Jump to content
Areisius

Who was Daenerys turned into?

Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, dtones520 said:

And what about the innocent slavers and their children? She determined that Slavery in those cities was wrong. We agree with that because we know Slavery is awful. BUT in that world and in those cities, that is all those people know. Dany decided their fate because she thought it was right and she made those decisions despite of the advice of her advisors who pushed her to go to Westeros.

Daenerys kills slavers because she thinks its wrong.

Daenerys kills hapless nobodies whom she wants to rule, because...?

She has a moral objection to slavery. She doesn't have a moral objection to hapless nobodies.

Share this post


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

Daenerys kills slavers because she thinks its wrong.

Daenerys kills hapless nobodies whom she wants to rule, because...?

She has a moral objection to slavery. She doesn't have a moral objection to hapless nobodies.

Those Children of the slavers didn’t choose the world that they were born into.  Just like the people of kings landing didn’t choose Cersei as their queen. She said it herself, the people of Kings landing didn’t rise up for her, they ran to Cersei for protection. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Areisius said:

I'm baffled as to who she was morphed into in S8. She went from having a sense of self awareness to becoming this delusional tyrannical child. 

 

In her last scene with Jon she acted completely detached from reality and was acting like a sociopath. What in the world did D&D do to her character?

She becomes a Robespierre. He's the architect of the French Revolution and wanted to liberate France from tiranny, but became a tyrant himself, killing the civilians he wanted to liberate, and sent Napoleon out to liberate other countries as well. The French Revolution was a very very bloody affair, though its abstract ideals were good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dtones520 said:

Those Children of the slavers didn’t choose the world that they were born into.  Just like the people of kings landing didn’t choose Cersei as their queen. She said it herself, the people of Kings landing didn’t rise up for her, they ran to Cersei for protection. 

So if innocents don't rise up against their rightful ruler to defect to a foreigner they deserve death without trial. Noted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dtones520 said:

Those Children of the slavers didn’t choose the world that they were born into.  Just like the people of kings landing didn’t choose Cersei as their queen. She said it herself, the people of Kings landing didn’t rise up for her, they ran to Cersei for protection. 

The children of slavers have a connection to their families. Random Nobody of Flea Bottom has zero connection to Cersei.

Share this post


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

She becomes a Robespierre. He's the architect of the French Revolution and wanted to liberate France from tiranny, but became a tyrant himself, killing the civilians he wanted to liberate, and sent Napoleon out to liberate other countries as well. The French Revolution was a very very bloody affair, though its abstract ideals were good.

Very well putted. They even tried in one scene where Tyrion was talking about the actions Dany did at essos. He said "we all applauded when she killed a bunch of bad people, for a good reason, what's so different in killing a bunch of innocent people for her" something like that.

Not very subtle, but D&D can't write shit anymore.

Share this post


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

She becomes a Robespierre. He's the architect of the French Revolution and wanted to liberate France from tiranny, but became a tyrant himself, killing the civilians he wanted to liberate, and sent Napoleon out to liberate other countries as well. The French Revolution was a very very bloody affair, though its abstract ideals were good.

Which is great, if you see it happen naturally, over the course of time.  Dany has the kind of personality that many revolutionary leaders possess.  She hates injustice, wants to make the world a better place, and risks her life to do so.  She's also an arrogant, cruel, control-freak.  

But, really she jumps Robespierre to become Adolf Hitler in this series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ser Loras The Gay said:

So if innocents don't rise up against their rightful ruler to defect to a foreigner they deserve death without trial. Noted.

Not saying I agree with it but in her mental state, that was her justification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ser Loras The Gay said:

Very well putted. They even tried in one scene where Tyrion was talking about the actions Dany did at essos. He said "we all applauded when she killed a bunch of bad people, for a good reason, what's so different in killing a bunch of innocent people for her" something like that.

Not very subtle, but D&D can't write shit anymore.

Agreed. It's not so much that she's a sociopath, but her ability to put the "ideal" before the actual lives in the current time. Once she started talking about killing everyone now to create a merciful world for the children of tomorrow, we basically had Robbespiere, willing to kill the civilians he wants to free so that the generations after were liberated. 

Share this post


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

Which is great, if you see it happen naturally, over the course of time.  Dany has the kind of personality that many revolutionary leaders possess.  She hates injustice, wants to make the world a better place, and risks her life to do so.  She's also an arrogant, cruel, control-freak.  

But, really she jumps Robespierre to become Adolf Hitler in this series.

Her speech in epi 6 is a Robespierre one. Her actions and reasoning in epi 5 and epi 5 are Robespierre's (including the executions). I hate how D&D graphically alligned it with Nazism almost. Adolf Hitler was no Robespierre. And yes, it was awfully rushed.

Edited by sweetsunray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This could have been at least moderately salvaged if they'd had her specifically only burn the Red Keep, which was full of civilians to serve as a human shield for Cersei, after the city surrendered. That would be enough of a push towards tyranny to justify Tyrion and Jon turning on her while actually leaving her actions understandable.  

Based on the character we've been presented with up till now on the show, there's simply no way to rationalize or understand her motivation for firebombing the fleeing civilians of King's Landing after they've surrendered whilst allowing Cersei plenty of time to escape the Red Keep. When even Emilia Clarke feels like this twist came out of "[expletive deleted] nowhere", you have a serious problem. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I would say that she became a generic tyrant but will all the talk about redemtion, utopia, fairness and oppression I've felt a strong message against communism/socialism. It is the only political ideology these days which states "we need to kill these people to reach paradise" (or at least "we would have paradise if not for those people"). Nazism goes more like "we need to kill these people because they are scum" or "these people do not deserve to live among us".

Edited by Saturno

Share this post


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

Her speech in epi 6 is a Robespierre one. Her actions and reasoning in epi 5 and epi 5 are Robespierre's (including the executions). I hate how D&D graphically alligned it with Nazism almost. Adolf Hitler was no Robespierre.

Executing Varys was Robespierre. Massacring King's Landing was not.

Robespierre - who was always first amongst equals anyway, and who wielded a mere fraction of Daenerys' power - went after people as individuals. He never tried to burn down Paris.

Share this post


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

Executing Varys was Robespierre. Massacring King's Landing was not.

Robespierre - who was always first amongst equals anyway, and who wielded a mere fraction of Daenerys' power - went after people as individuals. He never tried to burn down Paris.

Well he did not have the means to burn Paris. He wasn't leading an army able to follow that order, for instance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Saturno said:

I would say that she became a generic tyrant but will all the talk about redemtion, utopia, fairness and oppression I've felt a strong message against communism/socialism. It is the only political ideology these days which states "we need to kill these people to reach paradise". Nazism goes more like "we need to kill these people because they are scum".

I don't see any commentary on either.

More about the inevitable outcome of war being used to settle conflicts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

Executing Varys was Robespierre. Massacring King's Landing was not.

Robespierre - who was always first amongst equals anyway, and who wielded a mere fraction of Daenerys' power - went after people as individuals. He never tried to burn down Paris.

Because Robespierre didn't have a dragon. He just had the guillotine. He had 300000 arrested, 17000 people officially executed (2000 of those were in Paris) and about 10000 died in prison, all that in 1 year of Terror, 4 years after the actual Revolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jabar of House Titan said:

Why did the King's Landing civilians run to Cersei for protection when they could've just left the city?

Riddle me that

They were trapped inside the city. No one was running to Cersei. Cersei was the real tyrant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jabar of House Titan said:

Why did the King's Landing civilians run to Cersei for protection when they could've just left the city?

Riddle me that

They had no way to escape, thus having no option, thus proving that Dany's rationalization is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jabar of House Titan said:

Why did the King's Landing civilians run to Cersei for protection when they could've just left the city?

Riddle me that

Surely running to the woman who they verbally and physically abused in the streets and had their holiest place blown up by made the most sense...

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

×