Jump to content

[Spoilers] Episode 110 Discussion


Ran
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, RhaenysBee said:

Yes I can see all that, though the show didn’t do much to establish that the Targaryens as a family were into prophecies, or that Daemon in particularly was or how high society at this point generally views prophecy. That groundwork is missing for me to see the credibility in Daemon’s reaction or the weight of the revelation to him. My impression had been that Viserys was a history geek and this prophecy is important to him but not much more than any other legend from ages ago. It may be different in the books but I certainly didn’t get the Rhaegar vibe out of anybody and so the scene felt unduly over the top. 

It's a prophecy apparently passed down from king to heir, and it comes from Aegon the Conqueror himself, so I do think at least those in the know do believe in prophecies or at least regard them as important (after all, the Targaryens survived because of one). So I do think that was established as not just something Viserys was concerned with. Daemon's reaction was more because he saw how Rhaenyra was her father's daughter, following in the same foolish things, in his perspective (and also how she has Targaryen-related knowledge that he doesn't have), but we, the audience, know it's actually something important and that also he was left out of it because he was never considered an adequate heir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, TormundsWoman said:

I read the entire back and forth, and I must say there is something truly insulting about this specific sentence. I can't put my finger on why, but kuddos to you. I rarely feel insulted on the interwebz. Must be just me and the baggage and connotation that comes with the term "sexual deviance" applied to a woman (in this case a woman character) who has sex with multiple partners and / or outside of marriage. I'm sure you didn't mean it though.

It’s a bit like reading very old histories that describe Katherine Howard or Caterina Sforza as a “harlot.”

Edited by SeanF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The kings morals are more or less his own. He would be influenced by his parents, his family, and, especially, his tutors at a young age. What the Realm at large thinks and believes wouldn't reach him all that much, since a future king usually grows up at court, meaning he doesn't interact much with the nobility of the larger Realm.

Whatever wards and courtiers would live at court would completely submit to the ruling morality at the court if they want to stay there and gain and keep the ruling king's favor.

As Daemon succinctly tells his brother in the show: You are the Dragon. You can do whatever the hell you want. The only thing limiting you is your own imagination, the walls in your own head.

If Viserys wanted to watch Rhaenyra fuck a hundred publicly during a court session then this would happen and people would applaud and mimic such frolics. Such is the power of the Targaryen kings in that era.

You see how the most powerful non-royal lord in the Realm, Jason Lannister, starts to stutter and stammer when he realizes he has displeased the king.

Up until Maegor and Jaehaerys, the Faith and their morals had some real power over the Targaryens. They had to pay lip service to them, felt the real need to placate them, to not antagonize them, because they had too much influences over the masses.

But when Maegor and Jaehaerys broke the Faith this all but disappears.

Which is also why we should interpret Baelor the Blessed not as a weak king being ruled by the Faith and its doctrines ... but rather as a Targaryen king who, in his piety, took over the Faith and ruled them as much as the Seven Kingdoms.

There’s nothing to suggest that Rhaenyra’s sexual preferences are anything especially unusual in any case.

If she were openly flaunting strings of lovers, that could be an issue with the movers and shakers of Westeros, but she does not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Lady Anna said:

Daemon's reaction was more because he saw how Rhaenyra was her father's daughter, following in the same foolish things, in his perspective (

well this is a new read of it, one that I haven’t come across before. Goes to show how many ways the audience can view and interpret what we saw. Which isn’t a bad thing. I think both shows (hotd and got) neglected to incorporate the importance of prophecy into their world building, that’s where Jon Targaryen failed too. Even GoT only made this to be a Melisandre and Stannis thing who were both portrayed as moderately looney for being so caught up in prophecy. There were traces of prophecy around Daenerys but it was never portrayed as the full fledged driver into the story as it was in the books. I think something similar is the deal with hotd, because production is very careful to not border on what the audience might consider “silly”. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

How graphic is Dahmer BTW?

I dunno, haven't seen it either.

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

It’s a bit like reading very old histories that describe Katherine Howard or Caterina Sforza as a “harlot.”

I loved Caterina Sforza's portrayal in The Borgias (Neil Jordan's version).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, DMC said:

I dunno, haven't seen it either.

I loved Caterina Sforza's portrayal in The Borgias (Neil Jordan's version).

Elizabeth Lev's biography is very good, if prone to purple prose at times.  Her captivity at the hands of Cesare Borgia was frightful,   He raped her repeatedly, and subjected her to a mock hanging.  Her first husband, Girolamo Riario, consummated their marriage when she was ten.

Her reputation as a "harlot" was based upon taking one lover and marrying twice for love.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RhaenysBee said:

well this is a new read of it, one that I haven’t come across before. Goes to show how many ways the audience can view and interpret what we saw. Which isn’t a bad thing. I think both shows (hotd and got) neglected to incorporate the importance of prophecy into their world building, that’s where Jon Targaryen failed too. Even GoT only made this to be a Melisandre and Stannis thing who were both portrayed as moderately looney for being so caught up in prophecy. There were traces of prophecy around Daenerys but it was never portrayed as the full fledged driver into the story as it was in the books. I think something similar is the deal with hotd, because production is very careful to not border on what the audience might consider “silly”. 

I think in the scene itself Daemon says something like "my brother used prophecies to give a purpose to his weakness" or some such, right before he says "dreams didn't make us kings, dragons did". I definitely think he lost it because 1) he realized that Rhaenyra was following in her father's footsteps of being a level headed ruler, which he hated about Viserys seeing it as weakness (and here, I also think he might have been shocked to see that she wouldn't just follow him but instead assert her own decisions), 2) finding out Rhaenyra is privy to knowledge (relating to their family) that he isn't aware of and that nobody thought he was worthy of receiving.

I think part of his character is feeling the need to have power over women, so when Rhaenyra here "escaped" from under his influence, he snapped, because now he knows that she was Chosen in a special way and that now she's the queen and can give him orders. He's lost the power he thought he had over her. At least, that's my interpretation.

Regarding GOT, you're absolutely right that they didn't seem interested in pursuing the prophecy/fantasy side of things. Which is why the inclusion of this prophecy in Hotd seems stupid or weird to a lot of viewers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, DMC said:

Interesting Martin wanted to start the show depicting the friendship/rivalry between Aemon and Baelon and then the former's death and decision to make Baelon heir instead of Rhaenys.  Add in the Great Council and they maybe coulda done that in a couple episodes as an extended prologue, maybe even one near-film-length ep.

I think this could have worked fairly well as three-level take on succession issues. Aemon and Baelon would be the ideal brothers, at least on the surface. Baelon is perfectly fine with Aemon being the heir, but he does have a desire to prove himself and show himself to be as good ... or rather: better than his brother.

This is there in FaB with Baelon insisting to get his knighthood earlier than Aemon, and with him getting the bigger dragon at an earlier age, too. Baelon also does get a sister to marry, which puts him in a very good dynastic position, etc.

He could have been a guy who was perfectly fine with Aemon as heir ... but not so fine with the idea that his niece Rhaenys should come before him. After a King Aemon, yes, since ideally Baelon himself would be an old man, too, when a King Aemon died of natural causes, but not in the scenario as it presented itself.

So this could then have been a case of a friendly usurpation/pushing aside the obnoxious niece. And it could have been a considerable betrayal on part of Baelon and the Old King both since the show could have firmly established that Aemon was wishing that Rhaenys and eventually Rhaenys' sons by Corlys would succeed him on the Iron Throne. That could have been the consensus at Rhaenys-Corlys wedding. The decision would have been amicable enough in the end, with nobody really considering war or rebellion, but the peace in the family would have been destroyed.

The Great Council would then be a near succession war, with the Velaryons being determined to push for Rhaenys' or Laenor's coronation upon Jaehaerys' death, with Viserys being pushed forward as a pretender by Daemon and Aemma. This time it would only be good sense and to a point the personality of the people involved that avoids a succession war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the prophecy stuff:

I think they put that into the show to have an established plot device/subplot that can help explain some of the weirder things that happen during the Dance later.

By having Helaena as a confirmed dreamer they could also add new cryptic prophecies to the established stuff, giving the whole show a Jaehaerys II vibe.

We could see Rhaenyra eventually figuring out that Helaena is a dreamer, meaning she and her people might actually start to listen to what she has to say. Now, the dwarf woman said that Aerys and Rhaella's union would bring forth the promised prince ... what if Helaena says Rhaenyra and Daemon's bloodline will bring forth the promised prince? Rhaenyra's heirs are her elder sons, meaning Joffrey Velaryon at that time. What would happen if Daemon were told that the well-being of mankind demands that his son Aegon succeeds to the Iron Throne?

There is also the possibility that Daemon now gets obsessed with prophecy and dreams and the like because he actually realizes that what he viewed as his brother's weakness was actually a core tenet of Targaryen kingship. He just didn't know. Prophecy and dreams could eventually lead Daemon to his (apparent) death at Harrenhal.

Rhaenyra's journey could further be influenced by what she views as her duty to the Realm and the future since she could get convinced that Aegon II and Alicent's other children aren't up to the task, in part, of course, because nobody ever told them about this.

I've mentioned that I could see Rhaenyra and Alicent getting along again after Rhaenyra takes the throne - keep in mind that Alicent is not executed nor apparently treated badly (unless you go with the whore queens story which nobody should), so in context of the show take on things they could go with a reconciliation there. Alicent could be an honored guest/hostage at court, possibly even becoming an informal advisor. Alicent would still care for her children and would like to see them safe, but she herself could certainly make her peace with Rhaenyra's queenship.

Anyway, in such a scenario Rhaenyra sharing prophecy stuff with Alicent could also cause a change in her. Viserys only rambled on about this stuff, and Alicent never understood it, so when talking to Rhaenyra she could finally understand what Viserys' last words actually meant.

The prophecy could also come up in Jace's dealings with Cregan Stark - Rhaenyra's letter could mention it, and Jace could reveal that he knows about the reason for Aegon's Conquest - which the Starks of that generation could do, too, if Torrhen Stark actually bent the knee because Aegon told him why he wanted to unite Westeros. Which I think is pretty likely for the books.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, DMC said:

LOL, no, the discussion was never about absolute v constitutional monarchies.  Constitutional monarchies are obviously entirely irrelevant in a comparison to Westeros. 
 

Yes it was. Read the replies before jumping into a discussion.

22 hours ago, DMC said:

 

*Sigh*  First, it was you who first compared Rhaenyra's potential rule to Aegon IV, so it takes a special type of delusion to say I'm the one "stretching those behaviors."  Anyway, this will be my last attempt on this.  
 

In reference to sexual actions being irrelevant to a person’s ability to rule. To which I made note of Aegon IV. And if, as you say, there is a double standard then that makes it worse in the regard of Rhaenyra even if she does not practice such liberties to the same extent.

22 hours ago, DMC said:

You are the one making unfounded assumptions that because of Rhaenyra's sexual history she will not be able to "control her desires" and subsequently be a bad or even tyrannical queen.  Again, continually saying "we can't know" is not an argument, it is a rhetorical device to make baseless arguments - usually to slander the other side.  And now you're using another commonly used fallacy of accusing others of what you yourself are doing. 
 

My point is people that stood in her way had the proclivity of dying. It is not that she couldn’t muster up the constraint, but that she wouldn’t care or think the rules didn’t apply to her. 

22 hours ago, DMC said:

 

I’m not going to lengthen the comment chain any longer, but if you only read the book and saw her end up with Daemon, the man who took her to brothels as a child, that might reflect something potential about their marriage on or off the throne. 
 

As Cole seems to believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Yes it was. Read the replies before jumping into a discussion.

In reference to sexual actions being irrelevant to a person’s ability to rule. To which I made note of Aegon IV. And if, as you say, there is a double standard then that makes it worse in the regard of Rhaenyra even if she does not practice such liberties to the same extent.

My point is people that stood in her way had the proclivity of dying. It is not that she couldn’t muster up the constraint, but that she wouldn’t care or think the rules didn’t apply to her. 

I’m not going to lengthen the comment chain any longer, but if you only read the book and saw her end up with Daemon, the man who took her to brothels as a child, that might reflect something potential about their marriage on or off the throne. 
 

As Cole seems to believe.

Aegon IV’s lusts bordered upon mania.  Rhaenyra’s did not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, cock_merchant said:

That is only HBOmax. HOTD is viewed on both HBOmax and HBO cable.

Yeah. It seems to be that more people have shifted to watching it linear more than anything. There's a long piece in Vulture, I think, examining it and suggesting that linear viewing has grown as the show has become "appointment television" for people. Still that 29 million average viewership, IIRC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Aegon IV’s lusts bordered upon mania.  Rhaenyra’s did not.

Yup, which is the obvious point.  Just as Rhaenyra's sexual history/activity is not at all comparable to what Maegor did nor even Robert.

32 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The prophecy could also come up in Jace's dealings with Cregan Stark - Rhaenyra's letter could mention it, and Jace could reveal that he knows about the reason for Aegon's Conquest - which the Starks of that generation could do, too, if Torrhen Stark actually bent the knee because Aegon told him why he wanted to unite Westeros. Which I think is pretty likely for the books.

Yeah if they're going to continue to employ the prophecy, the is the most obvious place to make it impactful.  Plus it conveniently fits that Jace is the heir and old enough to have been told.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Crixus said:

 

We've been through variations of this and it is now beyond tedious. I love a good debate, but there has to be a semblance of fact and rationality involved. So I'm done, but you carry on. 

It’s obvious you think all my arguments are bizarre, incoherent, and even offensive. 

Obviously I disagree, I thought I gave a well written response that adequately explains my position. However given your feelings are so far apart from mine and that you don’t think my perspective is worthy of serious consideration, I don’t see how much further this conversation can go. 

I read your entire reply and well I can summarize it into a few central complaints and I’ll just make a few notes: 

1. Daemon’s default position is not support for Rhaenyra. He does not have to choose Aegon or Rhaenyra and he had the political support in the Stepstones, in Essos, and elsewhere if he so desired to try and seize power. 

But instead, his character is dedicated from a narrative standpoint to protect Rhaenyra and Viserys above his own self gain.  

Aemond meanwhile, who has no such power or political allies seeks to take the throne for himself.  

2. If Aemond in the book is a generic villain and that is how he is portrayed in the show, then that strengthens the case for why Daemon is fundamentally better. 

3. Actions themselves aren’t fundamentally evil, it is the motives underpinning them that give moral credibility or not. The Greens usurping Rhaenyra was not evil in of itself if there were adequate reasons. The show gave us none 

4. I think, humbly, that it is the show which is framing Daemon’s evil with a light touch. It was a creative decision to not have any negative repercussions for his crimes. It was a creative decision to have his victims be irrelevant to the narrative or function as obstacles against a morally sound purpose. 

And I think the public reaction has some baring on that. It is a result of the show turning the Blacks into a faction of unimpeachable moral purpose (to put Rhaenyra on the throne) and the removal of any possible reason for the Greens to oppose them with any credibility. 

5. Reluctance to escalate a conflict is not the same as surrender. Rhaenyra’s character has been built around the protection of her claim and she does just that. Instead of battling the Greens head on she tries to find political support elsewhere to press her claims. 

That is not however what she suggests in that scene with Daemon. What she suggests is relinquishing her claim and accepting the agreement offered. And that would never happen which is why no one mentions the possibility again. 

But in the end, I don’t think you care to have this discussion so I’ll stop. I put a lot of effort into my argument and it seems some of your responses are not exactly directed at me. 
 

Edit: since I now just thought about it, going from one extreme to the other isn’t conducive of good discussion. For example, if some believes a lake is too dry, the response should not be that said person wants a flood. In the same way, wanting Rhaenyra to show some moral vice in the face of injustice like anger, rage, violence, coldness, or emotional detachment doesn’t need to be taken to the extreme. 

Like she doesn’t need to scream like a banshee, but since you brought it up that would be more book accurate than the grief stricken and forgiving Rhaenyra we got.

Edited by butterweedstrover
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Ran said:

Yeah. It seems to be that more people have shifted to watching it linear more than anything. There's a long piece in Vulture, I think, examining it and suggesting that linear viewing has grown as the show has become "appointment television" for people. Still that 29 million average viewership, IIRC.

I haven't seen your thoughts on the finale and the season as a whole. Thoughts on the dance at the end?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't recall if this was already linked here but it's an interview with Ryan Condal for the New York Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/23/arts/television/house-of-the-dragon-showrunner-ryan-condal.html

I highlight this quote:

It all goes back to Alicent and Rhaenyra and their fathers. The daughters grew up into adults who’ve been manipulated and poisoned by their fathers, in a world where they’re taught, as we talked earlier, about picking sides. They go on to perpetuate this division that began in the pilot. It’s all about them, and will continue to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lady Anna said:

I think in the scene itself Daemon says something like "my brother used prophecies to give a purpose to his weakness" or some such, right before he says "dreams didn't make us kings, dragons did". I definitely think he lost it because 1) he realized that Rhaenyra was following in her father's footsteps of being a level headed ruler, which he hated about Viserys seeing it as weakness (and here, I also think he might have been shocked to see that she wouldn't just follow him but instead assert her own decisions), 2) finding out Rhaenyra is privy to knowledge (relating to their family) that he isn't aware of and that nobody thought he was worthy of receiving.

I think part of his character is feeling the need to have power over women, so when Rhaenyra here "escaped" from under his influence, he snapped, because now he knows that she was Chosen in a special way and that now she's the queen and can give him orders. He's lost the power he thought he had over her. At least, that's my interpretation.

Regarding GOT, you're absolutely right that they didn't seem interested in pursuing the prophecy/fantasy side of things. Which is why the inclusion of this prophecy in Hotd seems stupid or weird to a lot of viewers.

 

I agree with a lot of this.  My take is also that being in/around King's Landing and/or being drawn into the actual politics or 'Game of Thrones' brings out the worst in Daemon.  This is exemplified by how he seems to be 'fine'/more level-headed/happy when he's with Laena and his girls in Pentos, and after his marriage to Rhaenyra -at least while Viserys is still King/they are away from King's Landing and all of the scheming.  

But, the earlier episodes showed his need for affirmation from Viserys, and how he doesn't really react well when his counsel isn't taken when he's in/around the politics, and starts to act out.   I think that's kind of happening here.  He's being drawn back into the high stakes political game, he's more a man of action vs words, and I think he's surprised when Rhaenyra is not 100% on the same page as him.  Thus he's reverting back to acting/lashing out emotionally.    

 

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...