Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About kjl473

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. kjl473

    The death of the Dothraki and racism

    I should add that the last of the historical horse nomads were in countries that fell under communism. The communists collectivized their herds in the name of creating a classless socialist paradise and the horse nomads that didn't go into the collective farms died in a famine which killed millions.
  2. kjl473

    The death of the Dothraki and racism

    Historically speaking the nomadic horse warriors of the Eurasian steppes interacted with the settled peoples of China, India, Persia, Arabia, Rome for thousands of years. When one of the tribal confederations were pushed off the steps either they asked one of the settled Empires for land to settle on or they just settled down and assimilated into the settled population of a land the conquered. For example the Magyars when pushed off the steps were given land by the Byzantine empire and became the Hungarians. The Uighurs were assimilated into the Western Chinese empire (where they are currently being persecuted by the PRC). The Turkish tribes conquered Asia Minor from the Byzantine empire and eventually settled down with the much larger host population to become the core of the Ottoman Empire and now modern Turkey.
  3. kjl473

    Daenerys the Terrible?

    Why are we so shocked that we that we liked Dany and didn't pick up on her ruthless side until it was too late? We have a set of ideals we want to achieve. The revolutionaries tell us we can have it now if we just organize behind them. We support them and encourage them. They get ever more ruthless and go ever further past the bounds of conventional morality in order to achieve that goal. We continue to encourage them. A feedback loop forms and pretty soon the revolutionaries reach the point where they feel no morality binds them and that to achieve our goals they can be completely ruthless. Those of us who start to think they have gone too far pushing beyond the bounds of morality become the enemy and need to be eliminated just like those "other people". Then it turns into a dictatorship. This is a Bolshevik recruiting poster where each level is one step further along the evolutionary path of ruthlessness. Guess what the Bolsheviks did to their follow travelers when they achieved the dictatorship of the people. They didn't shake their hands and say "good job, we all did it together.' No, they had all the members of the other parties shot. If anything they became more ruthless to their follow socialists then they were to the tsarists in the first place.
  4. kjl473

    What was the purpose of Jon Snow?

    Maybe he was meant to be a tragic figure rather then a hero. He fell in love with 2 women and because he chose duty over love they both died in his arms. Perhaps we are supposed to read more into that? Maybe the first time was some sort of warning and he was supposed to choose love the second time? If Dany never felt betrayed by Jon somehow she wouldn't have turned out the way she did? It seems like a big stretch to me if that was supposed to be it. Then there is the whole concept that just trying to be a good person in a corrupt power mad world is not enough to make a leader. Maybe he was supposed to learn to be more pragmatic like Tyrion but since he didn't he wound up a failure like Ned? The world is just too corrupted by power for a person like him. It would be a very pessimistic statement to send.
  5. kjl473

    What was the purpose of Jon Snow?

    I agree. I felt that the ending was essentially a tragedy. Pretty much all the principle characters lost in the end, even the ones who "won". Bran became king but lost his humanity. Tyrion was "sentenced" to be hand of the king but he is going to be tormented because what happened the last time he was. Sansa becomes queen but she looses Jon forever because of it. I suspect that was the very last thing she wanted. My first impression of Arya wanting to go into the west was was afraid to be around people yet because of the person she had turned herself into.
  6. kjl473

    What was the purpose of Jon Snow?

    No. I am just using him as an example of a character you think is going to have the hero ending but in the end gets nothing. I chose him because of the Siegfried/Sigurd character in mythology. Siegfried/Sigurd the dragonslayer is usually depicted from a family who's symbol is the wolf. At some point in their past they sometimes could put on wolf cloaks and actually turn into wolves. Often they are descended from Odin who uses ravens to see the world, one of whom is named Memory and the other Thought. Since they are a dragon slaying family if you look in their eye you will see the dragon. Wagner's Siegfried is just an example who drives his aunt really nuts when they fall in love (also when she leaps in the funeral pyre to destroy the ring it lights the capitol on fire destroying it which is particular to that version of Sigurd as far as I am aware). I could have also gone with Aragorn, who is another Siegfried/Sigurd mythology based character. Fantasy authors love to put characters with aspects based on several different mythical characters in their works.
  7. kjl473

    What was the purpose of Jon Snow?

    In some cases the true purpose of a character turns out to be completely different then his/her preordained destiny appears to be. In Jon's case it was probably to get people to unite who ordinarily never would have. Take the case of Siegfried from Wagner's Ring Cycle. He is son of a good man who was born for the sole purpose to destroy the ring of power. Siegfried inherits his murdered father's broken sword and reforges it. He slays the dragon, gets the ring of power, and since he has no interest in power is the one person (we think) who is immune to it's curse ("the lord of the ring shall be the slave of the ring"). He passes through the magic fire to wake Brunhilde the Valkyrie who knows (we think) how to destroy the ring. They fall in love and marry (despite her being his aunt). At this point it seems obvious that Siegfried the hero will destroy the ring and become a king. However when Siegfried reaches the capitol he turns out to be a complete idiot. The villain runs circles around him and gets him to drink a potion which puts him under the villain's control. All Siegfried manages to accomplish is that he beats up Brunhilde, marries her off to another man who rapes her, and gets everyone to think she is crazy when she says she was raped. She is is so mad at him that the villain easily tricks her into telling him how to kill Siegfried and he dies after being ingloriously stabbed in the back. So what was the point of Siegfried? Brunhilde emerges from the suffering she has endured much wiser and she finally learns the actual way to destroy the ring herself (immolating herself in Siegfried's funeral pyre in the process). In the end his purpose was to put her through her hero's journey. Jon is a similar case. At least he gets to ride off into the sunset.
  8. Don't get me wrong. All I am doing is taking the 3 monologues that episode 6 gives us to sum up what happened to Dany and working backward to try to fit it into a story arc that would make sense. What actually came out in season 8 for Dany was disjointed and rushed. It could entirely be the case that D&D just wanted to get to an ending and threw together a cheep turn her into Aannakin trick. It could also be that Dany's ending is what GRRM wants but D&D didn't have a clue how to put it into action. If it is the former then the last 2 books will go in a different direction. If it is the later then Dany story arc could be fleshed out in the direction of Dany the revolutionary. By the next book we should know in which way D&D's rushed ending failed in execution. Heck it could be that GRRM knows the ending but can't figure out how to to get the characters there believably and that is why he has stalled out.
  9. In looking though one of my references I came across a striking example of a mythologized caricature of Vladimir Lenin which takes him from sympathetic youth to revolutionary avenger. It is a paraphrase of a 1926 book by Arosev titled 'On Vladamir Ilich'. To me at least there appears to be a lot of Dany's character in this mythical VI Lenin story.
  10. Stalinism would be the most likely example to be turned into a fictional character in a book warning that power corrupts but any Marxist-Leninist leader could be used. There is Vladimir Lenin himself. If you want a pretty boy cult figure you could say Che Guevara. It could also be any leader of any revolution at all which seeks to destroy the established order in order to bring about their dreams of creating an Earthly paradise. The whole of recorded human history is a broken record of these millenarian revolutions causing great destruction but failing to create the Earthly paradise.
  11. kjl473

    Dany the Mad Queen was a terrible idea

    The paradox of Daenerys is the paradox of Marxism-Leninism which took place in the 20th century. How could groups of people so committed to ending social inequality wind up killing millions of innocent people over and over again? Her victory speech is entirely about Karl Marx's perpetual revolution and she turns herself into a one person dictatorship of the proletariat. That was exactly how the Marxist-Leninists planed to make the world free from social inequality.
  12. I am starting to wonder if Dany went mad at all. After watching episode 5 the first time it is hard not to conclude that Dany has become the mad queen. Then I watched the scenes between Tyrion and Jon and Dany and Jon in episode 6 several times. I had heard these exact conversations before almost word for word in writings of the intellectual world as they slowly came to realize that the dream of the Russian Revolution of 1917 had failed and that they had been duped by their hopes and dreams into supporting Stalin for years, blindly ignoring the evidence in front of them. I have always been struck that Dany is the representative of revolutionary power in this story of how power corrupts. Her arc is that of the young idealistic proto-revolutionary coming to embrace the harsh realities of what a revolution truly is. I spent a great deal of time over the past 2 years reading on the Russian revolution for the centennial. I read their letters and speeches from when they were young and idealistic students, exiles paranoid that their inner circles contain informers, and hardened revolutionaries. The conclusion I am reaching is that Dany's action is not madness at all. It is the logical and rational conclusion reached by a student of any revolution which is to end in an Earthly paradise. Back in the council meeting in episode 4 at Winterfell Tyrion asks Dany point blank "We aren't going to destroy KL right?" For 3 seconds there is silence as she just stares at him and says nothing. Then as Varys steers the conversation elsewhere the shot goes back to her calmly looking at Tyrion. She never answers the question. Looking at that scene I think she has already thought everything through and has made up her mind. After that point the third most common line after "You are my queen" and "I don't want it" is multiple characters all saying "You do know what she is going to do?" Like the Bolsheviks Dany sees herself as the vanguard of the revolution. She is going to bring the people to class consciousness ("woke" is the modern term). In doing so they will bring about the revolution and a paradise will be created where there is no class inequality. Like the Bolsheviks she knows that many innocent people will be killed in the revolution. The "science" of history shows that it is not avoidable. Like the peasants of the Soviet Union the people of KL can not be brought to class consciousness till their society is utterly destroyed. Lenin and the Bolsheviks knew what they would unleash when they created the artificial class of "kulak" peasant and started dekulakisation. They were also certain that history would vindicate them once the worldly paradise was created. When we last see Dany in episode 5 before she burns KL it could be not that she is going mad but that she she is trying to steel herself. She is at the final test of a revolutionary. Her humanity tells her that she can not do what her intellect and ideology tells her must be done. Take another look at the 3 phases her face goes through in that last close up of her. Compare Dany's speech to Karl Marx's: Here are some quotes of Vladimir Lenin to compare with Dany's actions: