Jump to content

Ruki88

Members
  • Content Count

    57
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ruki88

  • Rank
    Freerider

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I can’t quite agree with your assessment of Jon and Dany. I think that you have to take into account the circumstance of their upbringing. Dany’s worth was measured in her usefulness to her brother, and Jon was raised as a bastard with basically no prospects. Both rose meteorically in their ranks and ppl expect them to perform well? I don’t think so. Sure, they had ppl give them good counsel here and there but I don’t think that measures to a full education, such as the one Robb Stark might’ve received for example, considering that he was destined to be the new Warden of the North. You can’t have 3 characters raised as a broodmare, a bastard and a lord destined to rule half of a continent respectively, and expect them to perform on the same or similar level as if the circumstances of their upbringing are irrelevant. Talk about lofty expectations. Did they blunder their way through and made small, big or horrific mistakes? Yes, obviously. If everything went hunky-dory for them then ppl would’ve complained that they’re Mary Sues and have plot armor as big as the Wall itself. If they make mistakes then they’re bad and stupid. Ppl already say they have plot armor as it is. Eh…. What I find interesting is that they’re the ones that break the status quo: Dany with the slaves and Jon with the wildlings. In pretty rigid and set in their ways communities. Does it go bad in both of their cases? Well. Duh. If rational conversation and clear communication would work as ppl think it should I wonder how many bad things could’ve been avoided in the world. Hell, ppl in this century are hard to reason to can you imagine doing trying it in medieval times? I by no means argue right now that they are the best of the best of the best. But, damn, this whole dismissal is pretty unfair as I see it. The characters we see doing the governing, and plotting, and scheming are the older ones. You know, the ones who’d been in this for years and years. Let’s look at Petyr Baelish when he was 15: challenged Brandon Stark who offered Petyr multiple chances to yield, Petyr refused to give up and got beaten up so badly Catelyn thought he would die. Now does he sound anything like the cunning, Machiavellian, unpredictable, deceitful, and ruthless manipulator of court politics that we know and love?
  2. I agree, every detail of his rule can't be added in text but what are Bran's qualifications? Besides conveniently having a vast amount of knowledge downloaded in his brain? At least with Aragorn we can say he has first hand experience to help him in ruling. And what exactly is the message expressed by this? If you don't have magic to give you the necessary tools "at the swish of a wand" (more or less), then don't bother? Humans too stupid to rule themselves? I think this was already pointed out multiple times, so. Maybe I understood it wrong, but I always thought that the ppl, as flawed as they are, will be the ones to rise above by their own work. That the supernatural parts of the story are there to 'spice' things, not to be the answer to a human problem. Look, 'magic did it' is a perfectly good solution. For other novels. Not ASOIAF. A lot of ppl were confused, myself included, on how Bran ended up king practically out of nowhere since his character was basically ignored for a no. of seasons already. I see it as being the same thing but in novel format. 5 novels done and 2 more to go. That's 70% of the material done. I mean. What even.
  3. Moooorning! Well, at least it's morning where I am. That’s a fair question, considering how I framed my argument. I put it that way to shorten my response and I suppose I was misunderstood. GRRM: “In Return of the King, Aragorn comes back and becomes king, and then [we read that] "he ruled wisely for three hundred years." Okay, fine. It is easy to write that sentence, He ruled wisely. What does that mean, he ruled wisely? What were his tax policies? What did he do when two lords were making war on each other? Or barbarians were coming in from the North? What was his immigration policy? What about equal rights for Orcs? I mean did he just pursue a genocidal policy, "Lets kill all these fucking Orcs who are still left over"? Or did he try to redeem them? You never actually see the nitty-gritty of ruling.” I’ll amend my argument in this case. What I meant actually, is that GRRM wanted to see the minutiae of being a king, the nitty gritty stuff of ruling. In that case, isn’t GRRM guilty of doing the same thing by skipping years of the story and just make Bran king? Whether he’ll be a good or a bad one is irrelevant. There are 2 more novels in which he can do it and I don’t see it happening. We have 5 novels and only about 2.5 years or so have passed and look how much happened. If we have a time jump in Winds that’s a big chunk of a character’s development being missed, especially for Bran since he is still a child. The same thing if we have an epilogue in which he states the aftermath of the events in ASOIAF. I can ask the same thing as GRRM: "he ruled wisely/badly for X number of years." Okay, fine. It is easy to write that sentence, “He ruled wisely/badly.” What does that mean, “he ruled wisely/badly”? etc, etc, etc. You might say I’m exaggerating and giving too much attention to this but if someone makes a statement about something, and alludes to the fact that he’ll do ‘better’ at the same time, then I am expecting to see that. Or I just might start thinking I’ve been trolled. You know.
  4. I actually did entertain the idea. But then, wouldn't it be the same as Aragorn? Wasn't GRRM's argument that we weren't shown how Aragorn was a good king?
  5. Uff, I do think that there are too many things stacked against Bran ending king, and even if he does end up king by some miracle, it still opens up a whole new cans of worms. Some ppl on this site already discussed this much better than me. Those are, as I call them, in story reasons. But for me to speak about why story wise it does not fit, I should be conviced why it doesn't fit externally speaking, in the first place. Externally speaking, my brain always brings me back to that remark about Aragorn. And there is somehing else that gives me pause. Since the 1st novel was published - what, like 20yrs ago? - how many ppl put forth the theory of Bran as king? Look, I get it that the author is praised on and on about his twists and what not, but that was mainly after the Red Wedding, I think - nobody kind of expected that, and rightly so. But after that, when ppl started really analizing the text, and I mean practically every word, there is still nothing? GRRM already said he added hints about the ending (his "the butler did it" analogy), but nobody got it? I find that highly unlikely. There are a lot of readers out there who put a lot of effort into analazying everything, not to mention the input they received from other once they put it online - like on this site -, input that might've strengthen their argument or disprove it. Maybe I haven't read it and it is written somewhere this theory of Bran being king. But as far as I know, Bran's fate was either turning evil or merging with the weirwoods, ruling Winterfell etc. I honestly don't remember someone claiming he'll be king of Westeros. I don't know man, there are way too many things that smell fishy to me. I think that this was GRRM vision at the start, but that was when the story was supposed to be shorter, with not so many things added on top like now. A lot of things have changed if we are to believe the plots that were dropped in the meantime are true. Now I'm left to believe that an illiterate, crippled child, who spent 5 novels hugging a tree will end up king in the last 2 novels. If the author 'turns his nose up' that it wasn't shown how Aragorn ruled then I expect the author to come up wih something to back up his remark.I'm sorry but if I wanted the answer to be "magic did it" I'll reread Harry Potter, you know. At least with Aragorn we have in text reasons to surmanise he'll manage pretty well at this whole 'king' bit.
  6. Ahh, it seems both of us are still scratching our heads trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. And let's say a somewhat believable explanation does come out, I would still try to understand how this is a good idea. The author took the time to ponder how Aragorn was a good king and he came out with this poo poo. Good lord.
  7. Yep, I still think he's the worst portrayed character in the show - at least the others were allowed to have a personality till the end. Since s6 he was slowly drained of any character development he had in the previous seasons. Good lord, I don't know where D&D got the idea that Jon has no personal ambition, why ppl assert that he doesn't want things. Can we get some perspective, pls. I was this close to facepalm myself into oblivion everytime I heard show!Jon say he "doesn't want it". For the love of...he's a bastard in the books. The only options he has, as far as he knows, are either stay at Winterfell under his brother's rule or leave to the Wall. The first option is neatly closed to him the moment Catelyn threatens to kick him out the moment Ned leaves. The guy has ambition enough to want to make a name for himself at the Wall - the only place where he thinks his birth won't matter. It's not that he wouldn't want to be a lord or king it's that these are so far out of his reach that it's laughable to even contemplate. He wants more out of his life but I do think any lofty dream he might've had as a kid were slowly beat out of him the more he grew up and learn what a bastard is. We can see him being bitter sometimes about this. In the show he's like a robot implanted with the program "Protect the North" / "Shield that protects the realm of men". It's like he's not even a real person anymore.
  8. You know, the evil Bran theory was such a delight and would've loved to see it in the books. But that wasn't how Bran was presented in the show - sure, ppl speculate that he manipulated everyone so he could get his hands on the crown. But that wasn't because D&D wrote it that way. It was just plain bad writing. Here Bran is presented as this super awesome, best guy, good chump who is the creme de la creme. That's a far cry from evil Bran. Also, where is the bittersweet ending in evil Bran winning? When even the books are poor in clues what does that say about the ending? Plot twist much? What about our favorite catch phrase: subverting expectations?
  9. Hmmm, isn't it a bit suspicious that after all this time the clues that elude to this ending are so scarce? After all this time of careful scrutiny? It looks a little like "subverting expectation" from GRRM for my liking. I know ppl like to think that the author is a literary genius but as I said in previous posts, I am of the opinion that the show and especially the long time that passed between the books inflated the sense that the quality of the books is higher than it actually is. We got into the hype train and never got off. It took most ppl to end up at s8 in the show to realize that what they're watching is not the same as what they loved in the first 4 seasons. Most ppl made excuses for s5,6,7 as ppl tend to do when they love something. No shade thrown here as I'm guilty of it myself; not for this particular series but yeah...It happens. Let's be honest, the enthusiasm for the books was kept alive by ppl who would discuss endlessly on how this could end - that was half the fun. And now we know. And it's not good. It feels like ppl are in damage control mode. Because otherwise it would mean that all these yrs devoded to something might've been...well, undeserved. I know, I know, the journey is what matters but in this case the ending does too. I would say it matters very, very much. Probably GRRM had this ending in mind but in my opinion, what this series ended up to be is way, way different than what it was at the beginning. He can't fit this ending to what he has now, not without tearing down most of what he built in 5 books. You have to follow where the evidence takes you. Right now it feels like ppl are twisting the evidence to fit the ending. I was waiting for threads on how Bran is actually the best option and boy, I was not dissapointed.
  10. I have a question though. As we know, this series has been analyzed and scrutinised by fans for years and years. A lot of theories have been born based on the clues and foreshadowings added along the text. Is there a theory out there that guessed Bran will end up king? Before we knew the ending of the show, I mean, not after.
  11. But the shield bit doesn't apply to Bran in the books, though. Anyway, if you reduce everything to the basics, we have 2 themes: the supernatural one and the ordinary one. They intertwined along the series but the solutions for these can't stand on 1person since I think that each theme requires a different skill set. Bran has a role in the supernatural theme, not the ordinary one. It's like Jesus dying for the sins of mankind, comes back to life and ends up king, pops a few kids and dies at a respectable age. I mean, what? I'm not very good at explaining myself, sorry.
  12. Indeed. Such a fatalistic ending if you think about it. I dont know, the idea of a God King worked in Dune since it was a theme right from the start of the series. But in ASOIAF it just doesn't click considering what GRRM spouted all these years about his work. Meh, the biggest dissapointment in terms of books I ever read. So much potential, so little payoff.
  13. But I think this is about life and humanity. You could say ASOIAF is realistic in depicting the unpredictability of life and the strengths and weaknesses of humanity and its struggles. The futility of the pursuit of power, and the hubris of entitlement. The fallacy of nobility and honor, and the power of sacrifice and the price sacrifice brings. GRRM: "the human heart in conflict with itself is the only thing worth writing about" And the final lesson we are to take at the end is that humanity needs a God Emperor to steer us in the right direction? I mean, I see Bran being a driving force in the battle against the supernatural for sure, but ending up king…It’s just so…reductive. Bran has a role in the magical conflict of the story (and its solution), not the ‘mundane’ conflict of the story (and its solution). What about “Aragorn’s tax policy”? What does "ruling wisely" means in this world? Apparently humanity is not good enough, it needs a magical being to do it for them. I don’t know. I don’t agree with the message here. This is how I see it and I just can’t agree. I don’t want a higher power/God like figure ruling over me/humanity – must be the atheist in me :P.
  14. I'm sorry guys but trying to fit this ending to the books it's like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. For me 2books to resolve all the plotlines AND end up with this ending is not enough. I'm not denying it will end up like this but for me it feels like I've been duped. If the author would've written the books at an even pace and not have these huge gaps between volumes then maybe, maaaybe ppl would be OK with the ending since the books wouldn't have been dissected to death... Instead these huge gaps in updates and the show allowed ppl to theorize and analyse the books to insane levels so to speak. And, frankly, ending up with much better resolutions than what the author will provide at the end it seems. I do think this is the reason ppl are so divided. I don't adhere to the idea that the author will do a better job therefore the ending won't be so bad. Sorry, not good enough. You don't spend 5books doing something and in the last 2books go with the "subverting the expectation" and doing a "shocking twist". I think after the show ppl are kinda over this subverting shit.
  15. Yeah...Bran ending king in the last 2 books is the equivalent of Dany ending mad in 1 episode in the show. I think we're slowly realizing that we were fooled by the books as we were fooled by the show that it is something great. At least that is how it feels to me. Anyway, it might seem exaggerated for some but I'm selling the books I bought and won't bother buying the new ones..that is, if the last one we'll ever be published. I've lost any enthusiasm for this series. This is the first time this happens to me when it comes to books. I've read books with not so good endings or where my favorites end up getting the short end of the stick but I never felt so disappointed. Ever. I'm still reeling over this nonsensical ending.
×
×
  • Create New...