Jump to content
Lady Winter Rose

Why people hate Dany, but love Arya?

Recommended Posts

Both Arya and Dany are unrepentant murderers who do not deserve your affection. Hopefully they both die before the series' end. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, ChuckPunch said:

Both Arya and Dany are unrepentant murderers who do not deserve your affection. Hopefully they both die before the series' end. 

Did Jon Snow repent for killing a sworn brother of the Night's Watch?  For that matter, was Catelyn repentant for igniting the wotfk?  And Jaime, the darling of many Targaryens haters, did he repent his part in starting the mess that escalated to the wotfk, murdering the man he promised to protect, cuckolding the king he served, and helping his lover steal a kingdom?  Has Sansa repented for betraying Dad's escape plan to their enemy for the purpose of being closer to handsome Joff?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

Did Jon Snow repent for killing a sworn brother of the Night's Watch?  For that matter, was Catelyn repentant for igniting the wotfk?  And Jaime, the darling of many Targaryens haters, did he repent his part in starting the mess that escalated to the wotfk, murdering the man he promised to protect, cuckolding the king he served, and helping his lover steal a kingdom?  Has Sansa repented for betraying Dad's escape plan to their enemy for the purpose of being closer to handsome Joff?  

The post to which you react is mindless and hateful but your comparisons are inept. Catelyn and Sansa didn't murder anyone, Jon did his duty as Lord Commander (in the NW rebellion => death penalty) and Jaime is notorious for never repenting about anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

The hilarity is too much at times.

I'm not so hilarious; from now on almost every thread ends in the crappers. It wasn't the case when I subscribed to this forum…

Edited by Nowy Tends

Share this post


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

It's not a stretch to believe that the Great Masters have other things on their mind, besides keeping tabs on the others.

When they are about to be besieged, no they don’t.

Quote

Why would they bother? It's done, now. No point bringing it back up, and risking punishment.

They wouldn’t risk any punishment if they admitted that the child killings were wrong. Or get conquered if they abolished slavery.

1 hour ago, cyberdirectorfreedom said:

Sure, I suppose it is. Just as your interpretation, which is equally unsupported by the text, is in your head.

Nope, this is not my “interpretation.” It’s what’s actually written in the books; that the GM had the children nailed in Dany’s POV chapters. I don’t remember the issue coming up in any other Mereen POV chapters. If something occurred in a different manner than what a POV character thinks, then there would be hints in other POVs. The most prominent example of this is Lyanna’s “rape.” In Ned’s POV, Robert is insistent in his belief that Rhaegar raped Lyanna. But Ned personally doesn’t think that. Then with other POV chapters, we learn that maybe Lyanna ran off with Rhaegar. Similarly with Dany’s idea of her long dead father the deposed king. She only knows what Viserys tells her, but later learns from people like Jorah that Aerys was mad. In Jaime’s POV, we learn exactly how mad.

Likewise, if GRRM wants to make a counterpoint, he does so. But there’s no such counterpoint with the GM. There are no instances where some GM are good, nice, or remorseful. If Dany is wrong in her belief that the GM nailed up the children, then GRRM would indicate it to us. There’s zero textual evidence for that. From what we learn of the GM, there’s really nothing to indicate that any of them would ever hesitate to do something like that. As @Skahaz mo Kandaq  mentioned, this was a botched up attempt at psychological warfare on the part of GM that goes very wrong for them.

1 hour ago, cyberdirectorfreedom said:

Convoluted? There's nothing convoluted about it. Daenerys could have been wrong in her belief that all of the Great Masters were complicit in the crucifixion of the children, and she didn't even try to confirm her belief, she just crucified a like number of Great Masters. Seriously, what's convoluted about that?

The keyword here is “could.” You don’t’ have any textual evidence to support that claim, just your belief and speculation. In the books, Dany doesn’t just believe that maybe GM nailed up the kids. It’s presented as something the GM evidently did. And who takes action in a group? The leaders.

Later, she only executes the leaders, the ones would be responsible for the atrocity. Here’s the passage from ASOS:

Quote

In the plaza before the Great Pyramid, the Meereenese huddled forlorn. The Great Masters had looked anything but great in the morning light. Stripped of their jewels and their fringed tokars, they were contemptible; a herd of old men with shriveled balls and spotted skin and young men with ridiculous hair. Their women were either soft and fleshy or as dry as old sticks, their face paint streaked by tears. “I want your leaders,” Dany told them. “Give them up, and the rest of you shall be spared.”

    “How many?” one old woman had asked, sobbing. “How many must you have to spare us?”

    “One hundred and sixty-three,” she answered.

 

1 hour ago, cyberdirectorfreedom said:

A large part of why I'm not calling Tyrion or Jon tyrants is because we're not talking about Tyrion or Jon. We're talking about Daenerys. Regardless of how I feel about Jon or Tyrion, they simply aren't the topic of conversation, so why would I bring them up? Also, why would you? It's not as if I referred to them favourably. I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make.

The point is you can’t hold one character to one standard and another character to something else entirely. If you do, then that’s your bias. Bias has no reasonable basis.

1 hour ago, cyberdirectorfreedom said:

I think it's probably because I think those are the actions of a crazed tyrant.

Do crazed tyrants second guess themselves and feel remorse as Dany does? It’s not like Dany doesn’t realize what she does is not exactly right:

Quote

    She had them nailed to wooden posts around the plaza, each man pointing at the next. The anger was fierce and hot inside her when she gave the command; it made her feel like an avenging dragon. But later, when she passed the men dying on the posts, when she heard their moans and smelled their bowels and blood . . .

    Dany put the glass aside, frowning. It was just. It was. I did it for the children.

 

 

1 hour ago, cyberdirectorfreedom said:

Oh? Here I am, judging people on their actions...

Oh really? Don’t care about intentions, context, only actions? Then is Tyrion a psycho murderer for killing Tysha abruptly, seemingly on a whim? Is Jon a despot for trying to change the NW for the better against the wishes of the watchmen? Is Ned another psycho killer for executing the maddened NW deserter, or worse, Lady, whom he knows is innocent? Is LF good because he saved Sansa from Joff?

Quote

Everyone they know? That makes no sense.

Subversion or sedition charges. Lords may burn whole villages if one person seems to have stepped out of line. That would be the charge for trying to kill a noble lord; it would be considered a sign of rebellion, among other things.

Quote

Sure, they don't care to exonerate the commoner, but they do want to ensure that nobody can get away with murdering a nobleman. They'd want the right person.

Yes. But sometimes it’s important to make a show of hanging a murderer of a lord than to spend time and resources actually finding the killer. But this is something else entirely.  

Quote

Yeah, I don't think so. It's not like it's a one on one trial. There was a room full of people. If there was some evidence that was compelling enough to sway the opinion of everyone in the room, there's no way Lysa could get away with killing Tyrion, regardless. At least, not without everyone there knowing that she decided to disregard the evidence, and completely abuse her power to murder him.

If the evidence was compelling, as I said, Tyrion would not be on trial. Of course, if Tyrion somehow did present compelling evidence exonerating him of the crime, then he would be let go. Lysa would have no reason to punish him.

1 hour ago, cyberdirectorfreedom said:

Strictly speaking, that's exactly what she does. Slavery wasn't a crime when the Great Masters were doing it, nor was the crucifixion of those children. She did come along and make up crimes to kill people. Don't get me wrong, though, she was within her rights, as Queen, to create her own laws. 

Slavery is common in Slaver’s bay, but in most parts of the world, it is not so. And the Essoi do seem to be aware of this fact. You could say that slavery in the southern states weren’t criminal until Lincoln made it so with the Emancipation Proclamation. So in this light, Lincoln would be a “mad tyrant” as you say. But that is definitely not how tyranny is actually defined. Oppression is a fundamental aspect of tyranny and dictatorship. You can’t say that the GM are being “oppressed” by Dany because they can no longer kidnap, torture, and enslave other people.

Quote

I never said there's a nice way. But there are certainly ways to have slaves that are comparatively nice, compared to other slaves. There are no ways to crucify someone that is comparatively nice to other crucifixions.

Well, if you say so, there are “nice” ways to crucify people too. Like killing them before nailing them. Making them numb. But the GM nail the children alive, also while disemboweled, which makes the atrocity even more horrendous. That’s exactly why Dany goes to crucify the GM in the same manner. After all, she had the city. She didn’t need to do it if she didn’t care.

Quote

Yeah, that's actually my point. No proof isn't proof that something didn't happen, but it's certainly not proof that it did happen. There's no proof either way, but the burden of proof is not on the accused. Daenerys was supposed to provide the proof that the people she crucified were the ones who were guilty of the crime they were accused of. She didn't even try.

She does try, as quoted above. She makes sure she executes the leaders, who cannot be ignorant of what happened. They are the ones who give the orders. It’s like the Nazi officers can’t say, oh no we didn’t know the prisoners were being gassed at the concentration camps. Of course they knew; they gave the orders.

Quote

No, really. She considers the slaves her children.

I was being sarcastic.

Quote

Seriously, that's twice now you've ignored that question, despite directly quoting it. I know why, it's because there is no proof they were all complicit.

Yes they were. They were the leaders. Even if one looked the other way, they would be complicit in an atrocity.

Quote

How was I to stop my coworker? Ask them to please stop murdering children? I never said I wouldn't go to the police if I had proof or if I witnessed murder. But I'd definitely not quit my job. But no, I wouldn't need to prove anything. The burden of proof wouldn't be on me.

You seem to misunderstand the difference between collective guilt and individual guilt. In the example I gave, if your coworker were a serial killer unbeknownst to all, then no one would accuse you of any crime. But if the coworker killed children in the name of the organization, as part of some warfare like the GM do, then you would share collective guilt. If you were, say, an executive at the organization that was part of the plot, you would be guilty as hell. If you directly benefited from the crime, you would be complicit. If you are part of an enterprise that kills children, you wouldn’t have to quit your job, you would end up on the execution table with the rest of your coworkers. The GM are the executives of the company that give the order to kill the children. That’s why Dany retaliate eye for an eye.

Quote

So? You can do things that benefit others, without them being a part of it.

You cannot benefit from serious crimes, even if others commit it in your name without your direct knowledge. If you do benefit from a serious crime, you would share the guilt and repercussions whether you like to or not. The victims would be within their right to extract retaliatory justice against you. If the victims were murdered, their relatives can ask for blood money, for example. Or in the past, actual death. In modern times, you could get sued for money, and possibly face jail time as well. No one can claim ignorance while at the same time reaping any sort of benefit or advantage from a serious crime.  

Quote

I don't think that's true. It's not much of a defense strategy, all it serves to do is piss Daenerys off. It strikes me less as a defensive move, and more of a "we can do what we want" statement.

It’s psychological warfare, like seriously. Saying we can do whatever we want is a form of that.

Quote

Right, so because it's "common knowledge", it must be true? There's no way they could be wrong? Just because "the Great Masters" did something, that doesn't mean that they all did it. For instance, say a Great Master had their men destroy someones shop. This person could say that the Great Masters destroyed his shop, despite it being the action of one person (and their goods). The same way people might say that "the cops" did something. That doesn't imply that every police officer did that thing.

But it refers to systematic injustice, doesn’t it? But in this case, the GM do not hide the fact that it is them who are responsible for the crime. They want Dany to know. That was the whole point of the atrocity. As you said, the GM wanted her to know what they can do, and were willing to do, to withstand her efforts.

Quote

Oh, so it's not that they were directly involved with the crime, but that they don't think there was a crime that earned them crucifixion? I... see.

You are totally missing my point with that one.

Quote

 

Uh huh. So, they possibly didn't know, and definitely didn't care. Why does that mean that they were part of it? Seriously, I don't get it. I'm not saying they were good people, but that doesn't mean they're guilty of this crime.

Enlighten me. You're right, I have no idea how wrong I am. Just saying that isn't very helpful. How wrong am I? Is it easy to see what's happening a mile away? Are the Great Masters themselves watching what's happening from the walls, to see the crucified children? "You're wrong" is the most worthless statement anyone can make. It's not going to change anybody's mind. Why am I wrong?

 

You are seriously going out of limb here to defend the GM. It is very explicitly stated in the books that GM did it. Not that they may have done it, but it was them. They are the guilty party. The question that you should be asking is, ‘is it actually okay to retaliate against them in that manner even if they did that horrible atrocity?’ That’s what Dany momentarily asks herself. The moral conundrum here is not that the people Dany nailed may have been innocent, but whether it’s okay to commit atrocities even if the reasoning is righteous. Like, Nazis are bad without a doubt, but should you carpet bomb Dresden? Is it okay to kill all the slaver families to wipe out slavery once and for all from Mereen? Ultimately, does the end justify the means? That’s what Dany has to decide for herself.

Quote

No, and I never implied that. I'm suggesting that the opinion of POV characters can be wrong.

Only within reason. There should be contradictory evidence, other statements, or other perspectives to make us doubt that a POV character might be wrong. Otherwise, there’s no basis to think that what a POV character sees, hears, or thinks is anyhow wrong. That would just be baseless speculation.

Quote

Really? You believe there's a "crucify slaves" policy when being besieged by an anti-slaver opponent, despite the fact that this is the first anti-slaver opponent Meereen has ever had.

Ugh. They obviously use the slaves to do whatever, no matter how horrific. When war comes, it’s their way to use the slaves as soldiers, shields, or in this case, a tool of psychological warfare. If that wasn’t the case, then this wouldn’t have happened.

Quote

No, she doesn't make them shelter the slaves, but you make it sound as if they're doing the wrong thing. Mistreatment is the word you used.

Huh?

1 hour ago, cyberdirectorfreedom said:

I don't think there's any message being sent. They just don't want to house and feed people who aren't working for them.

Here’s the passage from the DwD:

Quote

They had freed their slaves, yes … only to hire them back as servants at wages so meagre that most could scarce afford to eat. Those too old or young to be of use had been cast into the streets, along with the infirm and the crippled. And still the Great Masters gathered atop their lofty pyramids to complain of how the dragon queen had filled their noble city with hordes of unwashed beggars, thieves, and whores.

Of course they are trying to send a message. The GM want to show that slavery is somehow good for everyone because it’s “good” for the economy. They refuse to pay liveable wages for work, so the former slaves are just forced back into bondage labor. The GM want to make liberation unsustainable economically speaking. They do so later by telling Dany of people who sell themselves back to their masters, etc. This is very much what happened following Emancipation in real life. Dany thinks that if she works with the slavers, they would no longer need to be up to tricks like this, that they would somehow willingly pay the workers.  

Quote

A tyrant is a cruel and oppressive ruler. Definitely fits with my usage. A dictator is a ruler who has total power, typically obtained by force. Also fits my usage.

Do tell me how Dany is oppressing the great masters, or how she is horribly wielding her absolute dictatorial power over the former slavers by negotiating with them and even marrying one of the psychos who actually gets aroused by gore.

Quote

Tyrants don't necessarily just murder everyone, and I already stated that Daenerys dances between tyrant and benevolent dictator.

No you didn’t.

Quote

I agree. Well, not with Daenerys having a keen sense of justice. But regarding whether or not she's a hero, I feel she's got villain and hero within her, fighting for dominance. When she makes a decision, either way, things will go much better for her.

Yes, wanting to free slaves, stop wartime rape, save innocent people from being murdered, recognizing oppression…all that doesn’t give Dany a keen sense of justice I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why people always seem surprised that not everyone loves Dany.  I loved her once, I wanted her to win the IT once.  That was before, her, um, leadership challenges, her judgement fails and all the rest of her fails in Dance.

I'm not sure why anyone would expect Dany and Arya fan bases to be the same.  The characters are very different.

So, go ahead and put me down in the hate Dany, love Arya category and proud of it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Nowy Tends said:

I'm not so hilarious; from now on almost every thread ends in the crappers. It wasn't the case when I subscribed to this forum…

I know what you're saying. My point was that  it's hilarious how people can completely miss the point of a scene/character and still make absurd and totally unsupported claims as if they were gospel. 

And dealing w/ rabid haters can definitely be a challenge. And that is regardless of what/who the hate is directed at, even though all we seem to get nowadays is Stark hate threads. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nowy Tends said:

I'm not so hilarious; from now on almost every thread ends in the crappers. It wasn't the case when I subscribed to this forum…

You can be quite witty at times. You’ve given me many chuckles.

Problem is the site numbers started declining when WoW did not get released and season six of the show ran.

This olympic size swimming has shrunk to a toddler size wading pool.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

was Catelyn repentant for igniting war between Starks and Lannisters

Fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/17/2018 at 2:21 AM, Ghost+Nymeria4Eva said:

The keyword here is “could.” You don’t’ have any textual evidence to support that claim, just your belief and speculation.

Yes, the keyword here is could. I'll come back to that.

On 4/17/2018 at 2:21 AM, Ghost+Nymeria4Eva said:

In the books, Dany doesn’t just believe that maybe GM nailed up the kids. It’s presented as something the GM evidently did.

No, what is presented in the books is that Daenerys believes that the Great Masters were evidently responsible. Nothing more.

Do all rash actions have to be called out as rash actions to be rash actions? I don't think so.

On 4/17/2018 at 2:21 AM, Ghost+Nymeria4Eva said:

The point is you can’t hold one character to one standard and another character to something else entirely. If you do, then that’s your bias. Bias has no reasonable basis.

Okay, so what, I should have gone completely off topic and spoken about other characters? Why would I have done that? You can't say I'm biased for not decrying the actions of other characters when we're not talking about those characters.

On 4/17/2018 at 2:21 AM, Ghost+Nymeria4Eva said:

You could say that slavery in the southern states weren’t criminal until Lincoln made it so with the Emancipation Proclamation. So in this light, Lincoln would be a “mad tyrant” as you say.

I don't seem to recall that Lincoln crucified a bunch of people without proof of the crimes they were accused of...

On 4/17/2018 at 2:21 AM, Ghost+Nymeria4Eva said:

You can’t say that the GM are being “oppressed” by Dany because they can no longer kidnap, torture, and enslave other people.

Sure you can. She's actively preventing them living their own way. A way of life they've had for centuries. It's not a bad kind of oppression, but it's oppressive, regardless.

On 4/17/2018 at 2:21 AM, Ghost+Nymeria4Eva said:

She does try, as quoted above. She makes sure she executes the leaders, who cannot be ignorant of what happened. They are the ones who give the orders.

Right, but are they the ones who gave the orders? It's entirely possible that this wasn't some collective act, but was the actions of a few. So, no, she doesn't try to get the right people.

On 4/17/2018 at 2:21 AM, Ghost+Nymeria4Eva said:

I was being sarcastic.

So was I.

On 4/17/2018 at 2:21 AM, Ghost+Nymeria4Eva said:

Yes they were. They were the leaders. Even if one looked the other way, they would be complicit in an atrocity.

They wouldn't be "looking the other way" if they didn't know about it at all. There's no proof that they did all know.

On 4/17/2018 at 2:21 AM, Ghost+Nymeria4Eva said:

It is very explicitly stated in the books that GM did it. Not that they may have done it, but it was them. They are the guilty party.

No. That Daenerys believes that? Yes. That it's true? Not at all.

On 4/17/2018 at 2:21 AM, Ghost+Nymeria4Eva said:

The question that you should be asking is, ‘is it actually okay to retaliate against them in that manner even if they did that horrible atrocity?’ That’s what Dany momentarily asks herself. The moral conundrum here is not that the people Dany nailed may have been innocent, but whether it’s okay to commit atrocities even if the reasoning is righteous. Like, Nazis are bad without a doubt, but should you carpet bomb Dresden? Is it okay to kill all the slaver families to wipe out slavery once and for all from Mereen? Ultimately, does the end justify the means? That’s what Dany has to decide for herself.

Yes, it's a good moral quandary. It's not the only takeaway from this situation, though.

On 4/17/2018 at 2:21 AM, Ghost+Nymeria4Eva said:

Only within reason. There should be contradictory evidence, other statements, or other perspectives to make us doubt that a POV character might be wrong. Otherwise, there’s no basis to think that what a POV character sees, hears, or thinks is anyhow wrong. That would just be baseless speculation.

But there's a difference between baseless speculation and speculation. If a POV character has thoughts that the sky turned red recently, and nobody has ever explicitly said that the sky is and has always been blue, should we believe them? 

The fact that Daenerys believes this without proof is a hint that she might be wrong. The fact that there are no other perspectives confirming her thoughts is a hint that she might be wrong. I completely agree that it's speculation, but I would hardly say that it's baseless.

On 4/17/2018 at 2:21 AM, Ghost+Nymeria4Eva said:

No you didn’t.

 

Her first act as Queen of Meereen, the crucifixion, was the act of an absolute tyrant. Her later action are not those of a tyrant, but of a benevolent dictator. This is not a good thing. Her back and forth about her leadership style is the root cause of her inability to rule over the Meereenese.

Yes. I did.

On 4/17/2018 at 2:21 AM, Ghost+Nymeria4Eva said:

Yes, wanting to free slaves, stop wartime rape, save innocent people from being murdered, recognizing oppression…all that doesn’t give Dany a keen sense of justice I suppose.

She thinks that crucifying people without proof is justice. Many of her rulings as Queen of Meereen are awful. Her sense of justice is wanting, I think.

 

Anyway, I said I'd come back to it. Could. I have a question, and I'd really like an answer. It's a yes or no question, but you can feel free to elaborate, of course. Here we go:

Do you think it is possible that Daenerys could have been wrong? No matter how likely you think it, a hundred to one, a million to one, whatever. Do you think it's at all possible that the Great Masters didn't conspire together to crucify those children? That it was the action of a few?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2018 at 11:02 AM, Moiraine Sedai said:

Did Jon Snow repent for killing a sworn brother of the Night's Watch?  For that matter, was Catelyn repentant for igniting the wotfk?  And Jaime, the darling of many Targaryens haters, did he repent his part in starting the mess that escalated to the wotfk, murdering the man he promised to protect, cuckolding the king he served, and helping his lover steal a kingdom?  Has Sansa repented for betraying Dad's escape plan to their enemy for the purpose of being closer to handsome Joff?  

-Treason deserves execution, why would he repent that morally justifiable act?

-Catelyn clearly regrets what she did to Tyrion when he is on trial at the Vale.

-Jaime literally has a redemption arc. So yes.

-Sansa didn't murder anyone. Stupid comparison. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2018-04-06 at 7:12 PM, Light a wight tonight said:

As easy to ask why people love Dany but hate Arya. There may be real-life princess but they haven't been living in exile on charity, sold to barbarian chieftains, or hatched dragon eggs magically. So, realistic? Hardly.

IMO a lot of Dany love is based on the outdated notion of the Divine Right of KIngs to rule, that there are actually people destined by birth to be an upper class.

And Arya hate is based on gurlz not being allowed to be badass, taking care of business personally rather than through proxies. (She keeps an enemies list? Maybe haters are envious of her high degree of organization.)

Arya and Dany are both my faves. Dany is the most important character to me though - would never ever, ever have bothered with books or abomination if I hadn't known A GIRL WAS GETTING THE DRAGONS. 

Dany as a character seems a social experiment of GRRM, like: what would happen if a girl suddenly became the single most powerful person in a extreme partriachy? 

What you wrote about Dany-love is word for word how I view the Sansians. :D 

On 2018-04-09 at 1:21 PM, Bowen 747 said:

Dany is actually one of the smartest people in the novels.  Certainly she is much, much smarter than Jon Snow.  Look for the topic thread titled "Daenerys Targaryen's Power Plays" and if you have any reading comprehension at all, you will find strong proof of Dany's high level of intelligence.  

Yeah I'm in your boat. No other character finds as many third ways as Dany does. 

On 2018-04-09 at 11:05 PM, Damsel in Distress said:

 

  1. I have said above that I am a fan of Daenerys Targaryen.  She is the "most beautiful woman in the world," the Mother of Dragons, Azor Ahai, Khaleesi of the Great Grass Sea, the Mhysa, the Unburnt, an honest-to-goodness princess, heir to Westeros. Daenerys is very intelligent, slim, athletic, astute, brave, and charismatic.  Personally, those are some of the reasons why I love Daenerys.  Those blessings are also enough to shake the self-confidence of a lot of insecure boys and girls among the fans.  That is the not the case with me.  I am not as beautiful, as athletic, nor as smart as Daenerys but I have never lacked in those qualities.  Reading the text that describes Daenerys as an almost goddess-like figure does not shake my confidence in the least.  It just makes me admire her more.
  2. Arya is not attractive.  She does not possess charm and elegance.  I suppose that appeals to some of the fans out there.  I do not find Arya interesting.

1. Exactly the same for me, I don't mind that she's an extreme, because her extremeness is in itself interesting and particularly so in this setting.

2. Attractiveness isn't a factor in liking Arya or not, though. I think it's more to do with her being a serial-killer, which is the thing about Arya I find most fascinating, but a lot of people are just horrified or are put off by the unlikeliness of a tiny tomboy-assasin avenging her murdered family.

Some things Arya and Dany have in common that I appreciate: they are active (rather than passive like Sansa or reactive like Cat) they have backbone (rather than failing the Millgram-experiment, like most do, they take uncomfortable stances for what is morally right) and they are successful in achieving their insanely impossible goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Sigella said:

Arya and Dany are both my faves. Dany is the most important character to me though - would never ever, ever have bothered with books or abomination if I hadn't known A GIRL WAS GETTING THE DRAGONS.

Some things Arya and Dany have in common that I appreciate: they are active (rather than passive like Sansa or reactive like Cat) they have backbone (rather than failing the Millgram-experiment, like most do, they take uncomfortable stances for what is morally right) and they are successful in achieving their insanely impossible goals.

I don't know why we pit two women characters against each other.  I like them both even though personally I'm not into the dragons.  I do agree that Arya and Dany have more in common than people give them credit for. 

Share this post


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

I don't know why we pit two women characters against each other.  I like them both even though personally I'm not into the dragons.  I do agree that Arya and Dany have more in common than people give them credit for. 

They really do. I hope GRRM lets them be friends...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2018 at 9:02 AM, Moiraine Sedai said:

Did Jon Snow repent for killing a sworn brother of the Night's Watch?  For that matter, was Catelyn repentant for igniting the wotfk?  And Jaime, the darling of many Targaryens haters, did he repent his part in starting the mess that escalated to the wotfk, murdering the man he promised to protect, cuckolding the king he served, and helping his lover steal a kingdom?  Has Sansa repented for betraying Dad's escape plan to their enemy for the purpose of being closer to handsome Joff?  

If you're talking about the "bring me a block" incident, that was an execution for gross insubordination leading up to attempted mutiny. Refusal to obey a lawful, direct order and defying one's commander. Justifiable in any army, especially in time of war. Absolutely necessary to preserve discipline. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ChuckPunch said:

Jaime literally has a redemption arc.

Now, this is debatable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Kandrax said:

Now, this is debatable.

No, I really don't think it's debatable. It's one of the most interesting development of the series. In ADWD the way he resolves the siege of Raventree, then his short stay in Raventre, the meeting with Titos Blackwood, etc. shows a completely different Jaime – and a much better one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nowy Tends said:

No, I really don't think it's debatable. It's one of the most interesting development of the series. In ADWD the way he resolves the siege of Raventree, then his short stay in Raventre, the meeting with Titos Blackwood, etc. shows a completely different Jaime – and a much better one.

I want to say that some readers say that Jaime has humanisation arc, not redemption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Nowy Tends said:

No, I really don't think it's debatable. It's one of the most interesting development of the series. In ADWD the way he resolves the siege of Raventree, then his short stay in Raventre, the meeting with Titos Blackwood, etc. shows a completely different Jaime – and a much better one.

How can he be on a redemption arc if he doesn't regret his actions? He's trying to change, sure, but that's a different matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×