The Fandom's meaning of "Foreshadowing"

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

No, we don't. For it to be foreshadowing we would have to know that GRRM placed that clue on purpose.

I'd be honestly pretty shocked if GRRM didn't know exactly where Slynt's story would go, considering that the original series was much shorter and there's already other things in the first book that also popped up much later. I don't believe GRRM writes anything other than "on purpose," because the opposite just doesn't make any sense (how do you "accidentally" write something like that?). It's not just that Slynt is killed, he's done so by a specific method, specifically by the guy (or one of the guys) who's presented unambiguously as heroic.

So sorry, I'm not buying that that line was anything but deliberate, unless and until GRRM clarifies otherwise.

[Mladen]

This is especially odd - people arguing that GRRM is writing about the background/history of Westeros in order to tell us exactly what would happen to the main characters in the present in the future books. I mean, really? Why would he even do that and spoil every surprise? And then the logic goes: "History will repeat in the sense that characters from the same house and with the same name will do the exact things and have the same things happen to them as other, completely different characters with the same name and/or from the same house". The two particularly silly examples that come to mind are 1) the idea that the existence of an "Arya Flint" in the Stark family tree and the tale of Danny Flint "foreshadow" Arya being murdered in a similar way, and 2) the idea that Aegon "Targaryen" will leave Arianne and have a romance with Sansa just because they have the same last names (or supposedly so) as Rhaegar, Elia and Lyanna. *facepalm* Sansa/Aegon, for instance, seems to be something that some people decided they wanted to happen (because they still think of Sansa as AGOT Sansa who's desperate to marry a pretty prince and be a queen) so they find the most convoluted things that are supposedly "foreshadowing" - like the above mentioned fact that a Targaryen once ran off with a Stark, or that there was some highborn girl who was the defending QOLAB at the tourney at Hedge Knight (who was plain-looking according to Dunk who was more interested in Tanselle...) who had tourney champions from families like Baratheon, Hardying, Targaryen and I can't remember who else, and that's supposedly "foreshadowing" that Aegon would be Sansa's suitor... and then someone took it from there and claimed that Sansa/Aegon will happen because "there is a lot of foreshadowing for it". Uh, OK.

That's like thinking that Daenerys would marry Quentyn because of a princess Daenerys Targaryen who married a Martell some 150 years ago. Much more straightforward foreshadowing, eh? But we know how that turned out.

Well, I don't tend to think about this black and white. Simply, there is a reason for looking in the past and seeing some parallels, in a way that Rodrick Harlow suggests about history wheel. However, I agree with you that it doesn't mean literal parallels or the same cases. There are lines to everything. For instance the fact that there were two females leading Vale in the important historical moments make me consider that Sansa might be Lady of the Vale or have some power there. Naturally, I wouldn't put my hand into a fire for that, and I leave space to be wrong but there are parallels we can draw with the past events. Which is the point of the Reader's line after all.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

I have seen people go so far as to say tPatQ was only released because George was writing the events of the "second Dance" in Winds...

Well, mostly of the argumentation of Aegon being a BF comes from D&E. "Why would George release them if he didn't want us to think about the Blackfyres?".

[Lewton]

I'd be honestly pretty shocked if GRRM didn't know exactly where Slynt's story would go, considering that the original series was much shorter and there's already other things in the first book that also popped up much later. I don't believe GRRM writes anything other than "on purpose," because the opposite just doesn't make any sense (how do you "accidentally" write something like that?). It's not just that Slynt is killed, he's done so by a specific method, specifically by the guy (or one of the guys) who's presented unambiguously as heroic.

So sorry, I'm not buying that that line was anything but deliberate, unless and until GRRM clarifies otherwise.

I'm not sure is the story true, but I've seen it mentioned that Slynt was hanged in the original ADWD chapters and when Martin read it at a convention someone shouted Jon should behead him, and Martin agreed.

[Alayne's Shadow.]

I'd be honestly pretty shocked if GRRM didn't know exactly where Slynt's story would go, considering that the original series was much shorter and there's already other things in the first book that also popped up much later. I don't believe GRRM writes anything other than "on purpose," because the opposite just doesn't make any sense (how do you "accidentally" write something like that?). It's not just that Slynt is killed, he's done so by a specific method, specifically by the guy (or one of the guys) who's presented unambiguously as heroic.

So sorry, I'm not buying that that line was anything but deliberate, unless and until GRRM clarifies otherwise.

Apparently that wasn't the original version, but rather a change made in agreement with fans during one of his early readings of Dance, so It wouldn't classify as a foreshadowing.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

Jon says, 'Take him to the wall.' He thinks, 'I could send him away somewhere else, but if I send him to east watch, he'll come back to cause trouble.'

'Take him to the wall,' Jon says, 'and hang him.'

Slynt freaks, yelling, struggling, kicking as they throw him into the cage and start lifting. 'I have friends, if Tywin Lannister were alive you would never...' His voice fades away as he is lifted to the top. The rope they found was a hundred feet long but the wall is seven hundred feet tall. They hear his neck crack as he hits the end of the rope.

Jon glances back at Stannis. Stannis nods, then turns and goes back inside.

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/27418-pre-adwd-spoilers-jon-3-but-actually-jon-1/

[Mithras]

I don't agree that the context matters much when it comes to foreshadowing. Otherwise, we would not have such things:

The avarice of Craghas Crabfeeder and his partners in conquest soon turned feelings against them, however; the toll was raised again, and yet again, soon becoming so ruinous that merchants who had once paid gladly now sought to slip past the galleys of the Triarchy as once they had the pirates. Drahar and his Lysene and Tyroshi coadmirals seemed to be vying with each other to see who could demonstrate the greatest avarice. The Lyseni became especially loathed, for they claimed more than coin from passing ships, taking off women, girls, and comely young boys to serve in their pleasure gardens and pillow houses. (Amongst those thus enslaved was Lady Johanna Swann, a fifteen-year-old niece of the Lord of Stonehelm. When her infamously niggardly uncle refused to pay the ransom, she was sold to a pillow house, where she rose to become the celebrated courtesan known as the Black Swan, and ruler of Lys in all but name. Alas, her tale, however fascinating, has no bearing upon our present history).

This passage between the parenthesis does not belong to this story, even Gyldayn told that much. But GRRM put it there for some purpose.

[Annara Snow]

I don't agree that the context matters much when it comes to foreshadowing. Otherwise, we would not have such things:

The avarice of Craghas Crabfeeder and his partners in conquest soon turned feelings against them, however; the toll was raised again, and yet again, soon becoming so ruinous that merchants who had once paid gladly now sought to slip past the galleys of the Triarchy as once they had the pirates. Drahar and his Lysene and Tyroshi coadmirals seemed to be vying with each other to see who could demonstrate the greatest avarice. The Lyseni became especially loathed, for they claimed more than coin from passing ships, taking off women, girls, and comely young boys to serve in their pleasure gardens and pillow houses. (Amongst those thus enslaved was Lady Johanna Swann, a fifteen-year-old niece of the Lord of Stonehelm. When her infamously niggardly uncle refused to pay the ransom, she was sold to a pillow house, where she rose to become the celebrated courtesan known as the Black Swan, and ruler of Lys in all but name. Alas, her tale, however fascinating, has no bearing upon our present history).

This passage between the parenthesis does not belong to this story, even Gyldayn told that much. But GRRM put it there for some purpose.

That's less likely to be foreshadowing of anything, and more likely to be information GRRM put there so he could connect it to the info we get in the main series or Dunk & Egg and add background to some characters we meet in the present. We'll probably hear about the Black Swan at some point in the series again. And the reason it seems likely we will hear more about her is that GRRM put that information there even though it had no bearing on the story he was telling there.

But that has nothing to do with foreshadowing. If one of the major characters goes Essos and becomes a famous courtesan, that could be seen as foreshadowing. Until then (and I doubt anything like that is going to happen)... no, it's not.

[Ser Creighton]

Well, mostly of the argumentation of Aegon being a BF comes from D&E. "Why would George release them if he didn't want us to think about the Blackfyres?".

Well you got Summerhall, Egg, the prophecy, Bloodraven, and the Blackfyres, though the books do not overly focus on them. The history of House Targaryen which is a central theme. Generally they giv us all kinds of clues about various different things relating to the main series plus they are a good read. It also ties into Martins belief in world building. There is also the philosophy of you will take out of something what you want to take out of it. Martin plays with that, at least I think he does. I think he likes people making assumptions and even likes to guid them into making assumption, just so he can tell you not to assume.

[butterbumps!]

I don't agree that the context matters much when it comes to foreshadowing. Otherwise, we would not have such things:

The avarice of Craghas Crabfeeder and his partners in conquest soon turned feelings against them, however; the toll was raised again, and yet again, soon becoming so ruinous that merchants who had once paid gladly now sought to slip past the galleys of the Triarchy as once they had the pirates. Drahar and his Lysene and Tyroshi coadmirals seemed to be vying with each other to see who could demonstrate the greatest avarice. The Lyseni became especially loathed, for they claimed more than coin from passing ships, taking off women, girls, and comely young boys to serve in their pleasure gardens and pillow houses. (Amongst those thus enslaved was Lady Johanna Swann, a fifteen-year-old niece of the Lord of Stonehelm. When her infamously niggardly uncle refused to pay the ransom, she was sold to a pillow house, where she rose to become the celebrated courtesan known as the Black Swan, and ruler of Lys in all but name. Alas, her tale, however fascinating, has no bearing upon our present history).

This passage between the parenthesis does not belong to this story, even Gyldayn told that much. But GRRM put it there for some purpose.

What do you think those of us who brought up "context" mean when we use that term? Predictions that are based entirely on passages being called "foreshadowing" while disregarding the narrative are basically reading tea leaves, and not very strong indications of how the story will develop. Predictions that are based in contextual arguments-- character analysis and so forth-- with attention to the narrative have more weight behind them, and probably more consistently predictive value.

[Mithras]

What do you think those of us who brought up "context" mean when we use that term? Predictions that are based entirely on passages being called "foreshadowing" while disregarding the narrative are basically reading tea leaves, and not very strong indications of how the story will develop. Predictions that are based in contextual arguments-- character analysis and so forth-- with attention to the narrative have more weight behind them.

Completely disagree.

[Annara Snow]

Completely disagree.

So, what do you think this particular passage is foreshadowing?

[Mithras]

So, what do you think this particular passage is foreshadowing?

First you tell me why Gyldayn wrote such a thing in his history book :)

[butterbumps!]

Completely disagree.

You believe that you can accurately predict the future of the story by locating certain passages, declaring them "foreshadowing," and drawing conclusions from that, while completely disregarding the narrative and character analysis? And that these predictions made through "foreshadowing" is as good as, or even a superior, way of predicting the future than by actually studying the narrative and characters?

First you tell me why Gyldayn wrote such a thing in his history book :)

She already did.

[bemused]

Just to go back to the Sansa/Slynt thing for a moment... I'm sort of with Apple here (I think ?).It seems to me that at the very least GRRM revisited Sansa's earlier thoughts before writing the final version of Slynt's demise .He may have still been mentally tinkering with a couple of options at the time of the reading. ( If I'm not mistaken he's already warned us that the " Mercy " chapter from TWoW may not appear in exactly the same form in the book ?)

I mean, "throw him down" - Slynt's legs had to be kicked out from under him .. yet being pushed off the wall at the end of a rope might qualify as throwing down, as well. It still would have resonated with Sansa's thoughts for the reader .. and the particular use of the word "hero" stands out to me. I'd be more inclined to imagine Sansa using something like "true knight" ( chivalrous terms more than epic - whereas Bran would definitely think in epic terms rather than chivalrous).

So while you can't call it precise foreshadowing considering when the Sansa part was written, and the change in how the scene played out in the book, I think there's still an intentional compatibility. .. a sense of two things that fit together that I have to think is pre-planned. ( particularly hero=Jon , when Sansa has not been wont to think of Jon as a hero) .That GRRM only finalised how to tie them together later, doesn't diminish the intent for me.

ETA: Just for clarity ..If he puts thoughts in a character's mind intending to tie that in his later writing to future events .. either vaguely or explicitly..can it be called a coincidence?

[three-eyed monkey]

ETA: Just for clarity ..If he puts thoughts in a character's mind intending to tie that in his later writing to future events .. either vaguely or explicitly..can it be called a coincidence?

I agree completely. Some people don't realise that using foreshadowing, or any such device, takes work. You'd be one lucky writer if such things fell into place by coincidence. As BUTTERS said, writing is a craft. It's not a lottery.

[Lord Varys]

Paper Weaver,

there is a very good chance that the Gyldayn quote about the Black Swan was put in TRP - it's not unlikely that her story will be told in 'Fire and Blood' (if Lys and the Triarchy play an important role later on in the history of Westeros).

From what I know about the Dance, we should more try to imagine it as another version the War of the Five Kings - Rhaenyra as a successful Stannis, Aemond as Joffrey leading the City Watch into battle in the Riverlands, Dalton Greyjoy as a Balon who attacks the Lannisters, the Riverlords slaughtering the Westermen on their lands instead of being killed by them, etc., not as a blueprint for the Second Dance.

The Hightowers of the Dance are essentially the Lannisters/Tyrells during the War of the Five Kings, and it is very unlikely that the present day Hightowers will declare for Aegon or be able to help his cause at all. If they come to the fore militarily, it will be at a later point of the series, when Dany arrives in Westeros, not right now when the Ironborn threat forces them to keep their swords close at home. I think we can deduce such a thing easily enough due to the fact that Samwell will spent some time in Oldtown, and that his cabal believing that Dany is the savior will successfully prevent that Lord Leyton declares for King Aegon VI.