Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I think there's nothing to take up with the author, only with your interpretation.

You think his message is that war is always wrong.  I believe him, when he says some wars are worth fighting.

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists informs the public about threats to the survival and development of humanity from nuclear weapons, climate change, and technology. It was established in 1945 with the Manhattan Project. After the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, they started to warn the public about the consequences of these weapons. These scientists, who are still on that mission today, asked him a serious question about the meaning of dragon power in his work, and he gave them one. And you just don't want to engage with it at all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists informs the public about threats to the survival and development of humanity from nuclear weapons, climate change, and technology. It was established in 1945 with the Manhattan Project. After the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, they started to warn the public about the consequences of these weapons. These scientists, who are still on that mission today, asked him a serious question about the meaning of dragon power in his work, and he gave them one. And you just don't want to engage with it at all?

I can only reiterate that he has said some wars, like WWII, are worth fighting.  I would suggest that Dany's campaign in Slavers Bay is one such war.

If your take from these books is that no war, however well-intentioned, is worth fighting, then we must just agree to differ.

Edit:  As I said upthread, the power of a nuclear weapon is vastly greater than that of any dragon in this series, let alone dragons as small as Daenerys'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists informs the public about threats to the survival and development of humanity from nuclear weapons, climate change, and technology. It was established in 1945 with the Manhattan Project. After the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, they started to warn the public about the consequences of these weapons. These scientists, who are still on that mission today, asked him a serious question about the meaning of dragon power in his work, and he gave them one. And you just don't want to engage with it at all?

1) Dragons do not even come close to having the destructive potential of nuclear weapons.

2) Even if they did, there is a serious argument to be made in IR that nuclear weapons have actually made the world safer. Certainly, disastrous great power conflicts have declined to 0 since their introduction. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, aromaticanalysis said:

1) Dragons do not even come close to having the destructive potential of nuclear weapons.

2) Even if they did, there is a serious argument to be made in IR that nuclear weapons have actually made the world safer. Certainly, disastrous great power conflicts have declined to 0 since their introduction. 

Do you want to stay willfully ignorant?

Quote

 “I have tried to make it explicit in the novels that the dragons are destructive forces, and Dany has found that out as she tried to rule the city of Meereen and be queen there...She has the power to destroy, she can wipe out entire cities, and we certainly see that in Fire and Blood, we see the dragons wiping out entire armies, wiping out towns and cities, destroying them, but that doesn’t necessarily enable you to rule — it just enables you to destroy.” - GRRM, 2018

Deterrence theory usually works when other powers have nukes and both parties don't want MAD. This was explored when Dany was working toward peace in Meereen, but if she uses them, that theory goes out the window. That's why paying attention to what's going on in Dany's head is important. And if King's Landing has wildfire and Dany learns about this, it won't matter if she stops caring about loss of life altogether.

19 hours ago, SeanF said:

I can only reiterate that he has said some wars, like WWII, are worth fighting.  I would suggest that Dany's campaign in Slavers Bay is one such war.

If your take from these books is that no war, however well-intentioned, is worth fighting, then we must just agree to differ.

Edit:  As I said upthread, the power of a nuclear weapon is vastly greater than that of any dragon in this series, let alone dragons as small as Daenerys'.

That "wars are worth fighting" quote is vague as hell, it could be about any war in fiction or in real life, and isn't explicit like the Atomic Scientists one is.

And you keep trying to characterize me as a pacifist, but that's not what my argument is at all. My take is that if you must oppose slavery, try to vary your tactics for christ sake. Like perhaps, after conquering people, try to show how a free city can actually prosper. Using other tactics besides a flying flamethrower all the time might be helpful because the story clearly snaps back at the idea that using dragons solves problems!  We constantly see how things are destroyed with them, not built. That's why narratively, Dany had to destroy KL because it goes back to this theme.

Dany can either make a dead city bloom (Vaes Tolerro, Meereen, King’s Landing) and settle for an imperfect victory, or she can “kill the Sons of the Harpy and their sons and their sons” but she won’t be able to feed people or build something that lasts long-term. 

It's clear that all this writing about House Targaryen is exploring the limitations of what ruling through nuclear power can achieve. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using violence against enemies is often necessary, in Martin's world as in ours.  Otherwise, you and your people die.  That applies regardless of your surname.

In fact, both show and books make plain that she's willing to negotiate.  The problem is that many slavers will only settle for the restoration of slavery.  That has to be non-negotiable.  And they break treaties. And, it's difficult to make a city prosper when your enemies are waging war and terrorist campaigns against you, in order to enslave your people.

The show made clear that it was a waste of time to negotiate with Cersei, or slavers, or Dothraki Khals.  These people either don't stick to bargains, or they want to do horrible things to you.  If your enemies won't negotiate in good faith, what option is available, apart from violence?

In the books, some of the Great Masters and the Yunkish do want peace.  But the big powers (Volantis, Qarth, New Ghis) want to stamp out a free Meereen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/10/2019 at 4:56 PM, Rose of Red Lake said:

Of course dragons can be killed, but that doesnt mean Daenerys isnt the most powerful person in the world. Every villain and their weapon of choice has to be taken out eventually, it doesnt mean the Deathstar+Emperor is any less dangerous. 

I guess you dont understand the themes the author is working with here. Targaryens will always be shown to be limited to one form of power, which is efficiently killing lots of people, and the story will always come back to the idea that this method is insufficient to rule effectively.

To be fair The Emperor didn't really need the Deathstar he was very powerful without it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/15/2019 at 11:33 AM, Bittersweet Distractor said:

To be fair The Emperor didn't really need the Deathstar he was very powerful without it.

On the other hand, Daenerys is pretty much useless in combat without a dragon... until Season 8 and she managed to kill some wights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Angel Eyes said:

On the other hand, Daenerys is pretty much useless in combat without a dragon... until Season 8 and she managed to kill some wights.

Agreed, she wasn’t a skilled warrior like some of her ancestors, I’m quite looking forward to the prequel series,sure seeing the dragons in action will be great but it will also be great to see the likes of Visenya and Aegon in battle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/11/2019 at 2:55 PM, SeanF said:

Using violence against enemies is often necessary, in Martin's world as in ours.  Otherwise, you and your people die.  That applies regardless of your surname.

In fact, both show and books make plain that she's willing to negotiate.  The problem is that many slavers will only settle for the restoration of slavery.  That has to be non-negotiable.  And they break treaties. And, it's difficult to make a city prosper when your enemies are waging war and terrorist campaigns against you, in order to enslave your people.

The show made clear that it was a waste of time to negotiate with Cersei, or slavers, or Dothraki Khals.  These people either don't stick to bargains, or they want to do horrible things to you.  If your enemies won't negotiate in good faith, what option is available, apart from violence?

In the books, some of the Great Masters and the Yunkish do want peace.  But the big powers (Volantis, Qarth, New Ghis) want to stamp out a free Meereen.

“That doesn’t enable you to rule - it just enables you to destroy." Everything relates back to this theme of building vs. destroying, and you're ignoring it like most Targ stans. Something the author says he's trying to be EXPLICIT about. 

The goal is to make a city prosper without using nukes, and she had a window opportunity at the end of the novels. Hizdahr tells her to ignore the slavers outside her walls, they're just posturing and trying to get under her skin, and Dany lets them. The Shavepate says that the Yunkish leader was afraid of her using dragons, so she had the deterrent. She didn't actually have to use them. But she was the one who broke the treaty, because from their perspective she lured them there to burn them all with her dragon.

Marriage alliances are soft power, dragons are hard power, and good diplomacy involves knowing when to use both--not throwing one away and using the other on a whim. 

It's clear, Dany has no idea what she wants. At first she wanted to feed her people and then she wanted the deaths to stop, but now she wants slavery to end everywhere? How is this realistic? Dany can’t stop every instance of the slave trade and feed her people at the same time. Using dragons will have consequences, per the theme of building vs. destroying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

“That doesn’t enable you to rule - it just enables you to destroy." Everything relates back to this theme of building vs. destroying, and you're ignoring it like most Targ stans. Something the author says he's trying to be EXPLICIT about. 

The goal is to make a city prosper without using nukes, and she had a window opportunity at the end of the novels. Hizdahr tells her to ignore the slavers outside her walls, they're just posturing and trying to get under her skin, and Dany lets them. The Shavepate says that the Yunkish leader was afraid of her using dragons, so she had the deterrent. She didn't actually have to use them. But she was the one who broke the treaty, because from their perspective she lured them there to burn them all with her dragon.

Marriage alliances are soft power, dragons are hard power, and good diplomacy involves knowing when to use both--not throwing one away and using the other on a whim. 

It's clear, Dany has no idea what she wants. At first she wanted to feed her people and then she wanted the deaths to stop, but now she wants slavery to end everywhere? How is this realistic? Dany can’t stop every instance of the slave trade and feed her people at the same time. Using dragons will have consequences, per the theme of building vs. destroying.

I think she had good ideas, she just had so many ideas they get away from her. Like she doesn’t know how to think on a smaller scale for the sake of doing one thing at a time. The notion of ending slavery everywhere is quite a lofty one, I agree with that. She just got too big for her britches and it got the better of her. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

“That doesn’t enable you to rule - it just enables you to destroy." Everything relates back to this theme of building vs. destroying, and you're ignoring it like most Targ stans. Something the author says he's trying to be EXPLICIT about. 

The goal is to make a city prosper without using nukes, and she had a window opportunity at the end of the novels. Hizdahr tells her to ignore the slavers outside her walls, they're just posturing and trying to get under her skin, and Dany lets them. The Shavepate says that the Yunkish leader was afraid of her using dragons, so she had the deterrent. She didn't actually have to use them. But she was the one who broke the treaty, because from their perspective she lured them there to burn them all with her dragon.

Marriage alliances are soft power, dragons are hard power, and good diplomacy involves knowing when to use both--not throwing one away and using the other on a whim. 

It's clear, Dany has no idea what she wants. At first she wanted to feed her people and then she wanted the deaths to stop, but now she wants slavery to end everywhere? How is this realistic? Dany can’t stop every instance of the slave trade and feed her people at the same time. Using dragons will have consequences, per the theme of building vs. destroying.

Well, it's out of her hands.  She was trying to prevent Drogon from harming people in Danzak's Pit, even if the Yunkish won't see it that way.  And, by the time she returns, her soldiers and allies will have kerb-stomped the Yunkish and their allies.

The Yunkish were not acting in good faith either.  They did not inform her that the Volantenes were coming to attack, or make an attempt to call them off.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, SeanF said:

Well, it's out of her hands.  She was trying to prevent Drogon from harming people in Danzak's Pit, even if the Yunkish won't see it that way.  And, by the time she returns, her soldiers and allies will have kerb-stomped the Yunkish and their allies.

The Yunkish were not acting in good faith either.  They did not inform her that the Volantenes were coming to attack, or make an attempt to call them off.  

There's also the matter of the locusts.

They were poisoned. They were clearly meant for Daenerys (Hizdahr gave them to her!!!) but Belwas ate them. He barely survives the resulting illness and it is clearly pointed out that only his body size and composition saved his life. And even then, by the end of it, he has lost a lot of weight. Clearly, it would have killed someone of a smaller size and perhaps a more delicate age than Belwas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/18/2019 at 12:27 AM, SeanF said:

Well, it's out of her hands.  She was trying to prevent Drogon from harming people in Danzak's Pit, even if the Yunkish won't see it that way.  And, by the time she returns, her soldiers and allies will have kerb-stomped the Yunkish and their allies.

The Yunkish were not acting in good faith either.  They did not inform her that the Volantenes were coming to attack, or make an attempt to call them off.  

I didn't see her as trying to prevent Drogon from harming people. She sympathized more with Drogon who was hurt, she blocked out the people dying around her, and she basically had an orgasm on her dragon. A person feeling euphoric about flying isn't your typical sacrificial act. Whereas before she lamented that dragons are monsters, now she's fine with them. That's shift isn't exactly... admirable. 

What the Volantese will/won't do doesn't really matter, the deal was that slavery would end in Meereen - not all over the world - and the city can now receive trade for food. That's exactly what Dany set out to do:

Quote

 

“But how can I rule seven kingdoms if I cannot rule a single city? My children need time to heal and learn. My dragons need time to grow and test their wings. And I need the same. I will not let this city go the way of Astapor. I will not let the harpy of Yunkai chain up those I’ve freed all over again.” 

 

She had one job. To rule one city effectively, and keep it free. She achieved that at the end, until she rode her dragon. Could the author be more clear about the meaning of dragons here? They're an ALBATROSS.

If she concludes that dragons are the best way to achieve her goals, she fails and makes the same mistakes as her predecessors. She can't be Jaehaerys with dragons or Daeron II without dragons. She's can't be a ruler; she belongs at the head of a Dothraki khalasar, sacking cities but not ruling them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

I didn't see her as trying to prevent Drogon from harming people. She sympathized more with Drogon who was hurt, she blocked out the people dying around her, and she basically had an orgasm on her dragon. A person feeling euphoric about flying isn't your typical sacrificial act. Whereas before she lamented that dragons are monsters, now she's fine with them. That's shift isn't exactly... admirable. 

What the Volantese will/won't do doesn't really matter, the deal was that slavery would end in Meereen - not all over the world - and the city can now receive trade for food. That's exactly what Dany set out to do:

She had one job. To rule one city effectively, and keep it free. She achieved that at the end, until she rode her dragon. Could the author be more clear about the meaning of dragons here? They're an ALBATROSS.

If she concludes that dragons are the best way to achieve her goals, she fails and makes the same mistakes as her predecessors. She can't be Jaehaerys with dragons or Daeron II without dragons. She's can't be a ruler; she belongs at the head of a Dothraki khalasar, sacking cities but not ruling them. 

Sure, she sympathised with Drogon.  That still doesn't mean she was not trying to de-escalate the situation. She subdued him with her whip, at great risk to herself.  Flying off on Drogon is the only way of getting him out of Danzak's Pit.  The only way of saving lives.  A battle between Drogon and the people in the Pit is going to cost a lot of lives.  What's she supposed to do other than fly him out of trouble? Drogon however, is like a disobedient dog, and flies away far further than she intended.  In the subsequent chapter, she thinks that the peace is still in place, and wants to return to Meereen.

You can't just handwave away Volantis.  They are the regional superpower.  If someone has called in the local superpower to crush you, any peace which they have negotiated with you is worthless, unless they warn you, or try to persuade that superpower that peace has now been achieved. 

Dragons can be a blessing or a curse.  It depends what use you put them to.  The author does not dislike dragons any more than he dislikes wolves.  Assuming that Dany's dream at Astapor is prophetic, then dragons will play some part in the defeat of the Others, as well as the return of magic to the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SeanF said:

You can't just handwave away Volantis.  They are the regional superpower.  If someone has called in the local superpower to crush you, any peace which they have negotiated with you is worthless, unless they warn you, or try to persuade that superpower that peace has now been achieved. 

And how do we think Dany will deal with them? Probably something like, "Let's burn everything down!" And then Tyrion shows up and has to talk sense into her. Predictable.

Any plotline in Essos only matter as it reflects on Westeros anyway. The big question is, what does this whole Meereenese storyline mean for Westeros?

8 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Sure, she sympathised with Drogon.  That still doesn't mean she was not trying to de-escalate the situation.  Flying off on Drogon is the only way of getting him out of Danzak's Pit.  The only way of saving lives.  A battle between Drogon and the people in the Pit is going to cost a lot of lives.  What's she supposed to do other than fly him out of trouble? In the subsequent chapter, she thinks that the peace is still in place, and wants to return to Meereen.

Well, flying off on him was a PR disaster. She could keep fighting him off, so people could see she's a dragonslayer--which means she's on their side. The person who stabs him with a spear is called a "hero." That's telling. 

In their mind, Dany looks like another dragon-flying tyrant from Old Valyria now, which is exactly why people were resisting her in the first place. The marriage reconciled that image, and it was successful, but the peace wasn't even 24 hours old before she had to ride a dragon. I can see this pattern in F&B too. It takes years and years before the dragon pit is built (building), and on the day it's finally finished, the dragons almost destroy it (destroying) because Rhaena is furious about Aerea. 

11 minutes ago, SeanF said:

 Dragons can be a blessing or a curse.  It depends what use you put them to.  The author does not dislike dragons any more than he dislikes wolves.  Assuming that Dany's dream at Astapor is prophetic, then dragons will play some part in the defeat of the Others, as well as the return of magic to the world.

I think he thinks dragons are "cool" in the fanboy sense, but in the mature sense, they're awful for ruling. He says, “Oh sure, dragons are cool too, But maybe not on our doorstep” (x). And he also goes on and on about his fear of nuclear weapons destroying the world in this interview (x), which reflects his statements on dragons as nuclear weapons from 2011. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

And how do we think Dany will deal with them? Probably something like, "Let's burn everything down!" And then Tyrion shows up and has to talk sense into her. Predictable.

Any plotline in Essos only matter as it reflects on Westeros anyway. The big question is, what does this whole Meereenese storyline mean for Westeros?

Well, flying off on him was a PR disaster. She could keep fighting him off, so people could see she's a dragonslayer--which means she's on their side. The person who stabs him with a spear is called a "hero." That's telling. 

In their mind, Dany looks like another dragon-flying tyrant from Old Valyria now, which is exactly why people were resisting her in the first place. The marriage reconciled that image, and it was successful, but the peace wasn't even 24 hours old before she had to ride a dragon. I can see this pattern in F&B too. It takes years and years before the dragon pit is built (building), and on the day it's finally finished, the dragons almost destroy it (destroying) because Rhaena is furious about Aerea. 

I think he thinks dragons are "cool" in the fanboy sense, but in the mature sense, they're awful for ruling. He says, “Oh sure, dragons are cool too, But maybe not on our doorstep” (x). And he also goes on and on about his fear of nuclear weapons destroying the world in this interview (x), which reflects his statements on dragons as nuclear weapons from 2011. 

1. Volantis is on the brink of a social and religious revolution.  I expect that their Red Priests will persuade the soldiers and sailors to revolt in favour of the woman they preach is Azhor Ahai Reborn

2. PR disaster or not, it's the obvious way of saving lives.  If Drogon remains in the pit then one or more of the fighters or guards will try to kill him, (and quite possibly Daenerys too) and he will fight back, with fire and claws.   It's not as if she wanted Drogon to come back and start killing people.   She took the best decision she could, when everyone around her was panicking.  It would be quite a different matter if she started burning the people in the pit from Drogon's back. 

3. Ultimately, the only war that matters is the war against the Others.  If dragons are essential for that war, then it doesn't matter if they can cause destruction.  The Others threaten to extinguish all life on earth.  Dragons don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, SeanF said:

1. Volantis is on the brink of a social and religious revolution.  I expect that their Red Priests will persuade the soldiers and sailors to revolt in favour of the woman they preach is Azhor Ahai Reborn

Okay, and how does this matter for Westeros since that's primarily what the books are about.

13 minutes ago, SeanF said:

It would be quite a different matter if she started burning the people in the pit from Drogon's back. 

She DID DO THAT:

“The dragon twisted violently in the air, wounds smoking, the girl clinging to his back. Then he loosed the fire.” This is Barristan recalling what happened!

16 minutes ago, SeanF said:

3. Ultimately, the only war that matters is the war against the Others.  If dragons are essential for that war, then it doesn't matter if they can cause destruction.  The Others threaten to extinguish all life on earth.  Dragons don't.

They're not going to be the ones to solve it though. It makes sense that Targaryens, Dany, or dragons weren't the #1 heroes who saved the day. The show got the themes of dragons=destruction right, for once.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Okay, and how does this matter for Westeros since that's primarily what the books are about.

She DID DO THAT:

“The dragon twisted violently in the air, wounds smoking, the girl clinging to his back. Then he loosed the fire.” This is Barristan recalling what happened!

They're not going to be the ones to solve it though. It makes sense that Targaryens, Dany, or dragons weren't the #1 heroes who saved the day. The show got the themes of dragons=destruction right, for once.  

Once airborne, and outside the Pit, Drogon responded to attacks on him and his rider, with spears and crossbow bolts,  with flame.  You're totally misunderstanding this part of the story if you think it's all about Daenerys planning and carrying out a massacre of the Yunkish by Drogon.  But, I can see why the Yunkish would think that it was.  What it was was just very bad luck.  Barristan made plain his view, to the Yunkish envoy, that what took place was an accident.

And, I would be hugely surprised if Daenerys (and dragons) did not play a major role in the defeat of the Others (assuming that the Others are defeated).  That's what her prophetic dreams imply.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Once airborne, and outside the Pit, Drogon responded to attacks on him and his rider, with spears and crossbow bolts,  with flame.  You're totally misunderstanding this part of the story if you think it's all about Daenerys planning and carrying out a massacre of the Yunkish by Drogon.  But, I can see why the Yunkish would think that it was.  What it was was just very bad luck.  Barristan made plain his view, to the Yunkish envoy, that what took place was an accident.

I'm not misunderstanding. I'm arguing that dragons are always going to result in destruction. Whether accidental or not, that's what happened. She did burn people on his back, and she recalls people burning, but she doesn't realize she did that, all she can think about is how it was all worth it because she went on a dragon flight. This is Daenerys choosing her dragon over people - this fits with the show's ending.

40 minutes ago, SeanF said:

 And, I would be hugely surprised if Daenerys (and dragons) did not play a major role in the defeat of the Others (assuming that the Others are defeated).  That's what her prophetic dreams imply.  

The one where she melts away her enemies armored in ice at the Trident? That's a dream about vengeance and is laden with warning signs because she exults in her victory. When the word "exult" is used characters are being set up for some kind of failure. I can see dragons burning some wights, that's about it. The show having Dany and co bungle the wight hunt, bringing down the wall, giving the NK a dragon, was on theme because dragons always make characters trip over their own feet.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...