Why did George give daenerys everything

[TheSlayerofLies]

8 minutes ago, teej6 said:

I’m not making any predictions as to how the story will end just stating the obvious fact that the Stark are the good guys, which even a blind person can see. Besides the author himself confirmed this.

Well I'm not disputing that the Starks are the good guys.  

11 minutes ago, teej6 said:

Doesn’t matter if the title was abandoned, the author’s intent was clear and I suspect hasn’t changed. The title of last book was meant to imply it would be a time for wolves to rise. Although he changed the title (which I suspect was done as it gave too much away), the Starks are still going to rise in some way or the other, and anyone who thinks otherwise is deluding themselves. 

Isn't this you making predications based on the abandoned title?  I agree with you btw, in saying that the Starks will rise by the end, but one doesn't need a book title to reach that conclusion.  Which is why I'm not sure the mention of it helps your argument.

 

16 minutes ago, teej6 said:

And could you provide me with quotes to these “multiple occasions” where GRRM expressed his dislike for this title? To my knowledge, I don’t think there was any reason provided by GRRM as to why he abandoned the title, just that he did. 

Here (bolding is done by me)

Quote

 

I am not completely decided on the title of the last volume yet. My contract says A TIME FOR WOLVES, but I am not completely happy with that and will probably change it if I come up with something I like better.

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Month/1999/07/

 

and here

Quote

Oh, and I've also come up with a new title for the seventh (and final, I hope, I hope, I hope) volume of the series -- A DREAM OF SPRING. I like the sound of that a lot better than A TIME FOR WOLVES, which has been my working title for book seven up to now, and I also think it gives a better sense of the book that I want to write. So -- A DANCE WITH DRAGONS, then THE WINDS OF WINTER, then A DREAM OF SPRING. Shouldn't take me long (hah). 

http://grrm.livejournal.com/3797.html

 

[chrisdaw]

3 minutes ago, Makk said:

Yes, she changed her mind. But when she originally made that decision with the hostages she got what she wanted. She later found out that she didn't like it. 

Although it was really Baristan who threw it away. Peace can still be salvaged if she changes her mind again by the time she gets back. 

They'd have reverted back to slavery without Dany's presence, probably not even by another name. That's what the bed slave scene is about. And they were creeping it back in her presence, chipping away. Her hostage decision told them she was placable and gave them the belief that they'd prevail in a game of attrition.

[teej6]

19 minutes ago, Makk said:

Yes, she changed her mind. But when she originally made that decision with the hostages she got what she wanted. She later found out that she didn't like it. 

Although it was really Baristan who threw it away. Peace can still be salvaged if she changes her mind again by the time she gets back. 

Based on her thoughts in the last chapter of ADWD, I believe she is moving away from peace... “Fire and Blood” and “dragons plant no trees”. 

[teej6]

7 minutes ago, TheSlayerofLies said:

Here (bolding is done by me)

and here

 

Thanks for the quotes. I still think the original title is a good indication of the Starks’ rise in the end. Again, not a prediction but a very good hunch.  

[Starkz]

7 minutes ago, Makk said:

Right now there is a war because Baristan reneged on the deal that Daenerys made. 

There is war with the Yunkai because Drogon decided to fly into the pit causing a panic and people to die causing the Yunkai to site a breach in their agreement, a poor excuse making it likely that they had no intentions of peace, using the death of an old frail man as their reasoning. Even before this someone tried to posion Daenerys. The war never stopped.

[Lost Melnibonean]

22 hours ago, manchester_babe said:

Why did Geroge give Dany everything in book 1, inhuman beauty, dragons, her becoming queen in the end. 

And a lemon tree. Poor Daenerys. 

[Bowen 747]

On 8/20/2018 at 8:14 PM, manchester_babe said:

Why did Geroge give Dany everything in book 1, inhuman beauty, dragons, her becoming queen in the end. 

Might as well also ask why George made Jaime Lannister good looking, rich, skilled in arms.  How about Jon Snow getting so many easy breaks at wall.  Holy crap, Jon got away with midnight desertion, attempted murder of Ser Alliser Thorne, and the unjust execution of Janos Slynt.  Why not ask about that?  Might also ask how it is that Sansa managed to keep her virginity intact after all of this time.  Is that even realistic?  Oh man, talk about a creature with 9 lives!  That's her virginity for you.    And little Arya Stark waltzing through the river lands and Braavos without getting murdered.  All I am saying is, it is unfair to single out Daenerys for being lovely, great leadership skills, smarts, fire resistant, and having dragons.  Daenerys has a lot in her arsenal and she is using it to rescue slaves from their masters.  We should all be supporting her.    

Why should somebody like Sansa, who is self-serving, have the same kind of arsenal.  It would be useless and misused on Sansa.  What would Arya do with this kind of firepower?  Yeah, kill everyone who she thinks was responsible for hurting the Starks.  What a waste of firepower that would be.  I'm not bashing on Arya.   Comparison with other characters is fair whenever one is singled out for either praise or criticism.   I am just saying there are others who have been given as much and some of them have not earned it.  And the gifted Cersei, who probably never went hungry in her life unless she was doing the Jenny Craig week, born rich, lovely, powerful, queen of westeros, victor over the Starks.  I say she was given these things without have to work for it.  She had it far easier than Daenerys.  Daenerys had to work for her resources.  The poor girl grew up without parents, abused by her brother, went through many days of hunger, suffered a childhood on the run, watched her brother sell their mother's crown just to eat, and then married off to the Dothraki.  Daenerys earned her resources and deserve her power.

I'm not starting a quarrel with manchester-babe.      I hope she does not take my disagreement as such.  I suppose if we get down to the brass tacks, our differences are down to who we support in the books and who we want to succeed.  I am obviously a fan of the Khaleesi.  I spent enough time on this web site to know the division which exists among the fans.  It is always at play here on the majority of the posts.  We all know who we like and do not like.   

 

[BigBoss1]

3 hours ago, Sigella said:

I think you may be overlooking a potential value: in a few years these kids might return to their noble families as Danys allies or advocates. Not a short term gain but if they are treated warmly (which they are from what we've seen) its a longterm investment. The hostages are still mallable so its not unthinkable. 

That would require Dany to remain in mereen and she said she only wanted to learn how to rule. She's not staying in slaver's bay for 10+ years. Also she did not think of this possibility she only got the hostages to treathen the nobles.

[Starkz]

1 hour ago, Bowen 747 said:

and the unjust execution of Janos Slynt.  Why not ask about that?

 

 As if there wasn’t just 40+ pages debunking this. Some people on this forum really are slow.

[hodorisfaclessman]

6 hours ago, Starkz said:

 As if there wasn’t just 40+ pages debunking this. Some people on this forum really are slow.

Yeah i dont get this

Jon was lord commander , janos defied a direct order .....jon had every right to do everything from imprison to flay him slowly if he felt like it

[Lion of the West]

1 minute ago, hodorisfaclessman said:

Yeah i dont get this

Jon was lord commander , janos defied a direct order .....jon had every right to do everything from imprison to flay him slowly if he felt like it

Neither do I. +40 pages and people still argue that Janos was executed for justice and not vengeance.

[hodorisfaclessman]

46 minutes ago, LionoftheWest said:

Neither do I. +40 pages and people still argue that Janos was executed for justice and not vengeance.

Justice or vengenence? Who cares

Man defied a direct order  he was dead

[Geddus]

17 hours ago, Starkz said:

I never understood why she did that when she wasn’t willing to execute them but her people will be killed without blinking that she gave up.

I think she hoped the threat would be enough, she probably believed the masters wouldn't risk their children's lives. She underestimated their callousness.

[Lion of the West]

31 minutes ago, hodorisfaclessman said:

Justice or vengenence? Who cares

Man defied a direct order  he was dead

I care.

And I'm not down with bowing to authority regadless of what said authority does. Aerys overstepped his bonds when he killed the Starks and their companions, for example. Joffrey overstepped his bonds when he set his goons to physically assault Sansa.

Being a leader does not mean that you can do whatever you like, whenever you like it. Your actions will be judged and scrutinized regardless of your title.

[hodorisfaclessman]

51 minutes ago, LionoftheWest said:

I care.

And I'm not down with bowing to authority regadless of what said authority does. Aerys overstepped his bonds when he killed the Starks and their companions, for example. Joffrey overstepped his bonds when he set his goons to physically assault Sansa.

Being a leader does not mean that you can do whatever you like, whenever you like it. Your actions will be judged and scrutinized regardless of your title.

Not really comparable  jon didnt overstep here janos did ,he had no right to refuse an order.

 

[BigBoss1]

1 hour ago, LionoftheWest said:

I care.

And I'm not down with bowing to authority regadless of what said authority does. Aerys overstepped his bonds when he killed the Starks and their companions, for example. Joffrey overstepped his bonds when he set his goons to physically assault Sansa.

Being a leader does not mean that you can do whatever you like, whenever you like it. Your actions will be judged and scrutinized regardless of your title.

Refusing an order is desertion.

The night's watch aren't boy scouts.

[Here's Looking At You, Kid]

Why did George give daenerys everything

I would not say "give."  Daenerys is deserving of her "everything."  She is an agent of change who wants to improve the condition for the powerless.  I can think of no other character outside the wandering septon who actually wants to help the poor masses.  Everybody else is thinking revenge, justice for their families, and aggrandizement.  Daenerys is willing to set aside her life's ambition to help people she doesn't know and do this because it is the right thing to do.  She needs power to get this done.  

[Starkz]

8 hours ago, LionoftheWest said:

I care.

And I'm not down with bowing to authority regadless of what said authority does. Aerys overstepped his bonds when he killed the Starks and their companions, for example. Joffrey overstepped his bonds when he set his goons to physically assault Sansa.

Being a leader does not mean that you can do whatever you like, whenever you like it. Your actions will be judged and scrutinized regardless of your title.

Dude there is literally 40+ pages of this stop commenting about it on this thread. You must be very demented to have such short sight and bias towards Janos dying which is ludicrous. Jon executed Janos for insubordination and that’s the end of it. If you think otherwise you need to actually read the books, looks at what GRRM has said about it, or reevaluate your life. Jon didn’t execute him Janos for “vengeance”. He executed him for disobeying his orders and questioning his leadership.

[Lion of the West]

6 hours ago, hodorisfaclessman said:

Not really comparable  jon didnt overstep here janos did ,he had no right to refuse an order.

 

There are many, many other punishments that one can take rather than execution for this. Given the nature of the recruits at the Wall. If every Black Brother with an attitude problem would be executed only ghosts would man the Wall. Does there need to be discipline? Yes, absolutely and upheld with violence when needed, but killing off every offender is not a sustainable with the manpower problems the Watch already has.

6 hours ago, BigBoss1 said:

Refusing an order is desertion.

The night's watch aren't boy scouts.

No. Leaving the Wall is desertion. Refusing an order is insubordination. Those are different offences.

Of course its not the boy scouts, which Jon Snow learned fairly fast after he came to the Wall.

[Starkz]

6 hours ago, Here's Looking At You, Kid said:

Why did George give daenerys everything

I would not say "give."  Daenerys is deserving of her "everything."  She is an agent of change who wants to improve the condition for the powerless.  I can think of no other character outside the wandering septon who actually wants to help the poor masses.  Everybody else is thinking revenge, justice for their families, and aggrandizement.  Daenerys is willing to set aside her life's ambition to help people she doesn't know and do this because it is the right thing to do.  She needs power to get this done.  

This isn’t exactly true. Shes also doing all of this to garner support for her expedition to Westeros eventually to get justice for her family and take out the “usurper dogs”. She says herself she was staying in Meereen to learn how to be a queen. She hasn’t set aside her ambition to take the IT and eventually she will leave Meereen and the free cities to deal with their problems she caused. No one is completely selfless in this story or in real life.