Jump to content
Ran

[Spoilers] Episode 805 Discussion

Recommended Posts

Just now, The Marquis de Leech said:

My immediate thought was the Sack of Magdeburg... but that was a result of (unpaid) soldiers running amok, rather than a deliberate massacre on the part of the leadership. 

McGlynn makes the point (convincingly in my view) that sacks were more likely to be ordered from the top rather than simply the result of out of control soldiers running amok.

IMHO, Dany planned to massacre a large number of the inhabitants, so she burned her way through the city.  She had instructed Grey Worm to carry out a massacre as well.  Once the Dothraki and Northern soldiers saw what was happening, they knew their commander was letting them off the leash, and they joined in.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

But here's the thing: Daenerys doesn't want to add these people to her Empire. She actually wants to live among them and rule them. As such, she's broken Machiavelli's golden rule.

What is Machiavelli's golden rule? 

Share this post


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

What is Machiavelli's golden rule? 

It is better to feared than to be loved, but one must avoid making oneself hated.

Dany's view is more "Let them hate me, so long as they fear me."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

But here's the thing: Daenerys doesn't want to add these people to her Empire. She actually wants to live among them and rule them. As such, she's broken Machiavelli's golden rule.

Which is why she wouldn't be doing that in the books. At least not with as much wanton and pointless destruction of the place she wants to rule. However, KL could easily enough burn to the ground if so much as a single wildfire stash left was to explode considering it is a city mostly built from wood.

In the books a dragon would have to just fly across the city one time or use it to burn down the Red Keep or even the gates to start a fire that would consume the entire city. In fact, George's KL is completely unbelievable as a place housing dragons that never burned down, not even once. As a wooden city completely crowded KL should have major fires every decade or so, even without dragons living in their midst for 150 years.

9 minutes ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

My immediate thought was the Sack of Magdeburg... but that was a result of (unpaid) soldiers running amok, rather than a deliberate massacre on the part of the leadership. 

That was my thought as well, but that's not medieval warfare ;-).

However, Tilly definitely stood by and let his soldiers do their work for three (!) days. It was so brutal contemporaries condemned it, but it was still part of the warfare reality of those days.

From that we can draw the obvious conclusion that in George's world nobody is going to condemn anyone for a sack. Even Tywin's Sack of KL was never condemned because it cost the lives of thousands or tens of thousands of innocents - we don't even know how many Kingslanders the Lannisters raped and butchered. All Tywin is condemned for is the betrayal of his king in a rather foul manner and for murdering crucial members of the royal family. That's the outrage, not the sack as such.

Share this post


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

It is better to feared than to be loved, but one must avoid making oneself hated.

Dany's view is more "Let them hate me, so long as they fear me."

Do we even know she wants to rule the city she has destroyed? That has never been established in the show, has it?

Anybody who would deliberately burn down KL in the books would likely realize that this would destroy the Red Keep and the Iron Throne as well, meaning he or she would likely not want to rule from that particular place - if at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What surprises me is the amount of people who thought these two would do a decent job, i don´t care for the show since the end of season 4, until then it was a decent homage to the books but from 5 to now it's a free for all.

I ranted the treatment of Stannis in season 5 considering the book source by D&D not just because i like the character but because of the sheer stupidity, many were "meh it's not my favourite character nor a main one", well stupidity doesn't just leave and coupled with rushness to end the show and take other projects and vacations leads to this mess.

It's a great comedic show i give them that, from the "give me 20 good men" to the "scorpion aim 150% in episode 4 to joystick malfunction in 5", i laughed my behind off

Share this post


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

I'd recommend to anyone, By Sword and Fire, Cruelty and Atrocity in Medieval Warfare by Sean McGlynn, which is riveting, if depressing.

Plenty of medieval commanders would have done exactly what Dany did, upon capturing a city that had offered resistance, and whose commander had executed her best friend in front of her, at a parley.  They, like she, would hold all the inhabitants collectively guilty for the decisions of their leaders.   Beziers, Soissons, Cesena, Rome, Herat, Delhi, Baghdad, and countless other cities and towns bear witness to that. 

And, that's not to deny that the murder of civilians in Kings Landing was evil and barbaric.

Would  Caesar or any Roman general or emperor utterly destroy Rome or put to sword all its’ inhabitants when there’s no immediate incentive? A country’s capital is simply too valuable both in trade, and general cultural significance to where preferable to do irreversible damage to it after it’s been surrendered to them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Which is why she wouldn't be doing that in the books. At least not with as much wanton and pointless destruction of the place she wants to rule. However, KL could easily enough burn to the ground if so much as a single wildfire stash left was to explode considering it is a city mostly built from wood.

In the books a dragon would have to just fly across the city one time or use it to burn down the Red Keep or even the gates to start a fire that would consume the entire city. In fact, George's KL is completely unbelievable as a place housing dragons that never burned down, not even once. As a wooden city completely crowded KL should have major fires every decade or so, even without dragons living in their midst for 150 years.

That was my thought as well, but that's not medieval warfare ;-).

However, Tilly definitely stood by and let his soldiers do their work for three (!) days. It was so brutal contemporaries condemned it, but it was still part of the warfare reality of those days.

From that we can draw the obvious conclusion that in George's world nobody is going to condemn anyone for a sack. Even Tywin's Sack of KL was never condemned because it cost the lives of thousands or tens of thousands of innocents - we don't even know how many Kingslanders the Lannisters raped and butchered. All Tywin is condemned for is the betrayal of his king in a rather foul manner and for murdering crucial members of the royal family. That's the outrage, not the sack as such.

Yes.  The rape and murder of Elia of Dorne is considered a terrible crime.  The rape and murder of Elia of Flea Bottom would go unnoticed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Would  Caesar or any Roman general or emperor utterly destroy Rome or put to sword all its’ inhabitants when there’s no immediate incentive? A country’s capital is simply too valuable both in trade, and general cultural significance to where preferable to do irreversible damage to it after it’s been surrendered to them. 

Sulla put Rome to the sack, when he captured the city. When the common people started pelting his men with tiles from their apartments, he set them ablaze.

Edited by SeanF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we should expect this from the books.

The name of the episode os "the Bells" the sign that the city surrendered.

I think riding drogon she Will probably Go Full bloodlust. The way they did it, It just doesnt look like It Will be colateral damage. The focus is on bloodlust and the Twist is so big that It directly affects the end of story. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SeanF said:

Sulla put Rome to the sack, when he captured the city. 

Yeah, but that was more a cruel cleansing operation, supported by rather far-flung proscriptions - which, to be sure, actually profited the lower classes considering they could openly steal and plunder from the outlawed nobles they were also allowed to kill.

What they have Dany do is actually burn the city she wants to conquer, the city and castle her ancestors had built.

4 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Yes.  The rape and murder of Elia of Dorne is considered a terrible crime.  The rape and murder of Elia of Flea Bottom would go unnoticed.

In the framework of our story only Doran Martell would likely have issues with a sack of KL. But even if he would go through with it if it was part of his overall revenge/power plan and a pretty guaranteed success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Calaryion said:

Is it any different to Aegon the Conqueror’s victory? 

Aegom did not intentionally burn civilians. Only major Dragon attacks by him were on Harrenhal castle and on the alliance army.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a thought, not sure where the story goes with Bran but I think could've been good if developed well, is if in The Long Night we saw him try to warg a dragon like Reaghal and fail or whatever, only to try again this time and he's the reason Drogon burns down the whole city. We then find out it was Bran's masterplan to have Dany destroy the city and be hated.

Share this post


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

Aegom did not intentionally burn civilians. Only major Dragon attacks by him were on Harrenhal castle and on the alliance army.

Yea, that is a valid point. I feel Dany’s character has been backed into a corner, and forced to do this, she came to assist Jon with his war, lost next to everything and he gets the plaudits for it all. It is no surprise she’s gone mad and destroyed everything, she has been made to feel alone for most of her battles and now she pretty much is bar the remaining soldiers she has. Her decline is inevitable, as is her demise, which is a shame because I liked the idea of her ruling.  

Share this post


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

Dany didn't just fail to minimize deaths by exercising appropriate command responsibility. She intentionally caused them.

And to this point-causing innocents to die in response to another crimes is not controversial in Westeros. Think of Theon or the hostages Book Jon takes. Neither Ned or Book Jon is really evil but they would cut a child they’ve taken hostage’s throat if the child’s parents decided to rebel or assist in a rebellion. The main problem here with Daenerys’ is unlike those potential  killings, her’s was entirely pointless.

Edited by Varysblackfyre321

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny how:

  1. "Dany as villain" (Which I have always thought since reading the books) has been rushed and screwed up

  2. Jamie's arc of redemption turned out to be a circle. Which at the last second was rushed and screwed up.

  3. Arya's arc of "If you want revenge, dig two graves" and learning that revenge means nothing was rushed and screwed up.

  4. Tyrion has zero arc. His journey to Statesman and hero and leader just STOPPED as soon as he reached Dany. I am still suspicious that his arc will really be THIRD DRAGON CHILD in the books.

  5. Bran literally does nothing. That isn't an Arc but that fancy Oroborus snake thing that means something but I don't know what. (like his plot)

  6. Sansa's arc of sweet summer child to cold ass dark queen, will only work if she ends up queen next week. Otherwise she has gone on an arc from shop floor cleaner to DEPUTY manager of the store.

  7. Cersei's arc is the most broken I feel. She is supposed to be a bit crap as queen. Her journey was all about her hateful ways leading naturally to her commupance. But then people liked her and D&D turned her into the Emperor from Star Wars. And didn't even give her a good emperors death!

  8. Sandor for some reason had a huge life changing moment (the religious group) then switched back to TV show favourite the Hound and did KEWL THINGS and then for some unknown reason arbitaritly decided his brother was his arch nemesis and committed suicide by going to his "final battle". The character as written does not need to commit suicide. In fact he has gained humanity and a bit of soul. It just doesn't make sense beyond "CLEGANEBOWL MUST HAPPEN." It's like the ultra loyal mountain and hound read the script before hand and knew they had to betray their master/die off before the last episode.

 

It is like GRRM told D&D sort of the end state without nuance or logic... last week and they have 2 hours to get there. Each of these plots could have unfolded over many many weeks and closed ONE AT A TIME.

 

I can't wait for Kevin J Andersons final book in the trilogy based off of GRRM's notes. There is a chance that rogue would do a terribly mediocre job... that's better than this one.

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

×