The Meereense blot

[Dracul's Daughter]

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

@Rose of Red Lake is correct that Daenerys did not begin her career in Slavers Bay, intending to mount a campaign against slavery, but her actions have sparked off a revolution far wider than she knows of.  She was the spark that lit an enormous bonfire.

Ok,I understand that but I was wondering why she chose to free the slavers from Yunkai.They aren't fighters and there are many with her that don't know how to fight or can't because they are too old or too young.

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, Dracul's Daughter said:

Ok,I understand that but I was wondering why she chose to free the slavers from Yunkai.They aren't fighters and there are many with her that don't know how to fight or can't because they are too old or too young.

She felt sorry for them.  A really hard-nosed commander would have done as Ser Jorah suggested, and told the 40,000 non-combatants from Astapor to fend for themselves, while thoroughly looting Yunkai, before sailing West. 

[Dracul's Daughter]

1 minute ago, SeanF said:

She felt sorry for them.  A really hard-nosed commander would have done as Ser Jorah suggested, and told the 40,000 non-combatants from Astapor to fend for themselves, while thoroughly looting Yunkai, before sailing West. 

Yes,she felt sorry for them but @Rose of Red Lake stated her actions in Slaver's Bay as she only cared to make an army.At least that's how I saw her statement.

[Dracul's Daughter]

23 hours ago, Makk said:

 

The essays starting point is about who attempted to assassinate Dany. I find it very difficult to believe GRRM would speak so effusively about them if the basic premise, and then everything that follows, was incorrect. I'm not claiming that he said everything was (or was not) correct. But if you do accept the starting point of the essays things naturally become a lot clearer anyway regardless of what GRRM says.

If you read the last comments on the thread that @SeanF linked you will see that Martin didn't talked about the plot,but the character's struggle.So that's what Adam got right : the struggle in Dany,not the plot.Plus,Martin would never give away his plot lines.

[Dracul's Daughter]

To everyone saying Martin does not condone any war,here is he saying HE IS NOT A FULL PACIFIST.
 

 

[Hodor the Articulate]

17 hours ago, Dracul's Daughter said:

Yes,she felt sorry for them but @Rose of Red Lake stated her actions in Slaver's Bay as she only cared to make an army.At least that's how I saw her statement.

Yes, that's certainly what Rose was saying. But anyone who's done a proper reading of the books can tell that's completely untrue. As you and SeanF note, if Dany was just trying gain armies for free, she made a pretty dumb mistake in picking a city full of bed-slaves. And she wouldn't have then allowed the refugees ("mouths with feet", as Jorah puts it) to follow her. She also wouldn't have refused Yunkai's bribe or bothered to stay in Meereen.

[SeanF]

9 hours ago, Dracul's Daughter said:

To everyone saying Martin does not condone any war,here is he saying HE IS NOT A FULL PACIFIST.
 

 

He's also on the record as saying that on balance, he would have supported Robert's Rebellion.  We know that innocents died as a result of this rebellion, but on the other hand, the lords of the Seven Kingdoms couldn't let their ruler murder them with impunity.

[Dracul's Daughter]

7 minutes ago, SeanF said:

He's also on the record as saying that on balance, he would have supported Robert's Rebellion.  We know that innocents died as a result of this rebellion, but on the other hand, the lords of the Seven Kingdoms couldn't let their ruler murder them with impunity.

Exactly!

[SeanF]

8 minutes ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

Yes, that's certainly what Rose was saying. But anyone who's done a proper reading of the books can tell that's completely untrue. As you and SeanF note, if Dany was just trying gain armies for free, she made a pretty dumb mistake in picking a city full of bed-slaves. And she wouldn't have then allowed the refugees ("mouths with feet", as Jorah puts it) to follow her. She also wouldn't have refused Yunkai's bribe or bothered to stay in Meereen.

Her motives were not entirely altruistic.  She did want an army and she did want supplies.  But, no leader who fights a war, however just, does so for reasons of pure altruism (you can get people joining up, like the International Brigades, for purely altruistic reasons).  Robert, Ned, and Jon Arryn rose in rebellion to save their own necks, as well as to overthrow a tyrant.  Freeing slaves, and putting an end to egregious cruelty, were certainly important motivators for Daenerys, if not the only ones. 

I think that Daenerys's motives and conduct in Slavers' Bay were superior to those of any of participants in the War of Five Kings.

 

[Rose of Red Lake]

On 9/24/2020 at 10:13 AM, SeanF said:

She felt sorry for them.  A really hard-nosed commander would have done as Ser Jorah suggested, and told the 40,000 non-combatants from Astapor to fend for themselves, while thoroughly looting Yunkai, before sailing West. 

I don't think we really know her motives for attacking Yunkai? That chapter starts in medias res.

When Jorah describes that the city is full of bed slaves, she doesn't have a bleeding heart response. It's more about tactics and winning. 

The chapters reveal her love of conquest. Is it the thrill of winning in war that motivates her, or the cause of abolition? I think its intentionally muddled. She was still marching, and planning to abandon Astapor and Yunkai until she stopped at Meereen. 

[TheLastWolf]

1 hour ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

The chapters reveal her love of conquest. Is it the thrill of winning in war that motivates her, or the cause of abolition?

The thrill. She is more like Robert than she would accept. 

 

Spoiler

Barristan might have said something like, "Robert was much happier conquering than ruling..." and we see that in how much satisfaction she gets from the thrill of conquest in this passage.

 

[SeanF]

2 hours ago, TheLastWolf said:

The thrill. She is more like Robert than she would accept. 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Barristan might have said something like, "Robert was much happier conquering than ruling..." and we see that in how much satisfaction she gets from the thrill of conquest in this passage.

 

If Westeros had a role like Dux Bellorum, then she'd be ideal. 

It's true enough in real life that very few leaders can combine the skillset of military leader and effective politician.  Julius Caesar was one such, but I'd say his political skills deserted him towards the end. 

The best you can hope for in Martin's world is to have a successful military leader, who delegates civil matters to others, like Aegon I, or a successful politician who has a loyal commander, like Daeron the Good.

[Hodor the Articulate]

23 hours ago, SeanF said:

Her motives were not entirely altruistic.  She did want an army and she did want supplies.  But, no leader who fights a war, however just, does so for reasons of pure altruism (you can get people joining up, like the International Brigades, for purely altruistic reasons).  Robert, Ned, and Jon Arryn rose in rebellion to save their own necks, as well as to overthrow a tyrant.  Freeing slaves, and putting an end to egregious cruelty, were certainly important motivators for Daenerys, if not the only ones. 

I think that Daenerys's motives and conduct in Slavers' Bay were superior to those of any of participants in the War of Five Kings.

 

Well, she didn’t head into to Slaver's Bay with a mind to free slaves, but she ended up doing that after seeing just how terrible slavery can be. I guess you could argue that it wasn't true altruism because she felt good breaking chains. Though, who does anything if it doesn't benefit them in some way? I'm not sure pure altruism exists.

3 hours ago, TheLastWolf said:

The thrill. She is more like Robert than she would accept. 

"I was tired, Jorah. I was weary of war. I wanted to rest, to laugh, to plant trees and see them grow. I am only a young girl."

The whole reason Daenerys gave more and more ground to the Masters, despite having the power to annihilate them, is because she didn't enjoy war. Even the Meereenese Blot agrees that at least part of her wants peace.

5 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

She was still marching, and planning to abandon Astapor and Yunkai until she stopped at Meereen.

Neither cities were abandoned. She left a council of Astaporians to rule Astapor. And Yunkai was never claimed; she only demanded the release of all their slaves.

The fact that she stops in Meereen destroys your whole argument that Dany wasn't trying to free slaves. If she was just in it for the thrills, she'd have sacked Meereen and moved on to the next city.

[SeanF]

12 minutes ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

Well, she didn’t head into to Slaver's Bay with a mind to free slaves, but she ended up doing that after seeing just how terrible slavery can be. I guess you could argue that it wasn't true altruism because she felt good breaking chains. Though, who does anything if it doesn't benefit them in some way? I'm not sure pure altruism exists.

Only in the case of a true believer, who joins a side in a foreign war.

For a leader, altruism has to compete with self-interest.

[Dracul's Daughter]

4 hours ago, TheLastWolf said:

The thrill. She is more like Robert than she would accept. 

 

  Hide contents

Barristan might have said something like, "Robert was much happier conquering than ruling..." and we see that in how much satisfaction she gets from the thrill of conquest in this passage.

 

Yes,she might get the thrill of the battle but I don't think that was her only motivation.If she would have such a desire for battle she would have immediately gone to Westeros to fight for her right or wouldn't have pledged for peace in Meereen.

[Dracul's Daughter]

7 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

I don't think we really know her motives for attacking Yunkai? That chapter starts in medias res.

When Jorah describes that the city is full of bed slaves, she doesn't have a bleeding heart response. It's more about tactics and winning. 

The chapters reveal her love of conquest. Is it the thrill of winning in war that motivates her, or the cause of abolition? I think its intentionally muddled. She was still marching, and planning to abandon Astapor and Yunkai until she stopped at Meereen. 

She didn't abandon Astapor.She let it with people in charge and yes,it backfired.Yunkai was never taken by her and the fact that she frees the bed slaves that were there,when they are not useful in battle,it should tell you that she does it for empathy.I guess it was the fact that Martin didn't wrote a scene with her crying her eyes out that made you confuse about her feelings.

Look,it's clear that we have different views of her.You don't like her character and it's fine but I won't have a conversation with you twisting every f***ing scene of her just because you want people to see her like Hitler/Satan with dragons.

[mushroomshirt]

On 9/24/2020 at 12:15 AM, SeanF said:

https://towerofthehand.com/blog/2015/02/01-laboratory-of-politics-part-vi/index.html

Steven Attwell provides the counter-argument to the Meereenese Blot here, and I find it convincing.  Daenerys' mistake was to try to abort her revolution halfway.

Can you be more specific about what Steven Attwell says in this link that refutes Adam's essays?

I find the Untangling the Meereenese Knot essays completely convincing.  So I'm interested in substantive arguments against it.

On 9/24/2020 at 1:28 AM, Hodor the Articulate said:

But how does Steven's reading undercut GRRM's theme of the human heart at war with itself? If anything, it's the opposite. If [Feldman's] reading is correct (peace with the slavers is possible as well as desirable), then Dany essentially did everything right (advocating moderacy and reconciliation, marrying Hizdahr, ...) - only to inexplicably (Targaryen madness!) turn to fire and blood once Drogon showed up again. If, on the other hand, Steven's right, then you have a genuine internal conflict - Dany's tiredness of war, her wish to plant trees and see everybody happy vs. the necessities of violently supressing a counterrevolution. You can see this conflict played out vis-a-vis the high-born hostages: Killing an innocent child is horrible - but what if it saves the lives of countless freedmen?

I don't think this is a fair characterization of Adam's essay.  There is nothing inexplicable about turning to fire and blood once Drogon shows up again.  Drogon is part of her, both her own person and her Targaryen heritage.  In a sense Drogon is an extension of Dany.   Drogon is not an inexplixable external actor!

[Dracul's Daughter]

@mushroomshirt you can read the whole essay here.

https://towerofthehand.com/blog/2015/02/01-laboratory-of-politics-part-vi/noscript.html#wages

 

[SeanF]

28 minutes ago, mushroomshirt said:

Can you be more specific about what Steven Attwell says in this link that refutes Adam's essays?

I find the Untangling the Meereenese Knot essays completely convincing.  So I'm interested in substantive arguments against it.

I don't think this is a fair characterization of Adam's essay.  There is nothing inexplicable about turning to fire and blood once Drogon shows up again.  Drogon is part of her, both her own person and her Targaryen heritage.  In a sense Drogon is an extension of Dany.   Drogon is not an inexplixable external actor!

I’ve given my reasons at length, at 69, for believing Adam Feldman to be wrong.  These are informed by, but not identical, to Steven Attwell’s arguments.

[Targaryen Restoration]

On 9/24/2020 at 10:08 PM, Dracul's Daughter said:

To everyone saying Martin does not condone any war,here is he saying HE IS NOT A FULL PACIFIST.
 

 

He has even said that he would have dressed up and fought against the Nazis.  The Ghiscari slavers are worse than nazis.