Jump to content
AlaerysTargaryen

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

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, ToddDavid said:

Yes, she was reasonable and sympathetic.... to those who were relatable to her [the raped and the enslaved].  That doesn’t make her sympathetic and compassionate to ALL mankind though, as we well witnessed.  The only reason that she seemed “unmad” earlier is bc most of her dealings prior to S8 were with people she could relate to. Initially there were always bad men standing in her way and the enslaved to free.   Therefore her predilection toward madness was originally hidden behind the facade that her first million murders were of individuals whom nobody will miss.   Not to mention, liberated slave lands represent allies, soldiers, and territories.... people whom would stand behind her. 

However, Westeros isn’t a “slave territory”.  There wasn’t relatable population there for her to empathize with, which meant that everyone was fair game in her ultimate pursuit of the throne.  I mean, we’ve witnessed it multiple times where she portrays herself unrelatable to the common man. If Dany HAD an army and 3 grown dragons when denied entry into Qarth by the Thirteen, she would’ve madly reduced that entire place to ash just as she claimed she would.  Later she was made aware of an innocent life she slayed and displayed zero remorse about it.  Dany was a classic raging Narcissist through & through.  Even dating back to S1, she’s always been angry, spiteful, hot-headed, entitled, and self-absorbed.... and routinely displayed hostility in her tone of voice & mannerisms.  

I have no idea why anyone would want Jon to occupy the throne during a time of peace either.  He was mostly just a unifier, a rallier of the troops, and when it came to actual kingly duties, he always preferred to engage in tasks elsewhere.  Sansa was the one who performed most of his obligations.  

But what group that deserved it wasn't she reasonable and sympathetic to until the King's Landing snap? 

How is treating evil enemies harshly a sign of madness or proof that she had the capacity to do the same to the innocent? If you want to make a broader point that any ruthless or violent act, even if targeted against people who deserve it, takes a moral price again fair enough but the show never really took that position with any other character (or with Daenerys herself until Episode 5). Jon hanged a traumatized orphan child. He had legitimate reasons for doing so but he still did it. Arya and Sansa did horrible things why didn't any of them suddenly snap? 

If the message is just "Targs be crazy" again fair enough but Jon is a Targaryen who will be in charge of the Night's Watch. I bet I wasn't supposed to be sitting at the end there thinking "how long until he starts killing innocent wildlings given his clear capacity for violence?" 

Edited by The One Who Kneels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

One difference is that no one else has convinced themselves that dealing death to civilians is really mercy. No one else sees themselves as a messianic figure, nor do they expect to be loved for their actions, off the top of my head.

Yes but no one else has dragons, comes from a special Targ dynasty, is unburnt and managed to create an entire army from nothing (with the exception of Jon). What if they had all of these? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I mention 5 times that “I’m so mad I could kick a puppy!” and then I go out and kick some puppies... well then I’m a puppy kicker. Would you proclaim that I’ve only just become a puppy punter or would you suggest that the capacity for punting puppies has existed all along?

Share this post


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

If I mention 5 times that “I’m so mad I could kick a puppy!” and then I go out and kick some puppies... well then I’m a puppy kicker. Would you proclaim that I’ve only just become a puppy punter or would you suggest that the capacity for punting puppies has existed all along?

I would say both.

But the fact that you became a puppy punter and had the capacity for punting puppies all along does not make you unique. Nor does it make you insane.

It just makes you human like the rest of us.

Share this post


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

Understandable, but Dany was NEVER a woman of idle words.  Sure, some of her earlier threats may have appeared as statesmanship to those wanting to perceive it as such, but I think we can all deduce by her actions in King’s Landing that her statements were in fact promises. 

I compared Dany to Light Yagami in Death Note earlier and I honestly think this is the way GRRM is writing the character. The problem is we gradually see Light slip into madness and by the 4th or 5th episode Light takes his first innocent life. This is a person he views needs to die 100% because of his warped view on justice, but we as the outsiders know it's an act of evil. This shows us that no matter how many "bad people" Light kills, he always has the potential to kill an innocent, if the need arises. This makes his eventual fall into complete evil all the more believable.

Dany needed a case of killing someone 100% innocent, from our POV, but not to her warped view on right and wrong. The closest we ever get are the Tully's and even this I fully can't view as evil, because she gives them not one, but two chances to live, before killing them.

Edited by sifth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Nightwish said:

Yes but no one else has dragons, comes from a special Targ dynasty, is unburnt and managed to create an entire army from nothing (with the exception of Jon). What if they had all of these? 

They might turn into messianic tyrants as well.  Certainly Tywin Lannister would have no problem torching his enemies with a dragon, but it's doubtful he would then want to go on a worldwide liberation crusade of perpetual war.  And, key here, he would always know he was doing it out of selfish interests, he would never really believe he was doing it to be merciful or break the wheel.  Dany's issues are that she became delusional about her own actions and motivations combined with an always hair trigger temper and tendency toward brutality.

Share this post


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

If I mention 5 times that “I’m so mad I could kick a puppy!” and then I go out and kick some puppies... well then I’m a puppy kicker. Would you proclaim that I’ve only just become a puppy punter or would you suggest that the capacity for punting puppies has existed all along?

No, nobody will diagnose you until you start kicking the puppy.

And by the way even in our times  many political leaders are committing atrocities against other countries and cover their crimes and imperialistic views by saying that they are supposed to be the saviors, doing it for humanity, to eradicate a big threat and bla..bla..bla..

We all know it and we have seen it. But they are voted by their citizens again as loving or necessary leaders, have great political campaigns, and nobody calls them mad. 

Share this post


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

No, nobody will diagnose you until you start kicking the puppy.

And by the way even in our times  many political leaders are committing atrocities against other countries and cover their crimes and imperialistic views by saying that they are supposed to be the saviors, doing it for humanity, to eradicate a big threat and bla..bla..bla..

We all know it and we have seen it. But they are voted by their citizens again as loving or necessary leaders, have great political campaigns, and nobody calls them mad. 

Just like the Dothraki and Unsullied were willing to fight Dany's worldwide war of liberation...so, seems pretty realistic to me, that the charismatic leader's followers will not see the evil right in front of them.

Share this post


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

They might turn into messianic tyrants as well.  Certainly Tywin Lannister would have no problem torching his enemies with a dragon, but it's doubtful he would then want to go on a worldwide liberation crusade of perpetual war.  And, key here, he would always know he was doing it out of selfish interests, he would never really believe he was doing it to be merciful or break the wheel.  Dany's issues are that she became delusional about her own actions and motivations combined with an always hair trigger temper and tendency toward brutality.

One thing I always loved about Tywin was, the guy was honest. He was evil as sin, but at least he never pretended to be otherwise. You did what he asked or he would destroy you and heck he was even capable of kindness from time to time, like how accepted the River Lords surrender. The guy was a butcher, but only when he needed to be and that's why he will always be awesome. Possibly the series most complicated villain, IMO.

For the record, I don't approve of most of his actions, especially his treatment of Tyrion and his wife. I just really like villains I can at least somewhat understand, even if I don't approve of their actions

Share this post


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

She cheered and laughed at her brother tortured. She used all violence to scare, intimidate, and murder and opponents. Duh! Lmao anyone who didn't see it coming or how cold she was is biased af.

lol

You're a liar.

Edited by Jabar of House Titan

Share this post


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

She cheered and laughed at her brother tortured. She used all violence to scare, intimidate, and murder and opponents. Duh! Lmao anyone who didn't see it coming or how cold she was is biased af.

When did she ever do this? Viserys was a nut job who threatened to cut open his sisters belly and kill her unborn son. I know "words are wind" is a theme of the series, but he was drunk out of his mind and had a sword pointed at her belly when he made the threat. That's a little too close for comfort if you ask me. The guy had it coming, sad to say.

Share this post


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

One thing I always loved about Tywin was, the guy was honest. He was evil as sin, but at least he never pretended to be otherwise. You did what he asked or he would destroy you and heck he was even capable of kindness from time to time, like how accepted the River Lords surrender. The guy was a butcher, but only when he needed to be and that's why he will always be awesome. Possibly the series most complicated villain, IMO.

For the record, I don't approve of most of his actions, especially his treatment of Tyrion and his wife. I just really like villains I can at least somewhat understand, even if I don't approve of their actions

I agree, I thought he was a well done villain, smart, ruthless, always ready to hand out a sharp lesson, but not wallowing in sadism and brutality like the Boltons or Joff.  And as you say, capable of kindness and mercy on some levels when it served his purpose.  But also very human, with his own blind spots and prejudices that ultimately did him in.

Edited by Cas Stark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

They might turn into messianic tyrants as well.  Certainly Tywin Lannister would have no problem torching his enemies with a dragon, but it's doubtful he would then want to go on a worldwide liberation crusade of perpetual war.  And, key here, he would always know he was doing it out of selfish interests, he would never really believe he was doing it to be merciful or break the wheel.  Dany's issues are that she became delusional about her own actions and motivations combined with an always hair trigger temper and tendency toward brutality.

In fact we don't know what they would do. But generally I don't understand what you are saying. Did she ever hide that she wants her home back? 

She didn't pretend anything, all of these things happened to her on the way and she had to make decisions to protect what she built. Neither she was delusional. The slaves did love her back to Essos and were even quite upset seeing Tyrion closing a deal with the Slave Masters. 

How was she supposed to get the throne by sitting and having tea with the Harpies? 

 

Edited by Nightwish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Nightwish said:

Yes but no one else has dragons, comes from a special Targ dynasty, is unburnt and managed to create an entire army from nothing (with the exception of Jon). What if they had all of these? 

I always marvel when people criticize Daenerys for being "entitled" or thinking she's "special" or has a destiny. If you can live her Season 1 story and stand there in front of the kneeling Dothraki at the end with your baby dragons lovin' on you under the brand-new blood-red comet and NOT think you're "special," you're not thinking straight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nightwish said:

In fact we don't know what they would do. But generally I don't understand what you are saying. Did she ever hide that she wants her home back? 

He didn't pretend anything, all of these things happened to her on the way and she had to make decisions to protect what she built. Neither she was delusional. The slaves did love her back to Essos and where even quite upset seeing Tyrion closing a deal with the Slave Masters. 

How was she supposed to get the throne by sitting and having tea with the Harpies? 

 

But that was your original question, what if these other characters also had dragons.  Answer: they would use them.  It isn't the dragons that made Dany become a tyrant.  It was her inflexible nature, her tendency to act on her emotions and her self image as _______insert Dany titles here that allowed her to slip from her original idealism into tyranny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Just like the Dothraki and Unsullied were willing to fight Dany's worldwide war of liberation...so, seems pretty realistic to me, that the charismatic leader's followers will not see the evil right in front of them.

Madness is not the case though...

Many messiahs in this world are voted and well-respected exactly for their ability to drive wars and expand their country. And are respected not only by their voters but also from their opponents who may blame them but in short don't condemn them to death. 

Share this post


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

In fact we don't know what they would do. But generally I don't understand what you are saying. Did she ever hide that she wants her home back? 

He didn't pretend anything, all of these things happened to her on the way and she had to make decisions to protect what she built. Neither she was delusional. The slaves did love her back to Essos and where even quite upset seeing Tyrion closing a deal with the Slave Masters. 

How was she supposed to get the throne by sitting and having tea with the Harpies? 

 

Didn't Robert get his crown by being able to turn enemies into friends. I mean I hate to say it, but all Dany has really managed to do since taking Meereen is make more enemies. I'm talking about the books not the show however. I honestly doubt Varys is magically going to give Dany Dorne and The Reach the way D&D did. One of the key ways to get power and stay in power is not destroying stuff, but making new friends and allies.

Just look at all of the factions that want to her dead at the end of ADWD.

Edited by sifth

Share this post


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

But that was your original question, what if these other characters also had dragons.  Answer: they would use them.  It isn't the dragons that made Dany become a tyrant.  It was her inflexible nature, her tendency to act on her emotions and her self image as _______insert Dany titles here that allowed her to slip from her original idealism into tyranny.

But the question is not what they would do, but how they would perceive themselves, as ordinary people?  

Because as @Hodor's Dragon said:

Quote

 If you can live her Season 1 story and stand there in front of the kneeling Dothraki at the end with your baby dragons lovin' on you under the brand-new blood-red comet and NOT think you're "special," you're not thinking straight.

 

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

×