Skip to main content

game of thrones - How did Daenerys avoid injury in Vaes Dothrak?


In s06E04 Daenerys



sets Dothraki hut on fire and emerges unhurt. How is this possible, she is not immune to fire.




Now I am aware she did this once before but G.R.R.M. went on record and said that:



I paraphrase: The birth of dragons/comet was a one time event only. That's why she wasn't burned by the fire (her brother dies to burns) and this will not happen again.



Now the only explanation I have is that TV show is different from books, but this seems a major plot point that should somehow transfer to books as well.



Answer



GRRM did say that it was a one time event however it does not seem to have held up. In the books as well, Daenerys has shown ability to be (almost) unscathed by fire more than once. First when she gave birth to her dragons as you mentioned. Second when she claimed Drogon at Draznak's pit as Ser Barristan recollects:



Her hair was aflame. She had the whip in her hand and she was shouting, then she was on the dragon’s back, flying.




We know that part is true because Chapter sixty three of Dance with dragon says:



She ran a hand across her stubbly scalp where her hair had burned away, and felt more ants on her head, and one crawling down the back of her neck. She knocked them off and crushed them under her bare feet. There were so many ...



And as we have Dany's own account as well:



With a hiss, he spat black fire down at her. Dany darted underneath the flames, swinging the whip and shouting, “No, no, no. Get DOWN!” His answering roar was full of fear and fury, full of pain.



However, counter argument here would be that Daenerys tried to get away from that fire so she escaped with no more than her hair burned which is unlike the first event when she went into a pyre completely. But I suppose it is a weak argument because come on, it's dragon fire. Daenerys must have makings of a great athlete if she can be that quick.


But we do know that Targaryens are not fireproof, this is something that appears to be unique to Daenerys.




  1. Viserys Targaryen died of being burnt by molten gold.

  2. Rhaenys Targaryen was burnt to death by Vhagar and Sunfyre. (We can't be sure though that if it was the fire that killed her or the fall. But we do know her corpse was so badly burnt that it could not be recognized and that she was indeed dead).

  3. Rhaenyra Targaryen was burnt by Sunfyre.

  4. Aegon II was paralyzed due to injuries given by fire of Rhaenys Targaryen's dragon Meleys the Red Queen.

  5. Aegon V was burnt with Prince Duncan Targaryen at Tragedy of Summerhall. That left House Targaryen family tree limited to one lonely branch of Jaehaerys II.

  6. Aerion Brightflame died after drinking Wildfire. I suppose we can call it internal chemical burning.

  7. All deceased Targaryens are burnt in a funeral pyre which further shows that their bodies are not fire proof, as pointed out by Arnaud.D. David has provided a good counter-argument for that. He suggests that this supposed immunity could be tied to life-force of Targs (Even though that is disproved by numerous occasions of Targs dying due to burning).




This shows that Daenerys did continue to display her resilience against fire in future events of books as well. As you have noted as well, Show is heading into a completely different direction. How did Daenerys manage to appear unburnt out of the cottage? I fear the only speculation we can make is that Show runners are going to build on her supposed immunity to fire even further.


We can't have solid arguments in this regard because GRRM has never given us any details as to what exactly made Dany fireproof during birth of her dragons so we can't find similar patterns in future events she might show knack for being fireproof.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

futurama - How much time is lost in 'Time Keeps on Slippin''

In time Keeps on Slippin' , Farnsworth creates a basketball team which he matures by abusing Chronitons. This leads to time skipping forward by random, but ever increasing amounts. How much time was skipped in this way? Answer Unfortunately, I don't think a good estimate can be made for this, for two reasons: Many of the time skips move forward by an indeterminate amount of time. At one point, the Professor mentions localized regions of space skipping forward much more than others. We then see two young boys on the street below complaining about having to pay social security, only to suddenly become senior citizens and start complaining about wanting their money. Thus, each individual could have experienced a different amount of time skippage.
Post a Comment
Read more

aliens - Interstellar Zoo story

I vaguely remember this story from my childhood: it was about an interstellar zoo that came to Earth with lots of bizarre and unusual species, and humans would file through and gape at all the crazy looking creatures from other planets. The twist came at the end when the perspective shifted to the other side of the bars and we discovered that the "creatures" were traveling through space on a kind of safari. They thought they were the visitors and we were the animals. Neither side knew that the other side thought they were the zoo creatures. Answer Got it. Zoo, by Edward D. Hoch. Published in 1958. Link to Publication History Link to PDF
Post a Comment
Read more

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...
Post a Comment
Read more

harry potter - What is the difference between Diffindo and Sectumsempra?

In the Harry Potter books, Diffindo is called the 'Severing Charm' and it’s most commonly used to cut ropes and the like. However, in the last book Hermione uses it on Ron but misses, creating a 'slash in his jeans' and his knee gets cut, causing him to 'roar in pain'. We've only seen Sectumsempra used once on screen when Harry directly uses it on Malfoy in the sixth book, but there it's mentioned that he is 'waving his wand wildly'. Wouldn't Diffindo, if used in such a fashion also cause a similar effect? Similarly, if it was able to cut Ron, it would also be able to, say, chop off an ear (George's)? In that case, how are these two spells different, except for Sectumsempra seemingly used exclusively to hurt humans? Answer While Diffindo and Sectumsempra both can be countered by other spells, Diffindo is far more easily countered. Reparo, a relatively common spell, can completely reverse its effect when used once. “He pulled the old cop...
Post a Comment
Read more