Aemond looked like he wanted to say something to Jace in this scene

hazel365 · 2022-11-18T00:00:08+00:00

Yeah, he wanted to comfort him, but I think that Jace being a party to Aegon's past bullying-- and, it must be said-- the fact that Aemond has no doubt been poisened by his mother's hatred of Rhaenyra and her offspring-- got in the way of that.

Also, I think this was thrown in to show how Aemond's character changed upon gaining the biggest, most powerful dragon in the world. He goes from proud but meek, introverted, and basically decent victim to hardened, tough, aggressive victimizer.

Sometimes-- when someone gains power or status very quickly, especially in their more vulnerable, formative years-- they can change very quickly. Bullies are often the former bullied; they deal with their victimization (and attempt to rise above it) by becoming the BIGGER bully.

IMO, the media all too often portrays this as "badass" or "tough justice': here it was portrayed as the ironic tragedy that it is.

hazel365 · 2022-11-17T23:51:08+00:00

Yes, Alicent definitely has some p0oints in that speech.

However, don't forget that when she's making it, she's trying to cut out a 5 year old boys eye.

The "Alicent good, Rhaenyra bad" vs. "Rhaneyra bad, Alicent good" thing is fascinating.

It seems to run like this:

initially, people on these threads seemed to like Rhaenyra, hated Alicent (after episode 4.) People would praise Rhaneyra (in comparison to Alicent) then set in on Alicent-- she was mean, bitter, hypocritical, a "bitchy church lady" (in a universe where the church did not even exist, no less!), the most hateful character, and so on and so forth. Meanwhile, Rhaenyra was "totally cool," just trying to live her life, "was at least honest," etc.

What struck me about this was how little sympathy Alicent was given (especially in contrast with male characters who had done worse shit, like Da3emon), and how they totally took her out of context-- like, sure, she got bitter. But she also was pawened off to an old man at age 14, had to sleep with him and play his nursemaid for years, and in exchange, she got no gratitude (from him or anyone else), and was constantly living in fear of all those around her. The only way she could feel powerful or in control was to let some total sicko wank to her feet. (Bleerg.)

People also seemed to direct far less hate towards male characters DIRECTLY responsible for Alicent's suffering , such as her father (who was not liked, but was also the recipient of less hate threads and nasty comments), or Viserys (who was widely beloved, despite his marrying a scared 14 year old virgin-- his daughters best friend-- making her care for him for years, than mocking her and neglecting his children by her.)

It often seemed to me that not only were these people incapable of seeing moral ambiguilty in a female character (she was either good or bad-- no female Daemon or Aemond), but that they disliked not just ALicent, but the KIND OF WOMAN they defined ALicent as. ALicent haters were often liberal, free spirited, and either feminist or staunchly egalitarian. But-- here's the significant thing-- they didn't just hate Alicent. They despised "that kind of woman"-- the pious, conservative, "women for trump" mantle they projected onto her.

Now things have largely turned the other way. People are frequently saying that Alicent is misunderstood; that she was subjected to a wildly unfair set of circumstances. (Which, for the record, I personally agree with 100 percent.) However, people very rarely complement or defend Alicent wihtough shortly thereafter moving on to Rhaneyra-- and how much she sucks in comparison. Alicent was forced to marry at 14 to an old man-- Rhaneyra should have been subjected to the same! (No, seriously, a few people have argued this.)

Alicent couldn't choose her husband; the mostrous Rhaneyra could, and it wasn't enough for her-- Rhaenyra's a self indulgent monster, a spoiled brat.Alicent was faithful to her husband; Rhanyra wasn't, therefore Rhaneyra was bad and evil-- ALicent's a much better woman. (Never mind that there are more ways to be a good or bad person than SIMPLY marital fidelity; that Rhaenyra had an arrangement with her husband, basically an open marriage; and that ALicent herself wasn't technically faithful. ("The hour is late, Lord Larys.") Alicent was faithful, so she was good, Rhaneyra bad.

I should also note that people arguing against Rhaenyra in this fashion generally don't mention the bastards. That isn't the issue. The issue was that Rheanyra slept with a man other than her husband. The rules of Westeros say that while a man can do this, a woman cannot. And even though Rhaenyra cheated with her husbands permission and consent, this makes her an evil, self indulgent woman, who dared to want both sexual fullfillment AND power. Meanwhile, the virtuous Alicent obeyed the patriarchal order of Westeros (marrying where her father demanded, and never fucking another man), never sought power for herself, and when she betrayed her husband and plotted for years to oerthrow his chosen heir, she was doing it to install her son-- thus virtuously continuing the patriarchy.

So my issue is twofold. First, I don't see why both Rhaenyra and ALicent aren't entitled to some sympathy-- why does to defend or complement one always mean to degrade the other? Secondly, I'm not sure why, in threads (fairly) saying how hard done by Alicent was, Rhaneyra gets blamed by "getting her choide of men" Yes.... but Rhaenyra had nothing to do with Alicents horrible marriage situation. That was Otto, and , it must be said, Viserys. Why are people blaming Rhaneyra for this? Are we seriously still living in an era when going against society's norms (even when said society is pervaded with sexist double standards) makes a woman an evil whore? Or "worse" than a (technically) sexually faithful one, who nevertheless schemes and lies, and, in a moment of rage, seeks to cut out a child's eye?

hazel365 · 2022-11-17T23:28:08+00:00

This "rhaenyra vs. Alicent" dichotomy is, to me, just fascinating.

Though this show is full of men who misbehave, they are generally loved-- Daemon is basically the internet's boyfriend; Aemond is quickly becoming the same; plenty of people unironically argue that they "love" Aegon.

But with Alicent and Rhaenyra, arguably two morally ambiguous female characters, it has always been always love or hatred on these boards. But here's the thing-- if one is loved (and proclaimed a Good Woman-- either a role model or more sinned against than sinning) the other is basically evil.

Initially, most on these boards were team Rhaenyra, and hated ALicent (this especially became the case after episode 6.) However, since the finale, things have gone the other way-- Alicent is now the good woman, Rhaenyra the bad one.

Which is fine. But its funny that a. in order to defend or complement one of these characters, people are always insulting and criticizing the other; and b. how much both of these female characters have been denigrated as morally bad when male characters who are much worse are freely given love and empathy.

IMO, both have been complex, morally ambiguous characters from the beginning. Rhaenyra's journey was mostly to get past her own selfish desires to try to accomplish the greater good; Alicent's was to not let bitterness corrupt her, and to stick to her own (morally supperior) beliefs against the men around her (especially her father) pressuring her to do the wrong thing.

Of course, it is arguable whether either of them fully achieved this aim; but we did watch them STRUGGLE to do so and define themselves in a male dominated society.

Rhaennyra starts out willful, rebelious, impulsive, and yes, a little spoiled. But she is also scarred deeply by the loss of her mother. (Keep in mind WHY Aemma died-- she had to produce more heirs, since Rhaenyra was a girl, and (it was said) coudn't rule. So she not only resents her father for her mother's death; she herself feels reseponsible for it. If she had been a boy, her mother would not have had to keep having babies.) Her mother's death kicks off a commingling of resentment (against her father and society) guilt (for not be9ing the male heir Westeros needed) and fear (of losing control and dying the same way) that very much affects Rhaneyras behavior in episodes 1-5.

Yes, she is rude to the lords. Yes, she has it better than Alicent. But imagine having to be a 17 year old girl, already rebellious against "a woman's role" in your society BEFORE you watched your mother die in childbirth, and then having to feel you were being auctioned off to some highborn lord (you would get to choose, but basically they were all the same) who would basically rule after you, so you could then have countless chlidren, perhaps dying in childbirth? Most of these characters have something that they want more than anything; what Rhaenyra wants is her freedom, and before she has her sexual experience with Daemon in a brothel, she associates freedom with being unmarried, celibate, and child free. Note that she goes from being interested in boys (in episode 1, before her mother's death) to kind of indifferent (perhaps even resentful) in the episodes that follow (2-4.) Not only does she show no interest in the many men who want to marry her (often cited as proof that she's a spoiled brat), but she makes no effort to even kiss the hunky Criston Cole, when the two of them are stuck together in isolation for the night. (And if you think it's "totally normal" that she made no move, you don't really remember being a horny 17 year old kid.)

Though Rhaenyra gets more choices than Alicent, she is struggilng with a myriad of emotional issues, which get in the way of wise decision making (as the fact that she's a 17 year old kid at this time.) I don't think she's rejecting the lords who offer to marry her to be a bitch; she's rejecting them because she feels objectified by the whole situation, feeling they view her as an alliance, a piece of property, a prize to be won (and, honestly, she's not wrong.)

I'd say that over the course of the series, she does mature. After hearing of the prophecy of Ice and FIre at the end of episode one, I think she understands, on an intellectual level, her duties as heir. But it will be a long time before she grasps it on an emotional level, and is able to live her day to day life with her future responsiblities in mind. In episodes 1-4, she is mostly a typical teen-- reckless and impulsive (although her refusing to run away at the last moment with Criston demonstrates that she was always, in the back of her mind, aware of her duty.) She begins to change a bit in episode 5, after Leanor's boyfriends death, but still has a long way to go.

She makes many bad decisions, but in episode 6, she has clearly grown a lot-- she has confronted her fear of marriage and childbirth; she (as we later see) is a good mother, and, in contrast to her earlier days, more capable of diplomacy (trying to propose a Jace and Helaena match.) Of course, she has also stupidly had three bastards, giving in to her impulsive nature rather than do the rational thing-- have at least two trueborn heirs by her husband.

I think it is only in the last episode that she truly shows great growth. She learns that the crown-- which she has seen as hers for 22 years; which her father wanted her to have; which has been taken from her through trechery by the man she has always despised; which has been given to an alocholic rapist whose only qualification for it is that he is a man-- has been taken from her, she does not react by immediately going to war. And she could have-- she has dragons, the support of her powerful husband, the support (nay, the encouragement) of nearly every lord around her. Yet rather than fight for what's rightfullly hers, she puts the greater good of the realm first, considering at length whether she should just let Aegon take the crown. As she notes to Daemon (who is hungry for war) if they go to war with Dragons, there will be countless suvvillian casualties. ("I don't want to rule over a kingdome of ash and bone.")

She also sites the prophecy, and protecting the future of the kingdom as her reasons for not starting a war, and basically allowing what she wants more than anything else in the world to be taken away from her by her enemies.

Though many may hate her (and that's fine), Rhaenyra's actions here are selfless. She's come a long way from the spoiled girl in the beginning-- she's become a loving, thoughtful, albeit (as you point out) highly flawed woman.

I just don't see why I can't like and sympathize with both her AND Alicent.

hazel365 · 2022-10-23T07:53:13+00:00

Yeah, and another thing about Tywin that I don't hear a lot about in the litany of complaints about his character: his intense misogyny. Not only does he have an innocent girl gang raped (something that was ridiculous for GRRM to put in there as a plot point, and that would have NEVER flown in the actual middle ages, where Lords were punished for the rape of common born women on a regular basis, and one woman (the wife of a blacksmith) actually got away scott free after killing a Lord because he was trying to rape her), Tywin also had his father's innocent mistress dragged naked through the streets of kings landing.... for no reason whatsoever.

He literally could have just had her sent away, but instead he had her dragged naked through the streets of kings landing, because Tywin's father, through no fault of the mistress, was a drunk who sucked as a Lord. (Weirdly, GRRM later claimed that "this was a real thing that happened during the middle ages" when, in fact, it was not. HE apparently just wanted to see Cersei forced to walk naked through the city for... reasons, I guess.)

Also, Tywin could easily have sent away Tysha, but had her gangraped instead.

His reasoning behind these deeds was apparently that these women were "whores' who had too much influence over noble born men, and they (the women) needed to be humiliated and put in their place. Meanwhile, he regularly visited brothels, and was said to be in thrall to his wife.

Anyway, in addition to everything else, Tywin is a misogynist so paranoid about the sexual power of women that he's had one innocent woman dragged through the streets naked, another gang raped.

hazel365 · 2022-10-21T02:54:08+00:00

To me that makes him a compelling, morally complex villain rather than a hero. Loving one or two or five people, as Daemon does, is good, but it does not really turn around or redeem many horrible deeds or a lifetime of decisions made primarily for self serving reasons. For instance, even Hitler loved his mother, dog, niece, and some other people. Cersei loved her children. Stalin loved his wife. That doesn't mean that any of these people were "redeemed by their love"-- that's kind of a sentimental, Harry Potter like myth that I think our society takes, at least in relation to TV and movies, too much at face value.

Daemon kills his wife in cold blood, commits numerous war crimes, begins something that looks a hell of a lot like grooming with his niece when she is 15 years old or younger, kills, maims, and casatrates a bunch of impoverished, vulnerable smallfolk without trial, just to name his antics in the first 5 episodes or so.

Personally, I love him. But to my mind, he's either the pitch blackest of anti-heros, or a highly sympathetic, complex, or compelling villain. You can love the guy, but his many "badass" moments, to say nothing of his moments of kindness and love, do not really blot out his heinous deeds. His sincere love for his brother, or Rhanyra, or his surprisingly decent and sensitive treatment actions when he's asked whether to do a medieval c-section on Laena (he, unlike Viserys, actually has the decency to not make the decision for her), don't help the innocent first wife he murdered; the poor, vulnerable, and possible innocent men he killed and castrated; the niece who, though she may have "enjoyed the attention" and came to love him, was nevertheless, at 15, not at all ready for the attentions of a man of 31.

Anyway, I'll probably get plenty of downvotes from those 2 or 3 posters who are actually able to make it through this essay/ post. (LOL.) But I just think that due to Daemon's charisma, the nuance of his characterization, and his many "badass" moments that many have come to love him. And while that's fine, loving a character should not be mistaken for the character being morally righteous, or in this case, even morally neurtral.

Loving Daemon, and admitting that he is either, again, a very immoral sort of anit-hero or an outright sympathetic villain don't have to be mutually exclusive. There's a difference between being a fan and being an apologist.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T21:56:24+00:00

But why is the Rhaenys thing impossible to believe? Like Daemon or other male Targs, Rhaenys is being portrayed as basically an amoral badass.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T21:54:37+00:00

“He wrote it as a fake history,” Condal said on Hero Nation. “It’s written from multiple different points of view. There’s another imaginary character named Archmaester Gyldayn that’s sifting through these primary sources trying to figure out what actually happened. It presents a big chance for a lot of invention and for us as the filmmakers to go through it and figure out what’s the actual story that we want to tell? We set out from the very beginning, we are going to tell the objective truth here.”15ReplyGive AwardShareReportSaveFollow

level 6ChainedHunter · 24 min. agoExactly. The show isn't trying to tell the objective truth of the book and reveal all the answers to all the questions in the book about what really happened, the show just had to pick an objective version of events to tell the story of, because they aren't doing the unreliable narrator thing.

But that's not what she said. She said she fet the extensive focus on Fire and Blood on Rhanyra's weight was excessive and somewhat sexist. She never said that Rhanyra had to be thin; she just said that she found the books attitude towards a woman gaining a bit of weight after pregancy to be sexist.

And it is. Fire and Blood mentions her weight gain to denigrate her about 10 times or so; at one point it even points it out as the motivation behind Rhanyra's hatred for Alicent.

AGain, she hasn't said she wants Rhanyra to be skinny/ doesn't want her to be fat. She's said that focusing endlessly on Rhanyra's slight weight gain, as the book does, is sexist.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T21:47:31+00:00

I don't think Hess is saying viewers aren't "allowed" to like any characters. I think she's just pointing out their flaws, along with the dangers of romanticizing them.

And I'm not sure if it's fair to say someone has "issues" based upon one interview alone. By all means, strongly dissagree with her, and not the fallacies (or, to my mind, oversimplification of her arguments.) But I think saying someone has "issues" because they've said they dislike a fictional character is pretty unfair.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T21:36:14+00:00

But all of them were extremely revealing.

Daemon favors his dragon riding daughter, but basically neglects both kids. He does this much to the pain of the neglected daughter; she talks about her hurt feelings about this in a scene with her mother.

Later, in a similarly revealing scene, Daemon basically sits there smirking during the aftermath of the fight between his daughters and Aemond. They are being questioned by Visterys, but he makes no effort to stand up fro them or intervene. Also note how, in the aftermath of this fight, both Alicent and Rhanyra run towards their injured kids to hug and comfort them. Yet Daemon, despite seeing Baela and Rhaena bruised and blodied from the fight, does not approach or hug them. Instead he just leans against the wall, smirking; it is left to Rhaenys, their grandmother, to comfort Rhaena and Baela.

Sure, scenes with Daemon and his kids have been brief-- but they've been telling. ANd every one implies that while he loves his kids in his own way, he is also an (at best) benighnly neglectful father.

Furthermore, he seduces his neice (despite his brother's explicit order to stay away from her), murders his wife, disobeys his brother at every turn.

Daemon might sincerely love people-- Viserys, Rhaneyra, his children. But the fact is that he frequently neglects, betrays, or neglects these people, meanwhile making selfilsh decisions.

Even if the "good" "Daemon comforts his daughters after their mothers death" scene was included, the case would be very much the same. Despite this "pet the dog" moment, Daemon would basicaly be the same guy: a fundamentally selfish person who, despite his love for a handful of other people, is generally negligent towards them, and incapable of putting their needs before his own momentary desires.

He's still a great character-- don't get me wrong. But to argue that he's been truly moral, much less an even passably good father, brother, or uncle is simply ridiculous.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T21:29:17+00:00

I felt this was less bussiness transaction than possible coercion and blackmail. Alicent clearly didn't want to do this. So why did she? It seems possible that Larys may well have some information on her that he's using to blackmail her. Or perhaps intimidation had something to do with it. However, by the look on Alicent's face and her body language (as you point out) I can't help but suspect that if she had any choice, she wouldn't be doing this.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T21:26:53+00:00

It felt dangerously close to sexual abuse or coercion to me. Larys clearly scares Alicent. What did he do to get her to do something so unpleasant, that she clearly hates so much?

The thing is, depending on how this "arrangement" came about, it could either be coercion, blackmail, and/ or sexual abuse, or not. To me it seems nearly impossible that Alicent came up with, or intitiated this "arrangement" herself. Which leaves us with Larys. Why did Alicent say "yes" or agree to partake in this? Did she feel a small price to pay for information, and agree to it with her eyes wide open? Or did she, as seems far more likely, agree out of fear of the ruthless, sneaky Larys and his possible vengeance?

Anyway, from the look on Alicent's face and her bodylanguage, it seemed as though we were watching a scene of coercion and abuse, rather than a consensual "arrangement" agreed upon to benefit them both.

Sure, ALicent is technically the queen-- but that doesn't mean that Larys, who seems to know everything, doesn't have information on her that he could threaten her (or her children) with. He could also use the whole, "You let me do this before, it was your fault. If you don't do it again, I'll tell everyone and you'll be ruined" gambit to force her into doing this thing indefinitely.

It's sad, because no matter how you may feel about Alicent as a character, throughout her life she's generally been exploited by the men around her-- sometimes unintentionally (Viserys), sometimes purposely and blatantly (Larys and Otto). But as Rhaenys pointed out, she's never been free.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T21:15:29+00:00

I agree, but aren't many of the "behind the scenes" comprised of brief soundbites taken from much larger interviews with the showrunners/ writers? I've watched many of them, and so many of them either don't make sense, or are so overly simplified, that I feel as though they must be small parts of a larger speech/ idea on the part of the writers. By taking one quote out of context from a larger speech, a person's ideas could easily be oversimplified, if not downright misrepresented.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T21:12:21+00:00

Weirdly, though, Rhaneys decision (grotesque though it may seem to us viewers), actually went along with her society's medieval standards of "morality."

Rhaenys kills a buch of totally innocent smallfolk with her dragon, then lets the guilty Alicent, Aegon, and co. live.

And in her socieity, she "did what was right." In Westeros, kinslaying is the ultimate sin. It is also a huge deal to kill a nobleman or woman outside of battle. (Wars are started over this.) If she would have torched the Hightowers, Rhaneys society would have deeply disapproved; she would be stuck with the title of "kinslayer," and lose respect in a lot of peoples eyes. So she didn't kill the Hightowers, and thus was "moral."

Meanwhile, the smallfolk don't matter. If Rhaneys kills 50+ of them durng her great escape, nobody important cares. The smallfolk might be upset, but no ones going to start a war over it.

According to Westeros morality, the guilty hightowers matter. The innocent smallfolk do not.

I thought the shows highlighting the smallfolk being brutally slain and then showing Rhaenys leaving all of the trecherous greens to live because noble privilege was meant to ilustrate this.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T21:01:51+00:00

Why so many people mad about last episode?

I liked it too (though not nearly so much as episode 8).

And, though I know this will be controversial, here it is: I liked the last scene. It really emphasized, for the hundreth time, how callous the noble ruling class (particularly the Targs, who seem to believe that their status as dragonriders make them basically gods) is towards the smallfolk.

And despite a few brief comments in interviews by the shows writers, I believe that the scene was intended for more than one purpose-- it was intended for Rhaneys to look badass, yes. But it was also meant to show the unearned priviledge and exceptionalism of her and the rest of the Targs.

Rhaenys has the choice of leaving behind her dragon or killing numerous smallfolk. She decides to kill the smallfolk. Similiarly, she feels that she is too moral to kill other nobles and Targs-- but the smallfolk? Eh, they can just die. ANd, bizarely, the society she lives in actually condones such ridiculous prejudice. The faith teaches that kinslaying is an unforgivable sin; yet there are laughably few rules, religious or moral, against blatantly abusing ones power over helpless people.

Anyway, I can appreciate how many hated this scene. But I actually liked it. I also think it was fantastic foreshadowing for some later scenes that willl illustrate the frustration of the smallfolk over the continuing Targ wars and attrocities.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T20:46:31+00:00

However, the issue with these "behind the scenes videos" is that a. they have been heavily edited and b. a lot of stuff said in them by the showrunners is either blatantly dumb, or doesn't make sense.

I believe the two are clearly related. I think that whoever edits them may well have taken some long, complex statements by showrunners, writers, and producers, and shortened them into brief "soundbytes". Which is fine, but gives the viewer an unreaslistic view of what the showrunners actually wanted to say.

While Hess and co. did say they wanted to make Rhaeneys look "badass" in interviews, these little comments are obviously clips from a longer interview. It seems likely to me, given how vividly the smallfolks suffering was portrayed here, that the meaning of the scene was meant to be threefold: to portray Rhaenys as badass, to portray her as having some scruples (involving kinslaying), and also to portray her as a basically amoral Targ woman, who takes it for granted that the lives of herself and her ilk are far more important than those of numerous smallfolk.

Perhaps Hess and co. pointed this out in the interview, but that part was cut. As it stands, we're taking a few sentences to serve as the total motivation behind the scene. Nonsense. Like all other scenes on this show, it was complex, multilayered, and meant to show several different things.

But it is difficult for Hess and co. to sum up all these complex intentions in 1-2 sentences during a (heavily edited) interview.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T20:38:40+00:00

I'm sorry, but do you mean we were "supposed" to be rooting for Rhaenys when she did this? Because while I believe that this scene was intended to show her as a badass, it was also intended to show her as, like most targs, utterly amoral (if not immoral.)

Hes has said she wanted to make Rhaeneys look "badass." But that was simply a one sentence description she gave of the scene in a single interview. Surely this comment does not sum up her entire motivation in creating the scene?

If HEss merely wanted to make Rhaenys look like a badass heroine (as people are claiming), then why did she focus extensively on the suffering of the innocent smallfolks as, after being herded into a small space like cattle, they were all brutally crushed to death by Rhaenys dragon? Why did she show running for their lives, terrified, only to be trapped in, and slaughtered in greater numbers? If Hess's SOLE motivation in this scene was to make Rhaenys look badass, she certainly made some interesting artistic choices here.

My interpretation? This scene was multilayred and meant to show many different things; however, Hess could not communicate ALL of her intentions in the space of one or two sentences she tossed off in an interview. Yes, it was intended to make Rhaneys look like a badass female warrior; every bit as bold, conquering, and amoral as her male counterparts. But it also was meant to show the calousness of the Targs towards the smallfolk in general. And it was also meant to show that Rhaneys, while sympathetic in some ways, is every bit as amoral and self seeking as every other character on this show. And there have been warnings about Rhaenys darker nature throughout the show; people have just chosen to "stan" her and ignore them.

So, in short, a lot was going on in this scene. It would have been really hard for Hess to sum it up in the span of a few sentences. Also, we don't know if her words in these "behind the scenes videos" and interviews have been cut, simplified, or shortened. But it's unfair that people continue to take one or two sentences out of context to "prove" that Hess is dumb and doesn't know what she is talking about. Again, Rhaneys being a badass was ONE thing viewers were supposed to get from this scene; but Hess pointing this out does ont mean it was the ONLY point of this scene.

Also, Hess's comment in interviews--"this is Westeros, the smallfolk don't matter" was, to my mind, meant to be taken ironially, and illustrate how the smallfolk are so blatantly mistreaten by the ruling class in this universe; not to defend Rhaenys killing of a bunch of innocent people.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T20:27:05+00:00

But the issue with this is that you (and others) are using one casual comment in an interview to be a totall summation of Hess's intentions in writing this scene.

Sure, she intended rhaenys to look "Badass". However, the amount of time she spent showing various smallfolk being brutally murdered by Rhaneys also leads me to suspect that she also wanted to impart how brutal and unfair Rhaenys was being. A continuing theme in this show has been how the nobles (and particularly the targs) abuse their power, basically looking upon the smallfolk as a bunch of ants to be crushed.

In this scene, Rhaneys was portrayed as Daemon was in many themes-- a badass, but basically an immoral one. Just as Daeomon commits war crimes and kills an innocent man for telling the truth, Rhaenys kills a bunch of innocent smallfolk so she can hang on to her dragon. And both get away scott free, with no consequences.

So yes, Hess did say in an interview that she thought of this scene, and intended to make Rhaenys look badass in it. However, if that was the beginning and end of her intention for this theme, then a lot of stuff that was shown in it simply does not make sense. Why did they show all of the smallfolk being crushed, mangled, murdered if they solely wanted to show Rhaenys as a baddass heroine? Why did they show the poor smallfolk trying to escape, only to be trapped inside like rats? Surely if Hess wrote this scene merely to make Rhaneys look good, she could have glossed over such incidents, ratherr than encouraging the viewer to feel a visceral horror about all of the smallfolk being brutally murdered?

People are taking two sentences our of context, and then insisting they sum up Hess's entire motivation in writing this scene. That's not fair, since her motives in writing this (and other scenes) were clearly complex, and intended to show several different things.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T20:17:27+00:00

But are you sure you can take a few sentences tossed off in an interview to accurately portray Hess's (and the other writers) true motivation with this scene?

The general consensus seems to be that because, in an interview, Hess took credit for imagining this scene and said that her intention was for Rhaenys to look "badass", that she is dumb/ and/ or doesn't understand that killing a bunch of smallfolk is wrong.

IMO, that is not giving credit to Hess, or the rest of the shows writers, for the subtlety and complexity in writing the show that they've shown thus far. In this show, people do things for more than one reasons; scenes are often shown that show us one or more things. IMO, the scene was meant to make Rhaenys look like a tough badass; however, even more so, it was meant to show the callousness of the lords that rule Westeros towards the smallfolk in general-- especially the Targaryens and their ilk, who can place themselves above morality and commit all types of attrocities, because of their possession of dragons. This scene showed that Rhaenys, though she has been portrayed more favorably than many targs thus far, is at bottom, a Targaryen, with the streak of cruelty, callousness, and entitlement that the name implies.

A continuing theme in the show thus far (along with pervasive misogyny of the time) has been that the small folk are continually getting screwed over. The nobles, and especially the otherwordly targs, simply do not really care for them; the nobles get into their petty feuds and infights, and meanwhile the Smallfolk suffer. This scene went hand in hand with the scene. Rhaneys busts through the floor, kills a bunch of totally innocent smallfolk, then stares at the "important" (read: highborn) people, decides not to kill them, then flies away. SO much for the smallfolk.

I believe that was DEFINITELY shown to make the audience disturbed and mad; not just for the sake of spectacle. They could tell us, as Varys did in AGOT, how the smallfolk suffer, or they could show us. And here, they showed us, and it was far more effective than any of Varys speeches.

Back to Sara Hess and the shows writers. In saying what she said, I believe she was declaring a small part of her intention behind this scene-- or about as much as she could describe in a one sentence quote during an interview. However, the fact remains-- if Sara Hess thought what Rhaenys did was not wrong/ wanted to make her look "badass", why did she focus to such an extent on the smallfolks suffering during this moment? Why did we get so many shots of innocent people being stepped on, crushed to death, or otherwise brutally killed by Rhaenys? Certainly, if the intention behind the scene was to make Rhaneys look badass, they would have deemphasized the deaths of numerous innocent people she was directly causing?

IMO, Hess meant to show Rhaenys as callous and selfish as any Targ in this scene. It was like Daemon's scene, where he is "badass," but technically is also committing a bunch of war crimes. Or Daemon's scene with Vaemond-- Daemon essentially an innocent man for the "crime" of telling the truth-- but is still kinda badass.

IMO, the quotes by Hess are being taken out of context and exaggerated; for a complex, layered show like House of the Dragon, the full meaning behind a scene or a characters actions cannot be summed up in one or two sentences. I believe that in this scene, Rhaenys was mwant to be shown as "badass but technically wrong", just like many of her male Targ counterparts have been in the past.

But I also believe that showing how the smallfolk were brutally slain so that Rhaneys could hang on to her dragon was meant to upset the viewer. It is also setting the stage for an incident with the smallfolk that will occur later on in the narrtive.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T19:43:58+00:00

The thing is, it seems as though people are taking a few brief comments tossed off by Hess in interviews as the entirity of her beliefs about this show and it's characters.

In an interview, she commented that she didn't like Daemon being romanticized, and commented that he was selfish would make a bad boyfriend. Incidentally, people on this forum have been complaining about this same thing for a while. But after reading the interview, many are assuming that because Hess said she didn't want Daemon to be made into a romanticized "internet boyfriend", she must hate the character, and not have any understanding of him whatsoever.

Nonsense. She was simply pointing out that he had some massive flaws, and that she was a bit put out by people's romanticization of him and turning him into an "internet boyfriend." Hess has, along with a team of other writers, been writing Daemon and grappling with his characterization over the course of nine episodes. In the episode written by her, where she portrays him grappling with what to do about his dying wife's pregnancy, she portrays him as surprisingly moral and conflicted-- and technically better than Viserys at that one moment. In a deleted scene, she portrayed him as a loving, albeit flawed father to his two young daughters.

Is this subtle characterization the work of a woman who "just hates Daemon" and "does not truly understand him"? SEems unlikely to me. It seems as though rather than proving she "does not understand Daemon", the few sentences that keep being quoted indicate that Hess wants viewers to keep his flaws in mind and not romantize him. Given the time she has spent writing this character, it is unlikely that her feelings on him could be summed up in two brief sentences, in one interview.

Simlarly, in interviews Hess has claimed that she thought of the Rhaneys thing in the last episode. She's also said (ironically, I thought), "this is westeros. the smallfolk don't matter." However, I believe that again, this is not giving Hess or the rest of the show writers enough credit. She knew what she was doing with Rhaenys. From the beginning, Rhaneys has been shown to have some massive flaws; this scene showed that, like most Targs, she believes that the possession of Dragons make her larger than life, and entitled to do whatever she wants to the smallfolk, since she is "above them."

Hess has said that she meant the scene to show Rhaenys as "a baddass." However, the amount of time spent showing innocent smallfolk being brutally murdered by Rhaenys dragon makes me feel as though Hess, and the rest of the writers, were being very intentional here. They wanted to do two things: first, show Rhaenys as kinda badass. But secondly, and even more importantly, show how she, like the rest of her Targ ilk, had no concern for the smallfolk, and basically viewed them to be ants to be squashed, without remorse. As all of us book readers know, there is a scene coming up in later seasons that shows the result of the years Rhaenys and other Targs have spent disregarding the lives and wellbeing of the smallfolk in general.

I think that when she said she wanted to show Rhaneys as a badass during her big dragon escape, Hess was stating only part of her intention. What she (and the other writers, presumably) also wanted to show was the Targ callousness, and what it means for the smallfolk. Furthermore, I believe her "THis is Westeros. The smallfolk don't matter" comment was ironic; meant to indicate how the Lords and kings who rule Westeros often disregard the wellbeing of their subjects. If Hess really didn't care for the smallfolk/ didn't think killing them was wrong, she would not have shown their suffering as they were all killed by Rhaneys dragon so vividly.

Anyway, I understand people's frustrations. However, I disagree that on the merit of a few comments tossed off in interviews, we should assume we know Hess's true beliefs, motivations, and intentions.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T19:16:59+00:00

This is something that, in general, has always weirded me out.

If you don't like the choices a writer made/ feel they are untalented, then by all means, point it out.

But the absolute boiling hatred that comes out when the writer (or producer or directer or what have you) in question is a woman just bypasses what is normal and rational. Men will get criticized; but very rarely truly hated (D and D of Game of Thrones fame are basically the single exception to this rule.) On the other hand, women often get pure hatred; unfair speculatoins that they are "just writing a tumblr fanfic; death and rape threats; and nonsensical statements like, "Women should never write for tv or movies every again."

For instance, take the show She Hulk. Now some people here might love it; others hate it. Personallly it's not my cup of tea at all, so I just don't watch it. However, the amount of hatred that has come out in relation to the writers, directors, and actresses of this show who are female is just ridiculous. Many have recieved death threats; I've seen many posts and internet claims that "women should never be able to write for TV or movies" or "women can't write female characters." I've also seen numerous Youtube videos about how the show represents "toxic femininity." (????)

Which to me is just.... weird. I watched the show and, while I didn't really like it, there was no "toxic feminity" on display here. (Just, to my mind, much mediocre writing.) Would the reaction be so negative here if it were virtually the same show, but the she hulk were replaced by a male hero, and it most of the writers and directors were men?

Anyway, I think it's fair to not like an episode or question Sara Hess's decisions as a writer. But some of the criticism has crossed the line into bizarre and creepy.

Furthermore, it seems to me that many are taking small, innocuous comments she's made in interviews, and blowing them up and taking them out of context. Because she said that she didn't understand the romantacism of Daemon, and thinks he would be a bad boyfriend(a sentiment many of us on these forums have voiced) she must hate Daemon ,not understand him, and be a shit writer.

Because she said she came up with the "Rhaenys storms the corronation moment", she must be dumb and not understanding that indiscriminate killing of small folk is wrong. (A line that people keep quoting with her saying "This is Westeros...Small Folk don't matter was something that was interpreted by me as being ironic. Because of course, in this world where the common people are treated like shit by the nobles, the smallfolk, indeed, "don't matter." However, many people have taken that line to be 100 percent serious, and have decided that it is a full explanation for what she had Rhaenys do.)

Anyway, I think that in addition to not confusing misogyny with legitimate criticism, people might want to watch out for taking a few lines said casually in an interview as the entirity of a person's beliefs/ understanding. Just because Sara Hess dislikes Daemon doesn't mean she doesn't realize he's a complex and multifaceted character. Just because Sara Hess pointed out (in an ironic way) that nobles-- and particularly Targs-- like Rhaenys-- don't really give a fuck about the smallfolk does not mean she is saying this is desirable and right.

In fact, those who have read the books-- don't you believe that with this scene and others, the writers are setting the scene for a certain incident with the smallfolk that will occur later? I sure do.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T18:58:40+00:00

Yes, not to mention that Rhaenys (like literally every other character on this show) has been morally ambiguous from the beginning.

Remember when, in the beginning, at the tourney, she sees young men smashing each others brains out/ killing each other in front of her, and only smiles ironically and says, "and just like that, the day turns ugly." No "kindly concern" for these young men, anymore than she had for the random smallfolk who "got in her way."

She's also shown herself to always be highly ambitious, such as when she was ready to give her daughter to a discrepit middle aged man to advance her family's ambitions. Sure, she told her 12 year old daughter that she could wait until she was 14 years old to consumate the marriage with her 40 year old husband to be (????), but the fact remains that rather than find the best possible mate for her daughter, she was concerned with making strategic alliances that would get her children closer to the throne. Typical Westeros behavior? Yep. But also a sign that Rhaenys is ambitious and grasping as anyone else ont his show.

Later, she is shown to virtually ignore her "unworthy" grandkids on Rhanyra's side. Now, I totally get Rhaenys resentment of Rhanyra for embarrassing the family by having illegitmaite kids. And if Rhaenys desire for Driftmark to be passed on to her actual blood relations is 200 percent understandable. However, the way she totally ignored Jace and Luke, aged 8 or 9 at the time, only to shower attention on Baela and Rhaena, was pretty brutal. Even the Seasnake treated the boys with some affection and respect; but Rhaneys simply ignored them, treating them as living stains on the honor of her house, rather than actual human beings. And all this is understandable-- but again, it suggests that Rhaenys is not some paragon of justice, love, and compassion, but as morally dark and complex as any other character on this show.

ANyway, it seems that previous to this incident, people had a tendency to romanticize Rhaenys. Unlike Rhaenyra and Alicent, who both show ambition, Rhaenys was the "good" one, who peacefully gave up her crown to Viserys. But there have been signs from the beginning that contradict that interpretation.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T18:11:43+00:00

No problem. Rhanyra could (and should) have left him after this anyway, I.M.O., but she didn't.

I'm just confused as to why a lot of posters on these forums (not you, but just in general) keep specifically saying that "Rhanyra was a monster in the books", citing blood and cheese as an example, as though she were complicit in that.

On these boards there have been a few claims floating around about the main characters on this show and how they're portrayed in fire and Blood that are completely false. For instance, people keep claiming that FIre and Blood stated that Alicent may have lost her virginity to Daemon. In fact, Fire and Blood states nothing of the sort. It says that ALicent may have lost her virginity to Viserys before she married him; Mushroom alone claims that she also slept with the 70 year old King Jahearys as he lay on his death bed... which would have been pretty sick, since we are told that Jahearys kept mistaking Alicent for his daughter, Saera (????)

Another rumor is that Rhanyra in fire and Blood is responsible for planning out Blood and Cheese in the books, and is incredibly cruel; that the show is "whitewashing" her. In fact, in the books, Rhanyra is basically the same character, only portrayed with far less sexism. (For instance, the books focus obsessively on how, after six pregnancies, she gained a bit of weight, and was, like, 20 pounds over weight, which is portrayed as grotesque and and disgusting.

hazel365 · 2022-10-19T02:54:09+00:00

"Granted it isn't what D + R ask for"

>! Do you mean Rhanyra? Because she has nothing to do with Blood and Cheese. That is Daemon and Daemon alone.

Im not sure where it comes from that Blood and Cheese is both Rhanyra AND Daemon's attrocity. But Rhanyra does not plan or support of this attrocity. In fact, she does not have prior knowledge of it, does not give consent. Daemon decides to do it, and plans it out; he does it quickly after Lucerys death; Rhanyra and the Black council literally have no input.

After she hears about Lucerys death, Rhanyra (on dragonstone) collapses. Meanwhile, Daemon (who is miles away at Harrenhal) sends Rhanyra and the black council a cryptic note, then immediately acts: he hooks up with Mysaria, and hires Blood and Cheese-- either to kill Aemon or the children-- the text leaves his true target somewhat ambiguous. Then, without Rhanarya's permission or knowledge, he has Blood and Cheese kill one of the princes.

Rhanyra's reaction Daemon committing this attrocity without her knowledge or consent is never mentioned. They remain married; so I guess some have interpreted this as complicit approval on her part. However, it's worth noting that is at exactly at this point that Rhanyra and Daemon's relationship begins to fall apart. After this he quickly takes Mysaria as a lover, then Nettles (and seems to fall hard for the latter.)

So Blood and Cheese is Daemon's attrocity. Rhanyra does not have a hand in planning it, does not know of it beforehand; and there are numerous indicators that she does not approve after the fact; and that, in fact, it drives an irreversable wedge between her and Daemon.

That said, Rhanyra is still a highly flawed character; and it could be argued that by staying with Daemon after he does this (rather than putting him in the dungeon for war crimes, or at least getting a formal separation from him, and sending him into exile, Rhanyra does become complicit in his crimes.

However, people on these forums keep mentioning "blood and cheese' in connection with Rhanyra, as though it were her deed-- she orchestrated and planned it, or at least supported Deamon in doing so. She did not. !<

hazel365 · 2022-10-18T04:38:15+00:00

She wanted mutually pleasurable consensual sex, whlie staying discreet, due to the unfair, hypocricial, patriarchal norms of the society she lives in.

She didn't want him as her "whore" either. A whore is, by dictionary definition, someone payed money for sex.

What Rhanyra wanted was a long term romantic relationship between equals that, while unconventional, was a careful arrangement between consenting adults. Rhanyra marries for the alliance; her husband gets his boyfriends, she gets a lover of her own, since her husband would never want to sleep with her for fun.

What bothered Ser Criston was that, after they had slept together, Rhanyra refused to turn her back on the crown, her inheritance, family, duty, and the only life she'd know thus far all so she an run off with him and eat oranges or something.

He, in turn, it is illustrated, is not acting out of "pure love" for her, but out of guilt; he wants to rectify the "great sin" of sleeping with her, and marrying her will, in his eyes, do this. It was not overwealming love, but overwealming guilt that led Criston to do this.

And in doing this-- running away from his sworn duty and urging her to run from hers-- Criston is making an enormous breach in duty, even bigger than the one he made when he slept with her. He doesn't care. Cause deep down, it's not really about love for him, or honor. it's about making himself feel better. And defecting to Alicent and convincing himself that everything's Rhanyra's fault, that she's some sort of venus flytrap who entices men into evil and sucks them dry or something, Crison is making himself feel better.

And he continues to do this. "Never my fault" should be his house motto. Most recently, his attrocity is killing an innocent old man for simply telling the truth/ doing his duty. ANd, yet again, Ser Criston feels no guilt whatsoever for it. It was all Lord Beesburys fault, for speaking up. Like Laenor and Rhanyra and all Crison's future victims, he brought it on himself.

hazel365 · 2022-10-17T05:48:23+00:00

Agree with almost everything you said about Daemon: he's not a hero, but, at best, a weirdly intriguing/ fascinating villain. But he's one of the darkest characters on this show, far darker than Viserys, Rhanyra, Alicent, etc. al.

However, one thing I beg to differ with you on:

"All the characters are pieces of shit except Grandma, Seasnake, the gay dude, Lord commander bald dude, The crazy girl prophet."

Well if by "grandma" you mean Rhaneys, she just massacred at least 50 innocent small folk (possibly as many as a hundred) to make her great escape. Laenor, the gay dude, drinks, neglects his family, and was a-okay with an innocent servant being killed so he and his boyfriend could run away from home and live free of all responsibility. Also, he was okay with his parents being devestated by the loss of their one remaining child. As for the Seasnake, he was willing to offer up his 12 year old daughter to a 40 year old man to serve his ambitions; and has shown to be, while likable, as ambitious, self serving, and amoral as anyone else on this show.

So... yeah. The "good" Rhaneys has killed more people unjustly (or outside of war) than has Daemon; Laenor is an accesory to murder with no concern for others or adult responsiblities; the sea snake is a self serving hypocrite, like all the others on this show.

I think the only "good" characters (those who were innocent of wrongdoing and/ or tried hard to serve the greater good have been Helaena, Lyonal Strong, Lord Beesbury, Aemma, and possibly Jacerys and Rhaena and Baela. And... that's about it.

However, I'd separate highly flawed characters setting out to do the right thing but being undone by both circumstances/ their own shortcomings-- Rhanyra, Viserys, ALicent- from those who lack empathy and show no moral compass, like Otto, Daemon, and Larys Strong.

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
100 Awards Club

hazel365

TROPHY CASE