GRRM confirms that Dany has some heat immunity, but what is the point?

[tze]

At no point in the OP did I say she was immune to fire. GRRM said she had a higher heat tolerance than ordinary people. I wanted to discuss what are the purposes and origins of this high heat tolerance. :bang:

The OP tried to argue that GRRM said "she does have some fire resistance", which he pretty clearly did not. Fire and heat are not synonyms. Liking heat does not indicate fire resistance. Nor does the stated quotation, which expressly describes her single instance of fire resistance as "a one-time magical event", in any way support the idea that she showed any fire (or heat) resistance in Daznak's Pit, as the OP tries to claim. A one-off event by definition cannot be repeated.

As a side note, trying to parse a difference between being "resistant to fire" and being "immune to fire" is nonsensical. If a person is set on fire but doesn't burn, that person is immune. What circumstances could possibly lead to a person being "fire resistant" but not "fire immune"? Getting second degree burns instead of third-degree burns? You would have no way to know you were "supposed" to get third-degree burns in the first place!

And GRRM's quote says nothing of a "high heat tolerance" in the first place. It says "The Targaryens can tolerate a bit more heat than most ordinary people, they like really hot baths and things like that". I think this is why you're getting a lot of people arguing with your premise---because your premise is flawed. "A bit more heat" is not synonymous with "high heat tolerance". Liking hot baths is not a symptom of a superhuman ability. (And GRRM said the Targs could tolerate a bit more heat than most ordinary people. Not even all ordinary people.) You're twisting the actual words to say things that they expressly do not say.

As Dr. Pepper pointed out, Dany's love of hot baths in AGOT sets the groundwork for her later fire-and-heat-related beliefs. In fact, when Dany first thinks about liking hot baths in AGOT, she thinks:

She liked the heat. It made her feel clean. Besides, her brother had often told her that it was never too hot for a Targaryen.

Her love of hot baths is one reason she feels comfortable starting down the path of believing some of the pretty obvious BS Viserys told her about her family. Dany herself makes the same mistake in logic that this thread is making----that tolerating a bit more heat than most ordinary people, by liking hot baths and things like that, can in any way be evidence of a superhuman fire/heat ability. But Dany liking heat is not evidence that she has the capability of pulling some fire/heat related magical ability out of the air. Clearly she believes the opposite, which is why she's willing to attempt the pyre. But notice how Dany shows no heat resistance (and certainly no fire resistance) on the pyre at all until the actual witch casting a spell in the background burns alive---and notice how, when she first lights the pyre, the heat soon grows "too hot to bear", and Dany has to step away from it because she can't tolerate it. The pyre didn't confirm her "fire resistance' or even her "heat resistance", because it's pretty clear when you examine what actually happened there that Dany wasn't just naturally heat resistant or fireproof.

The point of the "heat resistance" in the form of "hot baths and things like that" is that it's meant to build the foundation for Dany to start believing in some very false ideas about her own capabilities. The pyre was a one-off magical event, and readers know it---but Dany does not. She thinks it further validated the BS Viserys was telling her about Targaryen capabilities. The point is that she's wrong. That's why she tries to tell herself Daznak's Pit mirrored the pyre, when readers can look at the two events and see all the ways the author is pointing out to us that they differed---we can see she's wrong but she cannot, because she doesn't realize that the foundations for her beliefs are faulty. And the reason she's amenable to this sort of idea in the first place is because she's convinced herself that liking hot baths was a symptom of a larger ability, a false belief that created this false foundation.

No, it's not that Quentyn and Daenerys are in a mind-meld. It's that Mr. Martin chooses to use this phrase twice in one book, once to describe the heat that killed Quentyn and once to describe the heat that did not kill Daenerys. If he wanted to describe two different things, why did he use the same expression in such similar context? It would not make much sense.

First, heat didn't kill Quentyn---fire did. That's the whole point: Drogon's "furnace wind" was just hot breath without any fire, while Rhaegal's "furnace wind" was accompanied by actual fire. We know this because Rhaegal's furnace wind presaged someone being set on fire, while Drogon's furnace wind did not. (And if you're trying to argue that Drogon's "furnace wind" did include fire, you're going to need some actual evidence of that in the text other than "the same phrase was used by two different people who were describing two very different dragon encounters." I mean, there aren't really a ton of easy-to-remember metaphors for what a dragon's breath feels like in the first place.)

And second, what we have are multiple limited narrators who have no access to each other's information base. The author clearly used the same phraseology in both events for a reason, but it's equally clear from the surrounding circumstances and effects shown that that reason was not to indicate that Dany and Quentyn were experiencing the same thing. By encouraging readers to compare the two events, GRRM actually highlights to readers the pretty stark differences between the two encounters.

Notice, for example, that Quentyn's "furnace wind" comes from behind him, where he can't "see" what's coming with it.

And then a hot wind buffeted him and he heard the sound of leathern wings and the air was full of ash and cinders and a monstrous roar went echoing off the scorched and blackened bricks and he could hear his friends shouting wildly. Gerris was calling out his name, over and over, and the big man was bellowing, “Behind you, behind you, behind you!”

Quentyn turned and threw his left arm across his face to shield his eyes from the furnace wind. Rhaegal, he reminded himself, the green one is Rhaegal.

When he raised his whip, he saw that the lash was burning. His hand as well. All of him, all of him was burning.

Quentyn didn't initially realize Rhaegal was breathing fire because Rhaegal was initially behind him, and when Quentyn turned, he shielded his eyes from the "furnace wind", which is why he doesn't see the fire coming, and also why he's then capable of seeing his body on fire when Rhaegal starts breathing fire at him---if he hadn't shielded his eyes from the furnace wind, his face would have been set on fire when he turned. But it's unmistakeable to readers that Rhaegal's "furnace wind" is followed by him breathing fire.

Dany's "furnace wind", in contrast, comes from right smack in front of her. We know this because Dany gives us a running description of Drogon's every movement immediately before, during, and after the "furnace wind". If she wasn't looking at him, she wouldn't have been able to do that. And if Drogon had actually been breathing fire at her there, Dany would have seen it. It's not like she can't recognize what a dragon breathing fire looks like---after all, after she grabs the whip and starts hitting him, she tells us that Drogon does start spitting fire at her. Given her later attempt to tell herself she'd had another Pyre incident, had Drogon actually been breathing fire along with his "furnace wind", Dany would have had every reason to highlight that fact while she was actually experiencing it. (In fact, her ducking under the fire a few paragraphs later makes zero sense had Drogon's "furnace wind" actually been accompanied by fire, as if she'd just experienced a full face of fire and been unharmed, she would have had no reason whatsoever to be afraid of, and therefore try to dodge, Drogon's fire later on. That she was afraid, and dodged, indicates quite clearly that she knew at the time the furnace wind was just hot air.)

The whole point here is to highlight to readers that these two POV characters were experiencing two very different things. In Dany's case, actual fire did not accompany the furnace wind---in Quentyn's case, the furnace wind was directly followed by fire. Later, when Drogon does start spitting actual fire at her (with no accompanying furnace wind), Dany was able to mostly dodge it (her hair gets ignited when she dodges under the actual fire, but it seems like nothing else did) because Drogon is within her eyeline and she can see his movements. Quentyn, however, couldn't dodge Rhaegal's fire because Rhaegal got the drop on him from behind while he was distracted with Viserion.

Dany's dragon encounter is clearly connected, from a literary and a plot standpoint, with Quentyn's dragon encounter, and it's pretty obvious that the two events are meant to be compared (I mean, Dany's actions in Daznak's Pit are at least partially the impetus, and definitely the blueprint, for Quentyn's later dragontaming attempt). If/when Dany finds out about Quentyn's fate, there's no doubt in my mind she'll attribute her success and his failure to differences in blood. However, when we as readers make that comparison, it becomes clearer and clearer that Dany and Quentyn were not actually experiencing the same thing. Quentyn died when his body was set on fire. Dany survived when her body was not set on fire. This is not evidence that Dany's immune to (or resistant---though what difference there could possibly be between "resistant" and "immune" when it comes to this topic eludes me) fire.

Dany later tells herself that she was fireproof in the Pit as she was on the Pyre, which is actually one major reason why the clothes, "furnace wind", and things like that keep getting brought up. Because Dany, one of our unreliable narrators, had every reason in the world to clearly describe herself being "bathed" in fire during her Pit POV, because she knows that's what happened to her on the Pyre. Dany had every reason in the world to painstakingly outline the fire's deleterious effects on her clothes, because again, fire-destroyed clothes were a hallmark of what happened to her on the Pyre. That she tries desperately to tell herself she's had another Pyre incident, while never admitting to having experienced the same things (body set on fire, clothes destroyed by fire) that clearly happened to her on the Pyre, is pretty clear evidence that she didn't have another fireproof event but is desperately trying to convince herself she did.

As far as the clothes go, she's wearing very little. She gets knocked on her backside. I picture her sitting with her knees up and her arms crossed in a way that mostly sheilds her remaining clothes from the flames while she is staring at Drogon over her arms. If you picture it differently, that's fine, but you really can't deny that the scenario I have described is realistic and that it provides a good explanation for why her clothes weren't burned away.

I really, really can. This is what she describes happening to her while she's in the Pit:

“No” was all that she had time to say. No, not me, don’t you know me? The black teeth closed inches from her face. He meant to tear my head off. The sand was in her eyes. She stumbled over the pitmaster’s corpse and fell on her backside.

Drogon roared. The sound filled the pit. A furnace wind engulfed her.

No indication there whatsoever of her "sitting with her knees up and with her arms crossed". For a scenario to be plausible, you need some indication in the text to believe your speculation is actually happening (and "because it's required for my theory to work" isn't an indication in the text).

I don't believe that her clothes turned into rags while she was wandering around the Dothraki Sea. She says that she took the whip and "the rags on her back" with her from Meereen. And they are already "hardly more than rags" when she left Drogon's cave to go walking in the Dothraki Sea. I think that her clothes weren't rags when she went into the pit to confront Drogon but they were rags when she rode out of the pit on his back.

What she actually says is this: first,

The sun was hot this morning, the sky blue and cloudless. That was good. Dany’s clothes were hardly more than rags, and offered little in the way of warmth. One of her sandals had slipped off during her wild flight from Meereen and she had left the other up by Drogon’s cave, preferring to go barefoot rather than half-shod. Her tokar and veils she had abandoned in the pit, and her linen undertunic had never been made to withstand the hot days and cold nights of the Dothraki sea. Sweat and grass and dirt had stained it, and Dany had torn a strip off the hem to make a bandage for her shin.

She mentions what happens to her other clothes---her sandal, her tokar, and her veils---in Daznak's Pit. What she doesn't mention is how her linen undertunic was somehow burnt into rags there. Given that the undertunic's fate is the only one not tied to the events of the Pit, that's an indication the undertunic didn't become "rags" in the Pit. And what she does mention, vis a vis the undertunic, is the wear and tear the environment of the Dothraki Sea has been having on it. Later in the same chapter, she mentions "As she walked, she tapped her thigh with the pitmaster’s whip. That, and the rags on her back, were all she had taken from Meereen." Given that by this point she's already described the wear and tear her clothes have undergone on the Dothraki Sea, mentioned what happened in the Pit to every other article of clothing except for her undertunic, there's really no logical way to infer that her clothes are rags because of dragonfire from the Pit, or that she's indicating the rags she currently has were rags in Daznak's Pit. Rather, the rags are all she has left by this point in time.

The idea that she's resistant to heat in some superhuman way, or that the pyre was the rule instead of a one-off, wishes away so many facts, provided in the books and by the author, that I really don't see how it makes any sense whatsoever.

[Ramsay B.]

Argument over. Hooray!!

[Ygrain]

What tze says. Plus, what both descriptions have in common is that "furnace wind", i.e. hot breath, is produced when dragons roar.

"Drogon roared... a furnace wind engulfed her."

"Then a hot wind buffeted him....and a monstrous roar went echoing"

Note that at this point, Quentyn is not burning yet, as there is no point in his friends yelling "behind you" at an already burning person. He turns, shielding his eyes from "furnace wind", which clearly is used as synonym for "hot wind", and only then he sees himseld engulfed in flames and starts screaming. Being turned with his back, and shielding his eyes with his hand, he never saw the flame coming after the roar.

ETA: Note also that when Dany falls on her backside over the pitmaster's body and Drogon roars full into her face, the pitmaster's clothes are not set on fire, and nor is the whip which is lying right within her reach. The whip is warm to the touch but not burning, like Quentyn's was, though givent he proximity, it should have been set afire, as well. The "furnace wind" is not hot enought to set objects afire.

[caravaggio]

I blame the show for the confusion. I think even a lot of book readers forget that the only time Dany has any special resistance is the pyre, which Martin has said was a one time event.

Having a bit more tolerance for heat doesn't mean she can stand in front of dragon's flame or probably even hold her hand over a candle for much longer than a typical human in the world. People living in Dorne or the Summer Isles probably have a higher tolerance for heat too. We don't look at the Northmen with Stannis and think they must have some magical ability because they are able to deal with the harsh winter conditions more than the southern knights.

As to the OP's original question of why Martin may have introduced it at all... Targaryens have often had the false belief that they had some fire immunity and paid the price for it. It may be possible at some future time that Dany also makes this mistake and pays for it.

[Mladen]

My God, how many puppies were killed in these two days :)

As a side note, trying to parse a difference between being "resistant to fire" and being "immune to fire" is nonsensical. If a person is set on fire but doesn't burn, that person is immune. What circumstances could possibly lead to a person being "fire resistant" but not "fire immune"? Getting second degree burns instead of third-degree burns? You would have no way to know you were "supposed" to get third-degree burns in the first place!

And GRRM's quote says nothing of a "high heat tolerance" in the first place. It says "The Targaryens can tolerate a bit more heat than most ordinary people, they like really hot baths and things like that". I think this is why you're getting a lot of people arguing with your premise---because your premise is flawed. "A bit more heat" is not synonymous with "high heat tolerance". Liking hot baths is not a symptom of a superhuman ability. (And GRRM said the Targs could tolerate a bit more heat than most ordinary people. Not even all ordinary people.) You're twisting the actual words to say things that they expressly do not say.

Bingo! There is no difference between resistant and immune. Only in medical terms, when we use these two terms for different things. As, Tze, pointed out any burn is sign that there is no supernatural ressilience or immunity to the heat or fire.

Also, the hot baths were in medieval times, something reserved for nobility. Even in Roman baths, only the highest circles of society could enjoy a hot bath. So, it`s normal to believe that any noble prefers hot baths, and that means nothing in terms of heat resistance. It just means they were rich and could afford it.

[King of Winters]

My God, how many puppies were killed in these two days :)

One thousand and one.

[chris999]

So that her dragons can never be used against her (specifically her).

Someone could steal them and use them to destroy her Dothraki and Unsullied army, but not her because she is the Mother of Dragons. She basically gave birth to them.

Even though it is not my favorite theory... I do believe that she is AA, and that the dragons are Lightbringer.

[caravaggio]

So that her dragons can never be used against her (specifically her).

Someone could steal them and use them to destroy her Dothraki and Unsullied army, but not her because she is the Mother of Dragons. She basically gave birth to them.

Even though it is not my favorite theory... I do believe that she is AA, and that the dragons are Lightbringer.

If someone could turn a dragon against her she would be nothing but charred bones unless there was some second magical event that protected her. She has no special immunity.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

<snip>

I was lucky enough to avoid popping a blood vessel by missing this the other day, but I just want to reiterate again how much I love reading your arguments, how much sense you make and how easily you brush aside some of the more nonsensical arguments on here. The myth of the fireproof Targaryen is one of the more tiresome ones on here, given that it keeps persisting despite evidence to the contrary and the own author insisting it's not true. I'm very ... proud, for lack of a better word, that you're able to argue so well against other arguments that basically amount to some need to fluff up the Targaryens to be more than what they really are.

Liking your baths hot and being able to tolerate warmer weather a bit better =/= immunity to fire. I'm sure the people swearing up and down that Dany has some super special fire immunity would be fine with her proving it by slamming a jug o' wildfire. Right?

So that her dragons can never be used against her (specifically her).

Someone could steal them and use them to destroy her Dothraki and Unsullied army, but not her because she is the Mother of Dragons. She basically gave birth to them.

Even though it is not my favorite theory... I do believe that she is AA, and that the dragons are Lightbringer.

I'm pretty sure that if she took an actual direct fire hit from any one of her three dragons, it would kill her. Which, as Tze pointed out, explains why she tried so damn hard to dodge Drogo's fire in the pit. If she wasn't worried about it hurting her, why not let it hit her?

[The Idiots Lantern]

I just have one question though:

What about the rumors of deformed Targ babies born dead with wings, scales, and claws? Supposedly Rheago was like this, and there's rumors of more of them. Is it just because Targs are so inbred? I know we haven't seen one of these dead dragon babies "on camera" so to speak, not even Rheago (which I find kinda odd: I'd think MMD would want to wave Dany's deformed baby right in her face, but maybe Jorah insisted they get rid of the corpse before Dany saw it) so it's possible they don't have wings or claws at all, but....what do you think this could possibly be? Anything?

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

I just have one question though:

What about the rumors of deformed Targ babies born dead with wings, scales, and claws? Supposedly Rheago was like this, and there's rumors of more of them. Is it just because Targs are so inbred? I know we haven't seen one of these dead dragon babies "on camera" so to speak, not even Rheago (which I find kinda odd: I'd think MMD would want to wave Dany's deformed baby right in her face, but maybe Jorah insisted they get rid of the corpse before Dany saw it) so it's possible they don't have wings or claws at all, but....what do you think this could possibly be? Anything?

I'm pretty sure this has to do with the spell, that seems to have "swapped" the life of Rhaego for the life of the dragons.

Apart from that, I'm not sure what "rumors" you mean, as I've never read anything about other Targaryen babies having such deformities.

[Mladen]

I just have one question though:

What about the rumors of deformed Targ babies born dead with wings, scales, and claws? Supposedly Rheago was like this, and there's rumors of more of them. Is it just because Targs are so inbred? I know we haven't seen one of these dead dragon babies "on camera" so to speak, not even Rheago (which I find kinda odd: I'd think MMD would want to wave Dany's deformed baby right in her face, but maybe Jorah insisted they get rid of the corpse before Dany saw it) so it's possible they don't have wings or claws at all, but....what do you think this could possibly be? Anything?

Again, people, how do you think sex between human and dragon actually happened. As Tze said, perhaps there were some crazy Targaryen trying to do it, but there isn`t any evidence that any baby was made at the process. The entire idea of this bestiality is crazy.

[yolkboy]

I just have one question though:

What about the rumors of deformed Targ babies born dead with wings, scales, and claws? Supposedly Rheago was like this, and there's rumors of more of them.

Are you thinking of the stunted, deformed dragons that were hatched?

[The Idiots Lantern]

Are you thinking of the stunted, deformed dragons that were hatched?

No, I think those are more proof that the Targs themselves didn't know how to hatch healthy dragons. Whatever secret ways they had in Valyria, they left in Valyria. The longer the dragons stayed in Westeros, the worse it got for them.

Again, people, how do you think sex between human and dragon actually happened. As Tze said, perhaps there were some crazy Targaryen trying to do it, but there isn`t any evidence that any baby was made at the process. The entire idea of this bestiality is crazy.

I think so too. I very much doubt that was sex with dragons. My money'd be on it being more likely the blood magic that the Valyrians liked to use.

Apart from that, I'm not sure what "rumors" you mean, as I've never read anything about other Targaryen babies having such deformities.

Really? I could have sworn I'd heard that because of the incest, they had a problem with dead, dragon-shaped children... it was one of the things that haunted the family.

[Mladen]

I think so too. I very much doubt that was sex with dragons. My money'd be on it being more likely the blood magic that the Valyrians liked to use.

As I said, it was most likely some blood ritual, than procreation between human and dragon.

Really? I could have sworn I'd heard that because of the incest, they had a problem with dead, dragon-shaped children... it was one of the things that haunted the family.

No, there were never mentioning any abnormality within Targaryen children. What haunted the family, is greatness and madness as two sides of the coin. I believe some of them thought that madness is resulted from incest throughout generations.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Really? I could have sworn I'd heard that because of the incest, they had a problem with dead, dragon-shaped children... it was one of the things that haunted the family.

I have never, ever seen or heard anything like that. Many of the later dragons that hatched were stunted and deformed; maybe that's what you're thinking of.

I would also love to see a Targaryen try to mate with a dragon, about as much as I'd love to see Dany chug wildfire. Which is to say, a lot.

[E-Ro]

Really? I could have sworn I'd heard that because of the incest, they had a problem with dead, dragon-shaped children... it was one of the things that haunted the family.

Yeah, not ringing any bells.

[redriver]

Nothing or no one is immune to fire.Even dragons were consumed by the Doom.

I can't understand why so many pages and posts have been dedicated to such a minor issue,and one that's been clearly explained by GRRM himself.

A non sequitur if ever there was one.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

I agree, which is why for the purposes of this discussion I think it's best to ignore those who don't accept the premise GRRM has strongly alluded to in the books and in the quote cited by the OP. If people really think he was just saying noble peoples have higher tolerance to heat because they more often take hot baths, that's fine by me and I couldn't care less. Likewise for those who use science to argue against the Targaryens having a special connection to dragons or any special abilities thereby related. They are welcome to do that, but I don't see the relevance, as we're dealing with a world of magic and the author has said he intends to keep it largely mysterious.

As for the topic itself, with the caveat that I haven't fully researched this, I tend to subscribe to the theory I've seen posted elsewhere that the Targaryens practiced blood magic to bind themselves (one method being the dragon horns) and their genetic line to dragons, and that this is what gives Dany a higher tolerance to dragonfire, if not heat and/or fire in general. It might not have much relevance going forward, but maybe it will help protect Dany when she's riding a fire-breathing Drogon during battle.

That's what I was wondering about? Will it have any relevance going forward? In Dany's story or in Aegon V's story in D & E? I know how Aegon eventually dies by fire, but a lot happens to him in the interim between the last D&E and his death.

I personally don't subscribe to the 'Dany is delusional from years of family propaganda, and all her POV's are basically a lie.' So I don't think this thread is the place to respond to all those posts. Whoever wants to start a new thread to discuss Dany's inaccurate descriptions of everything that happens to her, feel free to do so instead of hijacking this thread.

As a few people have suggested about Ancient targ's binding themselves to the dragons via blood magic or the dragon horns. I think this is the best idea I have heard as of yet; the only problem I have with it is that the text has suggested that the Dragon Horns were used by miners and slavers to get the dragon to bend to their will and do manual labor of some sort.

The closest dragon relationships seem to have existed between Targaryen's and their dragons, and theirs was a pet/owner relationship, a natural one, where the riders and the dragons chose to be there together, not bound to each other magically. So if at some point a Targaryen did preform some spell or magic to take some of the dragon's power/heat immunity (GRRM--'Dragons, on the other hand, are pretty much immune to fire.") I am still wondering Why this 'magic' became a family trait and is passed down from generation to generation. It seems to me that maybe more than one of the Ancient Targ's must have done this, otherwise it would have all stemmed from one singular person. And while this is possible, it would mean that it was a very, very powerful spell to alter the Targaryen DNA (or whatever) enough to pass it on to their children for centuries. Seems like a complicated feat for just one person to accomplish.

[WinterKing]

I personally don't subscribe to the 'Dany is delusional from years of family propaganda, and all her POV's are basically a lie.' So I don't think this thread is the place to respond to all those posts. Whoever wants to start a new thread to discuss Dany's inaccurate descriptions of everything that happens to her, feel free to do so instead of hijacking this thread.

This thread was not hijacked.The discussion about the precision of Dany's words appeared naturally, as it was used as an argument by both sides.