Metopheles Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 who is JRRM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sj4iy Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 Dany's story is more interesting in GoT. Jon's story is more interesting in ADWD. It all evens out eventually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Coogan Posted May 4, 2014 Author Share Posted May 4, 2014 Eh, I don't think that insinuating that someone who is trying to answer your question (in a language that is not their own) is uneducated and should just leave, is very polite either. But then again, our ideas of a discussion seem very different. To me, a discussion might be a response like this: "Oh really? I had no idea there was a time-gap. Thanks for letting me know, I will keep that in mind on my next reread. It would explain some of the more tedious parts. Don't you think that Martin handled the rest of it brilliantly though, in the way he... 'insert example of perceived brilliance', etcetera. That might be more productive, and is certainly a nicer way to go about it. Not acknowledging other people's answers to your question, but just responding with some meandering sentences that basically repeat your own view again, ending them all with supposedly thoughtful triple punctuations.... Meh. Either way, I'm out of your carefully curated thread. I've answered your question and after reading your responses, I've come to the conclusion that just like Dany's storyline, your ideas don't interest me all that much, so there is no need for me to linger. Good luck in exploring them further with other, more like-minded readers, though. Thank you for letting me know about the time-gap you are sooooo insightfull....God you have changed how I view the Dany arc and how I see the series in general... you have warped my fargil little mind... jajajajja... whatever man why don´t you go watch a Micheal Bay film if my views are too much for you? wait you probably think thats a compliment... And btw I knew about the five-gap... I just really don´t take it into acount... becuase the truth is we don´t know how much of Dany´s wouold have changed if the five year gap had been in play... maybe the meereerenese arc would be a lot shoter, maybe it would alot of flashbacks or maybe it was always meant to be an entire book... but any speculation on what it would be is just that: speculation... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheWanderer Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 Again: she wants an army that would fight for her not only because she commands them but becuase they believe in her... She thinks she can do this by ending the slave trade... but well as you see things get complicated... Ending the slave trade is only complicated in the long run. She has effectively eliminated the slave trade in Mereen, and did so in Astapor and Yunkai as well. The fact that the slave trade returned in those cities has had no discernible effect on the loyalty of her army. Nor did leaving Astapor and Yunkai lower the loyalty or moral of the slaves she freed there. In short, simply sacking Mereen and moving on would've given her the army she desires. If you analize most movies or books you´ll find that normally the main charecter at the middle portion of the story will not be dealing with the main conflict, but be inovoled in other sub-plots... A sub-plot is, by definition, a factor that is part of the main plot. Dany's decision to sack Slaver's Bay and use it to assemble an army to invade Westeros is a sub-plot. Dany's decision to stay in Mereen is a divergence from her main plot. There is simply no way in which her decision to remain in Mereen furthers her plot in any way. I haven't read many stories in which the middle chunk is the character doing something completely unrelated, let alone contradictory, to their overarching purpose. It'd be like if Frodo took The Two Towers off to go gardening with Sam or something. this is very relative... since how much charecter acts in a story is relative... there´s a book called "Less Than Zero" by Bret Easton Ellis where all the main charecter does is does is go to parties, get drunk and have sex... he takes no part in the terrible things that are happening around him... he dosen´t help does around them ether... he just watches... and yet his the main charecter... so having a big impact on the plot isn´t such a big deal... This... this is exactly my point. I'm genuinely curious now as to whether you're actually reading my posts. A main character, such as the main character in Less Than Zero is not necessarily one who is important to the plot. Dany is a main character, that does not make her necessarily important to the plot and as we can see from her chapters she isn't (yet, that will probably/hopefully change). and charecter progresion is what true story is really about... It's what some stories are about, it's definitely not what all stories are about. Many interesting and compelling stories don't really feature a lot of character growth. Thank you for letting me know about the time-gap you are sooooo insightfull.... Your welcome. (I assume that's sincere based on the fact that most people, upon being told something they didn't know about a topic they actually want to know other peoples opinions on, would be sincere.) God you have changed how I view the Dany arc and how I see the series in general... you have warped my fargil little mind... That's not why I posted, nor why the others have. You asked why people thought Jon's chapters were more popular. People, myself included, then posted as to why we personally found Jon's more engaging. I'm sorry that you take that as some kind of threat to your sanity but if didn't actually want to know what we thought... why did you ask? whatever man why don´t you go watch a Micheal Bay film if my views are too much for you? wait you probably think thats a compliment... I'd recommend you go watch a Micheal Bay film actually (personally I'd recommend Pain & Gain). Expand your mind a little bit. Not everything has to be 'high' art (herein meaning: character driven, message based pieces), not everything that is 'high' art is automatically good and not everything that is 'low' art (herein meaning: anything with a fair deal of visual spectacle) is automatically without deeper meaning. It genuinely saddens me to know that you would outright dismiss people's opinions, and ridicule them, based simply on what they find entertaining. A story with lots of explosions, tits and violence can have something meaningful to say about the human condition. A story that's about a characters struggle isn't automatically good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metopheles Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 I just throw this in:Michael Bay did an amazing film with The Island. Even if most of his stuff is predictable rubbish, that one was great.So even he can bring deep movies, but still with his style and with decent action and decent story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Abominable SnowOther Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 I just throw this in: Michael Bay did an amazing film with The Island. Even if most of his stuff is predictable rubbish, that one was great. So even he can bring deep movies, but still with his style and with decent action and decent story. watch this video. Its hilarious https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7ssUivM-eM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metopheles Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 watch this video. Its hilarious https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7ssUivM-eM ~~~~MICHAEL BAY SPLOSIONS!!~~~~ Not only is this so true about all the mentioned directors, most new films feel that way..kofkof Hobbit kofkof Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Abominable SnowOther Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 ~~~~MICHAEL BAY SPLOSIONS!!~~~~ Not only is this so true about all the mentioned directors, most new films feel that way..kofkof Hobbit kofkof :lol: lol, random chair explosion made it the greatest video ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metopheles Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 :lol: lol, random chair explosion made it the greatest video ever Or the guys jumping into the water and exploding. The thing is, I would watch that film. I would so pay money for that :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Coogan Posted May 6, 2014 Author Share Posted May 6, 2014 Ending the slave trade is only complicated in the long run. She has effectively eliminated the slave trade in Mereen, and did so in Astapor and Yunkai as well. The fact that the slave trade returned in those cities has had no discernible effect on the loyalty of her army. Nor did leaving Astapor and Yunkai lower the loyalty or moral of the slaves she freed there. In short, simply sacking Mereen and moving on would've given her the army she desires. We don´t know much about the loyalty or moral of the slaves, Martin is very ambiguos about it... but from the little information we get we can deduce... She freed the Unsullied after she left Ashtapor and they decided too stay with her... this means they belive in what she is doing... moral didn´t fall after Ashtapor and Yunkai becuase they knew she would continue to other slave´s cities and continue too free slaves... but if she where too leave Slaver´s Bay too it´s mercy, in a mess she created, ignoring the very reason that the Unsullied joined in the first place, I think, would create problems among there ranks... Maybe the Unsullied would still follow her, but they would be as loyal as they where before? Or maybe some would desert, stay in slaver´s bay and fight the masters... remember there free men... they can do what they want... A sub-plot is, by definition, a factor that is part of the main plot. Dany's decision to sack Slaver's Bay and use it to assemble an army to invade Westeros is a sub-plot. Dany's decision to stay in Mereen is a divergence from her main plot. There is simply no way in which her decision to remain in Mereen furthers her plot in any way. I haven't read many stories in which the middle chunk is the character doing something completely unrelated, let alone contradictory, to their overarching purpose. It'd be like if Frodo took The Two Towers off to go gardening with Sam or something We still haven´t seen fully what the effects of the Meereen plot will be... Or how it will factor in on the rest of the plot... and if most of it dosen´t there is still the joy of enjoying the plot for the plot it´s self... IMO... dislike of this plot is baised on impatice more than anything else... everybody thinks its so important that Dany too reach Westeros they forget about the journey (phsycally and mentally)... This... this is exactly my point. I'm genuinely curious now as to whether you're actually reading my posts. You also make me wander if your reader my posts... becuase you obviously didn´t get the point of my post... relevance to the plot dosen´t make a charecter important, his relashanship to the story does... a book like Less than Zero proves this where the plot is basiclly non-existante... Going back too your example in Lord of the Rings Pippin is more important charecter becuase we see him grow, change and make choices that test his vuales... where as Theoden, though he makes impact on the plot, is relatily a minor charecter who plays damsel in distress most of the second book... he may make some choices that test his vuales, but the narrative dosen´t enphasize alot on them... It's what some stories are about, it's definitely not what all stories are about. Many interesting and compelling stories don't really feature a lot of character growth. I said charecter progression, not growth... And too specify I mean the charecter making choices inside the narrative that test there vuales... Your welcome. Don´t flatter yourself I wasn´t taking too you... you know the quotes serves purpose... you could try reading carefully next time... That's not why I posted, nor why the others have. You asked why people thought Jon's chapters were more popular. People, myself included, then posted as to why we personally found Jon's more engaging. I'm sorry that you take that as some kind of threat to your sanity but if didn't actually want to know what we thought... why did you ask? I don´t know why poeple on the internet think a discussion a liscence too insult... if you wanna discuse in civil manner, fine discuse... save the insults for someone else... I'd recommend you go watch a Micheal Bay film actually (personally I'd recommend Pain & Gain). Expand your mind a little bit. Not everything has to be 'high' art (herein meaning: character driven, message based pieces), not everything that is 'high' art is automatically good and not everything that is 'low' art (herein meaning: anything with a fair deal of visual spectacle) is automatically without deeper meaning. It genuinely saddens me to know that you would outright dismiss people's opinions, and ridicule them, based simply on what they find entertaining. Never said everthing has too be high art... I actually enjoy many hollywood blockbusters (I think they used too make them better but still some of them are good)... Some of the Marvel films, Nolan´s Batman (especially The Dark Knight) trilogy and the new Star Trek movies are good... and let´s not forget the classics: Terminator, Alien, Blade Runner, Robocop, etc. and yes there´s meaningfull message in all them hidden inside the grand spectacle... well than there´s Micheal Bay... it genuinly saddens me that poeple still waste there time and money to see his crap...his movies are so ludacris too the point that they become offensive... I mean in Bad Boys 2 Will Smith destroys hundreds of poor poeple´s homes so he can save his daughter (or whoever it was) and he dosen´t even care, his almost happy about it... so no I will not be watching any more Micheal Bay... A story with lots of explosions, tits and violence can have something meaningful to say about the human condition. A story that's about a characters struggle isn't automatically good. Yes this is true a bit obvious but true... the series Spartacus is a good example of the first, witch could be softcore at times yet could be very profound at other times... and Somewhere by Sofia Coppala is charecter struggle that isn´t very good... watch this video. Its hilarious ajajaja... did you see Micheal Bay in South Park? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DCa4DwpWAk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Oromus Locke Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 I think people are grossly underestimating the Meereen chapters and particularly the Meereen characters.. IMOWell the thing is we actually can see Jon's plans coming to fruition while Dany's all fail miserably.Also the characters in Jon's PoV's are all really good (well written) characters (Mel/Mance/Stannis/Tormund/Val) while the ones in Dany's PoV's are sort of generic characters. And lastly a lot of things happen in Jon's PoV's that are really interesting and test his resolve and his ability to lead and to uphold his oaths that he took while also doing what is best for the watch and the realm. While Dany's PoV's are pretty much the same issues she has been having for the last 3 books.We get to see how Jon Is as a leader when we have seen for several books how Dany is as a leader and we cant help but compare them and realize one comes up very short. The only thing that we saw coming to fruition was him letting the wildlings through the gates and getting some of them to join the watch. WIth the rest potentially posing a major issue for him down the road, because he has enemies right next door and it disconnects him from what the rest of the Watch wants. Lets have something of a rundown of his plots, not going into the above yet again:- Sends Maester Aemon, Sam, Gilly, Lil'Monster and Daeron away: Aemon dies, Daeron defects, Sam ends up in Old Town, with Euron at the doorsteps.. Can't really say that's a 100% outcome of what he planned..- Executes Janos Slynt: Okay, this gives him more respect.. Except that Janos had quite a few followers.. Which may have kicked him in the end.- Moves the wildlings through the Wall and burns a fake Mance: Okay, lieing to a King and upsetting the majority of your peers and putting your order in a perilous situations in which you are surrounded by hate carrying old antagonists? SURE!- Sent out a search party for what you believe to be your sister, trust your former enemy to do this: SURE, it just goes all your vows, again trusting the enemy. Sure they have a common enemy, but this in essentia was a poor decision, especially when word of it comes out.- House Thenn: Breaking your vows, yet again...- Devising a rescue party for the Wildlings at Hardhome: We don't even know if Pyke actually went there, lots of Wildlings have already been sold as slaves by slavers, and then Jon didn't even follow up on it due to the letter. All of his plans have failed miserably or to some extent have horrible longterm consequences for him personally or for the NW. Honestly, who knows, Stannis may have found out about Mance not being burned by Theon knowing of Mance, somehow, and perhaps Stannis has therefore sent the Letter out of pure despise. A lot of things that happen break his oaths quite harshly.. Yes, realms of men, but as a commander of the Night's Watch, it's also paramount you protect that order. Putting the enemy right beside it kinda gives me the impression that you're doing it wrong. Also, several books for Dany being a leader, same issues for the last three books? I don't know if you're including Feast in that, but whatever. First off, we saw how Dany was as a conqueror, not as a ruler, there's a big difference. Lets see: - GoT: Gets her dragons, nothing like a leader, but learning to stand up for herself very naively.- CoK: Learns the issues of power and where power resides, somewhat.- SoS: Goes on the conquering tour, slightly coerced by Jorah. She never holds a court, she only sets up/strategizes a few battles.- DwD: She attempts to rule a city, has to deal with a spreading sickness, has to deal with being sieged, has to deal with unseen traitors. Nowhere near the same issues to be quite frank. Dany is a ruler/leader in Meereen. Her attempts fail just as badly, for instance: her plot to marry Hizdahr fails to ensure complete peace, as Yunkai is simply waiting for Volantis/Qarth to arrive - and she is still conspired against. Also, her decision to keep the fled Yunkaii outside of the city proves partially futile as the Pale Mare gets into the city regardless. Some things can be said though: the formation of the Shavepates and the three companies (Mother's Men, Stalwart Shields, Free Brothers) haven't proven to be unproductive as of yet and are actually valuable assets to date. Oh and she doesn't get stabbed. The only thing that can be said is whether or not you find the Wall to be more central to the overall story or not. I've seen reactions of people calling Daenerys/Essos as being merely: "Stretching the series". I don't think that's true. The dragons do need to grow for god's sake...And then there's the thing about the characters.. Personally, I like the dynamic in Essos, the only trustworthy people seem to be Barristan, Belwas and Skahaz mo Kandaq and even that's quite a loose cannon.. Characters like Skahaz make that story for me - because he's so grey and we really don't know what he's playing longterm (Is he Essos' LittleFinger? He's playing Barristan like Petyr was playing Ned: Notably: The Goldcloaks listen to me/The Brazen beasts listen to me, and he's got the exact same motives: climbing the ladder), while Brown Ben Plumm is just as good as Tormund if not better. There's only so much fun you can have with a character that's constantly bragging about his cock I always say.. The only times I liked Tormund was when he was talking about his children.. I don't even think Val is a character, just a blow up sextoy in a tower with no personality depth. Likewise, Stannis is fun/interesting I agree, but you don't really get a lot of diversity from him from what you can expect. Mel's just like Skahaz though, very much a loose cannon and somebody you don't have a clear idea off about what they want eventually or what they're plotting. Both Jon and Dany's chapters were boring to me to be completely fair. I just don't like people one was worse then the other...Jon was making shit happen And Dany was being played like a fiddle Jon was digging a grave for himself with every step he took. Also, many of the steps he took proved fruitless and potentially harmful down the road. The whole Bastard Letter, probably wasn't even written by Ramsay another piece of probable evidence that Jon was played. Dany was also being played like a fiddle, just like Jon. Nah dude Perhaps, Jon did get played( fuck it breaks my heart) he was still getting things done in his chapters Dany was doing what, exactly?Getting played and still not doing anything. Not even making decisions reallythough Drogon saved her lasts chapters. thank god for dragons, right :cheers: Jon did stuff that eventually got him stabbed/set up everybody against him and imperilized the Watch.. Essentially working towards his own downfall while getting played.. It's like that Police song, "every step you take.. every move you make..every vow you break.. every claim you stake (I'll be watching you)".. It's like somebody *coughBowen/Stanniscough* is humming that when looking at Jon... Dany chapters vs. Jon chapters, my personal view: Other Characters:Dany: Lot of new people whose name difficult to pronounce. People whom I don't find interesting. People whose culture is totally new, and Dany's interaction with them is not the height of diplomacy. (What the hell was she thinking marrying Hizdar(?) zo Loraq, if she wanted to be the queen of westeros, she SHOULD NOT have married a slaver. Barristan told her as much. What happened to the cleverness that got entire Unsullied in SoS? She was tired, but why should she be shortsighted? Jon: More of people we already know. Stannis, Mel, Mance, Tormund, Ramsay : Naturally one is interested to know what happened to characters we already know than new characters from out-of-the-blue. Even when such a character appears, everyone liked her(Alys Karstark). Dany does not meet anyone whom we can form a firm opinion about, unless that opinion is 'can't trust this guy'. Storyline:Dany: I would not say nothing happens, because a lot of incidents do happen, but the problem is I don't care what happens to Meereen or sons of the harpy. I would be happy to read Dany eradicating Slavery from Essos, but she is not doing that either. She 'rules' Meereen in the worst way possible for a good person. First read of DwD, Dany POVs were so boring that I skipped most of her chapters till the Barristan chapters, then went back and read her chapters to learn more about this Harpy who seemed mysterious. Jon: Hell lot of action. Wars, peace-treaties, decision making, more decision making. And the best thing about Jon is he doesn't make a decision without questioning himself. He doesn't say 'what other choice do I have?' and yield to the pressure from other people.He always surprise us with bold choices. Except for the last chapter, he acts like a 'wise king'. He is ready to accept the consequences if his decisions backfired. Dany used to do the same till SoS, but everything she did in DwD except climbing on Drogon was meek. Character development: Dany goes from a brave queen to a meek one that let her enemies thwart her. Jon goes from a reluctant, confused boy commander to an assertive leader who makes hard life choices and is ready to live by them. Main problem with Dany chapters: I like Dany, and its so hard when she keeps on making bad to worse decisions those are bound to fail. How long can you mutter "this is wrong, this is wrong"? Uhh... What war happened at the wall in aDwD, may I ask? I can't argue around the whole "people we already know"-argument. People are bound to play favorites. However, in defense of the Meereenese characters, Stannis is one dimensional, Mance was only present for two chapters and then off to Winterfell, Tormund is such a bad character outside of combat. I mean he only talks about his cock, drinking beer and his children.. He's King Bob of the Wildlings. Ramsay is not at the Wall. What happened to Dany's cleverness that got her the Unsullied? That's simple.. A. As she said, she was tired.. But that's an excuse. She's apparently a capable conquerer, being able to make plots to unsettle stuff with ease. Keeping cities settled is a totally different matter and needs a different skillset. A skillset to appease over the longterm, her conquering skillset, didn't match that. And lets be honest, for Astapor she used her trust in her dragons loyalty to simply forego a deal, in Yunkai she fed parts of the enemy army drunk and attacked before the proposed battle and in Meereen she let Barristan and Jorah perform a suicide mission she had no hope of seeing being effective - as she wanted them dead, pretty much. That's the extent of her quick reasoning.. It's not as if those "victories" are enough to tell us she's an avid thinker or a genius tactician.. It's because she's not that it actually worked.. Also, I disliked Alys Karstark and I reckon the only reason people liked her was because she wasn't the Stark that Mel saw in the flames. Mel making mistakes = people liking it... If you can't pronounce a few names:- Ska'haz mo Kan'daq- Rez'nak mo Rez'nak- Hiz'dahr zo Lo'raq- Ga'lazze Ga'lare Then you have something to worry about quite frankly.. Were there really that many names that were important? No.. Not really.. I really liked the Meereen setting because there were many perspectives and POV's, something the Wall is very sadly lacking. It was all moody, broody Jon and a single Mel-chapter... The entire book. Oh, and one Sam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sj4iy Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 I really liked the Meereen setting because there were many perspectives and POV's, something the Wall is very sadly lacking. It was all moody, broody Jon and a single Mel-chapter... The entire book. Oh, and one Sam You have the right to enjoy Dany's POV more than Jon's...but the criticism that he was 'moody' or 'broody' makes absolutely no sense at all, otherwise you would have to admit that Dany was the same. And while there were various POVs in Mereen, that doesn't automatically make them more interesting...especially Quentyn Martell (which was just about the most pointless chapter in the entire series). On the other hand, I would point to Melisandre's POV being one of the most interesting in the series, because we finally see what she sees and find out more about the prophecies and visions. Jon is trying to work with everyone to make sure that the Wall is manned properly for the upcoming war with the Others. And it's precisely that which makes his chapters more interesting than Dany's: we, the readers, know that the war with the Others is what the entire series has been leading to, and Jon is the only POV in ADWD (other than Melisandre's) that has been addressing that. With Dany so far away in Mereen and not being involved at all in the workings of Westeros, it's hard to stay interested in what she is doing because it just feels superfluous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 Neither os better or more interesting than the other, because everyone has their own.opinions. I like Danys chapters more, others around here like Jon's more. There is really no sense trying to point out why each of us shpuld like the other more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sj4iy Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 Neither os better or more interesting than the other, because everyone has their own.opinions. I like Danys chapters more, others around here like Jon's more. There is really no sense trying to point out why each of us shpuld like the other more People may have their preferences, but I think it's perfectly fair to point out why they prefer one to the other. I thought that was the whole point of fan forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Oromus Locke Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 You have the right to enjoy Dany's POV more than Jon's...but the criticism that he was 'moody' or 'broody' makes absolutely no sense at all, otherwise you would have to admit that Dany was the same. And while there were various POVs in Mereen, that doesn't automatically make them more interesting...especially Quentyn Martell (which was just about the most pointless chapter in the entire series). On the other hand, I would point to Melisandre's POV being one of the most interesting in the series, because we finally see what she sees and find out more about the prophecies and visions.Jon is trying to work with everyone to make sure that the Wall is manned properly for the upcoming war with the Others. And it's precisely that which makes his chapters more interesting than Dany's: we, the readers, know that the war with the Others is what the entire series has been leading to, and Jon is the only POV in ADWD (other than Melisandre's) that has been addressing that. With Dany so far away in Mereen and not being involved at all in the workings of Westeros, it's hard to stay interested in what she is doing because it just feels superfluous. I don't think Dany wasn't moody or broody. What I did in the first part of my post was a more or less objective analysis of their acts, which basically come to the same conclusion: They tried to lead, but in long term planning, they both failed and most of their exploits have been portrayed to be mostly fruitless. I was defending Dany, but only to showcase that Jon and Dany's chapters had a similar progression/theme. I get what you're saying with the Wall. I really do, it's just not fair to think long term plan for Jon and not to think long term plan for Dany. It's another comparison that apparently gets overlooked. - Jon is building his forces at the Wall, at the end of aDwD he gets a pretty big set back: He dies.- Dany is building her forces at Meereen, at the end of aDwD she gets a pretty big set back: She presumably dies. As for what the series is leading to, there's still a bit of contention with respect to the chronology and lay out: Will the Others attack sweep the nation only to be halted by Dany and the dragons? Or will Dany invade Westeros and will the Others then attack? Dany is thinking of ways in which she can get Westeros behind her. What better way then killing the incoming invasion of ice zombies? You're saying Jon is more important to this story arc because he's right there at the Wall, where it is going to happen, but in truth, Dany is probably equally important to that same event. Yes, him and Mel are the only ones that critically address the issue with the Others, but it isn't as if we don't know that Dany won't take a part in it. In the second part, in which I call Jon's chapters broody and moody.. Well, that's the personal experience I had. I do however completely agree with the Mel chapter. Possibly one of the most interesting chapters. Personally, I find the Victarion, Theon and Barristan chapters very easy to read. People may have their preferences, but I think it's perfectly fair to point out why they prefer one to the other. I thought that was the whole point of fan forums. It is, but this thread is based on the idea that there's a very big difference between the development these characters go through - which would be the reason why the other is popular, while the other is nothing short of being hated.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Abominable SnowOther Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 Jon was digging a grave for himself with every step he took. Also, many of the steps he took proved fruitless and potentially harmful down the road. The whole Bastard Letter, probably wasn't even written by Ramsay another piece of probable evidence that Jon was played. Dany was also being played like a fiddle, just like Jon. ...And what's wrong with that? Most decision he made were at least his own, for good or bad, he was the one making the choices. I thought this was a "why are Jon's chapters more popular" thread. Seeing as how we can't answer that question I gave my reasons for why I liked him. Oh, and I don't think he was being played. though, he obviously reacted like an idiot to the letter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metopheles Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 He would have been played by Val and the Wildlings, but he was on their side anyway and completely biased, for the good though, and actually did all the things they wanted without even being played by them. He did nothing really for the Watch, but pleased Stannis and the Free Folk. I think it was the right thing, but it actually wasn't from his position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Abominable SnowOther Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 If you're taking the side of the Watch than yeah, i won't deny that. Though, I sill think the other NW members had stick up their butts because he totally was helping the Watch out. Jon pleasing The Mannis and the Fee Folk is a plus in my book. Dany was making all her enemies hate her more and more. She did have it way harder though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 If you're taking the side of the Watch than yeah, i won't deny that. Though, I sill think the other NW members had stick up their butts because he totally was helping the Watch out. Jon pleasing The Mannis and the Fee Folk is a plus in my book. Dany was making all her enemies hate her more and more. She did have it way harder thoughJon made his allies hate him more though :p I call that an achievement :lol:Funnily enough, I think both Jon and Dany were moved by compassion to help a group of peoples in a perilous situation (the Wildlings and the slaves) with no foresight for things such as how to feed them all. Only the good luck (:rolleyes:) of Tycho Nestoris showing up at the Wall gave Jon the means to feed the Wildlings by granting.him the gold to buy food. Even so, this relies on finding a market willing to sell him food.Dany has the same/similar issue, only nowhere to buy food (she does have the wealth though) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Abominable SnowOther Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 Jon made his allies hate him more though :P I call that an achievement :lol:Funnily enough, I think both Jon and Dany were moved by compassion to help a group of peoples in a perilous situation (the Wildlings and the slaves) with no foresight for things such as how to feed them all. Only the good luck ( :rolleyes:) of Tycho Nestoris showing up at the Wall gave Jon the means to feed the Wildlings by granting.him the gold to buy food. Even so, this relies on finding a market willing to sell him food.Dany has the same/similar issue, only nowhere to buy food (she does have the wealth though)pssh, get outta here :devil: nah, but on a serious note, there were only a couple. Granted these couple of men ceasar'd his ass. :rolleyes: The "Tycho rescue" shouldn't even count, he hasn't even done anything yet. What do you guys think would've happened if Tycho had shown up in Meereen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.