Jump to content
Tyrion1991

Dany the Mad Queen was a terrible idea

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

 

I agree. Thirty years is long enough for your original ideas to become out of touch or fall behind the times.

For one thing, having a dude straight up murder his lover because he can’t sort out his relationship problems with her? Hmm. Yeah that’s a little too on the knuckle these days.

So if a person has a mental illness we should kill them. Of Mice and Men has the excuse of being written in the 30s. George does not.

Plus, frankly, George probably never imagined that Dany would be a hugely popular and iconic character. People named their kids after this fictional characters nickname. Which meant that the characters fate was always going to be more important than any thematic point he tried to make about the perils of fascism. Would not have been an issue in the 90s because most people would have seen her as another female character whose set against the guys we’re rooting for.

I think people today are actually quite accepting in their own ways of “the end justifies the means”. People aren’t interested in breaking bread or compromise atm. Whereas George saw the world through the prism of the Vietnam War and that’s an increasingly distant event.

George is critical of the power of the state. Whereas people today are more critical of elites. If King Bran happens then George never questions the role of feudalism or aristocratic power; instead centring everything on a discussion on the state getting too powerful. Which is what Daenerys crusade represents.

Also just as an aside. I actually think most people don’t agree with George’s Love vs Duty dichotomy. Even the show cops out because Jon chose the love of his family and could have chosen his duty by simply feigning love for Daenerys to save her from herself.

Its a story belonging to a different time.

 

Another point is that Martin started off loving the Starks, but has subsequently fallen in love with the Targaryens, and writes about them extensively.    They have a rock star quality that none of the Great Houses possess.  They're the Kennedys, and Borgias, and Tudors all rolled into one.  And, Dany is the most charismatic rock star of them all.  So, yes, people are bound to feel cheated when she suddenly turns into Adolf Hitler at the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3 June 2019 at 5:11 PM, Hodor's Dragon said:

The problem with this "her model is the Dothraki" idea is that she forced the Dothraki to radically change their ways. What Dothraki practice are y'all claiming she adopted and brought to Westeros?

Also--in the books, of course, she is raised by Ser Willem Darry, a Westerosi knight and master at arms of the Red Keep, her father's loyal ally. Since, I believe, her upbringing is glossed over without mention in the show--am I wrong about that? Is it mentioned at all?--I wouldn't run too far with the idea that she had no one but Viserys to train her.

I thought Adam Feldman's Meereenese Blot essays were very interesting but ultimately they drew the wrong conclusion.  Conciliating her enemies in Meereen *did not work*.  Some of the slavers were prepared to tolerate her, but enough were willing to play her false to make peace impossible.  They summoned over the regional superpower to destroy her, a power which is on the brink of social revolution, and whose leaders know they have to destroy her before revolution breaks out.

So, she will conclude (IMHO does conclude in her last POV chapter) that if you can't conciliate your enemies, you  have to destroy them, and their loved ones, so completely that they will never trouble you again.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Sansa is the person who fulfills that role, she's just the underdog the whole time until the end.

I just wanted to add that I enjoy Sansa's story a lot and that she Asha, Arianne and non-POV Margaery are strong characters waiting in the wings or being groomed to lead the next generation. But none of them get to play a fundamental role in the story or to exercise power (at least up until the end of ADWD).  The three that do: Dany, Cersei and Cat are all tragic or insane (or in the end both).  So yes there is room for other outcomes and Sansa and Bran embody the new generation taking the reins but GRRM is so good at breaking characters under the weight of events that I feel Good Queen Sansa and Wise King Bran would break or turn if he let the story play out beyond the point it ends.  Essentially they are only beginning their arcs and early signs of promise have plenty of time to fade into paranoia and cynicism.  That's a fairly dark assessment but it's how's he's treated his characters invested with power and facing problems on all sides.

12 hours ago, SeanF said:

IMHO, Aegon and his sisters were villains.  They did slaughter thousands of people, many of them civilians, for purely selfish reasons.  But, they were also competent and level-headed rulers.  They were examples of Maester Aemon's view that bad people can be good rulers.

Having Dany gradually transform from being an idealist to someone whose motives are - in the end - purely selfish, or if not purely selfish, certainly very questionable, would be a more interesting and believable arc, then having her go batshit over the course of two and a half episodes. 

House Gardener and House Hoare probably would have regarded the Targs as villains but events of the conquest aside there appears to be no resistance to Aegon's rule and no uprisings.  Maybe the Dragon wildcard kept a lid on simmering resentment until people were accustomed to Targ rule but there's no harrowing of the North or Hereward the Wake hiding out in the Fens against the conqueror.

It was remarkably effective, left Houses, inheritances and social customs intact (in marked contrast to the utter displacement of the Anglo-Saxon elite by the Normans) and won over the Faith and the Citadel.  If you weren't on the Field of Fire or at Harrenhall not much changed.

Do we even know why Aegon conquered Westeros?  Was it ambition or was he driven by prophecy?

I could take a Dany drawn on Aegon and think it would be more interesting by far than a Dany drawn on Aerys.  But part of me still thinks GRRM likes to spring large set piece surprises on his readers and that the destruction of KL has to stun the reader rather than be a logical progression in the disintegration or corruption of a character's personality.  Given we know the outline of the ending the challenge is a big one and I hope he'll meet it head on.

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

×