Jump to content

The Problem with Dany


Jeff Claburn
 Share

Recommended Posts

Thank you for admitting me to the Forum!

I have been sharing my theories with close friends for more than ten years, starting with Jamie & Cersei are half-Targaryen, R+L=J, and Arya=Odysseus. Some of my theories most people agree with now, but others are still debated or haven't been discussed. For example, I think George Martin is telling the Beauty and the Beast story three successive times with Sansa, first as Sansa and Sandor, then as Sansa and Tyrion, and next it will be Sansa and Jon Snow. I have written about this theory at some length recently on three Quora Spaces I created, "A Theory of Ice and Fire" and "A Sansa Space" and "Aragorn and Rhaegar's Sons." But please, I beg you, do not bombard me with Jonsa hate. It took me five years theorizing on my own before I started looking at the forums, and more than five years after that before I finally decided this year as my New Year’s resolution to become part of the open debate. But my very first experience posting on Reddit was getting flamed out by Jonsa haters. (I should probably say that all my theories are book-based and extensively considered, though anyone is welcome to disagree with them respectfully.)

If anyone has prior posts to point me to, and ideas to share, I am currently working on a multipart series, "The Problem with Dany." My overall thesis is that Daenerys's storyline is the one aspect of ASOIAF that really has the potential to turn off large numbers of passionate book fans, divide the fandom, and even spoil the series for lots of people. No one thinks George Martin is going to tell her story in the ham-fisted way that the show did. That's not the issue. But there are really complex issues that I want to explore as to why I think George has written himself into trouble with her storyline.
 

Edited by Jeff Claburn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jeff Claburn said:

Thank you for admitting me to the Forum!

I have been sharing my theories with close friends for more than ten years, starting with Jamie & Cersei are half-Targaryen, R+L=J, and Arya=Odysseus. Some of my theories most people agree with now, but others are still debated or haven't been discussed. For example, I think George Martin is telling the Beauty and the Beast story three successive times with Sansa, first as Sansa and Sandor, then as Sansa and Tyrion, and next it will be Sansa and Jon Snow. I have written about this theory at some length recently on three Quora Spaces I created, "A Theory of Ice and Fire" and "A Sansa Space" and "Aragorn and Rhaegar's Sons." But please, I beg you, do not bombard me with Jonsa hate. It took me five years theorizing on my own before I started looking at the forums, and more than five years after that before I finally decided this year as my New Year’s resolution to become part of the open debate. But my very first experience posting on Reddit was getting flamed out by Jonsa haters. (I should probably say that all my theories are book-based and extensively considered, though anyone is welcome to disagree with them respectfully.)

If anyone has prior posts to point me to, and ideas to share, I am currently working on a multipart series, "The Problem with Dany." My overall thesis is that Daenerys's storyline is the one aspect of ASOIAF that really has the potential to turn off large numbers of passionate book fans, divide the fandom, and even spoil the series for lots of people. No one thinks George Martin is going to tell her story in the ham-fisted way that the show did. That's not the issue. But there are really complex issues that I want to explore as to why I think George has written himself into trouble with her storyline.
 

Dany’s story line is what makes the series enjoyable for me. The problem for you is the enjoyment for many of us who are Dany fans. I would never have gotten through the first book if it was only about the dreadful Starks.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think most people are capable of appreciating stories that don't go the way they expected/wanted it to go, as long as the story is well written.  So far, I think the only legitimate complaint that could be held against Martin is the bloat.  If we do get the rest of Dany's story, I expect it will be a much more convincing journey than what other media may have written.  It won't be a late game sudden flip.  

I'm obviously a big Jon Snow fan.  I'm also a big Sam and Stannis fan.  While I'm far less certain on where the story is going with Jon or Sam, I think I have a good idea of the general direction of Stannis's story.  If Martin takes it a different way, I'm still going to enjoy it as long as he doesn't pull a BS reversal. It just needs to be consistent with the world and established characters, with any changes making sense.  He's been fantastic in that so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

Dany’s story line is what makes the series enjoyable for me. The problem for you is the enjoyment for many of us who are Dany fans. I would never have gotten through the first book if it was only about the dreadful Starks.  

Same for me and Daenerys

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you misunderstand. I had written a much longer post starting to explain the issue but my computer froze and it got lost when I had to go pick up my kids. By the problem with Dany I don't the problem with her, I mean the problems with her story line.

I read that Martin had won the Nebula Award for "Blood of the Dragon"--all Dany's collected chapters in a Game of Thrones--and so that is the first thing I read. Dany for me has always been the heart and soul of the story. She is the one who grew up with an abusive older brother, and no parents, who was sold into marital slavery at age 13 in a frankly horrific culture. Yet she has shown herself to be the most compassionate person in the story.

The problem with Dany is that I then read that George Martin says that the fan theorist who gets it is the one who wrote about how Dany learned all the wrong lessons in Meeren because the peace was working and she gave up on it. That line of analysis does seem to lead toward what happened in the TV show.

But that is not the story I read. There was no working peace in Meeren. Hizdar ordered her dragon (and baby) Drogon to be killed without asking her, which was tantamount to treason and a direct negation of her authority and her power based. And for nothing by Meerenese standards: Martin showed us that the Meerense love follies and planned to set lions on Tyrion and Penny while they were performing, until Dany stopped it. Martin showed us that the Meerenese like to tie up slave children coated in honey and blood and milk to see which of them a bear will eat as spectacle. Then a boar mortally wounds a female gladiator--right after an apparent assasination attempt on the queen in front of Hizdar, and Hizdar's response is to ignore his Queen and order Dany's dragon to be killed. How is this the peace working? There is no way Dany or her people could possibly allow Hizdar to stay in power or share authority with him after that. Yet I read this long Reddit post that Dany was the one in the wrong here and that George Martin says that reddit post got it right!

Another problem with Dany: We know that the dragons are necessary to save all humanity from the Others. We've always known that. We also know that Robert Baratheon has been a truly terrible, selfish king who bankrupted a wealthy realm after he killed Dany's family. We know the Lannisters have since taken over and Tywin and Joffrey and Cersei are all monsters, and now Cersei is destroying the country. So how is it bad for Dany to protect the dragons that we know are necessary to save the world as well as to remove the coterie that took over the realm and has run it horribly into the ground? Yet when I try to say positive things about Dany on Reddit and Quora, what I have run into is all these people who say Robb was great for rebelling against the Lannisters while Dany is evil for plotting to rebel against them, for hatching and not killing her dragons, for liberating all the slaves in Slavor's Bay (because it is bloody and destabalizing to do so).

Another problem with Dany: As far as I can tell, Cersei is an accumulation of every old trope and calumny used against intelligent and powerful women who have been involved in politics or government for 2,000 years. Livia exerted some influence on her husband Augustus, so Roman historians fifty years later accused her of poisoning something like 20 different people and ruining the early Roman Republic. They blamed Livia for every mistake actually made by Augustus and Tiberius and other men! Women who would have a role in government, right up to the present moment, have been accused of being conniving plotters with evil schemes (like Hillary Clinton). Of only caring about their own kids and not the welfare of the realm (another accusation lodged at Livia and so many ever since). Of being too emotional to make good decisions or rational judgements or stick to courses of action. Of being cruel and petty. Of listening to cute younger handsome men and ignoring wise old men. Of cheating on their husbands and partners and sleeping with every handsome man at court. All of these calumnies against women and more, Cersei actually does.

So I took it all along we were setting up a contrast where Cersei shows the false image but Dany shows how strong, assertive, intelligent women really can rule and do so more compassionately and carefully than so many overly warlike and ego-obsessed and closed minded male rulers and politicians. If so, I have been down with that story and I thought I was enjoying it. Then we got what happened in the show. But it's not just that the show was badly written, then all these other theorists have come forward supporting the argument that Dan and Dave are getting Dany right, they just rushed things over one and half seasons that should have taken three to five. And the things I have read, the hints from George, don't seem to be that they butchered Dany, but more along the lines that it's hard to change course in the middle of a series when you've planned things all along. In other words, that this was George's plan for Dany all along. He hated the way it happened in the show, but not that it happened, only the way it was done.

This is the problem with the Dany storyline, and I apologize if I phrased it misleadingly. I love George's writing on most aspects of the story, but it seems like he has headed Dany off a cliff that really is going to be hard to escape misogyny and telling what is frankly the celebration of 2,000 years of the worst tropes rather than anything interesting or trope-shattering when it comes to her storyline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Jeff Claburn said:

The problem with Dany is that I then read that George Martin says that the fan theorist who gets it is the one who wrote about how Dany learned all the wrong lessons in Meeren because the peace was working and she gave up on it. That line of analysis does seem to lead toward what happened in the TV show.

But that is not the story I read.

Then you miscomprehended it and I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jeff Claburn Quora is a cess pit of slavery apologism.  As it's fantasy, they can say the quiet part out loud.

I've written at length that the textual evidence points to the peace with the slavers being neither just, nor real. 

It seems perverse to me, to detail at length, the horrors of both slavery and the slave trade; to introduce (in the Sons of the Harpy) the local equivalent of the first KKK; to establish that the slavers will inflict unrestrained savagery on the freedmen at Astapor  and bring dysentry to Meereen;  to show the Slavers striving, at every turn, to violate the terms of the peace (by trying to murder Penny and Tyrion, by hosting a slave market outside the city, and by trying to kill the dragons);  to portray the freedmen as rejecting the very notion of peace with the slavers and the Widow on the Waterfront begging for the Volantene slaves to be freed;  to have a vast armada sailing to Slavers bay to crush free Meereen...

and then to argue, it's all Dany's fault that this wonderful peace deal broke down. Flying Drogon out of the Pit may symbolically, amount to rejection of the compromises she had to make, but it is an act that saved lives, not an act of war.

Which is why, I don't think that Martin did argue such a thing (notwithstanding Adam Feldman).  When he said "he gets it", he meant he got it thematically, not that he got he plot points right.

Edited by SeanF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Lady Stonehearts Simp said:

My issues with Daenerys’ story is that I honestly don’t care. Until she makes it to Westeros, it’ll never really grab me. 

I'm kind of in the same boat? I enjoy her POVs and I think she's a sweet character who has, of course, achieved admirable feats. But at the same time I wouldn't care if her or even Jon died, like permanently. I guess I just don't connect with them like I do other characters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Ser Arthurs Dawn said:

But at the same time I wouldn't care if her or even Jon died

:excl:

It was smooth sailing until this revelation! What did Jonno do?

49 minutes ago, Ser Arthurs Dawn said:

I guess I just don't connect with them like I do other characters.

Hmm... I can connect with Jon, and Daenerys quite a bit (until some of the Valyrian supremacist stuff she likely learned from Viserys crops up).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SeanF said:

Quora is a cess pit of slavery apologism.

Quora should just be avoided at all costs to be honest. You can claim your job is whatever you want so there are tons of supposed CEOs everywhere and they all are just dying to share their 'special political views'...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Dany’s arc, but it largely depends on which book. For example she’s awesome in ASOS, but beyond boring in ADWD, IMO.

She was awesome when she was making stuff happen and seemed to spend most of ADWD letting others walk over her. She basically feels like a hostage during the slave pit chapter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The really interesting thing about great characters is that they will surprise you.  Martin is a great story teller.  Even if all the worst theories, fan fiction and show themes find their way into ASOIAF I firmly believe Martin will make them palatable and logical.  I would have no problem with Dany ending up hero or villain because Martin has already set the ground work for her end game.  That fact will eliminate whatever distaste or dissatisfaction readers have with ending.  We will understand much more through Martin's carefully chosen words.  Whatever he does with Dany will make sense.  

The best part of belonging to a community is the sharing of information and ideas.  I tried to figure it all out by myself but the story is beyond my complete comprehension on levels.  Having many people to discuss with or even just read analysis from often illuminates story components you may miss by yourself.  It's not like ASOIAF is an easy story to digest 100% of the time. It's just fascinating to see how divergent people's ideas are and how they reach their conclusions.  

Dany is a Targaryen and a young disenfranchised one at that.  Let's see which side of the coin lands.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

:excl:

It was smooth sailing until this revelation! What did Jonno do?

Lol he did absolutely nothing wrong, maybe I'm just a psychopath. I love his storyline at the wall but I'm emotionally numb towards him most of the time. I have no explanation for it :(

5 minutes ago, Curled Finger said:

I would have no problem with Dany ending up hero or villain because Martin has already set the ground work for her end game.

Dany is a Targaryen and a young disenfranchised one at that.  Let's see which side of the coin lands.  

Oh, same here. The only reason I lean more towards villain arc is because it would be more entertaining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ser Arthurs Dawn said:

Lol he did absolutely nothing wrong, maybe I'm just a psychopath. I love his storyline at the wall but I'm emotionally numb towards him most of the time. I have no explanation for it :(

Well to be fair there are some characters I am emotionally numb to as well. And some for whom I feel glee whenever something bad happens to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Well to be fair there are some characters I am emotionally numb to as well. And some for whom I feel glee whenever something bad happens to them.

Ooh slide into my DMs and spill the tea. Honestly, if one of those people is who I think they are, I agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

Quora should just be avoided at all costs to be honest. You can claim your job is whatever you want so there are tons of supposed CEOs everywhere and they all are just dying to share their 'special political views'...

I expect most of the pro-slavery stuff comes from the incels, who yearn for an imaginary past when you could own a beautiful woman as your sex slave.  Admittedly, some billionaires come over as being incels.

Edited by SeanF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think possibly a trap you are falling into is assuming that because Dany is not the cliche-driven disaster that Cersei is, she will therefore necessarily be as one-dimensionally competent as Cersei is incompetent. A more realistic depiction of a strong woman is still a flawed human being…just nowhere near as flawed as Cersei. I guess what I’m saying is that within your argument, the problem with Dany is really a problem with Cersei.

 

For all the criticism the show rightfully gets, they obviously felt that Cersei needed to be more well rounded to be credible, and for most of the show they managed that. Book Cersei is formidable before we get inside her head, buffoonery to the point of satire afterwards, and you could rightfully say that’s not one of George’s better moments. 
 

edit: unless comedy is the central thrust of her arc, which I’ve heard suggested. It’s kindof how I read her now, light/dark comedy peppered with all kinds of important information she misses or misunderstands. 

Edited by James Arryn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...