House of the Dragon Gets 8 Episodes for Season 2, Season 3 (Almost) Greenlit

[Annara Snow]

On 4/9/2023 at 4:38 PM, The Bard of Banefort said:

It occurred to me that they might decide to kill off Helaena early if they wanted to avoid having too many “mad queens,” should they choose to go that route with Alicent and/or Rhaenyra.

To quote Arya Stark: That's stupid.

This fandom has had its mind poistoned by D&D's nonsense. There's absolutely nothing in season 1 of HotD that suggests Condal is worried about having "too many characters" or the audience being too stupid to recognize different characters because hey have similar names, which was D&D's sincere fear apparently.

What happens to Helaena is completely different from Alicent or Rhaenyra. If "mad" means traumatized in any way from angry and vengeful to depressed, they may as well cut half of the male characters - too many traumatized, angry men out there.

 And why  would they kill her off early just to chuck out her big contribution to the plot - to be a Princess Diana figure that people's dissatisfaction gets focused on and a catalyst for a rebellion?

They made her autistic and gave her prophetic abilities just to kill her off early as unimportant? I don't think so. I'm not even getting into how they would be called out for ableism. "Let's kill off the autistic character who fell into depression, because she's useless, instead of showing her being beloved by the people and her death mattering". They're not dumb in that regard. They knew not to do Bury Your Gays twice in the same season.

Edited April 10, 2023 by Annara Snow

[Annara Snow]

20 hours ago, Thomaerys Velaryon said:

I agree. Alicent and Viserys are portrayed as quite distant from their children which I don't really like.

Viserys is. Alicent isn't.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Annara Snow said:

Viserys is. Alicent isn't.

Alicent isn't emotionally close to any of her children. Helaena she doesn't understand, Aegon she abuses, Aemond she ignores until he gets his dragon. He tries to win her favor, but she doesn't seem to care for him all that much.

[The Bard of Banefort]

1 hour ago, Annara Snow said:

To quote Arya Stark: That's stupid.

This fandom has had its mind poistoned by D&D's nonsense. There's absolutely nothing in season 1 of HotD that suggests Condal is worried about having "too many characters" or the audience being too stupid to recognize different characters because hey have similar names, which was D&D's sincere fear apparently.

What happens to Helaena is completely different from Alicent or Rhaenyra. If "mad" means traumatized in any way from angry and vengeful to depressed, they may as well cut half of the male characters - too many traumatized, angry men out there.

Alicent, Rhaenyra, and Helaena were driven “mad” by the deaths of their children. They’re all the same in that regard.

1 hour ago, Annara Snow said:

 And why  would they kill her off early just to chuck out her big contribution to the plot - to be a Princess Diana figure that people's dissatisfaction gets focused on and a catalyst for a rebellion?

They made her autistic and gave her prophetic abilities just to kill her off early as unimportant? I don't think so. I'm not even getting into how they would be called out for ableism. "Let's kill off the autistic character who fell into depression, because she's useless, instead of showing her being beloved by the people and her death mattering". They're not dumb in that regard. They knew not to do Bury Your Gays twice in the same season.

So it would be wrong for them to kill her off because her main contribution to the story is. . . to die? Why is suicide less ableist than murder? Couldn’t you turn that right around by saying that the “normal” women, Alicent and Rhaenyra, are able to survive the deaths of their children whereas the atypical woman isn’t?

People didn’t care that the one Asian woman on the show is a sex worker who was introduced to us in doggy position. They didn’t care that all the black people were either quickly tossed aside or all but insignificant. They didn’t care that the only way the writers could figure out how to make Alicent sympathetic was by turning her into a child bride. They didn’t care that their main male character bludgeoned one wife to death and strangled another. For all the complaints GOT received about misogyny and racism, that didn’t stop anyone from tuning in each week and giving every episode until 8.3 a ridiculously high IMDb rating. All they cared about was the ending, which didn’t meet expectations. If people like HOTD’s ending, nothing else will affect the show’s reputation. If they find the ending unsatisfying, they’ll go back and say that everything we just talked about was a sign of how much the show sucked from the very beginning. That is the nature of the GOT TV universe. 

Edited April 10, 2023 by The Bard of Banefort

[Lord Varys]

I honestly don't think show Helaena will get her silly book story. Yes, Blood and Cheese will traumatize her, but I imagine it is more likely to cause her to have more visions and dreams about the future that will consume her, not turn her into an imbecile confined to her chambers for the rest of her life.

Rather she is likely to become some kind of Cassandra-like oracle.

What they also could do is switch the change around from Helaena to Alicent. In the book, Alicent is also right there in the room with Helaena and the kids since they are in Alicent's apartments. If they made Alicent pick a boy it certainly could help to give her a desire for vengeance ... although, of course, her witnessing what they make her daughter do while she lies there, bound and gagged, should also help with that.

Also, of course, I don't think they will give us any 'mad queen' plot ... because that's just childish and stupid. Especially since neither Alicent nor Rhaenyra ever actually come across as mad in the book. There are scenes where they lose it, but that has nothing to do with mental illness in either case.

[The Grey Wolf Strikes Back]

2 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Alicent, Rhaenyra, and Helaena were driven “mad” by the deaths of their children. They’re all the same in that regard.

It also happens in the books to a degree with Catelyn, Lysa, Alannys, etc. Honestly, Helaena is one of my biggest disappointments with the Dance. She's just...there. More prop than character. To expand on your point, the issue is that when GRRM has female characters go "mad" because their children die its always to render them passive and/or inactive in a way he doesn't make his male characters. Men get to rant and rage and actually do things. Rhaenyra, Helaena, Catelyn, etc. don't. They retreat inside themselves and let others take over.

And yeah, I feel like a lot of their attempts to make Alicent more "likable" boil down to 1) Making other characters worse (Viserys I), 2) Making her a victim in situations her book counterpart never would have been (Larys), and 3) Making her less proactive (meaning reactionary) than said book counterpart. (I, for one, vastly prefer the version of the Green Council we got in F & B, at least as far as the personalities involved are depicted.)

She's nowhere near the flaming dumpster fire that is Mysaria though thankfully.

Edited April 10, 2023 by The Grey Wolf Strikes Back

[Ran]

Keep it polite, folks.

[Lord Varys]

I honestly very much loathe the fact that Helaena Targaryen doesn't even get to take Dreamfyre on a joyride in FaB (aside from flying her to Laenor's funeral on Driftmark). She is indeed just a prop in the book.

But I don't think the show will or should take that road. They will do something with her, just as they will with Rhaenyra and Alicent.

[Annara Snow]

Well I'm again going to point out that it's pretty weird to argue that a woman is humiliated if she is shown having sex? Or specifically if it's doggy style? But a man or a person on top in the same scene is not? I'd love to see a defense of that argument.

Both Mysaria and Daemon were introduced doing their job they had at the time, but only one of them was doing it properly. Daemon was introduced engaging in police brutality and chopping the limbs of poor people. Mysaria was even good at faking that she was enjoying Daemon's extremely poor performance. But apparently the sex scene is humiliating and showing Mysaria badly because...she's the woman / the bottom, but not Daemon (who's in the same scene and struggling with erectile dysfunction)? Interesting. I'd say, if you worry about Mysaria being presented in a bad light, you should worry about her offering young virgins to Daemon - her trafficking very young girls is what makes her look bad, not having sex or in which position she's having sex.

Mysaria is portrayed as a woman of poor background who is smart and rises to a position of power, so of course no one else has ever argued their portrayal of her was misogynistic or racist - why would they?

On the other hand, the show has in fact been criticized for its portrayal of black women, Laena, Baela and Rhaena - in Baela and Rhaena's case because they were sidelined, but two of them are still alive and can get more screentime and development (especially as season 1 was crammed) and ...they are going to survive to the end. But if they were to be killed off  because they are deemed useless and "there are too many women on the show"? You bet the show would rightfully raked over the coals for that.

I'm still astonished by this idea that the show should kill off Helaena early as a useless character and not even make her death matter - because she dies anyway? Fine, let's kill off Daemon,  Otto, Aemond, Jace and Criston early, because they die anyway?! 

Neither Rhaenyra nor Alicent become mehtally ill, nor are their reactions anything like Helaena's. So what does "mad queen" even mean here? If "mad" means anything from angry and vengeful to emotionally unstable, then by the same logic, they should get rid of half of the male characters. Daemon, Aemond, Aegon, none of them are stable individuals, and even Daeron has a breakdown at Bitterbridge. Is that too many "mad princes"?

 

Edited April 11, 2023 by Annara Snow

[Annara Snow]

14 hours ago, The Grey Wolf Strikes Back said:

It also happens in the books to a degree with Catelyn, Lysa, Alannys, etc. Honestly, Helaena is one of my biggest disappointments with the Dance. She's just...there. More prop than character. To expand on your point, the issue is that when GRRM has female characters go "mad" because their children die its always to render them passive and/or inactive in a way he doesn't make his male characters. Men get to rant and rage and actually do things. Rhaenyra, Helaena, Catelyn, etc. don't. They retreat inside themselves and let others take over.

And yeah, I feel like a lot of their attempts to make Alicent more "likable" boil down to 1) Making other characters worse (Viserys I), 2) Making her a victim in situations her book counterpart never would have been (Larys), and 3) Making her less proactive (meaning reactionary) than said book counterpart. (I, for one, vastly prefer the version of the Green Council we got in F & B, at least as far as the personalities involved are depicted.)

She's nowhere near the flaming dumpster fire that is Mysaria though thankfully.

Actually Catelyn gets the opposite of passive when she goes "mad". She very much does get murderous in her last moments as she is trying to save Robb, and then becomes vengeance personified as Lady Stoneheart.

Rhaenyra doesn't get passive either. She doesn't fight, but that's because she's described as "not a warrior". She is very active, for better or worse: takes King's Landing, executes Otto, tortures Tyland to find out where the money is, overtaxes people, and when she gets really paranoody turns against Nettles and Addam and alienates her allies, and in the end goes to Dragonstone to try and find more dragon eggs 

Alicent is also not passive, especially when she can help it (not being a prisoner) - from allegedly having a role in Blood's torture, to taking care of Maelor when Helaena couldn't, to negotiating with Borros about new marriage alliances.

Helaena is the only character in the Dance whose response to trauma is to be broken and depressed rather than becoming vengeful or more determined or take it out on others. And the way fans react to that is typical of the contempt pop culture seems to have for people who are broken by trauma without becoming vengeful or empowered etc. even though I'm sure a lot of people are like that in real life.

HotD's "attempts" to make Alicent sympathetic have been very successful, as evidenced by the many people who relate to her and consider her the best developed character in the show - as well as all the aggressively Team Black fans who are angry that she is a complex and sympathetic character rather than a two-dimensional Evil Stepmother they had projected into F&B Alicent. Every time I see someone claiming that they prefer"book Alicent" (who, like F&B characters in general, is just a sketch to project interpretations ihto rather than a fleshed out character), it happens to be someone who wants the story to be about good guys Team Black vs bad guys Team Green and want Alicent to be a villainous trope easy to hate.

Re: the Green Council, interesting how F&B Alicent never doing anything separate from Otto is called "active" and "having agency", while HotD Alicent not being told about the plan by the Council and then having her own agenda and a conflict with Otto over how to proceed is deemed passive and having no agency.

IIRC the only thing F&B Alicent says at the Council is that she worries Daemon will find a way to kill her sons if Rhaenyra takes the throne, because they are a threat to her, especially as her 3 oldest sons are bastards. Sounds just like HotD Alicent's motivation. 

The otherthing she supposedly said was that she wishes Rhaenyra died in childbirth...according to Mushroom. Who was on Dragonstone. But somehow he supposedly knew what was said at a secret council in King's Landing.

 

[Lord Varys]

4 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

Well I'm again going to point out that it's pretty weird to argue that a woman is humiliated if she is shown having sex? Or specifically if it's doggy style? But a man or a person on top in the same scene is not? I'd love to see a defense of that argument.

I don't have much issue with Mysaria's general agenda in the show. She becomes her own woman there whereas we literally have no clue what the book Mysaria felt or wanted to accomplish. In fact, the idea that she was kind of defending the people she saw as her own is not exactly something that's at odds with her portrayal in the book ... because we just don't know what she does there.

However, recasting her as an Asian Dragon Lady character with an exotic accent that doesn't really work was not exactly a great choice. It may have worked much better to have her as a Valyrian-looking Lysene woman since that would have established and reinforced that Valyrian looks do not equal royalty. The albino freaks can be slaves and whores, too.

4 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

Rhaenyra doesn't get passive either. She doesn't fight, but that's because she's described as "not a warrior". She is very active, for better or worse: takes King's Landing, executes Otto, tortures Tyland to find out where the money is, overtaxes people, and when she gets really paranoody turns against Nettles and Addam and alienates her allies, and in the end goes to Dragonstone to try and find more dragon eggs.

LOL, sorry, but all that happens in the books specifically after the death of Jace shocked Rhaenyra out of her depression. Rhaenyra is exactly like Catelyn in AGoT. Luke's death is Bran's fall and the death of Jace is the attempt on Bran's life by the catspaw. Thereafter, Cat and Rhaenyra both return to the world of the living and take charge of things.

As for the book, Rhaenyra Targaryen doesn't exist as a character or leader from Luke's death until after the Gullet. All decisions are made by other people around her - Daemon, Rhaenys, and eventually Jace and Corlys. Rhaenyra is so much out of the picture that she doesn't even mount Syrax to fight in the Gullet after Aegon the Younger and the dying Stormcloud returned to Dragonstone.

Also, of course, it is unintentionally funny to give post-Gullet book Rhaenyra much agency there. She executes a plan her consort and the late Jace already made (means she didn't come up with that herself), she executes some traitors whose death was the obvious consequence of her ascension and she hands a guy to the torturers. But she doesn't torture herself, not does she overtax people - her Master of Coin does. Rhaenyra didn't micromanage this. She made Bartimos Celtigar her Master of Coin and told him to get her the money she needed.

Rhaenyra fails because she is too weak to take charge. And that's not just because George has his sources portray her so ... that's clear what she is.

[The Grey Wolf Strikes Back]

10 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

Text

While Bran is in a coma, Catelyn neglects her duties to the point Robb complains to her about it. Indeed, it isn't until the attempt on Bran's life that she snaps out of it.

When Luke is murdered, Rhaenyra breaks down, forcing Corlys and Jace to step up in terms of leadership. Similarly to Catelyn, Jace's death is what makes Rhaenyra snap out of her funk.

I never said anything about Alicent being passive. I said she's more victimized and reactionary in the show, which is different. That being said, you see something similar with Rhaenyra in episode 8. In F & B Rhaenyra orders Vaemond extrajudicially murdered and his corpse fed to Syrax. Pleasant? Hardly. Proactive? Yes. In the show, she banks on her father bailing her out.

Similarly, I said I like book!Alicent more specifically with regards to the Green Council scene, where she is much more of a confident leader.

If you think I'm in favor of a "Blacks=Good, Greens=Evil" narrative you're sadly mistaken. Just ask Lord Varys, Ran, The Bard of Banefort, or anyone else I've discussed the Dance with on this board. From the beginning, I've wanted more ambiguity and nuance, not less.

Edited April 11, 2023 by The Grey Wolf Strikes Back

[The Grey Wolf Strikes Back]

@Lord Varys

I have to disagree with you about Mysaria. In F & B she's one of the few genuinely loathsome members of the Black faction. Making her a champion of the smallfolk does not mesh well with that at all. Similarly, that speech she gives Otto annoys me to no end because it sounds like something out of Monty Python. No one in-setting would think that way, much less talk that way to the Hand of the King. The atrocious accent they've saddled the actress with is just the salt on an open wound.

[The Bard of Banefort]

18 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf Strikes Back said:

While Bran is in a coma, Catelyn neglects her duties to the point Robb complains to her about it. Indeed, it isn't until the attempt on Bran's life that she snaps out of it.

When Luke is murdered, Rhaenyra breaks down, forcing Corlys and Jace to step up in terms of leadership. Similarly to Catelyn, Jace's death is what makes Rhaenyra snap out of her funk.

I never said anything about Alicent being passive. I said she's more victimized and reactionary in the show, which is different. That being said, you see something similar with Rhaenyra in episode 8. In F & B Rhaenyra orders Vaemond extrajudicially murdered and his corpse fed to Syrax. Pleasant? Hardly. Proactive? Yes. In the show, she banks on her father bailing her out.

Similarly, I said I like book!Alicent more specifically with regards to the Green Council scene, where she is much more of a confident leader.

If you think I'm in favor of a "Blacks=Good, Greens=Evil" narrative you're sadly mistaken. Just ask Lord Varys, Ran, The Bard of Banefort, or anyone else I've discussed the Dance with on this board. From the beginning, I've wanted more ambiguity and nuance, not less.

I don’t even mind all the grief-struck mothers, because I find that realistic. But Alicent, Rhaenyra, Helaena, Catelyn, and even Cersei are all driven to some kind of madness by the deaths of their children. If GRRM/Condal wanted to make it more “equal,” so to speak, they could show the violent rampages men have been known to go on throughout history in response to their children’s deaths, as unpleasant as that is. The most we get is Otto executing all the rat catchers and Daeron burning that village to avenge a nephew he probably never even met.

I think what I would have preferred they had done was keep Alicent older than Rhaenyra and show her trying to be a good stepmother to her. In FnB we’re told she calls Rhaenyra “daughter” at her wedding; maybe in this version, Alicent takes this as her duty and tries to raise Rhaenyra right. Perhaps she tries to protect her from Daemon and other men (one line of hers, “Ser Criston protects the princess from her enemies, but who protects the princess from Ser Criston?” suggests that she sees something sinister in him). But then over time, certain things push Alicent towards her breaking point: Otto’s dismissal, Viserys refusing to betroth Rhaenyra and Aegon (which was Alicent’s idea in the books), Rhaenyra’s flouting of responsibility. If HOTD had hammered home the stigma against bastards like the books do, that would be a huge point of contention too. But the point of no return would be Rhaenyra’s marriage to Daemon. There’s no way that Alicent’s children would ever be safe if Daemon was king consort, and she would have no choice then but to rebel.

The underlying theme would be that the history books made Alicent into a villain when she had tried harder than anyone else to make peace. In the books, we’re told she says, “Mayhaps the whore will die in childbirth” during the Green Council. But perhaps one of the men says it instead (and is met with a cold stare from Alicent, much like in E6), but it nevertheless gets pinned on her. 

[Lord Varys]

54 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf Strikes Back said:

In F & B Rhaenyra orders Vaemond extrajudicially murdered and his corpse fed to Syrax. Pleasant? Hardly. Proactive? Yes. In the show, she banks on her father bailing her out.

Sorry, but were to you get it that this was extrajudicial murder? Rhaenyra was the liege lady of both Corlys and Vaemond ... and Vaemond did try to usurp the lordship of Driftmark.

Quote

That same year, across Blackwater Bay, the Sea Snake was stricken by a sudden fever. As he took to his bed, surrounded by maesters, the issue arose as to who should succeed him as Lord of the Tides and Master of Driftmark should the sickness claim him. With both his trueborn children dead, by law his lands and titles should pass to his eldest grandson, Jacaerys…but since Jace would presumably ascend the Iron Throne after his mother, Princess Rhaenyra urged her good-father to name instead her second son, Lucerys. Lord Corlys also had half a dozen nephews, however, and the eldest of them, Ser Vaemond Velaryon, protested that the inheritance by rights should pass to him…on the grounds that Rhaenyra’s sons were bastards sired by Harwin Strong. The princess was not slow in answering this charge. She dispatched Prince Daemon to seize Ser Vaemond, had his head removed, and fed his carcass to her dragon, Syrax.

The fact that Rhaenyra urges her good-father to name Luke his heir strongly implies she was right there in High Tide at Corlys' sickbed. Just as Vaemond was. So after the guy dared to declare his uncle's grandsons bastards, Rhaenyra had Daemon take him into custody. But then it clearly states '[she] had his head removed' which indicates a kind of trial and a formal execution, not 'extrajudicial murder'. It is not even clear if Daemon acted as the executioner here (very unlikely since such blood work usually is the headsman's job, not the kind of things royal princes do to soil themselves). The fact that the corpse was subsequently fed to Syrax also indicates that this was a kind of formal execution thing - Rhaena treated the dead Androw in a similar fashion after he jumped out the window rather than waiting for his wife to execute him.

The entire scene would have taken place at High Tide with the sick Corlys and Princess Rhaenys not opposing Rhaenyra's actions there. Else there wouldn't have been a dead Vaemond ... or if Rhaenyra and Daemon had murdered him before anyone could intervene then the Velaryons and their men-at-arms would have seized them.

That the Silent Five and Vaemond's wife and sons have to turn to KL and Viserys I also indicates that Corlys/Rhaenys were on the same page as Rhaenyra - else they would have demanded justice for Vaemond - with Rhaenyra or the king or both.

54 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf Strikes Back said:

Similarly, I said I like book!Alicent more specifically with regards to the Green Council scene, where she is much more of a confident leader.

While there is certainly considerable change there to Alicent's character ... I think it adds more depth to her not less. The person we get in the book is the evil stepmother cliché with the book not ever actually addressing what exactly caused the rift between the women. Yes, of course, they weren't besties in the book. But they were friends, on good terms. Gyldayn describes that their relationship deteriorated, shows us how people noticed that this was the case ... but we don't know why that happened, who started the animosities (pretty unlikely it was the princess who was ten years younger than her stepmother) and, most especially, not who was actually in charge of what would become the Green party - Alicent or Otto?

In that sense, the Green Council scene as given by George is a kind of silly thing where you just have a bunch of villains and opportunists plot. There is no context given about the motivations of the people in the room (especially not for the council members who effectively all first show up in that scene in the book), so such a scene couldn't have been adapted faithfully in a show which actually created three-dimensional characters.

I mean, the book scene actually doesn't have any of the characters consider what to do with Rhaenyra and her family once/if Aegon is crowned. Nor do they seem to consider the possibility/danger of a succession war. It is well and good if a historian kind of forgets to address this issue - perhaps his sources were silent on this topic or he forgot - but the show would have to do it.

That said - quite a few things could have been closer to the book, of course.

However, the text doesn't pin Alicent down there. Is she in charge or Otto? It is not clear. She is first informed as the queen, but her father arranges the coup. And when there is blood oath time the woman is pushed out of the elite circle of the male plotters ... never mind that Alicent is going to prove the most loyal defender of her children's and grandchildren's claims.

There are some nasty quotes attributed to her ... but we cannot pretend that we know they are genuine.

Also, of course, the idea that Otto and his buddies wouldn't include Viserys' wife in their plot could even make sense in the book context. We don't know the exact nature of the relationship of Alicent-Viserys (in their later years), so we cannot pretend to know that Otto might not have been wary his daughter might a mistake there, might (unitentionally) confess their plans to the king while he was yet able to intervene (which book Viserys obviously was until the day he died).

1 hour ago, The Grey Wolf Strikes Back said:

@Lord Varys

I have to disagree with you about Mysaria. In F & B she's one of the few genuinely loathsome members of the Black faction. Making her a champion of the smallfolk does not mesh well with that at all. Similarly, that speech she gives Otto annoys me to no end because it sounds like something out of Monty Python. No one in-setting would think that way, much less talk that way to the Hand of the King. The atrocious accent they've saddled the actress with is just the salt on an open wound.

I don't think so. Mysaria has her Vito Corleone 'put the studio boss king caricature into his place by killing something he loves' moment ... but that doesn't make her 'loathsome' in my book. She certainly is a crime lord ... but we don't know anything about her business nor the goals she wanted to accomplish with her business. The idea she is 'evil' or 'a villain' just because she helps one royal faction to murder some other royals actually means nothing. And neither do her schemes ruining Daemon and Nettles. The former is about her being a contractor for hire, the latter tells us that she might have a jealousy issue. But neither reflects in any way on her day-to-day life as a professional crime lord.

I don't know why Mysaria wouldn't speak to Otto in this way. They had a professional business relationship for years. And he knows it. Otto did rely on the White Worm many a time, apparently.

In that sense - there is every chance that book Mysaria could have had similar designs in the book - they would have just never been mentioned. I mean, we do have a series of novels here were a considerable number of the not-so-bright-readership still think Melisandre is 'evil' because she is a sorceress pretty much all male POVs who interacted with her in the first couple of books feared. Never mind that we get considerable insight into her personality both in ACoK and ASoS. Mysaria could easily enough be a similar case.

And to be clear - Mysaria isn't the champion of the smallfolk. She wants to push the Crown to stop the most perverse forms entertainment for highborn louts like Aegon the Elder. She doesn't want to change the system or anything like that. But she certainly is right that a feudal monarchy definitely needs the consent of the people to a degree. An uprising in the capital can end the reign of a monarch as the later uprising against Rhaenyra shows.

I don't think the writing is particularly great in those scenes ... but the idea to give Mysaria agency of her own is not bad at all.

[Annara Snow]

8 hours ago, The Grey Wolf Strikes Back said:

While Bran is in a coma, Catelyn neglects her duties to the point Robb complains to her about it. Indeed, it isn't until the attempt on Bran's life that she snaps out of it.

When Luke is murdered, Rhaenyra breaks down, forcing Corlys and Jace to step up in terms of leadership. Similarly to Catelyn, Jace's death is what makes Rhaenyra snap out of her funk.

I never said anything about Alicent being passive. I said she's more victimized and reactionary in the show, which is different. That being said, you see something similar with Rhaenyra in episode 8. In F & B Rhaenyra orders Vaemond extrajudicially murdered and his corpse fed to Syrax. Pleasant? Hardly. Proactive? Yes. In the show, she banks on her father bailing her out.

Similarly, I said I like book!Alicent more specifically with regards to the Green Council scene, where she is much more of a confident leader.

If you think I'm in favor of a "Blacks=Good, Greens=Evil" narrative you're sadly mistaken. Just ask Lord Varys, Ran, The Bard of Banefort, or anyone else I've discussed the Dance with on this board. From the beginning, I've wanted more ambiguity and nuance, not less.

Trust me, I wasn't referring to you there 

Catelyn's and Rhaenyra's reactions are immediate responses to trauma (Catelyn's lasts less than one chapter) and they both snap out of it , as you yourself point out - Catelyn fights an attacker with a knife, bare handed. She's the last character anyone could accuse of being passive.

This conversation started around the idea that Helaena could/should be killed of early because her development is supposedly too similar to Rhaenyra's and Alicent's. But it's really not. And a character who is broken by trauma and doesn't go into revenge mode or gets fueled or motivated by it would be a really rare thing to see on TV.

ETA: Rhaenyra banks on her father bailing her out in both book and show. That's how that works, she wouldn't be able to get away with any of it if her father the king wasn't supporting her. Even if she directly had Vaemond murdered, it would be only because she knows Viserys would have her back.

Rhaenyra having Vaemond killed and feeding his corpse to Syrax (which I'm pretty sure was not in the original novella, where Rhaenyra came across as flawed  but still fairly normal and lilkable before the war and losses make her paranoid and cruel) is the exact kind of thing that would make Rhaenyra look like a monster even early on in the story. I can't understand why you would want everyone to be horrible from the start, even before the war. How would that make for a compelling story? Where's the emotional connections if the characters are all monsters from the start you can't relate to, where's the tragedy if, instead of people who could have been better but have downward spirals as the war goes on, it's about a bunch of awful people just continuing to be awful? That sounds like a show no one would want to watch because they wouldn't care about anyone.

And the "feeding his corpse to her dragon" part makes me roll my eyes, because it's what F&B says every time a Targaryen, especially one with a bad or scary reputation, has soneone killed - Rhaenyra feeding Vaemond's corpse to Syrax, Aemond feeding Simon Strong's corpse to Vhagar, I think earlier Rhaena supposedly fed Androw's corpse to Drea.fyre...and in ASOIAF, one of the slanders against Dany spread by her enemies (iin addiction to other classics like bathing in the blood of virgins and having sex with horses) is that she feeds people to her dragons...so i'm inclined to think these are just BS rumors . It feels ridiculously OTT.

Edited April 12, 2023 by Annara Snow

[Annara Snow]

14 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I don't have much issue with Mysaria's general agenda in the show. She becomes her own woman there whereas we literally have no clue what the book Mysaria felt or wanted to accomplish. In fact, the idea that she was kind of defending the people she saw as her own is not exactly something that's at odds with her portrayal in the book ... because we just don't know what she does there.

However, recasting her as an Asian Dragon Lady character with an exotic accent that doesn't really work was not exactly a great choice. It may have worked much better to have her as a Valyrian-looking Lysene woman since that would have established and reinforced that Valyrian looks do not equal royalty. The albino freaks can be slaves and whores, too.

LOL, sorry, but all that happens in the books specifically after the death of Jace shocked Rhaenyra out of her depression. Rhaenyra is exactly like Catelyn in AGoT. Luke's death is Bran's fall and the death of Jace is the attempt on Bran's life by the catspaw. Thereafter, Cat and Rhaenyra both return to the world of the living and take charge of things.

As for the book, Rhaenyra Targaryen doesn't exist as a character or leader from Luke's death until after the Gullet. All decisions are made by other people around her - Daemon, Rhaenys, and eventually Jace and Corlys. Rhaenyra is so much out of the picture that she doesn't even mount Syrax to fight in the Gullet after Aegon the Younger and the dying Stormcloud returned to Dragonstone.

Also, of course, it is unintentionally funny to give post-Gullet book Rhaenyra much agency there. She executes a plan her consort and the late Jace already made (means she didn't come up with that herself), she executes some traitors whose death was the obvious consequence of her ascension and she hands a guy to the torturers. But she doesn't torture herself, not does she overtax people - her Master of Coin does. Rhaenyra didn't micromanage this. She made Bartimos Celtigar her Master of Coin and told him to get her the money she needed.

Rhaenyra fails because she is too weak to take charge. And that's not just because George has his sources portray her so ... that's clear what she is.

LMAO are you being serious with this?! "She doesn't torture the guy herself, and she doesn't overtax people, her Master of Coin does"?   Well duh! Rulers normally don't torture or execute people personally, they have torturers and headsmen whose job is to do that. And no king or queen ever served as every political position, of course they have people in charge of finances, legal matters  etc... That's how government works?

But it will be fun if we start arguing from now on that people in power never did anything unless they did it with their own hands. Tywin Lannister did nothing wrong - he just had other people doing it. Robert didn't try to assassinate Dany, he just promised lands and titles to whoever does. He didn't bankrupt the crown, Littlefinger did it all on his own. Cersei never tortured anyone, Qyburn did, she didn't murder the High Septon, Osney Kettleblack did, she didn't have anything to do with the murders of dwarfs, a bunch of random people kill them, nothing to do with her. It would be a cool defence.

Rulers / leaders also tend to have experts and councillors etc. so if we're going to say they are passive and don't do anything when they accept other people's plans...then most of them are "passive" by that logic if they're not coming up with everything themselves. 

 

Edited April 12, 2023 by Annara Snow

[Lord Varys]

10 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

Trust me, I wasn't referring to you there 

Catelyn's and Rhaenyra's reactions are immediate responses to trauma (Catelyn's lasts less than one chapter) and they both snap out of it , as you yourself point out - Catelyn fights an attacker with a knife, bare handed. She's the last character anyone could accuse of being passive.

The point there is that George obviously modelled Rhaenyra there on his Catelyn portrayal. It doesn't really matter that Rhaenyra seems to be too depressed to get out of bed for about a year or so - FaB is not a novel.

10 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

This conversation started around the idea that Helaena could/should be killed of early because her development is supposedly too similar to Rhaenyra's and Alicent's. But it's really not. And a character who is broken by trauma and doesn't go into revenge mode or gets fueled or motivated by it would be a really rare thing to see on TV.

A boring thing it would be, just as Helaena is a completely wasted non-character in the book. And it already seems they are not going to portray her in this way due to ther having prophetic dreams and being autistic. Book Helaena's life seems to have revolved around her children (at least that's how she is portrayed). But show Helaena has other interests. So while the choice might still be traumatic for her, she might react differently than the way the book character allegedly did.

10 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

ETA: Rhaenyra banks on her father bailing her out in both book and show. That's how that works, she wouldn't be able to get away with any of it if her father the king wasn't supporting her. Even if she directly had Vaemond murdered, it would be only because she knows Viserys would have her back.

That doesn't matter because it isn't the issue people are criticizing there. But, of course, Rhaenyra could have been right there counting on her dad's support when the Silent Five made their ridiculous statements.

10 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

Rhaenyra having Vaemond killed and feeding his corpse to Syrax (which I'm pretty sure was not in the original novella, where Rhaenyra came across as flawed  but still fairly normal and lilkable before the war and losses make her paranoid and cruel) is the exact kind of thing that would make Rhaenyra look like a monster even early on in the story. I can't understand why you would want everyone to be horrible from the start, even before the war. How would that make for a compelling story? Where's the emotional connections if the characters are all monsters from the start you can't relate to, where's the tragedy if, instead of people who could have been better but have downward spirals as the war goes on, it's about a bunch of awful people just continuing to be awful? That sounds like a show no one would want to watch because they wouldn't care about anyone.

LOL, you do know that the 'original novellas' were badly edited incomplete versions of the manuscript versions of 'Heirs of the Dragon - A Question of Succession' and 'The Dying of the Dragons', right? And of course that tidbit is right there in TRP:

Quote

The princess was not slow in answering this charge. She dispatched Prince Daemon to seize Ser Vaemond, had his head removed, and fed his carcass to her dragon.

FaB is based on the original texts written from TWoIaF which were then somewhat edited and enlarged (especially in the case of 'The Sons of the Dragon') - the 'original novellas' were completely ignored in the editing process there. And I can tell you that this episode was always a part of the manuscript of the bundle of text that would become FaB.

Also, of course, Rhaenyra is never a monster nor 'paranoid and cruel' later in the war. She is wary of treason but that is the case for effectively her entire council. She is not even remotely a mad nutcase monarch like Aerys II or even Baelor the Blessed (whose pious lunacies were his ideas and his ideas alone and he pushed them through against his Hand and other advisers ... although eventually he may have appointed like-minded folks to high office). Rhaenyra's bad decisions are made by the consensus of a majority of her council, not by the monarch alone - unlike the mad and cruel decrees of Aegon II and Aemond - killing all rat catchers, killing all Strongs, burning people declared to be the most fervent followers of the Shepherd, building immense statues of Aemond and Daeron, etc.

10 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

And the "feeding his corpse to her dragon" part makes me roll my eyes, because it's what F&B says every time a Targaryen, especially one with a bad or scary reputation, has soneone killed - Rhaenyra feeding Vaemond's corpse to Syrax, Aemond feeding Simon Strong's corpse to Vhagar, I think earlier Rhaena supposedly fed Androw's corpse to Drea.fyre...and in ASOIAF, one of the slanders against Dany spread by her enemies (iin addiction to other classics like bathing in the blood of virgins and having sex with horses) is that she feeds people to her dragons...so i'm inclined to think these are just BS rumors . It feels ridiculously OTT.

That seems to be a rather pointless objection. There is a consistent thread of dragons feasting on human corpses starting during the Wars of the Conquest. And it makes sense that a Targaryen sentencing somebody to death would feed the remains to a dragon - it is not only the ultimate humiliation, robbing the criminal of a proper burial, but it is also a sign that House Targaryen's victory is absolute. They physically destroyed their opponent.

There is also not the slightest indication that anyone would invent or record such invented rumors during a time while the Targaryens ruled supreme.

10 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

LMAO are you being serious with this?! "She doesn't torture the guy herself, and she doesn't overtax people, her Master of Coin does"?   Well duh! Rulers normally don't torture or execute people personally, they have torturers and headsmen whose job is to do that. And no king or queen ever served as every political position, of course they have people in charge of finances, legal matters  etc... That's how government works?

LOL, you don't seem to be getting at. You went out of your way to present Rhaenyra as very active in her own government with those examples ... and I showed that they are trivialities at best. It is like saying Trump was not a moron with a low attention span because he appointed officials, considered to pardon somebody, and authorized a battle plan his generals came up with. If we say a monarch does everything that's done in his name then Rhaenyra's earlier depression also doesn't matter - Daemon, Rhaenys, Jace, and Corlys all acted in her name, so she made all the decisions there, too, right? Thus there would be no difference between her kind of taking charge and her moping around in bed all day.

It is very obvious that Rhaenyra was a very weak monarch, that she rarely, if ever, actually took charge, that the decisions made in her name were mostly done by other people.

Which clearly is not the case for stronger monarchs who didn't rule by consensus or majority view of the council and who actually made the decisions their appointed officials then had to enact. You do know FaB - sit down, take some time, and reread and compare Rhaenyra's decrees and decisions to those of the young Jaehaerys I.

I'm not sure were you come from there but your view of Rhaenyra as a mad and evil tyrant is just nonsense. It isn't in the text. She becomes unpopular because of incompetence and a lack of funds ... not because she kills people left and right for no reason.

10 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

Rulers / leaders also tend to have experts and councillors etc. so if we're going to say they are passive and don't do anything when they accept other people's plans...then most of them are "passive" by that logic if they're not coming up with everything themselves.

Leaders who don't think about their own political agenda themselves, who don't make plans or programs themselves, who come unprepared to a council or staff meeting, etc. are weak and incompetent. They then only enact policies others come up with, possibly only on a whim.

Of course, a ruler doesn't have to be a genius who comes up with everything himself - but he should have a plan or a vision. Look again to Jaehaerys I - or even Tyrion in ACoK. They know what they want but they take good advice and incorporate things into their plans that better the original plan.

Rhaenyra never comes up with anything herself. The plan to take KL is Daemon's and Jace's. When she sits the throne she has no clue how to end the war - Daemon suggests eradication of all enemies, Corlys peace terms. She takes a middle road rather than thinking about things before herself. Making peace, making the people accept her queenship was her job.

After the Two Betrayers it is not her 'mad paranoia' that leads to the actions against Addam and Nettles - it is her council and Mysaria that push her in that direction. George could have written Rhaenyra as a paranoid madwoman there who had believed all by herself that the other bastard dragonriders would betray her. He could have had her dealing with a council of rational and sane people who tried to dissuade her from foolish actions which could only strengthen her enemies. He could have had Rhaenyra overrule them all commanding that Addam/Nettles be arrested/killed - like the Mad King might have done.

But he didn't. He wanted to portray Rhaenyra as a weak and indecisive ruler. And the best example for this are her doing effectively nothing to protect the dragons during the riots. You trying to portray her return to Dragonstone as something that shows she was meaning business is also hilarious. She was a broken, defeated woman who wanted to go back home. The talk about another dragon is nonsense. Sure, she may have hatched some eggs on the island, but it would have taken her years to use them in war.

[The Grey Wolf Strikes Back]

@Lord Varys

Re Vaemond: The way that line reads to me it doesn't sound like there was much of a trial, if any. Maybe @Ran could clarify for us?

Re Mysaria: You don't become known as "Lady Misery, the White Worm" and have people in the future comparing Bloodraven to you in a negative way without being someone of dubious morality. Plus, we never see or hear of her doing anything remotely good. Arranging Blood & Cheese, telling Helaena of Maelor's death (in one version), arranging the Brothel Queens (again, only in one version, though it must be said if people are willing to even entertain such a thing about you, clearly you're not seen as a remotely pleasant person), setting Rhaenyra against Daemon, sleeping with Daemon despite him being married to Rhaenyra (she appears to approve of it but the fact she turns to food for comfort makes me think that first bit isn't entirely true, and who knows what Rhea Royce thought), running a spy network (see the fate of Thoron True and Denys Woodwright for an example of her effectiveness in that role), none of that can be remotely construed as good in any traditional sense of the word, and you know what? That's fine! Part of good storytelling (and good representation) is that characters don't have to be pigeonholed. There's room for dark, ambitious, dare I say, evil, female characters.

Anyway, your ideas for show!Mysaria could have merit...if the dialogue wasn't so bad and the accent so weird its sometimes hard to make out what she's even saying. None of that is the fault of the actress though and for that she has my sympathies.

As for Alicent, I wasn't denying the show made her more likable and nuanced. I was saying that it did so in certain ways and some of those ways involved making her a victim (Viserys, Larys) or superficially appear more neurotic as opposed to the more confident femme fatale (for lack of a better word) vibe I got from F & B.

@The Bard of Banefort

I like your idea for how they could have adapted an older Alicent. Reminds me of the premise for a horror adaptation of Snow White starring Sigourney Weaver.

@Annara Snow

I'm pretty sure that bit with Vaemond was in TRP, long before F & B came out (and most of what GRRM expanded upon for that concerned TSOTD, not TRP, to the dismay of myself and many others). Most of what was cut from TRP concerned the GC of 101 AC.

Anyway, what I liked about the book version of that particular event is, again, Rhaenyra being more proactive in solving the problem presented to her. If they could have found a way to do that while dialing down the OTP horribleness as you put it I would have been quite content but as presented to us Rhaenyra couldn't count on her father bailing her out at the last second and yet had no failsafe for a trial she knew from the start was rigged against her.

As for the topic of Helaena and trauma, when one character is written to react a certain way, that's an acceptable decision. When multiple, specifically female, characters are written to react the same way, its a problem. And in the case of Helaena specifically the issue is that her grief renders her into an object by the narrative, which defeats the purpose because then we can't relate to her trauma.

Edited April 12, 2023 by The Grey Wolf Strikes Back

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, The Grey Wolf Strikes Back said:

@Lord Varys

Re Vaemond: The way that line reads to me it doesn't sound like there was much of a trial, if any. Maybe @Ran could clarify for us?

Pretty sure Ran doesn't have more information than the paragraph in FaB. Which definitely doesn't suggest 'extrajudicial murder' ... nor a move with which House Velaryon as a whole wasn't okay with.

1 hour ago, The Grey Wolf Strikes Back said:

Re Mysaria: You don't become known as "Lady Misery, the White Worm" and have people in the future comparing Bloodraven to you in a negative way without being someone of dubious morality.

I'm sorry, but Varys, Bloodraven, and Mysaria are viewed the way they are because they are either foreigner scum or a bastard albino sorcerer freak. Bloodraven is no villain, either. Mysaria got her name from other whores she competed with in the brothels at the beginning of her career. I'm sure they were about as accurate or objective in their takes on her character as the people of KL were in their assessment of Larra Rogare (who is basically the devil incarnate to them ... never mind that not a single thing indicates she had a cruel streak or was in any way 'evil').

It is the same with Tyrion's reputation in ACoK and ASoS. And, of course, with Melisandre as I already pointed out.

1 hour ago, The Grey Wolf Strikes Back said:

Plus, we never see or hear of her doing anything remotely good. Arranging Blood & Cheese, telling Helaena of Maelor's death (in one version), arranging the Brothel Queens (again, only in one version, though it must be said if people are willing to even entertain such a thing about you, clearly you're not seen as a remotely pleasant person), setting Rhaenyra against Daemon, sleeping with Daemon despite him being married to Rhaenyra (she appears to approve of it but the fact she turns to food for comfort makes me think that first bit isn't entirely true, and who knows what Rhea Royce thought), running a spy network (see the fate of Thoron True and Denys Woodwright for an example of her effectiveness in that role), none of that can be remotely construed as good in any traditional sense of the word, and you know what? That's fine! Part of good storytelling (and good representation) is that characters don't have to be pigeonholed. There's room for dark, ambitious, dare I say, evil, female characters.

That all fits in her work as a spymaster-for-hire during the war and her personal life ... not her general agenda as a professional crime lord before the war. I mean, she is clearly no saint in the show, either, she is a whore, a pimp, and eventually crime lord and information broker ... but that doesn't mean she cannot have had another agenda. And her success in her business certainly would imply she protected her own, her sources, etc.

1 hour ago, The Grey Wolf Strikes Back said:

As for Alicent, I wasn't denying the show made her more likable and nuanced. I was saying that it did so in certain ways and some of those ways involved making her a victim (Viserys, Larys) or superficially appear more neurotic as opposed to the more confident femme fatale (for lack of a better word) vibe I got from F & B.

You actually get a femme fatale vibe from book Alicent? How? She never even gets naked, there are no seduction scenes, no Salomé-like dances in front of the king, nothing erotic or sexual at all. One can view book Alicent as more ambitious for herself and her children than show Alicent is ... but even that's mostly interpretation since the book doesn't make it clear if Otto or Alicent or both arranged her marriage to Viserys. Hell, it isn't even clear if the entire thing wasn't just Viserys' brainchild - if the young and gorgeous Alicent caught his eye without either Otto or Alicent aiming at that then he would have decided it and Otto and Alicent would have (gladly) gone along with it.

Alicent's bottled up rage/neuroticism we don't have in the book ... but we don't have the opposite there, either. But it wouldn't be a stretch to imagine she didn't enjoy sex with the fat king as he grew older ... if she did enjoy it at all. Presenting Alicent as a woman very much under Viserys' thumb while his sickness wasn't that bad. Anything else would have turned him into a moron and would also not have made sense in the patriarchal setting.

1 hour ago, The Grey Wolf Strikes Back said:

@The Bard of Banefort

I like your idea for how they could have adapted an older Alicent. Reminds me of the premise for a horror adaptation of Snow White starring Sigourney Weaver.

Insofar as the books are concerned the blame for the strife can be laid completely at the feet of Otto/Alicent. Rhaenyra is but eight when Alicent marries her father, and turning fourteen in 111 AC when the factions first form. Alicent is ten years older than Rhaenyra, a woman grown when she marries, so it would have been her responsibility to not fuck up the relationship to her stepdaughter, especially since she was the elder and should have thus been able to deal with the rebellious behavior of an adolescent girl. There would come a point where Rhaenyra would also share part of the blame, to be sure, but things fell apart slowly and that started when Rhaenyra was only around ten or slightly older.

Blaming her for how things went down is kind of like blaming Sansa for not being able to remain/become Cersei's or Joffrey's bestie.

1 hour ago, The Grey Wolf Strikes Back said:

As for the topic of Helaena and trauma, when one character is written to react a certain way, that's an acceptable decision. When multiple, specifically female, characters are written to react the same way, its a problem. And in the case of Helaena specifically the issue is that her grief renders her into an object by the narrative, which defeats the purpose because then we can't relate to her trauma.

Basically, this is a fantasy show about dragonriders, not a medical drama about women dealing with trauma after the loss/brutal murder of their children. When such things happen one can include them ... but Helaena is a joke as a character in the sense that she got a big dragon and never did anything with it.

I mean, we also don't expect that the surviving direwolves and dragons in the books die in whatever stables they are kept. Right?