the original sin of house of the dragon is that it's an adaptation, not of the source material itself but the way it's constructed within another medium.
practical changes most certainly need to be made, they are necessary to fit within the limitations of an audiovisual medium. however, the story itself must remain intact. if the core themes of the source material are bent out of shape and exaggerated to fit what the showrunners, writers, and directors personal biases are instead of the original author, then at what point can it even be called an adaptation instead of something that is loosely inspired by? does it even resemble the original work anymore after being painted with the brush of thinly-veiled social commentary fit for a more contemporary setting instead of the quasi-medieval one for which serves as its foundation?
the sheer obnoxious arrogance to shrug, wave, even laugh off criticisms of the author and fans of his work (which itself isn't a sacred text free from any scrutiny) as opposed to taking a knee and observing why certain deviations garner frustration speaks volumes about how even as a collaborative effort, belligerence runs amok and squanders potential for improvement. it is understandable that certain aspects of art get lost in the adaptation process, but when that art is appropriated to service the sensibilities of so-called "creatives" who take a mile when given an inch and made more palatable for distribution, all the while fundamentally misinterpreting the author's vision and intent, how else are fans supposed to react?
...not positively, that much is evident.











