Conservative or Conspiracy Theorist?

[DaenerysWinsEverything]

The phrase "thinking outside the box" is something we use (not exclusively) to refer to the fact we have to step out from the established limits in the area of solving problems. The Gordian Knot legend, for instance, is an example of thinking about the box. Or how Kirk defeated the K. Maru scenario. Or the scene in Men in Black when Will Smith pulls the coffee table to solve his test.

 

But there is a pattern: THESE ARE TESTS.

 

The books are not meant to be SOLVED. They are meant to be INTERPRETED. And this interpretations are not limitless.

 

If you work in the area of design as I do, and you try to beat expectations by introducing something round when it's meant to be squared, then you are progressive. Because you're stepping aside from the established limits. You are saying: "see? you thought it was only one possible solution but I found a different way to see it".

 

With the books, there are no different ways to solve a problem: we HAVE TO FIGURE OUT Martin's views, where he is leading us. We are not WRITING the story. We are not allowed to have the progressive creative thinking. He is. We are meant to simply try to figure it out. If Martin had told us: "these are my characters, do as will", then, yes. We can step out of the box and do with them whatever we fancy. But we were not allowed.

 

We know Martin's style. We know he doesn't go for the "omg, shocking!". He is also a very obvious writer when he presents "fake identities". That's why most of the "X was in fact Y all along!" theories come as shocking. Because Martin doesn't write like that. His own editor has told us he has a way to present things (three steps way or whatever). That's what we HAVE to use to figure out the clues of his story.

 I disagree with the interpretation that Kirk solves the test. He doesn't really solve it; he cheats.

 

K. Maru scenario has an answer. Acceptance. Kirk is meant to accept the only possible solution. But he refuses to do what he's meant to do because he places his own intentions above the intentions of the test makers. He goes on to express that through his own value of changing parameters that he dislikes.

 

In other words, Kirk is a revolutionary.

 

I agree that the books are not meant to be solved. But that doesn't mean we can't do it anyway. Right now we're in a unique place because the series isn't finished yet. At some point the series will be finished and alternate solutions will be made irrelevant. But while we wait, we are free both to figure out Martin's intentions and, if we so choose, work out solutions that we consider better than what we suspect Martin is going to do.

 

Someone said that no one who took this position would read ASOIAF; I disagree. At the outset of the series it is impossible to know where it is going to go. Someone who has well-developed opinions on what fantasy should be and how it should go could easily decide that Martin's way of handling classic tropes is not to their liking, and develop alternative scenarios.

 

I remember that while reading 'Atlas Shrugged' I despised the author's values and opinions, and I would envision the 'right' ending for particularly despicable characters that she seemed to love.

[Winds of Winter blow cold]

The number of supporters doesn't make it "conservative" or "crackpot". Perfectly reasonable theories are screamed at by detractors all the time. Example: Check essays on other sites & vids on You Tube about who Septa Lemore is, & I don't see how you can come to any other conclusion but she's Ashara Dayne...but people cling to whatever little usually flimsy reason to disbelieve it!

[Mithras]

Conservative people believe that Summer saw a dragon at Winterfell.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

SEPTA LEMORE IS NOT ASHARA DAYNE AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!! <O>!!!

[Gilgamesh_McCoolio]

Theories I fully believe in (strong textual evidence): R+L=J, Sarella is Alleras, the gravedigging Hound, Ser Robert Strong is frankenGregor, Jojenpaste, Oberyn poisoned Tywin, Euron paid a Faceless Man to kill Balon

 

 

Theories I think have a shot, with varying degrees of likeliness (limited textual evidence): The Great Northern Conspiracy, A+J=T, (f)Aegon, the Sailor's Wife is Tysha, Lem Lemoncloak is Richard Lonmoth, Jyana Reed is Ashara Dayne

 

 

Theories I believe are false (little to no textual evidence): Howland Reed is the High Sparrow, Bolt-on 

[ShadowCat Rivers]

I have very little tolerance for ignoring the thematic and narrative coherence of the story (not to mention logic and reason) in order to be "creative" with filmsy to no textual evidence, just because "it can't be disproved".

 

If that makes me a "conservative", I will gladly accept the characterisation.

[Mithras]

Conservative people believe that Summer saw a dragon at Winterfell.

To be more clear, I meant literalism in this particular case. Some people stubbornly argue that what Summer saw was a dragon because it says "winged snake" in the text. But such a literalist reading completely ignores the logic and thematic/logistical coherence as Shadowcat Rivers said. According to the literalists, the dragon in Winterfell is the conservative reading.

[Lady Barbrey]

I think I fall somewhere in between. I adore reading other people's theories and hate it when they get bashed (as opposed to debated) by the more conservative faction. That doesn't mean I don't find some of them ridiculous but I'm willing to play along or just go on to something else. That's the point of the forum, isn't it? To have fun while discussing a favorite book?

I think it's important to remember that we all bring something to our interpretation of the story that others don't. So I might be convinced of a plot resolution because I see a similar thematic or plot trend from something I've read before, but you have never read it so it makes no sense to you.

As someone who has been known to guess the ending to a mystery in the first five minutes of a movie (thus seriously annoying friends), I love these books because I actually can't guess the answers right away. GRRM does all kinds of things to seed clues leading up to a reveal but still makes the reveal unpredictable. I like that. But it means I am constantly creating then discarding hypotheses.

In the end though, the text and my opinion on it matter more to me than what I read on the forums. The hints for RLJ were clear to me on my first read-through, for instance, but there were a few jarring notes and other options so I refrain from 100% certainty. I would expect that to be a conservative view but any time I've wanted to discuss the jarring notes, I've been jumped. So I guess it's progressive to only be 90% certain?

[DaenerysWinsEverything]

So I guess it's progressive to only be 90% certain?

Lol. Interesting post.

[Facebookless Man]

The political parallel is terrible on so many levels..

Anyway, I only believe in R+L=J until we get more info.

[Lateral]

I am always ready to accept tinfoily ideas when there is actual textual evidence (Frey Pies or Jojen Paste for example). However, I hate it when people twist sentences and build crackpot theories around it... for example, Melisandre said "Azor Ahai will wake dragons from stone" and there are actually many people who believe that this refers to Jon's possible resurrection, simply ignoring that this would mean that Melisandre is Azor Ahai, not Jon. or Euron says "we shall feast before the night comes" and people take this as clue that Euron wants to bring the Long Night back. Why would he want to feast before the night comes when the night is his actual goal? those logical errors really annoy me sometimes.

[Doorlocks]

YES. This is my belief, and it's what makes someone a Conspiracist vs. a Conservative. We're convinced that there is a hidden truth, or a recasting of perspective which will totally change everything. I really have hope that this is going to happen; it's just a question of how much and how. Largely I think this will be unpredictable because of the way GRRM writes, but we should still try by guessing wildly . . . lol . .. 

 

Well, the entire series is built on several central mysteries... there has to be a hidden truth somewhere!

 

A favorite writing technique of Martin's is to create a hierarchy of "truth" about an event, such as exactly happened at Joffrey's wedding.  He creates an official version, a romantic version, a secret version of the events.  He includes in the story what the smallfolk and even many lesser nobility think.

 

 

The northern girl. Winterfell’s daughter. We heard she killed the king with a spell, and afterward changed into a wolf with big leather wings like a bat, and flew out a tower window. But she left the dwarf behind and Cersei means to have his head. - Polliver

 

That's going to be the popular history, the one that becomes song and story and myth.  That will perhaps be told on the same nights of the adventures of the Young Wolf, who himself was supposedly able to transform into a giant animal.  The "official" history, believed among most nobility (even by those who were present) is some variation of Tyrion and Sansa planning it together, with either Sansa betraying Tyrion or Tyrion accidentally getting captured.  That's the version that will appear in the official histories as rebuttals to the romantic versions.  And it's just the reader, Sansa, Lady Olenna, and Littlefinger who know some variation on the actual truth.  Maybe some version of the truth will survive as rumor and gossip, a footnote, even though it's ultimately the most accurate.

[ASOIAF_Ali]

I am somewhere in between to be honest. I find some of the theories too far fetched, and don't buy that every single detail has to be significant. 

Theories I believe: R+L=J of course :rolleyes:, Sarella=Alleras, Robert Strong=UnGregor, Gravedigger=Hound, Oberyn poisoned Tywin. I'm not sold on most of them such as f(Aegon). I don't believe A+J=T and never will, unless it is proven in the text. Others are just way too far fetched such as the great northern conspiracy and the dornish master plan. Not to say some of these aren't true, I just don't believe all of them are. Also, I HATE the theories about dead people still being alive. 

But, I'm willing to listen to most theories, because it's fun to speculate. 

[idio]

Inot conservative. I expect some major reveals and plot twists in the next two books.
I disagree with the often repeated assertion that George isn't one to pull lots of "M. Night Shyamalan" tricks. I guess I hadn't been paying too much attention to details, but I remember the last couple hundred pages of Storm of Swords blowing my mind with all the reveals and plot twists. It was an epic conclusion to what I consider to be the "original trilogy."

Not sure I understand this. The original trilogy had a preconceived plot line that extended far beyond what occurred in the first three books. You've seen the original outline GRRM sent to a friend right?

[Lady Barbrey]

Well, the entire series is built on several central mysteries... there has to be a hidden truth somewhere!
 
A favorite writing technique of Martin's is to create a hierarchy of "truth" about an event, such as exactly happened at Joffrey's wedding.  He creates an official version, a romantic version, a secret version of the events.  He includes in the story what the smallfolk and even many lesser nobility think.
 

 
That's going to be the popular history, the one that becomes song and story and myth.  That will perhaps be told on the same nights of the adventures of the Young Wolf, who himself was supposedly able to transform into a giant animal.  The "official" history, believed among most nobility (even by those who were present) is some variation of Tyrion and Sansa planning it together, with either Sansa betraying Tyrion or Tyrion accidentally getting captured.  That's the version that will appear in the official histories as rebuttals to the romantic versions.  And it's just the reader, Sansa, Lady Olenna, and Littlefinger who know some variation on the actual truth.  Maybe some version of the truth will survive as rumor and gossip, a footnote, even though it's ultimately the most accurate.

I love this: the official story, the romantic story and the secret truth! Did you figure this out or did someone else? That is exactly how he layers things. It's why I suspect so many of us are fascinated by the Tourney of Harrenhal. We've received the official story from Yandel, the romantic story from rumours and Meera, but we've had no story of the secret truth so we all keep trying to discover it out of the official and the romantic.

[Lointain]

Im quite conservative regarding all the theories presented in the forum.
To me, it seems most theories are whisful thinking wrapped along the idea that all that Martin writes has some hidden meaning.
A theory that i pray to the 33 Gods, to the Seven and to the Old Gods, to be false is the R+L=J, because is incredibly cheesy.

[mediterraneo]

Everyone thinks they're conservative apparently, hah.

...

 

:agree: But point is: the title is misleading and pushing the OP worldview on the thread.

 

"Conservative" and "conspiracy theorist" are not the equal opposites.
"Dumb blind" and "conspiracy theroist" would, as "conservative" and "progressive" are. Or as "Conservative" and "bold" would in this matter.

 

If I asked if people feels "bold" or "dumb blind" people would answer that they are bold.

 

Also, what does it mean "not a whole lot else"?
From some points of view, even being sure that "Aegon" is an impostor is a bold statement.

 

Asking people if they are "bold" or "conservatives" would be more informative.

[ASOIAF_Ali]

A theory that i pray to the 33 Gods, to the Seven and to the Old Gods, to be false is the R+L=J, because is incredibly cheesy.

I would quite like this to be false as well  :) thought it was just me 

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

 

:agree: But point is: the title is misleading and pushing the OP worldview on the thread.

 

Nope. Some words do have multiple meanings, and "conservative" isn't only a synonym for "votes right-wing". There are such phrases as "a conservative estimate" (which does not, actually, mean "some phony numbers cooked for the Koch brothers"). Seriously, you can look it up.

 

In this context, I accept the label "conservative" as appropriate. Even though politically I'm anything but.

[OuttaOldtown]

Can't put a label on it, I'll consider any theory which is presented with text that makes the case for various points. Too often I read theories that sound really cool, people love them, but there's not a shred of evidence in the books. No quotes, it's probably bullshit, if that makes me conservative so be it..