Jump to content

Is there something that you really don't want to see happen in the series?


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, A Song of Ass and Fire said:

I think GRRM did a very good job of making someone who is ultimately a stereotypical evil antagonist sympathetic or at least understandable in the books, but this is difficult to convey in the show.  if Daenerys' origin story was not shown from the beginning from her POV, and this was a more typical fantasy series, we would hear about her evil deeds and growing power, and in one of the later books we would have her telling one of the protagonists her backstory and how she came to be the evil mad dragonqueen.  If done well, the author might be able to get the reader to feel a little sympathy for her, but not think it made her actions excusable.  GRRM did something really neat by making her a POV from the beginning and having her seem like a protagonist in the first book, at least to those not familiar with the fantasy tropes.  I have a feeling the show is going to have to accelerate her descent into evil and exaggerate some of her acts to keep show watchers from being totally confused and conflicted when she comes up against the protagonists later... even among the book readers, there is a sizable minority that expects her to have a happy ending where she is on the same side as the heroes, even after being hit over the head with mass crucifixions, blatant megalomania, and child torture.

Have you read her chapters or the Cliff notes ? This isn't even a matter of debate, saying Daenerys is evil is blatant misreading of the text.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, HairGrowsBack said:

Have you read her chapters or the Cliff notes ? This isn't even a matter of debate, saying Daenerys is evil is blatant misreading of the text.

I don't think she's evil.  I think if Martin was making her a villain protagonist, even a sympathetic villain protagonist, he'd have her performing more deeds that were unambiguously bad in the eyes of the reader - say burning Irri alive to hatch the dragons, or selling the Great Masters and their families into slavery.

I do however, think that she will be viewed as evil, by some of the other protagonists in the story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I don't think she's evil.  I think if Martin was making her a villain protagonist, even a sympathetic villain protagonist, he'd have her performing more deeds that were unambiguously bad in the eyes of the reader - say burning Irri alive to hatch the dragons, or selling the Great Masters and their families into slavery.

I do however, think that she will be viewed as evil, by some of the other protagonists in the story.

She will definitely be  evil in the eyes of many protagonists, but that's not the same as saying Martin is making her a villain, which I don't believe. Like basically every other characters, he's making her a grey, ambivalent character. If she was a villain, she'd have bad intentions (which could or could not be justified by her past), whereas Dany's tragedy is that she has good intentions and a good heart that always come in conflict with her Targaryen heritage and the complexity and difficulty to deal with a large amount of power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

I don't think she's evil.  I think if Martin was making her a villain protagonist, even a sympathetic villain protagonist, he'd have her performing more deeds that were unambiguously bad in the eyes of the reader - say burning Irri alive to hatch the dragons, or selling the Great Masters and their families into slavery.

I do however, think that she will be viewed as evil, by some of the other protagonists in the story.

She had a man's children tortured in front of him to extract information when she wasn't even sure that he knew anything about the crimes he was accused of.  That is pretty evil, as is mass execution by crucifixion.  The books don't point out that there were certainly some innocents among those executed, but since she asked the evil people to provide their own execution victims instead of trying to make sure that those responsible for the child slave killings were the ones executed, a reasonably intelligent person should be able to infer that.  The show had to have a character point that out since there are less reasonably intelligent people among HBO viewers.

Just those two acts alone, regardless of motivation, are evil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't anyone to magically become TPTWP or Azor Ahai.  I want them to earn the name through deeds.  I want people to look back and see who stepped up to help save everyone and then the world create the myth to fit with them.  I guess that is more what I want than what I don't want. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, A Song of Ass and Fire said:

She had a man's children tortured in front of him to extract information when she wasn't even sure that he knew anything about the crimes he was accused of.  That is pretty evil, as is mass execution by crucifixion.  The books don't point out that there were certainly some innocents among those executed, but since she asked the evil people to provide their own execution victims instead of trying to make sure that those responsible for the child slave killings were the ones executed, a reasonably intelligent person should be able to infer that.  The show had to have a character point that out since there are less reasonably intelligent people among HBO viewers.

Just those two acts alone, regardless of motivation, are evil.

And any "reasonably intelligent" reader should be able to realize that by the measure of "they once did something evil" nearly every character is evil.  That's what ambivalent morality is.  People do some bad things and some good things.  They do these bad and good things for bad and good reasons.  And in the end, they endure the consequences of these actions.  Do you want me to go through each individual case?  

Evil actions and evil intentions must be weighed against good acts and good intentions in any ultimate judgement of an individual's character. I certainly would not want to be judged only by the worst thing I ever did - nor would it be fair for me to do the same to you.  

Also most morality systems do take into account intention as an important aspect of the morality of an action.  This is reasonable because, you know, people are not omniscient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Duckfield said:

George should stop trying to make Areo Hotah happen.

It's NOT going to happen.

Oh yeah Areo is the the only POV I don't like. The guy has no opinion about anything, he's so bland he might as well be a statue. I get that he's supposed to be like that but I prefer POVs that offer a perspective on things rather than just stand there and listen to what other more interesting characters have to say. George probably only made him a POV because he couldn't make Doran one as he knew too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

first of all, tyrion targ. i hate it

jon son of rhaegar. i would prefer jon to be ned and ashara's but i know that R+L=J is a reality. i made my peace with it

aegon being real

syrio alive.

jon and daenerys together. but i  think its gonna happen anyway

dany on the throne in the end. i think she should have the throne but be there for a short time, maybe dying in the battle against the ww.

jaime arya davos or sam dying

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Things I do not want to see:

Arya stays with the Faceless Men.

Sansa stays with Littlefinger.

Bran stays in the cave.

Daenerys stays in Essos.

Characters who are dead don't stay dead.  

Someone besides Jon and Young Griff has secret parentage.  Enough already!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, A spoon of knife and fork said:

And any "reasonably intelligent" reader should be able to realize that by the measure of "they once did something evil" nearly every character is evil.  That's what ambivalent morality is.  People do some bad things and some good things.  They do these bad and good things for bad and good reasons.  And in the end, they endure the consequences of these actions.  Do you want me to go through each individual case?  

Evil actions and evil intentions must be weighed against good acts and good intentions in any ultimate judgement of an individual's character. I certainly would not want to be judged only by the worst thing I ever did - nor would it be fair for me to do the same to you.  

Also most morality systems do take into account intention as an important aspect of the morality of an action.  This is reasonable because, you know, people are not omniscient.

Crucified 160+ people.

Tortured a man's children in front of him.

We aren't talking about killing an innocent in a moment of anger or stress, or wrongfully executing a guy you hated because he contributef to the death of your father, or cutting down a child on the orders of your king, or pushing a kid out a window because they saw too much.

Mass crucifixions.

Torturing children.

Some things cannot be excused. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, especially if those intentions lead to you torturing people to death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...