So, I hate Daenerys

[TrueMetis]

None of those quotes prove that the acts of terrorism are due to her crucifying the slavers.

They prove exactly the opposite.

Exactly who else would have cause to do what they are doing? All the freed slaves? Nope. The slavers on the other hand.

Additionally :

IIRC these are all done after she has seen the children. Had they not killed the children she would have taken the food and left. Sacked but not conquered.

Leaders - not just any slaver.

In these cities they are the same thing. The more powerful you are as a slaver the more influence you have in the city. Like trade princes in other cities but dealing in slaves.

[Daemrion]

You are wrong. Dragons did not give her any power or a Khalasar and thats a fact.

They (or rather her walking into fire and coming out unburnt) gave her loyalty of a small ragged group of people (mostly old and weak remnants and cast outs) and have put her in increasing danger ever since.

They didnt help her cross the Red wastes and survive, they didnt make any crucial decisions for her or had anyone surrender to her.

The first attendance she got in Quarth, was just a veiled attempt to take the dragons away.

Then she went to meat the Walrocks and there they tried to kill her.

In Astapor, she was treated as a fool and a subhuman - again Slavers only wanting to take dragons away from her.

In Yunkai it was her alone that convinced one company of sellswords to join her and tricked the other while dragons were merely gnawing on bones and largely not paying any attention to the rest of the world.

And Meereen did not surrender either but had to be taken by force - by commands and decisions she had given.

And without the dragons, none of the slavers would have paid her a second glance. The dragons are a valuable commodity that means that people will listen to her because they want the dragons (being Qarth and Astapor). Qarth and Astapor only pay attention to her because she has dragons which they want.

She gets the army on the back of the dragons. Take away her dragons and she would not have got to where she is. Without the dragons she would not have gotten to the point where she could conquer Yunkai or Meereen.

You do realize youre reading a book where she has an integral part and influence on the whole setting, right?

Its not plot shielding - its the plot itself, ffs.

Yes, hence why it is a plot shield, because she is the 'main' character she gets to not die even though she should have otherwise. To advance the plot she must be shielded from death.

[Bronn is God]

People dont listen to her at all or do anything for her because of the dragons.

What book are you reading?

Books are not over yet and i find this request that main character HAS to die in order for there to be no "plot shield" totally ridiculous.

If you were to go by that logic all the main characters should have been killed in the first ten pages.

Going to say it again; you cannot walk into a fire in a moment of sheer delusion and come out alive with the most powerful things in the universe. Its Deus Ex Machina + plot shielding which makes it bad.

[Maia]

Must have been lost in all you're "they got what they deserved" bullshit.

Well, do you remember how Cleos Frey's escort was hanged in it's entirety when only 4 of them were guilty? And how Robb hanged a guy who merely _watched_ the Lannister prisoners being killed? How are Dany'sactions different, pray? That's the way even supposedly honorable people operate in this world.

And without the dragons, none of the slavers would have paid her a second glance.

And without Greywind Robb wouldn't have been able to dominate and lead his lords to the extent he did. Greatjon would have dumped him on his ass like the green boy he was and that would have been all she wrote. Maybe it would have been better in the long run, but there wouldn't have been a heroic boy-king, that's for sure. Nor would he have been able to sneak around Golden Tooth without Greywind finding a completely unknown track for him. And who knows how much Greywind helped the soldiers morale, fighting beside Robb?

The direwolves were doing absolutely essential things to keep Ned's boys alive since the first few chapters of AGOT, were crucial for a lot of their achievements and in case of Ghost even made some life-changing decisions for them (i.e. prevented Jon from deserting). The dragons' value was mostly symbolic until Astapor. Yes, they had great potential value and opened some doors for Dany, but they weren't running her life, like the direwolves did for the Stark boys and she had to pay a high price and take huge risks to get them in the first place.

Goingto say it again; you cannot walk into a fire in a moment of sheerdelusion and come out alive with the most powerful things in theuniverse. Its Deus Ex Machina + plot shielding which makes it bad.

Whereas finding giant telepathic wolves who become your faithful protectors and extension of your self is not Deus ex Machina at all, right? Seriously, now, without certain amount of Deus ex Machina and plot shielding, neither the Stark kids nor Dany would have been fit protagonists for this series.

[Bronn is God]

Whereas finding giant telepathic wolves who become your faithful protectors and extension of your self is not Deus ex Machina at all, right? Seriously, now, without certain amount of Deus ex Machina and plot shielding, neither the Stark kids nor Dany would have been fit protagonists for this series.

Are you comparing Direwolves to Dragons. These are motherphuckin' dragons. :commie:

[Maia]

And as I pointed out above, the direwolves were way more actively useful to the Starks than the dragons were to Dany until Astapor ;).

[Bronn is God]

And at Astapor, Dany used the dragons to get an army to be used to conquer the universe. Dont forget that Xaro Xar Xaria (or whatever) gave Dany accommodation and such DUE to the dragons. If she was a whored out former Khalessi, former Targ princess without dragons, she would probably get no hospitality and eventually abandoned by everyone except maybe Jorah, who just wanted to get it in.

[Daemrion]

People dont listen to her at all or do anything for her because of the dragons.

All they want to do is take them away - therefore they are a greater danger for her then some sort of magical wishing lamp that gets her everything.

Which is what you and your ilk are claiming - and which books directly contradict.

The dragons are a valuable commodity. They get her into a position where she can bargain with the slavers of Astapor, or be allowed into the House of the Undying at Qarth. Yes, they are a danger to her, but they are also the source of her 'power'. People want to seek her because she has the only dragons in the known world.

No one has ever claimed that they are a magical wish lamp, but without the dragons, she'd be nothing. People want the dragons hence, since she owns the dragons right now, that gives her some sort of bargaining power which allows her to get stuff that she wants for herself. She contracted to sell a dragon for a whole army, that's economic power for you right there.

Yes, they might not be militarily useful right now, but there are plenty of other types of power.

Books are not over yet and i find this request that main character HAS to die in order for there to be no "plot shield" totally ridiculous.

If you were to go by that logic all the main characters should have been killed in the first ten pages.

Not to mention that by that logic every important character in the books that is still alive should be accused of having a plot shield.

There are many other stories that don't have such obvious plot-shielding.

Maia,

Whereas finding giant telepathic wolves who become your faithful protectors and extension of your self is not Deus ex Machina at all, right? Seriously, now, without certain amount of Deus ex Machina and plot shielding, neither the Stark kids nor Dany would have been fit protagonists for this series.

Some of the direwolves have died. None of the dragons have so far.

Of course the main characters get some plot shielding, but this plot shielding is probably the most obvious case of it in the book.

[Bronn is God]

What is Tywin Lannister without Casterly Rock? Oh my god he was plot shielded by his gold all his life so that eventually he could serve the story as he did!

If Lord Tywin walked into a fire due to have a psychotic episode and gained Casterly rock from that, then we can talk.

[JJtheCrow]

Plot shield, Mary Sue....she's a main character!!!! I like Dany and I enjoy her chapters. Not liking a character doesn't make you sexist it just means you don't like the character. I don't understand a lot of the hatred towards Dany. Does a character have to die to not be considered "plot protected" or "Mary Sue"? It's laughable!!!! Every character still alive has a "plot shield", thats the fucking story!!!! Dany was sold to Drogo, fell in love with Drogo then he died, and she lost her baby. Yeah she's had it really easy. Another ridiculous point people hate about Dany is her sense of entitlement. Everyone going for the throne or a throne feels a sense of entitlement...Stannis, Renly, Robb. Madness!!!!!

[Patrick Tully]

Maybe it is time for you folks to agree to disagree and drop the argument. Has anyone made a new point recently?

Beating a dead horse is only worthwhile if it is a wight. :)

[Rakka]

I've already given my two bits on the issue of Danaerys. I doubt you're all that interested anyway, as everyone who doesn't agree with you is a "hater" and can't read anyway.

This is your very first post in the thread.

This best proves how irrational and illogical Danerys "haters" are.

--

her punishment of Slavemasters goes through similar distortion of seeing it through modern, contemporary rules of our society, not through rules and customs of Songs - as an excuse for hating her, rather then realistic justifiable reason.

--

Suck this, haters.

"Irrational", "illogical", "distorting" things to get "an excuse to hate her", ending with a bit of sexually charged obnoxiousness. And this is what you call "not insulting"?

You exhibit no intention taking anyone who disagrees with you as a person equipped with normal intelligence. I have to read your nonconstructive, willfully stupid posts at least so much as to be able to skip them. Their abysmal lack of anything but insults and misinterpretations of others points brings down the level of the board, and as a boarder it is my business.

I wouldn't even bother to respond, but this little gem needs a response since apparently nobody's said it yet:

"why would anyone not involved agree to be crucified instead of the ones who deserved it?"

Try "why would anyone who wasn't a witch agree to be accused as one and tortured and killed?"

It's called mob rule. When you tell people to give any random ten persons of their group of hundred to be punished for the group's collective sin, it's not like nobody will push out the neighbour whose sun-hogging tree they don't like, the guy who is a bit better off, the woman who speaks for better rights to someone not in power... no siree, it's their leaders they'll give to the slaughter. Of course. Because those other people just wouldn't agree to being the scapegoats, and the 90 will just say "oh, sorry, nothing then, sorry to have bothered you".

I don't know what world you live in, but the real one definately ain't that pleasant.

[SteveWestenra]

I never really liked her and still don't, really. I definitely feel sorry for her to an extent (in an objective way, at least), but she's never felt real to me the way the other characters have. She's somehow too perfectly perfect. I can't really pinpoint anything much about her personality, either. Nothing besides "powerful and determined," anyway. It just felt boring.

When I first started hanging around online, I saw some people criticize her of being a Mary Sue, and I think that hit the nail on the head for me.

[TrueMetis]

Well, do you remember how Cleos Frey's escort was hanged in it's entirety when only 4 of them were guilty? And how Robb hanged a guy who merely _watched_ the Lannister prisoners being killed? How are Dany'sactions different, pray? That's the way even supposedly honorable people operate in this world.

They aren't different and they we're all wrong, what's you're point? I don't recall ever defending Robb's or the Stoneheart's BWB for events like these.

[nim]

I'm only on my first re-read of the books, and am currently in the early chapters of FFC, but I'm also not understanding where the hatred of Dany is coming from, or why she needs to die. My heart broke for her, in the scene where she smothered her sun and stars with a pillow. Tell me that didn't move you??

My opinion of her may change after she makes it over to Westeros, but up to now, she's just been trying to survive. I think she's determined yes, but powerful? Almost, but not quite. Any power she has now seems a little fragile, and everyone who supports her does so because they want to, not because she was able to force them.

Apologies if I've repeated points that were already made earlier, but it was a bit annoying to read through all the cat-fighting, so just skimmed over those :ack:

[aryastark]

One thing i dont realy get from your posts hiver is that you want people to get you textual evidence that Dany would be nothing without her dragons? :stunned: Well she has the dragons so therefor no textual evidence on her being nothing without them can be provided, that would be another book where Dany doesnt get the dragons but still manages to do all that she has done so far without them, and if u ask me that would be damn impossible. She could still have gone to Qarth (not to mention Astapor or Meeren) but noone would even pay attention to her to Jorah or her small and weak kalasaar without the dragons, for me thats kind of a fact, and has nothing to do with liking her or not as a character, dragons are her source of power.

[TrueMetis]

One thing i dont realy get from your posts hiver is that you want people to get you textual evidence that Dany would be nothing without her dragons? :stunned: Well she has the dragons so therefor no textual evidence on her being nothing without them can be provided, that would be another book where Dany doesnt get the dragons but still manages to do all that she has done so far without them, and if u ask me that would be damn impossible. She could still have gone to Qarth (not to mention Astapor or Meeren) but noone would even pay attention to her to Jorah or her small and weak kalasaar without the dragons, for me thats kind of a fact, and has nothing to do with liking her or not as a character, dragons are her source of power.

Shouldn't this be a simple as posting the passage where the people show up looking for her specifically because she is the mother of Dragons? Cause I rather doubt they would arrive saying "We wish to see the last Targ deposed heir to a kingdom that we have nothing to do with and Khalesei of a broken down Khalasar" Not to mention that without the Dragon's her blood rider would have brought her to the Dothraki city to become a crone.

[Dornish]

But Dany still hasn't gone up against a worthy opponent. Slaver's bay is strictly minor league tactically, everyone she's faced there has been abysmally stupid. She would have no chance against the likes of Tywin Lannister strategically or Littlefinger politically. She's got the potential to move up to Westerosi level, but right now she wouldn't be much of a contender. Dragons or no, she's simply outclassed and would be eaten alive by the game.

[MyDogIsNamedDanerys]

But Dany still hasn't gone up against a worthy opponent. Slaver's bay is strictly minor league tactically, everyone she's faced there has been abysmally stupid. She would have no chance against the likes of Tywin Lannister strategically or Littlefinger politically. She's got the potential to move up to Westerosi level, but right now she wouldn't be much of a contender. Dragons or no, she's simply outclassed and would be eaten alive by the game.

This is where I get confused. Either Daenerys is OVERPOWERED and it's totes unfair that she gets dragons because they give her a big advantage and she is too good at politics for her age OR she is woefully unprepared and would get eaten alive by other players in Westeros and only wins because her enemies are so weak. Pick one!

The fact that both these critiques exist to me only highlights that Daenerys is an exceptional 15 year old ruler.

She is not an idiot, and has made some clever tactical moves.

She is not a jerk or needlessly cruel (e.g. she listens to coucil from others).

She tries to make moral choices, and worries that she has made immoral ones.

She is not helpless nor is she a puppet.

She has learned from every obstacle she has had to overcome, and will continue to learn until she perhaps can be a better player.

The thing that's disturbing about her enemies so far is more about orientalism and Western exceptionalism to me (see Lawerence of Arabia, Avatar, etc - white guy shows up and does everything better than the locals). Rather than a critique of Daenerys herself, it's a critique of the setting...

[Daemrion]

I'm only on my first re-read of the books, and am currently in the early chapters of FFC, but I'm also not understanding where the hatred of Dany is coming from, or why she needs to die. My heart broke for her, in the scene where she smothered her sun and stars with a pillow. Tell me that didn't move you??

Well no. From the time she asked Miz Mirri Duur to 'resurrect' Drogo, I could guess that he was going to be a zombie. I could guess that she'd gotten into a bargain that screwed herself over. It was obvious that she was playing with necromancy beyond her control. Hence, no sympathy.

Secondly, I think the thing is yes, she lost Drogo. However, the next thing we know, she suddenly has birthed dragons. And we know that dragons are extra special.

Yes, losing Drogo is a big thing, but 'plotwise' gaining the dragons give her something much more valuable and powerful.

It's probably because her story is so disconnected with the rest of the story in AGOT but it reads like 'yeah, she lost her husband but hey, she gained these uber cool dragons.'

It's almost like she had to lose her husband to gain the dragons. And the trade-off, we know is going to be positive. It's going to be a good deal for her to lose husband but gain dragons. We know in the end, that the dragons probably will help her much more than Drogo ever would or could. To me it cheapens the loss.

This is where I get confused. Either Daenerys is OVERPOWERED and it's totes unfair that she gets dragons because they give her a big advantage and she is too good at politics for her age OR she is woefully unprepared and would get eaten alive by other players in Westeros and only wins because her enemies are so weak. Pick one!

Dany is given a 'leg-up' by GRRM by making things fall too easily to her advantage, but we do realise that the story is set up that way. It, I think is one of the weaker bits of GRRM's writing. He does much better writing in other parts of the story.

People think she will get eaten alive by the other players in Westeros, because they make their moves with a lot less.