Let’s Change the Conversation: Remapping Dany

[Cas Stark]

Butterbumps. Dany's purpose in this series is to be an agent of change, and I agree that the brightest, hottest embers in a fire die out the quickest will probably apply to her. She is already changing Essos, probably forever. But her path will ultimately lead her to Westeros - what change will/can she bring about in that feudal system? Gender equality? More powers for the peasantry? A Charter of Rights, a Magnus Carta if you will?

If her purpose is an agent of change, she simply can't be a heroine that swoops in saves the day from the others and restore the old feudal system. What is her purpose regarding change when it comes to Westeros do you think? And who is likely to carry out her changes when she will (probably) die?

I think that's exactly what she can be. It's not consistent with her character to bring an end to the feudal system, she believes in the right of kingship by blood, unless she does a complete turnaround on her outlook, and how is a change agent who isn't interested in ruling going to bring about more power for the peasants...that hasn't even been a theme in the series, some kind of magna carta would be a good start, but that realistically isn't going to come from Dany. That's a Jon Snow type of an idea, or even a Tyrion Lannister idea.

I agree she is a change agent and her value and strengths are as a conquer and leader, bringing fire and blood to 'whomever' but where I disagree with the OP is the idea that tearing up existing structures because they're dysfunctional in some way should be automatically seen as some kind of positive manifestation of power. Tearing up the old does not always bring improvement, it can and has in real life brought significantly worse conditions....so the idea of Dany going to Westeros and destroying the existing social order and then ? something better will come along, I don't buy into.

[NotSoSilentSister]

1) Dany has her issues, but of course she's morally superior to Littlefinger (which admittedly, doesn't take much). Dany wants to change things for everybody, Littlefinger only wants to change them for himself. (It's okay, LF fans. The Great One wouldn't give a shit about being morally superior. No need to come to his defense.)

2) Her motives are not always entirely pure, so what. There's not a single character in the whole series who is completely free of self-serving tendencies. The difference is that with someone like Littlefinger, there's only the self-serving motivation. With Dany, it's at least ocassionally tempered with something else. Yes, that makes her more hypocritical than Littlefinger. She's still morally superior, because she tries at least. There's no accomplishment in not being hypocritical if you're a sociopath.

3) She's clearly not just paying lip-service to her abolutionist ideals. Time and time again, she makes personal sacrifices (eg. chaining her dragons, marrying Hizdar) in an attempt to keep her people safe.

4) Her "If I look back I'm lost"-mantra might have somewhat flattened her learning curve so far (although it certainly makes sense as a coping mechanism considering all the trauma she's coming from), but there's no reason to assume that she's not capable of critical self-reflection at all. We have seen that she is willing and able to hold herself accountable for her mistakes; she realizes that Astapor was her fault, which is why she doesn't just marry Quentyn and hop on Xaro's boats to let the Meereenese freedmen fend for themselves. Dany does take a lesson from Astapor. It might not be the lesson someone else would have wanted her to take, but it's a lesson nonetheless.

5) She fails in Meereen, because she hasn't yet built enough support for her project. Still, she has put herself on the map, which is essential to attract those valueable allies. And they're already waiting in the wings. Slave uprising in Volantis anyone? Benerro, Moquorro, the Widow at the Waterfront... social upheaval has been brewing for a while in Essos; Dany is just the spark they've been waiting for to set fire to the status quo - still they've been building that funeral pyre for a while, and good for them. Rhollorism will come with its own problems, to be sure, but on the slavery issue at least, they might be an improvement after all. And they'll bring an institutional framework, something else to put in place, once Dany has put her torch to the status quo. If Dany puts any of those in charge on leaving Volantis for Westeros, it won't be another Astapor. It will be rather ugly too, some people will get burnt. But it won't be another Astapor.

6) And don't forget Braavos. There are powerful people in Braavos who'll support abolution as well. If those gain sufficient influence on the Iron Bank, that might help with the economic side of things.

=> I just don't think Dany's abolutionist agenda is as doomed as certain people like to believe. It's definitely worth a try. Time is always ripe for ending slavery. The right people just have to find each other in time. And that will earn Dany her place in history. She's not suited to rule Westeros though, and she might even realize that herself.

Dany has been obsessed with the claim to her name, because her name was all that was left to her. Her true longing is for a place to call home. Once she realizes that Westeros isn't it, she might give it up rather easily.

[E-Ro]

Far be it from me to speak for butterbumps!, but it seems like you're wildly and insistently missing the point of the OP. You're conflating your condemnation of being unable to rule after overthrowing a social order with an actual inability to divorce the two. You might not like that it's done, but it can be done. This is the premise the thread, that Dany is very good at the first part but requires the compliment of someone better at the ruling part in order for her function as catalyst to bear fruit. Your repeated criticisms of Dany's inability to rule effectively do nothing but argue points that are already presupposed by the the OP. Thus, your only contribution to the thread is to insist on points that you believe are in contention but are actually built into the premise.

As a more general comment, I think it's interesting that this thread has elicited some very harsh responses from both people who believe it's an attempt at bashing Dany and those who believe it's an attempt at whitewashing her. Ultimately I think it's to the OP's credit that both of these groups find fault with it, there must be something right. It is, however, unfortunate that neither group has really managed to disagree constructively and by engaging the framework laid out at the thread's beginning. Instead, I've seen the same tired arguments replayed. But there are some really interesting ideas at work here, and while I don't agree with them categorically and have expressed my disagreement, I think it would be a shame to completely fail to discuss them.

Far be it for anyone to respond for the lemoncake. Anyhow, I suppose I agree with this post. The part about insistence on points especially. It could have been said better, but settling for this is fine.

to the OP (sorry I haven't caught up to the whole thread yet)

Just wanna say, excellent critique, bumps! I particularly enjoy the variety of buzzwords borrowed from the natural sciences to describe our Stormborn, DragonMother Queen of chaos. (and Stannis)

Dany tends to frustrate the casual reader with her perfunctory performance at ruling the SB, and the answer seems so simple: she's just not good at it. Whether due to lack of training, or reflection or interest, Dany just seems like a square peg in a round hole in Mereen. A career counselor would suggest to her that her passions lie elsewhere. Dany the catalyst of change is a far better discussion to be had for certain.

It's not just the symbolism around Dany that manifest her as a destructive force (Fire, the Dragon, "Storm" born), it's also her choices that pull her in that direction. It was Dany who chose the risky business of meddling with black magic via MMD. Dany also rejected living a cushy life in Qarth, in order to gain ships through marriage, and instead chose the riskier path of making it on her own. The examples go on and on, going through the red waste, going after Slavers Bay etc etc.

Dany's destructive powers aren't just familial features of dragons and fire on a crest, they stem also from her choices. Dany follows in the steps of becoming the Dragon and conquering her way to Westeros, not just a like an ambitious goal, but like self-fulfilling prophecy.

Amazing.

[butterbumps!]

Butterbumps. Dany's purpose in this series is to be an agent of change, and I agree that the brightest, hottest embers in a fire die out the quickest will probably apply to her. She is already changing Essos, probably forever. But her path will ultimately lead her to Westeros - what change will/can she bring about in that feudal system? Gender equality? More powers for the peasantry? A Charter of Rights, a Magnus Carta if you will?

If her purpose is an agent of change, she simply can't be a heroine that swoops in saves the day from the others and restore the old feudal system. What is her purpose regarding change when it comes to Westeros do you think? And who is likely to carry out her changes when she will (probably) die?

I think these are really good questions, and the bolded gets to the heart of things. I think there's a certain degree of hope and anxiety over the idea that she'd swoop in as a savior, fight the Others, and restore the Targ dynasty in exactly the same monarchal form Aegon I did. And as you point out, this doesn't seem her likely path when we look at the entirety of her character as a catalyst.

I do think she's going to have a role in the Long Night, but I actually don't think she or her dragons are going to have much relevance to the Others directly. Discussion of that could be too much of a tangent for here, but I think the greatest practical benefit she brings to that fight will be against the wights, against which I see dragons as the best weapon for that, whereas I believe the Others require something "different" that I think Jon/ Bran will be more focused on. Which is to say that I don't think any of the major players involved in the Long Night will have some exclusive monopoly on the various roles needed, or that any part of that Battle is necessarily more "heroic" than the others- different parts play to different character strengths.

I think unification is a possible action. I do believe that initially, at least as per DwD's ending, she's coming over with more of an antagonist (to Westeros) mindset, and that she may well attempt to conquer for it's own sake, believing it's her destiny just to take it back. However, I think that antagonism will be reframed once she surveys the current state of affairs and what conquest for the throne has already brought, learns more about her family's history, and becomes aware of the threat beyond the Wall. In particular I'm curious how she will come to view Euron and some of the other players who are about to become major, especially in the event the Ironborn manage to steal a dragon. Should Euron manage to get a dragon, I feel confident in saying that I would want Dany taking a stand against that, as it would be a great public service.

So I think part of where her arc is heading is probably leading toward facing some of the factions head on (at first as her personal conquest, and after some further epiphanies, for the sake of unity/ protecting the realm itself). I'm not sure if she will become the leader everyone rallies behind or not (I can see a case for other characters being forces of unification as well), but I do think her presence will have the effect of unification in some capacity.

I'm also curious about how she might feel if she became acquainted with someone like Meribald's feelings about social order, or spoke with the BwB at all, or any of the nascent tinges of popular unrest we've either seen or has been hinted at. I've wondered if she were to internalize "when the lords play the smallfolk suffer" whether she'd become disgusted and stand behind some sort of revolt. Not that I would ever, ever suggest that such a smallfolk revolt would have such traction that Westeros turned into some kind of democracy, but I'm curious about the prospect that she might empower some sort of popular revolt, the ramifications of which would overturn the social order in the immediate aftermath and would have a ripple on the way the order was rebuilt afterward. And again, I stress that in the event a popular revolt is in her future, that in no way am I suggesting democracy of sort as the result, merely, that such a revolt and the idea of smallfolk empowerment would be a significant change from what came before.

The idea of Dany's empowering some kind of popular revolt is something we've seen several times already-- she comes in looking for one thing and ends up refocusing her cause. I think this would be a natural progression for her, and it would answer how she might shake the status quo in some significant way. Much like with slave liberation, I think a popular revolt would be dreadfully messy immediately-- chaos and suffering, but that doing so at all would force a fundamental change to the system even if the government looks much like what we already had.

[NotSoSilentSister]

(As to how Dany giving up the Iron Throne might play out: I think she'll wrest it from Aegon and sit it for a hot minute, then she'll be called to the North to fight the Others before she can consolidate her power and lose the throne to Euron while she's off fighting Ice-Zombies. I'm sure Euron will get his carmic come-uppance eventually, so Dany might well survive him. But at that point she might have gotten over her need to win the damn chair back. Maybe because her own army is not in much of a fighting condition after that confrontation with the Others; maybe because she'll have lost all of her dragons at that point; maybe because Westeros itself won't look like much of a prize when all is said is done. It's really not that implausible of a scenario, I think.).

[SeanF]

The idea of Dany's empowering some kind of popular revolt is something we've seen several times already-- she comes in looking for one thing and ends up refocusing her cause. I think this would be a natural progression for her, and it would answer how she might shake the status quo in some significant way. Much like with slave liberation, I think a popular revolt would be dreadfully messy immediately-- chaos and suffering, but that doing so at all would force a fundamental change to the system even if the government looks much like what we already had.

A popular revolt against the system is one that ultimately denies her and her family any legitimacy.

It's why I suggested upthread that a move to a more autocratic style of government might be more in keeping with her character. One in which the Monarchy's propaganda is that it's an institution that protects the Smallfolk from the faction-fighting of the nobility.

Even if she lacks the administrative skill of Louis XIV or Peter the Great, she might be a sort of Ivan the Terrible figure. Someone who purges the nobility, and leaves it to his successors to build a more efficient form of government.

[NotSoSilentSister]

I could see Dany going for some form of enlightened absolutism, but I think Westeros is headed for constitutional monarchy (next King chosen by Great Council; Great Council as a permanent institution; Hand as Prime Minister, Small Council as cabinett).

[OnionAhaiReborn]

Far be it for anyone to respond for the lemoncake. Anyhow, I suppose I agree with this post. The part about insistence on points especially. It could have been said better, but settling for this is fine.

This is too addle to admit response.

[SeanF]

Yea, I think this is getting at what I was aiming for with that scenario-- the combination of force and followers working in tandem to some idealistic purpose. Of course, the slavery campaign is something I could get behind; I'm not sure a religious crusade would be seen as acceptably by us. That's a really fascinating point though-- if the Reds are seeking a religious purge with Dany at the top, would Dany accept that role and become a believer, or redirect that support to a non-religious social end? I think I could see an argument for both.

The upside for her is that she gets the support of millions of followers, and a priesthood hat can definitely perform magic on her behalf. The downside is that she could become trapped in the role of AA reborn, unable to control the forces she's unleashed, and required to perform appalling acts, like mass human sacrifice.

[butterbumps!]

A popular revolt against the system is one that ultimately denies her and her family any legitimacy.

It's why I suggested upthread that a move to a more autocratic style of government might be more in keeping with her character. One in which the Monarchy's propaganda is that it's an institution that protects the Smallfolk from the faction-fighting of the nobility.

Even if she lacks the administrative skill of Louis XIV or Peter the Great, she might be a sort of Ivan the Terrible figure. Someone who purges the nobility, and leaves it to his successors to build a more efficient form of government.

But importantly, I don't think she actually wants to rule at all anymore. She states as much, and resolves to being a conqueror. Meaning, I don't think she's coming in to take the throne for herself or the Targ dynasty generally.

Empowering a smallfolk revolt is precisely in her character. It presupposes that she will become aware of a few things and react to that knowledge in a certain way admittedly, but given how we've seen her behave in the past, I could really see her coming to the conclusion that leading smallfolk is her purpose, or something she ought to do given that she can.

I'm saying that I think she's going to fight, but that the nature of her fight will change from seeking the throne to backing some sort of revolt. That there will be a point when she shifts her focus to the smallfolk or some other disenfranchised group.

I 100% do not think that Dany will design some sort of enlightened, or conversely, more autocratic, form of ruling. I think this because I do not see her wanting to take the throne and restore the Targ dynasty at the end, and because designing a system of rule is not something she's remotely interested in.

I really think she's going to stir up the smallfolk in some capacity, and that her legacy will be in this having an impact on the way other people will be forced to rebuild the order.

[GoldenFleece]

I think that's exactly what she can be. It's not consistent with her character to bring an end to the feudal system, she believes in the right of kingship by blood, unless she does a complete turnaround on her outlook, and how is a change agent who isn't interested in ruling going to bring about more power for the peasants...that hasn't even been a theme in the series, some kind of magna carta would be a good start, but that realistically isn't going to come from Dany. That's a Jon Snow type of an idea, or even a Tyrion Lannister idea.

I agree she is a change agent and her value and strengths are as a conquer and leader, bringing fire and blood to 'whomever' but where I disagree with the OP is the idea that tearing up existing structures because they're dysfunctional in some way should be automatically seen as some kind of positive manifestation of power. Tearing up the old does not always bring improvement, it can and has in real life brought significantly worse conditions....so the idea of Dany going to Westeros and destroying the existing social order and then ? something better will come along, I don't buy into.

Well the UK has abandoned the feudal system for over 500 years and they still have a King/Queen by blood. So feudalism and monarchy are not tied together necessarily. I don't see why it is not realistic for Dany to do it, she has done more for human rights in ASOIAF than anyone else in the series.

I could see Dany going for some form of enlightened absolutism, but I think Westeros is headed for constitutional monarchy (next King chosen by Great Council; Great Council as a permanent institution; Hand as Prime Minister, Small Council as cabinett).

Nah I cannot see a democratic Westeros, not at the end of this series anyway. It's not that kind of series, too much of a happy ending really.

[E-Ro]

This is too addle to admit response.

Lofuckingl

Be back after I google this.

[Cas Stark]

Well the UK has abandoned the feudal system for over 500 years and they still have a King/Queen by blood. So feudalism and monarchy are not tied together necessarily. I don't see why it is not realistic for Dany to do it, she has done more for human rights in ASOIAF than anyone else in the series.

I just don't think this is the story that GRRM is telling, one that is building toward some kind of peasant revolution. It would mean that all of the family dynamics, the war between fire and ice, all of it was really window dressing for some rumination on people power. And if we look to historical parallels, the War of the Roses, any fundamental changes in forms of government and empowerment of a wider swath of the population is still centuries away.

[NotSoSilentSister]

My main obstacle to seeing Dany as a potential liberator of Westerosi peasants, is that Varys is already prepping Aegon for that role. The enlightened absolutist protecting the Smallfolk from the faction-fighting of the nobility. Sounds like a potential Varys spin on things.

Since Dany will probably have a role to play in Aegon's premature demise, I fear that particular well might be poisoned for her.

[GoldenFleece]

But importantly, I don't think she actually wants to rule at all anymore. She states as much, and resolves to being a conqueror. Meaning, I don't think she's coming in to take the throne for herself or the Targ dynasty generally.

Empowering a smallfolk revolt is precisely in her character. It presupposes that she will become aware of a few things and react to that knowledge in a certain way admittedly, but given how we've seen her behave in the past, I could really see her coming to the conclusion that leading smallfolk is her purpose, or something she ought to do given that she can.

I'm saying that I think she's going to fight, but that the nature of her fight will change from seeking the throne to backing some sort of revolt. That there will be a point when she shifts her focus to the smallfolk or some other disenfranchised group.

I 100% do not think that Dany will design some sort of enlightened, or conversely, more autocratic, form of ruling. I think this because I do not see her wanting to take the throne and restore the Targ dynasty at the end, and because designing a system of rule is not something she's remotely interested in.

I really think she's going to stir up the smallfolk in some capacity, and that her legacy will be in this having an impact on the way other people will be forced to rebuild the order.

That's why I am convinced that Daenerys and probabaly Jon (if R+L=J) will die at the end of series. Their deaths will end the Targaryen House and thus symbolise the end of Westeros as it once was, giving the chance for Westeros to be reborn (Summer) into a more enlightened way of being. Daenerys arc will be the catalyst of that change and thus redeeming the faults and crimes of her ancestors and house. I think that is the best outcome that us Dany fans can expect.

Smallfolk uprising is an interesting one. But could an uprising happen DURING the Others threat? I'm not too sure.

I just don't think this is the story that GRRM is telling, one that is building toward some kind of peasant revolution. It would mean that all of the family dynamics, the war between fire and ice, all of it was really window dressing for some rumination on people power. And if we look to historical parallels, the War of the Roses, any fundamental changes in forms of government and empowerment of a wider swath of the population is still centuries away.

And if you look at other examples like the French Revolution, fundamental changes in government and empowerment happen overnight.

The whole series of ASOIAF has been the new generation taking over from the old generation. The whole series is about renewal and change. I wouldn't write it off. And like real life when change is happening too quickly you have last attempts gasps from people still clinging to the old way of being - the Yunkai and its allies, the Night's watch, the Ironborn, the Sparrows.

[RoamingRonin]

My main obstacle to seeing Dany as a potential liberator of Westerosi peasants, is that Varys is already prepping Aegon for that role. The enlightened absolutist protecting the Smallfolk from the faction-fighting of the nobility. Sounds like a potential Varys spin on things.

Since Dany will probably have a role to play in Aegon's premature demise, I fear that particular well might be poisoned for her.

More like Varys is prepping the the realm so that Aegon appears to be a liberator.

[butterbumps!]

My main obstacle to seeing Dany as a potential liberator of Westerosi peasants, is that Varys is already prepping Aegon for that role. The enlightened absolutist protecting the Smallfolk from the faction-fighting of the nobility. Sounds like a potential Varys spin on things.

Since Dany will probably have a role to play in Aegon's premature demise, I fear that particular well might be poisoned for her.

Well, that's not exactly what Varys is planning-- in terms of liberation. He's concerned with the notion of an Enlightened despot who doesn't empower the smallfolk, but reigns responsibly over them.

I'm not sure how that would make Dany's potential desire to empower the smallfolk soured.

Varys seems to be about not changing the system itself, but about making rulers more responsible to their people through good training of an invidual monarch. What I'm proposing Dany might do is support the notion that the smallfolk themselves have power (not in some democratic sense, but in the sense that they have strength in their numbers and to challenge the fact that they suffer when the lords play the game). Varys is the one who's designing a reform to the system; I think Dany would be more inclined to topple the system to some degree. In the end, I suspect that Dany won't survive (or will abdicate before) to see a new system come to pass, but I suspect in the end, what we'll get is closer to what Varys proposes, with the added imperative by the smallfolk that they have power in numbers to pushback.

That's why I am convinced that Daenerys and probabaly Jon (if R+L=J) will die at the end of series. Their deaths will end the Targaryen House and thus symbolise the end of Westeros as it once was, giving the chance for Westeros to be reborn (Summer) into a more enlightened way of being. Daenerys arc will be the catalyst of that change and thus redeeming the faults and crimes of her ancestors and house. I think that is the best outcome that us Dany fans can expect.

Smallfolk uprising is an interesting one. But could an uprising happen DURING the Others threat? I'm not too sure.

I'm glad you brought that up. I think most of us would agree that a smallfolk uprising is a broadly positive thing to instigate. It might not be, however, well timed if it's happening while he focus should be on the bigger threat of the Long Night. I think this might be one of the bittersweet things-- something that we'd probably applaud in that it's being done at all, but upset it's not being done according to some plan, or while this other threat might require more focus.

But I wonder if the simultaneity will play off on each other; the Long Night is also going cause a great deal of changes, at least in terms of population depletion and the like, which might play to the notion of a challenge to the previous order.

[NotSoSilentSister]

More like Varys is prepping the the realm so that Aegon appears to be a liberator.

Obviously. I was talking about the spin, not necessarily the reality behind it.

Well, that's not exactly what Varys is planning-- in terms of liberation. He's concerned with the notion of an Enlightened despot who doesn't empower the smallfolk, but reigns responsibly over them.

I'm not sure how that would make Dany's potential desire to empower the smallfolk soured.

My worries are not so much about Dany being soured about the smallfolk, but rather about the smallfolk being soured about Dany, after she has - probably brutally - killed their previous champion. Don't forget, the mummer's dragon will be cheered by the crowds.

[Sansa_Stark]

"everywhere the dragons danced, peopled died"

that is what dany will bring

imo

and not much else really

[Gogossos]

Dany's radical change to Westeros ought not be radical at the time she arrives in Westeros. A simple change of, say, having an IT standing army, stripping away the extent of the lords' abilities to call their banners. She could have a more representative small council, something which she's already doing in Meereen - her council consists of leaders of the various groups.