6 Years After ‘Game of Thrones’s Controversial Daenerys Twist, ‘HOTD’ Still Misunderstands the Targaryens

by

Daenerys Targaryen’s shocking turn in the final season of Game of Thrones is famously controversial, but many viewers have misjudged the source of the show’s problems. While the last season of Game of Thrones had many issues, the HBO series actually started to go wrong with important details much earlier on.

Okay, so everyone talks about how the final season of Game of Thrones fell apart, but honestly, it wasn’t just a last-minute collapse. Looking back, the problems were building for seasons, and it’s really bothered me how the criticism has been framed. I’m not here to defend Season 8, but to point out that we – both the fans and the people making House of the Dragon – seem to be repeating the same mistakes. I want to really break down what happened with characters like Daenerys and Bran, and how the whole story about the Iron Throne just didn’t quite land.

What Daenerys Targaryen’s Actual Role In ‘Game of Thrones’ Is


HBO

Many fans were disappointed with the final season, particularly with Bran becoming king instead of Jon or Daenerys. There was also a feeling that Daenerys’s sudden shift towards destructive behavior didn’t fit with her established character. However, looking back, it becomes clear that the story wasn’t really building towards either Jon or Daenerys taking the throne.

In George R.R. Martin’s world, the Targaryen family served a particular purpose. They were a powerful dynasty with a mixed record of leaders – some were benevolent and just, like Jaehaerys I, while others, like Aegon IV, were truly awful. But even after the Targaryens lost the throne, things didn’t magically get better. Robert Baratheon’s rise to power brought a fragile peace, typical after a change in leadership. However, that peace didn’t last long; after Robert’s death, everyone started vying for the throne. The core issue is that despite the Baratheons taking over, the underlying social structure of Westeros remained the same, it just had a new name.

The popular idea in Game of Thrones that Targaryens are born with a chance of being insane – like a coin flip decides their fate – is mostly a symbolic device. While generations of marriage within the family certainly led to unpredictable outcomes, history shows similar patterns in almost every ruling family. Consider the Roman emperors after Augustus – the same could be said for them. The line isn’t meant to suggest half of all Targaryens are destined for madness; it highlights the risk inherent in any new ruler. Each monarch represents a turning point, potentially leading to progress or decline. This illustrates the fundamental flaw of inherited power and monarchical systems. Essentially, George R.R. Martin is showing us that monarchy is problematic, and a return to Targaryen rule was never a viable solution.

This raises a big question: why did Bran become king? Knowing this was George R.R. Martin’s intention from the start, it’s helpful to look at the hints within the story. Bran shares similarities with Brân the Blessed, a figure from Welsh mythology – ‘Brân’ meaning raven or crow – who was a king of Britain. Many scholars also link him to the Fisher King from Arthurian legends. The Fisher King is a weakened ruler with a severe leg wound, kept alive by the Holy Grail, which he’s tasked with safeguarding. Considering these clear influences, it becomes apparent that Bran Stark isn’t a king in the traditional sense of the word within Game of Thrones.

Bran, as a king in the world of Arthurian legend, isn’t a ruler who inherited power. Instead, he embodies the idea of leadership – a heroic, noble, and fair figure. This is the kind of ending George R.R. Martin aimed for with A Song of Ice & Fire. Like Aragorn becoming king in The Lord of the Rings, Bran’s ascension is about fulfilling a symbolic role. Both are kings in the spirit of Arthurian lore, but Bran, similar to the wounded Fisher King, is shaped by hardship. This feels more fitting for Game of Thrones than if Jon Snow had taken the throne, as Jon is more like the traditional King Arthur or Aragorn. In this way, Jon Snow served as a clever distraction.

‘Game of Thrones’ Lied To You About Daenerys Targaryen

Considering everything we’ve learned from the books, it’s easier to understand what George R.R. Martin originally intended for Bran Stark. The issue with the Game of Thrones TV show was how it presented Daenerys. The series focused on her so much that viewers missed the fact that her goals were ultimately destructive. I think Martin created Daenerys to be initially appealing, almost as a trap. He wanted readers to be charmed by her, similar to how people might be swayed by a charismatic ruler. However, subtle clues about her developing lack of empathy were always present, hinting at a darker side.

Around seasons 3 and 4, Game of Thrones seemed aware of how much fans loved Daenerys. Although the character was originally intended to become a ruthless leader, many viewers saw her as a feminist hero. While the show hinted at a darker side to Dany, these moments were often overshadowed by her more heroic actions, like riding dragons and freeing slaves. The signs of her potential descent into madness were present, but they were balanced by these spectacular and empowering scenes. Considering how popular the show became, it’s likely the creators intentionally leaned into Daenerys’s appeal, using her popularity to help drive Game of Thrones to new levels of success.

‘House of the Dragon’ Repeats the Same Mistake


Max

Many viewers are noticing a parallel between Rhaenyra Targaryen and Daenerys Targaryen, and it seems history is repeating itself with House of the Dragon. In the second-to-last episode of Season 2, titled “The Red Sowing,” Rhaenyra appears detached while surveying the devastating aftermath of her attempt to recruit more dragonriders, showing little concern for the lives lost. This moment hints at the Rhaenyra described in George R.R. Martin’s books – a more complex character – which has been somewhat overshadowed by the show’s focus on the conflict between the “Blacks” and “Greens” and the widespread adoration of Rhaenyra by fans.

I don’t think viewers will be as invested in Rhaenyra’s story as they were with Daenerys. The issue is that House of the Dragon seems to be repeating a common mistake: the writers are too attached to their characters and aren’t willing to let things happen realistically. It’s okay if the show leans towards supporting Rhaenyra’s side, but they shouldn’t be portrayed as perfect heroes. The writers, particularly when adapting an existing story, need to avoid shaping characters simply to please the audience.

Read More

2025-11-20 01:20