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

[rustythesmith]

4 minutes ago, Hodor's Dragon said:

This is a wild exaggeration, right? Please tell me you don't actually believe that this is anywhere near true. I'll even spot you one by allowing to re-define what you actually said to be only about the Daenerys scenes.

I'm up to the challenge. Put any scene to me and I'll tell you how it foreshadows or develops Dany  towards the mad queen ending.

Edit: Oh yeah I meant scenes with Dany in them.

[It_spelt_Magalhaes]

I don't think the 'foreshadowing' was insufficient. 

I think most people who say they knew all along she was going to fall were just as stupefied about 'bell ringing= going full psycho' as the rest of us idiots who were, like sweet summer children, hoping for quality tragedy.

It's like that person who will still say they knew when the dude's wife didn't talk to him during the restaurant scene. That was a decent plot twist, by the way.

[SansaJonRule]

23 minutes ago, tallTale said:

Faur enough. Please tell me the evidence that would push her to murder thousands of innocent people in a battle she won because she wanted to install fear and/or she lost control.

Okay, I think it's that those glimpses of her bad side were an indication that she had that "bad Targaryen seed". All it needed to grow were a few very personal setbacks: Missandei being murdered, thinking Jon didn't love her (he did, he was just conflicted about her being his aunt as has been discussed), knowing the people didn't love her, Varys betraying her, and then she snapped. When Tyrion was begging her to give KL a chance to surrender, to show mercy, she said that she would be showing mercy, to the future generations. In her warped mind, the innocents of KL were an acceptable sacrifice to bring the world she envisioned into being. She was clearly angry about being unloved, and now this is just my interpretation, but I think she believed that since the Northerners didn't love her even after she helped them defeat the AotD, the people of KL wouldn't love her either even though she freed them from Cersei's rule.

At any rate, people keep trying to apply logic and reason to Dany's actions. If she was mentally unstable, as Varys pointed out was possible, there is no logic or reason to it.

[Hodor's Dragon]

17 minutes ago, rustythesmith said:

I'm up to the challenge. Put any scene to me and I'll tell you how it foreshadows or develops Dany  towards the mad queen ending.

Edit: Oh yeah I meant scenes with Dany in them.

Start with the one in my avatar. 

[SansaJonRule]

33 minutes ago, Hodor's Dragon said:

I was paying very close attention, thank you. 

Clearly, readers/viewers are supposed to wonder about whether Daenerys would snap or go mad. Clearly.

That wasn't set up at all. There was never a hint in all 8 seasons prior to epi 5 that Dany would go mass destruction for no reason, or for a stupid reason. 

I think it was enough to give us hints that she might go mad, without the hints suggesting exactly how it was going to happen.

[H Wadsworth Longfellow]

I never felt guilty.  And I never will.  I love Daenerys.  I don't take the show seriously.  I'm more of a book person.  Like 95% book and 5% show.  My Daenerys is the one in the books because what the show created is beyond logic.  The show character is as much a cartoon character as the Starks, whom they choose to portray with zero accuracy.

[SansaJonRule]

44 minutes ago, rustythesmith said:

I'm up to the challenge. Put any scene to me and I'll tell you how it foreshadows or develops Dany  towards the mad queen ending.

Edit: Oh yeah I meant scenes with Dany in them.

Oooh, this sounds interesting. *grabs popcorn*

26 minutes ago, Hodor's Dragon said:

Start with the one in my avatar. 

Okay, I know I'm not part of this challenge, but just wondering, what scene is that?

[rustythesmith]

39 minutes ago, Hodor's Dragon said:

Start with the one in my avatar. 

Too easy. This scene is an amalgamation of scenes directly from the books, all of which I've already analyzed in an essay. I'll try to sum up the bigger points.

1. Dany's disgust for slavery and the people who practice it is amplified by her experiences in this scene.

"The blood of my enemies. Not innocents."

This quote demonstrates that Dany has a good and evil view of the world. If GoT and ASOIAF has an anti-premise, it is the good and evil world view. It's the reason the story is hailed for its "grey" characters. The good and evil world view is GRRM's biggest criticism of conventional fantasy. The good guys are beautiful and wear white while the bad guys are ugly and wear black. And it's the reason the whole book series is written from a first person point of view. Martin is drawing attention to the problem of moral relativity.

2. Jorah and Barristan are literally the angel and devil on Dany's shoulder in this scene, walking on either side of her. Jorah sells Dany on the idea of taking a bite out of the fruits of slavery by buying the Unsullied. It's the "ends justify the means" argument, one of many bad lessons Jorah teaches her.

Barristan makes the case against it by pointing out that people followed Rhaegar because they loved him, not because they were bought.

Jorah gives the last line of the"and Rhaegar died" speech, which is the next and perhaps most harmful lesson that Jorah teaches Dany. The takeway for Dany is that nothing she does matters if she dies. It suggests that death is the worst thing that can happen to her, or rather, that she should sacrifice her ideal when it is expedient.

Death is not the worst thing that can happen to a person, as we see with other characters like Theon. And there are some values that are worth dying for, such as protecting children, like we see Ned do. And, perhaps, not taking a bite out of the fruits of slavery.
 

[tallTale]

46 minutes ago, SansaJonRule said:

Okay, I think it's that those glimpses of her bad side were an indication that she had that "bad Targaryen seed". All it needed to grow were a few very personal setbacks: Missandei being murdered, thinking Jon didn't love her (he did, he was just conflicted about her being his aunt as has been discussed), knowing the people didn't love her, Varys betraying her, and then she snapped.

If all it took were some difficult moments, it would have happened already. She lost her unborn child, her husband, two dragons, Jorah, yet remained sane.

 

46 minutes ago, SansaJonRule said:

In her warped mind, the innocents of KL were an acceptable sacrifice to bring the world she envisioned into being.

She could have conquered anything she wanted without murdering her own people in a battle she already won. It made no sense. 

 

46 minutes ago, SansaJonRule said:

I think she believed that since the Northerners didn't love her even after she helped them defeat the AotD, the people of KL wouldn't love her either even though she freed them from Cersei's rule.

This whole thing about needing the love of the Northerners. Who cares. They made their decision. Burn their treacherous houses already. It would make sense since Sansa and co. were actively trying to undermine her claim immediately after working so hard to save them. 

 

46 minutes ago, SansaJonRule said:

If she was mentally unstable, as Varys pointed out was possible, there is no logic or reason to it.

Varys has conspired against every ruler he's served. He initially wanted Viserys on the throne. And if she was mentally unstable, we would have seen her cut herself, talk to herself, etc like Arys. 

[beeeeeen]

2 minutes ago, tallTale said:

If all it took were some difficult moments, it would have happened already. She lost her unborn child, her husband, two dragons, Jorah, yet remained sane.

When she lost her child and her husband she went into a pyre in which she burned a woman alive.... it's not a sign of a great mental health...

and when she lost Jorah and her second dragon, and Missandeï, and in some way the love of Jon, and Varys betrayed her... she snaped again... except that this time she had lost even more, and she had a full grown dragon...

[tallTale]

2 minutes ago, beeeeeen said:

When she lost her child and her husband she went into a pyre in which she burned a woman alive.... it's not a sign of a great mental health.

How can this moment be considered crazy? She obviously knew what she was doing. If she was crazy, she would have been burned, instead, she came out with three dragons. That was not an accident. I still believe the red god told her somehow.

 

 

 

1

Just now, beeeeeen said:

 when she lost Jorah and her second dragon, and Missandeï, and in some way the love of Jon, and Varys betrayed her... she snaped again... except that this time she had lost even more, and she had a full grown dragon...

I hear differing opinions of that bells moment. Was it an example of her snapping or was she using it as a tactical moment to create fear? Anyways, since I've explained why in the prior statement that wasn't a crazy moment, this would have been her first due to a traumatic instance, and after seven and half seasons, too little, too late.

[Tywin Tytosson]

8 hours ago, tallTale said:

The question isn't about if the 7 kingdoms will let just bow down to her, the argument is about whether Daeny would become a bloodthristy pycho that targets innocents.

the seven and half seasons prove she wouldn't do that.

Disagree.

Quote

She frees slavery from bondage because she sees them as oppressed.

Agree.

Quote

She marries a guy she doesn't even like to be a more fair ruler.

She marries a guy to try bring peace to Meereen.  Not necessarily to be a more fair ruler.

Quote

She locks up dragons for killing one innocent person.

She locks up the dragons because the person was a child and it triggers something in her re. her inability to have children.  [the show doesn't portray this; it is from my recollection of the books]

Quote

She saves the north, even without a guarantee they would bend the knee.

This is not correct.  She expects that Jon bending the knee means that the North will bend the knee.  She is not used to the Norths 'King in Parliament' kind of governance.

 

Quote

She didn't go blood thirsty insane even when much worse things happened to her in life then her briefly known boyfriend not liking her anymore.

Mmmm.. yes, she did.  She burned those Dothraki Khals alive.  And was quite ready burn 3 if not 4 of the cities that attacked Meereen in S6 to the ground.

[Lollygag]

2 minutes ago, beeeeeen said:

When she lost her child and her husband she went into a pyre in which she burned a woman alive.... it's not a sign of a great mental health...

and when she lost Jorah and her second dragon, and Missandeï, and in some way the love of Jon, and Varys betrayed her... she snaped again... except that this time she had lost even more, and she had a full grown dragon...

This too when she lost Barristan and she doesn't care if she burns innocent people alive in retaliation. 

 

[tallTale]

1 minute ago, Tywin Tytosson said:

This is not correct.  She expects that Jon bending the knee means that the North will bend the knee.  She is not used to the Norths 'King in Parliament' kind of governance.

When did she say this? 

 

 

1

1 minute ago, Tywin Tytosson said:

Mmmm.. yes, she did.  She burned those Dothraki Khals alive.  And was quite ready burn 3 if not 4 of the cities that attacked Meereen in S6 to the ground.

The Khal kidnapped her and threatened to rape her. She burned them alive. Good!

[beeeeeen]

2 minutes ago, tallTale said:

How can this moment be considered crazy? She obviously knew what she was doing. If she was crazy, she would have been burned, instead, she came out with three dragons. That was not an accident. I still believe the red god told her somehow.

 

I hear differing opinions of that bells moment. Was it an example of her snapping or was she using it as a tactical moment to create fear? Anyways, since I've explained why in the prior statement that wasn't a crazy moment, this would have been her first due to a traumatic instance, and after seven and half seasons, too little, too late.

Yes that's crazy, even if in this instance she ends up being right... if you jump into a pyre because a dream told you to do so, i will question your mental health, even if you end up unburnt and with 3 baby dragons.

[SansaJonRule]

10 minutes ago, tallTale said:

She could have conquered anything she wanted without murdering her own people in a battle she already won. It made no sense. 

First of all, like I said earlier, you're trying to apply sense and logical to something that inherently not logical. 

That's why I said "in her warped mind". .The northerners were supposed to be her people, but she didn't care about marching them to KL exhausted and wounded.

5 minutes ago, tallTale said:

If all it took were some difficult moments, it would have happened already. She lost her unborn child, her husband, two dragons, Jorah, yet remained sane.

Not necessarily. Everyone has their breaking point. Losing her baby and husband and losing her first dragon happened years apart. She lost Jorah and Rhaegon right before Missandei died, and it was after that that her "descent" seemed to begin, fueled by the other events I mentioned.

15 minutes ago, tallTale said:

This whole thing about needing the love of the Northerners. Who cares.

Obviously she cared, as was evident in her conversation with Jon. You need to stay within the context of the show, not apply your own feelings about what the northerners did/didn't do.

17 minutes ago, tallTale said:

Varys has conspired against every ruler he's served.

So? That does not negate the validity of his point, especially since he was not the one who coined the phrase "Every time a Targareyen is born, the gods flip a coin." And Varys made clear a long time ago his allegiance was to the people of Westeros, not to any one ruler.

21 minutes ago, tallTale said:

And if she was mentally unstable, we would have seen her cut herself, talk to herself, etc like Arys. 

Says who? Mental instability does not manifest the same way in every one who is. Hers was obviously buried deeper. She had good in her as well as bad, whereas her father was just insanely evil.

[NymeriaWarriorQueen]

I mentioned this in another post but will repost it here. Emilia in her interview with The New Yorker says that the showrunners told her early on that Daenerys arc was like that of Lawrence of Arabia.  It is about power corrupting a person absolutely.

I remember the boys—our writers and showrunners—telling me that Daenerys’s arc is that of Lawrence of Arabia. I watched “Lawrence of Arabia,” and I was, like, “Great, cool. He’s brilliant. He survived, and it’s wonderful.” But then you remember how that movie ended, with Lawrence’s disintegration. I didn’t quite put those two things together. Or maybe I didn’t want to see it coming because I care about Daenerys too much.

Can you talk about that a little more, how Daenerys’s arc is like Lawrence of Arabia’s life?

Well, fundamentally, he’s brought in as a savior. He goes in and fights for the people, but then, ultimately, it’s a story about how power corrupts absolutely. You see power turn this man wild and mad. He can’t see anymore through the haze, the giddy highs, of being in charge. And that’s what Daenerys experiences. And yet I care for her so much. She’s been a part of me for so long that, in reading this script, I did what any actor is told to do and would do. You have to agree with your character. If you don’t agree with your character, then you shouldn’t take the job.

I really just had to sit there and wrestle with how I could make good on what they had written. Because that’s her. They are the writers. They have made this woman, and I’m going to take on what it is and try and interpret that to my best ability. Now, when I showed the first glimmer of coldness, in Season 1, when Khal Drogo kills my brother, Viserys Targaryen—Jason [Momoa] kills Harry Lloyd . . .

 

[ToddDavid]

1 hour ago, SansaJonRule said:

 

We were frequently shown glimpses of her bad side. That's not foreshadowing, that IS character development.

Exactly.  In real life we’re not afforded all the foreshadowing of a raging narcissist or psychopath about to cross that point of no return. Just bc Ted Bundy didn’t start murdering until he was like 25 that doesn’t mean that his very real tangible life had no “Character arch” up until that point.   He wasn’t a murderer until he became a murderer.  The Space Shuttle Challenger was intact until it wasn’t. 

 

All the conclusive evidence anyone needs that Dany’s arch was fine and that S8 wasn’t some sort of uncharacteristic deviation from non fiction:

Powerful father murdered; forced to live in poverty as a result, living on carcasses and wild berries; older brother attempts to exert himself as the dominant figure; captured by family’s ex allies and forced into slavery;  grew up observing the tough political climate, including corruption, raids, revenge, tribal warfare, and thievery; escapes her enslavers; entered an arranged marraige, only to have her partner kidnapped shortly thereafter; experiences a permanent rift w/ a-hole brother;  beguiles rulers to lend large armies; promotes a new meritocratic way of life that benefited and attracted the lower class; encourages religious tolerance, unifies a region and elected ruler of their land, then delegated authority based on merit & loyalty rather than status or family name; after defeating rival enemies— their lands, soldiers, and civilians were not abandoned, as they were taken under her protection and integrated into her own tribe; also showed great compassion toward children & orphans; her ways inspired loyalty among her conquered people, making her stronger with each victory; life marked by betrayals & conspiracies;  brought peace to a warring land under a single unified political & military force; initially appeared morally aware; at one point interpreted a celestial occurrence as an omen of victory; became a beloved larger than life figure.  

Sound familiar??? Wups, that wasn’t a her. That’s not Dany. That’s Genghis Khan, right before his desire for revenge led him to wipe out the remnants of the Khwarazmian Empire and then some, including not only royal buildings but entire towns, populations, and all surrounding agricultural lands. One city was burnt to the ground, and the women & children who weren’t massacred were given to the soldiers as slaves. Khan’s sacking of Urgench was considered one of the bloodiest massacres in human history. 

Khan related to the Mongols and showed them compassion bc of it; everyone else, all those he didn’t relate to nor see himself in, nnnnot so much. He was pretty f***in brutal, a genocidal warlord.  He was good and then he was bad. 

But apparently Genghis Khan doesn’t have a damn character arch either because no one informed our entitled butts that he was about to go mad.  

BTW, I’ve always wondered if Dany’s character was influenced by Genghis. 

[ToddDavid]

The whole point of a mad person doing what they do is that their actions are entirely unpredictable.  

If this were 2010, Dany would’ve seen a shrink; he would’ve found out about her genetic predilection for madness, put her on some meds, and sent her on her merry way, then testified at her Sandy Hook trial about her unstable mental inheritance from good ole dad.... while the audience is all like, holy shit we should’ve seen this coming!

[SansaJonRule]

12 minutes ago, ToddDavid said:

The whole point of a mad person doing what they do is that their actions are entirely unpredictable.  

Exactly what I've been saying!

BTW, your user name is my brother's first and middle name. How weird is that?