Bear42 Posted May 17, 2019 Share Posted May 17, 2019 By now everyone is well aware of the criticisms and defenses of Dany's turn to the dark side and in my opinion there was an easy solution. Dany's actions needed to be inspired more by Aegon the Conqueror and less by the Mad King. None of the foreshadowing pointed to as evidence of her cruelty suggests that Dany is mad like her father, every awful thing she does is done in a cold, calculated, and pragmatic way. Her actions against the Tarlys, or MMD, or the masters of Mereen were not done out of rage in the heat of the moment but in a calm matter-of-fact approach (even more chilling). She always had a reason for her actions and we always understood what it was. When Dany burns king landing it is portrayed as her "going mad" which wasn't necessary. She didn't need to snap to be capable of doing what she did and that's why it feels so unsatisfying in my opinion. Dany is a conqueror not a sadist (according to D&D). Aegon wasn't one to cry over spilled milk or show restraint in the face of opposition. Torrhen Stark didn't bend the knee because of what he thought Aegon could do, he did it because of what he knew Aegon had already done. Dany would know this story well and it lines up pretty well with the situation she was facing on Dragonstone. The North (now Sansa) is determined to remain independent even though the conqueror (now Dany) could melt them in their castles. If Aegon hadn't burned thousands of men by then perhaps the North would've fought him tooth and nail instead of pledging fealty before any blood was shed. We needed to see Dany rationalize that Aegon didn't unite the seven kingdoms by holding his dragons back, and perhaps an example needed to be made of King's Landing to ensure the cooperation of the other kingdoms. After all they'd cheer to see Drogon killed or her head on a spike. Kingdom after kingdom would take their shot at fighting back only to surrender as soon as they might lose... unless surrender wasn't an option. The wolf wouldn't dare provoke the dragon then. She could've had this dialogue with Tyrion , Jon, Grey Worm, or Selmy (RIP) so that we would have a chance to see that the same sense of riotousness and detached pragmatism that we cheered earlier in the show has manifested into something truly horrifying. They could leave us with a hope that she'll show restraint when the battle finally comes (our Dany wouldn't really do that she's just giving another one of those famous "burn their cities to the ground" speeches) and then pull the rug out as she torches the city. She didn't need to become the Mad Queen, she's already Daenerys the Conqueror. Only now we'd see what that really means for the conquered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bayard Posted May 21, 2019 Share Posted May 21, 2019 She didn't need to, but they wanted her to be mad so it would be easy to go after her. Everything in this show is simple, the Night King is bad, so it's logical everyone should fight him. Cersei is bad, so they should fight her. Daenerys is mad so she needs to be put down. No nuance, no nothing. They want it simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aldarion Posted May 21, 2019 Share Posted May 21, 2019 Precisely. Ever since the show outran the books, it had been operating on a white-and-black morality so popular in Hollywood. In fact, there were traces of that approach even earlier: look at D&D's character assassination of Stannis, for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isewein Posted May 21, 2019 Share Posted May 21, 2019 I've been thinking back to Stannis and how his burning of Shireen in the show really mirrors Dany's senseless torching of Kings Landing. Both are events I could imagine playing out in some form or another in keeping with the characters' motivations, but instead of exploring those in the show they were used as hyperdrives for the characters to cross the moral event horizon. Both events were so clearly aimed at the viewers' moral sensibilities rather than rooted in the world that it shatters our suspension of disbelief. Back with Stannis I reasoned it was just D&D's dislike for that particular character, but they have truly applied the same formula to Dany now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aldarion Posted May 25, 2019 Share Posted May 25, 2019 Precisely. It is lazy writing: they had been going for shock value instead of character motivations and personality. It seems obvious now that D&D had never really cared to try and understand character motivations and personalities. Stannis is portrayed as a power-hungry warlord in his quest for the Throne, when that couldn't be further from truth. Jon Snow gets portrayed as a shallow yes-man. All characters had had their personalities and motivations dumbed down. And it is not a new problem: it had been happening since Season 1, but it became much worse once show outran the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeDoNotKneel_HailMance Posted May 28, 2019 Share Posted May 28, 2019 An excellent post, and I agree completely with responses that the show has taken complex characters and turned them into simple black-and-white or good-vs-evil people. Ugh. I like the idea of Dany burning KL strategically, channeling Aegon's fire & blood. This would also have connected her KL attack to the rest of Westeros, and her goal to rule all of the 7 kingdoms. And I agree that all it would have taken is a fair bit of dialogue to set all of this up. But, you know, that would have required the readers to actually think through this major left turn before just grabbing the wheel and pulling it blindly...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Techmaester Posted May 28, 2019 Share Posted May 28, 2019 Her getting killed by Jon would be viewed even more negatively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isewein Posted June 19, 2019 Share Posted June 19, 2019 But it would have been viewed negatively in a good way. As in, Jon would have been viewed more ambivalently for it, but the characters as a whole would have remained consistent. Mind you that even in the ending we got to see Jon didn't really kill her to avenge the innocents, but to protect his family. For his motivations it wouldn't have made a difference, and I think he would have been just as (un)justified from a Westerosi perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Stackspear Posted July 5, 2019 Share Posted July 5, 2019 Definitely agree with these thoughts. To name a character on the show everyone knows that they could have turned Dany into - Tywin Lannister. Make Dany ruthless, cunning, without mercy, and determined to set an example that she is to be feared and that her rule shall never be challenged. Have a conversation between Dany and Tyrion where Dany says something similar or exactly the same as Tywin and show Tyrion realizing he is now following his father on a dragon. Maybe Dany, seeing Sansa's reluctance to get behind her rule, commands Tyrion to re-marry Sansa and secure the North (and tells Jon to make it happen). But, all of that won't be enough - she has to exact damage from King's Landing - maybe not a full blown destruction, but serious damage and collateral death of civilians - a Reynes of Castamere for Cersei and the Red Keep. Jon's resentment toward Dany slowly builds, as does Tyrion's. They conspire to take her down and, because Jon doesn't want to rule, Tyrion suggests a council will choose the new king in the aftermath. But, they do a believable plan that doesn't plan on Grey Worm just throwing them in prison for a few weeks. The story that could have been . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rose of Red Lake Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 On 5/17/2019 at 11:45 AM, Bear42 said: Her actions against the Tarlys, or MMD, or the masters of Mereen were not done out of rage in the heat of the moment but in a calm matter-of-fact approach (even more chilling). She always had a reason for her actions and we always understood what it was. I dont think the show portrayed her as mad--that is a label fans have applied. I think her final moments are pretty much the same as her first victim. Dany believes she is righteous and completely untroubled in her beliefs about right and wrong. She acted the same with Mirri to KL. Just...no doubts whatsoever. The only difference from show to book IMO is that she wonders if she is mad and she is afraid of what she could become. I actually don't always understand why Dany does things and why she walks into bonfires, why she didn't stick around in Meereen, why she thought torturing some random masters would solve things, or why she took Jon prisoner. Also, many times in the books she does act simply on emotions and not cold, calculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanF Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 On 17 May 2019 at 7:45 PM, Bear42 said: By now everyone is well aware of the criticisms and defenses of Dany's turn to the dark side and in my opinion there was an easy solution. Dany's actions needed to be inspired more by Aegon the Conqueror and less by the Mad King. None of the foreshadowing pointed to as evidence of her cruelty suggests that Dany is mad like her father, every awful thing she does is done in a cold, calculated, and pragmatic way. Her actions against the Tarlys, or MMD, or the masters of Mereen were not done out of rage in the heat of the moment but in a calm matter-of-fact approach (even more chilling). She always had a reason for her actions and we always understood what it was. When Dany burns king landing it is portrayed as her "going mad" which wasn't necessary. She didn't need to snap to be capable of doing what she did and that's why it feels so unsatisfying in my opinion. Dany is a conqueror not a sadist (according to D&D). Aegon wasn't one to cry over spilled milk or show restraint in the face of opposition. Torrhen Stark didn't bend the knee because of what he thought Aegon could do, he did it because of what he knew Aegon had already done. Dany would know this story well and it lines up pretty well with the situation she was facing on Dragonstone. The North (now Sansa) is determined to remain independent even though the conqueror (now Dany) could melt them in their castles. If Aegon hadn't burned thousands of men by then perhaps the North would've fought him tooth and nail instead of pledging fealty before any blood was shed. We needed to see Dany rationalize that Aegon didn't unite the seven kingdoms by holding his dragons back, and perhaps an example needed to be made of King's Landing to ensure the cooperation of the other kingdoms. After all they'd cheer to see Drogon killed or her head on a spike. Kingdom after kingdom would take their shot at fighting back only to surrender as soon as they might lose... unless surrender wasn't an option. The wolf wouldn't dare provoke the dragon then. She could've had this dialogue with Tyrion , Jon, Grey Worm, or Selmy (RIP) so that we would have a chance to see that the same sense of riotousness and detached pragmatism that we cheered earlier in the show has manifested into something truly horrifying. They could leave us with a hope that she'll show restraint when the battle finally comes (our Dany wouldn't really do that she's just giving another one of those famous "burn their cities to the ground" speeches) and then pull the rug out as she torches the city. She didn't need to become the Mad Queen, she's already Daenerys the Conqueror. Only now we'd see what that really means for the conquered. Making an example would work in narrative terms, if say, she incinerated Lannisport, the city of her hated enemies. Not so much with her own ancestral home. My preference would be to have a real, fierce fight in Kings Landing. The Golden Company and Lannisters are dug in among the civilians. The battle might be lost. She chooses deliberately to burn a hundred thousand civilians, along with her enemies, in order to win the Iron Throne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.