much doubt it.

well, it was 7 yr old Laenor who lost to adult Viserys . but either way , when it comes to women succession in Westeros , it's a matter of preference rather than acceptance .considering a  daughter comes before a brother in lordships and looking at the facts that I explained in my previous post , it's clear that Westeros was more open to the idea of a ruling queen in that time in history and it was Jaeherys's decision in 92 that set the stage for future succession crisis, whether in 101 , Rhaenyra/Aegon , Viserys/Daena and so on . even in the Dance , despite 101 and 92 precedent  and despite the fact that Aegon was Rhaenyra's brother rather than an uncle , half the realm rose for Rhaenyra.

[EggBlue]

12 minutes ago, farerb said:

If they remove her suggestion that Aemond should be sharply interrogated next episode, then we will have our answer.

 even in the book she said that after Alicent brought forth the "eye for an eye" argument. 

[C.T. Phipps]

Fun fact:

Is no one commenting on the fact Alicent's argument about the Horse makes NO GODDAMN SENSE?

Because I took Viserys as talking about THEM.

Because Alicent's children look NOTHING like her.

[Farerb]

24 minutes ago, EggBlue said:

 even in the book she said that after Alicent brought forth the "eye for an eye" argument. 

There's still a difference between this reply and something more reasonable.

Anyway, it seems from the trailers that Alicent will try to cut Lucerys' eye herself and Rhaenyra will stop her.

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

6 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I’m now imagining a love triangle next season where Alicent starts sleeping with Cole and Larys...

You really got me with that first sentence. 

[Stenkarazine]

8 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

There he is kind of mistaken, of course, as with the notion that Rhaenyra must kill all her half-brothers to secure her crown. It is quite clear that Alicent is not really afraid for Aegon when she uses this argument to push him to his role as rival pretender - she is angry that he doesn't want to be king, that he wants to get along with Rhaenyra and his nephews (who clearly seems to like more than Aemond at this point).

 

This bugs me a little. The fact that Otto's and Alicent's fears are treated as delusional or manipulative is not very realistic. Our own Ancient and Medieval times are rife with brothers, nephews, cousins, offing each other at the first opportunity or the merest uncertainty about the succession, so we can assume the same in the setting of Westeros. The fact that Rhaenyra has never given any indication that she would murder her half-brothers on the first day of her reign does not dispel the possibility. I don't think that, to cite but one instance among countless others, Antiochus IV announced to all and sundry that he would liquidate his young nephew as soon as he got a son of his own. Maybe the thought didn't even occur to him before the uncertainty (ie., having a son of his own) occurred. 

No matter what Rhaenyra says or thinks now, the possibility that she (or her partisans) would execute, imprison or at least confine her half-brothers once Viserys dies is very real, and actually highly probable. Simply because she (and her family) have every interest to do so, in the same way that Alexander the Great, Antiochus IV, Caligula, the Ottoman Sultans, Catherine the Great and countless others had every interest to do so. Unless somehow Westeros, a realistic Medieval setting in almost every way, verges on idealism on this one particular point.

 

Edited September 27, 2022 by Stenkarazine