Daenerys Stormborn - A Re-Read Project Part II: ACoK & ASoS

[Maia]

Magic isn't completely arbitrary in Martin's world, but it is somewhat unpredictable. It may not work quite as the user intends, or it may come and go, and there's a price to be paid for using it.

Well, my point is that we have seen quite a bit of documented predictable, reliable magic. Skinchanging, it seems, has always been reliable, if a gifted person was properly trained. As were glamours and FM face-changing.

Other types of magic may have seemed unreliable when magic was generally weak, but now that it is stronger, they have become reliable again. The waters are likely additionally muddled because only certain people are magically talented and can make magic work at all.

The Citadel party line is that none of those who studied "higher mysteries" could make magic work... But that fire-mage in Quarth was always able "to coax fire from obsidian", if barely. I.e. magic was working for him, however feebly. Ditto for Marwyn and yes, Melisandre. From her PoV we know that _some_ of her spells worked for her even in the past. Only, they weren't showy/useful enough, so she augmented them with tricks.

.

It's important that magic should never be (in Tolkien's words) a "machine"; that is, a person simply has to utter a spell and their problems are solved, because that makes for a poor story.

It is a delicate balance, IMHO. If you have functional and predictable magic, it should be able to solve _some_ problems or we end up with absurd Weaslyisms. Sure, they can permanently turn anything into anything and magnify/shrink things, but Ron has to always wear worn, ill-fitting clothes, because they are supposed to be poor and magic shouldn't solve problems! This just detracts from immersion in the story and the world, IMHO.

Ditto many other "poor magicians" tropes, when the magicians are shown to have skills that should have allowed them to become prosperous.

Magic certainly can't solve _all_ problems - can any one form of power? But it would be hypocritical and implausible to pretend that it can't solve some. Our heroes have already very much profited from their skinchanging.

Can we talk about why would Illyrio send Barristan to Dany?

Well, Dany and her dragons could be major assets for fAegon's cause. And also, maybe Illyrio had a reason not want for Barristan to mert with fAegon quite yet. Maybe there is some discrepancy about fAegon that Barristan might notice? But once fAegon is safely wed it to Dany it wouldn't matter anymore.

How did the conversation go between Belwas, Barristan and Illyrio when he chose to send them with 3 ships to Qarth to get Dany, and more importantly, her dragons. I guess he only did this after Jorah informed on where Dany was and what she was doing? Doesnt Jorah say his last message to Varys/Illyrio was in Qarth?

Oh, certainly. Jorah didn't want Dany to remain in Quarth, so I am sure that he was more than happy to report on her. He is quite aware that Illyrio doesn't intend to hand her over to the Baratheons, so he didn't think that he was harming her.

And Illyrio, like rich and influential merchants iRL likely has factors in every major city that he trades with, who in turn have relatively speedy means of contacting him.

As to Belwas - why not? Illyrio likely offered him a better life than anything that he could look forward to at this point, he has no ties to Westeros, etc.

[Annara Snow]

A Targaryen is someone whose is the trueborn child of a Targaryen father according to the patrilineal rules of Westeros. Jon is Rhaegar's trueborn son, so technically that makes him a Targaryen. A rabbit thinking it's a wolf its entire life is still a rabbit, or in this case a dragon.

We don't know if Jon is a trueborn son of a Targaryen father (or that he would necessarily be considered that by everyone), but if he is, that doesn't change what I said: someone with a Targaryen identity is someone who considers themselves a Targaryen, is considered a Targaryen by others, cherishes Targaryen values, etc. None of that is the case with Jon, and we don't know if it will ever be.

Rabbits, wolves and dogs are actual species, very different from each other, with actual biological differences. Patrilineal rules of Westeros are not based on biology, they are societal, man-made and arbitrary.* There's nothing essential, biological or magical that makes a person what their father was rather than what their mother was. One of Jon's parents was a Stark. That is accepted by pretty much everyone and I don't think that anyone doubts it. Jon definitely has the Stark DNA. (It's obvious to everyone since he has the Stark looks.) But his upbringing, environment, values, self-identification are those of a bastard of the house of Stark, not a trueborn Targaryen child.

* And also changeable: for instance, the current Starks are apparently descendants of an ancestor who was a bastard child of a Stark woman.

"Snow."

Sam glanced up at the sound. Lord Commander Mormont's raven was circling the fire, beating the air with wide black wings.

Drogon's wide black wings beat the air.

Black blood was flowing from the wound where the spear had pierced him [Drogon], smoking where it dripped onto the scorched sands.

Once a man had said the words his blood was black.

In the cold night air the [Jon's] wound was smoking.

Which of these are actual dragon references in Jon's chapters? None, as far as I can see. Mormont's raven is black, and so is Drogon. So? That's really weak.

on's childhood roleplaying as Aemon the Dragonknight, his admiration for Daeron I the Young Dragon, his blade of dragonsteel, his dragon chat with Tyrion, his inner thoughts during the battle of the Wall (He might as well wish for another thousand men, and maybe a dragon or three [...] It felt like walking down the gullet of an ice dragon), the Dragonkin book that Sam drops and come open as it falls...

Aemon the Dragonknight is a legendary knight from the songs and the idol of many boys and girls in Westeros. Sansa mentions him many times - the songs about him and queen Naerys were among her favorites, and she hoped that Joffrey would be like the Dragonknight. Samwell was the one to use the dragonglass to kill an Other. Going by that, not only do Tyrion and Arya have dragon references, but so do Sansa and Sam. Catelyn remembers liking the song about Jenny of Oldstones and the Prince of Dragonflies and playing those roles with Petyr. Sandor tells Sansa that some fool asked him if he had been burnt by dragonfire. If we counted every mention of dragons, Aemon the Dragonknight, dragonglass etc. we could probably come up with even more characters with weak dragon references. That's hardly comparable to the literal and symbolic importance of dragons in Dany's chapters and her bond with them.

[Annara Snow]

I don't want to go back and bump the AGOT re-read thread, but since I sadly didn't participate in the discussion about the last two chapters in AGOT (which are among my favorites in the entire series) due to outside circumstances (computer trouble) and have only caught up and read the discussion later, I'd like to ask about something I'm still not clear on.

I've never been sure about the way that the 'only death can pay for life' rules worked in the case of the hatching of dragons.

It seems that the consensus here is that the three deaths needed to hatch the three dragons were Mirri's, Drogo's and Rhaego's? But how can that be - when Rhaego had already been sacrificed to save Drogo's life? Rhaego's life was given for Drogo's - therefore, he should not count. He wasn't even burnt in the pyre. The three beings that were actually burned in the pyre were Drogo (already dead), the horse (killed shortly before) and Mirri (burnt alive).

Furthermore, why was a horse's death needed in the first ritual, if it was just Rhaego's life for Drogo's? As a catalyst? But why pay for one life with two lives? Mirri said that Dany was lying to herself that a horse's life would be enough to pay for khal Drogo's. So how much is a horse's life worth? Is a dragon's life worth the same as a human life? Why would that be the case? That would mean that there is some kind of hierarchy of lives and how much their matter. So, dragons are just as valuable as humans, but horses aren't? What about other animals? What about direwolves, for instance? And if a horse's life was needed, does that mean that the life of an unborn child, even one supposed to be the Stallion, was not enough in itself?

If Drogo's death could be accepted as payment for one of the dragons, even though he was smothered beforehand, was it necessary to burn Mirri alive?

And was it necessary for Dany to step into the fire? Was that a part of the ritual? If so, was she offering her own life as some kind of a... deposit, in order to get the dragons?

[Parwan]

2. Can we talk about why would Illyrio send Barristan to Dany? How did the conversation go between Belwas, Barristan and Illyrio when he chose to send them with 3 ships to Qarth to get Dany, and more importantly, her dragons.

1. I guess he only did this after Jorah informed on where Dany was and what she was doing? Doesnt Jorah say his last message to Varys/Illyrio was in Qarth?

2. I think Illyrio sent Barristan to Dany as a political tactic to show his trust to Daenerys after he found out she had dragons, just the same thing he is doing with Tyrion.

My guess is that Barristan intially was searching for Viserys and then when he found Illyrio he found out about the whole Molten gold incident so he decided to set out for Dany with help from Illyrio.

...

2. Well, Dany and her dragons could be major assets for fAegon's cause. And also, maybe Illyrio had a reason not want for Barristan to mert with fAegon quite yet. Maybe there is some discrepancy about fAegon that Barristan might notice? But once fAegon is safely wed it to Dany it wouldn't matter anymore.

Oh, certainly. Jorah didn't want Dany to remain in Quarth, so I am sure that he was more than happy to report on her. He is quite aware that Illyrio doesn't intend to hand her over to the Baratheons, so he didn't think that he was harming her.

1. And Illyrio, like rich and influential merchants iRL likely has factors in every major city that he trades with, who in turn have relatively speedy means of contacting him.

As to Belwas - why not? Illyrio likely offered him a better life than anything that he could look forward to at this point, he has no ties to Westeros, etc.

1. Yes, Illyrio is a rich and influential merchant. He's also a clever fellow with a good info network. He tells Viserys that he has agents in Westeros. I'm confident that he also has them in Essos. His three ships got to Qarth, apparently with no problems. Information would have traveled west to him with few or no problems. He had almost certainly read Jorah's last letter, but I bet he knew a lot about where Dany was and what she was doing before that.

2. Illyrio is really impressed with Daenerys. This is clear from his conversation with Tyrion. Whatever the cheese merchant thinks of Aegon (or fAegon), he would want Dany on his side. It is natural for him to send a good crew to her. Barristan, Belwas, and three ships--the cheesemonger can easily afford that. He certainly wouldn't want to send her any less.

[Fire Eater]

We don't know if Jon is a trueborn son of a Targaryen father (or that he would necessarily be considered that by everyone), but if he is, that doesn't change what I said: someone with a Targaryen identity is someone who considers themselves a Targaryen, is considered a Targaryen by others, cherishes Targaryen values, etc. None of that is the case with Jon, and we don't know if it will ever be.

Jon is Rhaegar's trueborn son or the KG wouldn't have been at the ToJ in the first place after KL fell. The job of the KG is to guard the king as their name suggests, and if Jon was a bastard than the KG would have gone to Dragonstone to protect the king Viserys.

We swore a vow

You swore a vow to protect the king not to judge him

Hightower's answer wouldn't have made sense if Viserys was the king, but if Jon was trueborn than it would have made sense. Cherishes Targaryen values? What Targaryen values? Jon is still a Targaryen. Otherwise, it's the same as saying if Rickon was moved to the Eyrie and raised by Jon Arryn, than he technically isn't a Stark since he doesn't know he is one.

I twill be the case with Jon, or what is the point of giving him a secret Targaryen heritage if it isn't going to impact the story?

Rabbits, wolves and dogs are actual species, very different from each other, with actual biological differences. Patrilineal rules of Westeros are not based on biology, they are societal, man-made and arbitrary.* There's nothing essential, biological or magical that makes a person what their father was rather than what their mother was. One of Jon's parents was a Stark. That is accepted by pretty much everyone and I don't think that anyone doubts it. Jon definitely has the Stark DNA. (It's obvious to everyone since he has the Stark looks.) But his upbringing, environment, values, self-identification are those of a bastard of the house of Stark, not a trueborn Targaryen child.

The rules still apply to names, which is what we are talking about. The rules state the trueborn child takes after the name of his/her father. Everyone accepts he is Ned's son, but that doesn't make it so. Jon identifies wiht Hous eStark because he doesn't know he is a Targaryen, Ned hid it from him.

* And also changeable: for instance, the current Starks are apparently descendants of an ancestor who was a bastard child of a Stark woman.

Except I doubt a story/legend told by a wildling north of the Wall about the Starks in WF to be completely true. We don't know if that story about Starks being descended from bael is true. If it is, how come Jon hears about for the first time from Ygritte instead of from Luwin or Ned?

Which of these are actual dragon references in Jon's chapters? None, as far as I can see. Mormont's raven is black, and so is Drogon. So? That's really weak.

That's because you didn't even bother to do your HW. The last two are in Jon's POV, with the second to last referring to his stabbing. The exact same phrase is used to describe Mormont's raven, and Drogon twice. Drogon is also stabbed in an area similar to Jon's, and both their wounds are described a smoking. How many other wounds are described as smoking in the series? Whether or no something is weak is your own opinion.

Aemon the Dragonknight is a legendary knight from the songs and the idol of many boys and girls in Westeros. Sansa mentions him many times - the songs about him and queen Naerys were among her favorites, and she hoped that Joffrey would be like the Dragonknight. Samwell was the one to use the dragonglass to kill an Other. Going by that, not only do Tyrion and Arya have dragon references, but so do Sansa and Sam. Catelyn remembers liking the song about Jenny of Oldstones and the Prince of Dragonflies and playing those roles with Petyr. Sandor tells Sansa that some fool asked him if he had been burnt by dragonfire. If we counted every mention of dragons, Aemon the Dragonknight, dragonglass etc. we could probably come up with even more characters with weak dragon references. That's hardly comparable to the literal and symbolic importance of dragons in Dany's chapters and her bond with them.

Except Jon has plenty of dragon references, significantly more than plenty of others. He is even connected with the Ice Dragon.

Again, can we end this, and just stick to the main topic? It's derailing the thread.

[Parwan]

I. But why would the strongest magician be "on their side" and not become a ruler himself? We should have heard of at least some "sorcerer kings", but we haven't.

II. IMHO, there must be ways to protect oneself from magic that are not dependent on another magician actively helping you. Either magically warded objects (of more portable nature than the walls of Storm's End), or maybe some protection methods that even normal people can implement. Like it is possible to see through glamours, according to the Kindly Man. I suspect that the wildlings know some partially effective ways to fend off the Others ...

I. Yes, that’s a problem. See my comments below.

II. GRRM doesn’t appear to be into magically warded objects. The wildlings may have developed some methods such as you suggest. Maybe the crannogmen also have done this.

Magic isn't completely arbitrary in Martin's world, but it is somewhat unpredictable. It may not work quite as the user intends, or it may come and go, and there's a price to be paid for using it...

Well, my point is that we have seen quite a bit of documented predictable, reliable magic. Skinchanging, it seems, has always been reliable, if a gifted person was properly trained. As were glamours and FM face-changing.

Other types of magic may have seemed unreliable when magic was generally weak, but now that it is stronger, they have become reliable again. The waters are likely additionally muddled because only certain people are magically talented and can make magic work at all.

The Citadel party line is that none of those who studied "higher mysteries" could make magic work... But that fire-mage in Quarth was always able "to coax fire from obsidian", if barely. I.e. magic was working for him, however feebly. Ditto for Marwyn and yes, Melisandre. From her PoV we know that _some_ of her spells worked for her even in the past. Only, they weren't showy/useful enough, so she augmented them with tricks.

. It is a delicate balance, IMHO. If you have functional and predictable magic, it should be able to solve _some_ problems or we end up with absurd Weaslyisms. ...

SeanF’s idea about the “price to be paid” is something we’ve discussed a bit. It’s worthy of further development.

Again, see my comments below.

...

I've never been sure about the way that the 'only death can pay for life' rules worked in the case of the hatching of dragons.

It seems that the consensus here is that the three deaths needed to hatch the three dragons were Mirri's, Drogo's and Rhaego's? But how can that be - when Rhaego had already been sacrificed to save Drogo's life? Rhaego's life was given for Drogo's - therefore, he should not count. He wasn't even burnt in the pyre. The three beings that were actually burned in the pyre were Drogo (already dead), the horse (killed shortly before) and Mirri (burnt alive).

...

@ Maia: The question is not just whether magic is reliable. There are a number of questions about the needs for and the results of magic, especially strong magic.

@ Annara Snow: I don’t think there was a consensus that three deaths were required for three dragons. My feeling was that at least some of us agreed that Dany was special, her presence was required. Also, a human sacrifice was needed. Finally, the time had to be right. At any rate, I feel that these things are all probably true.

I can think of at least three relevant factors here.

1. The importance of religion

2. The existence of various special people—“naturals,” foretold heroes, assorted wild cards...

3. The correlation between strong magic and evil.

1. The red priests of Volantis have a good bit of magical power. So does Quaithe. The priests are devoted to their beliefs though, and I think that this is also probably true of the shadowbinder. One's religion could be a restraint on one's desire for power. It's also possible that there is a more direct linking of things than just moral inhibition. Perhaps power coming from the religion requires a certain restraint. A practitioner can't acquire much magical power if he or she lusts after a palace and a throne.

2. A person might gain considerable power by formal study and practice. Others, however, might gain as much or more as sort of natural gift. The Mother of The Others once referred to Dany as a magical savant. That's a good phrase. There might be rules to magic, but an individual might not be able to be all that confident about "getting to the top." You might think that you could learn the most, gain the most power, and then make yourself king. However, there could be others who naturally have more power than you. The whole thing could be hard to predict.

The idea of a "natural" is also related to a "chosen one," and both are often related to religions, myths, etc. People like the red priests, the warlocks, and others might direct their efforts not so much toward gaining immediate power as toward looking for the prophet or hero to come.

Also in this area are wild cards, things that just happen. Who would have predicted that a good-time, wine-drinking, whore-mongering apostate would gain the ability to raise people from the dead? Such powers could be considerable and, at the proper time, fairly regular and dependable. That would not make them too useful in gaining political power.

3. SeanF's "price" might come to be too great. Perhaps really strong magic can only be employed sparingly. Perhaps it will have future ill effects that a practitioner would not want to face. Also, the price might be paid by a great many people, not just the one performing the magic. Dany is the mother of dragons. What, in the final analysis, will result from the births? Perhaps it's best for the world if such things happen very rarely.

[SeanF]

I. Yes, that’s a problem. See my comments below.

II. GRRM doesn’t appear to be into magically warded objects. The wildlings may have developed some methods such as you suggest. Maybe the crannogmen also have done this.

SeanF’s idea about the “price to be paid” is something we’ve discussed a bit. It’s worthy of further development.

Again, see my comments below.

@ Maia: The question is not just whether magic is reliable. There are a number of questions about the needs for and the results of magic, especially strong magic.

@ Annara Snow: I don’t think there was a consensus that three deaths were required for three dragons. My feeling was that at least some of us agreed that Dany was special, her presence was required. Also, a human sacrifice was needed. Finally, the time had to be right. At any rate, I feel that these things are all probably true.

I can think of at least three relevant factors here.

1. The importance of religion

2. The existence of various special people—“naturals,” foretold heroes, assorted wild cards...

3. The correlation between strong magic and evil.

1. The red priests of Volantis have a good bit of magical power. So does Quaithe. The priests are devoted to their beliefs though, and I think that this is also probably true of the shadowbinder. One's religion could be a restraint on one's desire for power. It's also possible that there is a more direct linking of things than just moral inhibition. Perhaps power coming from the religion requires a certain restraint. A practitioner can't acquire much magical power if he or she lusts after a palace and a throne.

2. A person might gain considerable power by formal study and practice. Others, however, might gain as much or more as sort of natural gift. The Mother of The Others once referred to Dany as a magical savant. That's a good phrase. There might be rules to magic, but an individual might not be able to be all that confident about "getting to the top." You might think that you could learn the most, gain the most power, and then make yourself king. However, there could be others who naturally have more power than you. The whole thing could be hard to predict.

The idea of a "natural" is also related to a "chosen one," and both are often related to religions, myths, etc. People like the red priests, the warlocks, and others might direct their efforts not so much toward gaining immediate power as toward looking for the prophet or hero to come.

Also in this area are wild cards, things that just happen. Who would have predicted that a good-time, wine-drinking, whore-mongering apostate would gain the ability to raise people from the dead? Such powers could be considerable and, at the proper time, fairly regular and dependable. That would not make them too useful in gaining political power.

3. SeanF's "price" might come to be too great. Perhaps really strong magic can only be employed sparingly. Perhaps it will have future ill effects that a practitioner would not want to face. Also, the price might be paid by a great many people, not just the one performing the magic. Dany is the mother of dragons. What, in the final analysis, will result from the births? Perhaps it's best for the world if such things happen very rarely.

It's only just occurred to me that in the final chapter of AGOT, we don't actually have Dany's point of view after the point at which she walks into the fire. Oddly, the final paragraphs are from the point of view of Ser Jorah. We don't know what Dany experienced in the flames, and whether there was any further "price" that she had to pay for the spell to work.

Melisandre does reminisce that she has "paid the price" for her magical powers. I think that in her case, the price was either dying, and being resurrected as a wight - or alternatively, being so transformed that she can't really be considered human any longer. On top of that, she finds the practice of magic physically painful.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

I don't want to go back and bump the AGOT re-read thread, but since I sadly didn't participate in the discussion about the last two chapters in AGOT (which are among my favorites in the entire series) due to outside circumstances (computer trouble) and have only caught up and read the discussion later, I'd like to ask about something I'm still not clear on.

I've never been sure about the way that the 'only death can pay for life' rules worked in the case of the hatching of dragons.

It seems that the consensus here is that the three deaths needed to hatch the three dragons were Mirri's, Drogo's and Rhaego's? But how can that be - when Rhaego had already been sacrificed to save Drogo's life? Rhaego's life was given for Drogo's - therefore, he should not count. He wasn't even burnt in the pyre. The three beings that were actually burned in the pyre were Drogo (already dead), the horse (killed shortly before) and Mirri (burnt alive).

Furthermore, why was a horse's death needed in the first ritual, if it was just Rhaego's life for Drogo's? As a catalyst? But why pay for one life with two lives? Mirri said that Dany was lying to herself that a horse's life would be enough to pay for khal Drogo's. So how much is a horse's life worth? Is a dragon's life worth the same as a human life? Why would that be the case? That would mean that there is some kind of hierarchy of lives and how much their matter. So, dragons are just as valuable as humans, but horses aren't? What about other animals? What about direwolves, for instance? And if a horse's life was needed, does that mean that the life of an unborn child, even one supposed to be the Stallion, was not enough in itself?

If Drogo's death could be accepted as payment for one of the dragons, even though he was smothered beforehand, was it necessary to burn Mirri alive?

And was it necessary for Dany to step into the fire? Was that a part of the ritual? If so, was she offering her own life as some kind of a... deposit, in order to get the dragons?

I think in MMD's case, she didnt really 100% know what she was doing. She studied under Marwyn, but how many times prior had she been asked to bring someone back from near death? If I had to guess, it was her first time. But I agree with you, why would the horse not be enough but an unborn baby was? Or would the baby have been enough without the horse?

IMO MMD was trying to cause as much havoc as she possibly could, given her bitter admittance to Dany afterwards, plus the fact that she could have very easily been fucking with Drogo from the moment she bound his wound. As far as the pyre goes, maybe life is not needed as a sacrifice, only blood. Drogo and the horse would have had plenty of blood left to burn in the fire even if their lives were already extinguished. MMD was the life sacrifice, so maybe 1 'life sacrifice' is enough to pay for 3 dragons.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

It's only just occurred to me that in the final chapter of AGOT, we don't actually have Dany's point of view after the point at which she walks into the fire. Oddly, the final paragraphs are from the point of view of Ser Jorah. We don't know what Dany experienced in the flames, and whether there was any further "price" that she had to pay for the spell to work.

Melisandre does reminisce that she has "paid the price" for her magical powers. I think that in her case, the price was either dying, and being resurrected as a wight - or alternatively, being so transformed that she can't really be considered human any longer. On top of that, she finds the practice of magic physically painful.

I completely agree about Mel. We know that she doesnt really eat or sleep, probably doesnt use the bathroom much either. She is a humanoid at this point, I dont think she is wight/zombie as she seems to have all the use of her brain and senses left (well except feeling the elements on her skin). She is what she says I guess, a vassal for the lord of light. His power fuels her, I know that some of the stuff she says is only to impress and make her self look more mysterious/mystical/whatever. But I think she might be telling the truth about that one.

[SeanF]

I completely agree about Mel. We know that she doesnt really eat or sleep, probably doesnt use the bathroom much either. She is a humanoid at this point, I dont think she is wight/zombie as she seems to have all the use of her brain and senses left (well except feeling the elements on her skin). She is what she says I guess, a vassal for the lord of light. His power fuels her, I know that some of the stuff she says is only to impress and make her self look more mysterious/mystical/whatever. But I think she might be telling the truth about that one.

Some people who are brought back from the dead are more or less intelligent,

like Coldhands or Beric Dondarrion, and Lady Stoneheart, but they are also radically altered. I'm inclined to think that Melisandre has never actually died, but is so changed that her status isn't very different from those three.

I'm pretty sure Dany did not experience death and resurrection on the pyre. I think her ability to enjoy physical pleasure rules that out. But, I do find it odd that we get no flashbacks to what happened.

[Queen‍‍‍‍‍‍ Alysanne‍‍™]

Some people who are brought back from the dead are more or less intelligent,

like Coldhands or Beric Dondarrion, and Lady Stoneheart, but they are also radically altered. I'm inclined to think that Melisandre has never actually died, but is so changed that her status isn't very different from those three.

I'm pretty sure Dany did not experience death and resurrection on the pyre. I think her ability to enjoy physical pleasure rules that out. But, I do find it odd that we get no flashbacks to what happened.

I think she kinda did have a flashback in ADWD. She says on the dothraki sea that her experience in dazniks pit was similar to the pyre., she said she was unhurt by flames.

[Jerry Drake]

Mmd studied under Marwyn?

[MoIaF]

Mmd studied under Marwyn?

Yes, she talks about it when she's describing her training.

“My mother was godswife before me, and taught me all the songs and spells most pleasing to the Great Shepherd, and how to make the sacred smokes and ointments from leaf and root and berry. When I was younger and more fair, I went in caravan to Asshai by the Shadow, to learn from their mages. Ships from many lands come to Asshai, so I lingered long to study the healing ways of distant peoples. A moonsinger of the Jogos Nhai gifted me with her birthing songs, a woman of your own riding people taught me the magics of grass and corn and horse, and a maester from the Sunset Lands opened a body for me and showed me all the secrets that hide beneath the skin.”

Ser Jorah Mormont spoke up. “A maester?” “Marwyn, he named himself,” the woman replied in the Common Tongue. “From the sea. Beyond the sea. The Seven Lands, he said. Sunset Lands. Where men are iron and dragons rule. He taught me this speech.” “A maester in Asshai ,” Ser Jorah mused."

[Jerry Drake]

Thanks...

Boy, there are so many names mentioned off-hand, I don't even know who's relevant or not

[Parwan]

... We don't know what Dany experienced in the flames, and whether there was any further "price" that she had to pay for the spell to work.

Melisandre does reminisce that she has "paid the price" for her magical powers. I think that in her case, the price was either dying, and being resurrected as a wight - or alternatively, being so transformed that she can't really be considered human any longer. On top of that, she finds the practice of magic physically painful.

We shouldn't look at this matter as if it were a simple retail transaction. I don't think you make a one-time payment (even a large one) and then get a magical result. In many cases, the witch, wizard, practitioner of whatever title, continues to pay. For Melisandre part of this price is physical pain.

I think in MMD's case, she didnt really 100% know what she was doing. She studied under Marwyn, but how many times prior had she been asked to bring someone back from near death? If I had to guess, it was her first time. But I agree with you, why would the horse not be enough but an unborn baby was? Or would the baby have been enough without the horse?

...

...

I'm pretty sure Dany did not experience death and resurrection on the pyre. I think her ability to enjoy physical pleasure rules that out. But, I do find it odd that we get no flashbacks to what happened.

To me, Mirri appeared to be very familiar with the spell and quite skilled at it. I believe she had brought others back to life. If not, she had done similar things involving blood magic.

I don't know that we need flashbacks about the pyre beyond the simple memory that Queen Alysanne mentions. The "price" of magic is likely not only a continuing thing, it probably is often paid by people other than the one performing the magic. Said price(s) could involve all kinds of things--burned children, increased power for warlocks and pyromancers...

Marwyn is an interesting character. I believe that, in terms of magic, he was a student in the east. He taught Mirri human anatomy, not spells. The main reason he went to Asshai was to learn about mages, warlocks, shadowbinders, etc. This makes him stand out among his colleagues. He is much more a scientist than any of them. If you want to really understand something, you don't just try some parlor tricks and then say, "Well, there's not much to this stuff." You go to the source of things and do your own investigation. Marwyn may have exaggerated matters in his conversation with Sam, or he may not have done so. I don't know whether the archmaesters would have killed Aemon or not. The general assertion about how the grey sheep have closed their eyes seems accurate to me though.

I hope we see "the mastiff" again. If he talks to Dany he's not likely to approach matters by saying, "I'm sorry your grace, it's not my place. Perhaps I have said too much. I...I..." Nor is he likely to tell her that "To jump up, you must fall down. To be hungry, you must eat a lot. To see right, you must look left." He's much more direct than that. He is not inclined to be cryptic. Not only the queen, but the readers could learn some useful things about magic from him.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

We shouldn't look at this matter as if it were a simple retail transaction. I don't think you make a one-time payment (even a large one) and then get a magical result. In many cases, the witch, wizard, practitioner of whatever title, continues to pay. For Melisandre part of this price is physical pain.

To me, Mirri appeared to be very familiar with the spell and quite skilled at it. I believe she had brought others back to life. If not, she had done similar things involving blood magic.

I don't know that we need flashbacks about the pyre beyond the simple memory that Queen Alysanne mentions. The "price" of magic is likely not only a continuing thing, it probably is often paid by people other than the one performing the magic. Said price(s) could involve all kinds of things--burned children, increased power for warlocks and pyromancers...

Marwyn is an interesting character. I believe that, in terms of magic, he was a student in the east. He taught Mirri human anatomy, not spells. The main reason he went to Asshai was to learn about mages, warlocks, shadowbinders, etc. This makes him stand out among his colleagues. He is much more a scientist than any of them. If you want to really understand something, you don't just try some parlor tricks and then say, "Well, there's not much to this stuff." You go to the source of things and do your own investigation. Marwyn may have exaggerated matters in his conversation with Sam, or he may not have done so. I don't know whether the archmaesters would have killed Aemon or not. The general assertion about how the grey sheep have closed their eyes seems accurate to me though.

I hope we see "the mastiff" again. If he talks to Dany he's not likely to approach matters by saying, "I'm sorry your grace, it's not my place. Perhaps I have said too much. I...I..." Nor is he likely to tell her that "To jump up, you must fall down. To be hungry, you must eat a lot. To see right, you must look left." He's much more direct than that. He is not inclined to be cryptic. Not only the queen, but the readers could learn some useful things about magic from him.

Well it's hard to tell if MMD knew what she doing or if she was a great blunderer. She didnt heal drogos wound very well. Or she made him sick on purpose, if it's the latter then I agree with you that she is very skilled.

Ya know I was thinking more about it, maybe when Khal Ogo's khalasar attacked the lhazareen before Drogo got there, maybe they had already begun defiling the lhazareen. MMD and the other women were already getting raped, plundered and murdered before Drogo even got there to defeat Khal Ogo's tribe. She was taking double vengeance on Drogo, in her eyes he is to blame for everything bad that any Dothraki had ever done to her, essentially she was focusing all the hate onto Dany and Drogo even though many of the atrocities were not even their fault. So yeah if the consensus is that she is in fact very skilled, then she is even more of a villain, because she knew exactly what she was doing the entire time.

[MoIaF]

And was it necessary for Dany to step into the fire? Was that a part of the ritual? If so, was she offering her own life as some kind of a... deposit, in order to get the dragons?

I think it was necessary for Dany to step into the fire, not only because she was the perpetrator of the magic and thus she sealed the spell by stepping into the fire but also I think her presence there was necessary to hatch Drogon.

Drogon doesn't actually hatch until Dany steps into the fire (unlike the other two dragons). She had been dreaming with him for almost a year prior to these events, whatever bond they have I believe it's at a cosmic level.

And I fear you might be right in that Dany might have offered her own life in order to hatch Drogon. I believe that Dany's life is intrinsically tied to that of Drogon. Their bond is much more complex that anything we have seen. We know for sure no one has ever hatched dragons this way. We don't know if other Targaryens had dreamnt with their dragons prior to hatching them, however, because of the unique way these dragons were hatch I imagine that Dany's bond is at a different level. Drogon was basically showing Dany through her dreams how to hatch the dragons.

Here is an interesting quote about their connection:

Dany IX, ADWD

"The hero leapt onto his back and drove the iron spearpoint down at the base of the dragon’s long scaled neck. Dany and Drogon screamed as one."

[MoIaF]

Well it's hard to tell if MMD knew what she doing or if she was a great blunderer. She didnt heal drogos wound very well. Or she made him sick on purpose, if it's the latter then I agree with you that she is very skilled.

I think MMD new what she was doing and what she was getting into. If what she says is true she's had extensive training, as I quoted above she learned from Marwyn so we can believe she is speaking the truth.

[Ragnorak]

Very nice work, Suzanna.

Whew, finally caught up with this re-read!


Another thing that struck me, going through this re-read and my slow re-read of ASOIAF, is how unfair future accusations of Dany not having any talent for administration and generally only doing well as long as she was following advice of competent people (mostly Jorah) is.

I'm doing a bit of catch up here too, but I wanted to emphasize this. Personally I found Dany in Meereen frustrating to read the first time around and part of that was that I didn't think she made particularly good choices there. But much of that frustration was born out of my view of Dany as a good leader prior to Meereen and that the Meereen chapters were quite a departure from her earlier patterns. My expectations were that we would see Dany stumble in Meereen, possibly very badly, but generally improve upon and refine her earlier patterns of leadership for which I had a rather positive view of going into a Dance with Dragons. In fact even the observation that she needed to learn after the events in Astapor struck me as an incredibly positive thing and a very wise choice. It fits with Dany's pattern up to Meereen of actually looking back (despite what she says) and learning from the events of her past in an attempt to avoid those mistakes in the future. Her choice to keep the crown as she realizes she's walking in Viserys' steps is another good example.

The great redeeming moment for Stannis is when he shows up at the Wall because Davos convinces him that a true king protects his people. This is a priority Dany has had from the start and it is one of the refreshing things about her as we see the duplicitous nature of self serving power grabbers in Westeros. Part of the expectation of her returning to Westeros with dragons is the inherent comparison of her to all these other contenders for the throne. While I do think there's cause to be critical of her leadership decisions in Meereen, I don't think that criticism ought to overshadow or erase the positive leadership impression of Dany that is built up prior to Meereen. (It actually makes me think "leadership" is not the paramount development in Dany's story over the course of Dance.) I think it is important to keep in mind, especially for those who feel her leadership in Meereen leans heavily toward flawed, that Dany was intentionally given a positive foundation as a leader prior to her time in Meereen.

[Queen‍‍‍‍‍‍ Alysanne‍‍™]

While I do think there's cause to be critical of her leadership decisions in Meereen, I don't think that criticism ought to overshadow or erase the positive leadership impression of Dany that is built up prior to Meereen. (It actually makes me think "leadership" is not the paramount development in Dany's story over the course of Dance.) I think it is important to keep in mind, especially for those who feel her leadership in Meereen leans heavily toward flawed, that Dany was intentionally given a positive foundation as a leader prior to her time in Meereen.

I agree with this completely and thats why I still appreciate Daenerys as a character even after Meereen, she makes very good decisions as a leader prior to that.

I also agree with the part in bolded, for me personally one of the main themes was Dany accepting what her dragons are and overcoming the fear she had of Drogon/her dragons, her first chapter ends with her discovering Drogon ate a girl and I believe this sets the stage for the theme of her dance arc as she constantly thinks on that moment for the rest of the book, and it also affects all the decisions that she made. She ends the chapter accepting that she abandoned her children and finally calls Drogon "her" dragon vs. "the" dragon for the very first time in that chapter. I'll comment more on this theme when we get to Dance.