[Spoilers] Episode 107 Discussion

[Lord Varys]

20 minutes ago, EggBlue said:

so , you think I can't hope they'll skip mass-murderer Aemond part or cold kinslayer Aemond?! because , I've really started liking this kid (special thanks to the kid actor) . believe it or not , show has done something that I'm rooting for Aemond to kill Daemon above god's eye . not the other way around! 

I think they made him sympathetic to make it, well, uglier when he becomes a mad mass murderer.

I guess his clash with Luke will still be somewhat measured - if he is goaded into it, like in the book.

But from there it is just madness and cruelty.

What I'm looking forward to is Aemond ending up dominating and pushing around Aegon - who seems to be a complete loser and wastrel while Aemond already views himself as the better potential king ... and that's only going to increase now that he has Vhagar and develops into a good fighter.

It wouldn't surprise me if Aemond insists on his Riverlands campaign and later solo mission stuff because he wants to show everybody what he is capable of ... with the goal to permanently keep the Conqueror's crown. It is pretty clear that if he had successfully crushed Daemon and his allies at Harrenhal his standing in the capital would have only increased. Even if he had not deposed his brother as king, he could have insisted to rule as Prince Regent indefinitely, decreeing that Aegon was permanently unfit to rule.

If Aegon can usurp Rhaenyra then Aemond can just as well usurp his crippled brother. He might want to deal with the whore queen and her bastards first, but even in the book it seems not unlikely that he intended to keep the power he seized in the wake of Aegon's injury.

I'm also looking forward to the dynamics in the Green family there - Aemond has also little reason to love his mother and his grandfather, so he could be also instrumental in pushing them out of power. When the war begins in earnest they are all dependent on him and Vhagar, meaning he would have a veto against all decisions he doesn't like. He could always threaten to take his dragon and fly away ... or to not participate in any dragonrider campaign they might come up with.

I guess Aemond will have a similar plot as Criston Cole. He also started as pretty sympathetic ... only to be an ass now.

With Aemond it is hopefully being a more gradual process.

Edited October 7, 2022 by Lord Varys

[EggBlue]

34 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I'm also looking forward to the dynamics in the Green family there - Aemond has also little reason to love his mother and his grandfather, so he could be also instrumental in pushing them out of power.

we have seen so little of their interactions .but while Aegon and Haelaena have little to interest Alicent , Aemond seems to be the favorite and on the other hand Aemond seems to be the one sibling who's gonna truly love their mother especially after seeing she is the only person in their family who would stand up for him . additionally , Alys Rivers , a brunette same age as his mom, is right there to give us some sick complexity in his feelings.  

re, Aegon , Aemond already seems to feel he is worthier than Aegon before claiming Vhagar . so, it's not out of question that as prince regent he wanted to rule permanently or even eventually usurp Aegon and marry Haelaena like a true Targaryen. 

 

ps. I still think I'll be rooting for Aemond against Daemon in the show . while ,Aemond seems to be on the path of a bullied kid turning into a the biggest villain, Daemon had barely had an arc so far . he's been a sociopath right from the start , and it's only when he is with Rhaenyra that he seems normal (factoring creepy uncle angle!) , a relationship we already know will go downhill when he goes to his next lonely dragon lady teenager . 

Edited October 7, 2022 by EggBlue

[Lord Varys]

1 minute ago, EggBlue said:

we have seen so little of their interactions .but while Aegon and Haelaena have little to interest Alicent , Aemond seems to be the favorite and on the other hand Aemond seems to be the one sibling who's gonna truly love their mother especially after seeing she is the only person in their family who would stand up for him . additionally , Alys Rivers , a brunette same age as his mom, is right there to give us some sick complexity in his feelings.

Alicent pretty much gave Aegon permission to bully Aemond, and she was pissed that he made a fool of himself in the Dragonpit. She expresses some concern, but it seems to be more about one of her children being attacked than actual concern for Aemond.

1 minute ago, EggBlue said:

re, Aegon , Aemond already seems to feel he is worthier than Aegon before claiming Vhagar . so, it's not out of question that as prince regent he wanted to rule permanently or even eventually usurp Aegon and marry Haelaena like a true Targaryen. 

I hope they tone down Helaena's post-Blood and Cheese breakdown and make it more about her having more and more dreadful prophetic dreams.

[EggBlue]

18 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Alicent pretty much gave Aegon permission to bully Aemond, and she was pissed that he made a fool of himself in the Dragonpit. She expresses some concern, but it seems to be more about one of her children being attacked than actual concern for Aemond.

Aemond doesn't know that . in general , Alicent doesn't seem to care about her children the way Rhaenyra does . she loves them of course the way you have to love your family , but she thinks Aegon is an embarrassing fool and Haelaena is a weirdo . with Daeron in Oldtown , her only child is Aemond who unlike his siblings in fact seems to listen to mother's words very carefully . hence , he knows and repeats well about Strongs , Alicent's plans for Aegon and the value of a brother-sister match . 

18 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I hope they tone down Helaena's post-Blood and Cheese breakdown and make it more about her having more and more dreadful prophetic dreams.

me too . it'll be a huge miss if they don't . besides, Alicent will be enough as a mad queen . Rhaenyra and Haelaena need other paths. 

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, EggBlue said:

Aemond doesn't know that.

True enough, could be that he will become mommy's and granddad's special boy. But I doubt that he cares much about that.

1 hour ago, EggBlue said:

in general , Alicent doesn't seem to care about her children the way Rhaenyra does . she loves them of course the way you have to love your family , but she thinks Aegon is an embarrassing fool and Haelaena is a weirdo . with Daeron in Oldtown , her only child is Aemond who unlike his siblings in fact seems to listen to mother's words very carefully . hence , he knows and repeats well about Strongs , Alicent's plans for Aegon and the value of a brother-sister match . 

I don't think Aemond does actually care (much) about Helaena - his willingness (or desire) to marry his sister seems to represent his ambition as a Targaryen. He would like to be a king, he would like to keep the royal bloodline pure as proper Targaryens are wont to do. The dialogue is about Aegon not understanding what's expected of him, thinking personality and looks are important in arranged marriages, and not the purity of royal blood.

Aemond understands why Alicent betrothed Helaena to Aegon ... but Aegon himself does not.

1 hour ago, EggBlue said:

me too . it'll be a huge miss if they don't . besides, Alicent will be enough as a mad queen . Rhaenyra and Haelaena need other paths. 

Oh, I think she can suffer from anxiety and be a lot in her rooms ... but it should have (also) to do with her dreams and stuff, and not only with Blood and Cheese. But, of course, the trauma should not be erased or not depicted ... although I think they should also include Alicent there who is there as well. She may not have to make the choice, but she is there as well and can do nothing to help her daughter and grandchildren and is forced to witness it all.

[EggBlue]

12 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

 

I don't think Aemond does actually care (much) about Helaena - his willingness (or desire) to marry his sister seems to represent his ambition as a Targaryen. He would like to be a king, he would like to keep the royal bloodline pure as proper Targaryens are wont to do. The dialogue is about Aegon not understanding what's expected of him, thinking personality and looks are important in arranged marriages, and not the purity of royal blood.

Aemond understands why Alicent betrothed Helaena to Aegon ... but Aegon himself does not.

oh , I don't think he cares about Haelaena. he just seems to be the only one who knows and cares what Alicent tries to do . he's also a 10 yr old child , so , rather than  putting it on solely "ambition" , I think he's after proving himself to the world and that includes having a dragon , listening to mother and how she wants to put them in position of power and swordplay .

12 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Oh, I think she can suffer from anxiety and be a lot in her rooms ... but it should have (also) to do with her dreams and stuff, and not only with Blood and Cheese. But, of course, the trauma should not be erased or not depicted ... although I think they should also include Alicent there who is there as well. She may not have to make the choice, but she is there as well and can do nothing to help her daughter and grandchildren and is forced to witness it all.

I mean , it's fair to say by giving dreams to Haelaena instead of making her the happy child of F&B , they intend to give her dream madness instead of grieving madness . my theory is that her dreams will be more frequent and more vivid after her child's death which she would welcome , trying to shut down her dark memory , only for them to give her more reason to grieve for. but these three women's arcs should be handled delicately . basically, they'll all have to deal with loss of their children and in the book are presented as mad queens which is a real letdown for literally half of the women in the Dance. 

[butterweedstrover]

4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

 

With the Dance folks kind of deluded themselves into believing that both sides were equally right or equally wrong ... but that just isn't the case, just as it isn't in the War of the Five Kings or the Blackfyre Rebellion or many of the other wars. The Greens staged a coup and they started a war. They first imprisoned people, they drew first blood, they started executing people. 

Here is the thing you and @dsjj251 don't get. 

The Greens starting the war does not preclude moral judgment based on their motivation. The Germans in WW1 were the first to mobilize their troops entering through Belgium, but if you were in the mind of the Kaiser and the war was thought inevitable this action would not be deemed as instigating a war but more so a preemptive attack.  

The same could be assumed of the Japanese during Pearl Harbor if they thought the US was going to enter the war regardless. 

As such we require a deeper understanding of the characters to see why the Greens would have reason to believe such a course should be taken. If the Greens believed the Blacks wanted them dead then seizing power would not clearly delineate good vs. bad. It would be morally ambiguous certainly, but such is a compelling narrative since waiting around like sitting ducks wouldn't be morally righteous.  

F&B does not determine one approach against the other. It allows room for us to hypothesize on what motivations Alicent might of had, especially in the personal animosity between her and Rhaenyra. And as the latter did portray hints of jealousy, bitterness, and even violence it could have been further explored down a route that was somewhat interesting. 

Instead, as a change to the book, the show (in the last two episodes) clarifies that Rhaenyra would never harm the children beyond a reasonable doubt. It creates in Rhaenyra a more friendly disposition towards Alicent. It depicts Rhaenyra as being diplomatic and without the many flaws Gyldan's narrative bestows upon her. 

Which leaves Alicent with no motivation at all besides Jealousy or a lust for power. And instigating a war for either of those things removes any ability the audience may have to connect with her. For neither the jealousy or the determination for power were ever previously established as part of her psychology. The only reason we have to believe so is because there is no other possible reasoning behind her actions. 

Which is bad writing. 

11 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

 

You have repeated the same argument and never given a single example from the book. 

But I do. I gave reference to where Rhaenyra is shown to be jealous of Alicent. I gave reference to where Rhaenyra is depicted as bitter and unlikable. I gave reference to her lost of the moniker the realm's delight, and her retreat to Dragonstone (which was not necessary) away from her own court.  

You did none of that, instead you falsely misinterpret the book to say there is no animosity between Alicent and Rhaenyra when the entire premise of F&B is their rivalry. 

11 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

I did say Rhaenyra wasnt jealous of Alicent.  

Which, even if you disagree with the book as written and decide upon your personal head canon that she was not, doesn't make it any more likely that the opposite is true which is what the show is doing, and as such going beyond the source material to demonize Alicent. 

11 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

LOL, i dont mind you using a term I used, but here you are clearly just trying to use it because I said you were.  

Like @Lord Varys you think because the Greens struck first their motivations don't matter automatically turning them into the villain. But as I said to Varys, their motivations affect how viewers can understand and comprehend these characters and their morals. Something that F&B permitted us to hypothesize about without ever indulging the true psychological rational behind it. 

The show, going further than books, leaves us with the exclusive perception that it was done for two highly irrational reasons leaving the greens with no morality worth discussing, proving them to be evil without much nuance. 

11 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

You : There should be nuance to who is good and who is bad


My response was that Fire and Blood does indeed paint one side as better than the other, so the nuance you are asking for isnt actually what Martin intended overall, or at least not what he conveyed in the book. Others have replied and said the same, the Blacks are clearly the good guys, even if all their tactics to win werent above board. They didnt start the war. They didnt draw first blood.  

And as I said before and again, F&B does not go nearly as far as these last two episodes. F&B indulged into serious criticism of Rhaenyra's character and left room to hypothesize on Alicent's motivation. 

The show as of recent has gone beyond the book by adding detailed personalities which leaves nothing else to be determined. And what we have is a generic villains vs. heroes plot which hurts the format of the narrative which is by its nature duel perspective. 

4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

 

But the show really went out of its way to make Otto and Alicent and Aemond pretty sympathetic. They are three-dimensional characters now, and you feel for them. But their actions and plans still suck and they are just wrong.

Oh it added motivation to their characters. But their motivation is so shallow and pathetic that all it draws is disinterest especially given the fact that in Alicent's case none of her desires post episode 5 were ever established in the first five episodes.  

Edited October 8, 2022 by butterweedstrover

[Littlest Finger]

Spent a bunch of time with my equally obsessed friend bouncing ideas back and forth about the interpretation of  Halaena’s prophecy this episode. “Hand turns loom. Spool of green, spool of black. Dragons of flesh weaving dragons of thread.” This is what we came up with: 

There is a more direct and obvious meaning, but also one more subtle. “Hand turns loom” can be referencing the actual hand, Otto, being a looming threat. And the thread being physically shown to stitch up the flesh, specifically the eye of a “green” dragon and the arm of a “black” dragon, are the more obvious references. But there’s more to it than that. She first mentions the loom. A loom is symbolic of creation and weaving ones own destiny. The loom is referenced in mythology about Arachne. She was a woman who was turned into a spider by Athena because she was jealous of her ability to weave. Dragons of flesh weaving dragons of thread makes me think of “the mummer’s dragon” from the book series, which is a false Targaryen. This is a reference to Rhaenyra, a real Targaryen, weaving lies in order to shape her illegitimate children’s destiny. Alicent, like Athena (the goddess of battle strategy), is jealous of Rhaenyra’s ability to weave her lies and get away with them, and must turn her into a spider, a spider like the one Halaena is holding along with a seashell (representing the Velaryons), “a spider that stings and sucks it’s prey dry” as Criston Cole describes her in the last episode. Alicent and the greens have to vilify Rhaenyra somehow… and the prophecy said that the weaving was done with spools of black, AND spools of green… Looks like Alicent will be doing some weaving of her own.

What do you guys think?

[BlackLightning]

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

But the show really went out of its way to make Otto and Alicent and Aemond pretty sympathetic. They are three-dimensional characters now, and you feel for them. But their actions and plans still suck and they are just wrong.

Exactly.

But I've been watching a lot of reaction videos and a lot of people in the general audience are pro-green. Now, when I say pro-green, they aren't pro-Aegon. They are either pro-Alicent or pro-Aemond. And a lot of these people have been pro-green from episode 4.

For now, of course.

That will change when Aemond, Criston and Aegon start running around committing atrocities

20 minutes ago, Littlest Finger said:

Spent a bunch of time with my equally obsessed friend bouncing ideas back and forth about the interpretation of  Halaena’s prophecy this episode. “Hand turns loom. Spool of green, spool of black. Dragons of flesh weaving dragons of thread.” This is what we came up with: 

There is a more direct and obvious meaning, but also one more subtle. “Hand turns loom” can be referencing the actual hand, Otto, being a looming threat. And the thread being physically shown to stitch up the flesh, specifically the eye of a “green” dragon and the arm of a “black” dragon, are the more obvious references. But there’s more to it than that. She first mentions the loom. A loom is symbolic of creation and weaving ones own destiny. The loom is referenced in mythology about Arachne. She was a woman who was turned into a spider by Athena because she was jealous of her ability to weave. Dragons of flesh weaving dragons of thread makes me think of “the mummer’s dragon” from the book series, which is a false Targaryen. This is a reference to Rhaenyra, a real Targaryen, weaving lies in order to shape her illegitimate children’s destiny. Alicent, like Athena (the goddess of battle strategy), is jealous of Rhaenyra’s ability to weave her lies and get away with them, and must turn her into a spider, a spider like the one Halaena is holding along with a seashell (representing the Velaryons), “a spider that stings and sucks it’s prey dry” as Criston Cole describes her in the last episode. Alicent and the greens have to vilify Rhaenyra somehow… and the prophecy said that the weaving was done with spools of black, AND spools of green… Looks like Alicent will be doing some weaving of her own.

What do you guys think?

I agree.

Helaena's mantra is basically reiterating the fact that this entire war is Otto's making. He turned the loom and weaved the lie about Rhaenyra killing her half-siblings and planted it into Alicent's head.

Granted, Rhaenyra did herself no favors by being untrustworthy but, regardless of how you feel about her decision to pass off her illegitimate children as legitimate, the Iron Throne belongs to her. Otto had been scheming on being the ultimate power behind the throne for a long time. Daemon and Rhaenyra were threats to that because they are cut from a different cloth than Viserys...they would not tolerate his interference and subterfuge. Least of all Rhaenyra because she knows the truth of how crucial it is for the realm to be united and people like Otto only divide and destroy it.

 

I also think it's important to say that the the dragons of flesh weaving dragons of thread line points to the fact that the Targaryens (all of them) are ultimately responsible for the extinction of the dragons. The Targaryens are the reason why the dragons went extinct.

But she also mentioned that dragons of thread weave dragons of flesh. A double meaning: fake dragons can create real dragons in time...which feeds right into Corlys' line about legacy, history and how bloodlines are quickly forgotten as it is the names that matter.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, butterweedstrover said:

Here is the thing you and @dsjj251 don't get.

I get that. I just don't really care.

Of course you can assume or pretend you have (good) reason (or like) to think that the Alicent feared for the lives of her children. But this doesn't make it so, nor does it create textual evidence that she honestly thought that or had good reason to believe it. Rhaenyra's later actions make it perfectly clear that neither Alicent's life nor the lives of her children were ever in danger.

Yet even if we pretended this were the case ... it still doesn't justify a coup. This is a monarchy, and not some lawless despotic place where everybody is entitled to exploit a power vacuum and seize power because they have 'legitimate concerns'.

Alicent and her children had to hope for Rhaenyra's mercy. They had no right to steal the throne, no right to plunge the Seven Kingdoms into war.

A dowager queen and a couple of princes are not sovereign nations with the right to start preeptive civil or succession wars. There is a word for this in this world - treason. That's their first crime, followed by lots of others.

I think the show actually does a pretty good job at adding complex motivations to certain characters. I like show Otto and show Alicent reasonably well. You understand where they are coming from. Your issue seems to be more with the fact that those characters don't fit with your personal ideas who and what those characters should be.

1 hour ago, Littlest Finger said:

Spent a bunch of time with my equally obsessed friend bouncing ideas back and forth about the interpretation of  Halaena’s prophecy this episode. “Hand turns loom. Spool of green, spool of black. Dragons of flesh weaving dragons of thread.”

Otto being the Hand at the loom seems to be spot on. The dragons of flesh would be the Targaryens themselves, and the dragons of thread the banners they will make when people rise up for one of the two pretenders.

1 hour ago, BlackLightning said:

Exactly.

But I've been watching a lot of reaction videos and a lot of people in the general audience are pro-green. Now, when I say pro-green, they aren't pro-Aegon. They are either pro-Alicent or pro-Aemond. And a lot of these people have been pro-green from episode 4.

Even I like Alicent and Otto in the show. They make sense as characters.

And Emma and Olivia are really great in the dagger scene. When they kind of break down it is clear that beneath the anger and the loathing there is still also remnants of their friendship left. They know each other, or believe they do. Insofar as the two women are concerned, they could have still worked it out afterwards.

I'm expecting the men are going to fuck it up, Otto for Alicent and Daemon for Rhaenyra (these two still seem to loathe each other).

1 hour ago, BlackLightning said:

For now, of course.

That will change when Aemond, Criston and Aegon start running around committing atrocities.

I think most decent folk would have been done with Criston after the Joffrey incident and the way he talked and behaved in episode 6.

It was @The Bard of Banefort who suggested that Aemond would get an arc similar to that of Hawk in Cobra Kai ... and I think that's spot on. Aemond won't get a redeption arc, of course, but the audience is supposed to sympathize with him, to consider him cool and badass, the underdog who rise to the challenge.

Depending how they write the Aemond-Luke confrontation at Storm's End he might even not yet look this bad there ... but that's only his first true atrocity.

There might still be interesting humanizing elements with him later on, when he falls for Alys Rivers and stuff. They could very effectively contrast the soft side he may have with her to all the monstrous things he does. They should really play up not only Aemond's ridiculous extinction of the Strongs but also his brutal attacks on the Riverlands to properly build up the Storming of the Dragonpit. Tumbleton and Aemond's brutal attacks must be really gruesome so that the audience actually ends up rooting for the rioters when the dragons are put down.

The first seed in this regard may be the poor Targaryen worshipper Caraxes trampled at the beginning of episode 3. It perfectly foreshadows what the normal people are going to live through when the dragons start to dance ... and why this should have been avoided at all cost.

Edited October 8, 2022 by Lord Varys

[butterweedstrover]

2 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

But this doesn't make it so, nor does it create textual evidence that she honestly thought that or had good reason to believe it.

It also doesn't create textual evidence that she didn't. There was enough room within the breadth of of F&B the hypothesize on that or some other genuinely sympathetic reason, like a real concern for the realm if Rhaenyra ruled. 

In fact the show in its first five episodes sets that up. Until it decides to forgo whatever development happened before and run with a fairly uninteresting dynamic. 

2 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Rhaenyra's later actions make it perfectly clear that neither Alicent's life nor the lives of her children were ever in danger. 

No, they don't. Because even if Rhaenyra wasn't planning on sending the headsmen for them the day of her coronation, there was a reason to believe that the threat remained. It wouldn't happen on the first day of her reign, but given Rhaenyra's lack of capacity to rule, her marital relationship with Daemon, and her fraught relationship with Alicent, things could always have degraded. 

And foreseeing events and trying to stop them beforehand does much to add a layer of complexity to the Greens that makes them more than villains. Jealousy and Greed are just not that compelling, especially when we are given no reason to think why this or that character should feel this way.  

2 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Yet even if we pretended this were the case ... it still doesn't justify a coup. This is a monarchy, and not some lawless despotic place where everybody is entitled to exploit a power vacuum and seize power because they have 'legitimate concerns'.

Alicent and her children had to hope for Rhaenyra's mercy. They had no right to steal the throne, not right to plunge the Seven Kingdoms into war.

A dowager queen and a couple of princes are not sovereign nations with the right to start preeptive civil or succession wars. There is a word for this in this world - treason. That's their first crime, followed by lots of others. 

Ok cool, and that could be your opinion. But giving the other side some moral fidelity would just make your position that much stronger. It's easy to stick by a set of principles when they are clearly right, but sticking by them through ambiguous situations makes them more durable. 

If Alicent was more than just a jealous woman out for power, if the greens had actual moral arguments behind their claim, you sticking besides Rhaenyra in spite all that would have been a statement on your dedication to this mindset. Now all the weight behind the rule of law subsides under the shadow of basic common sense, that the unhinged power hungry woman shouldn't have the throne.  

2 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I think the show actually does a pretty good job at adding complex motivations to certain characters. I like show Otto and show Alicent reasonably well. You understand where they are coming from. Your issue seems to be more with the fact that those characters don't fit with your personal ideas who and what those characters should be. 

In the first five episodes yeah. But I don't understand where Alicent's lack of concern for her children's safety, her unrelenting hatred of Rhaenyra, and her unrelenting will for the throne come from. They total undo all the development in the first five episodes and leave a character that is sort of unhinged emotionally. 

 

[BlackLightning]

6 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Insofar as the two women are concerned, they could have still worked it out afterwards.

After the way that Alicent charged at Lucerys with the Conqueror's prophetic dagger and cut Rhaenyra damn near to the bone?

Nah, judging from the way that Rhaenyra was looking at her, I think that there is no chance that they could've been reconciled.

 

From what I hear some crazy stuff is about to pop off in episode 8 and I think that there will be no hope of them working it out and becoming friends after episode 10.

But yes, the scene at High Tide confirms everything. Alicent hates Rhaenyra for her irresponsibility, blitheness and entitlement and Rhaenyra sees Alicent for what she is...self-righteous and jealous and a bit exploitative.

8 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Even I like Alicent and Otto in the show. They make sense as characters.

I still don't like Otto. He's a self-interested, manipulative troublemaker who encourages and provokes people's worst impulses.

In fact, I liked him a lot more in the books to be honest.

15 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

think most decent folk would have been done with Criston after the Joffrey incident and the way he talked and behaved in episode 6.

It was @The Bard of Banefort who suggested that Aemond would get an arc similar to that of Hawk in Cobra Kai ... and I think that's spot on. Aemond won't get a redeption arc, of course, but the audience is supposed to sympathize with him, to consider him cool and badass, the underdog who rise to the challenge.

I haven't seen Cobra Kai. But I feel like I know what you mean. Aemond will be to House of the Dragon what Walter White was to Breaking Bad?

I think that'd be nice to see a middle child who had been teased and pranked by his peers turn into a monstrous war criminal and traitor (I think that he planned to usurp Aegon II; the historians lied or didn't know) with zero regrets or qualms.

I like the TV version of Aemond a lot. But an underdog? Not really.

20 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Depending how they write the Aemond-Luke confrontation at Storm's End he might even not yet look this bad there ... but that's only his first true atrocity.

They'd have to change the entire story of the Aemond-Luke confrontation at Storm's End to not make him look bad.

Well, I take that back. They can make it so that Cassandra Baratheon (a pretty important character if you are to ask me...) either meddles so much that the two find themselves at each other's throats or she actively deceives, manipulates or convinces Aemond into killing Luke.

23 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

There might still be interesting humanizing elements with him later on, when he falls for Alys Rivers and stuff. They could very effectively contrast the soft side he may have with her to all the monstrous things he does. They should really play up not only Aemond's ridiculous extinction of the Strongs but also his brutal attacks on the Riverlands to properly build up the Storming of the Dragonpit. Tumbleton and Aemond's brutal attacks must be really gruesome so that the audience actually ends up rooting for the rioters when the dragons are put down.

 

I wish that they had introduced Alys Rivers in this season.

She's supposed to be a bastard of House Strong. It would've been nice if we got to know if that was another one of Harwin's children or one of Lyonel's. The TV version of Larys is completely averse to children...but Alys could be his.

[BlackLightning]

9 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

It wouldn't happen on the first day of her reign, but given Rhaenyra's lack of capacity to rule

What do you mean her lack of capacity?

Rhaenyra proves herself more than capable in many different instances. Beginning with her proposal that her father mobilize the dragons to fight off the Crabfeeder and more recently with her olive branches to Alicent and appraisal of the severity of the Stepstones situation.

Rhaenyra is definitely more capable to be the ruler of the Seven Kingdoms than her father or even Daemon.

Much more so compared to her half-brother Aegon.

12 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Jealousy and Greed are just not that compelling, especially when we are given no reason to think why this or that character should feel this way.  

This is not true.

We understand why Alicent is so maddened with jealousy and envy. Because, at the end of the day, it is pretty unfair for Rhaenyra to be able to do basically whatever she wants while everyone else (mainly other women but especially Alicent) have to play by the rules and live life within the confines of their station. Granted, Rhaenyra is not everyone else....but it is extremely frustrating to deal with people who pretty much get away with everything while you are left holding the bag.

Extremely frustrating, again. I must iterate.

Otto's greed? It is what it is. But I think beneath his obvious greed lies fear. Fear of having to answer and deal with people as fierce as Rhaenyra and Daemon. It scares him. After all, the only king he has ever known of before is Jaehaerys. And he, like other people, had heard the horror stories about Maegor (and probably his mother Visenya). A dragonriding king (or queen) who can think for themselves and who possesses a ferociousness about themselves is a scary thing. Their word is truth and law literally.

[The Bard of Banefort]

59 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I get that. I just don't really care.

Of course you can assume or pretend you have (good) reason (or like) to think that the Alicent feared for the lives of her children. But this doesn't make it so, nor does it create textual evidence that she honestly thought that or had good reason to believe it. Rhaenyra's later actions make it perfectly clear that neither Alicent's life nor the lives of her children were ever in danger.

Yet even if we pretended this were the case ... it still doesn't justify a coup. This is a monarchy, and not some lawless despotic place where everybody is entitled to exploit a power vacuum and seize power because they have 'legitimate concerns'.

Alicent and her children had to hope for Rhaenyra's mercy. They had no right to steal the throne, no right to plunge the Seven Kingdoms into war.

A dowager queen and a couple of princes are not sovereign nations with the right to start preeptive civil or succession wars. There is a word for this in this world - treason. That's their first crime, followed by lots of others.

I think the show actually does a pretty good job at adding complex motivations to certain characters. I like show Otto and show Alicent reasonably well. You understand where they are coming from. Your issue seems to be more with the fact that those characters don't fit with your personal ideas who and what those characters should be.

Otto being the Hand at the loom seems to be spot on. The dragons of flesh would be the Targaryens themselves, and the dragons of thread the banners they will make when people rise up for one of the two pretenders.

Even I like Alicent and Otto in the show. They make sense as characters.

And Emma and Olivia are really great in the dagger scene. When they kind of break down it is clear that beneath the anger and the loathing there is still also remnants of their friendship left. They know each other, or believe they do. Insofar as the two women are concerned, they could have still worked it out afterwards.

I'm expecting the men are going to fuck it up, Otto for Alicent and Daemon for Rhaenyra (these two still seem to loathe each other).

I think most decent folk would have been done with Criston after the Joffrey incident and the way he talked and behaved in episode 6.

It was @The Bard of Banefort who suggested that Aemond would get an arc similar to that of Hawk in Cobra Kai ... and I think that's spot on. Aemond won't get a redeption arc, of course, but the audience is supposed to sympathize with him, to consider him cool and badass, the underdog who rise to the challenge.

Depending how they write the Aemond-Luke confrontation at Storm's End he might even not yet look this bad there ... but that's only his first true atrocity.

There might still be interesting humanizing elements with him later on, when he falls for Alys Rivers and stuff. They could very effectively contrast the soft side he may have with her to all the monstrous things he does. They should really play up not only Aemond's ridiculous extinction of the Strongs but also his brutal attacks on the Riverlands to properly build up the Storming of the Dragonpit. Tumbleton and Aemond's brutal attacks must be really gruesome so that the audience actually ends up rooting for the rioters when the dragons are put down.

The first seed in this regard may be the poor Targaryen worshipper Caraxes trampled at the beginning of episode 3. It perfectly foreshadows what the normal people are going to live through when the dragons start to dance ... and why this should have been avoided at all cost.

Aemond vs. Luke will look bad because Luke looks like a kid and Aemond looks like a 40 year old man.

[SeanF]

Greed and jealousy are entirely plausible reasons for war, even if unattractive ones.  And, my own reading of the text suggests that these were the Greens’ motives.

 

 

[butterweedstrover]

3 hours ago, SeanF said:

Greed and jealousy are entirely plausible reasons for war, even if unattractive ones.  And, my own reading of the text suggests that these were the Greens’ motives.

 

 

The point is that they are unattractive. That it leaves the greens with no moral claim and casts the Blacks in a heroic light which is a problem when you have a duel narrative. 

And it does a determinate to black supporters as it makes their stance less a one of principle and more a one of common sense.  

But as for the text, jealousy was never prescribed to Alicent in the text, but it was to Rhaenyra. So I don't know where you're coming from with that. 

And as for the first five episodes of the show, it made clear Alicent has zero ambition for the throne. And yet now she is putting the lives of her children at risk just for that. It might not be the reason the show wants us to think, but that is where sloppy writing leaves us. 

 

6 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

What do you mean her lack of capacity?

Rhaenyra proves herself more than capable in many different instances. Beginning with her proposal that her father mobilize the dragons to fight off the Crabfeeder and more recently with her olive branches to Alicent and appraisal of the severity of the Stepstones situation. 

In the last two episodes it is made clear that she has no serious deficit when it comes to ruling. The first five showed her to be flippant and undiplomatic while the book showed her to be jealous, bitter, and isolated. 

Any of which might have bolstered Alicent's perception of doing what needs to be done. But because the show casts such a positive light on Rhaenyra, it ruins any practical motivation she has for crowning Aegon and strips her of nuance and complexity. 

Also, it was Alicent that convinced Viserys to send aid against the Crabfeeder (which wasn't even needed in the end of the day).

6 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

 

We understand why Alicent is so maddened with jealousy and envy. Because, at the end of the day, it is pretty unfair for Rhaenyra to be able to do basically whatever she wants while everyone else (mainly other women but especially Alicent) have to play by the rules and live life within the confines of their station. Granted, Rhaenyra is not everyone else....but it is extremely frustrating to deal with people who pretty much get away with everything while you are left holding the bag. 

We can piece it together in our minds since jealousy is a very common human emotion, but it isn't well established. It isn't something built into Alicent in the first five episodes and by episodes 6 & 7 Rhaenyra is stuck in a fake marriage, raising three kids on her own while having to keep their true father at a distance. Wary of all the rumors she is hardly free to break rules, if anything she is more restricted by them. 

And while it can be realistic, there isn't a lot sympathy offered to Alicent for starting a war over her pettiness, especially when the audience isn't given much character development, shifting us five years and expecting us to accept this new dynamic (which was no where to be found in the book). 

6 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

 

Otto's greed? It is what it is. But I think beneath his obvious greed lies fear. Fear of having to answer and deal with people as fierce as Rhaenyra and Daemon. It scares him. After all, the only king he has ever known of before is Jaehaerys. And he, like other people, had heard the horror stories about Maegor (and probably his mother Visenya). A dragonriding king (or queen) who can think for themselves and who possesses a ferociousness about themselves is a scary thing. Their word is truth and law literally.

I was actually referencing Alicent's greed. Alicent in the first five episodes was shown to have no ambition for the throne (or even to become queen) and could only be persuaded down that route if she was convinced her children's lives were endanger. 

Post time skip she is putting her own children's lives at risk, rejecting any offer of protection they might receive, and all so that her line might ascend. The implied greed here is just not compelling because its not part of what we know of her and it has very little moral fidelity as a reason for starting a war. 

Edited October 8, 2022 by butterweedstrover

[butterweedstrover]

You know I don't think this point is made enough, but they really wasted the potential of Alicent and Rhaenyra's friendship. 

That was honestly a brilliant premise they did nothing with, and yeah it was an invention of the show but it added emotional depth and conflict to the story where before there was just a cliche evil step-mother/step-daughter trope. 

How do they deal with being put at opposite political ends, how do they try to preserve their relationship, and how does their fallout feed into a more deep seated hatred which, more than anything, might be the cause of war? The fact that they were too close and now enemies driving this underlining passion that burns the realm. 

There were so many thematic choices, some routes they could have taken, and instead they're just going for a very uninvolved and emotionally distant narrative of two sides that want power over the other (like with the War of Five kings) and it hurts more knowing the leg work they already did to get us there and then dropped. 

Take this: 

Alicent doesn't struggle with her flimsy motivations because she honestly doesn't care about Rhaenyra anymore. She doesn't have any internal debate between doing what she thinks is right and betraying her friend. There is never any doubt in her mind about the path to follow, its just a very rigid and uninspired psychological take that leaves little room for further exploration.  

Meanwhile Rhaenyra doesn't have any residual feelings for Alicent at all. She shows no passion as regards to Alicent and the Greens wanting to take her down. She is composed, level-headed, and distant when dealing with her ex-best friend. It doesn't fuel her with rage that the person she was closest with in all the world is now dedicated to see her dead (which, if she is passed over, will be the end result). 

Rhaenyra treats Alicent like a stranger. Her dislike of her step-mother is muted and practical. Even when Alicent runs at her with a knife Rhaenyra doesn't stew with anguish or lash out, she simply points out that Alicent is a hypocrite and continues afterwards to prepare for war between the two factions as if they were an invading army from the north. 

Sure it's easier to root for a woman who shows no emotional challenge and against one who is made to have one for all the wrong reasons. Sure it makes for any easier story to follow, it gives audiences an easy choice where they can just turn off their brains and enjoy. 

But it ruins the chance to make some seriously compelling drama that I think would have lasted longer than what we have now which is disjointed mess of motives and psychology.  

[Elaena Targaryen]

This whole "first five episodes portrayals vs time jump" really should have it's own thread in HotD General. It was obvious the show was favoring Rhaenyra with the white stag and I adjusted my perceptions, though I still find the Greens interesting. This latest episode has me favoring the Greens for the first time ever. I'm curious to see to what degree they can keep my regard. Alicent's children are more compelling by miles as well as Alicent herself.

Now in the "first five episodes" Alicent had no ambition for herself, she had nothing that was just for her and it was sad, she had to live for everyone else. However Alicent was ambitious for Rhaenyra. After years of supporting Rhaenyra while watching her flout the rules, after years of Otto and others (even Viserys waffling) pushing for Aegon, Alicent held firm for her friend over herself and her children. Rhaenyra's night out with Daemon, conflicting stories, moon tea, and betrayal of trust resulting in Otto losing his position and convincing her children's lives are in danger was too much. From her perspective why should Alicent keep blindly supporting Rhaenyra and why shouldn't she transfer her ambition to her son? 

But I do believe if the Greens threw their full support behind Rhaenyra, or dare I say it the Blacks throwing their full support for Aegon, everything would have have been fine and might have even ushered in a second age Valyria. However this story is a tragedy.

[frenin]

12 hours ago, butterweedstrover said:

But I do. I gave reference to where Rhaenyra is shown to be jealous of Alicent. I gave reference to where Rhaenyra is depicted as bitter and unlikable. I gave reference to her lost of the moniker the realm's delight, and her retreat to Dragonstone (which was not necessary) away from her own court.  

Tbf no, you don't.

 

• Rhaenyra only loses the "Realm's delight" moniker once she start screwing things in King's Landing, city that welcomed her with open arms. The text says that her beauty was fading, not that she wasn't beloved.
• Her retreat to Dragonstone is Viserys's order. Prior that her and her kids alternated their time between KL and the isles.

 

3 hours ago, butterweedstrover said:

In the last two episodes it is made clear that she has no serious deficit when it comes to ruling. The first five showed her to be flippant and undiplomatic while the book showed her to be jealous, bitter, and isolated. 

The books never showed that, especially the latter Don't you remind that the Greens had to do a full purge against Rhaenyra's people in the Red Keep? That they had to kill Beesbury?

 

[DMC]

I find this idea that if the greens "honestly believed" Rhaenyra was gonna kill them all it would make them morally righteous rather comical.  I'm sure at least some of Dubya/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz etc. "honestly believed" Saddam had WMD's and was intent on using them, it still doesn't make them any less wrong and villainous for invading Iraq.  Now, if the greens "honestly believed" this AND the reader/viewer is made to believe it as well, then sure, the greens would be portrayed as morally righteous.  But that doesn't make the narrative more "morally complex," it simply flips the narrative to the blacks being the villains.

Moreover, I do think show Alicent "honestly believes" her children are in danger if Rhaenyra takes the throne.  That's the entire point - Otto, herself, and Rhaenyra's actions deludes her into believing this.