Jump to content
darmody

The Problem with a Mad Queen

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, The_Spanish_Inquisition said:

Westerosi precedent is that Randyll Tarly should have been taken prisoner, but regardless, burning him was essentially the worst thing Dany could have done for her reputation as “not like my daddy, I promise!” 

If she needed to execute him in the battlefield, she had many other, more palatable options. Like beheading, as Jon did. 

Tyrion advising her stupidly in 90% of her other engagements doesn’t mean he wasn’t right in this case, and I’ve never disagreed that he sucks lately. 

Randyll Tarly taken prisoner? Nope. He's fair game.

Daenerys is the female version of Aegon the Conqueror. He burned more people with dragonfire than he took prisoner. No one calls him a bad king.

Dickon Tarly taken prisoner? Yes. That was wrong.

Beheading people isn't her style. The Starks of Winterfell behead people personally because "if you can't look a man in his eyes, hear his last sword and swing the sword anyway, then perhaps the man doesn't deserve to die."

Yet, it is shown and implied that that southerners have executioners to do their dirty work for them. Sansa killed a prisoner by feeding him to hungry man-eating hounds. Sansa passed the sentence on Littlefinger but Arya killed him....when, according to their father whose adages they adore and honor so much, Sansa should've been the one to kill him.

So, it seems to be, it's all a matter of style and personal preference.

Aerys the Mad burned people alive for entertainment. Sexual arousal too if I might add.

Tyrion has sucked lately? Try the moment they landed on Dragonstone. Why can't they just attack King's Landing right away? Because it's bad PR? Well...so is safely biding your time on an island within an ancient fortress while all your allies get trashed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jabar of House Titan said:

Randyll Tarly taken prisoner? Nope. He's fair game.

Daenerys is the female version of Aegon the Conqueror. He burned more people with dragonfire than he took prisoner. No one calls him a bad king.

Dickon Tarly taken prisoner? Yes. That was wrong.

Beheading people isn't her style. The Starks of Winterfell behead people personally because "if you can't look a man in his eyes, hear his last sword and swing the sword anyway, then perhaps the man doesn't deserve to die."

Yet, it is shown and implied that that southerners have executioners to do their dirty work for them. Sansa killed a prisoner by feeding him to hungry man-eating hounds. Sansa passed the sentence on Littlefinger but Arya killed him....when, according to their father whose adages they adore and honor so much, Sansa should've been the one to kill him.

So, it seems to be, it's all a matter of style and personal preference.

Aerys the Mad burned people alive for entertainment. Sexual arousal too if I might add.

Tyrion has sucked lately? Try the moment they landed on Dragonstone. Why can't they just attack King's Landing right away? Because it's bad PR? Well...so is safely biding your time on an island within an ancient fortress while all your allies get trashed.

Dany has stated more than once that she’s concerned about her image in Westeros given her father’s “madness”. 

Either she no longer cares whether the people fear her and her dragons, or she just doesn’t comprehend that laws exist, and she’s expected to uphold them. 

I don’t know what else to say here. She needs the support of the people to rule. Burning people on the battlefield with an animals that’s been largely mythological for centuries is going to (rightly) raise some concerns. 

If she wants to go the way of Aegon and just subjugate the continent through dragon fire, then fine. She should own it, and stop pretending she’s come to reclaim a legal birthright. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, The_Spanish_Inquisition said:

Dany needs the support of people in Westeros. She won’t get it by frying people. All that gets her is a reputation for being just like her daddy. 

Westeros has laws regarding enemies defeated on the battlefield, and prisoners. We know this because treatment of prisoners is a whole arc in Robb’s storyline. 

I get that we’re all mad about Randyll Tarly because he was an asshole to Sam, but being burned alive is still pretty godsdamned cruel. 

Westeros does not have laws about enemies defeated on the battlefield that are ever mentioned in either the books or the tv show. Codes of honor are the best you get, and they are clearly taken as optional.

Death would be the expected penalty for rebelling against the crown--Dany was being atypically merciful by offering Tarly the chance to bend the knee and survive, and I'm sure she made that offer because she had in mind that she wanted to build support. Once he declined that, she would've been seen as weak if she did anything other than execute him.

And so far as the type of death goes, death by dragon fire is actually pretty gentle compared to some of the alternatives (because it would be quick--dragon fire is hotter than regular fire). There is not a notion of "cruel and unusual punishment" in Westeros unless you think of it as an ideal for the high executioner to aspire to. Harsh punishment for rebellious activity was more than the norm than the exception, as a manner of instilling fear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Hodor's Dragon said:

Westeros does not have laws about enemies defeated on the battlefield that are ever mentioned in either the books or the tv show. Codes of honor are the best you get, and they are clearly taken as optional.

Death would be the expected penalty for rebelling against the crown--Dany was being atypically merciful by offering Tarly the chance to bend the knee and survive, and I'm sure she made that offer because she had in mind that she wanted to build support. Once he declined that, she would've been seen as weak if she did anything other than execute him.

And so far as the type of death goes, death by dragon fire is actually pretty gentle compared to some of the alternatives (because it would be quick--dragon fire is hotter than regular fire). There is not a notion of "cruel and unusual punishment" in Westeros unless you think of it as an ideal for the high executioner to aspire to. Harsh punishment for rebellious activity was more than the norm than the exception, as a manner of instilling fear.

Code of honor may be a better term to use. I don’t know the exact laws in Westeros, just what I recall about similar situations like Robb and Aerys. 

Regardless of laws and precedents and codes of honor, it’s bad news for Dany to openly flout the accepted standards of the region she’s trying to win over. 

I don’t disagree that she believes she had the right to execute him. I think it was a poor choice to use a dragon to do it, whatever she considers her right regarding battlefield prisoners. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Ned was offered two choices:
- Admit you're a traitor, beg for mercy, and take the black.
- Refuse, and die.

Randall was offered three choices:
- Bend the knee and receive a full pardon. (hardly the norm for PoW's in Westeros I suspect?)
- Take the black, without having to beg for mercy or having your honor besmirched. 
- Refuse, and die.

Bear in mind that Randall was offered a full pardon despite spending a few good seconds trashtalking Daenerys infront of both her men and other PoW's. There was nothing cruel about her executing Randall. (Rickon, as earlier stated, is a different story.)
Randall himself even seemed to think that the choices she gave him where fair. "There are no easy choices in war."

And as far as death by dragonfire being a cruel way of executing people, I'm not sure I necessarily agree. 
A direct hit from Drogon's flame at this stage seems to incinerate a human and turn them to ash within the second.
I'd probably prefer dying that way over beheading, hanging and being burned alive by regular fire. 

It ultimately might not send a good message however, but then who's gonna receive it?
The few remaining PoW's who ultimately ended up submitting anyway? 

This whole scene was ultimately just a plot device to have Rickon commit suicide by stupidity. 

Edited by MinscS2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MinscS2 said:

Ned was offered two choices:
- Admit you're a traitor, beg for mercy, and take the black.
- Refuse, and die.

Randall was offered three choices:
- Bend the knee and receive a full pardon. (hardly the norm for PoW's in Westeros I suspect?)
- Take the black, without having to beg for mercy or having your honor besmirched. 
- Refuse, and die.

Bear in mind that Randall was offered a full pardon despite spending a few good seconds trashtalking Daenerys infront of both her men and other PoW's. There was nothing cruel about her executing Randall. (Rickon, as earlier stated, is a different story.)

And as far as death by dragonfire being a cruel way of executing people, I'm not sure I necessarily agree. 
A direct hit from Drogon's flame at this stage seems to incinerate a human and turn them to ash within the second.
I'd probably prefer dying that way over beheading, hanging and being burned alive by regular fire. 

I’m clearly in the minority here regarding dragon fire, which is fine. 

Dany needs to either shit or get off the pot. Either accept the standards and norms of the realm, or admit you want to change the standards and expect people to fall in line with your new standards, and then own it.  

She can’t have it both ways. She can either be worried people won’t like her because her dad burned people, or she can burn people when she feels it’s warranted and tell everyone else to get over it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jabar of House Titan said:

The man who Dany referred to in a conversation with Sansa as being true to his word is Drogo. Drogo never schemed or backstabbed or plotted. He just ruled from a position of raw power and authority. If you cross him or had a problem, he wasn't the type to bide his time and get leverage on you. He was the type to openly challenge you to a duel and kill her.

Dany is experiencing what we know call a culture shock.

I think Dany is impatient, immature and short-tempered (in other words, a typical Aries). But Daenerys is not cruel. She doesn't hold grudges and she is not so arrogant to the point where she can't take advice or admit she is wrong.

I don't see what the problem with Daenerys is.

:agree: 

That was what she saw and experienced in all of Essos. Her entire Essosi conquest was about slicing right through the people who wanted to cross her and backstab her and she did it out of raw power and authority, in other words, fire and blood. Because A. that was what she believes is her heritage, B. That was what the essosi cultures she met (Dothraki, Slaver’s Bay) reinforced. 

4 minutes ago, The_Spanish_Inquisition said:

Dany needs to either shit or get off the pot. Either accept the standards and norms of the realm, or admit you want to change the standards and expect people to fall in line with your new standards, and then own it.  

She can’t have it both ways. She can either be worried people won’t like her because her dad burned people, or she can burn people when she feels it’s warranted and tell everyone else to get over it. 

:agree:  I do agree with this, and in my opinion she is stuck with this situation mostly because of the godawful advisor Tyrion has been. He’s just holding her back from exercising her power and military advantage but cannot come up with a functional alternative (other than wait or waste your forces or do nothing).

And now the show is putting these idiotic lines into Varys and Tyrion’s mouths that if Daenerys does decide to do something and exercise her power, it makes her mad. How the fuck this makes any sense is beyond me. 

 

Also, now some moronic buzzfeed article is telling me that the show hinted Daenerys’s madness for the first time when she stood up to her extremely abusive brother. I suppose that’s sign of madness now...? Oh god, I just want this bloody show to be over already... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, RhaenysBee said:

:agree: 

That was what she saw and experienced in all of Essos. Her entire Essosi conquest was about slicing right through the people who wanted to cross her and backstab her and she did it out of raw power and authority, in other words, fire and blood. Because A. that was what she believes is her heritage, B. That was what the essosi cultures she met (Dothraki, Slaver’s Bay) reinforced. 

:agree:  I do agree with this, and in my opinion she is stuck with this situation mostly because of the godawful advisor Tyrion has been. He’s just holding her back from exercising her power and military advantage but cannot come up with a functional alternative (other than wait or waste your forces or do nothing).

And now the show is putting these idiotic lines into Varys and Tyrion’s mouths that if Daenerys does decide to do something and exercise her power, it makes her mad. How the fuck this makes any sense is beyond me. 

 

Also, now some moronic buzzfeed article is telling me that the show hinted Daenerys’s madness for the first time when she stood up to her extremely abusive brother. I suppose that’s sign of madness now...? Oh god, I just want this bloody show to be over already... 

You're joking about that buzzfeed article, right? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole "mad queen" narrative is vaguely (and perhaps less than vaguely) sexist. Daenerys has done awful things. Military Times wrote an amusing article that places her second only to Ramsay Bolton when it comes to committing what we, on modern planet Earth, would consider war crimes. However, none of them are out of the norm for the world she actually inhabits.

She's shown much more restraint than Tywin, who waged a scorched earth campaign on the smallfolk, but no one calls him "Mad Tywin." People called her execution-by-fire of the Tyrell boys a warning sign of her madness, but lots of people have killed over less. Show favorite Tyrion had a singer murdered to keep him quiet about the affair he was conducting with a prostitute he later strangled to death, but no one calls him "Mad Tyrion."

I could go on, but my point is obvious. She can be harsh in the waging of war and the dispensation of justice, but unless she does something ridiculously out of character in the last two episodes, I don't think the title of "mad queen" makes any sense whatsoever. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Lady_Ghost said:

But is she really? I would agree with the term ruthless as Dany has shown numerous times that she can be quite brutal if she thinks she needs to be. But none of these actions were really crazy/mad - that's why all this Mad Queen- theories really bother me. If Dany is the Mad Queen based on her actions - how is Cercei not also a Mad Queen,too?

 

There's a flaw in D&D's writing style, whereby they rely on silent shots of the actors' faces to tell large chunks of the story. We are left to guess what Danny is thinking and what's motivating her much of the time. Emilia Clarke is not a great actress, and part of her character is to appear serene and unemotional and above it all. Which means we don't get much information.

Watching her interviews, I realize she has way more facial expressions than Danny ever shows. Danny has to carefully control herself in every situation. Not just her decisions and actions but her facial muscles, too. Because she's playacting. Something a Cersei learns at court from youth. But Danny's youth was spent struggling from place to place as a beggar-princess. 

We have scenes where carnage occurs on her orders and she walks by like she's the Coolest Girl in the World. Sometimes she takes visible pleasure in what happens. This could be indicative of lack of empathy in her psychology, or sadism. Then again, it could merely be spectacle. Because the show likes to have shots of characters looking badass. 

Edited by darmody

Share this post


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

The word "mad" is just a generic term that readers use because that is what is used in the books. There are different levels of mad just like there are different levels of villains in the way Martin says he writes. Some are light gray and some are very dark black. Argueing details over a commonly used word is part of the problem. 

Butt in this context we're talking about "every time a Targaryen is born the gods flip a coin." Genetic history of mental defect in the family tree. We're comparing her to her father, who actually was mad in the clinical sense. Out of his mind and not in control of his actions. Paranoid schizophrenic maybe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bran the Shipper said:

Viserys was definitely not mad just weak.  He was over stressed trying to reclaim his throne and was not cut out for Dothraki life.

Viserys was more than weak. Definitely something was wrong with him. Which could be environmental, because his family was murdered and he was torn out of his life and flung into uncertainty. Compare the surprise in Joffrey when his mother slaps him versus Viserys' reaction when Danny hits him back. Joffrey thinks most about witnesses around him and restrains his anger. Viserys is surprised to the point of utter shock. Like he didn't believe such a thing was physically possible. 

I want to say they made Viserys a comical villain to aid in Danny's character development. His actions, beliefs, facial expressions, etc. are so over the top reckless and selfish and outlandish. He was raised believing he was the Last Dragon, okay. But Joffrey was raised thinking he'd be king, and he was a jerk and in a way mentally defective, without being crazy. Viserys was on a whole other level. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jabar of House Titan said:

Burning Randyll Tarly is just another execution. It's just like beheading Janos Slynt

No, it isn't. The Night's Watch has its own rules. He was a member of the order, he disobeyed a direct order and was executed legally. 

Danny, on the other hand, is a queen in her own mind but not legally. He has surrendered and is her prisoner. He would at least have the right to trial by combat, I think, if not a real trial for treason. Summarily executing him was outside the bounds of Westerosi law, I should think. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, the Greenleif Stark said:

In regards to the books, if Dany does go Mad Queen......is Quaithe seeming more like hallucinations, playing into Dany losing it?

Is quaithe a hallucination? 

to be fair, hallucinations are really all prophecy is GOT is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The_Spanish_Inquisition said:

Is quaithe a hallucination? 

to be fair, hallucinations are really all prophecy is GOT is. 

I haven't reread the books in awhile, but wasn't she just popping up outta nowhere? at least in Dance. Maybe she was never really there and Dany was talking to herself because Dany is going crazy, or at least that's where Martin could take it.......I'm just trying to understand how Martin is taking us here if this is where the story is going

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, MinscS2 said:

Ned was offered two choices:
- Admit you're a traitor, beg for mercy, and take the black.
- Refuse, and die.

Refuse, be put through a mock trial, and die I should think. His confession rendered a trial moot.

The Lannisters may have coerced a confession out of Ned by locking him away with no water. I dunno. Otherwise, it was a legal proceeding. He confessed ostensibly to save his daughters' lives. The king could have opted for mercy but gave him the wages of treason instead. 

Edited by darmody

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, the Greenleif Stark said:

I haven't reread the books in awhile, but wasn't she just popping up outta nowhere? at least in Dance. Maybe she was never really there and Dany was talking to herself because Dany is going crazy, or at least that's where Martin could take it.......I'm just trying to understand how Martin is taking us here if this is where the story is going

I didn’t remember her showing up in Dance per se. She definitely wasn’t an hallucination earlier, because Jorah talks to her as well. 

Book Dany has all kinds of weird visions while she’s wandering around having a rough time of it in the desert, along with having what’s clearly a miscarriage. 

Interestingly most of her inner monologue involves her chatting with Jorah. Why Jorah? 

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

×