|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Jul 13, 2024 10:09:49 GMT
Alicent's misunderstanding of Viserys' last words is a show invention, not from the book. The comical situation of her finding out the rest of the Council had already plotted everything without her is not "a clarification of unreliable history". It is just character whitewashing. In Fire & Blood, three years separate the resolution of the succession of Driftmark by Viserys from his death. There is no happy family party, no reconciliation of Alicent and Rhaenyra in spite of the boys antagonising each other, and Larys Strong is not a creepy wanker. what a mess... well then they are not staying true to the book or orginal story if they are changing so much . I guess this is what happens when you have more than one writer on a show . I would like to know how George R.R.Martin feels about writers changing so much ? If i was writer of the story i wouldnt like it . He does object to the number of legs dragons have on the show's heraldry in his latest blog post.He seems very happy about the rest making him richer and talked about.
|
|
|
Post by jon snow loves sansa on Jul 17, 2024 0:03:07 GMT
I find him amusing, LOL, particularly because he invented a three-headed dragon. By the way, where does the concept of a three-headed dragon originate? Is it metaphorical, or was there an actual three-headed dragon in Westeros's history? I've also read that he was displeased with the show's omission of Heleana's and Aegon's second son, Maelor.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Jul 17, 2024 5:46:56 GMT
I find him amusing, LOL, particularly because he invented a three-headed dragon. By the way, where does the concept of a three-headed dragon originate? Is it metaphorical, or was there an actual three-headed dragon in Westeros's history? I've also read that he was displeased with the show's omission of Heleana's and Aegon's second son, Maelor. The three-headed dragon is a metaphor for Aegon the Conqueror and his two sisters. Westeros was conquered and ruled by a family of three persons with three dragons. Given Martin's unsubtle self, he also means to say it was never meant to be a monarchy and show how things started going bad the moment the trio was reduced to one person. It is an obvious parallel to the triumvirates of the end of the Roman Republic or to Napoleon's phony "Consulate" after the French revolution.
|
|
|
Post by jon snow loves sansa on Jul 20, 2024 15:53:09 GMT
I find him amusing, LOL, particularly because he invented a three-headed dragon. By the way, where does the concept of a three-headed dragon originate? Is it metaphorical, or was there an actual three-headed dragon in Westeros's history? I've also read that he was displeased with the show's omission of Heleana's and Aegon's second son, Maelor. The three-headed dragon is a metaphor for Aegon the Conqueror and his two sisters. Westeros was conquered and ruled by a family of three persons with three dragons. Given Martin's unsubtle self, he also means to say it was never meant to be a monarchy and show how things started going bad the moment the trio was reduced to one person. It is an obvious parallel to the triumvirates of the end of the Roman Republic or to Napoleon's phony "Consulate" after the French revolution. ah i see that makes sense
|
|