The Pyre Revisited

[Zabuza]

Here it is:

Rh'llor: Hey grrl you summoned me to dance? Well lets boogie.

MMD: This dumb girl out here wants me bring vitality back to her fallen horselord, I just want to dance.

Rh'llor: Alright cool well let me get my wolf friend the great shepherd so he can watch.

*dancing*

Enter Jorah carrying Dany.

Rh'llor: You never said there was an unborn child to offer, I'll give her the horselord for the kid.

MMD: Deal.

On the Fire

MMD: *Ululating*

Rh'llor comes back and looks at fire and who is in it.

Rh'llor: WTF I just gave that horselord vitality and your giving him back? what kind of insult is this? Now you want to be protected from this fire? You interrupted Breaking Bad for this crap? Bitch you can burn, here I'ma make that other grrl resist this fire. OHHH shit thems Dragon eggs! Here I refund Horselord and take you, and let them things hatch, they sure to give me some good sacrifices, MMMMmmmmm.

MMD: Begins screaming.

[TheZone]

I have been thinking about this, the blood of the dragon seems to be hot as described by Dany, what if the fire became almost an incubator for the eggs. The whole Dany being fire proof thing is still debatable I am in between just because I have a bias and GRRM does not simply say ..no DANY is not fire proof, he just says targs, but anyway Dany said to MMR " only death can pay for life" What if the three sacrifices for the eggs were Drogo,Rhaego, and the horse while MMD died to save Dany

[Adar]

I am in the camp where MMD botched the spell because she says, "You will not hear me scream," before being bound to pyre. She intended to come away unharmed.

She wouldn't want to help Dany. Clearly, she was never grateful for Dany's attempted rescue.

[King Jonboy]

I tell you why MMD makes no difference to the story and probably only singing for her own comfort. The tv series is why. GRRM has told D&D the secrets and the ending of the story, that episode would have had more highlighted on MMD but there wasnt.

[Gauis Julius Caesar]

Nope. The primary SSM that we use to let people know that Targs aren't fireproof is a response to someone asking, "Do Targs become immune when they get their dragons," or something to that effect. GRRM answers and says no, Targs aren't fireproof. He says nothing about it in relation to dragons, like, "They aren't fireproof but become so when they bond to dragons." No, they're not fireproof, period.

I also feel compelled to point out that the Aegon who liked hot baths and could stand Dornish summers is the same Aegon who died in the fire at Summerhall. So I wouldn't be taking any of that too seriously. There's a big difference between liking things hot and being able to survive being burned alive.

If you're right about Bloodraven's power being the result of Targ blood and First Men blood being mixed, what implications might that have for Jon?

to further that point liking things hot is more to do with your background and geography of your home country than it has to do with some mystical dragon link. i have relatives in italy who consider 23 degrees cold and chilly, doesnt mean they have a link with dragons

[IAmNobody]

Ok, I'm sorry if that has been resolved before but I have a nagging question that needs solving.

Which were the three deaths that were paid for the dragons?

I know people say Drogo and Rhaego were two of those deaths but they were already dead when Dany stepped into the pyre.

By that logic, could't anybody who had died in the past be a death to bring back life?

What's to say it was not Visaery's death and MMD's that paid for one of the dragons.

[Sevumar]

Which were the three deaths that were paid for the dragons?

I know people say Drogo and Rhaego were two of those deaths but they were already dead when Dany stepped into the pyre.

By that logic, could't anybody who had died in the past be a death to bring back life?

What's to say it was not Visaery's death and MMD's that paid for one of the dragons.

I don't think there needed to be three deaths for three dragons. Mirri Maz Duur's quote is, "only death can pay for life," so there's no indication that it has to be a one-for-one exchange here. I think there's a real problem with saying deaths that did not occur in the immediate timeframe of the pyre could "count" toward the ritual occurring with MMD's death. That rules out Viserys, Drogo, and Rhaego.

As I've said before, I think that the introduction of Dany into the tent where Mirri was already chanting caused a side-reaction to occur in addition to the moving of the horse's consciousness into Drogo's body. Rhaego's life force was "swapped" with the dead eggs, returning them to viability and resulting in the old, decayed thing that came out of Dany's body. By the time of the pyre, the eggs were no longer petrified and the sacrifice of Mirri Maz Duur along with her chanting/screaming on the pyre powered the hatching of the dragons.

[IAmNobody]

I don't think there needed to be three deaths for three dragons. Mirri Maz Duur's quote is, "only death can pay for life," so there's no indication that it has to be a one-for-one exchange here. I think there's a real problem with saying deaths that did not occur in the immediate timeframe of the pyre could "count" toward the ritual occurring with MMD's death. That rules out Viserys, Drogo, and Rhaego.

As I've said before, I think that the introduction of Dany into the tent where Mirri was already chanting caused a side-reaction to occur in addition to the moving of the horse's consciousness into Drogo's body. Rhaego's life force was "swapped" with the dead eggs, returning them to viability and resulting in the old, decayed thing that came out of Dany's body. By the time of the pyre, the eggs were no longer petrified and the sacrifice of Mirri Maz Duur along with her chanting/screaming on the pyre powered the hatching of the dragons.

oooo.. I like this explanation. Thanks Sevumar.

[Dr. Pepper]

I tell you why MMD makes no difference to the story and probably only singing for her own comfort. The tv series is why. GRRM has told D&D the secrets and the ending of the story, that episode would have had more highlighted on MMD but there wasnt.

The tv show and the books are two different things. D&D are going in different direction when it comes to Dany. She's built up as completely heat and fireproof in the show, something that does not happen in the books. While its fun to compare the show and the books, it's really not correct to use the show as clues to what happens in the books. Martin has told D&D secrets, that doesn't mean they are going to go the same route to get to the same ending, or even that they are going to have the same ending as the books (keep in mind that the show will likely surpass the books).

[IAmNobody]

I tell you why MMD makes no difference to the story and probably only singing for her own comfort. The tv series is why. GRRM has told D&D the secrets and the ending of the story, that episode would have had more highlighted on MMD but there wasnt.

In addition to what Dr. Pepper has said above, there is the case of Mago.

I read somewhere that GRRM specifically told D&D that Mago would be important (or pivotal) later on in the series. The makers of the show still went on to kill Mago just for the sake of establishing the ferocity of Khal Drogo. It wasn't scripted by GRRM.

When GRRM said Mago would be important later on, I'm sure he didn't mean Mago stealing back Eroeh.

[Fwaatcha]

Great thread, a lot of good theories

I personally am partial to the theory that Drogon was incubated before he was ever placed in the pyre, he took Rhaego's "life".

Longer incubation , bigger dragon. Drogon may be the "Stallion that mounts the World" and fulfill a prophecy.

MMD and the horse gave their lives to incubate the other 2 dragons.

After reading 99% of the posts here I am leaning towards the theory that MMD botched her spell , thus keeping Dany alive with a fire protection spell.(This make a lot of sense Tze)

Even though the dragons are incubated , they still needed more in order to hatch.

Heres where MMD's botched fire protection spell comes in.The shadows ,being that there dancing partner was tied up ,decided to dance with dragons(PUN!) .

Thanks for all the good reads and new insights .

Oh yeah I almost forgot. Fingernails can survive a hell of a lot longer then hair on your head when placed into a fire.

For instance

Take 1 paper cup , fill to brim with water. Hold over a campfire for a few minutes. You can actually bring the water to a boil without ever burning the cup if done right.But if you try this with a cup without water in it , it will catch flame quite easily.

So what i'm trying to say is

Full cup of water = fingernails

Empty cup of water = hair on your head

Edit--

Also about dragons being hatched and I believe someone posted it somewhere in this massive thread.Perhaps it took a female Targ to do what 20 insane male Targs couldnt.

[Dr. Pepper]

For instance

Take 1 paper cup , fill to brim with water. Hold over a campfire for a few minutes. You can actually bring the water to a boil without ever burning the cup if done right.But if you try this with a cup without water in it , it will catch flame quite easily.

So what i'm trying to say is

Full cup of water = fingernails

Empty cup of water = hair on your head

I know what I'm doing tonight! No seriously. I really am going to do with water cup test. I missed out on a lot of science stuff when I was a kid because I grew up in an area was science was the devil. Now I try to play catch-up and often look a crazy person doing so.

And to derail this thread even further, are fingernails more like horns or antlers than hair?

[DaveRoid]

I think one of the reasons the "Dany's fireproof!" theory keeps getting brought up despite all evidence to the contrary

There are is no evidence to the contrary. Other than an old Grrm interview (15 years ago) where he says Danny will "probably" not repeat the pyre experiences again and minor burns on her hands because she pulls a molten with dragon-fire spear head out of the drogon. it looks like dragon fire is much hotter than normal fire and has some small effects on her.

more is discussed on the subject in the link below, including the facts that no normal human can have their whole heard burned to scalp without sever injuries. That is exactly what almost killed Michele Jackson and that video is also posted here:

http://asoiaf.wester...ll-the-unburnt/

This is not a sequence of events that, in my eyes, points to anything about Dany being the magical key to her fire resistance on the pyre.

Biggest flaw with your point OP is that why did her hair burned? if it was some magical protection cast by the witch why did it not protect her whole? why did Danny think she would not die walking in there? WHY did the witch die of the flames and why would the witch cast a protecting spell on her would be killer? is there ANY evidence that a spell like that exists in the first place?

So many holes in your hypothesis.

Did Mirri get to finish her spell before the flames reached her and killed her? Did the agony from the flames cause her to accidentally miscast her spell?

LOL miscast her spell? dude you are jumping the shark. this is not D&D.

And I see nothing inherently magical or powerful about Dany at all.

Aye. it comes down to regular old character hate. The folks denying that danny is not fire proff most vehemently are the same folks who despise Danny or atleast dislike her character. for example you can look at posts histories of Apple martiny and the OP to see that is the case. It doesn't come from logic, it comes from emotions. Hence we get a 2 hour effort long posts about "miscasted" magics in ASOIAF. LOL.

[DaveRoid]

One thing bothering me - slightly unrelated but not completely:

The only thing in the story, to me, that remotely hints at targs being fireproof, is Dany's reaction to seeing Vis killed:

"he was no dragon; fire cannot kill a dragon."

Yet it's confirmed that Dany/Targs are not fireproof.

So.... is this just a superstition she's been brought up with? Does she think she has this ability? Did GRRM change his mind about something after GOT was published?

What does Dany mean when she says this?

Its really simple often repeated fanatasy formula: There is always someone special who exceed normal bonds either inherently or by the nature of practice. When she says Vis is not the blood of the dragon it means he is not that "worthy" or special character. Just like we have spacial characters in any group in fantasies, including targaryans.

Danny is fire proof, but Vicerian is not. It might come down to the purity of her blood, the character of the person, pure chance or simply being the "choosen one" by an entity or a god aka AA.

It all comes down to this : Danny is magical and special. Even among the best targaryans.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Aye. it comes down to regular old character hate. The folks denying that danny is not fire proff most vehemently are the same folks who despise Danny or atleast dislike her character. for example you can look at posts histories of Apple martiny and the OP to see that is the case. It doesn't come from logic, it comes from emotions. Hence we get a 2 hour effort long posts about "miscasted" magics in ASOIAF. LOL.

... And you don't comprehend that this works both ways? Meaning, the people clinging to the already debunked idea that Dany is fireproof are the ones who vehemently support her. It doesn't come from logic, it comes from emotions.

Look in the mirror, kiddo.

[tze]

. . . Wow. Where to start.

There are is no evidence to the contrary. Other than an old Grrm interview (15 years ago) where he says Danny will "probably" not repeat the pyre experiences again and minor burns on her hands

When you're trying to argue there "is no evidence to the contrary", dismissing the evidence to the contrary as somehow nonexistent (and trying to claim that 2003 was somehow 15 years ago) . . . because you don't want it to exist? Well, that certainly does nothing to bolster your argument.

Biggest flaw with your point OP is that why did her hair burned? if it was some magical protection cast by the witch why did it not protect her whole? why did Danny think she would not die walking in there? WHY did the witch die of the flames and why would the witch cast a protecting spell on her would be killer? is there ANY evidence that a spell like that exists in the first place?

First of all: actually reading the original post, as well as the pages of discussion subsequent to that post, is encouraged on these boards. Not only was the very question you wonder why the OP didn't ask . . . asked by the OP, but your other questions were also discussed elsewhere in this thread, at some detail and length. It's your responsibility on these boards to actually read a thread before posting. Otherwise, you run the risk of looking . . . foolish.

Second of all: you're pointing out here the biggest flaw in YOUR argument, not mine. You're trying to claim that she's naturally fireproof, when part of her body---her hair---has been shown as being 100% burnable 100% of the time. That's pretty strong evidence that Dany isn't actually "intrinsically" fireproof, certainly not that she is.

LOL miscast her spell? dude you are jumping the shark. this is not D&D.

I know basically nothing about D&D, I am not a dude, and "jumping the shark" is a term used when a television show starts going off the rails so I have no idea why you're trying to apply it to events in the first book of a 7-part series. And this idea---of whether or not magic always works the way the practitioner intends it to work---was actually addressed upthread; I'd summarize it again, but this thread is only 7 pages long, so it shouldn't be too difficult for you to find that discussion all on your own.

Aye. it comes down to regular old character hate. The folks denying that danny is not fire proff most vehemently are the same folks who despise Danny or atleast dislike her character. for example you can look at posts histories of Apple martiny and the OP to see that is the case. It doesn't come from logic, it comes from emotions. Hence we get a 2 hour effort long posts about "miscasted" magics in ASOIAF. LOL.

Wow. I'm just . . . wow. You went from "it doesn't come from logic" to "we get a 2 hour effort long posts [sic]" in only two lines. A less discerning individual might see an inherent contradiction there.

And a word of advice: trying to shut down a line of discussion based on your personal attitudes toward other posters---for example, trying to bring up posting histories as some bizarre form of "evidence" against a line of literary analysis---is something the mods tend to frown on.

I tell you why MMD makes no difference to the story and probably only singing for her own comfort. The tv series is why. GRRM has told D&D the secrets and the ending of the story, that episode would have had more highlighted on MMD but there wasnt.

Dr. Pepper already pointed out the differences between the show and the books---you can't use the former to argue about what happened in the latter. And frankly, in this particular instance, the whole issue should really be moot anyway, because the pyre scene in the show actually tracks the pyre scene in the books quite well. To a rather substantial degree, actually. In the show, Mirri Maz Duur is explicitly shown singing on the pyre, and Dany very clearly does not enter the pyre until the fire reaches MMD and MMD starts screaming/burning. The camera angle keeps going from Dany to Mirri, Mirri to Dany, over and over again, visually connecting the two in a way that the POV aspect in the books wouldn't have allowed. And Mirri's singing is actually highlighted in the show to a pretty strong degree, even more clearly than it is in the books (which isn't surprising, given that Mirri's singing in the show didn't have to compete with Dany's internal monologue for the reader's/viewer's attention).

Obviously I'm not claiming that the show is evidence of what's going on in the books---the show and the books are two different beasts. I'm just pointing out that, honestly, the sequence of events in the two "depictions" of the pyre actually line up quite well, so the entire book/show divergence issue doesn't even really come up in this particular instance.

[DaveRoid]

Sort of skimmed to the end, but just a couple of quick thoughts ...

1. "Dany dodged Drogon's flames." Yeah, right. Yes, I know what the passage in the book said, and it may even be how Daenerys remembers the event, but that sort of falls under this trope. If we see more evidence in the future of Dany's Matrix-dodging skills and fire's inability to be hot at all anywhere but where you physically touch the visible flames, we'll talk more about this theory. Until then, heh ... no.

Zero answer from our valiant "Danny is a normal girl with 3 adorable dragons" crowd to this important point. as expected. They are stretched to the limits of jumping sharks (miscast magic. LOL) to justify opposing a simply explained fact: Danny is highly fire resistance.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Zero answer from our valiant "Danny is a normal girl with 3 adorable dragons" crowd to this important point. as expected.

To be fair I think it's because many of us have that poster on ignore ...

[DaveRoid]

. . . Wow. Where to start.

When you're trying to argue there "is no evidence to the contrary", dismissing the evidence to the contrary as somehow nonexistent (and trying to claim that 2003 was somehow 15 years ago) . . . because you don't want it to exist? Well, that certainly does nothing to bolster your argument.

First of all: actually reading the original post, as well as the pages of discussion subsequent to that post, is encouraged on these boards. Not only was the very question you wonder why the OP didn't ask . . . asked by the OP, but your other questions were also discussed elsewhere in this thread, at some detail and length. It's your responsibility on these boards to actually read a thread before posting. Otherwise, you run the risk of looking . . . foolish.

Second of all: you're pointing out here the biggest flaw in YOUR argument, not mine. You're trying to claim that she's naturally fireproof, when part of her body---her hair---has been shown as being 100% burnable 100% of the time. That's pretty strong evidence that Dany isn't actually "intrinsically" fireproof, certainly not that she is.

I know basically nothing about D&D, I am not a dude, and "jumping the shark" is a term used when a television show starts going off the rails so I have no idea why you're trying to apply it to events in the first book of a 7-part series. And this idea---of whether or not magic always works the way the practitioner intends it to work---was actually addressed upthread; I'd summarize it again, but this thread is only 7 pages long, so it shouldn't be too difficult for you to find that discussion all on your own.

Wow. I'm just . . . wow. You went from "it doesn't come from logic" to "we get a 2 hour effort long posts [sic]" in only two lines. A less discerning individual might see an inherent contradiction there.

And a word of advice: trying to shut down a line of discussion based on your personal attitudes toward other posters---for example, trying to bring up posting histories as some bizarre form of "evidence" against a line of literary analysis---is something the mods tend to frown on.

Dr. Pepper already pointed out the differences between the show and the books---you can't use the former to argue about the latter. And frankly, in this particular instance, the whole issue should really be moot anyway, because the pyre scene in the show actually tracks the pyre scene in the books quite well. To a rather substantial degree, actually. In the show, Mirri Maz Duur is explicitly shown singing on the pyre, and Dany very clearly does not enter the pyre until the fire reaches MMD and MMD starts screaming/burning. The camera angle keeps going from Dany to Mirri, Mirri to Dany, over and over again, visually connecting the two in a way that the POV aspect in the books wouldn't have allowed. And Mirri's singing is actually highlighted in the show to a pretty strong degree, even more clearly than it is in the books (which isn't surprising, given that Mirri's singing in the show didn't have to compete with Dany's internal monologue for the reader's/viewer's attention).

Obviously I'm not claiming that the show is evidence of what's going on in the books---the show and the books are two different beasts. I'm just pointing out that, honestly, the sequence of events in the two "depictions" of the pyre actually line up quite well, so the entire book/show divergence issue doesn't even really come up in this particular instance.

Your evidence is highly contrived, stretching to the limit and lacking IMO. you have not convinced me at all that Danny is not fire resistance.

What motive you have is for yourself to know. Let me ask you a question, if Danny turns out to be fireproof for sure do you think she deserves it?

[DaveRoid]

... And you don't comprehend that this works both ways? Meaning, the people clinging to the already debunked idea that Dany is fireproof are the ones who vehemently support her. It doesn't come from logic, it comes from emotions.

Look in the mirror, kiddo.

I am not big on Danny actually, I like characters like Jon snow, Jorah Morment, Tyrion and Sandor Clegan more. But Danny's powers don't bother me like it does some other people. Also it doesn't bother me that she will likely sit the iron throne.

I am no kiddo unless you are over 40.

To be fair I think it's because many of us have that poster on ignore ...

And I am sure there is a reason for that. His post and link alone have more evidence in it than this entire thread. That must irritate a lot of Danny detractors arguments. Care to respond to its scientific facts about heat?

Also I love how some folks explain that "Danny pulled a dragonfire treated spear head out of drogon and burned her hand so she is not heat resistant" as their argument. Have you tried garbing a molten hot metal? nay garbing anything hot like a frying pan? you will pull back your hand the split second your skin touches it (instinctively) and if you insist on the grab you will scream and will be severely injured right away. You will not be able to use those hands to do anything until you have healed.