(Current) Book Copy For SERPENT SWORD: BATTLE FOR THE WASTELANDS #2

Just submitted Ch. 9 of Serpent Sword, the sequel to my military fantasy novel Battle for the Wastelands to my writing group. Per my earlier blog post, I hope to get the novel completed and published before the end of 2021, and based on word counts I'm probably around halfway to finishing it. Running it through writing group, getting professional editing, etc. will take time so I imagine it'll be close, but it's still doable.

In the meantime, here's the current draft of the book copy. Spoilers for the first novel, so be ye warned.

“Killing a cannibal overlord was just the beginning. Now there’s a war to win, and the odds are getting worse.

For capturing a dirigible from the cannibalistic Flesh-Eating Legion and rescuing rebel chieftain Alonzo Merrill, Andrew Sutter earned a promotion. Now the rebel armies are carving a bloody swathe toward the old capital of Jacinto. Victory seems near as the man-eaters crumble before the Merrills’ salvaged Old World arsenal.

But Grendel, first lord of the Northlands, marches south to turn back the tide. Although he had planned to betray the Flesh-Eaters and replace them with his son by Alonzo’s captive sister Catalina, Grendel cannot let the rebels’ defeat of the Flesh-Eater ruler go unavenged. He brings with him hundreds of thousands of reinforcements and Catalina herself as bait.

With Jacinto under siege and enemy armies drawing ever-nearer, Andrew and his friends must descend into the occupied city of Long Branch to rescue Catalina and confront the dreaded first lord himself.”

The title is the operational name for the assault on the Long Branch citadel. Given how Grendel's personal dirigible is called the Nicor — a Norse word for "water-monster" — and bears a dragon-head on its prow, giving the mission to kill him that name seems appropriate.

(Look closely at the cover and that's the Nicor floating over Long Branch's citadel. Imagine a Viking longship updated for steampunk warfare.)

Another "Bittersweet" Alternate Ending for GAME OF THRONES

The other day I had another idea for a "bittersweet" (per George RR Martin's stated plan) ending for the Game of Thrones television series that draws on the scripts of Alice Shipwise. In one of her "Battle of Winterfell" episodes, she depicts the Northerners--who had earlier been skeptical of Danaerys Targaryen due to her foreignness--converting hard-core for her after seeing the dragons in action against the White Walkers. This seems a lot more realistic than what happens in the actual show where the Northerners hail Jon Snow as "a madman...OR A KING" for riding a dragon, much to the ignored Danaerys' irritation.

(Seriously, she's been doing this for years and much more effectively, yet Jon who I don't think was very successful at commanding Rhaegal in battle is the one getting all the glory. Yes, they know him better than her, but still.)

Things broadly follow the television series until the attack on King's Landing. The city begins ringing its bells in surrender, but the Lannister die-hards continue firing on Danaerys from the Red Keep. Danaerys goes full dracarys on the Red Keep itself (not on the hundreds of thousands of non-combatants trying to surrender), only to accidentally trigger the wildfire stashes her father Aerys had stashed throughout the city. This leads to King's Landing going up like in the show, only with Danaerys watching in horror from atop Drogon as Jon, Grey Worm, Arya, etc. flee the city in a panic rather than her gratuitously murdering hundreds of thousand of helpless civilians and then making a megalomaniac speech about conquering the world afterward.

(I came up with a similar scenario around the time of the series finale and Twitterati Jacob Budz came up with a more detailed version and created a meme for it, which you can see here. Or just see below.)

Danaerys and her allies come together afterward and realize they have a massive mess on their hands. Not only do they have an enormous humanitarian crisis to deal with, but word is rapidly spreading in the South of the "Mad Queen" who murdered King's Landing, on top of the xenophobic nonsense Cersei had already been spreading earlier. Even though they all know that this isn't what happened, what matters is what people will believe. Danaerys isn't going to be accepted as a liberator from the White Walkers (most of Westerosi doubt they actually exist) or Cersei "I blew up the equivalent of the Vatican" Lannister. She will have to conquer most of Westeros with fire and blood. Although earlier in the series she'd made all sorts of threats to do exactly that (as people who defended her evil turn at the end of the series love to point out), seeing firsthand what this will entail on top of the losses she'd taken earlier (both personally and in dead soldiers) have soured her on the whole proposition. Bonus points if it turns out that, as Jon Snow pointed out earlier in the series, that witch wasn't a reliable source and Danaerys is pregnant with Jon's child.

(This is perhaps where Bran can come in, as Danaerys might not know she's pregnant at this point. This is another idea I borrowed from Ms. Shipwise, as it might make Jon agree to a political marriage even if he finds the idea of sleeping with his aunt gross.)

So what ends up happening is that Tyrion Lannister, who is once described as standing "as tall as a king" despite his dwarfism, ends up succeeding his sister Cersei as the king of everything south of the Neck. Jon retains his title as King in the North with Danaerys--whom the Northerners now adore even though people in the South view her as a monster--as his queen. To secure peace between the now-sundered halves of Westeros, Sansa's marriage to Tyrion is re-instituted.

(EDIT: A friend pointed out this could potentially undo Sansa's character development from a prince-obsessed bimbo into Littlefinger 2.0. This would need to be handled carefully--perhaps it's her idea, to immediately terminate the war rather than risk the rise of an anti-Targaryen leader in the South? The fact she and Tyrion both worship the Seven while Jon follows the Old Gods and Danaerys is irreligious might be helpful in heading off a Faith-inspired holy war against the pagan and the atheist. You could have Jon find it horrifying but ultimately agree to it.)

Like my scenarios earlier, this would meet Martin's goal of a "bittersweet" ending:

*The war ends with the victory of good over both supernatural and human evil, but enormous numbers of innocent people die anyway. Shades of Hiroshima.

*Danaerys wins the war but loses the peace purely by accident (as opposed to the contrived "everything goes wrong and she goes crazy" scenario we got in the show) due to other people's ignorance and bigotry. She gets to marry the man she honest-to-God loves, but it's a shotgun marriage with Jon's enthusiasm rather lacking given the revelation she's actually his biological aunt. Danaerys might not be bothered by the incest part, but she only has one-eighth (two-eighths if Yara Greyjoy and the Iron Islands come along) of what she sailed west to fight for--and it's the poorest and most backward section too. And although the fact she brings the world's only living dragon with her and Jon is a fairly mild personality means she's not going to be mistreated and will realistically have a large say in things, she's still a consort to a less-talented man rather than ruling queen.

*Although Sansa does get her childhood wish to be queen, it's to a man that, although she trusted him enough to spill the beans about Jon being a Targaryen and respected him due to his unwillingness to consummate their forced marriage, she has no romantic feelings or even physical attraction to whatsoever. And who is probably twice her age to boot. Of course, Tyrion does respect her intelligence and this would likely be some kind of Rule of Two situation rather than some kind of "unattractive nerd power fantasy," but still.

(My original idea featured Sansa remaining in the North, which means a future of catfighting with Danaerys, but this wouldn't be much fun either and it would give her even less opportunity to show off her intelligence and political savvy.)

BATTLE FOR THE WASTELANDS Is Going Indie (Here's First Phase of Cover)

Although The Thing in the Woods is my first published novel, it is not the first novel I've actually completed. Not counting my two lengthy Harry Potter fan-fics "Wrath of the Half-Blood Prince" and "Lord of the Werewolves" and my rewrite of Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen so aptly titled "The Revenge of the Fallen Reboot," my first finished novel is actually Battle for the Wastelands, which can be described as "a post-apocalyptic steampunk military fantasy" or more concisely "Dark Tower meets Game of Thrones."

I completed the novel sometime in 2011-2012 and have been submitting it to different agents and publishers over the years, tinkering with it based on any personalized rejection or commentary I got. This prolonged process (plus an edit by Apex Publications boss Jason Sizemore, who offers extensive freelance services) resulted in a less wordier book--the current draft is 88.5K and the original was 101K. This was accomplished by cutting only words and phrases--not only did I not need to cut anything significant, but even I added a new scene to give the sole female POV character a more solid character arc (overcoming depression).

Unfortunately, the prolonged process meant that its window has likely passed. I was told by a fellow writer that unless one is Cherie Priest, Barnes and Noble isn't stocking steampunk books. This means publishers are not likely to buy them, since Barnes and Noble is the largest brick-and-mortar bookstore. Although Battle is more subtle steampunk--it's more of a military novel that happens to be set in a different world than "all airships all the time"--there's still airships, Babbage engines, etc. Furthermore, the steampunk fandom seems in decline--there're fewer steampunk costumes at conventions, steampunk-focused conventions are trying to expand their offerings, etc. Although one can market Battle without using the dreaded S-word, it has so many steampunk tropes and aspects that big presses are likely to turn up their noses.

Speaking of turnaround time, one publisher was reviewing the book for roughly two years (it made the second round of judging and I think there was some personnel turnover, so I'm not blaming them). Although patience is a virtue, especially if you're an author trying to get a book deal, there aren't a lot of book publishers who'd consider it left at this point. Furthermore, one of the remaining ones I was warned could take a similar amount of time. I finished this book (and a companion novella focused on the main villain's adult son) seven years ago. I'm getting a little tired.

Another big (possibly the biggest) issue with a professional sale is that it's not standalone. The book pretty obviously sets up more battles to come in a way that Thing and my forthcoming Little People, Big Guns do not. I don't have an established track record, so publishers aren't likely to take a chance on what's an obvious series starter. Many readers won't start a series unless it's already done, which a nasty catch-22 that leaves many series unfinished for lack of sales.

Finally, although Battle is a better book for years' worth of tightening, the more concise length also makes it less salable. I've spoken to many people who know what they're talking about who think a fantasy novel should be 100K words if not more. I'd considered adding stuff to pad it out, but that's the key phrase--"pad it out." It will be obvious that stuff was added to meet a word count and the quality would suffer.

So I hired Mr. Sizemore once more for proofreading--and he went above and beyond by answering a lot of my publishing questions--and I commissioned a cover from artist Matt Cowdery, whom I met at DragonCon this past Labor Day. The cover will be completed in stages--here's the first part, which in artist lingo is called a "comp."

The final product will look something like this or this in overall style and detail.

Independently publishing means I'll have to do everything myself, but I listen a lot of writing-related podcasts and know several independent authors in real life. I've got a lot of ideas on what to do, some of which I cite in the next chunk below.

Problems For Danaerys Even If She Did Become Queen...

One of the more tragic elements of Game of Thrones Season Eight is that Danaerys Targaryen, who starts out as a young teen pimped to a barbarian warlord by her dirtbag brother but grew to become the commander of a powerful army and the liberator of hundreds of thousands if not millions of slaves, helps save humanity, and wins the war for the Iron Throne, ends up loses the peace. Or more specifically, at the moment of her victory, due to a conga line of personal tragedies all happening at once, she loses it, torches a city full of civilians, descends into unrepentant vicious megalomania, and ends up getting put down by her own family (Jon Snow is her nephew as well as her boyfriend) and her prime minister who by his own admission is in love with her.

(Here she is just after making the "we're going to liberate THE WORLD Eternal War Lenin" speech.)

I personally found her descent into madness rather ridiculous--it's like the show was written to set her up to fail in an immensely unsubtle way, probably for the benefit of a less talented and less interesting male character. I thought it would be Jon Snow, but it turns out it was Bran. And although the show established that Danaerys could be vicious to people who betrayed her and/or refused to obey, so were the male characters and nobody claimed that made them tyrants. Seriously, Jon Snow hanged a ten-year-old and nobody claimed he was inevitably going to turn into a madman even though he has the same Targaryen crazy genes. And I don't recall her engaging in atrocities toward non-combatant civilians at all, especially since she explicitly ordered the Unsullied to not harm children when she took Astapor.

One explanation for the situation I'd heard was that the show was supposed to be ten seasons of ten episodes and the creators rushed to finish up the planned storyline in eight seasons, one of which was a lot shorter. If Danaerys had a full season or two to fall into despotism, it would be a lot more convincing.

So here are some ideas I had on obstacles Danaerys would face even if she hadn't burned King's Landing and lived to take the Iron Throne:

*During her time in Essos, she sacked the city of Astapor, a city heavily dependent on slavery, and set up a council of educated former slaves to run it in place of the obliterated master class. Said council was soon overthrown by a demagogue who misgoverned the city and it ended up getting destroyed by armies from the other Free Cities eager to re-establish slavery. She forced the city of Yunkai to free their slaves and they re-enslaved them as soon as she was far enough away. She tried to govern Meereen herself to avoid those disasters, only to face an insurgency of former slave-holders and issues with slaves who didn't know how to live as free citizens, to the point at least one former slave (a teacher for a rich family) even asked to be re-enslaved.

In her defense she does come up with a way around this (former slaves could work for their masters on a contractual basis), but my point is that she has a reformist agenda that won't sit well with the local elites. A former Targaryen queen forced the nobility to abandon the right of First Night, but she was in a much stronger position with a dragon of her own and the ear of her husband, the king of all Westeros who commanded more. Danaerys has only one surviving dragon, her most loyal troops are foreigners (Unsullied and Dothraki), and she has minimal experience as a (successful) ruler. She might get a lot more pushback on any attempts to "break the wheel" she undertakes, especially in areas where the pre-war political structure hasn't been utterly destroyed. I'm reminded of Simon de Montfort, who led the English barons against the king in the name of protecting their rights against an overbearing king, but lost the support of the barons because he defended the rights of the commoners and low nobility against overbearing barons using the same logic. He was also heavily reliant on foreigners--in this case the Welsh--which didn't help.

*The murder of Ned Stark by the Lannister regime and Robb's military victories reignited Northern separatism and even though "the Kingdom of the North and the Trident" was ultimately defeated, this separatism continues under Ned's daughter Sansa. Although a lot of the Danaerys/Sansa friction came off to me as a bunch of "I don't like my brother's girlfriend" high-school catfighting (remember in-story the surviving Starks and Danaerys herself are in their late teens or very early 20s), there're very real political concerns there even if they weren't expressed as coherently or intelligently as they could've been.

*Based on Danaerys' speech to Jon on Dragonstone she isn't religious and even seems disdainful of the idea the gods or a God (i.e. R'hllor) had any role in her success. If she doesn't tone down the hubris and at least pretend some piety, that's going to alienate the Faith of the Seven (i.e. the religion of most people). And if she does adopt a religion for political ends, it's probably going to be the Faith like her Valyrian ancestors did, not the Old Gods. Even though neither faith is exclusive of the other (oaths are sworn "by the old gods and the new"), this could be an issue with Danaerys' Northern subjects, who are already skeptical of outsiders to begin with. They could see the woman whose most successful Westerosi supporters practice one religion adopt the faith practiced by her least successful supporters (Tyrells, Martells) and outright enemies (the Lannisters, Tarlys). Politically that would be the wise thing to do, but that doesn't mean people won't be annoyed, especially if they're looking for reasons to be annoyed.

*Cersei wooed Randyll Tarly to her side by appealing to his xenophobia. If she engaged in a wider attempt to undermine Danaerys by telling everybody she's a dangerous foreigner who'd let her Dothraki warriors rape women and would turn all the men and boys into Unsullied, much of the population would be inclined to resist her rule even if she's the most well-meaning person in the world. Just because something is wrong doesn't mean people won't believe it. It's my understanding many Russians viewed Napoleon as the Antichrist, even though Napoleon's government ended a lot of feudal repression in Western Europe.

*Danaerys granted the Ironborn independence under Yara Greyjoy. Yara is later part of the council that makes Bran king so that might not have lasted very long (the Iron Islands probably lost most of their fighting-age population in Balon and Euron's various schemes), but if the Ironborn remain independent or even autonomous, well, the Ironborn have a very bad history in Westeros and more recently Balon raided the North and his brother Euron was one of Cersei's powerful allies. People might not like like a people who have a history of being Westeros's predatory mad dogs getting a longer leash, let alone getting off the leash entirely. They might speculate Danaerys gave the Ironborn independence so they could serve as a threat to keep the rest of Westeros under her control or even engage in ribald theories about Danaerys and Yara.

*Jon has a better legal claim than Danaerys and is more popular among the Westerosi, something the post-victory celebrations at Winterfell make clear. Tyrion was already planning a dynastic union between the two back when everyone assumed Jon was simply Ned Stark's only surviving (non-disabled) son and in his conversation with Varys after learning of Jon's true parentage seemed to think this would still be a good idea, but upon learning Danaerys is his aunt, Jon is unwilling to sleep with her. Even if Jon decides to take one for the team and marry her to secure the realm (given how Westeros is based to a large degree on medieval Europe and was historically ruled by a dynasty that engaged in even more incestuous practices, this probably wouldn't be unusual), this isn't going to be a happy situation for him and Danaerys--whom to her credit legitimately loves Jon--is probably not going to be happy about his being unhappy. And if Danaerys' mental stability starts to slip, she might come to view him as a threat by virtue of his not enthusiastically putting out enough.

*Gendry, the late King Robert's illegitimate son, is raised to the lordship of Storm's End by Danaerys, making him one of the highest-ranking nobles in the realm. However, he's uneducated--he might not even be literate--and might face a lot of resistance by the remaining nobility of the Stormlands even if he is Robert's son. In the books Davos feared Stannis's lords would never obey him because of his common origins and lack of education and I did come across an "after the war" fan-fic where some distant born-noble relative of King Robert rebels against Gendry. Between nobles who resent having him around, period, and nobles who only support him because they think they can manipulate him, the Stormlands might not be a pleasant place even after Danaerys wins.

So putting all these different factors together, here's how Danaerys could more believably overreach and need (or "need") to be put down in a hypothetical Season Nine (or Ten, if the war with Cersei is dragged out)...

As the new queen, Danaerys might be able to rule the Crownlands-Reach-Stormlands core in the way she'd like by installing her own people that she's better able to control simply because the local nobility have likely all been obliterated (and Gendry in the Stormlands and Davos in the Crownlands, having risen from poverty themselves, might be sincere allies in "break[ing] the wheel"). However, the North, Westerlands, and the Vale are comparatively intact and their nobility likely retain significant power. If Danaerys meddles in their local government--and especially if she uses non-Westerosi like Grey Worm, "upjumped" commoners like Gendry and Davos, or people who transgress societal norms like Brienne of Tarth to do it--that's going to spawn resentment.

Given how, at least according to Roose Bolton, the First Night is still illegally practiced by at least some Northern nobles, I could imagine Danaerys taking issue with that both due to its illegality and her own history as a victim of sexual abuse by her brother, by her rough husband (at least at first), and by the "Dothraki dudebros" who would have raped her if she hadn't set them on fire. Her investigating that could be (or is seen as by others as) as a pretext to meddle in the affairs of a region already chafing against the Iron Throne, even if a Northerner is Danaerys' consort. An offended Sansa, who already dislikes Danaerys, uses this as a pretext to declare independence and other regions, whose leadership is fearful of losing their own prerogatives, join in. Gendry will likely support Danaerys, but would face unrest at home. Between her family's own history of mental problems and with her marriage souring, Danaerys is not in a good mood and she deals with the situation overly aggressively with her army of foreigners, Southerners (possibly including emancipated serfs who bear particular grudges against nobles), and Ironborn. That aggravates the situation, especially if her supporters engage in war crimes. If Sansa is the leader of the revolt (and Danaerys in her twitchiness blames Sansa and Northern sensibilities in general for her own difficulties with Jon), Danaerys might bypass the Vale and go for the North. Drogon burns Moat Cailin and Danaerys threatens to do the same to Winterfell itself. At this point Jon has had enough and to save his sisters and childhood home, he kills Danaerys.

(Even though marital problems with Jon are a contributing factor to this whole mess, she might not see this coming--she didn't seem to see this coming in the series finale, even though she knows he's rejected her romantically and that he's objected to her torching King's Landing and ordering her soldiers to kill prisoners.)

This would also set the stage for the elective monarchy at the end--the Targaryen dynasty fails due to madness, the Baratheon dynasty fails due to incompetence, and then the restored Targaryen dynasty fails due to madness (or what is perceived as madness--a totally sane but less competent monarch could still end up in this pickle). If Jon is killed in the process of taking out Danaerys or soon after (Drogon should've done it rather than torch the Iron Throne), the nobles might choose a new dynasty completely--and if they're afraid that a too-absolutist government might threaten their privileges, they might deliberately pick a weak new ruler. In that case you could still have King Bran, or if his magical abilities are viewed as too weird or threatening, a well-meaning non-entity like Edmure Tully. Tyrion, assuming he doesn't get killed earlier (Danaerys killing him could prove--or depending on what he does "prove"--that she's gone too far) could be the architect of this plan, just like in the show.

So what do you all think? I'm not planning on writing a fan-fic, although I've sent some of my ideas to the author of the Danaerys-rules story "Break The Wheel."

Some GAME OF THRONES Fan-Fiction For Those Still Vexed About S8

As my regular readers probably know by now, I was among those people who didn't like the ending of Game of Thrones. I was so disappointed in the characterization of Danaerys Targaryen and some of the decisions she made in the next-to-last episode that I didn't even watch the series finale--and from what I read about it, the season finale trashed her character even more before engaging in even more silly storytelling decisions.

Well for those who think they can do better than the people who made the creative decisions, there's always the option of fan-fiction. In addition to Alice Shipwise's Season 8 spec scripts (written before the season premiered, so they're not fan complaints), here are some other projects that either play the what-if game or explore the canonical outcome in ways the showrunners may not have anticipated.

Break the Wheel-Danaerys orders Drogon to torch King's Landing in a fit of anger at all the catastrophes (the death of Ser Jorah, the death of Rhaegal, the death of Missandei, Varys' treachery, and Jon's rejection of her romantic/sexual overtures) she's suffered in the last few days. Drogon, however, has other ideas, much to her surprise. She decides to just roll with it, sparing King's Landing and focusing her attention only on the Red Keep.

Things are going pretty well so far, although I do have my criticisms (mostly wording issues I describe in the reviews--I don't know if English is the author's first language). However, if Danaerys still has the radically reformist (although hopefully less warmongering, imperialist, and megalomaniacal than her speech to the Dothraki and Unsullied before Jon kills her) agenda, that could lead to all sorts of drama with Westeros's remaining nobility. I messaged the writer suggesting she look into Simon de Montfort to see what this might look like in a medieval social context and the possible problems Danaerys might run into. Meanwhile, Varys has been spreading word about Jon's parentage, Sansa and Arya aren't exactly fans of the Dragon Queen, and the xenophobia indicated by Randyll and Dickon Tarly's refusal to bend the knee after the defeat at the Gold Road might have gotten beyond two cranky noblemen. Given how the story tagline suggests Danaerys will have "a reign of fire and blood," Westeros might be in for a bumpy ride.

The Raven King-This article suggests that Bran's actions in S8 make a lot more sense if he's evil. This story goes into reasons why. It's canon-compliant and it's dark.

The Last War-This is another alternate universe story, but it diverges from canon at the beginning of S7, not at any point in S8. Drawing on characters and situations from the books that weren't included in the television show (for starters, Tywin's sister Genna, who was married to a member of House Frey, looks like she's going to play a large role and she has Edmure Tully under her control to boot), it goes deeper into the politics of both Danaerys' and Cersei's political coalitions. And the House of Black and White hasn't forgotten about Arya. It looks like it might end up in the same place the TV show did, but much in a much more justified and better thought-out fashion.

Alice Shipwise's GAME OF THRONES Season Eight Spec Scripts

Once upon a time, I was a lot more interested in working in film and television than I am now and learned about something called "spec scripts." Basically if you want to get into television writing, you write scripts for shows similar to the show you'd like to write and pitch them.

Well, a television writer named Alice Shipwise wrote a bunch of spec scripts for Game of Thrones Season Eight not long after Season Seven ended. She doesn't seem to have even seen Season Eight (she explicitly asks people to avoid spoilers when discussing her episodes), so they weren't written as a critique of the canonical season. However, in light of all the criticism the season has gotten from fans (the Night King getting deal with too easily, Jaime's failed redemption, Danaerys' madness, King Bran), there seems to be a lot of interest in them.

For the record, I think if the canonical series was based on these scripts instead, it would be a much better show. Some highlights:

*Although I didn't really think anything was particularly wrong with Danaerys torching Randyll and Dickon Tarly when they wouldn't kneel to her--Ned, Robb, and Jon have all killed men for disobeying them and Jon hanged a child--killing defeated nobles instead of ransoming them, holding them hostage, or sending them to the Night's Watch (as Tyrion advised) is something that would cause political problems in a chivalric society (killing is for commoners, dontcha know), especially given how her insane and tyrannical father was particularly known for burning people. In this version it's clearer that Sam is mourning his brother Dickon more than his abusive father Randyll and the ethics of Danaerys' "Tarlyque" (I wish I'd come up with that) get discussed between Jon and Sam and Jon and Danaerys.

*Speaking of Jon, his reunion with Arya--the fellow outcast of the family--is a bit more bittersweet once he learns what kind of murder machine his tomboy kid sister has become.

*Tyrion is the delightful smart-ass he always was. His revelation to Danaerys that he knows her and Jon have become lovers (much to her discomfort) is pretty funny and I could see Peter Dinklage delivering those lines.

*Danaerys and others learning that Jon is really the son of Prince Rhaegar and Lyanna Stark--and thus has the superior legal claim--is handled much better by everybody involved.

*The Faith of the Seven isn't forgotten after the destruction of the Great Sept. Medieval Catholicism wouldn't vanish if some Roman nobles or even the Holy Roman Emperor blew up the Vatican and the Pope. Despite her iron-fisted rule over King's Landing, Cersei has some religious problems to deal with. And religion is a potent political weapon for aspiring queens too. :)

*We see Danaerys "pressing flesh" with her new Northern subjects, starting with Arya Stark and eventually including the commoners, rather than holding herself aloof. And it's actually kind of adorable. It's more in the vein of Danaerys in the earlier seasons where she mingled with the freed slaves (up to and including crowd-surfing, which for the record I thought was ridiculous) and in the books where she cares for plague victims herself despite her advisers' pleas. If Danaerys had been a bit friendlier with the Northern public, perhaps it would've helped with the girl-drama between herself and Sansa and Arya. Speaking of Arya, the scene where Jon introduces them and Arya asks if she can ride Drogon (much to Jon's embarrassment) is pretty funny. :)

*The defense of Winterfell against the White Walkers is handled much better from a tactical perspective. Seriously, as has been discussed in a thousand think-pieces, the military strategies depicted on-screen were abysmal. What Ms. Shipwise came up with instead was pretty clever. And the Night King remains a long-term threat. :)

*There's a new character named Hodorro, a Dothraki horseman who's built up as a battle buddy for Jorah Mormont. One of the "woke" criticisms of Season Eight was that the Dothraki, in addition to their getting deployed absolutely horribly at Winterfell, was that there weren't any developed Dothraki characters. Hodorro is used to show rather than tell the evacuation of the Northern villagers from the path of the Night King and shows the limitations on the Dothraki--in the open plains they're lethal but they're not good for fighting in forests. And they have no conception of snow. :)

Although this is a vast improvement over the actual Season Eight we got, not everything in here is perfect. There's more "your dad isn't who think you think" drama beyond Jon's parentage that's kind of randomly dropped in there. And the character Tristifer Botley, who in the books come off as a bit of a clingy Nice Guy (TM) but is still loyal to Asha/Yara unto oblivion (and kind of acts as her one-man brain trust), is depicted in a much darker fashion. Oh well. Nothing's perfect.

Between the fact that a lot of the actors are outraged over the fans complaining about Season Eight and the lack of available funds (personally if I were HBO I'd permit the creation of "alternate S8" if the whiny fans were willing to put their money where their mouths were and crowd-fund it), seeing this on-screen isn't going to happen. However, it's entertaining as fan-fiction and were I a TV producer, I'd definitely be giving Ms. Shipwise a call.

Better "Bittersweet" Ending(s) for GAME OF THRONES

Once upon a time noted fantasy author George R.R. Martin told fans to expect a "bittersweet" ending for A Song of Ice and Fire. He specifically said that once a quest is completed one can't expect everything to be perfect. Although Lord of the Rings and A Song of Ice and Fire are often contrasted with each other, that comment reminded me of the LOTR ending in which the hobbits return from Mordor to find Saruman had ruined the Shire and even after it's rebuilt, Frodo leaves for the Undying Lands because having taken the One Ring to Mordor and surviving a continent-spanning war in the process, this world is no longer bearable for him.

Well, now the Game of Thrones television series on HBO is over. Going in I was already extremely annoyed with how the series piled on a conga line of contrived tragedies to break Danaerys and drive her crazy, culminating with the gratuitous destruction of King's Landing even though the city had already surrendered. I was thinking they were destroying a powerful female character they'd basically set up to be the messiah for the last decade in favor of Jon "Fail Upward" Snow, (and I wasn't the only one to think that--I most definitely was not). My students' graduation was that night so I didn't see the finale, but although the recaps do describe a "bittersweet" ending, some of the stuff they describe sounds absolutely stupid.

(photo courtesy of The Hollywood Reporter)

Danaerys: I expected there to be consequences for torching King's Landing, but I didn't expect her to go even more crazy before they came. Her ordering everybody who fought for Cersei down to the common soldiers to be killed and advocating an eternal war to free all enslaved people (and for her to basically rule the entire world) is ridiculous. Her goal from the beginning is the Iron Throne--where does world domination come in? She left Slaver's Bay for her ex-boyfriend Daario to rule without any intention of coming back, even though it would have made a good logistical base or source of funds for a continued war in Westeros.

If she needs to die, there was no need for her to get progressively more of a megalomaniac to make the viewers agree this was necessary. If you wanted a sad ending that does justice to her earlier humanitarianism, have Jon find her sitting on the Iron Throne having a total guilt-driven breakdown, remorseful for the havoc she wreaked when she went psycho but unable to be trusted not to do the same thing (or worse) again if she gets stressed out enough. Jon mercy-kills her no matter how much he hates to do it for the good of everybody, which seems to be something the series finale got right. Think Carol's "look at the flowers" execution of the unstable Lizzie from The Walking Dead.

(There's actually a GOT meme based on this, although I'd have said "look at the Iron Throne, Dany.")

The series finale (and the burning of King's Landing before it) sounds like the writers were just trying to beat Danaerys' alleged insuitablity to rule into the viewers' heads, much like they had Varys crap on the idea of a dual Jon-Danaerys monarchy that would be the obvious solution to Northern separatism, Jon's superior legal claim vs. Danaerys' superior military one, etc.

Bran: Bran has demonstrated even less interest in ruling (he refuses to be Lord of Winterfell even though he's the legal heir with Robb dead) and has vastly less experience in governing than Jon. And not only is he disabled (probably bad enough in a medieval world), but he seems disabled to the point of being unable to father children. Depending on where the spine break is, paraplegia can also cost one bladder/bowel control and sexual function, although there's nothing in the books or show to indicate Bran has to wear a diaper. Given the political instability (the dynasty that united the kingdom falls, the successor dynasty implodes in less than twenty years, and there's a prolonged civil war by rival dynastic claimants afterward), I would think the lords of Westeros would want a familiar, stable system. An elective monarchy in a continent that's never had that (outside of occasionally on the Iron Islands and at least one Great Council to select among Targaryens) this isn't. And then there's his becoming increasingly weird and inhuman in the process. Jon for all my issues with him would be a more realistic in-universe choice for king.

Arya: It's been established from the beginning Arya didn't want to be "a proper lady" at all, so her turning down Gendry's marriage proposal (especially the way he worded it with "be my lady") made sense. But when did she ever show any interest or aptitude for sailing? When has "what's west of Westeros" ever been an interest of anybody since Brandon the Shipwright, who I don't think is ever mentioned in the show? And why wouldn't Yara kill her at sea for publicly threatening her like she had earlier in the episode? I would imagine she'd be something like Dune's Master of Assassins for King Bran (Six Kingdoms) or Sansa (the North).

EDIT: A friend pointed out that in an earlier season she did say that she wanted to see what was "west of Westeros." My mistake. I'm keeping this entry here to retain what I thought might've been a better course of action and to show my fallibility.

Edmure: Why is Edmure offering himself up as the new king? The books establish him as a good peacetime lord who legitimately cares for his people, but he's a poor commander and the TV show emphasizes his incompetence with that whole "ignite Hoster Tully's funeral barge with an arrow" farce. After all the stuff that's happened to him, I could easily imagine that he knows this. And given his continued loyalty to his Frey wife (this is more in the books than in the show), he's going to have enough problems with the Riverlands. Is this just an excuse to have Sansa publicly humiliate him for a laugh?

Drogon: He didn't kill Jon why? Hell making Bran king would make sense if that happened.

However, it's easy to complain. Here's how I would have handled the last couple episodes to provide a "bittersweet" ending that's much less ridiculous.

*Make it more obvious that Cersei's propaganda campaign against Danaerys as a foreign invader has taken much deeper root among the elites and the common people. We see that in Season 7 with Randyll and Dickon Tarly, but that's just two nobles. If Cersei's nonsense had spread more widely, the armies moving south could find that the people simply do not trust Danaerys. If there are any incidents where the Dothraki rape and pillage, that would make things worse. These would be against Danaerys' orders, but that doesn't really matter where PR is concerned.

The fact that most people view the White Walkers as "grumpkins and snarks" means the fact that Danaerys' dragons saved Westeros from the Night King doesn't cut any ice (hee hee)--they think it's all made up. Varys sees this and between the likelihood the leader of the coalition would not be able to rule an increasingly xenophobic land and his own doubts about Danaerys' sanity (maybe we still get a "destiny" rant from her when he points out the PR problem she's having) starts spreading word around about Jon. Between that and a more obvious poisoning attempt, Varys gets executed in a situation that some viewers might think is a sign Danaerys is turning into her father.

*When Danaerys attacks King's Landing (provoked like in the show by Missandei's gratuitous murder), make the destruction of the city an accident. The bells are ringing and the Lannister main army is routing, but there might still be scorpion fire from the Red Keep from Cersei's die-hards. Danaerys attacks the Red Keep and accidentally triggers her father's wildfire stashes, utterly destroying the city to her shock and horror.

*Danaerys returns to her allies and they discuss that as word of this spreads, it will confirm forever in the eyes of both the elite and commons that Danaerys is the new "Mad Queen" and the rest of the continent will rise up against them. Danaerys could rule by terror via the Unsullied, the Dothraki, and Drogon, but that would require untold cruelty that would be too much for her and wouldn't really work in the long run. The Dornish held off the Targaryens via guerrilla warfare and there's always poison or other forms of assassination. Danaerys is stubborn (giving the viewers more worry that she actually IS the Mad Queen) but the guilt from the obliteration of King's Landing finally pushes her to agree to make Jon the new Targaryen king (even though he emphasizes he DOES NOT WANT IT) and return to Meereen with her loyalists. Danaerys has saved the kingdom from the White Walkers and the narcissistic tyrant Cersei, but she's lost the throne due to Cersei's dishonesty and the accidental destruction of the city confirming the "truth" of this in the minds of ignorant people.

So Jon is left mopier than usual on an Iron Throne he doesn't want and Danaerys retreats once more into exile. Perhaps someday there could be dynastic unification of the "Bay of Dragons" and Westeros with a marriage of Jon and Danaerys' children (or Jon and his heirs get the chunk of Essos Danaerys ruled by default if Danaerys really can't have children), but strongly imply this isn't likely to happen. Jon and Danaerys will have to marry other people, no matter their love for one another, for political reasons and to reduce the likelihood of future Targaryen insanity among their descendants. Very sad for everybody, although I could easily imagine Daario being happy to see her again.

*Alternatively, the PR situation hasn't gotten that bad (enough of the allies' leadership and common soldiers recognize the wildfire for what it is), but between the still severe backlash and Northern separatism epitomized by Sansa and all those skeptical peasants, it's still politically impossible for Danaerys to rule the Seven Kingdoms despite her military superiority. Jon resumes his rule from Winterfell, presumably with a dynastic marriage of his own (to someone from the North or perhaps the Vale), while Danaerys marries that new prince of Dorne (I'm guessing some distant member of House Martell since Doran and his son are dead) to stabilize her rule in the south and replaces the obliterated elites of the Reach and elsewhere with sellswords like Bronn, common soldiers who've fought well enough to be knighted, Dothraki (if they can adapt or if there's enough wasted land that can be left as pasture for their nomadic lifestyle), Northerners seeking better opportunities, etc. There're plans to eventually have Jon's children (and hers if she ever has them) marry to reunite the realm much like how Dorne joined the Seven Kingdoms through marriage, but imply with the Northern proto-nationalism that this isn't going to happen even though it worked before by making the ruler of Dorne a prince in his (or her) own right.

*Bran and Arya go with Jon, with Bran as the near-omniscient Master of Whispers and Arya as his enforcer. If Jon becomes the new king of Westeros, the Northern separatists are bought off with Sansa being elevated to Princess of Winterfell in the Dornish fashion. Tyrion, recognizing his multitude of mistakes as Danaerys' Hand, returns to Casterly Rock and Davos becomes Jon's new Hand either in the North or in King's Landing. If Danaerys stays in the south, perhaps Edmure Tully is brought in to become her peacetime Hand to buy off the Riverlands. There'd be an understanding that Grey Worm would have the military responsibilities so Edmure can focus on making a better life for the regular people, as one would think Danaerys based on her characterization early in the show would like.

*Ghost shows up, either having followed Jon south the whole time (Nymeria seemed to be doing pretty well in the Riverlands) or waiting for Jon in Winterfell when he returns. And he gets his pets. :)

What do you all think? This is a "bittersweet" ending that makes Jon and Danaerys suffer both politically and personally despite their victory, but at the same time it avoids the showrunners' character assassination (or rushed "character development" if you wish to be charitable) of Danaerys, along with the other bizarre character choices I listed above. In fact, it reminds me a lot of the eventual fate of the Federated Commonwealth from BattleTech--the best hope for human unification under rulers who respect human rights is thwarted by the villains' treachery and heroes' bad decisions even if said villains are ultimately beaten.

If anybody wants to do fan-fiction based on this premise, go ahead. I've already seen post-"Bells" fan-fic out there and this would certainly be better than petitioning HBO to re-do the final season.

My Thoughts on GAME OF THRONES Season 7 Episode 2: "Stormborn"

Last night I watched "Stormborn," the second episode of the seventh season of HBO's fantasy series Game of Thrones. In this one, there's a lot going on, including Danaerys' invasion of the Seven Kingdoms running into a major snag.

The Good

*Sam's surgery on Ser Jorah to cure his greyscale was extremely painful to watch, which was kind of the point. And the way they cut from Sam's knife penetrating Jorah's damaged skin to Arya cutting into a pie was masterful--if gross--in the same way they cut from Sam emptying bedpans to Sam serving slops in the Citadel cafeteria.

*I was very glad to see Arya going home instead of continuing her likely suicidal attempt to take out Cersei. Seriously, the group I watch the show with was straight-up cheering when, upon learning her brother (well, cousin, but she doesn't know that) Jon was ruling the North, she turned around.

*Although Jon is going about it in a clumsy way (no thanks to Sansa), he shows he has the best interests of the North at heart. He really should send Ser Davos or even Sansa herself to Dragonstone to negotiate with Danaerys, at least at first. Hopefully Littlefinger won't take advantage of his absence to push Sansa into doing something stupid and dangerous--it would suck massively if Jon had to personally execute (as far as he knows) his own sister for treason Ned Stark style.

*There are lots of good speeches here--Varys stands up to Danaerys and talks about how he's loyal to the people who'll prosper with good leadership and suffer under bad, Cersei rallying Westerosi lords against Danaerys' army of violent foreigners, and Jaime's attempt to woo Randyll Tarly and overcome his oaths to House Tyrell.

*I liked the scene between Jon Snow and Littlefinger in the crypt, even though I vocally referred to Littlefinger as an "oily prick" while it was actually in progress. Littlefinger mixes lies with truths as usual--Jon does owe him a lot for saving his behind in the Battle of the Bastards, but he had a lot more than just "differences" with Ned Stark and it wasn't very smart of him to reveal that he loved Sansa just like he loved her mother. Seriously, he earned that Big Brother Beatdown there. And the sheer gall of him coming to "pay respects" to Ned Stark's grave when it was him who betrayed him to his death in the first place. DIE! DIE!

*And Euron Greyjoy proves he can walk the walk, not just talk the talk. He takes Yara's fleet (or at least the core of it) by surprise in a pyromaniac orgy of slaughter, he's the first man aboard Yara's flagship riding down a skull-headed gangplank cackling with glee, and by the end of it, he takes multiple stab wounds and multiple blows from a whip from the Sand Snakes, and he still triumphs. Hot damn. That battle sequence was excellent and Euron is my favorite bad guy now. Many of the Game of Thrones villains are just gross (Ramsay, Joffrey), but Euron is just crazy awesome.

The Bad

*No mask for Sam when he's doing a highly risky--to him-- operation on Ser Jorah? Given how he knows from the Archmaester that the man who cured two advanced cases of greyscale died of the disease himself, I'm surprised he didn't wear a mask, whatever equivalent to goggles exist, etc.

*I thought the scene with Grey Worm and Missendei went on for too long. Yes, it's good to know even someone as damaged as Grey Worm can still love (and we know from an earlier season that the Unsullied, despite their physical incapacity, still desire intimacy) and Grey Worm's speech was good, but it seemed like the show's typical gratuitousness. I would have preferred a shorter scene and more time devoted to the Ironborn-on-Ironborn slugfest.

*Sansa needs to stop publicly undermining Jon and arguing with all his decisions. One of my friends said she wanted to punch Sansa through the TV screen. Seriously, they just talked about this last week, and Sansa is a lot more mentally agile and better at playing the game than she was in the earlier seasons.

*When Ellaria and Yara are talking about what Yara would do as queen of the Iron Islands, what they hell does she mean that Theon would serve as her "protector"? As we see later in the episode, Theon isn't very good at "protecting" anybody right now, or at least not protecting people from those bigger and more aggressive than he is. Yara knows how broken Theon is from the failed attack on the Dreadfort. Of course, perhaps this was wishful thinking on her part.

*How did Euron take Yara's flagship by surprise? It's at the heart of a much larger fleet. If he were somehow able to sneak his own ships into the core of Yara's armada, smash up the flagship and its immediate bodyguard, and then flee, leaving most of Yara's fleet actually intact that'd be one thing. But if he attacked at the edges and pushed inward destroying everything in his path, Yara and friends would have a lot more warning rather than being taken by surprise.

*I would have prolonged Theon's agony before he flees. He's shown no problems killing lots of Euron's Ironborn earlier in the episode, which shows he's got a lot of his mojo back. Maybe he advances more boldly on Euron, but slowly breaks back down before Euron's taunting and seeing Euron's people killing everybody around him? Intercut it with some Ramsay flashbacks and it'd be much better.

*Danaerys' strategy to conquer Westeros without alienating the people and leadership by using foreigners to attack the capital and without gratuitously destroying King's Landing with her dragons leaves out just what she would use her dragons for. They're war-winners when used aggressively--see the Field of Fire, the Battle of the Last Storm, and the burning of Harrenhal from Aegon's conquest--and they would allow her coalition to win with far fewer losses.

More Thoughts

*I wonder if they're setting up Sam to get greyscale with the Archmaester's warning and his insufficient precautions.

*The last time we saw Littlefinger getting choked by a Stark it was Ned in King's Landing, and it didn't end well for Ned. And we see Littlefinger rubbing his neck and watching Sansa ominously after emerging from the crypts beneath Winterfell. Jon better watch his back, because the little man is going to try something evil no doubt.

*With the Targaryen-loyalist faction of the Ironborn gutted and the current Dornish leadership captive (and possibly much of the Dornish army destroyed in transports), Danaerys might definitely need to "be a dragon" now, and with Qyburn building a huge ballista (that, per the books, is capable of killing a dragon) and having most of Cersei's wildfire stash besides, that could end badly for her. Hopefully she'll unleash the dragons on Casterly Rock in the next episode, which, incidentally, would give Qyburn more time to build up the capital's anti-dragon defenses.

*Theon is explicitly still alive at the end of the episode, although the sharks will likely be attracted by all the dead and wounded in the water. Unless some remnant of the Targaryen Ironborn fleet is there to pick him up, he looks like he's in trouble. On the other hand, the fact he's explicitly left alive onscreen means that this isn't the last we've seen of him. Let's hope Euron went with a "sneak in, burn, and sneak out" strategy that left much of Yara's fleet intact, for his sake at least.

*Ellaria Sand and one of her daughters are now prisoners of Cersei Lannister, whose innocent daughter they'd treacherously murdered. I wouldn't expect them to live very long, although given how in the books Qyburn seems to enjoy experimenting on women, there might be something much worse for them in store than Cersei simply chopping off both their heads.

(Yara's in a tight spot too, but Euron might want to pimp her out to one of his political allies for Greyjoy dynastic reasons.)

As always, looking forward to next week.

My Thoughts on "Game of Thrones" S7 Episode 1: "Dragonstone"

Just got back from watching the first episode of Game of Thrones Season 7, "Dragonstone." Here are some thoughts. Beware, here there be lots of spoilers...

This episode was really funny, both things that are obviously intended to be comic and things that really aren't. For example, the scene at the beginning where Arya Stark disguises herself as Walder Frey and poisons all of the male Freys (or at least the ones involved in the Red Wedding) was funny to me. It's not because watching people getting poisoned is innately funny, but because it's so masterfully done (including how Arya-as-Walder avoids drinking the poisoned wine and keeps "his"wife from doing so) and because Arya-as-Walder's speech is so cutting.

In terms of things that actually are supposed to be funny, Euron Greyjoy rocked the house this episode. I particularly liked his comment on how he's got "one thousand ships and two good hands," which is obviously a jab at Jaime Lannister. I also liked how Jaime reacted to it, as well as his less-than-flattering assessment of the Ironborn in general.

In case you're wondering what's going on, Euron arrives at King's Landing with the Iron Fleet to offer himself as a husband to Cersei Lannister, who has at this point usurped the Iron Throne but in the process has made a lot of enemies. Cersei displays what could be common sense in rejecting Euron (a known backstabber), at least until he can prove himself. But that could also be unnecessary arrogance, since the Iron Throne is in such a perilous state that something as drastic as a royal marriage might be necessary to get the Ironborn back on board. One wonders if there are any suitable women to push Jaime on? Oleanna Tyrell is too old and based on the events of the last season, any member of the Sand Snake junta in Dorne is out of the question.

And of course we see Tormund Giantsbane lusting after Brienne of Tarth again. That's pretty funny, especially his comments to Podrick Payne.

Moving on from the comedy, a lot of really important stuff story-wise happens in this episode. At long last, Danaerys returns to Westeros, taking control of Stannis's former stronghold of Dragonstone and dramatically touching the ground of her long-lost homeland. The "next week on Game of Thrones" preview shows all of Danaerys' allies gathering around Aegon's table and Yara Greyjoy offering to attack King's Landing right away, so that plot looks to be moving at a rapid clip.

I did like seeing some of the drama between Jon and Sansa. Sansa has clearly learned how to play the game and be ruthless as needed from Cersei and Littlefinger. She points out that Ned and Robb made some bad decisions and paid for it with their lives. However, publicly arguing with her brother is not the way to get what she wants. As Jon points out to him, that undermines his authority as King in the North, and he can't have that. And Littlefinger is clearly trying to manipulate Sansa into doing something.

(With Bran back in the game, we have a possible succession issue in Winterfell--Jon is a blooded warrior but he's a bastard, Sansa is the oldest remaining true-born child but she's a girl, and Bran is the oldest remaining true-born son but he's disabled. Depending on whether the break in his spine is he might not be able to father children, and he certainly can't lead men in battle.)

It was also interesting to see the Lannister soldiers who are friendly to Arya, one of whom was singer Ed Sheeran. I honestly thought they had bad intentions at first, with the way they were trying to offer her food and wine, but it seems they were honestly trying to be friendly. Maybe all the previous criticism about the violence toward women on the show has been taken to heart? Or perhaps the producers were making the point, like the books do, that when the nobles play their games of thrones, it's the commoners who suffer. None of those men seem like bad guys at all, but if Cersei and Jon go to war, Arya's people will kill them or they'll kill Arya's people. All very sad.

Although the episode was overall pretty good, I didn't like what I called the "extended poo montage," much to my friends' amusement. They could have made the point that Sam's life as a Citadel novice sucks in half the time, freeing up a few minutes to elaborate on some of the other subplots.

Also, what about Edmure Tully? Is Arya aware he's a captive in the Twins? It could be that she is and desire for revenge has consumed her to the point she doesn't care about her uncle. With most if not all of the male Freys dead, that might leave Edmure in an unexpectedly strong position to reacquire the Riverlands, assuming they don't just forget about him in the dungeon.

Still, definitely looking forward to next week.

Another ASOIAF AU Fan-Fic: Were We Different Men

I recently returned to the alternate-history discussion forum after months of self-ban to avoid distractions from my new career and my writing projects. Since I want to finish Little People, Big Guns (finish, revise/edit, and submit to an interested publisher) by the end of the summer, I'm self-banned again, but for awhile I was reading, commenting, and making sure my newsletter sign-up link is in my post signature.

(Seriously, that's a good idea if you're a writer.)

One thing I found (and spent most of a day reading) is a story called "Were We Different Men." I posted the fanfiction.net link so you can read it without having to join the site. It diverges from the canon timeline during the execution of Lord Rickard Stark, father of Brandon Stark (who in canon died alongside his father), Ned Stark (the protagonist of the first book), Lyanna Stark (who was abducted or eloped with Prince Rhaegar Targaryen), and Benjen Stark.

In the books Rickard demanded trial by combat and Aerys the Mad King decreed that fire would be the champion of House Targaryen. So Rickard was hung from the ceiling in his armor over a fire that roasted him alive. Brandon was put in a noose with a sword just out of reach and strangled himself trying to rescue his father. In this story, the noose breaks when Brandon is near-death from strangulation. He's got a hellacious scar around his neck and his voice is damaged, but he lives. Aerys forces him to watch his father roast alive and then dumps him in the Black Cells--where he's rescued by Ser Barristan Selmy, the eunuch Varys, and young Jaime Lannister, who then flee the capital.

As a result, Tywin Lannister is not restrained by having his eldest (and favored) son Jaime as Aerys' de facto hostage and joins Robert's Rebellion immediately. The Reach is forced to participate more actively (as opposed to just sitting there besieging Stannis in Storm's End) and although Robert's Rebellion is shorter, it is bloodier.

Here are some highlights of the story:

*Quellon Greyjoy, who sought to integrate the Iron Islands into the wider Westerosi world and rejected "the Old Way," lives much longer than in canon. This has some interesting consequences when some of his ideas lead to Westeros trying to compete with the Iron Bank and other banking institutions in the Free Cities and to suppress piracy and slaving in the Stepstones...

*Lysa ends up much better off than her resented elder sister Catelyn (who was slated to marry Brandon before his canonical death) in the marriage department. This is a positive situation for Lysa, not a negative one for Catelyn--Brandon's experience in King's Landing sours him on the out of control behavior that led to him getting the reputation as "the wild wolf." We have a happier and saner Lysa this time around.

*Barbrey Dustin has a happier life than in canon.

*Robert is a much, much better king than the lazy whoremonger he was in canon. Not going to go into detail for spoiler reasons, but he gets a much more intimate encounter with how unbelievably awful Aerys is and vows to do better.

*Cersei Lannister gets religion and becomes a much, much, MUCH better person than she was in canon too.

Of course, it wouldn't be George RR Martin if things didn't go wrong. The "interesting consequences" are near-apocalyptic in scope for Westeros and the Others are stirring again. The story is so well-regarded it even has a TVTropes page, which you can see here.

A Female Doctor And Bringing Back Romana

I'm not the biggest Doctor Who fan who has ever walked the Earth, but I am tapped into a lot science fiction, fantasy, and horror circles online and I've seen a push from some quarters suggesting the next Doctor be female. Here's one, which complains that Peter Capaldi is "another white guy." Here's another article I found recently that suggested a list of actresses to play a female Doctor. 

As Ms. Reese points out in the first article, there's some canonical material that suggests it's possible. Matt Smith initially thinks he's female and then finds an Adam's apple, there are older references to Time Lords regenerating as female despite having been male, etc. The Washington Post article cites several of them, one of which dates back to 1980 when present-day concerns about diversity, political correctness, etc. were in their infancy. There's apparently a female incarnation of The Master nicknamed "Missy." If the Master, a Time Lord, can change his sex/gender, surely the Doctor could as well.

I can understand the desire of many people to have a female Doctor. If you want to portray more equitable gender relations, having an older male Doctor with a succession of younger and often female companions isn't really helpful. The "Uncomfortable Plot Summaries" website refers to the Doctor as an elderly man who serially kidnaps young women. One of the Christopher Eccleston episodes even hilariously lampshades this by depicting the Doctor interrogated by police after his companion Rose Tyler is reported missing. Ms. Reese's article complains that many female companions are lovestruck damsels-in-distress and not impressive characters willing to call the Doctor out on his crap. Female viewers are likely rather sick of seeing such characters.

However, the presence of Time Lords and Time Ladies implies that the Time Lords are male and female, like humans. The cross-gender regenerations referenced above must be fairly rare occurrences--I've never heard the Time Lords referenced as being by nature hermaphrodites, non-binary genders, etc. that, if these things were fairly common occurrence, would make them. Furthermore, the Helen Mirren comment about a gay black female Doctor comes off as trying too hard.

That said, there is a way to avoid indulging in excessive PC-dom (i.e. the "trying too hard" bit I referenced above) while increasing female representation, especially in more powerful roles. After all, from a perspective of pure self-interest alone, appealing to the growing non-white non-male fandom means more popularity and more cash. My proposal would also shake things up less, avoiding aggravating the old-fashioned fans too.

That way is named "Time Lady Romana." I only watched a little of the pre-Eccleston Dr. Who programs (i.e. I might've seen a couple minutes on TV here and there), but I remember reading about a character named Romana who was a Time Lady, as opposed to a Time Lord. As a Time Lord herself she is a female character who is the Doctor's equal (unlike his companions, or at least many of them) and in the older material, rose to a very powerful position in the government on Gallifrey. Like the Master, she could be an isolated survivor of the destruction of Gallifrey or have something to do with what happened in that episode where a bunch of older Doctors came back and the planet was put in stasis or something rather than getting blown up by the Daleks. Also like the Master (and the Daleks, the Cybermen, etc), she'd be a nod to the older series, much like how old Expanded Universe stuff has been filtering its way into the new Star Wars canon.

Now, far be it from me to let you guys think I'm a white male fan insensitive to the concerns of others. :) On the matter of the role of the Doctor himself, keeping him male doesn't mean he has to be "another white guy." He could easily be played by a Caribbean or South Asian (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh) actor. Here's a bunch of British actors of South Asian background, including Naveen Andrews, who was a major character on Lost and has won or been nominated for many awards. The Afro-Caribbean community in Britain has got Mickey and I think there've been a couple black female companions too; have the South Asians got anybody?

(I'd wished they'd cast Hrithik Roshan as Khan Noonien Singh in Star Trek Into Darkness and he's the physical model for the young Great Khan in the back-story of my novel The Cybele Incident. Could a Bollywood actor be the Doctor?)

Or if that's too radical, another idea is a Middle Eastern type who isn't outright non-white but isn't unarguably Caucasian either. Owing to recent events in Game of Thrones, Alexander Siddig has become available. :) He's originally from Sudan and is of Muslim background even if there's nothing in the Wikipedia article that indicates he's a practicing Muslim. I'm aware of other Middle Eastern actors, but they're all Americans.

"Everybody Is The Hero of Their Own Story" -- STAR WARS and Writing Villains

On my Twitter feed this morning, I found this article in which Adam Driver and J.J. Abrams discuss the villain Kylo Ren, whom Driver plays in the upcoming science-fiction (science fantasy?) film Star Wars: The Force Awakens. The first article links to this article here in Empire, which goes into more detail. The gist of it is that according to Abrams, both devotees of the Light Side and the Dark Side are the heroes of their own story, while according to Driver, Ren is more a religious zealot who's doing what he thinks is right rather than someone who is truly evil by nature.

(I'm guessing by "evil" he would mean selfish and malicious. Someone can have the best of intentions, can honestly think they're doing the right thing, and still be evil. I was researching an alternate-history project in high school and college and, while reading about the Russian Civil War, learned about Cheka founder Felix Dzerzhinsky. According to future Polish leader Józef Piłsudski, who went to school with him, Dzerzhinsky "did not know how to lie," another source described him as being strict toward himself as well as others, and the quotes I found indicated he was wracked by guilt about the horrors he oversaw as the Bolsheviks' hatchet-man.)

A long time ago I discovered the quote that "everybody is the hero of their own story." I have taken pains to apply the principle when I write villains, and I cited it before in my blog post about Roose Bolton from the fantasy novel series A Song of Ice and Fire and its HBO adaptation A Game of Thrones. Dzerzhinsky thought he was building a utopia and that would justify breaking a few (or many) eggs along the way, while Roose Bolton could justify his treachery against Robb Stark by claiming it in the best interest of the North and the realm as a whole that the Lannisters win as quickly and bloodlessly as possible. The warlord Grendel of my Wastelands series wants safety, security, and power (to better ensure the first two) for his family and friends--which he seeks through imperialism and aggressive warfare. Meanwhile, the cult leader Phil from my Lovecraftian novel The Thing in the Woods wants to protect the town of Edington from corrupting outside influences--which he does by kidnapping people he doesn't like and feeding them to an alien monster.

And now we get back to Star Wars. One of the most interesting blog posts I've ever found was called "The Tao of Sith" and was posted on a blog that's essentially the events of The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi from the point of view of Darth Vader, Dark Lord of the Sith and apprentice to the Emperor Palpatine.

(The post initially went to some "Star Wars Webring" site, but I clicked on it again and it went to the right place, so have faith.)

The gist of it is that Vader believes the Sith were justified in their various misdeeds and creating the Empire because galactic civilization was in danger of collapse. Furthermore, the Jedi were neglecting their responsibilities and denying their emotions in favor of idle contemplation except in a few circumstances ("trivia that offends their effete sensibilities"), despite allegedly knowing that "an age of barbarism" was nigh. The Sith, in contrast, embrace life, embrace emotions, and embrace the actions necessary to save civilization.

(Given how the prequel-era Jedi demanded their adherents forsake emotional attachments, relationships, etc. a lot of Vader's comments ring true.)

Vader as depicted in the blog post is NOT a simple monster using politics as a cover to indulge his appetite for sadism, power and control, etc. My article on how fictional villains should not be sociopaths acknowledges such people exist, but they don't make for interesting bad guys (or girls). So if you're writing a villain, try to see things from their point of view. What is their story, and why are they the hero in it? Not only will you have a much better-developed villain, but you might also have a much varied and "grayer" world if it turns out the villain has some good points.