Jon, dead or alive. What’s best storywise?

[sj4iy]

I think that Jon's parents story has not been building up so much in the last couple of books. Everybody knows that it's going to be huge in the long term, because GRRM has said so, and because the theories in the forums. But I really don't thing there had been so many references to that particular plot point in the last few books. In a saga in which we have plenty of red herrings and macguffins that never fully get resolved, by the way.

...there was an absolute ton of foreshadowing in ADWD. It's been building.

[Lord Bowie]

It's the same kind of useless feeling we get when Robb and Cat die though.

Robb died without ever making it to the South. Cat died without ever seeing her daughters again. Ned died without revealing the truth about the Lannisters. Maester Aemon died before ever making it to the Citadel or Daenerys. Daenerys will probably die before ever reaching Westeros. It's a Song of Ice and Failures where all our expectations die on the page.

Exactly! People keep saying that killing Jon in this fashion would be bad writing, but only because we don't know for sure how everyone's arcs and stories are going to be. He was (though I still think he's a bore) very important for a lot of people AND for the plot. As Lord Commander he did make a lot of choices, good ones, and saved a lot of lives even if people forget his actions (most people tend to see Jon as a prophecy to be fulfilled or a lost Targ to claim a throne instead of a human being with choices and consequences).

Well, I for one am part of the minority such as the OP who would like Jon to die. But I know that's not going to happen. I'm not even sure if he's just hurt and will not need to be resurrected. I truly hope that his lineage is important for the plot, because if is just to please a curiosity then he's better off dead.

[sj4iy]

R+L=J can be a benchtest of how closely people paid attention without actually giving in to the secret parentage fantasy trope.

...yes, because that's all R+L=J is...people really wanting a secret parentage fantasy trope and not the author inserting one himself from the very beginning.

[Kikajon]

I wouldn't see anything wrong with Jon just surviving the attack. He wouldn't be the first king/comnander/president/emperor to survive an killing attempt (lacking the correct word)...

contrariwise I wouldn't like to see dome black or white magic involved.

He had it coming bur as far as we know it was an attempt to kill him, from his POV we see he faints away, we can argue than that he is dead of fainted and for the wounds we do not know how bad the are

.

just my opinion of course

[Forelver]

If Jon is dead we miss the reveal to him of his parentage, a possible reunion with Arya, and it also weakens the suspense of who AA is since it takes away a strong contender. So for me, the story is better if he lives.

[Big Daddy]

Narratively, why would you make readers wait several years to tell them a character died in a cliffhanger from the last book? Oh that huge nailbiter we left you on back in 2011? Oh, never mind, he died. Talk about wasting the readers' personal investment. If you can't see how that works, don't quit your day job because you'd never make it as a writer.

What's best for the story is, and always was, for Jon to be alive in the next book. While I'm not big on characters dying and coming back, I think this is supposed to be a pivotal moment for Jon's character. I think he's coming back by the end of TWOW, and will be very much changed. The foreshadowing was hammered into us a few times with they 'kill the boy and let the man be born' advice from Aemon that Jon mulls over in his head a few times.

Martin likes to move the pieces around the board every book and put characters on a new course or location. Jon has always been at or around the wall. I think this is all prelude to a change in that status quo. Martin can do it however he likes; have Jon spend a few chapters roaming as Ghost and then pulled back into his body as it's about to be burned, give him his Dany and her dragons moment, yadda yadda yadda. However he does it isn't the point, the point is, Jon goes from a boy to a man internally, and externally he leaves the wall with a new mission.

[Red Wedding Cake]

...yes, because that's all R+L=J is...people really wanting a secret parentage fantasy trope and not the author inserting one himself from the very beginning.

No doubt GRRM highlighted the mystery of Jon's parents and hints of R+L=J throughout the series. He also has a willingness to throw away character's efforts at a moments notice.

Keeping Jon alive is the best course for the series. It'll feel like it's taking something away from a Dance with Dragons. It's difficult to imagine what the next book would be like without Jon with so many hanging threads and GRRM's own statements in interviews. If DWD suffers for it so be it.

[Cilldara]

Dead or alive, I don't really mind. Just so long as he not UnJon. We've enough zombies running around.

[Ingelheim]

Alive.

[UnmaskedLurker]

Exactly! People keep saying that killing Jon in this fashion would be bad writing, but only because we don't know for sure how everyone's arcs and stories are going to be. He was (though I still think he's a bore) very important for a lot of people AND for the plot. As Lord Commander he did make a lot of choices, good ones, and saved a lot of lives even if people forget his actions (most people tend to see Jon as a prophecy to be fulfilled or a lost Targ to claim a throne instead of a human being with choices and consequences).

Well, I for one am part of the minority such as the OP who would like Jon to die. But I know that's not going to happen. I'm not even sure if he's just hurt and will not need to be resurrected. I truly hope that his lineage is important for the plot, because if is just to please a curiosity then he's better off dead.

Aside from whether it would be "bad writing" it is not the writing that GRRM is doing. GRRM has stated that when he gives clear clues regarding a mystery, he stays consistent with the clues--he gave the example that if all the clues say the butler did it, if at the last minute you decide to make it the chamber maid then essentially you "lied" to the readers. GRRM has given too many clues that Jon is critical to the endgame. GRRM has stated that Jon's parentage is important--the text has given many clues that Jon is TPTWP and AAR. If in the end, GRRM just goes--"tricked you, none of this matters and all these clues were red herrings," then GRRM will have "lied" to the reader in a way that he has indicated he does not do. The deaths that have happened so far have been important to drive the narrative forward. Other than "shock value" and supposed "payoff" for DwD, I am hard pressed to see how Jon's death would push the narrative forward. GRRM would have had to have written a very different story to that point for the death of Jon to work narratively. Thus, not only do I believe Jon will be alive (at some point by the end of WoW), but I believe that the story written by GRRM to this point only works if Jon is alive.

[sj4iy]

Aside from whether it would be "bad writing" it is not the writing that GRRM is doing. GRRM has stated that when he gives clear clues regarding a mystery, he stays consistent with the clues--he gave the example that if all the clues say the butler did it, if at the last minute you decide to make it the chamber maid then essentially you "lied" to the readers. GRRM has given too many clues that Jon is critical to the endgame. GRRM has stated that Jon's parentage is important--the text has given many clues that Jon is TPTWP and AAR. If in the end, GRRM just goes--"tricked you, none of this matters and all these clues were red herrings," then GRRM will have "lied" to the reader in a way that he has indicated he does not do. The deaths that have happened so far have been important to drive the narrative forward. Other than "shock value" and supposed "payoff" for DwD, I am hard pressed to see how Jon's death would push the narrative forward. GRRM would have had to have written a very different story to that point for the death of Jon to work narratively. Thus, not only do I believe Jon will be alive (at some point by the end of WoW), but I believe that the story written by GRRM to this point only works if Jon is alive.

This. It's not about whether Martin can trick us...of course he can. It's about whether or not he has built up his story to sustain losing such an important character. I don't believe he has.

[Toshio.Keepiru]

I think that given Varamyr's prologue where it is revealed that some skinchangers escape into their animals and Varamyr's estimate of Jon as a natural and strong, if untrained and in denial, warg: it is a strong possibility that Jon resides in Ghost for a while.

Given that Jon appears to be a character that fits too much into fantasy tropes for some people's liking given the R+L=J theory/hypothesis and hit general story arc.

My crackpot theory is that Jon survives but is changed by Ghost (especially if it is more than a crackpot theory that the wolves were placed their by old gods for the Stark children to find) and emerges a bit more feral, a stronger warg with a better sense of people's intention's. Perhaps a bit more prone to berserking.

As for whether he lives past the climax? I don't think so. I expect him to make it to the climax and that his warging ability will play a role in ending the threat of the Others at the cost of his life.

[Lion Of The Night]

This. It's not about whether Martin Cavan trick us...of course he can. It's about whether or not he has built up his story to sustain losing such an important character. I don't believe he has.

If he wants to GRRM could progressively kill off all his major characters one by one and introduce in the very last paragraph the character that "wins" the game of thrones. In my opinion, thats bad writing. Why introduce characters, make us involved in them to kill them off? It does bring in drama, and shock. By to do it to many of your characters is anti climatic. We had the shock of Ned being killed, and then the shock of Robb getting killed. We had the shock of Cat being killed, followed by the shock of her being raised into LS. Main characters dying off is subject to diminishing returns.

[Gibzit]

if jon gets ressed without consequense i will be hugely dissapointed because that will throw away the "death means something" that ASOIAF had goin for it, i mean really would ASOIAF really have a TV show and such a huge following without the meaningfull but logical main character deaths weve had time and time again? I hate r'hlorr in general, from shadowbabies to resurection it allways seemed very convinenient (like how renly died)

[Noelle Snow]

Why are people assuming he's dead? Tyrion "died" in the Rhoyne yet there he was a couple of chapters later. Bran was thrown from a window to his death yet is chillin' in a cave with a 120 year old tree dude. The last we saw of Jaime in ACOK he had a sword pointed at his throat by a woman who blamed him for the death of her husband. Yet Jaime is running around the Riverlands with his BFF Brienne.

There's plenty of examples of fake-outs for characters dying right along with actual character deaths. Do all those fake outs mean death has no consequence? No. They are near death experiences. "There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead" - The Princess Bride

That ending chapter for Jon in no way indicated that he was dead or dying. Not dead = no resurrection needed. I would buy injured and comatose over dead.

[Dya of Oldstones]

Alive is much better, and with the cliffhanger, I think he could get an extra push of adrenaline and fight his way through. I would rather not see him either dead or coming back as unJon either...like other posters have mentioned, we have too many undead zombies running around, and resurrection causes one to come back being less of who they were when still alive.

I could also accept him being seriously injured enough to warg into Ghost for a bit, in order to develop his skills like Bran had to.

[Pod The Impaler]

Jon’s arc in A Dance With Dragons ends with him being stabbed by his Night Watch companions. There has been plenty of speculation about whether he’s going to survive it or not. Well, my question is not “is Jon dead or alive?” but “what’s best for the story?”

Alive is far better than dead.

Dead may be better than UnAlive / resurrected by R'Hillor.

[donald*rain]

Jon’s arc in A Dance With Dragons ends with him being stabbed by his Night Watch companions. There has been plenty of speculation about whether he’s going to survive it or not. Well, my question is not “is Jon dead or alive?” but “what’s best for the story?”

On one hand, we have that Jon storyline has been growing for several books and he’s been shaped to be one of the heroes of the story. So it’s obvious that killing him off with (at least) a couple of books to go would be a huge blow for the saga. There would be a great amount of threads that would be left hanging. From the mystery about his mother, to some prophecies that seems to put him in a crucial spot for what’s coming.

Furthermore, he’s been our eyes at the Wall and, with Sam gone to Oldtown, he’s our only POV at the Wall right now (well, him and Melissandre, but she only have had one POV until now). Because of that, with his demise it would be very hard for us readers to have a clear view of what is happening at, and north of the Wall, which is arguably the most important thing going on right now on all Planetos.

So, it seems pretty obvious that for the story it would be much better if Jon is still around for the next two books, but…

Reading his attack for the first time, my first thoughts were that he was dead. And to me, his death was one of the greatest moments in the whole saga. It was like Ned’s death all over again. You never expected it, but it was the logical consequence of all that was happening in their respective storylines in each of their books. They tried to do what they thought was best, but they made plenty of mistakes, and annoyed a whole lot of people that could hurt them. The whole Jon storyline in ADWD it’s a great build-up for that moment. And his death would be even a greater payoff.

Then, when I thought about it, and I realized that he’s likely going to live, I couldn’t help but to be disappointed. Don’t get me wrong. I like Jonny boy, and I want him to be around for the end game. But to me his death was such a great moment that I feel kind of robbed of that moment if he lives (he will).

Also, GRRM hasn’t been shy of giving us a really major death every now and then. And most of the big characters that have bitten the dust (Ned, Cat&Robb, Joffrey, Tywin, …) have died because of some mistakes they have made, that have annoyed many people and it was a logical conclusion. Just like Jon.

Now, we’ve had a couple of books without any major death, but with a couple of teases (Tyrion or Brienne near deaths), and we end up with the big moment of Jon’s death. And it was great. We didn’t see it coming, but it was logical. It had a great build up, and it was in great part Jon’s own fault (unlike Tyrion’s and Brienne’s near deaths). And it obviously was a game changing moment. If he doesn’t die, we go back to a place where there are some untouchables, safe characters. And I don’t really like that. We need some major deaths once in a while to stay alert.

About the problem with the lack of POVs at the Wall, we can always rely on Mel for a couple of chapters, and then make somebody else go there. Or upgrade some Night Watcher or Queen’s Man to POV, if needed (I don’t think a wilding POV would really work). I mean, it would be a problem, but not a major one.

About the mysteries and prophecies… Well, prophecies are vague enough to be fulfilled somehow without Jon. And the only great mystery that would be left hanging is Jon’s mother. And that’s a big mystery more for extra-diegetic reasons (GRRM has said that it’s important, the forums know his parents are Rhaegar and Lyanna, which would be really important for the story, but only if Jon lives) that for storyline reasons (it’s been like three books since the mystery was really important in the story, and if it’s forgotten it would be ok storywise, IMHO).

So, I don’t know. It’s almost obvious that Jon should be important in the end game of the saga, and losing him would be a huge blow, but I think his death was probably the best single thing in the last two books, and I’m pissed that I’m robbed of that.

I know it sounds weird, but to me, if Jon doesn’t end up doing something really, really big, that nobody else could do, it would be much better for the story if he ends up dead by this attack.

i thought this was a great write up. I really want him to live, but I understand you feeling like this was a "cheat".

[Jaime's severed hand]

I think most of prophecies, clues and foreshadow concerning Jon are (as should be) vague enough to be fulfilled by other people. I mean, right now there are about half a dozen potential suitors for Azor Ahai reborn, for instance. That's the nature of prophecies, to point towards something, and then to be revealed to be something completely different.

I really don't think Jon's death in this moment would serve only for shock value. I think it would be a perfect closure for a great arc in aDwD. And it would bring the Wall into utter chaos, because Jon was the only thing preventing a clash between nightwatchers, queenmen and wildlings. Then again, a serious injury that left Jon's body laying down while his mind wargs Ghost would serve that same purpose...

And I won't really feel cheated if Jon story ends then and there. Yes, there would be a couple of threads left hanging, but I think it would be for the most part a coherent and interesting ending to a great arc, and would put in motion some other arcs.

I do think, however, that most of these near death experiences and cliffhangers are there for shock value only. And I do feel kind of cheated with this particular case. I feel robbed of all the awe I felt when I thought Jon was dying if (when) he survives it.

Anyway, I guess I could be wrong. I mean, everybody knows Jon is surviving this assassination attempt. And that's not only because GRRM has hinted off-books that Jon's arc is not done, but because the story itself points towards it. But I can't help to think that Jon's death under these circumstances could be really great for the story, if treated correctly. And I have no doubt that aDwD would be much better if Jon died.

[sj4iy]

If he wants to GRRM could progressively kill off all his major characters one by one and introduce in the very last paragraph the character that "wins" the game of thrones. In my opinion, thats bad writing. Why introduce characters, make us involved in them to kill them off? It does bring in drama, and shock. By to do it to many of your characters is anti climatic. We had the shock of Ned being killed, and then the shock of Robb getting killed. We had the shock of Cat being killed, followed by the shock of her being raised into LS. Main characters dying off is subject to diminishing returns.

...isn't that what I said? I said that of course Martin can kill off any character he chooses...but that doesn't mean it's a good idea, because it fundamentally changes the story every time he does. Like everything, there's a point where you can't afford to kill off an important character. That's exactly how it is for Jon right now. He could be killed at the end of the story, but I don't see how he can be killed right now and the story not collapse.