Jump to content

Sly Wren

Members
  • Content Count

    3,144
  • Joined

About Sly Wren

  • Rank
    Council Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Array

Recent Profile Visitors

8,817 profile views
  1. I asked a while ago, but the answer I got back--didn't say one way or another. No hint at all. That said, my question was wordy, so he may not have known exactly what I was asking. I decided not to pester him. But given all the rest of the stuff in the app, I'd be very surprised if the family tree he saw wasn't like all the other trees: in-world, not objective, reality. Yup. Martin's making it clear: we have to wait for the next books (grumble). Agreed--though I'd add the app only serves this way if we (the readers) let ourselves forget how Martin sets up his world. When we remember that, the omniscience goes away.
  2. Maybe--are you thinking this goes along with the "Jon was intended to be a sacrifice/second Summerhall" theory? On this--yes. Though I'd add that if all Ned has is Dawn, the trip still makes sense: he'd going to Starfall for his sister.
  3. Yeah--that seems kinda wacky to me, too. If Lyanna and Jon were at Starfall, pretty sure they stayed at Starfall. Instead, the KG rode out to meet Ned and Co. at a neutral location (the toj) away from the people they were actually defending. Like Jon, like Duncan, etc. Because they can't fight Ned's whole army, so they lure him to a parlay with a smaller force. Ned wins. Then goes to Starfall with Dawn, finding Lyanna and Jon there. I agree that the scenario you cited seems . . . excessive. But are there hints that Lyanna was at Starfall? That the Daynes are important and know something about Jon? Yes. We need to next book to sort it out.
  4. Agreed. But until it's confirmed in the books, things like the locale of Lyanna's death are all being guessed at by readers filling in blanks in ways that may or may not correct. We don't have direct evidence on the locale of her death. Like all reading, we are all anticipating potential outcomes and filling in blanks--exactly what we're supposed to do. Exactly what makes reading fun (sorry for sounding like a literacy promo). But none of it is direct evidence or confirmation until we get it in the novels. Agreed on the tree--no idea why that would be tied to her locale of death. But, for now, we don't have direct evidence that Lyanna died at the toj--we have readers filling in blanks (as we're supposed to) in ways that may or may not be right. So evidence for where she dies--toj, Starfall, any other place that might be posited--is still educated guesses and anticipation. Unless someone has presented direct evidence on any of those locales that I've missed. We need the books to settle it. That's the only "real" evidence that won't be readers filling in blanks. Yup.
  5. Yup. Absolutely--especially given how he reacts to finding out her name is gossiped about at Winterfell. Agreed--though other trees of other families do give the local and even basic manner of death for people. So, putting Lyanna's place of death on a tree wouldn't be out of character generally for how Martin constructs the trees. And I have a very, very hard time believing Martin needed any kind of reminder on where Lyanna died. Eye colors of minor and semi-minor characters? Sure. Where Lyanna died? No way. Until we get confirmation in the books, those trees/records aren't "truth" yet--but, as you said above, that doesn't stop their being "canon."
  6. Yup! So far, the appendices and family trees GRRM writes and publishes reflect the "official" record, not always conducive to actual reality.
  7. Precisely--an in-world family tree presenting in-world knowledge (what Ned told people), which may or may not be actually true once the full backstory of Lyanna comes out.
  8. But the family tree Ran cites about Lyanna at the tower of joy is like all the other family trees in the novels and appendices, right? It still shows Jon as Ned's son, right? So, it shows what Ned told people about Lyanna's death, like what he told them about Jon. So, maybe it's telling actual reality. Or maybe it's just saying what Ned told people--and, like other things Ned has told on this subject, it's a lie. So--we really need the novels to confirm.
  9. How? Not trying to be difficult--I'm really curious. GRRM establishes exactly who Dany's attracted to. It's not someone like Jon. I do think they are retrofitting Nissa Nissa into the story. Though what Jon's supposed to do with it . . . not sure. I have theories, but they'd all be really crappy if true. But. . . how so if it's based on who Dany's attracted to? Martin's been showing us this from the beginning. And being consistent throughout the novels. Why bother with all of that?
  10. Right--but that doesn't mean Dany and Jon are romantic and like this. Dany and Jon in the books are attracted to VERY different people: Dany likes violent sociiopaths who kill and conquer. Jon's really not that guy. And the story can be about the two of them without a lot of the stuff the show had them do. Rather like Book Sansa can go save the North with the Vale without becoming Jeyne Poole.
  11. There's still an hour and 20 minutes next time. Fingers crossed the true mysteries are solved!
  12. Well--given that the show melded Val with Dany and Jon with fAegon, seems at least possible that Jon and Val will have sex. I do think he will reject her, though--he's breaking what we hear about the Night's King from Nan, making different choices. But she may reject him first when he reanimates.
  13. Of course not--I completely agree with this. My point was just that we've been shown that Dany's capable of monstrous things. This was much worse--and not inevitable. But it had at least some set up.
  14. In the books it's clear. In the show, I've been afraid they'd have Dany and Jon have pretty, pretty babies and lots of dragons and wolves. Very grateful they didn't do that.
  15. That might be more layered that D&D generally do--but might be an interesting parallel. But Dany's needy--for her dragons and for her lovers.
×
×
  • Create New...