My Interpretation of Aegon II’s character in the show.

[Annara Snow]

On 5/13/2023 at 5:39 AM, Lady Stonehearts Simp said:

Honestly the show should not have made Aegon a rapist. They should’ve steered more into the abused sadboi character they kind of developed. Making him a rapist kind of makes him unsympathetic to most people.

Well then blame GRRM for making him a rapist. The show just showed the POB of one of his victims, which the books, by the nature of their format, don't csre about 

[Hiigara129]

On 5/12/2023 at 10:39 PM, Lady Stonehearts Simp said:

Honestly the show should not have made Aegon a rapist. They should’ve steered more into the abused sadboi character they kind of developed. Making him a rapist kind of makes him unsympathetic to most people.

Honestly agreed. The showrunners apparently wanted Aegon to be "sympathetic", yet portrayed him as a rapist. There's no coming back from being a rapist, as that's worse in the audience's eyes then murder. All that scene did was cement Aegon as the "bad guy" in the minds of most of the audience, and the showrunners absolutely knew that. There's very easy ways to portray Aegon as totally unsuited for the throne without being a caricature. I mean, GOT did a fantastic job of showing why Robert was a bad king without having to turn him into a monster (though they did slip in martial rape that I'm not sure was in the AGOT book. Would have to double check on that part).

 

On 5/30/2023 at 7:11 AM, Annara Snow said:

Well then blame GRRM for making him a rapist. The show just showed the POB of one of his victims, which the books, by the nature of their format, don't csre about 

 

Except GRRM never established Aegon II as a rapist. Of the three accounts of the Dance of the Dragons, only Mushroom's more or less called him one, found at his "revels" in a Flee Bottom rat pit, where feral children fought each other for the amusement of watchers, while Aegon, drunk and naked, was pleasured by a young girl. Considering how unreliable Mushroom is (and the fact that he wasn't even in King's landing at the time), anything established solely by him is meant to be suss. Of the other accounts, Septon Eustace claimed he was with a paramour/lover and Maester Munkun just said "revels". There's nothing I remember reading in F & B that established Aegon as any worse then say Robert Baratheon, or on the level of Aerys Targaryen. The most is maybe mentions of fondling women which, while gross, isn't the same as rape, more what drunk idiots do at a Hooters.

[Annara Snow]

On 8/1/2023 at 6:59 AM, Hiigara129 said:

Honestly agreed. The showrunners apparently wanted Aegon to be "sympathetic", yet portrayed him as a rapist. There's no coming back from being a rapist, as that's worse in the audience's eyes then murder. All that scene did was cement Aegon as the "bad guy" in the minds of most of the audience, and the showrunners absolutely knew that. There's very easy ways to portray Aegon as totally unsuited for the throne without being a caricature. I mean, GOT did a fantastic job of showing why Robert was a bad king without having to turn him into a monster (though they did slip in martial rape that I'm not sure was in the AGOT book. Would have to double check on that part).

 

 

Except GRRM never established Aegon II as a rapist. Of the three accounts of the Dance of the Dragons, only Mushroom's more or less called him one, found at his "revels" in a Flee Bottom rat pit, where feral children fought each other for the amusement of watchers, while Aegon, drunk and naked, was pleasured by a young girl. Considering how unreliable Mushroom is (and the fact that he wasn't even in King's landing at the time), anything established solely by him is meant to be suss. Of the other accounts, Septon Eustace claimed he was with a paramour/lover and Maester Munkun just said "revels". There's nothing I remember reading in F & B that established Aegon as any worse then say Robert Baratheon, or on the level of Aerys Targaryen. The most is maybe mentions of fondling women which, while gross, isn't the same as rape, more what drunk idiots do at a Hooters.

Yes he did.

Eustace (an Aegon supporter) is the one who says 15 year old Aegon was groping every servant in the Red Keep. Someone who's sexually harassing and assaulting women at 15 is far more likely to progress to rape as an adult than to suddenly magically develop understanding and respect for consent and women of lower classes 

It's also not hard to figure out that Aegon, whether or not Mushroom's account was exaggerated, sure wasn't doing anything as wholesome as what Eustace claims, or why else was Munkun so cagey. Munkun may be uncomfortable with talking about sex but not that uncomfortable to be cagey about Aegon having a paramour of acceptable age.

He is not worse than Robert or Aerys...so you just wrote "he is not worse than those two other rapist kings" and saw no irony in that?! I thought you wrre arguing he wasn't a rapist?!

[Lord Varys]

Aegon is clearly immensely more sympathetic in the show than the books as it is not only made evident that his mother abused and bullied him throughout his life, not to mention encouraging his own bullying behavior. Also, the fact that he actually does not want to be king, doesn't really loathe or hate Rhaenyra and her sons, etc. helps setting him up as a more sympathetic guy.

That he is also a sex offender doesn't change that. The Dyana story makes him a rapist by our standards ... but in Westeros that kind of thing would be common behavior in noble and royal youths.

A funny the show did with Aegon in episode 9 is that he wasn't actually at his revels but tried to hide ... while also confirming that he is more or less into what Mushroom told us he preferred. And that actually makes sense in light of Aegon's overall character as presented in the book.

[Landis]

On 8/5/2023 at 1:35 PM, Lord Varys said:

Aegon is clearly immensely more sympathetic in the show than the books as it is not only made evident that his mother abused and bullied him throughout his life, not to mention encouraging his own bullying behavior. Also, the fact that he actually does not want to be king, doesn't really loathe or hate Rhaenyra and her sons, etc. helps setting him up as a more sympathetic guy.

That he is also a sex offender doesn't change that. The Dyana story makes him a rapist by our standards ... but in Westeros that kind of thing would be common behavior in noble and royal youths.

A funny the show did with Aegon in episode 9 is that he wasn't actually at his revels but tried to hide ... while also confirming that he is more or less into what Mushroom told us he preferred. And that actually makes sense in light of Aegon's overall character as presented in the book.

Why is it “modernistic” and “bourgeois” for @Annara Snowto flag Alicent as abusing Aegon because she herself was abused, but it is neither to flag Aegon as abusing everyone with less power than him because he was abused..? By your own logic for vilifying Alicent alone, Aegon should be totes fine, because noble kids don’t expect to be loved by their parents, they get all the motherly and fatherly affection they need from their nursemaids.

[Annara Snow]

Nvm

Edited August 12, 2023 by Annara Snow

[Lord Varys]

11 hours ago, Landis said:

Why is it “modernistic” and “bourgeois” for @Annara Snowto flag Alicent as abusing Aegon because she herself was abused, but it is neither to flag Aegon as abusing everyone with less power than him because he was abused..? By your own logic for vilifying Alicent alone, Aegon should be totes fine, because noble kids don’t expect to be loved by their parents, they get all the motherly and fatherly affection they need from their nursemaids.

Difficult question. I'd characterize the difference as follows:

What I called 'modernistic' would be an interpretation (and also script-writing) where a lack of parental love results in the children being fucked up ... while ignoring the fact that they would inevitably get love and affection from other adults. And to their satisfaction. Many monarchs and royals are more closer to their nannies and nurses than their parents ... and they are not fucked up for that.

What is okay is to acknowledge a lack of respect or parental recognition shaping the life and self-worth of a royal child or heir. The show does that very good, I think, with Daemon's desire to feel loved by Viserys through Viserys offering him positions like the Handship, etc. But emotional needs are not fulfilled through your mother or father telling you you will be king one day ... or not.

However, it is quite different when you actually depict a royal parent abusing or humiliating their child, as Alicent repeatedly does in the show with Aegon. That will have an effect even if the child in question got love and affection and recognition elsewhere.

Also, of course, Alicent is no victim of abuse in the show (until she allows herself to be turned into Larys' obedient little foot bitch, of course). During my as of yet unfinished rewatch (lol) I very much realized that. Otto and Viserys have different ways of rearing their daughters - Viserys is a more liberal dad, Otto a very strict one who sees his daughter only as his pawn. Alicent has a lot of ambition and bottled up anger inside her which she only gradually recognizes as a result of her upbringing (made evident when she tells Otto in the end that they were never on the same page) - you see this from the start, for instance, in Alicent championing Rhaenyra's claim more than she herself does. Alicent feels helpless about her role as a noblewoman and she wanted Rhaenyra to be queen because that would liberate at least one of them. But she still internalized too many toxic traits of her patriarchal upbringing to accept the ways Rhaenyra enjoyed her freedom.

Viserys doesn't rape any of his wives nor does he abuse them. We see in the pilot how Aemma calls the shots about their sex life, making it clear that this pregnancy was the last one. Meaning no more sex afterwards in that context/world. Or no more vaginal intercourse. Viserys does not object. Alicent, on the other hand, meekly and dutifully goes to Viserys when he asks her to come to his bedchamber. She is not summoned there with a royal command. Her husband asks her for sex and she doesn't object. The way Viserys is portrayed he would have been fine with her objecting - as he like is later fine with Alicent forbidding the Helaena-Jace match or with a lot of other things Alicent pushes through (like the off-screen recall of Otto Hightower as Hand) - had she but told him her feelings/wishes. We can blame Viserys for not seeing or ignoring that Alicent doesn't want to have sex right now, but if she is doing her best to hide that fact it is also hard to beat up the guy for the fact that he wants it right now. This would be abuse if we had seen Viserys actively pushing Alicent into a role where she felt it was her duty to always please him.

In any case, though, Alicent's upbringing as well as her marriage have literally no narrative connection to Alicent beating up, bullying, humiliating and intimidating Aegon, have nothing to do with her condoning/encouraging Aegon bullying Aemond (under the condition that Rhaenyra's sons are not part of that), also have nothing to do with Alicent insisting that Aegon marry Helaena (which neither would have wanted).

Aegon is a clear victim of maternal abuse in the show ... and perhaps also of paternal neglect, although we see too little of that. As I keep saying, the show would have needed a scene where little Aegon approaches his father about the 'Will I be king one day as your eldest son as mother and others tell me?' question ... only for Viserys to put the lad's head right. There was a lot of potential there for Viserys to even transfer his own reluctance about being king to Aegon - whose desire to not be king is very strong in the show.

The way Aegon is treated by his mother there is little to no surprise he lashes out at weaker people, bullies and mocks Aemond and ends up taking what he wants from servant girls, too. The show wants us to draw that conclusion. And, of course, in case of the Green scheme to make Aegon king it also makes narrative sense in this world that Alicent as his mother took a special interest in him ... although it clearly it was one expressed through abuse and bullying because the lad was lacking the ambition and brains she felt he needed for the job she would one day force on him. But to be sure - royal children being mistreated or abused by their tutors and nannies might also have similar issues later on.

The show seems to have modeled the Alicent-Aegon relationship a bit on Tommen-Cersei from AFfC. We have an overbearing, abusive mother who pushes something on her son he doesn't actually want. And it seems clear to me that Aegon is going to try to break out of this cage. And the tragedy of his story will be that his injuries will make it impossible for him to physically or mentally escape his mother's leash. He will get one brief taste of freedom and liberation when he fires Otto and makes grand plans with Criston ... and then Alicent and Aemond will put him back into his place. I'd not be surprised if we are going to see an angry Alicent beating and threatening a helpless, bed-ridden Aegon both after Rook's Rest and later still after his restoration.

My issues with the interpretative framework is that looking at royal families as if they were bourgeois core families is wrong. Princes and princesses and nobility do find a lot of role models and parental figures outside their actual birth family. Theirs is a very large family, effectively encompassing the entire court they live at.

The show makes it pretty clear royalty are distant parents - Joffrey, Aegon and Viserys are too little to be seen much in the last couple of episodes, ditto Jaehaerys, Jaehaera, and Maelor. Earlier, too, we had Alicent parade out Aegon for one occasion but he is absent most of the time as is Helaena after her birth. The implication is not that royal parents actually do raise their children in this setting - they have other, better things to do and charge servants with such tasks.

In that sense it makes little sense to blame the royal parents for how their children turned out to be ... unless we have good cause for it. Like with Alicent's clear and continuous abuse of Aegon - and her condoning and approving of Aegon's abuse of Aemond.

[Khloey]

On 5/28/2023 at 4:16 AM, Lady Stonehearts Simp said:

I got in argument in the tiktok ASOIAF fandom about him. All I said comparatively, murder is a worse crime than rape. Not saying it isn’t awful, but compared to murder it isn’t. And they ripped my head off for it.

I think media in general, has desensitized people to how bad murder is.

I think most people underestimate what rape is and its consequences on the victim psychologically. To me, it's just as bad as murder.

By making Aegon a rapist, the showrunners knew what they were doing, especially by showing the girl with Alicent afterwards.

As others have said, I wish they had included at list one Aegon-Rhaenyra scene before the war. I also wished we'd had the conversation between Aegon and Criston Cole, it would have underlined his motives a bit better.

That being said, I think the actor portraying him did a lot of good work with what he had.

[BlackLightning]

On 5/27/2023 at 9:16 PM, Lady Stonehearts Simp said:

I got in argument in the tiktok ASOIAF fandom about him. All I said comparatively, murder is a worse crime than rape. Not saying it isn’t awful, but compared to murder it isn’t. And they ripped my head off for it.

I think media in general, has desensitized people to how bad murder is.

I agree 100%

People can feel however and whatever they want to feel but, at the end of the day, the reality of the situation is that human life is not only priceless but irreplaceable. A lot of pandemic era studies come to the conclusion that human life is worth trillions.

I hate to be blunt, but rape victims recover and go on to live full lives. Murder victims do not recover because they die. There is no road of recovery, no way out, no light at the end of the tunnel for them.

There's no such thing as a survivor of murder. 

Edited July 11, 2024 by BlackLightning
context

[C.T. Phipps]

I mean he's a guy who attends child gladiator fights of his own bastards.

Rarely do I say, "He's significantly worse than a rapist" but there we go.

Edited June 22, 2024 by C.T. Phipps

[KingAerys_II]

It was never stated Aegon II was a rapist in the books, he was not saint, but Daemon did order the death of Jaeherys in the book, so they made the blacks better in the show, Rhaenyra did bad things to the smallfolk and Tyland Lannister

[C.T. Phipps]

12 hours ago, KingAerys_II said:

It was never stated Aegon II was a rapist in the books, he was not saint, but Daemon did order the death of Jaeherys in the book, so they made the blacks better in the show, Rhaenyra did bad things to the smallfolk and Tyland Lannister

In Mushroom's account, we can say he's a pedophile as well.

Certainly, his partner can't give meaningful consent.

Mind you, I'm taking the tact that judging by modern standards is perfectly fine since we're not required to judge him by his time's as this is a fictional show we're enjoying for our own amusement.

Edited June 22, 2024 by C.T. Phipps

[KingAerys_II]

It's almost impossible not to be Blacks supporter they are better in the show

[C.T. Phipps]

1 hour ago, KingAerys_II said:

It's almost impossible not to be Blacks supporter they are better in the show

In the books, both sides are objectively terrible but most people still leaned Black.

[KingAerys_II]

3 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

In the books, both sides are objectively terrible but most people still leaned Black.

Daemon and Rhaenyra are better in the show, I am sure she was not happy about Blood and Cheese in the book too , in fact she spared Haelena for sister love , so she liked her sister in the book, she was decent in the book, but she trusted Daemon and Mysaria

[Lord Varys]

16 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

In the books, both sides are objectively terrible but most people still leaned Black.

I don't think that is true if you cut to the chase. The Blacks have Daemon as a controversial figure, and perhaps Rhaenyra shortly before her fall, but that's it.

And whatever they did, they never committed atrocities similar to those of the Greens. Aegon II used people as human torches, Aemond eradicated an entire noble bloodline, Daeron put an entire town to the torch because of something common scum did (that is like Jaehaerys I killing all of Flea Bottom to avenge Rego Draz). No Black prince or general did ever anything remotely on that scale.

Most Black supporters are good (in an ethical sense), courageous, and decent people. Even they make use of turncloaks and betrayers (we can view Luthor Largent as one such) there are no big atrocities. They keep things tidy and neat, and don't sack towns and butcher hundreds of people.

The Greens have no issue using or making common cause with utter scum like the Two Betrayers, Alfred Broom, the Toms, etc.

One could perhaps say, well, Dalton Greyjoy is 'a Black', but that is true in only a rather remote sense of the word as he didn't honor the decrees of Aegon III.

There is also the issue that the Greens are always escalating. They stage the coup, they spill first blood, they start executions, etc. They are even the first to display dragon heads as trophies.

The one diversion from the rule could be Daemon taking Harrenhal (which could be seen as the first battle of sorts), but as Daemon, Jace, and Luke all leave Dragonstone at the same time and as Storm's End is closest chances are good that Aemond killed Luke before Daemon even got to Harrenhal. Even more so as young dragons are faster than old(er) ones.

[Jaehaerys Tyrell]

On 6/23/2024 at 1:05 AM, Lord Varys said:

Daeron put an entire town to the torch

I always get downvoted to hell when I say this on reddit. It’s not only a monstrous act by modern standards but burning down septs filled with sheltering civilians would have absolutely horrified any pseudo-medieval society. It’s beyond my understanding that so many people consider him a morally good character

[C.T. Phipps]

2 hours ago, Jaehaerys Tyrell said:

I always get downvoted to hell when I say this on reddit. It’s not only a monstrous act by modern standards but burning down septs filled with sheltering civilians would have absolutely horrified any pseudo-medieval society. It’s beyond my understanding that so many people consider him a morally good character

But he felt bad about it!

Even though the village had already tried and executed the people who had killed his nephew!

[Lord Varys]

23 hours ago, Jaehaerys Tyrell said:

I always get downvoted to hell when I say this on reddit. It’s not only a monstrous act by modern standards but burning down septs filled with sheltering civilians would have absolutely horrified any pseudo-medieval society. It’s beyond my understanding that so many people consider him a morally good character

Part of the reason why I'm not on reddit, lol.

In the book we have Gyldayn point out repeatedly that Daeron is a noble, gallant youth, so that sticks with people. The Bitterbridge incident is easily glossed over in the reading process. Also, of course, when judging Dance atrocities readers come up with their own criteria, and the most crucial there are who killed the most people in a manner we would consider war crimes.

The butchery that was the Fishfeed wasn't that great, either, but this was at least a proper pitched battle with one side holding their (bad) ground whilst the other sacrificed many of their own to kill the enemy combatants. A blood bath, but an honest one.

The Blacks have no such sackings/burnings on their list, aside from, to a point, Dalton Greyjoy, but it is hard to count him as a proper member of the faction. Even if we wanted to count him as a Black, then it is still true no Black inner circle member - queen, prince, or lord on the Black Council - ever committed or participated in such atrocities as they were committed by Aegon II, Aemond, and Daeron.

And that is clearly no coincidence.

[Potsk]

It's funny that we expected most people would find him irredeemable after S1E8, but just one scene in S2E1 made everyone forget. Everyone loves Aegon now.

On 6/22/2024 at 7:17 AM, C.T. Phipps said:

In Mushroom's account, we can say he's a pedophile as well.

Isn't it implied in episode 9 as well when Sylvi says he doesn't come to the Street of Silk because "his tastes are known to be less discriminating?"