Is anybody else annoyed that there are 3 different illustrations of dragonstone in this book?

[Zarafrustra]

I love the World of Ice and Fire, but I wonder what was the decision to put three different Dragonstone illustrations in this book?

I thought this book was supposed to be canon and at least the pictures are supposed to represent how things look (especially since GRRM was pedantic about the looks of mistresses and similar stuff), but with Dragonstone it is really confusing.

So yeah, what is the deal with that? Which Dragonstone is supposed to be the 'right' one?

[TheNorthmen]

Not really. I took the artwork as representative of what artists of medieval times would of done...Theyd each have their own way of displaying what it was they saw...Even when they all saw the same thing.

Look at early maps of America. From each artist came a different image. Similar but not the same.

Id expect the portraits to differ slightly otherwise it wouldnt really feel as much apart of that world as it should.

[Zarafrustra]

Yeah, makes sense when you think on it like that, but you say differ slightly...and they definately not differ just slightly. Look at Dragonstone when you open the book and the dragonstone on page 230. A bit too different for my liking.

[Bitterflame]

Martin had a lot of involvement on some pictures and less on others. the one in the front of the book best depicts his vision. he said this in an interview, but I can't find it atm.

the one in the stormlands(?) section looks weird to me.. like something out of Egypt.

[Liz Stark-Targaryen]

I agree with TheNorthmen. I loved TWOIAF, but read it as something that a medieval scholar -- or "maester" in Westeros -- would put together. Thought it was brilliantly conceived when read that way.

[aryagonnakill#2]

Just look at the picture of Belarion, that's all I needed to see to know that the images were not canon.

[Zarafrustra]

Which page is that?

[White Ravens]

Just look at the picture of Belarion, that's all I needed to see to know that the images were not canon.

The one at the beginning of the book with Aegon looking tiny. I think GRRM confirmed that as canon. The Black Dread was massive.

[TheSovereignGrave]

The one at the beginning of the book with Aegon looking tiny. I think GRRM confirmed that as canon. The Black Dread was massive.

Huh, I imagined Balerion as bigger than that actually.

[aryagonnakill#2]

I was referring to him not having a neck when the dragons were always described as having long necks.

[TheNorthmen]

Yeah, makes sense when you think on it like that, but you say differ slightly...and they definately not differ just slightly. Look at Dragonstone when you open the book and the dragonstone on page 230. A bit too different for my liking.

Its possible the artist never even visited Dragonstone. Let alone saw the Castle there. Theres numerous examples in our own history of artists taking artistic liberties with a real life location that they had only heard of yet chose to paint.

I looked through the pages to see if there was a description that went with the artwork on pg 230 and I couldnt find one. Not sure why as most of the art in the book has these descriptions and I can understand how people would instantly equate that to Dragonstones Castle. Either the artwork wasnt of the actual castle but some interesting Dragon carved of stone over looking the port or it can be tossed up to an artist who hadnt visited the island and had used hearsay to paint themselves an image.

Either way. From the onset of the book with the letter to Tommen. Its obvious The World of Ice and Fire is meant to be an in-universe book. So everything and anything in it must be taken in the assumption that the words and the artwork is from citizens of that world.

[Zarafrustra]

I like how the maester thought a portrait of a young (now deceased) commander Jon Snow with his wolf was important enough to put in this book.

Too much foreshadowing to handle.

[Maid So Fair]

Yes, it's annoying. I understand wanting to include all the quality artwork, but Dragonstone especially sticks out. They should have commissioned just one artist per place/person or given more guidelines about how it was supposed to look.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

I like how the maester thought a portrait of a young (now deceased) commander Jon Snow with his wolf was important enough to put in this book.

Too much foreshadowing to handle.

The in-universe version of the book does not have the images. The images are purely for us, the readers. An actually published version of this book in Westeros would not have these images. Both images and familytrees are out-of-universe.

So Yandel did not put Jon Snow in his book ;) Nor Daenerys.

[protar]

The in-universe version of the book does not have the images. The images are purely for us, the readers. An actually published version of this book in Westeros would not have these images. Both images and familytrees are out-of-universe.

So Yandel did not put Jon Snow in his book ;) Nor Daenerys.

I'm pretty sure all the images are supposed to be canon, given that the one of Dany at the end comes with the speculative caption "dragons reborn?". The different Dragonstone illustrations can be explained by artists who haven't seen Dragonstone in person. The only one which sticks out somewhat is Jon Snow and Ghost. But hey, the story of the Stark Direwolves would have spread throughout Westeros, as would Jon Snow becoming LC. Maybe Yandel just thought the idea of a giant white direwolf was awesome?

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

I'm pretty sure all the images are supposed to be canon, given that the one of Dany at the end comes with the speculative caption "dragons reborn?". The different Dragonstone illustrations can be explained by artists who haven't seen Dragonstone in person. The only one which sticks out somewhat is Jon Snow and Ghost. But hey, the story of the Stark Direwolves would have spread throughout Westeros, as would Jon Snow becoming LC. Maybe Yandel just thought the idea of a giant white direwolf was awesome?

If images are out of universe, so are the captions... And 'canon' and 'in-universe' are two different things ;)

Anyway, Ran confirmed that neither the images, nor the family trees, are in-universe

The art is out-of-world, in the sense that it's not in the maester's actual book, so... some of the art is very close to how George sees things, because he was heavily involved in directing the artists (Nasmith's castles, Villeneuve's mistresses of Aegon IV, Simonetti's Iron Throne), while others had less direct input and are more the artist's interpretation.

Family trees are actually to be considered "out of world" -- they're not part of the maester's actual work, they're an appendix provided by, well, George. There's no Baratheon tree because I think George doesn't have one put together.

[protar]

If images are out of universe, so are the captions... And 'canon' and 'in-universe' are two different things ;)

Anyway, Ran confirmed that neither the images, nor the family trees, are in-universe

Seems weird to make that move, seeing as they clearly designed and captioned the images to fit with the in-universe story. They fit fine with the canon, why non-canonise them?

[DMC]

Its possible the artist never even visited Dragonstone. Let alone saw the Castle there. Theres numerous examples in our own history of artists taking artistic liberties with a real life location that they had only heard of yet chose to paint.

I looked through the pages to see if there was a description that went with the artwork on pg 230 and I couldnt find one. Not sure why as most of the art in the book has these descriptions and I can understand how people would instantly equate that to Dragonstones Castle. Either the artwork wasnt of the actual castle but some interesting Dragon carved of stone over looking the port or it can be tossed up to an artist who hadnt visited the island and had used hearsay to paint themselves an image.

Either way. From the onset of the book with the letter to Tommen. Its obvious The World of Ice and Fire is meant to be an in-universe book. So everything and anything in it must be taken in the assumption that the words and the artwork is from citizens of that world.

At least in my version there is a caption on page 233: "PREVIOUS PAGES: Baratheon men-at-arms at Dragonstone." Presumably taking it at the end of RR. And yes, it looks entirely different (and a little ridiculous) than the illustration at the opening of the book, which I've taken as much more aligned with Martin's vision. On a semi-related note, I wish there were better illustrations of Storm's End. We get great depictions of Highgarden, the Eyrie, Riverrun, the Rock, and even a pretty good one of Sunspear, but only hazy peeks at SE? Boo, I say.

[Aemond's Eye]

Seems weird to make that move, seeing as they clearly designed and captioned the images to fit with the in-universe story. They fit fine with the canon, why non-canonise them?

Well, the book itself is supposed to be a history for Robert I Baratheon, and it's unlikely a maester recording a history for a king and his heirs is going to commission artists - it's just not likely to happen. From an "in-universe" point of view they wouldn't be in the book any more than it'd come in the same overall package it does.

[protar]

Well, the book itself is supposed to be a history for Robert I Baratheon, and it's unlikely a maester recording a history for a king and his heirs is going to commission artists - it's just not likely to happen. From an "in-universe" point of view they wouldn't be in the book any more than it'd come in the same overall package it does.

Why not? A unique work, designed especially for a King is the perfect work to contain the king of fancy art work we see in the books. We know that the Maesters do have art work in their books.

The only thing that would probably be anachronistic is the art style. But my headcanon is that it's in the "vivid Myrish style" briefly mentioned in Game of Thrones.