You Said Corlys In The Show Doesn’t Do Well At Politics. Care To Elaborate? Because I Do Agree. Something

You said Corlys in the show doesn’t do well at politics. Care to elaborate? Because I do agree. Something seems off about the show portrayal but I don't know how to describe it. Been a while since I read Fire and Blood but I recall Corlys being a scheming character always at the heart of the politics in the war.

Yeah, Corlys’ characterization in HOTD has been heavily changed from F&B. The show portrays him as more of a rough warrior type whereas the book had him as an intelligent politician. Back when the show first aired, I tried viewing it as a mixed canon because Ryan Condal was saying that HOTD is the true telling of the Dance of the Dragons. But then GRRM came through with his two separate canons statement. Saved me a lot of headache trying to reconcile show!Corlys’ actions with that of book!Corlys. They are just two very different characters at this point. I would say that HOTD has very purposely altered the characterization in order to use Corlys to prop up other characters.

Season two barely gave Corlys any screentime, so I'll just focus on season one moments that I remember off the top of my head.

A statement like “history does not remember blood; it remembers names” is show only. Its purpose is to depict the character as ambitious at the cost of family. But book!Corlys is repeatedly portrayed as a person willing to sacrifice his ambition for the sake of family. As a result, the show gave us a character with great ambition but none of the cunning of his book counterpart.

This scene from episode 5 is a prime example. Season one has a couple different scenes where it looks like the characters around him are talking down to Corlys, and this is one of them. The show makes it look like Corlys has a real say in this matter, but if you watch how the scene is presented (the characters’ mannerisms), it’s Viserys who controls the topic. Whereas, Corlys appears humbled and at a loss.

F&B does have instances where the naming of the grandsons is decided (it’s first name discussed there not last name like in the show). It’s a very subtle change but it sends a very different message. The book presents Corlys as the one who holds the authority of deciding the names of his grandsons.

The fireside conversation between Corlys and Rhaenys in episode 7 has both of them not understanding politics. There’s talk of making Laena’s daughter heirs, but since Laena was younger in the show, the only way this could be done is by disinheriting the older brother, Laenor. Somehow, neither of them think of just betrothing the children to each other (even though that’s often the solution to 80% of these Westerosi nobles’ problems). We get the line about Corlys saying “history does not remember blood; it remembers names” in reference to the succession of the Driftwood Throne. But previously in episode 5, it was discussed that Jace would change his name to Targaryen instead of Velaryon upon becoming King. So it’s not even the ‘Velaryon’ name that will be remembered (and no the first name being Velaryon doesn’t count/eg. Daeron the Young Dragon has a Velaryon first name from his Velaryon grandfather but he is still viewed as a Targaryen because of his last name). In Westeros, there are examples of characters changing their last name to that of the ruling family if they come into a leading position but were part of a different family originally. So Corlys’ granddaughters would simply use the Velaryon last name upon ascension to the Driftwood Throne. Knowing something basic like this would probably be part of highborn’s education. Even the relatively lowborn Littlefinger in the main series knows this, as evidence by his suggestion of Harrold Hardyng changing his name to Harrold Arryn upon becoming Lord of the Eyrie. In the show, Corlys apparently doesn’t know this.

This specific scene between Luke & Corlys in episode in 7 is based off a book scene between Jace & Viserys.

While show!Corlys can be considered a person acting in order to protect the children, so was book!Corlys and he was very politically competent about it too. This change is not too terrible because Corlys does eventually come around to the idea of Luke as heir, but his acceptance was not so openhanded that he's left with nothing. The context in book vs show is very different. Since the grandchildren are not betrothed to each other until much later in the show canon, it does make you wonder "what is Corlys getting out of this?" His name won't succeed him on the Iron Throne. His blood won't follow him on the Driftwood Throne. What even is it all for??? "History does not remember blood; it remembers names" is actually a very empty phrase. It's almost as if the HOTD writers coined it as a catchy saying to put on sweaters and mugs. It has no deeper meaning beyond that. Also, the betrothal in the book wasn't even a full solution apparently since we get no acknowledgement of Luke as heir when he was younger.

Episode 8 is peak for this show erasing Corlys' political role. There's a whole petition happening behind Corlys' back to alter the Driftmark succession. F&B had Corlys bedridden, nearly at death's door, but he still remained the authority figure in his family. Rhaenyra turned to her father-in-law, Corlys, in order to have Luke formally named heir (he was 11 years old at the time yet never formally acknowledged which says a lot about Corlys' feelings on the matter). HOTD changed this to Rhaenyra begging her father for support.

It seems to be a very carefully done change that makes Corlys appear like a very different character in the show than he was in the book. His influential role in his own family is reduced to a great extent. HOTD writers know exactly what they're doing.

Then in episode 10, Corlys shows up at Dragonstone, informs Rhaenyra that he has sent his fleet forth to secure the Gullet and also starts making battle plans for her. She has not offered him anything for his support. He also believes she killed his son. I know I say this every time so I'm basically beating a dead horse at this point, but when book!Corlys was angered with Rhaenyra for INDIRECTLY causing his wife's death, he was only brought around after political concessions were made in his favor. Show!Corlys DIRECTLY blames Rhaenyra for his son's death, grumbles about it, and then bends over backwards for her. In the second season, he quietly accepts the position of Hand without voicing a single complaint to Rhaenyra's face as his book counterpart would have done. At this point, I can't see HOTD writers ever allowing Corlys to air out his grievances against Rhaenyra to her face, unless they were trying to double down on the "men are evil, women are victims" central theme of the show.