[Spoilers] Episode 108 Discussion

[C.T. Phipps]

2 hours ago, butterweedstrover said:

Putting aside how I think Vince made a few missteps in playing up WW badass nature and his all around (unearned) heroic death, Daemon’s crimes don’t haunt him or his character like they do Walter’s.

Walt at least has to deal with the damage he has caused. Daemon just smoothly transitions from resident baddy to the loyal brother helping Viserys to the throne and wacking the guy who called his daughter a whore.

We celebrate his awfulness as a tool the good guys can use to even the playing field, which is one of the problems with splitting the sides into clear cut good vs. evil. 

This seems like the opposite of your point. You seem offended the show makes no attempt to judge Daemon for his actions but leaves them up to the viewer.

You seem to want the show to punish him or frame his actions differently as a moral point.

Edited October 12, 2022 by C.T. Phipps

[Winterfell is Burning]

1 hour ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

Emma D'Arcy doesn't have that many credits yet, though?

  Yeah, Olivia Cooke is the one that had a much more established career- worked with Spielberg, a fairly big role in Sound of Metal, which got nominated for Best Picture and won Oscars, was in a movie that won Sundance, etc, though nothing as big as this show (she also seemed to be too often cast in "the girl next door love interest we're pretending is not being played by an actress that could double duty as a supermodel" type, which is very common in Hollywood).

 

4 hours ago, Crixus said:

@butterweedstrover

You keep conflating Daemon's popularity on social media with the show somehow whitewashing him - just check out the longstanding popularity of straight up asshole characters like Walter White from Breaking Bad, the Roy family - especially the men - from succession, Don Draper from Mad Men, Jaime Lannister and on and on.

 

 

HOMELANDER has lots of people thinking he's the hero. The guy who kickstarts the whole plot by raping someone, and kills people at random when they annoy him. That guy.

  

2 hours ago, Tijgy said:

In After The Episode they actually explain Alicent went more religious because she used her religion to feel less guilty of the fact she hurt Rhaenyra. 

Heh...frankly everything I hear about the After The Episode explanations make the characters and the people involved look dumber.

[butterweedstrover]

52 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

This seems like the opposite of your point. You seem offended the show makes no attempt to judge Daemon for his actions but leaves them up to the viewer.

You seem to want the show to punish him or frame his actions differently as a moral point.

I think the show is deliberately treating Daemon with kid gloves so as to not tarnish the Blacks.  
 

EDIT: Also, I don’t see how focusing on the victim’s perspective is judging the character, instead I see it as giving the viewers a fuller picture to use as a basis for their reactions.

Meanwhile, as is the issue, the Greens have their crimes treated with an emotional severity not applicable to Daemon.  

Besides the inequality of it all, it does come off as purposefully painting Daemon as a potential hero so he can fit comfortably into that mold.
 

46 minutes ago, Winterfell is Burning said:

 "the girl next door love interest we're pretending is not being played by an actress that could double duty as a supermodel" type, which is very common in Hollywood). 
 

Olivia isn’t that attractive (IMO).

46 minutes ago, Winterfell is Burning said:

 

HOMELANDER has lots of people thinking he's the hero. The guy who kickstarts the whole plot by raping someone, and kills people at random when they annoy him. That guy.

People also love these characters ironically or for the memes or just to sound edgy. 

HotD meanwhile has a clear delineation between the good guys and the bad guys, with the villains being treated with contempt while Daemon, who is fundamentally loyal, does bad stuff that either doesn’t affect the story/characters (like the murder of Rhea) or is done to actively benefit the good guys (like killing the guard to help Laenor escape or killing Vaemond for calling Rhaenyra a whore). 
 

When Homelander kills Starlight’s friend (what’s his name) we see the horror in her face, we see major emotional payoff, and we see that he is the villain. It helps build up Homelander’s power (derailing the good guys attempts to stop him) while also instilling fear in those that wish to oppose him.
 

Compare that to Daemon killing Rhea. He kills a character unrelated to the plot or story, an act which does not garner a single reaction politically or emotionally besides for one guy who spews empty threats only for Daemon to brush him off and mention an inheritance totally nebulous to the plot and irrelevant to his character. 
 

Either the showrunners didn’t want to damage Daemon’s appeal to the audience as a badass or they didn’t know how (which is nonsense since they do it with flying colors when it comes to Aegon, Otto, Cole, or any of the Greens).

Edited October 12, 2022 by butterweedstrover

[DMC]

5 hours ago, butterweedstrover said:

As an aside, a user (DMC) challenged me on several points to which my replies can offer further insight (of which he couldn’t rebut which I take to mean is him conceding that I was right).

LOL, you really need to stop with this bullshit.  Just because a poster tires of your ceaselessly inane and repetitive arguments and no longer finds it worthwhile to humor you does not mean they are "conceding" anything.  Especially if they are concurrently watching playoff baseball.  This is just last word freak horseshit.

4 hours ago, HelenaExMachina said:

I've only just caught up so are we currently missing Aegon's and Helaena's children?

They've been mentioned, but not shown yet.  Well, the twins have, Maelor hasn't.  This seems appropriate - as any good Milford man will tell you children should be neither seen nor heard.

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I meant to say that he was so dependent on the milk of the poppy that it addled his mind. He is not demented or confused because of age and sickness, but by the drug/medicine he is dependent on.

As we see later on when his mind is clear after he refused to take it for a day.

Right, this is made clear when he refuses the milk of the poppy from Otto "in the morning," then hours later we have the throne room scene.  Just saying I wouldn't call Viserys a drug addict just as I wouldn't for anyone being heavily medicated due to a chronic condition.

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Covering Aegon's rape seems to have to do only with her moral standards, not with it being perceived as a big crime.

Agreed.  As I said earlier her sympathy and outrage have little to do with a cover up.  She easily could have had another servant give Dyana moon tea and dismiss her - and even impress upon her to keep her mouth shut.  Which, as you say, isn't really that big of a deal in-universe.

[frenin]

Although Vaemond's death is ridiculous, it's the least ridiculous/random death we've had so far.

At least i've liked that the guards have actually moved against Daemon for having and using a blade in the King's presece but kinda let it go because everyone knew that Vaemond was a dead man walking and it was a matter of who killed him.  TThat said, this Kingsguard should think of retiring. If Daemon can kill a man in the presence of the King without them reacting in time.

Seing this somewhat acceptable random act of violence makes me understand less the Cole affair.

 

Btw did anyone else feel a bit of sympathy were Aegon says that he's crumbling under the pressure his mother puts him through and whatever he does it's never enough for his father (mr just has one only child). It was inmediiately he raped a poor girl but still, i kinda liked that. Book Aegon is just a sulky and entitled piece of shit.

Edited October 12, 2022 by frenin

[DMC]

11 minutes ago, frenin said:

Btw did anyone else feel a bit of sympathy were Aegon says that he's crumbling under the pressure his mother puts him through and whatever he does it's never enough for his father (mr just has one only child).

Yeah he was crying too and clearly hurt by Alicent saying he wasn't her son.  You could definitely feel for the kid in that moment.

[butterweedstrover]

25 minutes ago, DMC said:

LOL, you really need to stop with this bullshit.  Just because a poster tires of your ceaselessly inane and repetitive arguments and no longer finds it worthwhile to humor you does not mean they are "conceding" anything.  Especially if they are concurrently watching playoff baseball.  This is just last word freak horseshit. 
 

Well that is a matter of perspective, as I’ll prove shortly (btw, I have begun to ignore all your incessant profanities and rude language due to how typical they are of your conduct, but you might want to rein it in or else you might speak like that to someone who is far less forgiving than me). 

25 minutes ago, DMC said:

 

Agreed.  As I said earlier her sympathy and outrage have little to do with a cover up.  She easily could have had another servant give Dyana moon tea and dismiss her - and even impress upon her to keep her mouth shut.  Which, as you say, isn't really that big of a deal in-universe.

To both you and @Lord Varys, Alicent knowing that the act is horrific is more damning because she still names Aegon king. 
 

It makes her position less tenable than say if she didn’t know her son was a rapist or if she refused to believe it. And it highlights the magnitude of Aegon’s crime, forcing us to deal with the emotional ramifications rather than allowing audiences to shrug it off as they do with Daemon.
 

Making Alicent ‘sympathetic’ by having her go down a course she knows is morally wrong doesn’t add ambiguity to her position or her faction, it actually makes it more ridiculous and out of character lessening the impact of the wider conflict.

[DMC]

3 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

but you might want to rein it in or else you might speak like that to someone who is far less forgiving than me

LOL!!!

4 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

To both you and @Lord Varys, Alicent knowing that the act is horrific is more damning because she still names Aegon king. 
 

It makes her position less tenable than say if she didn’t know her son was a rapist or if she refused to believe it.

We are shown her husband, the king, raping her.  Robert Baratheon is a wanton rapist.  You acting like viewers will blame the woman for putting a rapist on the throne in nonsensical.  They will blame her for putting Aegon on the throne because she knows he is incompetent and unable to do the job.

[butterweedstrover]

21 minutes ago, DMC said:

We are shown her husband, the king, raping her.  Robert Baratheon is a wanton rapist.  You acting like viewers will blame the woman for putting a rapist on the throne in nonsensical.  They will blame her for putting Aegon on the throne because she knows he is incompetent and unable to do the job.

That marital rape scene is not a deciding factor in Alicent betraying Rhaenyra. 

Alicent’s relationship with Viserys is shown to be a dedicated one and she does not wish to see Aegon on the throne to spite him. In fact she takes his final words as a blessing to do what needs to be done. 

Aegon’s rape however is a blow to any justification she might have to raise him above Rhaenyra. Already she is suffering from a deficit of motives as to her rational for committing treason and this makes her position even less tenable. 
 
Her experiencing a similar situation to that of Aegon’s victim should further disincentivize her from seeing Aegon on the throne, and the fact that she goes through with it anyways makes her position less sympathetic and less coherent.

Edited October 12, 2022 by butterweedstrover

[DMC]

3 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

That marital rape scene is not a deciding factor in Alicent betraying Rhaenyra. 

...Who said it did?  Neither does Aegon's rape scene.  Have no idea why you're bringing this up.

3 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Aegon’s rape however is a blow to any justification she might have to raise him above Rhaenyra.

Well, first of all, them shoehorning the asoiaf prophecy into Viserys' death scene and her misinterpreting it clearly seems to be the show giving her justification.  I'm not a fan of that either but it is what it is.  Second of all, your argument makes no sense.  Even if Aegon wasn't a rapist, he still is incompetent and unfit for the job - and Alicent knows this.  Moreover, the show has depicted Aegon as not even wanting the job - repeatedly - and Alicent knows this too.  These are quite obviously more tangible reasons for the viewer to blame Alicent for making Aegon king when compared to covering up his rape.

[butterweedstrover]

15 minutes ago, DMC said:

...Who said it did?  Neither does Aegon's rape scene.  Have no idea why you're bringing this up. 
 

Then the scene of marital rape is only relevant in how it further adds emotional consequences behind Aegon’s action (something Daemon and the Blacks are free of).

15 minutes ago, DMC said:

 

Well, first of all, them shoehorning the asoiaf prophecy into Viserys' death scene and her misinterpreting it clearly seems to be the show giving her justification.  I'm not a fan of that either but it is what it is.  Second of all, your argument makes no sense.  Even if Aegon wasn't a rapist, he still is incompetent and unfit for the job - and Alicent knows this.  Moreover, the show has depicted Aegon as not even wanting the job - repeatedly - and Alicent knows this too.  These are quite obviously more tangible reasons for the viewer to blame Alicent for making Aegon king when compared to covering up his rape.

And yet Alicent knowing her son is a rapist damages her case even more, even if there are other deficiencies to his (Aegon’s) character. 
 

It in no way makes Alicent’s position more sympathetic nor Aegon’s. All it does is further decrease the moral ambiguity between the factions and makes the conflict even more one sided. 
 

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Then the scene of marital rape is only relevant in how it further adds emotional consequences behind Aegon’s action (something Daemon and the Blacks are free of).

Huh?  The marital rape scene - with Viserys - shows the prison Alicent is trapped in and makes her more sympathetic.  So, too, does the scene with her comforting Dyana and lambasting Aegon about his rape.  While also, granted, further demonstrating Aegon is a little shit.  Really don't get your point here.

5 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

It in no way makes Alicent’s position more sympathetic nor Aegon’s.

The scene with Dyana, objectively, shows Alicent sympathizing with the girl, which reminds the viewer of Alicent's own plight and naturally makes her sympathetic as well.  I don't see any reason to point to that scene as a reason to blame Alicent for putting Aegon on the throne, and I don't think it makes sense to expect other viewers to either.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Denam_Pavel said:

I don't know what makes you say this means he is not in a position to challenge Rhaenyra's rule. Vhagar can easily turn the Red Keep into a second, much smaller Harrenhal. It's more then big enough for that now. Aemond is never gonna surrender and could easily end up killing his daughters and his son if Daemon refused to deal with him.

I urge you to go back to the source material. Aemond is neither perceived as the real threat to Rhaenyra's reign - that's the Hightower army with Daeron - nor does he ever plan or consider attacking KL with Vhagar, nor do the people in KL fear he might do that.

Daemon and Nettles are sent to the Riverlands because Aemond is terrorizing Rhaenyra's friends and allies there.

Aemond is a moron, a guy who rides the largest dragon alive but doesn't know how to use it effectively. He neutralizes himself as a political player. He starts as Prince Regent, then he is the supreme general of an army fighting in the name of a deposed pretender, and then he is ... nothing but a brigand with a large animal.

Also note that Cole, too, didn't urge Aemond to use the army they had left at Harrenhal to march back to KL and try to retake the Iron Throne with Vhagar and the army. They knew they could not possibly prevail against Rhaenyra's dragons.

Funny details:

Apparently there is a hidden subplot revolving around a gift Aemond forces Aegon to give to Helaena in the wake of the rape thing. They talk about that during the feast but it is only visible if have subtitles enabled.

Also, it seems that Rhaenyra gives Daemon a quiet nod during Vaemond's speech, commanding him to take out the traitor. The attack is thus neither Daemon defending the honor of his wife or him displaying his love and devotion to said wife in a most disgusting manner ... but rather a loyal husband/subject obeying his liege lady/princess.

Which kind of puts things into perspective and makes this effectively what it was in the book - where Rhaenyra clearly did sentence Vaemond Velaryon to death (although as I said above - it isn't clear that Daemon executed him, he just arrested him and brought him before Rhaenyra).

Must say it could have been fun to have more dialogue when the children were presented to Viserys. They could have tried to crack jokes that they could have more and older grandchildren by now, if Viserys had but allowed to marry them earlier, and/or Viserys could have expressed regret about standing between them for so long.

1 hour ago, DMC said:

They've been mentioned, but not shown yet.  Well, the twins have, Maelor hasn't.  This seems appropriate - as any good Milford man will tell you children should be neither seen nor heard.

With only six years passing between episode 7 and 8, it seems fitting that Maelor isn't born yet. They could end up cutting him, of course, but there is time enough for him to be born next season. After all, time will have to pass for the sake of Joffrey, Aegon, and Viserys, so there is time and opportunity to introduce Maelor, too.

I must say it is pity that they cut both the memorable scenes with Viserys and his grandchildren. What should have been there, I think, would have been the earlier scene where Viserys takes young Jace up with him on the Iron Throne, telling him it will be his seat one day.

I guess if that happened it would have happened during the ten year time gap when Jace was still a toddler or five-year-old, so we might get if they were doing flashbacks or doing a special 'between the years' episode.

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Right, this is made clear when he refuses the milk of the poppy from Otto "in the morning," then hours later we have the throne room scene.  Just saying I wouldn't call Viserys a drug addict just as I wouldn't for anyone being heavily medicated due to a chronic condition.

Yes, not sure if there is another good short term for 'a guy who is addicted to pain medication because of a horrible illness'. Keep in mind that I'm no native speaker.

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Agreed.  As I said earlier her sympathy and outrage have little to do with a cover up.  She easily could have had another servant give Dyana moon tea and dismiss her - and even impress upon her to keep her mouth shut.  Which, as you say, isn't really that big of a deal in-universe.

I honestly do enjoy Aegon pretty much as a character so far. He isn't worse than his father in the rape department as the Alicent example shows, there are just different standards used. And certainly not as worse as a character as Daemon or Larys. His refusal to marry his sister is also not a bad character trait - wanting to have a spouse you are attracted to and have something in common isn't bad at all. He could express it in a nicer fashion, of course, but him being an ass doesn't make him a monster so far.

It is refreshing to see him genuinely disinterested in the crown, trying to avoid responsibility and actually not being that bad of a guy in general. Aegon clearly is no kingly material and should never be propped up as a pretender ... but seeing how both his mother and his maternal grandfather abused him there is a lot of potential there from him struggling to free himself from those kingmakers and would-be powers behind the throne.

I'm really looking forward to what they are going to do with Aegon.

Alicent's journey might become one of regret much earlier than in the book, realizing that neither of her elder sons was suited for the crown and that she is to be blamed for all the atrocities that happen. One could easily see her wanting to offer peace to Rhaenyra after Rook's Rest, only for Criston and Aemond pushing her aside and escalating the war even further.

[Fool Stands On Giant’s Toe]

:Viserys: -Removes mask- 

 “My own face…is no longer a handsome one…if indeed it ever was.”  
- Looks up to family.-

:Family:  “What the fuck!” 
            - Family gags and dry heaving-

             “Oh my God!”  
              -several vomiting-   
              “Why take that off?!”
              “At the supper table?!” 
              “Well I’m no longer hungry.”  
             “Not the best timing Gramps” 

:Viserys: -Looks to Rhaenyra-

“What? Is it bad? You said it wasn’t that bad!”

:Rhaenyra: -Represses gag-  

“No, no, it’s fine. :gulp: It’s not that bad.”

:Alicent:    “Ha! Wouldn’t be the first time she’s lied to you”

:Heleana:   “Why does Aemon have an erection?”

Edited October 12, 2022 by Fool Stands On Giant’s Toe

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

48 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Aemond is a moron, a guy who rides the largest dragon alive but doesn't know how to use it effectively. He neutralizes himself as a political player. He starts as Prince Regent, then he is the supreme general of an army fighting in the name of a deposed pretender, and then he is ... nothing but a brigand with a large animal.

The fact that nobody from team Green managed to steer him in the right direction makes them all a bunch of incredible morons. And Aegon was arguably the biggest moron of all because he fired the only guy on the team who wasn't a moron.

[Lord Varys]

24 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

The fact that nobody from team Green managed to steer him in the right direction makes them all a bunch of incredible morons. And Aegon was arguably the biggest moron of all because he fired the only guy on the team who wasn't a moron.

To be sure, one can - and should - ask how a guy barely 20 years old could seize the government of the kingdom after Rook's Rest. One imagines that they were not all falling over themselves to offer Aemond the regency. There were more senior members of the king's family - Alicent and Otto foremost among them. One imagines that this was a decision made by Criston Cole who Aegon had named Hand earlier and who wanted a like-minded man running the government.

In a larger context, though, the Greens were totally dependent on Aemond and his dragon. He could always threaten them to leave or not mount Vhagar if the Blacks were to attack.

Cole later tries to make him see reason at Harrenhal, but it doesn't work. I imagine the show is going to tone down the stupidity to replace it with arrogance. And, of course, once he falls in with Alys Rivers they may have their own secret plan together, something the book didn't really dig in so far. But we can assume, I think, that Alys promises him that if he follows her advice he will sit the throne one day ... although she might lie to her teeth there, using him only to conceive their child who she may believe (with good or bad reason) will be king one day.

While Otto was somewhat more effective, his slow approach wouldn't have led to success, either. Criston's riskier tactics at least robbed the Blacks of Rhaenys and Meleys.

[butterweedstrover]

3 hours ago, DMC said:

I don't see any reason to point to that scene as a reason to blame Alicent for putting Aegon on the throne, and I don't think it makes sense to expect other viewers to either.

Sympathizing with her plight as a woman is not the same thing as sympathizing with her objective. 

Her actions are distinctly villainous in that they are wholly unsympathetic. Alicent wanting Aegon on the throne is made less sympathetic when viewed under the lens of him being a rapist and her knowing it is wrong. 

If somehow, we could understand better why she puts Aegon on the throne, that would count as adding nuance towards the conflict. But this tidbit of information makes the motivating factor behind the entire conflict make even less sense.  

That is not to say Alicent is putting Aegon on the throne because he is a rapist, but that she is doing it anyways, making her actions less understandable. Again, if the entire Green faction has literally no basis for their pursuit of the throne, it dilutes the entire conflict which is the framework for the entire story. 

Alicent is to blame for putting Aegon on the throne because she is the one who makes that decision. Therefore she needs motivation, and that motivation needs to be at least partially sympathetic for the Greens to have some moral foundation. All this rape does is add less incentive to overthrow Rhaenyra, making her goals less sympathetic. 

What you are talking about is something different. You are saying Alicent is made more relatable because she reprimands Aegon for his actions and shows real grief. But this isn't followed through by a change in behavior. She still seeks to put him on the throne. She might say "you are no son of mine" but her actions following that prove otherwise. 

Therefore the character of Alicent does not actual reprimand her son despite claiming otherwise. A character who knows something is wrong but does not alter their behavior in response to that and continues down the same path is made less nuanced and less comprehensible by the audience. Her single mindedness from which she can ignore any influence onto her behavior makes her, and by extension her faction, a trivial addition to the heroes journey (the Blacks) not worthy of the psychological deep dive provided by the duel narrative. 

If you want a one dimensional villain, fine. But don't frame the entire show as a nuanced depiction of two factions with complex moral disagreements and focus on the internal struggles of one side.   

Edited October 13, 2022 by butterweedstrover

[DMC]

34 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Sympathizing with her plight as a woman is not the same thing as sympathizing with her objective. 

Her actions are distinctly villainous in that they are wholly unsympathetic. Alicent wanting Aegon on the throne is made less sympathetic when viewed under the lens of him being a rapist and her knowing it is wrong. 

You keep on trying to tie that scene to Alicent putting Aegon on the throne.  Obviously, her objective to put Aegon on the throne is NOT sympathetic.  But, again, this is because of myriad other reasons.  I didn't find anything in the books to make her decision to do so sympathetic in the books either, which is why I don't really understand the complaint.  If you did, fair enough, but my interpretation of Aegon was he was unfit for kingship in the books as well. 

Moreover, as I mentioned, her misinterpretation of Viserys' dying wish is a change the show provided to make such an objective more sympathetic.  Once again, in terms of the specific scene(s) with her response to the rape, Alicent is clearly being portrayed in a sympathetic light.  Indeed, between that and the (very temporary) reconciliation with Rhaenyra during the most awkward family dinner ever - including her trying to quell Aemond's provocative toast - she is portrayed as sympathetic for much of episode 8.  Is the rape further evidence that Aegon is wanton, unfit, and generally a bad person?  Obviously!  Of course no one is arguing that.

Edited October 13, 2022 by DMC

[butterweedstrover]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

You keep on trying to tie that scene to Alicent putting Aegon on the throne. 

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Obviously, her objective to put Alicent on the throne is NOT sympathetic.  But, again, this is because of myriad other reasons.  I didn't find anything in the books to make her decision to do so sympathetic in the books either, which is why I don't really understand the complaint.  If you did, fair enough, but my interpretation of Aegon was he was unfit for kingship in the books as well.  

A character is based on their actions¹. Their actions are based on motivation².  

The book discloses the first but does not offer a definitive answer as to the second.  

Alicent's main purpose in both the show and the book is to undermine Rhaenyra so that Aegon might be named heir.¹  

In the show:

a.) Alicent is a survivor of rape 

b.) Alicent does not wish to see other women experience rape 

c.) Therefore (we assume) Alicent is motivated in seeing the rapist reprimand²  

This is not her only motivating factor, but it is the one we are introduced to at the beginning of the episode. 

Alicent's objective (read: action) is not inherently unsympathetic. Our sympathy for her objective is based on our sympathy for the motivations underpinning that action. 

The rub here is that motivation and action must be linked. Action cannot exist without motivation, and motivation cannot exist without action. We are provided with a sympathetic outlook in her moral clarity but this does not motivate action. She does not respond to this knowledge of wrong doing, nor does it affect her course. 

Her sole objective in the show (which is to see Aegon on the throne)¹ comes to a head with this potential motivating factor as Aegon is determined to be rapist. Now her objective is in direct odds with the presumable motive that is meant to garner sympathy. 

And yet her sole objective in the show remains unchanged. Just as her actions are tied to her motives, her motives are reliant on her action. The reason this does not achieve sympathy or nuance for her character is because there is a disconnect between the motive and the action.  

 

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Moreover, as I mentioned, her misinterpretation of Viserys' dying wish is a change the show provided to make such an objective more sympathetic. 

Well I agree, but as I said before this is terrible writing as there have been 8 episodes of setup to try and develop potential reason for her actions only for the show itself to knock each one down. But seeing as they have to reach the same point as the book they offer a totally extraneous motive that had nothing to do with her character arc in the last minute. 

And that motivation is a lie meaning viewers can at best feel bad for her while having no scruples in wanting to see her objective fail. It is an awful premise to base the entire conflict upon but is a result of the show destroying itself in the last three episodes out of a desire to depict the Blacks as heroes.  

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Indeed, between that and the (very temporary) reconciliation with Rhaenyra during the most awkward family dinner ever - including her trying to quell Aemond's provocative toast - she is portrayed as sympathetic for much of episode 8. 

Besides the rape (which I again claim does achieve what you say it does due to a disconnect between her reaction and her response) all these examples are based on Alicent showing deference to the Blacks. 

If the Greens only sympathetic factor is their reluctance to oppose the Blacks, it further proves how (based on the show's framing) they have no moral stance since their existence in the narrative is based on their opposition to the Blacks. 

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Is the rape further evidence that Aegon is wanton, unfit, and generally a bad person?  Obviously!  Of course no one is arguing that.

Great, so it offers further reason for us not to sympathize with Alicent's action, or her incoherent motivations. 

Edited October 13, 2022 by butterweedstrover

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Her sole objective in the show (which is to see Aegon on the throne)¹ comes to a head with this potential motivating factor as Aegon is determined to be rapist. Now her objective is in direct odds with the presumable motive that is meant to garner sympathy. 

And yet her sole objective in the show remains unchanged. Just as her actions are tied to her motives, her motives are reliant on her action. The reason this does not achieve sympathy or nuance for her character is because there is a disconnect between the motive² and the action².  

The problem is you're conflating motivations, objectives, and actions.  Alicent likely doesn't see Aegon raping a serving girl as in any way related to her decision to put him on the throne.  And why should she?  She obviously isn't thrilled about Viserys raping her herself, but that doesn't mean she thinks he's an unfit king.  And, again, viewers have been exposed to numerous rapists-as-kings throughout the series.  The two are orthoganal in the universe/society therein.

I honestly don't understand the converse of your argument here.  It suggests you're saying if Aegon wasn't a rapist, that would give her moral justification for putting him on the throne.  Why?  He's still unfit and doesn't even want it - which outside of the obvious fact Rhaenyra is the named heir - makes Alicent bereft of any "moral justification."  Or even "nuance."  Aegon could be Baelor the Blessed (who, coincidentally, was also manifestly unfit), still doesn't change that fact.

9 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Well I agree, but as I said before this is terrible writing as there have been 8 episodes of setup to try and develop potential reason for her actions only for the show itself to knock each one down. But seeing as they have to reach the same point as the book they offer a totally ancillary extraneous motive that had nothing to do with her character arc in the last minute. 

Yeah, I said much the same on Sunday night, agreed.  Just pointing out, since you're looking for the show to provide some "justification" for her decision, this seems to be what they came up with.  And it does make her decision more understandable to the viewer - regardless of my own distaste for shoehorning it in.

13 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

If the Greens only sympathetic factor is their reluctance to oppose the Blacks, it further proves how (based on the show's framing) they have no moral stance since their existence in the narrative is based on their opposition to the Blacks. 

Again, what is their "moral" stance in the books?  The only one presented is the fear for their own lives, which we've already discussed but again, seems like a delusion (willful or otherwise) on their behalf in the books and similarly does in the show.