@The-Tree-of-Woe said:
@coin I disagree. Decimating the existing noble class and filling the void with those loyal to you is an entirely legitimate, if brutal tactic, and in this case one she probably should've employed.
To paraphrase the War Nerd:
Buy the corrupt. Make sure they know to stay bought.
Spare the incompetent and the used-up figureheads.
Brutalize the ambitious members of the old elite, ESPECIALLY the most egregious, if your conquest had a moral imperative (like Daenerys' did). Do not spare them, because they will come back to haunt you.
To which I would add: empower those who have a reason to love you and loathe the old order. Make sure they stay empowered. Find the best of them. Give them land, titles, money, and men.
You're missing the point of my post (and giving Daenerys way more credit than someone of her age and position, with her upbringing, should get at this juncture). My point is, she's royalty. She's part of the nobility, and the fact that she sits on a throne and declares herself ruler is in itself an indication that she sees those differences and accepts them.
So howevermuch she may be against slavery, she's still entirely for the segregation of classes, which in the long run is not that different, and which makes her--consciously or not--pliable to the plight of the former Masters. What you propose that she "should" have done is entirely remorseless and contrary to her values as someone who was brought up as fucking royalty. You can't just turn that shit off, man, much like you can't just be ruthless for ruthlessness's sake.
She has had her strong moments, she has had her weak ones, and I hope she keeps having both. That's what makes her compelling. I find the idea of an implacable Mother of Dragons stomping all over everyone in perfect and brutal political fashion, the way you propose, pretty boring from an emotional standpoint, and I think Daenerys's story is highly emotional.
@Three-Eyed-Crow said:
@Coin said:
Tolkien had a huge hard-on for his own characters, which is to be expected, since many authors (and roleplayers) fall in love with their creations in one way or another. G.R.R.M., from what I've been able to gather, doesn't have that "problem". (I use quotes because sometimes it's that very passion that creates such compelling stories.)
From his interviews, I get the feeling that he does have this attachment to Tyrion. And Tyrion's one of the more compelling figures in the story, so that's kind of telling in and of itself.
Well, that does sort of lend creedence to my point, yes.