People's reaction to Dany turning Mad Queen says something about us as humans

[Lollygag]

2 minutes ago, Hodor's Dragon said:

Thank you for clarifying, but I didn't pull that out of context. You said "But what's there is there. It was world conquest with endless innocent deaths laced together with a messianic narrative." When you're talking about what is "there," you're talking about what IS, not what will be, and that is the antecedent of "It" in the next sentence. So perhaps you could look to your own clarity of writing instead of telling me I took it out of context.

But whoever's fault it is, we miscommunicated: stuff happens.

I was talking about what IS in that particular scene with the Hitler imagery where Dany was talking about the future. Dany wasn't on world conquest in the past, just the IT. 

Bold - it is a bit of a brain pretzeler. 

47 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

54 minutes ago, It_spelt_Magalhaes said:

I get the power of the imagery. 

But in the end it's the same. Show, not tell. 

They made a nazi rally without the content. Compare to V for Vendetta and the regime there.

You'll never hear me argue that anything relating to Dany's turn isn't terrible. But what's there is there. It was world conquest with endless innocent deaths laced together with a messianic narrative. They gave themselves only minutes to get across where Dany was headed and there was no room for anything but anvil-upside-the-head obviousness. 

[SeanF]

14 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

It's pretty awesome and is weirdly more effective than the original scene. 

Dany should have given the horns sign as she took off.

[Hedgehog1977]

26 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

It's pretty awesome and is weirdly more effective than the original scene. 

*Thumbs up* for the horn sign... and this is *so* much better (and even suddenly emotionally disturbing, whence before they couldn't really make me care)

Another song that could work (albeit not as cool as good old AC/DC) "Hiroshima" by Wishful Thinking - and it wasn't Hitler who dropped *that* bomb, just btw.

[ToddDavid]

On 5/20/2019 at 10:22 PM, A man doesn't have a name said:

I see people complaining about poor character development, or unforeseen corruption of Daenerys, but I honestly feel like people are mad because of how humans are. We pick our favourite heroes and turn a blind eye to everything they do from the moment they become our heroes. We leave them unchecked or justify their actions on the basis of a greater purpose that they are trying to achieve.

I literally saw people trying to justify the burning of King's Landing in order to spare their heroin from moral judgement. That's the danger of idolizing someone for whatever reason. You grant the person the status of immaculate hero and from that moment the person becomes unaccountable. It happened to many dictators in history. A tyrant is seldom born a tyrant. They win people's hearts and then go rogue as people support them unconditionally.

I have observed that people who didn't idolize Daenerys from season 1 could clearly see how she was slowly becoming obsessed with power and gave up support to her by season 7,  as she failed to display lenience and to rule with wisdom.

I don't know. I'd like to hear people's opinion on that. Although I feel like Dany's fans are so passionate that this might attract some angry comments.

This is a common psychological occurrence unfortunately. It’s basic human nature that nobody wants to know that they’re a bad person or that they’re wrong about something.  Therefore, it’s much easier on the psyche to distort the narrative, story, reality, what have you to fit it to your established beliefs than it is to actually change one’s belief to fit the reality.  

 

[SansaJonRule]

6 hours ago, Ice Queen said:

I see a lot of Atreides in the Starks, and Bran could be Leto II. I think that was discussed elsewhere but the parallels are unmistakable. 

I just looked that up. Great! Another book series to add to my ever expanding list of want to read! SO many books, so little time...

[SansaJonRule]

6 hours ago, Nowy Tends said:

If you think the showrunners know anything about History, you haven't been paying attention. 

(damn, I HATE this quote now).

Darn, now that's bugging me. I know the quote is "If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." But I can't remember what it's from. Please clean out the cobwebs for me!

[Nowy Tends]

8 minutes ago, SansaJonRule said:

Darn, now that's bugging me. I know the quote is "If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." But I can't remember what it's from. Please clean out the cobwebs for me!

Ramsey to poor Theon when he was torturing him.

[Ice Queen]

25 minutes ago, SansaJonRule said:

Darn, now that's bugging me. I know the quote is "If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." But I can't remember what it's from. Please clean out the cobwebs for me!

Actually, Martin himself said it years ago. 

[JagLover]

11 hours ago, Lollygag said:

This is willful ignorance of the context and themes of the character and the show. Dany burned the city after it surrendered. How did you miss the whole bell part? And they have her constantly threaten to burn cities since she got her dragons. They have to keep talking her down from burning cities. 

Dany is clearly being compared to Hitler. GRRM said the Others are ice and Dany/dragons are fire. They've explicitly said that Dany is the fire equivalent of ice, the threat they didn't realize they needed to face which is just as bad as the WWs. Did you notice that Dany's ash looks like the Others' snow? There's a reason for that. Dany says that she has the 7 Kingdoms, then she says she's going to wage war to "liberate" Winterfell, Dorne, Casterly Rock, the rest of Westeros, from what? Herself? Jon holds Winterfell, and now Tyrion holds Casterly Rock. Where are they? Right beside her. So what the hell? She shows not only zero remorse or doubt, but exactly the opposite. 

I don't care what her motivation was, I only care about the result. You've seen the result. And she became the wheel, she became everything she said she didn't want to become. Queen of the Ashes among other things. She thinks it's awesome and let's do it again and again. If Dany is the fire to the Others' ice, burning the world is what's coming. If she was really interested in liberating people, she'd be in Essos where people are literal slaves and where the previous places she liberated are falling back into slavery. But she's in Westeros where there aren't slaves. 

Jon did try to talk to her. Several times. And seriously, "tone it down a bit?" 

 

In pre modern times a city got one chance to surrender, before the attackers had stormed the defences. Some bells ringing out were put there for the audience. 

In terms of Dany's aims the North and Dorne already serve her so no conquering required, she was talking of the breadth of her domain, from memory from Winterfell in the North to Dorne in the south, from Lannisport to Quarth. 

The crude imagery is meant to evoke the Nazi era, but her goals are never properly fleshed out on the show, for the sole reason that this would make her grey. The status of serfs wasn't much different to slaves if you read your history and we have seen in the books (less so on the show) how the smallfolk suffer. Do you think Westeros is a perfect society that could not be improved?, but the question is whether radical change (which Dany seems to have in mind) would do more harm than good.

She no longer trusted Jon fully because of the revelation of his descent, but she has listened to trusted councillors before, and, as her husband there is every evidence he could have been a moderating influence.

Shades of grey rather than the extremely contrived writing and (later) imagery used in the show from mid way through S7 onwards to kill off one of the most interesting characters while the masses cheer. 

[Tywin Tytosson]

23 hours ago, Techmaester said:

Unlikely and her purpose wasn't to end all life like the NK. Ignoring her inherent right to conquest  after the long night I think she would have simmered down after a while. Her reign in Essos wasn't all death but people seem committed to thinking it's all she would have done.

That wasn't the Dany who was making The Speech.  She was sounding like she was ready to take her Jihad to the world.  That isn't simmering down.

Her reign in Essos wasn't all death because she had advisers who talked her out of such things.  Mostly.

Remember S6, ep9.  "[I will] return their cities to the dirt" or "burn their cities to the ground".  That's at least 3 cities, one of which (Volantis) is one of the most populous is Essos and maybe the world.  Tyrion convinced her not to do this.

 

 

23 hours ago, Techmaester said:

Anyway this is kind of deviating from Jon being irredeemable to something else. Betraying someone like he did was vastly worse than Dany scorching an enemy of her rule during an active war and I will stand by it. War is not personal but love is.

 

I thought we were discussion Daenarys?

[Tywin Tytosson]

10 hours ago, Lollygag said:

Perfect! I'm starting Dune after I get a few rl things out of the way and am even more excited about it now. 

Warning - the quality goes down after you get past the books that Frank Herbert wrote.  But the ones that FH wrote are quite good.

[JagLover]

11 hours ago, Mono Canalla said:

I think the motivation is important, although I’m not saying the why can redime her, not at all. Is she looking to liberate people the same way she liberated slaves? That resonates with her difficult early life as she had to run away and run around with the “beggar king” because of powerful men? 

I’d still see echoes of the French Revolution in this, but as in both Winterfell and Dragonstone she spent time with lords and people of rank and never been seen talking with plain people, servants or civilians, or plain soldiers, she never asked how are they, how are they holding up. And now suddenly she wants to save them from... her own friends? (She does mention “from Dorne to Winterfell”). 

The only way "breaking the wheel" makes some sort of sense (and bearing in mind this is D&D so it may not make any sense) is that Dany wants to upend the existing social order, to end Feudalism. So she is not talking of conquering lands she already controls only that they will be included in the social changes.

The imagery was Nazi like, but her message was similar to the French revolution or Communism. 

[Charles Stuart]

Daeny would have repeated the massacre of KL all over Westeros and the rest of the world. It would have been a betrayal of Jon's own character to stand by and let her perpetuate some sort of revolutionary liberation jihad across the world leading to the deaths of millions.

They literally just fought a battle against the night king to save everyone. Do you think he is going to stand aside just to let daeny commit massacres all over the world in pursuit of her own vision?

[Techmaester]

3 minutes ago, Charles Stuart said:

Daeny would have repeated the massacre of KL all over Westeros and the rest of the world. It would have been a betrayal of Jon's own character to stand by and let her perpetuate some sort of revolutionary liberation jihad across the world leading to the deaths of millions.

They literally just fought a battle against the night king to save everyone. Do you think he is going to stand aside just to let daeny commit massacres all over the world in pursuit of her own vision?

New political system under her rule versus being actually dead. It's beyond dishonest to say it's her end goal to kill people and her desire not to has probably been her biggest flaw these last two seasons leading to fundamental strategic mistakes.  

 

15 minutes ago, Tywin Tytosson said:

That wasn't the Dany who was making The Speech.  She was sounding like she was ready to take her Jihad to the world.  That isn't simmering down.

Her reign in Essos wasn't all death because she had advisers who talked her out of such things.  Mostly.

Remember S6, ep9.  "[I will] return their cities to the dirt" or "burn their cities to the ground".  That's at least 3 cities, one of which (Volantis) is one of the most populous is Essos and maybe the world.  Tyrion convinced her not to do this.

 

 

I thought we were discussion Daenarys?

 

They acted against her, why is it surprising that someone is going to burn down a city which stood against them? That's the nature of conquest and a changing political system. Revolutions and changes in leadership are rarely done without violence. 

[Uilliam]

I want to see Danaerys' communist agenda materialise. At least she's direct and honest.

The whole drama could have been averted had Danaerys just set her pride to one side and married Cersei Lannister. They could have jointly ruled as queen and queen and their example would help legalise same sex marriage.

[Tywin Tytosson]

 

24 minutes ago, JagLover said:

The imagery was Nazi like, but her message was similar to the French revolution or Communism. 

Agree with this, I do   I thought the same when watching.  The image is Nazi, but the message is not. 

[JagLover]

22 minutes ago, Charles Stuart said:

Daeny would have repeated the massacre of KL all over Westeros and the rest of the world. It would have been a betrayal of Jon's own character to stand by and let her perpetuate some sort of revolutionary liberation jihad across the world leading to the deaths of millions.

They literally just fought a battle against the night king to save everyone. Do you think he is going to stand aside just to let daeny commit massacres all over the world in pursuit of her own vision?

You seriously think the next city isn't going to surrender after seeing what happened to those who defy her?

For your logic to have work what should have happened is KL surrender without a fight and then Dany kill everyone, that would have made her irredeemably evil. There isn't any surrender at the last moment after the attackers have fought their way past the walls and it was common practice by conquerors to make an example of cities that resisted. 

The whole business with the bells is in there for modern audiences. 

[Tywin Tytosson]

14 minutes ago, Uilliam said:

I want to see Danaerys' communist agenda materialise. At least she's direct and honest.

I'm thinking that it's more French Revolutionary rhetoric than a communist agenda.   But I get your point.

[Charles Stuart]

How is it beyond dishonest to say her goal is to kill people? She just torched a city in the name of her better vision, do you think it would be any different anywhere else when people with their own ideas naturally  resist her "better" vision? 

She even said that other people with different ideas have no choice, she gets to decide. What do you honestly think she is going to do if people disagree with her? Her own actions over 8 seasons indicate death by fire.

Let's also, she made this speech of global liberation to an army who had just sacked a city. You would be a fool to think she was going to spread this global liberation by asking nicely.

A war of liberation regardless if people asked for it or needed it, she decides that you need to be liberated and she is bringing an army and a dragon along to do it. No one else gets a say because it's her vision and you don't get a choice in it. 

So yeah, she will bring death and destruction, much like she did for 8 seasons.

[Hodor's Dragon]

2 minutes ago, Charles Stuart said:

<snip> Her own actions over 8 seasons indicate death by fire.<snip>

You misspelled "2 episodes."