House of the Dragon (Game of Thrones Spin-off) Thread

Which one outweighs the other is a separate proposition. As I said, the show indisputably does raise a point in favor of matrilineal succession based on the scandal over the parentage of Rhaenyra's children and thus their place in lines of succession for both Driftmark and the Iron Throne. Whether you think that outweighs the poor survival rate of childbirth or not is a separate discussion that I made no comment or claims about.


Not a serious question. The theme of arbitrarily sexist succession/inheritance policies is both explicit and implict in both the show and the books- and something Martin has talked about in interviews- with several characters expressing the judgment that men ought to take priority of women (Otto's brother, for instance), and arbitrarily so, i.e. not based on a comparison of the relative fitness of any specific male claimant or heir vs a female one.

This obviously isn't the motivation for Otto or Alicent, but it is for many of the houses that end up backing the Greens (and/or who supported Viserys over Rhaenys at the Great Council of 101, again because of the arbitrary and sexist tradition that male heirs must always take precedent over female descendants), and many of the commoners who dislike/oppose Rhaenyra (as with the play in Flea Bottom that Daemon takes teenage Rhaenyra to early in season 1).


That's good for you, but that's not we're talking about. I never said that everyone who supports Aegon over Rhaenyra does so on the basis of commitment to a sexist principle of succession or inheritance, obvious exceptions being Otto and Alicent. The point is that some do. Because, well, they do. And regardless of what any particular individuals or groups think, the tradition itself is arbitrary and sexist. I understand why that would get MRA's or people with weird gender politics panties in a twist, but there isn't really any way around it.


Yikes

Heimdall I like it.

These re-eductators you speak of... I pray to the 7 none are wearing sandals with socks?

Too soon, man.  Too soon.

Oh we're posting memes now?

Wait, what? I thought you just meant that there was a point in favor of matrilineal succession because it'd generally have been nice to know for a fact that the child was at least the product of the actual ruler compared to not knowing. Hence my incredulity at that being considered even relevant in the face of the inevitable instability and civil war caused by a statistical jump in dead monarchs over time.

Rhaenyra and her kids are in trouble because they were born out of wedlock and she's been lying about it even though it's obvious, discrediting herself and giving her kids' trueborn rivals a clear opportunity to push their own claims if enough people believe them. If "Viserynya" had originally birthed only a boy who "couldn't" inherit and was simply forced to make him heir because her sister was an unruly sociopath, and that son in turn presented "trueborn" daughters who were clearly the product of at most one of their parents after he finally got a sister and mom was too sentimental to disinherit him when it happened, we'd have the exact same situation.

And Vaermond tried to take the throne of Driftmark and threatened their position even after it turned out that Jace and Luke were going to marry his nieces' daughters, who indisputably had as much Velaryon blood as Leanor's sons theoretically would have, and would have ensured Velaryon blood on both the Iron and Driftwood thrones. Clearly, being absolutely sure that his brother's line continued wasn't the actual sticking point for him. Personally being passed over in favor of and expected to pay obeisance to walking lies was.


Doesn't the tangible, demonstrable, predictable consequences to the kingdom of sticking or not sticking to that policy completely regardless of the individual claimants make it... not so arbitrarily sexist? Culturally at least, if not personally for those characters? You see writers accidentally tell stories that clearly actually poke several holes in their espoused ideology all the time, but I don't know that anyone has ever done it as... elegantly... as George R.R. Martin, in that case. You're sure he's not just telling you what he knows you want to hear in those interviews?

Still don't see how those themes are either explicit or implicit, in any case. If you're telling me that this season was concocted by people intending to argue for women having belonged more at the tops of medieval feudal systems then that is the funniest and most bizarre thing I've ever heard. It'd be like a 1770's slave-owner sitting down to pen a letter trying to justify a new purchase and accidentally writing out the Emancipation Proclamation... and sending it off to the entire world for 200 million USD in postage, confident he'd made his point.

On a completely different note, watching the original show is really making me appreciate how much better HoD's action scenes are than early-GoT's. Kit Harrington and Nikolaj Coster-Waldau always made me cringe trying to look like they were having a sword fight. Just finished enduring that scrap between Jon and the dagger-twirling shit in season 4 for the second time, and it's so terrible I almost can't believe that kind of thing didn't drag the show down more.

Yeah I'll be really interested to see where they end the series, i.e. how much of the aftermath of the actual war it includes (the "Hour of the Wolf", etc). I also don't understand why, in an environment where show/film creators are always trying to milk an IP for every last possible drop of profit, the people behind GoT and House seem to be in such a rush to get things over with. Maybe they'll re-evaluate the 3-4 seasons they were originally planning for in light of season 1's success, although maybe that's not possible or feasible contractually. Either way, can't wait to see what's next. 

So not to keep complaining about shit, because I did really enjoy season 1 but... considering how perfectly casted the show has been otherwise, I've been EXTREMELY disappointed by the Strongs- all of them were super interesting characters, the father (Osmund) and Larys the Clubfoot in particular. But I found all 3 actors (and the writing/dialogue for their characters), and the two playing Osmund and Larys in particular, to be super underwhelming.

In the books, Osmund Strong was this gigantic brute who everyone assumed was a total meathead because of his size and the fact that he's taciturn and careful/quiet in his speech, but who was actually extremely smart and educated and had even studied at the Citadel and forged part of a maesters chain before getting bored and moving on. But in House he's one of the most vanilla and generic characters in the entire show. And Larys was also an enigmatic big dude with inscrutable thoughts and motives, and who was an absolute master of a spy and master of whisperers, who was behind the curtain pulling the strings for basically the entire Dance and had all of Westeros dancing to his tune... not some skinny wiener Littlefinger-knockoff with a foot fetish.

And I mean honestly, wtf was with that scene with Larys jerkin' it to Alicents bare feet anyways? So random and bizarre... 

Yeah I mean to each their own and everything, but like... Why? It was definitely funny, but probably not in a good way- it was sort of just funny in a "wtf were they thinking" sort of way. 

But yeah I agree that all of the Velaryons were well-cast, not only Rhaenys and Corlys, but also Laena and Laenor, both the adult and kid versions. And Viserys, Daemon, Alicent, and Rhaenyra are all absolutely amazing. Which is why the Strongs sort of stood out like a sore thumb, as the only poorly cast characters in a show that was otherwise impeccably cast.