[Spoilers] Episode 109 Discussion

[The Bard of Banefort]

1 minute ago, Adaneth said:

That's Mushroom's account, if you mean that they were lovers. They don't need to go that way.

 

The maester at the castle where they were staying also seemed pretty certain of it.

[Lord Varys]

23 minutes ago, Ran said:

Because he was obsessed with having a Valyrian bride on the show. Hence Mysaria asking if he wanted a young silver-haired girl. 

Laena and Rhaenyra both satisfy his apparent obsession on the show, but obviously this is a show thing, and Mysaria was in fact pregnant in F&B (but then she was probably Valyrian too!)

Daemon's erectile dysfunction is not only tied to his Valyrian fetish - which seems to be a thing in the book as well - but to him having trouble getting hard when having to perform under pressure and/or when he is mentally occupied with other things.

13 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

But he had the problem with Rhaenyra in episode 4.

The implication there is that he has second thoughts about the thing, presumably because he actually does feel bad about 'spoiling' Rhaenyra. He cannot admit that later to Viserys, of course, because it would make him weak and unmanly and impotent, but that's how it is.

One could also speculate that the Rhea match fell through because Daemon couldn't perform during the bedding, and Rhea subsequently mocked him, never letting this go, making it impossible for him perform later.

23 minutes ago, DMC said:

While she and Helaena do convince Aegon to offer peace terms (which, btw, they don't need to do in the show), her conduct and perspective at the green council is a significant change from the books that fundamentally changes the scene.  Also, even though there is the self-interested bias, I do believe it was Orwyle who first proposed offering terms in the books.  I would suspect most maesters to make such a proposal.

True enough, the Green Council is changed quite considerably. For book Alicent we can certainly assume she was a more active force in preparing the coup. She is the one who ensures that the death of the king is kept secret.

I must say I like the show's take on Orwyle so far. The book has him as a recent addition to the council, so it makes not only sense that he doesn't really have an opinion on things but also that he wasn't a Green partisan or crony - rather a guy who went along with the majority opinion because he had no other choice.

But that book Alicent isn't a character who wants (to escalate) a war makes this not a particularly drastic or significant change. Book Alicent would have to be little more than the gold digger/evil stemother cliché if they had gone with Viserys rotting for days and Alicent as feigning reconciliation earlier, etc.

Not to mention that they would have to go with the Viserys-Alicent marriage being a complete farce, with him being a moron blind for love whilst his wife feigned affection and the power her feminine wiles gave her over the old man to get what she wanted.

If things are not this blatantly obvious it actually makes a lot of sense that Alicent's own male partisans shield her from 'knowing too much' because she might let something slip to the king.

I mean, it is clearly not the case that we have a clear picture who is the actual leader of the Green party - is it Otto or Alicent in the book? We have no idea. The show even added more complexity to it by having Otto's brother be the original architect of this policy.

We also don't have a clear how much power Daemon or Jace wielded on Dragonstone compared to book Rhaenyra. The show could have easily enough portrayed Rhaenyra as more of a pawn or figurehead of the men propping her up as queen, rather than the powerful leader of her own faction.

The fact that the two political factions basically got their names from the gowns of the princess and the queen doesn't mean that the women actually had (full) control over those factions. Just remember how little actual power the second Daemon Blackfyre had over the people propping him up as king.

Additional thing:

I also greatly enjoyed the patriarchal/misogynistic outburst of Lyman Beesbury. His lines very much established how a Alicent may be perceived by the outside world, explaining why historians would remember her more as an ambitious schemer and potential kingslayer.

[Ran]

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

But he had the problem with Rhaenyra in episode 4.

Because he was conflicted about despoiling her, apparently, or alternatively (per the director, IIRC?) was bothered by the fact that Rhaenyra was taking charge.  It wasn't impotence, it was angst, on that occasion. 

Edited October 20, 2022 by Ran

[DMC]

14 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

If things are not this blatantly obvious it actually makes a lot of sense that Alicent's own male partisans shield her from 'knowing too much' because she might let something slip to the king.

Yeah I certainly agree with this - it makes sense for them to keep her in the dark on the planning in the books as well.  Still, though, it's clear she knew that was the plan in the books (hence her reaction to Viserys' death) instead of being caught completely off guard in the show, and obviously she was on board with it in the books and outraged in the show.

17 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

We also don't have a clear how much power Daemon or Jace wielded on Dragonstone compared to book Rhaenyra. The show could have easily enough portrayed Rhaenyra as more of a pawn or figurehead of the men propping her up as queen, rather than the powerful leader of her own faction.

I think the books certainly give the impression that Rhaenyra wasn't very active while they were still on Dragonstone/before taking King's Landing.  This is generally depicted as due to her grief/recovery, but perhaps it was she was more of a figurehead.

[Adaneth]

33 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

The maester at the castle where they were staying also seemed pretty certain of it.

Didn't he say that he treated her more like a daughter? I might be wrong though. I certainly do not remember everything. It has been awhile.

By the way, am I wrong or Aemond in the books is loyal to Aegon and has no ambitions to take the throne from him?

[Lord Varys]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

Yeah I certainly agree with this - it makes sense for them to keep her in the dark on the planning in the books as well.  Still, though, it's clear she knew that was the plan in the books (hence her reaction to Viserys' death) instead of being caught completely off guard in the show, and obviously she was on board with it in the books and outraged in the show.

Yes, in the book Alicent clearly is a major leader of her faction and seems on board with the coup. But even there we don't know if she is calling the shots or whether she is the dutiful daughter deferring to daddy Otto who knows best.

Them excluding her from their childish 'blood oath' thing because of her 'womanhood' certainly shows condescension on their part. Alicent doesn't just seem to play the role of the dutiful daughter and mother, she actually is treated as such by the men around her. This isn't just an act. Alicent only comes into her own, only takes active part in government and ruling when she has to - when all the men are gone or dead.

In that sense the show's take on Alicent as 'the dutiful woman' is actually very accurate. Her feelings for Viserys are a change, I think, as is the toned down hatred for Rhaenyra. But that actually makes her more complex.

And to be sure - they could still give us the Alicent who is urging her son to mutilate Aegon the Younger and pushing Jaehaera to murder her husband. The war and its atrocities have to affect those people and it is possible they will go with it making Alicent ever more resentful. I actually don't expect that to happen, but it is possible.

1 minute ago, DMC said:

I think the books certainly give the impression that Rhaenyra wasn't very active while they were still on Dragonstone/before taking King's Landing.  This is generally depicted as due to her grief/recovery, but perhaps it was she was more of a figurehead.

Oh, I just put that forth as one interpretation/depiction of her character that wouldn't necessarily be at odds with the book. The best argument against this, I think, is that Daemon never called himself King (Consort). If Rhaenyra was truly more a pawn or figurehead he should have been able to set himself up as the male co-ruler at her side ... or perhaps even the actual monarch, ruling by right of his wife. That this didn't happen seems to imply that Rhaenyra truly was mistress of her own house/court.

But this is a gradual thing - they could depict her as a woman who is abused and bossed around by her husband and son behind closed doors, but allowed to represent herself and her cause in public because the people truly in charge don't want to lose the advantage of propping her up as Viserys' chosen heir and the rightful queen.

With Aemond they certainly want to depict his desire for the throne ... which is clearly there in the book, but never elaborated on because it seemed to be a lesser issue playing out behind closed doors and never actually leading to clear/formal usurpation.

Although I think the show could easily enough have Aemond as a Prince Regent who makes it clear to Aegon, Alicent, and the Green Council that he won't step down again even if Aegon were to recover sufficiently to rule again. He could have done that in the book as well - they just never came to blows over this because Rhaenyra took the city.

3 minutes ago, Adaneth said:

Didn't he say that he treated her more like a daughter? I might be wrong though. I certainly do not remember everything. It has been awhile.

Maester Norren doesn't conclude anything. He says they were as close as father-daughter or lovers, detailing what led him conclude this.

3 minutes ago, Adaneth said:

By the way, am I wrong or Aemond in the books is loyal to Aegon and has no ambitions to take the throne from him?

In the book it seems clear he sees himself as the better king, too. At least that's how one would interpret his remark when he takes the Conqueror's crown from his brother. It also seems apparent in him being able to claim the regency. He is a young man with no experience in the government of the Realm ... only if he had strong ambition does it make sense that he could claim that. Alicent and Criston wouldn't have meekly offered the regency to him. And Otto may have also tried to return to power now that Aegon was incapacitated.

[Farerb]

When it comes to adaptations, my opinion is that it's not that changes are bad, it's how those changes are implemented, and as much as this show had blunders (like the ending of episodes 3,5 and 9), nothing was as terrible as Tyrion's introduction scene (in the book we first meet him at the library, in the show he's all about the whores), Littlefinger's sexposition scene or "making the 8". All of them were just from first season and were a red flag for what's to come.

[DMC]

7 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Them excluding her from their childish 'blood oath' thing because of her 'womanhood' certainly shows condescension on their part. Alicent doesn't just seem to play the role of the dutiful daughter and mother, she actually is treated as such by the men around her. This isn't just an act. Alicent only comes into her own, only takes active part in government and ruling when she has to - when all the men are gone or dead.

In that sense the show's take on Alicent as 'the dutiful woman' is actually very accurate.

Yes, sure, the show remains consistent on Otto/the council's patronization of Alicent and her "dutiful" character.  As it should be.  

On Aemond I agree that I always got the impression in the books he coveted the crown and I think this is pretty clear between him taking the crown, assuming the regency, and his comment.  I think it's ambiguous whether he actually intended to never abdicate the regency even if Aegon recovered, but I wouldn't mind the show going that way.

[Adaneth]

19 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

 

With Aemond they certainly want to depict his desire for the throne ... which is clearly there in the book, but never elaborated on because it seemed to be a lesser issue playing out behind closed doors and never actually leading to clear/formal usurpation.

Although I think the show could easily enough have Aemond as a Prince Regent who makes it clear to Aegon, Alicent, and the Green Council that he won't step down again even if Aegon were to recover sufficiently to rule again. He could have done that in the book as well - they just never came to blows over this because Rhaenyra took the city.

Maester Norren doesn't conclude anything. He says they were as close as father-daughter or lovers, detailing what led him conclude this.

In the book it seems clear he sees himself as the better king, too. At least that's how one would interpret his remark when he takes the Conqueror's crown from his brother. It also seems apparent in him being able to claim the regency. He is a young man with no experience in the government of the Realm ... only if he had strong ambition does it make sense that he could claim that. Alicent and Criston wouldn't have meekly offered the regency to him. And Otto may have also tried to return to power now that Aegon was incapacitated.

Thanks for clearing that up for me. I guess it's time for a re-read.

I actually do not mind Aemond having ambitions for the throne. And your argument makes sense. I just thought his loyalty was one redeeming quality of the guy who's nuts. lol Though an intriguing one to be sure. 

Edited October 20, 2022 by Adaneth

[Lady Anna]

This was a very poor episode in my opinion.

I feel that the overall writing quality of this show is decreasing with each episode. The Greens are still however more interesting and compelling to me on the show - their characterization and the actors both - but all around it all feels uneven.

Edit to say: The lighting on the show is baffling to me. The perpetual mist in every scene obscures so much, including the set & costumes work.

And while I do get people's criticism of the whitewashing of both Alicent and Rhaenyra compared to the books, I am really enjoying their characterization on the show. It's different but it's not bad at all to me. Especially Alicent's.

Edited October 20, 2022 by Lady Anna

[BlackLightning]

In the end, everyone's complaints about this episode (as well as general complaints about the show in general) can be boiled down to the fact that this show is trying to do way too much in 10 episodes

On 10/18/2022 at 10:40 AM, C.T. Phipps said:

There's no reason for the doors not to be blocked for the Dragon Pit, necessitating this way.

There actually is.

The Dragonpit was chosen as the place of coronation in the books specifically due to the rather obvious security concerns.

You can't do this if the backdoor is wide open.

[BlackLightning]

5 hours ago, Farerb said:

When it comes to adaptations, my opinion is that it's not that changes are bad, it's how those changes are implemented, and as much as this show had blunders (like the ending of episodes 3,5 and 9), nothing was as terrible as Tyrion's introduction scene (in the book we first meet him at the library, in the show he's all about the whores), Littlefinger's sexposition scene or "making the 8". All of them were just from first season and were a red flag for what's to come.

What was wrong with the ending of episode 9?

Rhaenys bursting out of from underneath the floor of the Dragonpit? The floor of the Dragonpit had already been established as being hollow/removable.

[Lord Varys]

5 hours ago, Adaneth said:

Thanks for clearing that up for me. I guess it's time for a re-read.

I actually do not mind Aemond having ambitions for the throne. And your argument makes sense. I just thought his loyalty was one redeeming quality of the guy who's nuts. lol Though an intriguing one to be sure. 

I actually think they are going to use Aemond's (blatant) ambition for the throne as (partial) explanation for his stupider actions later in the war. For instance, the campaign against Daemon in the Riverlands might be motivated by his desire to strengthen his role as the de facto king by taking out the most powerful/dangerous Black general. Ditto, his refusal to march with Criston to Daeron and the Hightower army could be motivated by pride and arrogance and his desire to literally single-handedly destroy Rhaenyra and her dragonriders. With the intention to claim the throne for himself after he has proven his prowess in this manner. Even if Aegon II survived the fall of KL, Aemond could declare that him fleeing the city means he abdicated/gave up his crown for good.

The symbolic significance of Aegon running away to hide shouldn't be downplayed in this context. Aegon is no longer a king once he runs away - he only regains his crown by taking Dragonstone, killing Rhaenyra, and by virtue of being the last adult male Targaryen on the Green side left.

If the Greens had crowned Aemond or Daeron in Aegon's absence there it wouldn't be a given that they would step down and accept Aegon as the actual king once he resurfaced. This problem was just avoided because nobody actually properly crowned another king in Aegon's absence.

[Adaneth]

12 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I actually think they are going to use Aemond's (blatant) ambition for the throne as (partial) explanation for his stupider actions later in the war. For instance, the campaign against Daemon in the Riverlands might be motivated by his desire to strengthen his role as the de facto king by taking out the most powerful/dangerous Black general. Ditto, his refusal to march with Criston to Daeron and the Hightower army could be motivated by pride and arrogance and his desire to literally single-handedly destroy Rhaenyra and her dragonriders. With the intention to claim the throne for himself after he has proven his prowess in this manner. Even if Aegon II survived the fall of KL, Aemond could declare that him fleeing the city means he abdicated/gave up his crown for good.

The symbolic significance of Aegon running away to hide shouldn't be downplayed in this context. Aegon is no longer a king once he runs away - he only regains his crown by taking Dragonstone, killing Rhaenyra, and by virtue of being the last adult male Targaryen on the Green side left.

If the Greens had crowned Aemond or Daeron in Aegon's absence there it wouldn't be a given that they would step down and accept Aegon as the actual king once he resurfaced. This problem was just avoided because nobody actually properly crowned another king in Aegon's absence.

I like that. I hope they go this way with him.

[Lord Varys]

Having gone back to the original Green Council scene from George, I must say that while Beesbury's arguments and Orwyle's speech betraying his ignorance about the impending coup would make sense ... most of the talk of the other people actually doesn't.

It makes no sense that the Green cronies would actually bother with 'arguments' about why Aegon has to be crowned if we would also assume that they have been waiting and preparing for this day for years - as they clearly did both in the book and the show.

The scene as given by George could only make sense if only a very small cabal within the Small Council was truly Green - say, Alicent, Otto, and Criston - whilst Lyman, Jasper, Tyland, Orwyle, and Larys still needed to be persuaded. The show could have gone with that but chose not to, which meant that they had to change the dialogue accordingly.

The alleged fear that a Queen Rhaenyra might kill Alicent's sons has been introduced earlier in the show, so it would be pointless to repeat and reiterate that, and the notion that Rhaenyra might steep as low as murdering Alicent is something that makes no sense in the show due to Alicent's and Rhaenyra's childhood friendship. They would not believe she might do this.

What they could have retained, I think, was Otto rambling on about Daemon and Criston slandering Laenor and his sons. Tyland taking over the treasury after Beesbury's death should also have been established, with his suggestion to split up the money coming only after he was actually in charge of the treasury.

Overall, the FaB scenario is actually more a poorly written 'introduction scene' to the Dance setting than an accurate depiction of a cabal staging a coup which must have been on their table for years. It is like Cersei explaining to her people why she is turning against Ned Stark and Robert's brothers in the night of her coup. The people involved would have known all that for months and years, there would be no need to tell things to an invisible audience.

If you look at the book then there isn't even a reason given why they would actually bother with arguments ... aside from convincing Beesbury. Everybody else is either on the Green track already, which is confirmed by them giving the very arguments as to why Rhaenyra should not be crowned, or is saying nothing at all.

Arguments would have made sense if George had made it clear that a small Green cabal was trying to and persuadeing actual undecided or Black council men to support them. But this doesn't seem to be the case.

Edited October 21, 2022 by Lord Varys

[Ran]

Folks, I've no problems with banning people. Be mindful.

[Adaneth]

Nevermind.

Edited October 21, 2022 by Adaneth

[C.T. Phipps]

On 10/20/2022 at 1:23 PM, DMC said:

While she and Helaena do convince Aegon to offer peace terms (which, btw, they don't need to do in the show), her conduct and perspective at the green council is a significant change from the books that fundamentally changes the scene.  Also, even though there is the self-interested bias, I do believe it was Orwyle who first proposed offering terms in the books.  I would suspect most maesters to make such a proposal.

I think the show isn't demonstrating that they don't need to offer peace terms because Rhaenys demonstrates IMMEDIATELY that they do not have nearly the advantage they think they do.

[DMC]

49 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I think the show isn't demonstrating that they don't need to offer peace terms because Rhaenys demonstrates IMMEDIATELY that they do not have nearly the advantage they think they do.

I just meant Aegon isn't involved at all in the decision to offer terms, so they obviously don't have to convince him.

[The Bard of Banefort]

They greatly reduced Criston’s role as kingmaker. I’m starting to think he was miscast too. The actor isn’t bad, but he doesn’t have the same gravitas as the rest of the main cast.