GOT Musings

[csuszka1948]

4 hours ago, SeanF said:

It’s much better than what we got, but I mostly dislike Jon’s story arc.

Jon is actually shirking his duty, to step up and rule a shattered nation.  There’s nothing admirable about self-abnegation.  Nor do I think Jon would throw in the towel, after Cersei set off the wildfire.

If there's a trope I've come to detest it is that the greatest leaders are those who reject power.  Truly competent and public-spirited people step up to the mark.

As for King Tyrion?  Simply, no.

 

 

 

Why will Jon shirk his duty? I find this a much better explanation (and something I imagine we might see in the books): 

"When Jon joins the Night's Watch, he is in a sense unknowingly following in Rhaegar's footsteps. Pursuing a heroic destiny as the fire that burns against the cold and the dark. Seeking a path that will give his life meaning. A path of heroism and dragons and death, that ends in the Long Night. But throughout his story Jon has also been called toward the path of Lyanna (such as when he is tempted to stay with Ygritte). And when the curtain finally closes on Jon Snow's story, he will go the way of his mother. Forging his own path as a free man. A king and his wolf."

 

 

 I agree with King Tyrion, it's ridiculous. That said, I am almost certain that the showrunners had to stick to GRRM's ending and make Bran King at the end, so that's the one aspect of the story we would have to change in this video. Obviously Tyrion would need a better speech (something about broken kingdom needing a broken king to heal it, about how the fact that Bran is not a warrior doesn't make him a worse King because warring Kings and Queens destroyed this continent with their selfishness, that elective monarchy is useful because it prevents such wars), but it could work reasonably well.

Edited May 19, 2023 by csuszka1948

[csuszka1948]

On 5/10/2023 at 1:44 PM, Angel Eyes said:

Again, Daenerys calls Tyrion on his screwups. He doesn't answer her question.

As for the grimdark tale, the books are already trending that way with Daenerys contemplating Viserys' advice (Dragons plant no trees), Sansa under Littlefinger, Bran with Bloodraven, Arya with the Faceless Men, Jon getting stabbed and not coming back normal (GRRM hates it when they do), and Brienne leading Jaime to Lady Stoneheart (another example of coming back wrong). It's going to take a spanner like Gollum with the One Ring to make things worthwhile.

 

I think that only means that all characters will be getting darker in TWOW, but ADOS will be probably uplifting.

[csuszka1948]

3 hours ago, SeanF said:

If Dany burning Kings Landing is a thing, my favoured scenario would be that her forces are facing defeat, after bitter street fighting, (somewhat similar to the video you linked to), at the hands of soldiers who have barricaded themselves, and who are using the civilians as human shields.

That’s when she makes the choice to unleash fire on soldiers and civilians alike.  Now that is cruel, but it’s also what almost any military commander would do.  Certainly what our own leaders would do, without possessing the technology for precision bombing.

 

 

 

Yes, it would make sense in that scenario.

The reason I changed my mind about Dany burning KL is primarily a narrative one.

I don't think her Dance with Aegon and her fight with the Others can be told in one book. Besides, both she (and even Aegon) would focus on the threat of Others before fighting each other and after the fight with the Others there is too much rebuilding to be done.

It also fits the original outline more: the Lannister-Stark war told in the first 3 books, the Targaryen invasion (Aegon replacing Dany) in the next 3 books and the war against the Others in the last book.

There are a few hints pointing to this besides the cyvasse of Aegon and Dany. Cersei is suddenly introduced as as an Aerys parallel in AFFC - paranoid and wildfire-loving - while Dany's dreams (which in the first 3 books centered around the Red Keep) suddenly shift to the House with the Red Door. This seems to point towards the conclusion that GRRM originally wanted Dany to have a hand in the burning of KL, but after he scrapped the 5-year gap and decided that Dany should stay in Essos longer, he changed the culprit to Cersei.  

 

Besides, would an Aegon-Dany dance fit either of their characters? Dany is searching for family and two heads of the dragon she can trust, she doesn't seem to put much stock in most the prophecies (except the personal ones - three heads and three treasons) - she trusted Quentyn and didn't treat Rezdan with suspicion despite Quaithe's warnings. If Aegon would be able to ride a dragon, wouldn't she be overjoyed?

I don't think it's impossible that she will be buy into her own myth and start to put her belief into prophecies later - after seeing what Quentyn has done and being named Azor Ahai in Volantis - but it is not consistent with the character she is now. 

Edited May 19, 2023 by csuszka1948

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, csuszka1948 said:

Why will Jon shirk his duty? I find this a much better explanation (and something I imagine we might see in the books): 

"When Jon joins the Night's Watch, he is in a sense unknowingly following in Rhaegar's footsteps. Pursuing a heroic destiny as the fire that burns against the cold and the dark. Seeking a path that will give his life meaning. A path of heroism and dragons and death, that ends in the Long Night. But throughout his story Jon has also been called toward the path of Lyanna (such as when he is tempted to stay with Ygritte). And when the curtain finally closes on Jon Snow's story, he will go the way of his mother. Forging his own path as a free man. A king and his wolf."

 

 I agree with King Tyrion, it's ridiculous. That said, I am almost certain that the showrunners had to stick to GRRM's ending and make Bran King at the end, so that's the one aspect of the story we would have to change in this video. Obviously Tyrion would need a better speech (something about broken kingdom needing a broken king to heal it, about how the fact that Bran is not a warrior doesn't make him a worse King because warring Kings and Queens destroyed this continent with their selfishness, that elective monarchy is useful because it prevents such wars), but it could work reasonably well.

In the scenario we're given, in that video, Jon is by far the best person to unify the country, with Cersei and Daenerys both dead.  

Not least, because with the various lords once again vying for power, the king has to be an experienced soldier.

Edited May 19, 2023 by SeanF

[SeanF]

31 minutes ago, csuszka1948 said:

Yes, it would make sense in that scenario.

The reason I changed my mind about Dany burning KL is primarily a narrative one.

I don't think her Dance with Aegon and her fight with the Others can be told in one book. Besides, both she (and even Aegon) would focus on the threat of Others before fighting each other and after the fight with the Others there is too much rebuilding to be done.

It also fits the original outline more: the Lannister-Stark war told in the first 3 books, the Targaryen invasion (Aegon replacing Dany) in the next 3 books and the war against the Others in the last book.

There are a few hints pointing to this besides the cyvasse of Aegon and Dany. Cersei is suddenly introduced as as an Aerys parallel in AFFC - paranoid and wildfire-loving - while Dany's dreams (which in the first 3 books centered around the Red Keep) suddenly shift to the House with the Red Door. This seems to point towards the conclusion that GRRM originally wanted Dany to have a hand in the burning of KL, but after he scrapped the 5-year gap and decided that Dany should stay in Essos longer, he changed the culprit to Cersei.  

 

Besides, would an Aegon-Dany dance fit either of their characters? Dany is searching for family and two heads of the dragon she can trust, she doesn't seem to put much stock in most the prophecies (except the personal ones - three heads and three treasons) - she trusted Quentyn and didn't treat Rezdan with suspicion despite Quaithe's warnings. If Aegon would be able to ride a dragon, wouldn't she be overjoyed?

I don't think it's impossible that she will be buy into her own myth and start to put her belief into prophecies later - after seeing what Quentyn has done and being named Azor Ahai in Volantis - but it is not consistent with the character she is now. 

The timeline certainly makes a civil war between Dany and Aegon very difficult, now.

And, Jon Connington seems the man to be triggered by the sound of bells.

[csuszka1948]

58 minutes ago, SeanF said:

In the scenario we're given, in that video, Jon is by far the best person to unify the country, with Cersei and Daenerys both dead.  

Not least, because with the various lords once again vying for power, the king has to be an experienced soldier.

 

 

 

 

 

I don't disagree that it's the best option. I just think King Bran was a fixed ending*, just like the Hold the Door moment and Stannis burning Shireen.

In fact, I think the showrunners might have come up with the 'Jon kills Dany' moment to justify making Bran King. 

 

*which doesn't really work out in ASOIAF now. Lords wouldn't make a known sorcerer King, even is he is well-intentioned and shows help against the Others.

In the original outline, Bran became King after Book 2, the Dance of Dragons, when probably all claimants were destroyed or their name dragged to the mud. 

The election of Torrhen Manderly as Hand of the King of Aegon III in a Great Council was probably set up to mirror this.

Edited May 19, 2023 by csuszka1948

[csuszka1948]

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

The timeline certainly makes a civil war between Dany and Aegon very difficult, now.

And, Jon Connington seems the man to be triggered by the sound of bells.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't think JonCon is likely to burn the city down. He doesn't even know about the hidden wildfire and the lesson he has learnt from Stony Sept is ruthlessness, not madness. 

I think it's more likely that Cersei locks up or kills Margaery and believes she has outsmarted the prophecy - because Aegon has no queen - and orders the wildfire to be blown up once Aegon takes the city. JonCon would die seeing Cersei doing the same to Aegon that he wanted to do to Robert.

 

I think my dislike over the 'mad Dany' plot also stems from the fact that I have recently (for the first time since the ending of the show) reread her chapters and found her characters completely contrary to the show and most fans' belief. She is a somewhat soft character who usually refuses to accept the more violent route her advisors propose (opposed to the show, where her advisors 'restrain' her) and most of the common criticisms against her don't stand. I feel her transformation at the end of ADWD is from 'Rhaenys' to 'Aegon', not Maegor or Visenya (I think post-ADWD Jon might fit Visenya more). 

For example, she is not arrogant or entitled at all and the only reason she wants to rule Westeros is because she feels it is her duty to her family. She only says that 'she is the blood of the dragon' to make herself feel more confident. She is not really inflexible - she has already realized that her father was a bad man and in most of ADWD she wonders whether she has the 'taint'. The reason most people don't realize this transformation is because it is subtextual.

She is not tyrannical at all (that would fit Jon - despite his generally excellent rulership - much more, Dany is probably too compromising) and doesn't just save the slaves because she has a 'saviour complex', either - she genuinely identifies with their plight as someone who was formerly sold in sex slavery and wants to make them feel equal to her.

 

“On the ADWD cover, I put Daenerys at the top of the stairs of the meereenese pyramid. And George told me that Daenerys wants equality for everyone, she wants to be at the same level as her people, so I had her climb down to keep it consistent” - Marc Simonetti

 

Blaming her for viewing Ned Stark the 'Usurper's dog' is also somewhat unfair - after all, Robert's reign was built on the butchering of Elia and her children by the Lannisters who were rewarded for the act by a marriage, and Ned Stark didn't do anything about this injustice, he accepted Robert as his King and even became his Hand. 

Yes, you could bring up the fact that Ned had really no reason to risk his people's lives to rebel, and you are right about it, but I think Dany is the one person from whom thinking this is not hypocritical. After all, she stood up against the injustice of slavery despite the massive odds stacked against her.

 

That said, her sometimes quick temper and her painting of family members (Drogo, Viserys) in a relatively good light is problematic. However, the main criticism that can be leveled against her is her lack of firmness and consistency. She treated Astapor, Yunkai and Meereen completely differently (yes, we know why, but from the outside it looks inconsistent) and she allowed the torture of the wineseller's daughter for information when she got angry over the death of a slave leader, but she refused to kill the children. She first refused to open the fighting pits but at the end she allowed it.

This lack of consistency make dealing with her difficult and allowed the slavers to paint her in a bad light.

Edited May 19, 2023 by csuszka1948

[Angel Eyes]

24 minutes ago, csuszka1948 said:

I don't think JonCon is likely to burn the city down. He doesn't even know about the hidden wildfire and the lesson he has learnt from Stony Sept is ruthlessness, not madness. 

I think it's more likely that Cersei locks up or kills Margaery and believes she has outsmarted the prophecy - because Aegon has no queen - and orders the wildfire to be blown up once Aegon takes the city. JonCon would die seeing Cersei doing the same to Aegon that he wanted to do to Robert.

 

I think my dislike over the 'mad Dany' plot also stems from the fact that I have recently (for the first time since the ending of the show) reread her chapters and found her characters completely contrary to the show and most fans' belief. She is a somewhat soft character who usually refuses to accept the more violent route her advisors propose (opposed to the show, where her advisors 'restrain' her) and most of the common criticisms against her don't stand.

For example, she is not entitled at all and the only reason she wants to rule Westeros is because she feels it is her duty to her family. She is not really inflexible - she has already realized that her father was a bad man and in most of ADWD she wonders whether she has the 'taint'. She is not tyrannical at all (that would fit Jon - despite his generally excellent rulership - much more, Dany is probably too compromising) and doesn't just save the slaves because she has a 'saviour complex', either - she genuinely identifies with their plight as someone who was formerly sold in sex slavery and wants to make them feel equal to her.

 

“On the ADWD cover, I put Daenerys at the top of the stairs of the meereenese pyramid. And George told me that Daenerys wants equality for everyone, she wants to be at the same level as her people, so I had her climb down to keep it consistent” - Marc Simonetti

 

Blaming her for viewing Ned Stark the 'Usurper's dog' is also somewhat unfair - after all, Robert's reign was built on the butchering of Elia and her children by the Lannisters who were rewarded for the act by a marriage, and Ned Stark didn't do anything about this injustice, he accepted Robert as his King and even became his Hand. 

Yes, you could bring up the fact that Ned had really no reason to rebel, and you are right about it, but I think Dany is the one person from whom thinking this is not hypocritical. After all, she stood up against the injustice of slavery despite the massive odds stacked against her.

 

I would say the one thing that can be leveled against her is her lack of firmness and consistency. She treated Astapor, Yunkai and Meereen completely differently (yes, we know why, but from the outside it looks inconsistent) and she allowed the torture of the wineseller's daughter for information when she got angry over the death of a slave leader, but she refused to kill the children. She first refused to open the fighting pits but at the end she allowed it.

This lack of consistency make dealing with her difficult and allowed the slavers to paint her in a bad light.

I think Jon Connington would likely be driven to sacking as an act of desperation before his greyscale advances too far. Or for all we know given how greyscale messes with the brain, the greyscale could literally make him do something irrational.

[Angel Eyes]

6 hours ago, SeanF said:

My preferred crack ending would be:

1. Jon stabs Dany, only for the dagger to snag on the chain mail sewn into the lining of her dress (medieval people knew all about the importance of such body armour.)

She says “Do you think I’d be so f***ing stupid as to walk around a city I’ve just sacked and burned without protection?”

2.  Jon is dragged off to her bedchamber.  He’s tied down on the bed.  She proceeds to disrobe seductively, before riding him hard.  He decides there are worse fates than being the boyfriend of a beautiful tyrant.

She tells him, he can redeem himself, by executing Tyrion.

3.  Jon burns Tyrion at the stake.  The Dothraki and Unsullied are present, the latter drumming their spears on the ground with approval.  The Dothraki leader says “Now you great Khal, worthy husband to Khaleesi.”

4.  The episode ends with Jon and Dany marching North to execute Sansa, with Drogon screeching in triumph, overhead.

 

Of course that would require Daenerys actually wearing armor.

[csuszka1948]

Just now, Angel Eyes said:

I think Jon Connington would likely be driven to sacking as an act of desperation before his greyscale advances too far. Or for all we know given how greyscale messes with the brain, the greyscale could literally make him do something irrational.

 

Yes, I think a sacking is much more likely. He acts to take revenge the actions of Robert and Tywin but in the end ironically he ends up doing the same as Tywin, brutally sacking a city and killing innocent children and woman (Myrcella, Margaery?).

[SeanF]

2 hours ago, csuszka1948 said:

I don't think JonCon is likely to burn the city down. He doesn't even know about the hidden wildfire and the lesson he has learnt from Stony Sept is ruthlessness, not madness. 

I think it's more likely that Cersei locks up or kills Margaery and believes she has outsmarted the prophecy - because Aegon has no queen - and orders the wildfire to be blown up once Aegon takes the city. JonCon would die seeing Cersei doing the same to Aegon that he wanted to do to Robert.

 

I think my dislike over the 'mad Dany' plot also stems from the fact that I have recently (for the first time since the ending of the show) reread her chapters and found her characters completely contrary to the show and most fans' belief. She is a somewhat soft character who usually refuses to accept the more violent route her advisors propose (opposed to the show, where her advisors 'restrain' her) and most of the common criticisms against her don't stand. I feel her transformation at the end of ADWD is from 'Rhaenys' to 'Aegon', not Maegor or Visenya (I think post-ADWD Jon might fit Visenya more). 

For example, she is not arrogant or entitled at all and the only reason she wants to rule Westeros is because she feels it is her duty to her family. She only says that 'she is the blood of the dragon' to make herself feel more confident. She is not really inflexible - she has already realized that her father was a bad man and in most of ADWD she wonders whether she has the 'taint'. The reason most people don't realize this transformation is because it is subtextual.

She is not tyrannical at all (that would fit Jon - despite his generally excellent rulership - much more, Dany is probably too compromising) and doesn't just save the slaves because she has a 'saviour complex', either - she genuinely identifies with their plight as someone who was formerly sold in sex slavery and wants to make them feel equal to her.

 

“On the ADWD cover, I put Daenerys at the top of the stairs of the meereenese pyramid. And George told me that Daenerys wants equality for everyone, she wants to be at the same level as her people, so I had her climb down to keep it consistent” - Marc Simonetti

 

Blaming her for viewing Ned Stark the 'Usurper's dog' is also somewhat unfair - after all, Robert's reign was built on the butchering of Elia and her children by the Lannisters who were rewarded for the act by a marriage, and Ned Stark didn't do anything about this injustice, he accepted Robert as his King and even became his Hand. 

Yes, you could bring up the fact that Ned had really no reason to risk his people's lives to rebel, and you are right about it, but I think Dany is the one person from whom thinking this is not hypocritical. After all, she stood up against the injustice of slavery despite the massive odds stacked against her.

 

That said, her sometimes quick temper and her painting of family members (Drogo, Viserys) in a relatively good light is problematic. However, the main criticism that can be leveled against her is her lack of firmness and consistency. She treated Astapor, Yunkai and Meereen completely differently (yes, we know why, but from the outside it looks inconsistent) and she allowed the torture of the wineseller's daughter for information when she got angry over the death of a slave leader, but she refused to kill the children. She first refused to open the fighting pits but at the end she allowed it.

This lack of consistency make dealing with her difficult and allowed the slavers to paint her in a bad light.

Oh, like so many, I think the book and show character are different people, even if they hit some of the same plot points.

Daenerys in the books is highly self-critical, compassionate, humorous, and she shies away from being ruthless.  The latter is actually a failing, in the context of Slavers Bay, as it benefits the slavers, at the expense of the freedmen.  The slavers are good at identifying and exploiting weakness.

GRRM correcting Mark Simonetti, and the contrast with the throne in the show, are both significant, IMHO.

I agree, Jon is harder than Daenerys is (which is no bad thing.)

 

Edited May 19, 2023 by SeanF

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, Angel Eyes said:

Of course that would require Daenerys actually wearing armor.

The idea of anyone flying into the range of arrows, without wearing armour, is beyond stupid.

My guess is that an archer is likely to get a free shot at a dragon rider, before being engulfed in flame.  But, an arrow is most unlikely to penetrate armour.

[Angel Eyes]

5 hours ago, SeanF said:

The idea of anyone flying into the range of arrows, without wearing armour, is beyond stupid.

My guess is that an archer is likely to get a free shot at a dragon rider, before being engulfed in flame.  But, an arrow is most unlikely to penetrate armour.

That does seem to be how Daenerys is; she doesn't wear armor (maybe it's the Dothraki rubbing off on her). If Drogon wasn't there in the battle on the road, Jaime would have made her into a shish-khaleesibab.

[SeanF]

16 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said:

That does seem to be how Daenerys is; she doesn't wear armor (maybe it's the Dothraki rubbing off on her). If Drogon wasn't there in the battle on the road, Jaime would have made her into a shish-khaleesibab.

She wears mail in the books.

[Angel Eyes]

52 minutes ago, SeanF said:

She wears mail in the books.

But not in the show.

[csuszka1948]

10 hours ago, SeanF said:

Oh, like so many, I think the book and show character are different people, even if they hit some of the same plot points.

Daenerys in the books is highly self-critical, compassionate, humorous, and she shies away from being ruthless.  The latter is actually a failing, in the context of Slavers Bay, as it benefits the slavers, at the expense of the freedmen.  The slavers are good at identifying and exploiting weakness.

GRRM correcting Mark Simonetti, and the contrast with the throne in the show, are both significant, IMHO.

I agree, Jon is harder than Daenerys is (which is no bad thing.)

 

 

Yes. The 'Dany becoming the villain' theories always portray her as a tragic heroine, whose fatal flaw leads to her downfall... but what is Dany's fatal flaw?

It could be her saviour complex, but she allowed people to sell themselves into slavery despite her best judgement, and even if her attitude changes, the story doesn't have time for her to reform feudalism in Westeros. Arrogance or entitlement, which are often mentioned alongside Dany, aren't her flaws. 

I don't think GRRM wants to turn the one character who had a very poor upbringing but still shows incredible compassion and empathy into a villain in the end, because it would show that you cannot overcome hard circumstances.

Besides, ASOIAF already has a pretty important secondary character (probably only Jaime, Brienne, Cersei, Theon and Euron rivaling him in importance), who despite his virtues meets a tragic end. It's Stannis, whose sense of entitlement is his fatal flaw and it will cause him to commit a heinous act (burn his daughter) and lead to his downfall. 

[SeanF]

52 minutes ago, csuszka1948 said:

Yes. The 'Dany becoming the villain' theories always portray her as a tragic heroine, whose fatal flaw leads to her downfall... but what is Dany's fatal flaw?

It could be her saviour complex, but she allowed people to sell themselves into slavery despite her best judgement, and even if her attitude changes, the story doesn't have time for her to reform feudalism in Westeros. Arrogance or entitlement, which are often mentioned alongside Dany, aren't her flaws. 

I don't think GRRM wants to turn the one character who had a very poor upbringing but still shows incredible compassion and empathy into a villain in the end, because it would show that you cannot overcome hard circumstances.

Besides, ASOIAF already has a pretty important secondary character (probably only Jaime, Brienne, Cersei, Theon and Euron rivaling him in importance), who despite his virtues meets a tragic end. It's Stannis, whose sense of entitlement is his fatal flaw and it will cause him to commit a heinous act (burn his daughter) and lead to his downfall. 

I’d say her fatal flaw is self doubt, bordering on self-loathing, causing her to second-guess all she does.

[csuszka1948]

26 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I’d say her fatal flaw is self doubt, bordering on self-loathing, causing her to second-guess all she does.

 

I don't think it was very strong before ADWD.

There are multiple reasons why she became so self-doubting in the last novel:

1) Her failures in ASOS: I think many people fail to realize this, but most of Dany's problems in ADWD don't come from incompetent rulership, but her mistakes during her 'conquest' in ASOS that we all cheered.

i. She didn't left soldiers in Astapor and appointed a council without legitimacy - allowing Cleon to overthrow them and enslave the former slavers

ii. She was too generous with Yunkai and trusted their word (despite she had no reason to do so after she herself broke her word multiple time) - this resulted in them re-engaging in slaving and inviting mercenaries from all over the world. (That said, I feel it's a bit of a plothole/retcon that Yunkai's masters had money to hire mercenaries after they had to give up slaves and much of their wealth with them.)

iii. She was too merciless and too lenient with the Meereenese masters by crucifying 163 of them, but leaving the rest alive and letting them keep their wealth (this part I understand though, it's very revolutionary for a girl from a noble family to let them keep their lives but redistribute most of their wealth). 

These are the mistakes that come back to bite him and she blames herself for lacking foresight and being too violent.

2. She is starting to realize the truth about her father and that deeply disturbs her

3. Hazzea's death

13 hours ago, SeanF said:

The timeline certainly makes a civil war between Dany and Aegon very difficult, now.

And, Jon Connington seems the man to be triggered by the sound of bells.

 

 

 

 

It's not just the timeline, it's also the narrative structure of the story.

The first 3 books are the first book from the original outline and ASOS has a proper closure, eliminating many of the important (mostly secondary - Tywin, Lysa) characters and setting the main characters on divergent paths.

If he wants to finish the story in 7 books, it makes sense that TWOW gets a similarly proper closure (ending of the second part of the original outline), eliminating many of the important (mostly secondary - Stannis, Aegon) characters and setting the main characters in convergent paths.

 

 

You are also right that Aegon being completely beloved by the crowds is not that likely - not because the boy is vengeful, but because many people who surround him - Jon Connington, the Sand Snakes - are. The Golden Company is the best sellsword company, but it's still a sellsword company who need rewards and probably wouldn't be holding back themselves from a bit of looting and rape.

It would be also ironic if Varys' genuine mission to craft a perfect heir and stop events such as the sack of KL and murder of children (Rhaenys) happening would result in the sack of KL and the murder of children (Myrcella)

Edited May 19, 2023 by csuszka1948

[SeanF]

3 hours ago, csuszka1948 said:

I don't think it was very strong before ADWD.

There are multiple reasons why she became so self-doubting in the last novel:

1) Her failures in ASOS: I think many people fail to realize this, but most of Dany's problems in ADWD don't come from incompetent rulership, but her mistakes during her 'conquest' in ASOS that we all cheered.

i. She didn't left soldiers in Astapor and appointed a council without legitimacy - allowing Cleon to overthrow them and enslave the former slavers

ii. She was too generous with Yunkai and trusted their word (despite she had no reason to do so after she herself broke her word multiple time) - this resulted in them re-engaging in slaving and inviting mercenaries from all over the world. (That said, I feel it's a bit of a plothole/retcon that Yunkai's masters had money to hire mercenaries after they had to give up slaves and much of their wealth with them.)

iii. She was too merciless and too lenient with the Meereenese masters by crucifying 163 of them, but leaving the rest alive and letting them keep their wealth (this part I understand though, it's very revolutionary for a girl from a noble family to let them keep their lives but redistribute most of their wealth). 

These are the mistakes that come back to bite him and she blames herself for lacking foresight and being too violent.

2. She is starting to realize the truth about her father and that deeply disturbs her

3. Hazzea's death

It's not just the timeline, it's also the narrative structure of the story.

The first 3 books are the first book from the original outline and ASOS has a proper closure, eliminating many of the important (mostly secondary - Tywin, Lysa) characters and setting the main characters on divergent paths.

If he wants to finish the story in 7 books, it makes sense that TWOW gets a similarly proper closure (ending of the second part of the original outline), eliminating many of the important (mostly secondary - Stannis, Aegon) characters and setting the main characters in convergent paths.

 

 

You are also right that Aegon being completely beloved by the crowds is not that likely - not because the boy is vengeful, but because many people who surround him - Jon Connington, the Sand Snakes - are. The Golden Company is the best sellsword company, but it's still a sellsword company who need rewards and probably wouldn't be holding back themselves from a bit of looting and rape.

It would be also ironic if Varys' genuine mission to craft a perfect heir and stop events such as the sack of KL and murder of children (Rhaenys) happening would result in the sack of KL and the murder of children (Myrcella)

I’ve said before but I think Jon Con and the Sands will perpetrate some terrible deeds, after capital falls.

[csuszka1948]

8 hours ago, SeanF said:

I’ve said before but I think Jon Con and the Sands will perpetrate some terrible deeds, after capital falls.

 

You are probably right. I previously denied it but if I discard the idea of a Dany-Aegon Dance, it makes sense.

That said, I don't think the Red Keep with Cersei will fall that quickly.