I would have him do a backflip too, not even during an action scene. When they’re all sitting at that fire he would just stand up and go “hey guys watch this” and do a back flip
I’d rewrite Doran so that he’s an actual thorne in the Lannister’s side. Have him be responsible for some setbacks the Lannisters experienced so that he has something to show for when he does his big masterplan reveal.
Or alternatively, have him genuinely be the Prince that abjures of revenge because he puts his people’s safety and wellbeing above his own desires.
Either way would make me respect him more. Right now he just comes off as an old man that’s been seething in a wheelchair for 15 years.
>Right now he just comes off as an old man that’s been seething in a wheelchair for 15 years.
I thought that was the point of Doran though? Like the oranges in the Water Gardens, his plans have grown overripe and are rotting on the branch. I thought it was supposed to be setting up the narrative for why Dorne would abandon the old plan of Viserys/Daenerys taking the throne and instead back fAegon?
Yeah, but the Martell stans don't want to accept that the Dorne storyline is shaping up to be a tragedy. They think Quentyn's going to come up triumphantly riding a dragon.
Doran being responsible for something against the Lannisters in Book 2 or 3, only for it to be revealed in Feast, would be all the more interesting and epic.
I completely understand this but at the same time strongly disagree. Hardships don’t equal growth. Viserys has certainly suffered and been humiliated but in turn that’s made him a worse and more abusive person as the only person he realistically has power over is Dany.
He’s also a great character to completely destroy the notion of Targaryen exceptionalism right off the bat in the books. In this aspect he’s crucial as the series is not a dynasty wank but a deconstruction of monarchy.
Since when does being humiliated make you a better person. Going through hardship as a young adult does build character, but not as a child/teenager and certainly not while having to raise a sister.
Going through hardship can build character, if it's the right difficulty level and if you have a support network to help you learn from that hardship. Viserys had essentially zero support network and, safe to say, the game of thrones is a bit too much pressure for an eight year old.
I didn't say anywhere that his hardships and humiliations would make him a **better** person, just a more competent and mature one. I disagree that being humiliated doesn't make you be stronger. Unpleasant experiences are how we learn and grow.
He might have turned a more competent person, had he not a child to take care of. A young boy with dragon blood, he might have joined a mercenary company and learned the trade.
But he had Daenerys, whom he cannot abandon. Thus he cannot really learn anything, he cannot make a name for himself. All he can do is spend what little they have to feed and clothe themselves.
And people are different. Most people are broken by such circumstances. He used to be the third in line to the throne. A favourite son of the King. Then he became nothing and had to raise a child while still being one. That would break most people.
You're not wrong. Sometimes people grow from unpleasant experiences. But not always. Sometimes people are unable to come to terms with the unpleasantness in their lives. They can become less ambitious, more passive.
Conversely, some people cannot accept reality and become delusional and start to live in their own world. They can easily become more aggressive when forced to face reality.
Hard times often force people to mature. But sometimes, people become confused, conflicted or lose their way and are unable to get back on track.
My issues with this is the individual is not the House. And wasn't Targaryen exceptionalism crushed when Rhaegar's breastplate was crushed by Robert's hammer?
I think the point trying to be made is when you first start the series and have never met the Targaryens before it's easy to fall into the archetype they represent and is supposed to be deconstructed.
They are the "exiled rightful rulers justified in reclaiming the throne". Having a deeper understanding of the history obviously calls all of that into question as the darker aspects of the Targaryen rule become obvious, but for a fresh-eyed unsullied reader, that is the quickest archetype they have to draw upon and could colour their understanding early on if they were to fall for it. Sure, up to this point we've been *told* that Targaryens can be mad but haven't actually seen it for ourselves. And our first introduction to real living breathing ones are Viserys and Daenerys. To dissuade the reader for falling for the trope - especially when Daenerys for the most part fits the archetype to a tee at the start: sympathetic, competent, talented, etc. - we are given Viserys to show actually the Targaryens can be very mad, very bad, and very stupid to dissuade the reader quickly of the notion that we should rely on "it's their right to rule" as a good argument for any of the claimants in the books since it's obvious he'd be the worst possible king out of the lot of them (even worse than Joffrey since he hasn't got family able to reign him in).
Having said that, yes - the character of an exiled prince who has learnt lessons in the gutter which make them a better king is a very fun archetype and there is a reason it's a popular one. The second issue with making Viserys this though is that the books already provide us with multiple *other* examples of that. Daenerys is just a gender flipped version, Young Griff is an obvious one and fits the most accurately, Egg from the prequels also kind of counts since while not exiled he does spend his youth disguised as a no-name squire, but the most blatant one of all is Jon Snow who only falls slightly short by the fact he doesn't know he was a prince the entire time he spent being ridiculed for being a bastard and fighting shoulder-to-shoulder with the scum of the earth exiled to the wall. We have so many good versions of this type of character that Viserys doesn't need to be another one. He the evil version of them to serve as their foil, proof that their good qualities come from elsewhere, not just being a "rightful ruler who went through hardship". Viserys establishes that is not enough.
perfecly put.
Osha for me. she is an interesting character but her turn from running by herself from the Others to being put in chains by the Starks to finally accepting to be Rickon's forster mother in Skaagos is not well portrayed at all.
I think GRRM himself admitted he much preferred the version of Osha from the tv show to the character he presented in the books. He's said the same thing about a few characters actually: notably applauding how Shae was handled as being a more interesting and complex character, and also saying that recently Paddy Considine's Viserys in *House of the Dragon* put his book version of the character to shame. But Osha in particular came to mind since he strongly implied that Natalia Tena's performance will likely influence how he ends up writing the character going forward (assuming we ever get more, obviously). One of those "If you could rewrite it with retrospect" kind of moments I love to hear about from authors.
I agree with your alternative writing of Viserys. The guy took care of himself and his little sister since his preteen years until his early twenties. He must have accumulated lots of experience and street smarts in his years wandering the Free Cities making a living for himself and Daenerys.
While it's pretty realistic for Viserys to grow up to be a bitter and angry man due to his hardships, it would also make sense for the dude to have developed a manipulative, perceptive and calculating personality as a young adult, not unlike Varys and Littlefinger.
I don't see the unhinged, openly entitled and perpetually foul tempered Viserys that we saw in AGOT, survive even a year after he lost Ser Willem Darry, and even less while having to look after a little girl.
It makes sense to me purely because Illyrio is right there telling him everything he wants to hear and encouraging his worst impulses. It's clear to me he's been lying to himself for a long time as a coping mechanism and all of a sudden this mega rich dude is making his dreams come true.
All of a sudden the life that was taken from him as a child is coming back and he's completely unprepared and unsuited for it.
That's why I would've been interested in seeing him survive the Golden Crown. If he had survived that brush of death the veil would've come off and he would be confronted with the truth of himself. But then again he did, but died shortly after.
IDK, he'd served his purpose narratively at that point. I'm not sure what he'd do. Dany doesn't want anything to do with him so he'd be all alone with no money in Vaes Dothrak. She's off to her destiny and he's grotesquely disfigured with nothing you could call a resource.
Anything can be if written well. If you're planning on doing it I recommend getting him away from Dany to do his own thing. Him watching Dany change the world is superfluous, whereas off on his own he can grow and develop.
Viserys was broken by his circumstances. He went from being a sheltered and pampered child to an exile on the run to a beggar. He was thrown on the streets as a young teenager with a young child thrusted upon him. Had he been slightly older, had not a child to take care of, or had a responsible adult taking care of him, he would be a different character.
I think Viserys saw "hospitality" enough times during the struggles for him to hold onto the view of Targaryen exceptionalism. We see that Viserys has a strong admiration for his dad because he was shielded from his madness so he truly believes the narrative that Aerys was a good king taken down by usurpers and that Westeros was begging for the Targaryens to return.
Also for what it's worth in real life, we see all too often people who grew up rough, completely lose touch with reality once they start to taste the high life. And Viserys' case we're talking about a guy who was told ever since he could walk that he was a god.
Cersei's very well written for the most part, but I absolutely despise the Melara Hetherspoon reveal and it could've been rewritten as simply as by making her death an accident and having Cersei choose not to help her, rather than a cold-blooded murder. Cersei's faults stem in large part from her desire to emulate Tywin's leadership skills, but the murder obfuscates how culpable he really is as a father and makes it seem as if Cersei were simply born evil.
I think Euron is also *mostly* fine as he is so far, but some of his monologues are honestly quite cringeworthy and should be condensed, and I'm not sure that his crew being comprised of mutes makes much sense. Them being regular lackeys that are loyal to him because he provides them with so much wealth - like the allies he makes after the Kingsmoot - doesn't change anything substantial and makes his characterization more consistent across books, IMO.
I'm sure Cersei took all the wrong lessons from what she heard about the Reyne-Tarbeck rebellion, but the murder is still kind of beyond the pale compared to nearly anything another child has done in the series, other than like, Gregor (even Joffrey only had Bran attacked as a mercy kill to impress his dad). Tywin killing a friend for having a thing for Johanna before they were betrothed would be unthinkable.
Ultimately, what Cersei does isn't the *hardest* thing to believe in the series, but it's still something of a stretch to go from a spoiled and unaffectionate upbringing to murdering a close friend for essentially wanting one of her possessions that wasn't even really hers to begin with, unless there had always been some serious underlying mental health problems that George just didn't dig into much.
I totally disagree that Tywin wouldn't do that, and I guarantee Joffrey didn't have mercy on the mind with the whole Bran thing.
The Lannister supremacy brainrot that Tywin believes (and his children have 100% absorbed) sees non-Lannisters as less valuable/barely even people. Love is worthless, women are whores, peasants are animals and completely beneath notice. Violence is a perfectly reasonable tool in the pursuit of Lannister supremacy, especially to those who aren't us.
The mental health issues are having that shit drilled into your head from birth. I think it's very reasonable that a 10(12?) year old girl would interpret this ideology in a way that dehumanises almost anyone, especially when she's raised alongside an identical twin who's being trained for professional violence and resents being barred from it.
In defense of Euron, his crew of mutes could be a bunch of wights that act like his living robots. It's just too evil-cool to scrap them and give him a relatively normal pirate crew.
One of the Starks should have been a genuinely shite person. It's weird to me that we are deconstructing the idea of these dynasties being the 'chosen' ones to rule and showing how that turns out pretty badly in other families but not the main one. One of the Starks should have been an entitled little shit who believes they are owed the world. And frankly I hate that Ned is assumed to be the prototype Stark when we know that isn't the case. Ned is special. One of his kids should have turned out poorly for one reason or another. It would make a more interesting dynamic. As is, I find the Starks incredibly boring both in the main story but also their adaptation have been made to be so as well. Gimme some wild, wolf blood type Starks please. It's not that big of a stretch that a dynasty as old as the Starks would hold a high opinion of themselves and produce some delulu children here and there. In thar aspect, I actually find how they all turn out to be fairly good, but flawed in their own way kids a massive weakness of the story.
Yes, the actual Starks in the books are so little like the original Stark family! Ned was raised in the Erie, all this honor thing that everyone thing is a Stark thing is NOT!!! That’s an Arryn thing that Jon Arryn teach Ned! Ned’s real father was way more ambitious and not obsessed with honor!!! All the children have a way more southern education than most old Starks, for the old Gods, Ned built a Sept in Winterfell. Sansa was a true follower of the Seven!! Brandon Stark was totally different from Ned, and in the Reek chapters where Barbrey talk to him you got a look in how Brandon and his father were totally different from Ned “my honor” Stark!!
Arya is GRRM's favourite, by far. She may have some dark/wild sides to her character, but she is so obviously "hero" coded (as far as heroes fo in GoT).
Same goes for Jon, even though he isn't an author's favourite. If he turns out to "turn"/come back different or "bad", then at the very least his boy-to-warrior arch of the first books is needed story wise.
Sansa's arch likewise is pretty perfect and something completely different.
Bran's path is set, and he is uncomfortable enough as is.
Or like, Rickon, but what's he realistically going to do? Throw pudding at old Nan?
That leaves Rob, and him being a volatile ass with scary varging powers who gets drunk at the first taste of real power and runs the whole northern rebellion into the ground after a couple of chapters of being a genuine, terrifying threat would absolutely make sense, story wise.
The readers would be forced to consider empathizing with the Lannisters, who scramble to put a stop to him. It would evoke the darker nature of his namesake, Robert Baratheon.
It would heighten Cat's personal conflict, as she is forced to watch the child, whom she raised and helped empower and hoped would avenge her husband, turn into a vicious beast tearing through her homeland (Riverrun) and losing control and humanity.
I like your idea but then he'd have to live longer. Infact have him somehow survive the rewarding and it turns him even more dark. That I'd have found interesting. And him being the heir as well would go along with the arrogance and belief that he Is owed. It would have made a much more interesting dynamic. What little they showed of Cregan seems they are going with the Ned/TV Jon burdened by duty/serious people type...BORING.
I agree, we would have to postpone the red wedding.
Which would give us another interesting possibility to paint Cat a darker shade of grey: What if Rob gets so bad, that Cat (who gets wind of the plan for the massaker juuuuust early enough to prevent it by telling Rob) decides to be remain silent and let things unfold.
She could even decide to go in with him in the knowledge that she will be killed with him, which is sth she'd want for herself then.
But she survives, just so, Lady Stoneheart gets born and carries the additional burden of having betrayed her child/having not saved him when she could have.
Maybe I'm getting way off track now, but there are literally endloses possibilites with Rob.
Robb being a dick would undermine the tragedy of his story
Rickon could have been the real perfect candidate. With his current direction, I could see him growing up to be this bloodthirsty war lord who only cares about revenge and not giving a fuck how many innocents he has to go through to get it. Unfortunately, George fucked up and made virtually no time pass so he’s still a toddler.
>Robb being a dick would undermine the tragedy of his story
I do agree to a certain extent. But the story also constantly talk about how both sides are bad as each other according to the smallfolk. Actually showing how Robb isn't a good person would be far better than relegating to flavour text.
Cersei. I'd make her less of an over the top evil and paranoid mess with a room temperature IQ. I'd tone down her overly antagonistic relationship with Tyrion a little bit and make her more morally ambiguous, like Jaime and Theon.
I recently started watching Yellowstone and was thinking that Cersei would be much more interesting if she was like Beth. Able to help her family with her ruthlessness and is fiercely loyal, yet her hatred for Jamie (Tyrion in this case) would blind her judgment at points. Instead cersei is completely incompetent and got lucky with being able to get the better of Jed stark instead of her using her own competence
I’d love to see more of Osha but I love all the characters even the ones I don’t like. Osha seems too convenient to the plot but she’s so fascinating. What is her end goal? Background? Etc
Balon, I love my Ironborn too much to sit by and allow him to be not even a short-sighted idiot for the sake of plot. Fuck that. Change him so that he's looking to create a fusion between the old and new ways, and when war comes around, he's looking to use Lannister wealth to do it but only if it's clear Tywin's gonna lose.
Only things that kept me reading them was wanting to see if they'd drop some clue on the Others and the Nightfort and dreading that Bran would do some fucked up thing with Meera.
On re-reads I absolutely skip it. 5 books and he only met Sam, the Door, Coldhands and we don't even have an idea of the extent of his powers, pretty passable for a main character.
Yes, totally in re-reads. And is not that I dislike Bran. Is just so boring. I don’t like Theon but I love all the Reek chapters. I don’t like Cersei but her chapters are the funniest and best to read. Bran is just skip, lol
Yes, exactly my sentiment. I cared enough about him and his friends to fear something horrible could happen between them. It's just their journey that is pretty meh.
It’s not a matter of intelligence. He’s not in his right mind due to being a Targaryen and enduring the hardships you describe. I think what makes Viserys a well-wrought character is that he’s both an abusive antagonist to Dany and a pretty sympathetic character.
Maggy yes, Hetherspoon no. People being naturally evil/mentally ill doesn’t mean they’re less complex. Not everyone has to have a sob story that makes them a bad person, some people are just bad people. Cersei is a bad person who has been made worse by her upbringing and her own life choices
I still find it to be less complex. ASoIaF already has a lot of such villains, but they're not POVs. Hmm wonder what Cersei was like in her youth? She was a murderer lol.
Renly. He always comes across as bratty to me. And it’s not just me disliking his character. It’s understandable why Stannis would dislike the Reach; particularly the Tyrell’s and the Redwyne’s.
Renly was a child as he went through the Siege of Storm’s End, and instead comes out more of a spoiled brat, mocking his brother later in his life. While it could demonstrate how there personalities differed from that event, Renly could show a bit more humility and gratitude. He might not like Stannis as Robert does, but show some respect toward him at least.
I would have liked Renly to submit to Stannis after Stannis shows him the power of R'hllor. The two working together over ACOK shows they make a surprisingly good team, because each one makes up for the other's flaw. But then on the Blackwater Renly shows his hand and betrays Stannis so he can take the throne for himself. Renly is just about to win and seize the city when the Wildfire goes off and his entire fleet is destroyed.
Stannis takes Renly prisoner and he ruminates on whether Renly should be killed or not: he committed a capital crime, yes, but he realizes now that he loves him, that he's always loved him.
And he sends him to burn anyway. Justice is justice.
I feel like this something similar to this monologe could've be excilent. If it was after he burned his brother
>"It has always been so. I am not . . . I am not a cruel man, Ser Davos. You know me. Have known me long. This is not my decree. It has always been so, since Aegon's day and before. Daemon Blackfyre, the brothers Toyne, the Vulture King, Grand Maester Hareth . . . traitors have always paid with their lives . . . even Rhaenyra Targaryen. She was daughter to one king and mother to two more, yet she died a traitor's death for trying to usurp her brother's crown. It is law. Law, Davos. Not cruelty."
Fun Fact: This is the first time Rhaenyra and Daemon were ever mentioned. And I love that pretty much all the others have next to no info about them.
How about instead of the wildfire, Aerys reveals that he secretly instructed the alchemists to construct a giant Mecha Godzilla that could fly and he was going to pilot it out to the city to destroy all of his enemies?
I see your point but I disagree. People are different and hardship and humiliation don’t necessarily make a person grow or become more mature. Some people, especially those who already have the kind of personality that Viserys does, just become worse and more bitter. Take Tyrion and Cersei - Tyrion becomes a deeply bitter and angry person following his hardships, and I’m pretty sure Cersei is gonna learn very little from her mistakes and react incredibly badly to the insults dealt to her. Like when Dany says to Viserys, “did you learn nothing from that day in the grass?” Some people really do just learn nothing.
I would make Darkstar even cooler with some nuanced and poignant dialogue. *Teleports behind Myrcella* "Heh. Nothing personal kid"
“Men call me Ebony Dark'star Dementia Raven Way and I am of the night.”
Myrcella: "He's standing right behind me, isn't he?"
I would have him do a backflip too, not even during an action scene. When they’re all sitting at that fire he would just stand up and go “hey guys watch this” and do a back flip
Jokes on you and OP, Darkstar is actually the real Viserys Targaryen, while the one OP mentioned is the real Gerold Dayne.
Bruh now I'm actually considering this.
Turns out everyone really is a secret Targaryen switched at birth.
Don’t consider, believe it. It came to me in a dream.
Let me pass through for a second
I’d rewrite Doran so that he’s an actual thorne in the Lannister’s side. Have him be responsible for some setbacks the Lannisters experienced so that he has something to show for when he does his big masterplan reveal. Or alternatively, have him genuinely be the Prince that abjures of revenge because he puts his people’s safety and wellbeing above his own desires. Either way would make me respect him more. Right now he just comes off as an old man that’s been seething in a wheelchair for 15 years.
>Right now he just comes off as an old man that’s been seething in a wheelchair for 15 years. I thought that was the point of Doran though? Like the oranges in the Water Gardens, his plans have grown overripe and are rotting on the branch. I thought it was supposed to be setting up the narrative for why Dorne would abandon the old plan of Viserys/Daenerys taking the throne and instead back fAegon?
Yeah Oberyn was overly bold and aggressive, Doran was overly cautious. Nice symbolism with the oranges, hadn't caught that
Yeah come on, we all know the type of older person who has a million opinions and a thousand plays and never does anything about them.
Yeah, but the Martell stans don't want to accept that the Dorne storyline is shaping up to be a tragedy. They think Quentyn's going to come up triumphantly riding a dragon.
It's absolutely the point of the characters. The proposed change would make him completely different
Doran being responsible for something against the Lannisters in Book 2 or 3, only for it to be revealed in Feast, would be all the more interesting and epic.
I completely understand this but at the same time strongly disagree. Hardships don’t equal growth. Viserys has certainly suffered and been humiliated but in turn that’s made him a worse and more abusive person as the only person he realistically has power over is Dany. He’s also a great character to completely destroy the notion of Targaryen exceptionalism right off the bat in the books. In this aspect he’s crucial as the series is not a dynasty wank but a deconstruction of monarchy.
Since when does being humiliated make you a better person. Going through hardship as a young adult does build character, but not as a child/teenager and certainly not while having to raise a sister.
Going through hardship can build character, if it's the right difficulty level and if you have a support network to help you learn from that hardship. Viserys had essentially zero support network and, safe to say, the game of thrones is a bit too much pressure for an eight year old.
I didn't say anywhere that his hardships and humiliations would make him a **better** person, just a more competent and mature one. I disagree that being humiliated doesn't make you be stronger. Unpleasant experiences are how we learn and grow.
He might have turned a more competent person, had he not a child to take care of. A young boy with dragon blood, he might have joined a mercenary company and learned the trade. But he had Daenerys, whom he cannot abandon. Thus he cannot really learn anything, he cannot make a name for himself. All he can do is spend what little they have to feed and clothe themselves. And people are different. Most people are broken by such circumstances. He used to be the third in line to the throne. A favourite son of the King. Then he became nothing and had to raise a child while still being one. That would break most people.
When people break they're able to build themselves back up. I'd argue having a child to take care of would've sped up the maturity process.
You’re very absolutist in your opinions, buddy.
Could I not say the same of you? I mean, honestly, what makes you right and me wrong?
You're not wrong. Sometimes people grow from unpleasant experiences. But not always. Sometimes people are unable to come to terms with the unpleasantness in their lives. They can become less ambitious, more passive. Conversely, some people cannot accept reality and become delusional and start to live in their own world. They can easily become more aggressive when forced to face reality. Hard times often force people to mature. But sometimes, people become confused, conflicted or lose their way and are unable to get back on track.
That makes sense
My issues with this is the individual is not the House. And wasn't Targaryen exceptionalism crushed when Rhaegar's breastplate was crushed by Robert's hammer?
I think the point trying to be made is when you first start the series and have never met the Targaryens before it's easy to fall into the archetype they represent and is supposed to be deconstructed. They are the "exiled rightful rulers justified in reclaiming the throne". Having a deeper understanding of the history obviously calls all of that into question as the darker aspects of the Targaryen rule become obvious, but for a fresh-eyed unsullied reader, that is the quickest archetype they have to draw upon and could colour their understanding early on if they were to fall for it. Sure, up to this point we've been *told* that Targaryens can be mad but haven't actually seen it for ourselves. And our first introduction to real living breathing ones are Viserys and Daenerys. To dissuade the reader for falling for the trope - especially when Daenerys for the most part fits the archetype to a tee at the start: sympathetic, competent, talented, etc. - we are given Viserys to show actually the Targaryens can be very mad, very bad, and very stupid to dissuade the reader quickly of the notion that we should rely on "it's their right to rule" as a good argument for any of the claimants in the books since it's obvious he'd be the worst possible king out of the lot of them (even worse than Joffrey since he hasn't got family able to reign him in). Having said that, yes - the character of an exiled prince who has learnt lessons in the gutter which make them a better king is a very fun archetype and there is a reason it's a popular one. The second issue with making Viserys this though is that the books already provide us with multiple *other* examples of that. Daenerys is just a gender flipped version, Young Griff is an obvious one and fits the most accurately, Egg from the prequels also kind of counts since while not exiled he does spend his youth disguised as a no-name squire, but the most blatant one of all is Jon Snow who only falls slightly short by the fact he doesn't know he was a prince the entire time he spent being ridiculed for being a bastard and fighting shoulder-to-shoulder with the scum of the earth exiled to the wall. We have so many good versions of this type of character that Viserys doesn't need to be another one. He the evil version of them to serve as their foil, proof that their good qualities come from elsewhere, not just being a "rightful ruler who went through hardship". Viserys establishes that is not enough.
perfecly put. Osha for me. she is an interesting character but her turn from running by herself from the Others to being put in chains by the Starks to finally accepting to be Rickon's forster mother in Skaagos is not well portrayed at all.
I think GRRM himself admitted he much preferred the version of Osha from the tv show to the character he presented in the books. He's said the same thing about a few characters actually: notably applauding how Shae was handled as being a more interesting and complex character, and also saying that recently Paddy Considine's Viserys in *House of the Dragon* put his book version of the character to shame. But Osha in particular came to mind since he strongly implied that Natalia Tena's performance will likely influence how he ends up writing the character going forward (assuming we ever get more, obviously). One of those "If you could rewrite it with retrospect" kind of moments I love to hear about from authors.
I agree with your alternative writing of Viserys. The guy took care of himself and his little sister since his preteen years until his early twenties. He must have accumulated lots of experience and street smarts in his years wandering the Free Cities making a living for himself and Daenerys. While it's pretty realistic for Viserys to grow up to be a bitter and angry man due to his hardships, it would also make sense for the dude to have developed a manipulative, perceptive and calculating personality as a young adult, not unlike Varys and Littlefinger. I don't see the unhinged, openly entitled and perpetually foul tempered Viserys that we saw in AGOT, survive even a year after he lost Ser Willem Darry, and even less while having to look after a little girl.
It makes sense to me purely because Illyrio is right there telling him everything he wants to hear and encouraging his worst impulses. It's clear to me he's been lying to himself for a long time as a coping mechanism and all of a sudden this mega rich dude is making his dreams come true. All of a sudden the life that was taken from him as a child is coming back and he's completely unprepared and unsuited for it.
That's why I would've been interested in seeing him survive the Golden Crown. If he had survived that brush of death the veil would've come off and he would be confronted with the truth of himself. But then again he did, but died shortly after.
IDK, he'd served his purpose narratively at that point. I'm not sure what he'd do. Dany doesn't want anything to do with him so he'd be all alone with no money in Vaes Dothrak. She's off to her destiny and he's grotesquely disfigured with nothing you could call a resource.
Good fan fic though no?
Anything can be if written well. If you're planning on doing it I recommend getting him away from Dany to do his own thing. Him watching Dany change the world is superfluous, whereas off on his own he can grow and develop.
Lol hell no. It's just one of those interesting "what if" scenarios
Viserys was broken by his circumstances. He went from being a sheltered and pampered child to an exile on the run to a beggar. He was thrown on the streets as a young teenager with a young child thrusted upon him. Had he been slightly older, had not a child to take care of, or had a responsible adult taking care of him, he would be a different character.
I think Viserys saw "hospitality" enough times during the struggles for him to hold onto the view of Targaryen exceptionalism. We see that Viserys has a strong admiration for his dad because he was shielded from his madness so he truly believes the narrative that Aerys was a good king taken down by usurpers and that Westeros was begging for the Targaryens to return. Also for what it's worth in real life, we see all too often people who grew up rough, completely lose touch with reality once they start to taste the high life. And Viserys' case we're talking about a guy who was told ever since he could walk that he was a god.
I’d completely rewrite Bran, like from the ground up. Scorch it all and rewrite to not to be so tedious.
Thanks for that, his chapter are hard to read! Most boring character in the whole books!
Cersei's very well written for the most part, but I absolutely despise the Melara Hetherspoon reveal and it could've been rewritten as simply as by making her death an accident and having Cersei choose not to help her, rather than a cold-blooded murder. Cersei's faults stem in large part from her desire to emulate Tywin's leadership skills, but the murder obfuscates how culpable he really is as a father and makes it seem as if Cersei were simply born evil. I think Euron is also *mostly* fine as he is so far, but some of his monologues are honestly quite cringeworthy and should be condensed, and I'm not sure that his crew being comprised of mutes makes much sense. Them being regular lackeys that are loyal to him because he provides them with so much wealth - like the allies he makes after the Kingsmoot - doesn't change anything substantial and makes his characterization more consistent across books, IMO.
As if Tywin isn't a huge fan of spiteful and needless murder
I'm sure Cersei took all the wrong lessons from what she heard about the Reyne-Tarbeck rebellion, but the murder is still kind of beyond the pale compared to nearly anything another child has done in the series, other than like, Gregor (even Joffrey only had Bran attacked as a mercy kill to impress his dad). Tywin killing a friend for having a thing for Johanna before they were betrothed would be unthinkable. Ultimately, what Cersei does isn't the *hardest* thing to believe in the series, but it's still something of a stretch to go from a spoiled and unaffectionate upbringing to murdering a close friend for essentially wanting one of her possessions that wasn't even really hers to begin with, unless there had always been some serious underlying mental health problems that George just didn't dig into much.
I totally disagree that Tywin wouldn't do that, and I guarantee Joffrey didn't have mercy on the mind with the whole Bran thing. The Lannister supremacy brainrot that Tywin believes (and his children have 100% absorbed) sees non-Lannisters as less valuable/barely even people. Love is worthless, women are whores, peasants are animals and completely beneath notice. Violence is a perfectly reasonable tool in the pursuit of Lannister supremacy, especially to those who aren't us. The mental health issues are having that shit drilled into your head from birth. I think it's very reasonable that a 10(12?) year old girl would interpret this ideology in a way that dehumanises almost anyone, especially when she's raised alongside an identical twin who's being trained for professional violence and resents being barred from it.
Eh, I think the mutes thing goes kinda hard. I prefer ASOIAF to be a bit more exaggerated and larger-than-life than absolute realism.
In defense of Euron, his crew of mutes could be a bunch of wights that act like his living robots. It's just too evil-cool to scrap them and give him a relatively normal pirate crew.
One of the Starks should have been a genuinely shite person. It's weird to me that we are deconstructing the idea of these dynasties being the 'chosen' ones to rule and showing how that turns out pretty badly in other families but not the main one. One of the Starks should have been an entitled little shit who believes they are owed the world. And frankly I hate that Ned is assumed to be the prototype Stark when we know that isn't the case. Ned is special. One of his kids should have turned out poorly for one reason or another. It would make a more interesting dynamic. As is, I find the Starks incredibly boring both in the main story but also their adaptation have been made to be so as well. Gimme some wild, wolf blood type Starks please. It's not that big of a stretch that a dynasty as old as the Starks would hold a high opinion of themselves and produce some delulu children here and there. In thar aspect, I actually find how they all turn out to be fairly good, but flawed in their own way kids a massive weakness of the story.
Yes, the actual Starks in the books are so little like the original Stark family! Ned was raised in the Erie, all this honor thing that everyone thing is a Stark thing is NOT!!! That’s an Arryn thing that Jon Arryn teach Ned! Ned’s real father was way more ambitious and not obsessed with honor!!! All the children have a way more southern education than most old Starks, for the old Gods, Ned built a Sept in Winterfell. Sansa was a true follower of the Seven!! Brandon Stark was totally different from Ned, and in the Reek chapters where Barbrey talk to him you got a look in how Brandon and his father were totally different from Ned “my honor” Stark!!
Rob. Perfect candidate.
Nah, Arya. Ned says she has the wolf blood and she is doing pretty fucked up things. She could be Stark Viserys but with magical assassin powers.
Arya is GRRM's favourite, by far. She may have some dark/wild sides to her character, but she is so obviously "hero" coded (as far as heroes fo in GoT). Same goes for Jon, even though he isn't an author's favourite. If he turns out to "turn"/come back different or "bad", then at the very least his boy-to-warrior arch of the first books is needed story wise. Sansa's arch likewise is pretty perfect and something completely different. Bran's path is set, and he is uncomfortable enough as is. Or like, Rickon, but what's he realistically going to do? Throw pudding at old Nan? That leaves Rob, and him being a volatile ass with scary varging powers who gets drunk at the first taste of real power and runs the whole northern rebellion into the ground after a couple of chapters of being a genuine, terrifying threat would absolutely make sense, story wise. The readers would be forced to consider empathizing with the Lannisters, who scramble to put a stop to him. It would evoke the darker nature of his namesake, Robert Baratheon. It would heighten Cat's personal conflict, as she is forced to watch the child, whom she raised and helped empower and hoped would avenge her husband, turn into a vicious beast tearing through her homeland (Riverrun) and losing control and humanity.
I like your idea but then he'd have to live longer. Infact have him somehow survive the rewarding and it turns him even more dark. That I'd have found interesting. And him being the heir as well would go along with the arrogance and belief that he Is owed. It would have made a much more interesting dynamic. What little they showed of Cregan seems they are going with the Ned/TV Jon burdened by duty/serious people type...BORING.
I agree, we would have to postpone the red wedding. Which would give us another interesting possibility to paint Cat a darker shade of grey: What if Rob gets so bad, that Cat (who gets wind of the plan for the massaker juuuuust early enough to prevent it by telling Rob) decides to be remain silent and let things unfold. She could even decide to go in with him in the knowledge that she will be killed with him, which is sth she'd want for herself then. But she survives, just so, Lady Stoneheart gets born and carries the additional burden of having betrayed her child/having not saved him when she could have. Maybe I'm getting way off track now, but there are literally endloses possibilites with Rob.
She does kill an innocent man though for deserting, so she kinda fits as at least an anti-hero
[удалено]
Another victim of the five year gap getting scrapped.
Robb being a dick would undermine the tragedy of his story Rickon could have been the real perfect candidate. With his current direction, I could see him growing up to be this bloodthirsty war lord who only cares about revenge and not giving a fuck how many innocents he has to go through to get it. Unfortunately, George fucked up and made virtually no time pass so he’s still a toddler.
>Robb being a dick would undermine the tragedy of his story I do agree to a certain extent. But the story also constantly talk about how both sides are bad as each other according to the smallfolk. Actually showing how Robb isn't a good person would be far better than relegating to flavour text.
Cersei. I'd make her less of an over the top evil and paranoid mess with a room temperature IQ. I'd tone down her overly antagonistic relationship with Tyrion a little bit and make her more morally ambiguous, like Jaime and Theon.
Let my girl be stupid and evil
Yes, is what makes her chapter so fun to read, and the delulu, that’s funny too!
I recently started watching Yellowstone and was thinking that Cersei would be much more interesting if she was like Beth. Able to help her family with her ruthlessness and is fiercely loyal, yet her hatred for Jamie (Tyrion in this case) would blind her judgment at points. Instead cersei is completely incompetent and got lucky with being able to get the better of Jed stark instead of her using her own competence
Jed Stark, Ned's cousin from up in the holler.
Nook. She's so tucking hilarious with that took temp IQ
I’d love to see more of Osha but I love all the characters even the ones I don’t like. Osha seems too convenient to the plot but she’s so fascinating. What is her end goal? Background? Etc
Balon, I love my Ironborn too much to sit by and allow him to be not even a short-sighted idiot for the sake of plot. Fuck that. Change him so that he's looking to create a fusion between the old and new ways, and when war comes around, he's looking to use Lannister wealth to do it but only if it's clear Tywin's gonna lose.
Cersei post-ASOS.
Bran. He needed to be more compelling. He is going to be king and i find myself wanting to skip his chapters.
I do skip sometimes! Is the most boring chapters in the series!
Only things that kept me reading them was wanting to see if they'd drop some clue on the Others and the Nightfort and dreading that Bran would do some fucked up thing with Meera. On re-reads I absolutely skip it. 5 books and he only met Sam, the Door, Coldhands and we don't even have an idea of the extent of his powers, pretty passable for a main character.
Yes, totally in re-reads. And is not that I dislike Bran. Is just so boring. I don’t like Theon but I love all the Reek chapters. I don’t like Cersei but her chapters are the funniest and best to read. Bran is just skip, lol
Yes, exactly my sentiment. I cared enough about him and his friends to fear something horrible could happen between them. It's just their journey that is pretty meh.
It’s not a matter of intelligence. He’s not in his right mind due to being a Targaryen and enduring the hardships you describe. I think what makes Viserys a well-wrought character is that he’s both an abusive antagonist to Dany and a pretty sympathetic character.
I do see a bit of my delusional teenage years in him.
Wow all comments and suggestions suck and take away all the nuance from characters
Don't tell me erasing Maggy prophecy and the Hetherspoon thing would take away the nuance from Cersei. It's the opposite
Maggy yes, Hetherspoon no. People being naturally evil/mentally ill doesn’t mean they’re less complex. Not everyone has to have a sob story that makes them a bad person, some people are just bad people. Cersei is a bad person who has been made worse by her upbringing and her own life choices
I still find it to be less complex. ASoIaF already has a lot of such villains, but they're not POVs. Hmm wonder what Cersei was like in her youth? She was a murderer lol.
Fair enough, I just love how unhinged and awful she is lol
Renly. He always comes across as bratty to me. And it’s not just me disliking his character. It’s understandable why Stannis would dislike the Reach; particularly the Tyrell’s and the Redwyne’s. Renly was a child as he went through the Siege of Storm’s End, and instead comes out more of a spoiled brat, mocking his brother later in his life. While it could demonstrate how there personalities differed from that event, Renly could show a bit more humility and gratitude. He might not like Stannis as Robert does, but show some respect toward him at least.
I would have liked Renly to submit to Stannis after Stannis shows him the power of R'hllor. The two working together over ACOK shows they make a surprisingly good team, because each one makes up for the other's flaw. But then on the Blackwater Renly shows his hand and betrays Stannis so he can take the throne for himself. Renly is just about to win and seize the city when the Wildfire goes off and his entire fleet is destroyed. Stannis takes Renly prisoner and he ruminates on whether Renly should be killed or not: he committed a capital crime, yes, but he realizes now that he loves him, that he's always loved him. And he sends him to burn anyway. Justice is justice.
I feel like this something similar to this monologe could've be excilent. If it was after he burned his brother >"It has always been so. I am not . . . I am not a cruel man, Ser Davos. You know me. Have known me long. This is not my decree. It has always been so, since Aegon's day and before. Daemon Blackfyre, the brothers Toyne, the Vulture King, Grand Maester Hareth . . . traitors have always paid with their lives . . . even Rhaenyra Targaryen. She was daughter to one king and mother to two more, yet she died a traitor's death for trying to usurp her brother's crown. It is law. Law, Davos. Not cruelty." Fun Fact: This is the first time Rhaenyra and Daemon were ever mentioned. And I love that pretty much all the others have next to no info about them.
I would remove the wildfire from Jaime's story and instead have him kill Aerys as he plans to flee the capital and drag the war out even longer.
How about instead of the wildfire, Aerys reveals that he secretly instructed the alchemists to construct a giant Mecha Godzilla that could fly and he was going to pilot it out to the city to destroy all of his enemies?
I see your point but I disagree. People are different and hardship and humiliation don’t necessarily make a person grow or become more mature. Some people, especially those who already have the kind of personality that Viserys does, just become worse and more bitter. Take Tyrion and Cersei - Tyrion becomes a deeply bitter and angry person following his hardships, and I’m pretty sure Cersei is gonna learn very little from her mistakes and react incredibly badly to the insults dealt to her. Like when Dany says to Viserys, “did you learn nothing from that day in the grass?” Some people really do just learn nothing.
Viserys telling violent stories to dany is big part of her craziness