Jump to content

What do you think of this argument that I found for why Dany isn't a good ruler?


Recommended Posts

Note: THIS IS NOT MY ARGUMENT. I came across it and I find it really well thought-out. However, I want rebuttals so I can see two sides.

Post

-------

Daenerys is a perfect example of how context and perception can influence, even manipulate, how people view a character. Just about every other main character has another character who interacts with them and provides context for their actions. This is why, for example, Cersei can seem pretty great to herself in her own POV (when she gets one), but other perspectives around her show what sort of person she really is.

We don't really get this with Dany. The closest thing is Barristan and Quentyn's POVs in the fifth book, and even then, you'll notice that they never interact with her directly within their own chapters. They also have a vested interest in painting her in the best possible light: Barristan has hitched his fortune to her and Quentyn wants to marry her.

All of this a long way of saying that of course Dany comes off as well-meaning and sympathetic, because we only ever see her the way SHE SEES HERSELF.

I also point to her opponents in Essos. They are either laughably incompetent enough to make her victories pretty easy (like the Astapori who after hundreds of years of selling Unsullied apparently never once thought of including a failsafe) or the most over-the-top, evil, sadistic, mustache-twirling types imaginable. Most readers see this and just think how wonderful she is for standing up to them. Few people bother to wonder why GRRM made her adversaries so one-dimensional and grotesque. I suspect it has to do with "throwing" the context and lulling people into a sense of ease with rooting for her, before she gets to Westeros and interacts with actual complex people, where she might not look quite as good. (He does this with Tyrion, too; next to Cersei and Joffrey he looks pretty good, but change the scenery and he becomes the bitter, vengeful, pathetically self-pitying person he actually was all along.)

As far as Dany's governorship, this is a person who destabilized an entire region, caused the deaths of thousands and thousands of people and who, I'm pretty sure, hasn't actually learned how not to repeat her mistakes. She gets burned by Mirri, then turns around and confides in the Green Grace, another seemingly harmless old woman who's bent on destroying her. I've studied counterinsurgency at the graduate level and can say with confidence that she's doing just about everything wrong trying to "fight" it.

She crucifies dozens of people who may or may not be guilty of any crime (she never bothers to check), she commits systemic torture, she allows the Unsullied to kill young teenage boys in Astapor based on their dress. She claims to be anti-slavery, yet she was willing to let Drogo slave to pay for an army. And then when she didn't want to pay for an army, slavery became bad again. And now she keeps uncompensated labor (read: slave labor) to do public works projects in Meereen, and allows the Meereenese to sell themselves for her profit.

She goes over the top when she should back off (torture and crucifixion), yet is often oblivious to actual threats like the Grace. Her people are starving while she eats figs and lamb on her rooftop. Apart from holding court and going to the temple to get married, she shows absolutely no interest in venturing out into Meereen or learning anything about its history and culture and families, despite wanting to rule them. She owes literally everything she has to her dragons, yet locks them up in a dungeon and ignores their training.

She still maintains that she's the rightful queen of Westeros, despite knowing very little about it and refusing to hear what sort of man her father really was. I can't wait until she has to acknowledge "Aegon," to see if her belief in legal succession can withstand someone with a better claim than her own ( I disagree with this part because I don't think he's real). It's easy to support the law when she thinks she's next in line. But if she decides to take Aegon out, that makes her no better than Robert.

But, you say, she's just learning! So thousands of people in Essos should die for her "lesson"? She means well! Good intentions pave the road to hell; does meaning well erase the horror of a terrible outcome? Quentyn said Astapor was the closest thing to hell he ever hoped to see. Do good intentions excuse that?

But look at the evil people she's fighting! Which goes back to my point about context and perception -- if she has to be surrounded by the most ridiculously evil people possible to look good, is that really a high point in her favor? But, but she frees slaves! Tell that to the person digging her bean ditches. She's freed them with absolutely no long-term social and economic plan, which isn't enough.

It's actually a very smart sleight of hand on GRRM's part. Make her crusade against slavery and pit her against comic book villains, and few people will dig deeper to evaluate what she's actually doing. The result being, a lot of shocked people asking where this came from when she arrives in Westeros with thousands of mouths to feed, a desire for vengeance and not a single clue.

Dany is actually a very tragic character: someone who ostensibly means well and yet destroys virtually everything she touches, be it cities, people and societies. And people want her to be queen of Westeros? Haven't they suffered enough

---------

End.

What do you guys think? Let me know!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree she is not right now a very good ruler (not surprising for a 15 year old who's only real knowledge of the world around her comes from a demented brother). The thing is Slavers Bay is a completely dysfunctional society I don't see how such a society could even exist for thousands of years [Martin's explanation of "Well people need to sell slaves somewhere!" is ridiculous. What..No one else ever got the idea to open a slave market?]




It does seem to be holding her to a double standard to say she has to provide prosperity for all her people. There is clearly a lot of poverty in this world. There are always going to be some people who are starving but not many people would tell you that it is better to be poor and enslaved than poor and free. Many would rather die than be a slave because slavery is extremely dehumanizing. I believe this is one thing Dany does understand correctly based on her own experience as a virtual slave.




I think this post raises good points though about the fact that the society she conquers has to be a thorough mess with no redeeming characteristics for her to actually seem like a savior who's actually doing the right thing. This is true in Slavers Bay but will not be true in Westeros which, for all it's problems is a lot more functional than the SB society. I can't see Dany keeping the IT for any length of time. She would only be slightly better than Joffrey or Aerys as a ruler there. If she stays in Slavers Bay though she could become a relatively good ruler.



Anyway, interesting post....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Note: THIS IS NOT MY ARGUMENT. I came across it and I find it really well thought-out. However, I want rebuttals so I can see two sides.

Post

-------

Daenerys is a perfect example of how context and perception can influence, even manipulate, how people view a character. Just about every other main character has another character who interacts with them and provides context for their actions. This is why, for example, Cersei can seem pretty great to herself in her own POV (when she gets one), but other perspectives around her show what sort of person she really is.

We don't really get this with Dany. The closest thing is Barristan and Quentyn's POVs in the fifth book, and even then, you'll notice that they never interact with her directly within their own chapters. They also have a vested interest in painting her in the best possible light: Barristan has hitched his fortune to her and Quentyn wants to marry her.

All of this a long way of saying that of course Dany comes off as well-meaning and sympathetic, because we only ever see her the way SHE SEES HERSELF.

I also point to her opponents in Essos. They are either laughably incompetent enough to make her victories pretty easy (like the Astapori who after hundreds of years of selling Unsullied apparently never once thought of including a failsafe) or the most over-the-top, evil, sadistic, mustache-twirling types imaginable. Most readers see this and just think how wonderful she is for standing up to them. Few people bother to wonder why GRRM made her adversaries so one-dimensional and grotesque. I suspect it has to do with "throwing" the context and lulling people into a sense of ease with rooting for her, before she gets to Westeros and interacts with actual complex people, where she might not look quite as good. (He does this with Tyrion, too; next to Cersei and Joffrey he looks pretty good, but change the scenery and he becomes the bitter, vengeful, pathetically self-pitying person he actually was all along.)

As far as Dany's governorship, this is a person who destabilized an entire region, caused the deaths of thousands and thousands of people and who, I'm pretty sure, hasn't actually learned how not to repeat her mistakes. She gets burned by Mirri, then turns around and confides in the Green Grace, another seemingly harmless old woman who's bent on destroying her. I've studied counterinsurgency at the graduate level and can say with confidence that she's doing just about everything wrong trying to "fight" it.

She crucifies dozens of people who may or may not be guilty of any crime (she never bothers to check), she commits systemic torture, she allows the Unsullied to kill young teenage boys in Astapor based on their dress. She claims to be anti-slavery, yet she was willing to let Drogo slave to pay for an army. And then when she didn't want to pay for an army, slavery became bad again. And now she keeps uncompensated labor (read: slave labor) to do public works projects in Meereen, and allows the Meereenese to sell themselves for her profit.

She goes over the top when she should back off (torture and crucifixion), yet is often oblivious to actual threats like the Grace. Her people are starving while she eats figs and lamb on her rooftop. Apart from holding court and going to the temple to get married, she shows absolutely no interest in venturing out into Meereen or learning anything about its history and culture and families, despite wanting to rule them. She owes literally everything she has to her dragons, yet locks them up in a dungeon and ignores their training.

She still maintains that she's the rightful queen of Westeros, despite knowing very little about it and refusing to hear what sort of man her father really was. I can't wait until she has to acknowledge "Aegon," to see if her belief in legal succession can withstand someone with a better claim than her own ( I disagree with this part because I don't think he's real). It's easy to support the law when she thinks she's next in line. But if she decides to take Aegon out, that makes her no better than Robert.

But, you say, she's just learning! So thousands of people in Essos should die for her "lesson"? She means well! Good intentions pave the road to hell; does meaning well erase the horror of a terrible outcome? Quentyn said Astapor was the closest thing to hell he ever hoped to see. Do good intentions excuse that?

But look at the evil people she's fighting! Which goes back to my point about context and perception -- if she has to be surrounded by the most ridiculously evil people possible to look good, is that really a high point in her favor? But, but she frees slaves! Tell that to the person digging her bean ditches. She's freed them with absolutely no long-term social and economic plan, which isn't enough.

It's actually a very smart sleight of hand on GRRM's part. Make her crusade against slavery and pit her against comic book villains, and few people will dig deeper to evaluate what she's actually doing. The result being, a lot of shocked people asking where this came from when she arrives in Westeros with thousands of mouths to feed, a desire for vengeance and not a single clue.

Dany is actually a very tragic character: someone who ostensibly means well and yet destroys virtually everything she touches, be it cities, people and societies. And people want her to be queen of Westeros? Haven't they suffered enough

---------

End.

What do you guys think? Let me know!

She thinks Aegon is dead & she doesn't the Varys switched them out because he tried to warn her father but he didn't listen. So when she finds out he's alive who's to say what she does,she did respect Visery's claim to the throne though she had doubts he'd ever win it back. Other than that she really is better than the rest who have no empathy for the people I dont think she sets out/relishes having to kill people to get back the iron throne. Her getting a tax for people hiring slaves, is better than them not getting paid. Now they have a choice in where and what they do for work. Before they were sold in to slavery w/o getting anything and they were owned for life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is that the people Dany has gone up against so far have been beyond stupid.


The Slave Masters at Astapor had to be the dumbest people ever I mean really she even asks them how loyal the unsullied are they say the unsullied will obey any command given by Dany once she buys them.Then are surprised when she orders the unsullied to kill them all.I mean really.....why on earth would they not just order the 8000 unsullied to kill/capture Dany and just take all 3 dragons.



Not to mention she needs to stop surrounding herself with people who idolize her as they are not giving her any good advice.I mean everyone on her council will support anything she says even Barristan who wants nothing more then to serve a good ruler yet doesn't stop her from torturing and crucifying people.....what the fuck Barristan.She only has a buncha Yes men who don't question any order she gives and don't bother to tell her that what she is doing is wrong (which is what a true friend would do)Instead they are content to sit back while Dany screws everything up.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

That looks really familiar. That could be one of Apple Martini's posts.

Wait...no "could" about it! Pretty sure thats one of Apple's!

I had the same feeling, but a quick google research about this post sent me to another site than this one. Unless she post under another name on others site.

ETA: :ninja: 'ed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about the Tyrion comparison. I think Tyrion actually changed in his own POVs as well. Pretty sure his case was either him actually changing as a person, or a more dormant part of his nature finally came to the forefront due to what he went through. It wasn't so much a case of us purely seeing things through his eyes or only seeing him in comparison to awful people.



We saw him with Jon and Catelyn and Sansa and Bran and plenty of other good people as well. Many of those people were shown to have more respect for him after actually having conversed than they did prior based on their own prejudgments from his family affiliation and being "an imp". I think we got at least a few different interactions involving Tyrion from other POVs unless I'm not remembering correctly.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had the same feeling, but a quick google research about this post sent me to another site than this one. Unless she post under another name on others site.

ETA: :ninja: 'ed

Maybe Apple just posted the argument before. I dunno its just im pretty sure ive seen this before.. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can also apply the same argument with Stannis. The only main POV he has had with him is Davos who absolutely worships him. Once he gets to the wall, with no POV to actually blow him off every sentence, he looks like a complete buffoon. His entire military strategy is to march on the Dreadfort, which a teenager basically laughs at and tells him how stupid he is. Then this great military strategist gets himself trapped in the snow on the way to Winterfell. And then decides to burn his own men who are starving to death because of his own stupidity. Basically every POV that reflects on him that isn't demented (Jon, Asha) thinks he is an assclown.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a side note, I wonder if that Quora person has an account on this site

person is from Washington DC and her name is Kelsey. Also says "So while Rhaegar and Lyanna running off together is what kicked off the events of the war, it did not officially begin until Arryn called his banners". So... do the maths.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good riposte to this would be: http://meereeneseblot.wordpress.com/2013/09/29/untangling-the-meereenese-knot-part-ii-the-peace-was-real/



And possibly the entire Meereenese Knot series on that site. It's long, but I'll try to sum it up in a sentence. Basically, it says how the peace Dany had achieved in Meereen would have worked had Drogon not showed up in the pit.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not exactly applying to the thread here but,

I've seen GRRM in interviews say that a horrible person can make a great ruler and a person with good intentions can make a horrible ruler.

This may very well be what he's trying to illustrate with Dany in Essos.

However just because I think GRRM is a brilliant writer doesn't mean I have to agree with every point he may or may not be trying to make about the world, I think he would concur. I don't think it's worth allowing a minority to suffer so a majority can live in peace and prosperity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can also apply the same argument with Stannis. The only main POV he has had with him is Davos who absolutely worships him. Once he gets to the wall, with no POV to actually blow him off every sentence, he looks like a complete buffoon. His entire military strategy is to march on the Dreadfort, which a teenager basically laughs at and tells him how stupid he is. Then this great military strategist gets himself trapped in the snow on the way to Winterfell. And then decides to burn his own men who are starving to death because of his own stupidity. Basically every POV that reflects on him that isn't demented (Jon, Asha) thinks he is an assclown.

When does Jon think he's an assclown? He agrees with his assessment that the wildlings should be allowed through the Wall for one thing. Asha disparages him for being (what she percieves to be) a misogynist but she's understandably bitter, having been defeated by him and taken prisoner. She notes that he has an iron ferocity (which is notable, she probably would reserve the descriptor of iron for someone she has at least a grudging respect for) and admits that while several of his lords and knights nurse doubts the common men all believe in him - honestly, Jon gets a great deal more criticism for his decisions than Stannis ever does.

On topic: It's a good write up - though I've seen the same arguments made before.

Also, it's interesting to note that Gerris Drinkwater (who admittedly is going to be biased, having seen Quentyn die) percieves Daenarys as having spurned his friend cruelly and mocks her for her downright immature infatuation with Daario. Barristan seems to turn a blind eye of course, but then Barristan is almost as good at denial and rationalization as he is at fighting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a well-made argument, but very much the case for the prosecution. There are other arguments.

1. Dany's compassion is genuine, but selective. She holds Doreah and comforts her as she's dying; she treats Missandei like a little sister; she feeds and cleans the dying refugees from Astapor; she's sickened by what she sees at Astapor (her reaction is similar to a British soldier entering Belsen). She insists that the Yunkish slaves are freed. We can't assume all these events are made up.

And yet, there is a very cruel streak running through her. Once she's convinced people deserve no mercy, that's what they get from her. And, she thinks bad people deserve to suffer unpleasant deaths.

2. Slavers Bay really isn't a stable society. It's economy depends on destabilising most of Essos in order to obtain slaves. Essos is filled with the ruins of towns and villages that were destroyed by the Dothraki, during their slave hunts. The gulf between the elite and the masses is immense. If Dany hadn't overturned this society, somebody else would have done.

That doesn't excuse bad decisions, like leaving Astapor with an ineffectual government, and leaving the remnant of the free population to the mercy of the former slaves.

3. Torture is routine in-universe. Sympathetic people do it. Qhorin killed a prisoner during questioning. Jon Arryn employed Mord. Stannis burns people. Lord Manderly's torturer shows Davos his "ladies". That's

leaving aside less sympathetic people like Cersei, the High Sparrow, Tywin, Lord Tarly, or the outright sadists. Modern governments resort to torture in the face of insurgencies. It's hardly surprising Dany's does as well.

4. Not all of her decisions in Meereen are poor ones. Planting crops is sensible. An amnesty is sensible, even though it results in injustices. Opening up trade with the Lhazareen is sensible. Given that she is against massacring the upper classes, trying to win them over by marrying Hizdahr is reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...