Daenerys: Analysis of psychology and foreshadowing

[snow is the man]

Just now, Tijgy said:

When it all went wrong: 

If only Barry was still alive, she wouldn't have been "setting towns and castles aflame, murdering son fathers in front of their fathers sons, burning men alive with wildfire dragonfire" or "giving her enemies the justice she thinks they deserved, each time making her feel powerful and right until the very end."

Barry died two episodes later which lead to this: 

Feeding the leaders of the nobles to her dragons not knowing if they are innocent or not. 

Someone was supplying those sons of the harpies and her response while brutal was understandable. However killing off sir barristan was stupid. He was one of the best characters on the show and they killed him off because...

[SeanF]

Just now, snow is the man said:

It's just a saying. But fine. No it made no sense.

It makes perfect sense to a conqueror.  Not to us.

Imagine if it was not Daenerys but Genghis Khan at the gates.  He calls on the city to surrender, and instead, the commander of the city executes his best friend on the city walls in front of him.  From that point on, there will be no mercy when the city falls.

[Hoo]

1 minute ago, snow is the man said:

bull This is not what she meant. I will say again this was just them destroying her character and doing it in the most shocking way possible even if it made no sense for her character or anything.

No.  It's in the character, it's in the storyline.

They were talking about power resides where people "think" it resides, Sansa opining about better rulers, Jon on the fence about not wanting to rule.  All that democratic garbage.

The power resides in Dracarys, in the weapon of mass destruction.  Missandei said Dracarys.

[snow is the man]

It was so out of character for her that it made no sense. And it was cersei who did it. she could have gone to the red keep and burned it down killing cersei but also killing the people inside and it would have showed her losing it but at the same time make sense. This would be the equivalant of jon deciding he wants to be a lannister.

[Corvinus85]

6 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

I myself understand it. But Dany expects this. She has the emotional maturity of a child, rather black and white, and all the messianic Meesha stuff in Essos didn't help her one bit.

Yes, she has failed as a ruler, despite her attempt to learn how to rule in Meereen, and her advisers failed her probably more than they they helped. But, unlike the books, the TV show does acknowledge that years have passed since this the beginning, even since Meereen. So can we really use the excuse that she has the emotional maturity of a child? All her experiences, that in the early seasons appeared to have made her stronger, have in fact been for nothing. If that's the excuse, then the argument that this is a great arc for Dany falls woefully short. 

[snow is the man]

1 minute ago, Hoo said:

No.  It's in the character, it's in the storyline.

They were talking about power resides where people "think" it resides, Sansa opining about better rulers, Jon on the fence about not wanting to rule.  All that democratic garbage.

The power resides in Dracarys, in the weapon of mass destruction.  Missandei said Dracarys.

Jon was on the fence? Jon said NO flat out. No this wasn't dany planning it or doing it for any reasons. This was bad writing. And that stupid "break the wheel" thing is way overused by fans. It's like how everyone expected that prophecy that cersei would be strangled by her younger brother to mean something. Sometimes people just say things and it doesn't matter.

[sweetsunray]

8 minutes ago, snow is the man said:

It's just a saying. But fine. No it made no sense.

It does to me.

[snow is the man]

2 minutes ago, Corvinus said:

Yes, she has failed as a ruler, despite her attempt to learn how to rule in Meereen, and her advisers failed her probably more than they they helped. But, unlike the books, the TV show does acknowledge that years have passed since this the beginning, even since Meereen. So can we really use the excuse that she has the emotional maturity of a child? All her experiences, that in the early seasons appeared to have made her stronger, have in fact been for nothing. If that's the excuse, then the argument that this is a great arc for Dany falls woefully short. 

Exactly. It makes no sense. It was just for shock value. It made no sense.

[sweetsunray]

3 minutes ago, Corvinus said:

Yes, she has failed as a ruler, despite her attempt to learn how to rule in Meereen, and her advisers failed her probably more than they they helped. But, unlike the books, the TV show does acknowledge that years have passed since this the beginning, even since Meereen. So can we really use the excuse that she has the emotional maturity of a child? All her experiences, that in the early seasons appeared to have made her stronger, have in fact been for nothing. If that's the excuse, then the argument that this is a great arc for Dany falls woefully short. 

She always grew in strength and power and strategic intelligence, but never in emotional maturity. 

[ron2112]

7 minutes ago, snow is the man said:

No dude the whole thing made no sense. I like dany alot and this was completly out of character for her and killed her character. The showrunners wanted to have the "good" person become pure evil and in the most shocking way possible. There was no other reason for it. Usually I try to find reasons and excuses for the writers in alot of show but this is just them breaking the show and dany's character.

I am gonna head cannon that after the bell rang a stray arrow hit dany in the fore head and she died and the rest of this never happened. And while I wanted a happy ending for her I would have understood her going mad. But this is just over the top. pretending that it was dany's evil twin makes as much sense as what happened.

Gonna put this here -- the entire scene this clip comes from is a real-world example of normal people snapping and doing crazy things in wartime:  

 

[Cas Stark]

1 minute ago, Corvinus said:

Yes, she has failed as a ruler, despite her attempt to learn how to rule in Meereen, and her advisers failed her probably more than they they helped. But, unlike the books, the TV show does acknowledge that years have passed since this the beginning, even since Meereen. So can we really use the excuse that she has the emotional maturity of a child? All her experiences, that in the early seasons appeared to have made her stronger, have in fact been for nothing. If that's the excuse, then the argument that this is a great arc for Dany falls woefully short. 

Making so many of the losses the fault of her advisors instead of her own [rash?] decisions was another mistake by the show that undercuts her now tragic story.  The show also did a very poor job of portraying that Westeros wouldn't greet her as a liberator, because most of the Sansa/Arya/North stuff came off as an irrational dislike of a woman who was bleeding on their behalf.

The idea that her cumulative losses, loss of allies, loss of Jon, loss of Missy, loss of the dragons, combined with Westeros is after all a strange an alien place to her....would cause her to revert wholly to fire and blood isn't a bad one, it was executed in a half assed manner.

[Westerosi]

9 hours ago, tallTale said:

I can’t believe so many people are discounting how many times Daeny has shown restraint, compassion, and intelligence in her story. It’s shocking to me! (Am I doing this right?)

Daeny has only used her dragons to attack military targets and political targets, she has never been bloodthirsty to the point that she would willingly slaughter helpless civilians. There are many tangible instances of proof to substantiate this. She actually chains her dragons away at one point for an accidental kill an of a civilian.

The showrunners are so desperate to show her as crazy that they made her roast innocent civilians running away, in a battle she had already won. I will never accept that after the numerous times Daeny has shown proof of her moral character.  

I wholeheartedly agree. 

[Hoo]

2 minutes ago, snow is the man said:

No this wasn't Dany planning it or doing it for any reasons. This was bad writing

No it was not bad writing.  This absolutely had to happen and they did great.  

When the bell rang she stopped and contemplated.  It was not enough that the bell rang.  Perceptions had to changed, business as usual had to be changed where someone takes the throne and Westeros goes on about there merry life. 

Getting them and the viewer to understand there will never be another war was the point.

She could've taken the throne without the added destruction, and fkers would keep plotting for wars. And then in S9E5 she would've had to burn down Vale or some other place.

This was about bringing endgame to the screen and it had to be done.

[Kobb]

9 hours ago, tallTale said:

I can’t believe so many people are discounting how many times Daeny has shown restraint, compassion, and intelligence in her story. It’s shocking to me! (Am I doing this right?)

Daeny has only used her dragons to attack military targets and political targets, she has never been bloodthirsty to the point that she would willingly slaughter helpless civilians. There are many tangible instances of proof to substantiate this. She actually chains her dragons away at one point for an accidental kill an of a civilian.

The showrunners are so desperate to show her as crazy that they made her roast innocent civilians running away, in a battle she had already won. I will never accept that after the numerous times Daeny has shown proof of her moral character.  

The show hasn't shown Danaerys go this far, but it has consistently shown she has a terrible temper and is quick to jump to irrational decisions when angry. It's the counsel of the wise people around her (Selmy, Jorah, Tyrion, Varys, Jon) that keeps her from doing this.

What we've never seen is Dany pushed this far. Nothing about this situation is typical, given everything she's been through recently. Sure, Dany has never been shown to murder civilians, but she's been shown to have a temper and this situation is clearly far more extreme than anything she's ever endured before. Of course her reaction also has to be unprecedented to properly match it.

[tallTale]

6 minutes ago, Kobb said:

The show hasn't shown Danaerys go this far, but it has consistently shown she has a terrible temper and is quick to jump to irrational decisions when angry. It's the counsel of the wise people around her (Selmy, Jorah, Tyrion, Varys, Jon) that keeps her from doing this.

What we've never seen is Dany pushed this far. Nothing about this situation is typical, given everything she's been through recently. Sure, Dany has never been shown to murder civilians, but she's been shown to have a temper and this situation is clearly far more extreme than anything she's ever endured before. Of course her reaction also has to be unprecedented to properly match it.

Well, she lost her husband and unborn  son and that didn’t push her to madness, but miss sandy dies and all bets are off ! 

[Ice Queen]

3 minutes ago, tallTale said:

Well, she lost her husband and son and that didn’t push her to madness, but miss sandy dies and all bets are off ! 

Walking into Drogo's funeral pyre was sane?

[Meera of Tarth]

13 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

She always grew in strength and power and strategic intelligence, but never in emotional maturity. 

I totally agree!!!!!!!!!

[tallTale]

Just now, Ice Queen said:

Walking into Drogo's funeral pyre was sane?

Certainly not blood thirsty mad queen insanity.

[snow is the man]

5 minutes ago, Hoo said:

No it was not bad writing.  This absolutely had to happen and they did great.  

When the bell rang she stopped and contemplated.  It was not enough that the bell rang.  Perceptions had to changed, business as usual had to be changed where someone takes the throne and Westeros goes on about there merry life. 

Getting them and the viewer to understand there will never be another war was the point.

She could've taken the throne without the added destruction, and fkers would keep plotting for wars. And then in S9E5 she would've had to burn down Vale or some other place.

This was about bringing endgame to the screen and it had to be done.

You do realize dragons have destroyed cities and armies before right? There are still wars. Once cersei was dead then only jon would be left as a contender and if she was truly mad she could have killed him then there would be noone with a claim or with enough power to attack her. Now all she did was kill civilians for no reason. The only way to end all war would be to kill everyone. Yeah not just in KL but in that ENTIRE world. So will she fly around killing everyone now? She finished the war and that was it. Then she killed civilians for no reason. I am done arguing about this

[snow is the man]

1 minute ago, Ice Queen said:

Walking into Drogo's funeral pyre was sane?

she planned to use that spell and it worked. It was risky  and I wouldn't do t. However there is a huge difference from that type of crazy to what happened.