Lack of POV perspective regarding Daenerys

[Traverys]

So, I know there are a ton of topics on Anti- and Pro- Danaerys.  Unfortunately I've never been able to take part of any of these discussions, but maybe one day I will log on and find a chance to voice my opinion on that.  I don't really consider this the place to do so, though I think it's safe to say that she may be one of the most controversial character in the series (and perhaps any fictional work).

However, let's discuss another aspect about her I can't seem to find much focused discussion about:  Is there significance in never seeing her actions and behaviors "in-the-moment" from another POV's perspective? 

For example, we only see Rob and Joffrey (almost polar opposites) from the perspective of other people.  In general, that's a fairly compelling concept because we never really get to know what's going through their mind.  Is Joffrey's actions merely an understandable consequence of the volatile relationship between his parents?  Is Rob really just an immature boy who dreams of a life of adventure, war, and heroism?  Instead, we end up judging their character based on their actions as provided to us through the lenses of other people.  Note that this is quite unique because we often get to see most other POV characters not only through their own narration, but through the narration of others.  For example, we see Cersei, Sansa, Jaime, and Catelyn through Tyrion's eyes, but also get to see their perceptions of Tyrion in their own respective chapters. 

Considering that we get random (yet very compelling) perspectives of "minor" characters (i.e., Damphair, Aerys Oakheart, Asha, etc.), why have we never seen any present tense interactions/behaviors of Daenerys from another's view?  For example, Jorah Mormant, Missandei, or any of her Dothraki followers are never provided with their own chapters, though they've (arguably) had ample opportunity to provide additions to the overall narrative.  However, the two POVs we do get, Barristan and Quentyn, only reflect on their past tense interactions with Daenerys.

It just seems odd to me... and very intentional on GRRM's part.  Imagine having Rob POV chapters and nixing all of the chapters from other POV's that describe him.  Would we think of him the same way?  This leads me to the following questions:

Is GRRM trying to slip something by us?  Is this just mere coincidence and inconsequential?  Discuss.

[SeanF]

2 minutes ago, Traverys said:

So, I know there are a ton of topics on Anti- and Pro- Danaerys.  Unfortunately I've never been able to take part of any of these discussions, but maybe one day I will log on and find a chance to voice my opinion on that.  I don't really consider this the place to do so, though I think it's safe to say that she may be one of the most controversial character in the series (and perhaps any fictional work).

However, let's discuss another aspect about her I can't seem to find much focused discussion about:  Is there significance in never seeing her actions and behaviors "in-the-moment" from another POV's perspective? 

For example, we only see Rob and Joffrey (almost polar opposites) from the perspective of other people.  In general, that's a fairly compelling concept because we never really get to know what's going through their mind.  Is Joffrey's actions merely an understandable consequence of the volatile relationship between his parents?  Is Rob really just an immature boy who dreams of a life of adventure, war, and heroism?  Instead, we end up judging their character based on their actions as provided to us through the lenses of other people.  Note that this is quite unique because we often get to see most other POV characters not only through their own narration, but through the narration of others.  For example, we see Cersei, Sansa, Jaime, and Catelyn through Tyrion's eyes, but also get to see their perceptions of Tyrion in their own respective chapters. 

Considering that we get random (yet very compelling) perspectives of "minor" characters (i.e., Damphair, Aerys Oakheart, Asha, etc.), why have we never seen any present tense interactions/behaviors of Daenerys from another's view?  For example, Jorah Mormant, Missandei, or any of her Dothraki followers are never provided with their own chapters, though they've (arguably) had ample opportunity to provide additions to the overall narrative.  However, the two POVs we do get, Barristan and Quentyn, only reflect on their past tense interactions with Daenerys.

It just seems odd to me... and very intentional on GRRM's part.  Imagine having Rob POV chapters and nixing all of the chapters from other POV's that describe him.  Would we think of him the same way?  This leads me to the following questions:

Is GRRM trying to slip something by us?  Is this just mere coincidence and inconsequential?  Discuss.

I think it is of significance, but I'm not sure yet what the significance is.

Most people are unreliable narrators, to a degree, in this story, if only because their information is imperfect.  One interesting thing I've noticed about Dany is that whereas it's clear, at the beginning of her story, just how horrible Viserys is to her, by the time we get to ADWD, she's starting to view him almost with rose-tinted spectacles.  She also feels immense, and increasing, grief and guilt about his death.  Dany is immensely self-critical, sometimes bordering on self-loathing.

[Traverys]

21 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I think it is of significance, but I'm not sure yet what the significance is.

Most people are unreliable narrators, to a degree, in this story, if only because their information is imperfect.  One interesting thing I've noticed about Dany is that whereas it's clear, at the beginning of her story, just how horrible Viserys is to her, by the time we get to ADWD, she's starting to view him almost with rose-tinted spectacles.  She also feels immense, and increasing, grief and guilt about his death.  Dany is immensely self-critical, sometimes bordering on self-loathing.

I'm not sure what the significance is either!  Hence the topic.

But I do think you have a point about her viewing Viserys with increasingly rose-tinted glasses.  I'm at 80-something percent done re-rereading ADwD and I know her hallucinations are approaching, including another encounter with Viserys.  Perhaps Viserys wasn't entirely unjustified with his treatment of Daenerys?  A compelling thought, though I think most people will tend to agree he was on the far end of hysterical.  But was he?

We only know him based on Daenerys' perspective.  Speaking as the third child of four sons, I can cast my two older brothers in a (likely) exaggerated dark light concerning their treatment of me.  But, conversely, they conceivably saw it as preparing me for the world.  This is not to say that giving your sister a purple-nurple (twisting her nipple) or selling her off to what you would consider a savage (Khal Drogo) is justified, but perhaps there's more of a story than Daenerys is willing (or able) to convey.

[SeanF]

4 minutes ago, Traverys said:

I'm not sure what the significance is either!  Hence the topic.

But I do think you have a point about her viewing Viserys with increasingly rose-tinted glasses.  I'm at 80-something percent done re-rereading ADwD and I know her hallucinations are approaching, including another encounter with Viserys.  Perhaps Viserys wasn't entirely unjustified with his treatment of Daenerys?  A compelling thought, though I think most people will tend to agree he was on the far end of hysterical.  But was he?

We only know him based on Daenerys' perspective.  Speaking as the third child of four sons, I can cast my two older brothers in a (likely) exaggerated dark light concerning their treatment of me.  But, conversely, they conceivably saw it as preparing me for the world.  This is not to say that giving your sister a purple-nurple (twisting her nipple) or selling her off to what you would consider a savage (Khal Drogo) is justified, but perhaps there's more of a story than Daenerys is willing (or able) to convey.

She recalls that there were times in the past when he was kind to her.

OTOH, it seems clear to me he had begun to molest her.  The fact that she makes no reaction when he tells her to undress, and begins groping her, in her first chapter, suggests to me that she was well-used to such behaviour and knew better than to object to it (my own sister would have gone berserk had I done that to her at the age of 13).  I don't doubt that Illyrio was right when he says that Viserys planned to rape her, the night before her wedding.  Had he not sold her to Drogo, I'm sure he'd have raped her at some point.

Then there's his lovely line "I'd let his entire Khalasar fuck you.  All forty thousand of them, and their horses too......" which is not an invention.

[Traverys]

14 minutes ago, SeanF said:

She recalls that there were times in the past when he was kind to her.

OTOH, it seems clear to me he had begun to molest her.  The fact that she makes no reaction when he tells her to undress, and begins groping her, in her first chapter, suggests to me that she was well-used to such behaviour and knew better than to object to it (my own sister would have gone berserk had I done that to her at the age of 13).  I don't doubt that Illyrio was right when he says that Viserys planned to rape her, the night before her wedding.  Had he not sold her to Drogo, I'm sure he'd have raped her at some point.

Then there's his lovely line "I'd let his entire Khalasar fuck you.  All forty thousand of them, and their horses too......" which is not an invention.

Haha, I forgot that he actually said that in the books and not just the show.  There's no arguing with his opinion of her when there's a direct quote like that.

Quote

We go home with an army, sweet sister. With Khal Drogo's army, that is how we go home. And if you must wed him and bed him for that, you will. I’d let his whole khalasar fuck you if need be, sweet sister, all forty thousand men, and their horses too if that was what it took to get my army.

But I'm inclined to see him as a plot device to show us the Targaryen madness in present tense.  We see it through Daenerys' eyes and (perhaps) through Illyrio's conversation with Tyrion.  I say perhaps because we have no reason to believe that Illyrio would say anything true to Tyrion, considering that the majority of the plot is instigated through the use of lies (i.e., Littlefinger saying the dagger belongs to Tyrion).  And Varys and Illyrio are playing for keeps.

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, Traverys said:

Haha, I forgot that he actually said that in the books and not just the show.  There's no arguing with his opinion of her when there's a direct quote like that.

But I'm inclined to see him as a plot device to show us the Targaryen madness in present tense.  We see it through Daenerys' eyes and (perhaps) through Illyrio's conversation with Tyrion.  I say perhaps because we have no reason to believe that Illyrio would say anything true to Tyrion, considering that the majority of the plot is instigated through the use of lies (i.e., Littlefinger saying the dagger belongs to Tyrion).  And Varys and Illyrio are playing for keeps.

Although Barristan thought that Viserys had the "taint" I never saw particular evidence of madness in him.  Cruelty and selfishness for sure.

[Lord Marghoob]

1 minute ago, SeanF said:

Although Barristan thought that Viserys had the "taint" I never saw particular evidence of madness in him.  Cruelty and selfishness for sure.

I strongly disagree. He clearly stated that if Khal Drogo failed to deliver his promise, he'd awake the dragon, while clutching his borrowed sword. Illyrio seemed perplexed (an understandable reaction, considering the relative strength of Viserys and Drogo, not even counting the latter's khalasar) but Viserys did not seem to notice. That's beyond the realm of regular cruelty and selfishness, that borderline madness. 

[SeanF]

1 minute ago, Lord Marghoob said:

I strongly disagree. He clearly stated that if Khal Drogo failed to deliver his promise, he'd awake the dragon, while clutching his borrowed sword. Illyrio seemed perplexed (an understandable reaction, considering the relative strength of Viserys and Drogo, not even counting the latter's khalasar) but Viserys did not seem to notice. That's beyond the realm of regular cruelty and selfishness, that borderline madness. 

"Kings lack the caution of common men." 

People with a massive sense of entitlement can behave in ways that seem irrational to the rest of us.

[Lord Marghoob]

51 minutes ago, SeanF said:

"Kings lack the caution of common men." 

People with a massive sense of entitlement can behave in ways that seem irrational to the rest of us.

Still seems like madness to me, especially considering that Arys possibly shared that massive sense of entitlement when he executed Brandon and Rickard and then called for the heads of Eddard and Robert, thinking he would win easily. 

Plus, the kings lack caution phrase was uttered by Illyrio for Viserys' appeasement. Half the things he said are bullshit, can we really believe that is true? There aren't many other kings who've shown that they lack the caution of common men. 

[Maxxine]

3 hours ago, Traverys said:

I'm not sure what the significance is either!  Hence the topic.

But I do think you have a point about her viewing Viserys with increasingly rose-tinted glasses.  I'm at 80-something percent done re-rereading ADwD and I know her hallucinations are approaching, including another encounter with Viserys.  Perhaps Viserys wasn't entirely unjustified with his treatment of Daenerys?  A compelling thought, though I think most people will tend to agree he was on the far end of hysterical.  But was he?

We only know him based on Daenerys' perspective.  Speaking as the third child of four sons, I can cast my two older brothers in a (likely) exaggerated dark light concerning their treatment of me.  But, conversely, they conceivably saw it as preparing me for the world.  This is not to say that giving your sister a purple-nurple (twisting her nipple) or selling her off to what you would consider a savage (Khal Drogo) is justified, but perhaps there's more of a story than Daenerys is willing (or able) to convey.

As far as the rose-tinted glasses she has for Viserys in Dance, I always chalked that up to he was still her brother and the only family she really ever knew, so it was understandable that she would feel guilt over his death and try to remember him as fondly as possible despite his cruelty. She had to try to hold on to something good from her family and as far she knows Viserys was the only family she had. But idk, how any other perspective could spin Viserys' actions and make us think differently about him. Not too many ways to interpret holding a sword to your sister's pregnant stomach or saying you will thousands of men rape her. Yeah I agree that there are some pieces from her childhood missing that may be important, but I don't think there's too much more to know or understand about Viserys.

In regards to the OP I think you bring up a good point, I never thought about. Idk if it's necessarily significant or just a symptom of Dany being so geographically removed from everyone else. You mention we could've gotten a perspective from Jorah, Missandei, or one of the Dothraki. But I don't think that would have worked. None of these characters are independently significant enough to warrant having POVs IMO. Their POV's only point would be to tell us what Dany's doing and fluff, which would be really disappointing (for an example see Hotah's POVs). I would say Jon is somewhat similar to Dany in this regard obviously to a lesser extent because we see him a lot through other perspectives before he leaves for the Wall and right when he arrives at the Wall and a few pages from Sam in the beginning of Feast and Mel somewhere in Dance. But I would say for 90% of Jon's actions we're getting just his view. Imagine if we got Ygritte's or the Marsh's perspective, how different we may feel. So I think it has more to do with proximity to other important characters than GRRM trying to get something past us. Btw, hopefully we're about to see Dany from Tyrion's view, which should be interesting.

[Blind Beth the Cat Lady]

Re: Viserys

- I'm 100% not comfortable with any assertion that his cruel moments to Dany were in any was justified. There's simply no justification for that.

- However I do think we have a pretty incomplete picture of Viserys and are encouraged to see him as "bad" when there is a lot more to the story. In my "Illyrio's Fingers" essay (below) I propose that Illyrio may have largely been the one responsible for driving Viserys into a state of unbalanced paranoia so that D&V would more easily fall in with I's plans.

- Also notable: In Clash Dany observes that Viserys really took his major turn for the worse after they sold their mother's crown. Dany interprets this as V. losing his last souvenier of Targaryen pride and being driven crazy by the humbling effects of becoming the beggar king. However, I think for Viserys the emphasis there may not have been on "crown" but "mother's". He was old enough to remember their mother and Jaime's account of Rhaella during the last days of Aery's reign gives the impression that she was quite close to her son. Surely her death had a tremendous effect on him, especially with no other close family members around. We don't know what his relationship with Ser Willem Darry might have been. Selling Rhaella's crown probably felt like losing his mother all over again in a way. I think attributing V's rough nature to grief over his mother paints a rather more tragic picture than viewing him as someone going nuts because of his own delusional pride. I also think it's a bit closer to the truth.

 

Re: Dany

I don't think GRRM is purposely trying to slip things past us by not giving a POV near Dany. Largely I think it's a result of the narrative structure--Dany is far removed from the other main characters, and there's no point inventing a POV character just to have eyes on Dany when Dany herself is a POV. We also see people reacting around her a lot. Unless she's constantly hallucinating, this gives us a good idea of how others see her. And they seem to see her the way the fandom does--very controversial. Some think she's terrible, others think she's the best. Even those closest to her have trouble giving a lot of constructive criticism because there is so much innate bias towards young women with power in our/their society. Yet there is certainly a lot of criticism that she might benefit from hearing.

I think an attentive reader can easily see that Dany has a lot of flaws even though she always tries to do what she thinks is best for her people (whomever she perceives as her people at that moment--her brother, House Targaryen, the Dothraki, the freed slaves, the Meerenese). And I think GRRM chose to mainly tell Dany's story from her own POV because what's going on inside her head is the most important aspect of her character IRT the larger story. (TBH I spent GoT thinking Dany was obviously the main character of the series and was rather confused when I first heard other fans saying that GRRM "killed off his main character." What? Dany didn't actually die in that fire...:-P)

That said, I'm dying to see Tyrion and Dany's POV of each other. That will be very interesting.

[Jak Scaletongue]

3 hours ago, Traverys said:

I'm not sure what the significance is either!  Hence the topic.

But I do think you have a point about her viewing Viserys with increasingly rose-tinted glasses.  I'm at 80-something percent done re-rereading ADwD and I know her hallucinations are approaching, including another encounter with Viserys.  Perhaps Viserys wasn't entirely unjustified with his treatment of Daenerys?  A compelling thought, though I think most people will tend to agree he was on the far end of hysterical.  But was he?

We only know him based on Daenerys' perspective.  Speaking as the third child of four sons, I can cast my two older brothers in a (likely) exaggerated dark light concerning their treatment of me.  But, conversely, they conceivably saw it as preparing me for the world.  This is not to say that giving your sister a purple-nurple (twisting her nipple) or selling her off to what you would consider a savage (Khal Drogo) is justified, but perhaps there's more of a story than Daenerys is willing (or able) to convey.

As a mother of a 6 year old - can you imagine being 8 years old and being responsible for a baby?  Yes, he had Darry, and help to do the little things, but still - having help to do the little things only helps to a certain degree when you realize you're responsible for another life!  Can you imagine how frustrating a 5 year old would be to a 13 year old?  A 5 year old is frustrating when you're a grown ass adult - for a 13 year old who's still learning how to cope without Darry, who's NOT a grown ass adult, who's likely barely hit puberty himself?!  I'd say his treatment was around 50/50 - some of it is understandable, I think, given their circumstances.  He was an emotional, hormonal teenager dealing with a child - most adults get reasonably frustrated at children, I think it's safe to say (and even understand) that a hormonal teenager is not going to react appropriately when faced with a frustrating little sister!  So I think it's highly likely that, while there are undeniably horrible things he's done to her (I agree he would have raped her eventually, and he certainly molested her), under the circumstances a lot of frustration and anger between the elder and younger is likely and normal.  And I'm just thinking and comparing to my interactions with younger members of my family - and we were a big family that got along (I'm including cousins, cause we were that close!) There's 4 of us within 2 years of each other (3 boys and me), then there's Jill, who's 8 years younger than me (and a girl, so I was stuck with taking care of her, never the boys god forbid) - f**k was she godawful annoying and frustrating when I was in that hormonal teenage stage and she was a child, I can only imagine how frustrating and angry a boy who's already got anger issues (among others) would react!  I didn't always act appropriately when Jill was bugging me, and I'm betting a good chunk of time Viserys acted like that too - nothing particularly noteworthy *bad* but certainly not the way one would expect a *parent* to react.  So some things (getting angry when she expresses a desire to be a sailor) I can understand as frustration for a responsibility a kid his age isn't "supposed" to have and frustration over the kid herself (kids ARE frustrating).  Other things are clear cut BAD SHIT.  And that BAD SHIT was definitely taking a turn for the worse, as Blind Beth points out, likely after having to sell the crown.  Basically I can give him a pass at rude, inappropriate, angry remarks and words that he didn't really filter before saying (I've said some pretty horrible shit to my brother and cousins, and they've said it all too) but it's the physical shit he doesn't get a pass on (except maybe the odd smack across the head - all kids need those once in a while once their heads are firmly attached to their necks!).  The reason I'd give him a bit of a pass on the verbal shit is because if their mother/parents/Darry had been alive, he'd have gotten a smack and been told to apologize by a responsible adult.  They had no responsible adults to teach Viserys what is and is not appropriate - how is he supposed to raise a kid "properly" when he's got no framework to use?  He's not her parent, he IS trying and clearly failing, but how can we fault him for failing at something he had no idea how to do?  That's like getting angry at your doctor for failing to fix your car properly!  All he's got is what he remembers from his own, very dysfunctional, family.  Of course he'd fail.  But failure did NOT need to include groping his sister.  So he gets a pass for some of it, in my book, but that still doesn't help his final score because his bad shit was BAD and not at all the logical result of his failure as a "parent."

[The Mountain That Flies]

I'd say there are two many reasons for us never seing Dany trough someone else's present-tense POV;

1. Isolation. The lack of perspective on Dany is likely a deliberate choice to give us a more meta-textual understanding of how alone she is. Even the characters who advise and support Dany do so while revering her, while other monarchs (Robb and Joffrey especially) have people whose honest assessments of them we're privy to. Dany knows and feels this in her chapters, and it's part of what gives her so much concern; she has no framework for knowing if she is making the right decisions. By denying us POV's directly looking at her, Martin puts us in a similar position of having to figure it out for ourselves.

2. Plot. There's really no story-based need to have other characters give their internal thoughts on what Dany is doing until Dance, because up until then it's a pretty straitforward story. It's only when things get bogged down in Mereen that we have too many things going on for just her to see, so that's when more POV's arrive.

[Sigella]

Viserys:

I think a lot of his behavior can be explained by two things, the first being that Dany is all family Viserys has left so marrying her off leaves him all alone. The second is that Dany & Vissy, prior to Illyrio, believes that they would/had to/should marry each other. So I can sort of feel for him unraveling in the Dothraki Sea, slowly loosing the only person who really matters to him. I'm in no way defending him, but I do feel for him.

He is not just giving Dany up but also their Targ incest-traditions which most likely irks him as well. (why else not be happy over niece or nephew?)

 

Dany: 

I'm not sure, but I think the lack of intersecting POV's might be GRRM playing with our expectations. I mean in Dany he has constructed one of the coolest heroines in literature. Dany is what sold the series to me "...story of dragons and giants... *yawn* WHAT?! WHAT?! A GIRL GETS THE DRAGONS OMFG MUST READ NOW"

Maybe its something GRRM does to goad the haters along? And then when they read the last page of Spring and Dany's still not turned Maegor the Cruel we all get to mock them. If only... 

[Blind Beth the Cat Lady]

7 minutes ago, Sigella said:

Viserys:

I think a lot of his behavior can be explained by two things, the first being that Dany is all family Viserys has left so marrying her off leaves him all alone. The second is that Dany & Vissy, prior to Illyrio, believes that they would/had to/should marry each other. So I can sort of feel for him unraveling in the Dothraki Sea, slowly loosing the only person who really matters to him. I'm in no way defending him, but I do feel for him.

He is not just giving Dany up but also their Targ incest-traditions which most likely irks him as well. (why else not be happy over niece or nephew?)

 

Dany: 

I'm not sure, but I think the lack of intersecting POV's might be GRRM playing with our expectations. I mean in Dany he has constructed one of the coolest heroines in literature. Dany is what sold the series to me "...story of dragons and giants... *yawn* WHAT?! WHAT?! A GIRL GETS THE DRAGONS OMFG MUST READ NOW"

Maybe its something GRRM does to goad the haters along? And then when they read the last page of Spring and Dany's still not turned Maegor the Cruel we all get to mock them. If only... 

Haha, totally on the Dany stuff. If not for Dany and Arya I would have left Game of Thrones in the airport. :-P 

[Traverys]

5 hours ago, Lord Marghoob said:

I strongly disagree. He clearly stated that if Khal Drogo failed to deliver his promise, he'd awake the dragon, while clutching his borrowed sword. Illyrio seemed perplexed (an understandable reaction, considering the relative strength of Viserys and Drogo, not even counting the latter's khalasar) but Viserys did not seem to notice. That's beyond the realm of regular cruelty and selfishness, that borderline madness. 

Yes, I agree this is somewhat indicative of madness, or at least a distorted perception of reality.  I don't think Khal Drogo would wither in fear when threatened with a purple-nurple.

 

3 hours ago, Maxxine said:

As far as the rose-tinted glasses she has for Viserys in Dance, I always chalked that up to he was still her brother and the only family she really ever knew, so it was understandable that she would feel guilt over his death and try to remember him as fondly as possible despite his cruelty. She had to try to hold on to something good from her family and as far she knows Viserys was the only family she had. But idk, how any other perspective could spin Viserys' actions and make us think differently about him. Not too many ways to interpret holding a sword to your sister's pregnant stomach or saying you will thousands of men rape her. Yeah I agree that there are some pieces from her childhood missing that may be important, but I don't think there's too much more to know or understand about Viserys.

In regards to the OP I think you bring up a good point, I never thought about. Idk if it's necessarily significant or just a symptom of Dany being so geographically removed from everyone else. You mention we could've gotten a perspective from Jorah, Missandei, or one of the Dothraki. But I don't think that would have worked. None of these characters are independently significant enough to warrant having POVs IMO. Their POV's only point would be to tell us what Dany's doing and fluff, which would be really disappointing (for an example see Hotah's POVs). I would say Jon is somewhat similar to Dany in this regard obviously to a lesser extent because we see him a lot through other perspectives before he leaves for the Wall and right when he arrives at the Wall and a few pages from Sam in the beginning of Feast and Mel somewhere in Dance. But I would say for 90% of Jon's actions we're getting just his view. Imagine if we got Ygritte's or the Marsh's perspective, how different we may feel. So I think it has more to do with proximity to other important characters than GRRM trying to get something past us. Btw, hopefully we're about to see Dany from Tyrion's view, which should be interesting.

I think you have a point concerning her grief.  People do that at funerals all the time.  Someone's death triggers something in us that only seems to remember the good despite the bad things a person has done.  Perhaps because we're all destined to die in the end and we would like people to do the same for us.

To your second point, I think the use of "fluff" minor characters in other regions of the world are sort of the point.  Why hasn't he used any that are in Essos?  I don't mind Hotah's chapters in the end, but I can totally see how anyone else would find them annoying or yawn-worthy.  A sand-snake would be a bit more compelling.  But hopefully Tyrion will enlighten us with his wit and jaded view of the world!

But yeah, I think it's a pretty fair point that we don't see much of Jon from another's perspective past the first book.  Maybe some memories, but not much beyond that.  But part of being a man of the knight's watch is isolation.  Daenerys has people all around her in Essos, it's not like it's desolate or  unpopulated.

 

3 hours ago, Jak Scaletongue said:

As a mother of a 6 year old - can you imagine being 8 years old and being responsible for a baby?  Yes, he had Darry, and help to do the little things, but still - having help to do the little things only helps to a certain degree when you realize you're responsible for another life!  Can you imagine how frustrating a 5 year old would be to a 13 year old?  A 5 year old is frustrating when you're a grown ass adult - for a 13 year old who's still learning how to cope without Darry, who's NOT a grown ass adult, who's likely barely hit puberty himself?!  I'd say his treatment was around 50/50 - some of it is understandable, I think, given their circumstances.  He was an emotional, hormonal teenager dealing with a child - most adults get reasonably frustrated at children, I think it's safe to say (and even understand) that a hormonal teenager is not going to react appropriately when faced with a frustrating little sister!  So I think it's highly likely that, while there are undeniably horrible things he's done to her (I agree he would have raped her eventually, and he certainly molested her), under the circumstances a lot of frustration and anger between the elder and younger is likely and normal.  And I'm just thinking and comparing to my interactions with younger members of my family - and we were a big family that got along (I'm including cousins, cause we were that close!) There's 4 of us within 2 years of each other (3 boys and me), then there's Jill, who's 8 years younger than me (and a girl, so I was stuck with taking care of her, never the boys god forbid) - f**k was she godawful annoying and frustrating when I was in that hormonal teenage stage and she was a child, I can only imagine how frustrating and angry a boy who's already got anger issues (among others) would react!  I didn't always act appropriately when Jill was bugging me, and I'm betting a good chunk of time Viserys acted like that too - nothing particularly noteworthy *bad* but certainly not the way one would expect a *parent* to react.  So some things (getting angry when she expresses a desire to be a sailor) I can understand as frustration for a responsibility a kid his age isn't "supposed" to have and frustration over the kid herself (kids ARE frustrating).  Other things are clear cut BAD SHIT.  And that BAD SHIT was definitely taking a turn for the worse, as Blind Beth points out, likely after having to sell the crown.  Basically I can give him a pass at rude, inappropriate, angry remarks and words that he didn't really filter before saying (I've said some pretty horrible shit to my brother and cousins, and they've said it all too) but it's the physical shit he doesn't get a pass on (except maybe the odd smack across the head - all kids need those once in a while once their heads are firmly attached to their necks!).  The reason I'd give him a bit of a pass on the verbal shit is because if their mother/parents/Darry had been alive, he'd have gotten a smack and been told to apologize by a responsible adult.  They had no responsible adults to teach Viserys what is and is not appropriate - how is he supposed to raise a kid "properly" when he's got no framework to use?  He's not her parent, he IS trying and clearly failing, but how can we fault him for failing at something he had no idea how to do?  That's like getting angry at your doctor for failing to fix your car properly!  All he's got is what he remembers from his own, very dysfunctional, family.  Of course he'd fail.  But failure did NOT need to include groping his sister.  So he gets a pass for some of it, in my book, but that still doesn't help his final score because his bad shit was BAD and not at all the logical result of his failure as a "parent."

I think you bring an interesting dimension to this discussion.  I've worked with school-aged children for four years and one thing is abundantly clear:  they can be cruel.  Is it their fault?  Not necessarily, considering they are still developing human beings.  In more ways than one, children exhibit our baser instincts that we self-correct as we age and gain more wisdom.  However, there are some actions that are inherently much worse (and usually telling of far worse afflictions...) and not excusable.  Usually a child has a parent to teach them (through whatever means of discipline) what is not acceptable.  Considering Viserys' rank as a prince, anything less than another member of royalty wouldn't have been very compelling of a disciplinarian to Viserys.  If anything can be said of Viserys (and, in the end, Daenerys), it's that he has a sense of entitlement.  How they approach that entitlement is abundantly different, though.

Do I think GRRM is learned enough to make Viserys this intricate of a character?  I would venture to say no.  Viserys is a static character versus dynamic.

2 hours ago, The Mountain That Flies said:

I'd say there are two many reasons for us never seing Dany trough someone else's present-tense POV;

1. Isolation. The lack of perspective on Dany is likely a deliberate choice to give us a more meta-textual understanding of how alone she is. Even the characters who advise and support Dany do so while revering her, while other monarchs (Robb and Joffrey especially) have people whose honest assessments of them we're privy to. Dany knows and feels this in her chapters, and it's part of what gives her so much concern; she has no framework for knowing if she is making the right decisions. By denying us POV's directly looking at her, Martin puts us in a similar position of having to figure it out for ourselves.

2. Plot. There's really no story-based need to have other characters give their internal thoughts on what Dany is doing until Dance, because up until then it's a pretty straitforward story. It's only when things get bogged down in Mereen that we have too many things going on for just her to see, so that's when more POV's arrive.

I appreciate you numbering off your points.  Helps keep me organized!

1.  She is really not that isolated.  It's not like she's at the wall!  Though, of course, the wall is a bit more populated these days.  Anyways, she's made it her business to become involved in the politics of Essos (namely slavery), but we never see much perspective of a natives of Essos.  For a series that thrives on its depiction of gray vs grey morality, we do seem to be only getting information from a very skewed (which we all are a victim of) POV.  What's up with that?  That's a way of rephrasing my original question, but I think your argument is clearly valid.  I just happen to disagree a bit.

2.  Though it's hard to argue this until the series is complete and we know all the POVs we get... do we really consider all the POVs to be necessary?  The Damphair?  Hotah?  Oakheart?  Jorah has been there since the beginning, and, in the end, I quite like Ser Mormont.  Why not indulge us with a native (or transplants,,, minus Arya) from Essos?  Even Illyrio when escorting Tyrion to the Griffs.  I still believe this is somehow significant, but maintain I don't know why.  GRRM is a very intentional author.  But maybe Tyrion will prove all these arguments moot when we finally get to see Daenerys through another person's eyes.  Perhaps he's been saving this for Tyrion since the beginning?

 

1 hour ago, Sigella said:

Viserys:

I think a lot of his behavior can be explained by two things, the first being that Dany is all family Viserys has left so marrying her off leaves him all alone. The second is that Dany & Vissy, prior to Illyrio, believes that they would/had to/should marry each other. So I can sort of feel for him unraveling in the Dothraki Sea, slowly loosing the only person who really matters to him. I'm in no way defending him, but I do feel for him.

He is not just giving Dany up but also their Targ incest-traditions which most likely irks him as well. (why else not be happy over niece or nephew?)

 

Dany: 

I'm not sure, but I think the lack of intersecting POV's might be GRRM playing with our expectations. I mean in Dany he has constructed one of the coolest heroines in literature. Dany is what sold the series to me "...story of dragons and giants... *yawn* WHAT?! WHAT?! A GIRL GETS THE DRAGONS OMFG MUST READ NOW"

Maybe its something GRRM does to goad the haters along? And then when they read the last page of Spring and Dany's still not turned Maegor the Cruel we all get to mock them. If only... 

 

1 hour ago, Blind Beth the Cat Lady said:

Haha, totally on the Dany stuff. If not for Dany and Arya I would have left Game of Thrones in the airport. :-P 

I agree on the Arya stuff!  She's probably my favorite (living) character.  I'm hopeful for her outcome.  I remember GRRM saying his wife threatened to divorce him if she died, haha... not that the threat would stop him. 

Anyways, Daenerys... I mean, the fact I never refer to her as Dany should be quite telling...  I'm a (male) feminist through and through.  There's nothing I love more than empowered women that kick ass, takes names, and triumph through sheer force of their own will.  Perhaps that's why I don't mind Cersei at all, though I'd never describe her as an intelligent (or good) person.

I was actually introduced to the series because my close friends told me I would love ASoIaF because of one strong female protagonist.  They were absolutely shocked when I said I didn't care for her beyond her story arc in the first book.  Don't get me wrong... I was rooting for Daenerys in the first novel!  Beyond that, there's just something about her I just can't seem to admire... or even stomach.  I know the common argument is that she's young and still developing, but I think Arya is a more compelling female figure.  Daenerys uses her gender as a tool while Arya views it as incidental, at best.  If Daenerys were ugly, I don't think she would have half as many followers as she does now... and I think that's quite telling... and quite unfeminist.  Perhaps her cause would be much better if she were of below average appearance... 

Read Till We Have Faces (C.S. Lewis) to see my point about a woman being more than her appearance.  There's no Lion Jesus, I promise.

 

Also just wanted to say thanks for all the respectful discussion of opinions we're sharing here!  What a great community! :]

[Sigella]

2 hours ago, Blind Beth the Cat Lady said:

Haha, totally on the Dany stuff. If not for Dany and Arya I would have left Game of Thrones in the airport. :-P 

Thoose two was what got me through the Brienne-chapters... 

47 minutes ago, Traverys said:

(snip)

I agree on the Arya stuff!  She's probably my favorite (living) character.  I'm hopeful for her outcome.  I remember GRRM saying his wife threatened to divorce him if she died, haha... not that the threat would stop him. 

Anyways, Daenerys... I mean, the fact I never refer to her as Dany should be quite telling...  I'm a (male) feminist through and through.  There's nothing I love more than empowered women that kick ass, takes names, and triumph through sheer force of their own will.  Perhaps that's why I don't mind Cersei at all, though I'd never describe her as an intelligent (or good) person.

I was actually introduced to the series because my close friends told me I would love ASoIaF because of one strong female protagonists.  They were absolutely shocked when I said I didn't care for her beyond her story arc in the first book.  Don't get me wrong... I was rooting for Daenerys in the first novel!  Beyond that, there's just something about her I just can't seem to admire... or even stomach.  I know the common argument is that she's young and still developing, but I think Arya is a more compelling female figure.  Daenerys uses her gender as a tool while Arya views it as incidental, as best.  if Daenerys were ugly, I don't think she would have half as many followers as she does now... and I think that's quite telling.

I love reading Cersei because she has these mean thoughts about people which I greatly enjoy, and I love reading Arya because she has this serial killing issue which I find fascinating (and kind of justified). So its kind of weird that I like Dany, because she is so not a typical character for me to like.

 

I suspect you might not be as "feminist" as you think are Felicia.

 

Sure if she was ugly Drogo wouldn't have married her and thus not prompting Illyrio to give her the dragon eggs (he might have given her them anyhow).

And Xaro might not have let her into Qarth if she was ugly (but he was gay and wanted dragons so its a big if).

Daario is the only one of her followers that explicitly say that he fights for beauty and how many is the storm crows? Not enough to say that she's dependent on them, surely.

[Traverys]

1 hour ago, Sigella said:

Thoose two was what got me through the Brienne-chapters... 

I love reading Cersei because she has these mean thoughts about people which I greatly enjoy, and I love reading Arya because she has this serial killing issue which I find fascinating (and kind of justified). So its kind of weird that I like Dany, because she is so not a typical character for me to like.

 

I suspect you might not be as "feminist" as you think are Felicia.

 

Sure if she was ugly Drogo wouldn't have married her and thus not prompting Illyrio to give her the dragon eggs (he might have given her them anyhow).

And Xaro might not have let her into Qarth if she was ugly (but he was gay and wanted dragons so its a big if).

Daario is the only one of her followers that explicitly say that he fights for beauty and how many is the storm crows? Not enough to say that she's dependent on them, surely.

I think you indicate some fine points.  And, I hate to say the Brienne chapters were (mostly) quite dull...  and she's also the kind of character that should be right up my alley.

Also, I think we can add Jorah to the list of people enthralled by her beauty, though it seems pretty clear he was originally attracted to the opportunity of being pardoned if she sits the throne (or pardoned for working for Varys if he had gone through with her assassination).  But why didn't Jorah go through with it?  Her wisdom and astute sense for leading people?  Hardly.  We see how relying purely on aesthetics resulted for characters like Sansa (Joffrey) and Tyrion (Shae). 

However, I do have to refute your claim that I'm not a feminist.  Pretty offensive, if I can be honest.  Can't say I've ever met a female feminist that didn't despise the fact that women are evaluated based on their appearance rather than character, as men often are.   Do the people that look up to Daenerys do so because she is a wise and prudent monarch?  Is her silver hair, purple eyes, and ample bosom not factored in by all the men that seem to rally to her claim?

What's admirable about Brienne is that she can (and has) defend herself.  Daenerys relies on the people (i.e., men) around her to do so.  Even her dragons, which are all named after men.  Let's not get into an argument on dragons and gender, since even the maesters seem to argue on that one.  She's lived with savages and never took it upon herself to learn anything savage.  Of course, I think Ned Stark really skewed (intentionally) our perspective about people who order executions but don't have the ability or stomach to carry out the sentence themselves.  In the end: Very anti-feminist. 

She even wears her Quarthian dress to turn heads she's trying to sway.  Is a femme fatale really progressive to equalization between the sexes?  That's like saying Ginger Spice (I'm a 90's child) actually did something for gender equality while dressing proactively and banking on her own sexuality.  Is that really progressive for women or just using the same strategy used since caveman days?

But this isn't supposed to be an anti- or pro- Daenerys thread so I'll stop there.

It's suposed to be about the choice of GRRM to never show us through any lense but her own.

[Alaynsa Starne]

I think it's possible that we don't get an external pov of Dany because GRRM intends to revert our expectations and/or opinion of her when she gets to Westeros. She's supposed to be a conquering savior. It's possible that our Westerosi characters will view her as the exact opposite, and I think if we had gotten used to seeing Dany from the outside it would ruin that effect. The only reason it now feels tortured is because the series carried on much longer than GRRM initially planned.

[Traverys]

11 minutes ago, Alaynsa Starne said:

I think it's possible that we don't get an external pov of Dany because GRRM intends to revert our expectations and/or opinion of her when she gets to Westeros. She's supposed to be a conquering savior. It's possible that our Westerosi characters will view her as the exact opposite, and I think if we had gotten used to seeing Dany from the outside it would ruin that effect. The only reason it now feels tortured is because the series carried on much longer than GRRM initially planned.

I think I totally agree with this.  Considering how war-torn Westeros already is... imagining her swooping in on a dragon and fighting for her claim will suddenly turn her into an antagonist.  We already see that the smallfolk are the ones that suffer the most during these games of thrones and power.  They are the ones pillaged and raped, they are the ones involuntarily recruited in levies, they are the ones that are starved when there is only enough food to feed the lords. 

There are few pure antagonists in this series.  Every person acts for the good of some people at the expense of others.  I think even Cersei has redeeming qualities where her children are concerned.  How does one judge a mother other than her instinctual desire to protect her own children?  But let's not get distracted by her irrational choices she makes due to this.

I think at this point in time we see Daenerys as a protagonist, but how can she be a protagonist in Westerosi eyes when her dragons are set loose on Westeros?  Assuming she can control them beyond some kind of lame deus ex machina.