Game of Thrones Message Board >> View Post
Post By

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 544
In Reply To
Drax the Legend

Member Since: Thu Nov 05, 2009
Posts: 13,188
Subj: Re: If you can read books, you can read lengthy replies too!
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 at 11:22:19 am CDT (Viewed 252 times)
Reply Subj: If you can read books, you can read lengthy replies too!
Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2019 at 02:49:14 pm CDT (Viewed 256 times)

Previous Post

    Ok. I wasn't sure if you meant Aegon or Strickland. Because Strickland hasn't been mentioned in the show at all. Neither has Aegon by name (Elia and her "children" were).

    Spoilers from books:

    In the books, Aegon sails back to Westeros. It is claimed that he is Elia and Rhaegar's child, so that wouldn't make him a bastard. I wasn't sure why you were calling him the bastard Aegon (unless you are think he isn't who he says).

Maybe I should have been clearer, but I thought since the premise of the thread is that the show may choose to fuse the two, writing "Strickland" would imply bastard Aegon. And to clear up another point of confusion, the official Aegon Targeryen in now Jon in the show, far as I'm concerned, and I am not sure if Targeryen bastards have a distinctive surname or if they too get named after the region they were born in. I am of a mind to use proto- and neo- for distinction, but I also like to remind people that Elia's son should be viewed as a bastard Targeryen now.

    Back to the TV show, if you ask most regular viewers of the show who Elia was, most people wouldn't know right off the bat. I doubt they are going to try and confuse people this late.

Yes, they probably could not place her by name alone, but I'm pretty sure it will only take a few lines to clear up any confusion (Oberyn's sister, the first wife Rhaegar dumped for Jon's mom, etc).

    And you're right, as far as the books go, the Golden Company and Aegon's story is presumably significant. But there are 2 more books left. The books still aren't close to the climax. The show is. Introducing Aegon to the show now, and having him make a real effort for the thrones, would be equivalent to George RR Martin introducing him halfway through Book 7, having him arrive our of nowhere and take the throne.

    The show is surprising. But every surprise has had major implications for future storylines. There are no more future storylines. This is it. This would be shock for pure shock value.

I feel that if we look back at everything that has happened, it's probable that we'll find instances where things have been done purely for shock value, but the real problem here is that we don't know how significant the GC storyline will end up in the books. If they end up doing nothing, why even introduce them in the books, much less the show? If they end up doing something pivotal, the show writers know it and would probably try to include it in some way. And since they are a part of the story but have not done anything by now, reason says they're being saved for something major close to the end.

As for it being the end, we can't know that. There's no way you can rule out that Martin's ending would not be setting up future storylines, because a lot of writers begin their stories knowing full well how they wanna end them. Back when he first conceived it, it's quite possible Martin thought he could wrap it up in a reasonable span of time and then move on to a sequel. So yes, he could have envisioned GC prevailing in the end or surviving and retreating to fight another day.

Moreover, while you may have a personal distaste for such a device, having the end of your storyline influenced and shaped by characters not previously featured in the bulk of your plot is not objectively bad or wrong or whatever. Since you appear to be a fan of his works, Tolkien concluded the First Age in such a way, presenting people with a bittersweet end (in that, yes, the good guys won, but the good guys who won were not the actual characters who were featured in the previous stories and struggles against Melkor, as he had been the ruin of pretty much all of those). And if you discount the Silmarillion as a work of limited appeal, then look no further than the conclusion of Marvel's cinematic saga. Or don't you expect the masses to eat up Captain Marvel in Avengers Endgame, a character introduced just a month ago (heck, a lot will probably not even have watched her movie beforehand, myself included)?

Finally, an overlooked aspect, IMO, is that Martin likes to present his sides more gray than black and white. I believe I've read somewhere that he was fascinated by how Hector and Achilles were both the villain and the hero in the Iliad, depending on which side's perspective you took. That is not something that can currently be said about the prevalent factions of his story, as pretty much everyone decent and moral is on one side, while everyone vile and psychotic on the other (and no one has the charisma of a Tywin, to somewhat gain our favor). But if you present an honorable leader, one who's been wronged by pretty much every major House, it mixes things up and makes them more interesting, especially in the event of a quick NK defeat.

So for me, it would be really interesting to see Jon and Daenerys react to his presence and a possible alliance with Cersei, especially since Jon doesn't really care about becoming ruler and has a morality that will most probably paint the actions that lead to his birth immoral. Like, imagine that Jon does not tell anyone about the annulment, feeling that the bastard was wronged. That would leave Daenerys with no claim, Cersei could have worked out a deal to marry the bastard and remain in power, etc. And it would be supremely ironic if the bastard actually turned out to be Azor Ahai!

What I'm saying is that I don't understand why you'd be so opposed to such a developement. Only interesting things can come from the show not just introducing a random mercenary force, methinks...

Drax the Legend, Captain of the Fist, The Starwalker, The Jade Slayer

Assuming Rhaegar and Elia's marriage was annulled in the books, I wondered whether their children would be bastards. They were married after all. And weren't the children born before the annulment? So would they be bastards? Not sure how that works.

At this point, the show and books are pretty distinct. It's possible the Golden Company and Aegon have an important story in the books. Doesn't mean that they will in the show. So when you say the show writers would try to include it because it's a pivotal part of the books, I guess I just disagree. Here's another way I look at it. If Martin had Elia's son Aegon winning the Iron Throne in the books, the show writers would have introduced him already. Martin's last book came out in 2011. They have had plenty of time.

It's possible that Martin will end Game of Thrones as setting up a sequel of sorts. In that instance, I get the sense that the character would be more important for that theoretical sequel, not so much the here and now. And with the way TV works, who knows it the TV show would touch on that.

I actually do consider it objectively bad to have the end of one's storyline significantly influenced by characters not previously featured. We go on journeys with these characters. Get personally invested in their struggles. So why should I want another character not before seen to be significant in the end? For characters to be significant in the climax of a story, I want to experience their journeys in a significant way. If not, then the end is cheapened.

And my objection to it isn't even really based on what I think is good or bad writing. Or right or wrong for the characters. I just don't think they will bring in Aegon because it would feel very weird for your average show watcher. Of all my friends/family that watch Game of Thrones, I know the most about it by far. Most of my friends/family just watch the show. Every once in a while they will read stuff online about what's going on. But that's pretty much it.

When Lyanna was revealed to be Jon's mom, I had to remind them about Lyanna's backstory. And they didn't get who the father was. I was even asked if Ned was the Dad. When I said it was Rhaegar, I can't tell you how many times I have had to walk them through who Rhaegar was. They thought he was the Mad King, Dany's father. Remember when Ned said "The Mad King is dead. Rhaegar lies beneath the ground." That confused them. When I explained Rhaegar was her brother, they said "That psycho brother who had the melted gold poured over his head?"

So introducing Aegon now? With a line like "Oh, he's Elia's son." You think that will fly with your average TV watcher?

I respect your knowledge of the series. And I understand where you are coming from and why, from your perspective, introducing Aegon could be an interesting development. I just don't think it would happen. But hey, I've been wrong before.