Envie Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 (my first post here, have lurked the boards before and have been a Song of Ice and Fire fan for many years) I noticed a great deal of discussion in the EP08 recap / impressions thread regarding the scene with Jon and throwing the lantern on the wight and his hand being burnt which disproves he could be another 'dragon' (via the ever popular R+L=J theory). It was of course pointed out that Viserys was not immune to burning either, since he dies to molten gold poured on his head.My topic at 'hand' is whether or not anyone feels GRRM put the small detail of Jon's hand being burnt into the show as a hint and yet more fuel to add to the 'fire' of speculation about Jon's still unknown Mother. In my own interpretation of the clues given (I've read quite a few of the R+L=J theory threads) - I feel that the "Song of Ice and Fire" name refers to a great looming battle between the threats of the North beyond the wall (the White Walkers / Others) and the return of the dragons via Daenerys. In that case, wherease Daenerys could represent the fire half, Jon Snow could represent the ice half of this as Commander of the Night's Watch, and possibly even Warden of the North.Do you think the way this plot has been portrayed in the television series supports the possibilities of Jon Snow being Targaryen and one of the 'dragons' or not? Why do you think they've possibly gone out of their way to include the smallest details (like Daenerys handling the eggs in the fire and not burning, or Jon's hand being burnt) in the television series if not to add more clues or hints to the theories about the coming ice and fire, or Jon Snow's parentage?Do you think the all important Tower of Joy scenes will be left out of the series or left for later seasons and do you think they will change it or how it plays into all the speculation about why such important members of the Kingsguard were there and what exactly happened there?This plot line is one of my absolute favorite mysteries and I'm super curious to find out how it will be handled (if at all) in the last two episodes or next season. Of course, after A Dance with Dragons releases, we will hopefully know ourselves who Jon's real Mother (and possibly Father) are and what to expect!Personally I think they've put a lot of hints into the television show, when many many other details from the book were omitted. I think this indicates a predicate of things to come... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smegma Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 I don't think Jon burning his hand has anything to do with anything other than it came from the books. Viserys was not immune to fire, and he was obviously of Targaryen blood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Envie Posted June 12, 2011 Author Share Posted June 12, 2011 I don't think Jon burning his hand has anything to do with anything other than it came from the books. Viserys was not immune to fire, and he was obviously of Targaryen blood.I agree that not all Targaryens were immune / resistant to fire. It came from the books, was a small detail - but why even bother to include that he'd burnt his hand at all? Many things from the book were not included.I would like to think it was included (specifically by the author) to continue fanning the flames of speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoren Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Book Daenerys is NOT inmune to fire/heat. GRRM stated that the final scene of AGOT was a one-time exception. However, Tv Daenerys is quite different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Envie Posted June 12, 2011 Author Share Posted June 12, 2011 Book Daenerys is NOT inmune to fire/heat. GRRM stated that the final scene of AGOT was a one-time exception. However, Tv Daenerys is quite different.Right. And why do you think they chose to make TV Daenerys different and to hone in on the whole fire immunity thing so much more?My original topic had a lot more detail however, regarding whether or not the tie-in to Jon Snow's parentage will also be mentioned or focused on in the series or not... and why so many more clues in a short span of time (in the television show's 8 hours) than in the book? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyDogIsNamedDanerys Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 I actually don't think that there are a lot fewer clues in the book with regard to Dany's dragon eggs. The damn eggs are in every chapter, and it's pretty clear there's some heavy foreshadowing. Check out this quote from a recent new reader blog for example:“Stone,” my ass.Seriously, I know this series is very magic-lite and all, but if those eggs don’t hatch at some point I will seriously eat my hat. Even though I don’t wear a hat. I will go out and buy a hat and eat it, okay?Because, just—no. You do not give fossilized dragon eggs to a girl who is supposedly literally descended from dragons and who keeps dreaming about dragons and reminding herself about being descended from dragons and dragons dragons dragons, and have nothing happen with them. Sorry, forget it. Even Martin can’t be that deconstructivist.:) As to the other side, I don't think they are focusing on Jon's burning his hand in greater detail in the show (if anything, they just want us to realize - oh that's HOT AND FIREY I guess the zombies are veunerable to FIRE!). IIRC in the book Jon has to keep his hand bandaged for weeks, and there's some fear he may not be able to wield a sword as well in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malarky1231 Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 The tv Daenerys is shown being immune to fire many times. In the pilot she walks into a steaming hot tub, without showing the slightest sign of being burnt. She then puts the eggs in the fire in another episode, while her handmaiden burns herself trying to remove the egs, while Dany shows no sign of damage. And then, there is the last scene where she actually walks into the flames. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spitsphyre Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Jon burned his hand in the book, badly. That's why he was always flexing it, Maester Ameon told him to do that so he didn't lose mobility while it healed and it became a habit, though in the book it was because he picked up a burning pile of cloth.And in the book Dany is shown that she likes things hot. She asks for hot baths and asks that the temperature be hotter and fires burn at weird times. But until reading forums I was always under the impression that she did things like this to be closer to her heritage more than a supernatural thing, just like how the other houses take attributes from their sigils and apply it to their lives. (Except the Tullys because, really, who wants to be a fish?) Then after hearing that GRRM said the fire immunity was a one time thing I went back to believing that.So on this topic, show Jon and show Dany aren't much different than their literary counterparts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Envie Posted June 12, 2011 Author Share Posted June 12, 2011 As to the other side, I don't think they are focusing on Jon's burning his hand in greater detail in the show (if anything, they just want us to realize - oh that's HOT AND FIREY I guess the zombies are veunerable to FIRE!). IIRC in the book Jon has to keep his hand bandaged for weeks, and there's some fear he may not be able to wield a sword as well in the future.I appreciated that quote from a new reader fiercely speculating about those 'stone' eggs - its fairly obvious they must play some important part in the story to a non-reader since they have shown them with candles / flame around them quite a bit in Daenerys scenes.Along those same lines, one could presume a lot of the focus on the immunity to fire theme is to aid the non-reader in fully 'getting it' in anticipation of the grande finale scene for Daenerys.Perhaps the same could be said for Jon - that his burnt hand is only a storytelling tool from the book and not a hint of anything. But I am firmly in the R+L=J camp, so I'll keep hoping. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Envie Posted June 23, 2011 Author Share Posted June 23, 2011 After the grande finale' I am a bit disappointed in only one thing - they did not have TV Daenerys' hair burnt off - I wonder why not! Her dress caught fire as she walked into the pyre, I caught that briefly in the scene. Don't get me wrong, I was absolutely thrilled with the final scene, the way they made the baby dragons look, and how Daenerys stood up naked and proud with her new children.Another quick difference I wonder if anyone noticed. When Mirri Maz Duur says the line about the sun rising in the west, and setting in the east etc etc., in response to Daenerys asking when Drogo would be normal again... they left out the line "when your womb quickens again and you bear a living child" ... I thought that was peculiar. Anyone else? While I always suspected the witch said this 'prophecy' as only a scare tactic, I now wonder if they left it out knowing a different ending for Daenerys (perhaps she bears another child later on...)I also always believed (hoped) that her baby, Rhaego, didn't actually birth as an abomination (and dead) and was instead spirited away somewhere. One can hope! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iheartseverus Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 After the grande finale' I am a bit disappointed in only one thing - they did not have TV Daenerys' hair burnt off - I wonder why not! Her dress caught fire as she walked into the pyre, I caught that briefly in the scene. Don't get me wrong, I was absolutely thrilled with the final scene, the way they made the baby dragons look, and how Daenerys stood up naked and proud with her new children.Another quick difference I wonder if anyone noticed. When Mirri Maz Duur says the line about the sun rising in the west, and setting in the east etc etc., in response to Daenerys asking when Drogo would be normal again... they left out the line "when your womb quickens again and you bear a living child" ... I thought that was peculiar. Anyone else? While I always suspected the witch said this 'prophecy' as only a scare tactic, I now wonder if they left it out knowing a different ending for Daenerys (perhaps she bears another child later on...)I also always believed (hoped) that her baby, Rhaego, didn't actually birth as an abomination (and dead) and was instead spirited away somewhere. One can hope!It actually made sense to me that her hair didn't burn off. I mean, her clothes did, of course, but they were just ordinary clothes. Whilst her hair, like her skin, eyes, entire body, is Targaryen.As to MMD leaving out the bit about 'when your womb quickens again' there's actually another whole thread already running which speculates about that.As to your last paragraph, well, yes, you can hope. :lol: But then again, this IS GRRM, after all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Envie Posted June 23, 2011 Author Share Posted June 23, 2011 It actually made sense to me that her hair didn't burn off. I mean, her clothes did, of course, but they were just ordinary clothes. Whilst her hair, like her skin, eyes, entire body, is Targaryen.As to MMD leaving out the bit about 'when your womb quickens again' there's actually another whole thread already running which speculates about that.As to your last paragraph, well, yes, you can hope. :lol: But then again, this IS GRRM, after all...Yes, I suppose one could interpret that to mean her hair is also immune to fire, though it did burn mostly away in the book version.I'm curious which forum the discussion about Miri Maz Duur's prophecy is in, I'll check it out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jurble Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 Show-Jon needs to have cooler burns. Book Jon is a badass, with his burns on both sides of his hands and up his forearm, with a massive scar on his face, a raven on his shoulder, and a wolf the size of a horse. I'm not even sure Show-Jon can pull off how badass Jon is he just doesn't have the face of a badass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetrobin Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 I am with many others in believing R=L=J, and I don't necessarily think having Targaryen blood can make one a "dragon". "Blood of the dragon" could be a gift that is only present in some, similar to being a warg or greendreamer. I think that when it is called for, in times of war and such, the trait can be brought out when the god or gods find the right champion. Had Rhaegar lived, he might have been able to wake the dragon eggs, but I doubt that Aerys or Viserys, true Targs, could have done so.There has been speculation that Tyrion is a Targaryen, and in the first season, he and Shae play the fire game. There is no real reason to show this game, it wasn't in the books. I think Tyrion being burned by the fire was put in as a counter for Dany and her being the true Blood of the Dragon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenHonors Posted April 1, 2012 Share Posted April 1, 2012 Jon burned his hand in the book, badly. That's why he was always flexing it, Maester Ameon told him to do that so he didn't lose mobility while it healed and it became a habit, though in the book it was because he picked up a burning pile of cloth.And in the book Dany is shown that she likes things hot. She asks for hot baths and asks that the temperature be hotter and fires burn at weird times. But until reading forums I was always under the impression that she did things like this to be closer to her heritage more than a supernatural thing, just like how the other houses take attributes from their sigils and apply it to their lives. (Except the Tullys because, really, who wants to be a fish?) Then after hearing that GRRM said the fire immunity was a one time thing I went back to believing that.So on this topic, show Jon and show Dany aren't much different than their literary counterparts.LMAO OOOOOOO at the tully comment. xDDDD maybe SOME people might like being fishes xD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.