| Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
All book discussion in this thread is now allowed. | ||
|
Zooper31
United States5713 Posts
On June 07 2013 07:08 SamsungStar wrote: sc4k compassion is not just for oppressed people. It's all encompassing. she's not compassionate if she's killing slavers. That's not how compassion works. She can definitely be compassionate if she's killing slavers. It's all in the context of why she's doing it and how she feels. | ||
|
stokes17
United States1411 Posts
On June 07 2013 07:10 sc4k wrote: Please explain what resolution would be more compassionate than Dany's choice because I'm at a loss to find a better resolution. Violence doesn't need to be met with violence. You can punish a wrong without razing a city. That would have been a more compassionate choice. Dany completely lacks compassion who those who she feels commit wrongs (slavery in particular this season, the witch in season 1, Doreah in season 2) against her Shes still a straight up BasAss though, no doubt | ||
|
sc4k
United Kingdom5454 Posts
On June 07 2013 07:18 stokes17 wrote: Violence doesn't need to be met with violence. You can punish a wrong without razing a city. That would have been a more compassionate choice. Dany completely lacks compassion who those who she feels commit wrongs (slavery in particular this season, the witch in season 1, Doreah in season 2) against her Shes still a straight up BasAss though, no doubt She didn't raze Astapor. The answer I would have accepted would be: throw all the slave masters into jail. Yes, that would have been a more compassionate result, but tactically it's far better to allow the slaves their moment of revenge and win yourself their respect and admiration. A slightly cold response from Dany...but I still consider her to be by far the most compassionate of all the major players. As I suspect most of them (barring possibly Stannis) would have either allowed the evil of the slave masters to perpetuate or would have had the entire city razed and plundered. | ||
|
TSORG
293 Posts
| ||
|
SpikeStarcraft
Germany2095 Posts
Other characters like Stannis or Ned are very righteous and strict to the law. Its honorable ofc but just as the idealistic approach not very flexible. You could call it somewhat stubborn too. Then you have the realpolitik approach from the Lannisters or Varys or Littlefinger for example. The end justifies the means. If you can end the war by assassination theyre gonna do it. Is that good or bad? the common people suffer the most from the war. If you can prevent more suffering by doing something dishonest, would you do it? Same thing for Jaime the kingslayer. So which approach is morally right or wrong? I think its not that easy to call. In the end the winner writes the history anyway , so you dont really get to know how it really was and who was the bad or the good guy. | ||
|
stokes17
United States1411 Posts
On June 07 2013 07:25 sc4k wrote: Astapor: Having closed the deal, receiving the harpy's fingers, a nine lashed whip that symbolizes her ownership of the Unsullied, she betrayed the terms of the deal and unleashed her dragons on the masters and the few remaining soldiers in the plaza, ordering the Unsullied to kill the remaining slave-masters [no mention of any other victims] of the city and freeing all of the slaves. Before leaving to Yunkai Daenerys left a council of three men, a healer, a scholar and a priest to rule. Sorry to repost this but you probably could do with reading this again. She didn't raze Astapor. The answer I would have accepted would be: throw all the slave masters into jail. Yes, that would have been a more compassionate result, but tactically it's far better to allow the slaves their moment of revenge and win yourself their respect and admiration. A slightly cold response from Dany...but I still consider her to be by far the most compassionate of all the major players. As I suspect most of them (barring possibly Stannis) would have either allowed the evil of the slave masters to perpetuate or would have had the entire city razed and plundered. are you seriously telling me she doesn't put the city to the flame? 3:55 It wasn't even relevant to my point. | ||
|
Mogwai
United States13274 Posts
| ||
Live2Win
United States6657 Posts
Hey sc4k, you are quoting lines from the ice and fire wiki, which is a wiki for the books, not the show. (there is a separate wiki for the show alone) Thus, you are technically "breaking the rules" by providing additional information and conclusions drawn by these info. It is true that many character's are portrayed and received differently in the show than their book counterparts, mainly because certain details and thought processes are omitted in the show. I see countless times when a certain character's actions are received differently by the audience, when the book readers know it's different, simply because we were given additional details on the event and the character. But that is simply the fault of the show producers, who weren't able to adequately portray the same result (understandably, of course. I feel like they've actually done a very good job for the most part). Ya just gotta let some things go, and hope that additional scenes for a certain character will redirect the audience's view of said character into the image of their book counter-parts. | ||
|
Dwelf
Netherlands365 Posts
On June 07 2013 07:25 sc4k wrote: Astapor: Having closed the deal, receiving the harpy's fingers, a nine lashed whip that symbolizes her ownership of the Unsullied, she betrayed the terms of the deal and unleashed her dragons on the masters and the few remaining soldiers in the plaza, ordering the Unsullied to kill the remaining slave-masters [no mention of any other victims] of the city and freeing all of the slaves. Before leaving to Yunkai Daenerys left a council of three men, a healer, a scholar and a priest to rule. Sorry to repost this but you probably could do with reading this again. She didn't raze Astapor. . This is book stuff, time to raise the pitchforks imo. | ||
|
sc4k
United Kingdom5454 Posts
On June 07 2013 07:41 TSORG wrote: i doubt it, slavery is abhorred in westeros pretty much, and jorah is there because ned sent him there for slaving and since robb is a mini-ned in many ways, he probably wouldnt have allowed it to happen. but who knows. only one who probably wouldve called dany and then raised her one would be joffrey, he wouldve put them all on spikes. Yeah but Robb is dead. I'm talking living. Tywin/Granny Tyrell would probably have allowed the slavery to continue as long as it benefited them. Balon would assrape everyone. Stannis...idk...but the lady of light would probably have everyone's balls chopped off and offered to the LoL as an aperitif. Frey and Bolton would hardly play nice. On June 07 2013 08:03 Live2Win wrote: Hey sc4k, you are quoting lines from the ice and fire wiki, which is a wiki for the books, not the show. (there is a separate wiki for the show alone) Thus, you are technically "breaking the rules" by providing additional information and conclusions drawn by these info. Well I consider it to be on the same level as when they explain that Talisa didn't exist in the books. It's just an interesting fact that in no way spoils anything to come. On June 07 2013 07:49 stokes17 wrote: are you seriously telling me she doesn't put the city to the flame? 3:55 Yes I absolutely am. All that happens is her dragon blows flames on like 5 tent stands. I'm pretty sure that Astapor is more than 5 tent stands. On June 07 2013 07:41 SpikeStarcraft wrote: Daenarys is one of the more idealistic thinking characters on the show in contrary to the realpolitik approach of most of the other characters. That can be good and bad at the same time. The Game of Thrones universe is far from ideal or fair or just but it works. You would need to change a lot and change is scary. It has winners and losers and you can create a lot of bad side effects at first to reach the superior goal eventually. If the route is to hard you could somehow call Daenarys naive to some extent. Other characters like Stannis or Ned are very righteous and strict to the law. Its honorable ofc but just as the idealistic approach not very flexible. You could call it somewhat stubborn too. Then you have the realpolitik approach from the Lannisters or Varys or Littlefinger for example. The end justifies the means. If you can end the war by assassination theyre gonna do it. Is that good or bad? the common people suffer the most from the war. If you can prevent more suffering by doing something dishonest, would you do it? Same thing for Jaime the kingslayer. So which approach is morally right or wrong? I think its not that easy to call. In the end the winner writes the history anyway , so you dont really get to know how it really was and who was the bad or the good guy. I take your point. But Dany is still clearly the 'good guy'. Tywin is the efficacious and respectably efficient one. Joffrey is the madman. If you root for Joffrey then you are chaotic evil. If you root for Tywin you are probably someone who is sick of ideology and is bored of caring about people. If you root for Dany, you have yet to give up the good fight and your heart still burns brightly for justice and good. At least that's how I see it  | ||
|
Zooper31
United States5713 Posts
On June 07 2013 08:09 sc4k wrote: Yeah but Robb is dead. I'm talking living. Tywin/Granny Tyrell would probably have allowed the slavery to continue as long as it benefited them. Balon would assrape everyone. Stannis...idk...but the lady of light would probably have everyone's balls chopped off and offered to the LoL as an aperitif. Frey and Bolton would hardly play nice. Well I consider it to be on the same level as when they explain that Talisa didn't exist in the books. It's just an interesting fact that in no way spoils anything to come. Yes I absolutely am. All that happens is her dragon blows flames on like 5 tent stands. I'm pretty sure that Astapor is more than 5 tent stands. You quoted a Wiki for the books and didn't even link where you got that information (you can't even link the information or you spoil anyone who click it). That's a temp ban, per the exact words of the mods. | ||
|
KlaCkoN
Sweden1661 Posts
On June 07 2013 07:54 Mogwai wrote: Personally, what bugs me about Dany is the entitlement. Scenes like the one outside the gates of Qarth where she's pretty much willing to let the people depending on her die rather than simply show the Thirteen her dragons are a huge turn off of the character and have made me irritated with her. I haven't read the books, so I'm not sure if this is portrayed differently in them, but as far the show is concerned, she's just so damn entitled and aloof. I agree she is acting very entitled. However I think she has turned it into a strength rather than a weakness. She is one of the only characters in the show, the only other perhaps being Stannis, who truly, honestly and with all her heart believes the Iron Throne belongs to her and her alone. People are drawn to such confidence like moths to flame, in the GOT universe as well as in real life. In that sense her dragons are more symbols of her own fire of conviction rather than anything else. Like varys said, "power resides where men believe it resides". She believed she had power strongly enough that others started believing it too, and suddenly she actually was powerful  Overall I think it fits fairly well with the general theme. | ||
|
SamsungStar
United States912 Posts
To the Slaver Cities like Yunkai, Meereen, etc, Dany is completely barbaric. She reneges on deals, acts excessively belligerent and self-entitled, and unjustly massacres the rightful owners of slaves. To the slavers, it is normal to take prisoners of war or the children of slaves and sell them as property. That is the custom of their culture. It's Dany who is imposing her own arbitrary values on them and acting in a really despicable fashion. People are just reading her actions through a modern-day Eurocentric lens and trying to paint her as the good guy. Hell, GRRM might be trying to do that too. But to me, she's just like everybody else: Someone who uses the values she's internalized to try to reach her goals. | ||
|
sc4k
United Kingdom5454 Posts
On June 07 2013 08:14 SamsungStar wrote: To the Slaver Cities like Yunkai, Meereen, etc, Dany is completely barbaric. She reneges on deals, acts excessively belligerent and self-entitled, and unjustly massacres the rightful owners of slaves. To the slavers, it is normal to take prisoners of war or the children of slaves and sell them as property. That is the custom of their culture. It's Dany who is imposing her own arbitrary values on them and acting in a really despicable fashion. People are just reading her actions through a modern-day Eurocentric lens and trying to paint her as the good guy. Hell, GRRM might be trying to do that too. But to me, she's just like everybody else: Someone who uses the values she's internalized to try to reach her goals. Her own arbitrary values...which are right. If not owning slaves is a Eurocentric paradigm...then Eurocentric is the only right way when slavery is concerned. And every other way is wrong and deserves nothing more than for the slaves to kill their masters. | ||
|
mikkmagro
Malta1513 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/971021_135598723303970_2130573940_n.jpg) | ||
|
SamsungStar
United States912 Posts
On June 07 2013 08:17 sc4k wrote: Her own arbitrary values...which are right. If not owning slaves is a Eurocentric paradigm...then Eurocentric is the only right way when slavery is concerned. And every other way is wrong and deserves nothing more than for the slaves to kill their masters. No. Get it through your head that there is no such thing as absolute right and wrong. | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
On June 07 2013 08:14 SamsungStar wrote: People are just reading her actions through a modern-day Eurocentric lens and trying to paint her as the good guy. Hell, GRRM might be trying to do that too. But to me, she's just like everybody else: Someone who uses the values she's internalized to try to reach her goals. Just as people living today abhor the way people in the past treated the africans. People are indeed judging Dany by their own values... but that doesn't make their judgements less valid in terms of who -they- see as the good guy. That is kind of the whole point of having an opinion of good and evil | ||
|
Itsmedudeman
United States19229 Posts
On June 07 2013 08:14 SamsungStar wrote: I think some people are projecting too much of their need for good guy/bad guy paradigms onto the story. If you actually look at the content with a critical eye, there are very few characters which can objectively be called good. Especially not the Starks. To the Slaver Cities like Yunkai, Meereen, etc, Dany is completely barbaric. She reneges on deals, acts excessively belligerent and self-entitled, and unjustly massacres the rightful owners of slaves. To the slavers, it is normal to take prisoners of war or the children of slaves and sell them as property. That is the custom of their culture. It's Dany who is imposing her own arbitrary values on them and acting in a really despicable fashion. People are just reading her actions through a modern-day Eurocentric lens and trying to paint her as the good guy. Hell, GRRM might be trying to do that too. But to me, she's just like everybody else: Someone who uses the values she's internalized to try to reach her goals. I don't think it's a normal custom for the slaves... You know, also humans who hold their own ideals. Many parts of the world hold terrible customs that a lot of people disagree with, and you know what, people do try to put ends to it despite being of a different culture. And this bullshit of no good/bad so we shouldn't see them in a "better" light needs to stop. Absolutely most moronic analysis I've ever heard. Morality is never objective, but according to our own values we can most certainly tell who's good or bad. I'm sure some people believed Hitler was a morally just person who was just trying to push his "arbitrary" values. The same way just about everyone agrees Joffrey is a bad person. I mean, he is a king after all, everything he does is okay and acceptable. Doesn't make it any less heinous in the eyes of some people. | ||
|
sc4k
United Kingdom5454 Posts
On June 07 2013 08:20 SamsungStar wrote: No. Get it through your head that there is no such thing as absolute right and wrong. I'm telling you right now that slavery is wrong with a capital W. Get it out of your head that slavery is ever right. Please try to stop employing 1st year university moral relativism theory. There may not be such a thing as absolute right and wrong, but slavery is wrong and so far away from right that for all intents and purposes it is absolutely wrong. On June 07 2013 08:13 Zooper31 wrote: You quoted a Wiki for the books and didn't even link where you got that information (you can't even link the information or you spoil anyone who click it). That's a temp ban, per the exact words of the mods. I'm sorry I edited out any offending areas. I didn't mean to break any rules, I was just going by my own judgment of what the word 'spoiler' means rather than the definition provided. | ||
|
sc4k
United Kingdom5454 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games Liquid`RaSZi4078 summit1g2241 FrodaN1275 Beastyqt615 ZombieGrub472 ceh9458 mouzStarbuck363 B2W.Neo353 Mlord351 KnowMe317 ToD181 C9.Mang0168 ArmadaUGS114 SteadfastSC84 Trikslyr71 Mew2King48 |
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Light vs EffOrt
OSC
PiGosaur Cup
Kung Fu Cup
The PondCast
Replay Cast
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
GSL
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
