Daenerys Targaryen – The “Breaker of Chains” Propaganda // Part One


There are many titles we could grant to Daenerys which would be more fitting than “The Breaker of Chains” – imperialist, incel, war criminal, and so much more. Daenerys was always going to take the Iron Throne with fire and blood. I could repeat in full length that the show and the books foreshadowed this, but I’ll leave you with this link instead which will explain it far better than I could. Daenerys’s worst impulses had been checked several times by her advisors, but, ultimately, her own impulse for fire and blood won in the episode horrifically titled “The Bells” when she committed mass murder by burning thousands of innocent people. Would Jon, Sansa, Davos, Brienne (and countless others) do the same? No. Can we consider someone who murders a rape victim, crucifies slavers without a trial, or torches prisoners of war a moral person? Sure, the show set up Daenerys’s descent into darkness poorly – that could have been achieved with more episodes – but viewers and readers had been made aware of just what Daenerys Targaryen was capable of however cartoon-ish the villains were in Essos. They chose not to listen and bought into the “Breaker of Chains” propaganda. Even I hoped that she wouldn’t succumb to her worst impulses, but it became more apparent as this season progressed that she would.


I discussed earlier that ‘Ice and Fire’ are dualities, two sides of the same coin. The Targaryen sigil is shockingly similar to the symbols and messages that ‘The Other’s’ left. But I think it, also, represents another thing – the wheel. Daenerys has often spoken about “breaking the wheel,” but another Targaryen on the throne means continuing the wheel that her ancestors had created. The wheel will continue its cycle until the throne is destroyed; the Iron Throne, in this story, represents ‘the ring’ (LotR) and the pursuit of the ring brings absolute power. Monarchy is absolute power based on genetics and ruling, in this manner, will always reproduce rulers who are unworthy and unfit to rule. The most satisfying conclusion to the show would be if a ruler was elected through a democratic process and then rules alongside a council.


Let’s talk about Daenerys Targaryen, the incel. Remember Alek Minassian? I spoke about him in ‘Look Around You, Incels Are Everywhere.’ Minassian, inspired by the 2014 Isla Vista shooting, killed 10 pedestrians, mostly female as a result of his involuntary celibacy (incel). Similarly, Daenerys freed slaves in various cities in Essos. She fought alongside the North to defeat the White Walkers. In her mind, she had done the right thing, the nice thing. Yes, Cersei did not send her troops, but Cersei is a villain, and Daenerys claims to be a heroine. Considering the White Walkers were aiming to wipe out the Westerosi population and that Daenerys would have to deal with them eventually if she chose not to fight, how does it make sense for Daenerys to feel entitled to Westeros for doing what she had to do in the first place? Likewise, Incels believe they are entitled to sex because they have been ‘nice’ even though ‘niceness’ is something that factors into being a dutiful human being. Daenerys, angered by Jon’s refusal to resume their previous intimate relationship, angered that the Westerosi do not love her, believed that it gave her the right to rule through fear which resulted in the massacre of thousands of innocent citizens. They didn’t love her, so she murdered them. It is not for nothing that many fans dislike Daenerys’s sense of entitlement.

Considering that I studied ‘Superpower Relations,’ (Daenerys v Cersei) the Vietnam War (the Field of Fire), Hiroshima (“The Bells”) and the British Raj (Daenerys’s imperialism) in college, I am surprised (and slightly mortified) that I did not pick up on how Daenerys’s story (and the inclusion of the Iraq War – Daenerys conquering Meereen) is a parallel. All this spelled that Daenerys was an imperialist, a coloniser, a war criminal, and though I questioned the morality of many of her decisions, it wasn’t until I researched Daenerys that I discovered what Daenerys really is. Daenerys achieved this through her “Breaker of Chains” propaganda that she herself believed using vague rhetoric such as “breaking the wheel.” Similarly, thedomino theory‘ was used as propaganda by the U.S. In this case, one could argue that Cersei and Daenerys are parallels to the U.S. and the Soviet Union with Cersei being presented as the threat; in actuality, Daenerys and her very own WMD, her dragons, present just as much as a threat, if not bigger.

How Daenerys murdered thousands of civilians is very much a similar tune to the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki which claimed the lives of 129,000-226,000 of which most were innocent civilians; Japan, consequently, surrendered. The bells rang the surrender of King’s Landing; Daenerys no longer cared. It wasn’t enough. Truman called for Japan’s surrender with a warning attached: “expect a rain of ruin from the air, the like of which has never been seen on this earth.” Daenerys states in the previous episode: “They should know whom to blame when the sky falls upon them.” We shouldn’t sympathise with Daenerys, not any longer, or try to humanise a Hitler-like character. Nor should we plead the insanity defence; that would be a grave injustice and take away the severity of Daenerys’s crimes. What Daenerys did does not make her a ‘Mad Queen,’ she hadn’t lost her senses. By trying to plead insanity as a defence, by sympathising with Daenerys, we contribute a similar energy to Fox News and Daily Mail defending and humanising mass shooters by piling on a tragic backstory and a mental illness. Many people have mental illnesses, and they do not commit mass murder.


War is terrifying and not as glamorous as some stories tell us. This is why it is imperative that we saw it from Arya’s POV. Some have called this decision contrived because Arya is a fan favourite. I agree that it must have played a part, but, let us not forget, that Arya is an assassin. “I know death. He’s got many faces. I look forward to seeing this one.” But now Arya has seen enough death, she’s had enough of it. And when you see what war really is, how war makes men and soldiers beasts (think My Lai massacre), how women and children are raped and murdered, you will distrust those who wage war and disguise their intentions as doing it ‘for the greater good’ when really seizing power is the underlying motive. There is nothing heroic about war – especially ones that never needed to be fought in the first place.


-Sophia Ismaa.

Do you think Daenerys deserves sympathy? Should grief, mental illness, or hurt excuse criminals? What do you think of ‘entitlement?’ What are your thoughts on war? Let me know in the comments!

Connect with me:

-Let’s talk all things books on Goodreads
-Talk politics, books, TV shows, blogging and life with me on Twitter


  1. YES THANK YOU! This was always going to happen! My problem was with Arya FINALLY getting into the castle to kill cersei only to have clegane go “nah homie go home.” I’m happy she didn’t kill such a big character but I predict she will be the one to kill Daenarys which would kind of suck because Arya is way too OP


    1. I think my girl was so done with murder after seeing what Dany did… Jon and Tyrion are culpable for their misplaced idealism, so I’m glad it was Jon who did the deed. I hope it’s executed in the books a lot better though!

      Liked by 1 person

    1. Jon did the deed! Though I wasn’t entirely happy with the way it was executed (the books will do it better), but hard to care because I’m glad the mass murderer is dead! 🙂


    1. They did – but I feel like Game of Thrones is not the kind of show you want if you’re looking for escapism. It’s more for people who love advanced English lit (& lessons on foreshadowing) and analysis! If you don’t have the capacity for those, then you wouldn’t have seen it coming! Not in a mean way or anything, I know a lot of people, me included, who watch tv to escape, but the author, GRRM, has said himself that this is not that kind of story – it’s really an anti-monarchy and pacifist story.


  2. Daenarys deserved sympathy following several traumatic experiences throughout her brief life but not long-term, exculpatory sympathy. No, grief and hurt do not excuse criminal acts, although they can explain them. And yes, poor mental health of sufficient severity, at least in the American legal system, can be used as the basis of a finding of not guilty. I think too many people feel entitled to too much with little grounds for support and almost always at the expense of others who, naturally, feel they’re no less entitled. As for war, it sucks. It’s hell. And as long as we remain humans, it will never cease to be a part of our condition.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s