Jump to content

[Spoilers] Episode 110 Discussion


Ran
 Share

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, Ran said:

Off the top of my head: Beric Dondarrion, the Redwynes, Meryn Trant, Red Ronnet Connington, Addam Marbrand, Mycah the butcher's boy, the mother of Berra (Robert's last bastard child), Lord Merryweather, Fireball, Glendon Flowers, Rohanne.. And more, certainly, but yeah, there's a number of them. I don't know if it's disproportionate to the other hair colors, though. Probably not.

Thank you. I repeat: it’s not Westeros without redheads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

A mark of a great society, no. But a kindness that she should have received from a supposedly loving husband, even in a patriarchal monarchy.

Yes, of course. I wanted to stress the fact that it is kind of patronizing to assume that Aemma would have chosen the life of her child if the c-section decision would have been hers. She could have just as well been so angry and pissed about her death that she wouldn't agree to be cut open to give her husband an hypothetical unborn son as a farewell gift.

This kind of thing is quite telling about the way women and motherhood are still treated today. One just assumes that it is natural that a woman would die to protect her (unborn) child ... but they don't have to do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Yes, of course. I wanted to stress the fact that it is kind of patronizing to assume that Aemma would have chosen the life of her child if the c-section decision would have been hers. She could have just as well been so angry and pissed about her death that she wouldn't agree to be cut open to give her husband an hypothetical unborn son as a farewell gift.

This kind of thing is quite telling about the way women and motherhood are still treated today. One just assumes that it is natural that a woman would die to protect her (unborn) child ... but they don't have to do that.

Aemma made it pretty explicit earlier in the episode that she believed it was her duty to provide an heir for the throne. I’d say that’s reason enough to assume she’d allow the c-section rather than just have them both die together out of spite. And a full-grown, nine-month gestated baby is very different than one that’s only been gestating for six weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Aemma made it pretty explicit earlier in the episode that she believed it was her duty to provide an heir for the throne. I’d say that’s reason enough to assume she’d allow the c-section rather than just have them both die together out of spite. And a full-grown, nine-month gestated baby is very different than one that’s only been gestating for six weeks.

All true. But we also see that she was growing weary of this thing ... and we see that nobody has prepared her for the possibility of this kind of emergency 'save the child, kill the mother' c-section scenario. Despite her many pregnancies so far.

If she refused to allow the maesters to kill I'd not necessarily use the word 'spite' to describe this. It could be a decision out of spite, to be sure ... but also simply a refusal to be killed, an inability to make that decision while also refusing to allow others to make it for you, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

All true. But we also see that she was growing weary of this thing ... and we see that nobody has prepared her for the possibility of this kind of emergency 'save the child, kill the mother' c-section scenario. Despite her many pregnancies so far.

If she refused to allow the maesters to kill I'd not necessarily use the word 'spite' to describe this. It could be a decision out of spite, to be sure ... but also simply a refusal to be killed, an inability to make that decision while also refusing to allow others to make it for you, etc.

I don’t know, man. In fiction, men who choose to save a child in exchange for themselves are portrayed as heroic. But when a woman does it, she’s an agent of the patriarchy.

This show isn’t nearly as clever about women and gender as it thinks it is.

Edited by The Bard of Banefort
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I don’t know, man. In fiction, men who choose to save a child in exchange for themselves are portrayed as heroic. But when a woman does it, she’s an agent of the patriarchy.

This show isn’t nearly as clever about women and gender as it thinks it is.

I didn't say she would be. I just pointed out that the general consensus would be that a mother would be gladly die for her unborn child. I mean, that is the timeless ideal of the divine, heroic, aristocratic, royal mother - to die to give to her son, to nurture and protect him (in absence of a father ... or against his father), to defend his interest and prepare him for his role, and then meekly stand aside and hand power to him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I didn't say she would be. I just pointed out that the general consensus would be that a mother would be gladly die for her unborn child. I mean, that is the timeless ideal of the divine, heroic, aristocratic, royal mother - to die to give to her son, to nurture and protect him (in absence of a father ... or against his father), to defend his interest and prepare him for his role, and then meekly stand aside and hand power to him.

I wasn’t referring to you specifically, just to a general mindset you see a lot of around pop culture (ex. Karsi being paralyzed with fear when seeing the wight children in Hardhome put a lot of people in a tizzy, even though there’s no way they would have ever shown a heroic man killing a bunch of zombie children either).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I wasn’t referring to you specifically, just to a general mindset you see a lot of around pop culture (ex. Karsi being paralyzed with fear when seeing the wight children in Hardhome put a lot of people in a tizzy, even though there’s no way they would have ever shown a heroic man killing a bunch of zombie children either).

There are children and children.  No one sheds any tears for Joffrey or would shed tears for Sweetrobin.  But, they’re a pair of little snots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I didn't say she would be. I just pointed out that the general consensus would be that a mother would be gladly die for her unborn child. I mean, that is the timeless ideal of the divine, heroic, aristocratic, royal mother - to die to give to her son, to nurture and protect him (in absence of a father ... or against his father), to defend his interest and prepare him for his role, and then meekly stand aside and hand power to him.

Thank you, (and everyone else who) actually answered the multiple choice.

I get that a lot of people weighing in on this have never even been pregnant let alone gone through a long, difficult labour and delivery even with the help of modern medicine and have no concept of how much hormonal biology takes over a woman’s survival instincts/brain during it. To assume Aemma would have been anywhere near capable of being altruistically rational enough to make a choice and not have completely gone into feral aggro panic mode of denial she wouldn’t survive once told of her situation is absolute fantasy and, IMO, would have been laughably implausible on screen to everyone who has gone through anything remotely close to it, which is a lot more women (and their partners/family/healthcare workers) than you imagine.

8 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I wasn’t referring to you specifically, just to a general mindset you see a lot of around pop culture (ex. Karsi being paralyzed with fear when seeing the wight children in Hardhome put a lot of people in a tizzy, even though there’s no way they would have ever shown a heroic man killing a bunch of zombie children either).

I completely agree.

And speaking of not showing an heroic man killing zombie children… I have a feeling Blood and Cheese will likely mostly or entirely happen off screen. Which will be exponentially more horrific happening in non book-readers imaginations. (Like Poe never specifically describing the horrors of the Pit in The Pit and the Pendulum. If you think you know that short story because you’ve seen the Vincent Price film - which only has the title in common - you don’t. Do yourself a favour and go read it. It’s free online at eapoe.org.)

I think having Aemond hearing a report of an incident then racing to Helaena’s chamber and seeing Alicent trying to comfort Helaena cradling a pile of bloody sheets containing Jaehaerys’s headless corpse, then having Alicent take him quietly aside to explain in VO out of Helaena’s earshot while we see a silent montage of what happened up until they grab Jaehaerys instead, then back to Alicent telling Aemond of the killing blow with the shot focused on Helaena getting closer to her face, If we don’t get all of it in Alicent’s exposition with the camera on Helaena the entire time getting closer to her face.

Then the growling rage on Aemond’s face…

Edited by ShadowKitteh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ShadowKitteh said:

Thank you, (and everyone else who) actually answered the multiple choice.

The choices you offered obscured the full picture. Primarily because: 

1. The choice made by Viserys was to torture his wife for the chance of maybe having a child that could possibly survive (meaning his choice was made to the determinate of his wife, not just as an acceptance of her fate).

2. Viserys was driven to have a son by dreams and prophecies, not duty and honor. 

3. Viserys felt guilty because he knew he did something wrong.  

If he had prioritized the life of his wife she wouldn't have been cut open, screaming and afraid. Which is to say you can't white-wash his actions as a totally practical decision made in the heat of the moment. It was a cowardly decision made to increase his wife's suffering for sake of an unborn child who was of superior importance due to the king's own personal obsessions.  

But the question is, do you think Viserys did anything wrong in this whole situation? Put aside pressuring his wife to have a second child, did he do anything that might reflect poorly on his character?  

I think him, like Rogar, not being able to face up to his own decisions was testament to how the love he bore for his wife did not inform his behavior. 

 

 

Edited by butterweedstrover
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, butterweedstrover said:

But the question is, do you think Viserys did anything wrong in this whole situation? Put aside pressuring his wife to have a second child, did he do anything that might reflect poorly on his character? 

No and no. Apologies, I thought that was clear. My fault entirely. Let me try again.

Grand Maester Mellos tells him they can attempt to save the child or lose them both. I cannot fathom breech birth mortality is as foreign a concept in 105 AC Westeros as it obviously is today in 2022 Earth with modern medicine. In fact, I’d venture to say most were as familiar with just what a long, horrible death a woman would suffer in Aemma’s condition as those who lived in 15th century Britain. 

Who wouldn’t want to spare someone they love from such a fate? When Mellos tells Viserys, “There’s a technique taught at the Citadel…” and explains how they might be able to save the child, clearly implying there’s no way to save Aemma, “but the resulting blood loss…” Viserys is clearly and willingly in denial at that point, but you see it dawn on him what’s happening… Aemma is going to die a long, horrifically painful death.

Paddy plays it brilliantly. You can see his brain working as it clicks in his head and he almost vomits at the thought of what Mellos is saying but they both know Aemma is faced with a far more tortuous end than what she’s already experiencing.

Mellos is actually offering more of a mercy for Aemma than anything else. The astronomically small chance of saving the child in the process, is more to ease Viserys’s conscience so he can attempt to live with making the right call rather than “leaving it to the Gods” and putting her through a long, painful, and gruesome death of sepsis causing all her organs to slowly shut down. I doubt there’s enough milk of the poppy to ease her way, since it’s likely not morphine-grade.

The only person who would question his character is Viserys himself.

He absolutely makes the right call. Everyone fully aware of the horrific dangers of childbirth in 105 AC Westeros knows that. But because of his deep love for her, her death leaves a hole in his soul that can never be filled, and he blames himself for the rest of his life, because that’s what humans do. We always blame ourselves for not doing enough, regardless if it was completely out of our control, and torture ourselves with, what if as if we could will ourselves back in time to make different choices and somehow cause a different outcome.

It’s part of the grieving process for most of us, even in the death of relationships.

His guilt also makes him vulnerable to Otto manipulating him into naming Rhaenyra his heir while pimping his own daughter into being Viserys’s new Queen.

The most heart breaking moment is the end of episode 8. “My love.”

#2 is when he says to Alicent in Ep7, “I’m going to bed Aemma.”

He never stopped loving her, and it most certainly informed his behavior. How could it not?

 

 

Edited by ShadowKitteh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/4/2022 at 10:35 PM, Ran said:

Off the top of my head: Beric Dondarrion, the Redwynes, Meryn Trant, Red Ronnet Connington, Addam Marbrand, Mycah the butcher's boy, the mother of Berra (Robert's last bastard child), Lord Merryweather, Fireball, Glendon Flowers, Rohanne.. And more, certainly, but yeah, there's a number of them. I don't know if it's disproportionate to the other hair colors, though. Probably not.

Which brings us back to the old "population of Westeros" debate. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The redheads curiously don't come with the skin conditions many redheads have to deal with. But then, what to expect from a world where a bunch of albinos hang out in the south and do like heat despite their pale skin ... not to mention the albino-albino (Bloodraven) having no eye problems (sans the missing one) and actually being a super duper archer.

If there is one thing a realistically depicted (one-eyed) albino wouldn't be it is a great archer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In retrospect, I would have preferred that Aegon was more of a lovable loser than an alcoholic degenerate. The actor showed enough brief glimpses of this that I definitely think he could have pulled it off. By making Aegon so despicable, and by not playing up how Daemon would definitely have had his nephews put to the sword, the show failed to make this conflict more morally ambiguous, despite clearly intending to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

In retrospect, I would have preferred that Aegon was more of a lovable loser than an alcoholic degenerate. The actor showed enough brief glimpses of this that I definitely think he could have pulled it off. By making Aegon so despicable, and by not playing up how Daemon would definitely have had his nephews put to the sword, the show failed to make this conflict more morally ambiguous, despite clearly intending to.

But would that make the conflict morally ambiguous or would it make turn the audience against Daemon instead?

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...