Jump to content

Archived

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

Armand Gargalen

What is wrong with Daenrys´ character

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Armand Gargalen said:

I am not reacting strongly to her using dragons in battle either. Of course anyone with a wish for the Iron Throne would have used them. What I am objecting strongly is to the artificial divide the showrunners are trying to force feed us in order to prove she is both fierce and kind: using dragon on civilians is evil at Cersei´s level, using them on enemy soldiers is perfectly justified. And you know why I do not buy it? Because,as the show has already established in this same season, this soldiers are also civilians, albeit forcefully conscripted ones, normal guys whose main desire is to return home with their families. So burning them and showing no remorse or doubt whatsoever is totally out of character for any decent human being.

It was perfectly reasonable to roast those soldiers.  They are the enemy.  The Tarlys did the same to the Tyrells.  Those same soldiers killed other soldiers.  There are no innocents.  Those soldiers that died on that battle field got from the Dothraki what they gave the Tyrells earlier. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, yes, yes. I agree with the OP completely. Dany struggles at times with the choices she makes which is one of GRRM's main themes in the entire story. I understand it's all internal but they could have rectified that on screen by just adding a couple scenes throughout the series where she discusses her feelings and justifications for her actions. But instead we just have this supposed "girl power" nonsense where she just goes around blowing shit up all the time rarely showing any emotion other than pure stoicism, even in private.

And on a side note, I believe Emilia Clarke gets a little too much flak for this. We saw back in the first season that Clarke was able to play decent emotion when allowed. It's the writers who decided once she got her dragons they were just going to focus solely on her "badassness" because, you know, girl power and stuff. They did the exact same thing to the Sand Snakes only the Sand Snakes didn't have the luxury of a nice back story like Dany.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/18/2017 at 3:34 PM, darmody said:

Dany was responsible. She used Drogon just as Jon used a sword. 

People get hung up on Ned's line about the man who gives the order carrying out the execution himself. But cutting off heads isn't easy. Remember how much trouble Robb had with the Carstark?

Now imagine little Dany swinging a big old sword on not one but two full-grown men. They could be there for hours. 

yeah and i dont think  dany has ever held a sward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bowen Marsh said:

It was perfectly reasonable to roast those soldiers.  They are the enemy.  The Tarlys did the same to the Tyrells.  Those same soldiers killed other soldiers.  There are no innocents.  Those soldiers that died on that battle field got from the Dothraki what they gave the Tyrells earlier. 

I never said they were innocents, because I am not discussing the morality of the soldiers. But Daenerys should know, as any educated Westerosi should, that the bulk of the army are CONSCRIPTED PEASANTS. Some of them may have done terrible things during battle, some other may have cowered in fear and horror and prayed for everything to end and for no commander to notice they are not really fighting, but that is beyond the point. The point is that the choice that Daenerys gave them is not so different to the one the Lannisters did: fight for me or die.

And once again, regardless whether the use of dragons is justified, what is not what I am trying to discuss, a humane sensitive person would feel bad about doing it, even if they can convince herself that it was what had to be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Heathen Librarian said:

And on a side note, I believe Emilia Clarke gets a little too much flak for this. We saw back in the first season that Clarke was able to play decent emotion when allowed. It's the writers who decided once she got her dragons they were just going to focus solely on her "badassness" because, you know, girl power and stuff. They did the exact same thing to the Sand Snakes only the Sand Snakes didn't have the luxury of a nice back story like Dany.

I don´t know much about Emilia Clarke´s work outside GOT, but I am quite sure she is not to blame for this mess. For starters, because if it really were her fault and the showrunners were disappointed by her performances, giving that she is one the top three characters in the show, they would have had a serious talk and looked for ways to improve her acting.

I have the gut feeling that she is directed to act like that, and most of her deadpan expressions look odd not because she is a bad actress, but because the spectators are left wanting for a deeper feeling to be displayed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, cade said:

Your comparison is totally fallacious because she had no control over Drogon at that point. It was established in season 6, if not late season 5 when he rescued her, that they have a telepathic connection that did not exist before. Now she has such control over him that he often does what she wants without her even having to tell him. She still said 'dracarys,' but without her even verbalizing anything to him he knew when to roar at the prisoners and he knew exactly which ones to burn. 

My example with the little girl maybe not exactly correct (it was done on purpose, in case you didn't understand that). It doesn't change anything: using dragon as a weapon is not the same as taking responsibility for your actions when you are actually swinging the sword, which was my original point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, darmody said:

Back in Mereen Dany held herself responsible for the actions of rogue Drogon. That's why she locked up the other two dragons when the shepherd brought in his dead kid. If she couldn't control them, she wouldn't have them running wild. 

I'm not suggesting Dany is "one whole with" Drogon. Drogon is her instrument. You don't necessarily become a beast simply by mastering a beast and having it do your bidding. 

As for Ramsey, his problem wasn't that he used dogs. Plenty of people do, and it's perfectly acceptable in our society for the police, for instance, to train dogs to attack people. The problem we have with Ramsey is that he killed the wrong people, with excessive brutality. If it was also by the wrong method, well, that's secondary and beside my point anyway. 

Ramsey obviously was perfectly capable of beheading men with a sword and his own two hands. Dany isn't. If she retrained Ramsey's dogs to do her bidding I'd say the same thing. She would be carrying out the execution herself, because she would be using dogs as her instrument. 

Sort of like Sansa did to Ramsey himself. Not that that scene had even the pretense of legality, but I don't think many people would say Sansa wasn't taking responsibility for his death. 

Granted, Dany could pick another method, one she is capable of carrying out. Flipping a switch to hang a man, for instance. But that's a question of method, not of agency. 

My example with the little girl maybe not exactly correct (it was done on purpose, in case you didn't understand that). It doesn't change anything: using dragon as a weapon is not the same as taking responsibility for your actions when you are actually swinging the sword, which was my original point.

P.S. Please, don't answer to this post, since I am not going to answer back - I am not going to make change your mind. For the thousand times I am convinced that it is better just read the threads (which I've been doing for years before this season came) rather than intervene in the discussion and tell my opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with Daenerys's character is HBO. She's written and directed as a one dimensional Hot CEO. She's ambitious,cold, disciplined, poker faced, professional and ruthlessly goal oriented. Because that's what makes a woman a "badass" or a "feminist" icon.

From a few behind the scene clips it's quite clear that Emilia is directed to play Daenerys this way. It's not her being a crappy actor. She is far from the best actress of her generation or of the show, but she is decent when she is given usable material (see season 1, that one other movie I've seen her in). She is also a very different person than a Daenerys and it seems like she finds it more and more difficult to find this Daenerys the show is writing in herself. 

What is even sadder than this is that ALL main female characters (Cersei, Arya, Sansa) are variation for this same basic equation. And the show has taken this to the level where their actions, their facial expressions and even their goddamn costumes are roughly the same. It's awful to watch. And Daenerys is the worst to watch because she was my little favorite in season one and now she is a bad cliche . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/17/2017 at 6:33 AM, Armand Gargalen said:

Hi all, 

I have been having gripes with the way the show has recently portrayed Daenerys´ character and I think this reached really low point this last episode. After some debating in this forum and at home, I think I have sorted out my thoughts regarding this issue, and I would like to expose them.

To start with, I must admit I consider myself a book, not show follower. I started reading the series almost 20 years ago and I am still fascinated by them. I have always loved Daenerys´ character, who became my favorite since the beginning. So I will start with my view of her from the books and then will proceed to analyze how she has been portrayed in the show.

I find Daenerys´arch in the book fascinating. She has been shown from the beginning to be a kind, sensitive person, who displays honest and sincere concern for the welfare or other people, not just people she knows, but also random strangers. At the same time, she has been kind of "brainwashed" by her brother about Targaryen  right to rule the Seven Kingdoms, which she never questioned and challenged.

It was her kind heart what drove her to liberate the slaves at Astapor and later Yunkai and Mereen. It was also what made her decide to stay at Mereen and try to rule, thus becoming a Mother of the People, not just Mother of Dragons. 

Sadly, and partly because of her trusting, kind nature, she has suffered serious betrayals and disappointments along the way. These experiences have hardened her, and made her make some ruthless decisions, chiefly among them crucifying the slavers´relatives after taking Mereen. All the while, she has been conflicted between her desire to become a merciful ruler at Slaver Bay and her desire to obtain the Iron Throne. 

Her arch reached a climax at the end of ADWD, with the poisoning attempt and the remaining slaver cities breaking the peace and attacking Mereen. Last time we saw her, at the Dothraki Sea, she seemed to have made the choice to embrace her Targaryen/Dragon side, and I am really looking forward to see how this pans out, specially once she finds out another Targaryen claimant is on, or about to be on the Iron Throne. So, IMHO, GRRM has made an excellent job of telling a story about how sometimes people with genuine good intentions can make disastrous decisions, specially when they resort to violence as a mean to make things happen the way they think things should happen.

Now, let´s move on to Show Dany, specially during this last season. The showrunners have tried hard to keep the image of Dany as a kind person with sincere concerns for others. We can see it in the way she is nice to Missandei and all her other followers, respectful with the KiTN and his entourage, and how she even gave common soldiers a choice after winning a battle. Albeit in a vague an imprecise way, her "breaking the wheel" rhetoric also seem to align with this side of her character. And in a nonsensical form a logical point of view, she also displays kindness when she decides not to use her dragons against civilians.

They have also tried hard to present her as a ruthless, hardened person, who does not hesitate to burn those she perceives as her enemies, mainly the slavers and, in this last episode, the Tarlys. They have also kept her belief that she is the rightful queen of the Seven Kingdoms, and that nothing will stop her from obtaining what she perceives as her legitimate birthright.

So, if they have the right ingredients, what is it missing? I think the answer to the question is the conflict between them.  It is known that GRRM famously said "the only thing worthy writing about is the conflict of the heart", and this is something we get really well in the book POV´s. We can get inside Daenerys´head and see her struggle when trying to decide what is right and what is wrong .Her conflict regarding the reopening of the fighting pits is a prime example.  

This internal struggle seemed to have completely vanished from the show version of her. In order to make her look kind, ruthless and entitled, all at the same time and without a shadow of a doubt, the showrunners are forced into contriving convoluted and ridiculous war strategies which have the convenient additional benefit of keeping Lena Hadey´s character on screen when she should have been killed or exiled at Episode 2 maximum.  They also make her display what seems to be an split personality when dealing with Jon, Tyrion, Varys and some other characters; she is all nice and supportive one second, then she just suddenly says something along the lines of : "but bend the knee" or "if you betray me, I will feed you to the dragons". 

I will also use an scene from this episode to showcase my point. We have Daenerys freshly arrived from Field of Fire 2.0, where she has seen her dragon roasting hundreds of people, including the father and brother of Jon´s best mate (she has no means to know that, I know, but we, as spectators, do, so it can still be strong emotional material). She has a conversation with Jon, at which she displays no emotion or conflict whatsoever. Instead she just delivers one of her "to help people you have to be strong"  speeches, like there are no other ways to help people... And are we supposed to buy that Jon can see through that attitude and perceive the true kindness of her heart?

Would it not have been much more powerful if we saw a Daenerys who is trying to hide her tears for the horrors she just witnessed and committed because she has to be a strong ruler who can no display weakness in public, only to be surprised by Jon? That would really show she is a real human being with a conflicted heart, someone another decent human being could fall in love with.

Sadly, this is the treatment many other characters in the show, specially female "empowered" characters (Arya, another book favourite of mine is a prime example), are receiving from the showrunners. I won´t delve on the reasons why they are doing this, much has been said about cheap thrill value, fan service and the lot.

I just think this is really sad, and the main reason the show has become a really poor adaptation of one of my favourite book series ever. Because the main ingredient of the recipe, the conflict of the heart, is missing.


@Armand Gargalen that was a very well-composed and thought-out post.  It's clear to all of us who read the show (whether we give them too much shit I am unsure) are slack-writing and people are becoming SO one dimensional it's awful.

With Daenerys, though, I view her as being a seasoned ruler and she knows WHERE and WHEN and TO WHOM to show strength/power or heart/kindness.  The first time she met Jon she was very prickly and sitting there having Misseandei launch of all her titles and whatever.  SLOWLY did she open up to Jon.  It took a while.  And she doesn't treat others like she treats him, or how she treated Dorne or Asha Greyjoy and Theon.  She had to lay it down to the Lannister/Tarly force in strength to make a statement.  She is used to having to do that and not weep about it.  She knows hard choices have to be made.

Concerning her undying "mission" to obtain Westeros, yes I think think this WAS really a brainwash from Viserys.  It maybe still kind of is.  HOWEVER when you think, she sees she is untouched by fire (feeding into what Viserys kept saying about "The Dragon") and that it was not HIM but HER with the ability to do that.  Combined with the magical birth of dragons unseen in the world for ages....... then ALL the horrors she had to endure to get where she is now.  LOOK at what she said to Jon "I've been chased to be murdered in my cradle, raped, sold into slavery, etc etc" and then "the only thing that kept me standing the whole time was my mission to get to Westeros and rule as my Divine Right" - those are not the exact words but conveying the sentiment. 

So it's all she has ever known.  Winning Westeros is all she has ever known. 

I believe the show is showing her different sides by WHO she interacts with instead of showing her diverse nature to many people.  Even to the Tarlys, she was like "I didn't come here to murder - that's Cersei Lannister"........ but then offers them a choice.

I do believe Jon can see the difference between Daenerys the woman and Daenerys the Ruler.  Him - more than most - understands that there are hard choices in war and you sometimes have to do awful things to achieve an honorable objective.  He has learned that through his own struggles.  He's probably the one person in that group now who has the history and ability to understand what she is doing and why than maybe anyone else. 

THAT as opposed to Varys and Tyrion sitting around drinking wine who have never really been in these situations.  Maybe I could consider Tyrion as able to understand more than Varys since Tryion has had a hard life and lived under an asshole (his father) plus being thrust into basically commander of Black Water when Joffrey went to hide with the women and children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Iron Mother said:


@Armand Gargalen that was a very well-composed and thought-out post.  It's clear to all of us who read the show (whether we give them too much shit I am unsure) are slack-writing and people are becoming SO one dimensional it's awful.

With Daenerys, though, I view her as being a seasoned ruler and she knows WHERE and WHEN and TO WHOM to show strength/power or heart/kindness.  The first time she met Jon she was very prickly and sitting there having Misseandei launch of all her titles and whatever.  SLOWLY did she open up to Jon.  It took a while.  And she doesn't treat others like she treats him, or how she treated Dorne or Asha Greyjoy and Theon.  She had to lay it down to the Lannister/Tarly force in strength to make a statement.  She is used to having to do that and not weep about it.  She knows hard choices have to be made.

Concerning her undying "mission" to obtain Westeros, yes I think think this WAS really a brainwash from Viserys.  It maybe still kind of is.  HOWEVER when you think, she sees she is untouched by fire (feeding into what Viserys kept saying about "The Dragon") and that it was not HIM but HER with the ability to do that.  Combined with the magical birth of dragons unseen in the world for ages....... then ALL the horrors she had to endure to get where she is now.  LOOK at what she said to Jon "I've been chased to be murdered in my cradle, raped, sold into slavery, etc etc" and then "the only thing that kept me standing the whole time was my mission to get to Westeros and rule as my Divine Right" - those are not the exact words but conveying the sentiment. 

So it's all she has ever known.  Winning Westeros is all she has ever known. 

I believe the show is showing her different sides by WHO she interacts with instead of showing her diverse nature to many people.  Even to the Tarlys, she was like "I didn't come here to murder - that's Cersei Lannister"........ but then offers them a choice.

I do believe Jon can see the difference between Daenerys the woman and Daenerys the Ruler.  Him - more than most - understands that there are hard choices in war and you sometimes have to do awful things to achieve an honorable objective.  He has learned that through his own struggles.  He's probably the one person in that group now who has the history and ability to understand what she is doing and why than maybe anyone else. 

THAT as opposed to Varys and Tyrion sitting around drinking wine who have never really been in these situations.  Maybe I could consider Tyrion as able to understand more than Varys since Tryion has had a hard life and lived under an asshole (his father) plus being thrust into basically commander of Black Water when Joffrey went to hide with the women and children.

Thanks for your kind words. 

I still the show is doing a really poor job at characterizing her, and that may be due to the fact Daenerys is my favourite character in the books, so I am extra critical.

As I said, I am actually under the impression that female characters are quite worse written than male ones in the show. When you come to think about it, most female characters express their inner conflicts, if they have any, via "split personality"; quite was said last season about Schrodinger´s  Sansa, and Arya has been all over the place for quite a long time. Cersei has lost any complexity she might have ever had and become a cartoonish villain.

Just a small detail. If Varys backstory is to be believed (and that is a big IF in the books, while I think it will be irrelevant in the show), he has gone through a harder life than Dany, Jon or Tyrion, at least for the early years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, RhaenysB said:

What is even sadder than this is that ALL main female characters (Cersei, Arya, Sansa) are variation for this same basic equation. And the show has taken this to the level where their actions, their facial expressions and even their goddamn costumes are roughly the same. It's awful to watch. And Daenerys is the worst to watch because she was my little favorite in season one and now she is a bad cliche . 

That's basically true, at least since Olestra died. Except good enough actresses like Lena Headey overcome it. Arya's not even a real character anymore, so I won't bother with her. I think if you plopped Lena in the role of Dany or Sansa, she wouldn't be as good because her material would be a lot cheaper.

But she'd at least have more than one facial expression. You'd be able to tell what she's thinking, rather than the show explaining it to us in little documentaries after the episode. In that sense, the problem with Dany and Sansa both is not entirely but partly in the acting. 

About the costumes, that's a problem with literally everyone this season, not just the womenfolk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, darmody said:

That's basically true, at least since Olestra died. Except good enough actresses like Lena Headey overcome it. Arya's not even a real character anymore, so I won't bother with her. I think if you plopped Lena in the role of Dany or Sansa, she wouldn't be as good because her material would be a lot cheaper.

But she'd at least have more than one facial expression. You'd be able to tell what she's thinking, rather than the show explaining it to us in little documentaries after the episode. In that sense, the problem with Dany and Sansa both is not entirely but partly in the acting. 

About the costumes, that's a problem with literally everyone this season, not just the womenfolk. 

I am sorry but this is not true at all. One of Emilia's biggest strengths is her ability to convey emotions with her facial expressions.Just watch the scene when Jon volunteered to go on the wight hunt missions and see Dany's face as she reacts to it. She tells him that "he didn't have her permission to leave" but her face was saying "I don't want you to go because I am afraid you are going to get killed'. This was clear as day and many viewers picked up on this on other message boards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, darmody said:

That's basically true, at least since Olestra died. Except good enough actresses like Lena Headey overcome it. Arya's not even a real character anymore, so I won't bother with her. I think if you plopped Lena in the role of Dany or Sansa, she wouldn't be as good because her material would be a lot cheaper.

But she'd at least have more than one facial expression. You'd be able to tell what she's thinking, rather than the show explaining it to us in little documentaries after the episode. In that sense, the problem with Dany and Sansa both is not entirely but partly in the acting. 

About the costumes, that's a problem with literally everyone this season, not just the womenfolk. 

I don't like Lena Headey's portrayal of Cersei at all, which is a vastly unpopular opinion and isn't Lena's fault, more a writing/directing problem. But I do think she is overrated as an actress. (And yes, I do know she's still better the Emilia, no argument there) 

and yes, if Sophie and Emilia were better actors maybe Sansa and Daenerys wouldn't be so insufferable, but it's at least 50% writing and directing too, because Emilia was fine in season 1. 

Yes, agreed. Tyrion looks ridiculous in his medieval version of a pin striped suit. The maesters are wearing potato sacks. Of the NW clocks are Ikea, I guess the old town tunics are Tesco Value... I do like Euron though. Rock star jack sparrow is much better than Theon Beta from the previous season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Armand Gargalen said:

I have the gut feeling that she is directed to act like that, and most of her deadpan expressions look odd not because she is a bad actress, but because the spectators are left wanting for a deeper feeling to be displayed.

I think you are absolutely correct.

5 hours ago, RhaenysB said:

I don't like Lena Headey's portrayal of Cersei at all, which is a vastly unpopular opinion and isn't Lena's fault, more a writing/directing problem. But I do think she is overrated as an actress. (And yes, I do know she's still better the Emilia, no argument there) 

I think she was improperly cast for book!Cersei but the show writers hired her because they like her version of Cersei better. I hated it but eventually I just grew to accept it as an alternate version. Lena's version has grown on me a little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

6 hours ago, darmody said:

That's basically true, at least since Olestra died. Except good enough actresses like Lena Headey overcome it. Arya's not even a real character anymore, so I won't bother with her. I think if you plopped Lena in the role of Dany or Sansa, she wouldn't be as good because her material would be a lot cheaper.

But she'd at least have more than one facial expression. You'd be able to tell what she's thinking, rather than the show explaining it to us in little documentaries after the episode. In that sense, the problem with Dany and Sansa both is not entirely but partly in the acting. 

Definitely I think the writing has for the most part been better for male characters than female ones. The exception here is Cersei.

Now some people don't like the way ShowCersei has been written and wanted the portrayal more in line with her book counterpart. Whereas others prefer ShowCersei.

Either way, its hard to deny Lena Headey has been given both a more consistent character portrayal and better plotlines to work with than any of the other main female characters. 

If Lena had the rubbish written for Arya, Daenerys or to a lesser extent, Sansa, these past two seasons to work with, she may not have fared so well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, RhaenysB said:

The problem with Daenerys's character is HBO. She's written and directed as a one dimensional Hot CEO. She's ambitious,cold, disciplined, poker faced, professional and ruthlessly goal oriented. Because that's what makes a woman a "badass" or a "feminist" icon.

From a few behind the scene clips it's quite clear that Emilia is directed to play Daenerys this way. It's not her being a crappy actor. She is far from the best actress of her generation or of the show, but she is decent when she is given usable material (see season 1, that one other movie I've seen her in). She is also a very different person than a Daenerys and it seems like she finds it more and more difficult to find this Daenerys the show is writing in herself. 

What is even sadder than this is that ALL main female characters (Cersei, Arya, Sansa) are variation for this same basic equation. And the show has taken this to the level where their actions, their facial expressions and even their goddamn costumes are roughly the same. It's awful to watch. And Daenerys is the worst to watch because she was my little favorite in season one and now she is a bad cliche . 

This show fad feminism is really cringeworthy. Somebody should explain the showrunners feminism is not about women behaving like men, specially like stupid, violent ones, but about women behaving the way they decide to behave. 

5 hours ago, Gaz0680 said:

 

Definitely I think the writing has for the most part been better for male characters than female ones.

The male characters are not better written, they are just less painful to watch. This is mostly because they are less conflicted and behave more consistently, albeit in a plain, monotone way. The exception may be Tyrion and Jaime, but they are also wrong in so many other ways that it is still terrible writing. Let´s do a quick recap:

- Davos. He is just Jon´s sidekick. A season ago he was "done with kings", but he seems to have forgotten all of that.

- Jon. His supposed conflict is so artificial that does not have any sense. He keeps repeating that he can not bend the knee because the Norther Lords chose his king, but he never even tries to consult their opinion. He is suppressing his feelings for Daenerys when a political marriage is extra convenient (especially since Robert Arryn, who would be the only better suitor, seems to have vanished into thin air).

- Jaime. He has been stuck in his conflict between his love for Cersei and ? since I do not remember when. 

- Tyrion. All of a sudden he has become "the most moral man in the universe" and he just concocts stupid strategies to solve his internal struggle between his newfound moral high ground, his support for the hot chick with dragons and his subconscious desire to protect his family. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Iron Mother said:

 

Concerning her undying "mission" to obtain Westeros, yes I think think this WAS really a brainwash from Viserys.  It maybe still kind of is.  HOWEVER when you think, she sees she is untouched by fire (feeding into what Viserys kept saying about "The Dragon") and that it was not HIM but HER with the ability to do that.  Combined with the magical birth of dragons unseen in the world for ages....... then ALL the horrors she had to endure to get where she is now.  LOOK at what she said to Jon "I've been chased to be murdered in my cradle, raped, sold into slavery, etc etc" and then "the only thing that kept me standing the whole time was my mission to get to Westeros and rule as my Divine Right" - those are not the exact words but conveying the sentiment. 

I think the key thing for Dany's arc is going to be getting over exactly that belief in her birthright.

The one thing that's gotten her through all the horrors she's faced is that she was born to rule Westeros, so she both should and inevitably will do so. But she's about to learn that Jon actually has a better claim than her. (In the novels, she's going to first learn about fAegon, then learn that he's fake, then learn about Jon, but the show is obviously simplifying that.) So, what does that mean?

Here's the truth: Her claim gives her a foot in the door, people willing to fight for her—and that makes her no different from Stannis, Renly, or even Cersei. Beyond that foot in the door, it doesn't matter to anyone whether her claim is better or worse than anyone else's—that's the point of Stannis. None of Cersei's followers, or even Jon's, are going to say, "Well, after a careful consultation of the legal precedents, it looks like Dany has the legal claim after all, so I'm going to switch sides", because people don't work that way.

She will win not because she has the best claim, but because she has the dragons—and Dothraki and so on—but also because everywhere she goes she saves people and they want her to be their Queen.

She should win not because she has the best claim, but because she has the best plan for the people of Westeros, and the hard-won experience (won at the expense of other people, which sucks for the Ghiscari, but it's nice for Westeros) to achieve it.

She can't learn any of that until she confronts the truth that Jon has a better claim than her. And her arc isn't over until she learns it.

And I think the show could very well get this right.

The problem with S6-S7 Dany is that D&D don't know how to keep things interesting until they get to that point. They've basically been treading water with her until they're ready to reveal R+L=J. (GRRM has also been treading water, but he can get away with it by not releasing the next book until he works it out; the show sadly has to make the episodes whether they know what to do with them or not.)

I could be wrong—the R+L=J reveal could just lead to a perfunctory discussion that does nothing to advance her character and leaves her treading water as a useless character until the series ends. But I'm at least cautiously optimistic that they'll pull it off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She WANTS the Iron throne like all others (Stannis, Renly etc) before her.

But WHY does she want the Iron throne? Because she's entitled to have it, it's her birthright.

Seriously, she wants to break the wheel so badly, but at the same time she'll be the top spoke if she wins.

I cannot take her seriously anymore unless she wins the Iron throne only to renounce it and creates a new political system WITHOUT the Iron throne.

 

dddd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, falcotron said:

I think the key thing for Dany's arc is going to be getting over exactly that belief in her birthright.

 

I have been saying this forever.  It would be a GOOD character arc for Daenerys to finally give up the conquest mentality and turn to something else like continuing the Targaryen family line and procuring Dragonstone for that purpose.  Rejecting the Iron Throne for something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×