Semantics.
When one typically says “goes mad”, they mean that they lose control of their faculties. That they can’t see the world for how it is, or don’t understand the consequences of their actions, or have some other mental deficit that keeps them from making fully formed, sane decisions.
You don’t have to be insane to be evil or to do great harm. Plenty of our own world’s greatest butchers would probably be declared sane by objective psychiatric evaluation.
Sigh. I think I’ve said it a couple of times by now. Are you forgetting the Tarlys? She burned them after they surrendered and were disarmed. She wanted to send a message, make an example, and she did. By burning unarmed captives alive. Now, she acknowledges she will have to take power by fear. She needs to send a message, make an example, writ large. The whole kingdom is at stake, and needs to feel the message. What to do?
In the progression of a tyrannical regime, each step is always worse than the last, often able to be excused (“but they wouldn’t bend the knee!”), until all of a sudden it isn’t and you’re left wondering what the hell happened to the world you thought you knew. Some amazing non-GoT-related reading on that very subject that everyone should read anyway. It’s also a TV show, and in the interest of impact and dramatization they kind of need to skip straight from “long knives” to “holocaust” because if they add an intermediate step of burning a handful of civilians for some reason, they splinter a lot of the audience right there and the final step will lose a lot of dramatic impact. Or, if they manage to write in a justification for it, the final turn will still have people complaining “she never did that before.” Well, that’s the point. Each step is worse than the last.
EXACTLY. In the link above, the excerpt of Mayer’s text gets to what do you do when you finally realize what’s happened. I think a lot of viewers who felt, for some reason, that Daenerys was inherently a good person, have finally and suddenly reached the point where her brutality is just too much. She’s gone too far, she’s hurt the wrong people, this time, and rather than consider that they cheered on some awful things or that they should’ve seen it earlier (or that they’re just not particularly perceptive), they throw up their hands and declare “I’m out” and flame the writers.
Another thing we are doing to justify Dannys actions is that we (and by default the writers) ignoring what happened in episode 3 like it never happened.
Danny might not have felt the love in that supper party but im sure everyone would love her for what she did. Even in KL they would have some admiration for her but instead it’s as it never happened.
I haven’t really seen any commentary outside of here, so you may very well be seeing things I haven’t, but I’m not seeing Jon get a pass. He has been repeatedly ridiculed for being stupid with his “always tell the truth” honor. Always telling the truth doesn’t mean blabbing everything you know, you can just keep the names of your birth parents to yourself.
As for the Lannisters, I’m not sure what you mean by extremely strange behavior. Tyrion knows he’s probably going to die. He even tells Jaime that the lives of thousands of innocent and guilty people is worth more than the life of one not very innocent dwarf. He’s trying to do the honorable thing and he is willing to pay the ultimate price to do so, just as Varys did. Cersei was arrogant about the battle because she thought they had the key to defeating the dragon. Jaime just wanted to save Cersei. I think the bell thing was just something thought up by Tyrion as a signal which could be heard over the sounds of the battle. The fact that everyone else was calling for the bells after surrender was just a scripty-wipty thing so that we viewers knew that Daenerys knew for sure that the troops had surrendered and there would be no fog-of-war ambiguity about her attacks.
After the surrender, there were people in the city screaming “ring the bells” - I don’t think it’s a plan they made up on the spot, I’m pretty sure it’s a traditional sign of a city surrendering in Westerosi lore.
Of course in our real world, cities would almost never be given mercy if they surrendered after being stormed. You typically had a choice - surrender now, or be brutalized if the attacker ends up winning. So there’s no “ring the bells” tradition in our world because no one would be expected to be given quarter or mercy after an attacker had to storm the city.
Stannis burnt The King in the North alive cause he wouldn’t bend the knee. Just wanted people to remember that. Also Dany did give the Tarlys an out of taking the black, but daddy Tarly invoked a technicality. He also pretty much let his son die with him. I mean if we’re following letter of the law like Tarly did, he could have ordered (narf) Dickon to not burn with him.
Coincidentally Stannis had his too far moment too. And like Dany…Team Stannis had tons of his fans forgetting what Stannis did before Shireen. Hilariously they abandoned him exactly like happened onscreen.
Here’s a Q: Is there gonna be another huge battle?? Or is Bran gonna warg Drogan and burn the Dothraki? Cause thats the only way I see of getting rid of them. They arnt just gonna ‘go home’.
That’s a good point. And not only that, he supported (ordered) the Red Wedding, which was presented in the show as the worst sin you could commit, and again, nobody batted an eye. Only the Tyrell matriarch seemed to even mention it, and her take was “Why give men even more reason to fear weddings?”
Davos, a King’s Landing native in season 2 I’ve never known bells to mean surrender.
Sounds like a plot hole/writing error then, because if Tyrion just made up the bell surrender thing (as Jaime would tell Cersei to do) then random citizens wouldn’t be shouting to ring the bells, since they have no way of knowing about that plan/signal.
Yeah, that definitely comes across as a continuity error.
Ten years ago, the writers were like, “We’re doing a night scene, how do we build up battle tension? Ooh, I know, sound! Let’s have competing ominous music ahead of the battle, bells from the city and drums from the ships!” All good, serves the story.
Now, the writers were like, “We need a way that the city can signal its surrender city-wide, no matter where you’re standing. Ooh, I know, sound! Let’s have a tradition in Westeros that ringing the bells signals a citywide surrender, and Tyrion can exposition-dump that info to the viewer, and then we’ll have this great moment of tension.” All good, serves the story.
But unlike the dragonfire thing (which is perfectly easy to explain), this disparity is pretty difficult to explain. Either use of bells is fine, but both of them? That’s a continuity error.
Fortunately, I don’t give much of a crap about this sort of error, except as a minor amusement, along the lines of giggling when Dorothy’s hair keeps changing length during the scarecrow’s song.
Or, Tyrion was lying about what the bells meant. Maybe it really means, I don’t know, “The city is lost! Run for your lives!” He did look a little shifty when he was mentioning it.
Could be. That would be an unwieldy thing to explain in the final episode, and a strange thing to leave unexplained, but I suppose it’s possible.
Nah, he was looking shifty because he knew he was going to be helping Jaime escape.
It wouldn’t be that hard to explain. We’ll meet some survivors who say “we heard the bells and knew the city was about to he sacked.”
I’m not reading, much less discussing outside SDMB. “Contentious” I can handle, but my guess is that fallacious arguments and spurious tangents are still the norm outside SDMB, consequently i don’t get out much.
The notion than Jon is being ridiculed for his need to tell the truth supports my idea that maybe the big reveal is that “good” or “the truth” and monarchies can’t co-exist. People want a good king that never lies, but suddenly the system of lies woven around religion and fairy tales to bolster monarchies is exposed and anyone pretending to a crown is shown to be as nuts as Emperor Norton. It would be awesome if the rage that the stuff Benioff and Weiss made up about Daenerys ended up being transferred to actual monarchs who only have any power because of another bunch of made up stuff. That would elevate the series to high art, and explain why GRRM hasn’t gotten to the point yet. Generally, calling out crownheads, presidents-for-life and Ayatollahs is still dangerous today, even if you’re only doing a pop-by the consulate to grab some paperwork.
Last episode I was playing along with the “who will take the Iron Throne” game as the most central question to be resolved and speculating that Arya’s unborn child by Gendry was the Azor Ahai, so don’t look at any of this as other than wild conjecture, but with so many viewers turning their backs on Daenerys and the series’ writers, I have to wonder if there isn’t a The Sting-type ending where the viewer was being conned in order to drive some larger point home.
At the very least a few more days wait for the final dénouement It won’t make much of a difference if nothing justifies the stupid we’ve seen in Season 8, and the petitions and pitchforks will still be there. No idea how it will pan out but there are many ways Daenerys’ actions could seem euhhh…“not so crazy” and never forget that the viewer of the series has a privileged view, in the real game of thrones Daenerys has the dragon and the power and whatever version of events she decides to tell those that are still alive is going to be the one written in history books.
You sorta started me on this train of thought when you discussed Daenerys’ last warning to Tyrion, but when the battle starts long after Tyrion has freed Jaime, “Does Daenerys know yet?” seems like a pertinent question.
But people were screaming “ring the bells”.
If it means, “Run for your lives,” then people might still shout that.
But I think the likeliest explanation is that it means surrender, and they’d forgotten a throwaway line from a previous season.
Do you guys really not get that the show portrayed logical reasons, whether justifiable or not, for Dany’s previous heinous actions? Or are you guys just being obtuse? How can anyone believe the actions of Dany post-surrender was foreshadowed? I would not be complaining if KL did not surrender but the same exact events happened. If Dany decided to burn the city to the ground during the battle, OK, that would be brutal but in-character.
But the only way to explain what happened was that Dany snapped Mad-king style. Saying she was always like this, or always had this in her, is just retconning her entire arc.
Um, are those my only two choices?
Wouldn’t they be busy, you know, running for their lives?