[Spoilers] Episode 108 Discussion

[DMC]

Just now, butterweedstrover said:

And I’m clarifying what I meant which is that Larys doing something not only morally wrong but counter to her interests does not explain why she would return afterwards to him and solidify their alliance as if he were a useful asset.

And I already addressed this.  She's basically entrapped/blackmailed by Larys afterwards - as is heavily implied by their conversation when she assures he will be eventually rewarded.  Moreover she's clearly creeped out by him - as is demonstrated when he stares at her to the extent that Cole is concerned.  As for whether he proved useful to her, the former scene suggests he has been over the last six years.  Granted, we're not given specifics, but the show moves fast.

5 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Then why does she show any horror at all if she bares no responsibility. The framing was that her private chats with Larys are what brought on his action. 

What the hell are you talking about?  She does feel responsibility even though she in no way intended it -- that's part of why she's so horrified.  Her venting to Larys has nothing to do with her spreading rumors about the Strongs.  Larys obviously is aware of the bastardy with or without Alicent informing him.  Further, this is an important difference in the show.  In the books the bastardy and whether people are aware is more ambiguous - and it is indeed suggested it's primarily Alicent and co. that are spreading the rumors.  In the show it's clear she doesn't need to spread the rumors and rather the bastardy is an open secret to basically everybody.

[butterweedstrover]

2 minutes ago, DMC said:

And I already addressed this.  She's basically entrapped/blackmailed by Larys afterwards - as is heavily implied by their conversation when she assures he will be eventually rewarded.  Moreover she's clearly creeped out by him - as is demonstrated when he stares at her to the extent that Cole is concerned.  As for whether he proved useful to her, the former scene suggests he has been over the last six years.  Granted, we're not given specifics, but the show moves fast. 
 

And she despite that, rather than trying to distance herself from him and having Larys threaten her further, we have Alicent be the one to instigate a more official alliance in the long term. 
 

As for his usefulness, he has already proved the opposite of being useful by trying to control her. That isn’t an ally you can rely on in difficult times.

2 minutes ago, DMC said:

Her venting to Larys has nothing to do with her spreading rumors

They’re directly related. She is talking about this to everyone, Larys just happens, unbeknownst to her, to be a psychopath. 
 

Maybe she would be more wary who she talks to about this stuff or maybe she’d regret what she (intentionally or otherwise) did to this family a lay off a bit. But nope, she is full steam ahead.

2 minutes ago, DMC said:

about the Strongs.  Larys obviously is aware of the bastardy with or without Alicent informing him.  Further, this is an important difference in the show.  In the books the bastardy and whether people are aware is more ambiguous - and it is indeed suggested it's primarily Alicent and co. that are spreading the rumors.  In the show it's clear she doesn't need to spread the rumors and rather the bastardy is an open secret to basically everybody.

It’s made clear that the Greens are in control of KL and having been ruining Rhaenyra’s image in the city which is why their arrival is so cold and fraught.

[C.T. Phipps]

Alicent thinks she's Catelyn but she's actually Cersei is the best way to summarize her character for me.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

And she despite that, rather than trying to distance herself from him and having Larys threaten her further, we have Alicent be the one to instigate a more official alliance in the long term. 

Again, you keep on ignoring the fact she's scared to distance herself from him.  Also, I have no idea how she "instigates a more official alliance."

3 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

They’re directly related. She is talking about this to everyone, Larys just happens, unbeknownst to her, to be a psychopath. 

No, they're not.  Her venting is about not having any allies at court and that she would if Otto was hand.  THAT'S why Larys kills his father.

5 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

It’s made clear that the Greens are in control of KL and having been ruining Rhaenyra’s image in the city which is why their arrival is so cold and fraught.

It's clear the greens are in control of KL, of course.  It's not clear at all Rhaenyra's image in the city has been ruined.  The muted arrival is obviously just an insult on behalf of Alicent and Otto.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Yeah, it'd be kinda weird if Maegor took him to a whorehouse, but I suppose it's possible.  Kinda like Princess Bride.  "I'll very likely kill you tomorrow, but c'mon, let's go get ya laid!"

I kinda like the idea that Maegor got along pretty well with Viserys until he had him tortured and killed on a whim after Alyssa's escape. The lad seems to have been both his presumptive heir and a hostage, so there is a chance that he got along with him.

But, sure enough, I'm not saying that Viserys is a likely candidate to have fathered an or multiple unacknowledged bastards - that's more likely something Aegon the Uncrowned may have done.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

The thing is though the book doesn’t offer psychological motivations. It utilizes rumors and one dimensional stereotypes to fuel the conflict, but we never get the actual substance behind their position.

For example, if all Alicent wanted was power the question remains what motivates her lust for power. And as for yourself you seem inclined to ignore the gossip behind Rhaenyra from the book but embrace those of Alicent as established fact.

Even if you buy all the rumors about Rhaenyra ... they have nothing to do with her ability as a ruler.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

The show was always suppose to flesh out their motivations. The problem is they couldn’t find one for Alicent because they couldn’t bring it upon themselves to give the Blacks some moral deficit.

Rhaenyra doesn't have any deficits that we would find problematic.

And to be clear - Laenor is the one to be blamed for their children in both the book and the show (assuming the children aren't his). He didn't do his duty as a husband to the degree that it would lead to them having children.

While Rhaenyra clearly didn't want to marry Laenor in the book, she did agree to the match eventually ... but it is Laenor who decided to live at High Tide on Driftmark, whilst Rhaenyra lived first at court and later on Dragonstone.

If Laenor had had issues with how Rhaenyra was conducting herself he should and would have not acknowledged her sons as his, he would not have given them Velaryon names, he may not even have honored his third son by naming him after his beloved Joffrey.

This is a non-issue for the Velaryons, just as nobody really cares about Vaemond Velaryon's fate. Corlys and Rhaenys do side with Rhaenyra and Daemon, after all.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

You’re assuming this slander was the basis for her character in the book, which it was not.

What is the basis for Alicent's character in the book.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

However, the show could still have made her nuanced while showing her sexual proclivities. All it needed to do was give her a decent motivation. 

An act is not evil or lacking in nuance in of itself. The action is given depth by the motivations underlying it.

Alicent as an ambitious person using sex as a means to get what she wants is pretty much cliché.

We also don't get that for Rhaenyra, by the way. She does have sex with people she desires and loves, not as a way to exert power.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

And she cares so much for him she tries to use his weakened state as an opportunity to remove his daughter from the line of succession. 

Does she do that? Only the king can rule on his own succession. Otto could have declared Rhaenyra's sons bastards, barring them from succeeding to Driftmark and to the Iron Throne.

But that wouldn't necessarily have resulted in Rhaenyra losing her position as heir - although her reputation would have been damaged considerably.

It is also possible that Otto wouldn't have dared to rule on the legitimacy of Rhaenyra's children, instead merely ruling in favor of Vaemond without explaining why. That would have had considerable effect, too.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

The show tells us a lot about Alicent, but her actions in the plot have no basis in those perceived attributes and dilute her entire faction into bad guys, removing ambiguity from the conflict. 

They are bad guys. They go against the wishes of their king. And they do so by underhanded and insidious means.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

Her dedication to Viserys is not shown in her evaluation of what needs to be done. The story prioritizes her own (irrational) vendetta over whatever affection she might have for the king. 

Offscreen we can be told about certain dynamics to people’s relationships, but if it doesn’t affect the story or their character then it only exists to magnify how shallow and meaningless her character really is.

Alicent also has a terrified reaction to her son being a rapist. But this is framed as the result of her pressuring him to become king and in response to this traumatic revelation… she names him king.

Nah, Aegon becoming a rapist has nothing to do with his mother pressuring him. His drinking might have to do with that, but his sexual appetites are all his own.

Although, to be sure, Aegon drinks himself into oblivion at a funeral. He may have issues with death and grief, etc. Not to mention it might be boring as hell to him.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

That’s a nice theory but it doesn’t explain why Alicent is so dedicated in seeing her friend’s downfall even at the expense of her own children. 

And it doesn’t explain Rhaenyra’s completely passiveness in response to this betrayal or her lack of personal flaws that might further fan tension.

Alicent, for no reason at all wants, to see Rhaenyra destroyed. And Rhaenyra does not have even the slightest bit of anger, upset, or emotional crack in seeing her best friend try to ruin her. 

Rhaenyra doesn't really believe Alicent wants to destroy her. That fits with the book, where the Blacks are utter morons, not preparing for a civil war.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

A lie ten years ago that Rhaenyra has attempted at every turn to amend. Alicent showing an endless resolve to destroy Rhaenyra over a lie ten years ago, even at the expense of her children, her husband, her friendship, and her morals doesn’t reflect upon Alicent a complexity of character.

It reflects upon her an unrestrained monomania lacking in nuance or depth.

It is not just the betrayal back in episode 4-5 but also the Harwin affair. She cannot let that go, apparently. Which is exactly how it is in the book, too. Alicent is the asshole who mocks the looks of Laenor's children to his face and who feeds her children the idea that they are Harwin's children.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

Despite all the times Rhaenyra actually shows concern that the Greens might actually pose a threat (which they do) she also shows no vindictiveness, anger, or stress at her best friend trying to destroy her. 

She isn't concerned all that much.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

This is damning in of itself. If the only way for Alicent to have any moral complexity is for to lose all her agency then what is the point of developing the Greens and their potential motivations? What is the point of having a duel narrative at all.

LOL, no. Alicent could still struggling to convince her sons and the other men running the Green government to see reason. Only to fail. She will remain a main character, of course, but she is not going to be the de facto ruler. At least I don't expect her to be.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

None of this is true. She is not motivated in seeing her family gain in status. Her possible motivation for sake of her family (episode 5) would be to see her family protected.

Just drop that shit. There is no chance that anyone would seriously fear for their children in this setting. The kinslayer taboo is too strong for that. Otto and his brother are motivated by ambition, and Alicent does as she is told, most of the time. And after she has children of her own she also has a duty to them.

Of course she struggles with the idea of Aegon as king, but they could not possibly crown Aegon instead and go against male primogeniture if that's their main justification for the coup.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

And given the number of olive branches Alicent rejects, fueling a precarious war of succession, she is not behaving out of concern for her family’s well being. Neither is she acting out of affection for the king. Or the ‘friendship’ she had for Rhaenyra. 

I'm giving Alicent the benefit of the doubt with the Jace-Helaena match that she simply cannot bear the idea that her only daughter is married to a filthy bastard. I mean, that's also the reason why she cannot let this go.

[The Bard of Banefort]

18 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I actually don't think they will take that road. I think Alicent is not going to become Rhaenyra's big nemesis. Her men will push her aside, take matters out of her hands entirely (I mean Aegon, Aemond, Criston, and Larys there). I could even see Rhaenyra and Alicent kind of re-bonding during Rhaenyra's reign, with Alicent finally realizing that her old friend is or could be a fine monarch, after all. Of course she would still be torn between loyalty for her family, trying to protect them, but I think the writers could make it work that these two women won't be stuck in an eternal bitch fight.

The way to turn this story into a good TV show is to do some unexpected things, especially where the personal relationships are concerned.

I’m not convinced. Alicent changes on an episode-to-episode basis, and once Luke is killed, it’s going to be hard for her and Rhaenyra to reconcile. If the whole theme is destroyed-by-the-patriarchy, then that’s also going to be a hard sell if she spends half the show as a captive in the Red Keep, with all the oppressive men either dead or away at war. 

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

So Harrold Westerling is still alive and will appear in the next episode. Isn't Criston supposed to be the Lord Commander when he does his Kingmaker stuff?

[DMC]

16 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

So Harrold Westerling is still alive and will appear in the next episode. Isn't Criston supposed to be the Lord Commander when he does his Kingmaker stuff?

I think somebody mentioned this earlier, but I suspect he takes Steffon Darklyn's role - absconding with Viserys' crown and spiriting away to Dragonstone in the night.  It's expedient to use an already introduced Kingsguard member for the role.  I suppose Cole not being the Lord Commander does technically complicate the Green Council scene, but I suspect they'll just write it off as him being Alicent's protector - if they mention it at all.

[C.T. Phipps]

Alicent doesn't change very much. The problem is her "nuance" is hard to understand.

She believes Rhaenyra is a liar who will kill her children.

It's just the AUDIENCE doesn't believe Alicent should believe that.

So they ascribe her other motives.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I’m not convinced. Alicent changes on an episode-to-episode basis, and once Luke is killed, it’s going to be hard for her and Rhaenyra to reconcile. If the whole theme is destroyed-by-the-patriarchy, then that’s also going to be a hard sell if she spends half the show as a captive in the Red Keep, with all the oppressive men either dead or away at war. 

One has to wait and see what her role will be during that time. Alicent could be less of a prisoner/hostage and more of an adviser at Rhaenyra's court.

If they cannot reconcile because of Luke then Rhaenyra should have just killed the captured Alicent. Which she doesn't do in the book.

I was thinking along those lines in light of the fact that Alicent starts to lose children or her own only later in the war, and pretty much neither of those deaths can be laid directly at Rhaenyra's feet. Of course, there is Blood and Cheese, but by the time she takes KL Rhaenyra will have lost both Luke and Jace, so she is the one who has been hurt much more.

59 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

So Harrold Westerling is still alive and will appear in the next episode. Isn't Criston supposed to be the Lord Commander when he does his Kingmaker stuff?

We can assume that Westerling either is in team Black, becoming one of the crown thieves ... or he will be executed for refusing to turn against Rhaenyra/accept Aegon as king.

Criston Cole might be the new Lord Commander when he puts the Conqueror's crown on Aegon's brow.

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Lord Varys said:

Criston Cole might be the new Lord Commander when he puts the Conqueror's crown on Aegon's brow.

Yeah I'd bet good money he's named the new Lord Commander by that time.

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

I think somebody mentioned this earlier, but I suspect he takes Steffon Darklyn's role - absconding with Viserys' crown and spiriting away to Dragonstone in the night.

But wasn't there a trailer that showed Erryk Cargyll with the crown on Dragonstone?

[DMC]

7 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

But wasn't there a trailer that showed Erryk Cargyll with the crown on Dragonstone?

I dunno.  If you say so I'm sure you're right.  I honestly haven't kept up on all the other stuff - trailers, previews, leaks, the behind the scenes stuff...

[Lord Varys]

I'd imagine that Erryk Cargyll will be a crucial party in the delivery of Viserys' crown to Rhaenyra.

The show seemed to switch things around there - in Eustace's version of events from 111 AC we had Arryk Cargyll finding Rhaenyra and Daemon abed together, giving us a hint as to why Arryk may have ended in team Green later on.

The show didn't go with Eustace's version as such, but they seem to give Erryk a similar motivation considering that he was the KG that was told about Aegon raping the servant girl. That could be deciding factor why he ends up defecting to Rhaenyra.

Also, I think, the show made a good choice introducing the Cargyll twins only later. It was always kind of weird to have them as KG in the 100s already, meaning they would have been middle-aged or older men in 129 AC. Them choosing different pretenders on principle going to the point of killing each other always felt like something younger men would do. Older men should have a more practical, possibly even more cynical approach.

Was Steffon Darklyn already on Dragonstone in the show? He did show up in the last episode, no?

[The hairy bear]

12 hours ago, DMC said:

I suppose Cole not being the Lord Commander does technically complicate the Green Council scene, but I suspect they'll just write it off as him being Alicent's protector - if they mention it at all.

A significant difference between the books and tv (both Got and HotD), is that in the later the Lord Commander is not part of the Small Council. So I'd say that the absence of the Lord Commander in the King's Council is not particularly noteworthy.

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Was Steffon Darklyn already on Dragonstone in the show? He did show up in the last episode, no?

Ser Steffon Darklyn is the KG who anounces Rhaenyra when she arrives at the Red Keep, early in the episode.

My guess is that him, Westerling and Erryk will be the ones that steal the crown. I could imagine Ser Harrold staying behind to fight a duel with Cole, in order to let the other two escape. The writers will want to make room for all the new characters they'll have to introduce in season 2.

[DMC]

2 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

A significant difference between the books and tv (both Got and HotD), is that in the later the Lord Commander is not part of the Small Council. So I'd say that the absence of the Lord Commander in the King's Council is not particularly noteworthy.

I know Westerling isn't actually at any of the small council scenes (at least from what I can remember), but is it ever actually stated in HotD that the Lord Commander isn't part of the small council?  GoT had the scene where Selmy tells Jorah he explicitly was not part of Robert's small council, but that was emphasized as a special case.

[butterweedstrover]

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

Even if you buy all the rumors about Rhaenyra ... they have nothing to do with her ability as a ruler. 

Well they do, and it is not about whether I believe it or not. It is how you selectively choose which to believe to skew your interpretation of F&B as the universal standard. 

A standard you're using to brush over poor writing from the show's end. 

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

Rhaenyra doesn't have any deficits that we would find problematic. 

In the show you're right. But it does not stop at 'problematic'. She has an inhuman calm, a lack of pettiness or vindictiveness foriegn to mankind.  

Rhaenyra responds to her best friend trying to get her killed by mending ties and raising her cup to the queen. She is always first to show forgiveness and has an aptitude for kindness untainted by passion or fear. And they do this to keep Rhaenyra from doing anything that might constitute poor judgment so that her opponents have zero grounds to dispute her and are left looking like mentally unbalanced psychopaths for hating her so. 

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

And to be clear - Laenor is the one to be blamed for their children in both the book and the show (assuming the children aren't his). He didn't do his duty as a husband to the degree that it would lead to them having children. 

You talk as if your the arbiter of a book that does not disclose who bares fault for what act. The show however made it clear it was not Rhaenyra who ignored him, but Laenor who would not do his duty once again totally absolving Rhaenyra for the bastards. 

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

If Laenor had had issues with how Rhaenyra was conducting herself he should and would have not acknowledged her sons as his, he would not have given them Velaryon names, he may not even have honored his third son by naming him after his beloved Joffrey. 

What do you know of their situation? A number of things could be done to depict Rhaenyra's total disregard for rules and customs which she breaks without much thought. 

The point is the show went out of its way to reassure viewers that Rhaenyra did everything possible to make it work and only resorted to bastards when she no longer had any other choice. It pins the blame squarely on him so even that minor flaw of Rhaenyra being even somewhat selfish is done away with. 

Laenor is the selfish one who drinks with his lovers and lets his princess down. He is the one made to apologize to her for letting her down. Imbuing Rhaenyra with an aspect of selfishness wouldn't have made her a bad person, but it would add ambiguity to her morality and help build a case for why she might not be the greatest queen. 

But the show, in its incessant desire to absolve her of any wrong doing, leaves us a person that lacks typical moral failings so much so that the Greens themselves seem to be pitted against her for totally arbitrary reasons. 

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

This is a non-issue for the Velaryons, just as nobody really cares about Vaemond Velaryon's fate. Corlys and Rhaenys do side with Rhaenyra and Daemon, after all. 

It wouldn't have to be an issue for them, but it would be an issue for Rhaenyra's character, giving her actual flaws that give her opponents something to potentially fear. 

A pure hearted princess with no emotional outbursts and an unending capacity for forgiveness isn't someone you fear. And yet the show is trying to sell us on the fact that Alicent is worried about her children (all the while destroying their lives).  

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

What is the basis for Alicent's character in the book. 

No, you're using it as the basis for her character just as you ignore all the slander against Rhaenyra as having any reflection upon her character. The show was suppose to add depth and motive behind Alicent's character and in that regard it completely fails. 

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

Alicent as an ambitious person using sex as a means to get what she wants is pretty much cliché. 

Sure, nut it could be made interesting or insightful depending on how the show framed her motivations and her rational. The show as is might not have made her into a sexual person, but it does not offer her compelling reasons to be so dedicated in seeing her best friend's downfall.  

Making Alicent worse than a cliché, but an incoherent character blemished with bad writing. 

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

We also don't get that for Rhaenyra, by the way. She does have sex with people she desires and loves, not as a way to exert power. 

Again, using the book as an excuse for why the characters have to be one dimensional is stupid because the book itself does not expand upon their psychological complexities. 

Rhaenyra might have tried to seduced a great many people and failed on account of her looks, just as she might have (as the rumors say) tried to seduce Criston Cole. 

But that doesn't matter. Even if the show doesn't depict her as sexual promiscuous it needs to give her some failings. There was a lot of room in the book for Rhaenyra to be shown as selfish, self-indulgent, entitled, or cruel. It was a creative decision to excise any of these attributes from her leaving a shallow stick figure in its place. 

Just how you made the executive decisions that all the rumors surrounding Rhaenyra are false and those surrounding Alicent are the basis for her character. But really we're talking about the show and how it was on them to give these characters depth, and how it ultimately failed in this endeavor. 

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

Does she do that? Only the king can rule on his own succession. Otto could have declared Rhaenyra's sons bastards, barring them from succeeding to Driftmark and to the Iron Throne. 

That's literally her entire purpose in the show for over 10 years. And she works to this end with the understanding that her husband is opposed to it but too impotent to stop her. That is Alicent's character in the show and telling us stuff off-screen only makes her look worse in comparison. 

And, more importantly, Viserys didn't want Luke disinherited, so no matter what angle you look at it Alicent is using Viserys impotence to get what she wants and to subvert his will. And that is the heart of their relationship in the story and plot, not the extraneous details mentioned to us beforehand. 

Extraneous details, which btw, make Alicent more incoherent. 

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

But that wouldn't necessarily have resulted in Rhaenyra losing her position as heir - although her reputation would have been damaged considerably. 

Some people say it would, others say it wouldn't. But we know that is what Otto and Alicent's objective is and they pursue it by trying to keep the King safely away and ignorant of their actions. Otherwise they'd consult him about their intentions. 

Incidentally, much like how we are told one thing about Alicent and shown another, we are given the same as regards to Otto. We are told how great a hand he has been in administering the realm, and yet all his advice is devious, destructive, and selfish. 

He might have been made to be on the right side of one argument relevant to the story which would give him depth, but all the story tries to reinforce is "Otto bad" which makes the attempts at giving him nuance by telling us otherwise build a stupidly bad framework for maintaining coherence and nuance. 

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

They are bad guys. They go against the wishes of their king. And they do so by underhanded and insidious means.  

No Lord Varys, an action is not explicitly bad in every situation. The action, and by extension their faction, is given depth by fleshing out their motivations and the circumstances that led about to the execution of their goals. 

It was up to the show to do that, and all it did was to make them generic bad guys which didn't have to be the case. They (Alicent) could have had multifaceted reasons for doing this. Instead she puts her rapist son on the throne because she wants to be protect the son that she had just disowned to destroy her best friend putting their lives in danger. 

Which puts to question, why frame this narrative as a duel perspective with nuanced motives on both sides worthy of exploring. The more time we spend in the mind of Alicent, the more ridiculous her character becomes and the more the story wastes away.  

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

Nah, Aegon becoming a rapist has nothing to do with his mother pressuring him. His drinking might have to do with that, but his sexual appetites are all his own. 

Well, in that case the show's own attempt to given Aegon depth failed. Which provides even more reason for Alicent to not want him on the throne. 

But, for sake of clarity, that is what the show is telling us. The show wants us to think Alicent's turning her children against Rhaenyra is what has destroyed them. 

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

Rhaenyra doesn't really believe Alicent wants to destroy her. That fits with the book, where the Blacks are utter morons, not preparing for a civil war. 

She literally knows. She tells Daemon she needs help against the "Greens". 

And even if she didn't think Alicent wanted the throne, her best friend is still trying to destroy her and her children and Rhaenyra doesn't give a shit. She shows no emotions behind this traumatic betrayal which might have actually made her character more relatable and give grounds for the expansion of this rivalry. 

As is the rivalry makes no sense and is fueled by the irrational hatred of one side. 

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

It is not just the betrayal back in episode 4-5 but also the Harwin affair. She cannot let that go, apparently. Which is exactly how it is in the book, too. Alicent is the asshole who mocks the looks of Laenor's children to his face and who feeds her children the idea that they are Harwin's children. 

But she does let it go, in the last episode. She raises her cup to Rhaenyra and says she would make a good queen. Alicent started her vendetta before the affair, she has been wearing green since episode 5, the bastards were just the latest excuse in a long line of them to bring Rhaenyra down. 

And why? Because Otto told her she (Rhaenyra) would have no choice but to kill Alicent's children if she ascends to the throne. And Alicent decides then to put her own children at risk and reject every olive branch because of an affair we are explicitly told was no fault of Rhaenyra? 

She would risk her own children's lives because she doesn't like the idea of Harwin Strong being the father? You can't just spitball different ideas hoping one of them stick, you have to build a coherent narrative around Alicent's intentions and motivating factors. 

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

She isn't concerned all that much. 

Well, in the show she is given how much panic she had over the Valeryon succession, pleading to her half-dead father for aid. But more importantly... 

It doesn't matter if she is concerned, it matters that her best friend is trying to destroy her. She should have an emotional response to that not because she might think Alicent could succeed, but because of the betrayal at the heart of this rivalry. And Rhaenyra gives no reason for this rivalry to exist and seems to just keep going because the plot needs it to.  

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

LOL, no. Alicent could still struggling to convince her sons and the other men running the Green government to see reason. Only to fail. She will remain a main character, of course, but she is not going to be the de facto ruler. At least I don't expect her to be. 

That would be her becoming irrelevant to the conflict, because she would have no influence over the Greens anymore. But more importantly, it would give her moral depth by admitting she was wrong. Meaning her actual objectives were pure evil and the fact that she pursued them at all suggests the character herself was one dimensional and motivated by pure evil. 

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

Just drop that shit. There is no chance that anyone would seriously fear for their children in this setting. The kinslayer taboo is too strong for that. Otto and his brother are motivated by ambition, and Alicent does as she is told, most of the time. And after she has children of her own she also has a duty to them. 

The threat wouldn't have to be directly from Rhaenyra, but anyone who disapproved of Rhaenyra's rule and might use them against her. The threat also would be based on Alicent's perception, and the people Rhaenyra surrounds herself with. It is a rivalry based on fear and anticipation. 

But the show, in its infinite wisdom, decided to remove any possibility that Alicent could logically believe that could ever happen by having her instead destroy her own children and put them at risk anyways. 

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

Of course she struggles with the idea of Aegon as king, but they could not possibly crown Aegon instead and go against male primogeniture if that's their main justification for the coup. 

The justification was that for Aegon to survive he would need to be named king. Which is even more ironic considering Alicent just disowned her own child on that same day. 

On 10/14/2022 at 2:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

I'm giving Alicent the benefit of the doubt with the Jace-Helaena match that she simply cannot bear the idea that her only daughter is married to a filthy bastard. I mean, that's also the reason why she cannot let this go.

Your left assuming because the show is not consistent in what Alicent believes and for what reason. 

Edited October 16, 2022 by butterweedstrover

[Ran]

59 minutes ago, DMC said:

I know Westerling isn't actually at any of the small council scenes

On the show, at least, they previously showed Ryam Redwyne in attendance... but standing behind Viserys, as a guard, not seated at the table. It seems to me that with their little stone ball mechanism to show their attendance, the fact that he doesn't sit and doesn't have a place to sit or mark his own attendance is pretty strongly suggestive that the Lord Commander is not, in fact, part of the small council on the show.

 

[Corvinus85]

5 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

Ser Steffon Darklyn is the KG who anounces Rhaenyra when she arrives at the Red Keep, early in the episode.

My guess is that him, Westerling and Erryk will be the ones that steal the crown. I could imagine Ser Harrold staying behind to fight a duel with Cole, in order to let the other two escape. The writers will want to make room for all the new characters they'll have to introduce in season 2.

I believe Graham McTavish will be in season 2, so any duels he fights now or in the finale will not mark his end. I think Westerling is the one to take the crown to Rhaenyra, and Aegon II will name Cole as his LC as a result. Then Cole will take military command as per the book.

As to Arryk and Erryk, I'm not sure how things will develop. The trailer for the upcoming episode does suggest some focus on them, probably to give the audience a clear view of them and set them for the future plot, but it also suggests a scheme that involves both.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Ran said:

On the show, at least, they previously showed Ryam Redwyne in attendance... but standing behind Viserys, as a guard, not seated at the table. It seems to me that with their little stone ball mechanism to show their attendance, the fact that he doesn't sit and doesn't have a place to sit or mark his own attendance is pretty strongly suggestive that the Lord Commander is not, in fact, part of the small council on the show.

Yes, so far the Lord Commander is not yet part of the Small Council in the show, although that may change when Cole becomes Lord Commander.

His presence at the Green Council and the subsequent murder of Lyman Beesbury will likely be explained by him being there as Alicent's bodyguard.

Last week's Small Council also didn't yet include Larys Strong as a council member - one imagines that's also only going to change this week - or later still.

To be sure, Viserys I's Small Council apparently didn't include a Master of Whisperers originally, just as Jaehaerys I didn't name and keep such a royal official. I guess Larys is already Lord Confessor as of episode 6 - else he wouldn't have had authority over the prisoners - but nothing more. And the Lord Confessor doesn't sit on the council.