Would the Essos Storyline be more interesting if the Villains had more Depth?

[Craving Peaches]

The slavers are so evil they don't even feel like real people. They are flat, two-dimensional characters for Daenerys to beat, that is it. And there is basically no real moral conflict in the battle because the morality is all on Daenerys' side. And they are really incompetent so there wasn't even much of a struggle to beat them. Now I am not saying there are no moral complexities in the Essos storyline because there is, but they all come from Daenerys. We have potentially two ex-slaver characters, the Green Grace and Hizdahr, who say they want reform, but none of the readers seem to believe them so if this was an attempt to give more depth it has failed.

[StarkTullies]

Maybe, but I enjoy the Meereen arc specifically for the character development of Dany (not the side characters).  That's ultimately the purpose of Meereen: the main story is in Westeros, and Essos is just a layover on the way over.  Hizdhar, the Green Grace, etc. are going to exit the story (whether alive or dead) before all the living POV characters in Essos leave for Westeros by the end of TWOW, so ultimately they don't matter.

My "problem" with the characters in Slavers Bay isn't with the villains lacking depth, but all characters except the POV characters lacking depth.  However, I don't think that is really a problem because I think it is quite intentional.  In the beginning of AGOT, the hill tribes of the Vale and the "Wildlings" north of the Wall were portrayed in a similar manner: barbaric backward savages with little depth to them, because that's how the rest of Westeros sees them.  Then we see the hill tribes through perspective of Tyrion (a self-absorbed narcissist), and they remain portrayed that way.  We see the Wildings through the perspective of Jon (a very compassionate and empathetic character), and suddenly the Wildlings are complex people after all.  Ultimately I think the two groups are supposed to be very similar, but they are only portrayed the way the POV sees them.

Even some hardcore pure villains, such as the Roose and Ramsay, are still complex hardcore pure villains through Theon's viewpoint.  None of the villains (or non-villains) in Essos are complex.  Is that because George Martin is not invested in them because they are just a stop on the way to Westeros?  Maybe, but I don't think so.  I'm not trying to turn this thread into something it's not meant to be, but I think the Dothraki, freedmen, and slavers alike are not portrayed with much depth because they are viewed as inferior subjects rather than complex people... with the whole "dragons don't mate with sheep" superior blood mindset.

Dany's chapters in ADWD are some of my favorite chapters in the entire series (I know that's not a popular opinion), but for different reasons than unraveling the mystery of the Harpy's identity.  Meereen is not about plot development but Dany's character development, and I think it's done perfectly.  Her apparent lack of understanding toward the other characters is part of the progression of where I think Dany's character and story are going.

[FictionIsntReal]

There is a general problem with a lack of interesting characters in Essos. Dany was our only POV there until ADwD, and even setting aside POVs the Essossi were more thinly characterized than the wildlings (the relative cultural outsiders in Westeros that Jon comes to lead). Mance Rayder represents a genuine threat to the Wall who would be expected to win if Stannis hadn't shown up, but the rotating command of the slaver army both removes any sense of personality at its head and marks them as so incompetent there's no way they could win. The Battle of the Blackwater had Davos as a POV on the Stannis side (initially), Tyrion as a sympathetic protagonist on the villainous Lannister side, and Sansa as a Lannister hostage who is still given reason to fear a victory for Stannis. For Meereen there's both Barristan & Victarion on the pro-Dany side, while Tyrion gets the mercenaries he's with to switch sides. It would be more dramatically impactful if Victarion showed up and provided a surprise victory in the battle, or if the slavers initially seemed to have an advantage until their betrayal by their mercenaries, but here it's overdetermined and there's no surprise at all.

I think the bigger issue is that GRRM just hadn't initially planned on Dany being in Essos for this long while the civil war in Westeros raged, so he's essentially had her spinning her wheels amongst uninteresting people she's expected to leave when she fulfills her actual narrative purpose.

[Lady Stonehearts Simp]

Yes, I enjoyed Dany’s chapters in the first 3 books well enough, but her chapters in Dance are dull as dirt. On the level of Bran’s IMO, without the benefit of lore dumping. I’d rather drag my balls across a table of salt, lemon juice, and broken glass then read her chapters in Dance again

[SeanF]

The slavers in ASOS are gross and perverted, without a single redeeming feature.

There is more depth to them in ADWD.  Xaro puts the case for slavery about as effectively as anyone can.  The Green Grace and Hizdahr are a lot more interesting than their Astapori or Yunkish counterparts. Admittedly, the Yunkish that Tyrion encounters are ridiculous.

Yet Dany’s chapters in ASOS are much more fun than in ADWD, where they are a hard slog.  Her story only comes alive at Daznak’s Pit (I expect it will be great in TWOW).

We have seven chapters where Dany does not do very much, and seems strangely passive in the face of slaver aggression.  It’s this strange passivity that makes her story drag, rather than lack of depth among her enemies.

[astarkchoice]

The issue with it is if in recall geoge wrote the slavers from danys perspective to be strange/alien including their names.we dont get a pov on them as they as supposed to be odd , danys pov storywise  is served by her being a fish out of water on top of all the other issues she wrestles with.

 

Its a shame as essos is just as rich for storytelling as westeros if not  more so

As for the slavers as villans  they really do start to flesh out as more of a real interesting  culture in mereen.They do seem extremely evil  from our perspective but  its not unrealistic .....as we well  know in real life(history and present) that the  sociopathic treatment of slaves as non humans can be widespread, the slavers do not see anything wrong with what they are doing. Just as with the u.s deep south they even see the removal of their 'property' as the real evil, like tyrannical theft.

As for them as threats/villians id say they come across as decently competent . If we look at her campaign.

Astopor: a lot has been made of the slavers trust here , why didnt they see this  comming etc but the modern equivalent would be some middle class accounatant suddenly.sucker punching a drug dealer, killing him with his own gun then abandoning a comfortable middle class life to be a dealer!! Yes it could easily occur but obviously there would be consequences.

Her battle of yunkai the bad guys seem to apply a sensible battle plan partly ruined by one characrer falling in love with dany.

1st siege of mereeen-dany and co's attack is well planned here as is the slavers resistance, the plot armour/massive shot of luck applies here where dany happens to have a man who can lead them.through mereens sewers to rally an uprising behind the walls.

 

2nd siege: the slavers seem.incompetent here but we must remember between the  insurgency, dany going missing and dragons imprisoned  it would seem the war is a foregone conclusion given the force mismatch hence the arrognannt rotating officer system and extravagent niche troops , they seemingly have it  all won!!!!

 

[Lord Varys]

The villains in Essos have not really less depth than the Westerosi villains. Tywin is a complex character ... but Walder Frey, Roose Bolton, and Ramsay Snow are caricatures. Euron Greyjoy and Gregor Clegane, too. Also, of course, most of the ridiculous henchmen and cronies we get - the Bloody Mummers, especially Vargo Hoat himself, Ramsay's boys.

The villains we see in ASoS don't have much screentime, but Reznak, Hizdahr, Galazza Galare, Yezzan zo Qagaz, and some other folks in ADwD do have some substance.

[BalerionTheCat]

I believe the Essos storyline is as complex as Westeros'. Except most characters are only seen from Dany POV. But they are deceiving her. Or she is not very perceptive, focused as she is en her goals. There is a GOT in Meereen. Everyone, the Houses, the Graces, the shavepates, the slaves and slavers. All know Dany will leave. They position themselves to occupy the power vacuum when it will happen. They are playing her as a pawn...

Maybe readers are just seeing the slaving and nothing else. I would compare the slavery to the ruthless rule of men like Tywin or the Boltons. Or the forced oaths of the NW. I would say I don't see that much of a difference.

[Nevets]

I don't think anybody from Meereen is very well developed.  I could probably tell you more about, say, Missandei, than I could about Hizdar, Shavepate, Green Grace, and Reznak - combined.  And they are the most prominent people from Meereen.  They are basically cardboard cutouts with names and titles.  The Great Masters are even less developed.

Whether that is a good thing or not is a good question.  I happen to think Slavers Bay is something of a detour and have a hard time really caring about it.  It seems like an entirely separate story from the main story in Westeros.  Of course, your mileage may vary.

[astarkchoice]

Another factor to consider is a mereen pov with a  local would probably.give enough extra depth and details to figure out who the harpy is.

[GZ Bloodraven]

The Essos storyline would be much more interesting if there were depth to the non-Dany-team characters (though I do find it interesting currently, but more depth is never a bad thing). The villains for AGoT was Viserys and then Mirri, ACoK has Pyat Pree and the warlocks, ASoS has Astapor with Kraznys and the four Grazdans, Yunkai with...just Grazdan named?...and the Great Masters of Meereen. ADwD has the nameless Sons of the Harpy, Yurkhaz, Yezzan, Malazza, Paezhar, Chezdhar, Maexon, Grazdhan, Ghazdor, Morghaz, Gorzhak, Faezhar, Charioteer, Beastmaster, and Perfumed Hero. Of these, Viserys and Mirri have the most depth I'd say, I would call them both genuinely some of the best antagonists in the series (especially Mirri), and the others are seriously crippled as antagonists because of their lack of depth. If Galazza Galare and Hizdahr end up being behind the Sons of the Harpy, that would be interesting, but it would have taken 3 books to get a real central antagonist in Meereen. 

But the point that these chapters aren't about Daenerys' conflict with individuals but more with the conflict with herself, her advisers, and with the system she's attempting to abolish is a good point. However it would have been nice to learn more about these really one-dimensional slaver characters, as well as the Qarth warlocks. 

[James Fenimore Cooper XXII]

The Essos storylines are the most interesting to me because Daenerys and the dragons are there.  The arrival of Ser Barristan and Tyrion Lannister make those chapters the highlights of the novels.

The slavers and the Easterners do have a lot of depth.  We know their history and we have met very, very compelling characters in the Shavepate, Reznak, Yezzan, Strong Belwas, Hizdahr, and the Green Grace.  The depth is there.  The villains who do not have any depth are the Others.  The Others have none when it comes to depth.  But we already know the real villains in Westeros, the Starks.  You are partly right because the Slavers do not have the depth of the Starks when it comes to villainy.  We will know their motivations when the Starks are finally revealed as the villains in Westeros. 

[Lady Stonehearts Simp]

2 hours ago, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

The Essos storylines are the most interesting to me because Daenerys and the dragons are there.  The arrival of Ser Barristan and Tyrion Lannister make those chapters the highlights of the novels.

The slavers and the Easterners do have a lot of depth.  We know their history and we have met very, very compelling characters in the Shavepate, Reznak, Yezzan, Strong Belwas, Hizdahr, and the Green Grace.  The depth is there.  The villains who do not have any depth are the Others.  The Others have none when it comes to depth.  But we already know the real villains in Westeros, the Starks.  You are partly right because the Slavers do not have the depth of the Starks when it comes to villainy.  We will know their motivations when the Starks are finally revealed as the villains in Westeros. 

Jesus fucking Christ just say you haven’t read the books.

[Craving Peaches]

3 hours ago, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

You are partly right because the Slavers do not have the depth of the Starks when it comes to villainy.

What? Are you seriously claiming the Starks are more villainous than the Slavers? I don't really know why I'm surprised anymore, but come on. You don't actually believe that, do you?

[sweetsunray]

On 3/25/2023 at 4:49 PM, SeanF said:

We have seven chapters where Dany does not do very much, and seems strangely passive in the face of slaver aggression.  It’s this strange passivity that makes her story drag, rather than lack of depth among her enemies.

Dany tries to be as un-dragonlike as she can be in Meereen. On the one hand there's the locking up of the dragons, but also her wearing a tokar that is extremely restrictive in how much you can move. Dragons need freedom to grow and be themselves, no walls, no chains. It's not just true for the beasts, but for Dany as well. Put her in leather on a horse a whip in hand (tail) on grasslands and she is a free dragon. Lock her up behind walls and put her in a tokar, and she's "stifled". So, much that she is scared of the army of circus freaks and feels she must make peace with them.

Daznak's pit represents the ultimate choice: the annihilation of her dragon identity and self sacrifice if she were to allow her dragon to be killed and would have eaten the poisoned locusts herself (and Belwas represents her "dragon belly"). This she cannot do, and she reclaims herself when flying off on Drogon. 

The pity for Dany is that the IT is no less restrictive.

[SeanF]

6 hours ago, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

The Essos storylines are the most interesting to me because Daenerys and the dragons are there.  The arrival of Ser Barristan and Tyrion Lannister make those chapters the highlights of the novels.

The slavers and the Easterners do have a lot of depth.  We know their history and we have met very, very compelling characters in the Shavepate, Reznak, Yezzan, Strong Belwas, Hizdahr, and the Green Grace.  The depth is there.  The villains who do not have any depth are the Others.  The Others have none when it comes to depth.  But we already know the real villains in Westeros, the Starks.  You are partly right because the Slavers do not have the depth of the Starks when it comes to villainy.  We will know their motivations when the Starks are finally revealed as the villains in Westeros. 

Nice one.

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, sweetsunray said:

Dany tries to be as un-dragonlike as she can be in Meereen. On the one hand there's the locking up of the dragons, but also her wearing a tokar that is extremely restrictive in how much you can move. Dragons need freedom to grow and be themselves, no walls, no chains. It's not just true for the beasts, but for Dany as well. Put her in leather on a horse a whip in hand (tail) on grasslands and she is a free dragon. Lock her up behind walls and put her in a tokar, and she's "stifled". So, much that she is scared of the army of circus freaks and feels she must make peace with them.

Daznak's pit represents the ultimate choice: the annihilation of her dragon identity and self sacrifice if she were to allow her dragon to be killed and would have eaten the poisoned locusts herself (and Belwas represents her "dragon belly"). This she cannot do, and she reclaims herself when flying off on Drogon. 

The pity for Dany is that the IT is no less restrictive.

That is so much better an interpretation of Daznak’s Pit than seeing it as a choice between peace (good) and war (bad).

[astarkchoice]

12 hours ago, GZ Bloodraven said:

The Essos storyline would be much more interesting if there were depth to the non-Dany-team characters (though I do find it interesting currently, but more depth is never a bad thing). The villains for AGoT was Viserys and then Mirri, ACoK has Pyat Pree and the warlocks, ASoS has Astapor with Kraznys and the four Grazdans, Yunkai with...just Grazdan named?...and the Great Masters of Meereen. ADwD has the nameless Sons of the Harpy, Yurkhaz, Yezzan, Malazza, Paezhar, Chezdhar, Maexon, Grazdhan, Ghazdor, Morghaz, Gorzhak, Faezhar, Charioteer, Beastmaster, and Perfumed Hero. Of these, Viserys and Mirri have the most depth I'd say, I would call them both genuinely some of the best antagonists in the series (especially Mirri), and the others are seriously crippled as antagonists because of their lack of depth. If Galazza Galare and Hizdahr end up being behind the Sons of the Harpy, that would be interesting, but it would have taken 3 books to get a real central antagonist in Meereen. 

But the point that these chapters aren't about Daenerys' conflict with individuals but more with the conflict with herself, her advisers, and with the system she's attempting to abolish is a good point. However it would have been nice to learn more about these really one-dimensional slaver characters, as well as the Qarth warlocks. 

Yes agree id love to learn more of the essos cultures.

The warlocks history for example are they responsible.for the dead dragon outside quarths wastelands?  , a description of the naval forces that allow them to dominate the straights and thus grow rich ,the interactions of the major council members,  any more  of the lore of their history , how they view westeros etc.

Id wanna see more of the ghiscari too. Much more about the seemingly powerful.new ghis , a variance of cultures of some kind  in the 3 cities we see to explain the 3 niches (gladiator pits, unsullied and bed slaves), their own version of the wars vs valyria  and the sanori, maybe some kind of explanation of how the dothraki were 'tamed' from enemy to essential cog in the slave empire!

We see the slave masters as weak and yet onzak zo phal rides out and is clearly trained to battle as heavy cavalry and then once his horse is injured he gets up to cross swords with strong belwas....so the question remains is there some martial culture within the ghiscari masters we dont see?, a 'knight' like minority who may in old times have commanded the legions and/or maybe a small minority train and fight in the pits themselves...the offering of blood to their gods has to have come from somewhere! Its have been nice for grmm to clear this up

The dothraki could be expanded upon too.we know many go and mix among the free cities wearing rich fabrics and sweet  perfumes, this seems like it could be expanded upon like a comming of age ritual (sorta lile the amish) the similarities between them and the lamb men seems to indicate common roots maybe with a pacifist peaceful  religion being the difference, also otd be interesting to know their pov on say the jogos nhai!

Its a pity as id say none of this will be fleshed out in the last 2 books.

[Terrorthatflapsinthenight9]

Any story becomes more interesting if it has good villains. For AGOT Viserys had the virtue of being an entertaining character, and was more pathetic once you look at his backstory and mental health and his one moment of short-lived joy and relief before Drogo kills, while Mirri Maz Durr was a complex anti-villain who had great reasons to hate Daenerys and Drogo. 

The antagonists of Qarth, Astapor, Yunkai and Meereen are neither very interesting nor entertaining in any way.

[SeanF]

6 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

What? Are you seriously claiming the Starks are more villainous than the Slavers? I don't really know why I'm surprised anymore, but come on. You don't actually believe that, do you?

It makes no sense to think of the slavers as villains, but to see the Boltons, Tywin Lannister, and the Freys as noble and heroic, or vice versa.

They're all on a par with each other.  Logically, if you admire the latter, you must also admire the former.