Jump to content
Ran

[Spoilers] Rant & Rave without Repercussion, Final edition

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, SeanF said:

I could easily envisage her taking the Kings Landing  by storm, and unwittingly triggering the caches of wildfire in the process.  In the books, the city is mostly built of wood, so it would burn like London in 1666.  What would actually be an accident would look like deliberate atrocity.    

I think that Dany's being a woman, a foreigner, and Aerys II's daughter, will ultimately doom her in Westeros, however good or heroic she is.

Regardless of her original intent or actual actions, if the final narrator is an opponent, Daenerys, and indeed any notion of the Targaryen dinasty, will be a horror story of tyrants and idiots unredeemable by the occasional Jaehaerys. 

GRRM repeatedly gives us the unreliable narrator, the perspective of an emotional recounting of events.

The notion that, in any iteration of this universe, a defeated foe might be spoken well of is at the very least naive.

I don't know how it well happen, but the Mother of Dragons will be remembered as the Mother of Monsters.

Share this post


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

Regardless of her original intent or actual actions, if the final narrator is an opponent, Daenerys, and indeed any notion of the Targaryen dinasty, will be a horror story of tyrants and idiots unredeemable by the occasional Jaehaerys. 

GRRM repeatedly gives us the unreliable narrator, the perspective of an emotional recounting of events.

The notion that, in any iteration of this universe, a defeated foe might be spoken well of is at the very least naive.

I don't know how it well happen, but the Mother of Dragons will be remembered as the Mother of Monsters.

Well, they'll have D & D to piss all over her memory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Le Cygne said:

That's a good point. Also I think Jon could very well return to the story with a darker personality in the books.

GRRM said the show was an alternate reality, so it's like the show was that bad historian messing it all up.

 

11 hours ago, SeanF said:

I could easily envisage her taking the Kings Landing  by storm, and unwittingly triggering the caches of wildfire in the process.  In the books, the city is mostly built of wood, so it would burn like London in 1666.  What would actually be an accident would look like deliberate atrocity.    

I think that Dany's being a woman, a foreigner, and Aerys II's daughter, will ultimately doom her in Westeros, however good or heroic she is.

I think King's Landing could go down a number of ways, and I highly suspect any triggering by BELLS should have something to do with Connington, or it should, LOL  I cannot imagine that what we saw is close to the actual KL battle.  Also, as an aside, I'm tired of hearing that KL has a million people, more people than all of the North combined, etc., etc., according to the Ds and St. Tyrion of the Street of Silk.  I also call BS on the idea that even if Dany burns the entire city (of whatever amount of inhabitants)........that she would be responsible for more deaths than Tywin and Cersei combined.  MY GAWD, Tywin was warring and Rain of Castemereing entire families/castles for decades, before he was even a Lord or Hand of the King.  But the Ds need their nonsensical numbers, an empty North that never remembers, and obvious Evil to hit the audience over the head to TRY and tell their story. 

Once the 'histories' are written of the time in universe, I suspect that the greatest sin may be that Dany is a woman.  Reading Fire and Blood, and giving thought to all the supposed 'facts' about different powerful and/or well known women over the course of ASOIAF's history, I become more convinced that what may be widely thought of Dany  is liable be an inaccurate mess.  It's somewhere between sad and angering when I think about it and what it means, not just in that world but in ours as well. 

Edited by Lady Fevre Dream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Lady Fevre Dream said:

 

I think King's Landing could go down a number of ways, and I highly suspect any triggering by BELLS should have something to do with Connington, or it should, LOL  I cannot imagine that what we saw is close to the actual KL battle.  Also, as an aside, I'm tired of hearing that KL has a million people, more people than all of the North combined, etc., etc., according to the Ds and St. Tyrion of the Street of Silk.  I also call BS on the idea that even if Dany burns the entire city (of whatever amount of inhabitants)........that she would be responsible for more deaths than Tywin and Cersei combined.  MY GAWD, Tywin was warring and Rain of Castemereing entire families/castles for decades, before he was even a Lord or Hand of the King.  But the Ds need their nonsensical numbers, an empty North that never remembers, and obvious Evil to hit the audience over the head to TRY and tell their story. 

Once the 'histories' are written of the time in universe, I suspect that the greatest sin may be that Dany is a woman.  Reading Fire and Blood, and giving thought to all the supposed 'facts' about different powerful and/or well known women over the course of ASOIAF's history, I become more convinced that what may be widely thought of Dany  is liable be an inaccurate mess.  It's somewhere between sad and angering when I think about it and what it means, not just in that world but in ours as well. 

Logistically, it would be impossible to kill a million people in the course of an afternoon's aerial bombardment.  It would take days to kill on that scale, especially as Kings Landing in the show is a stone-built city. 

Share this post


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

it would be impossible to kill a million people in the course of an afternoon'

True, but even if it were possible, isn’t it weird how history remembers Caesar or Alexander not as disgusting mass murderers, but as great military geniuses and conquerers that shaped our world in spite of the number of people killed (I doubt Caesar really killed one million Gauls as he says, but still). So why is Dany different. Could Lady Fevre be right about the gender being an issue?

Edited by hewman

Share this post


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

True, but even if it were possible, isn’t it weird how history remembers Caesar or Alexander not as disgusting mass murderers, but as great military geniuses and conquerers that shaped our world in spite of the number of people killed (I doubt Caesar really killed one million Gauls as he says, but still). So why is Dany different. Could Lady Fevre be right about the gender being an issue?

Gender is a huge issue.  Instinctively, I'm a sexist.  I find it far more jarring to read about a 16 year old girl handing down death sentences than I would if the same were being handed down by a 40 year old man.  Rationally, of course, there's no distinction to be drawn between the two, but I think it does affect the way that Daenerys is viewed among fans, for good and ill. 

Medieval attitudes were somewhat different.  No one questioned the need for capital punishment.   And, the death or capture of male family members meant that death sentences were frequently handed down by noble women, acting as regents or guardians.   Daenerys being a regent would have been considered acceptable.  Daenerys actively seeking power in her own right would be seen as unnatural  BUT this is also an honour culture, where the duty to seek revenge for wrongs done to family members is imposed on both men and women.  So, Daenerys would be seen as unnatural in one way, but acting in keeping with the mores of her culture in another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think GRRM's overall message with Dany is going to be one about gender, while that is in the mix, as it is with his other female characters, it seems to me that her story is more about power and the dangers of self delusion.  Westeros may reject her partly because she is female, but I would suspect more so because she will be seen as foreign, with a foreign army, or they might just reject her because they already embraced Aegon and her timing was off.  But, I believe that when she goes bad it will be because of her own personality and judgment flaws, which we have already seen especially in the last book.  

Share this post


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

where the duty to seek revenge for wrongs done to family members is imposed on both men and women

This is more like it. Once you pick the Dothraki as your weapon of choice and bring them to Westeros, your rating would quickly slide from “Dany the Amiable” to “The Scourge of Westeros”. So, as much as she was my second choice for “Realm’s Delight” (after Rhaenyra ended up overdone at the last family barbecue), madness or not, mother of flames or not her choices were more fitted for punishment than the beginning of a promising reign. Even if Drogo had survived, I don’t see him saying “well, wifey, hop on that iron throne I got you and I’ll just fuck off to Essos for some more rampage”. So, no, burninating binge or not there was always  little chance of people loving her. Revenge was the most she could get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, hewman said:

This is more like it. Once you pick the Dothraki as your weapon of choice and bring them to Westeros, your rating would quickly slide from “Dany the Amiable” to “The Scourge of Westeros”. So, as much as she was my second choice for “Realm’s Delight” (after Rhaenyra ended up overdone at the last family barbecue), madness or not, mother of flames or not her choices were more fitted for punishment than the beginning of a promising reign. Even if Drogo had survived, I don’t see him saying “well, wifey, hop on that iron throne I got you and I’ll just fuck off to Essos for some more rampage”. So, no, burninating binge or not there was always  little chance of people loving her. Revenge was the most she could get.

Worse still, in the books, I imagine the Red Priests will have carried out a revolution in her name in Volantis, and be cleansing the world of unbelievers, with fire. So, I imagine her army will seem like the Army of the Underworld.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/31/2019 at 2:05 PM, Cas Stark said:

I don't doubt at all that they got Dany as a tragic villain from George, people who think they did that on their own and she has a different ending are fooling themselves.  However, like pretty much everything from season 5 onward, they never created the story to support it, they never really created a believable bond even between Tyrion and Dany, why would you keep someone as your adviser who gets your allies killed over and over?  They never sold Dany as a villain or why or how her worldview became skewed.  They never sold much of anything in the last 3 years and they wasted the acting assets and storylines they had.  Cersei dying like a fucking coward?  Arya taking a powder for no stated reasons?  And on an on.  If GRRM ever finishes the series I'm sure that most of these end points will be well grounded and believable.  If. that is. 

Well said. The amazing part is that all you have to is read the last few posts of this thread to realize that the writers had about 10 different options for Dany's story to make it coherent and believable (versus just Dany turning into Hitler/Satan in 2 episodes). They never created the story to support it. 

......Dany could have....been a relatively moral conquerer who was unfairly rejected in Westeros for any # of reasons (gender, brought Dothraki, R'Hllor support, daughter of Mad King, offended Lords, etc).....or she could have slowly become a monster and murderer (starting @ beginning of S7), abusing power with her dragons, burning many lords alive (and more unfairly then R Tarly), letting peasants starve out of spite or anger, impulsively betraying agreements with the Tyrells or Dorne or Yara, becoming less and less just while blinded by her self delusion about power, fire, and blood..... oooooooooooooor simpler options could have included 1) her having a major, darker, horrifying character worldview after fighting the Army of the Dead, 2) in conquering King's Landing we could have seen her forced into a conflicting choice - if she was losing the battle at the start and she had to choose between genocide and beating Cersei vs saving peasants and losing KL, she chooses genocide, and Jon kills her for that choice, or 3) they could have had Varys actually plot against her and put her in a situation where she had to burn 1,000s of good people alive in order to survive..... 

Really they just had so much to work with, and instead decided to just flip the Hitler/Satan switch, because, hey subversion and oh it doesn't require much work. The audience will be so fooled! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, WeDoNotKneel_HailMance said:

Well said. The amazing part is that all you have to is read the last few posts of this thread to realize that the writers had about 10 different options for Dany's story to make it coherent and believable (versus just Dany turning into Hitler/Satan in 2 episodes). They never created the story to support it. 

......Dany could have....been a relatively moral conquerer who was unfairly rejected in Westeros for any # of reasons (gender, brought Dothraki, R'Hllor support, daughter of Mad King, offended Lords, etc).....or she could have slowly become a monster and murderer (starting @ beginning of S7), abusing power with her dragons, burning many lords alive (and more unfairly then R Tarly), letting peasants starve out of spite or anger, impulsively betraying agreements with the Tyrells or Dorne or Yara, becoming less and less just while blinded by her self delusion about power, fire, and blood..... oooooooooooooor simpler options could have included 1) her having a major, darker, horrifying character worldview after fighting the Army of the Dead, 2) in conquering King's Landing we could have seen her forced into a conflicting choice - if she was losing the battle at the start and she had to choose between genocide and beating Cersei vs saving peasants and losing KL, she chooses genocide, and Jon kills her for that choice, or 3) they could have had Varys actually plot against her and put her in a situation where she had to burn 1,000s of good people alive in order to survive..... 

Really they just had so much to work with, and instead decided to just flip the Hitler/Satan switch, because, hey subversion and oh it doesn't require much work. The audience will be so fooled! 

 

It turned out that the audience were not fooled.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's important to remember that the POV characters can feel a certain way about Daenerys immediately after she does something controversial and that the faux-history books of Fire and Blood will have something entirely different to say.

Remember, in A Clash of Kings, Stannis called Rhaenyra a traitor for trying to steal her brother's crown. But then we get Fire and Blood and we find out way more complicated than what Stannis believes. As a matter of fact, it's so much more complicated, Stannis' statement about Rhaenyra is completely false. Because it was Rhaenyra's crown that was stolen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suck at computer crap, but it seems that the GOT script is now missing from the Emmy site, I'm not sure about the other shows?  If anyone finds info on what's going on:  ie, all scripts are gone or just the GOT one, please let us know. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Lady Fevre Dream said:

I suck at computer crap, but it seems that the GOT script is now missing from the Emmy site, I'm not sure about the other shows?  If anyone finds info on what's going on:  ie, all scripts are gone or just the GOT one, please let us know. 

Maybe they're just too embarrassed by it.

Share this post


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

Maybe they're just too embarrassed by it.

They knew it would win no matter what. They didn't think anyone would actually bother to read it.

39 minutes ago, Lady Fevre Dream said:

I wonder.  It's a bit late now, isn't it? LOL 

True, there were lots of articles written about it. The cat is already out of the bag and it's a smelly cat.

Edited by Le Cygne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Le Cygne said:

They knew it would win no matter what. They didn't think anyone would actually bother to read it.

True, there were lots of articles written about it. The cat is already out of the bag and it's a smelly cat.

More like the cat's faeces are out of the bag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Le Cygne said:

They knew it would win no matter what. They didn't think anyone would actually bother to read it.

True, there were lots of articles written about it. The cat is already out of the bag and it's a smelly cat.

 

53 minutes ago, SeanF said:

More like the cat's faeces are out of the bag.

That cat, like Drogon...........is outta here, LOL 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Lady Fevre Dream said:

I wonder.  It's a bit late now, isn't it? LOL 

Everything related to s8 seems so amateurish… If they knew the script was garbage why did they post it? Wouldn t it be better to just not compete in that category? to post a sample?

Does anyone think that if that script wins the emmy loads of people won t have negative reactions? that it won t embarass Hollywood, hbo and other people?

 

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

×