Otto Slaytower 💚🤨

[˖᯽ ݁˖ @1Cr0ww]

Oldtown

[miss let it linger @glindacent]

watching the world suddenly turn into fans of alicent when shes funny

[Tia ˖·˳. #knightcent @ellipsixm]

When rhaenyra brings the wrong baby home from daycare

[Simo 🧸 @_rebels_rose_]

this gif, generational

[river @onewayrhiyo]

this has to be the funniest gif in house of the dragon history

[miss let it linger @glindacent]

this gif is fucking awesomejfkskjfks

[sha alicent explainer @elumaxluv]

nevermind

[girl abed nadir @alicentpacino]

“I cannot be seen to favor Hightowers” can’t relate #biased WE LIGHT THE WAY

[RT 💚🦋 @rangobich11]

Rhaenyra wants to send Daeron, legitimate prince to the wall, while her illegitimate son, Joff stays in KL, if I was Alicent I would have put Joff on Syrax myself.

[🗡️ @aryasmercy]

episode 3 spoilers //

the only thing corlys has done wrong is not say any of this a long time ago 😭 he has lost his entire family and home in this war and the monarch insists on her bastard with no velaryon blood inheriting his seat, i would have crashed out ages ago

[sen @aemondfilms]

this is frying me so bad 😭😭😭

[atalanta 𖦹 @sacraamarte]

the battle above the gods eye

[sen @aemondfilms]

alicent got riding gloves on and looks shocked…. calling it now, she’s about to claim cannibal

[s. @toutestt]

“Enjoy, guys. Stay alive.” Rhys 😭

[bride of dragons♐️ @sofpals]

Definitivamente la serie está hecha para los locals y no para los fans de los libros. Una pena porque sin los libros ni sus fans no serían nada pero bueno.

[Mady @majolpl]

Rhaenyra: Bring Aegon the usurper to me!

Meanwhile Aegon and Larys in their sitcom subplot:

[Andrea 🩵 @thanergy]

I love when hotd is a comedy

[gio @aegoniada]

as avaliações da série são tipo: aconteceu algo bom com a rhaenyra = nota alta

aconteceu algo bom com os verdes = nota baixa

pateticos, não consigo levar a sério nada que venha dessa série mais

[The Critical Maester 📚💚 @th3CritclMaestr]

I think that the key to reading Fire & Blood is in understanding the difference between what is established history and what is open for historical interpretation.

Things that happened behind closed doors like private conversations, conspiracies, secret plans or the motivations behind a character's decisions = things that are disputed by the book's sources and can often appear to be contradictory in the way that they are described. 🤷🏾‍♂️ This is where I think that an adaptation has room to interpret some of these events and choose its own version of what happened.

But publicly witnessed events are a different matter. Things like dates of birth and death, who fought whom, when and where battles took place, how those battles unfolded, major political decisions, relationships between characters, and even many aspects of their personalities = these are the accepted historical record of Westeros and should be adapted faithfully. 🙌🏾💯

Think about it in terms of how we know about things that have happened in real life history. For instance, we KNOW that Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon in 49 BC, defeated Pompey and became dictator of Rome. We KNOW that he was assassinated on the Ides of March (15th of March) by conspirators who included the likes of Brutus and Cassius. Those events are historical fact and are not up for dispute. But what historians still debate is why Caesar made certain decisions. Did he truly want to become a king?? What were his ultimate ambitions politically?? 🤔 Any adaptation of Caesar's life would be free to interpret those motivations - but it wouldn't be free to pretend that the Rubicon never happened.

The same thing would apply to Caesar's personality. We know that he was politically ambitious, very intelligent and that he was a brilliant military commander. This means that he was also probably very charismatic and extraordinarily confident because those traits are demonstrated consistently throughout his life. Therefore, if an adaptation portrayed him as timid, politically indifferent or as someone who accidentally stumbled into power, most historians would reject it because it would be contradicting the overwhelming evidence of his actions.

And that's my issue with House of the Dragon. 😤😤

It's not that I think that every moment involving Alicent has only one possible interpretation. Of course there is room to imagine her inner thoughts and motivations, but there are also aspects of her character that the historical record makes abundantly clear. Alicent was no doubt very politically ambitious and she was determined to place her son on the Iron Throne. Those aren't things that are up for debate - they are the only conclusion that consistently fits her recorded words and actions throughout Fire & Blood. The writers should not be making any changes to those facts. 🙅🏾‍♂️⚠️

My problem with the show is that the writers don't just reinterpret the private motivations of these characters; they often change the fundamental characteristics and defining qualities of the characters, which in itself starts to contradict the history that Fire & Blood presents as undisputed facts.