Showing posts with label Viserys Targaryen. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Viserys Targaryen. Show all posts

Saturday, June 8, 2013

Viserys: Villain or Victim?


“Viserys had been stupid and vicious, she had come to realize, yet sometimes she missed him all the same. Not the cruel, weak man he had become by the end, but the brother who had sometimes let her creep into his bed, the boy who told her tales of the Seven Kingdoms and talked of how much better their lives would be once he reclaimed his crown.”

(Daenerys’ thoughts on her brother)

                   
 
“He doesn’t see himself as a villain. He’s the hero of this story! That’s how you have to play it: ‘I’m the fucking lead! Why isn’t anyone treating me like the lead?”

(Harry Lloyd, on Inside HBO’s Game of Thrones, on playing Viserys Targaryen)

 
                   


Who is Viserys Targaryen?  Those who have read George R. R. Martin’s series A Song of Ice and Fire may call him “The Beggar King,” and know that he had been the only surviving son of the Mad King Aerys. Those who have watched HBO's Game of Thrones (2011-Present) have been known to call him “The Blond Baddie.”  To all, however, and whether they have read the books (first published in 1996), watched the television adaptation, or both, Viserys is most definitely known as the jerk who got his comeuppance and received his “golden crown.”

As someone who has read the first couple books in the series, as well as kept up with the show, I do understand how easily a person could take either side.  Is Viserys a villain?  Certainly, he has all the makings of the treacherous foe without having to dig very deeply below that overbearingly demanding and manipulative personality.  Or, is he a victim to the circumstances that befell him during his short life?  Is it possible that fate was against him from the very beginning?

The fair and honest answer would be both.

Digging into the history of Viserys, we find that he was a young boy during Robert's Rebellion. His father having been assassinated and elder brother killed upon the Trident, Viserys escaped with his pregnant mother, Rhaella. When she died shortly after Daenerys' birth, Viserys and his younger sister found safety with Ser William Derry and stayed with him until his death.


Tender or terrible?  Sibling love or the kiss of death?  Viserys often keeps us guessing.


This is where I begin to feel for Viserys, and I daresay that I am likely not the only one with at least a slight pang of sympathy for our villainous victim. Having lost his entire family save his younger sister, Viserys was responsible for keeping them both alive, as King Robert was still hunting them. After the death of Ser Derry, the two young Targaryens wandered city to city—relative vagabonds—staying as guests of powerful citizens.  To be sure, it is not much of an existence, and a humbling one at that: how the could’ve-been-mighty have fallen.  Eventually, and after overstaying their welcome, Viserys and Daenerys are forced to sell off many priceless heirlooms in order to survive. When they have to pawn Rhaella'a crown, it is then that people began to call Viserys “The Beggar King.”  

 

If such a turn in the young man’s life could be likened to anything contemporary, it was a case of bullying by others that made a bully.  His heart hardened by the treatment received from others, Viserys blamed his sister for killing their mother during childbirth and began to treat her terribly, prefacing these moments with threats about “waking the dragon.”

As readers and/or viewers, we get our first real look at the Targaryen siblings when we find them living with Magister Illyrio Mopatis.  He has allowed them to stay with him in exchange for rewards once Viserys ascends to the Iron Throne.  As part of the game plan, the two men arrange the marriage of Daenerys (played by the lovely Emilia Clarke on the show) to the Dothraki Khal Drogo (the towering Jason Momoa).  Of course, in this great chess-like game, a woman has little say and is merely a pawn between the male players. 

Perhaps Viserys’ character could have been more forgivable if this was all—a young man, finding himself in a difficult position and having been part of a promising family pedigree that has since crumbled, has scraped together a living and merely done what he has out of survival mechanisms.  We could forgive the selfishness and misogynistic tendencies if that were all: a man who is victim of circumstance.  But then, events take another turn, and we begin to question just what the ratio of victim: villain is when it comes to Viserys Targaryen.

He’s got his eye on you!  Viserys’ pensive face is often a combination of pain and plotting. 
We’re not sure how much we’d actually like to know what goes on in his head,
 but we bet there are lots of dragons swooping around.

At some point, we learn that Viserys had every intention of raping his sister the evening before her wedding.  His attempt to keep control of the situation by deciding that if he wasn't to marry her like originally planned (incest is common in Martin’s world), he would at least be the one to take her virginity. Fortunately, Illyrio has the foresight to place guards at her door, and so Viserys, does not succeed.  It’s quite a moment of foreshadowing, too—yet another moment where this tenacious young man will make an attempt to control a situation, only to be thwarted.

I don't condone the way Viserys treated his sister, nor can I pretend to understand why he abused her. My only guess is the stress he must've felt. On his own, he has no hope of gathering an army, and thus, a very slim chance of reclaiming the Seven Kingdoms.  What is more, once his sister has grown comfortable in her role as Khalessi, and is very much beloved, he feels alone in his efforts.  In truth, I even came to feel more resentful towards her.

Certainly, though, there is something worth digging into if the treacherous figure lurking in the shadows of a story, plotting rape, theft, and rebellion, has enough of a redeeming spark to make an audience (or at least me) feel a twinge of sympathy.

Perhaps much of this feeling is due to the nuanced, very human portrayal of Viserys, as acted by Harry Lloyd. 

In short, I am continuously impressed with Harry’s portrayal of The Beggar King, dragon-crazed blonde every time I re-watch Season One of HBO’s series. Book Viserys was horrible. I could find nothing likeable about him.  I felt he had no redeeming qualities and was barely human at times. He was a character-type, obviously the villain, and obviously there to spur hatred and create tension in the plot.  I do wonder, though, if part of my feelings is because we, as readers, only see Viserys from Daenerys' point of view.  Certainly, Viserys would have a wholly different portrait of himself to paint.  And, of course, had Viserys told his own story, it would be biased, but that is the problem with the alignment with Daenerys.  Without the third-person omniscient narrator, we’ll truly ever know the “real” Viserys Targaryen in the realm of the novels.

Yet, Harry Lloyd and the three-dimensions of television viewing allowed us a glimpse of something more, something into which we can dig our teeth and sink our nails, if we so desire.

Harry gives TV Viserys a shred of humanity. We are able to see him as his own character rather than just through his sister's eyes.  Isn’t this the goal of good characterization: to craft a figure who feels realistic?  And aren’t all people in real life more than just caricatures of a cardinal vice (or virtue), having aspects of both dwelling within them?

Sure, in the HBO Game of Thrones series, Viserys is still a jerk (and that may be putting things politely).  He definitely doesn't win the “Brother of the Year” award (then again, he’s not really good at “winning” things.  See the whole “Golden Crown” moment…) but at least he makes you feel, whether it be hate, pity, annoyance, or amusement.

In truth, I do not think that just anyone could have embodied this role. There are many actors who could have taken the role, sure; but I don’t think they could have done nearly as well.  Personally, I’m thrilled that Harry is always up for a challenge. Of course, I’m writing this for a blog called Lloydalists, which is already inherently biased, but this page and group was created out of an admiration for an underrated and dedicated actor.  He doesn't shy away from a possibly difficult role. In fact, it appears he likes to sink himself into such gigs as deliciously as Viserys would like to get his hands on dragon eggs.
 
More crinkled brow and concerned look:
Careful, Viserys, or your face will get stuck like that! 
Then again, you’d probably prefer that than what happens
 when you finally got your “crown”…
 

Harry puts so much effort into learning his characters, learning how to do the things they're supposed to do, learning the kind of information they should know, so that when it is time to call “Action,” he's as prepared as he can possibly be.  In the end, he’s a dedicated actor who puts everything on the line, pools all his energies and pours them into his diverse characters, and, let’s face it—he can pull off the baddie-blonde wig.

So what would have happened if Viserys had stayed alive long enough to claim the crown?  What kind of king would he have made?

I've seen some viewers compare him to Joffrey Baratheon (played gruesomely by another blonde baddie Jack Gleeson on the television series), while others say he probably would have been mad and erratic like his father.  Could Viserys have redeemed himself? I find it rather sad that he (as well as the reader/viewer) are never able to find out.  He never has a chance to become much of anything.  Again, while I don't condone anything that he does, I do feel he had a rough life and had much responsibility forced upon him too early, which, in part, led to his downfall. 

He could have made for a lovely tragic hero if he wasn’t too busy getting caught up in the kinds of things that transform one into a greedy villain.

“C” and I are interested in hearing your thoughts, comments, and reactions on/to this topic. Feel free to leave us feedback here, or join us on the Lloydalists' Facebook page or tweet @Lloydalists on Twitter.

 

Works Referenced

 
Game of Thrones. Dir. Alan Taylor, Daniel Minahan, David Nutter, et al. Perf. Peter Dinklage, Lena Headey, Maisie Williams, et al. HBO. 2011-Present. Television Series.

Martin, George R.R. A Game of Thrones. Book One of A Song of Fire and Ice (1996). New York: Bantam Books, 2005. Print.


~ Written and Posted by K; Edited/Revision Suggestions by C ~

Friday, November 30, 2012

Lloydalists Weekly Round-Up (Featuring The Fear)

As Lloydalists resumes its weekly “Flashback Fridays” (Harry Lloyd-style) on Twitter (find us @Lloydalists; we revisit a role, character, and/or photo-shoot Harry’s done in the past every Friday and love others’ contribution and suggestions), we also thought it best to do a round-up of the most recent Harry-related news.  Now that The Fear is only a few days away from its UK-television premiere, the interviews, articles, and advertisements have been seeping out of the woodwork and oozing into our hot-little-hands.  Here, we serve them up for you!
 

  Gripping stuff (the mini-series and Matty Beckett’s (Harry Lloyd) clench on his drug-lord-/Alzheimer’s-fighting father (Peter Mullan). Image ©Channel 4/The Fear (2012), as posted on Harry-Lloyd Tumblr.

 


“And I Could Kill Everyone”: The Latest on The Fear
In a very recent interview for Channel 4, and still sporting slicked hair and slim-cut clothing while on-set, Harry discussed his character of what the station is calling “the cool and calm” (“Harry”) Matty Beckett in the following way: “of the two [Beckett sons], he’s the sensible, business-minded, logical, seemingly-intelligent one”  in comparison to the “wild” and “instinctive” older brother played by Paul Nicholls (qtd. in “Harry”).  In the same interview, Harry also explains Matty’s involvement in fending off “twin” horrors—his father’s Alzheimer’s disease and the Albanian mob.  Regarding the latter, and despite younger-Beckett-boy Matty’s “sensible” nature, Lloyd’s character seems very well-poised to get properly nitty and properly gritty.

 
Intense gesticulations are integral to great acting. Or, rather, to explaining great acting. Image ©Channel 4  (2012)

 

Regarding what may be, perhaps, a flaw in Matty’s character is his disconnection from his father’s disease.  Matty, according to Lloyd, takes a cold, if not callous tact and “doesn’t take it personally” (Lloyd, in “Harry”).  He “writes it off,” and—making useful gesticulations, Harry explains Matty as a logical, if not overly-pedantic mind, someone “who just has to get to the next step” (qtd. in “Harry”).


Harry also talked a bit about his preparation and process for the role, revealing that reading and preparing a script never adequately prepares him for what is to be discovered when he’s actually in the scene, acting it out (“Harry”).  “It does get very emotional,” Harry admitted, talking about shooting his scenes with the Dad (Peter Mullan) who’s just not there and how he “has to drag him back” (“Harry”).  Overly-preparing for such high-expression moments cannot and should not be over-rehearsed: “You kind of find it on the day, I found” (Lloyd, in “Harry”).


Other salient bits from the interview include his highlight-moments of working with his fellow actors and, for lack of a better phrase, playing family with his onscreen family.  Harry discusses the “little bits” and “big chunks” of the irregular shooting schedule (he watched The Olympic Games on a miniature t.v. during takes), and reveals that “the most fun…is my first bit of driving-acting!” (Lloyd, in “Harry”).  Citing that his frequent period-piece acting does not often require “a mobile phone and a car,” Harry says it’s “very exciting, still, for me” to continue evolving in his sundry roles, as well as as an actor (“Harry”).

 

Harry, mid-interview, not exactly looking too convincing as a serious, mob-fighting tough-guy.  Graffiti backgrounds add much-needed street-cred. Image ©Channel 4 (2012)

 
In The Fear, Episode One, be sure to look out for Harry, driving away from Albanians in a pricey Mercedes, and—while he likely will look horrified and stressed in the scene—more certainly feeling pretty darn content to have been able to be part of such a mini-series and to have had the pleasure to inhabit the role of Matty Beckett, not to mention the freedom to drive down a country road for real, as a job, in the aforementioned car, and “I could kill everyone” (Lloyd, in “Harry”).

 

Thankfully, his driving skills must be at least half as good as his acting: everyone in the car survived even if “it was terrifying!” (“Harry”).  Maybe not too much—the laugh at the end of that admittance gives him away.

 

CLICK HERE FOR VIDEO of the entire Channel 4 interview with Harry Lloyd.

 


Would you trust this guy with your Mercedes? Or to drive your getaway car?! Image ©Channel 4 (2012)

 


On His-Own-Method-Acting, On-the-Road Antics, and Champion Hula-Hoopers
Another recent, print interview with Harry comes courtesy of The Shortlist. Interviewer Jimi Famurewa learns about how Harry went from preparing for the role of dragon-obsessed, “blond-wigged git” Viserys Targaryen in HBO’s Game of Thrones (2011) to that of “a drug lord’s son” in The Fear (2012).  Go to THESHORTLIST.COM to read more about Harry’s research, methods, and style when it comes to acting.  Read on for his thoughts on his now-well-known relation to Charles Dickens; and read further to learn about his United States Jack Kerouac/Neal Cassady and Company-esque road-trip.  Other memorable moments: The Doctor Who gossip, trademark blonde wigs, and the suggestion of, he laughingly reveals, that “if the [acting] work dries up then I can go on the circuit and record some audiobooks” based on Dickens’ novels (Famurewa).


Matty Beckett crosses the set...keep walking, Harry; cars may not be safe under your control. Image ©Channel 4 (2012)

 
 

Unworldly, Aesthetic Pleasures
Meanwhile, check-out some of the masterpiece work behind The Fear advertisements and that teaser-trailer we talked about in the last The Fear post.  A step-by-step TAYLOR JAMES CREATIVE PRODUCTION STUDIO video shows how the creative concept was orchestrated (Taylor James).  Working with Kevin Griffin to create the “rather unworldly theme of the crime series” (Taylor James), the ads and t.v. spots combine Griffin's photography with CGI effects. 


Paul Nicholls, Peter Mullan, and Harry Lloyd stand strong despite the weightiness of The Fear. Image ©Taylor James Creative Production Studio (2012)

 

As a reminder, The Fear will air on the UK’s Channel 4 for four consecutive nights, Monday December 3rd through the 6th, at 10 p.m.  With all-eyes watching, including perhaps the proud ones of Bristol residents, since The Fear was filmed almost entirely on-location there this summer (“Bristol”), we can’t wait to hear the fan reaction!

 

 
See you Monday, Matty! Image ©Channel 4/The Fear (2012), as posted on The Short List (2012)



Works Cited & Referenced

“Bristol on Screen.” Bristol.gov.uk. 30 Nov. 2012. Web. 30 Nov. 2012.  <http://www.bristol.gov.uk/press/business-bristol/bristol-screen>.

Famurewa, Jimi. “Film & TV: Harry Lloyd.” ShortList.com. 29 Nov. 2012. Web. 29 Nov. 2012. <http://m.shortlist.com/entertainment/tv/harry-lloyd >.

“Harry Lloyd Interview.” Channel4.com. Nov. 2012. Web. 30 Nov. 2012. <http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-fear/articles/harry-lloyd-interview>.

Photo: Harry Lloyd and Peter Mullan from The Fear (2012). “Harry-Lloyd.” Harry-Lloyd.Tumblr.com. 29 Nov. 2012. Web. 30 Nov. 2012. <http://harry-lloyd.tumblr.com/post/36814206550>.

Taylor James—Creative Production Studio. “Print/Channel 4 “The Fear.” Nov. 2012. Web. 29 Nov. 2012. <http://www.taylorjames.com/the-fear?thumb=7728>.

 

 

~Written & Posted by C, with Research from K~

Monday, June 11, 2012

"Viserys Was Here" a.k.a. "The Exploding Pen Theory"

I wanted to let everyone know that I blame “C.”It is, without doubt and irreconcilably, her fault. Without her clever rouses and maneuvers, her constant chit-chat about the alluring-and-enigmatic acronym“BBC,” and her dangling before me such sumptuous visual feasts, I would not be what I am today. Folks, “C” is not to be trusted! Without her conniving, artful ways, I would not here, nor would you. I would not be a Lloydalist and you would not be reading this confession.

It was around Christmas 2011 (the evening of December 20th, to be exact) when the trailer for Peter Jackson’s two-part epic film The Hobbit (2012, 2013) was released. Despite being super excited to see this film (after several years’ worth of hiatus and snafus), finally becoming reality, and thus allowing my exuberance to get the best of my senses as my eyes bore through the screen the first time I watched the trailer, I was still half-conscious enough to tear myself from Middle Earth long enough to make a few notes. Mostly, I noticed a dwarf named Thorin Oakenshield.

If you pay any attention to The Lord of the Rings fandom, at all you will know the role is being performed by a tall, brooding, British man (and not at all a short, squat, dwarf-y bloke) who bears a striking resemblance to that cravat-wearing guy from BBC’s indulgent miniseries North & South (2004) who catalyzed not a loyal following by an entire Army. You may have heard of him: Richard Armitage. (His fans have dubbed themselves The Armitage Army.)

Side note: It’s actually “C” who woke me up, with her phone call, on that evening of December 20th. She had been stalking TheOneRing.net for hours, waiting for the word that the long-awaited trailer was up and running(later, this long-awaited trailer and its viewers crashed the Internet, but that’s another story). After she saw it, she called and, through a blather of hyper, high-pitched squeals and rapid-fire sentences, because “C” can rarely maintain coherence when her bottled excitement has been loosed, I managed to realize what she was saying. I looked at my clock and realized that I’d slept through the launch of the trailer—but I needed my sleep! And the trailer wasn’t going anywhere! So, not only is “C” evil, she is also a sleep-destroyer.

In any case, though, I was surely wide-awake after enjoying the aforementioned trailer and setting my eyes on that baritone, silk-voiced actor behind the dwarf-leader get-up. Through the Christmas holiday and into the New Year, and after various repeat performances (read:wearing out the replay button) of The Hobbit’s teaser trailer, my admiration for Richard grew as I spent time getting my hands on as many of his performances as I could. “C” wasted no time fueling the as-yet-humble fire of interest. First, she recommended that I watch BBC's Robin Hood (2006-2008). This is what “C” said on December 29, 2011 about Richard Armitage’s Guy of Gisborne: “Totally Lucifer-likedespicable—gorgeous and greedy; dangerous and beautiful.” How could I not want to watch that?!

Robin Hood is where the fire began to rage a little (don’t worry, Sherwood Forest wasn’t burned), as I eagerly threw on more kindling: I watched all three seasons in about a week and a half. What can I say? I was hooked! And it wasn’t just because Richard Armitage was so appealingly sinister, with his wavy black locks, form-fitting leather garb, and occasional half-smirk; so divinely dimensional and human, despite a sometimes flat script that really had the actor putting his heart into elevating a dastardly character that, by the end, you cannot help but love.

No, dear readers, while I had begun Robin Hood with the idea that I had come to Nottingham for Richard’s “flawlessly-flawed”(“C’s” term) Guy of Gisborne, the somehow-it-works-on-him eyeliner and all!, I left with the idea that the happiest moment had been stumbling off the typical path, into the humble village, and into the path of a humble carpenter’s son.

His name was Will Scarlett. The actor portraying him was then-22-year-old Harry Lloyd.

I really think “C” was trying to keep him to herself at first, to be honest. But then, she slipped up. In a conversation about Robin Hood and Richard Armitage one day in early 2012, she made the mistake of mentioning Harry Lloyd. She was sneaky about it, dropping in a reference as if casually, hoping I wouldn’t notice or would be too concerned with thoughts of Mr. Armitage and his spectacular job as the psychically-torn Guy of Gisborne to have my mind on anyone else.

It was bad enough that Robin Hood was beginning to interfere with my sleep. “Too much Robin Hood this week,” I messaged her on January 6th. “(Can there be such a thing!?),” I asked, rhetorically, before admitting, “I've been staying up late watching it so it's no wonder I was tired.” This was only one of several sleep-deprivation-due-to-Merry-Men messages I sent to her. Okay, it was my choice to stay awake—but “C” started it. She shouldn’t have thrown more kindling on the fire when it was time for lights out!

Then, one day, in the midst of a conversation about Guy of Gisborne and Mr. Armitage’s impeccable performance, she drops oh-so-nonchalantly into the conversation, with her off-handed, “don’t-pay-attention-to-me,-I’m-not-saying-anything-important” manner, “Oh, and Will Scarlett’s a joy to watch, too. He’s played by Harry Lloyd.”

That was it. An almost flippant remark, couched in a slight-comparative study between Will and Guy (as if the two are even comparable as characters).

I admit I enjoyed Harry's performance as the shy carpenter-turned-outlaw, who barely escapes a hanging in episode one, when I first watched Robin Hood but it wasn't until my second viewing of the series (because, naturally, I watched it again soon after) that I was sold.

What came between early 2012 and the present is the fodder, I’m sure, of many future blog entries on Lloydalists. Suffice to say, we have plenty of time for discussing Harry’s role as Will Scarlett in Robin Hood, as well as his other roles, on the Lloydalists blog, and we hope that you will engage with us and add to the discourse as well.

For now, though, let me not mislead you any longer. I’m sure the title of this blog post piques your interest enough. What does Viserys have to do with anything? There has not been one mention of that white-haired ruffian from Game of Thrones (2011-Present) thus far! And “The Exploding Pen Theory”?! Surely Harry never appeared in an episode of Sherlock (2010-Present), although that would be something worth pursuing (Steven Moffat—sign him up! He already passed the test as the creepy possessed schoolboy in two episodes of Doctor Who (2007)!)

What, then, could it all mean?

Let’s leave all the talk of Will Scarlett, Robin Hood, and carpentry behind. I’ve watched it, re-watched it, and even made a trek part-way across the country in order to visit “C” and watch some of the Season One episodes with her.

Fast forward a couple months and by mid-March 2012 I watched all the works I could find featuring Harry Lloyd, although I still have not watched every one of his performances. It didn't matter. I was thoroughly smitten with this charming, talented actor. My begrudging attitude toward “C” was by now very much softened. “C” and I had been keeping up on current news and saw that Harry would be in London performing as incestuous,malignant Ferdinand in John Webster’s play The Duchess of Malfi at the Old Vic Theatre. How thrilling, we thought, that Harry was involved in such a dark, engrossing play (“C” had read it in college and assured me it was a meaty, thought-provoking role, something with which Harry could sharpen and show his acting chops). She and I hatched our plan: we wanted to let him know how much we were enjoying his work, bonding over it, and celebrating all the little nuances of his characters, from the wonderful to the wicked. The performances we couldn’t see—like those unavailable on DVD in the U.S. or the stage play that we had no way of getting to—stoked us for more Harry Lloyd, and we wondered what projects he would tackle following the conclusion of Malfi on June 9th.
So, back then, in mid-March, we decided that we wanted to wish him good luck during the run of The Duchess of Malfi, and send our humblest but truest “best wishes” for everything beyond.  Certainly, a talented actor like this deserved to know he had supporters “across the pond” sending thoughts and good-vibes his way.

“C” and I selected our stationary, ordered our International Reply Coupons, waxed with anxiety for weeks over what we wanted to write, reorganized our stationary drawers, bought our padded envelopes, selected the stamps, agonized some more, and, a couple of weeks later, we’d each (independently) written a supportive letter to Mr. Lloyd. Additionally, we both included two pictures of him that we (politely, we hope!) asked him to sign. And then, after the stuffed-and-sealed packages sat on our dressers for a day or two, “settling” and gathering courage for the flight in the U.S. Mail plane across the Atlantic, we finally got up the courage to mail them.

“C” mustered her courage sufficiently to send that packet of love and support the second week of April; I sent mine on Tax Day (that’s one way to take the edge off a not-so-wonderful day; distract yourself with pleasant letters, not unpleasant tax forms). My co-blogger will undoubtedly fill you in on her side of the story at some point, so I will leave that portion of our “tale” alone. As for myself, I received a response last week on June 1, 2012.
This is where our riddle begins. As aforementioned, I had sent Harry Lloyd two photographs to sign for me, one from a photo shoot in 2009 and the other a candid-looking still of Will Scarlett,sitting in the Robin Hood set-forest, no doubt.
And yet, what was sent back was the 2009 photo of Harry and, not Will Scarlett’s photo, but and an entirely different head shot, a black-and-white, smaller portrait of Harry that, according to other fan reports floating around the Internet, has been used for fan autographs since at least 2010. Not a big deal, of course—who wouldn’t be ecstatic to get a relatively-prompt reply from someone she admires?!—but I had loved that image of Will so much and wondered of its fate. Poor “Will,” nowhere to be found: what could have happened?

By now, it may be quite obvious that “C” and I are not exactly known for our total composure and sobriety. We are self-entertainers, whimsical as much as we are serious. The “Missing Will” led us into some fun of conjecturing as to where our Merry Man had wandered,perhaps lost in Sherwood Forest, out “collecting honey” with Djaq, or wandering the Holy Land with his growing family, having retired from the gang of outlaws(at the end of Season 2; see Robin Hood for the meaning of the “collecting honey” euphemism).

In any case, I couldn't imagine why the picture would be traded out unless it met some sort of tragic ending. “C,” of course—nosey as ever—wanted to know the precise details of everything that had arrived in the self-addressed-stamped-envelope I’d sent and received back. I,of course, obliging and kindhearted friend that I am, detailed everything as much as possible. I spread out the two photos before me like a private eye examining the evidence of a fishy case, touching each in turn very gingerly.Not out of fear of smudging fingerprints, mind you—but out of fear of smudging one of the odd golden globes adorning the front and back of the photos.

Yes, golden globes. Or blobs. Or globs. You get the idea. As if Viserys Targaryen, in his last moments of agony, had dripped his “crown” over these photos, signing them as his last altruistic duty to an admirer abroad.

To be specific: the back of one of the photographs had two large globs of gold ink and, when I flipped it over, I found smaller specks of gold on the picture itself, nowhere near where Harry used the gold pen to sign it. So, did Harry pull a “Viserys”? Was my picture showered in gold ink? Is he so much a “golden boy” that gold dust is shooting out of his fingertips, as “C” offered (only half-jokingly) as another thought as to how the gold got where it did? We may never know.

Probably the most logical explanation is that a gold-ink Sharpie “exploded” as he was writing on the Will Scarlett photograph. Finding it a mess, Harry had to substitute it for the 2010 head shot he had on hand, still managing to get flecks of ink (probably covering his hands, if not his clothing) on the photographs. Perhaps this is the end to the “Exploding Pen” mystery.

Personally, “C” and I like to think he really is that much of a “golden boy.” We have high-hopes for him, and we hope to see his career flourish more and more, as we chart it here on Lloydalists.

Speaking of “C,” I’d also like to return to my cohort, my colleague, my partner-in-crime. Though “C” would gladly accept all the responsibility for introducing me to that angular, green-eyed actor named Harry Lloyd, it would probably be more appropriate to thank her. So thank you, “C.” This blog certainly wouldn't be here if it wasn't for you.

And, of course and last but not least, I want to take a final moment to say a deep, hardy “Thank you” to Harry for the wonderful response and for signing (and substituting!) my pictures. I love them and they are quite at home on my wall. They have become part of my own home, amidst a collection of other photos, pictures, and memorabilia that adds a touch ofhappiness—dare I say sparkle?—to my life.

All Good Things,
K


~Written by K (with editorial suggestions by C); Posted by K~