red comet in ACOK who got it right

[Hodor's Dragon]

Nothing could be clearer than that Martin uses the comet to show how people twist facts to suit their own agendas. You get a million and one different interpretations of the comet from people in the text. It's very well done and quite entertaining.

But the fact that numerous unreliable interpretations appear is not any sort of evidence at all that no interpretation is reliable. That's not logic, that's getting led down the primrose path.

[Bryanfury]

But the fact that numerous unreliable interpretations appear is not any sort of evidence at all that no interpretation is reliable. That's not logic, that's getting led down the primrose path.

It's not logical to treat correlation as causation either, yet that's the essential argument of the pro-dragon interpretation.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Nothing could be clearer than that Martin uses the comet to show how people twist facts to suit their own agendas. You get a million and one different interpretations of the comet from people in the text. It's very well done and quite entertaining.

But the fact that numerous unreliable interpretations appear is not any sort of evidence at all that no interpretation is reliable. That's not logic, that's getting led down the primrose path.

The question then becomes, whose interpretation is reliable? Who's to say whose is and whose isn't?

You can't say that the comet shows that people twist facts to suit their own agendas, and then turn around and say that there's an objective reliable interpretation. Because pretty much anyone who says, "My interpretation is reliable" is twisting facts to suit their own agendas. Everyone who sees the comet thinks that their "interpretation is reliable." That's the point.

ETA: People have asked GRRM about the comet before, and he's basically said that it's up to readers how to interpret it. What he's never said, at least not that I'm aware of, is that X person is absolutely correct about what the comet meant, and that Y person is absolutely wrong. He did talk once about his inspiration for the comet, from "Julius Caesar."

"When beggars die there are no comets seen. The heavens themselves blaze forth the death of princes."

The comet from which GRRM drew inspiration marked the death of a political leader. The first time we see the comet is not when Dany lights the funeral pyre. It's actually around when Ned's executed.

This is not, before someone jumps down my throat, me saying that the comet was definitely about Ned. I don't think it was "about" anything. But the idea in the story that the comet is a marker of Ned's death is not as without merit as some might think, especially given what inspired GRRM to use the comet motif in the first place. And similarly to what's presented in the story, Caesar's assassination had fuck all to do, in a causal sense, with the comet in the sky.

[Lady Tippy Wolfsbane]

But the fact that numerous unreliable interpretations appear is not any sort of evidence at all that no interpretation is reliable. That's not logic, that's getting led down the primrose path.

The fact the numerous unreliable interpretations appear is evidence that no interpretation is reliable.

The fact that numerous unreliable interpretations appear is not evidence that all of those unreliable interpretations are incorrect.

That's logic.

ETA: I'm drunk...and just confused myself a bit. Haha!

[Cubicz]

Save for the inconvenient fact that no comet anything like this has appeared in Cressen's lifetime, and that maester was almost eighty. See the beginning of ACoK or the quote from the same given above.

Maybe he never saw one, but others came and went:

http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Aegon_Targaryen

A comet was seen above King's Landing on the night Aegon was conceived, which led his father Rhaegar Targaryen to believe that he was the prince that was promised. The comet was seen as "the bleeding star" of the prophecy.

[Slender Aimry Hill]

This is the season - the season, the year, the day, and I am the man...

[Hodor's Dragon]

The question then becomes, whose interpretation is reliable? Who's to say whose is and whose isn't?

You can't say that the comet shows that people twist facts to suit their own agendas, and then turn around and say that there's an objective reliable interpretation. Because pretty much anyone who says, "My interpretation is reliable" is twisting facts to suit their own agendas. Everyone who sees the comet thinks that their "interpretation is reliable." That's the point.

I've presented what to me seems an extremely convincing set of facts linking it to Dany and her epic story. (I mean, come on now, spectacularly comets are extremely rare events, and it shows up within 24 hours of the 1st dragons in centuries?) I don't see anything half that convincing for any other character. Please feel free to put forth the set of facts linking it to another character and/or another story. I'm open-minded, but I'm not terribly open-minded to the blank assertion that "everybody is twisting facts."

ETA: People have asked GRRM about the comet before, and he's basically said that it's up to readers how to interpret it. What he's never said, at least not that I'm aware of, is that X person is absolutely correct about what the comet meant, and that Y person is absolutely wrong. He did talk once about his inspiration for the comet, from "Julius Caesar."

The comet from which GRRM drew inspiration marked the death of a political leader. The first time we see the comet is not when Dany lights the funeral pyre. It's actually around when Ned's executed.

Say what? We've already been over exactly when it showed up, in detail, in this very thread. The first time the comet is described is when Dany lights the pyre. It was mentioned but not described one previous time, in what appears to have been a mere continuity error, for reasons I have previously described.

This is not, before someone jumps down my throat, me saying that the comet was definitely about Ned. I don't think it was "about" anything. But the idea in the story that the comet is a marker of Ned's death is not as without merit as some might think, especially given what inspired GRRM to use the comet motif in the first place. And similarly to what's presented in the story, Caesar's assassination had fuck all to do, in a causal sense, with the comet in the sky.

Hodor's Dragon, on 22 Jul 2014 - 9:29 PM, said:

And you know that the comet in this fantasy novel is not magical - how exactly?

Considering that he took pains to show multiple differing opinions on what the comet meant to different parties (all opinions that are just as contingent on timing as Dany's interpretation, e.g. right after Ned's execution), and based on general attitudes he's taken toward such things in Q&As and interviews I've seen/read, I'm pretty comfortable with my conclusion. An overarching theme of the story is that people see what they want to see and believe what they want to believe. I think the comet is a pretty good example of that.

At least you seem to have backed off the position that it's an "objective truth" that the comet is not magical. I've got no argument with your believing it isn't or setting out your reasons. I don't really have a firm position on that; my position is merely, as I've been saying, that the author intended us to associate the comet with Dany and her dragons. Whether it's magical or a red herring, we're meant to associate that.

[The King in Black]

Beautiful- we could have been discussing other versions of this 'happening' but no....Daenerys's fandom and haters should have an exclusive website all for just themselves

[Hodor's Dragon]

Beautiful- we could have been discussing other versions of this 'happening' but no....Daenerys's fandom and haters should have an exclusive website all for just themselves

I'm kind of a Dany fan. Tyrion is my favorite character, but I find the intense (and often illogical) anti-Dany faction very motivational.

[sj4iy]

Beautiful- we could have been discussing other versions of this 'happening' but no....Daenerys's fandom and haters should have an exclusive website all for just themselves

Personally, I don't get why anyone hates or worships any character. Jon is my favorite character, but I'll be the first to point out the problems with this character and things I didn't like about him. But some people have to go overboard at both ends. It makes it hard to have a conversation sometimes.

[Khal BlackfyreO]

I think the comet means a space rock's trajectory passed near to the orbital trajectory of Planetos...

[JonSnow4President]

Personally, I don't get why anyone hates or worships any character. Jon is my favorite character, but I'll be the first to point out the problems with this character and things I didn't like about him. But some people have to go overboard at both ends. It makes it hard to have a conversation sometimes.

Well, as a (mild) Dany hater, it really comes down to thinking this person would be a horrible ruler in her present state for multiple reasons (sense of justice, integrity, logistical strength, attitude, ignorance without the desire to learn the truth, etc.). I hate the character as it stands now, although I don't hate the story.

Edit: And I also want to add that I don't think she will just be idly swept aside. She will play an important role in events. At some point, I think she aligns herself with Jon, as I've mentioned in other threads. My opinion certainly isn't set in stone. I hate 16 year old me, but I think I'm a decent person now. People change, and my opinion will change as/if she does.

[MoIaF]

I think the comet means a space rock's trajectory passed near to the orbital trajectory of Planetos...

Wow! Mind blown...

/thread

[sj4iy]

Well, as a (mild) Dany hater, it really comes down to thinking this person would be a horrible ruler in her present state for multiple reasons (sense of justice, integrity, logistical strength, attitude, ignorance without the desire to learn the truth, etc.). I hate the character as it stands now, although I don't hate the story.

Edit: And I also want to add that I don't think she will just be idly swept aside. She will play an important role in events. At some point, I think she aligns herself with Jon, as I've mentioned in other threads. My opinion certainly isn't set in stone. I hate 16 year old me, but I think I'm a decent person now. People change, and my opinion will change as/if she does.

Oh, I don't think she's a good ruler at all. She doesn't have the training, knowledge or innate ability to do it well, and I think even she knows that. Without her dragons, she would have starved to death long ago. Her intentions are well-meant, but that road to hell is paved with good intentions.

That said, I know she will still play a very important part in the War for the Dawn (she has dragons, how could she NOT be?), and is probably one of the prophesied heroes that will help save humanity from the Others. But I don't see her ending up on the Iron Throne. I also don't see her going crazy and burning everything like some people seem to think she will do. It's not in her character at all. Embracing her family's words doesn't mean she has to go burning down everything in sight. But we'll see. I think Martin started off with Dany being this great figure to root for, but she's slowly become a character I find frustrating. Hopefully, this will be remedied.

[JonSnow4President]

Oh, I don't think she's a good ruler at all. She doesn't have the training, knowledge or innate ability to do it well, and I think even she knows that. Without her dragons, she would have starved to death long ago. Her intentions are well-meant, but that road to hell is paved with good intentions.

That said, I know she will still play a very important part in the War for the Dawn (she has dragons, how could she NOT be?), and is probably one of the prophesied heroes that will help save humanity from the Others. But I don't see her ending up on the Iron Throne. I also don't see her going crazy and burning everything like some people seem to think she will do. It's not in her character at all. Embracing her family's words doesn't mean she has to go burning down everything in sight. But we'll see. I think Martin started off with Dany being this great figure to root for, but she's slowly become a character I find frustrating. Hopefully, this will be remedied.

I think that's one of the big reasons I disliked her. At the start of the story, I liked how things were going. Right up until about Qarth. Then, things started going downhill for me (/\ in graph form).

As far as know she will play, I hesitate to say know anything with Martin.

For the op, I think the comet is there for two main narrative purposes. Either a red herring or the red star to fit the AA/PTWP prophecy, and to illustrate how people will twist things to fit their own ideas.

[Jasta11]

At least you seem to have backed off the position that it's an "objective truth" that the comet is not magical. I've got no argument with your believing it isn't or setting out your reasons. I don't really have a firm position on that; my position is merely, as I've been saying, that the author intended us to associate the comet with Dany and her dragons. Whether it's magical or a red herring, we're meant to associate that.

Which is in direct contradiction with what he said in the SSM. To quote him;

''I like it to my readers to make sense of signs and portents.''

So, the author says he wants his reader to interpret things and wrack their brains at it, and you stand there telling us, no, no, this is all about Dany and no one else.

Sorry, I know who I want to believe in that scenario.

[Hodor's Dragon]

Which is in direct contradiction with what he said in the SSM. To quote him;

''I like it to my readers to make sense of signs and portents.''

So, the author says he wants his reader to interpret things and wrack their brains at it, and you stand there telling us, no, no, this is all about Dany and no one else.

Sorry, I know who I want to believe in that scenario.

You must have me mixed up with somebody else. I certainly didn't say anything at all about "no one else" in the quote you used, and in fact I have specifically said at least twice that it's possible it could also be a signifier for someone else. "Associated with Dany" is an entirely different proposition from "associated only with Dany." I said the first one, not the 2nd.

What I have said, and will be happy to repeat, is that the textual evidence more closely associates it with Dany than anyone else. That appears to me to be textually indisputable, although I'm certainly open-minded if anyone wants to present the textual evidence of how it relates more strongly to anyone else.

Oddly, I don't see anybody doing that in this thread. The points people have made are either (1) a comet is a collection of gasses and dust, doesn't mean anything, or else (2) it's an equal-opportunity signifier for all characters. I've disputed (1) because this is a fantasy novel and it's very possible it has deeper significance, and I've disputed (2) by showing the evidence for how it is associated with Dany while explicitly reserving the possibility that it may also be associated with someone else.

The floor is open for anybody to show us the textual evidence linking the comet to someone else.

[Jasta11]

You must have me mixed up with somebody else.

''I've presented what to me seems an extremely convincing set of facts linking it to Dany and her epic story. (...) I don't see anything half that convincing for any other character. ''

Keyword: You. Your interpretation. What you think. It's as valid as anyone else's. But you seem to think we must all share it, and go on and on about how it's obviously about Dany. We're not saying you're wrong, we're saying that unless GRRM confirms it, by definition you can't be objectively right since the point of the comet is to be a portent that the reader interprets in his own way, along with the characters.

Plus, you ignored facts that other people have brought up. Dany didn't see it first. The Northerners talk about it just as much, and their interpretation doesn't seem much less valid to me, especially in light of George's inspiration for the comet itself. Given that Red Priests seemingly grow in power after it (Thoros), Mel and her follower's interpretation that it's a sign from her god is not that far-fetched either. And since Joffrey actually defeats most of his enemies, Arys's interpretation is not really wrong either.

The ''evidence'' towards the comet being linked to Dany first and foremost is, simply put, not as solid as you believe it is.

[Hodor's Dragon]

''I've presented what to me seems an extremely convincing set of facts linking it to Dany and her epic story. (...) I don't see anything half that convincing for any other character. ''

Keyword: You. Your interpretation. What you think. It's as valid as anyone else's. But you seem to think we must all share it, and go on and on about how it's obviously about Dany. We're not saying you're wrong, we're saying that unless GRRM confirms it, by definition you can't be objectively right since the point of the comet is to be a portent that the reader interprets in his own way, along with the characters.

Plus, you ignored facts that other people have brought up. Dany didn't see it first.

I hardly ignored that, I wrote about it at length. If you disagree with me that the mention in question is likely a continuity error, please address my analysis. Or don't, but please don't say I ignored it. To be blunt, you're not doing a great job of describing my analysis, so maybe you should just stick to making your own points.

The Northerners talk about it just as much, and their interpretation doesn't seem much less valid to me, especially in light of George's inspiration for the comet itself. Given that Red Priests seemingly grow in power after it (Thoros), Mel and her follower's interpretation that it's a sign from her god is not that far-fetched either.

First, you're being a bit vague about the Northerners, which makes it difficult for me to analyze what you're saying about them. I can actually see a visual Rh'llor connotation (comet's fire-like appearance) that you don't mention.

Yes, definitely Thoros grows in power and Mel has some real magic going on, too. As I've said before, magic and dragons are repeatedly linked; I'll go a little farther: we see magic starting to re-assert itself before we see dragons. I'd say that dragons and magic cause each other, or maybe it's that some other force we don't know about cause both - all we can really say is that they're linked.

But other than the fact that it's fire-colored (although the most consistent descriptor of it is blood-colored), I don't see the specific facts that link it to Rh'llor, Thoros or Melisandre: the rise in magic is more generic. So I'd have to say that I'm still waiting for others to supply a list of specific facts linking the comet to somebody other than Dany.

And since Joffrey actually defeats most of his enemies, Arys's interpretation is not really wrong either.

The ''evidence'' towards the comet being linked to Dany first and foremost is, simply put, not as solid as you believe it is.

[Whitering]

Dany only saw the comet on the night she walked into an incredible hot pyre and came out with Dragons. No doubt it was a celestial phenomena and the hugest coincidence in the history of Planetos. I suppose. I choose to think that it was a sign, of what? I don't know, but it did have the net effect of increasing magic in the world, that allowed the Dragons to be borne. I don't think, though someone will no doubt point out an SSM that says differently, that Dragons cause magic to increase, simply that magic is required for Dragons to exist.

That's why the deaths at Summerhall didn't result in Dragons.