Jump to content

WolfOfWinter

Members
  • Content count

    267
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About WolfOfWinter

  • Rank
    Hedge Knight
  • Birthday 10/04/1993

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female

Recent Profile Visitors

1,591 profile views
  1. WolfOfWinter

    Why Daenerys as the Mad Queen?

    Unless it's a slaver, slave trader, rapist or child murderer Dany cares about, in which case they get the honor of being remembered as heroes by her as per her conversation with Tyrion about Drogo, Daario "fuck Meereen and its people" and Jorah. Or child killers such as Ellaria and the Sand Snakes who murdered two innocent children, one of them their own kin, making them usurpers. Or Theon and Yara. Child murder is a defensible sin in those cases. It's almost like Dany has a history of black and white thinking which reared its ugly head once again when the commoners refused to worship her. Dany ended up being the Mad Queen because that's how it's going to go in the books. And while the show spent way too much time whitewashing her, she was still portrayed as a person who constantly needed to be talked down from committing atrocities e.g. her pledge to burn down the entire cities of Astapor and Yunkai after she was to crucify every master, regardless of which among them actually waged war against her. She literally had someone tell her to chill every season. Additionally, throughout eight seasons of the show, Dany only gave one man a quick and merciful death. Everyone else was dragged behind her horse, burned alive, crucified, locked in a vault or fed to her dragons. Not even show!Cersei could beat that record of cruelty.
  2. Given that people regularly whine about it on here and other places (looking at you, /freefolk), I'd say yeah, it most definitely left an impact. People complaining about SW doesn't change how massive it was and continues to be. Game of Thrones has also shaped the tv landscape and is the main reason every streaming service is investing so much money in high fantasy. Not to mention how much it popularized the deaths of main characters and redemption arcs. There's a reason the phrase "they pulled a Ned Stark/Game of Thrones" whenever a main character is killed off is a thing. It absolutely is a cultural phenomenon regardless of how one might feel about the ending.
  3. Everyone suddenly becomes a saint once they die.
  4. WolfOfWinter

    The Starks

    It's true that everyone suffers in the series but the things that befall the Starks appear especially tragic because 1. most of the family consists of children and 2. the Starks were perfectly content to not play the game and just live their lives. They only got involved because Ned wanted justice for Jon Arryn, an inherently noble goal. Tyrion and Dany, while considered heroes by some, made an active choice to involve themselves in the game of thrones for personal gain and ambition. Tyrion's atrocities speak for themselves. As for Dany, for all her claims about wanting to settle down with a husband and children, she still tried to persuade Drogo to invade another continent to put her son, prophesied to be a future dark lord, on the Iron Throne. That choice had disastrous consequences for the innocent Lamb People, and Dany herself, who then chose to birth weapons of mass destruction instead of selling the dragon eggs because she chose war over settling down. Between that and the systemic murder of 12-year-olds in Astapor, the profiting from the slave markets outside Meereen, the torture of innocent girls in front of their likely innocent father, the crucifixions of random people, the burning of Mirri, and the many things to come, she's a morally dark grey character at best. Nothing the current generation of Starks has done even compares to Dany allowing the torture of the wineseller's daughters in a fit of rage after acknowledging that the man is probably innocent and torture is ineffective anyway.
  5. WolfOfWinter

    ....

    To show that someone can be good and bad at the same time. Jaime helping Brienne didn't diminish all the other hurtful things he'd done throughout the show. And tbh Jaime really didn't do much good in the show after returning home. He stuck with his family through pretty much everything, including the bombing of the sept, Tommen's suicide, Tyrion's murder of Tywin, the siege of Riverrun etc. People hyped his redemption because NCW is a fantastic actor who's good at looking conflicted, and because he had a tragic backstory, but his arc stayed stagnant from seasons 4-7. Precisely. For all the claims of misogyny aimed at Daenerys by "haters", Cersei was the true victim of misogyny by the audience. She didn't have Robert's bastards killed, didn't set a KG on Tyrion, was terrified of Joffrey, was openly taunted by the Tyrells who were quite obviously manipulating Tommen into sending her away etc. Even her treatment of Tyrion was significantly toned down. Besides having Mycah and Lady killed in season one, and trying to assassinate Robert (which, whatever), Cersei's biggest crime till season six was having someone beat up Ros to get at Tyrion, who sent Myrcella to Dorne where she was killed, just as Cersei feared. Seeing people paint Cersei as the ultimate villain for blowing up the sept while preemptively justifying Dany blowing up the Red Keep stuffed with civilians because "people die in war" was quite illuminating.
  6. WolfOfWinter

    Martin confirms Dany's coin lands good.

    This thread is doing a great job of illustrating just how dangerous charismatic leaders such as Daenerys are when they veil their ambition in good intentions and pretend to be fighting for some higher ideal. How far is Dany allowed to go before her actions become indefensible? The murder of 12-year-old Astapori boys or profiting from the slave trade outside Meereen wasn't enough for some book readers. Feeding a random man to her dragons before admitting she didn't care whether he was innocent or not (he was) before threatening to kill Hizdahr as well, imprisoning him, letting him believe he was dragon fodder and then forcing him to marry her, after randomly crucifying his father, wasn't enough for some show fans. Will her actions always be defensible to some people because she claims to have good intentions? Is there really no such thing as good or bad in her case because she freed slaves once? Going by some of the discourse I've seen on other sites such as reddit, some people are already preemptively justifying Dany nuking King's Landing in the books "for the greater good." I want to point out the hilarity of singling out book!Dany as some great anti-slavery revolutionary who'll have to choose fire and blood to eliminate slavery, because that worked out so well in Astapor. The truth about slavery in Slaver's Bay is that it's so ingrained in the economic and cultural structures of the region that it'll take more than just violent interventionism to change its foundation. Even book!Dany finds herself partaking in slavery when she 1) allows a flourishing slave trade outside the gates of Meereen because the refugees are desperate, 2) profits from the aforementioned slave trade, and 3) enforces slave labor because it's "necessary" and justifies it because they're "paid" with food and shelter. Show!Dany allows former slaves to sell themselves back into slavery in season four because they're homeless, terrified and desperate. I'm sure someone will do a perfunctory job of explaining how this isn't slavery, how Dany is very different from all the other slavers (in the books), how slavery was totally necessary for those situations, or how fire and blood over diplomacy will create more jobs, stability, homes, food sources, and economic stability. OP, D&D didn't have some secret vendetta against Daenerys. If they had, they wouldn't have turned her into some sort of empowered, feminist figure whose actions and consequences were significantly toned down (to the point of turning even Mirri into a more devious character to prop up Dany) to get the audience to root for her. After the allegations of misogyny following Sansa's storyline, do people really believe they'd turn their most popular feminist and female character into a villain against Martin's wishes just to spite a significant part of the audience?
  7. WolfOfWinter

    ....

    Jaime was never on a redemption arc. Dany's ending was the most logical outcome for her character. Jon didn't deserve to be crowned by the Northerners. Cersei really wasn't that bad a person in the show.
  8. WolfOfWinter

    Why is Sansa so antagonistic towards Daenerys?

    Why was Dany so antagonistic towards Cersei? Same answer as for Sansa: they had different political goals. Sansa wanted independence and Dany stood in the way of that. Dany wanted the Seven Kingdoms and Cersei stood in the way of that. The writing really isn't that complicated.
  9. WolfOfWinter

    Master thread on what the Show means for the book plot

    I don't believe he's the real deal either, but I think it's one of the things Martin will keep ambiguous for characters as well as the readers. And ultimately, I foresee this being a dilemma of whether his legitimacy matters or not from a moral standpoint if he can manage to restore peace in Westeros and be a competent king to the people. The more I think about it the more I'm convinced that the books will also have Cersei and Euron on the Iron Throne during the Long Night. I don't have any deep analysis to prove it, but Euron's presence was so insignificant that I'm convinced he was only kept in the story because of his future alliance with Cersei in the books. I can totally see Euron getting a dragon and destroying the Wall before ditching everyone to deal with the mess while he takes advantage of the situation. The way I think it'll go is that Dany will kill fAegon and become the most hated person in Westeros. This will lead her to join the fight against the Others, both because it's the right thing to do and because of good PR. Except the Westerosi will continue to hate her because of her reputation as a kinslayer as well everything else she'll be associated with. Meanwhile, during what was meant to be her positive PR campaign, Euron and Cersei will take over KL. It will be a massive setback to what should have been a successful campaign, and she won't even have gained the love of her allies. Feeling like she's sacrificed so much for nothing in return except for a reluctant alliance with the North/Vale/Riverlands, she'll torch KL to the ground. Basically, I think Dany's journey in the last season was very true to what book!Dany's will be. It's the lack of Aegon and the destructiveness of her invasion, as well as the implication that she stabilized SB, that takes so much away from the story.
  10. Everyone on here is gonna tune in out of genuine interest, curiosity, or a reason to continue ranting about the show.
  11. WolfOfWinter

    Master thread on what the Show means for the book plot

    Dany will win the battle but Aegon will win the war. Killing him will destroy Dany, emotionally as well as politically. Jaime's still loathed 18 years later for killing a mad king. Dany killing a beloved and competent king who's also her nephew after supposedly killing her own brother and husband? She's so fucked. The show has proven more than anything how important fAegon is to the overall story.
  12. WolfOfWinter

    The character assassination of Daenerys

    We're talking about a character who told a bunch of terrified soldiers she only invaded their country to save them from oppression, before telling them to bend the knee or burn alive. Who smirked at the Northern peasants running away in terror at the sights of her dragons because she didn't like that they distrusted and disliked her. Who fed some random man to her dragons before admitting that she didn't care whether he was innocent or not (after beheading a former slave for killing a Son of the Harpy because "everyone deserves a trial". Who actually had to be reminded that trials were a thing by Barristan. And who literally had to be talked down from crucifying every master, killing every soldier, and burning Yunkai and Astapor to the ground. She was never a graceful ruler. Deluded and cruel? Absolutely. Her biggest accomplishment was somehow tricking her fanbase into believing that she only invaded a foreign country for the commoners' sake. Like she wasn't willing to wage war against Westeros when Tommen and Margaery ruled Westeros. Or like she didn't ally herself with Ellaria and the Sand Snakes, who only came to power after murdering two innocent children, one of them the niece to her Hand, and the rightful ruler of Dorne. I can't wait to see her transform into a tyrant in the books (if we ever get them), and for Jon to choose the Starks over her. It's going to be glorious.
  13. WolfOfWinter

    Anyone else annoyed that Tyrion is hand again?

    1. He was screwed either way. He was trying to make a deal on behalf of the Mother of Dragons when she'd ditched town and there were no dragons to help him win. He wasn't dumb; he just had no power to enforce his will. 2. The Red Keep where Cersei intended to gather as many civilians as possible? Wasn't Dany's whole shtick that she was different from all the other rulers, and that she only invaded Westeros to free them from oppression? Cool. 3. Oath to whom as Tarly even pointed out? Olenna turned to a foreign invader with a Dothraki army for help out of vengeance and in the process screwed her own people over. Besides, Tyrion advised her to behead Randyll and imprison Dickon. She refused because she didn't believe in forcing people in chains. She just happened to forget her prisoner Jon Snow back on Dragonstone, and burned two men alive when people already feared she was a pyromaniac like her daddy. We can debate the morality of it all day, but from a strategic POV, it just reinforced that she was a hypocrite who had no desire to be different from all the previous tyrants. It's also what turned several other characters against her, including Varys. 4. Flying beyond the Wall had no positive impact on her relationship with the North. It didn't benefit her in any way beyond Jon forcing his people to kneel. But it did give the NK a dragon and the means to cross the Wall, so cool. 5. Yes, that was stupid. So basically the argument is that Tyrion gave Dany bad advice as well. I never negated that. All I did was point out that Tyrion gave her good advice as well. Too bad he ended up with a leader who never had a good idea beyond wanting to burn shit to the ground. This is a person who thought that legitimizing a Baratheon bastard was some epic machiavellian move on her part. She was doomed for failure.
  14. WolfOfWinter

    Master thread on what the Show means for the book plot

    The Northerners' fight for independence is a lot more bloody and drawn out in the books. And it's going to sting a lot more once Dany, whose Dothraki and dragons won't be as mellow in the books, flies in and forces them to kneel/Jon gives up sovereignty in the books. That's more than enough reason for the other Starks and the North to stand up against Dany. That's not even the most important part. We learn in Arianne's chapter that rumors about Dany killing her own brother to usurp him and then her husband for the same reason are spreading from Essos to Westeros. And now she's being set up to kill Aegon, her own nephew as well as her rightful king. Kingslayers and kinslayers are already loathed in Westeros, so why would the North and the Vale ever be comfortable kneeling to a person who's an oathbreaker extraordinaire? Moreover, how do you think the Starks are going to feel once they find out that their own brother is also Dany's nephew after she's already killed another nephew? It's absolutely going to cause a rift between them even if they were otherwise amenable to each other. Pitting the Starks against Dany, both sides who for the longest time have been considered the heroes, is a very Martin thing to do; especially after pitting Dany against one-dimensional villains for so long.
  15. WolfOfWinter

    Anyone else annoyed that Tyrion is hand again?

    There's plenty of things wrong with the way Tyrion is written but the idea that he never gave any good advice to Dany is just laughable. He's the one who talked her down from burning her enemies' ships by reminding her that she kinda needed ships to set sail towards Westeros. He talked her down from burning Astapor and Yunkai to the ground which would have destroyed any chance she had of gaining anyone's trust in Westeros, including Jon's. He carefully wrote the summons asking Jon to come to Dragonstone because Dany lacked tact, and he persuaded her to let Jon mine the dragonglass which ended up saving the world. He told her not to fly beyond the Wall which is where she practically handed the NK a dragon. Her going against his advice to burn the Tarlys was the beginning of her downfall. Finally, he and Varys advised her to let the remaining of Cersei's allies abandon her and for the new Prince of Dorne to join their side, but she couldn't wait a few weeks. The problem with show!Tyrion is that his job was to constantly reign in Dany's impulses and steer her clear from committing atrocities. Nine out of ten times his job was to talk her off the ledge and remind her that burning people alive was bad. And a large part of that is obviously due to the writing, but Tyrion's function was very different from his function as a Hand during season two. That said, Tyrion's true desire was to become Lord of Casterly Rock, which his position as Hand of the Kind robbed him of. It felt more like a punishment than anything since the realm was one big clusterfuck. It's going to be worse in the books where Martin won't just keep the Dothraki on Dragonstone, fAegon will fight the Tyrells and Lannisters, Euron will have a bigger role, and the Others will be a much bigger threat. Why would anyone want to be in charge of overseeing the aftermath of that?
×