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

[HoboJed]

By screwed, I mean "will suffer heavy losses instead of getting off lightly." We may end with the remaining Starks reunited, building a new kingdom from the ruins of what is left... sounds pretty bittersweet to me.

[UnmaskedLurker]

By screwed, I mean "will suffer heavy losses instead of getting off lightly." We may end with the remaining Starks reunited, building a new kingdom from the ruins of what is left... sounds pretty bittersweet to me.

I agree that they will suffer heavy losses both in people and property. But you were arguing that the reason that they were "screwed" or now re-stating the point as suffering heavy losses is all because Jon died from having been ignored. No, Jon living may be the only reason that humanity is not wiped out entirely. Jon being the "savior" is not the same thing as Jon preventing anything bad from happening to anyone. Bad stuff is going to happen--even with Jon involved.

Bottom line, people like to speculate about how upending all the normal rules of fiction would be fun and exciting for the reader--but in reality, it would just result in a mess of a story that does not hang together and in the end satisfies no one. You can "subvert" these "rules" to some extent, but in the end, writers of fiction stick to certain guidelines for a reason--they work. GRRM has admitted as much when he argues that it does not work to give all the clues that the butler did it just to switch in the end of the chamber maid. It might sound "cool" to "trick" the readers that way, but in fiction writing, it really does not work. Too much has been foreshadowed about Jon having a central role in the endgame to be left dead at this point in the story. So while it might seem "cool" to kill off the "savior," it really would not work and GRRM would not do it.

[Narvi]

Jon just being dead would just be horrible for the story as a whole in my opinion. All the wasted energy writing a dead end just makes no sense. Even if it turns out he is just Ned's bastard son. The whole assassination sequence is riddled with so much symbolism. If you hold to that he is AA then everything in the prophesy is there. Undead Jon is another useless plot device unless he retained his memories somehow. Having the fire god bring him back, don't think so. He is a tool of the old gods if anything. We are left with so many unknowns that killing him off for good would be just bad writing in my opinion. I've been reading Georges stuff since his scifi days and it doesn't seem consistent with his style. That's just my 2 cents.

[Hype_Train_Conductor]

I think it would move the story along better if he were to die. He was in the most power to actually do something about the Others, and if he's gone, the Wildlings won't listen to anyone else. This leaves a weak NW and when the Others come, they'll break through the wall, adn that will cause everyone to do something about it. More ploys will be placed in the chaos, and Varys will need to press harder to make sure that Aegon assumes the throne. It might also cause Dany to come to Westeros.

[Lonin]

I think we need to see where grrm is taking the Jon story arc before deciding. I think Jon will play a major role in saving Westeros... and I don't particularly like the idea of an undead Jon.. so for now, I think Jon being alive is best/

[Falstaff_Stark]

Bittersweet to me means a non epic, heroic-journey style ending. People don't learn, and repeat the same cycle again. characters will get rewards NOT based on their virtue or villainy. there will be a loveless marriage with one spouse undeservingly ruling, and a heroic character in a minor role fading to obscurity despite saving humanity. Tptwp is not going to be Aragon with a winged crown and hot elf booty in the tower. But it will fit. Lil smile and a couple tears combined with a sigh of relief neither nor GRRM died before the end.

[Duckfield]

Jon should stay dead but I think "Killing" him was a mistake by Martin IMO, he's obviously bringing him back in some sort of way. I'd rather have him dead than resurrected, that card is already overplayed.

[Lady Flandrensis]

Jon has to live, he has way more to do. I hope not as an Undead, too.

[FaceGardener]

The Wall is coming down soon. So long as it stands, The Others pose no threat to Westeros, thus making the story pointless.

Thus I think it would be fitting if Melisandre, powerful and misguided as she is, brings down the entire wall to resurrect Jon. This would remove the potential cheesiness of Jon's resurrection, because a lot of people would die for him to live. Bittersweet in the GRRM fashion.

[oopeed]

Well, the pros of him being dead is that it will bring the already boiling situation at the wall into madness. Jon was hated by many but still loved by some, his demise will certainly mean that blood will be shed in the wall. But as much as I'd like to see a wildlings vs queen's men vs NW free-for-all, Jon is still my guy, so he must be alive for gods' sake.

The problem with him not being alive anymore is that there's no character with his insight; He was raised like a northern lord, knowing the ways of the north and the strengths and need of its people. He's also the lord-commander of the oldest institution in Westeros and has spent time knowing the wildlings and their problems.

Mel is a dumbass fanatic that knows no shit of the northmen, the queen's men are no better but even much dumber, the wildlings only think about themselves and the black brothers are either dumb, not diplomats or wildling haters. So Jon is the best POV option

[Ivashanko]

I'd love it if he were dead. I actually don't agree that it, by itself, is 'bad writing'. It could easily become bad writing, but there are several things that GRRM could do that would make the moment pivotal enough, and give the reader enough sense of ongoing loss throughout the rest of the series (for instance, the revelation that he isn't actually a bastard would be particularly poignant if he were not alive to know it), that it could turn into something really special.

But he is alive. I have made my peace with that.

[JonisHenryTudor]

Jon doesn't know who his parents are. It would be a narrative idiocy to kill Jon off before he found this out, because the story has been building it up over the past 5 books. Jon's story isn't done, so it would be bad storytelling to kill him off right now.

This.

[Attitude]

Don't know if it has been said already, but:

GRRM stated that Jon will know who his mother is. So if he dies at this point, GRRM is a liar. I don't think he's a liar (about this). So he will survive (or be resurrected).

A bit more OT:

Jon has to survive. If jon is gone, the entire fight at the north requires a new build up to be interesting. This won't happen.

[BRANDON GREYSTARK]

Jon as the living dead lord of the Others .

[JonisHenryTudor]

Well he might not be crowfood yet, but "the third knife took him in the back" sounds a heck of a lot like a stab to me.

He is also wearing armor of some sort. He took it in the back, but says nothing about depth, wound, etc. He was stabbed with a dagger which is a short blade. Also, as Lady Blizz loves to point out, dead people don't feel cold.

The gut shot could be nasty, but again no indication out deep it went. The neck hit was to the side of his neck, it would not bleed out.

Jon being "took in the back" could mean he was hit without penetration. Boiled leather with mail could deflect a poorly swung blade. He has one wound for sure that is nasty, that is it.

He's slipping out of consciousness so he's either 1. Losing a ton of blood or 2. Taking a nap, the boy works way too long and hard for that Wall I tell ya.

But yes it is pretty vague and it has all that AAR imagery and stuff going on.

I'm excited to see his fate and probably won't be disappointing how it plays out. Alive, dead, dead alive. It'll probably be an interesting read.

When? The last line?

My personal opinion...Ghost is standing right there, which is why he says Ghosts name and the scene ends ... It would be odd for Jon to say his name, instead of think it in the moment. It is very likely that someone let Ghost out. Him feeling the cold is both obvious and vague. First, he is lying in the snow. That is the obvious part. The vague part is what is happening. If Ghosts is there, which I think he is, the attackers are no longer focusing on Jon so he is sort of lying in the snow, but not unconscious just injured.

There is another possibility....the Others have arrived thus Jon feels the cold. Again not losing consciousness.

As I have said elsewhere, I think a scene at the wall picks up right where it left off, perhaps from a different perspective? Or maybe not....