[Book Spoilers] Daenerys evil moment rushed. Runners look uncomfortable with it.

[Dragon of Valyria]

You can't reduce people to statistics. Of all the things wrong with what she did, it's not the proportion of the populace that I'm concerned with. It doesn't make it any less of a terrible act just because the Meereenese social order isn't disturbed by it.

It's still arbitrary killing to send a message. But if you want to go into the results, fine. Not only is it monstrous, but it doesn't work.

[Cas Stark]

I was more bothered that they left out the whole "savage sack" angle of her take over of Meereen...the show makes it look practically bloodless.

At least they could have shown the aftermath of burned out buildings and stacks of dead masters all over the place.

[jarl the climber]

Not a Dany fan...especially showDany...but the scene was fine. Love the TargBanner endshot.

That was an iconic shot, it was very well done.

It apparently wasn't significant enough to let us know, and it stretches credulity that each of then contributed exactly one slave.

But most tellingly though is what she asks -- not "who," but "how many?" The intent is pretty clear there. She's not concerned with guilt, but mass punishment.

I' not disagreeing but as we sort of see before this her freedmen followers are fine with killing slavers, the more the better. So it played well with her base but if she tries to forge a peace and rule over the city like in the books maybe listening to Ser Barristan might have made more sense but we will see.

[The Third Eye]

Yep, I've seen the light. This place is beyond saving.

Later folks.

c'mon... I'm not trying to be the moral douchebag about one getting money off the books, being a sellsword and gosh.. .even incest and murder. I'm talking about crucifying somebody and a person's atitude towards it. How can somebody think that nailing a living human being to a wooden bar leaving them there to die within 24, 36 or even more hours is NOT evil??

[Rhaegar I Targaryen]

c'mon... I'm not trying to be the moral douchebag about one getting money off the books, being a sellsword and gosh.. .even incest and murder. I'm talking about crucifying somebody and a person's atitude towards it. How can somebody think that nailing a living human being to a wooden bar leaving them there to die within 24, 36 or even more hours is NOT evil??

You're good, I hear ya.

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

You can't reduce people to statistics.

But see, you can. Have you heard of decimation? A legion displeased its commanders, an example needs to be made, so let's kill every tenth soldier. Chosen by random. Sure, we don't do that today, but the novels don't take place in modern world. There's no Universal Declarations of Human Rights, there's no Geneva Conventions.

[PatrickStormborn]

The true problem with crucifying the Great Masters (apart from the obvious "crucifixion" problem - not defending that BTW) was that it just wasn't enough. She should either have issued a blanket pardon or punished every Great Master. Personally I think she should have stripped them of their wealth and redistributed it among the population.

I'm not sure whether setting up a trial would have been an effective method. I have no doubt that each of the Great Masters was guilty of some crime - it would eventually lead to her having to punish every slave owner in some capacity.

Barristan's coup d'état in Meereen was incredibly clever and successful, so I wouldn't say he doesn't know anything about politics and ruling. He was more successful in like three days than Dany was in months.

Barristan did a decent job, but ultimately he was manipulated by the Shavepate.

None of what he achieved would have been possible without Dany's sacrifices though. She dealt with the sack, she dealt with the Sons of the Harpy, she dealt with her dragons, she dealt with the Fighting Pits, and she dealt with the Yunkai'i. Barristan was in a relatively easier position, because he had only two options: obey Hizdahr, or disobey Hizdahr.

[Dragon of Valyria]

But see, you can. Have you heard of decimation? A legion displeased its commanders, an example needs to be made, so let's kill every tenth soldier. Chosen by random. Sure, we don't do that today, but the novels don't take place in modern world. There's no Universal Declarations of Human Rights, there's no Geneva Conventions.

I. It's historically unclear how often decimation was actually used as a punishment given the paucity of reliable historical information on the kingdom and early republic. Our best source for that is Livy, whose primary purpose was moral edification and who delighted in telling stories of the stern virtues of the old Romans. Yet the only attested decimation -/ earlier in the same century in which Livy write -- was regarded with revulsion by the Romans, who were unimpressed by Crassus's decision to invoke what was at the very least an outdated and extreme punishment, if it was ever truly practiced in the past. I mean for goodness sakes, the armies that lost at Arausio or the Caudine Forks weren't decimated, and those were far graver defeats than what Spartacus inflicted on the legions of Crassus.

II. That entirely aside, the post is that the audience ought to be repelled. Westeros is backwards, yes. But part of the point is that the series deromanticizes fantasy settings and portrays them as harshly medieval. Surely that doesn't mean the audience approves of, say, setting farms to the torch and murdering peasants?

III. And like I said, even within the context of the show or books, we've not seen another character regarded as good do something like that. Tywin may think nothing of exterminating a house that violated the feudal contract and he may have the law in his side, but we don't think of him as a good guy.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

On one side, we have people complaining that HBO has an obsession with rape. In the other, people complaining that the rape and sacking of Meereen wasn't shown.

I agree with a friend, now. Fans don't know what the want.

[salmonsnake]

Maybe the variety of responses and feelings in this thread serves as evidence that the sequence of events wasn't entirely whitewashed and one-sided.

That is, until the Ser Pounce thread overtakes this one in length and ponderance.

[Koi No Yokan]

On one side, we have people complaining that HBO has an obsession with rape. In the other, people complaining that the rape and sacking of Meereen wasn't shown.

I agree with a friend, now. Fans don't know what the want.

They want to complain.

[Ser Desmond Wine's Bane]

I. It's historically unclear how often decimation was actually used as a punishment given the paucity of reliable historical information on the kingdom and early republic. Our best source for that is Livy, whose primary purpose was moral edification and who delighted in telling stories of the stern virtues of the old Romans. Yet the only attested decimation -/ earlier in the same century in which Livy write -- was regarded with revulsion by the Romans, who were unimpressed by Crassus's decision to invoke what was at the very least an outdated and extreme punishment, if it was ever truly practiced in the past. I mean for goodness sakes, the armies that lost at Arausio or the Caudine Forks weren't decimated, and those were far graver defeats than what Spartacus inflicted on the legions of Crassus.

The humiliation the Legion underwent at the hands of the Samnites at Caudine Forks far outweighed the humiliation of decimation though... It does seem apparent that decimation wasn't particularly about punishment though. It was more about honour and the legion punishing itself for its failings in an attempt to regain that honour. It is, as you say, a murky area, made even more murky by Crassus's legion not being a legion of Rome, but his own personal army.

[C0bR]

That was an iconic shot, it was very well done.

It was iconic in how bad the CGI was.

[Dragon's Bane]

This, fellow forumites, is how to sack a city:

Step 1: Sneak in weapons.

Step 2: Give a speech about freedom.

Step 3: Have a horde of former slaves kill a single unguarded slaver.

Step 4: Congratulations. You have won.

It's not as if there was an abundance of crimes.

[Bastard of the Dreadfort]

Flay them... Flay them all....

[Señor de la Tormenta]

It was iconic in how bad the CGI was.

Glad to read Im not the only one who saw it as a cheap video game scene.

[Roose Seal]

On one side, we have people complaining that HBO has an obsession with rape. In the other, people complaining that the rape and sacking of Meereen wasn't shown.

I agree with a friend, now. Fans don't know what the want.

It could be argued that in this case, showing raping and pillaging would've actually had served a point — unlike the random raping going on at Craster's Keep to show just how evvviiiil those guys are (cause we didn't get that when they mutinied and killed the Lord Commander)

I'd rather they showed no rape at all, but if they really have to, ya know for the "pervert audience", then it might as well be in places where it makes sense.

[Rhaegar I Targaryen]

They want to complain.

:cheers:

Y'all want some cheese to go with your whine :lmao: :lmao:

[Northernmonkey]

I can't believe people are still accusing D+D of whitewashing Dany. They made it perfectly clear that she chose to violently crucify 150 people, even though Baristan warned against it. I think it's fair to say that they're showing the good and bad sides of Dany's character.

[RoamingRonin]

Where was this thread when the little girl was crucified? She wasn't disemboweled like in the books and there was only one child shown. Wasn't nearly as graphic as it should have been. Were the writers uncomfortable with that part, too? I think people would be more uncomfortable with a eviscerated child than a bunch of adults.

Rather than expose Dany for a villain, the show is exposing some of her detractors as hypocrites. Hypercritical hypocrites.