Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Sea Dragon

Martin confirms Dany's coin lands good.

Recommended Posts

I believe this article was actually not quoting SSM, but the conversation between Barristan and Dany in ASOS Dany VI:

Quote

 

"King Jaehaerys once told me that madness and greatness are two sides of the same coin. Every time a new Targaryen is born, he said, the gods toss the coin in the air and the world holds its breath to see how it will land."

"So I am a coin in the hands of some god, is that what you are saying, ser?"

“You are the trueborn heir of Westeros. To the end of my days I shall remain your faithful knight, should you find me worthy to bear a sword again. If not, I am content to serve Strong Belwas as his squire.”

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Sea Dragon said:

How can it not be the case when the author himself says it is true?

Your source is quite problematic... You produced some obscure French article where the author of the article claims that George made such statements in the past, without referencing the source. That makes the article at best hearsay, at worst an outright lie.

So far nobody has been able to produce the original interview where GRRM supposedly said this, nor does it make any sense for George to make any such affirmative remarks, when he's setting up the whole "flip a coin" idea about Targaryens in the last book featuring Dany. Why on earth would an author raise the question with the reader via this concept in his last published book, and give the answer in an interview while the answer should be written in the next two books (I expect the answer to be revealed in the final book). Even if George intends Dany's "coin to fall on the good side", he's not going to spoil it two books ahead, is he?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

Your source is quite problematic... You produced some obscure French article where the author of the article claims that George made such statements in the past, without referencing the source. That makes the article at best hearsay, at worst an outright lie.

So far nobody has been able to produce the original interview where GRRM supposedly said this, nor does it make any sense for George to make any such affirmative remarks, when he's setting up the whole "flip a coin" idea about Targaryens in the last book featuring Dany. Why on earth would an author raise the question with the reader via this concept in his last published book, and give the answer in an interview while the answer should be written in the next two books (I expect the answer to be revealed in the final book). Even if George intends Dany's "coin to fall on the good side", he's not going to spoil it two books ahead, is he?

I agree.

I'm pretty sure (as of books 1 to 5) that Martin has not written Daenerys to be a villain protagonist, but we don't know what books 6 and 7 will contain.

Share this post


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

Your source is quite problematic... You produced some obscure French article where the author of the article claims that George made such statements in the past, without referencing the source. That makes the article at best hearsay, at worst an outright lie.

Right. I was thinking the same thing. When has GRRM ever given away large story progress/ending details to anyone (even Parris)?

2 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

So far nobody has been able to produce the original interview where GRRM supposedly said this

Right again. I spent a little bit of time looking for this source and cannot find anything near the claim.

2 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

, nor does it make any sense for George to make any such affirmative remarks, when he's setting up the whole "flip a coin" idea about Targaryens in the last book featuring Dany. Why on earth would an author raise the question with the reader via this concept in his last published book, and give the answer in an interview while the answer should be written in the next two books (I expect the answer to be revealed in the final book). Even if George intends Dany's "coin to fall on the good side", he's not going to spoil it two books ahead, is he?

Right again, again. And on top of this, information like this would have been scooped up and masticated like hell by fans a long time ago... yet we've only heard this idea from a second hand rumor.

George has made clear, many times, that he is intending on finishing his story the way he planned from the get go. Gardening details and all that might change, and we have plenty left to see, but I find the main OP statement hard to believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/27/2019 at 9:10 PM, Sea Dragon said:

This just came out and I want to discuss it here so everyone will know. According to this french site, Martin has already confirmed that Dany's coin will land on the side for good. Targaryen madness is a lie. No show talk here because that will just enrage everyone again including me. I knew the books would be better and I love that Martin confirmed this. 

So can we please stop debating this now? It is confirmed and we need to move on with how she and her dragons are the symbol of peace and rebuilding and it is others that want to tear her down. 

https://unificationfrance.com/spip.php?page=pages_mobiles&squelette_mobile=mobile%2Farticle&id_article=60319&fbclid=IwAR03u54S2b60O883iktgyhWPzzvuJbHGxvWivgsO8UeiK41mJ1t6cFBZHwI&lang=fr

"Dragons are a symbol of peace and rebuilding..." Likewise, @LmL says fire and blood is "neutral."  We really inhabit the 'post-truth' alt-universe now!    :drunk:

Martin likes playing his games, coyly equivocating on the periphery.  However, nothing is 'confirmed,' until it's written. 

Dany represents Vietnam and Iraq --blonde and boobified, but horror, nonetheless... Despite such sultry modifications, these so-called 'liberations' are not going to end well, poppet. 

Quote

A Dance with Dragons - The Discarded Knight

Prince Quentyn was listening intently, at least. That one is his father's son. Short and stocky, plain-faced, he seemed a decent lad, sober, sensible, dutiful … but not the sort to make a young girl's heart beat faster. And Daenerys Targaryen, whatever else she might be, was still a young girl, as she herself would claim when it pleased her to play the innocent. Like all good queens she put her people first—else she would never have wed Hizdahr zo Loraq—but the girl in her still yearned for poetry, passion, and laughter. She wants fire, and Dorne sent her mud.

You could make a poultice out of mud to cool a fever. You could plant seeds in mud and grow a crop to feed your children. Mud would nourish you, where fire would only consume you, but fools and children and young girls would choose fire every time.

And, as @Mithras quoted above, the word 'seem' coming from GRRM is hardly a clincher!  

Keep reading. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ravenous reader said:

"Dragons are a symbol of peace and rebuilding..." Likewise, @LmL says fire and blood is "neutral."  We really inhabit the 'post-truth' alt-universe now!    :drunk:

Martin likes playing his games, coyly equivocating on the periphery.  However, nothing is 'confirmed,' until it's written. 

Dany represents Vietnam and Iraq --blonde and boobified, but horror, nonetheless... Despite such sultry modifications, these so-called 'liberations' are not going to end well, poppet. 

And, as @Mithras quoted above, the word 'seem' coming from GRRM is hardly a clincher!  

Keep reading. ;)

Martin has been explicit the war in Slavers Bay is not an allegory for the Iraq War.  

IMHO, the Sons of the Harpy resemble the original KKK, more than a national liberation movement.

Edited by SeanF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ravenous reader said:

Dragons are a symbol of peace and rebuilding..." Likewise, @LmL says fire and blood is "neutral."

And both statements are equally hilarious! :lol:

Share this post


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

And both statements are equally hilarious! :lol:

The first is obviously wrong, although it does seem that the climate deteriorated in Westeros with the disappearance of dragons, resulting in harsher winters and famine.

I wouldn't say the second is neutral, but there are times when fire and blood is necessary.   Hence in Fevre Dreme, you have the hero, Abner Marsh, saying that he'd prefer to see slavery end peacefully, but if it has to end "with fire and blood" then so be it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Well I guess that settles it, I was wrong, and Dany is the goodest, most heroic character ever! Fire and blood must mean freedom and liberation! 

Part of the problem with discussing Daenerys is that too often it comes down to    (a) she's a saint v (b) she's evil.  

Like every sympathetic character in this tale, she's a shade of grey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SeanF said:

The first is obviously wrong, although it does seem that the climate deteriorated in Westeros with the disappearance of dragons, resulting in harsher winters and famine.

Dragons being part of a greater balance is one thing, but to say they are a “symbol of peace and rebuilding” is total bollocks and a completely different thing than being connected to some magical balance or whatever. My 2p worth.

3 hours ago, SeanF said:

I wouldn't say the second is neutral, but there are times when fire and blood is necessary.   Hence in Fevre Dreme, you have the hero, Abner Marsh, saying that he'd prefer to see slavery end peacefully, but if it has to end "with fire and blood" then so be it. 

I agree. Although I do think that for every issue/situation/whatever there’s a line. This line will be different for different people as well. And we still don’t know where Dany - or Jon, Arya, Jaime, etc etc etc - will draw hers/theirs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/29/2019 at 10:50 AM, SeanF said:

Part of the problem with discussing Daenerys is that too often it comes down to    (a) she's a saint v (b) she's evil.  

Like every sympathetic character in this tale, she's a shade of grey.

The majority of characters arent mass murdering dictators hellbent on “liberating” the world. At some point the “nuance” and “greyness” becomes a quirk, like Hilter being fond of dogs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

The majority of characters arent mass murdering dictators hellbent on “liberating” the world. At some point the “nuance” and “greyness” becomes a quirk, like Hilter being fond of dogs. 

It's just as well that Martin has never written such a character, then. 

At least, not in my copy of the series.

Edited by SeanF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SeanF said:

It's just as well that Martin has never written such a character, then. 

For a second there I thought I had wandered into the show forum. :ack:

I actually had done just that! :lol:

Edited by kissdbyfire

Share this post


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

For a second there I thought I had wandered into the show forum. :ack:

I actually had done just that! :lol:

TBH, I'm not sure if the discussion is book or show at this point.  I think this thread probably belongs in the General ASOIAF section.

Edited by SeanF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, SeanF said:

It's just as well that Martin has never written such a character, then. 

At least, not in my copy of the series.

I think GRRM would relish the challenge of making readers empathize with or root for Hitler.

It would take a lot of talent to write a POV trap so well that readers didn’t realize Dany was a female villain, misdirecting readers the whole time but in the end being truthful to what dragons mean, having her glittering ideals end in self righteousness and mass murder, and warning how heroes can sometimes, if unchecked, lead their followers off a cliff. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Rose of Red Lake said:

I think GRRM would relish the challenge of making readers empathize with or root for Hitler.

It would take a lot of talent to write a POV trap so well that readers didn’t realize Dany was a female villain, misdirecting readers the whole time but in the end being truthful to what dragons mean, having her glittering ideals end in self righteousness and mass murder, and warning how heroes can sometimes, if unchecked, lead their followers off a cliff. 

I'm sure he would.  It would make an interesting tale.  But, the story of Hitler is not that of someone who had noble goals, but somehow lost his way..

Harry Turtledove does it with his Southern Victory series, in the person of Jake Featherstone, a Hitler-like figure who is at times, fairly sympathetic.

Share this post


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

I'm sure he would.  It would make an interesting tale.  But, the story of Hitler is not that of someone who had noble goals, but somehow lost his way..

Of course he did, he didn’t start gassing people in concentration camps at age 13. He wanted to be an artist or a priest, live a religious life, and sing in the choir, etc.

15 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Harry Turtledove does it with his Southern Victory series, in the person of Jake Featherstone, a Hitler-like figure who is at times, fairly sympathetic.

Also in Dune, A Tale of Two Cities, and the Watchmen, Heart of Darkness. It’s a thing, that I can’t see GRRM missing out on. At the end in Dany’s POV, (which we probably won’t get in print form) I can see her doing what she thinks is best just like Hitler thought he was doing what was best for Germany. She has all the elements lined up for the same kind of megalomania.

Share this post


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

Of course he did, he didn’t start gassing people in concentration camps at age 13. He wanted to be an artist or a priest, live a religious life, and sing in the choir, etc.

Also in Dune, A Tale of Two Cities, and the Watchmen, Heart of Darkness. It’s a thing, that I can’t see GRRM missing out on. At the end in Dany’s POV, (which we probably won’t get in print form) I can see her doing what she thinks is best just like Hitler thought he was doing what was best for Germany. She has all the elements lined up for the same kind of megalomania.

You might want to read a bit about Hitler, before trying to compare the two.

Try Ian Kershaw's Nemesis and Hubris.  Hitler was not someone who started off by freeing slaves, before going a bit OTT.  Hitler's blunt philosophy of racial subjugation and extermination was there from a very early stage.

If Daenerys were to become a tyrant, then I think someone like Robespierre or Dessalines would be a far better comparison than Hitler.

Edited by SeanF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...