TWOW in 2021 seems ever more likely

[The Bard of Banefort]

George posted this the other day: https://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2020/12/21/so-true/

I really do wonder if he's been finished for a while, but is just so nervous about putting the book out that he keeps second-guessing himself. Someone please give George a hug 

[Kimbono]

"There is nothing to writing. All you do is sit down at a typwriter & bleed." - Ernest Hemingway

From GRRM's Not a Blog.

Even though it is a kinda sadistic statement about his writing, I'm happy over any post he mentions writing. And to be honest I don't expect anything else.

[Wall Flower]

8 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

I think a perspective shift will be happening in some form, so that Dany's perception about who is her "enemy" or who is "guilty" or "deserving of death" doesn't change, but the reader's perception does and they can't agree. I really like this Quora write up that explains more. 

As one of the poor sheeple apparently incapable of self reflection, I found that write-up truly objectionable. The author of the piece seems to possess a lot of the characteristics that she accuses Dany of - arrogance, self-righteous certainty and an overweening sense of superiority to those who apparently don't share her brilliant insights. Don't even get me started on the idea that one's view of a fictional character is a predictor of an ability to spot a real life tyrant.

I'm particularly uncomfortable with the idea that freeing slaves and attacking a brutally oppressive regime is the first step in becoming 'Stalin with tits'. That's a lot easier argument to make if you're not one of the oppressed. I think Martin is asking hard questions about how far we can go in opposing evil before falling into evil ourselves but that doesn't mean that doing nothing in the face of evil is the right choice.

[Werthead]

Quote

So GRRM does have some creative input on HOTD? That's good news at least.

Yup. Condal and his writing team will still be taking point on it but George is still involved, and at least one of George's personal assistants is working FT on House of the Dragon as a liaison and a writer, which wasn't the case with GoT.

5 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

George posted this the other day: https://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2020/12/21/so-true/

I really do wonder if he's been finished for a while, but is just so nervous about putting the book out that he keeps second-guessing himself. Someone please give George a hug 

I suspect one of his minions found a picture of it online, showed it to him and he laughed and told them to repost it on his blog because he found it funny.

[SeanF]

6 hours ago, Wall Flower said:

As one of the poor sheeple apparently incapable of self reflection, I found that write-up truly objectionable. The author of the piece seems to possess a lot of the characteristics that she accuses Dany of - arrogance, self-righteous certainty and an overweening sense of superiority to those who apparently don't share her brilliant insights. Don't even get me started on the idea that one's view of a fictional character is a predictor of an ability to spot a real life tyrant.

I'm particularly uncomfortable with the idea that freeing slaves and attacking a brutally oppressive regime is the first step in becoming 'Stalin with tits'. That's a lot easier argument to make if you're not one of the oppressed. I think Martin is asking hard questions about how far we can go in opposing evil before falling into evil ourselves but that doesn't mean that doing nothing in the face of evil is the right choice.

The author used to post here as Apple Martini.  As far as I recall, she never had a good word to say about Daenerys.

I think the best way to describe her viewpoint is "the pacifism of the privileged."  To most of us, being a slave is unimaginable.  It's easier to imagine oneself as a master, in much the same way as Edward Gibbon imagined himself as an aristocratic Roman.  It would never have occurred to him to imagine himself as a slave, a woman, a member of the lower classes, or a religious dissident, who would have viewed the Second Century Roman Empire through much less rose-tinted spectacles than he did. One can empathise more easily, in a way, with the masters who fall victim to the slaves who revolt, than one can with the slaves.

Slave uprisings in real life are very brutal, indeed far more brutality would get visited on the masters and their families than Daenerys ever unleashed on them.  Absolutely horrific things were done to les grand blancs and their families when the Haitian slaves revolted, for example, but I still think the answer is not to own people as chattels in the first place, rather than to condemn the slaves and their leaders, whatever D & D may think.

To my mind, it would be like arguing that we might think that Allies in WWII were justified, but they only looked good compared to the Axis, and in reality, we should view them as pretty evil.  That is an argument one can hear, from both the far right and the pacifist left, but it does not merit respect.

[$erPounce]

On 12/22/2020 at 1:30 PM, Werthead said:

Brynden is a great guy with some strong analyses but he does not have access to "insider information" at all.

BryndenBFish claims that he does have some information about The Winds of Winter that we don't know about.

However, I cannot confirm that it is true that George R. R. Martin did not work on The Winds of Winter from 2015 until the release of Fire & Blood due to depression. I haven't heard it directly from the original source, but from someone else who apparently heard it in the NotACast Podcast (only the higher memberships give access to certain TWOW gossips and rumors), I only have a membership of 5 EUR per month.

It is said that George R. R. Martin was actually "almost done" in 2015. However, he was dissatisfied with the end result and ended up in a depression. He wrote nothing about ASOAIF until the end of 2018, with the release of Fire & Blood. It seems that since then he also rewrote large parts of The Winds of Winter.

So, now you have the full statement. The extent to which it is factually true has yet to be ascertained, but on the basis of the information we have available elsewhere, it may well be that it actually happened.

Quote

“I felt a tremendous amount of pressure for years now,” he says. “The most pressure I felt was a few years ago when I was desperately trying to stay ahead of the show. There was a point when the show was coming out in April and my editors said if I could finish the book by December they’d rush it out. And the pressure I felt that fall was the greatest pressure I’ve ever felt and then at a certain point it became apparent I’m not going to finish it by then. I don’t only want to finish it, I want to make it as good as I possibly can. Since then there’s been pressure but not like there was at that point. There’s no longer a race. The show is over. I’m writing the book. It will be done when it’s done.”

We should not underestimate the impact of the TV series on George R. R. Martin. In addition to writing four scripts (each taking three to six weeks according to the author himself), he also had a more or less advisory role during the first four seasons - as well as attending more events than usual due to the great success of the TV series itself.

George R. R. Martin's fame among mainstream audiences as a result of the TV series has led to tremendous pressure during the writing of the Winds of Winter. The idea that the TV series would pass the books (after cutting out a lot of storylines from the books that GRRM probably would have preferred to keep) didn't have a good influence on his mental well-being. 

Rewriting and deletion is also very common in the working method of George R. R. Martin himself. Below a quotation about the Meereenese Knot, but I believe that this applies to every chapter:

Quote

Now I can explain things. It was a confluence of many, many factors: lets start with the offer from Xaro to give Dany ships, the refusal of which then leads to Qarth's declaration of war. Then there's the marriage of Daenerys to pacify the city. Then there's the arrival of the Yunkish army at the gates of Meereen, there's the order of arrival of various people going her way (Tyrion, Quentyn, Victarion, Aegon, Marwyn, etc.), and then there's Daario, this dangerous sellsword and the question of whether Dany really wants him or not, there's the plague, there's Drogon's return to Meereen... All of these things were balls I had thrown up into the air, and they're all linked and chronologically entwined. The return of Drogon to the city was something I explored as happening at different times. For example, I wrote three different versions of Quentyn's arrival at Meereen: one where he arrived long before Dany's marriage, one where he arrived much later, and one where he arrived just the day before the marriage (which is how it ended up being in the novel). And I had to write all three versions to be able to compare and see how these different arrival points affected the stories of the other characters. Including the story of a character who actually hasn't arrived yet.

If we look at the original versions (pre-release) of certain chapters from the past two books, we see clear differences with the final version. In the draft version of the chapter The Queenmaker for example, they all surrender to Areo Hotah peacefully (Arys Oakheart didn't make his suicidal charge, Gerold Dayne didn't hurt Myrcella, he also yielded).

That's one of the many things that changed at a later stage. So do not underestimate how many changes George R. R. Martin makes over the years, which also has an impact on the course of other chapters. Even just a restructuring of the chapters means changes in writing in other chapters, due to the modified chronology. A major problem is the butterfly effect created by every small change.

Moreover, George R. R. Martin makes different versions of each chapter (often with a different outcome), only one of which ends up in the final book. Each version has different plot possibilities and a different impact on the other storylines. In finding out what is best suited for the finished book, you are again struggling with the butterfly effect. George, a self-proclaimed gardener, very often experiments with the destinies of certain characters and their course towards it. Unfortunately, this is not ideal for a series of books with dozens of storylines interwoven and interacting with each other.

The butterfly effect can lead to a large part of the book having to be rewritten when making an adjustment to a crucial storyline. 

[Mithras]

18 minutes ago, $erPounce said:

It is said that George R. R. Martin was actually "almost done" in 2015. However, he was dissatisfied with the end result and ended up in a depression. He wrote nothing about ASOAIF until the end of 2018, with the release of Fire & Blood. It seems that since then he also rewrote large parts of The Winds of Winter.

The only thing I believe here is that he didnot write anything related to TWoW between 2015 and 2018. And possibly the depression too.

[Werthead]

1 hour ago, $erPounce said:

BryndenBFish claims that he does have some information about The Winds of Winter that we don't know about.

The "publication rumbling in the industry" is something that I also heard, but it came down to a blowhard trying to make it sound like they had insider info. It was not anyone directly related to either Bantam or Voyager (the only people who do have insider info, and then not very much).

Quote

 

However, I cannot confirm that it is true that George R. R. Martin did not work on The Winds of Winter from 2015 until the release of Fire & Blood due to depression. I haven't heard it directly from the original source, but from someone else who apparently heard it in the NotACast Podcast (only the higher memberships give access to certain TWOW gossips and rumors), I only have a membership of 5 EUR per month.

It is said that George R. R. Martin was actually "almost done" in 2015. However, he was dissatisfied with the end result and ended up in a depression. He wrote nothing about ASOAIF until the end of 2018, with the release of Fire & Blood. It seems that since then he also rewrote large parts of The Winds of Winter.

 

This is all speculation, and in some of this case I know it to be incorrect. People from podcasts and speculation sites and whatever do not have insider info. Virtually no-one does bar Elio & Linda, GRRM's assistants and GRRM's publishers (some of whom I know, and are not talking).

GRRM has never explained why he was so certain that completion appeared possible in 2015/16 but then did not happen. My own understanding, although not backed up by word of GRRM, pins it to George's statement in 2014 that he had not done much or any rewriting on TWoW in favour of blasting through in an early draft format and revising the whole book later on (the strategy he used, to great success, with ASoS and to a lesser extent on AGoT and ACoK), but this strategy was not successful because TWoW required much extensive rewriting than ASoS due to the conflating of storylines and timelines.

The only other clue of note is George's publishers urging him to split the book in two a couple of years back a la AFFC-ADWD but he was unwilling to consider any such split until the entire TWoW narrative was complete, which suggests the book is long enough so that a significantly-sized novel can be assembled from the pieces, but because he feels the AFFC-ADWD split was ultimately not entirely productive, he wants the whole thing done first. That may mean we end up with a novel considerably longer than any previous one in the series, which would at least explain the considerably greater wait.

Ultimately this kind of speculation is fruitless until we get more substantive updates with page counts, or until the TWoW postmortem post where he breaks down what happened in detail (if indeed he chooses to do so).

[Mithras]

14 minutes ago, Werthead said:

The only other clue of note is George's publishers urging him to split the book in two a couple of years back a la AFFC-ADWD but he was unwilling to consider any such split until the entire TWoW narrative was complete, which suggests the book is long enough so that a significantly-sized novel can be assembled from the pieces

Or GRRM's manuscript was very lopsided towards certain POVs as it was the case before the AFfC split and the publishers thought that if GRRM focused only on these POVs, he might have completed enough material fit for publishing before the deadline (nevermind the fact that this new split would have expanded the series from 7 books to gods know how many).

Unless GRRM makes a detailed new year post about TWoW progress as he did in 2015, the most realistic explanation of why we don't have TWoW yet can only be the most pessimistic one.

[BlackLightning]

On 12/20/2020 at 10:31 AM, The Bard of Banefort said:

The ironic thing is, George has said that Breaking Bad inspired him to want to create his own Walter White, who would begin a hero and end as a villain. At the time, most of us assumed that he was talking about Tyrion, but after season 8, it looks much more likely that it's actually Daenerys. So to have the show butcher that plotline the way they did is the cherry on top of this whole fiasco.

That said, in his blog posts after the finale, George seemed pretty upbeat, which is another reason why I think the ending is closer to the books than a lot of people want to accept. From what I've heard about FCKAD so far, he was a lot more upset about earlier changes like RamSan (thank God). Of course, the ensuing backlash probably put a damper on whatever good feeling there was at first.

Speaking of which, when are we finally going to get an inside look into HBO and D&D's reactions to the fan outcry? James Hibberd was obviously never going to give us that, but there has to be a reporter out there who wanted to do some snooping. At the very least, I'm surprised there hasn't been a reddit leak by an HBO employee. (There was one a few years ago, but I can't find the link to it now).

Interesting.

George's seemingly upbeat attitude made you think that the show got the ending right. To me, George's seemingly upbeat attitude made me think "Hey, I'm glad that's over," "The books are going to end so differently...thank god!" or "Hey, if worst comes to worst, at least my ending won't be that bad."

George stopped talking about the show probably because constantly complaining and not writing/finishing the books is a very bad look. And for all we know, they put a gag order on them.

What we do know is that George cut his ties with the show in the middle of production in season 4.

[Rose of Red Lake]

18 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

Interesting.

George's seemingly upbeat attitude made you think that the show got the ending right. To me, George's seemingly upbeat attitude made me think "Hey, I'm glad that's over," "The books are going to end so differently...thank god!" or "Hey, if worst comes to worst, at least my ending won't be that bad."

George stopped talking about the show probably because constantly complaining and not writing/finishing the books is a very bad look. And for all we know, they put a gag order on them.

What we do know is that George cut his ties with the show in the middle of production in season 4.

"so if nothing else, the readers will learn what happened to Jeyne Poole, Lady Stoneheart, Penny and her pig, Skahaz Shavepate, Arianne Martell, Darkstar, Victarion Greyjoy, Ser Garlan the Gallant, Aegon VI, and a myriad of other characters both great and small that viewers of the show never had the chance to meet."

That sounds like "Main character endings are the same so if nothing else we can find out what happens to Darkstar." YAY!

[BlackLightning]

12 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

"so if nothing else, the readers will learn what happened to Jeyne Poole, Lady Stoneheart, Penny and her pig, Skahaz Shavepate, Arianne Martell, Darkstar, Victarion Greyjoy, Ser Garlan the Gallant, Aegon VI, and a myriad of other characters both great and small that viewers of the show never had the chance to meet."

That sounds like "Main character endings are the same so if nothing else we can find out what happens to Darkstar." YAY!

The key words being "so if nothing else." And honestly, all of those characters GRRM named are extremely important. The omission of Aegon and Stoneheart is when the show started collapsing under its own weight. Those two characters impacted have massive other main characters.

Your definition of "so if nothing else" is incomplete. Yes, what you described can be what it means. But that's not what's in the dictionaries. Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines it as something is probably the only thing that is true, acceptable, desirable or certain because there are no better/worse possibilities and gives "the food was cheap, if nothing else" as one example and "if nothing else, you should send him a card" as another. Saying "the food is cheap, if nothing else" suggests that the only good thing about the food was that it was cheap. Saying "if nothing else, you should send him a card" is saying that sending him a card is the least you can do. Context clues of GRRM's statement points to how he was using the "there are no worse possibilities" part of the defintion.

The Free Dictionary's Idiom section defines "so if nothing else" as a phrase used to indicate that something is a priority or the most important thing. The example they use? "I know you're busy today, so if nothing else, please make sure you respond to these messages." Th Collins Dictionary defines it as a phrase used to express an contrary opinion about something or after a negative statement to suggest that the opposite is true and a phrase used to indicate a certain deviation, choice, or outcome that is contrary to that which was previously mentioned or suggested

Examples? I don't think we should be waiting for help to arrive—if nothing else, we need to keep moving. And If nothing else, the report points out the need for better math education.

If GRRM means that the endings are the same and that he is mostly happy/satisfied with it, why is he using a phrase that makes it seem like he is dissing his own work. If the endings of Jon, Dany, Tyrion, etc. are good, why is he using the term "so if nothing else" in reference to characters like Arianne Martell, Victarion Greyjoy and Shavepate. Why would characters like that (who more than a few people, maybe even yourself, consider to be minor characters) be the only good thing about the ending. Because that's what the definition you are trying to use refers to: used to emphasize one good quality or feature that someone or something has, while suggesting that it might be the only good one

Especially since the A Song of Ice and Fire series is what he will be known for long after his death. Why would he do that?

Rickon Stark and Osha were in the show. But GRRM says he has big stuff planned for them beyond being props in Ramsay Snow's story. Ser Barristan is not only still alive in the books but he is doing some pretty big things.

I resist the idea that the main character endings are the same. And no, it's just about Daenerys. I'm talking about all the others. I hated all of the endings for the main characters. The only ending that I really liked that was fulfilling and justifying was Grey Worm's. I liked the endings for Brienne, Sansa and Samwell but they either didn't make sense, were lackluster, were rushed or any/all of the above.

The other endings for the main characters were atrocious. Especially Jaime's and Cersei's.

How can the endings for the main characters be the same when in the books all the Starks have magical powers that impact both the plot and their character arcs?

[Yaya]

aye aye BlackLightning - great post.  

i agree with your interpretation of the phrase 'so if nothing else' - he's totally throwing red herrings out; basically this phrase is not confirming anything. 
i have not watch the tv show past season two, i quit it as it was not the books.   as such i've noticed that practically every single post (of the past couple of years) in the novels general forum is tainted with the misinformation from the show.  everyone has fan fiction & the show all mixed up with the REAL story of the novels.

there is BOUND to be a different ending to the books than the stupid tv show.  certainly some of the characters fates in the books may be the same/similar to that which is depicted on the show but on the whole why would GRRM let the stupid tv show steal his thunder?

were i GRRM and this was my thing, there is no way i would let the show take anything away from my writing.

 

[SeanF]

O

On 12/25/2020 at 2:00 AM, BlackLightning said:

Interesting.

George's seemingly upbeat attitude made you think that the show got the ending right. To me, George's seemingly upbeat attitude made me think "Hey, I'm glad that's over," "The books are going to end so differently...thank god!" or "Hey, if worst comes to worst, at least my ending won't be that bad."

George stopped talking about the show probably because constantly complaining and not writing/finishing the books is a very bad look. And for all we know, they put a gag order on them.

What we do know is that George cut his ties with the show in the middle of production in season 4.

IIRC, the very different treatment of Shae's murder in books and show was one of the things that prompted it.

What we got in the show were characters who shared the same names as their book counterparts, and who did some of the same things, but were otherwise very different people (especially when you had characters, such as Sansa, being an amalgam of three or even four book characters).  

[The Bard of Banefort]

One day, I will try to explain why Daenerys has always disturbed me (when I say "always," I mean since book 3/season 3). Part of it is cultural, and how I think that the the media celebration of "righteous violence" on GOT was an omen for some of the trends we're seeing today that I find very upsetting. Another is about my own feelings on sovereignty and imperialism. These are all heavy topics however, and it's going to take a while for me to put them together.

In the meantime, I thought I'd share this one great essay from right before season 8 that foretold Dany's fall from grace through a Shakespearean lens, which I think some of you will enjoy: https://themanyfacedblog.wordpress.com/2019/04/19/daughter-of-death-a-song-of-ice-and-fires-shakespearean-tragic-hero/. I have met some Dany fans who are into Shakespeare and have come to like the idea of her becoming a tragic character.

[SeanF]

2 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

One day, I will try to explain why Daenerys has always disturbed me (when I say "always," I mean since book 3/season 3). Part of it is cultural, and how I think that the the media celebration of "righteous violence" on GOT was an omen for some of the trends we're seeing today that I find very upsetting. Another is about my own feelings on sovereignty and imperialism. These are all heavy topics however, and it's going to take a while for me to put them together.

In the meantime, I thought I'd share this one great essay from right before season 8 that foretold Dany's fall from grace trough a Shakespearean lens, which I think some of you will enjoy: https://themanyfacedblog.wordpress.com/2019/04/19/daughter-of-death-a-song-of-ice-and-fires-shakespearean-tragic-hero/. I have met some Dany fans who are into Shakespeare and have come to like the idea of her becoming a tragic character.

Tyrion as an Iago-type figure is quite insightful.  I’ve set out my reasons elsewhere for rejecting Adam Feldman’s analysis.  Among these are that I don’t see her choice as being between war and peace, so much as between war, and the acceptance of institutionalised violence and degradation.  

She may very well turn out to be a tragic heroine, but it’s important to note that tragic heroes and heroines are not bad people - they are good people who possess some fatal flaw.

[Rose of Red Lake]

4 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

One day, I will try to explain why Daenerys has always disturbed me (when I say "always," I mean since book 3/season 3). Part of it is cultural, and how I think that the the media celebration of "righteous violence" on GOT was an omen for some of the trends we're seeing today that I find very upsetting. Another is about my own feelings on sovereignty and imperialism. These are all heavy topics however, and it's going to take a while for me to put them together.

In the meantime, I thought I'd share this one great essay from right before season 8 that foretold Dany's fall from grace trough a Shakespearean lens, which I think some of you will enjoy: https://themanyfacedblog.wordpress.com/2019/04/19/daughter-of-death-a-song-of-ice-and-fires-shakespearean-tragic-hero/. I have met some Dany fans who are into Shakespeare and have come to like the idea of her becoming a tragic character.

Nice, thanks for sharing that link. I love tragic downfall arcs. 
 

My favorite explanation of Dany is this thread from 2013.

 OP and Replies are so calm and reasoned here.

[The Bard of Banefort]

41 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Nice, thanks for sharing that link. I love tragic downfall arcs. 
 

My favorite explanation of Dany is this thread from 2013.

 OP and Replies are so calm and reasoned here.

As someone who never really cared for Dany, except in the very beginning, the likelihood of her becoming a tragic character--someone whose desire for love and belonging leads her astray--makes her much more interesting. I think it could be very poignant and beautiful.

I've only read the first entries of the post you shared so far, but you're right, it's a great thread. Dany killing the slavers always felt more like an exercise in power than in justice to me--possibly as a way of vicariously retaliating against her own oppressors--and she didn't take the time to ascertain who was guilty of what (which, on a much less fatal scale, is a tendency I think we're beginning to see in our culture today). What really upset me was Dany believing it was her right to invade a foreign country, kill a slew of people, dismantle the government, and flounce. This is an argument that we see a lot today (though, honestly, not as much as we should): is invasion ever justified, even if the place being invaded is carrying out terrible crimes? There's no defending slavery, but if we're going to view slavery through a 21st century lens, then we should also view imperialism the same way, right? The Dany we met in AGOT assimilated to the Dothraki culture, but by the end of ADWD, she's tired of playing along.

The best example of this in the show was probably the episode in the fighting pits, where Dany said she was willing to reduce Meereen to ashes "for a good reason," and Hizdahr asked her, "So the Meereenese don't know what's good for them, but you do?" If D&D were smarter, this could have actually been used as foreshadowing for Dany telling Jon in the finale that the Westerosi "don't get to choose" what's right. Instead, it was undercut by Tyrion comparing Hizdahr to Tywin (lol) and Dany hopping on a dragon, framing the entire scene as one of Female Empowerment.

[SeanF]

7 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

As someone who never really cared for Dany, except in the very beginning, the likelihood of her becoming a tragic character--someone whose desire for love and belonging leads her astray--makes her much more interesting. I think it could be very poignant and beautiful.

I've only read the first entries of the post you shared so far, but you're right, it's a great thread. Dany killing the slavers always felt more like an exercise in power than in justice to me--possibly as a way of vicariously retaliating against her own oppressors--and she didn't take the time to ascertain who was guilty of what (which, on a much less fatal scale, is a tendency I think we're beginning to see in our culture today). What really upset me was Dany believing it was her right to invade a foreign country, kill a slew of people, dismantle the government, and flounce. This is an argument that we see a lot today (though, honestly, not as much as we should): is invasion ever justified, even if the place being invaded is carrying out terrible crimes? There's no defending slavery, but if we're going to view slavery through a 21st century lens, then we should also view imperialism the same way, right? The Dany we met in AGOT assimilated to the Dothraki culture, but by the end of ADWD, she's tired of playing along.

The best example of this in the show was probably the episode in the fighting pits, where Dany said she was willing to reduce Meereen to ashes "for a good reason," and Hizdahr asked her, "So the Meereenese don't know what's good for them, but you do?" If D&D were smarter, this could have actually been used as foreshadowing for Dany telling Jon in the finale that the Westerosi "don't get to choose" what's right. Instead, it was undercut by Tyrion comparing Hizdahr to Tywin (lol) and Dany hopping on a dragon, framing the entire scene as one of Female Empowerment.

The slave trade doesn’t just affect the slaves of Slavers Bay.  It’s the most brutal form of imperialism there is.  The demand for fresh slaves fuels war across Essos, and piracy at sea, as people raid for slaves.  Slaves are not just born in Slavers Bay, but free people have to be enslaved from elsewhere for the system to continue.  Foreign imperial powers, like Volantis, New Ghis, and Qarth intervene to reinstate the trade at Slavers Bay.  All of that mirrors real life politics in the 19th century (compare Napoleon's determination to reinstate slavery across the French Empire).  The customs officer at Selhorys helpfully points out Daenerys’ real crime - stopping a profitable trade.

Most people fighting against slavery in this tale are ex-slaves.  Are they in the wrong?  

Like @Wall Flower, I’ve real unease with the view that Daenerys and her supporters are wrong to oppose slavery/slave trading because it’s the elite’s culture/way of life/she’s foreign/it’s their economy, and I don’t think the author is making that point.  He pulls no punches in setting out just how vile the commercial activities of the slavers are.  Since we also get the viewpoints of Quentyn, Barristan, and Tyrion, I don’t get the idea that this is all just a misunderstanding, and Essossi slavery is a more benign institution than Daenerys imagines.

Most readers feel disgust for Ramsay Bolton.  Why not the same for governments that institutionalise Ramsay’s behaviour?

WRT the old thread, I was initially persuaded by Apple Martini when I joined this site, but came to conclude she works from the assumption that Daenerys is the devil, and reasons backwards from there.  Steven Attwell’s essay on slavery really altered my thinking.  https://towerofthehand.com/blog/2015/02/01-laboratory-of-politics-part-vi/index.html

[The Bard of Banefort]

8 hours ago, SeanF said:

The slave trade doesn’t just affect the slaves of Slavers Bay.  It’s the most brutal form of imperialism there is.  The demand for fresh slaves fuels war across Essos, and piracy at sea, as people raid for slaves.  Slaves are not just born in Slavers Bay, but free people have to be enslaved from elsewhere for the system to continue.  Foreign imperial powers, like Volantis, New Ghis, and Qarth intervene to reinstate the trade at Slavers Bay.  All of that mirrors real life politics in the 19th century (compare Napoleon's determination to reinstate slavery across the French Empire).  The customs officer at Selhorys helpfully points out Daenerys’ real crime - stopping a profitable trade.

Most people fighting against slavery in this tale are ex-slaves.  Are they in the wrong?  

Like @Wall Flower, I’ve real unease with the view that Daenerys and her supporters are wrong to oppose slavery/slave trading because it’s the elite’s culture/way of life/she’s foreign/it’s their economy, and I don’t think the author is making that point.  He pulls no punches in setting out just how vile the commercial activities of the slavers are.  Since we also get the viewpoints of Quentyn, Barristan, and Tyrion, I don’t get the idea that this is all just a misunderstanding, and Essossi slavery is a more benign institution than Daenerys imagines.

Most readers feel disgust for Ramsay Bolton.  Why not the same for governments that institutionalise Ramsay’s behaviour?

WRT the old thread, I was initially persuaded by Apple Martini when I joined this site, but came to conclude she works from the assumption that Daenerys is the devil, and reasons backwards from there.  Steven Attwell’s essay on slavery really altered my thinking.  https://towerofthehand.com/blog/2015/02/01-laboratory-of-politics-part-vi/index.html

It's hard to make an argument here, because I'm obviously not going to defend slavery. I think the issue isn't that Dany is ending the slave trade, but what her personality and ideology says about where she's heading. Dany believes that she's entitled to rule Westeros, a country she has no recollection of and whose people and culture is foreign to her. Every character who believes that the Iron Throne is "theirs by right" is corrupt in one way or another: Cersei and the Lannisters, Renly (who thought he could take the Throne just because he wanted it), even Stannis, who burns dissidents alive and wants to destroy the other religions of Westeros. We barely know Aegon, but I'd be willing to bet that he isn't going to be the perfect king that Varys and JonCon think he is. There's also the fact that burning people alive is arguably the cruelest and most inhumane form of execution (and Stannis and Mel are definitely also guilty here), and that Dany finds that empowering.

Personally, I think Dany's Meereenese plot is the weakest part of the series, and that most of the people who like it seem to view it as a confirmation of their own theories. I can understand why it took George so long to write. 

As a reminder, this is not to say that I think Dany is irredeemable or even unsympathetic. I just personally find her very unsettling.