-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
What Daenerys Targaryen meant to me (full GOT spoilers)
- Thread starter BDS
- Start date
I'm asking if you think everybody else who was pursuing the throne was incapable of destroying the enemy capital. That means Stannis, Renly, Dany, and Cersei. Renly is the only one who hasn't done some atrocity but he never even got to his first battle.
Obviously, Genghis Khan and any other feudal war had the real threat of your city being destroyed and your family being enslaved, at best. But even as recently as WW2, there were cities being firebombed and nuked, because it sends a message that is strong enough to prevent future battles from being needed.
Stannis, I don't think would do it.
Cersi, would do it, but I don't think she would if they surrendered.
Dany, did do it.
Renly, wouldn't do it.
The only real comparison I can think of here is dropping the atomic bombs on Japan, which probably killed about as many people as Dany did.
Only Dany did it AFTER they surrendered. Even the Nazis didn't cut through cities and slaughter bystanders indescriminately. Other characters in Thrones were certainly EVIL enough to do it if they had the power, but we're comparing Dany to like Ramsey and Joffrey at this point. Stannis and Tywin and such, even Cersei, would probably have accepted the surrender.
I've been detecting quite a bit of mansplaining in this thread. In a show where the two classic hero archetypes, Jon Snow and Bran Stark, we're frustrating, irritatingly useless 90% of the time, and actually helping out the villains through brain dead moves... where Stannis Baratheon sacrificed his own daughter and murdered his own (very decent) brother ...where Littlefinger was a manipulating, murderous snake... where Cersei respected no boundaries when it came to murder, aligned with monsters, crossed everyone, created an abomination, and nuked her own city with wildfire... out of all of these stupid or vile contenders for the throne, Danaerys stood alone, pure as the driven snow in comparison.
She was never deceptive or vague about her intentions. She did what she said. She was open to guidance. She was merciless to slavery because she was a slave. Yet she seemed to give everyone a chance to join her side.
I can't fault anyone for stanning Dany. She was easy to root for. She had the toughest, longest road with the largest odds stacked against her. Cersei may have worked the hardest, but Dany was the most tested. She is a survivor. She fought her way to King's Landing virtually alone - she had no one that could really understand her, no kin, no one to show her how to be a Targaryen, to take care of dragons, to be a queen. Make no mistake, Missandei and Grey Worm were yes wo/men, fully obedient. They would never challenge her or show her how to grow. Those that could, those she let into her circle of trust, almost all betrayed her.. and those that did believe in her fell/died along the way. And nevertheless, she set aside her quest to risk her life, her army, and her claim by taking on the dead - losing one of her children in the process ‐ while cunning Cersei secured loans, an army, and redoubled her defenses.
The show was cruel to Dany. And in the end, the show itself betrayed her. It killed off her devoted protectors, distracted her one remaining protector, Grey Worm (with grief I guess?), and used her closest remaining allies to stab her in the heart.
And in so doing it betrayed anyone who aligned with her.
No character is meant to be 100% sympathetic. You're not supposed to identify with every characteristic or choice. They're just meant to relate to some part of yourself that you wish was stronger. Dany was one of the most resilient, confident, resolute, and level-headed* contenders for the throne.
*admit it, if she didn't snap at the very end of the KL siege she would have been the coolest, most resigned conqueror in the show's history. If she had just parked Drogon and marched into the Red Keep, no one would be calling out how they predicted her to become the mad queen the whole time. Stannis wishes he was that in control.
She was honestly admirable.
The Dany that had been built up through 7.5 seasons - and her fans - deserved way more respect.
She was never deceptive or vague about her intentions. She did what she said. She was open to guidance. She was merciless to slavery because she was a slave. Yet she seemed to give everyone a chance to join her side.
I can't fault anyone for stanning Dany. She was easy to root for. She had the toughest, longest road with the largest odds stacked against her. Cersei may have worked the hardest, but Dany was the most tested. She is a survivor. She fought her way to King's Landing virtually alone - she had no one that could really understand her, no kin, no one to show her how to be a Targaryen, to take care of dragons, to be a queen. Make no mistake, Missandei and Grey Worm were yes wo/men, fully obedient. They would never challenge her or show her how to grow. Those that could, those she let into her circle of trust, almost all betrayed her.. and those that did believe in her fell/died along the way. And nevertheless, she set aside her quest to risk her life, her army, and her claim by taking on the dead - losing one of her children in the process ‐ while cunning Cersei secured loans, an army, and redoubled her defenses.
The show was cruel to Dany. And in the end, the show itself betrayed her. It killed off her devoted protectors, distracted her one remaining protector, Grey Worm (with grief I guess?), and used her closest remaining allies to stab her in the heart.
And in so doing it betrayed anyone who aligned with her.
No character is meant to be 100% sympathetic. You're not supposed to identify with every characteristic or choice. They're just meant to relate to some part of yourself that you wish was stronger. Dany was one of the most resilient, confident, resolute, and level-headed* contenders for the throne.
*admit it, if she didn't snap at the very end of the KL siege she would have been the coolest, most resigned conqueror in the show's history. If she had just parked Drogon and marched into the Red Keep, no one would be calling out how they predicted her to become the mad queen the whole time. Stannis wishes he was that in control.
She was honestly admirable.
The Dany that had been built up through 7.5 seasons - and her fans - deserved way more respect.
I am not sure which mansplaining you are refering to here? Since not agreeing =/= mansplaining (unless I miss some post since the thread is so big).
I 110% agree that the last season treated her badly and way to rushed. But I find the show Dany more intresting from a show perspective then what she started out as.
Stannis burned his own daughter alive because he lost his supplies. I feel like he would seriously consider it as a pragmatic decision.
I think Cersei would do it if she was not a "native" of King's Landing. If she didn't believe that she would have their loyalty, then why not just make them an example for everyone else?
I think the reason they showed her feeling so calm about the decision in the finale was because it wasn't an act of passion. It was something she always considered and felt she had to do to prevent more war.
Well looking at the Nazis, the Holocaust was completely a waste of human resources, but Hitler probably thought it helps to have an enemy to demonize and that it also has the effect of scaring any 100% aryan-blooded Germans into following along rather than get on his bad side. They already had the Jews and others living in ghettos and doing slave labor, but the Nazis still decided to commit murder on an industrial scale.
Heriditary monarchy is still a thing. Sansa becomes Queen of the North because of her Stark name. All the people currently ruling are in positions of power because of their name. Nothing has changed because Dany died. Bran knew everything that was going to happen and remained silent, ending up king. Sansa betrayed her brother and plotted against Dany. Sam tried to manipulate Jon into breaking his oath to Dany. Tyrion destroyed Dany's campaign with his bad advice and made Dany believe she was better than everyone else and led her down a path of destruction. Bronn is a sellsword.
Honestly, how are any of these people better than Dany? She at the least had a vision. She saved slaves. She saved the North. She did both, halting her campaign. She wanted to help people. She wanted to change the world. She was the sole character in power who actually wanted to help the small folk. Apart from Edmure Tully in the books. And we saw how D&D treated Edmure Tully.
The show made her go 'mad' in the penultimate episode and had her indiscriminately kill people - immediately destroying 8 seasons worth of character in 5 minutes. Because she was a Targaryen and hence destined to become like her father. That's it.
Except the writers confirmed it was a spur of the moment decision after seeing the red keep
This is where your argument and of course Dany falls down.
The ends justify the means personified.
Dany was a murderous war criminal who just happened to Kill the people you don't like.
Even the *Lannisters* conducted trials.
She decided her own justice depending on how she felt at the time and at the end of the day, she desired only one thing, the crown of the seven kingdoms.
She is, was and forever was a tyrant, just one that you agreed with. She had to be pulled back from brutality repeatedly in the name of retribution.
The question remains that if she won the throne, would she offer freedom only to those who swear loyality, and death to anyone else?
That's not freedom. That's the point of her character arc. That replacing one firm of oppression with another is still oppression. You just change one class of people under oppression to another.
Because her action to burn KL, after they had surrendered, was far beyond anything anyone have done in regards to atrocities.
As mentioned before, good acts don't erase the bad acts.
More reffering to renaissance to last eras when the question of morality in executions was taken seriously.
i like some of the points in the r/asoiaf post that OP posted but i fail to see how it's sexist. it just seemed like bad writing to me, not like they were trying to say that you can't trust women because they might have hysteria.
Oh and while we're on the subject of double standards for Dany
Don't wanna keep replying to you as it's clear we don't see eye to eye, and ultimately I have nothing personal agianst you. But I gotta say that's an awful take.
Thought to be fair, not as bad as Lindsay Ellis's take. That was nuclear bad.
I don't get this - yes, Jon Snow and Bran Stark were mostly useless, but why is everyone ignoring the two kick-ass women that were anything but useless? Sansa became one of the smartest characters in the show and a great leader. Arya became a powerful fighter and fucking saved Westeros. She - saved - Westeros.
The show literally showed us incompetent men and competent women with the Starks. Literally every male Stark was a fool. Ned, Rob, John, even Bran. A bunch of righteous fools, but still fools - while every female Stark was smart and capable by the end (including Catelyn Stark). And foolish men don't stop with Starks - what about Tyrion, what about Jamie? The show demonstrated how they were all thinking with their dicks and almost doomed the world for it (in fact, the only really smart but good man in the show didn't have a dick at all :)
To me, Dany was a nutjob from the start. She believed she was a messiah that will save the world. She believed she was destined to rule. This is some very crazy teritorry if you ask me. She was often cruel, calculated and cold, just like Tywin or Cersei. Yes, she fought for the slaves, but it was more out of vengeance against slavers than compassion towards the slaves themselves. Her basic philosophy was "if you don't rise up against your masters, you deserve your fate" - which is a very wrong way of looking at things. Only a psychopat looks at victims of tyranny with that logic. She had zero empathy, her primary emotions were rage and anger. I think one should fight injustice with determination and force, but the moment the punishment of your enemies becomes more important than the well-being of your people, you have your priorities mixed up.
As for Sansa, she is the true hero of the story for me. After all the shit she went through, she was strong enough not to allow all that evil and wrongdoing to cloud her judgement. She wasn't preoccupied with ego or destiny, but the well-being of the people of the North. While Dany was obsessed with heritage, lineage (even being angry at people for standing against the Mad King), Sansa was - at the end of her story arc - one of the wisest characters of the show. One that cares about her people more than her personal agenda. The Queen in the North!
Last edited:
Sansa is pretty much what you wanted out of Dany though, right?
The way I see it is that she was let down by the writers. They just didn't care.
She has the whole "mad queen" vibe since she was revealed but the problem here is that this season it felt like they were hammering it down instead of doing that plot point justice. They could have had some inner conflict to her which would have taken a full season to develope properly but the writers didn't care. I guess the star wars money are too good.
At the end of the day she is just one of the parts this season was a trashfire.
She has the whole "mad queen" vibe since she was revealed but the problem here is that this season it felt like they were hammering it down instead of doing that plot point justice. They could have had some inner conflict to her which would have taken a full season to develope properly but the writers didn't care. I guess the star wars money are too good.
At the end of the day she is just one of the parts this season was a trashfire.
Read up on the razing and sacking of cities in ancient times. Killing, raping and enslaving everyone after they surrendered was pretty common.
Also pretty sure the nazis committed some major atrocities in Yugoslavia that really fit the bill.
I've said stupid shit in the heat of the moment when I was younger. It has no bearing on who am I today. Just because I say something at some point years before does not mean I'm destined to do exactly that. I understand that this is a show but she was not developed in a logical way that brought her to this conclusion. Those are not warning signs to me because what she said and what she did, which was primarily to slave owners and awful people, are not the same.
I can see how she gets to this season finale but the show did not do the work to develop that angle. No amount of hints or her threatening to do something is indicative of her responding the way she did in King's Landing. She had not established precedent for killing innocents on a smaller scale ever before, which if she had would've made her heel turn more believable.
Fantastic post BDS, you've explained it perfectly.
I disagreed with you in that other thread and earnestly sought to engage with you but you've been constantly hostile and only interested in engaging with folks that cheered you on. If it's so exhausting and pointless then why come into these threads without any intention of engaging in sincere and open discussion?
I disagreed with you in that other thread and earnestly sought to engage with you but you've been constantly hostile and only interested in engaging with folks that cheered you on. If it's so exhausting and pointless then why come into these threads without any intention of engaging in sincere and open discussion?
Last edited:
Well, I do appreciate you keeping this respectful and not personal despite your opinions and questionable ability to understand the arguments I made.
Anyway, as far as Lindsay Ellis goes, she usually has her head on right as a media critic. She lives and breathes how media affects us, and even though I don't agree with all her arguments (particularly her death of the author video), I've yet to see her give an opinion that she doesn't back up with a well thought out argument. And in the case of this one particular, all she's really saying is what can be said of any other problematic trope: The story they dramatisized and framed is the story that abusers tell themselves to make them feel better about their abuse, and framing it in a from that perspective for the audience could can be bad - Both in validating abusers worldviews and in abused people seeing their abusers justified in media.
When she makes her video on GoT's, she'll probably go into the deeper specifics of the origins of "Man kills woman he loves for her own good" and it's history and how it affects us today, but in the tweet itself, all she is saying that this trope did what all tropes do, and that could potentially be rooted in either the creator's numerous and documented blindspots regarding sex and gender, it's kinda harmful. That seems like a perfectly reasonable take to me.
But fine, sure. Lets hear your reasoning why it's bad. I'm not even looking for an argument, I'm just curious if you actually have anything besides "Whoa whoa whoa, lets not be throwing the S and M word out so carelessly!" backing it up.
And that's the point. She spend 8 seasons being better than anyone - an actually pro-active ruler who looked out for the small folk, who has ruled, who has conquered and fought battles. And they basically just destroyed all of that in one episode by making her 'mad'.
This is not based on the books. There were very few 'mad' Targaryens and those who were insane became so slowly over decades. Not in 5 minutes because of some bells.
People keep praising Sansa in here. What did she do? She was a pawn for 5 seasons. She won the Battle of the Bastards by writing a letter to LF accepting his offer of help. Which he only offered because he was infatuated with this Catelyn look alike. Sansa then got manipulated by LF for the whole of season 7 and needed Bran and Arya's help to get rid of him. She undermined Jon constantly, kept important information from him, betrayed his trust and sat comfortably in a crypt while Jon, Dany, Arya etc. were fighting to save her home. She was rude and undiplomatic to an ally that they needed.
What did Sansa do for the North? It was Jon, Dany and Arya who defended the North against the WW. The North supported the Boltons and later Glover went off to Deepwood Motte when Sansa asked for help against the dead. The only northerners who helped were Alys and Lyanna from houses who supported Jon.
And ultimately in the end, even though her own brother was now King, she demanded independence for the North. Which means that the Iron Islands and Dorne are also going to be demanding independence - why should the North get special privileges? So we are going to get civil war. Most of the North don't even support the Starks anymore on the show. How long is she going to last up there? How are the Starks ruling the North and the 6K going to be different from what Dany wanted? Why should Dany be evil for wanting to rule, but it's okay for Sansa?
Dany was the central female character with hard, raw power - her own power. She bowed to no man. She was no pawn. She was unapologetically ambitious. She wanted to rule. She was unique in the fantasy genre and on television. She was the most powerful character on the show and many women around the world found that inspiring.
Many people like Sansa because she's all about the feminine soft power. That's why she's popular with the male crowd. Dany makes people uncomfortable because she had a story traditionally given to male characters. Her violence is often described as cruel and mad when male characters are cheered for their violence. Her ambition makes her arrogant and entitled. D&D often say that Dany is cruel and merciless because she shows no emotion - apparently women who show no emotion are monsters.
And instead of giving her a proper arc to that ending of being stabbed to death by a man she loves, they turned her mad in 5 minutes because it's in her genes and destroyed everything she did prior to that. Destroyed this beloved character. And that's why people are pissed.
I no longer want to hear about how GOT has great female characters. It does not. They are all shit.
I can somehow understand your pain OP. Felt the same with Cersie tbh. Book Cersie is way more nunanced where you still feel she could overcome her past and become a good character especially after the trail but TV Cersie is just pure evil except for the last few seconds in her life. It was so predictable and boring and not rewarding at all for what she and her brother went through
Sansa went from whiny, power hungry Joffrey worship to mature, wise, fair and noble.
The Dany worship ignored the best women in the series in terms of character development and in the end people rooted for the wrong people.
It's a shame that Gilly wasn't better utilised as a massive influence on Sam and of course Arya was the hero we all needed but nobody seemed to want.
Fuck that noise.
The show, and many fans put such time and stock into a person with a Messiah complex it overlooked people who frankly speaking are the heroes of the series overall.
Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but I see Dany as the oppressed becoming the oppressor, an analogue of the creation of Israel.
Someone removed from their homeland, oppressed, representing people who have suffered, promising them a new homeland and power and portraying those who oppressed them, and anyone else who opposes them as enemies who must be stopped.
Once created, the people will be free, but those who opposed her must be dealt with. The cycle of war then continues with a different bent with those who were displaced by Dany sweeping into power cast as enemies.
Sound familiar?
First of all a coffee cup, then a water bottle. Then they just forgot the green screen.
There are many words I would use to describe Sansa, none of these ones though.
Only she didn't, wasn't and isn't most of the things you describe.
I'm sorry you backed a murderous tyrant bent on her own form of murderous tyranny.
Also everything you say is exactly the point of Martin's writing.
The series is loosely based on the War of the Roses and the creation of the Tudor dynasty.
The infighting and separatist mentalities is what caused the Reformation and multiple rebellions against the crown. All caused by the split in power caused by multiple wars over succession of the crown.
There are no heroes of the story here, just like in real life. Just people who want to hold power over others for their own interests. The fact that the Starks "won" ignores the fact that they control a house of cards that will fall the moment Bran loses power.
That's intentional and probably Martin's final influence. The seeking of simplicity in the complex. The want of a "hero or heroine" to root for despite the fact that the very system of monarchy was a tool of tyranny and oppression and the point of the sword to decide power is inherently evil and leads to people committing grave acts.
Obviously real life didn't have dragons but the blood spilled in the name of claims to birthright is no joke and is something we shouldn't be celebrating as those who celebrated Dany did do unquestionably.
As I said before, I don't have a problem with Dany being "mad" and blind to what she is doing, I have a problem with how they handled it since it was so rushed and hence felt forced. And I don't see the same as Dany making people uncomfortable, but I guess that is my circle of friends.
Also agree, Sansa was not a good person in any way imo, she "won" though so I guess she got that.
Arya and Brienne are two strong women in the series imo.
Straight up beautiful write up OP.
I can't help but feel hollow about this shit show season.
I mean, they moved heaven and earth to make just the worse situations bloom. "
Oh, Dany can get her goals and sit on the throne in one direct power move? Guess we gotta make it seem like if she does that she's going MAD and have her do what the wise advisers she has trusted suggest with some fancy fluffy plan of att- oh no, doing what they suggested made her lose tons of her forces!
/Oh, Jon thinks he can convince the crazy selfish PoS on the Iron Throne that they all need to work together to kill the NK by kidnapping a zombie? It goes side ways? Guess Dany has to travel cross the world in record speed to save him and lose a dragon for it ... making it so that the NK can actually breach the wall faster with her dead baby
/ If the NK DIES they all shatter? Guess the NK should have some personal grunge against Bran so that he comes outta hiding to do the deed himself ... so super Ninja girl can kill him with a basic AF move
/ Dany can't see a shit ton of ships from high in the sky cause we need to take away a 2nd dragon ...
/ Somehow they make a huge attack and kill how many JUST to find and kidnap the ONE black woman that's always by Dany's side?
/ "Maybe we should have someone who doesn't want to be king be king for a change ... " wasn't that Robert? You know, the fat lazy PoS you advised who drove the kingdom into bankruptcy under your watch and only got the Throne because he was a war hero in the right place at the right time? (Also, I didn't forget the random AF "you know just as well as I that MEN hold the real power in this world ... even though I've been committing myself to serving this Queen til now) "
The moment they moved heaven and earth to put the ONE important black woman in this show (who was also a former slave freed by Dany) BACK into chains, make a fucking snarky comment about Dany's Breaker of Chains title and have her beheaded as nothing more than a middle finger to Dany ... that is when I decided in my mind that this whole series can go in the trash. The way they write women and PoC ... these 2 fuckers are gonna ruin SW worse than I thought Jurassic World dude would.
I can't help but feel hollow about this shit show season.
I mean, they moved heaven and earth to make just the worse situations bloom. "
Oh, Dany can get her goals and sit on the throne in one direct power move? Guess we gotta make it seem like if she does that she's going MAD and have her do what the wise advisers she has trusted suggest with some fancy fluffy plan of att- oh no, doing what they suggested made her lose tons of her forces!
/Oh, Jon thinks he can convince the crazy selfish PoS on the Iron Throne that they all need to work together to kill the NK by kidnapping a zombie? It goes side ways? Guess Dany has to travel cross the world in record speed to save him and lose a dragon for it ... making it so that the NK can actually breach the wall faster with her dead baby
/ If the NK DIES they all shatter? Guess the NK should have some personal grunge against Bran so that he comes outta hiding to do the deed himself ... so super Ninja girl can kill him with a basic AF move
/ Dany can't see a shit ton of ships from high in the sky cause we need to take away a 2nd dragon ...
/ Somehow they make a huge attack and kill how many JUST to find and kidnap the ONE black woman that's always by Dany's side?
/ "Maybe we should have someone who doesn't want to be king be king for a change ... " wasn't that Robert? You know, the fat lazy PoS you advised who drove the kingdom into bankruptcy under your watch and only got the Throne because he was a war hero in the right place at the right time? (Also, I didn't forget the random AF "you know just as well as I that MEN hold the real power in this world ... even though I've been committing myself to serving this Queen til now) "
The moment they moved heaven and earth to put the ONE important black woman in this show (who was also a former slave freed by Dany) BACK into chains, make a fucking snarky comment about Dany's Breaker of Chains title and have her beheaded as nothing more than a middle finger to Dany ... that is when I decided in my mind that this whole series can go in the trash. The way they write women and PoC ... these 2 fuckers are gonna ruin SW worse than I thought Jurassic World dude would.
Last edited:
I didn't either until pretty much the end.
When I realised the show wanted me to oppose her because she went against people like Jon Snow but of course, he then went ahead and put his eggs in Dany's basket and completely vindicated her approach.
Even the whole Arya/Sansa thing was trying to turn people against her but in the end, she wasn't wrong.
People saying that she was popular because she was passive and used soft power kinda miss the point. She was brutalised by men, including those she thought she loved and came through stronger and more importantly, able to stop them in their tracks.
Her speech to Ramsay Bolton was impeccable. Her ability to put Jon Snow in his place, brilliant.
She is the opposite of Dany. Dany lost people and lost confidence in herself. Sansa lost people and discovered herself.
WhY dO SoMe oF yOu TyPe LiKe ThIs?
no offense but that's a really cringey way to mock someone's opinion (even if deserved). also makes my head hurt.
anyway, it sucks if you really liked Dany as a hero of some sort and got invested over the years, i get that. personally i disliked her and knew and hoped she would turn out to be as evil as i thought she would, felt vindicated at the end heh. i KNEW it! not super hard to predict from all the red flags though, but it could have gone either way.
im still hurt they killed my boy Ned, i kept hoping it was just a shapeshifter and i would see Sean Bean again in some mega-twist, but that hope died last night lol :(
no offense but that's a really cringey way to mock someone's opinion (even if deserved). also makes my head hurt.
anyway, it sucks if you really liked Dany as a hero of some sort and got invested over the years, i get that. personally i disliked her and knew and hoped she would turn out to be as evil as i thought she would, felt vindicated at the end heh. i KNEW it! not super hard to predict from all the red flags though, but it could have gone either way.
im still hurt they killed my boy Ned, i kept hoping it was just a shapeshifter and i would see Sean Bean again in some mega-twist, but that hope died last night lol :(
Huh, I've never met a guy called Gaius. Did you?
But naming your child after a fictional character that you DON'T KNOW how and where she will end up is dumb and I feel sorry for those children.
User Warned: Inflammatory Generalizations
Okay well I tried to be civil.
You have no clue what you're talking about. You're like a parody of what those who mock this site claim we are like. You just ignore, every single little bit of context no matter what.
You havn't even watched the show. You are litteraly talking out of your ass and making points up as you go.
She was always from the start made out to be a character who becomes a villain. That people retroactively don't like that because they projected onto their perfect little Aryan power fantasy princess doesn't change anything.
She was always, always going to be the villain. That was always clear to the vast majority of people and has been for a long time except the few cultish die-hards.
Nothing will change that. Nothing at all. To deny that is pointless.
You also don't seem to understand which take of Lindsay's I'm talking about. It's the one a few pages back.
Last edited:
I have nothing further to add to how the story arc of Daenerys was butchered in the last two episodes, but I'll have to mention a couple of other things...
Regarding the tired 'If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.' counter, well, that's exactly the opposite of what happened with the remaining Starks. What really left a sour taste in my mouth was how the oathbreaker Sansa was rewarded for her plotting against the person who saved the north from White Walkers. She manipulated Tyrion, knowing what he would do, and her actions contributed on pushing Daenerys into a corner. Thus she was partly responsible for the slaughter in Queen's Landing. In the end, she refused to bow to even his own brother, and was allowed to rule the north on her own because reasons. Oh well, at least she got what she always wanted, to be the queen of the castle, and live a life of luxury.
Regarding the tired 'If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.' counter, well, that's exactly the opposite of what happened with the remaining Starks. What really left a sour taste in my mouth was how the oathbreaker Sansa was rewarded for her plotting against the person who saved the north from White Walkers. She manipulated Tyrion, knowing what he would do, and her actions contributed on pushing Daenerys into a corner. Thus she was partly responsible for the slaughter in Queen's Landing. In the end, she refused to bow to even his own brother, and was allowed to rule the north on her own because reasons. Oh well, at least she got what she always wanted, to be the queen of the castle, and live a life of luxury.
Storytelling wasn't there in the last few seasons, but we've been saying this was going to happen for a long time.
Daenerys is a story about how killing bad people doesn't automatically make you good, and how the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
The character is perfectly coherent, and tyrion even goes through the trouble of spelling it out in the last episode - She's a deeply traumatized child with no real connection to the real world, with a penchant for vengeance and impulsive acts.
She's textbook historical tyrant material.
The issue in the modern sense, that GRRM is probably trying to convey, is very simple:
Killing bad people doesn't make you good.
Daenerys is a story about how killing bad people doesn't automatically make you good, and how the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
The character is perfectly coherent, and tyrion even goes through the trouble of spelling it out in the last episode - She's a deeply traumatized child with no real connection to the real world, with a penchant for vengeance and impulsive acts.
She's textbook historical tyrant material.
The issue in the modern sense, that GRRM is probably trying to convey, is very simple:
Killing bad people doesn't make you good.
Last edited:
Yes, that's entire premise of the books, the central message and a precursor to what happened in the UK in the aftermath.
The highborn, those who believed they deserved power because of their blood spend years fighting over the crown while crises (Dead people here, poverty etc in reality) reign.
The end of the war of the roses started a renaissance in the UK and a period of stability. This is the period that I *think* Bran's reign would represent, analogue to the Elizabethan era. However the stability that created was short lived and ended with Charles I.
I don't disagree that the way Dany was handled in series 8 was *awful*. I however don't see anyone in the series as worthy of worship or as anything other than tyrants wanting power for their own end. Plebians like myself are always the victims of those who decide they are chosen to rule over us. I see no nobility or monarch as a hero. Maybe my republican views (Anti monarchy, not American party!) has coloured my views here.
Also I always seen GoT as a political period drama, with dragons. Not as a hard fantasy first and foremost. The set pieces obviously were a selling point but more important to me was the political intrigue. I loved watching the game but from a view that they were all in the end, selfish tyrant's bent on their own gain.
No, she was not.
I have seen people blaming other charachters, but this is such an act, NOTHING justifies it, not even the slightest. She did it on her own, she owns it on her own.
If your idea of being civil is saying that something I just posted is garbage only to turn around and call another person making a different claim was worse garbage, I don't want to be invited to your house parties.
Anyway, as far as this goes....
This is just pathetic. It's not even so much an argument as a truly half-assed strawman attempt to mischaracterize me and other people voicing their grievances. The consistent complaints I see out here are how bad the writing was, not because it's inconcievable that there is a narrative path where Dany would come to this moment (because there is and I have expressed several times my belief that GRRM will get us there in a far better done fashion), but because it's a character betrayal to have her jump to this moment with the flimsy, limp justifications we got. I don't even feel as strongly about Book Dany as others here have written, like BDS, but I can see when a character is failed by the writing.
I don't know if you think you've been respectful up to this point, but this view you have of those voicing how they feel let down by narrative, I got a sense of this is how you thought of it and it's why I haven't been respectful in kind. Your not interested in hearing these perspectives, you're just interested in disassembling them. What about this view deserves respect? It is, to put it in terms you'd understand, nuclear fire. Speaking of....
I was assuming you meant this one, since it was posted here,
https://www.resetera.com/threads/wh...-to-me-full-got-spoilers.118000/post-20966226
If it's a different one, let me know, I'll give my thoughts on that one.
I think I like show Dany even more than book Dany. GRRM is a great writer, but he seems to have written himself into a web he can't easily break out of with Dany and her Eastern adventures.
Emilia Clarke played the different incarnations/stages of her character, complete with the villainous development that still stays true to Dany the original's character super well, and I think the show had to make some sacrifices particular in seasons 7 and 8 to be able to show us what GRRM has intended for her before we all die of old age. While I am disappointed with other elements and think the strongest episodes were in earlier seasons, it's still a top notch series with a great final season and Dany's character played a major part in that.
Emilia Clarke played the different incarnations/stages of her character, complete with the villainous development that still stays true to Dany the original's character super well, and I think the show had to make some sacrifices particular in seasons 7 and 8 to be able to show us what GRRM has intended for her before we all die of old age. While I am disappointed with other elements and think the strongest episodes were in earlier seasons, it's still a top notch series with a great final season and Dany's character played a major part in that.
Who's talking about justification? I'm talking about how a character was undeservedly rewarded for plotting against an ally who saved her ass, turning people against the ally, and a royalty breaking an oath without any consequences. It's been shown several times during the series where manipulation can lead to, and she should have paid the price for it. But no, her reward was to be crowned.
Haven't seen that tweet... but I don't understand the reason for it to the context of the show ?
I mean, this has happened a lot during the course of the show... so I don't see anything strange with it? But even if I would agree with you that she was rewarded, it has nothing to do with the actions of Dany.
If you click the link, there is a twitter thread that explains it entirely. I'll post the whole think though, one second.
I don't know how to explain to you that the trope of a man killing the woman he loves while in intimate embrace, framing him as the REAL victim here, it's uh... bad. It is toxic and it's bad.
And I am so weary of Thermians in my @'s rationalizing violence done against women (in Game of Thrones, or Logan stabbing Jean, or whatever) with "well he had no other choice!" Like narrative fiction is not a series of choices created by writers.
And it kind of makes you go "hmm" that the most romantic tragic situation they can think of is, what if man does a stabby, but he had to. She's gone Dark Phoenix. But he's real sad about it guys. As though non-fantasy versions of this scenario don't play out in real life a LOT.
Like if you are a woman and a homicide victim, the person most likely to murder you is a current or former intimate partner. "Someone they would normally expect to trust." But narratives like Game of Thrones paint the murderer as the sympathetic one.
The trope of a man tragically killing the woman he loves, with the murderer as the sympathetic party, does not exist in a vacuum. When people are violent against their partners, they see themselves as Jon Snow. They HAD to do it. Look what you made him do, Dany.
As the series demonstrated (and totally botched in the end) the way one frames their own narrative matters. Dany framed herself as a liberator and could not see she was a tyrant. But the show frames Jon in the way domestic abusers frame themselves.
And this is why I'm deeply troubled by the people crowing "he HAD to do it, he had no other choice" - like yes, that is certainly how the show frames it, D&D created a situation where our hero's violence against a woman's body is SAD (he so sad), but justified. In sum, Thanks! I hate it!"
Thanks. It is a mess to navigate through the threads on twitter if you don't have an account if I remember correctly.