A+J=T v.9

[ravenous reader]

18 minutes ago, Wouter said:

The problem is, the choices of the show are already influencing book-only discussions. People are careful not to mention where they get extra "inspiration", but if a character goes a certain way in the show (that may differ from where the books appear to be going or even have gone already) you will start to see "book" theories that assume what happens in the show will happen in the book. Because they cannot admit to this, the interpretation of show events (and the likelihood of similar things happening in the books at a later date) is not discussed, and rather gets treated as a given. But I do believe that S5 in particular has been shaping some book discussions, unnoticed.

How interesting.  That's precisely what I was getting at in my previous comment.  Human beings are primates, primarily visual creatures, so that means external visual images have a tendency of sneaking into the brain and taking root, surreptitiously (this is the basis of manipulation by advertising) -- and trumping those images generated more 'internally' (by association with words, for example) -- which is a shame.

[DMC]

20 minutes ago, Wouter said:

Exactly. It's a pity that show-fans and book-fans tend to be at odds (sometimes to rather extreme degrees, like it's a political or even religious discussion) and many discussions that could be interesting are not pursued because fans of one medium often like to dish the other one. I consider myself fan of both show and books. I would prefer the books if I had to choose, but I'm glad the show is moving forward as Martin's pace grows ever slower and new material is such a breathe of fresh air to stale theories. It's also nice, that after years of undecided discussions, finally there may be elements which allow to say if a certain theory is right or wrong.

The problem is, the choices of the show are already influencing book-only discussions. People are careful not to mention where they get extra "inspiration", but if a character goes a certain way in the show (that may differ from where the books appear to be going or even have gone already) you will start to see "book" theories that assume what happens in the show will happen in the book. Because they cannot admit to this, the interpretation of show events (and the likelihood of similar things happening in the books at a later date) is not discussed, and rather gets treated as a given. But I do believe that S5 in particular has been shaping some book discussions, unnoticed.

Couldn't have said it better myself; I agree with every word.  It has often perplexed me that saying I'm a fan of both the books and the show here is like being bi-racial in the American south (an exaggeration, I know, I know).  I think the problem with moving the discussion to the show forum is it is generally more polarized - at least in my (admittedly very limited in the past few months) experience many more threads there have a tendency to devolve into book vs. show BS.  Perhaps this is why discussion of the show in the books forums is more tightly monitored, which actually makes it quite understandable.  However, such a rationale also completely supports creating a new venue like you and UL are talking about for book-inclined fans to calmly discuss the potential implications of developments in the show.

[ravenous reader]

7 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

It has often perplexed me that saying I'm a fan of both the books and the show here is like being bi-racial in the American south (an exaggeration, I know, I know).  I think the problem with moving the discussion to the show forum is it is generally more polarized - at least in my (admittedly very limited in the past few months) experience many more threads there have a tendency to devolve into book vs. show

In other words, we should take a less 'R'hllorist' stance, when it comes to all these dichotomies!

[Wouter]

DMC515;

In my (equally limited) experience, the show forums indeed are a very hostile environment at the moment. I would hope though, that a thread about a specific (mostly book-inspired) theory would not be considered an interesting battleground by the keyboard-warriors. Those will probably concentrate on whatever controversial topic happens to come from the latest episode, and thus hopefully be mostly confined to the subforum for that particular episode.

[DMC]

Wouter,

Hopefully, but I guess I'm just more cynical.  For instance, UL has (rightly, I think) complained in the past about many posters rejecting AJT solely on the "no more secret Targs" and "it ruins his relationship with Tywin" mantras.  If this thread gets put up in the show general forum, you're asking to deal with a whole hell of a lot more of that in my estimation.  But I hope I'm wrong!

[UnmaskedLurker]

25 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Wouter,

Hopefully, but I guess I'm just more cynical.  For instance, UL has (rightly, I think) complained in the past about many posters rejecting AJT solely on the "no more secret Targs" and "it ruins his relationship with Tywin" mantras.  If this thread gets put up in the show general forum, you're asking to deal with a whole hell of a lot more of that in my estimation.  But I hope I'm wrong!

Actually, I have a slightly different point of view than perhaps you think I have about that issue -- not on the substance (i.e., of course I strongly disagree with those weak objections to AJT), but on the process (i.e., I am not as bothered as you suggest by such posters). If a large number of people have such a view, I encourage them to state their views and do their best to support them. I really want dissenting views vetting. And because different people are active on this board from time to time, the same issues need to be re-vetted periodically so that new viewers and posters have a chance to see the terms of the debate (I don't expect them to go back are read all 8 prior versions of this thread).

So if people want to post that they don't believe in AJT because "there are too many secret Targs" or "it ruins the Tywin/Tyrion relationship", I think that is great. That type of post then gives the rest of us the opportunity to give the opposing point of view so that anyone who is just reading and not actively posting (as I think is the majority of people who visit the board) gets a chance to see both sides and make up their own mind.

I try not to be thin skinned (at least not as UL, I wish my real identity remained as calm as my UL identity, but writing out all thoughts has its advantages), so if people was to get a little dismissive of my position, I can live with that. I might come across as a bit annoyed or frustrated in my response, but in reality, I get where they are coming from (they want to books to be a certain way and therefore convince themselves it is that way). Now if people get too personal or nasty or irrational, I will simply stop responding to them. I don't bother to report people or continue to engage in pointless debates with people who are not interested in or capable of a calm, rational discussion. But usually those people move on when they stop getting the desired reaction.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

8 hours ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

But would such a discussion be allowed in the show subforum? It uses information from the show but is not really a discussion of the show, It is a discussion of the books using information from the show. And if such a discussion is not allowed on the show subforum, then "management" is saying we simply are not allowed to have that discussion on this board at all -- that it is not what this board is for. As I said -- their house -- their rules -- I respect that. But I don't have to like it, and it might force some of us to go elsewhere, despite preferring to stay here if they just gave us a space to engage in such a discussion.

I think it is the only place for it. It would be a discussion of a book/show combination, and thus far, the general show-subforum is the place where such discussions have been allowed thus far (as far as I am aware, but I'm not really active on the show subforums). Because in the end, no matter how many book-quote you wish to analyse, the core of the discussion will be found in the show.

Is there any reason to assume that a specific type of discussion will not be allowed? I personally haven't read anything that would imply such.

[UnmaskedLurker]

1 minute ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

I think it is the only place for it. It would be a discussion of a book/show combination, and thus far, the general show-subforum is the place where such discussions have been allowed thus far (as far as I am aware, but I'm not really active on the show subforums). Because in the end, no matter how many book-quote you wish to analyse, the core of the discussion will be found in the show.

Is there any reason to assume that a specific type of discussion will not be allowed? I personally haven't read anything that would imply such.

I am not talking about book quote vs. show analysis. I am talking about what the thread is trying to debate. It won't be debating whether AJT is true on the show. In my example above, that question was resolved on the show so there would be no point to continue to debate the issue with respect to the show in that case. But in any event, regardless of that specific example, the topic of discussion will be whether AJT is true in the books -- the canon that GRRM is still writing. Even if the analysis focuses on show information, it is not an analysis of what is happening or going to happen on the show -- but rather in the books -- using information from the show to inform the analysis about the books. 

I don't know if such a discussion is allowed in the show forum. I think we soon will find out.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

3 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

I am not talking about book quote vs. show analysis. I am talking about what the thread is trying to debate. It won't be debating whether AJT is true on the show. In my example above, that question was resolved on the show so there would be no point to continue to debate the issue with respect to the show in that case. But in any event, regardless of that specific example, the topic of discussion will be whether AJT is true in the books -- the canon that GRRM is still writing. Even if the analysis focuses on show information, it is not an analysis of what is happening or going to happen on the show -- but rather in the books -- using information from the show to inform the analysis about the books. 

I don't know if such a discussion is allowed in the show forum. I think we soon will find out.

I'm not talking about book vs show analysis either, you misunderstood me .

I'm sure it will all work out

[Lord Varys]

You can discuss whatever the hell you want in the show sub forum as long as you properly designate what you want to discuss (spoilers and stuff). And this certainly will include whether Tyrion will be also Aerys' son in the books if he is revealed to be his son in the show.

The reason why this is a no go here is pretty obvious. It contains spoilers. There is a pretty big number of people who don't watch the show (anymore) and this is, in essence, a forum dedicated to the book series, not the show.

From the time I still cared about the show I remember that there is not all that much discussion going on in that field when the season is over, at least not over here. So it will be quite safe to then discuss all the implications the show may or may not have on the books in the show forum. At least for those people who think this will be fun or a fruitful discussion. I'd think this is a waste of time. It is just a matter of personal opinion whether this or that aspect of the show is, perhaps, based on something George has written.

If the show gives 'an answer' to any of the longstanding mysteries then I don't want to know - not just because I don't care, but because the show's take on that is actually irrelevant. The Jon Snow question has effectively been settled long ago, and the show is not going to contribute anything to the unanswered questions from the books.

The Tyrion question also has been answered, I think, by ADwD and TWoIaF. We only lack the details. But they will have to wait to be discussed until a book is published. Until such time, people better keep their spoilers out of this section of the board.

[UnmaskedLurker]

2 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

You can discuss whatever the hell you want in the show sub forum as long as you properly designate what you want to discuss (spoilers and stuff). And this certainly will include whether Tyrion will be also Aerys' son in the books if he is revealed to be his son in the show.

The reason why this is a no go here is pretty obvious. It contains spoilers. There is a pretty big number of people who don't watch the show (anymore) and this is, in essence, a forum dedicated to the book series, not the show.

From the time I still cared about the show I remember that there is not all that much discussion going on in that field when the season is over, at least not over here. So it will be quite safe to then discuss all the implications the show may or may not have on the books in the show forum. At least for those people who think this will be fun or a fruitful discussion. I'd think this is a waste of time. It is just a matter of personal opinion whether this or that aspect of the show is, perhaps, based on something George has written.

If the show gives 'an answer' to any of the longstanding mysteries then I don't want to know - not just because I don't care, but because the show's take on that is actually irrelevant. The Jon Snow question has effectively been settled long ago, and the show is not going to contribute anything to the unanswered questions from the books.

The Tyrion question also has been answered, I think, by ADwD and TWoIaF. We only lack the details. But they will have to wait to be discussed until a book is published. Until such time, people better keep their spoilers out of this section of the board.

I certainly do not intend to violate that edict. Good luck, however, in expecting 100% compliance from everyone. Over time, the information will seep in. It is almost impossible for it not to -- people are only human, after all.

[StarkofWinterfell]

It's 100% certain for me that Tyrion is a secret Targ. I need look no farther than Shiera Seastar

[HexMachina]

On 23 March 2016 at 10:50 PM, UnmaskedLurker said:

I am not talking about book quote vs. show analysis. I am talking about what the thread is trying to debate. It won't be debating whether AJT is true on the show. In my example above, that question was resolved on the show so there would be no point to continue to debate the issue with respect to the show in that case. But in any event, regardless of that specific example, the topic of discussion will be whether AJT is true in the books -- the canon that GRRM is still writing. Even if the analysis focuses on show information, it is not an analysis of what is happening or going to happen on the show -- but rather in the books -- using information from the show to inform the analysis about the books. 

I don't know if such a discussion is allowed in the show forum. I think we soon will find out.

Speaking as a mod here, I see no problem with an A+J=T thread in the show forum to discuss the theory with relevant show information. Just remember to tag the title as "book spoilers" or something like that  

[UnmaskedLurker]

On 3/27/2016 at 5:09 AM, HelenaExMachina said:

Speaking as a mod here, I see no problem with an A+J=T thread in the show forum to discuss the theory with relevant show information. Just remember to tag the title as "book spoilers" or something like that  

I appreciate your confirmation that our proposed approach will be permitted in the show subforum, and when I set up the thread there -- I will be sure to include a book spoiler notice in the title.

Thanks.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

On 3/24/2016 at 7:06 PM, UnmaskedLurker said:

I certainly do not intend to violate that edict. Good luck, however, in expecting 100% compliance from everyone. Over time, the information will seep in. It is almost impossible for it not to -- people are only human, after all.

Hi

That is what I have this thread for, Ill add AJT to the title of the next one.  MIssed you guys! But the HBO ads have driven me back to need for fruitful discussion lol.

edit:Just changed the title

So there is zero discussion of show allowed on this thread? Lol What if they say its true on the show, it's all true?

[Shayla]

On 2/21/2016 at 2:23 PM, UnmaskedLurker said:

Actually, it can be fairly difficult to make edits in this new format. And expanding the hidden text does not always work well because the hidden text for the quotes is so long. I keep trying to make it as readable as possible -- but I struggle sometimes. I might decide to break the quotes up into more hidden text boxes so that no one box is so long.

While I agree that Targ blood is needed to ride a dragon -- and thus Tyrion needs Targ blood to ride a dragon -- I think the analysis goes deeper. In essence, that argument can get a bit circular -- GRRM could have a different way for Tyrion to ride a dragon if GRRM wants Tyrion to ride a dragon and not have Targ blood. So GRRM is not required to make Tyrion a Targ bastard even if GRRM wants Tyrion to ride a dragon -- GRRM can write the story any way he wants.

I think that something more must be going on for the Targ connection to be so central. I think that the "dragon must have three heads" aspect of the prophecy is relevant. It is the link between Jon, Dany and Tyrion -- as the three heads of the dragon -- and as family members -- that makes the connection important to the story. Sure GRRM could write a story where Tyrion becomes a dragon rider some other way and makes the choice to help a woman (Dany) and her nephew (Jon) (or if you prefer, help a man (Jon) and his aunt (Dany)) win the Battle for the Dawn as the third "war general" and dragon rider -- making him the third head of the dragon.

But I just don't think that the prophecy makes sense if someone with no real connection to the Targs can be the third head with Jon and Dany -- both of whom we are pretty sure are at least 1/2 Targ (assuming RLJ). Sure, GRRM stated that the third head is not "necessarily a Targaryen" but if one really takes this statement to mean that the third head does not need to have any biological connection to the Targs (as opposed to merely suggesting a bastard who is not entitled to the Targaryen name but has significant Targ blood), then what does it really mean to be a head of the dragon? That approach would seem to reduce the prophecy merely to a statement that three dragon riders will win the war -- and it seems like the prophecy should go to a deeper level than that.

Yeah I loved your analytical breakdown on this. The significance of" Dragon must have three heads" appears to be important. They all had mothers who died giving birth to them. As far as we know. I could go on and on but it's already exhausted me obsessing over this for many year. 

[UnmaskedLurker]

11 hours ago, Suzanna Stormborn said:

Hi

That is what I have this thread for, Ill add AJT to the title of the next one.  MIssed you guys! But the HBO ads have driven me back to need for fruitful discussion lol.

edit:Just changed the title

So there is zero discussion of show allowed on this thread? Lol What if they say its true on the show, it's all true?

Welcome back. We missed you. I will check out your HBO thread and let you know what I think.

11 hours ago, Shayla said:

Yeah I loved your analytical breakdown on this. The significance of" Dragon must have three heads" appears to be important. They all had mothers who died giving birth to them. As far as we know. I could go on and on but it's already exhausted me obsessing over this for many year. 

Welcome to the boards and welcome to AJT.  

[Lost Melnibonean]

13 hours ago, Suzanna Stormborn said:

Hi

That is what I have this thread for, Ill add AJT to the title of the next one.  MIssed you guys! But the HBO ads have driven me back to need for fruitful discussion lol.

edit:Just changed the title

So there is zero discussion of show allowed on this thread? Lol What if they say its true on the show, it's all true?

I was so worried the burpy girl got ya. 

[Suzanna Stormborn]

4 hours ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

Welcome back. We missed you. I will check out your HBO thread and let you know what I think.

Welcome to the boards and welcome to AJT.  

it's nothing special, but every season of HBO, obviously we need a place to be able to discuss the relevance to the books.  I get what everyone is saying about how different it is from the books, but let's face it, the Dany, Jon and Tyrion storylines have stayed extremely close and accurate to the books, obviously not 100%, but for instance I am fairly certain that however Jon is revived on the show will be taken directly from GRRM's Winds of Winter.  Anyway it's nice to have a free discussion.

 

5 hours ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

I was so worried the burpy girl got ya. 

lol!! Nah I'm good, well away from that crazy lady.  how you doin? 

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

19 hours ago, Suzanna Stormborn said:

Hi

Hey! It's been a while!