Anyone else see Dany as becoming evil?

[Jon's Queen Consort]

32 minutes ago, Lady Ren said:

She is who she is and it's all blood and fire.

That is quite true, she is all fire. Hence she is an extremity and by definition that isn't beneficial for the humanity.

[khal drogon]

3 hours ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

That is quite true, she is all fire. Hence she is an extremity and by definition that isn't beneficial for the humanity.

Then Bran and the Starks are all ice and they aren't beneficial too.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

6 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

Then Bran and the Starks are all ice and they aren't beneficial too.

I never said that it will be Bran or a Stark that will be the savior. We need both Fire and Ice, we need balance and the only one who is both is Jon.

[khal drogon]

7 minutes ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

I never said that it will be Bran or a Stark that will be the savior. We need both Fire and Ice, we need balance and the only one who is both is Jon.

If the story goes that way I will puke.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

15 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

If the story goes that way I will puke.

If that makes you feel good.

[RhaenysBee]

This is stupid. Daenerys is not evil, she is quite clearly not evil. Not in the books not in the show. And comparing her to Jon Snow and saying that he is a "good guy" and Daenerys is closer to "bad guy" is even more stupid. Jon Snow opened the gate to tens of thousands of rapist barbarians who slaughter villages and eat little boys' parents for dinner. Jon Snow was a double agent, Jon Snow deserted, Jon Snow led hundreds to death in the battle of bastards to get back his (supposed) family's castle, Jon Snow hanged people and Jon Snow was an accomplice in feeding a person to his own dogs. How is Jon Snow a better guy than Daenerys? 

and for god's sake kinslaying Dornish? About everybody is kinslaying in the bloody show at this point and how is Daenerys responsible for the past actions of the Dornish bastards and the Ironborn and the Dothraki who follow her? Point me out the one character in the show who was never in an alliance with someone of questionable moral. Go. Oh wait, there isn't such person? How could that be? It is profoundly stupid to call Daenerys evil. 

[SeanF]

I hope she'll become like Caligula in I Claudius, and demand that she be worshipped.

[Gaz0680]

16 hours ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

I never said that it will be Bran or a Stark that will be the savior. We need both Fire and Ice, we need balance and the only one who is both is Jon.

I really wish people would stop trying to boil this whole story down to one savior. It isnt going to go that way, either in the show or the books.

Lots of characters have an important part to play and as GRRM has said, he originally envisioned five central characters. It was never one.

Jon has an important part to play, but he is surely not everything. If this story boils down to one savior, I concur with khal drogon and would puke. Id be so disgusted in GRRM and also D&D if they let this beautiful, magnificent and diverse story end in such a simplistic and meaningless way.

I like what Varys said to Tyrion "I dont believe in saviors, I believe that men of talent have a part to play in the wars to come".

[Jon's Queen Consort]

2 hours ago, Gaz0680 said:

I really wish people would stop trying to boil this whole story down to one savior. It isnt going to go that way, either in the show or the books.

You can wish whatever you want. That doesn't mean that so far we have learn about one leader or hero; Azor Ahai.

2 hours ago, Gaz0680 said:

Lots of characters have an important part to play and as GRRM has said, he originally envisioned five central characters. It was never one.

Importand part to play yes, no one said anything else. All will fight together but one will be the leader.

2 hours ago, Gaz0680 said:

Jon has an important part to play, but he is surely not everything. If this story boils down to one savior, I concur with khal drogon and would puke. Id be so disgusted in GRRM and also D&D if they let this beautiful, magnificent and diverse story end in such a simplistic and meaningless way.

Of course he isn't everyhing. He is just the leader.

[Pink Fat Rast]

4 hours ago, RhaenysB said:

This is stupid. Daenerys is not evil, she is quite clearly not evil. Not in the books not in the show. And comparing her to Jon Snow and saying that he is a "good guy" and Daenerys is closer to "bad guy" is even more stupid. Jon Snow opened the gate to tens of thousands of rapist barbarians who slaughter villages

That was their "pragmatic" warfare tactics while they were trying to escape mass extinction.

I think the show went a bit too far portraying them as essentially noble savages though (with the exception of Thenns) - could've been a lot more bad apples, dilemmas and ambiguity there.

4 hours ago, RhaenysB said:

and eat little boys' parents for dinner.

Again, that was just the Thenns.

4 hours ago, RhaenysB said:

Jon Snow was a double agent, Jon Snow deserted, Jon Snow led hundreds to death in the battle of bastards to get back his (supposed) family's castle,

Free the North of cruel tyranny, also said Walkers from the north and Boltons from the south was a bit too much - Ramsay also was gonna attack the Wall to get Sansa, presumably.

4 hours ago, RhaenysB said:

Jon Snow hanged people

Not complete saints tho

4 hours ago, RhaenysB said:

and Jon Snow was an accomplice in feeding a person to his own dogs. How is Jon Snow a better guy than Daenerys? 

Daenerys wants to cahnquer and has a strong tendency to see all Westerosi as enemies - it's a good thing she teamed up with some of them.

Also she burned Mirri even though she was more in the right than her - thought she had been "wronged". despite drawing first blood.

4 hours ago, RhaenysB said:

and for god's sake kinslaying Dornish? About everybody is kinslaying in the bloody show at this point and how is Daenerys responsible for the past actions of the Dornish bastards and the Ironborn and the Dothraki who follow her? Point me out the one character in the show who was never in an alliance with someone of questionable moral. Go. Oh wait, there isn't such person? How could that be? It is profoundly stupid to call Daenerys evil. 

Well, it is for that particular reason

[Pink Fat Rast]

2 hours ago, Gaz0680 said:

I really wish people would stop trying to boil this whole story down to one savior. It isnt going to go that way, either in the show or the books.

Lots of characters have an important part to play and as GRRM has said, he originally envisioned five central characters. It was never one.

Jon has an important part to play, but he is surely not everything. If this story boils down to one savior, I concur with khal drogon and would puke. Id be so disgusted in GRRM and also D&D if they let this beautiful, magnificent and diverse story end in such a simplistic and meaningless way.

I like what Varys said to Tyrion "I dont believe in saviors, I believe that men of talent have a part to play in the wars to come".

Varys rejects magic, he doesn't necessarily have a valid opinion about mystical chosen ones and stuff like that.

Yes, for the story to end in a "simplistic" fashion would be a let down - but a Chosen One at the center wouldn't necessitate such a thing, there's be plenty of ways of doing that I imagine.

[RhaenysBee]

18 minutes ago, Pink Fat Rast said:

That was their "pragmatic" warfare tactics while they were trying to escape mass extinction.

I think the show went a bit too far portraying them as essentially noble savages though (with the exception of Thenns) - could've been a lot more bad apples, dilemmas and ambiguity there.

Again, that was just the Thenns.

Free the North of cruel tyranny, also said Walkers from the north and Boltons from the south was a bit too much - Ramsay also was gonna attack the Wall to get Sansa, presumably.

Not complete saints tho

Daenerys wants to cahnquer and has a strong tendency to see all Westerosi as enemies - it's a good thing she teamed up with some of them.

Also she burned Mirri even though she was more in the right than her - thought she had been "wronged". despite drawing first blood.

Well, it is for that particular reason

Well, Daenerys's pragmatic warfare tactic was to free the Unsullied soldiers she didn't buy and break up with all the dehumanizing practices they had been forced into while under the leader/ownership of the masters. 

The wildlings are about the exact same as the Dothraki in terms of culture and civilization, that's one huge parallel in Jon's and Daenerys's storylines, they both lived among "barbaric" people and experienced that even though their ways are foreign from the westerosi point of view, they aren't "evil" and can make as good allies as any Westerosi foot soldier (who is also hardly likely to be significantly more civilized than a Dothraki ride or a man of the free folk - dick jokes everywhere). 

Daenerys went on a crusade to free the slaves of Slavers' Bay from under the cruel tyranny of their masters who massacred children by the hundred. She left councils to ensure the transition from slavery to a society based on freedom. 

Are you trying to tell me that Mirri deserved being hanged less than a twelve year old kid? Or maybe that she and the masters were saints after all or at least better people than Ollie and Alliser and the rest? 

Daenerys doesn't see westeros as an enemy she sees those who killed her family and took her ancestral home as enemies, namely the Baratheons and the Lannisters. Jon sees those as enemies who did the same, the boltons and the lannisters. Robb stark saw those as enemies who did the same, the lannisters and the ironborn. 

So let's sum this up. 

Daenerys lived in a barbaric culture and later took them as allies as she knows that they are valuable even if they have foreign ways. She freed a slave army that was created and maintained with cruel practices. She broke up with said practices and went on a quest to free every slave in slavers' bay to save these people from the whims of their cruel masters. She installed councils to ensure the transition of the cities to liberty based society. She stayed in one said city and attempted to make peace between the liberated underdogs and their previous masters, even though the attempt was unsuccessful. Once she had enough allies, she sailed home to retake her family seat and avanhe the death of their family. What an absolute bitch. 

Jon lived in a barbaric culture and later allied with them as he learned that in spite of their foreign ways they are valuable. He also decided to help a outcast layer of people to save them from the whims of nature and the threat of the others after battling them at length. As he became a ruler, he freed the wildlings from north of the wall and let them south in hope of a liberty based society in which they would take care of themselves. Jon attempted to make peace between the underdogs and those who thought themselves to be on top and disliked the change - sadly, unsuccessfully as he was murdered while trying. Once he had enough allies (including previously mentioned barbarians), Jon marched south to retake his family home and avange his family. What an absolute hero. 

Please. 

[Pink Fat Rast]

4 hours ago, RhaenysB said:

Well, Daenerys's pragmatic warfare tactic was to free the Unsullied soldiers she didn't buy and break up with all the dehumanizing practices they had been forced into while under the leader/ownership of the masters. 

That was alright, but indiscriminately crucifying the masters was neither just nor pragmatic.

Threatening to feed them to the dragons later on was, because she was demonstratively aware of some of them being innocent and it was to stop the terrorists.


But the crucifixions were Dany's characteristic "blind justice" - i.e. the same impulse that drives an angry mob to lynch innocents while believing they're lynching murderers: angry, self-righteous, too reckless and driven to check properly.

She didn't realize not all of them guilty (and neither did Selmy, apparently) until Hizdahr(?) told her.


Not very pragmatic either, since that stunt must've contributed a lot to the Harpy insurgency...

Quote

The wildlings are about the exact same as the Dothraki in terms of culture and civilization, that's one huge parallel in Jon's and Daenerys's storylines, they both lived among "barbaric" people and experienced that even though their ways are foreign from the westerosi point of view, they aren't "evil" and can make as good allies as any Westerosi foot soldier (who is also hardly likely to be significantly more civilized than a Dothraki ride or a man of the free folk - dick jokes everywhere).

Maybe at some point the Dothraki and the wildlings were the same - but it looks like Mance (along with Tormund and whoever else) stirred them in a more noble direction, and he wanted to put a stop to the "raiding and killing" after crossing the Wall.

They were driven primarily by survival, and secondarily by resentment against the crows and sutheners who were keeping them out - especially now that their existence is threatened by demons.


It's questionable how noble Drogo could've ended up had he not dropped dead - shortly before he did so, he was still condoning unnecessary mass rape even though he agreed to put a halt to it to please his wife.

Rape and pillage is in the very Dothraki culture and religion, and they hadn't been neutered yet like the Ironborn - I'm not aware of the same applying to most Wildlings, they were just generally savage and violent and warring with each other etc. but raiding and raping wasn't an inherent part of their "culture" was it? Hating the Crows sure, but that's about it.

So under normal circumstances, Drogo probably couldn't have stirred his tribe away from that without losing his position - under slightly more messianic circumstances, if they had born their Stallion and started to unite all the Khalasars and whatnot, who knows; 
apparently they were awed enough by D's fire trick to turn at least slightly less evil, so who knows.

But then Drogo died, and the dude from S6 didn't seem particularly benign, so yea - the Dothraki in S1-6, much worse than wildlings; the new Dothraki under Daenerys' leadership, maybe now comparable to wildlings under Mance's and now Jon's.

Or.... at least MORE comparable - they're stilll out for glory and conquest, unlike the freefolk.
 

Quote

Daenerys went on a crusade to free the slaves of Slavers' Bay from under the cruel tyranny of their masters who massacred children by the hundred. She left councils to ensure the transition from slavery to a society based on freedom. 

No one's saying that she isn't "grey at worst" - however, causing massive damage in the euphoric belief you're doing good and restoring justice, can be a very dangerous thing, and in fact an evil thing in the eyes of those affected.

So I'd say to herself she might appear as "light grey" (realizing her methods to be slightly... epic, but all in a good just cause and necessary), while in some others she'd be seen as "dark grey" - a horrible destructive tyrant who, in her own mind, thinks she's doing good.
But that depends on her behavior in S7, I'm just saying that's the worst case scenario.

 

 

Quote

Are you trying to tell me that Mirri deserved being hanged less than a twelve year old kid?

1) Burned isn't comparable to hanging. Though I guess clean beheading is even better.

2) Yes - she took direct revenge against Drogo; that's comparable to Olly killing Tormund or something (even though Tormund had a more ethical motivation in the first place).
I bet even if he killed Ygritte in Jon's arms while she wasn trying to shoot him while they were on opposing sides of a battle, Jon still wouldn't have executed him - and if he had, it wouldn't have been brutal but at least then it would've started being comparable.

Also: Olly was told, TWICE, about the necessity to make peace with the wildlings.
There was never a "necessity" for Drogorys to invade Westeros in the first place, she didn't come up Mirri and said "look, I know Drogo burned down your village a month ago, but he was scared of the ghost grass and now the ghost grass is on its way here - please understand, and don't kill my baby out of revenge if that's possible he's prophsized to eat all the grass, saving YOU from it as well".

Quote

Or maybe that she and the masters were saints after all or at least better people than Ollie and Alliser and the rest? 

You mean magi? Uh, I dunno, have any of them sheep people done anything bad anywhere?

Quote

Daenerys doesn't see westeros as an enemy she sees those who killed her family and took her ancestral home as enemies, namely the Baratheons and the Lannisters. Jon sees those as enemies who did the same, the boltons and the lannisters. Robb stark saw those as enemies who did the same, the lannisters and the ironborn. 

So let's sum this up.

She went quite a bit further in her "break the wheel" speech.
However, she showed willingness to moderate herself after learning Aerys was a tyrant => Baratheons maybe not so bad for eliminating him, etc.

The question at this point is, is she gonna continue on this, uh, more enlightened path provided by her various advisors, or are the zeal and glory going to take over again? She shows some dangers of slipping.


Jon probably wouldn't be particularly tempted to "kill all the Lannisters" after befriending Tyrion - though I'd prefer if he did and then someone had to bang heads with him over his hypocrisy with the wildlings;
we've got enough noble heroes elsewhere, I want more juicy grey shades in my game of thrones.

Quote

Daenerys lived in a barbaric culture and later took them as allies as she knows that they are valuable even if they have foreign ways.

She was Stockholm-deluded into thinking that killing her beloved warlord invader and the prophesized super-invader in her womb was an utterly evil act - as was the audience, that's why she appeared as sympathetic when getting back at Mirri, even though objectively it's the other way around.

Has she shown regrets about that after she's gained power and freedom? Or I guess it hasn't been brought up by anyone.

Even though that she's "taken them as allies", or followers even, her motivation is still glory rather than something noble - or, rather, it's primarily the former, but she's convinced the latter plays a big role and the two could end up being in conflict later on.

Quote

She freed a slave army that was created and maintained with cruel practices. She broke up with said practices and went on a quest to free every slave in slavers' bay to save these people from the whims of their cruel masters.

That was a noble cause, yep.
However, Westeros isn't enslaved atm - depending on how tyrannical Cersei's gonna be, anyway; 
the Tyrant in the North had just been defeated, and Dorne/Reach seem fine for now.

Quote

She installed councils to ensure the transition of the cities to liberty based society. She stayed in one said city and attempted to make peace between the liberated underdogs and their previous masters, even though the attempt was unsuccessful. Once she had enough allies, she sailed home to retake her family seat and avanhe the death of their family. What an absolute bitch. 

No one said "absolute bitch", but for some more nuance see the breakdowns above^^^^

Quote

Jon lived in a barbaric culture and later allied with them as he learned that in spite of their foreign ways they are valuable. He also decided to help a outcast layer of people to save them from the whims of nature and the threat of the others after battling them at length. As he became a ruler, he freed the wildlings from north of the wall and let them south in hope of a liberty based society in which they would take care of themselves. Jon attempted to make peace between the underdogs and those who thought themselves to be on top and disliked the change - sadly, unsuccessfully as he was murdered while trying. Once he had enough allies (including previously mentioned barbarians), Jon marched south to retake his family home and avange his family. What an absolute hero. 

Please. 

1) Boltons = asshats; Westeros on its whole, not so much.

2) Daenerys has shown self-righteous recklessness even in pursuit of the "noble" cause, i.e. freeing the slaves and crucifying a bunch of masters who were innocent (probably).

And taking back Westeros is even less of a clear-cut issue than slave cities - HOWEVER, the way things are right now, if she stays allied with the good Starks, the good Tyrells, the "good" Martell/Sands (at least in the sense they seem not to be going after their population), and Yara's Ironborn, all of whom support her claim to the throne, while opposing Cersei (with nuance even, judging by the leaks) and Euron's Ironborn;
and makes sure neither the Dothraki nor her red priests get to apply their glorious ways to the wrong people... then I'd say the better angels of her nature are bound to prevail - or, in fact, even avoid temptation altogether.
...


.....


Let's see how that'll work out

[Pink Fat Rast]

On 20.4.2017 at 0:38 PM, Nocturne said:

Sorry for going off topic, but at some point the twist do have to stop. You can't keep it gray until the end, lines have been drawn and Cerci is evil whichever way you look at it.

Its not a bad thing that the good guys will come and actually clean the bad away, probably temporarily though as the WW army is right around the corner ready to fuck everybody's shit up regardless of their good/bad nature.

If the gray's gonna be cleared away, why have it there the whole time in the first place?

Nah, keep it complicated till the end kthnx

[RhaenysBee]

@Pink Fat Rast I'm supposed to read all that? I can see you said unkind things about Drogo, that's not a good start, and I've had a hell of a day, so maybe I should get back to this tomorrow morning. And knowing I will never agree with anybody on Daenerys (or Drogo) being evil, especially in comparison to Jon, I should probably just propose to agree to disagree. Shall we settle on that? 

I eventually read your post in detail until I saw the word "Stockholm". And I'm just too tired for that shit. I agree to disagree with you on the fluffy free folk and evil red eyed Dothraki and Jon is a hero who does the right things for the right reasons while Daenerys is a mad queen who does the wrong things for the wrong reasons. These fandoms are irreconcilable anyways. 

Oh god no, now I saw the collocation "good starks". I can't. You seem like such a nice new board member, but I just can't. Good starks, Stockholm syndrome, evil Drogo... we can never be friends. Next you are going to tell me Stannis is great. (JK, obviously) 

 

[Pink Fat Rast]

1 hour ago, RhaenysB said:

@Pink Fat Rast I'm supposed to read all that?

Yeah!

*Christ Rock gif*

1 hour ago, RhaenysB said:

I can see you said unkind things about Drogo, that's not a good start, 

Drogo did nothing wrong.

1 hour ago, RhaenysB said:

and I've had a hell of a day, so maybe I should get back to this tomorrow morning. And knowing I will never agree with anybody on Daenerys (or Drogo) being evil, especially in comparison to Jon, I should probably just propose to agree to disagree. Shall we settle on that?

Uh, sure, okay

1 hour ago, RhaenysB said:

I eventually read your post in detail until I saw the word "Stockholm".

It's a nice city.

1 hour ago, RhaenysB said:

And I'm just too tired for that shit. I agree to disagree with you on the fluffy free folk and evil red eyed Dothraki and Jon is a hero who does the right things for the right reasons while Daenerys is a mad queen who does the wrong things for the wrong reasons. These fandoms are irreconcilable anyways.

hm

1 hour ago, RhaenysB said:

Oh god no, now I saw the collocation "good starks". I can't. You seem like such a nice new board member, but I just can't.

I came here to fight RRRRanters who complain about the showrunners worshipping St. Daenerys too much, among other issues - now I'm confused...

1 hour ago, RhaenysB said:

Good starks, Stockholm syndrome, evil Drogo... we can never be friends. Next you are going to tell me Stannis is great. (JK, obviously) 

The Throne was his by right.

[Pink Fat Rast]

On 20.4.2017 at 4:02 AM, Lady Ren said:

Do you think the latter is going to happen? I theorized this, and honestly, this show doesn't shy away from upsetting fans or going a little bloodthirsty. Doesn't GRRM constantly snip about the fact that D&D are even more cruel with the characters than he is? 
It would be strange if they refrained from going full force right at the climax of the whole series.

As far as specifically Daenerys vs. Stark conflicts, the only way I can think of right at this point is if all those Red Priests take some issue with Bran's greenseeing / weirwood / CotF and start insisting that R'hllor has the correct solutions and answers to the threat rather than the "false Old Gods" - despite it being the other way around, most probably.


As far as generally how could thinks develop in a somewhat less predicted manner: 

On 20.4.2017 at 4:02 AM, Lady Ren said:

At first I thought it was human v. WW. It could still be that way. That could be the war we have all been waiting for. But the WW are weapons created by people. The show I'm watching right now seems to be pointing towards:  people v. people and WW. v. dragons. 

What other way do you think things could get turned on its head?

Probably something like different human factions trying to use the WWs to their advantage or finding some kind of way to control them or make a pact with them (i.e. like Craster, or maybe a Dead Man's Chest kind of thing) - not just Cersei or Euron, but neutral or "good parties" as well: Olenna could be tempted to use it against Cersei, the Warlocks to increase their power again; LF might prefer "ruling in hell to serving in relative heaven", and on it goes.

Then a large part of "the end game" might end up consisting of humans fighting and plotting over WW control, those trying to "get good with the Gods" and finally those trying to destroy them as initially expected.
Things could get messy if someone did an incantation and made the WWs invulnerable to dragonglass and fire etc.


So that kind of situation could turn anyone into a zealot, and Daenerys the "fire queen" probably most of all - kinda hard to predict specifics though, if all that were to happen.

[RhaenysBee]

14 minutes ago, Pink Fat Rast said:

Yeah!

*Christ Rock gif*

Drogo did nothing wrong.

Uh, sure, okay

It's a nice city.

hm

I came here to fight RRRRanters who complain about the showrunners worshipping St. Daenerys too much, among other issues - now I'm confused...

The Throne was his by right.

Indeed he didn't, he was a rather enlightened Dothraki leader and Jason Momoa is a dream. 

I am sure it is a very nice city. 

Because the show runners don't worship Thaint Jon enough? 

So am I. If you fight people who complain about thaint Daenerys, doesn't that make you pro- Daenerys?  But then, aren't you pro- Jon based on this thread? 

Back in the day I had come here to obsess about the show and the books. Happy times. Half a decade later here I am bitching about both, and no I don't think that's my fault. 

I don't say it wasn't. 

[Pink Fat Rast]

39 minutes ago, RhaenysB said:

and Jason Momoa is a dream.

aha

39 minutes ago, RhaenysB said:

Because the show runners don't worship Thaint Jon enough? 

So am I. If you fight people who complain about thaint Daenerys, doesn't that make you pro- Daenerys?  But then, aren't you pro- Jon based on this thread? 

Depends on the type of the complaint - if it's for example "Tht. Daenerys has no edges", and my counter is that yes, she does have edges and the ranter should pay more attention next time, then no, that wouldn't make me "pro-Daenerys" (maybe pro-Daenerys-scenes if I think they're better than they claim, but that's something else entirely).


They get a lot of facts wrong over there, and their value judgements can be quite confusing as well: for example if the show adds "edge" to a character or scenario then that's bad juvenile cynicism, but if it reduces said edge then it's bad Hollywood Fanfiction.

Personally I'd prefer as much moral ambiguity and confusion in this show as possible - so Jon's S5 arc was a huge missed opportunity in that regard, and if S7 goes for good two shoes Jonarys as some fear, it'll be yet another.

[Pink Fat Rast]

On 18.4.2017 at 8:00 AM, KarlDanski said:

I don't know if it might sound a bit bad for Daenerys but let me recollect a little bit. 

Btw something I forgot to mention, there's a possibility that the notion that her agenda might end up having a bit of an edge to it was actually implied by the score, i.e. in the ending sequence.

3 minutes of sunshine, optimism and spiritual elation, but then in the last 5 seconds when the camera goes for the final scenic zoom out and eventually the screen turns black, the tone suddenly turns more sinister and then ends on a note of worry and uncertainty.

Might be meaningless and just something the composer came up with, but could also be, well, meaningful - no proof, but might be a potential clue ; - )