baellaggio - Tumblr blog

[baellaggio]

Elia Martell

[baellaggio]

i bring a “house of the dragon is a poorly written fanfic cash grab that glorifies house targaryen and completely misses the message of fire and blood. all the characters deserve better” vibe people aren’t particularly fond of i fear

[baellaggio]

Do you still remember the thirst-induced Geralt/Witcher looking Edric Dayne that had us all hot and bothered months back? Could we have him again please with an equally hot Arya who is also older and in sexy clothes? Mmm, let them be Westeros hottest couple please! Make them sizzle! 🔥🔥🔥 Sorry, the thirst is making me a bit crazy. There’s only about five of us who ship Edric x Arya. 😭

[baellaggio]

Straight from the degree itself, heh. Where’s that other tumblr user? The one who can’t read. I’m glad to see some people make use of their education.

And to answer that last question, the answer is a resounding no.

Let's talk adaptation theory, because I've been seeing a lot of accusations that criticism of HotD is just "wanting it to be exactly like the books" and "book purists" not knowing what an adaptation is. So okay, let's talk about what an adaptation is, then.

I'll mostly be quoting from Linda Hutcheon's A Theory of Adaptation, because this is the first book most everyone reads when going into adaptation studies. Let's look at several ways we can approach and critique adaptation.

ADAPTATION AS INTERPRETATION

The adapted text, therefore, is not something to be reproduced, but something to be interpreted and recreated [...]

No one expects HotD to be a 1:1 reproduction of F&B. Hutcheon often compares adaptation to the process of linguistic translation, in that there will always be an inevitable loss of fidelity when translating from one language to another. However, the translator is still expected to provide an accurate representation of the source text — hence, adaptation as interpretation and recreation.

"Fidelity criticism" is not what GRRM did. He didn't criticize the show simply because it differed from the books, and often even praises changes from the source material if it "strengthens" the impact of the work.

But to go back to adaptation as translation, GRRM is pointing out that HotD and its audience will have a difficult time interpreting and conveying F&B's message (story) if the showrunners actively take out key words (characters) and terminology (plot events). If we view adaptation as translation (from one medium to another), then the role of the adapter is to convey the intention and meaning of the source text as accurately as possible. And people do have a right to criticize "accuracy" of meaning if we see adaptation as a process of translation and remediation — which you are free not to, but some people DO come from this angle and are often dismissed as "book purists."

If you see adaptation as interpretation, are you a book purist? Perhaps, depending on what the definition of "book purist" is, but to make it clear, the people who are coming from this viewpoint (such as GRRM) clearly do not expect a blow-by-blow reproduction, and to argue that they do is dismissing a whole school of thought when it comes to adaptation.

ADAPTATION AS SUBSTITUTION

Another way to look at adaptation is through a "process of substitution." Pretty simple to understand, right? Prose that says "red dress" is substituted for an image of a white gown but with ruby embellishments, two characters are merged into one for the show, and Aemond and Aegon working together in Rook's Rest is substituted for the former betraying the latter. Your mileage may vary on whether you find these acceptable substitutions.

How does one know if a substitution is "acceptable?" Well, I'd like to use the analogy Hutcheon brings up about surgery:

Usually adaptations, especially from long novels, mean that the adapter's job is one of subtraction or contraction; this is called "surgical art."

Good adaptations are like good surgeries: the body remains holistically intact and ideally functions better with the replacements and removals. Bad adaptations are like bad surgeries — hence the oft lobbied critique of an adaptation "butchering" the source material. The body of the adapted text cannot function on its own, being maimed or crippled by the adaptation process.

For example, the adaptational change of making Rhaenyra and Alicent the "heart" of the story has been discussed a lot by fans and critics. It was praised in the first season because it gave the story an intimate and personal "face." But it was lambasted in the second season because it actively deterred the plot progression, "crippling" the pace and stakes of the show.

Again, this is valid criticism and a legitimate approach to HotD as an adaptation.

ADAPTATION AS AUTONOMOUS

Perhaps one way to think about unsuccessful adaptations is not in terms of infidelity to a prior text, but in terms of lack of creativity and skill to make the text one's own and autonomous.

Basically, this approach to adaptation asks, "Is the show still good by itself? Or does it need to rely on its sequels, prequels, and paratext (interviews, podcasts, press releases, etc.) to prop itself up?"

A critique lobbied at the season two HotD finale was that its impact relied solely on the legacy of the prior show and the A Song of Ice and Fire mystery of who truly is The Prince That Was Promised. If the audience had no connection to Daenerys, no investment in the question of who truly was TPTWP, and never watched Game of Thrones, would Daemon's decision to finally devote himself to Rhaenyra make sense? Or does its emotional resonance rely solely on what the audience's investment to another story that is not this one?

This is all to say that a lot of criticism levied against the show, including GRRM's, can't be chalked up to "people not knowing what an adaptation is." There are several different ways to approach adaptation — the question is does HotD succeed in any of them?

[baellaggio]

Edit: This got screenshotted and posted to Reddit with the very sensationalist title of "Xiran Jay Zhao, author and close friend of GRRM." That is NOT what I am!! I've only met and spoken with him a few times!!!

All right there has been some Discourse TM about George RR Martin because of that post he made going rogue on HOTD's writers (deleted a few hours later but archived) and I'm seeing some misinformed reactions by people who aren't in the publishing or entertainment industries so lemme clarify some things:

- Creators are not the ones with the power. Execs are. Even an author as big as George gets their opinions dismissed if the higher-ups don't want to listen.

- HBO has not listened to George's feedback and concerns for years. They do not have to, because once adaptation rights are signed away it is OUT of the author's hands. How do you think GOT Season 8 happened?

- George cannot just shut down production or refuse to let them make future seasons of any show inspired by his works because he doesn't like what they're doing. He can't break the contract willy-nilly either when HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS are at stake. I hope people keep that in mind before saying "oh why is he complaining while continuing to collect his royalty checks?" Well, if they're fucking up his stories he might as well get some money out of it.

- He's not complaining for complaining's sake. I hung out with him a few weeks ago and heard his full scope of opinions on HOTD and what he said in the post was VERY mild. Probably the least spicy storytelling critique he could've brought up. And I do believe this was on purpose and strategic. He's not going full scorched earth on HBO, but he's showing them that he COULD. He did this as a warning shot to get them to listen to him because clearly he saw some very upsetting plans for upcoming HOTD seasons. If he just wanted to complain there's way spicier shit he could've said.

- For those who think he's disrespecting the show's writers...How do you think he felt when they have dismissed his feedback in private and driven him to the point of risking legal action to make his point to them?

- Just because he didn't mention something in the post doesn't mean he approves of it or doesn't care, and the post should not be used to extrapolate his opinions on anything that's not related to what he specifically addressed. Again, what he said was VERY mild. Ultimately, what matters to him is logical storytelling and complex, morally gray characters.

- Lastly, I do not consider myself part of the HOTD or GOT fandoms. I'm a casual and defending him as a fellow author. Please do not involve me in any fandom drama. I do not know what's going on in there and I don't want to.

[baellaggio]

i hope grrm never finished twow and ados actually bc none of yall deserve those books

[baellaggio]

preach cunterly. a degree doesn’t make you any less pathetic for this trash opinion

can George R. R. Martin please go fuck himself if he's gonna bitch and moan about adaptations he agreed to for the next few years?

"but he didn't know they were gonna—" it's a fucking adaptation, not a visualization of his backwards ass trauma porn of a book series.

he signed and gave HBO the rights to adapt his works, if he's that concerned about his legacy or how his works are made into TV, he should've finished his damn book and tell HBO no.

honestly I have very little patience for people who refuse to acknowledge that adaptations are absolutely creative works that deserve to be viewed outside of the narrow, purity-first scope.

[baellaggio]

also the way some people are saying grrm should keep his opinions to himself and focus on finishing twow is so?? sickening?? authors are so much more than their books and they don’t owe anyone anything !!

[baellaggio]

tumblr users exposing themselves as unable to read 😆

grrm deleting the blog post means people r going to wildly exaggerate how critical it was and what it was critical about forever. so its important we remember now that it was almost entirely about him being super annoyed they cut historical targaryen dead baby number one million because of the ripple effects this will have on later seasons (kingsguard rickard thorne will not be able to distinguish himself as a brave warrior immediately before dying by trying to protect maelor)

[baellaggio]

Shout out to MY favourite quote from George’s blog:

“I have no idea what Ryan has planned - If indeed he had been planned anything”

[baellaggio]

Like truly To Me george rr martin can do whatever he wants forever no matter what because he wrote a storm of swords. idgaf.

[baellaggio]

I seriously need someone else to talk about Our Fathers Clad in Red (by @aifsaath and @gwenllian-in-the-abbey).

THIS IS POSSIBLY THE BEST TARGARYEN FIC I HAVE EVER READ AND DID NOT EXPECT TO LIKE THE AEGON AND BAELA PAIRING AS MUCH AS I HAVE.

[baellaggio]

grrm right now

[baellaggio]

To everyone saying ‘oh George should of solved this behind closed doors’ or ‘oh he should shut up and write winds’

I need you to listen closely. This is obviously his last resort. HBO and Condal have stopped listening to him. This is how he’s keeping influence over HIS work. This is HIS story. He is more than justified to be mad they’re changing it. This is his last attempt to get influence back over his work. He’s showing HBO he won’t be quiet anymore. They can’t walk over him like they did with GOT.

He’s also allowed to work on two things at once.

[baellaggio]

Arya and Sansa's trip to the wall in the winter. This is what they should be doing instead of going to the south.

[baellaggio]

Daenys and her baby Balerion

You can't convince me he wasn't spoiled.

[baellaggio]

Sigh.

No, Westeros isn't an absolute monarchy it's a medieval vassalage and the king's word is only law when he can enforce it. Rhaenyra's - I like her book character not so much the show where they white washed her - children aren't legitimate just because the king and the Velaryon's pretend they are. Blood and legality are inextricably linked in this world - it was made pretty obvious in the main series of books.

Now, some people will argue that it's fine that her kid's aren't Laenors because their claim comes through her. The thing is

a) people can only have a claim when they're trueborn/legitimised by royal decree. Example: If a bastard of House Mooton said that his bastardy didn't matter and that he could press his claim to lordship of Maidenpool because it rests solely on the fact that he has his lordly father's blood, irrespective of legitimacy, people would laugh at him.

You need to be trueborn as well, because then what would stop bastards with noble blood from attempting to usurp their noble family's inheritance? Noble blood and being trueborn is what makes a claim, elsewise we could argue that even dragon-seed's have a right to the throne.

b) this whole line of argument ignores the dynastic reasons behind Rhaenyra's marriage to her cousin Laenor. It was to combine both of their powerful claims to the throne. Laenor was the son of Rhaenys, who under Andal Law, had more right to the throne than Viserys. Viserys hoped that by marrying Rhaenyra to Laenor he could bolster her children's claim to the throne.

Combining the two powerful claims - and prior to Viserys's kingship Laenor's claim was more powerful that Rhaenyra's and arguably after - was the entire purpose of the marriage. If they'd produced trueborn children those kids would've have been able to assert their claim to the Iron Throne because of both their mothers - and crucially as much as the fandom likes to ignore this - their father's blood.

This is what I think and what I believe the source material to be telling us. You've a right to agree or disagree but PLEASE keep it respectful. No, I don't hate TB stans I just really disagree with them but that shouldn't stop us from having a polite conversation, right?