Jump to content

[Spoilers] Episode 110 Discussion


Ran
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, DMC said:

This seems to be getting really convoluted and I'm not even sure what you're arguing at this point.  So Mysaria would insist on killing Jaehaerys even though Daemon only wants either Aemond or Aegon to be killed but then Daemon is just like "yeah ok."  That doesn't sound like any miscommunication at all.

I expect that when Daemon sends a message to Mysaria - by letter or messenger since I think it makes no sense whatsoever to have Daemon actually sneak into KL, personally - Mysaria is already determined to have her own revenge.

In fact, if they wanted they could even go with making the whole thing Mysaria's revenge with the Greens merely pinning it on Daemon/Rhaenyra. Alicent might know the truth, but would not exactly be motivated to share it with her family or the public.

5 minutes ago, DMC said:

I really don't see it that way.  First, why would Daemon ever be "satisfied" with vengeance?  That's not his character.  Second, by the time of the God's Eye, there's a whole shitton more to avenge anyway.

They should also explain why Daemon would want to go after Aemond and Vhagar with Nettles rather than rule with Rhaenyra or deal with the Hightower army at Tumbleton. Caraxes and Sheepstealer are not exactly the dragons best suited to take on defeat Vhagar. One should think that one would want Vermithor aboard that team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

So Ryan Condal confirmed that Daeron will appear in future seasons. What's the best way to introduce him without it feeling weird?

I think there is a pretty good hook for that in episode 9. When Alicent and Otto have their talk in the wake of Aegon's discovery, Otto was just sealing a letter. It could have been a letter to Oldtown, informing them about the death of King Viserys and the impending coronation of Aegon II.

The Oldtown introduction scene could thus be a raven flying across the city, to the rookery in the Hightower, with the letter being handed to an ailing, bed-ridden Lord Hobert, who then informs his heir Ormund and his ward Prince Daeron about what has transpired.

There we could see what was originally a part of the FaB manuscript - Daeron weeping when he heard about his father's death - which was then omitted in the final version where it confirmed that the prince was in Oldtown at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/25/2022 at 11:05 AM, DMC said:

None of these are arguments for why Rhaenyra's sexual activity/promiscuity would make her a bad ruler (and most of them aren't even really arguments).  Since you've repeatedly evaded the question, I'll take this to mean you have no basis for such an argument, but will persist in claiming as much when it suits you.  Like most people who shame women for their sexuality.

It’s not about me, it’s about Cole, and if he would have reason to believe Rhaenyra would make a bad queen. 

But yeah, a female leader with an open relationship who does not have either a stable romantic partner or any claim to chastity would be a distraction at best, and a tyrant at worst. 
 

And I question the judgment of a female leader who would do this. Either she doesn’t understand her own society, in which case she is unfit to rule, or she does and she thinks she can burn people into silence/acceptance in which case she is a tyrant.

On 10/25/2022 at 1:03 PM, The hairy bear said:

 

Not Grand Maester Mellos, who nonchalantly claims “I do not like the taste of fish, but when fish is served, I eat it.” Nor many of the POVs we've seen in ASOIAF where we see that while queer characters are seen as an oddity, they are respected and admired in their own right (Renly, Loras, Oberyn,...). And no one questions their ability to rule because of their sexual preferences.

It seems clear to me that Criston Cole is far more homophobic than the average Westerosi citizen.

I don’t know how accepting they are based on any of those quotes, or even how much it would be tolerated in the open… but the nobility have always been more progressive than the unwashed masses. In secret they accepted a lot more behaviors than would everyone else (in moderation). 
 

Cole is no peasant, but he is much lower down the ladder both in terms of blood and education. His holding of the views of the majority isn’t unexpected or worth that much note.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/25/2022 at 2:03 AM, Landis said:

I feel like I’ve scrolled through multiple threads here at this point and I see a whole lot of people declaring that Alicent is characterized inconsistently, but nobody acknowledging the repeated statements by all four of the actors playing Alicent and and Rhaenyra, both showrunners, and multiple producers and writers to the effect that romantic chemistry underlines the friendship they had as kids, for Alicent in particular? Idk, having watched the show through that lens from the beginning (it was called out in interviews from the get), I can’t honestly say that I’ve felt Alicent’s behaviour has ever felt out of place in that context — on the contrary, it is unexpectedly some of the most accurate, specific, and deliberate writing and acting (especially from Olivia Cooke) of a deeply- closeted reactionary conservative I’ve seen in a very long time, and that it succeeds in doing so empathetically instead of cartoonishly is quite to the credit of everyone involved.

The lesbian angle falls apart once Alicent’s jealousy is framed as a meaningless substitute for more practical motivations (like fear for her children) and then undone after one toast in which Rhaenyra praises her for being a good wife (lol). 
 

As for Rhaenyra, she shows zero attachment to Alicent. Her best friend has spent 20 years trying to destroy her and she cannot even muster the energy to be upset or distraught. 
 

She literally holds out an olive branch, passively ignoring each insult as if they were coming from a total stranger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Raksha 2014 said:

 

Aemond might know that he would do a better job as ruler of Westeros than his brother (heck, I think Helaena would make a better ruler than Aegon the self-indulgent rapist); but as I recall from the book; he would never usurp the throne from Aegon.  I am not sure that Aemond is capable of loving anyone other than himself; possibly he loves his mother (at least TV-Aegon) or at least values her.

 

The Daemon stuff would be the same as my reply to the gladiator. As for Aemond, in the show he absolutely wants to usurp his brother.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/25/2022 at 12:11 AM, LordBolton'sLeech said:

I mean I don't think Corlys treated the Strong kids any worse than his own son? I mean he hasn't shown any overt love for the Strong boys despite defending them as his trueborn grandsons and being kind to them. And Rhaenys did cite their possible deaths as a reason to not sit the conflict out (in case the Greens killed them). But flip side, Corlys did force his son into an unhappy marriage that if he empathised with his kid a little more he should have known does not work -at all-. 

The only reason Corlys played along was the theone, which is now being denied to them and Rhaenys was always cold and distant to the children. Her caring is just odd.

In the books their alignment is obvious, they want the throne and they love the kids, so they-ll obviously fight for them but in the show...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

In fact, if they wanted they could even go with making the whole thing Mysaria's revenge with the Greens merely pinning it on Daemon/Rhaenyra. Alicent might know the truth, but would not exactly be motivated to share it with her family or the public.

I hope not.  It's time for the blacks to get their hands dirty.  Or at least Daemon on behalf of the blacks.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

They should also explain why Daemon would want to go after Aemond and Vhagar with Nettles rather than rule with Rhaenyra or deal with the Hightower army at Tumbleton.

Sure, of course.  It makes no sense why Daemon wouldn't want Vermithor for such an effort.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

But yeah, a female leader with an open relationship who does not have either a stable romantic partner or any claim to chastity would be a distraction at best, and a tyrant at worst. 
 

And I question the judgment of a female leader who would do this. Either she doesn’t understand her own society, in which case she is unfit to rule, or she does and she thinks she can burn people into silence/acceptance in which case she is a tyrant.

The idea that Rhaenyra's sexual history with a lifetime maximum total of five men would make her a bad ruler because it "goes against society" is ludicrous and offensive - both in-universe and without. 

Hell, even if it wasn't just simply gross for a modern reader to buy-in to this flagrant double standard, we have contemporary examples of female leaders "going against society" in terms of their sexuality.  Both Lady Sabitha Frey and Jeyne Arryn are widely believed to be lesbians, with Jeyne's paramour - Jessamyn Redfort - even named.  And while it's fundamentally different, there's also the scandal of Lady Sam (Tarly), who eventually married her dead husband's son Lord Lyonel Hightower.  The High Septon at the time refused to marry them or even travel with them, sure, but all three female rulers were well respected and certainly not "tyrants."

Cole's statements are absolutely nothing more than slut-shaming propaganda, and should not be afforded any merit by the reader.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Sorry if you explained this already and I missed it, but what do you mean?

It basically means the showrunners are afraid of their own audience's reactions and are attempting to manipulate them rather than simply presenting the character as intended before letting the audience judge for themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, DMC said:

 

The idea that Rhaenyra's sexual history with a lifetime maximum total of five men would make her a bad ruler because it "goes against society" is ludicrous and offensive - both in-universe and without. 

Hell, even if it wasn't just simply gross for a modern reader to buy-in to this flagrant double standard, we have contemporary examples of female leaders "going against society" in terms of their sexuality.  Both Lady Sabitha Frey and Jeyne Arryn are widely believed to be lesbians, with Jeyne's paramour - Jessamyn Redfort - even named.  And while it's fundamentally different, there's also the scandal of Lady Sam (Tarly), who eventually married her dead husband's son Lord Lyonel Hightower.  The High Septon at the time refused to marry them or even travel with them, sure, but all three female rulers were well respected and certainly not "tyrants."

Cole's statements are absolutely nothing more than slut-shaming propaganda, and should not be afforded any merit by the reader.

There is a lot of goal post moving going on here: 

1. Rhaenyra’s sexual relationships before ascending the throne and after are two different things. If we were under the impression, like Cole, that she would be engaged in an open marriage, then that would be more than just the five men you brought up.

As is we cannot be sure how she would behave on the throne. 
 

2. The examples provided are not only minimal and monogamist (or at the very least secretive) but also not involving the high seat of power. 

If as Queen Rhaenyra would have sexual relationships with multiple men without any concealment she would make a bad queen because: 

a) She is unwilling or unable to contain or curb her desires to fit the stature her position demands  

b) She either has no conception of the risks involved or doesn’t care, which bodes poorly for her in any other decisions she might make. 
 

You posted earlier about modern readers, but the thing is modern readers will judge her based on not just our moral standards, but the moral standards of the time in which she existed. My (or anyones) assessment of her capacity to rule must be measured by her actions in regard to her society. If her behavior garners a negative reaction and she knows this but does it anyways, I am not judging her for being sexually promiscuous, I am judging her for unnecessarily aggravating tensions and distracting from the duties of the realm.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t buy this whole: the showrunners are shocked by the reaction to Daemon. 

Maybe Sarah as an individual, but the show deliberately treats Daemon with kid gloves. While people like Otto are made to bully, manipulate, and undermine characters we love Daemon only assaults none-characters and faces zero repercussions. 
 

It allows people to laugh at his villainy while cheering his heroics when he aids the people we love (Rhaenyra, Laenor, Viserys) and smacking down those we don’t (Otto, Cole, Vaemond). 
 

He killed his wife and no one cared. The show could have given her family’s grief a spotlight to put shame upon the murder, but instead they bring out a fat guy who is full of bluster and then push him away, never to be recalled again. 
 

His choking of Rhaenyra is the first exception (since Rhaenyra is the hero) but really, the affect is undermined by having her spew a bunch of out-of-character nonsense in the middle of a critical moment. 
 

Stand down to Alicent and get ourselves killed because the song of ice and fire?? The fuck is she talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, butterweedstrover said:

There is a lot of goal post moving going on here: 

You're the one who keeps moving the goal posts.  You keep on wanting to make the conversation about Cole instead of your own views, even though this is now the third time you've had to be reminded this is about your own views as the reader.

2 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

As is we cannot be sure how she would behave on the throne. 

We have no reason to believe she would take a paramour.  Indeed, by all accounts, at the start of the war until Daemon's death, it was her husband that had an open paramour, not her.  And even if she did, so what?  As long as she doesn't have any children nobody should give two shits - again, in-universe or without.

4 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

If as Queen Rhaenyra would have sexual relationships with multiple men without any concealment she would make a bad queen because: 

By all accounts she has never had relationships with multiple men at the same time - other than perhaps starting up with Harwin while still trying with Laenor for their dozen or so attempts.  Thus we have little to no basis to believe this would the case.  Especially since we as the reader are told that during the war while Daemon essentially spent his time with Mysaria, Rhaenyra herself did not take on a paramour. 

And even if she did, again, so what?  Why should the modern reader think this would make her a bad queen?  Why does having multiple partners suggest an inability to "curb her desires" to the modern reader when it comes to ruling?  It's applying a blatant double standard that would obviously never even be brought up if she were a male, and it's really gross to see it echoed on this forum.  But again, you do you!

11 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

You posted earlier about modern readers, but the thing is modern readers will judge her based on not just our moral standards, but the moral standards of the time in which she existed. My (or anyones) assessment of her capacity to rule must be measured by her actions in regard to her society. If her behavior garners a negative reaction and she knows this but does it anyways, I am not judging her for being sexually promiscuous, I am judging her for unnecessarily aggravating tensions and distracting from the duties of the realm.

No, modern readers are perfectly capable to judge characters by their own standards rather than the standards of the time.  By your logic, everybody should distrust Jon because he's a bastard, or think Tyrion is an evil monkey demon because he's a dwarf.  It's an absurd excuse used to simply echo gross prejudices.

Moreover, you're ignoring the fact that her "behaviors" are only looked down upon because they are used as propaganda by her enemies that want to take the throne.  THAT'S why Ladies Frey and Arryn did not receive similar "judgment" - there was no one challenging their rule.  Her enemies are responsible for using her sexual history to "aggravate tensions," not her behavior.  It's very sad you don't see that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DMC said:

You're the one who keeps moving the goal posts.  You keep on wanting to make the conversation about Cole instead of your own views, even though this is now the third time you've had to be reminded this is about your own views as the reader.

We have no reason to believe she would take a paramour.  Indeed, by all accounts, at the start of the war until Daemon's death, it was her husband that had an open paramour, not her.  And even if she did, so what?  As long as she doesn't have any children nobody should give two shits - again, in-universe or without.

By all accounts she has never had relationships with multiple men at the same time - other than perhaps starting up with Harwin while still trying with Laenor for their dozen or so attempts.  Thus we have little to no basis to believe this would the case.  Especially since we as the reader are told that during the war while Daemon essentially spent his time with Mysaria, Rhaenyra herself did not take on a paramour. 

And even if she did, again, so what?  Why should the modern reader think this would make her a bad queen?  Why does having multiple partners suggest an inability to "curb her desires" to the modern reader when it comes to ruling?  It's applying a blatant double standard that would obviously never even be brought up if she were a male, and it's really gross to see it echoed on this forum.  But again, you do you!

No, modern readers are perfectly capable to judge characters by their own standards rather than the standards of the time.  By your logic, everybody should distrust Jon because he's a bastard, or think Tyrion is an evil monkey demon because he's a dwarf.  It's an absurd excuse used to simply echo gross prejudices.

Moreover, you're ignoring the fact that her "behaviors" are only looked down upon because they are used as propaganda by her enemies that want to take the throne.  THAT'S why Ladies Frey and Arryn did not receive similar "judgment" - there was no one challenging their rule.  Her enemies are responsible for using her sexual history to "aggravate tensions," not her behavior.  It's very sad you don't see that.

I’ve responded to you directly and I’ll do it again: “I, the reader, think it would make her a bad queen.” 

Not because I think women shouldn’t be allowed to have sexual relations outside of their marriage. 

I think so because the character in question (Rhaenyra) would be doing it willfully in defiance of the realm and would knowingly provide ammo to her detractors and exponentially increase the chances of a war. 

Life is unfair, but if you know how your behavior will affect others, have no need to act this way outside recreational purposes, and engage in this recreations anyways, you as a human being aren’t considering the consequences of your actions and should not be given the responsibility (burden) of leadership. 
 

Fairness does not factor into this occasion. It’s unfair that a bear is stronger than me, I’d still be stupid to provoke it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, butterweedstrover said:

Not because I think women shouldn’t be allowed to have sexual relations outside of their marriage. 

I think so because the character in question (Rhaenyra) would be doing it willfully in defiance of the realm and would knowingly provide ammo to her detractors and exponentially increase the chances of a war.

You are arguing that because of her sexual history, she would not be able to "control her desires" and this would make her a bad ruler.  There is no basis in the text that she wouldn't be able to control herself, it's absurd to suggest this would affect her decision making as a ruler, and I find it's grossly distasteful to echo the slut-shaming propaganda of her enemies.  But that's your answer, so fair enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, butterweedstrover said:

the nobility have always been more progressive than the unwashed masses.

Says who?

If you are to base your entire (flimsy) argument on such an arbitrary statement, you might want to provide some source. At least where I live, the nobility is far more conservative than the rest of the population (washed or not).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DMC said:

You are arguing that because of her sexual history, she would not be able to "control her desires"  

Lol, no. That is what Cole is arguing. And if true, I agree, it would make her bad queen. 
 

We don’t know the full reasons behind her sexual relationships so how it would’ve turned out is up for debate.

6 minutes ago, DMC said:

and this would make her a bad ruler.  There is no basis in the text that she wouldn't be able to control herself, it's absurd to suggest this would affect her decision making as a ruler, and I find it's grossly distasteful to echo the slut-shaming propaganda of her enemies.  But that's your answer, so fair enough.

It wouldn’t affect it her decision making, it would be her decision making.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The hairy bear said:

Says who?

If you are to base your entire (flimsy) argument on such an arbitrary statement, you might want to provide some source. At least where I live, the nobility is far more conservative than the rest of the population (washed or not).

What country is that? Modern day constitutional monarchies exist to uphold traditions. 
 

Monarchies with real power like the shah of Iran, the house of Saud (Saudi Arabia) or the Tsars were (are) all more progressive than the population because they were (are) unaffected by traditional customs the rest had to uphold.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, The hairy bear said:

Says who?

If you are to base your entire (flimsy) argument on such an arbitrary statement, you might want to provide some source. At least where I live, the nobility is far more conservative than the rest of the population (washed or not).

Progressive ideas usually begin in academic circles, which wealthier people have more access to. It’s part of the reason why many western countries (including the US and UK) are seeing a realignment among voters, with working class people now leaning more conservative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

That is what Cole is arguing. And if true, I agree, it would make her bad queen. 
 

We don’t know the full reasons behind her sexual relationships so how it would’ve turned out is up for debate.

Yikes.  Again, it's you echoing his slut-shaming propaganda and acting as if it has any merit when everything we know from the text confirms it doesn't.  And "we don't know" isn't an argument, it's a classic rhetorical device to slander people you disagree with/don't like.  South Park did a whole episode on this and "I'm just asking questions!" ("Dances with Smurfs").

10 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

It wouldn’t affect it her decision making, it would be her decision making.

No, it's not.  This is a brazen double standard.  Nobody applies a male's sexual activities to their abilities as rulers, at least not if it's as muted as Rhaenyra's, and we shouldn't for her either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...