#like we're 6 eps in and she still has got no devotion to the idea of an independence

[sandraharissa]

it's kind of insane to me that s1 gave us 9 episodes of build-up to a revolution, heck even s2 act I gave us whole 3 episodes to just see the fallout of a societal upheaval, but after that only one episode was dedicated to said revolution and ppl are saying this might be the end of this plotline as we'll probs need to focus on fighting noxus/the arcane in act III

[saintclarkegriffin]

I'm sorry the more I think about the last scene the less I like it. I mean, did it feel good to see Alicent and Rhaenyra on screen again? Yes, absolutely! Emma and Olivia have top tier chemistry, and their acting in the scene did not disappoint. However, I can't help thinking that the writing of the scene just doesn't make any sense whatsover and makes both Rhaenyra and Alicent look bad. Not in a "they're bad people" kind of bad, but in the "their motivations and personalities are inconsistent" kind of bad.

Putting aside the realism of Rhaenyra sneaking in and out of King's Landing completely undetected... It just doesn't make sense for this scene to happen now, at this point in the story. It's been, what, a month, since Luke has died? And it's been a couple of weeks since a grief-stricken Rhaenyra has said "I want Aemond Targaryen" in front of her entire council. I'm pretty sure that meant that she wanted him dead. But now she's willing to negotiate for peace with Alicent, the mother of that very same Aemond? So what, she just put aside her grief and need for revenge in the span of two weeks? Or did she think that Alicent was going to roll over and accept the murder of her son in retribution? 'Cause in the former case, she's inconsistent, in the latter, she's dumb. Neither looks good.

And Alicent also doesn't look good at all in this scene. First of, the idea that she had no intention whatsover of putting Aegon on the throne BEFORE Viserys' death is completely inconsistent with her characterization in the second half of season 1. There's a whole scene in ep 6 where she makes it clear to Aegon that he is the challenge to Rhaenyra's claim and that he will become king. And then there's the scene in ep 8 where she and Otto are clearly plotting and she says "he may yet live" talking about Viserys... even if her main concern in that moment was Driftmark, she was still very much plotting against the Blacks and Viserys' wishes. But now we're supposed to believe that she really did care about Viserys' wishes and that she only put Aegon on the throne because she misunderstood Viserys' dying words??

And don't get me wrong, I think in part Alicent did delude herself in believing that Viserys wanted Aegon to be king, as a way to ease her conscience. But in season 1 it was pretty clear that her biggest drive and motivation was her love for her children, and the fear that Otto had instilled in her that Rhaenyra or Daemon would kill them in order to get rid of any competition for the throne. It's why she got so mad and scolded Aegon in ep 6, because in her mind he didn't understand the very real danger he was in. It's why she snapped in ep 7, after seeing Viserys' blatant favorism for Rhaenyra and her children, over the physical well-being of Aemond, their child.

And none of this excuses Alicent's actions by the way, it doesn't excuse putting Aegon on the throne and causing a civil war, but it explains why Alicent did what she did. She was a mother concerned for the lives of her children. That makes perfect sense and it's all the audience needs to understand and sympathize with Alicent. But now, after that scene, what are we meant to understand about Alicent? That she was perfectly fine with the idea of leaving her children to Rhaenyra and Daemon's mercy even AFTER the events of Driftmark? That she was so devoted to Viserys that his dying words were enough for her to go against Rhaenyra, put Aegon (who was and still is unfit to rule) on the throne and cause a civil war, even though she was willing to go against Viserys' wishes just a few hours before his death?

I don't know, I just feel like the writers of the show want so badly to show Alicent in a sympathetic light that they accidentally made her character inconsistent. Like "see she can't be evil if she never, ever wanted to usurp Rhaenyra's throne, it was just a big misunderstanding, she's good!". But the thing is... an "evil" character who is consistent in their motivs and actions will always, always be more interesting than a character who is "good" but inconsistent. Not to mention, that if people understand a character, they are far more likely to sympathize with that character because they understand where that character is coming from. It was easy for me to like and root for Alicent in season 1 because I understood her, but now that I don't, who or what am I supposed to like/root for?

Also, I think the writers are doing the exact thing with Rhaenyra... going out of their way to make her more peaceful/less blood-thirsty than book!Rhaenyra in order to make her more sympathetic to the general audience... She lost her throne, her father, her unborn daughter, and one of her sons in the span of a few days... She should be angry!!! She should be furious!!! She should want to light things on fire!!! Not risking her life to try and make peace with the very person who is partially to blame for all of this!!! Let. Rhaenyra. Be. Mad. People will still love her, I promise.