Daenerys 'Stormborn' Targaryen: The Breaker Of Chains, Mother Of Dragons Etc

[Colorful Mess]

On 5/19/2019 at 5:14 PM, Zuleikha said:

But what we have been shown to this point does not support the specific choice the writers made for the character of having her massacre civilians post-surrender. That's simply not the particular logic and flavor of the way Dany is brutal. It's possible the writers could have developed her character in a way to make that choice feel right and true, but they didn't because they didn't want to take the time to do so.

Three times she's rounded up people and executed them as a group of prisoners, regardless of guilt/innocence. They did not personally betray her. That's enough character development for me for this decision. In her mind she probably took the whole city prisoner and executed them. 

Even though I think the show did enough legwork to get her there, there are book scenes that they excluded that could provide insight. They really needed to stick with book canon in the first dragon flight scene in S5. That was important character development for this S8 decision. In both, Dany had effectively won but she still wasn't satisfied. In both, she massacred innocents on her dragon. The only difference is that in the first one, she's not completely in control of Drogon yet. Still, she saw innocents massacred and was untroubled. 

Edited May 21, 2019 by Colorful Mess

[RobertDeSneero]

7 hours ago, Callista said:

No. If some of them were really aiming higher, they wouldn't be content with simply being King in the North; they would also want to be king of all the 7 kingdoms.  And the more cunning among them would see Dany as a means to reach that goal.

For example, in the first few seasons, we saw the Boltons--Northerners--usurp the Starks. Do you really think they would have been content to remain simply Wardens of the North for the rest of their lives? Especially if the political situation had continued to work in their favor?

But, as I've been saying, the writers wanted to focus on the main characters and their goals/problems, so they didn't bother with other political realities anymore.

The Boltons are a bit of a special case, with a long-running rivalry with the Starks.  I doubt any of the minor houses of the North have the power and resources to consider what you suggest.  And I think you underestimate the power of Northern nationalism.

[ShellsandCheese]

2 hours ago, RobertDeSneero said:

The Boltons are a bit of a special case, with a long-running rivalry with the Starks.  I doubt any of the minor houses of the North have the power and resources to consider what you suggest.  And I think you underestimate the power of Northern nationalism.

It's easy to be united when you have a common enemy. In the case of the North, the common enemy was The South and whichever King (or Queen) sat on the Iron Throne. Now that they are independent, they don't have a common enemy to unite them. It seems pretty obvious that it won't be long before they start to squabble with each other.   

[VCRTracking]

[Spartan Girl]

If I may change the subject...

Is it wrong that a small petty part of me hopes that killing Dany will haunt Jon for the rest of his life?

You could justify it all you want, but at the end of the day he killed a woman who loved him, woman who was his own kin. It was arguably worse than how Jaime killed the Mad King, because at least with the Mad King it was to stop an immediate attack on millions of innocent people. Maybe if Jon had done it to stop her from torching KL in the first place, it would be comparable, but that wasn't the case, she had already done it. The death was supposed to prevent any future killings, true, but it doesn't change the fact that he killed her when she was vulnerable and alone. He can't hide behind self-defense like Tyrion did with Shae. And he did it the same way the Night Watch killed him: stabbing her in the back.

She clearly was vulnerable and hopeful at that moment; she knew his "you're my queen" was just lip service in the last episode, and yet when he did it again this time, she actually fell for it. It made it all the more worse, IMO.

He was obviously struggling with it. When he told Tyrion that it "felt wrong" I was like, "Well, no shit." But I wish he'd admitted out loud that despite everything he still loved her. Because whatever Dany was at the end, it sucks that aside from the Unsullied, nobody alive was left to remember any of the good she'd done.

[spaceghostess]

21 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

If I may change the subject...

Is it wrong that a small petty part of me hopes that killing Dany will haunt Jon for the rest of his life?

 

I hear you and yeah, I think he'll carry this forever, just as he carries guilt about his betrayal of Ygritte and her end, the weight of this will always be on his conscience. I always had the impression that he stills feels bad about hanging Olly (even if he felt it was justice at the time). That's just how Jon rolls.

One of the notable things to me in the finale was just how TIRED Jon looked, as if he were wearing an invisible cloak of everyone he ever killed. Assassinating Dany pretty much broke him--that's why stood there ready for Drogon to do his worst.

Edited May 21, 2019 by spaceghostess

[VCRTracking]

[Solace247]

On 5/19/2019 at 11:38 PM, SNeaker said:

More like D&D themselves think they could substitute foreshadowing for character development.

Unforgivably lazy. I've never in my entire life seen as terrible a hatchet job as was done on Dany.

The fact that they had to put voiceover dialogue bits in the preceding scenes to the episode where Daenerys burns KL and have Tyrion dialogue about the character’s journey to Jon (the audience) in the finale tells you EVERYTHING you need to know about this arc. It was unearned as was most of the season.

[GraceK]

[BooBear]

2 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

it doesn't change the fact that he killed her when she was vulnerable and alone. He can't hide behind self-defense like Tyrion did with Shae. And he did it the same way the Night Watch killed him: stabbing her in the back.

Here is the basic question for me.. why did he have to kill her? Other than the obvious they were running out of time for the story and wanted shock value. Though I love Drogon to me it makes more sense to kill the Dragon, which can do far more damage even without Dany. Just one shot from one of those left over scorpions and the Dany threat would largely be reduced.  Dany could be imprisoned and tried. 

But more logic errors here why was killing Dany any guarantee that (1) the dragon wouldn't kill them all, (2) the unsullied wouldn't kill them all, (3) the dothraki wouldn't kill them all and (4) the second sons wouldn't come over from Essos and kill them all. 

I know this slap shod show made everything work out for this plot twist by why did Jon think killing Dany would really solve anything? 

[GraceK]

3 minutes ago, BooBear said:

Here is the basic question for me.. why did he have to kill her? Other than the obvious they were running out of time for the story and wanted shock value. Though I love Drogon to me it makes more sense to kill the Dragon, which can do far more damage even without Dany. Just one shot from one of those left over scorpions and the Dany threat would largely be reduced.  Dany could be imprisoned and tried. 

But more logic errors here why was killing Dany any guarantee that (1) the dragon wouldn't kill them all, (2) the unsullied wouldn't kill them all, (3) the dothraki wouldn't kill them all and (4) the second sons wouldn't come over from Essos and kill them all. 

I know this slap shod show made everything work out for this plot twist by why did Jon think killing Dany would really solve anything? 

Even the way he did it made me sick. I’m sorry this characterization of Jon is such a disservice. Look her in the face and kill her. His cowardly, deceptive ruse dishonors both his Stark and Targaryen blood. Who is this guy? 

[Spartan Girl]

4 minutes ago, GraceK said:

Even the way he did it made me sick. I’m sorry this characterization of Jon is such a disservice. Look her in the face and kill her. His cowardly, deceptive ruse dishonors both his Stark and Targaryen blood. Who is this guy? 

Yeah. I felt no sympathy for him whatsoever when he was sniveling over her body. Your bitch tears are nothing, Jon Snow.

[Umbelina]

This is a tiny bit of a post in the unsullied forum from Llywela.  I (we) can't reply there, but it was so very good I thought I'd bring it here:

I'm not sure what to say about Dany, in the end. I really thought last week that her savage slaughter of King's Landing was a moment of madness and bloodlust, brought about by a release of pent-up rage and grief. I thought once it was over, in the harsh light of a new day, she might see the horror in the eyes of her closest advisors and feel or express some semblance of regret – for having killed children, at the very least. But no. She did what she did deliberately, and felt no regret at all. How far she has fallen, how horribly her noble ideals have been corrupted by her ambition and her ruthlessness and her entitlement and her delusion. After everything that had been said, after the promises she had made, she felt utterly justified in her actions, and planned to continue until the whole of Westeros was brought to its knees. "If not love, then fear." What's that quote? Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely. Dany's story, in the end, was a tragedy. Tyrion pretty much summed up to Jon everything I said last week about Dany's journey – I can look back over her narrative trajectory across eight seasons and see clearly how she ended up where she ended, and can also see clearly how many opportunities there were for her to take a different road.

[GraceK]

[GraceK]

I wish they didn’t drop her connection to prophecy and the red priestesses, cause looking back, wow! 

Kinvara says “ Daenerys Stormborn is the one who was promised. From the fire she was reborn to remake the world.”  

That parrots almost what Daenerys ultimate goal becomes by season 8. She wants to remake the world.

She also says  “The dragons will purify nonbelievers by the thousands, burning their sins and flesh away “. Which came true when she burned King’s Landing, burning those who did not “ believe in her”.

“Her dragons are fire made flesh, a gift from the Lord of Light.... Daenerys has been sent to lead the people against the darkness in this war and in the great war still to come.” 

Which also came true, because Dany and her dragons were instrumental in fighting against the AOTD.  

It’s also interesting that the other red priestess we see in Essos is the one who looks at Tyrion when he first arrives, and they share that deep look that seemed to foreshadow something. Looking back, it seems like she knew he was dangerous  somehow, which is good set up to his betrayal because really, who has done Daenerys the most damage? Jon even questions if he did the right thing killing her, because it doesn’t feel right. Because maybe, it wasn’t. Maybe she really was sent to reshape the world. 🤷🏻‍♀️And it’s Tyrion and the 3ER who don’t want things to change . 

My headcanon is that Drogon brings her back to Essos and she is resurrected.

Edited May 22, 2019 by GraceK

[Spartan Girl]

16 minutes ago, GraceK said:

My headcanon is that Drogon brings her back to Essos and she is resurrected

That is a popular theory on the Internet...especially since Drogon was last scene flying toward Volantis where the red priestess Kinavra was from!

Hey why should Beric and Jon be the only guys to come back from the dead?

[RobertDeSneero]

If she is resurrected, maybe she'd be more like Lady Stoneheart.

[rmontro]

1 hour ago, RobertDeSneero said:

If she is resurrected, maybe she'd be more like Lady Stoneheart.

Only if she lays dead for days.  In that case, there would probably be nothing left of her but vengeance.  I like someone's idea here that if she was resurrected she would spend the rest of her days in anonymity helping the poor.  A little humility would have done Dany good.

Then there's the idea of her becoming the new Night Queen, through some sort of dragon magic.  Not saying I would want that to happen, but it's an interesting idea.

[Brn2bwild]

I watched her death scene again and couldn't help but wish that in a twist, Dany had killed Jon.  It doesn't make sense that she'd be so happy and open with him when she was staring warily at him just the scene before and was threatened by him in previous episodes.  She had to know he was coming to kill her, even before he started to remind her of the people she burned.

Then Arya could kill her, or something...

[lucindabelle]

Not my observation- I think time magazine- but dany got the death that should have been Cersei’s, being killed by someone she loves.

[rmontro]

2 hours ago, lucindabelle said:

Not my observation- I think time magazine- but dany got the death that should have been Cersei’s, being killed by someone she loves.

There's some truth in that.  Actually, I kind of expected them both to have the same end.  Cersei because of the valonqar, of course.  And Dany because of the Azor Ahai/Nissa Nissa prophecy. 

Azor had tempered the steel of his sword Lightbringer by thrusting it into Nissa's breast.  Jon (who was supposedly Azor Ahai reborn, in some theories) did end up killing Dany, but if they did it I expected it to be some sort of odd situation against the Night King where some sort of sacrifice was called for to kill him, because of magical reasons.  Sort of like Thanos had to sacrifice something to get the soul gem in Avengers Infinity War.

So part of me kind of breathed a sigh of relief when the Night King was killed.  Until the next episode, and I saw they were going the mad queen route.  That was another possible foreshadowed ending, but I would have honestly preferred Dany's ending to be the Nissa Nissa one.  Because it might have allowed her to heroically sacrifice herself, instead of having Jon put her down like a rabid dog, and her character would have remained intact.  

[Spartan Girl]

6 hours ago, lucindabelle said:

Not my observation- I think time magazine- but dany got the death that should have been Cersei’s, being killed by someone she loves.

And that is what pisses me off most of all. I would have preferred Cersei to get stabbed by Jaime, and for Jin and Dany to sacrifice them self to save the world a la Romeo and Juliet.

[Colorful Mess]

The weight should be on how he enabled the killing of half a million people by believing in a tyrant. At least Tyrion felt guilty for that. The guilt of killing one person - who was clearly not innocent - isn't really that compelling. He should feel guilty for backing Dany for so long that he had to be a kinslayer. I'm glad he betrayed her and chose his family over her. He saved the world from ice and fire. Sam will be sure that gets written into A Song of Ice and Fire.

[lucindabelle]

Also, re jon Killing Dany, I have a problem with killing someone because of potential crimes. That's how it was presented to him, rather than as punishment for what she'd done. I also have a problem with Jon "I cannot tell a lie" sneaking up on her and using her love for him to trick her.

[rmontro]

I really hope that GRRM sits down and rethinks his ending.  It's too late for HBO, but it's not too late for him.  So many people find this ending unsatisfying.  There's a common theme to a lot of the discontent:  "I came all this way for THIS?".  

I think George got too wrapped up in his desire to write an unhappy ending.  He forgot that he owes something to his reader.  A reader wants to go on the journey with the idea that there will be some payoff at the end.  Frodo DID get to Mount Doom, and the ring was destroyed.  The Scouring of the Shire ending that he liked so well was more like an epilogue to the main story.  Having Dany turn evil and making Bran king doesn't give the reader anything for his trouble, doesn't give him anything for the long walk he's taken.

Someone was telling me they wanted to watch all the episodes over from the beginning.  That idea does not appeal to me, because why should I watch all that stuff again and all those characters again, when I already know it isn't going anywhere?

By the way, here's a video of Aaron Rodgers expressing his dissatisfaction with the ending (he's just part of a huge chorus, let's face it), and he also clears up some misunderstandings about which came he played in The Bells:

https://www.packers.com/video/aaron-rodgers-discusses-his-game-of-thrones-appearance-series-finale

[GraceK]

1 hour ago, rmontro said:

By the way, here's a video of Aaron Rodgers expressing his dissatisfaction with the ending (he's just part of a huge chorus, let's face it), and he also clears up some misunderstandings about which came he played in The Bells:

https://www.packers.com/video/aaron-rodgers-discusses-his-game-of-thrones-appearance-series-finale

This warmed my heart 😂

Also I will Stan my Queen forever ❤️👑 

[BooBear]

20 hours ago, Brn2bwild said:

I watched her death scene again and couldn't help but wish that in a twist, Dany had killed Jon. 

Everyone keeps talking about how if they squint really hard they can deal with the ending.. but I can't kind of because of this. Having the woman, the young nieve, beautiful woman go "mad" is such a cliche.  Now I am not a woman's activist but choosing Dany, of all the characters, to take the rotten turn falls into years long tropes all based in the idea that beautiful woman have power over men and the way for men to level the playing field is women's Achilles heel... they are mentally unstable.

What did Dany need any man for at the end of season 6? Not much. She had bent legions of men to fight for her with her looks, sure, but her good nature, bravery, and ruthlessness.  Yet she wasn't prone to indulgences in puppy love or silly romantic pairings. 

Then comes Jon Snow. Well, what did she really need him for? Not much. Honestly, all guys think the good looking woman should want them because they are nice - that is it - even though they really  have nothing special to offer. And this storyline certainly apes that. A strained love affair with Jon only weakens Dany and promotes Jon. But why? Cause Jon is the "good guy".  So of course the heroine should fall madly in love with him... 

So if they really wanted to subvert expectations it should have been Jon, being killed. Perhaps he was made a white walker by the night king or for some other reason.  Dany being the reasonable and resigned person who had to kill her love -- again. 

It also just would have worked with the story so much better. Jon's story really was over. He has not really done much interesting since dying the first time. The battle of the bastards wasn't that interesting to me and he lost. 

Dany had a whole promising life to live filled with endless story possibilities.  Dragons, uniting Essos and Westeros, breaking the wheel and rolling up her sleeves and fixing things. What would that world have been like? Dany birthed dragons, free slaves, raised an army, and took the iron throne back by what.. the age of 22? What would her next 30 years been like?

But she broke the one rule for a woman character.. you can't be too good. Now I know there is some talk about how women are turning into Mary Sue characters. But Dany was not a Mary Sue. She struggled and earned every name they had for her. She was the real thing... this story's "the one" but the temptation to take her down so they could push Jon up was too strong. 

Instead we get Bran in his chair, Tyrion really running things, and Jon playing cave footsie with the free folk. Nothing much changed and I don't really want to imagine any of it. It was all just a waste of time. Is that the message? Cynical and unimaginitive.

If someone had to die, it should have been Jon. 

[GraceK]

Did you any of you guys watch Jason Mamoas livestream of his reaction?? Be still my heart!!   I posted two videos just in case, they are both good. 

he’s such a loyal Khal ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️

Edited May 23, 2019 by GraceK

[RobertDeSneero]

2 hours ago, rmontro said:

I really hope that GRRM sits down and rethinks his ending.  It's too late for HBO, but it's not too late for him.  So many people find this ending unsatisfying.  There's a common theme to a lot of the discontent:  "I came all this way for THIS?".  

I think George got too wrapped up in his desire to write an unhappy ending.  He forgot that he owes something to his reader.  A reader wants to go on the journey with the idea that there will be some payoff at the end.  Frodo DID get to Mount Doom, and the ring was destroyed.  The Scouring of the Shire ending that he liked so well was more like an epilogue to the main story.  Having Dany turn evil and making Bran king doesn't give the reader anything for his trouble, doesn't give him anything for the long walk he's taken.

I'd lose a lot of respect for him as an artist if he panders to the point of changing his ending.  Plus, it would probably take him twice as long to finish.

[Maximum Taco]

3 hours ago, rmontro said:

I really hope that GRRM sits down and rethinks his ending.  It's too late for HBO, but it's not too late for him.  So many people find this ending unsatisfying.  There's a common theme to a lot of the discontent:  "I came all this way for THIS?".  

I think George got too wrapped up in his desire to write an unhappy ending.  He forgot that he owes something to his reader.  A reader wants to go on the journey with the idea that there will be some payoff at the end.  Frodo DID get to Mount Doom, and the ring was destroyed.  The Scouring of the Shire ending that he liked so well was more like an epilogue to the main story.  Having Dany turn evil and making Bran king doesn't give the reader anything for his trouble, doesn't give him anything for the long walk he's taken.

It's doubtful that he will. 

He's been pretty firm that he's not going to change his ending to suit other people. 

Here's a quote from an interview he did in 2012

Quote

Of course I will disappoint some of my fans because they are making theories about who will finally take the throne: who would live, who would die… and they even imagine romantic pairings. But I have already experienced that phenomenon with Feast for Crows and again with Dance with Dragons, and repeating the words of Rick Nelson: “You can’t please anyone, so you’ve got to please yourself”. So I will write the two last books as good as I am capable of and I think the great majority of my readers would be happy with it. Trying to please everyone is a horrible mistake; I don’t say you should annoy your readers but art isn’t a democracy and should never be a democracy. It’s my story and those people who get annoyed should go out and write their own stories; the stories they wanna read.

I wouldn't count on GRRM to change the ending because the fans are upset. This is his story and he's always kind of beat that drum, he says he doesn't like fanfiction because he doesn't like people playing in his sandbox, so why would he let fan response dictate his writing? I don't think he feels like he owes anything to his readers, other then gratitude that they bought his book and liked it. 

[GraceK]

I don’t think he’s gonna change his ending. I just think his ending will make more sense.

Listen, what’s more interesting?

a woman who walks into a fire and births dragons, with good intentions and a gentle heart, a fervent desire to change the world and help people and firepower and literal destiny to do it? And over time, the more armies she’s gains, and the stronger she gets, and more people she frees, the more righteous she becomes. The more evil people she burns,and the gratification she receives from the people she liberates and the love she gets is a balm to her heart. More and more she becomes she convinced that her destiny is divine, that she is put on this earth to Remake the world, and why not? Especially if she helps defeat the AOTD? She has dragons and is a liberator. Isn’t her will the will of the Divine? Isn’t that how Tyrants are really born? That’s interesting. That descent into bloodshed and tyranny is tragic and beautiful. Danys falls from grace will be truly heartbreaking because she’s not Hitler. She’s not evil. She’s not a bad person setting out with bad intentions. She’s a good person with good intentions who ultimately  is a victim of the greater good trumps all, even it means burning them all amongst the way. Like Alexander the Great, or Julius Cesear.

Instead we got a hero who went mad at bells and a lovers rejection 🙄. Oh and her genetics.  Please. George will do this so much better.  That’s why people are mad. They went with Hitler imagery and dialogue...like really? 🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️Come on. That’s not who she is. She’s the dangerous side of an idealist. She’s the messiah figure pushed too far. She’s Buffy willing to sacrifice Dawn and 50,000 civilians if it means the world is safe. ( in her head logic) . She’s not Hitler or the Nazis, who are evil and knew they are evil and went into things hoping to wipe out certain portions of the population out of racism and bigotry. D and d are just so simple and dumb 🤦🏻‍♀️🥺🥺they don’t understand nuance.

Edited May 23, 2019 by GraceK

[Zuleikha]

She’s the dangerous side of an idealist. She’s the messiah figure pushed too far. She’s Buffy willing to sacrifice Dawn and 50,000 civilians if it means the world is safe. ( in her head logic) . She’s not Hitler or the Nazis, who are evil and knew they are evil and went into things hoping to wipe out certain portions of the population out of racism and bigotry.

Yes! This exactly! There was a logical storyline for Dany becoming an antagonist, but D&D gave us the lazy incoherent one instead.

[MarySNJ]

On 5/21/2019 at 7:27 PM, BooBear said:

Here is the basic question for me.. why did he have to kill her? Other than the obvious they were running out of time for the story and wanted shock value. Though I love Drogon to me it makes more sense to kill the Dragon, which can do far more damage even without Dany. Just one shot from one of those left over scorpions and the Dany threat would largely be reduced.  Dany could be imprisoned and tried. 

But more logic errors here why was killing Dany any guarantee that (1) the dragon wouldn't kill them all, (2) the unsullied wouldn't kill them all, (3) the dothraki wouldn't kill them all and (4) the second sons wouldn't come over from Essos and kill them all. 

I know this slap shod show made everything work out for this plot twist by why did Jon think killing Dany would really solve anything? 

Because reasons, of course. /s

Because George R.R. Martin plans that outcome for his character arcs for Jon and Dany and D&D had to contrive (poorly) some reason to get them to that point. In my opinion, very little about these characters makes any sense in this season and they were checking off bullet points to get the characters in the GRRM-assigned outcomes in the course of a few episodes. Logic, what’s that?

[Brn2bwild]

4 hours ago, GraceK said:

This warmed my heart 😂

Also I will Stan my Queen forever ❤️👑 

She wasn't even my favorite coming into this season, but damn they screwed her.

[VCRTracking]

If you showed only Dany's scenes throughout the series without it intercut with the storylines in Westeros, her arc wouldn't have been that much of a surprise.

[rmontro]

4 hours ago, GraceK said:

Did you any of you guys watch Jason Mamoas livestream of his reaction?? 

I was already a fan of Jason Mamoas, but I'm an even bigger one now.  Loved his reaction, very similar to my own. 

3 hours ago, RobertDeSneero said:

I'd lose a lot of respect for him as an artist if he panders to the point of changing his ending.  Plus, it would probably take him twice as long to finish.

I'd gain a lot of respect for him if he realized he was wrong and changed things around a bit.  I posted this quote before, but I'll repeat it here:

"I’ve been so slow with these books," Martin told Rolling Stone. "The major points of the ending will be things I told [Benioff and Weiss] five or six years ago. But there may also be changes, and there’ll be a lot added."

https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/100950/did-game-of-thrones-end-the-way-that-george-rr-martin-intended

He hasn't written the ending yet, so nothing is in stone.  If his mind comes up with a better ending, how good of an author would he be not to use it?  He can change the ending without having to pander.  Anyway, there's a big difference between not trying to please everyone, and having people recognize this as the worst ending ever.

[slf]

Just rewatched scenes of hers from season two, when she's in Qarth bargaining with The Spice Trader and damn. Like, tone deaf in the extreme to play the birthright card in a roomful of people born to nothing. She stutters when she has to admit she has no army, no allies in Westeros, just a naive belief that people will rise up and fight for her when she retusn to the Seven Kingdoms. All she can offer is a promise she will repay him three times over if he gives her his ships (which, as he points out, he needs). It's so embarrassing. And then she starts in with the fire and blood talk. She really was already on the path.

Edited May 23, 2019 by slf

[VCRTracking]

[MJ Frog]

17 hours ago, GraceK said:

Listen, what’s more interesting?

All of the things. All of the things you described in your post were far more interesting than what we got, and were what I would have hoped for in Dany's arc. What a show THAT would have been. The seeds were there, and a number of us saw them, but they were never allowed to grow they way they should.

And I very much agree that Dany was not an evil conqueror, but someone potentially just as dangerous: a zealot. Someone who believes any sacrifice is worth the goal, and woe betide anyone she sees as being in any way a threat to that goal.

Great post.

Edited May 23, 2019 by MJ Frog
A thing. Small thing, really.

[Zuleikha]

And then she starts in with the fire and blood talk. She really was already on the path.

Which path? Because I agree if you mean the path to taking the Iron Throne by violent conquest. But I strongly disagree if you mean the path to massacring civilians post-surrender. She was blustering with her fire and blood talk after she'd been completely owned in an attempted diplomatic negotiation. It's not like she actually attacked. She didn't do anything violent until she was betrayed and attacked.

[rmontro]

4 hours ago, Zuleikha said:

Which path? Because I agree if you mean the path to taking the Iron Throne by violent conquest. But I strongly disagree if you mean the path to massacring civilians post-surrender.

D&D even said that it took a perfect storm to bring Dany to that point.  So it's not like "This is her, this is who she always was".  She had some instability in her Targaryen genes and some ruthless traits, sure.  But she was never a murderer of innocent children.  She was driven to that, and it took a unique combination of circumstances to bring her to that.  

At least, that's what D&D's take on it is.  I hate the whole lot of it, and I intensely dislike the way Dany was portrayed after S08 E03.

[slf]

9 hours ago, Zuleikha said:

Which path? Because I agree if you mean the path to taking the Iron Throne by violent conquest. But I strongly disagree if you mean the path to massacring civilians post-surrender.

I did mean violent conquest, lol. But, y'know, one screaming about her birthright and being owed the Iron Throne and how she'd burn anyone who betrayed her and take what was rightfully hers with fire and blood. So for me this is splitting hairs. I get that it isn't for you.

I agree it was rushed (from an emotional and psychological pov) in the last two seasons (and she was given a deeply stupid trigger) but the destination was probably always gonna be the same and it's easy to look at earlier seasons and see how.

Edited May 24, 2019 by slf

[PatsyandEddie]

16 hours ago, VCRTracking said:

Emilia also studied old footage of dictators like Hitler to get the tone and imagery on point. Even though they were speaking languages she couldn’t understand, the inflections in their voices left their message quite clear. 

[FemmyV]

Right now, I feel like D and D's second greatest mistake, in rushing Dany from hero to zero in two episodes is that it didn't give viewers time to psychologically detach from the character. Although Ned's death was a shocker, we watched his slide to disfavor over the course of several episodes. Although the Red Wedding was a shocker, we watched Rob fuck up for almost a full season, leading up to it.

As someone who long ago expected Dany to die near the end, and even to die at Jon's hands, everything about the way it was done came off as rushed, contrived and half-ass. Dany was portrayed as a hero, right up until the moment she wasn't (when she begged Jon to keep silent — and in that moment, she wasn't tyrannical, she was simply weak).

[RobertDeSneero]

3 hours ago, FemmyV said:

Right now, I feel like D and D's second greatest mistake, in rushing Dany from hero to zero in two episodes is that it didn't give viewers time to psychologically detach from the character.

Why should viewers be given time to psychologically detach from the character?

[TheGreenKnight]

I think their biggest mistake was not clarifying what the hell actually happened with the character. Right now I could give you 3 to 7 possible explanations of what she was thinking in the moment and what might have contributed to the decision, though no clear explanation was given in-show for her actions.

With the Red Wedding we know the Freys killed the Starks because Robb didn't keep his deal to marry one of the daughters. With Ned's death, we know he died because Joffrey was a lunatic psychopath who wouldn't be controlled by Cersei. With Daenerys, there is no clear explanation for why she did what she did. Was it planned beforehand (after Missandei's death or even years prior) or was it a split-moment decision? Was it purely emotional for her (the people weren't cheering for her or she was undone by yet another betrayal in Tyrion letting Jaime go or she just saw her birthplace and went berserk to have it), was it political (an attempt to scare all of the 7 kingdoms into submission and subdue any push for Jon's claim to the throne later on), was it genetic (she was craaazzzzy the whole time and the viewers missed it somehow), or something else entirely (some have suggested she might have seen the people as complicit in evil because they allowed the Lannisters to rule or that she might have wanted to get rid of the people there to replace them with her own)? Who even knows? How to even discuss a character where there is only mystery and no absolute fact aside from she went on an inexplicable, uncharacteristic, unnecessary massacre?

Edited May 24, 2019 by TheGreenKnight

[Umbelina]

It's also kind of smug of the show to be all:  THIS IS A MESSAGE TO YOU ABOUT SAVIORS AND THEIR PRESS! 

• You should not have been swayed by "the edit" or the triumphant music
• You should have listened to Dany's words and watched her deeds and been more aware of her dangerous side all along
• How many of YOU were calling for her to burn everything down after Mellisadae was beheaded?  Be careful what you wish for!

While I can kind of see the point of all of that, this is not real life, where OF COURSE we would have been afraid of Dany and her dragons, and her very scary armies of killers, rapists, and pillagers, and the woman who was spouting off like a messiah and quite obviously deluded? 

It was a TV show dudes.  Where people do take their clues about how we feel about characters from the WRITERS of said characters, and the EDITING choices of music and lighting and costume and camera angles.

So no, TV show alone?  I understand why people bought into the heroine shtick.

It's honestly hard for me to judge TV-only viewers responses to Dany.  In the books I started doubting Dany long ago, so on the show, of course I did as well, in spite of editing and all the rest.

I do think that implication of being condescending toward viewers who were rooting for Dany is annoying and insulting to show-only people.

I also think the message of "look at facts and deeds" rather than the press of "leaders" is a decent message.  However, that should have been done ON the show, not in interviews or "inside the episodes." 

[Constantinople]

Say what you will about Dany, but she didn't violate guest right when Mero was being an asshole to her and Missandei in Dany's tent outside of Yunkai

[rmontro]

6 hours ago, FemmyV said:

Dany was portrayed as a hero, right up until the moment she wasn't (when she begged Jon to keep silent — and in that moment, she wasn't tyrannical, she was simply weak).

And aside from being weak, she was also right.

2 hours ago, Umbelina said:

this is not real life, where OF COURSE we would have been afraid of Dany and her dragons, and her very scary armies of killers, rapists, and pillagers, and the woman who was spouting off like a messiah and quite obviously deluded? 

I agree with most of your post, but I don't agree that Dany was obviously deluded.  She was at the end, of course, but that was after the villain edit came into effect.  If she was obviously deluded all along, she wouldn't have gained the support of other heroes of Westeros like Jorah, Varys, Tyrion, Yara, Theon, Jon, Davos, and even Missandre (she had a hero's edit in the end).

By the way, I was thinking about how incredibly common it is in GRRM's world to burn cities to the ground.  How many cities do you suppose get burned in his books?  I know it's a lot of them.  Even Winterfell was burned by the Boltons. 

I'm not defending Dany's actions here, but it seems like we are only supposed to feel moral outrage when she does it.  Most actions take place through the incredibly cruel and barabaric lens of the middle ages, but for Dany we're suddenly supposed to don our politically correct modern sensibilities, as cued by all the slow motion scenes of women and children dying, along with the sad music.

I'd also add that Jon Snow killed a child, as did Missandre, and Theon killed children, and they got to die with the hero's edit.  

I will say that the image of Dany with the dragon wings (Drogon's) was pretty cool though.

[Zuleikha]

I also think the message of "look at facts and deeds" rather than the press of "leaders" is a decent message.  However, that should have been done ON the show, not in interviews or "inside the episodes."

But if we look at the facts and deeds, Dany's still not some obvious monster. Westeros/Essos are cruel worlds in which brutal justice is common and acts of war are also common. I'm not going to go through the laundry list, but every character who is still framed as heroic at the end of the show has done acts of justice that are arguably just as brutal as anything Dany's done and arguably for less reason. For example, Ramsay had to die, but he didn't have to die that particular way. Arya didn't have to kill the Freys at all, much less the vicious way that she did. Those brutal acts were for personal satisfaction.

Dany's most gray acts prior to the burning of King's Landing were generally coupled with delivering a political message that was intended to end real, active, significant dangers to both her rule and her vulnerable people. 

And IMHO, by show narrative structure, Dany was wrong to listen to Tyrion about King's Landing instead of Yara/Ellaria/Olenna back when she first moved on Westeros. Tyrion's strategy was a disaster, costing Dany her alliance with three of the seven kingdoms, Ellaria and Olenna their lives, and strengthening Euron at Yara's expense. The show had Olenna explicitly tell Dany she shouldn't be listening to Tyrion, which again, given what happens, the show appears to be endorsing Olenna's viewpoint as having been right.  (I also have NEVER understood how the alternate plan of starving the city was supposed to result in less deaths than a quick, tactical attack with dragons. Did Tyrion really think Cersei would do anything other than let people die while she hoarded food personally and tried to think of a way out?)

So it's all just a jumbled mess. Especially when you add on to all of the above that Westeros has real issues with highborn abuse of the small folk and we never ended up truly knowing what Dany's plans were/how destructive they really would have been for the Westerosi.