Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

JonisHenryTudor

Why I believe Jon is NOT in need of resurrection/warging

Recommended Posts

First bold - that is not always the case. We have several documented examples of men losing arms, legs, eyes, etc during battle and not dying. It certain was the case, but it isn't absolute.

Yes I know that is precisely what I said. I gave three possible points where the blade could hit and the consequences of it.

Again you are missing the most important point. Martin does not integrate any descriptive mechanism to suggest excruciating pain or massive blood loss.

I never mentioned losing a limb.. Losing an arm or leg is not the same as having your internal organs pierced. Any swordsman would gladly lose an arm to having his internals skewered. Your organs shut down you shut down. That means arms, legs and everything. Your internal organs are a magnitude more important than your arms and legs. For the simple fact we cannot survive without them.

Gut wounds are the worst wounds.

Martin didn't have to be more descriptive than he was. Following this conversation proves as much. If we take him at his word the cliffhanger here isn't whether or not Jon's human form is dead. It is most certainly dead. The cliffhanger is whether or not he managed to escape to Ghost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never mentioned losing a limb.. Losing an arm or leg is not the same as having your internal organs pierced. Any swordsman would gladly lose an arm to having his internals skewered. Your organs shut down you shut down. That means arms, legs and everything. Your internal organs are a magnitude more important than your arms and legs. For the simple fact we cannot survive without them.

Gut wounds are the worst wounds.

Martin didn't have to be more descriptive than he was. Following this conversation proves as much. If we take him at his word the cliffhanger here isn't whether or not Jon's human form is dead. It is most certainly dead. The cliffhanger is whether or not he managed to escape to Ghost.

I don't have the time to respond with more detailed examples today, but we have plenty of documented cases of men suffering all sorts of wounds and surviving. I am just pointing out that it is not technically correct to say a man punctured will soon die.

You are correct that belly wounds are nasty, but what I am suggesting is other than Jon's assertion that he was punched in the stomach little else about that wound suggests that he took the wound that is implied. In fact, the scene suggests that particular wound is not as it seems.

I think that we are so used to people dying that it is impossible to conceive one character not dying. Could it happen. Of course, this is fiction, not nonfiction where we create a text based on documents. Do I think it will happen, no? Of course I could be wrong, but I just don't think that is what the scene expresses.

As a final point....I have thrown out bits that Martin would be a lazy writer, etc, however, I do not believe he is.

Jon - Stabbed - Nope don't want you to die - Mel brings him back to life....There are far more creative ways to show Jon's transformation than resurrecting him. That would be lazy IMO, and Martin is not lazy with his story (I am not talking about writing :)) Again he could do this, but the scene just does not imply that. IMO, in a nutshell, Martin is turning one of his own approaches on its head. "I kill characters, none survive [enter evil laugh]", and then he doesn't actually do that for Jon. He has laid out a scene, yet ends with a TBC.

Let's for sake of argument suggest that it is as you and others have seen it. Why not just end, why end with ... ? He could pick up in WoW with a chapter from Mel's pov moving the body, etc and proceed as he saw fit. But instead he ends with a ...

I don't have the text, but when Bran falls the chapter ends IIRC? Then it picks up with Bran in bed in a coma. Why not end this chapter that way instead of the universal to be continued "symbol". Historians regularly use ... in lengthy quotes to suggest that there is more to the excerpt, but I only want you to see this bit now. Why suddenly use that device now if Jon is just going to be dead or in a coma like Bran was?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 4 wounds, at least. The first cut is enough to have him weak. The 2nd is a dagger in the belly. A dagger is not a small knife! And belly wounds are extremely lethal, even if death is not immediate. The 3rd is another dagger in the back. And there is at least another one. If there was only one wound, you could believe it spared vital organs. But with four?

And BTW, what would be the point of wounding Jon, even very severely, if it was to have him back to square one in the next book? With just a few annoying brothers missing? Such changes could be done with a minor struggle, some wound to remember, like after his fight with Othor in book 1. No, this awful cliffhanger, the biggest of all the books so far, must be for something huge. GRRM did a lot of "apparently dead but not dead" already, but none like this one.

I believe Jon must advance to the next stage. Like Daenerys did at the end of book 1. We arrive at book 6, it should be time to start revealing what Jon is (what, not who). At least some of it.

There are three wounds. Not 4. The 4th that was never felt does not suggest it actually landed. Only one wound seems to be bleeding while the other is smoking.

The entire premise of this post is that the wounds are not as bad as they seem. I also gave a counter that if the would are as bad as you and others suggest, there is no indication of this in the text. That is in context with how Martin tends to write these scenes, etc. (that and a medical pov)

I do agree that Jon needs a transformation, but I disagree that he needs to die and be resurrected. If that happens it happens, but I find that to be a very lazy and sad attempt by Martin to rely on something he has already used in the story. Having Jon live in Ghost is something another author (his friend) already used. Again this all could happen, but the scene itself does not suggest that.

The point of his being attacked by the Watch and not dying--I mentioned Mel above as at least an option. She does something horrible to "revive" him, or even tries to sacrifice him for Stannis--something. All sorts of things could advance the plot from there--perhaps the most fantastic would be her bringing down the Wall (not really likely). Or, more humanely, sets John up to break from the Watch overall. Or other things (obviously).

Not sure what it could mean, but I do think cliffhanger and red-herring can work together here--we are hoping Jon lives. We assume since Mel is at the Wall she will raise him. And, for readers invested in Jon as "what" he is (I assume you are arguing that he is the balance of ice and fire--apologies if my assumptions are presumptuous), those readers assume that's where this is going. Which means readers assume the wounds are fatal.

But if the wounds aren't fatal as argued in the OP (well done, by the way, and thank you!), if this is a cliffhanger AND a red herring--that could have very interesting implications.

Thanks! :cheers: Much of this came from several posts with different members on the same issue. I tried to condense it here. A few who come to mind are Bemused of course, Ladyblizz, Sj4, and numerous others who have all pointed out similar things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are three wounds. Not 4. The 4th that was never felt does not suggest it actually landed. Only one wound seems to be bleeding while the other is smoking.

I don't read "He never felt the fourth knife" as "there was no fourth knife". No matter. We don't know what this one was, what damage it could have done.

It is Jon POV, he cannot really analyze his wounds. Like Barristan says in the next chapter, in the next page in fact: "Often, even with a deep cut, the blood came before the pain." He is weak shortly after the first cut, he does nothing against Bowen Marsh. The cut must have been deeper than he thought. He seems in a shock state, which is rather indicative of serious wounds.

Obviously not everyone agrees, or will agree, on the wounds gravity. But I feel it would be cheap by GRRM, to have this show of apparently critical wounds. And to write, many years later, in another book: "Oh no, it was just a scratch."

That, and the fact that Jon doesn't yet match the prophecy "Born amid salt and smoke, beneath a bleeding star." IMO, recovery from a wound is a little short of a birth. Unless Jon is not TPTWP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the prologue I think the following lines are crucial:

"That was his last thought as a man. True death came suddenly; he felt a shock of cold, as if he had been plunged into the icy waters of a frozen lake".

At this point his consciousness is searching for one of his beasts...so Jon only feeling the cold after he's repeatedly stabbed seems to me to be making it clear that he has died his true death. He's warging ghost, where he will stay until (I believe) ghost is sacrificed (only death can pay for life).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great OP :agree: and a good thread.



I am also of the opinion that Jon is not dead and will not need resurrecting. I won't enter the debate analysing his wounds though, as other posters do it much better than I could. I think the scene, as a piece of writing is ambiguous enough to leave open the possibilities of both death and survival, and I'm sure that it was perfectly intentional on Martin's part, so the injury arguments are probably valid on both sides (saying that as a non-expert).



I'm convinced that Jon will survive (without death and resurrection) because of what I see as the logic of his story and also because of what I have seen of resurrection in the story so far. The plot needs Jon as a fully human being, not as either a subhuman or a superhuman creature come back from death. Of course, if Martin knows a way of resurrection that would keep Jon fully human ... but that's not what we have seen so far.



Anyway, to add to the actual discussion here... about the mail shirt and the armourer in Castle Black:



We know that the Night's Watch has more weapons (and probably armour) than they have men to use them.



When Samwell Tarly arrives in Castle Black, he brings his own armour.



As none of it was black, Ser Alliser insisted that he reequip himself from the armory.



After Noye's death, what are the men of the Night's Watch to do? Will they just wait until another armourer takes the black? They can only do that if they have plenty of spare weapons and armour, and Jon's conversation with Stannis (as quoted by others) heavily implies that this is the case.



Yet, just to be on the safe side (with the possibility of imminent war), is there nothing they can do until another armourer arrives?



The black brothers set new recruits to many different tasks, to learn where their skills lay. Jon cherished the rare afternoons when he was sent out with Ghost ranging at his side to bring back game for the Lord Commander's table, but for every day spent hunting, he gave a dozen to Donal Noye in the armory (...)



So every black brother has some training in the armory as well as in other places in Castle Black. There can easily be one or two among them talented enough to do basic jobs after Noye's death. What is more, Noye is probably not the only armourer in the Night's Watch. Both Eastwatch and the Shadow Tower may have their own armourers, so the mail shirt we saw in AFfC may have been sent to one of these castles to be finished (if Jon didn't have the time or the skill to work on it himself). There the Lord Commander's mail shirt was obviously given priority, but I don't think Jon had to go without a mail shirt while it was being repaired either. (I also suspect that a new armourer for Castle Black could be trained by the armourer of Eastwatch or the Shadow Tower, but it would take longer than repairing Jon's ringmail.) For Jon to go without ringmail for months without ever being worried about it is not like the average bad decision a leader might make. It is like a ballet dancer not having ballet shoes and not minding it at all.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great OP :agree: and a good thread.

I am also of the opinion that Jon is not dead and will not need resurrecting. I won't enter the debate analysing his wounds though, as other posters do it much better than I could. I think the scene, as a piece of writing is ambiguous enough to leave open the possibilities of both death and survival, and I'm sure that it was perfectly intentional on Martin's part, so the injury arguments are probably valid on both sides (saying that as a non-expert).

I'm convinced that Jon will survive (without death and resurrection) because of what I see as the logic of his story and also because of what I have seen of resurrection in the story so far. The plot needs Jon as a fully human being, not as either a subhuman or a superhuman creature come back from death. Of course, if Martin knows a way of resurrection that would keep Jon fully human ... but that's not what we have seen so far.

:agree:

Which is why I think the writing is set up to leave us uncertain--just how wounded is Jon? Martin is letting us fill in all the info from previous wounds, resurrections, etc. Sets us up to lead ourselves into our own version of the cliffhanger.

What the OP does so well is expose the holes that we as readers have to fill if we assume resurrection or warging. Not that either of those can't happen, but that in the scene as written, it is NOT necessary. No evidence that Jon is severely injured. Lots of holes--in the narration. Not Jon.

Disclaimer: I don't know if the above was the intent of the OP--but the OP does this, intent or no intent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:agree:

Which is why I think the writing is set up to leave us uncertain--just how wounded is Jon? Martin is letting us fill in all the info from previous wounds, resurrections, etc. Sets us up to lead ourselves into our own version of the cliffhanger.

What the OP does so well is expose the holes that we as readers have to fill if we assume resurrection or warging. Not that either of those can't happen, but that in the scene as written, it is NOT necessary. No evidence that Jon is severely injured. Lots of holes--in the narration. Not Jon.

Disclaimer: I don't know if the above was the intent of the OP--but the OP does this, intent or no intent.

Actually that was precisely the intent. I am open to warging, and I have agreed with others in various threads that Jon may warg ghost. In fact, it is entirely possible when he mutters Ghost's name that he wargs Ghost and attacks through Ghost alla Bran. That would certainly push the Jon/Warg arc forward. But yes my intent was to show that Jon does not necessarily need to be revived. He will be hurt, yes, but the ambiguity of the scene at least IMO begs for closer examination.

@Julia H. - Whereas I stand by my argument, I am certainly open to the possibility that Jon may need to be revived. After all this is fantasy. But for reasons that you stated about prior resurrections and others, I see this as rather unlikely.

Also good points about armor. I would imagine that if there was a shortage the NW would have had the sense to strip dead members before burning them. Nice ballet reference. It is also like a car breaking down, most people pick up a rental car until their car is fixed. I would imagine as bemused has pointed out and others, that Jon would have found a piece of mail for the interim.

From my own perspective if for some reason I stabbed someone and they suddenly started billowing smoke from their wound, I would probably cease the attack. I might even run away screaming. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do have something else to add here.



Dany went through something akin to a rebirth as well. Before she entered the pyre, she was somewhat beaten down and beginning to find her strength. She then steps into the pyre and emerges as a much different person. She was sort of reborn if you will as the true Dany Targaryen. After that point, Dany no longer coward to the males around her (again she already began this), and she began to assert herself much more. If we were to pick a point in Dany's arc that solidified her transformation, I think most people would point to the pyre. Now Dany did not have to die for that to happen. The events combined elements of magic, but the end result is still the same. Dany emerged from the fire transformed, or reborn if you will.




Jon - In Jon's story we see him becoming more of a leader, but he still had some boyish qualities, and Aemon obviously notices this. In Dany's event, the impact was huge and pre-pyre Dany is essentially dead. We can look to Dany through the lens of Aemon. "Kill the girl, and let the woman be born". That is precisely what happened in the pyre experience. Surviving that and having the dragons hatch changed everything. In Jon's case, I see something similar but not the same happening. Jon still needs to cross over the peak of the hill and come down the other side. I don't think death is the mechanism needed to force this shift. Let's forget the AAR idea, and just consider Jon as becoming the man. I think that, much like Dany, that this attack will have a supernatural element involved that leads to Jon's transformation. We have not seen the entire scene play out, so what that is is hard to tell.



If Jon wargs Ghost as some argue, can BR communicate with him? Can wargs communicate through their animals, and can one animal be warged by two men/women? Just curious?



Regardless, I think that when all is said and done, this event will resemble Dany's experience, and Jon ultimately will be "reborn". It was fire with Dany, but I suspect that Ice will be involved here. I don't want to speculate but all remains the same. Jon doesn't die, and his process of transformation is aided by some supernatural element, and when he emerges--from a coma or literally pulls himself off the ground--he will rise a man.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the prologue I think the following lines are crucial:

"That was his last thought as a man. True death came suddenly; he felt a shock of cold, as if he had been plunged into the icy waters of a frozen lake".

At this point his consciousness is searching for one of his beasts...so Jon only feeling the cold after he's repeatedly stabbed seems to me to be making it clear that he has died his true death. He's warging ghost, where he will stay until (I believe) ghost is sacrificed (only death can pay for life).

Yes. You cannot ignore the prologue. The prologue is there to remind us of what happens when a warg dies.

But I don't think Ghost will be the price. It would be like paying the Old Gods with their own coins. But there will be sufficient blood, if blood is needed. Free Folk and NW Brothers certainly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually that was precisely the intent. I am open to warging, and I have agreed with others in various threads that Jon may warg ghost. In fact, it is entirely possible when he mutters Ghost's name that he wargs Ghost and attacks through Ghost alla Bran. That would certainly push the Jon/Warg arc forward. But yes my intent was to show that Jon does not necessarily need to be revived. He will be hurt, yes, but the ambiguity of the scene at least IMO begs for closer examination.

:cheers: Always good to know I'm not delusional.

Regardless, I think that when all is said and done, this event will resemble Dany's experience, and Jon ultimately will be "reborn". It was fire with Dany, but I suspect that Ice will be involved here. I don't want to speculate but all remains the same. Jon doesn't die, and his process of transformation is aided by some supernatural element, and when he emerges--from a coma or literally pulls himself off the ground--he will rise a man.

I like this,. And your take on "kill the boy"--it does say "let the man be born." Not "the supernatural save us all figure"--through I can't think why Aemon would say that.

Exactly what Jon is going to learn through this, I don't know. The Dany analogy works--Jon realizes that he has to go even farther, change something--he is already changing a lot--how much farther he could go with this could be interesting.

But I'm not averse to the "revelation in the underworld" scenario either. A dream, a vision--he's already had those. Something that gives him more of what he needs. Either way, I think whatever he does, the transformation will be a "human" one--kill the boy, and the man is born.

Still, with the ambiguity you have exposed in the scene, Martin has lots of options open . . . I just don't like the magic ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I want to point out. I believe the line about the fourth knife is used as a literary metaphor. In my opinion, the fourth strike happened. Here's why. Have you ever heard the phrase "It was like he was never there." or "It was like it never happened" I believe that the line was used in the same context. Sorry I couldn't come up with a better example for that type of metaphor. If anyone can, please reply.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. You cannot ignore the prologue. The prologue is there to remind us of what happens when a warg dies.

But I don't think Ghost will be the price. It would be like paying the Old Gods with their own coins. But there will be sufficient blood, if blood is needed. Free Folk and NW Brothers certainly.

I don't think you can ignore the prologue, but I also do not think that just because it is there immediately means that it is referencing Jon. That seems like a terrible plot device. "I am going to write a prologue, and eventually it will tie into a major character". I think the prologue is there to tease our minds more or less. Also after Jon's chapter, it is kind of obvious who the prologue links to. I am not necessarily arguing that clarity equates to RH, but I am not ready to pounce on the idea that "well the prologue said this, so obviously this is precisely going to happen in Jon's chapter"

From my POV, that seems to be a rather lazy way to write things. So we are going to have a prologue that tells us that wargs can live after death in an animal, then Jon dies, and then in WoW we are going to essentially get the prologue over again. Seems kind of odd.

:cheers: Always good to know I'm not delusional.

I like this,. And your take on "kill the boy"--it does say "let the man be born." Not "the supernatural save us all figure"--through I can't think why Aemon would say that.

I have always read that as a coming of age statement, or something a father might say to their son(s) in a modern world. Sort of like, "It is time to grow up, get a job, and be a man now". In context of Jon, to be a leader he needs to lead as a man, not a boy. So in a sense, Aemon wants Jon to be the opposite of Robb. Some of Robb's choices were immature (i.e. the Westerling girl). It isn't that men fail to make bad choices, just Aemon seems to want Jon to shed the byish desires and take control. At least that is why I think Aemon said that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I want to point out. I believe the line about the fourth knife is used as a literary metaphor. In my opinion, the fourth strike happened. Here's why. Have you ever heard the phrase "It was like he was never there." or "It was like it never happened" I believe that the line was used in the same context. Sorry I couldn't come up with a better example for that type of metaphor. If anyone can, please reply.

Yes. I have heard of that, but I think him not feeling the knife but feeling the cold is rather bizarre.

If it ended with he never felt the knife, only the warmth... My immediate response would be that he warged Ghost who is locked in his chamber and probably by a lit hearth.

I personally believe Ghost is on site, and the fourth did not come because the attackers were distracted. Also consider that Wun Wun is nearby.

Obviously it is possible that he didn't feel it as you suggest due to shock. But I think one thing that is somewhat lost in the scene is the chaos at CB that seems to be ignited, and that scene is isolated from the chaos. Wun Wun ripping Ser Patrek to shreds is not something that would go unnoticed by the NW, nor would the noise be unheard.

The isolated scene I believe is amidst major chaos, and it is very very possible that Wun Wun immediately noticed Jon trying to protect him and then being stabbed thus he intervenes to protect Jon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No , I'm not joking, but I think you misunderstand me..The second life is real, alright..We first get a hint of it with Orell's eagle (back at the end of ASoS), then we get the Varamyr prologue, then Bran's experience when learning to skinchange the ravens. The "second life" could go on to have many implications (and perhaps permutations) that could affect more than one character...

I think the misdirection lies in causing us to immediately leap to assume Jon is dead and warging into Ghost, ignoring all other clues. (I didn't say the second life was misinformation)...At the same time, there could be some foreshadowing in the prologue (and later in Bran's chapter when summer takes on Varamyr's wolves) of an unsuspected enemy if Jon goes north of the Wall when old One-eye is still alive.

To my mind, it's the clues that have been well hidden in apparently unconnected anecdotes , obscure parallels, and even in meticulously chosen language that bear paying attention to, more than to those that are obvious at first glance... Many readers miss the hidden clues entirely, so those clues are relatively useless as red herrings or false signposts. ...It's the clues that easily stand out that are useful tools for misdirection.

Now I wonder if you're joking..I've heard some of this before of course, but it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. When Stannis is planning to use the wildlings in his van, he wants the NW to outfit them...

He means to plunder our armory, Jon realized. Food and clothing, land and castles, now

weapons. He draws me in deeper every day. Words might not be swords, but swords were swords. “I could find three hundred spears,” he said, reluctantly. “Helms as well, if you’ll take them old and dinted and red with rust.”

“Armor?” asked the Magnar. “Plate? Mail?”

“When Donal Noye died we lost our armorer.” The rest Jon left unspoken. Give the wildlings

mail and they’ll be twice as great a danger to the realm.

So it's not that the NW has no mail on hand it's that Jon doesn't want Stannis to plunder what he has. And he has no reason to trust Sigorn at this point (who would have been commanding Stannis' wildlings) . When he thinks "Give the wildlings mail", etc. , that definitely implies that he has some but is reluctant to give it. It's true they lost their smith and couldn't replace dozens, or perhaps hundreds of pieces of mail.. but he's also trying to conserve supplies for use at the Wall.

When "Rattleshirt" challenges him...

“Emmett, find some armor for him. I want him in steel, not old bones.” Once clad in mail and

plate, the Lord of Bones seemed to stand a little straighter.

Are we really to believe that there's mail to be had for men in the practice yard, but none for the Lord Commander ?

When Jon takes Val to meet Selyse, Val asks... Should I have dressed in mail instead of wool and fur? ... Why does she ask?..is she comparing herself to Jon, who is wearing mail?.. Don't forget he'd just gone out (to an unknown reception) to negotiate with Tormund.

When he goes out to let Tormund's people in..

Jon had never liked surrounding himself with guards, but today it seemed prudent to keep a few good men beside him. They made a grim display in their ringmail, ... Again, mail for the tail, but none for the head ?

And, no time..?? .. No time for self preservation? ...Well, he has time to work out in the practice yard on a regular basis (without mail?) He's spent hours poring over letters and the books Aemon left for him..We've seen him go to bathe..should we think that's the only bath he's taken at the wall ? We can bet that he follows Ned's example and takes care of cleaning Longclaw himself. Why would he not have time (make time) to make adjustments to his mail ? He knows it's important.... He's good with his hands..He fashioned the hilts for the obsidian blades found in the cache... and every ranger or soldier would be expected to take care of their equipment as best they could (besides being in their own interest).

Jon knows he has potential enemies (even in the watch).. Honestly, how stupid or careless do you think he is ? It's asking us to suspend disbelief to an outrageous degree to assume he's gone without wearing mail all this time.

I think Addicted just got told...You should just mic drop now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have the time to respond with more detailed examples today, but we have plenty of documented cases of men suffering all sorts of wounds and surviving. I am just pointing out that it is not technically correct to say a man punctured will soon die.

You are correct that belly wounds are nasty, but what I am suggesting is other than Jon's assertion that he was punched in the stomach little else about that wound suggests that he took the wound that is implied. In fact, the scene suggests that particular wound is not as it seems.

I think that we are so used to people dying that it is impossible to conceive one character not dying. Could it happen. Of course, this is fiction, not nonfiction where we create a text based on documents. Do I think it will happen, no? Of course I could be wrong, but I just don't think that is what the scene expresses.

As a final point....I have thrown out bits that Martin would be a lazy writer, etc, however, I do not believe he is.

Jon - Stabbed - Nope don't want you to die - Mel brings him back to life....There are far more creative ways to show Jon's transformation than resurrecting him. That would be lazy IMO, and Martin is not lazy with his story (I am not talking about writing :)) Again he could do this, but the scene just does not imply that. IMO, in a nutshell, Martin is turning one of his own approaches on its head. "I kill characters, none survive [enter evil laugh]", and then he doesn't actually do that for Jon. He has laid out a scene, yet ends with a TBC.

Let's for sake of argument suggest that it is as you and others have seen it. Why not just end, why end with ... ? He could pick up in WoW with a chapter from Mel's pov moving the body, etc and proceed as he saw fit. But instead he ends with a ...

I don't have the text, but when Bran falls the chapter ends IIRC? Then it picks up with Bran in bed in a coma. Why not end this chapter that way instead of the universal to be continued "symbol". Historians regularly use ... in lengthy quotes to suggest that there is more to the excerpt, but I only want you to see this bit now. Why suddenly use that device now if Jon is just going to be dead or in a coma like Bran was?

Volume to point of contact there is no reason to suspect a man struck in the gut with a piercing weapon will survive long. Sure, if the odds are in his favor he may live hours instead of minutes. It doesn't get much better than that unfortunately. Our abdomens were not made to withstand such punishment. Mind, nothing in the text and the way Jon responds to it gives the impression he was lucky.

What suggests it wasn't as it seems? The blow felt like a punch because Bowen Marsh put all he had behind it. He meant that to stick and stick good. Jon dropped to his knees immediately after it. The dagger stayed where he left it. In his gut. Jon had to wrench it loose from his abdominal wall. Again, there is zero indication here that he didn't take that blow in the worst way possible. Also, that bit about smoke rising off of it is body heat. He had a new hole in him that was releasing body heat into the world.

They're at war. Lots of people good and bad die in war. Entire families are killed in war. Family names are lost forever. Bloodlines lost forever. Cultures and societies are also lost forever. A war where nothing is lost is not a war.

Or maybe Jon is not the prince who was promised. Maybe his entire role going forward is from ghost helping his kin. Or maybe he is resurrected. Who can say? All I'm telling you is that Jon's human form being dead is not the end of this tale. It seems an afterthought that Melisandre will use her red priestess power to resurrect Jon.

He left the cliffhanger in for a reason. Obviously Jon is not kaput. He can warg. There is a red priestess nearby who can resurrect him. Not all is lost. He just left off there with Jon so we'd have something to talk about I suppose. If he ended the scene with him warged into ghost running away or the red priestess standing over him that'd be different. Then we'd have not much to talk about.

Bran falling is only slightly different. We didn't know the extent of Bran's wounds. So the fall either killed him or it didn't. With Jon, we know the extent of his wounds and they are life-threatening. This makes the cliffhanger outcomes a little different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What suggests it wasn't as it seems? The blow felt like a punch because Bowen Marsh put all he had behind it. He meant that to stick and stick good. Jon dropped to his knees immediately after it. The dagger stayed where he left it. In his gut. Jon had to wrench it loose from his abdominal wall. Again, there is zero indication here that he didn't take that blow in the worst way possible. Also, that bit about smoke rising off of it is body heat. He had a new hole in him that was releasing body heat into the world.

I am not trying to be rude, but I think you need to re-read the series. There have been plenty of wounds in cold weather in the story. No mention of smoke. Also there is a huge difference between smoke and steam. Your body doesn't smoke, it steams in cold weather. Also Jon's neck wound is not smoking. Steam is the byproduct of something cold or wet hitting heat or heat vapors in very cold weather. Smoke is the byproduct of fire. Unless Jon literally has a fire within, the smoke is a symbolic gesture.

It is rather symbolic that smoke is pouring from a wound that is centrally located on the body, or as we refer to it "i have a pain deep down here" or something similar. Deep within, Jon is a Targ. The belly shot struck him at his core and releasing the first tangible hint that Jon at his core is a Targ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not trying to be rude, but I think you need to re-read the series. There have been plenty of wounds in cold weather in the story. No mention of smoke. Also there is a huge difference between smoke and steam. Your body doesn't smoke, it steams in cold weather. Also Jon's neck wound is not smoking. Steam is the byproduct of something cold or wet hitting heat or heat vapors in very cold weather. Smoke is the byproduct of fire. Unless Jon literally has a fire within, the smoke is a symbolic gesture.

It is rather symbolic that smoke is pouring from a wound that is centrally located on the body, or as we refer to it "i have a pain deep down here" or something similar. Deep within, Jon is a Targ. The belly shot struck him at his core and releasing the first tangible hint that Jon at his core is a Targ.

You're reading too much into his description of what it looks like.

On a very cold night it may appear that smoke is billowing from your nostrils. We know it is steam but the appearance is more pronounced when it grows colder and darker.

This is the entire line, for clarity.

In the cold night air the wound was smoking.

If it were truly smoke then the prefixed statement would not matter. It wouldn't have been necessary. Smoke is obvious day or night. It is only on a cold night does steam appear to look like smoke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're reading too much into his description of what it looks like.

On a very cold night it may appear that smoke is billowing from your nostrils. We know it is steam but the appearance is more pronounced when it grows colder and darker.

This is the entire line, for clarity.

If it were truly smoke then the prefixed statement would not matter. It wouldn't have been necessary. Smoke is obvious day or night. It is only on a cold night does steam appear to look like smoke.

Ok but nobody refers to a wound as smoking or sweaty athletes in very cold weather as smoking. Steaming is the usual descriptive word.

Also, in the thousands of times that someone had been stabbed in the story, this is the only one where a wound happens to be smoking.

It also just coincidentally happens to a character who does not know of his Targaryen heritage, and is closer to learning of it. We are not talking about some random knight in Stannis' camp, we are talking about Jon here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok but nobody refers to a wound as smoking or sweaty athletes in very cold weather as smoking. Steaming is the usual descriptive word.

Also, in the thousands of times that someone had been stabbed in the story, this is the only one where a wound happens to be smoking.

It also just coincidentally happens to a character who does not know of his Targaryen heritage, and is closer to learning of it. We are not talking about some random knight in Stannis' camp, we are talking about Jon here.

I would think that first statement to be wrong. Not that you nor I would really know how sports reporters would describe it. I'm sure it has been said before though. I'm not a big sports nut so I'd not know offhand.

We don't know his bloodline is Targaryen yet. Also, it just happens to be a central character experiencing this assault. They tend to be more descriptive than nights watch #23456787 just fell off the wall. :drunk:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×