Danny's hate for Starks...permanent?

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

What did the Starks do to the Freys before Robb became king? What did the Freys do to the Starks before that also? Nothing. The Targaryens did nothing to the Starks before Aerys and the RR, so I don't see why you think they aren't comparable?

Robb broke a marriage vow, he didn't strangle and/or roast any Freys alive. It's not the same thing and a lazy comparison.

[Blackaz01]

What did the Starks do to the Freys before Robb became king? What did the Freys do to the Starks before that also? Nothing. The Targaryens did nothing to the Starks before Aerys and the RR, so I don't see why you think they aren't comparable?

Because Dany hates the starks because of what happened to Aerys and Rhaegar when it was the starks who were wronged by her family. Arya hates the freys because they straight up killed her mother and brother by turning on them in the worst way possible. Aryas hate is justified because the starks werent hurting the the freys when they turned on them. Danys father wanted all of the starks heads how can she hate the starks for what her father started?

and as I said what the freys did to the starks is more comparable to what the lannisters did to the targs. Turning on them at the last second.

[TheMysteriousOne]

Because Dany hates the starks because of what happened to Aerys and Rhaegar when it was the starks who were wronged by her family. Arya hates the freys because they straight up killed her mother and brother by turning on them in the worst way possible. Aryas hate is justified because the starks werent hurting the the freys when they turned on them. Danys father wanted all of the starks heads how can she hate the starks for what her father started?

and as I said what the freys did to the starks is more comparable to what the lannisters did to the targs. Turning on them at the last second.

Even though the Starks were justified in rebelling against the Targaryens, they still had a hand in the demise of her family.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Even though the Starks were justified in rebelling against the Targaryens, they still had a hand in the demise of her family.

And you don't think the latter statement is mitigated in any way by the former? And unlike the Freys, the Starks were in open rebellion and didn't have to resort to backhanded tactics. They were against Dany's family but they came by it honestly. They didn't feign a truce and break guest right.

[The Broke Howard Hughes]

How and why are people comparing what the freys did to the starks and what the starks did to the targs?

As far as history goes the starks really didn't do shit to them until the mad king killed Brandon and his father and Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna (not proven to be 100% the case but as far as history goes in westeros its the general consensus) and this is compared to the boltons and freys turning cloaks on their liege lord and breaking guest rules? I could understand if you said Dany will never forgive the Lannisters for betraying her father or Robert and the Baratheons for killing Rhaegar. But as far as the starks are concerned her family started it.

Oh and as far as forgiving them goes? She will have to or she will die.

I understand your point and agree with you mostly but what did the Starks do the the Targs? The Targs (Aerys in particular) are the bullies in this story. They pretty much forced the Starks to join the rebellion. Aery's killed Brandon and Rickard,then called for Ned's head, after Rhaegar 'kidnapped' Lyanna. Nothing the Starks did, with the exception of Brandon's ill advised ultimatum to Aerys, could even remotely be considered offensive.

[Faint]

Even though the Starks were justified in rebelling against the Targaryens, they still had a hand in the demise of her family.

What were the Starks supposed to do? They couldn't fight to raise Rhaegar, because he is the one who precipitated the whole situation in the first place! If anything, the Starks should get some credit on behalf of Ned for not killing Rhaegar's son.

I suppose the interesting question arises at to what Ned would have done had he secured King's Landing while Aegon was still alive. But that's simply conjecture at this point.

[TheMysteriousOne]

And you don't think the latter statement is mitigated in any way by the former? And unlike the Freys, the Starks were in open rebellion and didn't have to resort to backhanded tactics. They were against Dany's family but they came by it honestly. They didn't feign a truce and break guest right.

Okay, the Frey-Stark and Stark-Targaryen issues can't really be compared...I was wrong for that part.

What were the Starks supposed to do? They couldn't fight to raise Rhaegar, because he is the one who precipitated the whole situation in the first place! If anything, the Starks should get some credit on behalf of Ned for not killing Rhaegar's son.

I suppose the interesting question arises what Ned would have done had he secured King's Landing while Aegon was still alive. But that's simply conjecture at this point.

The Starks were completely justified in rebelling against the Targaryens, I'm just saying that to Dany, they will always be the ones who played a part, a small part, but a part nonetheless, in her family's demise.

[drayrock]

She's going to be around Arya soon and I don't think Arya is going to kill her so I think that the Usurper's Dogs problem will somehow be resolved by then.

I don't think she has to have love for the Starks though. Ned still worshiped the man who rewarded Aegon and Rhaenys' killers. Sure he was mad initially but not mad enough to not get over it and mend their relationship.

From Ned's POV you can say yes they're friends and Targaryens are nothing to him but from her POV that's her family. Her mother also had to flee and she and Viserys had to flee because of Stannis. Ned supported Stannis although I'm not sure if she knows that.

She doesn't have to hate them but I don't see any reason for her to think these are good people. I must care for them like the fandom does.

What makes you think she'll see arya soon?

[Faint]

The Starks were completely justified in rebelling against the Targaryens, I'm just saying that to Dany, they will always be the ones who played a part, a small part, but a part nonetheless, in her family's demise.

And their survival. If it wasn't for Ned, both her and Jon might be dead and the entire family extinguished. As I said before, the Starks do not owe the Targaryens recompense; if anything, the opposite is true.

[drayrock]

Because Dany hates the starks because of what happened to Aerys and Rhaegar when it was the starks who were wronged by her family. Arya hates the freys because they straight up killed her mother and brother by turning on them in the worst way possible. Aryas hate is justified because the starks werent hurting the the freys when they turned on them. Danys father wanted all of the starks heads how can she hate the starks for what her father started?

and as I said what the freys did to the starks is more comparable to what the lannisters did to the targs. Turning on them at the last second.

This.

[TheMysteriousOne]

And their survival. If it wasn't for Ned, both her and Jon might be dead and the entire family extinguished. As I said before, the Starks do not owe the Targaryens recompense; if anything, the opposite is true.

Yeah, I believe that also.

[drayrock]

All and all I'm rooting for Danny but she needs a fast dose of humility education and maturity... All of which I'd hoped shed have showed signs of by the end of dance...instead she pulled the biggest cop out if history and married that grease ball

[WardenOfTheNorth]

Let's consider another family that has suffered greatly during the Robellion. Ned lost his father, his brother, his sister. And yet the last time he has given the Targaryens any thought, was when he stood up to his king and best friend, trying to save Daenerys' life. After that, it's fucking hard not to feel disappointed with Dany's attitude.

Ned did lose some family, but years later, he has a lovely wife, 6 kids, and has a comfortable position as Lord of Winterfell. Meanwhile where is Dany? Roaming Essos as a beggar with her brother(the only family that she knows she has left)who abuses her. Always on the move, never having a real home. Save for the one she had for a little while, in Braavos. It's not the same situation IMO.

[WardenOfTheNorth]

Unfortunately I would say never; whatever Tyrion says is poison he is a man who comes with advice related to being willing to kill civilians with your enemies like poisoning wells who failed the game of thrones; murdered his father and brags about it; worst in Dany's view killed an innocent woman and shows no public remorse, was convicted of kinslaying a child in court and in trial by combat etc.

Tyrion telling her the Starks are good would be like Theon Greyjoy telling the Martells Wildlings are good after killing Balon; it just won't come with any credibility because the Martells will have superficial knowledge about Theon's past including his killing children and father.

The only Targaryan who was alive relatively recently who Dany wants to hear about is Rhaegar; she doesn't want to learn her father was a nutjob or that Ned Stark was the most honorable man in the realm or that the wealth of Lannisport will make reconciliation with them much easier then conquest. She might not even be on her way to Westeros.

Who's the innocent woman Tyrion killed? I sure as hell, hope you don't mean Shae.

[ghost of Harrenhall]

In my head I have this scene, where Tyrion gives this speech to her. That is summed up in Miss Storm born if had met your father you would have given him all he wanted, and burned him alive!

[ARYa_Nym]

What makes you think she'll see arya soon?

It's in the foreshadowing threads. The recent one's OP goes over many of the foreshadowing and the thread discusses more.

[Zman1863]

Dany's series long story has been that of the education of a ruler. Confronting the history she thinks she knows is another of the lessons Dany is going to have to learn. She really hasn't had to confront the events that led to her own exile as of yet. We've had snippets. She knows that there is at least some truth to the name "Mad King". She knows that Barristan isn't completely anti-Stark.

The reader has a much fuller picture about the past than Dany does. We have a much deeper knowledge of Aerys's reign. The reader, or at least the great majority, knows that the Starks (like Dany) are the "good guys". The fact that GRRM writes complicated characters does not mean that there are no heroes and villains in his books; it just means more of a struggle between between light grey and dark grey rather than white and black. And as this topic demonstrates, GRRM's heroes and villains are not aligned in conventional ways.

The sprinkling of history lesson's Dany has received and the clear presence of existing misconceptions, indicates that Dany will have to confront the full truth at some point. And I expect that she will eventually come to an enlightened conclusion about the Starks.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Dany's series long story has been that of the education of a ruler. Confronting the history she thinks she knows is another of the lessons Dany is going to have to learn. She really hasn't had to confront the events that led to her own exile as of yet. We've had snippets. She knows that there is at least some truth to the name "Mad King". She knows that Barristan isn't completely anti-Stark.

The reader has a much fuller picture about the past than Dany does. We have a much deeper knowledge of Aerys's reign. The reader, or at least the great majority, knows that the Starks (like Dany) are the "good guys". The fact that GRRM writes complicated characters does not mean that there are no heroes and villains in his books; it just means more of a struggle between between light grey and dark grey rather than white and black. And as this topic demonstrates, GRRM's heroes and villains are not aligned in conventional ways.

Skeptical Apple is skeptical.

[lady m]

I guess my main issue as someone who has slowly fallen out of love with Dany over the books, and now is skeptical of what she wants, her actions don't add up to a positive outcome. It doesn't matter to me what her age is, her ambitions are very adult, and when you take on adult ambitions you don't get to be a child any longer.

She wants to be ruler of the Seven Kingdoms and restore the regency of House Targaryen, to me that is how she is to be judged. This is her current ambition. As such, I think it is her duty if she wants to be the just ruler she wants to see herself as to educate herself. Part of being a just & wise ruler is knowing all the facts, not plugging your ears and going la, la, la. She shouldn't have to be confronted by Tyrion about the truth, she should be seeking this information out herself. She shouldn't be doing a crash course in Westerosi history during a sea voyage, she should have been immersing herself in Westerosi history from the moment she acknowledged she wanted to rule. Her not wanting to know or understand the full story about Ned just fits into this.

If her ambition is just to rain down 'fire & blood' and *avenge* her family then there is no need to educate herself. And as we've gone further into the story I think the latter becomes more likely than the former.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Part of being a just & wise ruler is knowing all the facts, not plugging your ears and going la, la, la. She shouldn't have to be confronted by Tyrion about the truth, she should be seeking this information out herself. She shouldn't be doing a crash course in Westerosi history during a sea voyage, she should have been immersing herself in Westerosi history from the moment she acknowledged she wanted to rule. Her not wanting to know or understand the full story about Ned just fits into this.

I definitely agree with this, that she should have the wisdom to seek it out for herself.

I think that a clue to how Dany approaches Westerosi history can be found in her reaction to the history books that she has.

"Children's stories, if truth be told; too simple and fanciful to be true history. ... Last night she had been reading about of the three princesses in the red tower, locked away by the king for the crime of being beautiful."

Isn't it interesting that GRRM has Dany write off this stuff as "children's stories," but yet uses the example of a piece of history that we know to be true? Baelor really did lock up his sisters in the Maidenvault. We know it actually happened, but Dany thinks of it as just a story. I wonder if this sort of hints at her unwillingness/ignorance of Westerosi events in general. Bear in mind that this isn't some obvious fairy tale; it's her own family history, something even fishermen in the Sisters know about. What if she shows up in King's Landing and starts talking about that fairy tale with the three princesses and someone has to awkwardly tell her it actually happened? She writes off the comparably "fluffy" bits of family history, what will she do with the harsh bits?