Springwatch

Anyone close to the Targ main line is a top candidate to die - Targs and secret Targs - because it's hard to end the story with magical abominations who can be super charismatic, ambitious, powerful, desirable and/or mad, however the dice rolls. And that's without dragons.... So in the firing line: Dany, Jon, Aegon, Cersei, Jaime, Myrcella, Tommen, Tyrion. Baratheon bastards probably ok - too dilute.

Thanks for the link anyway; I like codes (and from the quote above, sounds like George does too!). I wanted to see how the theory developed, but we seem to start in the middle when the idea has got really overdeveloped; and suffers from the problem of all code theories for these books - danger, violence and plotting happen all the time, so anything could predict them.

Mel has red eyes too - do you want to develop further on this? Triple-sacrifice is wrong; the quote doesn't say she sacrificed them and that's not what we saw happen. It's doubtful that even MIrri could be called a sacrifice because Dany's only religious idea at the time is Drogo's ascent to the afterlife, which doesn't even need a sacrifice. More likely Mirri's death was extreme punishment in revenge for her causing the deaths of Drogo and Rhaego. Which she did.

If George failed at all, it's a failure to understand how difficult decryption is - his end of the process is (relatively) simple; he follows his own formula and maybe he worries it may be too obvious, too boring, so he has his three layer system of hinting, and he likes things having multiple levels of meaning (e.g. Needle, and many more), and real-world references and homages, and I'm pretty convinced there's a lot of word play too. But the reader trying to reverse-engineer George's process has a massive problem because there are just so many elements to herd into place, and the more hints and illustrations George adds, the more possibilities and combinations there are. Oh yes, and if everything he writes depends on what he wrote already, his challenge is increasing exponentially too. So at least we're all in it together.

There was an idea of Tyrion being in love with Arya too (iirc), but my instinct is that transferred to Shae, who might be a kind of Arya shadow, who knows? Maybe JonArya could go the same way. Anyway, I'm fine with JonArya being discussed, even in favour because I'm expecting a kind of Aegon-and-his-sisters replay - not sexual, but the scenario alone might be enough to justify a bit of foreshadowing. Backshadowing, whatever. He could be talking shit to you too. Isn't the fandom even more demanding than a publisher? Too strong!! And it really bugs me when people suddenly conflate Martin's fantasy world (lots of incest, cousin marriages too) with the real world and real people's values. Can't argue with that. Although if GRRM wants to go down the JonArya route, there is just about an opening for it, precisely because they're not siblings, and because they've been (or may be) separated in the years when Arya transitions away from childhood, so the sibling taboo never develops in the usual way. Not expecting it to happen.

This is way too clever for me, but... GRRM is always up to something. He's been way to clever for his own good, or we'd have a much better understanding of the books by now. Personally I don't think a book with so much fantasy can tell us about real human societies. Planetos people are bent out of shape; surreal things happen. Also it'd be hard to write a truth-beats-lies parable when (we expect) Jon is the 'true' heir to the Iron Throne and so if the truth prevails, we end with the triumph of hereditary monarchy. For my money, GRRM is thinking of Plato. The mortal world is a false and imperfect copy of the realm of ideas, of perfect forms (I'm not a Plato expert, mind). The physical world is 'false', the mental space is 'true' - and I think this is where the gods come in, bending mortals to their template. It's a very elitist point of view (well it is the god view), and that's why I think the false side, the mortal side, will triumph.

Well the reader's got to make a choice here. Either discard this first take on Tyrion's 'arc' (but you get another, more nuanced one!) - or discard all ideas of foreshadowing (everything that looks clever and meaningful is just a stinky mass of rotten red herrings).

It's a fascinating idea, but I have to say very unfair on the reader because there's not so much as a flicker of unity between Mel and Benerro's crew. She is Melisandre of Asshai, her place is at the Wall, and her AA is Stannis or possibly Jon. The Essosi are on a different track entirely. This. She saw something in the flames that really made her believe. Wish we knew what. Wish we'd see her get news of Dany, and what she thought about that. Yeah, she is sorta right! and that's exactly how prophecy seems to work; it always turns out, but not as expected. Soo... as Melisandre expected? or as Benerro is expecting? Because Benerro seems to have the 'obvious' interpretation, and the obvious usually has the most problems. On the other hand Mel-Stannis-Jon are looking very icy at the moment - they are on a mission to preserve, their home is the Wall. Odd, but honestly a more appealing vision than the fire-consumes vision Benerro has for Dany's followers - war, death and resurrection. What they have in common is that both sides are amazingly fatalistic. Stannis goes out to defeat and maybe death. Jon is surrounded by lethal daggers. Moqorro is sent out on a sinking ship. Was there the memo, today is not the day they die, etc? Maybe, but it was Jojen the greendreamer who 'knew' his day hadn't arrived - Mel the fire priestess seems to look for and find specific threats to life. I don't think she could be certain of Stannis surviving the Blackwater by this method. Or Jon surviving the skulls and daggers. Fatalism.

Oh ok. I think all red priests are unbalanced (if they're doing it properly that is), which is probably tough for the religious hierarchy. I guess Mel's talent and complete lack of team spirit was a pain to the administration, and the only help they could offer was a long distance ticket out together with their best love.

Assuming magic and gods cover the same phenomena, we do have air: there are aeromancers in Asshai; Dany is gifted a 'magic' ointment to reveal spirits of the air; spirits of the air are mentioned multiple times, usually in connection with legend or ghosts. Hm? Where did you get the impression that red priests are level headed? They're all ranting, human-sacrificing zealots. Except Thoros, and he knows he's more of a pink priest than a red one.

Circumstantial evidence points to Arryn checking out the gold-always-gives-way-to-coal theory -

Because from what we've seen, Butterbumps is seriously good: ETA He's practised this stuff already.

Butterbumps could do it. Sleight-of-hand is his thing. Otherwise I agree the crystal is very soluble in wine, otherwise Cresen would have screwed up, and he's supposed to be an expert.

Bravos don't wear purple, but nobles do: In the Seven Kingdoms nobles draped themselves in velvets, silks and samites of a hundred hues whilst peasants and smallfolk wore raw wool and dull brown roughspun. In Braavos it was otherwise. The bravos swaggered about like peacocks, fingering their swords, whilst the mighty dressed in charcoal grey and purple, blues that were almost black and blacks as dark as a moonless night. No sigils at all I guess, Illyrio doesn't think much of them.

That is good thinking - there's got to be something going on here, even though the Swyft castle is a long way from Harrenhal. It is very near Crakehall though, which is a good enough connection in itself.

Reminds me that some children are named in tribute to another (e.g. Lollys's son Tyrion, originally intended to be Tywin). It's maybe possible that Janei is partly named for Cersei - Kevan was totally charmed by the young Cersei (Ser Kevan remembered the girl she once had been, so full of life and mischief. And when she’d flowered, ahhhh … had there ever been a maid so sweet to look upon?).

I'd love to know this too. Here's your 'ei' characters: Amarei Crakehall Amerei Frey, known as "Gatehouse Ami". Carolei Waynwood Cersei Frey, called "Little Bee", daughter of Ser Raymund Frey. Cersei Lannister, daughter of Lord Tywin, wife of King Robert, twin to Ser Jaime. Elenei Emberlei Frey Janei Lannister Marei Mellei, servant to Arianne Missandei Sallei Paege Serenei of Lys Shirei Frey Wynafrei Whent Zei ETA : So many Freys! Wynafrei is married to a Frey too. And Sallei. ETA2 : The adult women seem a sexy bunch. Zei and Marei are whores. Cersei and Amerei Fret sleep around, Crakehalls are insulted as 'sluts', Shirei's mother sleeps around. ETA3: Added Mellei & Missandei

Maybe. Maybe not. There are ways of making it quick - it depends on the executioner. Certainly Jon considered hanging for Janos and he's no sadist. ETA Sadism is the key point for me here because I consider it a mental illness, or close to it. Good or bad, I don't care, I'm just looking for balance between the male and female characters. Anyway, as I read it, it could be Piper's men, or Bracken's, or Bolton's, but probably not Dondarrion's. I'd still call this close to zero prominence for the person who hanged those women.

Children, their vulnerability and protection, get so much emphasis, I think it's a developing theme that can't be understood at this time, so I'm not going to try. Some children meet excessively brutal attacks (e.g Rhaenys and Aegon). Some get excessively noble protection (e.g. Edric Storm). I'd say Ned is swayed by this theme the most - says (for no good reason), "Robert, I ask you, what did we rise against Aerys Targaryen for, if not to put an end to the murder of children?". Well, many reasons, none of them involving the murder of children. And then of course he risks and loses everything to protect Cersei's children. I wouldn't say he appears mad though, just his fine morals overpowered his judgement. Yes, and there's a whole other discussion to be had on who is the most evil, or who caused most suffering. It's just the point that's bugging me is, why are so many major female characters presented as mad? And why so much prominence? Someone hanged those women, but the guilty person has zero prominence, we don't know or care who did the deed. Also hanging isn't necessarily sadistic, but crucifixion is, and we're inside Dany's head when she feels the horror of it and tries to justify it to herself. Now that's what I call prominence.

Aerys is the maddest ruler to be sure, but it's the prominence that hits and hurts for me. Aerys is a 'history' character, he's not a point of view, we don't spend a lot of time with him - the pull on our emotions is just not there. The same is true for all the other Fire and Blood characters - to me anyway - e.g. Alysanne may be a good queen, but her history doesn't have the life and force of a major character in Asoiaf. We don't spend enough time with her either - so due to availability error alone, Alysanne can't and doesn't balance out Cersei. To compare like with like - Ned and Robb are major characters and 'good' rulers. Tragic, of course, but doing their damnedest to rule wisely and well, with very humane instincts, and totally sane. There's no female equivalent - on the female side, Dany has already vengefully burnt Mirri alive, and ordered a mass crucifixion, and Catelyn, Lysa and Cersei are strongly linked to mental instability. Arianne I actually like, she's got potential, but it's spelt out hard that she's a dreamer and not much of a thinker. She's not as big a character as the early POV's, so I'd compare her to Doran, Jon Arryn, Edmure and similar -and they all look more like rulers than her. I've got a hopeful feeling GRRM has got some clever scheme behind all this - there's a sort of consistency to Jaime's statement that all mothers are mad (Dany, Cersei, Lysa, Catelyn), but Arianne is not a mother and not mad. Not quite a ruler yet either. What I want is the fantasy side of things to come out as the cause of this weird imbalance - magic, not psychiatric illness - and I'm pretty confident it will, but this is a wretched time to stop writing the books.

On the question of love, I wonder if this is the problem? It's a very powerful and famous piece of writing, with I believe great influence on Western ideas of love, true love that is. It's also a bit saintly, because it was written by a saint. It's also completely and utterly not Cersei, couldn't be less in fact. But. I'm certain George is not limiting himself to the saintly when he writes about love in the books - there's also love that hurts: mad passions (Jaime & Cersei), obsessions (Lysa), love that might drive you lose your property and your principles (Jorah), love that might drive you to murder (Jaime again, but Ned has dark suspicions of everybody I think). But it's all love as far as the themes of the books go, and there are quotes to show it: The things I do for love. Love is the bane of honour. Love is poison.

Fair. But Tywin is a monster hypocrite for getting all preachy about honour. Face it, honour is out of reach for the Lannisters - having Barristan by their side is not going to make people forget the treacherous Sack of KL, the murder/rape of Elia and her children, the unprovoked attacks on the smallfolk of the Riverlands by the Mountain and the Mummers etc. Renly's supporters don't need honour either, seeing as they're usurping four heirs to the throne. Stannis has honour and the true claim, but it does him no good. Family loyalty is absolutely key here. The truth about the twincest is out - if Barristan starts to listen and believe, he'll change loyalties in an instant. Because Joffrey is no true king. Barristan didn't train them very well, did he? Anyway, the KG members were very poor quality, and caught between Tyrion and Cersei's quarrels besides. I don't think either Jaime or Barristan could have done much. Mandon was arguably correct to protect Joff not Sansa; similarly Boros to accept new commands from the Hand over who's escorting Tommen; Sandor didn't abandon Joffrey, he broke down and had to flee 'justice'; the assassination attempt is still a mystery.

The men don't either. They said how great it would be to have Tyrell bannermen on the Small Council. Well it happened under Kevan, and it wasn't great. She needed Kettleblacks because Tyrion took away all her guards. She flirted with them because she thought it was the only way to ensure their loyalty - it's sad, but I wouldn't call it vanity, or illogical. Tywin can't even run his own family. Tyrion ruled like a lunatic as Hand (chief policy - war with Cersei). I don't want to argue over Cersei's every action and inaction, but I don't think we have to accept uncritically everything said by a Lannister male.

Much later. And even then - the man terrified of fire fought for the Lannisters all day on Tyrion's hellfire battleground. That's pretty loyal. He fought until he couldn't take any more. Can't cost less than nothing. Janos Slynt was only important during Cersei's coup, but at that point his role was absolutely vital - he could literally choose between Ned and Cersei. He had to be secured at any cost. Later of course, Tyrion discarded him with no trouble at all. I don't know all the examples, but this sounds like the Hall of Lamps - Kevan says she embrassed Mace but it looks to me that Cersei was in courtesy mode when she refused Garth. Kevan is so anxious to appease the Tyrells that he ends up with Mace as Hand (which he told Cersei she'd be a fool to do), alongside Tarly and one of the other ones, and Mace angling to get Garth on the Small Council as well. I'm not saying Cersei's choices were great. But the Lannisters abandoned her, and the Tyrells want to take over. This is Tywin's opinion regurgitated whole. I'm trying to say maybe we shouldn't take everything said by a Lannister man as the gospel truth. Barristan is a two edged sword. He does add respectability (hasn't made a huge difference yet, but there's time). But his moral standards put a strain on his loyalty to a king like Joff - when Barristan was dismissed, all his anger and contempt come straight to the surface; and after a little more thought, he realises he's a Targ loyalist. No, Jaime was a better choice. Later splits in the Lannister family couldn't be predicted at that time.

Fair enough, but I sincerely hope GRRM is planning something better than a long series of women in power who are stupid and go mad, and ultimately need euthanizing like the rabid bitches they are. Think of all the theories we've heard, and count 'em. Cersei. Dany. Catelyn. Melisandre. Lysa. Even Sansa. Actually GRRM is more subtle, more grey, than he's given credit for, but he does build the 'stupid' reputation in two ways: first having the character herself think I don't know, that was a mistake, I feel stupid/helpless etc; and/or by surrounding the character with a chorus of (usually) males criticising her every decision. Cersei is mostly clear of the first, but scores big on the second with every male relative saying they would have done it so much better - which is not really proved. Was it really such a bad idea to raise the Hound to the KG? No, he's a great bodyguard, and loyal. Was the honourable Barristan at all compatible with the Lannister way of doing things? Maybe Jaime as LC could be an improvement. Was using Harrenhal to buy Janos Slynt really such a bad deal? It cost them nothing in the end. Was it a bad idea to suppress Tyrell power in council? Apparently yes when Cersei does it, but Kevan starts to see the point of it when he has to deal with them himself. And so on. None of which makes me a Cersei fan (no one is), but I do like backup from the text.