Discussion Heartwarming / GameOfThrones

A new system was not in place "in honor" of Dany. A new system was put in place due to her actions. It's not even a new system because it the same song just different chorus. Those on top, Noble in power. The few commanding the rest. Without their input or say so or influence. Its not about how it's interpreted but what actually happened. Was the wheel broken? No. It keeps spinning, if the new system just another version she was trying to break then it's not heartwarming because her dream is still not realized nor have her actions lead it to be.

Double post

Tyrion literally said that the system he proposed was "the Wheel our queen wished to break". It was clearly done in honor of her. This wasn't done to spite her actions or in response to her actions. It was done to honor what she wanted to originally achieve.

Again, you can have whatever criticisms of the new government you like, but that isn't what is in question here. We aren't debating how effective it is—only whether or not it was done to honor Dany and whether or not some fans and people In-Universe would view that positively. And there is absolutely no argument that the answer is yes.

That's the problem , Tyrion said. His perspective. The council who choose the new King did not do it in honor of his queen. Nothing has really changed, still got a King deciding what's what with a council. A good King? Yes. But still one chosen by those "above" to rule those "below". The council did not appoint Bran for "her", Bran will not rule wisely for "her", so Danerys had no effect on the new system. Especially in the say so of a former advisor who may still view her in rose tinted glasses. We are at an impasse and we need others for input. I'll tag Team Tony in as well.

Tyrion literally said that half of Westeros hates him for siding with Daenerys and half of it hates him for betraying her. Even In-Universe, Daenerys was still a divisive character, and Tyrion refers to her as "our queen" in regards to Yara, himself and Grey Worm.

Why would you tag in Team Tony when his position is quite clear at this point, and it's been quite clear that he has been inflexible? What purpose does that serve?

Again, I don't understand what's difficult here. We're not arguing about whether anything has changed or not. We're arguing whether 1) the system was put in place in honor of Dany (it was) and whether either people in-universe or in the fandom view this as heartwarming (yes, they do).

We're not debating about whether or not the characters or the fans are right. We're arguing about whether or not they hold the opinion in question.

It was not put in place to honor Dany, if anyone besides Tyrion said so then I would think that was a possibility. It was put in place because of her actions. Stating it was in honor of her is stating it was made in respect of her actions. It was not, some fans do not think so. Some fans have the opinion it did not. Some fans hold the opinion burning down a City doesn't mean any action done later however beneficial can be attributed to the person who committed mass slaughter to Innocents. That's the problem you and I cannot agree. You say yes I say no. Neither will budge because we believe ourselves correct. I invited TT because it cannot be reverted unless agreed, mod or consensus. And because maybe TT can offer their reasoning as well.

The entire point of the scene was that Tyrion was speaking for the group. The argument of "no one also said so" is countered by the fact that no one spoke against it either, and then did exactly what he suggested. Trying to pretend that because no one voiced active agreement that they must have disagreed is incredibly dishonest, in context with how the scene unfolds.

Some fans disagreeing with whether or not the scene is heartwarming is irrelevant, because the Heartwarming trope/page is Your Mileage May Vary. So naturally, yes, this is a case of mileage varying. We don't NEED to agree. We only need to decide "Do people hold this opinion? (Whether in universe or out.) And if the answer is "yes", then it is a clear example.

And again, inviting Tony makes ZERO sense because again, he has demonstrated again and again that he has no intention of cooperating with an opposing opinion. If you're trying to reach "consensus" by inviting him, the effort is questionable.

On the topic of whether or not to restore the entries removed by Team Tony, I would support the re-addition of this entry ("While Daenerys lost her way, her dream of leaving the world in a better place after her death is being fulfilled") but perhaps not the first removed entry.

I don't think the second removed entry ("While Daenerys lost her way[...]") or Tyrion's words necessarily credits or honors Dany with the implementation of a new system but that's only my view. I think it only acknowledges she had a dream to make the world a better place and it is believed this system will be an improvement for the world. As Nubian Satyress notes, Tyrion believes an elected king is a move toward breaking the system Daenerys had wanted to break.

Sansa: Who better to lead us into the future? Bran has no interest in ruling and he can't father children.

Tyrion: Good. Sons of kings can be cruel and stupid, as you well know. His will never torment us. That is the wheel our queen wanted to break.

As entries on Moments pages are subject to YMMV and based on troper opinion, I don't think it's unreasonable for this entry to be included as some fans did find it heartwarming.

That's my vote :)

^ That is exactly the point I wished to make, thank you.

The thing is, it's an elected King. Elected by nobles not the people. Which is not much different from before. As a bloodline could claim the throne but Noble allies and armies helped keep them in place. It's not a better system, same system different way about it. The wheel turns just different handle. Also it's just that Kingdom that is better off not the World. Who knows what's happening in Slavers Bay without her Army and Dragons there. Did her actions lead to a better King? Yes, but did it break the wheel? No. Was it put in place because of the results of her actions? Yes. Was it put in place to honor her? No. Was it put in place due to a political meeting to prevent civil war where the North almost went to war to protect John? Yes. A good result in one Kingdom made out of necessity due to one person's actions but not in tribute to them. I have no issue that Danys actions lead to a better outcome, just giving credit to where it's not due and claiming it achieved something it did not.

Tuvok, we are not here to argue the merits of oligarchical elections. Please stop derailing the conversation on that topic.

It was proposed in accordance to Dany's desires. Again, this indisputable. Tyrion specifically says that he proposes the idea as what [his] queen wanted.

The entire point of the meeting was, as Davos says, to find a "better way". This was the "better way" Tyrion proposed. Again, whether or not we agree with the merits of oligarchical election is irrelevant. But Tyrion proposed the new system based on what he thought Daenerys wanted.

"What he thought his Queen wanted" As stated before what Tyrion believes not what she wanted. In the end what she wanted was to burn everything down that disagreed with her. Tyrion put up a system and the nobles agreed because they could not agree who among them was worthy of the throne. A system in result of her actions, not in tribute if her. It's not derailing as it's repeating our main point of contention. You believe this new system is in tribute to her, and what she desired. I contend it's a result of her actions not in honor of her. Also not what she wanted but what Tyrion believes she wanted. He also believed she wanted to be a merciful Queen but what she wanted and what she ended up are two different things. She wanted to break the wheel, wheel still there but different sprockets.

What Daenerys wanted is up to several interpretations. It's not up to you (or anyone else) to decide what it absolutely is or absolutely isn't. Also, Danerys's final actions in the series are irrelevant to her goals at the start.

At this point, I think this thread and ATT are making it clear that you've got an anti-Daenerys slant and simply don't want to attribute this to her because of her actions at the end.

It's also obvious you have a pro-dannerys slant. As fair play it's not up to you or anyone else to decide what is or absolutely isn't. Hell I really didn't have a horse in the race. I am not anti Dany. Danny did plenty of brilliant and heart warming things. My only contention is giving undue credit. The honoring part seems incorrect and that's my issue. Maybe I'm harsh or cynical but that's it. Which is why I suggested a reworking.

I'm not pro-Daenerys. As I said, she is a complex character, and trying to pigeonhole her into either being wholly bad or wholly good misses the entire point of GOT and its source material.

Also, you can't reverse my words against me here. I'm NOT saying what interpretation is or isn't absolute. The entire point to it not being absolute is that if there are fans who feel that it's heartwarming, then their opinion should be noted in an example. If there are fans that don't, it should be acknowledged also on an appropriate page. (Like Moral Event Horizon or Dethroning Moment Of Suck or whatever.)

That's the thing. Your stating they made the change to honor her simplifies what happened and gives a sense of absolution to her actions. The new system was not put in place for her but because of her. Not to destroy the wheel but keep the peace. Did Dany despite losing it in the end make life better in Westbros for the people? In effect yes with a new King , Bran. Was he put there in tribute to her. No. But was the old Dany aim to make life better for the people made real with Bran in charge. Yes.

No it doesn't. Tyrion literally describes the new system as breaking the wheel as Daenerys wanted. It doesn't make him correct, and it doesn't mean the system will work as intended. However, that is the cause-and-effect.

Trying to argue that it was NOT created to break the wheel is going against what is explicitly stated in the work. Saying it was "not put in place for her but because of her" creates a false either/or argument which is just untrue. It was put in place both because of her actions (otherwise, she undoubtedly would have ruled as dictator) and because of what she wanted.

See that's the thing. That's the rub. I can concur the system in place changed due to her actions. But it did not change because what she wanted or how things are done. During the meeting Tyrion offered a compromise stating it's what she wanted. They agreed not because it's what she wanted but because the alternative was war. No one was going to let another house take a throne and establish a bloodline NOT because if what Dany wanted but because of what they wanted. They did not want a new Dynasty to start especially if it was not theirs. Hence a cripple who could bear no sons. A compromise that prevents war is a result of actions not a tribute. Tyrion stated what his Queen wanted and the nobles agreed not for her but for neccesity. She achieved a better Westbros by her actions but not because of her wants. Also Tyrion declaring he was breaking the Wheel as Dany wanted does not change it did not break. No indication that the nobles considered it broken.

None of that is what happens in the scene. Tyrion says he proposed the plan based on what Daenerys wanted and claims it's a better system than a hereditary monarchy.

It is NEVER said in that scene that no one wanted another dynasty. In fact, Sansa raises opposition to Bran being king BECAUSE he can't have children, and that's when Tyrion says that breaking the wheel by creating elections is a good thing. The argument that this solution was proposed strictly because no one wanted another tyrant like Daenerys is completely false.

You keep using your own personal interpretations of the scene to facilitate these arguments, but they do not follow what actually happened.

Everyone keeps saying that Daenerys wanted to break the wheel...but she didn't. She wanted to make herself Queen which is maintaining the wheel, not breaking it.

Id also disagree that her actions at the start and at the finale are irrelevant to each other.

Essentially: Daenerys showed, throughout the eight seasons, a consistent desire to take the Iron Throne. She may have said she wanted to break the wheel, but her actions disagree. So what went down in the season 8 finale is the opposite of what she would have wanted. Daenerys did not want the Lords and Ladies of Westeros to elect a ruler. She wanted them to bow down to her so she could establish a new Targaryen dynasty- her birthright, as she repeatedly says. She should not get credit or honouring or anything for Bran being elected, or for Westeros being better.

On numerous occasions, we are shown Daenerys going out of her way to try create a better system. She was also aware that she would not create another Targaryen dynasty, as she was unable to have children.

The fact of the matter is, we are never explicitly told what she meant by "breaking the wheel", so any claims about what she did or didn't want are opinions, whether by us or characters in the story.

As I said, Tony has pretty much demonstrated that he holds nothing but contempt for the character and sees her as strictly Evil All Along. Which is fine as an interpretation, but it should not be held as the golden truth.

I disagree. Her intent was to make Westeros better. I agree she wanted to get rid of the Lord's and the politics of Kings. I disagree it was not ego regarding the throne. She thought her suffering and birthright would make her a just ruler and better alternative to the Kings of before. I do agree she should not get credit for Bran election (a political move) or the reasoning behind it . Speaking of golden truths wanting to make a better System is different from being capable of making one. Which is why the new system is just a reworking of the old.

"Lannister, Targaryen, Baratheon, Stark, Tyrell: they're all just spokes on a wheel. This one's on top, then that one's on top, and on and on it spins, crushing those on the ground." Quote from Daenerys. If she wants to break the wheel, then putting House Targaryen on top again is the opposite of what she wants...and yet, that is precisely her main goal. So, yeah, she may say she wants to break the wheel but she does not actually want to, as demonstrated by her actions.

Please name one occasion wherein Daenerys did something to make a better system that was not also beneficial to herself. Because I cannot think of one.

As much as I am firmly in the camp of Mad Queen Daenerys, you seem to be in the camp of Good Queen Daenerys Who Never Does Anything Wrong, so I doubt we are going to come to any kind of agreement here.

To be fair TT she tries. That's not in question. Because she originally wanted to do right for the powerless. Even at the end despite her fall she truly was trying that.

I disagree that she tries to make anything better without there also being a selfish motivation. That isnt what we are discussing though, so I will drop it.

Also, if she originally wanted to do right to the powerless, why did she not try to help the Lamb people Drogo and his men took as slaves? More than just saying that the men should marry them? Which is a terrible solution, by the way. So, yeah, I disagree with that too.

^^ At no point did I ever claim that Daenerys never did anything wrong. So please stop with the False Equivalence.

The lack of foreshadowing to Daenerys's heel turn is practically a meme at this point, so to argue that you can't think of anything she ever did that tried to make a better system is weird.

Its a meme among Dany fans. There are plenty of fans who called her face heel turn long before it actually happened.

She did do things to try and make a better system...just things that also benefitted her as well, usually with that as her primary motivator.

This has nothing to do with the original point, so I suggest we stop debating this tangent.

So to recap.

TT- is more then fine with the removal Me- Readding but rewriting somewhat. Her end goal was realized somewhat, change made by her actions but not in tribute to. NS-Readding as is. I think we should wait for more input from others or a mod then go from there.

^^ So again, we're right back to her being a complex character. As I said, she has multiple ways of interpreting her character, so it's dishonest to try to keep making this into an "us versus them" dynamic.

If you want to stop debating the tangent that YOU created, then be my guest.

I agree. Clearly we are not going to come to any kind of agreement, given our vastly different views on Daenerys.

^^^ No, I did NOT say to readd as is. I am fine with a rewrite, but not a deletion.

^ My point remains that our views on Daenerys is immaterial to the argument. We are talking about an example describing fan opinions in general, not the individual opinions of us three.

THAT is why I am opposed to you and Tuvok on this.

The thing is NS all three of us are representative of fan opinions not just you that's the point. Some believe as you do , others as TT and others like myself. That's why we oppose each other. You claiming to represent fan opinions in general makes me think you believe you speak with final authority on the matter. Apologies if incorrect.

^^^^^ Tuvok,

"So to recap.

TT- is more then fine with the removal Me- Readding but rewriting somewhat. Her end goal was realized somewhat, change made by her actions but not in tribute to. NS-Readding as is. I think we should wait for more input from others or a mod then go from there."

I am good with a re-write and/or re-add as well :)

EDIT: I think the example as written is fine, I don't think it's crediting or honoring Dany, but if others perceive this to be the case (and if the consensus decides to rewrite the example), I think that'd be a good compromise.

Three for rewrite. Sounds fair.

^ "The thing is NS all three of us are representative of fan opinions not just you that's the point."

No, I am NOT representing any part of the fanbase. I am only saying that the segment of the fanbase that sees this as heartwarming exists. Again, the problem here is that you and Tony DO think that the two of you act as "counterpoints" to the argument, but you don't. None of us do.[

To repeat, how the three (four of us, including cherry) feel about it is irrelevant. What we are here to determine is "is there a fanbase who feels this is heartwarming"?

But that fandom is not at this page. We are. You and TT. You are right there are those fandomwise who think it's heartwarming for certain reasons and those fandomwise who do not. You think it qualifies, TT thinks it doesn't I think it's half and half and all three points are valid which is why we have ATT and discussion to sort out. A mod is not giving ruling so consensus is the only way to proceed. Three votes for a rewrite is the only option right now. We can't readd, as is because only you so far advocate that. Because is there a fanbase that finds it heartwarming, yes. Is there fandom who for some reason thinks she deserves nothing and was selfish all along yes. We can't cater to all we get edit wars. I am trying to compromise because that was my intent. The end result was heartwarming, not perfect and not due to her wants or tribute to her.

We don't trope only what is "at this page". Fandom tropes reflect opinions from outside of our Small Reference Pools.

And stop saying I "advocate for readding". I have not said that once, and your assumptions about what I want and what "sides" I'm on are getting irritating.

As is your assumption on what I and TT want and how it must go as you wish. It's natural to assume you wanted it reverted because you took the deletion up in discussion. If you don't want the example restored then what is the issue? I advocated a compromise, for fairness. If that is not want you wanted then their is no issue. To prevent further strife I'll side with TT to leave as is. Two for leaving as is, one for readding ( with modifications) and one for undecided.

You and TT have flat out stated what you want, though. I'm not assuming anything. I also never said anything about this going "as I wish"; you are the two who are arguing in absolutes and trying to make this a "us versus them" argument, not me.

I never took up the deletion in the discussion, either. Again, that's you making assumptions. And not even bothering to fact check before you make them, either. As I said, you constantly claiming I said or did things I never said or did is getting extremely annoying.

If what you want is to rewrite the example for "compromise", then why don't we start proposing a re-written example. And lastly, as I said, TT is not a reliable vote in this issue.

Frankly, I think both Team Tony AND Nubian Satyress are not reliable votes for this issue based on the discussion here and in ATT. Nubian Satyress's position throughout has been voiced as "You are wrong, I am right, and this is indisputable" about how to interpret what occurs in the story, then shouting down anyone who presents a counterargument, then claiming people are misrepresenting their position about the fan reaction question when they have actually focused their arguments on story interpretation. If that was not what they intended to focus on, it was not expressed clearly.

The various people who have participated seem to agree that the answer to "do some fans find this heartwarming" is "yes." The entry that was deleted focused on a story interpretation as the reason it was heartwarming, which Team Tony's edit reason said was factually inaccurate to the events of the story and not a valid reaction. Team Tony has since been all right with having a rewrite.

So— some fans find it heartwarming that the political system is changing, and link that to how Daenerys wanted a change. A rewrite would help clarify WHY that is heartwarming for those fans without suggesting it is based on a "correct" interpretation of the story.

The deleted item was:

• Crosses over a little bit into Tear Jerker, but Daenerys ultimately succeeded in one of her most important goals. By establishing an elective monarchy, the world took the first step in breaking the wheel that had bound it for so long. The cycle that she had sacrificed so much to destroy might finally be ending, even if there's a lot more work to do. It's just a shame that she wasn't around to see what she did to see it and know that, in a way, she did make a better world.

Here's a possible starting point for a rewrite:

• Tyrion successfully proposes an elective monarchy to help the world take a first step in the long process of "breaking the wheel." Even after Daenerys's decline and his grief over her death, Tyrion still loves Daenerys and continues to be inspired by her to change the system.

" Nubian Satyress's position throughout has been voiced as "You are wrong, I am right, and this is indisputable" about how to interpret what occurs in the story, then shouting down anyone who presents a counterargument, then claiming people are misrepresenting their position about the fan reaction question when they have actually focused their arguments on story interpretation. If that was not what they intended to focus on, it was not expressed clearly."

The only two things I said that are indisputable is whether or not Tyrion based the new system of government on Dany's wishes (he did) and whether or not some fans find it heartwarming (they do). The former is a fact that we are told within the story and the latter is evident in how divided the reaction to the character is. Any further interpretation of it I have staunchly said is mixed and equally valid. I think you're confusing what I said with TT and Tuvok, who have been trying to claim that either that never happened or that the only people who think it happened are Dany fans. Both of them have staunchly tried to argue that because of what she did in the end, that she was therefore completely disassociated from the new government being put in place.

That being said, I like your rewrite. I think it has room for improvement but it's well-written.

Yeah, I am not satisfied with it myself— I wrote it hurriedly just to get something out and move the discussion along— but anyone who wants to build on it, rework it, ditch it for something else, go wild!

• While Daenerys lost her way and betrayed her own ideals, Tyrion successfully proposes an elective monarchy as a first step in the long process of "breaking the wheel." Despite everything, Tyrion continues to be inspired by her to change the system.

Basically, I just opted to go for more concise wording.

^ I'm a "more concise wording" fan and that includes this more concise wording.

How do other people feel about Nubian Satyress's reword?

^ I like Nubian Satyress's reworded example!

So do I. My only issue was the wording accrediting the system to Dany. As stated before I believed it was heartwarming I just found it worded incorrectly which is WHY I sought compromise intiately. Also more of a fan of precision while a fan of adding it back I would remove the long process if breaking the wheel because it's not really a first step of doing so. Dany wanted to free the people from Tyranny. Yes. But no steps to breaking the wheel has been set in motion. Lord's deciding whose King is still the same as Lord's backing a claim to a Throne via bloodline. Same wheel , same parts just different handle.

How about this for a compromise

• While Daenerys lost her way and betrayed her own ideals, inspired by her original goal. Tyrion successfully proposes an elective monarchy bringing peace to the people as she had originally desired. While the Wheel remains intact for now with a more stable system in place there is hope for change in the future.

Its a touch more accurate while remaining hopeful for change and showing that Dany managed to bring positive change as she originally planned.

Tuvok, almost there, yours needs some grammar tweaking, so trying to balance concise with precise to bring together different points people have made...

• While Daenerys lost her way and betrayed her own ideals, Tyrion remains inspired by her original goal and successfully proposes an elective monarchy to bring peace to the people. The Wheel hasn't been broken, but who holds the Throne is no longer determined by bloodline succession or seizing it in war. This more stable system gives hope for change in the future.

^ That streams much better thank you. I'll wait for a bit and if no objections will add it in.

I prefered immichan's "first step toward breaking the wheel" to Tuvok's "The Wheel hasn't broken". Again, we are not here to judge whether or not Tyrion's system WORKED.

Also, the part about the throne no longer being determined by war is also Speculative Troping. We don't know that, and how would anyone stop it anyway? Just because this new system is in place doesn't mean war is gone forever. We need to stick to what we're told in the story.

Also, this again allows the entry to have more concise wording.

• While Daenerys lost her way and betrayed her own ideals, Tyrion remains inspired by her original goal and successfully proposes an elective monarchy as a first step to "breaking the wheel", as claim over the Throne is no longer determined by bloodline succession. This more stable system gives hope for change in the future.

I prefer immichan's version.

Good point about the war thing being speculative— I am good with cutting that out. I was unnecessarily elaborating on what would change from what went before, and there is no guarantee a war wouldn't break out if someone disapproved of who got put on the throne.

Aside from this discussion, I have seen other articles and posts with criticism that this just upholds the status quo of having a monarch and the nobility making all the decisions, rather than genuinely a start on breaking the Wheel, while others feel it is a genuine first step since it eliminates hereditary inheritance and Tyrion said it was supposed to do it. Can we come to a compromise on whether or not we call it anything to do with the wheel? Or should we not even mention the wheel since it becomes flame-bait? For instance, a wheel-less version could be:

• While Daenerys lost her way and betrayed her own ideals, Tyrion remains inspired by her original goal and successfully proposes an elective monarchy so that claim over the Throne is no longer determined by bloodline succession. This more stable system gives hope for change in the future.

(When we settle this, we should probably have a comment pointing editors to this discussion that it shouldn't be changed since it took a lot to arrive at a final wording.)

I'm fine with that proposal.

^^ I like immichan's compromise and proposed example too.

I like it too.

Me four, in regards to mmichan's compromise regarding the non wheel version.

Have re-added

^ Thanks, Tuvok :)

Late to the party, but yeah, Looks good.

... also, I really do have to point out that Team Tony's point that "anti-Dany fans were totally on board with her rampaging" is pure bunk. I've been a detractor of Dany since S2 and her Face–Heel Turn was comically poorly done.

Thanks, everyone! :)

I know this got heated and tense here and in ATT, but I am glad we could find a compromise and hopefully it addressed the various concerns.

There was also a suggestion to open a discussion about handling Daenerys examples in other places, and maybe there are other examples that need some review and compromise. I am not sure where to go for that, but if someone knows the appropriate place...

(Larkmarn, was ANYONE on board with the rampaging?! I have only seen a few fringe people who were like "yeah burn the world down!")

The implication of TT's line Its a meme among Dany fans. There are plenty of fans who called her face heel turn long before it actually happened is that non-Dany fans, including ones who thought she would have a Face–Heel Turn, didn't think this was sudden and jarring and instead were like "yeah, we were right!"

Dany's rampage being out of left field isn't a meme, it's a fact.

^ Yeah, the whole "Mad Queen" theory started years ago, right? But specifically as a GRADUAL DESCENT told across seasons not a momentary snap decision of "whelp, guess I'll burn down the whole city after it surrendered"?