Daenerys the betrayer

[Hajk]

Buy there's the problem, isn't it? If you take the authority upon yourself to make changes that affect millions of people, you really ought to have experience and evidence on your side. There are very few examples of an external invasion that just changed society overnight. Because Dany was not properly groomed to rule, she doesn't know how power structures and societies work. Aegon being the polar opposite, at least according to Varys. But what she has been groomed for is expecting a position of authority and dominance, thanks to Viserys. Again, I'm nit defending the Slavers, because they're monsters. To take another example, I think Dr Assad is a fiend who is willing to starve his own people, and has them like cockroaches. But neither do I support going in there and killing him, or supporting the Al Quada rebels that are fighting him. Sometimes societal change has to come from within, if it is going to be meaningful and lasting.

Dany hasn't really been groomed for a position of authority. Viserys always expected to have authority himself. And with Viserys as a teacher it's a miracle she knows how to do anything. But it is not like people who have been groomed have done much better. At least Dany seems to care. Had she been Tywin she would have sacked the cities, not given a damn about any consequences, and gone on her merry way without any guilt over anything. Maybe "The Masters of Astapor" would have become her favorite song.

On the issue of whether the ultimate consequences of Dany's actions will be good or bad, I think the appropriate response is the Zhou Enlai approach, i.e. it is too soon to say. Things are a mess right now, but whatever new social order ultimately emerges is an unknown (with zero prior experience to draw upon in the asoiaf universe). Once again, when nations with immense political and historical experience, countless experts of all manner advising everyone on every minute detail are still able to delude themselves into thinking that this is a good idea in the modern era (despite having a long list of failed examples etc.), and only seem to come around to seeing things in this manner in the aftermath of recent spectacular failures, can we really blame her for not having the foresight to see this?

[El Guapo]

Do bad people deserve everything that happens to them? Do Slavers deserve to be massacred and crucified? Does Cersei deserve to be stripped naked and paraded through the city? Does Theon deserve to be tortured by Ramsay? Does Vargo Hoat deserve to be fed his own flesh?

I think the author wants to us to question this idea.

I did question it and my answer was that I have no sympathies and could care less about the Astapori that were massacred and the Mereeneese who she crucified.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

I did question it and my answer was that I have no sympathies and could care less about the Astapori that were massacred and the Mereeneese who she crucified.

Oh, so you do care?

I tend to take SeanF's approach to all of this. They were evil people and maybe they got what was coming to them. But what happened to the city afterward -- what I'd argue is the real crime in all of this that gets lost in the bloodlust aspect of the "Dracarys!" stuff -- is abominable and I think that if you're going to hold Dany accountable for something, it should be what happened to the city after she left it. And it must be said that the price Dany ultimately paid for that was, say, sending envoys to Mantarys and getting their severed heads sent back to her. Was it worth getting the love of the slaves, as Butterbumps pointed out? Perhaps. But it's a little odd that Dany can do that on the one hand and then be perplexed that no one in the region wants to ally with her on the other.

I also have to wonder, going back to the bloodlust thing, if this is some sort of litmus test to differentiate between justice and vengeance, or retaliation done with an alarming sense of self-satisfied righteousness. I think it's the mark of a very mature person to recognize that the slavers themselves are evil and what was done to them may have been evil, too. I found myself, in the short term, rooting for what Dany did, but seeing how it turned out, especially Astapor, under no circumstances can I look back on it and delude myself into thinking that it was actual justice.

[illrede]

Do bad people deserve everything that happens to them? Do Slavers deserve to be massacred and crucified? Does Cersei deserve to be stripped naked and paraded through the city? Does Theon deserve to be tortured by Ramsay? Does Vargo Hoat deserve to be fed his own flesh?

I think the author wants to us to question this idea.

Ah, but do they deserve your sympathy? Different question, that.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

I don't remember if I have said it before but I think that when you punish somebody you must make clear why you punish him. Dany hasn't make it clear.

[Ser Creighton]

Oh you have to be kidding me, another one of these? The next thread should be called "The never ending quest to find reasons to hate Dany because we feel she threatens are favorite characters."

I don't know what's worse the obsessive witch hunt or the fact that this is as creative as some fans can get. You don't like a character? Fine. But if you were to try and apply the socratic method to these debates you would literally break it, critical thinking and being hyper critical are not in fact the same thing.

[SeanF]

Ah, but do they deserve your sympathy? Different question, that.

Not necessarily. I feel sympathy for Cersei and Theon, but plenty of people don't. We have their points of view.

We don't have a slaver's point of view, so it's hard to feel sympathy. But, if we were given the point of view of a 12 year old boy, so saw his family cut down, and was then gelded, and forced into the new Unsullied, we might think differently.

[illrede]

Oh you have to be kidding me, another one of these? The next thread should be called "The never ending quest to find reasons to hate Dany because we feel she threatens are favorite characters."

I don't know what's worse the obsessive witch hunt or the fact that this is as creative as some fans can get. You don't like a character? Fine. But if you were to try and apply the socratic method to these debates you would literally break it, critical thinking and being hyper critical are not in fact the same thing.

The next thread should be called "What's wrong with Daenerys".

It seems possible that Daenerys could arrive on Westeros as an antagonist to other characters in the midst of realm-healing and world-saving plot arcs as she rights the wrong (his deposing and murder) done to the man who fathered her by rape with the erection he gained by killing a man for begging him not to kill hundreds of thousands of his subjects out of spite. She also has the strange distinction of having Robert Baratheon's (and for that matter, Brandon Stark's) take on the dynamics of Rhaegar and Lyanna's... elopement and giving it her unreserved approval. She set fire to an envoy and snarked it off (her envoys are killed with impunity). And that's just things I care about, so long as she maintains conventions I'm pretty uncritical about being horrible to horrible people. They'd eat her alive with a smile otherwise. She's a conqueror in competition with barbarians, slavers, and international medieval trade factors. It's a rough and unforgiving trade.

So.. hanging a hat on there's something wrong with Daenerys- Youthful lack of discipline. Heck, youth. Filial piety taken to the point it becomes a vice. Whimsical cruelty. Caprice. A personal feelings approach to life and reality (good for hatching dragons, less good for warmaking and governance, or for that matter assessing the people in your life.). If any or all, these are not unknown things in a leader.

So my vote is she's a child-ruler. (I also think she deceives herself a lot, she didn't know her own mind at all and didn't know that she didn't know her own mind at all, and her preferred self defense mechanism gets in the way of self-assessment, but that's incidental. Well, decisive. But it won't matter at all until later- 1) At some point she subconsciously decided to stay in Mereen and abandon Westeros, ironically to avoid stress. 2) She justified this using whatever means was at hand to supply its own reason, and was unable to examine or even acknowledge her assumptions. 3) Refusing Quentyn Martel was the most important thing she has done after hatching Dragons, and it was a blunder set up by "1" and "2" and one of the most important things she will ever do in life.)

(If she doesn't arrive at Westeros as an antagonist it stands to be because of that; a war against an Aegon-Dorne faction that consumes her initial efforts until the greater situation sinks in with her.)

But I'll thank you if I can keep the Prester John hope/Ghengis Khan reality dynamic firmly in mind when I consider her possible impact on the story and not be dismissed. It's well possible.

[ServantOnIce]

I cant believe that everyone is absolutely okay with the sack of Astapor and the unsullied deal. People are even saying that it is one of the greatest moments of the books?! I actually felt bad about the slavers and everyone in the city.

Even the slavers had more dignity than her. If this is how Dany is about to handle deals, I don't think anyone is ever going to trust her.

TROLLING . .

:ack:

[illrede]

Not necessarily. I feel sympathy for Cersei and Theon, but plenty of people don't. We have their points of view.

We don't have a slaver's point of view, so it's hard to feel sympathy. But, if we were given the point of view of a 12 year old boy, so saw his family cut down, and was then gelded, and forced into the new Unsullied, we might think differently.

Whether they have it or not doesn't hinge on them deserving it or not, more that they are empathized with. You could also empathize with the freed slaves who killed Daenerys' council, aggrandized a butcher's rise in the wide world led by their passions, and were obliterated by the wide world after suffering horrifically.

To be more trite than I care, Astapor rode a tiger, and the tiger ate it. Empathy demands my sympathy, logic demands my criticism, resulting in my (personal) ambivalence. Could go either way, though.

[WolfOfWinter]

But, no. Let's cry about how she profited from letting people sell themselves into slavery.

You make it sound like some trivial thing we can easily dismiss. When Dany ordered the massacre at Astapor, she didn't just go after Kraznys and the others responsible for creating the Unsullied, she went after every single slaver present, indiscriminate of how they treated their slaves because she'd decided slavery was wrong. Later though, she changes her mind and starts allowing people to sell themselves back into slavery and even profits from it. She's being completely contradictory and it's relevant to discuss her part in profiting from slavery because the purpose of her campaign has been to abolish the slave trade yet here she is accepting it and getting the same amount of money out of it as the Astapori. It makes her look bad and not only in the eyes of the readers. What's everyone supposed to think when she keeps sending mixed signals?

I'll just repeat myself:

When you, on your anti-slavery crusade, massacre hundreds of people for dabbling in slavery you don't decide to somewhat partake in it too. It just makes you look like a giant hypocrite.

[Hajk]

You make it sound like some trivial thing we can easily dismiss. When Dany ordered the massacre at Astapor, she didn't just go after Kraznys and the others responsible for creating the Unsullied, she went after every single slaver present, indiscriminate of how they treated their slaves because she'd decided slavery was wrong. Later though, she changes her mind and starts allowing people to sell themselves back into slavery and even profits from it. She's being completely contradictory and it's relevant to discuss her part in profiting from slavery because the purpose of her campaign has been to abolish the slave trade yet here she is accepting it and getting the same amount of money out of it as the Astapori. It makes her look bad and not only in the eyes of the readers. What's everyone supposed to think when she keeps sending mixed signals?

I'll just repeat myself:

When you, on your anti-slavery crusade, massacre hundreds of people for dabbling in slavery you don't decide to somewhat partake in it too. It just makes you look like a giant hypocrite.

I think this is just evolution. She is realizing that the world is more complex than she initially knew and is coping with things dynamically rather than allowing her moral convictions to remain static and hence be incapable of dealing with the world. Try an example from our world:

Some of us will be offended by the Islamic Hijab as something that oppresses women and perpetuates a patriarchal suppression of their rights. I assume the same views will hold about polygamy. Clearly they need to be emancipated. They must be taught the gospel of modernity whence the truth shall set them free...except that does not always happen. Some continue to embrace it. Some embrace it even after they have been emancipated. Some interpret it completely differently from how we in our parochialism may have interpreted it. In fact, for some it is even a symbol of emancipation etc. Now what? The stubborn will continue to insist on the infallibility of their initial convictions and consider any deviations a sign of hypocrisy. But I would argue that views need to work dynamically.

Dany's initial worldview had no place for the possibility of people voluntarily embracing bondage. Freedom was a great gift that she was bringing. Well not everyone agrees with her way of looking at things. Some of those who have received the gift want to give it back. What is she to do? Disallow it? Insist that they see things her way and appreciate the blessings she has brought?

People wanting to return to slavery is a Black Swan for her and she deals with it in that context.

[Señor de la Tormenta]

I cant believe that everyone is absolutely okay with the sack of Astapor and the unsullied deal. People are even saying that it is one of the greatest moments of the books?! I actually felt bad about the slavers and everyone in the city.

Even the slavers had more dignity than her. If this is how Dany is about to handle deals, I don't think anyone is ever going to trust her.

You are not alone buddy.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

I think this is just evolution. She is realizing that the world is more complex than she initially knew and is coping with things dynamically rather than allowing her moral convictions to remain static and hence be incapable of dealing with the world.

And yet thousands of people have to die while she comes to this sudden realization that the world isn't black and white. That is quite possibly my biggest annoyance with her -- she gets people killed en masse while she plays with her starter kingdom, suffering no noticeable consequences herself.

When you, on your anti-slavery crusade, massacre hundreds of people for dabbling in slavery you don't decide to somewhat partake in it too. It just makes you look like a giant hypocrite.

And also this. Either slavery is outlawed or it isn't. If it is outlawed, then stop letting people sell themselves and taking your cut. And if it isn't outlawed, then stop killing people who practice it.

[Sansa_Stark]

Ah, but do they deserve your sympathy? Different question, that.

'Only one of those deserves sympathy imo.

[Señor de la Tormenta]

And yet thousands of people have to die while she comes to this sudden realization that the world isn't black and white. That is quite possibly my biggest annoyance with her -- she gets people killed en masse while she plays with her starter kingdom, suffering no noticeable consequences herself.

And also this. Either slavery is outlawed or it isn't. If it is outlawed, then stop letting people sell themselves and taking your cut. And if it isn't outlawed, then stop killing people who practice it.

pfff....plus its easy to ban the slavery if everybody around you still acts as your slave. Irri is still her sex slave who fucks her as "duty" , the unsullied are just the same robots they were before, belwas is her slave bodyguard, etc. Does she pay wages to all this people?

[Hajk]

And yet thousands of people have to die while she comes to this sudden realization that the world isn't black and white. That is quite possibly my biggest annoyance with her -- she gets people killed en masse while she plays with her starter kingdom, suffering no noticeable consequences herself.

So is your annoyance at the fact that the story hasn't developed in a way so as to cause her more suffering (which if anything is the author's fault not her's), at the fact that she comes at this realization at all, or at something else entirely?

[Hajk]

And also this. Either slavery is outlawed or it isn't. If it is outlawed, then stop letting people sell themselves and taking your cut. And if it isn't outlawed, then stop killing people who practice it.

Can't it go something like "It is outlawed for anyone to force someone into it, but there is a tax in those cases where it is completely voluntary" etc.?

[Tolsimir]

If Daenerys makes it through the books whithout getting backstabbed by any of the fine assassins the people of Essos could hire, then I will be dissapointed.

Bonus points for GRRM if Arya does it!

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

So is your annoyance at the fact that the story hasn't developed in a way so as to cause her more suffering (which if anything is the author's fault not her's), at the fact that she comes at this realization at all, or at something else entirely?

Everything is by definition the author's fault, good and bad. So I don't get your point.

Can't it go something like "It is outlawed for anyone to force someone into it, but there is a tax in those cases where it is completely voluntary" etc.?

Slavery is illegal in the U.S. I can't legally sell myself into slavery even if I wanted to. There's no tax, no voluntary loophole, nothing of the sort. It's illegal. And if Dany was the abolitionist she thinks of herself as, she'd've made it 100% illegal too. Instead she talks out of both sides of her mouth and turns a profit. And it's only because the city she rules is such an absolute shit hole that people are trying to sell themselves into slavery in the first place.