Jump to content

chrisdaw

Members
  • Posts

    5,468
  • Joined

  • Last visited

8 Followers

About chrisdaw

  • Birthday 03/01/1984

Contact Methods

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

13,824 profile views

chrisdaw's Achievements

Council Member

Council Member (8/8)

  1. And if she was up against it she'd have called in all available arms and the bulk of them would be like Osgrey's. Sure there's a tip of the spear, but when he gives us that Sworn Sword call to arms and training and writing that they took pot boys with stolen kitchen knives in the War of the Nine Penny Kings I doubt GRRM is setting up conventional Westeros armies as professional fighting forces.
  2. It makes sense when you consider they had no interested in Stannis and the heavy magic side of things and wanted to shrink the story and get out. They were also very conscious of not revealing story beats/twists, they basically cut and ran after the published material, before even. Stannis won't necessarily lead them but he will be a linchpin, a focal point that when defeated will end the threat or turn the tide.
  3. Yeah I disagree as it is literally in the Sworn Sword, that's one of the themes of the story.
  4. I don't agree. A conventional Westeros army are a pack of farmers with regular lives and so a lot to lose, they've got every reason to break in battle whereas the Unsullied and Dothraki are warriors who live for battle.
  5. In response to the original post I believe (well GRRM has basically said this with different wording) GRRM has a tendency to create hard rules to his magic, but then sees this in part as a flaw in his writing. It's magic, not science, it's not supposed to be entirely consistent or require complete explanation. I think the manifestation of this is going to be magical rules that appear complete and consistent, but then have exceptions. For example bloodlines will matter when it comes to riding dragons, almost always, but then someone like Nettles may not be of any dragon blood and have achieved dragon riding by simply feeding and allowing the dragon to become familiar with her.
  6. A Night King doesn't exist yet but Stannis will become the approximation of one. As the Blood Emperor foreshadows Euron but there's no expectation Euron will ever be called a Blood Emperor, the Night King foreshadows Stannis but Stannis won't likely ever be given or take that name/title. Nothing I've read from GRRM precludes him creating a contemporary Night King parallel. I've never read a good idea for what Benjen is all about. His interaction was almost wholly with Jon (unless I misremember, it's been a long while) so I expect he has to relate to Jon's arc rather than Bran's. I should probably reread his part in the texts to see if I can get a feel for what's doing. Maybe he's next to take up the mantle of Aemon/Mormont as the authority figure telling Jon to abandon his family/love to carry out his duty. Something along the lines of this theme would be my best guess.
  7. I'm quite sure I know where it's leading but the wording is rather grey and I'm probably missing something in how it's going to be presented. An important question (riddle) will eventually emerge, the question being what does one need to make a rideable dragon to save the world? The answer is a dragon second lifed by a human (probably one of particular blood - Valyrian/Targaryen) thus made rideable, these are what Valyrian sphinxes represent and so they're not the question but the answer. To make some assumptions I would guess Aemon got it from a text and the text will resurface in the series and put the exact way the sentence is worded into a context that makes more sense. Alleras/Sarella might be a GRRM hint at something related to this thematically, but she's obviously not the literal answer, Aemon is talking about waking dragons and saving the world in the war for the dawn, a girl pretending to be a boy in Oldtown doesn't relate literally.
  8. Nothing has been fulfilled, fulfilling prophecies at the start of a story defeats their purpose as a literary device.
  9. When the series is finished you will still be able to argue who was AA, Jon or Dany (or Rhaego or Jon and Dany's bastard), such will be the shared and scattered manner in which the prophecies will play out.
  10. The topic has been debated since at least 2013. It really should be put to bed by now though, on reread it's abundantly clear what's happened behind the scenes. Stannis talks to Mance, draws his own conclusion that Mance has value, Mel tells him Mance has value, Val has standing with the wildlings and pleads with him for Mance's life and Jon tells him Mance has value. For these reasons he does really want to spare MAnce, BUT, he has two problems 1) He wants his show burning to eliminate Mance and place himself as the Wildling's only hope so that they'll come to his side, and; 2) He can't consciously free Mance because the law. Mel's ruby trick satisfies Stannis on the first point, allowing to have his shown burning, and Jon's sagely advice that the law ends at the Wall satisfies him on the second. The trickery is distasteful but it is what it is. Stannis saves Mance and gives him to Jon as Jon asked. He saves Mance as Val asked and not coincidentally she does as Stannis wants, as she said she would.
  11. This is a useful quote in explaining Stannis knew. "Rattleshirt" to Jon. When we understand Stannis knew (made the actual decision) the quote takes on a different meaning. I wonder if GRRM meant for it to be ambiguous, I don't think he did. I think it's just the nature of having to keep the whole identity secret for as long as required and that if you "knew" you'd never read it not knowing and so wouldn't necessarily catch that your reveal didn't make it immediately apparent that it was Stannis behind the decision and that people would assume Mel acted without him. An interesting question is if Val knows. Val never cried when "Mance" was burned. She believes she knows Mel knows about the baby swap, although why she believes this is not entirely clear, suggesting some communication between the two. And when Jon mentions Stannis by name in requesting Val not berate Seylse Val turns from playful to uncharacteristically serious and agrees to Jon's request, they then carry on in silence.
  12. He can galvanise the Vale (right now) behind Harry while influencing Harry to do his bidding, he can't galvanise the Vale behind Robert while also controlling Robert. To the Vale lords Robert is a puppet with LF at the strings and they wouldn't just go along with any plans whereas Harry would be a man grown making his own decisions and LF would be serving and advising at Harry's pleasure, the Vale lords will all do what Harry wants and mostly with enthusiasm.
  13. It's a good thought, not that she'll specifically take three dragons and melt the rock but that Dany will generally destroy Casterly Rock. Symbolism of Targaryen's overcoming rock/stone and relating particularly to Dany (one of her three lies to slay is the stone beast, her blood melts stone in her waking the dragon dream, and there's more) is persistent throughout the series not just Harrenhal. Strong possibility.
  14. The concepts of mercy and justice are core components of leadership and Arya's storyline.
  15. In the near term Jon will bloodily win and lead the north as KITN until his surrender to the Iron Throne, which will then probably see him named Lord of the North, then he will die towards the end of the series. Sansa may become Lady of the North on Jon's death and to end the series but if she does it will be a banishment of sorts forced on her and designed by others, the purpose of which will be to physically keep her from the powerful in King's Landing so that she may not manipulate and rule Westeros through them.
×
×
  • Create New...