The reason why all the Blackfry theorys are wrong

[Ser Charles of Rosehaven]

Yes, you are perfectly correct that Blackfrys will be unimportant, and probably won't exist in the books or show.

Now, Blackfyres, hmm, that's a totally different story.

I Was thinking the same as You

[Stannis th3 Mannis]

I didn't state anything as a fact I simply made a observation, had a thought about this observation and then made a post.. I'm not the one speaking has I no for a fact what will and will not be important from here on out

[Stannis th3 Mannis]

Of course if u don't have anything worth saying you could always start picking out spelling mistakes.

[Lord Damian]

i hate to break it to you all but it is obvious that when Aegon becomes King it will not be for long as Dany will most likely take it from him. The real question is whether someone will take it from her? The show is spoiling a lot more than most people seem to think. I think it also shows that Sansa is about to die out as she is apparently not in the end game just a player now to fill some space.

[Stannis th3 Mannis]

Awwww man u didn't use a spoiler tag

[Ser Charles of Rosehaven]

Of course if u don't have anything worth saying you could always start picking out spelling mistakes.

I can point out more if You want. It is just that Was the most notable.

Back to the topic. As almost everyone has said. Game of Thrones And A Song of Ice And Fire are different worlds. For example the show only mentions Rhaegar when Dany is naming something. And doesn't mention Lyanna in any season but the first one. Still, readers are convinced that R+L=J

[Stannis th3 Mannis]

Yea I guess start pointing seeing how u have not found anything worth saying

[RedShirt47]

The show has merged story-lines many times, to me this seems like rather than two Targ exiles invading from Essos to reclaim their throne the show will have only one.

It appears that Aegon is removed entirely so we can draw no conclusions about him at all from the show.

By this logic Ned is most likely Jon's father as all the clues like:

The fever dreams.

The blue rose at the Wall in Dany's vision.

The story of KotLT.

are all missing from the show.

[The_Noctua]

Blackfry:

http://www.dumbdrops.com/ratchet-memes/templates/Black_Fry.jpg

:bowdown:

[UnmaskedLurker]

The show has merged story-lines many times, to me this seems like rather than two Targ exiles invading from Essos to reclaim their throne the show will have only one.

It appears that Aegon is removed entirely so we can draw no conclusions about him at all from the show.

By this logic Ned is most likely Jon's father as all the clues like:

The fever dreams.

The blue rose at the Wall in Dany's vision.

The story of KotLT.

are all missing from the show.

By necessity the show has to drop plotlines that are significant in the book series. The TV show is narrowing down plots to just what they feel they need to get to the endgame. Aegon/Griff apparently will not be in the show. That tells us two things: (1) Aegon/Griff is probably not part of the endgame (and thus likely not a head of the dragon or final dragonrider -- although he might ride a dragon prior to his death) and (2) nothing else really. In other words, he could be a Blackfyre (as I think he is) or not -- TV show tells us nothing because if Aegon is not in the show, then introducing the notion of Blackfyres is not necessary because that entire subplot involving Aegon/Griff is gone.

[Neds Secret]

Yes, you are perfectly correct that Blackfrys will be unimportant, and probably won't exist in the books or show.

Now, Blackfyres, hmm, that's a totally different story.

hahaha

[Facebookless Man]

The problem with your argument is that the Blackfyre theorists are already assuming that the whole Varys/Illyrio/Aegon plot is completely irrelevant. In fact for a lot of them that's the starting point.

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

You might be right, and Aegon might not be a Blackfyre in the show. Heck, in the show Aegon could be absent altogether. Isn't he? If he is, then it's a perfectly moot point anyway: "the book has Young Griff and it has the Blackfyre backstory, too, but the fact that the show lacks both proves they aren't connected in the books, either". :dunno:

[NOT A TARG I SWEAR]

Just because something isn't in the show doesn't mean you can draw too many conclusions about the impact of that exclusion. There are a lot of reasons things are excluded from the show including: budgetary concerns, time constraints, talent issues, inability to adequately tell the story on television, inessential to the story, other/better way of telling the story, and combinations of many of these factors. Sometimes aspects of the story are excluded entirely. Sometimes they merge characters and plot points to avoid introducing new non-essential characters so they don't have to hire another actor or confuse the audience.

We also don't know exactly everything the show runners were told from George, we know they have at least a general idea of the ending and that's about it. As we often don't hear exact reasons why things were excluded, we generally just don't have enough information to confidently come to a conclusion about a particular plot point.

In the case of Dance of Dragons and Blackfyre rebellions, particular aspects that play heavily into the books such as history and myths can be difficult to pull off well on television, especially with the limited time alloted per season. I think these historical events aren't necessarily essential to the conclusion of the future stories, but help build a richer world where the histories can often relate to future events similar to our own world. They can also act as a means of foreshadowing future events. It is a tool to add another layer to the narrative. There are probably ways to get to the same end game without them, but George likes to use them in his stories which a lot of fans tend to really like.

The Game of Thrones show runners probably couldn't find a way within their 10 episodes per season to convey the necessary backstory and to adequately relate future events to those backstories while satisfying the contracts with their actors and not over-relying on exposition or flashbacks. It could also be they just didn't like that aspect of the books, I just don't know. We do know they have taken to stream-lining a lot of the narrative and to crop a lot of the extra world building. As such, all we can safely assume is that Dance of Dragons and Blackfyre Rebellions aren't absolutely necessary to get to the eventual conclusion of ASOIAF and as such Dan and Dave have decided not to use them to the same extent to tell their version of the story. It doesn't mean in George's books they will not be relevant to upcoming events.

[Lost Melnibonean]

Here is a summary of how the Blackfyre plotlines were introduced by the George...

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/126482-the-blackfyre/

As the recently disclosed 1983 letter confirmed the George originally envisioned a three-part saga, with the first act being the struggle between Houses Stark and Lannister, and the second being Daenerys's return to Westeros to claim her father's throne, and the third being the war against the Others.

We also know that the George's tale grew in the telling, so that the first part of the original trilogy became a trilogy in itself, Game, Clash and Storm.

The backstories of both the Blackfyre and the Dance were referenced in the first three novels. After Storm, the George gave us The Sworn Sword, in which we learned the most important details of the First Blackfyre Rebellion. Then the second act of ASOIAF opened with Feast, and Arianne and Arys told us, quite specifically, that we should see the Blackfyre again...

". . . Are you aware that the Golden Company has broken its contract with Myr?"

"Sellswords break their contracts all the time."

"Not the Golden Company. Our word is good as gold has been their boast since the days of Bittersteel. Myr is on the point of war with Lys and Tyrosh. Why break a contract that offered them the prospect of good wages and good plunder?"

"Perhaps Lys offered them better wages. Or Tyrosh."

"No, she said. I would believe it of any of the other free companies, yes. Most of them would change sides for half a groat. The Golden Company is different. A brotherhood of exiles and the sons of exiles, united by the dream of Bittersteel. It's home they want, as much as gold. Lord Yronwood knows that as well as I do. His forebears rode with Bittersteel during three of the Blackfyre Rebellions." She took Ser Arys by the hand, and wove her fingers through his own. "Have you ever seen the arms of House Toland of Ghost Hill?"

He had to think a moment. "A dragon eating its own tail?"

"The dragon is time. It has no beginning and no ending, so all things come round again." Anders Yronwood is Criston Cole reborn. He whispers in my brother's ear that he should rule after my father, that it is not right for men to kneel to women . . . that Arianne especially is unfit to rule, being the willful wanton that she is." She tossed her hair defiantly. "So your two princesses share a common cause, ser . . . and they share as well a knight who claims to love them both, but will not fight for them."

This was the first we learned of the most formidable of the sellsword companies, which was founded by Bittersteel with those Blackfyre loyalists that had followed him across the Narrow Sea. They continued to fight for gold, but we were told that they want home, i.e., the Seven Kingdoms. We also read that Bittersteel returned two more times to lead the Third Blackfyre Rebellion and the Fourth Blackfyre Rebellion. And then, perhaps most importantly, we read the arms of House Toland, a dragon eating its own tail, and we were told that the dragon was time, and all things come round again. This was not just homage to The Wheel of Time. The George was clearly telling us early in the second act of ASOIAF, when Daenerys Targaryen would return to reclaim her fathers throne, that the Blackfyre, or at least something like it, would return.

And then Aegon, who's life was supposedly bought with the life of the pisswater prince, was introduced in Dance.

Following Dance, we got TP&TQ and The Rogue Prince. And the George has told us that the Second Dance of the Dragons will be the subject of a book.

Daenerys will dance with a dragon and that dragon will be a Blackfyre.

ETA

I would suggest that the exclusion of Aegon means that he is a Blackfyre. If he were the son of Rhaegar he would be the rightful heir to the Targaryen seat. But he's not. And Daenerys will slay the lie that is the mummer's dragon before we start dreaming of spring.

[Throck]

How do you know that they cut Aegon from the show?

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

How do you know that they cut Aegon from the show?

Browsed the cast for Season 5, and saw no "Aegons" or "Young Griffs" there.

[Throck]

Browsed the cast for Season 5, and saw no "Aegons" or "Young Griffs" there.

can't they bring him in in season 6? o.O

[Frey family reunion]

While I hesitate to use the show as too much evidence towards the direction the books will take, I will note that in a recent Vanity Fair interview, the show runners did state that while there will be some differences between the show and the books, the basic ending is the same and there will be major spoilers during the show for the books. Now, that doesn't mean that Aegon isn't a Blackfyre, but it does make me wonder just how significant his plotline will be for the conclusion of Martin's series.

On that same line of thinking, the show has never mentioned Ashara Dayne (to my knowledge anyway), has barely mentioned Rhaegar, Howland, or Arthur Dayne. So major issues that we speculate and debate about has hardly been touched at all in the shows.

[denny717]

I don't think I 100%understand the question. Are you saying aegon is not significant in the books, or that the blackfyre theory is insignificant.

Aegon is already kind of a significant character, considering he's a king who has taken a large part of the kingdom and isn't far from marching on the capital.

The blackfyres, whether aegon is in the show or not, will likely be left out of the show. But I don't think it will be ignored in the books. The show ignores these details, because it adds confusion to the viewer, had is just too much info to consume with so much already going on. Like leaving out tysha details and the volanqar prophecy. In the show, these are details that would just add confusion. In the book, they have a lot to contribute in certain characters story archs.

So maybe it will just be a wonder in the back of the readers heads, but there's so much hype, that I think aegons possible lineage will have to be put into question eventually. It's the perfect propaganda tool for his enemies to use against him, and if the reader can make the connection, then certainly some characters will fabricate their own connection between aegon and his questionable lineage, whether true or false.

The writers have stated that in the end, the story will end up roughly the same as the book, but along the way there will be great differences. Characters will be cut out, killed off, or added as the writers see fits. So in the end, yes aegon will more then likely die, but he's already a big player, and there's plenty of characters who's back rounds have been downsized for storytelling purposes.