jons resurection and "salt and smoke"

[butterbumps!]

1) pretty much agree with you with the need of personality change... i just disagree with the need of resolving R+L before death.. it could be dealt by old-Jon before his resurrection ("in between" if you will).. therefore New jon shouln´t.

2) yes, he can be all sorts of kings, he could be both KitN and King of westeros. Still R+L=J gives him the best claim to the IT. I´m sure that is to be used at some point.

There is, IMO, no chance whatsoever that a consensus can be formed to allow a bastard (because of his bastardy) to rule the seven kingdoms.

Unless the tragic events to be unfold, destroy the feudal society. It´s just not realistic. If Jon is named king through consensus (a great council of sorts), he could be a candidate because his leadership during the Long Night 2.0, or/and his identity as a targaryen, nor because people want a bastard to change stuff. Nobles would never allow such thing.

3) No, i believe it foreshadowing as long as he lives a Second life... when is another matter . I just find the second life more likely now., since the opportunity is so clear.

but think about it, if jon will be king, or will be revealed as king (one could argue he already is king) before his death.. then the line works backwards. The line foreshadows his second life, because of his kingship.. not his kingship because the second life... of course that is not so atractive since the bond with Ghost is well established before his kingship, and so are his warging habilities. There is not much to forehadow in that sense.

4) "this beast/companion/friend/whatever is worthy of a king" is one thing... "a second life in this beast is worthy of a king", is another. one demands the second life, the other just by having the beast...

always if we assume it has foreshadowing value (we can´t really know what GRRM was thinking when he wrote that line).. it could also be as you say just a reference on power deconstruccion.

5) true. literally he needs to be king. What does it mean though? Jon is already king by right of birth and blood, unless aegon is legit... he could even already be crowned in the ToJ according to some theories..

1. You mean that Jon would be dead and his mind goes into Ghost, and while in Ghost, R+L is revealed, and that, as a wolf, Jon copes with this news, and comes to a resolution about it before Mel gives him the Last Kiss that jolts him back? So it would be like Harry at King's Cross Station, except that Harry would have been a stag during this incident, and would awake a new person afterwards who may or may not apply this apparent resolution to the question posed while in a state of death?

2. No, R+L really does not give him the best claim to the throne. Especially given that A. who's going to believe it, and B. who the hell is going to care? People don't really care whether the person with the right name sits the throne. This is why Stannis has had to fight for it, why Ren got that army, why the Tyrells married into the Lannisters.

No matter who takes the throne in the end, there will need to be some kind of consensus. What works in Jon's favor is that he rose to the LC as a compromise candidate; there is already precedent in Jon's arc to be seen as the best compromise out of more divisive choices. His bastardy-- at least in terms of renouncing ant specific House connection and taking the name Snow-- is that the balance of power isn't altered. That is, it's not putting any of the existing Houses into a position of superiority over the others. This is kind of what worked for the Targs as well-- they were a new family (not part of the extant major Houses) who took control. That concept would work for Jon as well. Not to mention that if Jon actually does something that benefits a large number of people-- whether helping to feed them (*cough* bank loan *cough*), managing to protect them against a greater threat or whatever else, then yes, people might actually choose to follow him, having decided that deeds are more important than a name. This is basically one of the major messages drilled into Jon's arc via Mance-- men follow the man, not the name, and so forth. So conceptually, yes, it all works.

And the nobles-- at least the old guard-- are all dying off. The Westeros we see now is not the same Westeros we saw at the start of aGoT. There are a lot of possibilities in terms of rewriting the status quo.

And for the record, I'm not hellbent on Jon's becoming king of the IT. But I am hellbent on the idea that if it happens, it won't be because of R+L, and that based on the world and change Martin's been building, he might actually have a shot of getting there as Jon Snow.

3. Well, you were just arguing that you don't think it will work that way in the event he survives the stabbing. That's why I said that. That last post was basically arguing that you see the second life thing as strong foreshadowing that Jon will die and go into Ghost due to the stabbing, but that you don't see it working that way if he survives this and dies later. Which I thought was highly selective.

And, no. If we're getting technical, that line works most clearly as foreshadowing if Jon becomes king, then dies and gets the second life "fit for a king." But I did also say that although I don't think it works as neatly, the outcome where Jon dies get the second life, and then become king isn't precluded. Like, I'm not sure if you understand that I'm not arguing against it as a possibility. I just think it's a less clean interpretation of that line.

I really don't understand your position on this other than you seem really hellbent on reading that line as foreshadowing that Jon dies, has a "second life fit for a king," and emerges in a 3rd life as a king.

I just don't see why-- if that line is truly foreshadowing-- it must be about this stabbing aftermath.

This might be a good time to take a minute to point something out. Do you realize that I'm not arguing against the possibility of Jon's literal resurrection? Do you realize that I'm not arguing that Jon's going into a second life and coming out of it via resurrection is impossible? I fully recognize it's a possibility. My interest in this topic is about the implications of that outcome. What this means for Jon and what it means for the story. I get the distinct feeling that those who argue in favor of Jon's literal death and resurrection at the end of DwD haven't actually thought through the implications of it, based on the various discussions about it I've been part of and read. I don't care if it's possible or not. I care what this resurrection outcome means for Jon and the story.

5. Jon is not already king by blood. Does your blood make you king or is there something more sophisticated in terms of being recognized as king, and given your power by man's beliefs? Jon's the son of the former Crown Prince. A new dynasty replaced them. Then that dynasty was usurped by the Lannisters, who tout the Baratheon name, but actually have Lannister blood. And Stannis is the "legit" heir according to the supposed inheritance laws, but no one wants him as king. Kingship is more than sitting a throne, and power is really an illusion. I think that might be a very significant takeaway for Jon's arc.

[sj4iy]

I guess they would fall back and fight against the Others in any way they could. I'm not arguing that there wouldn't be mass desertion at this point among the survivors, who wouldn't be many to being with.

The point is that a vow is to the gods, not to some Night's Watch authority that would be destroyed in your scenario.

And what are the gods going to do? Strike them down? They've never struck down any deserters before...the Lords of the Seven Kingdoms have done that. And if the Lords found out that the Wall had collapsed and the Night's Watch's castles were all destroyed, would they really punish them as deserting? I doubt it.

[Dr. Pepper]

there is no indication that such blade exists because our POV passes out (probably already dies).. but such blade would exist, or the betrayers would want it to exist, if Jon has no fatal wounds.. these people are not idiots. They know how to kill someone..

So yes, i´m assuming that once Jon passes out, (again, if he isn´t dead already) the betrayers will want to finish the job..

The same way you are assuming someone will save him in the last second, i´m assuming marsh will want to stab him one more time and be done with it..And the last options seems more reasonable (to me) with the information at hand. probably the fith blade isn´t even neccesary. since Jon was already facing the ground.

as ive shown before, feeling the cold, and not the pain, is consistent with Second life expierience. obviously Jon has the hability of such life, and reaches out to ghost before dying. So there is nothing unexpected with feeling cold but not the forth blade.

Ok, so, in your own words, Bowen Marsh is no idiot. This is of course the same man who has been described as an idiot by several characters. The same man who decided to attack the Lord Commander while he's surrounded by allies and a goddamn giant. Yeah, Ok.

I also assume the betrayers want to finish the job. What I'm not assuming is that there are logical reasons they would be prevented from finishing the job. The attack was only possible because of the chaos and because everyone was focused on the giant with the bloody doll in his hand. We've already had indication that the attack has been noticed. The men start screaming. I agree, there is nothing unexpected about feeling cold. It's fucking cold, he's also facedown in the snow, he's also been stabbed twice. I'm also not denying that Jon has the ability to continue in a second life or that he reaches out to ghost.

What I'm pointing out is the blindingly obvious. Bowen and co use the chaos to launch their attack, yet they are still surrounded by Jon's allies one of which is a giant who likes Jon. A giant who has just displayed some severe anger and who is actually facing the crowd and thus able to see what's happening. Bowen and co can't actually stab one more time if they've been stopped by Jon's allies who are all around him.

Varamyr: yet his chapter doesn´t end with his death..there is more than ellipsis.

.His story is fading, not ended. that is why the chapter doesn´t end with his death, and it shows us a bit of the second life..

BTw he is still varaymr, living in the body of a wolf, fading slowly to be fully replaced by the beast.

of course GRRM woulnd´t do that in Jon´s case.. therefore the ellipsis is well explained.

Why would there be ellipsis? His story is finished. He's dead. There's no ambiguity here. He's not still Varamyr. He's a wolf. A wolf is not a human. I'm sort of embarrassed that I have to explain this.

So, you are saying you only need the ellipsis when the chapter is the last of some character of some book? is that what you are claiming?

An ellipsis indicates an unfinished story, a to be continued. It does not indicate "this story is finished". I'm also embarrassed I have to explain this. A dead Jon is a finished story. Much the same way a dead Varamyr is a finished Varamyr story. Arya is not a comparable example because there's no ambiguity about it as we know right away that the bump on the head was a bump on the head. A closer example might be Brienne where she had to say a special word to determine her future and we don't find out until Dance which word she says. This ellipsis suggests that Jon's story continues. A resurrected Jon isn't Jon. Jon in a second life in Ghost isn't Jon.

My point here is that you see so sure that Jon is dead when the evidence is simply nowhere near conclusive and actually points towards the opposite. He's taken two stabs yet he's surrounded by allies who are screaming, one which includes a giant, and then chapter left off with a clear symbol that this character's story will continue.

read again what i meant.

And BTw, Jon is no king beyond the wall, he is lord commander of the crows historical enemies of wildings, and kneelers. he made peace with (some) wildlings, nothing more.

I've read what you meant. Try reading what other people are saying.

Ok, so it's probably not a good idea to get into it with you about Jon's relationship with the wildlings within this thread since it's off topic and I'm concerned you have skipped large portions of the text since you weren't aware that Arya lived beyond the knock to the head.

[LordToo-Fat-to-Sit-a-Horse]

1. You mean that Jon would be dead and his mind goes into Ghost, and while in Ghost, R+L is revealed, and that, as a wolf, Jon copes with this news, and comes to a resolution about it before Mel gives him the Last Kiss that jolts him back? So it would be like Harry at King's Cross Station, except that Harry would have been a stag during this incident, and would awake a new person afterwards who may or may not apply this apparent resolution to the question posed while in a state of death?

2. No, R+L really does not give him the best claim to the throne. Especially given that A. who's going to believe it, and B. who the hell is going to care? People don't really care whether the person with the right name sits the throne. This is why Stannis has had to fight for it, why Ren got that army, why the Tyrells married into the Lannisters.

No matter who takes the throne in the end, there will need to be some kind of consensus. What works in Jon's favor is that he rose to the LC as a compromise candidate; there is already precedent in Jon's arc to be seen as the best compromise out of more divisive choices. His bastardy-- at least in terms of renouncing ant specific House connection and taking the name Snow-- is that the balance of power isn't altered. That is, it's not putting any of the existing Houses into a position of superiority over the others. This is kind of what worked for the Targs as well-- they were a new family (not part of the extant major Houses) who took control. That concept would work for Jon as well. Not to mention that if Jon actually does something that benefits a large number of people-- whether helping to feed them (*cough* bank loan *cough*), managing to protect them against a greater threat or whatever else, then yes, people might actually choose to follow him, having decided that deeds are more important than a name. This is basically one of the major messages drilled into Jon's arc via Mance-- men follow the man, not the name, and so forth. So conceptually, yes, it all works.

And the nobles-- at least the old guard-- are all dying off. The Westeros we see now is not the same Westeros we saw at the start of aGoT. There are a lot of possibilities in terms of rewriting the status quo.

And for the record, I'm not hellbent on Jon's becoming king of the IT. But I am hellbent on the idea that if it happens, it won't be because of R+L, and that based on the world and change Martin's been building, he might actually have a shot of getting there as Jon Snow.

3. Well, you were just arguing that you don't think it will work that way in the event he survives the stabbing. That's why I said that. That last post was basically arguing that you see the second life thing as strong foreshadowing that Jon will die and go into Ghost due to the stabbing, but that you don't see it working that way if he survives this and dies later. Which I thought was highly selective.

And, no. If we're getting technical, that line works most clearly as foreshadowing if Jon becomes king, then dies and gets the second life "fit for a king." But I did also say that although I don't think it works as neatly, the outcome where Jon dies get the second life, and then become king isn't precluded. Like, I'm not sure if you understand that I'm not arguing against it as a possibility. I just think it's a less clean interpretation of that line.

I really don't understand your position on this other than you seem really hellbent on reading that line as foreshadowing that Jon dies, has a "second life fit for a king," and emerges in a 3rd life as a king.

I just don't see why-- if that line is truly foreshadowing-- it must be about this stabbing aftermath.

This might be a good time to take a minute to point something out. Do you realize that I'm not arguing against the possibility of Jon's literal resurrection? Do you realize that I'm not arguing that Jon's going into a second life and coming out of it via resurrection is impossible? I fully recognize it's a possibility. My interest in this topic is about the implications of that outcome. What this means for Jon and what it means for the story. I get the distinct feeling that those who argue in favor of Jon's literal death and resurrection at the end of DwD haven't actually thought through the implications of it, based on the various discussions about it I've been part of and read. I don't care if it's possible or not. I care what this resurrection outcome means for Jon and the story.

5. Jon is not already king by blood. Does your blood make you king or is there something more sophisticated in terms of being recognized as king, and given your power by man's beliefs? Jon's the son of the former Crown Prince. A new dynasty replaced them. Then that dynasty was usurped by the Lannisters, who tout the Baratheon name, but actually have Lannister blood. And Stannis is the "legit" heir according to the supposed inheritance laws, but no one wants him as king. Kingship is more than sitting a throne, and power is really an illusion. I think that might be a very significant takeaway for Jon's arc.

1) yes. Within the time that Jon is dead, second life whatever.. or just after death, or just before resurrection..

Haven´t seen, nor read the end of harry potter. I wouln´t know.

2) Wrong.

Claim is one thing. R+L=J gives him the best claim (if Faegon). whether he can press that claim, or not, is another thing. The claim has to do with succesion laws, not with real politks

3) Ok, that seems like fanfiction.

Certainly Wildings don´t care about names, but rather deeds.. Nobles of the seven kingdoms aren´t the same.

what worked for the targaryens, were dragons and comrpomise. Not being a new name.

what is the Old guard of nobility exaclty? how does the political system change so that nobility loses its power and the people choose a bastard king?

4) one last time:

a) if jon becomes king, and later dies going into his second life.. the line has no value in terms of foreshadowing, because his bond with ghost is explicitly known, and so are his warging habilities. There is nothing to foreshadow... the mystery is kingship here.. not the second life. And since foreshadowing means anticipating future events (or information for that matter), then pre-kingship second life, doesn´t have any value.

b) On the other hand, if jon dies , goes into his second life, is resurected and then becomes (or is revealed) as king, then line had a lot of value in terms of foreshadowing:

Ghost is a second life worthy of a king...if Jon goes into his second life, then he must be king (even if we don´t know it yet)

Yes, i understand that you believe in certain posibility. What it means for the story... as speculated by many, very important personality changes. i think there was a great post arround. i´ll look for it.

Otherwise, Meereenese blot had an essay on post death Jon.

and of course, for the bigger picture, it allows the fullflilment of the central prophecy of the story. Yolkboy´s theory is great on this issue.

4) Come on, be reasonable.. Are you saying that for foreshadowing purposes, a King should only be considered those who actaully have the power to rule the seven kingdoms?.. Since Robert´s death we haven´t had one of those..

Robert´s claim to the Iron Throne is quite uncertain. Conquest could replace the former dynasty. But since the targaryens weren´t exterminated, nor relinqueshed their claims, one could argue that conquest wasn´t "completed".

besides the baratheon had a numer of continuations and do seem to claim the IT for having targ blood.. so it´s really uncertain .

[butterbumps!]

1) yes. Within the time that Jon is dead, second life whatever.. or just after death, or just before resurrection..

Haven´t seen, nor read the end of harry potter. I wouln´t know.

2) Wrong.

Claim is one thing. R+L=J gives him the best claim (if Faegon). whether he can press that claim, or not, is another thing. The claim has to do with succesion laws, not with real politks

3) Ok, that seems like fanfiction.

Certainly Wildings don´t care about names, but rather deeds.. Nobles of the seven kingdoms aren´t the same.

what worked for the targaryens, were dragons and comrpomise. Not being a new name.

what is the Old guard of nobility exaclty? how does the political system change so that nobility loses its power and the people choose a bastard king?

4) one last time:

a) if jon becomes king, and later dies going into his second life.. the line has no value in terms of foreshadowing, because his bond with ghost is explicitly known, and so are his warging habilities. There is nothing to foreshadow... the mystery is kingship here.. not the second life. And since foreshadowing means anticipating future events (or information for that matter), then pre-kingship second life, doesn´t have any value.

B) On the other hand, if jon dies , goes into his second life, is resurected and then becomes (or is revealed) as king, then line had a lot of value in terms of foreshadowing:

Ghost is a second life worthy of a king...if Jon goes into his second life, then he must be king (even if we don´t know it yet)

Yes, i understand that you believe in certain posibility. What it means for the story... as speculated by many, very important personality changes. i think there was a great post arround. i´ll look for it.

Otherwise, Meereenese blot had an essay on post death Jon.

and of course, for the bigger picture, it allows the fullflilment of the central prophecy of the story. Yolkboy´s theory is great on this issue.

4) Come on, be reasonable.. Are you saying that for foreshadowing purposes, a King should only be considered those who actaully have the power to rule the seven kingdoms?.. Since Robert´s death we haven´t had one of those..

Robert´s claim to the Iron Throne is quite uncertain. Conquest could replace the former dynasty. But since the targaryens weren´t exterminated, nor relinqueshed their claims, one could argue that conquest wasn´t "completed".

besides the baratheon had a numer of continuations and do seem to claim the IT for having targ blood.. so it´s really uncertain .

1. Ok. This scenario sounds particularly ridiculous, but if that's how you see this working, then have at it.

2. No. I'm not wrong. Jon's "claim" is no better than Stannis' or Aegon's. I'm sorry, but that's how it is. Dany's claim is pretty good as well, being as how she's the only clearly identifiable Targ, and happens to have at least one dragon.

3. It's not fanfiction. Are you really telling me that you failed you note all these things that go against what's supposed to be the alleged status quo, that the status quo doesn't truly exist anymore, and how even in the non-wildling realm, people are following leaders for reasons other than their name or strict adherence to succession?

And yea, the Targs conquered with dragons and compromise. But the fact that they were a completely separate House from the others worked to their advantage and helped that compromise.

4. Ok, so for the last time: the capacity of foreshadowing remains the same either way. One way has it functioning as foreshadowing of Jon's becoming king after resurrection, the other foreshadows his living on in Ghost after becoming king.

And thanks, but I have no interest in the Mereenese Blot series. I saw enough to know I thoroughly disagree.

5. Be reasonable? What am I not being reasonable about exactly? Where are you getting that I'm saying a king should only be considering those with power to rule the 7 kingdoms (and adjacently, what does that sentence even mean?)

6. Yea, that's my point. It is completely uncertain who will be king. There is no such thing as the "true heir" in this series, and what makes someone "rightful" is being constantly addressed and deconstructed. And the series itself is set in a time of great social crisis and upheaval, to become even more uncertain when zombies start roaming, this new wave of claimants comes through, and god knows what else is coming.

[LordToo-Fat-to-Sit-a-Horse]

Ok, so, in your own words, Bowen Marsh is no idiot. This is of course the same man who has been described as an idiot by several characters. The same man who decided to attack the Lord Commander while he's surrounded by allies and a goddamn giant. Yeah, Ok.

he may be an idiot on many accounts, on many others he seems competent btw.. But i´m sure we can agree he knows how to kill.

He knows if any of those wounds will end Jon or not.

Btw, there is some foreshadowing that Marsh might get the upper hand out of this.

I also assume the betrayers want to finish the job. What I'm not assuming is that there are logical reasons they would be prevented from finishing the job. The attack was only possible because of the chaos and because everyone was focused on the giant with the bloody doll in his hand. We've already had indication that the attack has been noticed.

Actually you are assuming there are reasons that will prevent them from finishing the deed. That last second save, for which we have no evidence that will arrive in time..otherwise we will have to agree, jon will be killed after he losses consciosness.

I´m fine with that.. i just think it´s highly unlikely that someone will be able to stop all four betrayers (if not more) before they can give jon that last fatal wound that would take them (any of them) less than a second.

The men start screaming. I agree, there is nothing unexpected about feeling cold. It's fucking cold, he's also facedown in the snow, he's also been stabbed twice.

Neither scenario has any issue with the cold. As Varamyr shows.

What I'm pointing out is the blindingly obvious. Bowen and co use the chaos to launch their attack, yet they are still surrounded by Jon's allies one of which is a giant who likes Jon. A giant who has just displayed some severe anger and who is actually facing the crowd and thus able to see what's happening. Bowen and co can't actually stab one more time if they've been stopped by Jon's allies who are all around him.

again, yes, i have no problem with that. I´m sure many would like to save Jon. I just find it highly unlikely that anyone can, since Jon describes no one close to do so, and time is of the essence here.

Why would there be ellipsis? His story is finished. He's dead. There's no ambiguity here. He's not still Varamyr. He's a wolf. A wolf is not a human. I'm sort of embarrassed that I have to explain this.

GRRM disagrees with you. His story isn´t finish with death.. he actually has a couple of paragraphs more. Second lives apparently prolongs the character´s story.

Uncertain. Varamyr is still the narrator here. Second life is described as fading. Varamyr will be replaced by the beast in time, until there is more beast than Varamyr.

A wolf is not a human, but certain "human chatpters" include warging experiences. That is they describe dreams told from the view point of the beast.

Should GRRM separate them, and write chapters called "Ghost", "Nymeria"??

An ellipsis indicates an unfinished story, a to be continued. It does not indicate "this story is finished". I'm also embarrassed I have to explain this. A dead Jon is a finished story. Much the same way a dead Varamyr is a finished Varamyr story. Arya is not a comparable example because there's no ambiguity about it as we know right away that the bump on the head was a bump on the head. A closer example might be Brienne where she had to say a special word to determine her future and we don't find out until Dance which word she says. This ellipsis suggests that Jon's story continues. A resurrected Jon isn't Jon. Jon in a second life in Ghost isn't Jon.

again, death isn´t Varamyrs end of chapter.

Arya´s story is ambiguious untill you reach the next chapter.. same goes for jon.. whether he is resurected (and has Pov). only difference Jon´s chapter is his last of Adwd.

My point here is that you see so sure that Jon is dead when the evidence is simply nowhere near conclusive and actually points towards the opposite. He's taken two stabs yet he's surrounded by allies who are screaming, one which includes a giant, and then chapter left off with a clear symbol that this character's story will continue.

I´m not sure.. just an opinion.. chill out.

I've read what you meant. Try reading what other people are saying.

Ok, so it's probably not a good idea to get into it with you about Jon's relationship with the wildlings within this thread since it's off topic and I'm concerned you have skipped large portions of the text since you weren't aware that Arya lived beyond the knock to the head.

Well have you understood?

[sj4iy]

he may be an idiot on many accounts, on many others he seems competent btw.. But i´m sure we can agree he knows how to kill.

He knows if any of those wounds will end Jon or not.

If he knew how to "kill", he would have given Jon a fatal wound while Jon was completely distracted and unable to arm himself...not stab him with a dagger in the stomach, which could be hit or miss.

[LordToo-Fat-to-Sit-a-Horse]

1. Ok. This scenario sounds particularly ridiculous, but if that's how you see this working, then have at it.

2. No. I'm not wrong. Jon's "claim" is no better than Stannis' or Aegon's. I'm sorry, but that's how it is. Dany's claim is pretty good as well, being as how she's the only clearly identifiable Targ, and happens to have at least one dragon.

3. It's not fanfiction. Are you really telling me that you failed you note all these things that go against what's supposed to be the alleged status quo, that the status quo doesn't truly exist anymore, and how even in the non-wildling realm, people are following leaders for reasons other than their name or strict adherence to succession?

And yea, the Targs conquered with dragons and compromise. But the fact that they were a completely separate House from the others worked to their advantage and helped that compromise.

4. Ok, so for the last time: the capacity of foreshadowing remains the same either way. One way has it functioning as foreshadowing of Jon's becoming king after resurrection, the other foreshadows his living on in Ghost after becoming king.

And thanks, but I have no interest in the Mereenese Blot series. I saw enough to know I thoroughly disagree.

5. Be reasonable? What am I not being reasonable about exactly? Where are you getting that I'm saying a king should only be considering those with power to rule the 7 kingdoms (and adjacently, what does that sentence even mean?)

6. Yea, that's my point. It is completely uncertain who will be king. There is no such thing as the "true heir" in this series, and what makes someone "rightful" is being constantly addressed and deconstructed. And the series itself is set in a time of great social crisis and upheaval, to become even more uncertain when zombies start roaming, this new wave of claimants comes through, and god knows what else is coming.

2) Dragons are not law-enhancing elements. They are hard power.. Dany has more possibilities of pressing her claim.. which doens´t mean she has a "better" claim. Claims are laws.

3) Rebellions and war ar recurring in Westeros.. yet the seven kingdoms have always gone back to feudal society. even after the long night (actually the long night strenghned the feudal society).. even after the Dance of dragons..

tommen is king, claiming being son of Robert... Stannis is king, claiming being brother of Robert, (him not having trueborn sons), Euron is king, by kingsmoot..sounds reasonable since theon can´t reign.

Aegon will be king by a Targaryen claim.. so will Dany.. i don´t see any nobility status quo broken here.. just chaotic successions. The high sparrow won´t be king of westeros.

And yea, the Targs conquered with dragons and compromise. But the fact that they were a completely separate House from the others worked to their advantage and helped that compromise.

to same degree. it also was a disadvantage.. cultural differences for instance.

4) yeah i said that before, if Jon becomes king first.. then the line works backwards.. but since Second life in Ghost, shouln´t have much foreshadowing value,.. it doesn´t really work as well.. We all know Jon is a powerfull skinchanger.. we all know the concept behind Second Life,.. we all know jon´s bond with ghost..

So we all know Jon will have a second life... the real juicy mystery is Kingship..

5) i misunderstood i apologize, used another post.

your original comment was this:

ton is not already king by blood. Does your blood make you king or is there something more sophisticated in terms of being recognized as king, and given your power by man's beliefs?

yes, he doesn´t have that sophisticated thing in terms of recognition, nor the power by man´s belief.. yet.

what i meant with being reasonable when analysing foreshadowing.. is that even if a line needs kingship, and said character is not yet king (by those sophisticated requirments), the lines can still have value in anticipation.. for instance R+L=J, or KitN

so yes, a king should have that second life.. And Jon (unless crowned at birth and even if so, he isn´t really a king) is not yet king .. he only has his unknown claim.

So, if he has that second life, that could mean he has a future kingship..

6) it´s not the first time things like this happen.. Succession crisis will keep on happening as long as rulers fail to secure them correctly.

You are thinking a scenario in which nobility losses all power, and the people (am i understanding this right?) will choose by consensus a new king?

[LordToo-Fat-to-Sit-a-Horse]

If he knew how to "kill", he would have given Jon a fatal wound while Jon was completely distracted and unable to arm himself...not stab him with a dagger in the stomach, which could be hit or miss.

Killing a moving enemy is not as easy as it sounds, and requiers skill more than knowledge on fatal wounds.

[the conquering bastard 25]

...and what if he isn't actually a bastard?

Then that's just one more dimension of his character. I mean GRRM is setting Rheagar's two son's on two different specturm.

For Aegon he's the hidden prince that escaped the sack. He's come home to take back what was once his grandfather's. He's taken Storm's End a nigh impossible task, which by all accounts was a blood bath. Proving he's a true Targaryen living up to his family's motto of fire and blood. He's had the education to know that ruling is his duty, not his right. He's got the faith being set up to being on his side. He's got he instruction to make the new high sparrow eating out of his hand. A true scion of house Targaryen. While Jon on the other hand

He's been raised as the bastard son of Ned Stark, whom was a traitor not only the Targaryen's but also, to his friend Robert Baratheon. Then he joins the nights watch but like his adpative father he can't stick with his vows and broke them. With the thin cloak that he was under orders, also he killed one of his sworn brothers. It's already spread around that he's an oathbreaker, craven. I mean his reputation as far as Braavos has him colored as the Black Bastard of the Wall. So Jon already has a sinnister reputation. Now we the reader know differently but the world on the outside can only judge him on what they know about him. That he's sold the realm to the wildlings and was going to march an army against Winterfell and the crowns appointed Warden of the North. That's treason if anyone was paying attention. So it doesn't matter if he's trueborn or not he's got a tough battle on his reputaion already. So the only way that's going to get better is if the realm sees that he's trying to save the realm. Yet that's only going to happen if the realm comes together to fight the Others and the Long Night. Now if that happens and the realm sees just what a good guy he is they might change their opion.

Now the flip side of that is , that all that glitter isn't gold. So just because Aegon is looks like this shiny prince on the surface doesn't mean he's not tarnished around the edges. It seems to me that Aegon is a little arrogant, and is definitely testing his new found wings. Keeping Jon Connington waiting for half the day. The kicking of the board game when Tyrion provokes him. Aegon freezing up when faced with the stoneman. Jon faced his own dead man and acted without hesitation.

I don't think that GRRM is setting them up to be parallels without having another way of smashing that being trueborn makes you better. I mean even if the realm except that Jon is Rhaegar's doesn't mean that they are going to except that he and Lyanna were married so he could still have the Bastard mentality.

To draw from another parallel. LothR, Aragon is this really harden looking character when we first meet him, we are given this sinister impression of him. Only through reading the books do you find out that he's lived a hard life but he's a really decent guy. I get the feeling that Jon is similar. Only we are seeing the years that made Aragon seem like a harden man on the outside. IF that makes any sense.

[sj4iy]

Killing a moving enemy is not as easy as it sounds, and requiers skill more than knowledge on fatal wounds.

There's no indication that Jon is moving around when Bowen Marsh stabs him. In fact, he's fumbling with Longclaw when Marsh steps right in front of him...he could have killed Jon right then and there, yet he stabs him in the stomach.

[sj4iy]

Then that's just one more dimension of his character. I mean GRRM is setting Rheagar's two son's on two different specturm.

For Aegon he's the hidden prince that escaped the sack. He's come home to take back what was once his grandfather's. He's taken Storm's End a nigh impossible task, which by all accounts was a blood bath. Proving he's a true Targaryen living up to his family's motto of fire and blood. He's had the education to know that ruling is his duty, not his right. He's got the faith being set up to being on his side. He's got he instruction to make the new high sparrow eating out of his hand. A true scion of house Targaryen. While Jon on the other hand

He's been raised as the bastard son of Ned Stark, whom was a traitor not only the Targaryen's but also, to his friend Robert Baratheon. Then he joins the nights watch but like his adpative father he can't stick with his vows and broke them. With the thin cloak that he was under orders, also he killed one of his sworn brothers. It's already spread around that he's an oathbreaker, craven. I mean his reputation as far as Braavos has him colored as the Black Bastard of the Wall. So Jon already has a sinnister reputation. Now we the reader know differently but the world on the outside can only judge him on what they know about him. That he's sold the realm to the wildlings and was going to march an army against Winterfell and the crowns appointed Warden of the North. That's treason if anyone was paying attention. So it doesn't matter if he's trueborn or not he's got a tough battle on his reputaion already. So the only way that's going to get better is if the realm sees that he's trying to save the realm. Yet that's only going to happen if the realm comes together to fight the Others and the Long Night. Now if that happens and the realm sees just what a good guy he is they might change their opion.

Now the flip side of that is , that all that glitter isn't gold. So just because Aegon is looks like this shiny prince on the surface doesn't mean he's not tarnished around the edges. It seems to me that Aegon is a little arrogant, and is definitely testing his new found wings. Keeping Jon Connington waiting for half the day. The kicking of the board game when Tyrion provokes him. Aegon freezing up when faced with the stoneman. Jon faced his own dead man and acted without hesitation.

I don't think that GRRM is setting them up to be parallels without having another way of smashing that being trueborn makes you better. I mean even if the realm except that Jon is Rhaegar's doesn't mean that they are going to except that he and Lyanna were married so he could still have the Bastard mentality.

To draw from another parallel. LothR, Aragon is this really harden looking character when we first meet him, we are given this sinister impression of him. Only through reading the books do you find out that he's lived a hard life but he's a really decent guy. I get the feeling that Jon is similar. Only we are seeing the years that made Aragon seem like a harden man on the outside. IF that makes any sense.

I don't think that Jon's reputation is quite as tarnished as you make it out to be, though. Every time we hear about him on the "outside", it's more about how the son of Ned Stark has risen to LC of the Night's Watch. The realm isn't going to know anything about the internal politicking and Jon's spy mission amongst the Wildlings. And even if they had, there is proof that his warning kept the Wall from falling and the seven kingdoms safe from Wildlings.

If Jon's parents really were married, it seems inevitable that there would be some way to prove it to the world at large, because it would be pointless to even have in the story otherwise. I don't believe that Aegon is really Aegon, because it all seems too convenient and neat. But he would more readily be accepted as the King than Jon would at this point without a doubt.

[RumHam]

And what are the gods going to do? Strike them down? They've never struck down any deserters before...the Lords of the Seven Kingdoms have done that. And if the Lords found out that the Wall had collapsed and the Night's Watch's castles were all destroyed, would they really punish them as deserting? I doubt it.

I'm not arguing that gods are going to strike down deserters. I just took issue with the suggestion that the collapse of the wall would free Jon from his vows.

[butterbumps!]

2) Dragons are not law-enhancing elements. They are hard power.. Dany has more possibilities of pressing her claim.. which doens´t mean she has a "better" claim. Claims are laws.

3) Rebellions and war ar recurring in Westeros.. yet the seven kingdoms have always gone back to feudal society. even after the long night (actually the long night strenghned the feudal society).. even after the Dance of dragons..

tommen is king, claiming being son of Robert... Stannis is king, claiming being brother of Robert, (him not having trueborn sons), Euron is king, by kingsmoot..sounds reasonable since theon can´t reign.

Aegon will be king by a Targaryen claim.. so will Dany.. i don´t see any nobility status quo broken here.. just chaotic successions. The high sparrow won´t be king of westeros.

to same degree. it also was a disadvantage.. cultural differences for instance.

4) yeah i said that before, if Jon becomes king first.. then the line works backwards.. but since Second life in Ghost, shouln´t have much foreshadowing value,.. it doesn´t really work as well.. We all know Jon is a powerfull skinchanger.. we all know the concept behind Second Life,.. we all know jon´s bond with ghost..

So we all know Jon will have a second life... the real juicy mystery is Kingship..

5) i misunderstood i apologize, used another post.

your original comment was this:

yes, he doesn´t have that sophisticated thing in terms of recognition, nor the power by man´s belief.. yet.

what i meant with being reasonable when analysing foreshadowing.. is that even if a line needs kingship, and said character is not yet king (by those sophisticated requirments), the lines can still have value in anticipation.. for instance R+L=J, or KitN

so yes, a king should have that second life.. And Jon (unless crowned at birth) is not yet king .. he only has his unknown claim.

So, if he has that second life, that could mean he has a future kingship..

2. I wasn't referring to the dragons as weapons there. I was pointing out that she's the person people will easily believe is actually a Targ. She's the clearest Targ in the mix, which makes her claim as a Targ strong.

But actually, let's skip the rest of the point by point for a moment and address the heart of the issue.

I think I'm getting a clearer picture of what's going on here, based on how you're advocating for certain things. It seems like you believe the importance of R+L is that Jon will become king, and that this is really the point that's central to you.

But you seem to be working backwards from that conclusion-- that Jon Targ becomes king-- to fit the evidence. Like, it looks as though you really believe Jon has to become king, but can't see any way for that to happen, or for R+L to have significance, except by having Jon claim a Targ identity and use that to become king.

I'm not convinced that Jon will become king of the IT, but I can say with pretty strong conviction that the significance of R+L is not going to be what you, and I guess a lot of others, seem to believe it is. As in, R+L =/= "King Jon Targ." I think it works much differently in this story, which is not Return of the King. If Jon becomes King of the IT, it won't be because R+L got him there. We know this, because Martin's made a point of deconstructing the notion of a "true heir" in the timeframe of this story, as well as in the histories he's developed about this universe.

If you truly believe that Jon must become King, then there are ways set up that would allow him to take the throne as King Jon Snow. Like, this isn't fanfiction, but reading what's going on in the background of the main characters POVs, and between the lines of all the power struggles that have been occurring. Not only is this the most major civil crisis Westeros is facing, but this crisis is set during a zombie apocalypse, which you cannot deny will bring a cataclysmic shock to the system. It's like the Black Death on steroids in terms of catalyzing an interruption of the status quo.

Instead of assuming that this will work like Aragorn, maybe take another look at what's really going on in this story, the messages about power being sent, and reevaluate whether R+L= King Jon Targ even has meaning in this world Martin's set up. I think once you cross that barrier of questioning, these other channels for Jon Snow to become king start opening up. And King Jon Snow is still only one of many possible endgames for Jon.

[Mithras]

I don't think Jon died or will die. More likely, he is in a coma. He will be healed similar to Bran.

[Julia H.]

Looking for foreshadowing is great fun, but choosing any line as the one that the rest of the story hinges on is necessarily a subjective interpretation, and if we were all to choose such a line, we would probably choose very different ones. If you have a theory, you can probably find some kind of foreshadowing for it in five volumes of text. You can probably find foreshadowing for the opposite as well if you really want to.

Let's, face it: The stabbing scene is written in an open-ended, ambiguous way, and it is completely intentional on Martin's part. It is not spelt out that Jon is dead or that he will necessarily die, but nor is it spelt out that he is alive. Martin wanted us to have doubts, so I don't see any point in saying this or that is conclusive proof in either way.

From the … open ended last sentence, there are three possible ways to go in the next book:

1. 
   

   Jon is dead or at best living in Ghost as a wolf. End of story (well, Jon's story). Sure, he could rip apart Bowen Marsh and a couple of other people, but his human consciousness will gradually fade and then he will be just a big, strong white direwolf hunting for prey in the vicinity of Castle Black. He won't ever be the shield that guards the realms of men and he won't ever care who his real father is.

   
   

   I guess if Martin wanted that, it would have made for a very dramatic ending in Book 5 to explicitly say that this is happening. Book 5 started with Varamyr dying as a man and ending up forever in the body of a wolf, and the same book could have been finished by Jon explicitly doing the same. Martin, however, did not choose that.

   
   
   
2. 
   

   Jon literally dies but he gets resurrected somehow so he can walk and talk and act in the shape of a human. (It would still make for an interesting twist to let us know he is dead and then start the next volume with the resurrection.) We know from the book that resurrection has a cost, and it is more than just a dramatic change in personality. Death isn't just a really powerful experience that will affect the rest of your life, it is the end of something. (Actually even in LoTR, it is stressed very explicitly that death is the lot of humans. Gandalf can return because he is not human but one of the Maiar – I'm not even sure that he is really dead in the first place.) Only death can pay for a life. The magic we have seen in ASOIAF can only give back a semblance of life, where the personality in question loses all complexity, therefore these beings are not fully accountable for their choices any more, nor do they have any possibility of character growth.

   
   
   
   

   If you argue that Jon is freed from his vows because he dies – I know that is what the words say (“It's in the bloody vows, I swear 'tis.”) - I will argue that it means death severs his supposedly only ties in life, because a man of the Night's Watch has no family but his black brothers, no allegiance but to the Night's Watch, no purpose other than protecting the realm, no honour but what he owes the NW – I could go on. If death releases Jon from his vows, it also puts an end to all of the above, but it has never been said that death – or a mere semblance of life - can give him anything (like a new sense of responsibility or the ability to make a conscious choice or any true feelings besides the attitude dominating the new personality). We get essentially a new character – and Jon is dead.

   
   
   
   

   Now, a creature with very limited moral responsibility and a limited view of the complete picture, a creature with no ties and allegiance, one who possibly does not even need to eat and sleep - ending up on the IT? Would it be really where this story is going? It would be the next nightmare Westeros has. The only good thing coming out of this may be that the undead may not be able to start a dynasty at least.

   
   
   
3. 
   

   Jon survives the attack. (The way that final scene is set up absolutely makes it a possibility.) That means he remains human and alive, capable of feelings and moral decisions, capable of further change / development, he will continue to have the responsibility of living humans – and yes, the choice to keep or break his vows.

   
   
   
   

   Moral decisions are an integral part of Jon's character. If he is to become a greyer or darker character, it would be a waste to rob him of the moral responsibility for his future decisions, especially if those decisions are in sharp contrast to the ones he has made before. If he consciously decides to break his vows (and his ties with the NW), that will satisfy the criteria for a “greyer” character in my eyes, but it will also be a decision that has been “hanging” over his character arc all the time, therefore it will count as organic character development. Jon has also been reinterpreting the vow and the purpose of the NW for a long time. OTOH, his own personal life-purpose – to be the shield that guards the realms of men (of all men) –, which he found in front our eyes as a result of gradual character development, would be much more difficult to undo within a believable and organic character arc.

   
   
   

[north of the wall]

Jon wasn't killed, George himself has basically confirmed this. Also, "reborn" could mean alot of different things.

I agree. I think he is wounded, wargs ghost and stays in a coma while his body heals/is healed and learns the truth about his parentage from Bran(?) And thus is reborn as Jon Targ/stark rather than just waking from coma as Jon Snow.

(This may have already been said, sorry I only read the first page)

[Dr. Pepper]

he may be an idiot on many accounts, on many others he seems competent btw.. But i´m sure we can agree he knows how to kill.

He knows if any of those wounds will end Jon or not.

Btw, there is some foreshadowing that Marsh might get the upper hand out of this.

Lol, ok so we can plainly see that Marsh got the upper hand here. That upper hand ended up in Jon's belly. I'm sure Marsh knows how to kill but the fact is, he didn't deliver a fatal blow here. This despite the fact that he had the upper hand (chaos and everyone's eyes on the giant) and despite the fact that he had a clear shot to the target and didn't direct his shot to an immediately fatal area. When you're assassinating someone in plain sight and surrounding by allies of the target, you kinda need to do it right the first time, not leave your knife in the victim and hope you get a second shot.

Actually you are assuming there are reasons that will prevent them from finishing the deed. That last second save, for which we have no evidence that will arrive in time..otherwise we will have to agree, jon will be killed after he losses consciosness.

I´m fine with that.. i just think it´s highly unlikely that someone will be able to stop all four betrayers (if not more) before they can give jon that last fatal wound that would take them (any of them) less than a second.

Neither scenario has any issue with the cold. As Varamyr shows.

again, yes, i have no problem with that. I´m sure many would like to save Jon. I just find it highly unlikely that anyone can, since Jon describes no one close to do so, and time is of the essence here.

I'm not assuming anything. I'm pointing out what is explicitly in the text. Non-fatal blows, a giant facing the crowd who happens to be Jon's homeboy and is already very angry, and the men start screaming when Wick delivers the first nick. These are pretty legitimate reasons to conclude that Bowen is going to be prevented from trying again to kill Jon (since, you know, he didn't know how to do it the first, second or third time).

I don't know why you insist that Jon describes no one close to him. He's standing in front of a giant, he points out all of the people who pour out of the buildings to come see what's going on, he's directing people to back up and form a line, he's telling Leathers to talk to Wun Wun. There are clearly people all around him.

GRRM disagrees with you. His story isn´t finish with death.. he actually has a couple of paragraphs more. Second lives apparently prolongs the character´s story.

Uncertain. Varamyr is still the narrator here. Second life is described as fading. Varamyr will be replaced by the beast in time, until there is more beast than Varamyr.

A wolf is not a human, but certain "human chatpters" include warging experiences. That is they describe dreams told from the view point of the beast.

Should GRRM separate them, and write chapters called "Ghost", "Nymeria"??

again, death isn´t Varamyrs end of chapter.

Actually, I am agreeing with GRRM here.

That was his last thought as a man.

Varamyr is dead. Varamyr was at the top of his food chain, a high profile skinchanger, etc. Everything that made Varamyr who he was ceased to exist when he died. There's a small shadow of him that remains inside the wolf, but he will never be Varamyr again because he's dead.

There's no comparison to when Arya is warging or having wolf dreams because she's not dead. She still exists.

Well have you understood?

It's sort of hilarious that you are asking this, but I'll answer anyway. Yes, I understand that you are quite confused.

[LordToo-Fat-to-Sit-a-Horse]

Lol, ok so we can plainly see that Marsh got the upper hand here. That upper hand ended up in Jon's belly. I'm sure Marsh knows how to kill but the fact is, he didn't deliver a fatal blow here. This despite the fact that he had the upper hand (chaos and everyone's eyes on the giant) and despite the fact that he had a clear shot to the target and didn't direct his shot to an immediately fatal area. When you're assassinating someone in plain sight and surrounding by allies of the target, you kinda need to do it right the first time, not leave your knife in the victim and hope you get a second shot.

a) I meant after ides of Marsh.

b) You think he did not deliver the fatal blow..That´s far from sure.. with no maester, no healer available.. the belly stab, or the shoulder blade stab, both could potentially be fatal. never mind that last one

d) " When you're assassinating someone in plain sight and surrounding by allies of the target, you kinda need to do it right the first time, not leave your knife in the victim and hope you get a second shot."

actually you contradict yourself.. you apparently don´t need to do it the first time, since they could stab him twice after the first attack with no intervention, (nor sign of any inmidiate intervention by said allies).. We can safely assume they will get at least one chance more.

I'm not assuming anything. I'm pointing out what is explicitly in the text. Non-fatal blows, a giant facing the crowd who happens to be Jon's homeboy and is already very angry, and the men start screaming when Wick delivers the first nick.

Wrong, you are assuming non-fatal blows..

Jon can´t be rushed to a hospital to treat in injury that in real world is managable.. he gets wounded in potentially very serious places.

The giant himself is drunk (?), confused, wounded. You simply don´t know whats he is going to do.. even if he could do somehting before one last blow kills Jon (if he is not dead already)

These are pretty legitimate reasons to conclude that Bowen is going to be prevented from trying again to kill Jon (since, you know, he didn't know how to do it the first, second or third time).

I don't know why you insist that Jon describes no one close to him. He's standing in front of a giant, he points out all of the people who pour out of the buildings to come see what's going on, he's directing people to back up and form a line, he's telling Leathers to talk to Wun Wun. There are clearly people all around him.

there are "pretty" legitimate reasons to conclude someone will try (this being the key word here) to stop the four betrayers from delivering the final blade..

There are no legitimate reasons to conclude (this being the key word) that they will stop that final blow.. that is somethign you just asume, with no evidence to support it. (i´m fine with it, not critizincing, i simply don´t believe it myself because i find it unlikely)

Jon simply doesn´t see anyone in a position to do so.. there are people "around him", but that doesn´t mean, close enough to stop a knife.

Actually, I am agreeing with GRRM here.

That was his last thought as a man.

indeed. he dies, he leaves his body.. yet his chapter isn´t finished, and follows with a second life (somthing jon is definetly capable of).. now it´s pretty easy to understad why Grrm needs ellipsis to end jon´s chapter.. because normally, it wouln´t end there even if he were killed.

Varamyr is dead. Varamyr was at the top of his food chain, a high profile skinchanger, etc. Everything that made Varamyr who he was ceased to exist when he died. There's a small shadow of him that remains inside the wolf, but he will never be Varamyr again because he's dead.

I guess it depends on how small shadow remains.

When the man’s flesh dies, his spirit lives on inside the beast, but every day his memory fades, and the beast becomes a little less a warg, a little more a wolf, until nothing of the man is left and only the beast remains.”

of course, the warg becomes little less warg, and more beast each day.. memory fades.. and so on.. Varamyr spirit is still alive in moment 0 after death.

it will go on lossing parts of himself until nothing remains..

Exactly what GRRM needs to resurrect jon.

There's no comparison to when Arya is warging or having wolf dreams because she's not dead. She still exists.

yet she left her body, and the one telling the story is Nymeria.. again, if Varamyr in moment 0 isn´t varaymr as you point out..

Shouln´t GRRm make chapters separetad for wolf dreams?

It's sort of hilarious that you are asking this, but I'll answer anyway. Yes, I understand that you are quite confused.

you haven´t.. read again.

[Dr. Pepper]

<snip>

Ok, so it's incredibly clear that you aren't interested in actually examining what the text actually says nor reading what others have written and prefer to make shit up as you go along.

You're missing the point, plain and simple. All I have been saying is that Jon's death is far from conclusive. You seem to be trying to say that Jon's death is a foregone conclusion. I'm not arguing that Jon's death is an impossible outcome. I'm arguing that it's not the only outcome, which seems to be what you believe which actually requires ignoring the text or making shit up to get there. I'm not sure if there's any point in continuing this further