Game of Thrones Thread -

Silent Observer

Tetramonadist Titan
kiwifarms.net
Stop trying to be clever, call them sandniggers like everyone else. And yeah, actual life experience tends to produce better writers. Tolkien served in WWI and was at the Battle of the Somme, probably the most pointless battle in an extraordinarily stupid war. He went on to write the defining work of what's called high fantasy.
Excuse me? I'm going to call them Desert Mormons because that's what they are. You can call them whatever you want. And as far as your point about life experience.....that's absolutely true. GRRM is lazy AF and perhaps some military service would give him the ambition to actually finish his novels. That being stated, even without military service, he did a pretty damn good job crafting his world. Matter of fact, his story has the potential to be better than LOTR, provided he ever completes it.
 
Last edited:

Spatula

kiwifarms.net
But if you look at the facts...

Season 1 Dany: Threatens to take over an entire nation
Season 2 Dany: threatens to burn entire cities to the ground (qarth wouldn't have been as vulnerable to a coup if they had let her die outside of the gates)
Season 3 Dany: burns the slavemasters alive after doing a deal with them. Is offered the ships she was after, but refuses. Conquers two cities, crucifies many of the defeated.
Season 4 Dany: more threats of fire and blood
Season 5 Dany: more threats of fire and blood
Season 6 Dany: burns all the dothraki khals alive.
Season 7 Dany: more fire and blood, burns the food caravans and house tarly
Season 8 Dany: wait why does she burn a city to the ground!?
When you consider these people were all criminals, terrible people, or POW that refused a life sentence(taking the black), her 180 psychosis makes less sense.
I would have loved to see a greek tragedy, a fallen tragic hero, but we were robbed of that with Daenerys, because they had to wrap it up.
 

verissimus

kiwifarms.net
D&D set her up as a heroine with a special destiny in these scenes. What is missing are the scenes that depict her flaws, a lack of humility and understanding of limitations, the display of hubris that foreshadows downfall.
I disagree with the latter. Yes, they leaned far more heavily on her being a heroine than a villain, but Danaerys even up to even season 8 still had a petulant/impulsive, uncompromising, and obsessive side to her. Granted she was beforehand often tempered either by those around her, or as others have noted elswhere, by some kind of moral compass to the common man in the case where 2 of her dragons went wild, but apparently as the memes goes, the writers kind of forgot about the character's past behavior. They simply had her turn just because they wanted a tragic ending instead of easing us into it which they had done before. It's also pretty insulting (mind you this character has been one of my least favorite characters in the show well before this season) that they would even think of doing this to a character they had been building up for 8 seasons and who we knew awhile ago would help Jon and the rest fight the White Walkers.

Simply put, the execution was terrible, the idea to make her the villain not so much.

Edit : Yeah, I also agree with the whole thing about how all the characters who looked up to her and died for her have also been betrayed as well except Missandei. I think she wouldn't have given a crap if Danaerys burned the city to the ground before or after she was queen.
 
Last edited:

Mola Ram

Self Righteous Ego Bastard Asshole
kiwifarms.net
Season 1 Dany: Threatens to take over an entire nation
Season 2 Dany: threatens to burn entire cities to the ground (qarth wouldn't have been as vulnerable to a coup if they had let her die outside of the gates)
Season 3 Dany: burns the slavemasters alive after doing a deal with them. Is offered the ships she was after, but refuses. Conquers two cities, crucifies many of the defeated.
Season 4 Dany: more threats of fire and blood
Season 5 Dany: more threats of fire and blood
Season 6 Dany: burns all the dothraki khals alive.
Season 7 Dany: more fire and blood, burns the food caravans and house tarly
Season 8 Dany: wait why does she burn a city to the ground!?
I understand Daenerys always had the potential to go apeshit and be the ultimate villain of the story. The problem, as so many people are pointing out, is the execution. A lot of the things on your list are mere rhetoric: who cares if she threatens to burn cities to the ground if she never actually did it? The first season example is particularly unconvincing: "the Stallion Who Mounts the World" was a pure Khal Drogo idea, and as time went on, Dany seemed to understand that Drogo was an impulsive hothead who never would have made a decent ruler, even if she still cherished his memory. The people she actually kills were, at least arguably, guilty of terrible crimes themselves. Still, these examples do lay the groundwork for the possibility of her going overboard someday. The problem is the counterexamples were always presented much more thoroughly as more indicative of her character: the trial for her ex-slave advisor whose execution caused a riot, locking up her dragons for the death of a single shepherd girl, the warm moments between her and Barristan Selmy when he reminisces about what a kindly man Rhaegar was (that last clearly reflected when Jon mentions he does not enjoy killing -- you can practically see her fall for him in that moment).

I think Martin's goal -- and I haven't read the books, so grain of salt and all -- was to depict the creation of a fantasy villain from relatively innocent beginnings to a tragic, crushing fall from grace. That's super interesting and could have been heartbreaking if done correctly. But the show put so much focus on Daenerys's sympathetic side, and cast her actions in such a righteous light (or at least in a gray area), that the decision to indiscriminately massacre the largest city in Westeros (it's fucking burnt flat! the death toll might well be in the hundreds of thousands) really does seem against her character -- as if she's learned nothing from what she's gone through in the last eight seasons. Which, really, seems to be the problem with most of the characters in the final act. Everyone is regressing to our initial impression of them.

What's missing, I think, is a scene or preferably a series of scenes where Dany reflects on her attempts to be a just ruler and how it never really worked out -- all she got was revolution and civil unrest, slowly coming to dismiss the successes she had and rationalizing that even those would never happen in Westeros because the people didn't accept her. The arc of her story after finally arriving in Westeros was just fuckup after fuckup, but every bit of it seemed to be due to the bad advice of her councilors rather than the methods she employed in Essos not working. It could have become something absolutely chilling if she drew the conclusion that slaves are worth saving but free people are not, since in their freedom they make the wrong choices (i.e., not loving Daenerys Targaryen).

All of this needed more episodes than they allotted. That'll be the ultimate conclusion, most likely: Game of Thrones failed because they tried to wrap it up too soon and too hastily.
 

verissimus

kiwifarms.net
You know, now that I think about it, why didn't the show writers think to combine parts of season 5 and 6 together with regards to the fight for the north? That is bypass the stupid bullshit about Jon having to stay in the wall while Stannis pisses off to fight the Boltons pretty much for his family's behalf. I mean, I'd have to go back to see how exactly they would have to cover all their bases, but you'd think that would have been the optimum thing to do in terms of time left remaining in the show especially considering Jon just does what Stannis tried to do anyway a season later. They could have also just as well given Stannis a decent sending off if he died in battle side-by-side so to speak with Jon.

It's all so stupid especially in the case of the absolutely meaningless "we can't take Kings Landing right now" bit in season 7. What's the difference in not doing that then and there when 1) that's the most logical thing for the characters to do, 2) you're going to have the characters do this anyway, and 3) this gives you more time to give the show a tragic ending, but no, we have to rush things now because we clearly procrastinated before.
 
Last edited:

StarkRavingMad

kiwifarms.net
Personally, I have been wanting a Daenerys villain arc for years now. Yet, this past episode was absolutely pathetic.

It's simply not enough to say that "Dany has had people executed before!" Do we forget that Jon Snow literally had a child executed after he was brought back to life? ALL leaders in GoT have had people executed. Does everyone forget that Ned Stark even professed that all good leaders should be the ones to carry out the executions they order? Nobody has accused any of the Starks of "going mad," though.

The problem with Dany's turn isn't just that it was rushed; it's that it was done in a way that makes everything unintentionally hilarious. "The BELLS triggered her. Missande being killed, of ALL people, was the straw that broke the camel's back!" LOL.

EDIT: Also ... The episode made it seem like Dany not getting the D from Jon that one night was also a trigger for her. Hilarious.
 

Mola Ram

Self Righteous Ego Bastard Asshole
kiwifarms.net
You know, now that I think about it, why didn't the show writers think to combine parts of season 5 and 6 together with regards to the fight for the north? That is bypass the stupid bullshit about Jon having to stay in the wall while Stannis pisses off to fight the Boltons pretty much for his family's behalf.
The whole Stannis storyline after Blackwater feels like this weird digression that ultimately goes nowhere. He saves the Night's Watch and crushes the Wildling invasion, but at no point did he ever seem like a serious contender for the endgame. The dreary existence he led from his defeat at King's Landing really only seemed to be there to make sure Melisandre was there at the right moment to resurrect Jon.

t's all so stupid so stupid especially in the case of the absolutely meaningless "we can't take Kings Landing right now" bit in season 7. What's the difference in not doing that then and there when 1) that's the most logical thing for the characters to do, 2) you're going to have the characters do this anyway, and 3) this gives you more time to give the show a tragic ending, but no, we have to rush things now because we clearly procrastinated before.
What makes the whole Season 7 delay in attacking KL even more ridiculous in retrospect is that when Daenerys actually does attack the city, she conquers it with minimal loss of life, two fewer dragons, and a massively reduced army ... in less than ten minutes. Why did she wait?‽
 

iRON-mAn

kiwifarms.net
You know, now that I think about it, why didn't the show writers think to combine parts of season 5 and 6 together with regards to the fight for the north? That is bypass the stupid bullshit about Jon having to stay in the wall while Stannis pisses off to fight the Boltons pretty much for his family's behalf.
They did it that way because that's how it happens in the books, and D&D probably reveled at an opportunity to kill off Stannis.
 

Zero0

kiwifarms.net
The person on the throne should be someone we like and is a good ruler, that would have made Dany trying to conquer westeros actually morally ambiguous, the people wouldn't support her, the other kingdoms wouldn't support her and she would go apeshit and burn things down.

IMO it would work better that way.
 

Stab You in the Back

kiwifarms.net
I think Martin's goal -- and I haven't read the books, so grain of salt and all -- was to depict the creation of a fantasy villain from relatively innocent beginnings to a tragic, crushing fall from grace.
Book Dany is a thirsty 16 year old who fell in love with a pirate with a neon blue beard. It makes a lot more sense when she goes ham on people because that's what you'd expect from a hormonal 16 year old who learned everything she knows about how to rule from her brother Viserys.

Sexy, sexy Daario.
Daario_Heads.jpg
 

Mola Ram

Self Righteous Ego Bastard Asshole
kiwifarms.net
The person on the throne should be someone we like and is a good ruler, that would have made Dany trying to conquer westeros actually morally ambiguous, the people wouldn't support her, the other kingdoms wouldn't support her and she would go apeshit and burn things down.

IMO it would work better that way.
Daenerys actually becoming Queen and then fucking it up? Interesting. Definitely needed a full season to play out. I have a horrible suspicion, though, that the whole point of this is to have her die in sight of the Iron Throne without ever having sat on it, because Deep Symbolism or something.
 

Lemmingwise

Through a scanner smuckly
kiwifarms.net
I understand Daenerys always had the potential to go apeshit and be the ultimate villain of the story. The problem, as so many people are pointing out, is the execution. A lot of the things on your list are mere rhetoric: who cares if she threatens to burn cities to the ground if she never actually did it? The first season example is particularly unconvincing: "the Stallion Who Mounts the World" was a pure Khal Drogo idea, and as time went on, Dany seemed to understand that Drogo was an impulsive hothead who never would have made a decent ruler, even if she still cherished his memory. The people she actually kills were, at least arguably, guilty of terrible crimes themselves. Still, these examples do lay the groundwork for the possibility of her going overboard someday. The problem is the counterexamples were always presented much more thoroughly as more indicative of her character: the trial for her ex-slave advisor whose execution caused a riot, locking up her dragons for the death of a single shepherd girl, the warm moments between her and Barristan Selmy when he reminisces about what a kindly man Rhaegar was (that last clearly reflected when Jon mentions he does not enjoy killing -- you can practically see her fall for him in that moment).

I think Martin's goal -- and I haven't read the books, so grain of salt and all -- was to depict the creation of a fantasy villain from relatively innocent beginnings to a tragic, crushing fall from grace. That's super interesting and could have been heartbreaking if done correctly. But the show put so much focus on Daenerys's sympathetic side, and cast her actions in such a righteous light (or at least in a gray area), that the decision to indiscriminately massacre the largest city in Westeros (it's fucking burnt flat! the death toll might well be in the hundreds of thousands) really does seem against her character -- as if she's learned nothing from what she's gone through in the last eight seasons. Which, really, seems to be the problem with most of the characters in the final act. Everyone is regressing to our initial impression of them.

What's missing, I think, is a scene or preferably a series of scenes where Dany reflects on her attempts to be a just ruler and how it never really worked out -- all she got was revolution and civil unrest, slowly coming to dismiss the successes she had and rationalizing that even those would never happen in Westeros because the people didn't accept her. The arc of her story after finally arriving in Westeros was just fuckup after fuckup, but every bit of it seemed to be due to the bad advice of her councilors rather than the methods she employed in Essos not working. It could have become something absolutely chilling if she drew the conclusion that slaves are worth saving but free people are not, since in their freedom they make the wrong choices (i.e., not loving Daenerys Targaryen).

All of this needed more episodes than they allotted. That'll be the ultimate conclusion, most likely: Game of Thrones failed because they tried to wrap it up too soon and too hastily.
Although I agree with the general gist of your post, it's not at all true that my post was mere rhetoric; it is daenerys who convinces khal drogo to set on a plan to conquer westeros; that's not a khal drogo idea: it's hers. And he isn't convinced until the failed assassination attempt. The idea that she is somehow above him and sees him as an impulsive hothead is not really apparent either.

Slavery is not a terrible crime in Essos (at least slaver's bay), it's not even a crime at all and for her to impose it as such, is a radical idea. It goes against the whole social order. It is far more radical than burning the Tarly's because they refuse to bend the knee; killing houses is not that uncommon in the world of game of thrones. Opposing slavery is normal in Braavos and westeros (it's what got Jorah banished), but not in slaver's bay.

It's as almost as radical as enacting gay marriage in saudi arabia, or abolishing it in the west.

Many people saw a just revenge from Daenerys when she suddenly spoke valyrian and burned the slave masters; I saw people who should not have tried to trade with her and put her to the death. Similar with Qarth, where the social order was upset by her arrival. She broke her trade agreement when she had been received as a guest. Rudely perhaps, but there is some comparison to the red wedding even there.

After that I found it hard to like her. What if Missandei or the unsullied had chosen to not follow her, when they were given the choice? What if the dothraki hadn't? We don't really see people defecting from her. In a conversation between Jon and Missandei, she is adament that she would receive a ship and be allowed to leave. But we don't really know if that is true.

Now that I think about it, there's an interesting parallel between Robb Stark and Daenerys Stormborn. After all, his campaign truly went into the shitter after one of his followers, the karstarks, killed an enemy that was imprisoned and he executed the follower for it, dealing irreparable damage to his forces. Daenerys too executed one of the slaves, who killed a master who was already caught and lost the support of the lowerclass:


I agree that she is highlighted in a sympathetic light and the sentimental element in her music themes are part of that; but I also think that's the women are wonderful effect, where in general people are more forgiving of what women do and more likely to root for them.

As for the earlier point about all the people being wrong about her; Barristan Selmy was barely there long enough to really form a strong opinion on her, Jorah was already someone with poor life judgement (slaving in westeros for his wife; falling in love with the person he's supposed to spy on; going through valyria). Jorah's devotion, though he says it's because she's good.

The part that made sure that Daenerys could never really be good is her ambition; an ambition similar to Tywin, Littlefinger and Margeary (who had a part in setting up Renly against Stannis, against the line of succession).

The elements of Daenerys ambitious side were always there, not in the least in her dealings in the east. Another example is when she arrogantly took the gifts offered to her in trade for her leaving for westeros and then armed their slaves and used them to cause insurrection. I know that in modernity people view these things as noble, particularly for its comparison to Lincoln and abolishing of slavery, but I don't believe that abolishing slavery is either her or Lincoln's motive: if you are ambitious you have to find someone disaffected to be your foot soldier. The change of social order is a tool more than a goal. In the end her goal was always to "break the wheel", which is essentially just her usurpations to become the person that divine authority derives from.
 

Lemmingwise

Through a scanner smuckly
kiwifarms.net
Book Dany is a thirsty 16 year old who fell in love with a pirate with a neon blue beard. It makes a lot more sense when she goes ham on people because that's what you'd expect from a hormonal 16 year old who learned everything she knows about how to rule from her brother Viserys.

Sexy, sexy Daario.
View attachment 759627
How the hell do they make blue hair and gold-tipped mustache look almost alright? Artists man, fucking magicians.
 

Mola Ram

Self Righteous Ego Bastard Asshole
kiwifarms.net
Although I agree with the general gist of your post, it's not at all true that my post was mere rhetoric; it is daenerys who convinces khal drogo to set on a plan to conquer westeros; that's not a khal drogo idea: it's hers. And he isn't convinced until the failed assassination attempt. The idea that she is somehow above him and sees him as an impulsive hothead is not really apparent either.

Slavery is not a terrible crime in Essos (at least slaver's bay), it's not even a crime at all and for her to impose it as such, is a radical idea. It goes against the whole social order. It is far more radical than burning the Tarly's because they refuse to bend the knee; killing houses is not that uncommon in the world of game of thrones. Opposing slavery is normal in Braavos and westeros (it's what got Jorah banished), but not in slaver's bay.

It's as almost as radical as enacting gay marriage in saudi arabia, or abolishing it in the west.

Many people saw a just revenge from Daenerys when she suddenly spoke valyrian and burned the slave masters; I saw people who should not have tried to trade with her and put her to the death. Similar with Qarth, where the social order was upset by her arrival. She broke her trade agreement when she had been received as a guest. Rudely perhaps, but there is some comparison to the red wedding even there.

After that I found it hard to like her. What if Missandei or the unsullied had chosen to not follow her, when they were given the choice? What if the dothraki hadn't? We don't really see people defecting from her. In a conversation between Jon and Missandei, she is adament that she would receive a ship and be allowed to leave. But we don't really know if that is true.

Now that I think about it, there's an interesting parallel between Robb Stark and Daenerys Stormborn. After all, his campaign truly went into the shitter after one of his followers, the karstarks, killed an enemy that was imprisoned and he executed the follower for it, dealing irreparable damage to his forces. Daenerys too executed one of the slaves, who killed a master who was already caught and lost the support of the lowerclass:


I agree that she is highlighted in a sympathetic light and the sentimental element in her music themes are part of that; but I also think that's the women are wonderful effect, where in general people are more forgiving of what women do and more likely to root for them.

As for the earlier point about all the people being wrong about her; Barristan Selmy was barely there long enough to really form a strong opinion on her, Jorah was already someone with poor life judgement (slaving in westeros for his wife; falling in love with the person he's supposed to spy on; going through valyria). Jorah's devotion, though he says it's because she's good.

The part that made sure that Daenerys could never really be good is her ambition; an ambition similar to Tywin, Littlefinger and Margeary (who had a part in setting up Renly against Stannis, against the line of succession).

The elements of Daenerys ambitious side were always there, not in the least in her dealings in the east. Another example is when she arrogantly took the gifts offered to her in trade for her leaving for westeros and then armed their slaves and used them to cause insurrection. I know that in modernity people view these things as noble, particularly for its comparison to Lincoln and abolishing of slavery, but I don't believe that abolishing slavery is either her or Lincoln's motive: if you are ambitious you have to find someone disaffected to be your foot soldier. The change of social order is a tool more than a goal. In the end her goal was always to "break the wheel", which is essentially just her usurpations to become the person that divine authority derives from.
Well, there's certainly a lot to debate. I don't like the idea that I basically fell prey to emotional manipulation provided by music and camera angles, but I can't dismiss it, either. I guess my most fundamental problem is that I really can't accept the leap from "morally ambiguous ruthlessness" to "wholesale slaughter of innocent civilians after the end of hostilities" as it's depicted in the show.

It's also just kind of odd to realize that everyone who distrusted her was 100% right in the end, despite most of her enemies being depicted as incompetents, tyrants, opportunistic scumbags, and leering perverts, from the rulers of Qarth to the Masters all the way back to fat, cuckolded, drunk, dead Robert Baratheon himself. Goddammit, Ned, why didn't you just let him slit her throat?
 

Wallace

Cram it in me, baby!
kiwifarms.net
Oooh, awkward.

Elizabeth Warren said:
Daenerys “Stormborn” Targaryen has been my favorite from the first moment she walked through fire.
...
Dany believes fiercely in her right to rule, but she despises what ruling means in the world she’s grown up in. She doesn’t want to be a slave owner or a dictator — and she definitely doesn’t want to become her murderous father.
 

God of Nothing

kiwifarms.net
Book Dany is a thirsty 16 year old who fell in love with a pirate with a neon blue beard. It makes a lot more sense when she goes ham on people because that's what you'd expect from a hormonal 16 year old who learned everything she knows about how to rule from her brother Viserys.

Sexy, sexy Daario.
View attachment 759627
Tyroshi trash cannot compare to Lyseni ass.

Anyone else feel like they're going to tard cum the GoT setting after they're done ruining the main story? Seems like the way to go. Gonna be shit unless they just adapt Martin's side novels no one gives a fuck about.
 

Lemmingwise

Through a scanner smuckly
kiwifarms.net
Despite most of her enemies being depicted as incompetents, tyrants, opportunistic scumbags, and leering perverts, from the rulers of Qarth to the Masters all the way back to fat, cuckolded, drunk, dead Robert Baratheon himself.
I never considered Robert a cuckold, considering he had more children than his wife, but I suppose there's some truth to it.

But yeah, there's no doubt that the show has turned her into a cartoon villain at the drop of a coin, but that's because all characterization has become cartoon versions. It's because a lot of tell and very little show. Why exactly is Tyrion afraid of Daenerys? We don't know. Why does he side with her over the spider? We don't know.

But that Daenerys doesn't care for law or justness was proven when she burned all the khal's alive. That she doesn't really care for the common people was proven when she executed the slave that she herself had armed against the masters. She cares about as much as a modern limousine liberal cares about the environment, taking private jets to environment fundraising events, or the way a modern neoconservative tries to earn brownie points by saying: look I support this gay Milo, I'm a good guy.

Her overriding goal has always been to sit on the throne and to break the current social order; more so than improve the world for others. She has already seen her failures at ruling and rather than think: Maybe I should do something else in my life, she is going to keep trying at playing god with other's lives until it works out.
 
Tags
None

About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. We call them lolcows because they can be milked for amusement or laughs. Our community is bizarrely diverse and spectators are encouraged to join the discussion.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.

Supporting the Forum

How to Help

The Kiwi Farms is constantly attacked by insane people and very expensive to run. It would not be here without community support.

We are on the Brave BAT program. Consider using Brave as your Browser. It's like Chrome but doesn't tell Google what you masturbate to.

BTC: 1EiZnCKCb6Dc4biuto2gJyivwgPRM2YMEQ
BTC+SW: bc1qwv5fzv9u6arksw6ytf79gfvce078vprtc0m55s
ETH: 0xc1071c60ae27c8cc3c834e11289205f8f9c78ca5
LTC: LcDkAj4XxtoPWP5ucw75JadMcDfurwupet
BAT: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
XMR: 438fUMciiahbYemDyww6afT1atgqK3tSTX25SEmYknpmenTR6wvXDMeco1ThX2E8gBQgm9eKd1KAtEQvKzNMFrmjJJpiino