Jump to content
Kajjo

Daenerys: Analysis of psychology and foreshadowing

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, The One Who Kneels said:

Are we now supposed to believe that Dany is just stupid or forgot what happened previously? That she really thinks "Uh-oh its two minutes into my sudden violent arrival on a dragon and they aren't cheering better burn them all!?"

Dunno, for a person who managed to forget about a frikkin' fleet which had taken out her own fleet....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, chatty83 said:

For me its fairly simple and has been building since episode one. Dany has been building herself up and giving herself a reason to rule from the beginning and in her head the fantasy would ring true. Only it hasn't and to rub it in her face she has first hand accounts of the person it is true for.

1. Dany believed that her and her brother were the last of the Targs and when Viserys died then she became the last Targ on the planet. This tbf was true for a long time and in terms of going to the Targaryen dynasty she was the last true ruler and heir to the throne. That's a lot for a thirteen year old girl to have thrust on her but she believed her own hype and for seven series she's been building that to a climax.

2. She believed she was destined for the throne. Even when Viserys is talking about his destiny you can see Dany thinking its her destiny as well. Not exactly how Viserys planned it out but Dany took his fate and made it her own. Her whole tennage/adult life has been all about one thing and that is taking the throne.

3. She wanted to be a good leader, the type of leader everyone loved and she conned herself into thinking she was going to come to Westeros with droves of people backing her, wanting her to come and save them from the tyranny they have been subjected to. Dany was going to be the savior of Westeros and the people were going to love her. Early seasons she communicates this and her victories in Essos only helped create in her own mind that no matter the problem their would be a solution and that it would result in her on the iron throne, beloved by all, savior of Westeros.

All these things aren't about her though, they are about Jon. Jon is also one of the two last living Targs, he is the true heir to the throne. Jon doesn't want the throne but people want him on it, he is a hero and by being humble he has the backing of Westeros, something Dany has never had. Mostly its Jon the hero that grates on Dany, he has had no designs on what Dany wants yet he is there and more successful at it that Dany, he has the blood, the rights, the backing and the love of the people and...……. he doesn't want it. He doesn't want any of it.

She wants to be Jon, Jon doesn't want to be her and if she can't be Jon well then she'll take what she wants by brutality. I think that snapped her when she heard the bells ring. She wanted Cersei to fight so she could save Westoros like a dragon riding hero, when that was gone she took it anyway.

What you and so many folks on this forum leave when you talk about "he believed she was destined for the throne:"

THE DRAGONS

She walked into a pyre under a brand-new, blood-red comet and not only survived but came out with the first dragons in the world in centuries.

That shit happened to me, I'd think I was destined for something, too. Everybody else sure did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

If we are being honest then we have to include all of the "Inside the Episode" content.  I say this not to rant or rave, but it is just a fact that the show runners have gotten into the habit of revealing key backstory/character development details.  They will say things that happened neither onscreen nor in the books, so the information should be included in the show's canon.  A "So Spake D&D" for the show, like the "So Spake Martin" catalog for the books.

Edited by Dolorous Pat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hodor's Dragon said:

What you and so many folks on this forum leave when you talk about "he believed she was destined for the throne:"

THE DRAGONS

She walked into a pyre under a brand-new, blood-red comet and not only survived but came out with the first dragons in the world in centuries.

That shit happened to me, I'd think I was destined for something, too. Everybody else sure did.

Its not that she isn't destined for it though, its hers, she can have it but she cant have it how she had built it up in her own mind. Instead of working hard to win the people over shes took a benny radge and decided if the people don't love her they will fear her instead. Her destiny is correct. her vision for that destiny wasn't.

Share this post


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

No, that wouldn't work, because then people would justify and defend her decision, because they would see those civilians as her enemies and rebels.

Here we have a situation where she regards civilians as enemies, exactly because they surrender, but do not cheer her and instead flee her. It's incredibly twisted. But hey, even then still people try to defend it with "oh, maybe she knows it's a trick, a set-up". WTF cares whether Tyrion intended to trick her. You can clearly hear women shouting to ring the bells. You see soldiers laying down their arms. And people flee. She BURNS women and children fleeing in the street, away from her. That's their crime. That they're scared of her, and not of Cersei. 

Is there precedent for this warped interpretation by Dany, leading up to it? There certainly is in s8. It's set up in s1 with Illyrio. It's set up in Mereen, with the Mysha stuff (people made her feel loved, and she loved that). It's set up in Qarth in S2.

I get that explanation but that still doesn't make sense within the context of the show. Dany said before the battle "let them fear" it doesn't make sense for her to kill them if they are afraid of her since that is exactly what she wanted? Her killing the civilians still comes off as bad writing unless she wanted to kill half of them to instill fear but the episode made it clear that she was interested in killing every single person (aka genocide).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Queen‍‍‍‍‍‍ Alysanne‍‍™ said:

I get that explanation but that still doesn't make sense within the context of the show. Dany said before the battle "let them fear" it doesn't make sense for her to kill them if they are afraid of her since that is exactly what she wanted? Her killing the civilians still comes off as bad writing unless she wanted to kill half of them to instill fear but the episode made it clear that she was interested in killing every single person (aka genocide).

She decided "let it be fear", but it's the opposite of what she "wants". She wants "love". That's what she told Jon. She wants civilians to rise up and rebel against Cersei when she arrives, like the people of Mereen. That's what she told Tyrion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

She decided "let it be fear", but it's the opposite of what she "wants". She wants "love". That's what she told Jon. She wants civilians to rise up and rebel against Cersei when she arrives, like the people of Mereen. That's what she told Tyrion.

Did Tyrion facilitate that?

Share this post


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

To me it is not so much "madness" as Otherness that drove Dany, and Grey Worm too. They suffered horrible losses recently, yes and were in deep grief which is a kind of temporary mental illness, yes. But more importantly they saw this as coming at the hands of people they did not love or relate to in any way on a human level. They felt it was ok to take revenge in this way (spear in the back of soldiers who surrendered by Grey Worm, and Dragonfire from Dany) because they could not humanize the people they were doing this too. For Dany the people of KL refused to recognize her rule and so were in the wrong, and they did not love her so she did not care about them. For Grey Worm, he is a soldier who went through dehumanizing training and is facing foreign people in a very foreign land. He doesn't care the least bit about them.

I can see that for Greyworm, but Danny already had relationships with Jorah and Tyrion, and Jon and she supposedly fell in love. The Northerners were cold to her, but they're cold to everyone. They were even cold to Sansa and Jon in season Six. 

Think about the tens of thousands of soldiers gathered around Winterfell. There wasn't a single dramatized incident of strife between Westerosi and Dothraki/Unsullied. Not counting little kids running away from Miss Sandy.

On the other hand, several seasons ago Starks and Karstarks were at eachother's throats despite the fact that they were on a winning streak, all because Jaime killed one person. 

Edited by darmody

Share this post


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

Dunno, for a person who managed to forget about a frikkin' fleet which had taken out her own fleet....

Twice, the ironfleet took out her fleet twice, once when they attacked yara and killed all the sandsnakes and the dornish allies and again when they attacked the unsullieds fleet at Casterly Rock, wooops. I guess the 3rd time was a charm when a khaleesi remembers not to send any of her forces by ship until she burned that pesky Ironfleet once and for all.

Edited by darksellsword

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hodor's Dragon said:

Whatever she may've meant, she quite clearly did not intend to end rule by monarchy. That's the flat opposite of her character arc, so I think you rule that interpretation out from the start unless she explicitly so stated, which she did not.

I don't think she meant anything. It was just sounds coming out of her mouth. But if you take her at her word, that's what the analogy meant. 

Share this post


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

Did Tyrion facilitate that?

I don't understand your question here or what your point is. I only explained what Dany's message to Tyrion was when he explained the people of KL were innocents and hostages.

Share this post


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

She decided "let it be fear", but it's the opposite of what she "wants". She wants "love". That's what she told Jon. She wants civilians to rise up and rebel against Cersei when she arrives, like the people of Mereen. That's what she told Tyrion.

Ah I probably didn't hear that part then well.

Having said that I'm still not sure I agree that was her reasoning for killing the civilians. I think in a scenario like that the shot would have panned to a few civilians showing expressions of fear while looking up to Dany and then moving up to show an angry/emotional Dany in response to that. Instead, we got a shot of the Red Keep

Edited by Queen‍‍‍‍‍‍ Alysanne‍‍™

Share this post


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

I don't understand your question here or what your point is. I only explained what Dany's message to Tyrion was when he explained the people of KL were innocents and hostages.

The point is Tyrion and Varys weren't doing what they were supposed to be doing.

If they cared about people they'd had done something for the people.   So they would welcome the queen.

Edited by Hoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Queen‍‍‍‍‍‍ Alysanne‍‍™ said:

Ah I probably didn't hear that part then well.

Having said that I'm still not sure I agree that was her reasoning for killing the civilians. I think in a scenario like that the shot would have panned to a few civilians showing expressions of fear while looking up to Dany and then moving up to show an angry/emotional Dany in response to that. Instead, we got a shot of the Red Keep

Camera fixes on Dany's face several times, listening, waiting, and then sounds of women crying for the bells to be rung, again a shot of her face, listening, waiting. The Bells get rung. Jon sighs in relief. Back to Dany as more bells ring. Her face falters. Then she gazes at the Red Keep. Camera back to her face and her expression turns angry once again. She flies off and initially it seems as if she's flying for the Red Keep. Then a long shot of people fleeing and running, like truly a mass of people. And then she burns them and turns around to burn down the city.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, darmody said:

I don't think she meant anything. It was just sounds coming out of her mouth. But if you take her at her word, that's what the analogy meant. 

There's nothing at all in the quote that says or even implies she will end monarchy. Their is no completely definite meaning, but the internal clues indicate that she wants to end "crushing" of those on the bottom of the wheel.

"Lannister, Targaryen, Baratheon, Stark, Tyrell – they're all just spokes on a wheel. This one's on top, then that one's on top, and on and on it spins, crushing those on the ground. I'm not going to stop the wheel. I'm going to break the wheel.”

Share this post


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

The point is Tyrion and Varys weren't doing what they were supposed to be doing.

If they cared about people they'd had done something for the people.   So they would welcome the queen.

And how could they have done that? They're not wizards. And why the hell are they responsible for Dany being upset because she doesn't get a welcome committee as she did in Mereen? There is only one person responsible for this and her feelings about people surrendering, but not welcoming her as a liberator, and that's Dany. Everybody else gets that smallfolk don't really care who they are ruled by as long as they are left in peace, except Dany. There is just no way that Tyrion could have foreseen that Dany would ever twist his words about the innocense of smallfolk in this way.

Edited by sweetsunray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was no foreshadowing for Dany indiscriminately burning the civilians of KL after she had already won.  This was completely out of character for her.  The only people she has been ruthless towards in her journey were the ones who refused to bend the knee/surrender to her, and she never targeted the smallfolk.  Here her enemy was isolated in the Red Keep, the city was surrendering, and the remaining army had given up... then she starts burning the women and children.  She went from making a few questionable decisions regarding punishments for her enemies, to committing genocide.

 

There is no "analysis" to be made of characters acting out of character to meet a plot point.  If Jon had started killing children during the battle you wouldn't point at the execution of Olly as foreshadowing.  They didn't lay out the breadcrumbs for this to make sense nor did they create a character in Dany for which this was believable.  For all we know she just gets really angry when she's hungry, since her entire "descent into madness" was completely coincident with a short fast.

Share this post


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

And how could they have done that? They're not wizards. 

Spread the word.  Work on that.  They did not.  They did the opposite.  They had their own agenda and it had nothing to do with saving people.  It had to do with them governing, with them being in charge and making decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Hodor's Dragon said:

There's nothing at all in the quote that says or even implies she will end monarchy. Their is no completely definite meaning, but the internal clues indicate that she wants to end "crushing" of those on the bottom of the wheel.

"Lannister, Targaryen, Baratheon, Stark, Tyrell – they're all just spokes on a wheel. This one's on top, then that one's on top, and on and on it spins, crushing those on the ground. I'm not going to stop the wheel. I'm going to break the wheel.”

I never said end monarchy. I said change the form of government.

It has to be the form. It can't be just a different ruler, unless somehow rulers were divorced from families. Which would be to end dynastic rule. Which would be to change the form of government.

And it can't just mean stopping the crushing of people. Because you could do that by simply preventing the wheel from rolling forward. Which is what putting the Targaryens on top forever would accomplish. But she doesn't want to do that. She wants to break the wheel, allegedly. 

Edited by darmody

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

×