My biggest issue with the finale is that they tried to make us feel guilty for supporting Daenerys' journey.

[beeeeeen]

1 minute ago, snow is the man said:

No she didn't! She took the stuff form that one guys house in the show and that was it. If she had sacked the city she could have bought all the unsullied easy and all the ships she could have. In the book she gets kicked out of that guys house when she refuses to marry him and then joins up with sir barriston and..can't remember that guys name who brought three ships to take her to that guy in pentos who we saw at the beggining when he spent time with dany and her brother and set up her marriage to khal drogo.

 

She never sacks Qarth just that guys house who helped take her dragons to the warlocks and killed some of her people and tried to have her killed too.

yes yes it was a mistake, as i already admitted a few minutes ago

[snow is the man]

1 minute ago, beeeeeen said:

yes yes it was a mistake, as i already admitted a few minutes ago

didn't see that till after I wrote it. My mistake.

[beeeeeen]

1 minute ago, snow is the man said:

didn't see that till after I wrote it. My mistake.

no problem, for once i was wrong about something (jk) i deserve it

 

[ToddDavid]

14 minutes ago, The One Who Kneels said:

Ned didn't show Jorah mercy. He was going to execute Jorah but Jorah fled before Ned caught him. 

So the masters who ultimately sat by and watched while other masters crucified children are completely innocent but a random guy who gets pressed by his lord into being a lookout is thoroughly culpable of murder? 

And again why did you ignore my example of vassals and their men-at-arms who are forced to follow bad causes? If you're born a vassal of Tywin Lannister what excuse do you have when he (and the rightful King as far as you know) order you to round up your men and come fight for him against Robb? People who don't deserve it always die in war. I'm perfectly willing to concede that some innocent people were probably unnecessarily killed at Meereen but you're the one who claimed she slaughtered innocents by the thousands. Please point out where she did prior to King's Landing. 

Jorah explicitly said in THE SHOW that Ned was merciful to him.  

How do I come to the number of “thousands murdered”? Well, I just do the math.  I think about the massive number of people she impulsively and mercilessly slaughtered and then I take a percentage of that. It’s pretty commonsensical. Obviously not all of her victims would have chosen a different, more altruistic path if available, but plenty of them would have. Unfortunately she killed them all.

Again, like the core of GRRM’s beliefs- we’re all capable of both good and evil.  Wicked, vengeful, ruthless, merciless Dany simply doesn’t bother herself to look for the good in others most of the time, however. It’s just “death to ‘em all!”. 

Do I need to remind you of Jon’s plea to Greyworm to not eviscerate the soldiers who had metaphorically raised the white flag.  As a direct extension of Daenerys’s cognitive system, of course GW didn’t listen. 

[ToddDavid]

32 minutes ago, The One Who Kneels said:

This may have slipped your notice but Drogon isn't a human being. He's a carnivorous animal. 

Which makes your argument even worse, for obvious reasons.  Back in those days, just a minor attack on a human begets the carnivorous animal a death sentence.  Hell, even today it often does. But we’re talking about burning a little girl alive. What human back then doesn’t receive a blade to the neck for such atrocity? How many slave owners, some innocent, did Dany impulsively exterminate over the treatment of children? Again- hypocrite.  

[ToddDavid]

If serial killers can actually convince themselves that they’re good people then I guess it only makes sense to see Daenerys supporters convince themselves that her S8 actions were somehow implausible and not foreshadowed all along. 

[The One Who Kneels]

43 minutes ago, ToddDavid said:

Jorah explicitly said in THE SHOW that Ned was merciful to him.  

How do I come to the number of “thousands murdered”? Well, I just do the math.  I think about the massive number of people she impulsively and mercilessly slaughtered and then I take a percentage of that. It’s pretty commonsensical. Obviously not all of her victims would have chosen a different, more altruistic path if available, but plenty of them would have. Unfortunately she killed them all.

Again, like the core of GRRM’s beliefs- we’re all capable of both good and evil.  Wicked, vengeful, ruthless, merciless Dany simply doesn’t bother herself to look for the good in others most of the time, however. It’s just “death to ‘em all!”. 

Do I need to remind you of Jon’s plea to Greyworm to not eviscerate the soldiers who had metaphorically raised the white flag.  As a direct extension of Daenerys’s cognitive system, of course GW didn’t listen. 

He never said that. He explicitly mentions in S1 that Ned Stark wants his head. 

Who are these people?

Of course we're all capable of both good and evil. But if you're going to interpret that as meaning "any character can commit mass murder without any reasonable buildup and it's not stupid because we're all capable of good and evil" then I think you're missing the point a bit. 

I don't know why you need to remind me. You're the one who's singling out Daenerys for probably having good people among her enemies. Ned, Robb, Jon, Tyrion etc. all of the enemies they fought and killed were even likelier to include good people who were just in service to a bad cause. Somehow that didn't count as foreshadowing them leading a mass murder of unarmed civilians. 

40 minutes ago, ToddDavid said:

Which makes your argument even worse, for obvious reasons.  Back in those days, just a minor attack on a human begets the carnivorous animal a death sentence.  Hell, even today it often does. But we’re talking about burning a little girl alive. What human back then doesn’t receive a blade to the neck for such atrocity? How many slave owners, some innocent, did Dany impulsively exterminate over the treatment of children? Again- hypocrite.  

It does? A carnivorous animal hunts and kills by nature. It has no conception of law or what's right. You're literally asking "why does Daenerys treat human beings and animals differently." Are you sure she's the mad one? 

[sifth]

2 hours ago, Jabar of House Titan said:

Are you serious? He didn't win the game.

He had no real friends except for Ned. He says so himself and look where that got the both of them.

He was a pawn for other people and then he died when he outlived his purpose in the games of other people.

I agree with Dany's knack for making enemies; she is just like Jon in that regard. It's probably the point GRRM is trying to make.

Revolutionaries have no friends. Conquerors and generals who lack political aptitude (it's very rare to be a good politician, a good commander and a good person) have no friends.

That's why successful revolutions rarely work out in the long run. The Haitian Revolution was successful but Haiti was blacklisted and isolated for centuries due to racism and classism and, as such, it became worst than it was under French rule. The French Revolution was successful but was very ugly and very bloody and gave birth to the Reign of Terror and then Napoleon Bonaparte and then the kneejerk response was the super-conservative age of European nationalism and imperialism that eventually caused World Wars I and II. And we all know how spectacularly the Russian Revolution in 1917 and the Chinese Revolution in 1948 turned out.

The American Revolution is the exception to the rule (part of the reason why the world is so fascinated with us) but even us Americans had serious problems. Currently, not only are we still struggling with issues that should've been put to bed a long time ago, but we also are struggling with current issues that are currently pulling the country further apart.

But the common thing between Dany, Jon and Ned Stark is that they are trying to do good things and somewhat succeed in doing so. However, they are hated by bad people who hate the good they do, they are hated by people who are indifferent and comfortable because they hate change and they are hated by good people who misunderstand or are envious of them.

 

I'm starting to think you didn't read the books.

[Red Dragon10]

19 minutes ago, The One Who Kneels said:

He never said that. He explicitly mentions in S1 that Ned Stark wants his head. 

Yes, he did say that, in season 4, episode 7. 

[ToddDavid]

19 minutes ago, The One Who Kneels said:

He never said that. He explicitly mentions in S1 that Ned Stark wants his head. 

Who are these people?

Of course we're all capable of both good and evil. But if you're going to interpret that as meaning "any character can commit mass murder without any reasonable buildup and it's not stupid because we're all capable of good and evil" then I think you're missing the point a bit. 

I don't know why you need to remind me. You're the one who's singling out Daenerys for probably having good people among her enemies. Ned, Robb, Jon, Tyrion etc. all of the enemies they fought and killed were even likelier to include good people who were just in service to a bad cause. Somehow that didn't count as foreshadowing them leading a mass murder of unarmed civilians. 

It does? A carnivorous animal hunts and kills by nature. It has no conception of law or what's right. You're literally asking "why does Daenerys treat human beings and animals differently." Are you sure she's the mad one? 

1) Jarah most certainly did say that, explicitly!  I must’ve watched a dubbed scene then, this one right here at the 2:03 mark: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi4pEMoJ1kE

2) No, that’s not how I interpreted it whatsoever.  Please reread my comment, unless you’re intentionally trying to create a straw argument.  I clearly stated that some one those people she executed for “representing the enemy” could’ve actually had good within him and thus deserved mercy, just as Jorah EXPLICITLY told her of how Ned showed him mercy.  

3) Ugh, there’s a huge difference between killing people in battle and mercilessly slaughtering people after the fact.  Ned, Rob, Jon, Tyrion etc didn’t herd people into pens and slaughter them like beasts. 

4) Now you’re stooping low enough in your defense of Mad Dany to suggest that it’s ok to BBQ a little girl so long as you’re not a human?  I tend to think you’re the mad one now. 

[Kajjo]

18 hours ago, madhikun said:

What she does throughout the show is exactly what we cheer other characters for, but we never call that going mad. 

You focus too much on the "mad". 

Tune it down to "Daenerys showed streaks of ruthlessness, brutality and wanting to burn down cities" in almost all seasons. That's the point. Destroying and burning down cities is something she mentions quite a lot. It's in her all the time. It's not about changing 180° but about what is in her all the time.

[JagLover]

23 hours ago, Dokivi said:

They just tried to tell us that Dany, a character who ended slavery was already evil back in Essos and we were wrong to cheer for her. What?

I mean... I'm a white gal from Europe, but they do have tons of viewers of various ethnic backgrounds. I don't imagine the descendants of former slaves would be inclined to agree with D&D's "philosophy" and moral of this entire arc. Especially since Dany is by no means the only character in this story to have killed her enemies (Tyrion and Jon included).

Slavery is evil, but is every slave owner in a culture that practices slavery evil?. That last point goes to the heart of it as Dany slaughtered every slave owner in Astapor. Many of whom were probably not very dissimilar to the small craftsmen and tradesmen of Westeros. They just had a few slaves rather than servants and apprentices.  

The setup was there they just did not develop things properly at all on the show. They used Nazi imagery but really Dany was a metaphor for communism.

Anyhow I still think the ending was a cop out. Dany sat on the iron throne with Drogon behind her while most kneel before her in fear would have fit the feel of the show far more I think. 

[sifth]

21 minutes ago, JagLover said:

Slavery is evil, but is every slave owner in a culture that practices slavery evil?. That last point goes to the heart of it as Dany slaughtered every slave owner in Astapor. Many of whom were probably not very dissimilar to the small craftsmen and tradesmen of Westeros. They just had a few slaves rather than servants and apprentices.  

The setup was there they just did not develop things properly at all on the show. They used Nazi imagery but really Dany was a metaphor for communism.

Anyhow I still think the ending was a cop out. Dany sat on the iron throne with Drogon behind her while most kneel before her in fear would have fit the feel of the show far more I think. 

I think the bigger problem is Dany ended slavery, for no other reason than she "doesn't like it" and then didn't think to put into place a system for the slaves to get a fair wages and honest work. In the books many of her freed slaves sell themselves back into slavery, simply because they can't find work and suddenly find themselves homeless and starving. In Astapor's case she over throws the government and puts in place a ridiculous governing system that has no chance to stay in power with all of the Unsullied leaving with Dany. In fact many former slaves become slavers as a result of her actions, so yea she really screwed up her approach.

Simply put, Dany's heart was in the right place, but she basically wanted to over throw a system of slavery without a plan on what to do after the fact.

Dany's logic, free slaves + ? = everyone being happy.

[rustythesmith]

On 5/20/2019 at 5:45 PM, Tyrion1991 said:

Yeah they totally shift the goal posts. 

In this episode they frame it as Dany making a decision for the Greater Good. Torch the Red Keep to kill Cersei killing the people inside. Instead of what she actually did, butchering the Lannister prisoners and the whole city. That’s an act of insanity. One episode she’s snapped and the next we’re talking about the Terror of the French Revolution.

Plus for all the talk of the wheel, they didn’t have the courage for Dany to actually say she would do anything for the common people. Like, you know, abolish serfdom and give the land back to the people who worked it for generations. This isn’t a legitimate argument over the Greater Good.

I think they made her actions so far beyond the pale, unreasonable and without any justification because they ultimately want you to sympathise with her killer and his emo feelings. That kind of sours if there’s any doubt on the Starks. I suspect they knew people might give Dany the benefit of the doubt unless they were unequivocal on her being evil.

Personally, in the books, I would want it to be Jorah who’s there to grieve for her; not Jon. Maybe have him go Robert Baratheon 2.0 while we’re at it. Rhaegar died...

It isn't an act of insanity. Dany felt completely justified in what she did. Insanity is when you aren't in control of your faculties or don't understand the consequences of your actions. The whole point of her arc is to force the audience to contend with the ugly truth that people can and do get to this point where they feel justified in slaughtering a million people.

It's absolutely vital for the purpose of the story that the audience is able to construct a defense for Dany's atrocious actions. And that's exactly how the story played out. In episode 6 Jon and Dany BOTH made the defense that 1. It was a necessary evil. Jon went even further to make the defense that 2. She never needs to do it again. Tyrion demolished the 2nd defense which left Jon with only the first defense, which he knows in his heart is wrong after his experiences with the free folk.

The writers went out of their way to leave Team Dany with some defense to cling to, and I imagine they will be clinging to it long after the show is over. "It was a necessary evil." These are exactly the people who should never be given power in our society because they would lead us right into genocide.

[tallTale]

11 minutes ago, rustythesmith said:

leave Team Dany with some defense

Seven and half seasons is much more than "Some defense". It's a fucking open and shut court case.

[rustythesmith]

Just now, tallTale said:

Seven and half seasons is much more than "Some defense". It's a fucking open and shut court case.

Seven and a half seasons of what? Slaver's Bay is in ruins! Every city she conquered has reverted back to slavery. She got tens of thousands of people killed. The fact that Dany had good intentions is not a valid defense for her actions. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Team Dany Defense #1: She had good intentions!
Team Dany Defense #2: She has a good heart!
Team Dany Defense #3: Two wrongs make a right!
Team Dany Defense #4: The ends justify the means!
Team Dany Defense #5: Queens are justified to do whatever they want!

This is the entire range of defenses that Team Dany keeps calling upon. Do I really need to point out how weak each and every one of these defenses are from an ethical standpoint? And no, ethics is not a MODERN problem. It's an evolutionary one. Our intrinsic sense of morality is older than trees.

[Hodor's Dragon]

14 hours ago, ToddDavid said:

<snip>How do I come to the number of “thousands murdered”? Well, I just do the math.  I think about the massive number of people she impulsively and mercilessly slaughtered and then I take a percentage of that. <snip>

What's a percentage of zero? Dany never killed anybody without a good reason before epi 5, season 8.

Again, like the core of GRRM’s beliefs- we’re all capable of both good and evil.  Wicked, vengeful, ruthless, merciless Dany simply doesn’t bother herself to look for the good in others most of the time, however. It’s just “death to ‘em all!”. <snip>

This is complete bullshit.

 

[Hodor's Dragon]

Just now, rustythesmith said:

Seven and a half seasons of what? Slaver's Bay is in ruins! Every city she conquered has reverted back to slavery. <snip>

This is not true. She defeated the slavers and left the Second Sons to enforce the peace.

[rustythesmith]

2 minutes ago, Hodor's Dragon said:

This is not true. She defeated the slavers and left the Second Sons to enforce the peace.

Yes it is true. Go rewatch the scene where Jorah tells Dany that Yunkai and Astapor have been retaken. Team Dany seems to have a selective memory about how the events of Slaver's Bay really went down.

[Hodor's Dragon]

Just now, rustythesmith said:

Yes it is true. Go rewatch the scene where Jorah tells Dany that Yunkai and Astapor have been retaken. Team Dany seems to have a selective memory about how the events of Slaver's Bay really went down.

That was before Dany won the climactic battle and ordered Daario to enforce her peace.

Quote

With slavery finally abolished in Slaver's Bay, Daenerys decides to return to Westeros and reclaim the Iron Throne. However, she insists that Daario and the Second Sons remain to keep the peace. Daario is dismayed and declares his love for Daenerys, but ultimately agrees.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daario_Naharis#Season_6