Am I the only one who's tired of HotD Daemon being reduced to a Valyrian supremacist storyline this season? Notice how its always Daemon who's telling Rhaenyra when she doubts herself that they are gods so that he indirectly appears a manic leading Rhaenyra down the supremacy path.
In the book, there was no hint that either Daemon or Rhaenyra were these hugeass Old Valyria supremacists specially since Rhaenyra had three visibly non Valyrian looking kids as her heirs and Daemon seemed content enough to betroth them to his only daughters. Targs lived in Westeros for more than a century at this time and after Jaehaerys reign they were all but assimilated into the culture and faith.
I feel this is deliberately done by HBO to alienate Targs and make them seem "aliens" and outsiders to justify the ending of Game Of Thrones, to show how every Targ is mad to some level like it's the faulty genes. Even though I liked akotsk and it was largely canon accurate, it was also somewhat Targ critical like some choice of lines.
Back to Daemon, Matt Smith is real good but I am so done with Daemon being this "make Westeros new Valyria" What? And he says it openly in front of River lords and Northerns as though Westerosi lords and people have no problem with it? As tho the only hurdle are the Hightowers and everyone else would just get on with it? The writing is giving Game Of Thrones seasons 7 & 8.
Sigh! They could have done something different and better with Daemyra's story this season but instead they did this. It's as awful as it's predictable. Particularly the whole prophesy bogus and Valyrian vs Faith spiel because it's not only bastardising story but also these characters.
I mean, this has been show cannon for ages. The Targs are the ontological evil of the universe, the GOT's Slytherin House that only produces blood supremacist tyrants. And this has been reinforced not only through the members we've seen on screen or mentioned in universe (Daemon, Aemond, Dany, Rhaenyra, Aerys, the AKOTSK Targaryens, etc.) but the coin flip line the shows have taken to using as shorthand for inevitable Targaryen-specific madness and corruption.
I think this is something that needs to be accepted in the show's cannon because the nature of these adaptations has always been to simplify, and sanitize stuff into good vs evil when translating onto the screen, so casual audiences can have someone to root for. (Until they need to flip the switch, and then they'll just have the characters don medieval Sith outfits to stage nazi rallies so the audience knows they're evil now. It's kind of insulting how they just think people won't get it unless you have literal Nazis on screen)
Tbh, in theory, i don't mind this concept being presented in the show. The book Targs are inextricably linked with their Valyrian heritage, and do engage in supremacist rhetoric, despite their assimilation. And this is to be expected, as they are at the top of a feudal hierarchy; there's a reason IRL royalty used the divine right of Kings to justify their rule, why they called themselves blue bloods, why they often cited relation to the gods. It was a way to justify their grip on power, present themselves as above the common man to reinforce the hierarchy as natural.
And this is relevant to the Targs cause they are relative newcomers to the land, when you compare them to the other houses. So they need something to justify why they get to rule over nobility that once ruled in it's own right. So they reference a genetic connection to the most powerful weapon in universe—dragons—to reinforce their own specialness, and monopolize said control. Because if you need their specific blood to claim dragons, then no one else can topple them, as they lack the same access.
Side-note, this is why Nettles is such a fantastic character; cause she completely deconstructs this idea of this special genetic heritage. Her taming of Sheepstealer mirrors how early Valyrians may have done this originally. Like TWOIAF states they started off as sheephearders and I don't think thats a coincidence.
It's very likely they tamed the dragons the same way she did, and then turned to magic to monopolize this connection for the purposes of imperialism. Its lowkey why I think the Freehold and the Targs got fucked after; because this exploitative relationship is destructive in nature, and is bound to lead to ruin in the end.
Meanwhile, Nettles, who was already hesitant to use her dragon as a weapon of war, got to fly away and live out her days in relative peace, where she and her dragon got to exist as equals. (Its also why I think dragons being presented exclusively as weapons of mass destruction isn't a perfect analogy, as the universe states the death of dragons resulted in harsher winters, and the death of magic in universe. I think they're magical animals that are necessary to maintain the equilibrium of the world; the issue is, people treating them as nothing more save weapons of destruction which has disastrous consequences)
Tangent aside, the Targs would have a reason to still cling to supremacist beliefs, both while they're at their apex and after they've lost their dragons. Like Daemon and Aemond being supremacists is good character development as it speaks to their second son syndrome. These two are men who, by virtue of circumstance, get nothing in the inheritance. So it makes sense they'd cling to their Valyrian heritage as a way to distinguish themselves, especially cause in their minds, said heritage (dragons) was the very thing that saw them gain this position in Westeros. Aerion is much the same, except his complex is even stronger cause he has no dragon to physically back up his assertion.
The problem is the farming of this beliefs as a biological inevitability, not a byproduct of systemic indoctrination, and an artificial system that was created to justify this hierarchy. Nope, it's this one family that's the root of all tyranny and evil, and no matter how hard they try, they'll never be able to break free because evil has been chosen for them ages ago. And I can hear you saying "uhhh Cersei and Joffrey were portrayed as evil too!" Yes, but their villainy was never pathologized or linked to some biological coin flip that affects their entire lineage (hell, Tywin's ruthlessness is often portrayed in a positive light, as clever, strategic pragmatism)
It's all deterministic and very fatalistic; you can never escape your biology, you're doomed to be just like your evil ancestors, period. But it makes for digestible TV for casual audiences; it also helps you market and sell stuff lol.
I'm in the process of creating my OCs family but realized I first need to create their House, their history and which region they live in - all the nitty details that make a noble family in Westeros.
I'm dead serious when it comes to fleshing out my OCs and more so now as this is my first fanfic for the world of ASOIAF.
I know this question might be putting you in a difficult position, but in your honest opinion, do you think Rhaegar and Lyanna truly loved each other? Or do you think their relationship in the play was created mainly to explain Jon's origin?Of course, the prophecy was deeply involved in their relationship, but according to some people, there wasn't any genuine affection or romance between them in the books. What do you think?
Short answer; yes, I think this is what George always intended.
Long answer: it won't matter to fandom because of what this relationship entails. Okay, so when we're looking at this in a vacuum, George calling Rhaegar a 'love-struck prince' and having everyone bar Robert have positive opinions of him was his way of hinting that he and Lyanna were meant to be ASOIAF's Romeo and Juliet (whose relationship was also colored by prophecy, but two things can be true at once). But the problem is, irrespective of authorial intent, the fandom will interpret this relationship negatively—with good reason.
For starters, George is not great at writing romance. He has a fondness for shocking age gaps (which were not as historically accurate as people love saying) and lacks understanding of power dynamics. Like couples he describes as good and romantic still have a plethora of issues.
If I remember right book Ygriette is 19 to Jon's 15 and she uses some coercive tactics to get him to sleep with her. Jaehaerys and Alysanne are described by George as a loving couple, and yet we see in F&B that she was routinely subjected to reproductive abuse by him. Also, this man was out here saying that 13yo book Dany's wedding night was a 'seduction' all the way in 2016. So, point is, his barometer for what's appropriate isn't great.
All this to say, irrespective of what George intended, I think a good portion of the fandom will continue to view this relationship unfavorably, primarily because of the age gap, power dynamic, cheating and overall ramifications that happened as a result of these two eloping together. And I honestly understand why cause this is a problem George made himself.
I'm a tywin lannister fan the same way I'm a dany fan! which is such an interesting thing because both are polar opposites lmaooo but they both fascinate me (also charles dance played the HECK out of tywin! even better) but anyways my point is: I can love these characters and see that there's flaws to them. tywin is obvious because he's definitely no perfect man 😭 but he's still complex and fascinating to me. as for dany, she also has flaws. she's not perfect and that's okay to me. I will never take a dany stan seriously if they say she's flawless, like no! she's important to the narrative but not perfect which is what makes her compelling. and honestly? I'll say that about any asoiaf fan, nobody in this asoiaf world is perfect. they're not flawless nor are they good or bad (well okay there's some exceptions to this lol), they all have their flaws. their strengths and weaknesses! hell even in f&b, that can also be said.
and to top it all off: GOT & HOTD don't seem to get that unfortunately nor do some of its show stans get it.
Every compelling ASOIAF character is flawed, and that is precisely what makes them worth reading.
The shows stripped that complexity away and reduced far too many of them to flat plot devices with one or two convenient traits.
Anyone insisting their favorite is a spotless saint is too emotionally invested to judge the character honestly. At that point, they are defending a fantasy version they invented, not making a serious argument about the text.
haven't watched the new season of hotd for as many reasons as you can imagine, only having seen clips here and there, and listened to everyone's takes and commentary on how this show has gotten so fucked. today i decided to tune in for once and Ryan Condal genuinely needs to be locked up 💀💀💀 I hate this show so bad. WHY...like WHY?!
Cause something something bad writing. The man's previous writing credits include that goddawful 2015 Hercules movie and Rampage (both b movies starring the Rock)
Couple that with studio pressure, budgetary constraints and you get this mess; cheap, fanservice, designed to pander to audiences, shock them and produce gifs and tiktok soundbites.
I'm praying AKOTSK doesn't go down the same route but I'm prepared for anything tbh
i am once again begging lovers of the incest trope who say "well if you don't like incest, you shouldn't read the books" to shut. up. INCEST IS JUST A FRACTION OF WHAT'S INCLUDED IN THE GIANT WORLD THAT IS ASOIAF.
sigh. I don't care if people like or enjoy the incest trope, my problem relies in the fact that if you like the trope but think others who don't like incest shouldn't be reading the series and enjoy it, you're weird. that's just one theme in a world that explores several themes in the series. it just frustrates me.
I understand you, anon.
People should read whatever they enjoy without attacking one another over books. Incest is indeed only one element of an enormous, complicated world, and nobody has to like every theme in ASOIAF to appreciate the series.
So many of your asks lately have just been anons bodyshaming the actors. This fandom is toxic enough already. If you don't like a character that's fine. You don't need to degrade someone's looks.
Most of those comments came from the same obsessive Alysmond anon who has been harassing me for weeks and attacking Phia for no apparent reason.
Everyone else has generally been lovely, and we have been joking around without insulting the actors’ appearances. So I am not sure what pattern you think you are seeing here, anon.
