Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Tyrion1991

Will Dany take Jorah back?

Recommended Posts

In ADWD we’re presented with two possibilities. Tyrion points out to Jorah that Dany exiled him as a traitor and she will kill him as a fool for thinking she’ll just take him back with a girlish giggle. At the end of the story, in Danys arc we have her apparently thinking about how she really misses him and how she’s all alone because she sent him away. Plus within Jorahs arc we see him get brutally humiliated. I mean, he’s enslaved, beaten, branded and made to act out the Bear and the Maiden fair with the menagerie. That is beyond cruel.

I think it’s fairly clear that things aren’t going to go back to how they were. Jorahs not going to be in the circle of trust anymore.  I also think there might be a play on Dany not being aware how smashed up Jorah was and refusing to meet or shunning the character for some time. Then she’s in a formal situation where she can’t be like “OMG what did they do to your face!”; which could come across as overly cold. I can see George the twisting the knife a bit. Plus if he ultimately does plan to have Jorah leave Dany to join the NW like his father wanted then he has to be pushed away from Dany.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Poor, poor Jorah. I too think he'll be sent away again. He loves her in a way that's ultimately intolerable for a future monarch. Not to mention the mother of dragons. I do think he'll successfully fight his way back to her, only to be told once more to leave. But this time it could be with a blessing, and not a curse. He should do what he avoided doing in the past and submit to northern justice by joining the watch. Seven knows they could do with a man like him. And it'd be interesting to see him butt heads with Jon (if he's resurrected).
You know... what with Jon being a lot like Ned and all. It might be just what Jorah needs in order to find peace. At least, inner peace. I doubt there'll be much peace at the Wall! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TheThreeEyedCow said:

Poor, poor Jorah. I too think he'll be sent away again. He loves her in a way that's ultimately intolerable for a future monarch. Not to mention the mother of dragons. I do think he'll successfully fight his way back to her, only to be told once more to leave. But this time it could be with a blessing, and not a curse. He should do what he avoided doing in the past and submit to northern justice by joining the watch. Seven knows they could do with a man like him. And it'd be interesting to see him butt heads with Jon (if he's resurrected).
You know... what with Jon being a lot like Ned and all. It might be just what Jorah needs in order to find peace. At least, inner peace. I doubt there'll be much peace at the Wall! 

 

 I am not sure I ever really agreed with the idea of jorah going to the wall. People don’t join the NW for redemption or the North they do it to keep humanity safe from Undead. That’s what matters. Jorah helping bring Dragons, Dothraki and Unsullied (Astapor was his idea) to Westeros whilst helping Dany is arguably going to do far more than another sword on the wall. 

Plus I kind of get the impression that Dany needs Jorah to be there for her. It would be kind of abandoning her. Even if she ostensibly wants to chop his head off.

It could be that Jorah thinks “Iam an idiot, she’s going to kill me” and bolts after he learns of his fathers last wish. 

I mean a lot depends on what if anything he does in the Battle at Meereen. If he saves the day then he won’t bolt. If he screws up then he’s going to run. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/2/2019 at 12:55 AM, Tyrion1991 said:

 

 I am not sure I ever really agreed with the idea of jorah going to the wall. People don’t join the NW for redemption or the North they do it to keep humanity safe from Undead. That’s what matters. Jorah helping bring Dragons, Dothraki and Unsullied (Astapor was his idea) to Westeros whilst helping Dany is arguably going to do far more than another sword on the wall. 

Plus I kind of get the impression that Dany needs Jorah to be there for her. It would be kind of abandoning her. Even if she ostensibly wants to chop his head off.

It could be that Jorah thinks “Iam an idiot, she’s going to kill me” and bolts after he learns of his fathers last wish. 

I mean a lot depends on what if anything he does in the Battle at Meereen. If he saves the day then he won’t bolt. If he screws up then he’s going to run. 

People haven't joined the wall to keep Westeros safe form the 'Others' for a very long time. It seems unrealistic for our characters to understand this.  So I wouldn't project that onto them. I mean, if we're going to be idealistic, we may as well criticise every fighting man south of the wall for not joining the watch. As readers, we know where the real fight is. They do not. And I wouldn't class him as 'just another sword on the wall'. Jorah would be worth a dozen wildlings. He's an excellent fighter from a well known family. He'd command some respect at the wall and would be a good candidate to lead one of the castles. 

Jorah bringing Dothraki to Westeros is important? To whom? I mean, if you're rooted in team Danearys then I understand your meaning but I don't see how bringing a barbarian horde to Westeros just as Winter is approaching as important to anyone other than Dany and her claim. I also think their very presence will alienate many lords and ladies against her in her campaign.

You could be right about Dany needing Jorah. I think the jury is out on that one. I kind of see her becoming very autonomous. It feels too 'nice' for our story to have Jorah and Dany rekindling any of what they had. 

I don't think Jorah will turn away from Dany by his own volition. He'd need to be 'sent'. He's quite obsessed with her and seems intent on going through seven of his Andal Hells to get to her. I just think she'll send him away again. I think it'll break her heart. But him returning is sort of defying her orders. And I believe she'll see it as an opportunity to look strong by sticking to her convictions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheThreeEyedCow said:

People haven't joined the wall to keep Westeros safe form the 'Others' for a very long time. It seems unrealistic for our characters to understand this.  So I wouldn't project that onto them. I mean, if we're going to be idealistic, we may as well criticise every fighting man south of the wall for not joining the watch. As readers, we know where the real fight is. They do not. And I wouldn't class him as 'just another sword on the wall'. Jorah would be worth a dozen wildlings. He's an excellent fighter from a well known family. He'd command some respect at the wall and would be a good candidate to lead one of the castles. 

Jorah bringing Dothraki to Westeros is important? To whom? I mean, if you're rooted in team Danearys then I understand your meaning but I don't see how bringing a barbarian horde to Westeros just as Winter is approaching as important to anyone other than Dany and her claim. I also think their very presence will alienate many lords and ladies against her in her campaign.

You could be right about Dany needing Jorah. I think the jury is out on that one. I kind of see her becoming very autonomous. It feels too 'nice' for our story to have Jorah and Dany rekindling any of what they had. 

I don't think Jorah will turn away from Dany by his own volition. He'd need to be 'sent'. He's quite obsessed with her and seems intent on going through seven of his Andal Hells to get to her. I just think she'll send him away again. I think it'll break her heart. But him returning is sort of defying her orders. And I believe she'll see it as an opportunity to look strong by sticking to her convictions. 

 

I do not believe any individual could have saved the Nights Watch. Certainly not Jorah. Jon Sue couldn’t do it and died for our sins trying. It was beyond saving and it achieved nothing. It deserves to die as an institution once this is all over. The potters and sweepings of Flee Bottom are wasted at the Wall. The Others are coming and their magic will easily overwhelm the NW. Jorah would quite likely end up dead had he joined. There won’t be a NW  very soon in the story. 

If George makes the armies irrelevant and it all comes down to Bran Ex Machina defeating the Others, then you’re right, a million Dothraki soldiers would be useless. But, if fighting the Others means they need soldiers then it should be no different than Rohan showing up. George would be using a double standard if he held the Dothraki to be worse than what occurred in the riverlands. He would be straying into nihilism territory to insist that they’re more trouble than help. It’s like saying we could beat Germany without the Soviet Union. Westeros doesn’t have the manpower to fight the Others without adding the armies of Essos. As you’ve noted, most of the Kingdoms are militarily spent as a force.

Youre right it is too nice and I think George intends to throw Dany under the bus at every turn as he has done since ASOS. I really am expecting most of the Unsullied to get killed at Mereen, the rest to die on the Daemon road and storms sink most of her army. Maybe the Bloody Flux kills most of them. He wants to show how Dany is in the wrong and to demolish the archetype she represents. It’s satire. Plain and simple. Alexander the Great at least gets success before his tragic end. He intends to make Dany this bungler who is going to get in the way of those good Starks saving the world.

She ran from the decision once. Now she has embraced being a conqueror. That means being decisive. I think it will be a very sharp contrast. Either she pushes him into being her enemy, or she takes him back but it’s never going to be the same. Which could lead to him eventually leaving her. Either way seems viable. I can see George wanting to have Tyrion be right and have Dany actually try to have him beheaded. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Khaleesi pleaseeeeeeeeeee.

 

I think she will. Jorah has a role to play in Mereen & she will need more than just Tyrion before heading to Westeros.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/5/2019 at 10:05 PM, Tyrion1991 said:

 

I do not believe any individual could have saved the Nights Watch. Certainly not Jorah. Jon Sue couldn’t do it and died for our sins trying. It was beyond saving and it achieved nothing. It deserves to die as an institution once this is all over. The potters and sweepings of Flee Bottom are wasted at the Wall. The Others are coming and their magic will easily overwhelm the NW. Jorah would quite likely end up dead had he joined. There won’t be a NW  very soon in the story. 

If George makes the armies irrelevant and it all comes down to Bran Ex Machina defeating the Others, then you’re right, a million Dothraki soldiers would be useless. But, if fighting the Others means they need soldiers then it should be no different than Rohan showing up. George would be using a double standard if he held the Dothraki to be worse than what occurred in the riverlands. He would be straying into nihilism territory to insist that they’re more trouble than help. It’s like saying we could beat Germany without the Soviet Union. Westeros doesn’t have the manpower to fight the Others without adding the armies of Essos. As you’ve noted, most of the Kingdoms are militarily spent as a force.

Youre right it is too nice and I think George intends to throw Dany under the bus at every turn as he has done since ASOS. I really am expecting most of the Unsullied to get killed at Mereen, the rest to die on the Daemon road and storms sink most of her army. Maybe the Bloody Flux kills most of them. He wants to show how Dany is in the wrong and to demolish the archetype she represents. It’s satire. Plain and simple. Alexander the Great at least gets success before his tragic end. He intends to make Dany this bungler who is going to get in the way of those good Starks saving the world.

She ran from the decision once. Now she has embraced being a conqueror. That means being decisive. I think it will be a very sharp contrast. Either she pushes him into being her enemy, or she takes him back but it’s never going to be the same. Which could lead to him eventually leaving her. Either way seems viable. I can see George wanting to have Tyrion be right and have Dany actually try to have him beheaded. 

 

 

Woh, how did we get onto the topic of "saving the NW"? We can both agree that Jorah couldn't save them. I'm only saying that he would make a difference. And he'd be worth ten of anyone else (using the term loosely).

We differ on the subject of Jon. I think he pushed things a bit too far. The suicide mission to Hardhome was one thing. The march on WF was too much. As readers, we understand his feelings re Wildlings and WF. Ygritte told Jon the story of Bael. And of how the Free-Folk are kin to the Starks. We know that Jon loved his family deeply. But his true brothers are the men at the wall. And as far as Bowen and co can tell, Jon is loyal to his heart and not the NW. 

I don't necessarily think any of the armies are useless. I mean, there's a clear distinction between the politics and ideologies of every group. Who and what they fight for etc. I just don't believe George will have the main issue of the 'Others' resolved by fighting them head-on. The prologue makes it seem difficult to even be near the other's, let alone demonstrate a significant degree of martial prowess. I think we've been told explicitly that the man or men who can stand against them are more than mere men. BUT it does matter who holds the IT by book's end. It would be great if it's someone who can bring a certain degree of peace. If it's Cersei, you know that peace simply won't last. But if it's a magical person, like Bran, well.... maybe a psychic tree overlord can succeed where so many mortals have failed? 

Re Dany: I just don't know. How much can one person endure before they lose their grip entirely? Dragons don't bring peace. She's fire and blood. It would be wholly unrealistic to expect her to be perfect. But she'll try. Just as Jon did. She'll try to be the one who gets to dispense justice. The sole decider of people's fate. I think it's more tragedy than satire. But I totally get your point. Might is not right. And yet, the mighty always win. It's a wheel, and if Dany truly wants to break it, it may mean she has to lose the game of thrones. But that doesn't mean she fails. It's just that our current estimations of what a winner is needs to be revised.  I willing to wager that most of our heroes will be remembered as traitors or struck from record altogether. Leaving only legends in their wake.  

As for your last paragraph, I agree. She won't be a lost little girl when Jorah finds her. She will be Dany the Conqueror. A true Targaryen. Mother of Dragons. Fire & Blood. She'll embrace it. For better or for worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, TheThreeEyedCow said:

Woh, how did we get onto the topic of "saving the NW"? We can both agree that Jorah couldn't save them. I'm only saying that he would make a difference. And he'd be worth ten of anyone else (using the term loosely).

We differ on the subject of Jon. I think he pushed things a bit too far. The suicide mission to Hardhome was one thing. The march on WF was too much. As readers, we understand his feelings re Wildlings and WF. Ygritte told Jon the story of Bael. And of how the Free-Folk are kin to the Starks. We know that Jon loved his family deeply. But his true brothers are the men at the wall. And as far as Bowen and co can tell, Jon is loyal to his heart and not the NW. 

I don't necessarily think any of the armies are useless. I mean, there's a clear distinction between the politics and ideologies of every group. Who and what they fight for etc. I just don't believe George will have the main issue of the 'Others' resolved by fighting them head-on. The prologue makes it seem difficult to even be near the other's, let alone demonstrate a significant degree of martial prowess. I think we've been told explicitly that the man or men who can stand against them are more than mere men. BUT it does matter who holds the IT by book's end. It would be great if it's someone who can bring a certain degree of peace. If it's Cersei, you know that peace simply won't last. But if it's a magical person, like Bran, well.... maybe a psychic tree overlord can succeed where so many mortals have failed? 

Re Dany: I just don't know. How much can one person endure before they lose their grip entirely? Dragons don't bring peace. She's fire and blood. It would be wholly unrealistic to expect her to be perfect. But she'll try. Just as Jon did. She'll try to be the one who gets to dispense justice. The sole decider of people's fate. I think it's more tragedy than satire. But I totally get your point. Might is not right. And yet, the mighty always win. It's a wheel, and if Dany truly wants to break it, it may mean she has to lose the game of thrones. But that doesn't mean she fails. It's just that our current estimations of what a winner is needs to be revised.  I willing to wager that most of our heroes will be remembered as traitors or struck from record altogether. Leaving only legends in their wake.  

As for your last paragraph, I agree. She won't be a lost little girl when Jorah finds her. She will be Dany the Conqueror. A true Targaryen. Mother of Dragons. Fire & Blood. She'll embrace it. For better or for worse.

 

Of course it will be for the worse. Unlike Jon who gets a slap on the wrists Dany has consistently been destroyed and constantly has people mocking her.

So obviously, the whole premise of ADWD will be turned on it’s head. We’ll have all the Slaver cities pleading for generous terms and deserved mercy only for her to kill them out of hand. We’ll have her breaking them depicted as a pointlessly cruel act. We’ll see every Westerosi faction and POV think she’s a monster many years before she reached Westeros. Of course we’ll have multiple characters saying “if only she had just stayed that sweet and kind girl she would have won everyone over”. Yet she’s still going to suffer murderous casualties from plague and starvation that leaves her too weak to simply impose a peace. It’s satire. George wants to tell us that the worlds better off without some hero rocking up with dragons because becoming powerful means crushing the little people. His attempts at making Dany sympathetic don’t change that core message. 

But the Starks are the Kings of Winter who only wish to restore the status quo. They don’t want more power and wealth than what the Old Gods gifted them with. Of course, this doesn’t make them grubby dour hypocrites who warg into wolves and eat children or possess their friends. It’s all for a good cause. These are the brave heroes who will save the world and deserve what Dany so vainly desires. The Children of the Forest chose them by sacred compact to stand in defence of the land. How dare this little girl think owning a fat lizard gives her any right to power. They are Greenseers and Wargs. 

I think George has a huge double standard with how the Targaryens and Starks are depicted. I find it obnoxious. If they don’t want power then why do they want to rule the North? I don’t see how being a bean counter “Winter is coming” and telling people to lay off the pies makes you nice people. I mean, Danys already taken grief for her dragons eating (maybe) one person whereas Arya and Nymeria rampaging through the Riverland peasants and eating human flesh is never going to be punished. Will Bran warging people be criticised? I really don’t think George will. It’s just edgy whereas with Dany there is a sharp moral criticism being levelled.

Edited by Tyrion1991

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/5/2019 at 10:36 PM, nyser1 said:

Khaleesi pleaseeeeeeeeeee.

 

I think she will. Jorah has a role to play in Mereen & she will need more than just Tyrion before heading to Westeros.

 

But Dany knew that he was useful to her when she exiled him. But she still felt that it was more important that he be punished. Jorah hasn’t become more useful to her since then and there’s no reason she would be more forgiving. Even if she does regret it and realise it’s left her alone in ADWD. 

Yes Dany is a conqueror. But that doesn’t mean Danys thinking in terms of real politic. If she sees Jorah she won’t think “another useful tool” she’ll think that she made a decision and he is defying that decision. Dany can’t allow herself to be seen as wrong. So she has to kill him or find some other way of punishing him without losing face. Plus Barristan and Daario will suggest she kill him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

 

Of course it will be for the worse. Unlike Jon who gets a slap on the wrists Dany has consistently been destroyed and constantly has people mocking her.

It's funny. 'Cus to me, that describes Jon.

 

4 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

So obviously, the whole premise of ADWD will be turned on it’s head. We’ll have all the Slaver cities pleading for generous terms and deserved mercy only for her to kill them out of hand. We’ll have her breaking them depicted as a pointlessly cruel act. We’ll see every Westerosi faction and POV think she’s a monster many years before she reached Westeros. Of course we’ll have multiple characters saying “if only she had just stayed that sweet and kind girl she would have won everyone over”. Yet she’s still going to suffer murderous casualties from plague and starvation that leaves her too weak to simply impose a peace. It’s satire. George wants to tell us that the worlds better off without some hero rocking up with dragons because becoming powerful means crushing the little people. His attempts at making Dany sympathetic don’t change that core message. 

I don't see it being as black and white as that. There will be some who say she is just in what she does. Where-as others will curse her very name. We've already seen this. It isn't going to change completely. It might just swing around the other way. We get it from Jaime when he's Cat's prisoner. He tells her that (I'm paraphrasing) he's loved for for something he never did, and despised for what was, in truth, his finest act. (Or words to that effect.) 
Every character will have to face this. Not just Dany. She'll have to forsake some virtues in favour of other ones. Just like everyone else. That's life. Being the mother of dragons doesn't change that. 

 

4 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

But the Starks are the Kings of Winter who only wish to restore the status quo. They don’t want more power and wealth than what the Old Gods gifted them with. Of course, this doesn’t make them grubby dour hypocrites who warg into wolves and eat children or possess their friends. It’s all for a good cause. These are the brave heroes who will save the world and deserve what Dany so vainly desires. The Children of the Forest chose them by sacred compact to stand in defence of the land. How dare this little girl think owning a fat lizard gives her any right to power. They are Greenseers and Wargs. 

The Starks are significant during Winter. Yes. But that's about it. They all failed miserably in the south and paid the highest price. There's a lot more honor in shielding people from winter than there is invading a foreign country. One group is invested in preservation. The other in destruction. But both have dire consequences if unchecked. The FM preserved customs that are long obsolete. And the custom of hating free-folk who are their kin needs to be destoryed. The Targaryens consume more than they can create. You need both. And if our story is anything like every other piece of fantasy fiction, we'll see a marriage of those two forces. Maybe not literally. But they are equal and opposing forces. It's ying and yang. And I think that is what is at the core of Martin's sentiments. Regardless of right and wrong. Regardless of morality. 

 

4 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

I think George has a huge double standard with how the Targaryens and Starks are depicted. I find it obnoxious. If they don’t want power then why do they want to rule the North? I don’t see how being a bean counter “Winter is coming” and telling people to lay off the pies makes you nice people. I mean, Danys already taken grief for her dragons eating (maybe) one person whereas Arya and Nymeria rampaging through the Riverland peasants and eating human flesh is never going to be punished. Will Bran warging people be criticised? I really don’t think George will. It’s just edgy whereas with Dany there is a sharp moral criticism being levelled.

The Targaryens have an entire book (Fire & Blood) devoted to their history in Westeros. It's a mixed bag. No one Targaryen seemed to be able to do it exactly right. They want the IT. They want to rule. This makes them stand out compared to any family. Not just the Starks. 

Comparing Arya to Dany would be a mistake. They come from very different 'places' so to speak. Arya actually knew her family. Had loved and played with them. Her warging abilities are completely wild. She doesn't have full control of it. And yet, her time spent in Nymeria is leaving a mark on her. Nobody has told her that Nymeria leaves a piece of her inside Arya. Just think of that implication. Arya can feel great inside the body of a Direwolf that isn't afraid and can bring down fully grown men. But she doesn't know the cost. She may do, though. She may learn in time how to control her Direwolf and by extension, herself. Pretending that she's someone else isn't doing her any favours. And that is pretty much the only valid comparison to Dany. There is hope for Arya. But Dany cannot control three dragons. And three dragons will do a ton more damage than one Direwolf with a pack of regular wolves. 

Bran, we know to be a darker shade of grey. The Varamyr prologue informed us of three abominations that a warg must not commit. Bran has committed two of them: Eating of human flesh and warging other people. The reader can make up their own mind. But it looks like Bran has to do some horrible things. And it isn't going to get any 'nicer'. I've seen entire threads devoted to why Bran is absolutely disgusting etc etc. It's a perspective thing. there is no definitive answer.

George loves to smother us with moral ambiguity. He isn't going to change tact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheThreeEyedCow said:

 

It's funny. 'Cus to me, that describes Jon.

 

I don't see it being as black and white as that. There will be some who say she is just in what she does. Where-as others will curse her very name. We've already seen this. It isn't going to change completely. It might just swing around the other way. We get it from Jaime when he's Cat's prisoner. He tells her that (I'm paraphrasing) he's loved for for something he never did, and despised for what was, in truth, his finest act. (Or words to that effect.) 
Every character will have to face this. Not just Dany. She'll have to forsake some virtues in favour of other ones. Just like everyone else. That's life. Being the mother of dragons doesn't change that. 

 

The Starks are significant during Winter. Yes. But that's about it. They all failed miserably in the south and paid the highest price. There's a lot more honor in shielding people from winter than there is invading a foreign country. One group is invested in preservation. The other in destruction. But both have dire consequences if unchecked. The FM preserved customs that are long obsolete. And the custom of hating free-folk who are their kin needs to be destoryed. The Targaryens consume more than they can create. You need both. And if our story is anything like every other piece of fantasy fiction, we'll see a marriage of those two forces. Maybe not literally. But they are equal and opposing forces. It's ying and yang. And I think that is what is at the core of Martin's sentiments. Regardless of right and wrong. Regardless of morality. 

 

The Targaryens have an entire book (Fire & Blood) devoted to their history in Westeros. It's a mixed bag. No one Targaryen seemed to be able to do it exactly right. They want the IT. They want to rule. This makes them stand out compared to any family. Not just the Starks. 

Comparing Arya to Dany would be a mistake. They come from very different 'places' so to speak. Arya actually knew her family. Had loved and played with them. Her warging abilities are completely wild. She doesn't have full control of it. And yet, her time spent in Nymeria is leaving a mark on her. Nobody has told her that Nymeria leaves a piece of her inside Arya. Just think of that implication. Arya can feel great inside the body of a Direwolf that isn't afraid and can bring down fully grown men. But she doesn't know the cost. She may do, though. She may learn in time how to control her Direwolf and by extension, herself. Pretending that she's someone else isn't doing her any favours. And that is pretty much the only valid comparison to Dany. There is hope for Arya. But Dany cannot control three dragons. And three dragons will do a ton more damage than one Direwolf with a pack of regular wolves. 

Bran, we know to be a darker shade of grey. The Varamyr prologue informed us of three abominations that a warg must not commit. Bran has committed two of them: Eating of human flesh and warging other people. The reader can make up their own mind. But it looks like Bran has to do some horrible things. And it isn't going to get any 'nicer'. I've seen entire threads devoted to why Bran is absolutely disgusting etc etc. It's a perspective thing. there is no definitive answer.

George loves to smother us with moral ambiguity. He isn't going to change tact.

 

It was black and white in every book Dany was in. I don’t see why it will be any different in TWOW. He clearly has an axe to grind with Danys archetype that he does not have with Bran, Jon and Arya. You don’t get the sense that WHAT those characters are is invariably dangerous and you don’t have characters like Mirri Maz criticising the Starks. 

Because most people are not going to be aware of Bran and Aryas crimes. So it’s not going to impact their view of them. So it’s not the same because Danny’s dragons kill one kid and it’s enough to have the world condemning her; but Arya murders hundreds and eats them but nobody dismissed her claim to Winterfell.  Nobody is going to accuse Arya of being a monster or pile the bones of children at her feet. So it isn’t the same.

Its night and day. One character is held the highest scrutiny and so much as a  sneeze sets people off. But a Stark eats people and hunts them for kicks and it’s just a matter of her doing some soul searching.

Because having Dany from a crazy family of inbreds is a method of manipulating the reader into thinking getting rid of them is a great idea. As opposed to the Starks who are shown as the amazing Kings of Winter with their bond to the land, their humility and that they don’t want power; the implication being that hey deserve it. So the history itself is a double standard. Every piece of Stark history is positive whereas there is an arsenal of reasons why the targaryens are horrible.

No because I think George is suggesting that the nature magic of the children is balance between the two extremes of ice and fire. So Bran winning is balance because it subdues the extremes of the Others and Dany’s fire. 

He is far, far more critical of fire magic and the idea that passion is a destructive force. Most of the plot has centred around this. When has he ever said that a character being calm and self controlled has been bad? Saying that ice is about preservation is actually depicting it as hugely positive. This is where all the “Others are good guys” come from. I think the writing is on the wall that he intends to have the Starks come out on top and for Dany to ignominiously fail. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

 

It was black and white in every book Dany was in. I don’t see why it will be any different in TWOW. He clearly has an axe to grind with Danys archetype that he does not have with Bran, Jon and Arya. You don’t get the sense that WHAT those characters are is invariably dangerous and you don’t have characters like Mirri Maz criticising the Starks. 

Because most people are not going to be aware of Bran and Aryas crimes. So it’s not going to impact their view of them. So it’s not the same because Danny’s dragons kill one kid and it’s enough to have the world condemning her; but Arya murders hundreds and eats them but nobody dismissed her claim to Winterfell.  Nobody is going to accuse Arya of being a monster or pile the bones of children at her feet. So it isn’t the same.

Its night and day. One character is held the highest scrutiny and so much as a  sneeze sets people off. But a Stark eats people and hunts them for kicks and it’s just a matter of her doing some soul searching.

Because having Dany from a crazy family of inbreds is a method of manipulating the reader into thinking getting rid of them is a great idea. As opposed to the Starks who are shown as the amazing Kings of Winter with their bond to the land, their humility and that they don’t want power; the implication being that hey deserve it. So the history itself is a double standard. Every piece of Stark history is positive whereas there is an arsenal of reasons why the targaryens are horrible.

No because I think George is suggesting that the nature magic of the children is balance between the two extremes of ice and fire. So Bran winning is balance because it subdues the extremes of the Others and Dany’s fire. 

He is far, far more critical of fire magic and the idea that passion is a destructive force. Most of the plot has centred around this. When has he ever said that a character being calm and self controlled has been bad? Saying that ice is about preservation is actually depicting it as hugely positive. This is where all the “Others are good guys” come from. I think the writing is on the wall that he intends to have the Starks come out on top and for Dany to ignominiously fail. 

 

 

It's all a question of perspective. The next book is called the winds of WinterSo if you're longing to have the Starks, or wolves or Ice or whatever be perceived as 'bad' then you'll probably get your wish. 

You're drawing conclusions too soon. And I sincerely hope your not basing any of this on what happened in that other version that we don't talk about. 

If you've ever read a story by GRRM, you'll know that there is no real good guy or hero. Everyone ends their tale either dead or with something to chew over. There is an ambiguity to GRRM's work. You're just calling things too soon. 

And I do not agree that Dany has been presented as the one who's in the wrong. I don't agree that fire has been portrayed as wholly wrong. I think they just haven't had an alternative to compare it to. 

As for the CotF. I feel certain that they themselves are responsible for the imbalance. Something they resorted to in the wake of their own destruction. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TheThreeEyedCow said:

It's all a question of perspective. The next book is called the winds of WinterSo if you're longing to have the Starks, or wolves or Ice or whatever be perceived as 'bad' then you'll probably get your wish. 

You're drawing conclusions too soon. And I sincerely hope your not basing any of this on what happened in that other version that we don't talk about. 

If you've ever read a story by GRRM, you'll know that there is no real good guy or hero. Everyone ends their tale either dead or with something to chew over. There is an ambiguity to GRRM's work. You're just calling things too soon. 

And I do not agree that Dany has been presented as the one who's in the wrong. I don't agree that fire has been portrayed as wholly wrong. I think they just haven't had an alternative to compare it to. 

As for the CotF. I feel certain that they themselves are responsible for the imbalance. Something they resorted to in the wake of their own destruction. 

 

The weight of the story is too heavily tilted towards one faction and it’s mentality and position. 

So far George has avoided having to put Dany under the scrutiny of another POV. Which implies that we’ve only seen things through her bubble and those outside it like Sansa or Arya will oppose this. Whereas no character has seriously or sincerely claimed the Starks are wretched and evil people who are bad for humanity. Even Tywin doesn’t claim this. At worse George has implied that the Starks are like wolves noble but savage; yet pure of purpose. 

Contrast this with where Dany is in the plot:

- Dany has been depicted as a fool for wanting to take her throne back ever since her first book. This is what Mirri kills Drogo and her child over. Arya and Bran are never going to have one of the little people get revenge on them like this.

- Her family are portrayed as unambiguously evil and an unnecessary risk when you could just have a mentally stable family (Starks) on the throne.

- The fact she wants to use dragons is depicted as qualitatively different than using either conventional weapons or any of the “Ice magic” employed by the Starks, the Children or even the Others who are just a force of nature. George wrote an entire history book on why Dragons are bad. Point me to the book where he says that the Starks warg and greenseer magic is bad?  

- Where is the equivalent of Melisandre corrupting a King and making human sacrifices to a malevolent Blood God? The insinuation that Dany might actually be that God’s chosen avatar is not a good thing. It means she is an enemy to all human life.

- You can point at the doom of Valeria whereas the childrens magic and that of the first men lasted unbroken for millennia. Even the Others are not depicted as being as destructive for humanity as the dragons.

- You have entire factions dedicated to opposing dragons including the Maesters, faceless men and Braavos. Powerful factions depicted as smart and correct. Whereas the institutions ostensibly opposed to Ice such as the NW support the First men, Children and the Starks. The insinuation being that Ice can coexist with humanity but fire cannot.

Which is all before he’s even brought Dany under the inevitable criticism of our main characters. 

Spoiler

Arriane already doesn’t like Dany. She will not be the only one.

 

 

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
Sign in to follow this  

×