"I am but a young girl and know little of the ways of war": the learning curve of Daenerys Targaryen

Before I begin my atrociously long tirade/analysis of Daenerys’ actions once entering the Ghiscar peninsula, I have to mention (for my own sanity) how disappointed I was of Dany’s portrayal in ADwD. It seemed as if between ASoS and ADwD, Daenerys Targaryen dropped approximately 50 points in her IQ. To be honest, I blame GRRM for that. I can only hope her stagnant storyline was included in order to set the stage for the next book.

I would like to state, before I even attempt to continue, that I have not seen any evidence supporting the arguement issued by many anti-Dany proponents. Many assert that Dany is “stupid”.

Dany was orphaned at a young age. Her father, the “Mad King”, was slain by Jaime Lannister and her mother died in childbirth. Everything that Dany had heard about her lineage, her House, and the name ‘Targaryen’, was either from Viserys or Willem Darry. Considering the fact that Willem Darry was a staunch Targaryen loyalist, it might be a bit too convenient to rely on his ‘objectivity’ regarding House Targaryen. Either way, Willem Darry dies early on in Dany’s childhood. From there, she and her brother are constantly on the run from the Usurpers “hired swords”.

When considering the two biggest, and perhaps only, influences in Dany’s life- Ser Willem Darry and Viserys-  it becomes apparent that she has been indoctrinated possibly since birth about how House Targaryen is the greatest House, how they’re the true rulers of Westeros, how they have the right to the Seven Kingdoms, etc by her brother Viserys. How would you know anything else if all your life you’ve been told that you’re inherently superior than everyone?

——————————————————————————————-

That was a gigantic tangent. Here we go. For real, this time. Also, before you read this, note that I am in no way condoning any type of slavery with this piece. In fact, I am arguing that the way Daenerys Targaryen went about liberating the Ghiscari slaves was a rash one.

I have come across a poster that argued that Daenerys’ action of liberating the Ghiscari cities of the slave trade was a “noble” and “valiant” thing to have done. They then prompted that if said slaves were Caucasian, other posters would not accuse Dany of being patronizing. They posed the question: Why are her actions deemed wrong in Ghiscar? Are they only wrong because of the colour of Ghiscari skin? If the slavers had been white would it have been alright for Dany to end their inhuman ways, but because they’ve got brown skin and different names it’s somehow patronising for her to do anything about it?

The poster is certainly entitled to their opinion, but it’s not one I share.

It serves no import as to whether her actions were wrong or right based on skin color, but that she’d come to a place in the world where the social, cultural, political, economic and environmental conditions were the complete opposite of what she had known in Pentos or even learned of in Westeros.

During her sojourn to the Ghiscari cities of Astapor, Yunkai and Mereen, not once did Daenerys consider to discern more about the Ghiscari civilization. She neither attempted to comprehend the institutional powers and systems that perpetuate and propagate inequality amongst the populace nor how deeply such powers are embedded into the Ghiscar culture and tradition. She never consulted the opinions of the citizens of Astapor, Yunkai or Mereen outside of Missandei. When attempting to take down a centuries-old institution such as slavery without almost any information regarding its origins, history, and power dynamics, it doesn’t require much inference that the results would be disasterous without some sort of preconceived plan or strategy to restructure society into one of democratic harmony. 

Furthermore, Dany neglected to comprehend the repercussions of her actions until after she burned down Astapor and Yunkai. Look what ended up happening: The cities are in an even worse state than before, slavery is returning, and even more vicious than ever with the slavers taking extreme protocols, the Harpy is slaughtering innocents every night in shocking numbers in Mereen, and Dany refuses to heed her ministers’ advice.
A “good”, well-equipped leader would have had the foresight to compile some preliminary research, first and foremost. It would have to include the region’s geography all the way down to its culture and how it influences individuals within said region. Then, and once she has the support of the city or cities, her advisors, and a concrete plan for the rehabilitation and reconstruction of the infrastructure and bodies of governance that would be a viable long-term option, she would, along with the people themselves, take down the institution and the social class system. This means that she would have had to spend quite a long time in each of the cities in turn.

Who gave Dany the jurisdiction to take it upon herself to slaughter over 100 people in revenge of the 100 child corpses in order to make it a point to the slavers, decimate the cities of Astapor and Yunkai, killing thousands, and to abolish the slave trade by herself in the three Ghiscari cities? No one. She did. As she was the one who wrought destruction upon these cities on her own orders and of her own will, she should have been the one to have carefully considered exactly what she was doing, if there were any alternatives (none of which she explored, may I add, or even tried exploring) she should have sought them out, and she should have considered the consequences of her action. None of which she did until everything lay in ruins.

Dany’s intervention in Astapor, Yunkai, and Mereen reeks of the “White Savior Industrial Complex” of the Colonialist era.
Essentially it’s a particular type of activism where those who are the most privileged (comparatively, Caucasians make up the vast majority of the wealthiest societies and/or these societies have most of their history and culture molded by Caucasian ancestors) intervene in communities, cultural and societal contexts that are not their own. Their original intention is not based upon “justice” but more so about having a large emotional experience that helps justify their privilege and validates their “do-gooding” attitude.


Dany literally rode into Astapor, Yunkai, and Mereen on a white horse (Silver, anyone?) and decided to help “resolve” the area’s “problems”.  Her good heart took over yet she never took a step back and tried to connect the dots or see the deeply embedded institutional networks of power behind the slave trade in these cities. All she sees is poverty (hungry mouths to feed), chains (people being held against their will), and need. A journalist named Teju Cole puts it correctly when he says “all [she] sees is need, and [she] sees no need to reason out the need for the need.”

Essentially this is a type of global racism that’s been rooted from the colonial times. The “slaves” in these cities serve as a ideological battleground for the argument between Westerosi and Essosi discourse. By reducing these cities to flames, Dany essentially rendered illegal what seemed to be an integral part of the Ghiscari society and identity. She destroyed their economy, culture, social and political structure with a beat of Drogon’s wings. I’m sure if anyone wrote a history of the Ghiscari cities now, the slaves would be portrayed as “victims” and “the oppressed” of an inhumane practice known as slavery. A discrepancy materializes then. Dany has seen the strength and bravery of the Unsullied and is told that only the best of the best become fully trained soldiers. They inspire awe all around the world, world-renowned. Thus, the Unsullied, as slaves, are described in two very mutually exclusive ways:  they are seen as oppressed victims coerced into this lifestyle or else as heroes and the truest of all soldiers. They (the slaves) have no idea how to view themselves now. Were they victims or were they strong, hardened men? Historian Lata Mani develops this concept of discrepancy while tackling the issue of Sati amongst women in India and how it was outlawed by the colonizing British invaders.

Think of this statement by Stephan Morton (about the practice of Sati) and then contextualize it with Dany’s motivations and actions in Astapor, Yunkai and Mereen:

“By representing sati [slavery] as a barbaric practice, the British [Dany] were thus able to justify imperialism as a civilising mission in which […] they were rescuing Indian women [Ghiscari slaves] from the reprehensible practices of a traditional Hindu patriarchial society [Ghiscari racist and classist society].”  

Yet it is DANY that gives the “representation” of slavery as barbaric and uses that to justify her conquests. Her efforts at change were superficial; she did not target the root causes of the institution of slavery and oppression. Did I want to see slavery abolished from the Ghiscari cities? Hell yes. In this way? Hell no. The short-term benefits (the new-found freedom of the liberated slaves) of Dany’s actions pale in comparison to the long-term problems the society will have to face down the line (slavery re-appearing and more brutal than ever; political, economic and social discord prevalent amongst every class, etc).

We see Dany mirroring much of what has occurred in contemporary society. One the many reasons America gave to the public to engage in military intervention in Afghanistan was the deplorable conditions of women and girls under the Taliban regime. This was another scenario where well-intentions (on behalf of the public, not so much Bush’s) with hope of changing conditions “led to some kind of state-sanctioned, military endorsed violence upon a community you are trying to “uplift.”’ Military interventions tend to be a short-term response, not doing the people of the country much good in the end.

I really can’t say it better than Teju Cole on this subject of a foreigner intervening in another country’s affairs:

…there is much more to doing good work than “making a difference.” There is the principle of first do no harm. There is the idea that those who are being helped ought to be consulted over the matters that concern them.

A nobody from America or Europe can go to Africa and become a godlike savior or, at the very least, have his or her emotional needs satisfied. Many have done it under the banner of “making a difference.” To state this obvious and well-attested truth does not make me a racist or a Mau Mau. It does give me away as an “educated middle-class African,” and I plead guilty as charged.

And we also agree on something else: that there is an internal ethical urge that demands that each of us serve justice as much as he or she can. But beyond the immediate attention that he rightly pays hungry mouths, child soldiers, or raped civilians, there are more complex and more widespread problems. There are serious problems of governance, of infrastructure, of democracy, and of law and order. These problems are neither simple in themselves nor are they reducible to slogans. Such problems are both intricate and intensely local.


It begins, I believe, with some humility with regards to the people in those places. It begins with some respect for the agency of the people of Uganda in their own lives. A great deal of work had been done, and continues to be done, by Ugandans to improve their own country, and ignorant comments (I’ve seen many) about how “we have to save them because they can’t save themselves” can’t change that fact.

To do this would be to give up the illusion that the sentimental need to “make a difference” trumps all other considerations. What innocent heroes don’t always understand is that they play a useful role for people who have much more cynical motives.

 Daenerys’ choices regarding the Ghiscari cities, however, are something I was displeased about but I can only hope she’s learned that invading and conquering is futile and hopeless for the denizens of the region unless the decision was well-informed and the rehabilitation of the area in the aftermath of the war has been already well planned in advance, or at the very least, considered.

With that said, Dany is learning. I get that. It was her first real challenge/test as a leader and she mucked it up a bit but there’s no question that Dany realizes her mistakes later (when she’s gazing out of her balcony in Mereen after hearing about the Harpy) and we can only hope she has developed a keener sense of judgement in the future. “You live and you learn” is probably the best adage that would befit her after her trials in the Ghiscari peninsula.