Yes, this has been noted a lot in the fandom who bother to study Nettles and the possibility that she's Daemon's bio bastard daughter from his stint at the Stepstones. If she is, GRRM really did another thing right there, the continuity goes crazy AND it is like a clue towards a self-affirmation of Nettles def being his bio daughter.

I like it, it's both pretty "real" & sets us up for later Targs without losing this impression of whimsy. That's just how nature be sometimes, and it's still a wonder.

So I didn't watch the episode and have gotten wind that Hugh is Saera's son in HotD but that he doesn't describe her as the very successful & well known brothel owner and proprietor that she canonically was. Which is weird bc even if he left before she really took off, there's no other indication in HotD thus far that she is still one of many, more vulnerable brothel sex workers of Planetos who must give up a portion of their wages according to the owner's style or will. Hugh's knowledge of Saera is the only knowledge thus far for the locals and non bk readers, so the first "public" perception & understanding of Saera is through this man "ashamed" to have been her son he seemingly never came to terms with. And her being a SW appears as if it is a leading reason (aside from some others not reveled) why he left Volantis for KL.

She exists to characterize Hugh and it's done with focus on her sexual "deviance" in like with Alyssa's being used in a deviant sexual dream forced on Daemon. It's not her being used to characterize Hugh that bothers me but their way of doing it is to leave it as sexual shame of female sexuality through the stigma of sex work when there was much more to Saera. Similar to how there were more & better storylines from Alyssa to use for Daemon's "redemption" arc.

Yes, I've seen the tweets and comments about the karma of Saera's son being the one to bond with Jahaerys' dragon. How this reconnects the two through a bastard (a "result" of Saera not acting as a "proper", sexually limited and "chaste" woman-girl) as well as adds an interesting layer to Hugh's eventual betrayal (as one of Jaehaerys' chief anxieties and issues against Saera was the distribution and availability of dragons--in her escape from his forcing her into septahood, she tried to get to Balerion it is said and he saw this as her "stealing"). And that anxiety has been evident in F&B since Elissa Farman stealing what would become Dany's 3 dragon eggs. His fear being that there would be new dragonlords popping up that not only would/could endanger the world (he specifically said they didn't need another Old Valyria) but would rival the Targaryens and his own authority/grasp on power. These are all actually very good points, and yeah, this is one example of HotD's better writing and storytelling.

However, going back to Hugh saying Saera was just like "regular" sex workers who have to answer to higher authorities and were more vulnerable to many sorts of parties (clients, abusive and greedy brothel managers & owners, other citizens/subjects bc of the stigma against SW, etc.) -> again, Saera eventually became a brothel owner and very well respected/known. With seemingly a lot of influence in Essos as well as a great name in Westeros even infamously--she wasn't a nobody anywhere, is what I ]'m saying and HotD makes it seem as if she kinda is when she's filtered through only her ashamed son as being like less autonomous-authoritative sex workers. It doesn't matter that she was at one point that and she "spoiled" herself (which no, she didn't); even she was asked atp whether she'd take the throne or ascend, to which she declined AND I speak to how HotD is allergic to female authority figures--which even if she had more power in Essos, she's still a figure of authority nonetheless--acting like authority figures without self-effacing themselves (Rhaenyra) or being totally un-self aware and insufferable (Alicent) to make them a false idea of "decent".

So unless the show will give us some sort of context of smallfolk not knowing of her life aside from "she disappeared" or that her later life was only recorded and disseminated in books they don't have access to thus Hugh never found out what was up w/her later life, it's very easy to make as if either she was always a "lower" SW OR Hugh simply decided that it didn't matter what she was other than she was a SW. Which would tell us a lot about his character, his values, clue us in one the trajectory of his story in a curiosity-peaked sort of way & thus add some nuance both to him and to her. And she had other sons who showed up to the GC of 101 [look back to 1x01, where they are tallying up votes for the next ruler b/t Rhaenys and Viserys]...

Wouldn't news of these sons spread throughout KL, so how could Hugh not know of these sons who quite obviously brought so much evidence of their wealth that could very well have at first come from their shared mother? Or do these sons just not exist in the HotD universe? Without these questions answered, it seems they are just doing themselves a disservice when they have the opportunityt to make their world more "believeable" and "lived-in". Like it'd breathe so much more life than a mere mention of Saera's later life, but even the mere mention from any more unbiased source would add a regard toward the lore than currently.

Again, again, again, he is thus far the only source the show gives us as to her fate.

If it turns out that she never managed to be an owner and proprietor in the HotD universe, then this is pretty reductive just as how they portrayed Alyssa to be.

Alyssa was reduced through sex/a sexual depiction/interaction into being a device for Daemon's arc of self development when they had him eat her out in a dream, and that could have been literally anything else: Alyssa taking him out on his first ever dragon ride as an infant; him watching her die slowly from childbirth but still interacting; her at the training yard and trying to get her brother/his father's attentions as a child; her dumping the wind on their brother Vaegon's head as a child when he denigrated Daella's intelligence [Daella, the grandmother of Rhaenyra, which thus could have brought another layer or reminder of his and Rhaenyra's need for unity and their already-there connection, how he needs to step up more for her and in a less "oppressive" way since the writers want to claim being more "feminist" even though I still think Daemon's entire Harrenhal arc is an unfair and illogical illustration of him and his capabilities/role in Rhaenyra's life/claim]; etc.

This was local's first intro into her & any connections she has to any--yes, Daemon esp--living or recent Targ they know of. And she is made into a participant of incest the Targs do not practice to show to Daemon he's being way too self absorbed looking for any sort of family who believes in him instead of reigning in his most dramatic urges? Once again, why is it okay for Alyssa to be in that compromising position if she has to be a device for this specific arc? You can't express anything that concerns family, Targs, and women without it sexually objectifying or inflicting worse or noncanonical violence against women?! Is this not what happened with the Alicent-Larys foot scene & making Alicent Viserys' rape victim? Dameon killing Rhea when he categorically DIDN't in canon?

With Saera, yes, you can argue they didn't have time to flesh her out and thus opted for a quick confirmation of her being Hugh's mother...the execution of the news leaves much to be desired.

The framing of the news and how it defines later possible depictions...bc you know that if she is brought up or described later, HotD fans are going to bring up HotD to try to "explain" her. Even her bk character. And--once more, IF HotD doesn't elaborate and use her bk!characterization--which is highly unlikely as she's served her purpose & this show is hefty with the male gaze--HUGH's either uninformed or outright reductive outlook will be the prime/only source for her life and how she fared outside of Jaehaerys' and Westerosi sexism's influence.

Instead of giving us three separate scenes of Alicent's "psychological journey" that really just went back to square one (I do watch the trailers for the episodes) as:

Why are we focusing so much on Hugh's arc when he was a rapist and in the show also reduces his own mother?

This is all IF they don't at least also mention that she became a renowned proprietor. Just bc one "sold" their body to survive and continued to make money off of it, doesn't mean that there is significance in how she managed to survive and thrive apart from the desires of the social paradigms she was born into. Or that SW defines the entire worth of a human being.

I wrote on Twitter this abt Daemon and Alyssa of S2 Epi5, btw...

LINK

LINK

LINK

So yes I know what the writers were going for. I still criticize it.

On the one hand, people say Daemon's desire is manifested in this dream, the desire for a family member to believe in him...meanwhile, the only female Targs he knew are Alysanne, Alyssa, Rhaenys, Baela, Rhaena, and Rhaenyra. Of the options he could be having sex with in a dream he is clearly having fun with AND with this woman not looking like any of the women he knows...isn't it so weird that Daemon goes to town on a woman he supposedly has never seen before? Or is it that people brush it off as him fucking a random Valyrian look-alike sex worker?

Either way, another contradiction comes up: Daemon's enthusiasm & his seeming disgust in finding out it was Alyssa all along vs people saying that all of the dream (plus Daemon's own enthusiasm) was Alys' magic's fault, not his own.

Because Alyssa is only there to further Daemon's "toxic man must be fixed uo for our morally pure female protagonist" arc....even though Daemon canonically both in show and book had "settled" down enough to prove a reliable supporter of Rhaenyra long before the war.

Like I said in this post, Alyssa is a tool for a man's development similar to how rape in many male-centered stories are there to just signal the man or men are good or bad. Such female devices are reduced, thus there's more likeihood they will not be represented as themselves and that can often include down to their very appearance. Because even if you try to argue Daemon was too young to know what she looked like, that is even highly unlikely. Even without portraits and paintings of Targ family members, his father, Baelon, would eventually tell him. His grandmother would eventually tell him. His uncle Aemon or aunt Jocelyn Baratheon could tell him. He could hear of her appearance from random people growing up as he lived in the Keep whenever they talked of her at some point bec she was so singular in appearance that people would likely always include her heterochromia if not her broken nose and hair color--anyone could have dirty blonde hair and even Alysanne didn't have Valyrian pale hair/gold-silver hair and anyone could have a broken nose...but heterochromia? Nah. Alyssa's eyes could be described as some working servants as even "demonic" or just a way to "show" how ugly she could have been perceived to be. Point is, all these features, and esp her eyes coupled with her nonconforming "unfeminine" behavior--all of them together really set her apart...so much that Daemon would INEVITABLY have known what she looked like as he grew older.

Because she'd just be so talked about. again, even IF you argued there were not portraits of her, which I think is very unlikely.

And finally, there is the possibility of Daemon having seen as his mother suffered for months after her labors with Aegon and had that image imprinted on his 3/4 yr old mind forever.

But the writers don't take any of this into account bc their aim was not to humanize a character but to use her to further their faux male-improvement plot. It's also possible that they simply don't remember Alyssa when they read F&B or they simply didn't care to internalize Jaehaerys' years to separate that from the Dance's unique sort of "unreliability".

BTW, I am very aware that the writers wanted it as Daemon seeking out pure faith in him from someone in his family...but this kinda contradicts the claim of him not being responsible for the dream's contents bc Alys Rivers makes him dream it. Aside form how the dream male gazes Alyssa when she could have had other depictions for their Daemon-at-Harrenhal-for-self-discovery arc.

I did not watch S2 E3 and I shan't, so I do not know what exactly Ulf says, but I'm inclined to think that he says whatever he says so that either he can just feel bigger & get some chance of respect/care about his life from people around him than his measly life (sometimes people be stupid, and his book self was certainly that; the drinking habit would worsen his tongue and loose faculties) OR/AND he is aware of the idea of dragons only being able to bond with those descended from Valyrians/Targs.

And it is a society-held belief that Targs exclusively can ride dragons through their blood. Has been for years before Rhaenrya was even born. If Ulf knows he had a Targ parent, he can just, yes, more material to believe he could ride a dragon.

@deus-sema

Reminds me--and it is definitely connected to & fueled by the same principle of male centeredness--when SA and rape against women is used more to define a male character than to elucidate anyone on why men rape in fiction. It's either to signify a man who rescues said woman as "good"; the man who does it as "bad". And that's it. How does the woman feel and develop into the future with this incident, how does the community deal or not deal with the event and not just the rapist/would be rapist, what does anyone do to try to prevent it, etc., nothing.

Which underplays rape and gender violence as "a thing that happens" as if innate to human nature and not malleable behavior for the sake of creating character for males.

In a recent reaction post to Epi 5, I said that the writers trying to make their version of Rhaenyra seem suppressed by her own council by making the "monarchs can't go into battle" thing an excuse to not deal with a woman make war instead of a pretty valid reason that had real life male monarchs not actually go to war themselves MOST of the time (the one who is meant to be the opposite of the fiery and proud Rhaenyra GRRM described but also a Rhaenyra who is trying her damdnest to be taking seriously or approved by the men around her as if that was who bk!rhaenyra was).

@thevelaryons said this in their post about how HotD writes Rhaenys and Corlys' relationship:

And they are coming from how HotD rewrote Rhaenys to be way too accepting of the Hull boys in her awareness when book!Corlys actually kept them away from anywhere Rhaenys herself might go to see them or discover them...bc she too didn't take what she and most noblewomen would see as insults to them of their husband's not only cheating but bringing their bastards around in the same spaces as their wives. Rhaenys was a Targ princess and very proud to be one.

Though Marilda is impressive as a human being (leading her own trad eboats later on), in the social context of these people I don't think noblemen would not take exception to not only their wives cheat on them but also cheat on them with any lower classed man or a stable boy and male readers not identify & recognize that as bringing shame to that man. Yes, men are socially graced to cheat, but noblewomen in Westeros still are expected to not have to raise his by-blows or have those bastards "sully" their own status by having them around. that's just the way things go, as those men love to say.

Then there is Daemon-at-Harrenhal trying to display his great leadership that he wants to prove to both Viserys and Rhaenyra that he was as capable of being a monarch/leader as he thinks they don't think he should be. Based on incompetence. Which is compounded by his bungling the Blackwoods and Brackens thing and thus endangering Rhaenyra's ability to get more soldiers...when bookwise, he doesn't perform any such stupidity and never tried to prove anything about his being able to be a competent king/independent agent to anyone. In fact he, like Jace, manages to collect many supporters from Rhaenyra with little problem. not only that, bk!Rhaenyra had an almost a ubiquitous and eager base in the Riverlands. These are CRITICAL changes made for shallow & logically inconsistent drama. Inconsistent bc we see Daemon and Rhaenyra have more or less a pretty settled marriage where Rhaenyra shows she had trusted Daemon to at least not betray her...which is why her later despair at his death and "betrayal" with Nettles was as intense as it was.

It reveals a pattern HotD makes of trying to poke fingers at misogyny while still being very sexist in how they do it by simplifying their men like Daemon and Corlys, try to overpunish and vilify Daemon, as well as how they pacified their female characters. It's all a distorted, very overly literal and unnuanced rewrite of the original story. But what else is new?

This is the story people want, right?

(AWoIaF -- The Targ Kings -- Aenys I)

In the list of marriages cosigned in ancient "Valyria", parent-child ones were never one of them.

But to talk about episode 5's DaemonxAlyssa scene, they may have been not trying to establish that Daemon lusted after Alyssa/his own mother bc "Targs going a Targ" and they were actually trying to make Alyssa a device for Daemon's "come-to-Jesus" development. Having Alys making him confront his desires for a person w/absolute faith in him being a consummate leader, good enough to be a King even. That Viserys, the brother who rejected him out of suspicion of his self control, was wrong about him and actually as weak as show!Daemon thinks of him. Alyssa, lost & forever inaccessible from having died young when Daemon was 3ish, is unable to really contradict him or Alys.

It's not about attraction to mothers, but about her as a device sexualized using Targ incest merely for erotic visual pleasure...bc there are thousands of ways to have Alyssa--this woman who didn't conform to many female Andal ideals of upperclass female behavior & took both boys soon after they were born for their first dragonrides on her Meleys (yes, Rhaenys' dragon) but also dies from labor complications--serve as a "origin" point for some of show!Daemon's present issues with family concerning Rhaenyra, Viserys, and his daughters, even though even here I say he shouldn't have as that was supposed to be handled in his marriage to Laena as is canon, but that's a digression.

It's not just abt sex being used to advance everything and that being a GoT thing...this is about reducing a woman--esp this woman--to being a visual sexual plaything of either another woman or her own son. What did the sex truly ADD or explain, other than false notions of Targs' incest having less boundaries simply bc it is unlike the sort of incest nonTarg Westerosi practice? So bec ancient Egyptians practiced sibling marriage unlike Europeans having second cousin or first cousin or avunculate marriages, ancient Egyptians would be more liekly to be genuinely attraced to their own mothers without us actually thinking about what sort of boundaries the Egyptians would have socially developed themselves as Europeans also have?

Male gaze and xenophobia at their finest.

Refers to this post.

Well...I guess it's fine? I don't have much to say about this not bc I think this storyline is atrocious by quality or by morals, but because I think I would have cared a lot more if they had just given more Dragonstone family scenes for me to have that context for this psychological progress that should includes pre-Laena/Rhaenyra...so it feels very...constrained by the narrative & rushed. Shallow connection to the ocean floor, lightweight anchor.