Greymoon

Members
  • Content count

    1,924
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Greymoon

  • Rank
    Council Member

Recent Profile Visitors

614 profile views
  1. R+L=J v.161

    Because, iirc, GRRM has said something along the line that it's not the gods, but the individuals and their innate magic that matters. So 1) we have no certainty Jon is dead, and 2) we have no certainty Melisandre could pull off a resurrection because she isn't Thoros, or Beric. She is Melisandre. As you said, Thoros did something every red priest should be able to do. Yet, every red priest does not randomly resurrect people. There is too much surrounding Beric's resurrection that we do not know - it's not a "normal" occurrence, we don't know how it works, why it worked, to what end etc. ...At one specific point in time, Dany survived fire. Can we conclude anything from it?
  2. R+L=J v.161

    Yes I did in fact read the books. We have a different reading of the books, that's all. Sleepy Jack, Sleepy Jon Snow, these are the references I was speaking off, taken straight from the books, they are no invention of mine. There are some others as well, I remember seeing a thread some years ago about references to fairy tales. You are basing your whole argument of the fact that Jon dies. But why we should follow your explanation of GRRM's sentence, rather than the more straightfoward interpretation, is something you haven't fully explained.
  3. R+L=J v.161

    Whose standard, yours? Based on what? It's not sufficient to claim it's "standard". The text alludes to the sleeping beauty tale and to the mythology of the Valkyries. There was a thread on that once... Why discard that in favor of something that isn't hinted at by the text? Where is it ever hinted at that Jon's body will be burned? What about the other "standard interpretation" where Jon is locked in an ice cell? Where does that figure in the scenario of him bein burned ? How do you take into account that foreshadowing in the books (Jon growing cold in Bran's vision; Jon seeing his own reflection in the wall; the focus on the ice cells ect.) Melisandre can work shadow magic and withstand poison, ok I'm not arguing that...but that's still not the same as resurrecting someone. Different sort of magic, different skills. Anyway. Having Jon become a Beric Dondarrion v. 2.0 is somewhat redundant, especially as we have Cat filling that role already. Why not explore other avenues?
  4. R+L=J v.161

    "Oh, you think he's dead, do you?" says GRRM. The straightforward and literal explanation for that quote is that Jon isn't dead. The less straighforward explanation is that Jon is dead and is going to be resurrected. Melisandre has yet to prove she can work real magic... glamours and tricks are not the same as resurrecting someone. In the books she's never even met Beric Dondarrion and Thoros...She might not even know that resurrecting the dead is possible. As for Morna and Val, it's true don't know wat they can do, but it's possible they know some healing - not necessarily magical either, just traditional healing.
  5. R+L=J v.161

    We've been asking how Jon could prove his legitimacy....but how would anyone go about proving that fAegon isn't who he claims to be? There is no proof...not even a paper proof. So it's all a matter of how many powerful supporters Aegon manages to get on his side. I don't expect him to have a long reign, so I don't think he'll have the time to become unpopular. Aegon will parallel Robb in some ways: swift rise to power, followed be a brutal, sudden death.
  6. R+L=J v.161

    1) Why am I confusing things? Bran's survival defied all logic. Yes, he lost his legs and that is the price he paid. How do you know that Jon's wounds can't be healed by Val, or Morna White Mask? even Melisandre could heal him - that doesn't mean she resurrects him though. Bran was pulled away from death by Bloodraven, but it's Maester Luwin help that allowed for it to happen. I don't deny that Jon is badly wounded, but to write him off as dead or dying when we haven't gotten there yet in the books is precipitated. 2) No. I'm suggesting that Jon's near death experience will open interesting possibilities. Jojen Reed didn't become a greenseer, but started greendreaming. Who knows what near death does for Jon. 3) Yes they did both experience near death. Jojen nearly died of greywater fever, that much is made clear in the books. Bran nearly died falling from that tower. There's hints in Brans dreams while in coma that his choice is "to fly" or to die. 4) Aegon might appreciate not having to conquer the north, why should he refuse that? even better if it comes with the riverlands and Vale... or do you think that Sansa won't matter at all, or that Sansa and Jon will be at odds? EDIT: on near death and magical abilities, there's also the case of Patchface, the prophetic fool. Unless he died and was resurrected by some mysterious force.
  7. R+L=J v.161

    1) As far as I'm aware Jon hasn't died in the books. It's a bit precipitated to speak of resurrection when we don't actually know how badly he is injured. We don't know anything about how he'll get back on his feet. I for one, don't believe Melisandre will be the one to heal him/bring him back. imo, Bran and/or Bloodraven will be pulling strings behind the scene....It does appear that Bloodraven was able to pull Bran and Jojen back from their near death...If we combine Bran's comatose dreams and Varamyr's death...we get a picture of what I expect for Jon.... but this could only come to fruition if Jon doesn't die. 2) As for Jon and Dany...I do not see an alliance, nor do I foresee a scenario where Dany and Jon have fought side by side and Dany then bends the knee to him. I simply expect Dany to be unpopular and to bend to the will of the majority. If we have two books left, it seems logical to expect that westeros will know war on numerous fronts, simultaneoulsy.... the threat from the north might not be taken seriously by those in the south, already deeply involved in other conflicts. The west coast will have to deal with the Iron Born, the south will face Aegon, Dorne, the Faith Militant...even if Aegon's manages to establish a semblant of peace, Dany's arrival will throw the south into chaos once more, with the possibility of civil war in Dorne (tensions are already rising). So, basically, if the north first faces a series of small scale attacks, reports of the attacks may be met with disbelief - as has been the case from book one. By the time this conflict culminates into a full out battle for the dawn and the south finally sees the light, it may be too late for the southern troops to move up north and help, especially if snow piles up high on the roads and the seas can no longer be navigated. It's possible communication between north and south will be difficult even before that. Yes Dany can fly her dragon up north and see for herself. But why should she, if she's fighting a war of her own in the south? 3) Jon's parentage might be important both magically and politically. As stated above, Bloodraven seems to have the power to pull people back from near death. He did it with Bran, he did it with Jojen. Both Bran and Jojen developed theirs powers after their near death experience. I believe (though people are free to disagree, of course) that the main difference between a simple skinchanger and a greenseer is near death experience ...this could prove potentially interesting for Jon. (In his moment of death, Varamyr's spirit suddenly becomes parts of the stars and trees ect... is the difference between Varamyr and Bran the fact that Bran has an anchor (his human body) and Varamyr doesn't?.... as a side note, a near death experience was one of the criteria for the selection of a shaman in siberia; people with near death experiences were thought to be capable of communicating with the world of the spirits...Bran's cave is full of death symbols, as if the cave was some sort of underworld). Concerning the political ramification, imo, it will be important in relation to fAegon. As you said, Jon does not appear to want power. But, if he becomes a leader of sorts in the north, it may fall to him to decide which new king to support...after Stannis's defeat, before Dany's arrival, the candidates would be Euron, fAegon, Tommen or some other previously unknown individual with a dubious claim. If I were Jon, I'd declare for fAegon.... furthermore, it's possible that fAegon's missing ships, the ones carrying his elephants, land somewhere north. (They got separated by a storm near Lys. Other ships caught in a storm were carried all the way up to hardhome....) For me, Jon’s potential future kingship hinges on three things: on fAegon acknowledging him as his half-brother; on fAegon’s popularity before defeat...and on Jon's participation in the war with the Others. If fAegon vouches for Jon and if the people of westeros genuinely believe fAegon to be Rhaegar’s son, if fAegon is celebrated and loved….after his defeat, fAegon’s supporters might turn to Jon. As for his role in the battle for the dawn, Jon doesn’t need to be the ultimate hero of the battle… but he needs to have been one of the commanders involved in the battle.
  8. Jon Snow complete injustice

    Jon is my favorite character as well - and I do not recognize him in the show. I realized, re-reading a chapter from Dance yesterday (the one where Jon helps Stannis out, and explains to him the politics of the north) that not only is show Jon following Stannis's arc (sort of, minus the storm), but Jon's own arc and knowledge has been given to Davos and Sansa. Since when is Davos an expert in northern politics? (before leaving the wall, Jon's arc was, in parts, given to Samwell Tarly. Making Jon look incompetent and passive in his role as lord Commander....!) BookJon knows the Umbers well. He knows the mountain clans. He knows (roughly) how many men each house has, since he indicates that Stannis could gain 2000 to 3000 men by going to the mountain clans. He knows that Stannis's army can't march on the Dreadfort without being seen and suggest a better course of action.... Stannis even takes the time to write Jon to tell him that his plan worked out better than Stannis himself had expected. Jon knows the north...so why did they make him so stupid in the show? Where has his skill in negotiation gone? This is the guy who knows and uses all the proper courtesies to speak to Queen Selyse and Stannis's southern lords...he's the guy who gets along with Tormund Giantsbane, Dolorous Edd, Samwell Tarly, Alys Karstark...Val!...people that couldn't be anymore different if they tried. In the show, that same guy is intimidated by a ten year old girl? Do northerners, generally speaking, not dislike courtesies and "flowery speeches"? How does Jon forget that about his own kinsmen? (Not to mention that BookJon had a great relationship with Arya and Bran. You'd think he gets along with kids.) As for Jon/Ned comparision.... imo, Jon is the epitome of pragmatic, thus he doesn't value honor as highly as Ned...or Robb.
  9. Jon Snow complete injustice

    ? In the books, Jon does not consider himself a hero and he only acts irrational when his family is threathened. The truth is that Jon has a tactical mind (he helped make Stannis's battle plans...he had some great idea for the defence of the wall ect.) and that he is quite good at negotiation (Alys's marriage, the wildling "Blood price", the fact he manages to convince the heads of the some mountain clans to "accept" the wildlings south of the wall....the deal he makes with the Iron Bank ect...) and he's good at planning ahead (sending Sam away to train as maester, gathering wildling valuables to trade in Braavos, getting a loan to buy more food ect.) ....even if, and that is something we must admit, - for all of his great planning, he forgets the most essential of all...a thing called "communication". The show did butcher his character, as it did many others. It's a shame because the costumes, the decor and the shots are quite beautiful.
  10. What is Jon Snow's real name?

    agreed and thank you
  11. R+L=J v.161

    well, cheers to pointless issues, then
  12. R+L=J v.161

    The missing point is that I was not speaking about a specific passage in literature and that I'm not even objecting to the fact that they have similar appearance. I was only adding that body language / mannerism is part of the visual characteristics that establishes resemblance, even between people that don't really look like each other upon closer inspection. Had I known this would actually start a debate about something I didn't even mean, I'd have kept it to myself.
  13. We are getting off topic, here. There clearly was a deal, yes, but I doubt it involved any sort of love potions....imo, it doesn't fit GRRM's style, it's cheap and turns Robb into an even greater Gary Stu. Let him be human and make mistakes, he'll be more authentic for it.
  14. Are The Dayne's Valyrians?

    There's no need to get worked up over it, I did in fact read your original post. You totally ignored the main content of my post though. Let me clarify what I was objecting to: The word often : we have a total lof three Daynes being described. Three Daynes does not make "often", one Dayne having strands of silver hair, one having pale blond hair, one having dark hair, is not sufficient to even see a tendency in Dayne coloring. Furthermore, blond hair and blue eyes are not specifically Valyrian, so they do not help your argument. You were being generally non-specific, thus I thought that you may not know that this "they can have silver hair" actually only applies to Gerold Dayne.
  15. R+L=J v.161

    I was not arguing for a different interpretation of that specific statement, but speaking in general terms. In my experience, people are not as observant as Ygrain implied. If body language doesn't establish visual resemblance between people, why does it matter so much for professional lookalikes to emulate the body language of those they are supposed to resemble? and what about child-actors in flashback scenes?....imo, general outward characteristics are usually sufficient for most people to find a resemblance between two individuals.