Riding the dragon

This is where we begin to question what actually makes a good story in House of the Dragon. It's occurred to me a couple times that George R. R. Martin might have taken some of the criticism of his books and the subsequent TV series to heart about the role of women in Westeros. His intent was to present a set of cultural conditions that would have been typical of Middle Ages and Renaissance Europe and which, honestly, remained largely similar even into modernity, especially for the noble classes still conscious of how trading women could gain them money and status. His response to those conditions was largely embodied by characters like Cersei, Arya, and eventually Sansa, who manipulated, evaded, or endured (and hardened; at least somewhat in the books by the end of Dance of Dragons) those conditions, respectively, to forge as much of their own path as they could. But despite their starring roles in ASoIaF, the voices complaining about the general misogyny of the setting became louder and more numerous. When he switched over to what seems like an endless delve into the history of the Targaryens, he pushed that issue to the forefront. This was no longer a story about ice demons and prophecies, but about political struggle quite focused on the question of whether women deserve to be treated as equals. This is why Rhaenyra is the focal character of House and probably why it's far less of a sprawling epic, since the vast majority of the plot tends to center around her and the consequences of her actions. So, at root, House is a story about sexual identity, which means that sex, even if we hadn't seen it regularly in Game of Thrones, would naturally be an important aspect of it.

With that in mind, it's fair to question at this point whether depictions of sex are just titillation or actual aspects of the plot. I pointed out one instance in the first episode where it was clearly the former, as we didn't need to see Daemon's experience with actual impotence (in addition to his political impotence) in a brothel when it could have been displayed in one room with his consort. But GoT-style sexposition being what it had been in the past, I'm assuming the showrunners decided to just follow suit. Last night's setting was somewhat different, in that it was a chance to see Daemon showing his niece what the other side of King's Landing looks like, as well as explore the chemistry that's existed between them, with the idea that he might not only get back at his brother in a rather vicious way, but also take one step closer to the throne by, y'know, screwing the currently-named heir. The fact that he happens to be her uncle is less of a concern for him, trying to be a prince of genuine Targaryen/Valyrian outlook than it is for Viserys, who's mostly trying to keep a pile of unstable alliances with the far-less-sanguine-about-incest Westerosi houses under his thumb. The fact that it would have been Rhaenyra's first sexual experience, as a virgin waiting to be traded for highest value, adds another layer of complexity to it.

From a storyteller's perspective, what I've been mulling over is: Knowing that the thing that most people would be discussing would be the fact that Uncle Daemon almost screwed his niece, does that serve your story?  Certainly, a story about politics will often involve sex because politics is about life, as I was saying over here. As noted above, a story centered on sexuality is even more likely to involve sex. There's nothing wrong with that, as long as it serves that story. Will most of the commentary be about the motivations I mentioned above or the fact that Daemon was once again unable or unwilling to perform or the fact that the two of them have already exhibited an attraction for each other and what all of that says about their characters? Or will most of the discussion be about the fact that he almost shagged a 16-year-old? The fact that she later went on and had that first experience with her oathsworn personal protector, also much older than her, and whom would be likely burned alive for participating is almost a side note to the main scene in the brothel. Alicent is, of course, the prime example of the type of life that Rhaenyra is trying to avoid- trapped in an uncomfortable relationship with a man she isn't attracted to and feeling like nothing that happens is her choice, including sex -so the fact that she made her own physical choices that night (and seemed to be ready to make her own earlier with Daemon) is the centerpiece of this story. This is what it's supposed to be about. But I'm still left wondering if people are really going to get that in the same way they might have if the brothel part was left out of it.

This might be a microcosm of my continuing unease with the whole series. I mean, sure, sex. Sex is fun. I'm not objecting to the brothel scenes in the same way I'm not shocked by the potential incest. If that's what your story is about, then, there it is. Part of what's leaving me adrift is that so much of the rest of what's going on outside of Daemon is kinda pedestrian. When Cersei and Jaime Lannister were first presented, they were wicked people AND they were screwing siblings. But there was an element of texture to their menace that was fairly rapidly revealed to be high intelligence and an understanding of where each of them stood in society-at-large. Even though she was better at playing the game than the vast majority of men involved, she was still a lesser entity in that game than they were. Jaime's confrontation with Eddard in the streets of the city was more an expression of his affection for Tyrion and an acknowledgment of his role as a tool of his house than anything to do with his own personal perfidy. You could see all of this in the first couple episodes. So far, I'm not getting anything nearly that complex or interesting from anyone but Daemon, which is only continuing the trend from the first episode where he was the only one with an actual personality. So far, these characters just aren't deep enough to be intriguing, which only makes the presentation of what could be character- and culture-building moments like the brothel scene seem more like titillation to distract from the fact that most of these people just aren't that fascinating. One mild exception is Ser Criston Cole (Fabian Frankel), since he's been playing the role of the guy who's extremely conscious of just how out of place he is quite well.

The reality of most speculative fiction is that it can be either plot-driven or character-driven (unlike most literary fiction which is largely the latter.) But to be plot-driven, you usually need some more high concept stuff than "noble families bicker over throne", dragons or no dragons. GoT was character-driven. There wasn't anything involved that ventured too far past bog-standard fantasy other than a willingness to kill major characters because more major characters in these settings should die more often or everything becomes trite. ASoIaF is a character-driven story and the showrunners of House are presenting this show as the same sort of thing. But to do that, you need interesting characters and, so far, it's lacking in that respect. It is improving from the first couple offerings, but that's not a really high bar by which to measure. I'm holding on to kinda just see where it meanders off to. The preview of what may be happening to Viserys next week means that things might start to really accelerate. Will the story be able to carry the lack of compelling people? Dunno.