Jump to content

Daenerys - red herring?


Katerine459

Recommended Posts

This is SUBJECTIVE, do you realize?

I don't see it as bad writing at all. It's actually a brilliant sharp subversion of expectations. The poor exiled princess ends up destroying everything she touches. It's downright Shakespearean. And it's not as if would be out of nowhere or a gut punch or a cheap shot. This girl has been doing downright despicable things for a while now. Is it bad writing if the girl who burns, crucifies and tortures people really does end up being an antagonist?

No, that would be a tragedy. Not something I'm hoping for, at all, but not something I would object to, either.

What I do object to, is the fact that, earlier, I brought up a hypothetical example of something that GRRM could do (since he can do anything), and the hypothetical example that I brought up is the perfect example of a bait and switch... and people are arguing that if he did do that, then it would not be bad writing!

There are limits to the "subjective" label. He could have the cast of Star Trek come down on Westeros. It would be bad writing. That's not subjective, that's just true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that would be a tragedy. Not something I'm hoping for, at all, but not something I would object to, either.

What I do object to, is the fact that, earlier, I brought up a hypothetical example of something that GRRM could do (since he can do anything), and the hypothetical example that I brought up is the perfect example of a bait and switch... and people are arguing that if he did do that, then it would not be bad writing!

There are limits to the "subjective" label. He could have the cast of Star Trek come down on Westeros. It would be bad writing. That's not subjective, that's just true.

That's something entirely else than letting Dany become a villain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dany becoming a villain would not automatically be bad writing... But it would take a lot of effort from GRRM's part to make it good writing. It's just not what her character is heading for.



To be clear; when we say ''villain'' in ASOIAF, we think about the lowest of the low, the most depraved, vicious and heartless of them all. The Joffreys, the Gregors, the Ramsays, the Kraznys's. We mean people who are cruel and have very few, if not none, redeemable qualities. Tywin himself doesn't enter that category of pure, abject evil (IMO). Dany may be fairly ruthless, mood-swingy and extremely unforgiving to her enemies, but she's a far cry from the monstruous specimens we have considered villains so far (even if her bodycount is higher than all of them put together so far :p).


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dany becoming a villain would not automatically be bad writing... But it would take a lot of effort from GRRM's part to make it good writing. It's just not what her character is heading for.

To be clear; when we say ''villain'' in ASOIAF, we think about the lowest of the low, the most depraved, vicious and heartless of them all. The Joffreys, the Gregors, the Ramsays, the Kraznys's. We mean people who are cruel and have very few, if not none, redeemable qualities. Tywin himself doesn't enter that category of pure, abject evil (IMO). Dany may be fairly ruthless, mood-swingy and extremely unforgiving to her enemies, but she's a far cry from the monstruous specimens we have considered villains so far (even if her bodycount is higher than all of them put together so far :P).

I also don't see her becoming an outright villain, although I fully admit she has done some questionable acts. However, I wouldn't be surprised if she were to become an antagonist to some of the main characters. Let's look at this hypothetical situation. She lands in the North to discover that Stannis, the Usurper's brother and a claimant of the throne, is fighting the Boltons and Freys. I could easily see her siding with the Boltons and Freys, not knowing the monsters they are; she joins them simply because Stannis is Robert's brother.

Do I think this will happen? No. But it is plausible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's something entirely else than letting Dany become a villain.

As I said, letting Dany become a villain would be a tragedy. That's what a tragedy is - when a good character goes bad, due to some character flaw. Not something I'm hoping for, at all, but not something I'd claim as "bad writing," either. I just wouldn't like it, because I'm full-up on tragedy in ASOIAF.

I was talking about something else entirely.

From my perspective, here's what led up to the post you quoted [happened in this thread leaving my original words because I'm rewording this very belatedly]:

  • I'd said in my original post that Dany being a "red herring" can't happen, for literary reasons, because GRRM had already asked the readers to take so much on faith with the Dany chapters in the first place - since in the entire first two books, those chapters weren't related to anything else going on. I do have my interpretation of the nature of Dany's importance to the story, but mainly the issue was that I'd interpreted, "red herring," to mean something along the lines of, "pretending that Dany's story is important, when it's not really all that important, except incidentally."
  • Apple Martini replied with points about how he/she thinks Dany will be important, but as a villain. But then, he/she also said, "As for what "can" and "can't" be the case, the only person who has any insight of value there is the author."
  • I countered with an example of something GRRM can't do, because it would be betraying the faith that the readers put in him, that our time, the many, many hours reading his books, was being well spent. In my hypothetical example (of something GRRM can't do), Dany would have no importance to the overall story, at all, other than to give her dragons to somebody else.
  • Apple Martini repeated that GRRM can do whatever he wants.
  • I said that he could, but sometimes, it would be bad writing. By, "sometimes," I was thinking of the above example of a bait and switch, because in my mind, that's what we were still talking about. I was not thinking about Dany becoming a villain.
  • Apple Martini and jenerationx both countered that this is subjective.
  • I disagree.

I apologize for any misunderstandings on my part, btw. My head is pounding and this makes me very cranky. :stillsick: Again, apologies for any misunderstandings.

(Edit: I also apologize for the above list of events. There must be a more courteous and fair way to end the misunderstandings in this thread, than to give a one-sided blow-by-blow account while naming names, like this. I'm sure there's a better way... I just can't figure out what it is. That's my fault, and I apologize.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole AAR/PTWP prophesy is a red herring in my personal opinion.

I think its no one, or it was Aegon Rhaegar's son and he is dead now.

I don't think GRRM is going to make one prophecy centered around one person.

This isn't Harry Potter or other series where we have an Oracle confirming if prophecies are false or not and who they are.

True he won't do it around one person, but three is his magic number. "Child of 3, daughter of death." Everyone assumes the 3 is about her two brothers and her. But as Martin likes to play with double meanings all the time, this could refer to 3 children of death. Dany, Jon and one more. Who's death is the real question, there death or what you point them at? Or both? There will be a third person who will also appear to fulfill the prophecies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • I countered with an example of something GRRM can't do, because it would be betraying the faith that the readers put in him, that our time, the many, many hours reading his books, was being well spent. In this example, Dany has no importance to the overall story, at all, other than to give her dragons to somebody else.

I have dealt with this mindset enough to hear it now, "but giving her dragons away is REALLY IMPORTANT! It will be at the exact right time to the exact right person and then she can die a hero!"

I am saying that is not a good enough payoff to justify following her from chapter 3, book 1. All this, all this leadership and strife and scheming and betrayal, all of it so....she can be a very timely delivery girl. Literally, as well as figuratively, if the theory that she'll die in childbirth giving a male character an heir holds true.

I think there's a darker side to this theory, and it involves wanting to see the high brought low. It involves wanting to take everything cool from one character, and empower another character with those exact things because, he just deserves them in a way that she doesn't. I think that's where the "Oooh I can't wait until a warg mind-slaves her dragon into eating her," mentality comes from...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that would be a tragedy. Not something I'm hoping for, at all, but not something I would object to, either.What I do object to, is the fact that, earlier, I brought up a hypothetical example of something that GRRM could do (since he can do anything), and the hypothetical example that I brought up is the perfect example of a bait and switch... and people are arguing that if he did do that, then it would not be bad writing!There are limits to the "subjective" label. He could have the cast of Star Trek come down on Westeros. It would be bad writing. That's not subjective, that's just true.

And if he decides to of any of that, it's his decision, not yours. It is not for you or me or anyone else to say what he can and can't do.

Bad writing, reader betrayal, pissing readers off, however you want to put it ... It has nothing to do with what the freaking author can or can't do with his own creative property. You keep making the mistake of conflating what may or not be poor decision-making with what a writer can objectively do with things he created. Which is ANYTHING he chooses. Whether or not you or anyone else agrees with it is irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have dealt with this mindset enough to hear it now, "but giving her dragons away is REALLY IMPORTANT! It will be at the exact right time to the exact right person and then she can die a hero!"

I am saying that is not a good enough payoff to justify following her from chapter 3, book 1. All this, all this leadership and strife and scheming and betrayal, all of it so....she can be a very timely delivery girl. Literally, as well as figuratively, if the theory that she'll die in childbirth giving a male character an heir holds true.

I think there's a darker side to this theory, and it involves wanting to see the high brought low. It involves wanting to take everything cool from one character, and empower another character with those exact things because, he just deserves them in a way that she doesn't. I think that's where the "Oooh I can't wait until a warg mind-slaves her dragon into eating her," mentality comes from...

I think you're now attributing the desires of a subset of people (those who believe Jon will get everything, including the Iron Throne) to a broader swath of people (those who believe Jon is AA),

I personally have no desire to see Dany "give" her dragons to Jon so that he can be the only hero. But neither do I think Dany is the sole hero. We have a bunch of heroes and they all have their individual roles to play.

What I DO believe is that it's actually possible that NEITHER of them take on both the roles of Azor Ahai and the person who will lead the Seven Kingdoms once the dust has settled. In fact, to give more purpose to more characters, it makes sense that different characters would fulfill those roles. Saying that Dany is not AA is NOT the same as saying that she needs to give up her dragons or be any kind of "delivery girl." In fact, it may very well be that Jon, as AA, is the person who gives up HIS life/potential claims so that Dany can be the one to finally sit her ass on the Iron Throne that she's been wanting all this time.

Saying that one believes Jon is AA does not equate to saying that Jon is the only hero of the story and he's going to be the messiah and the king and whatever else. Some people might believe that, but not all of us do, and arguing against things that aren't even being argued in this thread (at least, not by me or most of the responses I've seen) is muddling the discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said she'd "give" away her dragons. The theory goes, I believe, that they will be TAKEN from her, magically, by someone's warg powers.

...And then the plan for her just...stops. No army (no, not even the Unsullied or the Dothraki) will follow her without her dragons, and without an army, she can want whatever she wants, it won't matter, because she's lost her ability to enforce her will.

Not that it matters, because the theory ALSO goes that she'll be pregnant with a fatal fetus by then anyway so her story is, effectively, over.

What I hate about this is it makes the whole point of her tale about how she would, eventually, empower someone else by being in the right place at the right time to legitimize them/ give them her stuff/ deliver her followers and stand back while he flies off with her (really his) dragons to claim her (really his) kingdom and save her (really his) world.

And then, perhaps, they imagine her watching him fly away on Drogon, tears streaming down her face, saying to herself, "it's for the best, I was never meant to be queen anyway, all our hopes live through you now good Ser SnowStarkGaryan! Oooh I have a pain! Here is a baby! Now I die having accomplished anything I was ever going to accomplish."

And they feel satisfied.

And I feel sick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry you have such damage about other people's opinions, but they're not mine, nor are they what has been argued in this thread.

I apologize. For what it's worth, I agree with you that nobody, not Jon or Dany, is or should be the Chosen One, the Magical Prophetic Hero who will fix everything on his way to ruling everything. That's not a good way for this story do go. I want EVERYONE to have their turn at the Others and their moment saving the world.

Where I take issue is when people believe (and feel justified believing) that Dany will only fight the Others by empowering Jon to do so. I don't like the idea that her ultimate legacy, more important then her actions, will be how she was good support to the real heroes.

I'm ok with Jon being AA, I am NOT ok with that also meaning he's the Three Heads of the Dragon, The Prince that was Promised, the rightful king, the cure for cancer, and the lord and savior of the whole world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said she'd "give" away her dragons. The theory goes, I believe, that they will be TAKEN from her, magically, by someone's warg powers.

...And then the plan for her just...stops. No army (no, not even the Unsullied or the Dothraki) will follow her without her dragons, and without an army, she can want whatever she wants, it won't matter, because she's lost her ability to enforce her will.

Not that it matters, because the theory ALSO goes that she'll be pregnant with a fatal fetus by then anyway so her story is, effectively, over.

What I hate about this is it makes the whole point of her tale about how she would, eventually, empower someone else by being in the right place at the right time to legitimize them/ give them her stuff/ deliver her followers and stand back while he flies off with her (really his) dragons to claim her (really his) kingdom and save her (really his) world.

And then, perhaps, they imagine her watching him fly away on Drogon, tears streaming down her face, saying to herself, "it's for the best, I was never meant to be queen anyway, all our hopes live through you now good Ser SnowStarkGaryan! Oooh I have a pain! Here is a baby! Now I die having accomplished anything I was ever going to accomplish."

And they feel satisfied.

And I feel sick.

Far from me to intrude, but you might be slightly too invested if you are that disturbed by a very fringe idea/theory shared on an internet forum. One that has not been expressed in this thread so far, no less. We have no idea what will happen, and given that this is GRRM anything but the most out-there scenarios can't really be ruled out.

But if it makes you feel better, as someone who doesn't really like Dany, I strongly doubt she'll solely be a delivery girl for Johnny boy. No sane author would waste so much time on a character for so little payoff, and Martin is not completely insane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Far from me to intrude, but you might be slightly too invested if you are that disturbed by a very fringe idea/theory shared on an internet forum. One that has not been expressed in this thread so far, no less. We have no idea what will happen, and given that this is GRRM anything but the most out-there scenarios can't really be ruled out.

But if it makes you feel better, as someone who doesn't really like Dany, I strongly doubt she'll solely be a delivery girl for Johnny boy. No sane author would waste so much time on a character for so little payoff, and Martin is not completely insane.

I agree, especially with the part I bolded. Dany's been too important too long to be brushed aside, though GRRM can do it, as Apple pointed out. No doubt she'll figure mightily in the final endgame, whether she's hero, villain, or just one more major participant. As to the red herring discussion, sure, she could be a red herring for the real AAR. But the argument that it's too obvious, too literal, too clear does not convince me. GRRM can be a very subtle author and at times seems to excel at misleading the readers (or letting them mislead themselves?). By the time we're second guessing and third guessing, anything is possible, including that a logical candidate really is AA. Personally, I think Jon is more logical and obvious, though some of the clues themselves are more subtle.

One other thing, on a more general plot level we do have an obvious red herring--fAegon. And for many people Varys's comments to Kevan are convincing. I would wager that when the TV programme gets around to presenting Aegon and then shows the Varys - Kevan scene, 99% of the viewers will be convinced Aegon is genuine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, especially with the part I bolded. Dany's been too important too long to be brushed aside, though GRRM can do it, as Apple pointed out. No doubt she'll figure mightily in the final endgame, whether she's hero, villain, or just one more major participant. As to the red herring discussion, sure, she could be a red herring for the real AAR. But the argument that it's too obvious, too literal, too clear does not convince me. GRRM can be a very subtle author and at times seems to excel at misleading the readers (or letting them mislead themselves?). By the time we're second guessing and third guessing, anything is possible, including that a logical candidate really is AA. Personally, I think Jon is more logical and obvious, though some of the clues themselves are more subtle.

One other thing, on a more general plot level we do have an obvious red herring--fAegon. And for many people Varys's comments to Kevan are convincing. I would wager that when the TV programme gets around to presenting Aegon and then shows the Varys - Kevan scene, 99% of the viewers will be convinced Aegon is genuine.

I just can't see how Jon is any more obvious than someone who actually hatched dragons and who has people saying flat-out in the story that yes it's her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not like what he'd do because he'd be thinking we'd discount what he'd do, so he'd head us off at the pass and make sure AA is the person we thought it was before we thought it was the person he thought we'd think it was because the people have actually SAID it's that person so it can't be! YES! We don't need to read the other books now! We know how it's gonna end!


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...