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

[slf]

7 hours ago, rmontro said:

Dany has definitely sought to rule, but her reasons have always seemed to be valid.  She wanted to restore her family's legacy

I always saw that as more Visery's thing, the family legacy- getting back what he saw as theirs. Dany didn't personally seem to care much but her tune changed when Robert Baratheon repeatedly tried to have her killed. So, in a way, self-defense was her reasoning.

For me, when things started getting interesting was when it switched from going after the people who tried to kill her to the 'taking what's mine with fire and blood' nonsense.

[Sakura12]

5 hours ago, GraceK said:

What’s better to you? A woman JUSTIFIABLY  angry at advisors who aren’t loyal, whose  military plans lost her key allies, who are trying to kill her , who prefer a male claimant,  and are constantly helping her enemies? Or a woman who suddenly hears bells and goes insane?

But the coin tossing, her having no reaction to watching her abuser get killed after he threatened her and her unborn baby and her burning slave owners for killing children, freeing slaves and forbidding the rape of women. All that foreshadows Dany suddenly going crazy and burning women and children instead of going after her enemy. Makes perfect sense. 🙄

If they went with Dany is angry and all out of fucks to give then I would buy that. It's the sudden turn to insanity that they are pushing I don't buy. Going with well she's a Targaryen and they are supposed to be insane is not telling me a story of what drove someone to become a mad woman. 

Cersei's been a Mad Queen for awhile and not one character ever called her that. Some were even making excuses her by saying she has a good heart when it comes to her children even though her last child killed himself because of what she did. She had someone that loved her despite all the awful things she's done to others and him. Then she gets a romantic ending by dying with the one that loves her. And Dany is the one that is alone and insane. 

[Athena]

Please remember the discussion is about a fictional character and not about the audience and other posters.

[sistermagpie]

12 hours ago, rmontro said:

Dany has definitely sought to rule, but her reasons have always seemed to be valid.  She wanted to restore her family's legacy, she wanted to avoid her father's mistakes, and she wanted to use her position to do good, and free the slaves.   She specifically has wanted to avoid becoming what her father was, and yet in the space of about an episode she does (I think she starts the transformation during the post war celebration at Winterfell, and it is arguably complete by the beginning of the next episode).

Yeah, they just really needed more steps. And not in terms of having her slowly "go mad" which whatever they say, she really hasn't done if by "mad" we mean losing touch with reality. 

To me it is perfectly logical in her mind, only they didn't lay out the logic of the last few jumps to this step. (The whole show is like we were playing chess and suddenly it turned into checkers (jump jump jump - KING ME!") But imo she doesn't particularly stand out in terms of being "evil" except that she's more powerful.

The story is basically about power. That's why it makes sense to name the TV show GoT instead of SoS or CoK or whatever. Everybody is dealing with having or not having power. Most characters are seeking it on different levels or in different ways. Often in order to keep themselves from being under somebody else's power.

At the top of this ladder, though, we have the few characters going for the biggest symbol of power, the IT. (Actually, that's probably the second rung--the top is the Night King.) Dany, Renly, Stannis and Cersei all go for it. Renly's characterized as the least focused on power and he gets wiped out early. Stannis and Dany have a lot in common--they both have a history of wanting to be just, both consider themselves the legitimate heir, both come to believe they have a great destiny beyond themselves to sit on the throne. And both burn something.

They both do something that could be seen as mad. In both cases it went against their behavior in the past (Stannis *loved* his daughter, he didn't secretly not care about her.) It's just this kind of need for power--even if it comes out of a need for security--eventually gets too big unless you outright reject it or put a limit on it. 

It's imo ridiculous for them or anyone to put it in terms of her being a Targ--the only way that seems really relevant to be is that the Targs had power. It's the power that's the danger, not necessarily mental illness (though inbreeding can cause instability, of course). Dany is the most powerful individual character so she's the most dangerous. There was never going to be a solution on this show that came down to the strongest person (the ruler of the 7K) needing more power, which Dany represents. 

10 hours ago, rmontro said:

I can't wait to hear this speech she's going to give about her future plans.  Spoilers say that it's about freeing the slaves.  My memory may be faulty, but there are no slaves in Westeros, are there?  I'm wondering is she will talk about going city to city, "freeing" those who are under the rule of their local leaders, unless they bend the knee, and if they don't they all burn.  That would likely goad Jon into killing her, if he hadn't already decided to.  I also wonder if she directs any threats toward Sansa.

I could totally believe she'd put this all in the context of freeing slaves. The Unsullied are the perfect moment for her. Break the chains and freely and gratefully worship your savior.

9 hours ago, Andromeda said:

I love this article.  

Saying ‘Game of Thrones' fans should regret naming kids after Daenerys is sexist. Stop it!

Doesn't Khaleesi basically mean a female warlord? The name was already about empowerment. There's lots of male names that celebrate power and dominance. The name can be about the ideal.

5 hours ago, slf said:

I always saw that as more Visery's thing, the family legacy- getting back what he saw as theirs. Dany didn't personally seem to care much but her tune changed when Robert Baratheon repeatedly tried to have her killed. So, in a way, self-defense was her reasoning.

For me, when things started getting interesting was when it switched from going after the people who tried to kill her to the 'taking what's mine with fire and blood' nonsense.

Yes, there's a logical ratcheting up of the need for power. First you're powerless. Then you get protection for yourself from the threat. Then you destroy the threat. Then you start destroying the threats to other people. That might lead to you yourself being a threat. Now you've got threats to yourself again to destroy...

[Portia4844]

10 hours ago, Andromeda said:

It all Bran's fault. 

Bran being evil would be interesting. 

So much time was devoted to the NK/Others and Dany and the dragons but not Bran after he becomes the 3ER.  Since Bran is the only one of those storylines left when Dany and possibly Drogon are dead, it has to mean something to Martin at least. 

D&D have made Bran as mysterious as possible with all the sitting, staring, and throwing out a few lines to show he knows something.  They carefully make sure no one spends any time with him except Tyrion but won't reveal what was said.  I keep thinking they must be saving some moment to show how clever they are in surprising us.  Bran being King makes no sense based on what we've been shown.  It would surprise me if Bran is just evil and has been plotting to get on the throne for that reason.  But, that would be too much like Dany suddenly goes crazy.  I want him to have more purpose than that.

[izabella]

Bran wants nothing, as he said to Tyrion.  He hasn’t been plotting to get the throne.  The show runners failed on his storyline.  

[Hana Chan]

An interesting and well-thought out take on Dany's actions that puts a lot of things in perspective. Worth listening to.

[GraceK]

http://watchersonthewall.com/daenerys-targaryen-throne/

Another really good article on Danys motives. I wish the writers are this smart.

[Umbelina]

1 hour ago, Hana Chan said:

An interesting and well-thought out take on Dany's actions that puts a lot of things in perspective. Worth listening to.

This was very good.  Thanks.

I think Dany is such a fascinating character.  I think she's also a cautionary tale that I think GRRM was telling.  That is, be careful of saviors, be careful of those who inspire worship or adoration, especially if they thrive on that and require it, people are complex, but an overwhelming need for power and acclaim is a warning.

It has been a warning in just about every contender for the throne really.  The difference is Dany has "nukes" (the dragons) and is capable of faster and more total devastation.

I don't know which option would be "better" for that character though.

1. She's sane.  She nukes KL as a warning to others not to even think about challenging her, because she will destroy anyone and anything standing in her way with "fire and blood."  She kills hundreds of thousands because it's the fastest way to win, and she may even justify it to herself by saying, "in the end more would die if we drag this out."  There are certainly twentieth century parallels to that.
2. She snapped, got furious and upset about so many losses in such a small space of time.  She's very upset that her dream of being greeted with flowers and love was completely idiotic, and she failed to see that.  She wins, but it's not enough, her FIRE AND BLOOD fury demands retribution, she has a deadly temper tantrum, and because she has dragons, it's incredibly destructive.
3. Targs because of centuries of inbreeding have a tendency toward madness, which sometimes presents itself later in life, in times of stress.  This could even be because there is a part of some of them that IS part dragon.  So, Dany finally turns more dragon than human, or "insane" in that whatever was holding her back from the quickest and most sure way of winning?  Disappears.  Others call that insanity, but Targs do think they are better than mere humans.  It's why she has some immunity to fire.  Her "destiny" is not only being able to birth dragons and rule wherever she says she wants to?  Her "destiny" is also having a different moral code as far as how to get there, more of a dragon's code than traditional human.

Of all of those, the 3rd is the most generous to Dany really. 

She is definitely not more bloodthirsty than others who have wanted that throne.  She is, because of dragons (nukes) more able shed blood and devastate lands, and thus, to win by fear than they were.  "Let it be fear."  "Fire and Blood."

That's why I don't buy the whole "misogyny" argument, and I am a complete feminist and sensitive to that.  We haven't had many men trying for that throne that were any better or "saner" than Dany.  They have mostly been bloodthirsty and horrible, and they have killed innocents as well, and not cared at all either.

Did the showrunners do a good job telling this tale?  Hell no.  They rushed it abominably, and they went for plot and showbiz blockbuster over characters. 

However, I think other characters were sacrificed far more than Dany here.  We don't even know the 3ER, Jon's a blithering weak idiot.  Varys and Tyrion have been eating stupid pills forever.  Cersei is not a victim, she didn't give a shit about her children, she's an asshole...I could go on.

All to end this complicated story ASAP  Shame on them.

1 hour ago, Hana Chan said:

An interesting and well-thought out take on Dany's actions that puts a lot of things in perspective. Worth listening to.

Sorry, somehow this double posted

Edited May 17, 2019 by Umbelina
it double posted

[rmontro]

On 5/16/2019 at 8:55 PM, RobertDeSneero said:

My contention is that the evidence that Dany would do what she did is not foreshadowing.  I believe that the actual show tells us that she told Tyrion that she planned on burning the city, that he got her to concede that she wouldn't do it if the bells rang, then she decided to do it anyways.  Thus, she had already shown that she was willing to attack those that viewers presumably see as innocents.

Yeah, but she was already getting the evil villain edit by that time.

20 hours ago, Andromeda said:

It all Bran's fault. 

That's pretty funny, but it makes as much or more sense than what we're seeing.  Not only Drogon, Bran could probably warg himself into Dany if he wanted to, if you assume that his powers are growing.

[lucindabelle]

I wasn’t angry about the red wedding. I was sad but not angry because it was logical and made sense wrt choices characters had made and who they are. Big difference.

shock for shock sake is not good storytelling nor is it even tragic. Tragedy is supposed to come from character flaw. Many of us don’t feel that flaw has been showcased in any meaningful way.

[Colorful Mess]

Her flaw was wanting the Iron Throne and letting her dragon side take over. She started acting like her brother. You could tell she wanted to in S7. Whenever she suffered a defeat, she lashed out with violence. 

[lucindabelle]

Not what I saw. Give me an example of her being defeated and reacting with violence. I don’t consider killing people about to gang rape her “reacting with violence,” but self defense. In her eyes burning of mirri justified (I tend to agree). 

How is her self defense a dragon side? Is it also for arya and Sansa and if not why not?

[MrsR]

On 5/18/2019 at 1:47 PM, rmontro said:

Only to turn around and tell me we're supposed to despise her.

I'm satisfied with the ending. Almost happy but I can't bring myself to say happy because this is after all a Tragedy, (as opposed to a Comedy).

I don't despise nor do I think the writers wish for us to "despise" her. It's not so black and white. I pity her, I have empathy for her.  She had a great life, living large surrounded by people who loved her, and had a spectacular career doing great things. (Sometimes she did it badly) And she gave it up to chase the Throne. 

She's feared, not despised. In the end, she'll be pitiful. You don't have to despise her.

A classical, Nietzschean, Brechtian, ending. Or if you prefer a more modern moral, "The only way to win the game, is to not play the game."

Edited May 20, 2019 by MrsR

[Snowball II]

2 minutes ago, MrsR said:

I don't despise nor do I think the writers wish for us to "despise" her. It's not so black and white. I pity her, I have empathy for her.  She had a great life, living large surrounded by people who loved her, and had spectacular career doing great things. (Sometimes she did it badly) And she gave it up to chase the Throne. 

She's feared, not despised. In the end, she'll be pitiful. You don't have to despise her.

I don't despise Dany, either.  I despise what she has done, of course, but I understood how she got to that point.  So, even though the final season has been rushed, I don't think it's been a complete failure.  I get it, I just wish we had seen more of the journey before we got to the destination.

[izabella]

Did she “give up” a great life to chase the IT?  I don’t see it that way.  She felt entitled to the IT, and lived her life and did her life just to get it.  It’s been he goal forever.  I recall she and Drogo were really big on talking about destroying cities to get it...revenge for the IT having been taken from her ancestors.  

If the show wants me to think she is insane, they failed.  I think she has always been angry and gave in to her anger at the people of KL for not cheering when she defeated them.  Then she did what she always wanted to do - burn it to the ground.  The only way KL could have saved itself is if everyone had cheered for her as their savior after the bells of surrender.

[Colorful Mess]

13 minutes ago, lucindabelle said:

Not what I saw. Give me an example of her being defeated and reacting with violence. I don’t consider killing people about to gang rape her “reacting with violence,” but self defense. In her eyes burning of mirri justified (I tend to agree). 

How is her self defense a dragon side? Is it also for arya and Sansa and if not why not?

Mirri was a prisoner and a slave and no longer a personal threat.  Xaro and Doreah, were also prisoners and no longer a personal threat. Her punishment was cruel and unusual. Her response to the masters crucifying the children was to arbitrarily round them up and give them eye-for-an-eye. This is not a person to lead Westeros into any sort of Enlightenment even though she claims she can (tyrants always promise stuff they cant deliver). The former masters she again arbitrarily rounded up and fed to her dragons. She says she'll let her dragons decide who is guilty/innocent - that is basically the same "justice" as Caligula. Her imprisonment in the Dothraki is what seems to have turned her into a conquering dragon (similar to her father's imprisonment) because now she's giving speeches about killing men in iron suits who are no threat to her. She reacts with anger when she finds out she's losing to Cersei in 7x4, and she launches her furious rampage on the Lannister armies. She wanted to burn the Tarlys who were prisoners and of no threat to her. It was chilling how clinically she executed them, delivered the news to Sam, and her reaction to his reaction (zero empathy). She responded with a haughty anger to the Northern small folk who didn't simper and bow to her. In the "previously on" the show used the phrase "you don't want to wake the dragon, do you?" over Dany's face as she's watching Missandei's execution. That seems to have set off what we saw in 8x5, but the dragon was awake for a long time. Her suppression of it really seemed to be an effort. Viserys comes up in Season 7. In 7x2, when she picked up the miniature dragon and wistfully says that her brother Viserys would have attacked KL by now, Tyrion reminded her that she's not here to be Queen of the Ashes. But she puts down the miniature dragon and looks disappointed. She also defends Aegon's rule by fear even as Tyrion is trying to help her be different (like Jon's reminded her), and she herself is claiming to be different (illustrating her hypocrisy). Visual imagery also helped that scene by having lightning flash in the background when she mentions Viserys. She's gotten quite a few ominous shots like that. Standing on top of the pyramid in Meereen, like a god over all the people, with the Targaryen banner in the background looking similar to a Nazi symbol. Looking crazy-eyed with anger when she accuses Tyrion of intentionally losing to side with his family. Anxious violins playing over her face when she sees Jon getting praised for the battle. Dragonstone - everything about that place screams evil Bowser's Castle. Jon being visibly afraid of her dragons and she telling him not to be afraid. Usually when a character says that, it's a signal to the viewers that YES we should be afraid. And the shot of Drogon staring at Jon was scary. If people saw that as cute/funny, they probably misread Dany the whole time. 

[GiuliettaMasina]

 

 

 

6 minutes ago, MrsR said:

A classical, Nietzschean, Brechtian, ending. Or if you prefer a more modern moral, "The only way to win the game, is to not play the game."

In classical theatre the hero is brought down by their own hubris. Dany has done almost nothing but follow her advisors this season. If they'd given the death of Rhaegal any meaning this might look more a like a Greek tragedy (e.g. she needed two dragons to win the Battle of Kings Landing, and resorted to scorched earth techniques when she realizes there's no other way to win).

Nietzsche revers ancient Greek tragedy and disliked naturalist theatre. He also believed a chorus was an essential element of tragedy. The purpose of the chorus is to tell us how to feel; tragedy is not about intellectual stimulation, but about catharsis. Wanting to "trick" your audience is neither Greek nor Nietzschean.

Brecht's epic theatre was inspired by a (mis)interpretation of East Asian dramaturgy and also deliberately eschewed realism. In a common example of Brechtian staging, actors remain visible to the audience even when they are "off-stage" in the action. Revealing the mechanics of theater is the point--to manipulate you while simultaneously revealing the sources of manipulation. It is an inherently political theatre. The closest I can think of to a Brecthian episode of television is Dead Freight on Breaking Bad, which was a more or less constructed to expose the audience to its reaction to and enjoyment of a very particular trope. There is also no foreshadowing in Brecht's epic theatre; he believed each moment, scene, etc should stand on its own.

[lucindabelle]

27 minutes ago, Colorful Mess said:

Mirri was a prisoner and a slave and no longer a personal threat.  Xaro and Doreah, were also prisoners and no longer a personal threat. Her punishment was cruel and unusual.

RAMSAY WAS A PRISONER AND NO LONGER A THREAT WHEN SANSA FED HIM TO THE DOGS.

Her response to the masters crucifying the children was to arbitrarily round them up and give them eye-for-an-eye. This is not a person to lead Westeros into any sort of Enlightenment even though she claims she can (tyrants always promise stuff they cant deliver).

THIS IS RET CONNING. THESE MASTERS HAD CRUCIFIED CHILDREN AS A WARNING.

The former masters she again arbitrarily rounded up and fed to her dragons. She says she'll let her dragons decide who is guilty/innocent - that is basically the same "justice" as Caligula.

YOU DONT LIKE HER PUNISHMENT BUT WHAR DOES IT HAVE TO DO WITH DEFEAT?

Her imprisonment in the Dothraki is what seems to have turned her into a conquering dragon (similar to her father's imprisonment) because now she's giving speeches about killing men in iron suits who are no threat to her.

WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? ROBERT HAD LITERALLY SENT SOMEONE TO KILL HER.

She reacts with anger when she finds out she's losing to Cersei in 7x4, and she launches her furious rampage on the Lannister armies.

SO WAIT A MINUTE, LANNISTER ARMIES ARE SANE TO SACK OLENNA BUT SHES CRAZY TO FIGHT THEM? THIS IS THE VERY DEFINITION OF A DOUBLE STANDARD.

She wanted to burn the Tarlys who were prisoners and of no threat to her. It was chilling how clinically she executed them,

NO IT WASNT. SHE OFFERED THEM OPTIONS WHICH THEY DECLINED. ALSO IM REALLY TIRED OF HER FACIAL EXPRESSION BEING ILJUDGED, A STANDARD NOT ASSIGNED TO JON WHEN HE KILLED OLLY, FOR EXAMPLE.

delivered the news to Sam, and her reaction to his reaction (zero empathy). 

TOMATO TOMAHTO I THOUGHT SHE WAS QUICK AND RIPPED BANDAID OFF. 

She responded with a haughty anger to the Northern small folk who didn't simper and bow to her. In the "previously on" the show used the phrase "you don't want to wake the dragon, do you?" over Dany's face as she's watching Missandei's execution.

HAH THAT IS THE RET CONNING OF THE VERY EPISODE WERE COMPLAINING ABOUT SO OBVIOUSLY DOES NOT XOUNT.

That seems to have set off what we saw in 8x5, but the dragon was awake for a long time. Her suppression of it really seemed to be an effort. Viserys comes up in Season 7. In 7x2, when she picked up the miniature dragon and wistfully says that her brother Viserys would have attacked KL by now, Tyrion reminded her that she's not here to be Queen of the Ashes. But she puts down the miniature dragon and looks disappointed. She also defends Aegon's rule by fear even as Tyrion is trying to help her be different (like Jon's reminded her), and she herself is claiming to be different (illustrating her hypocrisy). Visual imagery also helped that scene by having lightning flash in the background when she mentions Viserys. She's gotten quite a few ominous shots like that. Standing on top of the pyramid in Meereen, like a god over all the people, with the Targaryen banner in the background looking similar to a Nazi symbol. Looking crazy-eyed with anger when she accuses Tyrion of intentionally losing to side with his family. Anxious violins playing over her face when she sees Jon getting praised for the battle. Dragonstone - everything about that place screams evil Bowser's Castle. Jon being visibly afraid of her dragons and she telling him not to be afraid. Usually when a character says that, it's a signal to the viewers that YES we should be afraid. And the shot of Drogon staring at Jon was scary. If people saw that as cute/funny, they probably misread Dany the whole time. 

My answers in caps.

not one of your examples does what you say it does. Yes, they tried to use mise en scene to be convincing in THIS KAST EPISODE.

if you judge music there you’ve got to judge it in the earlier clips you now say were evidence of something else- which you do not.

you can’t use the very episode we’re saying came out of nowhere to prove it didn’t come out of nowhere- that’s the definition of circular reasoning.

nonw of this is remotely persuasive.

[Colorful Mess]

53 minutes ago, lucindabelle said:

RAMSAY WAS A PRISONER AND NO LONGER A THREAT WHEN SANSA FED HIM TO THE DOGS.

You asked for evidence when she responds with violence after a loss. I gave you an example of Dany doing that. Sansa has nothing to do with this storyline. Sansa doesn't have enormous power like Dany does. This isn't a story about Sansa being corrupted by power, because she has very little. Dany has numerous examples of asserting her dominance and using unnecessarily cruel methods to punish people. Sansa only has one. 

56 minutes ago, lucindabelle said:

THIS IS RET CONNING. THESE MASTERS HAD CRUCIFIED CHILDREN AS A WARNING.

Viewers are supposed to feel uncomfortable and not simply take Dany's decisions at face value. If the show had wanted Dany to feel completely justified they wouldn't have had Barristan caution her to show mercy. Hell, they wouldn't have had her advisors caution her to show mercy in every scene with the masters, if they believed her instincts were correct. Dany's instincts were always to kill them all first. Advisors had to walk her back from that path. This time no one did. It was going to happen eventually. 

57 minutes ago, lucindabelle said:

YOU DONT LIKE HER PUNISHMENT BUT WHAR DOES IT HAVE TO DO WITH DEFEAT?

She felt like the former masters had won when they killed Barristan. She felt like she had "lost." That was why she decided to use her dragons to intimidate and execute these random dudes who were clearly not even responsible for Barristan's death. Even more, he had cautioned her not to choose that path by reminding her about how each time the Mad King gave his enemies the justice they thought they deserved, he felt powerful and right. This was an important scene because from that point, viewers should have begun to scrutinize exactly how Dany feels about delivering "justice."

58 minutes ago, lucindabelle said:

WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? ROBERT HAD LITERALLY SENT SOMEONE TO KILL HER.

Robert Baratheon was dead and no one was alive to be a threat to her anymore.

58 minutes ago, lucindabelle said:

SO WAIT A MINUTE, LANNISTER ARMIES ARE SANE TO SACK OLENNA BUT SHES CRAZY TO FIGHT THEM? THIS IS THE VERY DEFINITION OF A DOUBLE STANDARD.

She's the aggressor in this situation. She started this war. I gave you an example of her reacting with anger when she's losing. She used overwhelming use of force and slaughtered them like she slaughtered the people of King's Landing. The Lannisters didn't have to be defeated THAT badly. 

1 hour ago, lucindabelle said:

NO IT WASNT. SHE OFFERED THEM OPTIONS WHICH THEY DECLINED. ALSO IM REALLY TIRED OF HER FACIAL EXPRESSION BEING ILJUDGED, A STANDARD NOT ASSIGNED TO JON WHEN HE KILLED OLLY, FOR EXAMPLE.

Again I gave you an example of her responding with violence instead of mercy. She didn't have to kill both the father and the son. Dickon was whom Sam was really upset about. That sealed his decision on Dany on why she's unfit for rule. 

We can't judge facial expressions, the cornerstone of acting? We do that with every character. I'm scrutinizing Jon's face all the time. He looks really uncomfortable in every Dany scene. 

1 hour ago, lucindabelle said:

TOMATO TOMAHTO I THOUGHT SHE WAS QUICK AND RIPPED BANDAID OFF. 

What was important was her lack of guilt in contrast to Sam's character. Sam feels extremely guilty about stealing a book and a sword; Dany feels no remorse about burning people alive.

1 hour ago, lucindabelle said:

HAH THAT IS THE RET CONNING OF THE VERY EPISODE WERE COMPLAINING ABOUT SO OBVIOUSLY DOES NOT XOUNT.

It's not a ret-con if its a clue before the episode airs. The "previously on" is providing show context for what is to come. But it's not even necessary, really. People were supposed to see how angry she was when she watched that execution. That is a "waking the dragon" face. Prior to that scene, people were supposed to see how she wanted to kill them all anyway no matter what Cersei did. The Missandei execution was the icing on top that made her extra furious. I'd say most of the time, she wanted to do the most violent thing during periods of anger, for many seasons now. This just tipped her over. 

[Zuleikha]

The only way KL could have saved itself is if everyone had cheered for her as their savior after the bells of surrender.

Am I wrong to remember her as being on Drogon, looking at the streets from a high rooftop view when she heard the bells ring? And that her facial expressions showed her staring at the Red Keep and looking agonized as the bells ring? Am I wrong to not remember seeing a single shot of the common folk reacting and doing ANYTHING before Dany flew off and started laying waste to the city? 

The way it was shot was as though the sound of the bells made Dany really angry so that she laid waste to the surrendered city. It had nothing to do with the character development that has been done, showing her justice as brutal. It had nothing to do with her established flaws. 

That's why people are so cranky and resonate so much with "foreshadowing is not character development." This turn was foreshadowed, but it wasn't developed. There were other options that would have fit with what was developed. She could have gotten angry after Varys betrayed her and led her armies to raze the city, with surrender not an option. That would have been in character. She could have conquered and turned into another cruel despot. That would also have been in character. But this specific post-surrender brutality was not, which is why there's so much push back.

It's also frustrating to have the show retroactively justify Tyrion's, Varys's, and Sansa's actions instead of letting us see them as part of what drove Dany to raze King's Landing.

[slf]

Probably, for me, the most interesting moment for Dany is when she takes the Unsullied. It's a very tricky, complex episode. She's not acting as a traditional slave owner, no, but the Unsullied are hardly a truly free people making their own decisions as she likes to pretend.

[rmontro]

4 hours ago, Colorful Mess said:

Mirri was a prisoner and a slave and no longer a personal threat.

She turned Dany's husband into a vegetable and killed her unborn child.  There's a lot of difference between that and killing innocents.  She has always been ruthless with her enemies, and we've been shown that the failure to do so will cost you in this world.

4 hours ago, GiuliettaMasina said:

The purpose of the chorus is to tell us how to feel; tragedy is not about intellectual stimulation, but about catharsis. Wanting to "trick" your audience is neither Greek nor Nietzschean.

I'm no fan of Nietzche, but I agree this whole turn at the end amounts to a cheap "trick" on the audience.  There's no other good reason to have depicted her as a heroic for nearly eight years only to switch it in the final hour.

I saw someone out wearing a "Mother of Dragons" shirt today.  It just reminded me that they've destroyed a great character, just for the sake of a cheap ending.  That's the real shame here.

[Maximum Taco]

1 hour ago, rmontro said:

She turned Dany's husband into a vegetable and killed her unborn child.  There's a lot of difference between that and killing innocents.  She has always been ruthless with her enemies, and we've been shown that the failure to do so will cost you in this world.

There's a difference between being ruthless and being cruel though. There's a difference between beheading someone, or hanging them and letting them burn alive. 

Jon is pretty ruthless with his own enemies, anyone who deliberately acts against him ends up dead. He hangs a child for gods sake. But what he doesn't do is stab Olly to death because that's what happened to him. 

I very rarely have issues with the people Dany chooses to execute (beyond when she rounds up people and "lets the dragons decide" cause that's crazy for cocoa puffs.) Most of the time the people she chooses to kill have it coming, or at least are granted a choice. But the ways she goes about it are needlessly cruel. She burns people alive, she locks them in windowless vaults, she crucifies them, she feeds them to literal monsters. 

Sure a couple other people do comparable things. Sansa feeds Ramsay to his hounds and clearly enjoys it. But she doesn't do it everytime, she probably could've justified torturing Littlefinger, he fomented distrust in her own House, and led to the killings of her father, mother and aunt. But she didn't, she had his throat cut and was done with it. 

Dany does it again and again and again. And the only reason why that I can find is that she enjoys it. How many times has Dany killed someone painlessly? I can only think of Mossador, and he was clearly sympathetic to her cause. 

Edited May 19, 2019 by Maximum Taco

[Portia4844]

It will be interesting to see if they give Dany any moments of remorse or if that part of her is completely lost.  Martin would have given POV and not having that makes it so much harder for so many to reconcile it in so few episodes.  It's understandable that those who have loved her character struggle with this.  

[slf]

2 hours ago, rmontro said:

She turned Dany's husband into a vegetable

Good for Mirri. He deserved it and rape victims always deserve to get revenge on their abusers. Dany falling in love with him (a very complicated thing considering he was her abuser) doesn't change who Drogo was and what he did to thousands of people.

[rmontro]

1 hour ago, Maximum Taco said:

There's a difference between being ruthless and being cruel though.

This is a key point, I think.  I certainly don't deny that Dany can be cruel to her enemies.  I'm not so sure that execution by dragonfire is necessarily cruel, however.  It appears to be so hot that death is virtually instantaneous.  Varys didn't even cry out.

It appears that in episode five, in Dany's state of mind, she saw the innocents of King's Landing as her enemies.  You can see her thinking that in her previous conversation with Tyrion.  Of course, this is evil/mad Dany being written by this time.  I don't believe that Dany would have seen the citizens as enemies if this was her from a past season, for instance.

48 minutes ago, slf said:

Good for Mirri. He deserved it and rape victims always deserve to get revenge on their abusers

Well, Drogo didn't rape her personally, it was one of his khal.  But yeah, the Dothraki attacked her village, so Mirri had her reasons too.  Dany tried to use her position to show her mercy and make her lot better, but she wasn't having it, and wasn't grateful.  That's okay, she didn't have to be.  But she chose to mess with the bull, and got the horns.

[lucindabelle]

6 hours ago, Colorful Mess said:

You asked for evidence when she responds with violence after a loss. I gave you an example of Dany doing that. Sansa has nothing to do with this storyline.  

In other words you’re admitting that when another character reacts as Dany does  you don’t judge her he same way because she’s not Dany.

thanks for proving my point.

not one of your examples actually does what you say it does, especially because as above you admit you simply hold her to a different standard.

and no you can’t use a “previously on” that did not actually happen from the episode under discussion to prove something about the episode under discussion. It’s illogical, and unpersuasive criticism.

merely asserting that she reacts a certain way after a loss because YOU FEEL she does is not giving evidence, especially when you expressly admit you don’t judge other characters the aame way.

i will not be debating you further. You can read in and ret con all you like.

1 hour ago, slf said:

Good for Mirri. He deserved it and rape victims always deserve to get revenge on their abusers. Dany falling in love with him (a very complicated thing considering he was her abuser) doesn't change who Drogo was and what he did to thousands of people.

But did Dany deserve to be lied to? Did she deserve to have her unborn baby turned into a monster?

Mirri had her reasons but I find it odd people condemn Dany for not dealing honorably with slave trader and sadist Krazynys but are fine with Mirri deceiving Dany.

its a double standard.

[lucindabelle]

4 hours ago, slf said:

Probably, for me, the most interesting moment for Dany is when she takes the Unsullied. It's a very tricky, complex episode. She's not acting as a traditional slave owner, no, but the Unsullied are hardly a truly free people making their own decisions as she likes to pretend.

Actually SHE FREED THEM. So how you can say “hardly a free people” eludes me. And after she freed them and they chose her we get a reaction shot of Jora and Barristan approving. All of these are directorial choices telling us she was right and now like rhaegar. As she likes to pretend: that is not what the show gives us. 

[ShellsandCheese]

The show has never showed Dany enjoying killing me. At most, she’s indifferent. Drogon is her weapon. If she were Ned she’d be using Ice to behead deserters. And quite frankly, dragonfire seems pretty quick and probably a lot less than painful than a botched hanging, botched beheading, or getting ripped apart by a pack of starving hounds. 

[Maximum Taco]

1 hour ago, ShellsandCheese said:

The show has never showed Dany enjoying killing me. At most, she’s indifferent. 

She doesn't cackle in glee no, but she tells Mirri that she will hear her screams, she locks Xaro and Doreah in a vault as they beg for mercy. 

She is doing these things because she wants to. She could easily execute them in a cleaner manner, if she really wants to send a message to others who may betray her she could do it publicly with a lot of ceremony. But instead she goes for the cruelest approach. 

A lot of people are willing to hand wave this type of behavior because of who Dany is doing it to, what we should be asking is why does she feel the need to execute people in the harshest possible manner?

Edited May 19, 2019 by Maximum Taco

[TheGreenKnight]

5 hours ago, slf said:

Good for Mirri. He deserved it and rape victims always deserve to get revenge on their abusers. Dany falling in love with him (a very complicated thing considering he was her abuser) doesn't change who Drogo was and what he did to thousands of people.

Yes, but as it pertains to Dany (which was the poster's point), Dany has no reason not to put her to death for murdering her husband and child. I don't sympathize with Drogo whatsoever--and I remember feeling sorry for Mirri and her people--but Dany putting her to death isn't out of left-field or "insane" behavior by any means.

[lucindabelle]

Doreah andXaro has conspired to have Dany chained forever in the house of the undying.

all she did was turnabout and it seemed merited. Cruel but merited.

[Maximum Taco]

7 minutes ago, lucindabelle said:

Doreah andXaro has conspired to have Dany chained forever in the house of the undying.

all she did was turnabout and it seemed merited. Cruel but merited.

In my opinion, violent, cruel people, are going to use that excuse to do what they want. 

"You did that or were going to do that to me, so it's just/right if I do it to you."

You don't see Jon do these things. He doesn't say that Olly stabbed him to death and he therefore has a right to stab Olly to death.

Dany is a cruel person who commits cruel acts. She justifies them, no doubt.  

"She killed my baby and my husband"

"They stole my dragons and were going to lock me up forever"

"They are slavers who crucified children"

"I'm doing it to keep the peace"

"They would not bend the knee"

"Let it be fear."

The excuses get thinner and thinner until they are practically non existent. Because Dany herself is a cruel person. She chooses to act violently, she chooses to act cruelly because she wants to. This is where the show failed IMO, they should have had more of these executions that were difficult to justify, but it seems they leaped right to "Let it be fear" and it was too big a leap.

[slf]

2 hours ago, lucindabelle said:

Actually SHE FREED THEM. So how you can say “hardly a free people” eludes me. And after she freed them and they chose her we get a reaction shot of Jora and Barristan approving. All of these are directorial choices telling us she was right and now like rhaegar. As she likes to pretend: that is not what the show gives us. 

They were stolen from their families, abused, mutilated, and raised to kill. They had known exactly one thing all their lives. When Dany freed them, they had nothing. No families to go back to, no homes of their own, no skills unrelated to killing people. They were given babies from the local population to kill as part of the training, and while some of those locals might forgive them because they were slaves others wouldn't. The Unsullied had no real chance of being able to assimilate and lead normal lives. Dany freed them and that's all well and good, but within a day they'd need to eat. How? They had no money of their own. In all likelihood they would utilize the skills taught to them because it's all they knew how to do, most of them. Throughout history freed slaves mostly worked in industries that utilized the skills they devloped while enslaved; there are exceptions but they generally proved the rule. So when Dany stands there and frees them she has every reason to expect they will immediately follow her. If only because she's the Mother of Dragons and the Unsullied knew intimately exactly how barbaric people can get, exactly what they'll do to get what they want. Killing the masters benefited Dany; the Unsullied don't strike me as naive. What benefited Dany also worked for the Unsullied but that doesn't mean they followed her out of pure love, respect, and gratitude.

I don't care about directorial choices? These writers/show runners are misogynistic racists who think a lot of things are okay that aren't. That Mhysa crowd-surfing scene was such a White Savior moment and it being filmed in an approving way doesn't change that.

52 minutes ago, TheGreenKnight said:

Yes, but as it pertains to Dany (which was the poster's point), Dany has no reason not to put her to death for murdering her husband and child. I don't sympathize with Drogo whatsoever--and I remember feeling sorry for Mirri and her people--but Dany putting her to death isn't out of left-field or "insane" behavior by any means.

She has plenty of reason to not put Mirri to death for the murder of Drogo; Dany knew firsthand what sort of man he was and couldn't really counter Mirri's point about how claiming to have saved Mirri is laughable.

Now, yes, Dany and people like her can always rationalize whatever they've done and whatever they want. But do we honestly think Dany would have done any differently if she was Mirri? Of course not. And I think Dany knows she wouldn't, too.

Quote

Well, Drogo didn't rape her personally, it was one of his khal.

I know Drogo didn't but he was responsible, it was his army and his orders.

Quote

But she chose to mess with the bull, and got the horns.

So did Dany.

Edited May 19, 2019 by slf

[lucindabelle]

Directorial choices are all there is. This is a TV show. Analysis that ignores the elements of what we’re given is not actually talking about the TV show. Similarly, adding this level of analysis to what the Unsullied would do is outside of the realm of the show. But given what we come to know of Greyworm, the soldiers are not without personality and individuality.

in any case it’s unfair to say she didn’t free them. She did.

[lucindabelle]

8 minutes ago, Maximum Taco said:

In my opinion, violent, cruel people, are going to use that excuse to do what they want. 

"You did that or were going to do that to me, so it's just/right if I do it to you."

You don't see Jon do these things. He doesn't say that Olly stabbed him to death and he therefore has a right to stab Olly to death.

Dany is a cruel person who commits cruel acts. She justifies them, no doubt.  

"She killed my baby and my husband"

"They stole my dragons and were going to lock me up forever"

"They are slavers who crucified children"

"I'm doing it to keep the peace"

"They would not bend the knee"

"Let it be fear."

The excuses get thinner and thinner until they are practically non existent. Because Dany herself is a cruel person. She chooses to act violently, she chooses to act cruelly because she wants to. This is where the show failed IMO, they should have had more of these executions that were difficult to justify, but it seems they leaped right to "Let it be fear" and it was too big a leap.

Are you seriously suggesting she had no right to defend herself?

explain to me why what Mirri did to DANY isn’t as deceptive and evil. she ALSO uses justification for what is very cruel. I get that you and others are on her side but that doesn’t change the fact that Mirri does these horrible things to someone who trusted her because she feels justified.

Well have to agree to disagree because I don’t consider myself to be evil at all but if I had JUST escaped from being bound in chains forever and came across the person who did it I’d have no qualms about sentencing them to an awful death. 

[slf]

12 minutes ago, lucindabelle said:

Directorial choices are all there is. This is a TV show. Analysis that ignores the elements of what we’re given is not actually talking about the TV show. Similarly, adding this level of analysis to what the Unsullied would do is outside of the realm of the show. But given what we come to know of Greyworm, the soldiers are not without personality and individuality.

in any case it’s unfair to say she didn’t free them. She did.

Just because the directors want me to think something is good doesn't mean I have to. For example, the show runners think Dany has gone insane and did all kinds of shots that showed other characters thinking what Dany did to KL was awful. Do you agree with all that just because Directorial Choices? And it's very fair to say she didn't really free them. Conquering and liberation, etc., are not easy, clean things. They're very complex situations full of morally gray, at best, decisions. I'm Gonna Ride In And Free The Slaves And They're Gonna Follow Me and Die For Me Of Their Own Choosing is fucking child's level thinking. I mean, how amazingly convenient for Dany that the well trained slave army all just immediately swore themselves to her.

Edited May 19, 2019 by slf

[TheGreenKnight]

2 hours ago, lucindabelle said:

explain to me why what Mirri did to DANY isn’t as deceptive and evil. she ALSO uses justification for what is very cruel. I get that you and others are on her side but that doesn’t change the fact that Mirri does these horrible things to someone who trusted her because she feels justified.

I agree. And it doesn't change the fact that Mirri took her revenge on Drogo out on his child (who was not responsible) and the child of his wife, who had attempted to help her in however small a degree--the same wife that was sold to Drogo and who was raped by him herself. Mirri's vengeful actions make sense, but so do Dany's towards her. Those actions are not cruel or insane to me.

[lucindabelle]

1 minute ago, slf said:

Just because the directors want me to think something is good doesn't mean I have to. And it's very fair to say she didn't really free them. Conquering and liberation, etc., are not easy, clean things. They're very complex situations. I'm Gonna Ride In And Free The Slaves And They're Gonna Follow Me and Die For Me Of Their Own Choosing and fucking child's level thinking. I mean, how amazing convenient for Dany that the well trained slave army all just immediately swore themselves to her.

She gave them a choice. That’s what we saw. You’re going way outside the show to jusfify the retcon that she was evil. In that very same show we saw her give water to a slave on a crucifix. You are bringing in your feelings about something outside the show. No you don’t have to feel what the directors want you tonof course but if you’re going to analyze the show then analyze the actual show, which is based on their choices, camera angles, shots, lighting, music, none of which is done by accident. One could easily and just as persuasively argue that the Unsullied could have commandeered boats and sailed away to Naath or wherever. You’re making a lot of assumptions about this world, which are not based on evidence, but on your own opinions of what they must be like based on your knowledge of slavery here on earth. The fact is at that point in the show we really don’t know how resourceful or independent they could be. greyworm turns out to have quite a lot of personality and independence. All we can really know is what we see. 

This is why many of us are angry. We haven’t seen what made Dany go nuts. We see what she’s done but not why. At most one could argue there have been hints she has this potential but hinting is not character development. 

[slf]

6 minutes ago, lucindabelle said:

She gave them a choice. That’s what we saw. You’re going way outside the show to jusfify the retcon that she was evil. In that very same show we saw her give water to a slave on a crucifix. You are bringing in your feelings about something outside the show. No you don’t have to feel what the directors want you tonof course but if you’re going to analyze the show then analyze the actual show, which is based on their choices, camera angles, shots, lighting, music, none of which is done by accident. One could easily and just as persuasively argue that the Unsullied could have commandeered boats and sailed away to Naath or wherever. You’re making a lot of assumptions about this world, which are not based on evidence, but on your own opinions of what they must be like based on your knowledge of slavery here on earth. 

Retcon? Not a directorial choice which is all there is?

I'm assessing the situation of the slaves by prioritizing what we know of them and their society and not prioritizing the Queen who wanted them for herself.

If the Unsullied not rising up is proof of something to you do you think them not having orchestrated an escape over the decades they were with their masters means they weren't really slaves?

Also:

Quote

So how you can say “hardly a free people” eludes me. And after she freed them and they chose her we get a reaction shot of Jora and Barristan approving. All of these are directorial choices telling us she was right and now like rhaegar.

This is saying I have to think what Dany did was good because that is what the directors want me to think.

Edited May 19, 2019 by slf

[Hana Chan]

I'm not arguing that Dany is "evil". But she did do an evil thing. She has done evil things in the past. Like every other character on this show, we might like the character but they do things that we find difficult to wrap our minds around.

Dany has been prioritizing winning the throne over all other considerations for quite a lot time now. She's killed for it, and had others kill on her behalf. She wrested leadership of an entire race of people and bent them to her will, dragging them from their homeland to fight and die for a cause that doesn't benefit them in any meaningful way. She "freed" the Unsullied from their masters, but didn't send them on their merry way to find lives of their own choosing. They're just fighting for a new master (again, in a foreign land that they have no connection to). She has not hesitated to use lethal force to press her will. 

It's been easy to overlook Dany's cruelties because we are constantly contrasting them to worse alternatives. But that doesn't erase the fact that Dany has been on a slow and steady decline to have reached this point. Is it so outrageous that the woman who ordered the crucifixion of slave owners without caring whether the people she'd ordered to death were actually responsible for the killing of children and lead a people known for pillaging and raping those that the conquered would eventually reach the point where killing non-combatants in order to achieve her goal.

And her goal, to me, wasn't just defeating Cersei and claiming throne. She needed to be the unquestioned ruler and with the knowledge that Jon also had claim to the IT flying around, she would have to make sure that no one questioned her power to hold the throne.  She had to send a message to the entire continent that she not only had the power to take the throne but would hold it against any claimants and would destroy anyone who defied her rule. It was to send a message to all of Westeros.

The sad thing to me isn't that Dany as a person has become a tyrant. It's that all of the goals that she had wanted to accomplish by being queen has slipped away. She's not freeing slaves here - she's bending a population to her will. 

[Colorful Mess]

14 hours ago, Zuleikha said:

She could have conquered and turned into another cruel despot. That would also have been in character

Thats what she did, though. Conquering involves killing everyone, with the goal of rule by fear. She learned how to do that in Essos. That was her "ruling arc" - how to conquer people then rule like a god above them. She just dropped the "I'm saving you while conquering you" farce, which is what all colonialists think they're doing. Dany became true to herself, her house words, and what dragons always represent in the story.

[Colorful Mess]

6 hours ago, slf said:

Just because the directors want me to think something is good doesn't mean I have to. For example, the show runners think Dany has gone insane and did all kinds of shots that showed other characters thinking what Dany did to KL was awful. Do you agree with all that just because Directorial Choices? And it's very fair to say she didn't really free them. Conquering and liberation, etc., are not easy, clean things. They're very complex situations full of morally gray, at best, decisions. I'm Gonna Ride In And Free The Slaves And They're Gonna Follow Me and Die For Me Of Their Own Choosing is fucking child's level thinking. I mean, how amazingly convenient for Dany that the well trained slave army all just immediately swore themselves to her.

Exactly, they are 1) illiterate, and 2) brainwashed. She can't afford them so she pulls a trick to get them anyway. She doesn't pay them a wage. Some of this is sketchy. I think its fine to have them fight other slavers in Essos, but once Dany used them for her own personal vengeance quest in a strange land they've never been to, that's morally grey.

Re: directorial choices. Throughout, they are trying to play both sides of the "coin." D&D talk about her capacity for cruelty/empathy in that Astapor scene. Both are growing at the same time she's learning what conquering means. Its not a clear cut hero - and why would it be? Thats not the essence of the story.

Jorah and Barristan as a litmus test for the audience isnt unquestionable approval of Dany. They arent exactly the sharpest tools in the shed. Jorah sold slaves just to be with a woman who hated him and Barristan was loyal to Aerys beyond reason. Sansa and Arya are about the only ones who get Dany right. "We don't trust your queen." Daario and Cersei also saw her for what she was and cut through a lot of the b.s.

Edited May 19, 2019 by Colorful Mess

[slf]

It's been a hot minute since I've watched the episode where Dany gets the Unsullied so I rewatched it and there were a few things that stuck out to me. When Dany buys the Unsullied and gives the order for them to kill all the masters, anyone holding a whip, etc., only two out of eight thousand break rank and do as she says (killing one master each). The others stay where they are. And it's like, oh honey, you are a master right now and you're the one literally holding the big ass whip. She and Kraznys trade barbs/quips, then she has Drogon roast him. She speaks one word and a fucking dragon burns her enemy to death. And then the Unsullied follow her orders. And like, shit me too.

[lucindabelle]

6 hours ago, slf said:

Retcon? Not a directorial choice which is all there is?

I'm assessing the situation of the slaves by prioritizing what we know of them and their society and not prioritizing the Queen who wanted them for herself.

If the Unsullied not rising up is proof of something to you do you think them not having orchestrated an escape over the decades they were with their masters means they weren't really slaves?

Also:

This is saying I have to think what Dany did was good because that is what the directors want me to think.

No. I’m saying the directors have a point of view and are telling you what you should think. Similarly, George Lucas clearly wants you to think blowing up the death star was a good thing. The triumphant music, etc.

whether or not you actually think those things is entirely up to you, but to say there is no directorial POV is not true.

you again are not arguing from show canon but from your opinions of what a slave army must be like. We don’t know enough about them at that point for your opinions to be persuasive. Once again, there’s no compelling reason why they couldn’t take the boats of the masters at that point. 

[slf]

12 minutes ago, lucindabelle said:

No. I’m saying the directors have a point of view and are telling you what you should think. Similarly, George Lucas clearly wants you to think blowing up the death star was a good thing. The triumphant music, etc.

whether or not you actually think those things is entirely up to you, but to say there is no directorial POV is not true

I haven't said there is no directorial point of view, I said I don't care. Your earlier response was, "So how you can say “hardly a free people” eludes me. And after she freed them and they chose her we get a reaction shot of Jora and Barristan approving. All of these are directorial choices telling us she was right and now like rhaegar." D&D have a shitty pov so what directorial choices get made matter less than dirt to me. 

12 minutes ago, lucindabelle said:

you again are not arguing from show canon but from your opinions of what a slave army must be like. We don’t know enough about them at that point for your opinions to be persuasive. Once again, there’s no compelling reason why they couldn’t take the boats of the masters at that point. 

Well, that's certainly your perspective. The episode where the Unsullied were introduced gave us a great deal of information about them and how they were trained, and "army comprised of slaves trained only to kill according to their masters" doesn't leave a lot to the imagination.

But if you believe that the Unsullied had other options would you mind sharing what they are and how they would go about that? And why the Unsullied didn't rebel before if it's as easy as all that? 

Edited May 19, 2019 by slf

[lucindabelle]

I’ve now said twice the Unsullied could have taken  boats and left. I suspect they will do exactly that tonight. After dany is killed since she now deserves it after the show turned her into a war criminal.

of course you can argue against D&D POV. That’s how many of us feel about last week. But that’s not what you’re doing when you say she didn’t free them. You’re actually not even acknowledging.

i for example am not going to argue Dany didn’t kill the people in KL nor that she was raging. Quite obviously she did. I will argue instead that this was poorly set up and not believable.

why they didn’t rebel before? They were not free. When their new master ordered them to kill they did. I don’t make anything from us only seeing two at first because the burning happened so quickly, but at least there we are arguing on the same plane, rather than your drawing in conclusions not based on the show at all.

i stand by what I wrote: she quite obviously did free them on the show. That’s simply what happened. (Similarly she burmed KL). You are claiming it was a meaningless gesture which is something else.

it so frustrating debating this with you as you clearly refuse to stick to show canon whatsoever and are reading in and bring in external facts to support your conclusions. You are constantly changing the terms of this debate. Please do not quote me again.

Edited May 19, 2019 by lucindabelle

[Maximum Taco]

8 hours ago, lucindabelle said:

Are you seriously suggesting she had no right to defend herself?

explain to me why what Mirri did to DANY isn’t as deceptive and evil. she ALSO uses justification for what is very cruel. I get that you and others are on her side but that doesn’t change the fact that Mirri does these horrible things to someone who trusted her because she feels justified.

Well have to agree to disagree because I don’t consider myself to be evil at all but if I had JUST escaped from being bound in chains forever and came across the person who did it I’d have no qualms about sentencing them to an awful death. 

No. I'm suggesting that she has a proclivity towards violence and cruelty. Her first instinct every time is Fire and Blood. There's no rehabilitation, there's no mercy, there's no even sense of decency. She goes Fire and Blood every time. 

What Mirri did to Dany was deceptive and evil and cruel. That doesn't excuse what Dany did as heroic, right or just. At what point does doing what the monsters do turn us into monsters ourselves?

I don't doubt that I would probably also want vengeance if someone attacked me or mine directly, it's a very human response to betrayal, that's why we can relate to Dany. If given ultimate power, and a reason to use it in a cruel manner to harm those who harmed us what would we do? 

But with Dany specifically at what point do the slights against her stop warranting that kind of response? Is it when she begins punishing random masters with no evidence in an effort to stop the terrorist attacks? Is it when she executes the Tarlys for failing to immediately recognize her god given right to be their overlord? Is it when she slaughters the Kings Landers for failing to love her? I think we can all agree that the last instance is entirely unwarranted.

I'd argue that her first offense breeds those others, that violence in the world begets violence in the heart, and doing those things once, when they feel warranted makes it easier to do them later when they are clearly not. 

Edited May 19, 2019 by Maximum Taco

[Colorful Mess]

10 hours ago, lucindabelle said:

Actually SHE FREED THEM. So how you can say “hardly a free people” eludes me. And after she freed them and they chose her we get a reaction shot of Jora and Barristan approving. All of these are directorial choices telling us she was right and now like rhaegar. As she likes to pretend: that is not what the show gives us. 

Rhaegar lost honorably and died - and he wasnt a conqueror. In the Astapor scene, Dany played dirty like Aegon the Conqueror and won. I think they were trying to show her character development as a conqueror, turning people into abstract things to subdue:

"We’ve never really gotten a sense of her capacity for cruelty. She’s surrounded by people who are terrible people but who haven’t done anything to her personally. And it’s interesting to me that as the sphere of her empathy widens, the sphere of her cruelty widens as well. All at once she becomes a major force to be reckoned with. She spent a lot of time futilely kind of banging her fists on the doors and declaring that she was owed the Iron Throne by right, but now she’s stepped into her own as a conqueror.” - D.B. Weiss, S03E04 Inside the Episode

Not that this matters that much. D&D lie through their teeth. They lie on screen using cinematic tricks, they lie to actors, they lie in magazines. Better to go with GRRM's interviews.