Jump to content

Heresy 185


Black Crow

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Matthew. said:


Yep, this was my feeling too; marriage for love is a rare luxury in GRRM's world - and often ends disastrously when it happens -, and in this case it's proposed as the payoff to a romance that doesn't even exist in the first place, so I'm not convinced that GRRM is going to contradict his own themes just because, once upon a time, he'd considered pairing Jon and Arya.

I think so too...and the one time that a Stark marriage actually worked well was a political marriage, Ned and Catelyn's...which in time became a love match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

Of course she is. I imagine that, even if Jon were to be reunited with, say, Rickon, the significance of the familial bond would be more profound than ever; regardless of biology, they've all lost their 'father', lost one another, and lost their home.
 

Not at all. They were brought up in the same household but otherwise as far apart as it was possible to be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Black Crow said:

Not at all. They were brought up in the same household but otherwise as far apart as it was possible to be. 

Nah, too limited a view by far. They're not close like Jon and Arya, and we're given very few glimpses into their dynamic - such as Jon recalling Sansa lecturing him on courtly etiquette -, but they are still children of Lord Eddard. As early as aCoK, Sansa is including Jon in her prayers, because she increasingly values her own family, and all that she has lost. This is the reason that I make the Rickon comparsion; the fact that there wasn't a personal relationship there before is far less important than what they have all subsequently become to one another, even without a single interaction since aGoT.

Because the Starks have spent the story more widely spread than he'd originally planned - before, they were meant to be concentrated at the Wall - the dynamics have shifted dramatically. Sansa coming to fiercely love Jon and Arya as siblings is a natural development in her character journey, whereas sudden romantic feelings for the man she has finally learned to appreciate as a brother seems ill fitting.

I don't question the possibility, I question the purpose--from my perspective, this is a plot that no longer belongs in the story that GRRM has told.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Black Crow said:

Not at all. They were brought up in the same household but otherwise as far apart as it was possible to be. 

I've never understood why you want to discuss Jon+Sister, and always thought you were a bit too fascinated by that part of the 1993 letter. Your mention of Arya in this regard never ceases to trouble me, even if made in passing. Arya is eleven, and might be 13 by journey's end. You need to let go of that fantasy. It isn't healthy. LOL

But, a strong point in favor of your view is that House Stark is a ruin and Ned believed Bran would be unable to have children due to his paralysis. That leaves Rickon, and Rickon is likely a dead end. Even if he weren't, Rickon is five. It would be hard for a five year old to inspire a great deal of confidence after all that has happened and with Winter on the doorstep.

Jon+Sister solves that.

The objection then is of course that while Jon's parentage might solve the incest legally, we haven't seen anything to solve it emotionally. GRRM has not included any of the 1993 letter's torment for Jon+Sister and has instead replaced it with Jon+Ygritte, with Val as an eye-catching fancy. It seems you want to ignore that.

While the detraction from the 1993 letter in that regard is obvious, we must accept where it is accurate. Winterfell is a ruin, and House Stark needs to be rebuilt. I think there are many other scenarios for that to happen, thank the gods, and I'll list a few in order of likelihood.

1. Sansa can marry a wildling or a Karstark. It would most likely be a wildling. (If one hopes to rule the North, one must deal with what is now a very large wildling population. I've listed this as #1 because Alys Karstark's marriage to the Magnar of Thenn might already be GRRM's way of dealing with this issue.)

2. Jon+Val (for the wild reasons above).

3. Sansa, or Arya, is strong enough to gain and hold the north on her own.

4. House Stark is meant to end.

5. Benjen, or Rickon, enters stage left with a force to reclaim Winterfell just as all seems lost.

6. There is no option six.

7. A prologue/epilogue chapter of a maester assisting Jeyne Westerling as she gives birth to Eddard Stark II (my unlikely favorite).

 

As unlikely as some of these scenarios are, I think each is far more likely than Jon+Sister. (And if anyone wants to discuss the mummers that must not be named this evening, we'll have multiple threads on the topic here.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Voice said:

I've never understood why you want to discuss Jon+Sister, and always thought you were a bit too fascinated by that part of the 1993 letter. Your mention of Arya in this regard never ceases to trouble me, even if made in passing. 

It was GRRM who mentioned Arya in the first place and while he seems happy at embracing a mediaeval view of eligibility for marriage this is a major reason [though not the only one] for putting Sansa forward as an alternative.

As for my fascination with the sister act, it isn't the proposed conjoining per se but the fact it forms a major element in one of the two most comprehensive story arcs in the synopsis and its relationship to the secret of Jon's parentage; not least in making it clear that Jon is not the son of Eddard Stark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Voice said:

Winterfell is a ruin, and House Stark needs to be rebuilt.

Along these lines, if GRRM weren't so tight-lipped, I'd love to know how his own feelings about the series, and his planned outcomes, have evolved over the years. In particular, I wonder whether or not he no longer loves some of the ideas he has planned for the ending, yet is hard pressed to come up with a better solution.

"House Stark needs to be rebuilt" is a perfect example of what I mean by this. From the perspective of the characters that GRRM has spent all of this time getting us invested in - the Starks, Tyrion, and Dany - the restoration of their Houses and their return (or ascent) to positions of political authority constitutes a "happy ending," yet this is a happy ending that necessarily requires a restoration of the feudal status quo, after GRRM has spent several books depicting feudalism in a highly negative light.

On a surface level this is fine, because it represents a "victory" for characters we like and characters that, in some cases, we trust to rule wisely. But what of their children, or grandchildren, or the next time a question of succession comes up, as happened after Robert's death? Does writing a satisfying fantasy ending, to some degree, require a contradiction of the series' themes? It seems like the kind of thing that might nag at GRRM, in the same way that he wonders about shit like Aragorn's tax policy, or orc policy.

I apologize that this isn't even a "theory" about the story, so much as rambling speculation about some of the things that might be grinding GRRM's writing process to a snail's pace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting thought and perhaps another interpretation of the bittersweet ending might be that a resolution of the present conflict requires a return to the former status quo and an acceptance that the dodgy seasons will continue and another Long Night will come. I don't hold with the reincarnation of the principals every time around, but each new generation may have to refight old battles because there is no benign summer around the corner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Black Crow said:

It was GRRM who mentioned Arya in the first place and while he seems happy at embracing a mediaeval view of eligibility for marriage this is a major reason [though not the only one] for putting Sansa forward as an alternative.

Yup. He mentioned it back when he was thinking of tormenting Jon and Arya with desire for one another, and was planning to include a 5 year gap to make it happen.

You are the one mentioning it without a 5 year gap and without any desirous siblings. You do not

 

1 hour ago, Black Crow said:

As for my fascination with the sister act, it isn't the proposed conjoining per se but the fact it forms a major element in one of the two most comprehensive story arcs in the synopsis and its relationship to the secret of Jon's parentage; not least in making it clear that Jon is not the son of Eddard Stark

Per se?

I wish the conjoining were not a fascination at all. But to each his own.

I understand you like the role of this secret within this arc because the purpose of the secret is not King Jon I, but Jon as Lord of Winterfell. I get it. We all get it. But there are far more plausible ways to get there now. We need not rely upon the 1993 letter's clearly scrapped lustful siblings.

 

 

1 hour ago, Black Crow said:

And just by the by, whilst Val is clearly meant to be eye-catching, I somehow don't see a relationship following through.

I find it a bit ironic (and a lot strange LOL) that you'd find Val less plausible than one of Jon's sisters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

Along these lines, if GRRM weren't so tight-lipped, I'd love to know how his own feelings about the series, and his planned outcomes, have evolved over the years. In particular, I wonder whether or not he no longer loves some of the ideas he has planned for the ending, yet is hard pressed to come up with a better solution.

"House Stark needs to be rebuilt" is a perfect example of what I mean by this. From the perspective of the characters that GRRM has spent all of this time getting us invested in - the Starks, Tyrion, and Dany - the restoration of their Houses and their return (or ascent) to positions of political authority constitutes a "happy ending," yet this is a happy ending that necessarily requires a restoration of the feudal status quo, after GRRM has spent several books depicting feudalism in a highly negative light.

On a surface level this is fine, because it represents a "victory" for characters we like and characters that, in some cases, we trust to rule wisely. But what of their children, or grandchildren, or the next time a question of succession comes up, as happened after Robert's death? Does writing a satisfying fantasy ending, to some degree, require a contradiction of the series' themes? It seems like the kind of thing that might nag at GRRM, in the same way that he wonders about shit like Aragorn's tax policy, or orc policy.

I apologize that this isn't even a "theory" about the story, so much as rambling speculation about some of the things that might be grinding GRRM's writing process to a snail's pace.

I think that's precisely the problem. He's done a great job making everyone seem flawed, including the Starks. It's a lose-lose situation. If he gives the Starks a somewhat happy ending, it's cliche. If he doesn't, it's a tragedy.

I lean towards the latter, tbh. I think it's possible we'll see a few attempts to restore House Stark's grandeur, but that they will ultimately fail. I doubt the miasma of the Others can be ended if House Stark continues to exist, and I believe that will be what Jon's bittersweet decision comes down to in the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Black Crow said:

But with that in mind, we've argued enough over the possibilities of Jon and Sansa and I'd like to move on, but only slightly, and look again at what else is in that synopsis.

I don't know how much more we have to work with when it comes to the five main journeys, but another aspect of the letter I've always found curious is the fact that he intended to eventually have Jaime Lannister carve his way to the Iron Throne, and seemingly serve as a primary antagonist for Tyrion + the Starks at the Wall.

That seems extraordinarily unlikely in the story as written, since Jaime isn't even in the line of succession, and that's before we take into account the problem of him being in the King's Guard. The straightforward answer here might be that Cersei has some rough approximation of that plot role, though I think some of those core ideas may have been translated to Littlefinger as well; Littlefinger's plan isn't to murder his way to the throne through swordsmanship, but he is giving the Great Houses the nudges they need to destroy one another, while he rapidly climbs the ladder.

OTOH, I agree with e1kabong that Jaime is undergoing something of an interesting journey. He seemed resolved to be a better man in ASOS, yet in AFFC we see him taking a morally gray political role with Edmure, so now his ultimate destination looks a little more murky. I'll admit to huge personal bias here, as I'm a big proponent of the idea that either Jaime or Brienne will be wielding Lightbringer 2.0, but I think there's room for Jaime Lannister to yet become a political force.

It may sound like crazy talk, or really improbable, and I'd have to agree...but House Lannister is in disarray, Kevan died in the ADWD prologue, and Jaime is still Tywin's son. If he were to leave the KG - or be relieved of his duties - he might find support in the Westerlands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

I don't know how much more we have to work with when it comes to the five main journeys, but another aspect of the letter I've always found curious is the fact that he intended to eventually have Jaime Lannister carve his way to the Iron Throne, and seemingly serve as a primary antagonist for Tyrion + the Starks at the Wall.

That seems extraordinarily unlikely in the story as written, since Jaime isn't even in the line of succession, and that's before we take into account the problem of him being in the King's Guard. The straightforward answer here might be that Cersei has some rough approximation of that plot role, though I think some of those core ideas may have been translated to Littlefinger as well; Littlefinger's plan isn't to murder his way to the throne through swordsmanship, but he is giving the Great Houses the nudges they need to destroy one another, while he rapidly climbs the ladder.
 

Yes, as originally written in that synopsis Jaime is close to Robert d'Artois and I agree that initially at least Cersei has taken on that role. Jaime was of course complicit in what she's done and while his present arc is redemptive, how long before he decides that the only way to bring peace and justice to Westeros is with his sword?

Littlefinger is a difficult one as he doesn't figure originally, but wonder whether his immediate ambitions mask something else underlying his rivalry with that other enigma Rugen/Varys

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wrote a long text about Asoiaf and Irish mythology two years ago, wanted to post it here back then, but I didn't finish. A lot of it is probably not new, but it might be helpful to compile these related theories. Now I tried to put it back together (its a bit fragmental and missing some clues but anyway).

If some of you are interested in disgussing Irish tales, that would be great. I didnt want to post it here, because its quite long and I also think the subject ASoIaF/GRRM and Irish mythology definitely deserves an own thread!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the stuff has been mentioned in more detail in other threads, also there were more files on my other computer, and some issues are only mentioned briefly, I just compiled what I had on my labtop now, but it would also be great to include older detailed texts from the heresy threads (moonsingers, Bael the Brad, Bran, the Nights King, the last hero etc) that focus on specific issues or add new ideas, but the thread should be limited to Irish mythology, then I think it could be a quite interesting discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So are the show scenes fair game?  

The scene with the CotF creating the White Walkers was pretty compelling.  But they're clearly NOT in control of them anymore.

I suspect we'll find out in the books that the CotF created the White Walkers as a curse to turn humanity against itself. This lead to the Last Hero (who I also believe to be Azor Ahai) coming to them and them agreeing to a new peace, but the CotF couldn't stop the weapon they created.  Thus, they told them how to fight the White Walkers (obsidian infused metal, ie Dragonsteel which later became Valyrian Steel).  My guess is they also infused a human with greenseer blood somehow (there must be a Stark in Winterfell?).  This "Last Greenseer"'s job is to use his powers to keep the White Walkers at bay.  Thus why we haven't seen them in thousands of years.  Bloodraven became too old and too weak as Bran was born and his power begins to leave Bloodraven and go to Bran without a smooth transition of power.

My bet is that Bran eventually ends up in a weiwood throne in the Crypts of Winterfell.

It does look like my prediction of the "Heart of Winter" being a frozen heart tree was correct, at minimum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...