#hotd discourse

[helaenamyqueen]

I found this on Reddit and it perfectly explains my problems with the show and the direction it has taken

[synchodai]

i am genuinely unfollowing and unsubscribing asoiaf "content creators" turning on grrm for being "unprofessional" and telling him "to shut up and finish winds." thank you for telling me that you don't care about the author's vision as long as you get more soulless seasons and shows to turn into tiktok theory vids and ship fodder. thank you for letting me know that you are more concerned about HBO's ability to churn out half-baked slop and want TWOW now regardless of how it reflects the author's creative message and how happy he is with it. thank you for letting me know that you see asoiaf as primarily a content mill for you to profit off of and you will turn on anyone who threatens the content mill, even the very person who made the world and characters you claim to love so much.

[dreamfyre-beautiful]

Let me get this straight, when team green uses the book to say making Aegon a rapist was wrong we’re “excusing it” cuz it’s a different source, but when team black does it for Daemon being abusive to women NOW the show is wrong?

[newts-gay]

to all the people yapping about the “hypocrisy of alicent sleeping with cole when she abused and hated rheanyra all these years for sleeping out of wedlock” ermmm that’s just such an oversimplified and ignorant reasoning for alicent’s actions and it’s just really frustrating to read this view, missing well the point… i mean yes young alicent was an obedient lady that followed the customs and rules but she was never shown to hate on rhaenyra for the sole fact of out of wedlock sex or later infidelity. her first reaction when she thinks her friend slept with daemon was to help her out of the situation - even if she disagrees with such an action and the reason she does so is because that would compromise her position as a female heir to the throne. it is rhaenyra’s unabashed lying to alicent leading to otto being removed as hand and sent away of king’s landing that’s the actual blow to her regarding this incident. it was the consequences of rhaenyra’s “I do as I please” attitude paid by alicent’s family.

and again later on it’s not really an issue of morality (even if addressed as such), so much as it’s about rhaenyra flaunting her privilege to do whatever she pleases and having her dad save the day just because he can simply will everything so, just because they’re targaryen and can exist above the law. that is what her fucking whoever she wants and having multiple bastards “represents” in a way. of course alicent’s (r)eactions are also affected by the fact that she herself didn’t own her body or her pleasure in that forced-by-her-father marriage where she was raped to have children her abuser didn’t even want and yes it is misogynistic that this spite towards rhaenyra is fuelled by this comparison of lives but there’s so much more at play than “alicent is a conservative religious bitch”.

also maybe we could consider how hypocritical of the fans it actually is to shame and hate on alicent for trying to seek some sexual pleasure now that her abuser husband is dead because what she was salty about rhaenyra having obvious bastards?? like how does one thing justify the other

[sunnysideaeggs]

I finally found out why the Laena/Daemon match made me so uncomfortable 😵‍💫

Are you really going to tell me that a little girl went from this:

To this:

In three years? 🧐🧐🧐

It makes me so upset that hotd makers really casted another actress for Laena making a 16 yo effectively look ‘elder’ and ‘grown up’ and ‘seeking’ Daemon. They’re actively feeding stereotypes about girls of color growing up faster, wanting men’s attention earlier or being ‘more developed’ than their white counterparts. Alicent and Rhaenyra, two characters who are in universe older than Laena, kept their actress after the time lapse.

Laena Velaryon’s age and appearance seems to fluctuate however it’s more convenient for Targaryen men. She’s just a cute kid when Viserys is searching for a wife, making Alicent the ‘more sensible’ choice. She’s a beautiful young woman when Daemon needs to get away from Rhaenyra for a bit. She’s a middle aged woman who’s getting boring when he needs to come back.

Also, why did they change the actress (again!) after the time lapse? Only 12 years passed, at most. And teen!Laena is 16.

Are you really going to tell me she looks 28? Don’t get me wrong, Nanna Blondell is beautiful, but she, as she should, looks her age (37). Laena didn’t need another actress for just an episode, showcase her youth and the tragedy of being a placeholder in Daemon’s life (who, btw, didn’t age a day. I’m starting to think he keeps himself youthful by feeding on little girls.)

Alas, it really bothers me. As a young woman of color, it always pisses me off whenever people find excuses to sexualize woc and especially prey on young girls. It’s even worse when big entertainment companies feed into it.

[mhsdatgo]

By far, I think the "prophecy" is the greatest bullshit that has been adapted in HBO's House of the Dragon. It really makes no sense whatsoever.

Especially in the way it was used in ep.9. Basically the only reason for Alicent to start defending her children, as if she already didn't have enough reasons to believe that they would be at risk as long as she'd let Rhaenyra do what she pleased for much longer.

Rhaenyra watched Alicent's son in the only eye he had left since her child sliced it out, she watched as he was stitched up, she watched how Alicent forgot the very concept of decorum out of the rage and desperation that gripped her. Yet she demanded that Aemond be tortured for speaking the truth.

"And now you take my son's eye, and to even that, you feel entitled."

This is Alicent tipping over the edge. If it were me, Rhaenyra would've been lucky to walk out of that room alive.

She's not talking crap here. Rhaenyra really does not give a shit. She presses on, she accuses her of hiding beneath a mask that has now "fallen." How can anyone look at this scene, hear this line, and have the point of Alicent's words completely fly over their head? How can anyone think this woman was going for Rhaenyra out of jealousy?

Did she really need a misunderstood prophecy to put Aegon on the throne? Many like to see this from his point of view, which is being forced onto a position he does not want. Which is right in that case. But Alicent should've done it to keep her family alive and not for a dying man's last words. After Driftmark, she really shouldn't have needed any more reasons.

[gwenllian-in-the-abbey]

It might come as quite a shock to those who think that having a woman on the throne would mean anything for women's liberation in Westeros, but trickle down feminism is not a thing. Liberation cannot start at the top, it is a movement that must start from the bottom up, otherwise the privileged class simply creates more vectors for oppression. Power and privilege are inherently self-protecting, and a those in power, yes, including women, will tear down the less privileged before sacrificing even a tiny scrap of their own privilege or power. This is one of the main themes of ASOIAF and yet this fandom has bought into the myth of the liberating queen so wholeheartedly that people actually believe that allowing a tyrant to take the throne, so long as she's a woman tyrant, is praxis. Rhaenyra is not a liberator of women or anyone else, in fact she damages the cause of liberation much more than she helps it. Control over the dragons was bought and paid for with the blood of countless slaves, and Rhaenyra wields the tools of the oppressor expertly, threatening all who challenge her with fire and blood, a threat she delivers on before she ever crowns herself queen. Her very claim comes from the belief that the one person in charge should wield absolute power and ruthlessly defend that power with the might of dragons.

Remember who kills more of the living dragons in Fire and Blood than any one Targaryen. Set aside the silly logistics of the storming of the Dragonpit, and think about the bravery it would take to face down a dragon armed with only a pitchfork and conviction. That is where liberation begins, from the people standing in front of the dragons, not those sitting atop them.

[itisasadness]

Why do some people in this fandom act like we killed their grandma and kicked their dog? We literally just mind our own business and create and share content.

[witheredoffherwitch]

Targaryens: Infamous End Inevitable.

This entire discourse on Jaehaera is so laughably absurd. I love my Green characters, but I couldn't care less what the show does with Jaehaera's arc. Team Black loves to remind everyone that Rhaenyra's lineage survived while Team Green's perished. That is true... BUT not only did her sons separate themselves from their mother's legacy to keep the Lords happy, but they did nothing to elevate her name in any way after their supposed 'win'. Their mother's 'usurper' was perceived as the legitimate ruler while she was branded a traitor. Rhaenyra's legacy was so badly tarnished that even after her lineage lived on, no Targaryen descendent carried her name, despite the House's tendency of reusing names.

For me, the Dance tells the story of how House Targaryen ruined itself. They put their most powerful assets (Dragons) all in at once... only to become extinct in just over a century, while the other noble houses had been ruling Westeros for millennia. It doesn't matter whose line survives - if this doesn't make sense to you, then you are not intelligent enough to engage with any form of media. I'm content with the way things ended because ultimately, no one is triumphant.

Even if Jaehaera lives, her line still loses since it was Viserys II's line that eventually took over. No matter who ends up reigning, HOUSE TARGARYEN WILL BE DEAD! The last survivor of the house (barring Jon Snow) will make sure its legacy would be one of infamy. It will linger in Westeros like the Mussolini's monument, forever infamous.

Even if the books attempt to alter Dany's storyline, it would be idiotic to expect a Targaryen restoration. To those who foolishly believe that the books will be rewritten and the Targaryens will once again sit on the Iron Throne, then I've got a bridge in Pyongyang I'm looking to unload.

[pureworlds]

it was interesting to see the fight between rhaenyra and daemon because it could be interpreted in many different ways. the one way that stood out to me the most though, was the idea of her never loving him from the start. in my mind, daemon is one of the only men rhaenyra knows, so naturally she clung/went to him. i mean she said it herself, she never fully trusted him. perhaps she's waking up to the truth: the version of daemon she created in her head, is different from the real daemon.

i could be wrong but these are just my thoughts!

[beware-of-pity]

House of the Dragon suffers from the deep problem of purposely misunderstanding the world they are adapting and changing it to satisfy their own demands.

From the little things such as the lack of ladies in waiting, changing the dragon lore to fit whatever idea they came up with and had to insert in their weird made-fanfiction style story, the importance of oaths, the ignorance of the canonical past of the same dynasty the show is based on. Little things that do not seem to matter, but when gone every little piece starts to fall and before you know it everything is crumbling.

From the way the council of 101 was portrayed, to the use of the game of throne formula of simplifying the feudalist politics of Westeros, when it comes to politics, which is supposed to be the show's primary foundation and the cause of the main conflict, it comes across as completely lacking in the area.

Hell they didn't even bother to replace Lyonel Strong with a new master of laws after he was made hand, and you want me to believe they care about politics??? Do you truly want me to believe that neither Rhaenyra nor Alicent ever became friends with anyone else after their friendship fell apart? Especially Rhaenyra, the literal heir to the throne, future queen, and daughter of the king, who in the books had an entire army of ladies in waiting and lady friends,only so you could milk out the tragedy of the relationship between these two???

[thisonetimeinmeridian]

So I have a thought about that prophecy that HotD is using to justify the Targaryen invasion of Westeros. Obviously, this isn't entirely their fault since George R.R. Martin is the one who came up with it and has said a similar thing in different interviews . Yes, the books make Rhaenerya more vengeful and thirsty for blood, but it also does not make the Greens sympathetic at all and views them as one dimensional villians. George also had the Starks and the Blackwoods side with the Blacks, so I think it's clear which side we were "supposed" to root for, if any, but I digress. Anyway, into my theory.

Time and time again, we hear that Targaryens are the closest thing to gods because they have superior blood that "controls" the dragons. That they are dragons. We hear this within the books, within HotD, even in Game of Thrones. But really, they are no better than anyone else, GOT even had Dany say this outright in the last season when she says that without their dragons, they weren't great at all. Your argument might be well they could control them thats what they mean." But really, no, they couldn't. I'm not even just talking about when Aemond accidentally killed Luke. In one of the earlier seasons, Dany's dragon literally burned a child alive, and she didn't even know until much later. Does that sound like control to you? Neither Luke nor Aemond had control in that fight. Their animals, their instincts, took over despite what their riders wanted. You could say that "oh well, Aemond is only HALF Targaryen, that's why we need to keep the blood pure with superior Targaryen blood," in which case, refer to my earlier point about Dany.

Unlike some people, I like this change of Luke's death being an accident. It shows that the Targaryen's aren't gods, or infallible after all. As I said, Game of Thrones even shows this to us.

So that's why I think they are going in a similar direction with the whole "prophecy" BS. We hear multiple times within the original series that prophecies are never direct and often misinterpreted. This is made even clearer when Melisandre misinterprets the "Prince Who Was Promised" multiple times. This, combined with the fact that GRRM is heavily involved with HotD, and the fact that they've already shown that Targaryen's aren't immune or gods after, leads me to believe they are going in a similar direction as the idea that they can "control" the dragons. See my previous point.

It could likely be a criticism of the Targaryen hubris, and the fact that they think they have "superior" or "pure" blood makes them better than everyone else. Or that they are justified on starting multiple wars that lead to immeasurable amounts of death and destruction. As Ser Barristan said about the Mad King, "the mad king gave his enemies what he thought they deserved, and each time it made him feel more powerful and right."

Targaryen's are their own worst enemy, and they will tear each other apart over "who deserves it more" or "who has the purest blood" and is "more Targaryen." The prophecy is just an excuse to hold up their own superiority and god complex, despite the fact that no one wanted them to rule in the first place. Even George R.R. Martin says that holding the realm together with dragons is ficle and bound to break.

[synchodai]

I understand that because GRRM deleted his post, people will wildly misconstrue and exaggerate what was written, so here it is in full so you can read the actual words firsthand:

I want to isolate the part about Maelor. Here are the things GRRM says about him:

Condal assured him that Maelor would be included but walked it back.

Said that he still loved the B&C sequence on the show despite the lack of Maelor and it not being as strong as in the books.

Rickard Thorne in Bitterbridge wouldn't happen without Maelor.

Helaena commiting suicide wouldn't have happened if she didn't receive news of Maelor being so brutally murdered in Bitterbridge.

The Butterfly effect he is talking about is Maelor's birth -> B&C Helaena chooses Maelor -> Jaehaerys is killed instead of Maelor which leads to Helaena's guilt and trauma -> Maelor is brutally murdered in Bitterbridge -> Shatters Helaena's already fragile psyche -> Helaena kills herself -> KL smallfolk riot because Helaena was a popular queen -> Rhaenyra is driven out of KL by the smallfolk.

Things GRRM DIDN'T say:

He hates how the show handled B&C.

That Rickard Thorne or even Maelor is an essential character.

That the events have to happen as written in the book.

That he hates Rhaenyra.

Ryan Condal has committed treason most foul and now must be fed to his dragon.

[dreamfyre-beautiful]

Am I the only one that gets weirded out by Criston Cole hate? Like he called a RICH WHITE lady who was his boss a cunt once and suddenly he’s satan??

[greenqueenhightower]

Hey.

I constantly argue back and forth with TB stans that Jace, Luke and Joffrey aren't legitimised just because Laenor, Corlys and Viserys go along with Rhaenyra’s lie about them being "trueborn". As I'm sure you're aware, in Westeros only a king can legitimise the illegitimate by first declaring their bastardy and then legitimising them afterwards. And TB stans. Just. Don't. Get. It. They also seem to think that the King's word is law in Westeros. They don't understand that this a feudal monarchy where the king and his vassals are reliant upon each other and both must respect the social contract in order for the Westerosi social structures e.g. monarchy to be maintained.

IMO, they fall for the narrative trap of the Targaryen characters. Just because Viserys and Rhaenyra say that the King's word is law doesn't actually make it law. It's only law as long as the king has the ability to enforce it. Therefore, if a king did something insane in the eyes of his noble polity, e.g., try to place his bastards in the line of succession, they'd rebel proving accurately that the King's word is in fact not actually law. Aerys's overthrowing is a great example of this. As is the reign of Daeron II: if his word was law and everyone had to obey him, no one would have joined Daemon Blackfyre's rebellion.

Anyway back to TB stans. I think alot of them don't actually realise how the world works. Even GRRM confirmed the bastardy of Rhaenyra’s 3 son's for goodness sake. Every time they try to deny it using the aforementioned argument it only confuses me. Are they insecure about Rhaenyra having illegitimate children? Is that how far they're para-social relationship with her goes?

They also have another stupid argument that Rhaenyra's kids having her blood means that they can inherit her throne. No no no no no no no no no. THAT'S NOT HOW IT WORKS TB. If it was Westerosi lords with bastard relatives, it would allow them to inherit. You have to be trueborn. It's unfair but these unfair laws are what keeps Westeros from constant civil war. That's the point of inheritance law in the Seven Kingdoms.

Anyway, sorry about the rant. It's just that sometimes when I argue with certain TB stans they don't seem to understand the laws of the world they're fans of. They will bend over backwards to excuse their faves, not understanding that you are allowed to criticise a character you like (& in their case love). I think Rhaenyra is an interesting character - moreso in the book TBH - I just don't get why so many TB stans willfully refuse to understand the way in which the laws of the world she inhabits work. Any thoughts?

Hi anon, it took me forever to get to your ask but you're right! 💚

Not all TB stans share the same views, and there are people in here with whom you can converse intelligently, but I have also seen the discourse you're referring to, and it is very annoying when the stans don't get it.

You put the Westerosi legitimization process very well. If we consider the greater Middle Ages-inspired world-building context that Westeros is based on, it makes sense why bastardy is a stigmatized social issue. Blood "purity," lineage, and legitimacy are important because they are the only way land and titles are bequeathed and inherited.

The King is the only one who can legitimize his own illegitimate children as heirs, but he can do so for other illegitimate children, regardless of whether these are related to him by blood. King Louis IV, for example, legitimized John II Duke of Brabant's son, Jan Cordeken, after a petition John wrote to him thus enabling him to inherit his father's fortune and found the House of Glymes. From Ancient Egypt, Greece, and Rome to Enlightenment Europe, there are examples of Kings legitimizing not only their children but also the children of their officials, courtiers, and friends. It was seen as granting a favor to them, and when it came to personal matters, a King might choose to legitimize his children when he ran out of heirs, or in the case of Louis XIV, because he could and wanted to.

In other words, Viserys, who knew of but chose to ignore Rhaenyra's sons' (his grandsons') bastardy, had ample time and opportunity to legitimize them but chose to blind himself to the truth instead. What was that about Alicent calling Viserys "weak" in one of the deleted scenes of S1? Well, "weak" isn't the only word I would use to describe him... also irresponsible, foolish, and inadequate.

Nevertheless, the legitimization process in history was seldom favored by the court, the King's vassals, and the people, and caused quite a stir. As you say, the King's law didn't hold up that much ground compared to the law of tradition and at times the Church. The people didn't care if a King legitimized a child by naming them heir... the stigma of being born "illegitimate" wasn't washed off that easily, because bastards were seen as devilish, impure, half-breeds, unnatural hybrids, and so forth. So Viserys choosing to ignore the issue face front was bound to be catastrophic, because no matter how he tried to silence the tongues that wagged by threatening to cut them off, the issue of his grandsons' apparent bastardy remained, and THE REALM would not accept any of them on the Iron Throne, for the same reasons.

And Viserys did nothing about it. He could have confronted Rhaenyra when Jace was born and reminded her of the stark reality of the consequences of what she was doing. Not only did he name Rhaenyra (a woman) as his heir, which alone was controversial and unprecedented, but a woman with three illegitimate children, whose existence never even tried to correct or prevent. Viserys alone weakened Rhaenyra's claim with his lack of foresight and counsel.

If TB uphold the "Viserys loved his grandsons and he accepted them as they were" narrative, they are not only deluded but lack media literacy as well, because Viserys DIDN'T CARE if his grandsons were trueborn or not, or if that would plunge the realm to war, the same way he didn't care that he had named Rhaenyra as his successor when the realm, who was so used to having Kings for centuries, knew he had THREE legitimate sons of his own.

So my two cents on the discourse would basically be that those who don't understand the social and political repercussions of Rhaenyra having bastards, not being counseled as to why this is destructive, left on her own to raise them, and having to cope with the consequences of her actions as she realizes that the father she so loved and admired didn't protect or support her at all, are missing out on a much more interesting character in Rhaenyra and a more complex dynamic with her sons, who she now understands are exceptionally vulnerable and potentially threatening to her cause.

This is a far more intriguing reading than anything TB stans are getting at with their "no criticism" ban on Viserys and Rhaenyra.

[ride-thedragon]

Nettles, Rhaenyra, Laena, Mysaria, and the Prize that is DAEMON TARGARYEN

Now, I'm not going to sit here and police shipping. I'm also not going to act as though better writers and thinkers long before me haven't talked about the same phenomenon of centring men in women's narratives as a way to value the women. However, as a person in this fandom, I do want to apply this thought to the shipping discourse of Daemon Targaryen because it has become exhausted.

We treat this man as though he's the prize to gain when these women are in relationships with him. In the sense that when Daemon picks these women to have a relationship with they gain a value and devalue the women he leaves behind. We see this with him going:

from Rhea and Mysaria to Laena.

He finally has a Valyrian bride who matches his spirit and can give him Valyrian children. They get along and are of equal standing.

From Laena to Rhaenyra.

He moves on, finds real happiness, finds his true family, becomes the Targaryen he was destined to be with his Targaryen bride at his side, and their Targaryen children with his real family

From Rhaenyra to Mysaria .

Rhaenyra became mournful and wasn't as she once was. Him and Mysaria just have this connection, and Rhaenyra approves.

From Rhaenyra and Mysaria to Nettles.

Daemon finally found someone he could look past himself for. The singers say they end up together. He does all of this and leaves the Rhaenyra to her death because Nettles left. He's finally ready to settle down and grow old. She saved him.

All of this is an overgeneralised hyperbole of conversations I've seen, but they always centre Daemon choosing these women to be in a relationship with as their biggest accomplishment in the narrative. Him at their side is the biggest deal, and when he leaves them, they are discarded and replaced by his new love interest.

The issue with this

Prioritising a man, this man, as the main factor in these relationships, discredit the women who exist outside of him and make it seem as though he's the only thing that adds value to them. The language being used, in short, dismisses their personhood and equates them to something he can own, discard and replace at whim, and he alone adds value to them. It's icky language especially with his game card.

Lady Rhea: wasn't even her choice. She hated him and refused to give him an heir to inherit Runestone. In the show, she makes sure he returns and kills her by insulting his sexual prowess.

Mysaria: is complicit and involved in his worst action but always ensures she pulls herself up with it. Being his courtesan made her wealthy, almost made her his wife. Then she's complicit in blood and cheese and gets herself promoted to the Lady of Whispers to the Queen, eventually putting an end to him.

Laena: CLAIMED THE LARGEST DRAGON IN THE WORLD AS A TEEN. Is quite literally the mother of the girls that survived the Dance. Her blood inherits her house's seat.

Rhaenyra: Queen of the Seven Kingdoms. Had men avenge her death, and her son sat on the iron throne after her.

Nettles: created the religion that forged the most dangerous tribe in the Vale of Arryn. Claimed a wild dragon and committed alleged treason and escaped.

I'm not saying Daemon isn't important. I'm not saying he doesn't play a part. I'm saying that when we have these conversations about him and these women and the progression of his relationships with them, I hope we can reach a place where the idea that he leaves them isn't a jab or joke against one woman for the sake of the one he chooses. It's getting strange.

Women don't lose value because of a man. Ever.

This also applies to Baela and her adaptation in the show. She isn't uninteresting because she isn't a tomboy or like Daemon. They make her a political girl in the show and like Laena. That's not a loss. She's modelled after Rhaenys as well. She's just reflective of the women in her life. I'm sure she'll have a relationship to Daemon as well, but she's the Ward of Driftmark. That's quite interesting. We also have tomboys like Alysanne and Sabitha, so we aren't in a deficit by any means.