OT: All Things Game of Thrones III (The End!?)

[baudib1]

I think they ruined the Dothraki angle on this for several seasons. Bringing a horde of Dothraki to Westeros would pose as great an existential threat as Mance Rayder's wildlings at minimum. They don't settle into cities and castles and integrate with the population.

Dany also made all of them blood riders, so they would be honor bound to seek revenge upon her death.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

Also as pointed out Greyworm was prepared to exit service of Dany to be with Missandei so their are clear indicators that before her death he was prepared to move on from his military career into another role under Dany

Its very possible after death of both Missandei and Dany he had to come up with a plan for his men and himself. They couldn't just sit in ruins of KL forever surrounded by Northmen and fighting as Davos highlighted would just leave thousands dead with nothing accomplished

So Davos giving him an out was reasonable thing and given ways of Westeros it makes sense. Davos doesn't know much about Unsullied/Dothraki/Essos outside of what he has observed in service of Jon interacting with Dany/etc. So again reasonable for him to not understand Greyworm or his men but looking for best solution that he knows which in Westeros is to make someone lord and give them lands

 

[baudib1]

Davos offering the Unsullied High Garden is about 30th on the list of stupid things that happened in that meeting.

 

[Flyotes]

He seems to legitimately see her as a pure "liberator". That's always been suspect to me. Somehow seeing this series as an affirmation of the patriarchy takes quite a bit of work.

Nah, I don't. It's unlikely any ruler would be perfect, especially a warring one. She is, however, challenging the status quo, and my suspicion is that Western ideology crept in (Western writers, not a surprise). They (or Martin) made her that way. People are stating her issues after the fact. I'm pointing out the intentionally flawed design that led to those issues. At her moment of triumph they grenaded her. What is that saying?

If you don't call that winning then you're just deadset on pushing a narrative.

Ah, you'd think that of me? My standard is simply "getting the throne" which makes me look at which character has paths to "the most powerful position" and then see what rationale they give each character for getting or not getting there. Some of those positions seem suspect to me.

 

[deadhead]

Nah, I don't. It's unlikely any ruler would be perfect, especially a warring one. She is, however, challenging the status quo, and my suspicion is that Western ideology crept in (Western writers, not a surprise). They (or Martin) made her that way. People are stating her issues after the fact. I'm pointing out the intentionally flawed design that led to those issues. At her moment of triumph they grenaded her. What is that saying?

Ah, but she IS the status quo.
The Targaryens conquered Westeros on the back of dragons, burning cities.

 

[baudib1]

Ah, but she IS the status quo.
The Targaryens conquered Westeros on the back of dragons, burning cities.

What cities did Aegon I burn down before being crowned king of the seven kingdoms?

Answer: None.

 

[Lord Defect]

What cities did Aegon I burn down before being crowned king of the seven kingdoms?

Answer: None.

Harrenhall, and every castle in Dorne besides Sunspear.

 

[baudib1]

Harrenhall.

Harrenhal's not a city it's a castle. Harren the Black called his bannermen as Aegon advanced on his stronghold, but they turned out for Aegon instead. Aegon offered to let him keep control of the Iron Islands if he yielded, but Harren refused, pointing out the security of his stone walls. Balerion the Dread roasted him and his sons the next night.

After that, the Field of Fire pitted the combined Lannister/Gardener host of 55,000 men that was routed by a 11,000-man Targaryen force and three dragonriders. 5,000 lannister/Gardeners perished.

The Stormlands were won when Lord Argilac rode out in a charge and his personal guard was destroyed by Queen Rhaenys' dragon Meraxes and he died at the hand of Orys Baratheon.

The North and the Vale essentially surrendered with no loss of life.

Dragons were never used agaisnt a civilian population center.

 

[Qyburn]

The last sentence makes it a little easier to take.

 

[Qyburn]

Can we consider Bran, for a minute? What is with that line about: "Why do you think I came all the way here for?" There are green seer powers, historical powers (wouldn't help that much, except maybe in a predictive sense, still seems like a reach)-- but did he know the city would be destroyed and told no one? Or was that just lazy writing?

I think it's about something else. Consider the line "you shouldn't envy me. I live mostly in the past now". That could easily be redundant of course. But just as easily both lines could support the Bran = Night King theory, which I think makes too much sense not to be a reality. NK is just 10000 year old Bran, hating life because living so long and seeing so much drives you insane and makes you want to end it and the only way to end everything, which is what he constantly sees, is to literally end everything. He knows he's got an epic fight ahead of him with himself and his own being. He probably can't kill himself, or is incapable of conceiving of it since he's no longer really a person. What to do? At least get things off to a good start, cherishing the early years of a long nightmare like the one he's in for, giving a little something back to his family just because he somehow senses it's right.

 

[mja]

Nah, I don't. It's unlikely any ruler would be perfect, especially a warring one. She is, however, challenging the status quo, and my suspicion is that Western ideology crept in (Western writers, not a surprise). They (or Martin) made her that way. People are stating her issues after the fact. I'm pointing out the intentionally flawed design that led to those issues. At her moment of triumph they grenaded her. What is that saying?

You're not making a whole lot of sense, quite frankly. You keep pushing this western ideology criticism and it's facile. If you're reading Dany as non-western, you've read her wrong. She's a representation of classical western civilization, and her right to rule is entirely rooted in that. She isn't meaningfully challenging the status quo. She keeps talking about breaking the wheel, when all she really wants to do is to replace it with a new wheel with herself as its hub. She wants to be a benevolent dictator, sure, but a dictator all the same, and has always been perfectly willing to use Fire and Blood to accomplish her goal.

She wasn't grenaded. Since her character was conceived by her creator, she was always meant to go down this path, for reasons literary and political. What is that saying? Maybe it's saying something about the folly of trying to bring "freedom" to people through military might (remember, Martin, an American, started writing this story in the early 90's in the wake of several decades of the US interventionism). Maybe it's saying something about the perils of the cult of personality. Maybe it's saying something about the limits of revolutions. Maybe it's saying something about how desperately flawed even the best human beings are, and how easy it is for them to be corrupted.

 

[Embiid]

You're not making a whole lot of sense, quite frankly. You keep pushing this western ideology criticism and it's facile. If you're reading Dany as non-western, you've read her wrong. She's a representation of classical western civilization, and her right to rule is entirely rooted in that. She isn't meaningfully challenging the status quo. She keeps talking about breaking the wheel, when all she really wants to do is to replace it with a new wheel with herself as its hub. She wants to be a benevolent dictator, sure, but a dictator all the same, and has always been perfectly willing to use Fire and Blood to accomplish her goal.

She wasn't grenaded. Since her character was conceived by her creator, she was always meant to go down this path, for reasons literary and political. What is that saying? Maybe it's saying something about the folly of trying to bring "freedom" to people through military might (remember, Martin, an American, started writing this story in the early 90's in the wake of several decades of the US interventionism). Maybe it's saying something about the perils of the cult of personality. Maybe it's saying something about the limits of revolutions. Maybe it's saying something about how desperately flawed even the best human beings are, and how easy it is for them to be corrupted.

Noam Chomsky authored a book in the 90's called the New Military Humanism....Lessons from Kosovo. Talks about so called humanitarian interventionism and it being used as a guise for more malevolent reasons. I thought of that analogy with Dany's crusade that she wanted to embark upon.

 

[Lord Defect]

Harrenhal's not a city it's a castle. Harren the Black called his bannermen as Aegon advanced on his stronghold, but they turned out for Aegon instead. Aegon offered to let him keep control of the Iron Islands if he yielded, but Harren refused, pointing out the security of his stone walls. Balerion the Dread roasted him and his sons the next night.

After that, the Field of Fire pitted the combined Lannister/Gardener host of 55,000 men that was routed by a 11,000-man Targaryen force and three dragonriders. 5,000 lannister/Gardeners perished.

The Stormlands were won when Lord Argilac rode out in a charge and his personal guard was destroyed by Queen Rhaenys' dragon Meraxes and he died at the hand of Orys Baratheon.

The North and the Vale essentially surrendered with no loss of life.

Dragons were never used agaisnt a civilian population center.

The wiki never stated one way or another if any cities were attacked. Especially the long attack on Dorne. The Dornish people prevented being taken over with non traditional tactics(it’s to early to spell the right word), then his favorite wife/sister was killed and it enraged him to go there himself. I’d imagine that scorched earth was on the menu.

 

[baudib1]

I think it's about something else. Consider the line "you shouldn't envy me. I live mostly in the past now". That could easily be redundant of course. But just as easily both lines could support the Bran = Night King theory, which I think makes too much sense not to be a reality. NK is just 10000 year old Bran, hating life because living so long and seeing so much drives you insane and makes you want to end it and the only way to end everything, which is what he constantly sees, is to literally end everything. He knows he's got an epic fight ahead of him with himself and his own being. He probably can't kill himself, or is incapable of conceiving of it since he's no longer really a person. What to do? At least get things off to a good start, cherishing the early years of a long nightmare like the one he's in for, giving a little something back to his family just because he somehow senses it's right.

Bran and the NK can both access the Weirwood network, the NK was just more experienced at doing it -- previous conversation with Benjen makes it clear that Bran had to get up to speed. To an extent, both are still serving the Children of the Forest/Weirwood net.

A lot of this is not conveyed well because you don't get the sense from the show who the previous 3ER was, what his motivations were and how much he controlled the events in the story. It could be argued that Bloodraven, who was a master of the game as Hand to Aegon V, was manipulating events to the same level as Littlefinger. And in Essos, Quaithe/Shiera Seastar is playing the game at a lower level with Dany.

Jon Snow and Dany are both agents of destiny and prophecy. I actually think that the Prince That Was Promised and the Rebirth of Azor Ahai are different things. And controversially I think Dany is the PTWP (tied to generations of Targaryen prophecies of the return of dragons) and both Jon and Dany are aspects of Azor Ahai (dealing with the threat of the Long Night). Arya, Melissandre and Beric Dondarrion and maybe others were also aspects of Azor Ahai. Both Dany and Jon are also echoes of Nissa Nissa (both died by being stabbed in the heart).

 

[baudib1]

The wiki never stated one way or another if any cities were attacked. Especially the long attack on Dorne. The Dornish people prevented being taken over with non traditional tactics(it’s to early to spell the right word), then his favorite wife/sister was killed and it enraged him to go there himself. I’d imagine that scorched earth was on the menu.

For starters the only "cities" in Westeros are Kings Landing, which didn't exist, Oldtown. White Harbor, Lannisport and Gulltown. There were no dragon attacks there. The wars in Dorne involved dragons burning castles over and over that were abandoned. It was the Dornish who went scorched earth by poisoning all the wells and destroying crops in their guerrilla war.

Outside of burning down Harren and his sons, the Field of Fire, and Argilac, the dragons didn't see a ton of battle in the conquest. They were used more as a show of force/intimidation. Visenya took King Ronnel on a dragon ride after his mother yielded the Vale.

I'll grant that the histories are written by pro-Targaryen maesters and bards.

 

[deadhead]

You're not making a whole lot of sense, quite frankly. You keep pushing this western ideology criticism and it's facile.

There is no "Western Ideology," that's a myth of the left.
Imperialism goes way back, the Chinese Empire, the Roman Empire, the Arab conquests, the Mongols, Turks, etc.

"Capitalism" is a term invented by Marx that means nothing, since "capital" goes back to the first settlers out of Africa who took possession of land and invested current resources to build up future production. All organized societies have a ruling caste, whether priests, soldiers, merchants and kings, that control "the means of production."

Marx rejected the "wheel" in favor of Hegalian determinism, which was invented out of thin air and is totally ahistorical. The idea of progress is an enlightenment conceit, which applies to science and technology, since they're built on human capital, but not to human nature, which is embedded in our genetic legacy.

 

[Flyotes]

You're not making a whole lot of sense, quite frankly. You keep pushing this western ideology criticism and it's facile. If you're reading Dany as non-western, you've read her wrong. She's a representation of classical western civilization

The point is that the situation is Western-- and you're right, but you aren't going far enough. You certainly get a critique of "Thing bad" imperialism, which is from the Western left, but you're also getting the anti-feminism, anti-progressive. It doesn't surprise me. Martin came out in support of Biden.

There is no "Western Ideology," that's a myth of the left. Imperialism goes way back, the Chinese Empire, the Roman Empire, the Arab conquests, the Mongols, Turks, etc.

As a student of history, I completely disagree. While imperialism is shared, the west and the east have different ideologies-- it's not even close. If you're conflating the two, I'm not sure what can be done. The differences are quite interesting-- in fact, the Western hot takes on the East, over the years, are quite comical, and spawned a ton of spilled ink on the subject.

"Capitalism" is a term invented by Marx

Just factually wrong.

that means nothing, since "capital" goes back to the first settlers out of Africa who took possession of land and invested current resources to build up future production. All organized societies have a ruling caste, whether priests, soldiers, merchants and kings, that control "the means of production."

There are bones to pick with Marx, but Marx can explain all of this and all of it is fine.

Marx rejected the "wheel" in favor of Hegalian determinism, which was invented out of thin air and is totally ahistorical. The idea of progress is an enlightenment conceit, which applies to science and technology, since they're built on human capital, but not to human nature, which is embedded in our genetic legacy.

Hegelian (lol) history is 100% historical. What.

I agree that progress is enlightenment conceit, at times, but even someone like myself, an admitted postmodernist, admits that it seems progress has been made. Probably not as much as most people believe.

Genetic legacy? I'm smelling some Peterson here.

 

[Rebels57]

Did anyone else watch The Last Watch documentary? I really enjoyed it. I feel like it gave me some emotional closure with the show.

 

[mja]

The point is that the situation is Western-- and you're right, but you aren't going far enough. You certainly get a critique of "Thing bad" imperialism, which is from the Western left, but you're also getting the anti-feminism, anti-progressive. It doesn't surprise me. Martin came out in support of Biden.

Yeah, you're coming at this with a very specific point of view. Any reading of the story as anti-feminist is completely unwarranted in my opinion, for reasons I've already elaborated on earlier in thread.

 

[Flyotes]

Yeah, you're coming at this with a very specific point of view. Any reading of the story as anti-feminist is completely unwarranted in my opinion, for reasons I've already elaborated on earlier in thread.

Agree to disagree at this point then.

 

[baudib1]

Martin's story is not sexist. I think the show added a ton of incredibly misogynistic elements.

 

[baudib1]

Did anyone else watch The Last Watch documentary? I really enjoyed it. I feel like it gave me some emotional closure with the show.

I watched about half of it, was pretty good. Apparently the "official" was supposed to be 120,000 wights to 18,000 combined Northern/Dany forces.

 

[BillDineen]

Dany succumbing to "absolute power corrupts absolutely" should be seen as pro-feminist. That is if you believe feminism is still about equality.

 

[Rebels57]

I watched about half of it, was pretty good. Apparently the "official" was supposed to be 120,000 wights to 18,000 combined Northern/Dany forces.

Yeah I heard the extra guy say that. Interesting.

 

[Beef Invictus]

It takes too many mental gymnastics to conclude the ending was anti-feminist.