The problem making Daenerys Stormborn into Elric 'Stormbringer'

[Jeff Claburn]

What caused Dany to lose her sanity in the show?

Bad writing.

If George Martin intends for this to happen in the books—and that’s a big if—then he almost certainly has in mind that the Targaryen dragons are like the demon runeswords used by royal Melnibone in the classic fantasy series by Michael Morecock, Elric of Melnibone. They slowly transform the personality of their wielder as they are possessed and used in the tradition of the One Ring (but with no Sauron).

The Melnibone

The Targaryen’s and Valyrian’s are clearly inspired by the Melnibone, who live on their own island, ride dragons, use magic, and have longer lives than normal human beings. They are a debauched ancient race who worship the Lords of Chaos and make widespread and horrific use of human slaves, similar to how the Freehold of Valyria ran a massive slave empire that included forcing slaves to work in horrific conditions in their geothermal mines and to serve as test subjects for magical experiments.

Elric of Melnibone was born an albino with pale white hair and white skin, similar to the platinum-blonde hair that George Martin has given to the Targaryen’s. But unlike the other members of his race, he has a conscience that makes him value human lives and not want to use and abuse slaves. Elric’s conscience is similar to how Daenerys has great empathy for slaves, children, and common folk and tries to protect and free them wherever she goes. In her time with the Dothraki, she was Khal Drogo’s conscience pushing him to prohibit the raping of women. In her time on Slaver’s Bay, she decides to break the wheel of slavery throughout the world.

The Runeswords of the Royal Melnibone

But Elric’s curse is his runesword, Stormbringer. The runeswords were forged from demons in order to allow royal Melnibone to defeat the Gods of Chaos who are a threat to the entire Universe. Nonetheless, they are still evil. Elric gets forced into wielding Stormbringer to defend himself against his evil cousin who is wielding its sister blade and tries to kill Elric. Elric is merciful and spares his cousin, just as Daenerys is merciful. But he finds that once he has the sword he can’t get rid of it. This is similar to Dany chaining up her dragons but being unable to chain up Drogon and having Quentin Martell release the other two despite her best intentions.

Stormbringer makes Elric powerful. Elric is born with medical conditions that make him weak unless he consumes magical herbs and potions regularly. Stormbringer frees him from dependence on these “drugs” to remain healthy and strong. It makes him powerful in battle, able to defeat magical beasts. Indeed, every time Elric kills a magical beast or person with Stormbringer, the sword sucks their soul and Elric gets stronger and more powerful. But Stormbringer gives Elric bloodlust. The sword craves for blood and souls and it makes Elric crave battle as well. Sometimes the sword will fly out of his hand to kill people that Elric wishes to spare. The longer he uses the sword, the more violent and unstable Elric gradually becomes.

The Targaryens and their Dragons

George Martin’s idea seems to be that Targaryen’s have a magical connection with dragons similar to how the Starks have a magical connection with wolves. But the influence goes both ways. Targaryens can ride and control dragons because of their magical blood bond. But riding and controlling dragons also influences Targaryens to take on the personalities of dragons.

You see this in the backstory character arc we hear for Mad King Aerys. He was charming and popular when young, if arrogant, something like Jamie Lannister. As he grew older, he started to become obsessed with gold and kept increasing taxes on the realm so as to accumulate a horde of gold in the royal treasury, similar to a dragon’s horde. This lead Denys Darklyn, Lord of Duskendale, to kidnap and imprison him, demanding that he agree to permanently roll back taxes as the condition for his release. Instead, Ser Barristan Selmy of the Kings Guard managed to scale the castle walls, sneak in and rescue King Aerys. But after that he was never the same. He became paranoid, violent, and obsessed with fire. He grew his nails long into claws. He wanted to eat burnt flesh as his primary diet and enjoyed seeing his enemies burned alive. He had been becoming somewhat more dragon-like over the course of his life, but the trauma at Duskendale sent him over the edge to being more dragon than human in personality.

Now that Dany is bonded with Drogon and riding him—and captive of the Dothraki—the idea seems to be that she too is going to start to slowly have this transformation. Moreover, if the Dothraki chain her up and treat her badly on the trip back to Vos Dothrak—which seems likely—she will be traumatized like the Mad King, start to become paranoid and fearful of being chained up again, and desireous of burning her captors in order to get freedom, which will probably happen with Drogon burning the khals to free her.

The dragons are effectively Lightbringer to Dany as Stormbringer was to Elric. The more she is forced by circumstances to fly them in battle, the idea seems to be the more they are going to infect her with bloodlust and firelust. Eventually, in Elric’s story, the Lords of Chaos come in an attempt to take over and destroy the world, similar to the Others. Elric is able to use Stormbringer and give several of its twinblades to his relatives to defeat, kill, and utterly destroy these Chaos Lords. So it will be with Dany and the Others. But the process leaves Elric scarred and transformed in character. Elric is a Frodo that doesn’t get to go to Valinor across the sea and heal his wounds; instead, Stormbringer flies from his hand and kills him on the last page of the story.

Should Daenerys Stormborn be Elric 'Stormbringer'?

I for one hope that George Martin changes his mind and finds a more unique storyline for Dany that is not a redux of Elric of Melnibone’s story! This arc for a fantasy hero becoming a dark antihero works much worse in the case of Dany because she was raised without mother or father by an abusive older brother and sold into marital slavery against her will at age 13. Elric by contrast grew up in the capital as the heir to the empire and inherited his throne. Elric was much more the master of his own fate. Indeed, one of the Elric novels is entitled Sailor on the Seas of Fate. Elric was the ultimate entitled royal scion who sacrificed himself for the greater good, becoming a tragic anti-hero, but got to enjoy so many benefits of privilege along the way, as the emperor of the most powerful kingdom in the world. He even had the most gorgeous and powerful woman in Melnibone, his cousin, completely dedicated to him. Elric is not Dany—a champion for readers who grew up physically and sexually abused, and for women who grew up with dominating males in their family, and for women trying to break into professions dominated by men.

Furthermore, Cersei Lannister—especially in her many chapters in A Feast for Crows—has already embodied the fairy tale/fantasy archetype(s) of the Evil Queen (Snow White) and the mistreated young woman who becomes the Wicked Witch (Maleficent, Wicked). If that wasn’t enough, we’ve also gotten the Unfaithful Queen who helps murder her husband (Clytemnestra in Agamemnon, Gertrude in Hamlet)—in the form of the Lysa Arryn poising Robert Arryn and Cersei ordering Robert drugged on the boar hunt to get him killed. Add in the Medea figure—the Scorned Wife who turns Child Killer—in the form of Cersei ordering Robert’s bastards killed and Lysa almost throwing Sansa out the moon door. These wicked witch/queen tropes are all rather tired to begin with. Do we really need them to repeat yet again at the end of the story?

 

We have also gotten to see Cersei, Lysa, and for some Catelyn as embodiments of the historical queen figure whom male historians (parroting popular conspiracy theories) blamed for everything that went wrong in their countries. For example, Catherine De Medici who became Queen Dowager in France and Livia who the Roman historians preposterously accused of poisoning a dozen better men to put her son Tiberius in the emperor's chair (when it was really just Augustus naming the most successful living Roman general as his heir for the third time). In our story, Cat and Lysa start a civil war which Ned has already started preparing for just a little too soon (by arresting and putting Tyrion on trial), leading to Ned’s death as well as Robb’s and so many others. Then Cersei is just a terrible queen when she gains power, both for the realm and the Lannister’s.

I have always argued that Dany can’t have the same end as the show because George Martin is simply not that sexist a writer, when it comes to it. The theme of this fantasy epic can’t be women are too emotional to lead—and when they try, they ruin everything! I just don’t believe that’s the story George Martin wants to tell.

Rushed Ending or Bad Ending?

The biggest problem with the show is that Dan and Dave did not want to do more than seven seasons of the show, and only begrudgingly did an eighth. George Martin by contrast wanted the show to run for 12–13 seasons and begged Dan & Dave as well as HBO for a minimum of ten seasons in order to be able to complete the story properly. The rushed ending left no time to show a slow, gradual change in Dany’s personality brought on by circumstances beyond her control, as happened to Elric in the later part of his story. Instead of her being a tragic hero sacrificing herself and her soul to save humanity, Dan and Dave made her suddenly turn into a psychopath. It simply wasn’t explained. Nor it is a satisfying end for her character arc in any case.

[Green Stag]

Welcome,

I'm not fully certain, but discussion of the show seems to be mostly verboten on this particular forum.

I agree that Targ and Melnibonean have considerable similarities, and the author very likely drew on them for some inspiration.  Your theory is that the dragons and the black swords caused the madness, yes ?  However, there are some problems with this  theory, both with the dragons and with Stormbringer causing madness.

Elric showed some issues with madness before he ever took Stormbringer (IMO),  even more so for Yyrkoon who took the black sword Mourneblade.  Similarly, Aerys never had a dragon, he went mad for other reasons - which may include being drugged / poisoned by Varys (IIRC, it is mentioned that Aerys only became REALLY bad after Varys showed up at court).  Jaehaerys rode a dragon for a long time and showed no indication of madness, Daemon and Aemond were always a little off in a way, but having, flying using a dragon for destruction didn't seem to make either one outright mad like Aerys.

IF Dany goes mad, it will likely be for other reasons I believe, nothing to do with her dragons.

Lastly, there alread seems to be a likely Elric pastiche in the story in form Brynden Rivers, and albino Targaryen Great Bastard, rumored sorcerer, carried a "magic sword" (Darksister), and was rumored to have a rivalry with his brother over the love of his half sister (similar to some the rivalry between Elric and Yyrkoon)

[maesternewton]

A very insightful read, if I should say so myself. Especially for someone who has never read Stormbringer.

The only question I have after reading it, is why would Daenerys be more affected by her dragons than any other Targaryen we have seen before her?

Neither, Jaehaerys, Aemon, Baelon, Aegon the Conqueror or even Maegor are noted nor implied to be affected by their dragons to such a dragon that they take on their traits.

Sort of unrelated, that sounds suspiciously similar to Skinchanging, since we know if you Skinchange into an animal for too long, you eventually take on it's traits.

[Lady Stonehearts Simp]

I think the “madness” the dragons bring are simply overconfidence and arrogance. And Daenerys does have faint traces of arrogance about her family in her.

[Darth Sidious]

Yes, the Targaryens have bonds with their dragons but there has been no evidence that the dragons influence their humans. The Targaryens are the most important and most studied family in the story and we have seen no instances of Dragonriders becoming more savage because of the bond. Let’s take Rhaenys, Visenya, and Aegon for example. They were a lot less violent than the lords they conquered. The Targaryens were very measured and appropriate when they responded to threats and violence. 

The Starks and their wolves are another matter. Time and pages of the story have shown that the wolfbond cause the Starks to become more violent and more primal. The wolfbond is a mind bond as well as an emotional bond that travels in both directions. Rickon’s growing savageness and increasingly volatile moods is the perfect example. 

[csuszka1948]

I think there is a good explanation why the showrunners made Dany 'mad': they knew that Bran is going to end up King, and wanted to eliminate both Dany and Jon as potential candidates.

In the books, we see the characters' inner thoughts and why Jon and/or Dany could possibly decide to reject the Throne, but the show we don't.  book!Dany isn't obsessed with taking the Iron Throne, but show!Dany absolutely is.

[Jeff Claburn]

14 hours ago, csuszka1948 said:

I think there is a good explanation why the showrunners made Dany 'mad': they knew that Bran is going to end up King, and wanted to eliminate both Dany and Jon as potential candidates.

In the books, we see the characters' inner thoughts and why Jon and/or Dany could possibly decide to reject the Throne, but the show we don't.  book!Dany isn't obsessed with taking the Iron Throne, but show!Dany absolutely is.

Maybe so, but American audiences definitely did not buy it. The show was still widely popular with fans through the first four episodes of the last season, then approval for the final season plummeted to just 30% based entirely on the last two episodes which made Dany mad and evil. Dany is largely inspired by Abraham Lincoln, who based his entire political career around freezing and eventually ending slavery, and who is directly responsible for freeing tens of millions of American's ancestors from horrific conditions as slaves, and also the most lauded American leader except possibly George Washington. So it definitely went over like a lead balloon with audiences.

If that was the problem they were solving, then I would argue that the cure was much worse than the disease. I think in the books Bran won't disconnect from his humanity; instead he will walk out on Bloodraven against his wishes to go back and be a Stark, and he will fly the Green dragon to be a knight like he always wanted. He will lead the defense of Winterfell, Kings Landing, and the God's Eye from the Others and their army of the dead from dragon back while Jon and Dany are off in the far, far North with Jaime and Breanne attacking the heart of winter to stop the Others at their source. Then there will be a good story for why people like him and want him as king. As it was, Dan and Dave gave no reason why the people or the viewers should want the weirdo Bran as king compared to Dany or Jon or for that matter Sansa or Tyrion or a random lord. If they weren't going to give us the reason for Bran to be king, they should have made Jon or Danny or Jon and Danny king and queen and left Bran's kingship for the books!

It was a terrible decision to fixate on a few of Martin's end points (but not all) but refuse Martin's desperate pleas to do at least ten seasons and include certain characters like Mother Merciless and (f)Aegon that Martin believed were necessary to get there! They should have written their own endings and ignored Martins if they were doing eight seasons, or listened to the damn author and do what he asked.

Edited June 6, 2023 by Jeff Claburn

[csuszka1948]

4 hours ago, Jeff Claburn said:

Maybe so, but American audiences definitely did not buy it. The show was still widely popular with fans through the first four episodes of the last season, then approval for the final season plummeted to just 30% based entirely on the last two episodes which made Dany mad and evil. Dany is largely inspired by Abraham Lincoln, who based his entire political career around freezing and eventually ending slavery, and who is directly responsible for freeing tens of millions of American's ancestors from horrific conditions as slaves, and also the most lauded American leader except possibly George Washington. So it definitely went over like a lead balloon with audiences.

 

Isn't Dany inspired by Joan of Arc Henry Tudor, Cleopatra and Alexander the Great? That's what I remember reading somewhere.

I don't think she is a Lincoln figure, even if American audiances found him a good comparison. Lincoln decided to announce the freeing of slaves amidst a war to win them on their side, while Dany freed them because she emphatized with them and despised the slavers. Lincoln is a charismatic and progressive politician, while Dany is a revolutionary messiah.

4 hours ago, Jeff Claburn said:

If that was the problem they were solving, then I would argue that the cure was much worse than the disease. I think in the books Bran won't disconnect from his humanity; instead he will walk out on Bloodraven against his wishes to go back and be a Stark, and he will fly the Green dragon to be a knight like he always wanted. He will lead the defense of Winterfell, Kings Landing, and the God's Eye from the Others and their army of the dead from dragon back while Jon and Dany are off in the far, far North with Jaime and Breanne attacking the heart of winter to stop the Others at their source. Then there will be a good story for why people like him and want him as king. As it was, Dan and Dave gave no reason why the people or the viewers should want the weirdo Bran as king compared to Dany or Jon or for that matter Sansa or Tyrion or a random lord. If they weren't going to give us the reason for Bran to be king, they should have made Jon or Danny or Jon and Danny king and queen and left Bran's kingship for the books!

 

I agree that Bran won't lose his humanity and portraying it as such was horrible. That said, I am pretty sure Bran won't ride a dragon, riding a dragon isn't part of his story at all.

There will be a Dance of Dragons in which at least 1 (but probably 2) dragon perishes and the three heads of the dragon will be Jon and Dany riding Drogon, this post explains why: 

Regarding making Bran King, I am not sure if D&D actually wanted it or Martin required them to do that, so I excuse them for that.

I think it's right to blame them for writing terrible endings for the rest of the characters, though, this video is a good example how do make it better:

4 hours ago, Jeff Claburn said:

It was a terrible decision to fixate on a few of Martin's end points (but not all) but refuse Martin's desperate pleas to do at least ten seasons and include certain characters like Mother Merciless and (f)Aegon that Martin believed were necessary to get there! They should have written their own endings and ignored Martins if they were doing eight seasons, or listened to the damn author and do what he asked.

 

The cast of the show was already huge. Why should they introduce characters like Lady Stoneheart or Aegon when their purpose or payoff isn't clear at all in the written books? It's absurd.

If Martin wanted them to include them, he should have finished Winds of Winter before season 5. 

[The Sleeper]

I don't remember Elric being mad, though to be fair it's been twenty years since I read the books. What I do remember I'd Stormbringer hooking Elric by appearing to be the only answer to the increasingly chaotic and violent situations he found in, until only Stormbringer was left and set free. Which worked as a metaphor for the falsely necessary, ever escalating and harder to escape nature of violence. 

That very broad theme does exist in ASoIaF, not just Dany's arc, though it is presented in much more practical terms rather than the philosophical and almost metaphysical exploration of it in Moorcock's work.

That said I also don't think that Dany is mad or that Targaryen madness is a genuine story element rather than an in story affectation. What we're seeing are the effects of power and conceit, with maybe some supernatural influences.

The issue with Dany is that she doesn't need to do anything particular violent to be presented as mad or tyrannical. All she needs to do is be just like everyone else, it's the nature of the system. Only in her case it will all be twisted in a more sinister directions.

This is addressed in the story, through the  rumors circulating in Volantis about events we witnessed as readers concerning Dany and how while some have factual basis they represent gross misinterpretations and are of course aimed at vilifying Dany. 

So while I could see Dany growing more ruthless and violent, I don't really see her reaching the levels of a Tywin or a Roose. 

As for Cersei, Catelyn and Liza, well, Cersei is the logical conclusion of Tywin, Liza's agenda was far from illogical, but just appeared so from Catelyn's perspective, who didn't know she had murdered and was looking for a patsy and as for Catelyn you could argue (and I have, at great length) that she was in the right and everyone else was a dumb ass not follow her lead or at the very least stay out of her way. 

These characters are reminiscent of certain tropes and may have been, at least in part inspired by said tropes, however there are in each case subjective factors that lead to the development of their individual characters as well as an objective framework that limits and impedes the exercise of their agency, that can both be attributed to the social context they found themselves in.

That said, the King's Landing arc has been almost entirely gutted in the show along with most of the North and the Wall, along with who knows what else. Obviously the books can't end like the show. Individual plot points without context are meaningless. 

[SeanF]

@The SleeperYes, a woman who seeks the Iron Throne would already be considered unnatural in Westeros, and a woman who leads armies and rides dragons will be seen as mad/evil, to many who would consider the massacre of civilians as simply performing a soldier's duty, if done by a man.

[SeanF]

6 hours ago, Jeff Claburn said:

Maybe so, but American audiences definitely did not buy it. The show was still widely popular with fans through the first four episodes of the last season, then approval for the final season plummeted to just 30% based entirely on the last two episodes which made Dany mad and evil. Dany is largely inspired by Abraham Lincoln, who based his entire political career around freezing and eventually ending slavery, and who is directly responsible for freeing tens of millions of American's ancestors from horrific conditions as slaves, and also the most lauded American leader except possibly George Washington. So it definitely went over like a lead balloon with audiences.

 

There are Americans who detest Lincoln, some of whom would view slavery as a kind of finishing school.

Lincoln, I think, was far more of a politician than Daenerys is.

[csuszka1948]

8 hours ago, SeanF said:

There are Americans who detest Lincoln, some of whom would view slavery as a kind of finishing school.

Lincoln, I think, was far more of a politician than Daenerys is.

 

 

 

Yes, in similar argument can be made that the 'North should have allowed the South to secede and slowly dismantle slavery on their own terms' instead of fighting with them and causing endless suffering in an imperialist war.

Edited June 6, 2023 by csuszka1948

[SeanF]

8 hours ago, csuszka1948 said:

Yes, in similar argument can be made that the 'North should have allowed the South to secede and slowly dismantle slavery on their own terms' instead of fighting with them and causing endless suffering in an imperialist war.

I’ve read such arguments.  Along with claims that slaves were treated “like family”, or “beloved pets”, and that most of them loved their masters.  Only slaves of “bad character” tried to escape.  These are arguments made today, not 150 years ago.

Edited June 7, 2023 by SeanF

[Khal Rhaego Targaryen]

On 6/4/2023 at 8:59 AM, Darth Sidious said:

Yes, the Targaryens have bonds with their dragons but there has been no evidence that the dragons influence their humans. The Targaryens are the most important and most studied family in the story and we have seen no instances of Dragonriders becoming more savage because of the bond. Let’s take Rhaenys, Visenya, and Aegon for example. They were a lot less violent than the lords they conquered. The Targaryens were very measured and appropriate when they responded to threats and violence. 

The Starks and their wolves are another matter. Time and pages of the story have shown that the wolfbond cause the Starks to become more violent and more primal. The wolfbond is a mind bond as well as an emotional bond that travels in both directions. Rickon’s growing savageness and increasingly volatile moods is the perfect example. 

Precisely!

[BlackLightning]

On 6/4/2023 at 6:59 AM, Darth Sidious said:

Yes, the Targaryens have bonds with their dragons but there has been no evidence that the dragons influence their humans. The Targaryens are the most important and most studied family in the story and we have seen no instances of Dragonriders becoming more savage because of the bond. Let’s take Rhaenys, Visenya, and Aegon for example. They were a lot less violent than the lords they conquered. The Targaryens were very measured and appropriate when they responded to threats and violence. 

The Starks and their wolves are another matter. Time and pages of the story have shown that the wolfbond cause the Starks to become more violent and more primal. The wolfbond is a mind bond as well as an emotional bond that travels in both directions. Rickon’s growing savageness and increasingly volatile moods is the perfect example. 

Arya too.

Not even Jon is immune to this effect.

[Darth Sidious]

On 6/9/2023 at 3:07 PM, BlackLightning said:

Arya too.

Not even Jon is immune to this effect.

This is one way George Martin is writing a unique story. Powerful, mighty dragons are actually less savage compared to the direwolves. The dragons are way more intelligent and their long lifespans give them experience beyond direwolves. 

[Lady Stonehearts Simp]

On 6/7/2023 at 3:46 AM, Khal Rhaego Targaryen said:

Precisely!

Wrong lol.

[Jeff Claburn]

I agree with @The Sleeper and the others that say that Dany doesn't need to go down a darker path to be portrayed in incredibly dark terms, as we have already seen, by her enemies in world (not to mention the critics in our world of her breaking the wheel of slavery in Martin's world).

That's already happening, and she will probably destroy the citadel at Volantis--melting it down--to destroy the slave trade, especially since they declared war on her and sent their fleet to Slaver's Bay. Tyrion will also recommend that her forces attack the Vale and ally with Tyrion's mountain men who want to burn the Vale for how they have been treated for centuries. So again, she doesn't have to change at all for her to be portrayed as incredibly vicious and destructive and evil by her enemies.

[BlackLightning]

On 6/11/2023 at 9:46 PM, Jeff Claburn said:

I agree with @The Sleeper and the others that say that Dany doesn't need to go down a darker path to be portrayed in incredibly dark terms, as we have already seen, by her enemies in world (not to mention the critics in our world of her breaking the wheel of slavery in Martin's world).

That's already happening, and she will probably destroy the citadel at Volantis--melting it down--to destroy the slave trade, especially since they declared war on her and sent their fleet to Slaver's Bay. Tyrion will also recommend that her forces attack the Vale and ally with Tyrion's mountain men who want to burn the Vale for how they have been treated for centuries. So again, she doesn't have to change at all for her to be portrayed as incredibly vicious and destructive and evil by her enemies.

Exactly

And Volantis is an ancient city and home to at least two world wonders. The destruction of Volantis would do more than kill the slave trade...and I'm not at all saying that it's unnecessary or that it's not worth doing. It just is.

[SeanF]

On 6/12/2023 at 3:46 AM, Jeff Claburn said:

I agree with @The Sleeper and the others that say that Dany doesn't need to go down a darker path to be portrayed in incredibly dark terms, as we have already seen, by her enemies in world (not to mention the critics in our world of her breaking the wheel of slavery in Martin's world).

That's already happening, and she will probably destroy the citadel at Volantis--melting it down--to destroy the slave trade, especially since they declared war on her and sent their fleet to Slaver's Bay. Tyrion will also recommend that her forces attack the Vale and ally with Tyrion's mountain men who want to burn the Vale for how they have been treated for centuries. So again, she doesn't have to change at all for her to be portrayed as incredibly vicious and destructive and evil by her enemies.

Although slavery is condemned in Westeros, I think there would be many nobles who would be horrified by the idea of members of their own class perishing in slave uprisings.

And one can imagine nobles fleeing overseas and bearing tales of horror.