Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Kyriakos, May 14, 2019.
I can dream can't I!!!!!?
I'm beginning to suspect the actual villain of the piece is the demon who is possessing bran.
Well it appears that "the judgment of the plot be upon" them both...
For my part, I've been saying here that Dany's burning of KL was well telegraphed throughout the show and the episode where she does it is intentionally shot in a way that showcases her as a villain from the perspective of the people in the city.
I've got no problem with people condemning Dany. I like Dany and I didnt like Stannis, but both had their faults. It can all be very subjective. That's part of what made the characters interesting.
All the cool outfits helped too.
That just tells you that bourgeois morality draws the line somewhere. Eliminating thousands of lives is acceptable for fulfilling one's ambition; one million lives is not. Also mirrored by real-life political discourse. The excesses of capitalism are excusable in the name of creating wealth because they don't outright kill millions, while Stalin's purges and collectivisation are always condemned.
Jeez... Stalin's purges? I thought we were just having a nice talk about Game of Thrones...
My point was just that both Dany and Stany were ultimately brought down as a consequence of their bloodthirsty quest for power... and that one man's brutal dictator is another mans purty lady... or something along those lines.
As a side note... Did anybody notice how Jon called her "Dany" in the finale when he was tearfully pleading with her not to be evil? Maybe I'm misremebering, but I don't recall anyone in-universe referring to her as "Dany"... I always thought of it as fan-shorthand. So had they been doing that all along or was that a last bit of fan-service... or ad-lib/slip-up by Harrington (like when Luke accidently calls Leia "Kay" at the end of EP4)?
Well, there is (hopefully) some difference between how we analyze fiction and reality (typically, how "fun" jerks are popular in fiction and a PITA in reality), but a good amount of our, if I can say so, "reasoning subroutines" tend to stay the same and reflect a good deal of our values.
You just have to take a look at a Warcraft debate about Horde and Alliance to get a good idea how nationalism and selective bias (able to disregard anything up to objective truth) work in the real world.
Tyrion does too and it really bothered me. I'd been making a point not to.
I don't think it is so much a 'demon' possessing him as an amalgamated consciousness formed by one greenseer skinchanging into another for countless generations. Like with ordinary warging the mind that takes control mingles slightly with that it dominates and eventually the host mind carrying the consciousness of a dead warg reasserts itself while retaining only some trace memories and prejudices from the prior warg. The consciousness within Bran now is mostly that of Brynden Rivers, the Targaryen Bastard who served as Hand for several kings almost a hundred years ago. He was not exactly evil, but had a very "the end justifies the means" mindset that would excuse committing atrocities for what he believed was the greater good of the realm. Older minds still holding slight sway over him were mostly Children of the Forest, who wanted revenge against humanity for stealing Westeros from them and cutting down their sacred trees. Myriad birds, beasts, and even trees also play some part in forming the composite personality. One of the early Three Eyed Ravens was responsible for creating the first White Walkers. Bran is part of a long con by the Children of the Forest in order to protect themselves and make sure that any surviving humans honor their religion. I expect his next steps are focused on undermining the Faith of the Seven and bringing all of the Seven Kingdoms back to the faith in the Old Gods. That might involve reinstating the practice of human sacrifice to feed the roots of the wierwoods with blood. That would be a long term goal though, probably not to be accomplished in Bran's body. He just needs to make sure that the Lords Paramount always choose a successor with the gift of greensight, so that he can continue to hop from body to body for thousands of years without ever letting mere moral human beings rule themselves again.
Jon called Daenarys Dany in s7 e6 when they were "getting to know each other". Don't think anyone else ever did until Tyrion.
Stannis paid the price only after burning his daughter; Dany paid the price only after burning a million people.
Come to think of it, that family is worth maybe about a million people is an ancient trope in storytelling. If you kill a thousand strangers, it might still be okay; but kill your innocent daughter and you're screwed (cf. Agamemnon in the Trojan War, for example). This sort of narrative has been deeply ingrained in our psyche and it bleeds into real life. And if you kill a million indirectly like the most powerful corporate/national leaders do today, you might still be okay too.
But they're both "screwed"... cause they're both dead...
And Stany tried to burn KL way before Dany did... he just failed and got all his tens of thousands soldiers burned instead... so I guess I'm murky on the distinction you're drawing... if any.
Timing is everything. Stories seldom delay the consequences of decisions unless they're clearly signposted throughout the duration of the delay. It wasn't clear that Stannis was going to die an ignoble death till he killed his daughter. It wasn't clear that Dany would be assassinated until she burned a whole city down.
Separate names with a comma.