How do some people honestly think Ramsay wrote the pink letter?

[butterbumps!]

24 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

In that sense, the speech may have been more to convince the wildlings and whatever Watchmen sat on the fence to march with him against Winterfell than anything else.

Yes, the speech was designed to convince the Wildlings to his cause, but what gives you the impression he planned for or wanted a single Watchman to participate in his mission?  I'd argue the speech was also designed precisely to dissuade the Watchmen from following him.  That speech renders the idea of Watchmen joining his mission totally reprehensible.

As a side point, what's the significance if Tormund was going to take even a handful of wildlings with him (not that this is suggested anywhere, but for argument's sake).   It's very clear that Jon reconfigured the mission to be carried out by the Watch, as a Watch mission, with Tormund as the leader, and that he's clearly talking about giving Tormund Watchmen in that speech.  If he had planned for any wildilngs on that mission, he'd have made a different speech.

[Free Northman Reborn]

Just now, Greg B said:

For all we know, Bolton may not have much of an army! In any case, Jon may go south thinking to run a BwoB-style guerilla operation against the Boltons, only to discover he has quite a few more allies in the North than he imagined. Along similar lines, by the time he recovers from being dead, there may be open civil war in the North and he merely has to step in to unify and lead the anti-Bolton, Stark-loyalist side. Regardless of the details, I think that's the direction it will go and finding men willing to fight for him won't be a problem. In the end, in my view, he needs to unify the North -- including what's left of the wildlings -- to defend the Wall (one way or another, and not necessarily successfully).

I think this is the way it is going to go. The reality is that the idea to march on Winterfell with the wildlings was a stupid one. We know how many wildlings there are. We got an exact count as they passed through the Wall. Something like 3400 if I recall correctly. Men, women and children.

So how big an army can you really gather from that? 500 men? 800 men if you're lucky? 800 raiders. These guys don't have a hope in hell of besieging Winterfell, the strongest castle in the North. So indeed, once Jon is resurrected, I think his plot can only go towards Winterfell. There is nothing but empty wastes above the Wall. His plot has always been intricately linked to Winterfell, and whether he belongs there or not.

So I expect that once he is reborn, he will not only have newfound resolve, but I think he will soon have new manpower as well. It might start out with only the wildlings, but then some plot developments will take place.

Davos might well arrive at the Wall with Rickon and 2000 Skagosi in tow. The Mountain Clan lords that were visiting the Wall (I can never remember why they were there, exactly), might witness his rebirth as a sign from the Old Gods and call all their men to his banner.

Fake Arya will arrive at the Wall, and serve as a rally point for Jon to gather the Northern lords to his cause.

And last but certainly not least, Robb's will might be revealed at that point, designating Jon as the new King in the North.

Some or all of the above developments combined will serve to raise a real army for Jon, with which to unite the North for the war against the Others. He is wasted at the Wall, with its paltry few hundred men. He needs a far larger command to fight the War of the Dawn with. So his plot for now goes South. To Winterfell, and perhaps beyond, before it turns North to the Wall again. If the Wall even exists anymore at that point.

[Lord Varys]

Well, this is not a thread about the future development of the series.

I'm inclined to believe that the North will be unified in some fashion but it will lose many people on the way, not gain new men. People are going to die at the lake, at Winterfell, and wherever else there will be fighting. And if Stannis actually dies (the way Ramsay claimed or in a similar way - that it is, if he is slain in battle eventually) then this most likely will mean that his forced will suffer a severe defeat.

Imagine the scenario from the Pink Letter for a moment. A seven days battle and Stannis dead. We know that Stannis Baratheon doesn't lead from the front, he leads from the rear. If he is captured or slain than all his most loyal troops are most likely to be dead, too.

If Stannis were Robert it is easily imaginable that leader/general dies and the army survives, but not with Stannis. In addition there is the fact that clansmen are preparing themselves for suicide attacks. They won't care if they live or die in the coming battle(s) and while this certainly will indicate a lot of losses on the Bolton side it is also very likely that they, too, will lose many men.

Should Stannis lose the whole fake Arya thing is irrelevant. She has been married to Ramsay anyway, and the laws of gods and men actually would dictate that she is returned to her lord husband (unlike Alys who had not yet been married to Cregan Karstark). Nobody is going to take up arms against Roose if he actually takes the North by conquest - which he would do if deals with Stannis and all those who have joined him.

In addition, I must say I've real difficulty imagining a realistic scenario in which not all hell breaks lose in the sense that the wildlings just return to their ways after Jon's assassination. They could free their hostages and do whatever the hell they want. Not all are likely to do that but a good portion will. Especially if there is fighting at the Wall and buildings and houses are destroyed, food is stolen, and a lot of women are raped.

Since I expect the Others not actually to attack in the near future and TWoW is going to be packed with a lot of other story lines I don't think Jon Snow will rise to real prominence in the next book. I think Stannis will end up in charge of things with the Boltons either destroyed or sidelined (they could become much more interesting later in the midst of the fighting against the Others) and Stannis fulfilling the prophecy that false saviors are only going to lead to more troubles. As of yet he hasn't fucked up things all that much but if he actually ends up being the guy in charge of the first phase of the war against the Others (the one that might take place before the Others actually attack the Wall) then he'll get his chance.

You have to see everything in perspective. If the North is united under Stark rule by the end of TWoW then the chances to actually end this thing are gone. Dany is not likely to arrive in Westeros in the next book. At best we might see Aegon (or Euron) rise to the Iron Throne in TWoW and Dany begin her journey west. 

In addition, any lack of chaos in the North should enable the people there to actually think for a while and try to contact the people down south and tell them (or try to tell them) about the Others. It is one thing to ignore the superstitious NW who doesn't write very precise letters, but quite another to treat the entire North this way (especially if many corroborating tales are told about the threat the Others pose).

But George clearly does not want to give Westeros the opportunity to prepare itself. That was the point of the entire story up to this point.

[Greg B]

25 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, this is not a thread about the future development of the series.

*snip*

I think Stannis will end up in charge of things with the Boltons either destroyed or sidelined (they could become much more interesting later in the midst of the fighting against the Others) and Stannis fulfilling the prophecy that false saviors are only going to lead to more troubles.

This will be pretty "awesome" (scare quotes indicate sarcasm) if the Pink Letter isn't just a plot device, Stannis is alive and victorious, and Jon just swallowed the letter's BS whole and got himself killed. If Stannis survives, I hope Jon stays dead. Not sure I can deal with, "Aw, shucks, you mean Ramsay lied? Why didn't I think of that!"

[Free Northman Reborn]

While Stannis may indeed survive, that does not need to imply an outright victory for him over the Boltons either.

He is in fact the one that may be sidelined only to re-emerge later as an interesting participant in the eventual war against the Others.

The fact that the bulk of his army are Northmen is no happenstance, and was in fact designed by Martin with some effort. Remember that there was no need for Martin to bring the Clansmen into the story at this late stage. Stannis could have arrived at the Wall with 5000 southron troops without it changing any part of his story up to that point. And that would have negated the need for him to gather men from the Clans.

So the fact that Martin went to some effort to orchestrate a Northmen dominated army under Stannis signifies to me that he has a purpose with these Northmen beyond just being suicidal cannonfodder for Stannis's cause.

I therefore expect the Battle of Ice to be bloody indeed, but that most of the spilled blood will be that of southroners. In particular all of the Freys and most of Stannis's remaining 1500 Stormland knights.

These two groups are out of their element and it is the Northmen who will now thrive. Martin has a further purpose for them in the Starks' new united northern army.

[Lord Varys]

@Free Northman Reborn

While I'm saying that no Southron knights are going to die in the coming battle(s) they certainly lack the suicidal eagerness of the clansmen to bathe in Bolton blood before they die. Many of them don't expect to live through winter, after all.

Perhaps the losses won't be that great, after all. I mean, we'll have to wait and see whether the Freys get themselves killed in the lake without (m)any casualties on Stannis' side and whether the Manderly knights can successfully switch sides and join Stannis before the Bolton army attacks (if such an army is coming at all - the only thing suggesting as much are Theon's half-mad speculations).

We should also keep in mind that Stannis now has the means to manipulate the Bolton strategy vie the ravens/maester he has. While this is not very likely to have an impact on the movings of the Freys and Manderlys it might enable him to lure Roose/Ramsay's troops (assuming they come) in a very good trap of a different sort (for instance, Stannis could repay Roose in kind and have the Karstark and Manderly men lead his troops into a trap in which they are suddenly attacked from all sides).

But again, people will die in the coming battles, and a scenario in which Stannis is killed in battle (which I find not very likely) would most likely entail pretty heavy losses on his side, perhaps even a complete destruction of his troops (that is certainly implied by the seven days battle in the Pink Letter - a battle stretching over seven days usually should get a lot of people killed).

15 hours ago, Greg B said:

This will be pretty "awesome" (scare quotes indicate sarcasm) if the Pink Letter isn't just a plot device, Stannis is alive and victorious, and Jon just swallowed the letter's BS whole and got himself killed. If Stannis survives, I hope Jon stays dead. Not sure I can deal with, "Aw, shucks, you mean Ramsay lied? Why didn't I think of that!"

Well, what can I say? Jon Snow was stupid to actually declare war on the Boltons without actually waiting for an independent source to confirm that Ramsay did not lie. But I'm not so sure he had all that much choice to wait. He intended to go on the Hardhome ranging, after all, and if he had done that know he might have found Ramsay or Roose at the Wall and in charge of things there upon his return. Any wait on his part would have given Ramsay/Roose the time and opportunity to actually learn that he effectively had a wildling army, and had he not been killed marching down south would have helped uncover the real truth anyway.

I've said it already - in my opinion the Pink Letter makes the most sense if you imagine it as being written very shortly after Theon's escape. Ramsay and Roose are very angry and both want Arya/Theon back as well as ensure that Jon Snow knows that he is going to regret what he has done.

I'm also not sure how things could get back on track if the gang the Wall continues to believe Stannis is dead (a letter arriving from him shortly after the Pink Letter could correct that impression - not to mention the arrival of Justin Massey and Tycho Nestoris). I mean, who is going to want to bring Jon Snow back to life in such a scenario? And who would want to follow his resurrected ass if it was true - assuming he would continue his mad quest against the Boltons days/weeks after the arrival of the Pink Letter when the political landscape around him (and in the North in general) may have changed.

[Free Northman Reborn]

Lord Varys

You are ignoring a massive part of the current Northern story. And that is the mystical involvement of Bran, and the fact that the Northmen believe in the Old Gods. We already see Bran intervening out of the blue with Theon's arc at the Lake. We know all the Clansmen will be gathered there to see Theon executed before the Heart Tree.

True magical involvement from Bran will swing them to a new course in a heartbeat, with Stannis no part of that. The wildlings are even more superstitious, and a similar display at the Wall - with Jon actually resurrected in front of their eyes - will have a massive impact on them too.

Then we have the followers of Mellisandre - who by now will also believe that Jon is Azor Ahai. So she is going to lead the attempts to resurrect him at the Wall - initially likely in failure, until Bran intervenes to add the second half of Jon's Song to the spell.

All you then need is for Jon to either get Rickon delivered to him, or else for Robb's will to be announced to the North, and you have a very different tale to the current one, none of which requires Stannis's involvement.

As you said, we know Shireen is being burned. We also know that it won't be Stannis who does this. So it can only be Mellisandre acting without Stannis's consent. And that likely to resurrect Jon Snow. Or to attempt it at least.

There is a lot of freaky magical shit about to happen, and the end result is going to turn the Northern storyline on its head.

 

[Lord Varys]

@Free Northman Reborn

What we know about Shireen is that the showrunners said to us that the way of Shireen's death comes from George (and I include Stannis deciding that she should be burned in that) and that he hadn't yet written that scene back when last season aired. So the best guess we can make is that this scene isn't going to occur in the near future. Shireen Baratheon isn't a real character in the books, she has barely any dialogue and is neither interesting nor funny (as she was in the show). Therefore the only other option - that George for some reason postponed the writing of the chapter in which Shireen died to the very end like he did with the Red Wedding is very unlikely.

So, no I don't buy that we'll see Shireen dying in the near future in the books.

I don't ignore Bran at all. In fact, I've long ago suggested and still maintain the idea that Bran might physically intervene during the coming battle at the lake. Asha gave us a glimpse of what might happening there when she remembers the stories she has heard as a child of the greenseers once using trees as living weapons in the ancient times (not to mention that we already know Bloodraven can use huge amounts of ravens as weapons, too).

But I'm not expecting any huge magical Bran interventions all over the place. And I'm certainly not expecting Bran single-handedly resurrecting Jon Snow. There is no reason to believe that greenseers even can do such spells.

Unless TWoW will begin with a huge info dump during which everybody and their grandmother learn about Jon Snow's true heritage there is no way Melisandre of all people will believe Jon Snow is the promised prince/reborn Azor Ahai. Especially not if she herself as a hand in that. Nobody believes Beric Dondarrion or Catelyn Stark were/are Azor Ahai, either.

You also have to keep in mind that we don't really know Bloodraven/Bran's plans or anything. Does Bran even want to reveal his identity/existence to a broader public? What does he want with Theon? And how can you be sure he does not want to work with Stannis for the time being? I mean, the guy takes the threat of the Others seriously and is fighting against the Boltons. Bran himself cannot serve as mundane figurehead and neither can Jon Snow (right now).

As to Rickon, you really seem to jump ahead of yourself. If George usual writing style is any indication we are going to see Davos' journey to Skagos and follow his search to find Rickon before we'll see him meet the boy. And then there is the question whether he or the Skaggs will allow Davos and Rickon to leave the island alive, etc. Things are not going to fall neatly into place in this series. They never do.

The same goes for Robb's will. If that was to play a role now one would expect that we would have had any news about the whereabouts and plans of the gang that's presumably still in the Neck. But we did not. Telling a lot of important stuff retroactively isn't George's style, so I don't expect anything to come from that direction in the near future. For all we know, Howland Reed may have shut down this whole idea revealing to Maege Mormont and Galbart Glover that Jon Snow wasn't Robb Stark's half-brother. That would explain why we never got any news from those people.

[Free Northman Reborn]

Lord Varys

I included the Rickon scenario merely to counter your own earlier contention that Rickon's arrival would spell the end of Jon's rise to power in the North. I am therefore demonstrating that with or without Rickon's arrival Jon has a clear path to power in the North. If Rickon arrives at the Wall, it can serve Jon's cause with Rickon serving as the Stark he galvanizes the North around. And if Rickon only arrives in the last book, it will equally serve his cause, as he himself is then the only Stark to gather the North. I suspect Rickon will only arrive later, thus giving Jon a bit longer to act in the capacity of Jon Stark, before taking the step up to Jon Targaryen.

Regarding Mellisandre, she herself has shown us that when she asks to see Azor Ahai in her visions, she is only seeing Jon Snow. The news of the death of Stannis, the increasing doubt in her previous convictions and the increasing prominence of Jon Snow in her visions are showing that she is only one step away from realizing the truth, which is that Jon is the saviour R'hlorr was leading her to, and Stannis merely the vehicle to get her there.

Once that realization dawns, she will take action herself to move events to her desired conclusion. Not necessarily the correct action. But action nevertheless.

Regarding Shireen. The manner of her death has been confirmed. Nothing else. Seeing as we last saw Stannis still adamant that Massey must raise 20k sellswords on Shireen's behalf even if Stannis himself is dead, this indicates that he has no intention of sacrificing her. And the logistics also make it difficult to see how he would be able to do so. The Red Woman is not with him, and neither is Shireen. For Shireen to be sacrificed, you need two of those three characters to be together, and Stannis is not one of them.

As for Bran. I find it ironic that you deem it easy to see Bran physically move the trees to participate in a large scale battle involving thousands of men, something which I frankly find Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings like in its off the scale High Fantasy nature, but can't see him instead subtly influence the resurrection of a single individual, through proven blood sacrifice means that have already been demonstrated in this series.

He is not going to send an army of Ents to take on the Boltons in the Wolfswood, but he might well draw a decapitated Theon's life force from him through the Heart Tree on the Lake, and use it to resurrect Jon in the Weirwood Grove just North of the Wall. The latter is far less fantastical than the former.

EDIT

Just to take it one step further, if we go by the previously issued prophecy of "Two kings to wake the dragon, first the father then the son, so they both die Kings," then it implies that it might in fact be Stannis who gets sacrificed first, before Shireen, so they both die as monarchs.

Which might give Theon a reprieve. As I find it difficult to envisage how that would come to be though, I find the idea of Theon and Shireen being the two sacrifices to be the more plausible scenario. But for Shireen to count, Stannis then has to be dead already, else she is not Queen yet.

 

 

[Red Helm]

48 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

I find the idea of Theon and Shireen being the two sacrifices to be the more plausible scenario.

Given how meticulous and intentional George R. R. Martin writing is, do you therefore view the plot that is growing in Asha's mind (Theon nullifying the Kingsmoot) to be nothing but a red herring to lull readers into a false sense of security that Theon will not be executed because of the idea that he still has a role to play on the Ironborn's end?

(If you have addressed this before, I apologise for asking you an answered question)

[Free Northman Reborn]

15 minutes ago, Red Helm said:

Given how meticulous and intentional George R. R. Martin writing is, do you therefore view the plot that is growing in Asha's mind (Theon nullifying the Kingsmoot) to be nothing but a red herring to lull readers into a false sense of security that Theon will not be executed because of the idea that he still has a role to play on the Ironborn's end?

(If you have addressed this before, I apologise for asking you an answered question)

The term red herring is used far too frequently, in my view. Few things are red herrings, simply inserted for shits and giggles, to throw the reader off course.

In this case, I view Asha's reflections as a very deliberate plot device to remind the reader that Theon is in fact the true King of the Iron Isles, thus setting him up as a worthy candidate for sacrifice, justifying Jon's resurrection.

Consider that if not for Asha's thoughts on Theon's status and the invalidity of the Kingsmoot, few readers would consider Theon as a King, instead viewing Euron as the legitimately appointed King of the Ironborn. And then Jon's potential resurrection as a result of Theon's sacrifice would have less impact, and in fact appear not to make sense in the context of the "Two kings to wake the dragon", prophecy.

[Protagoras]

On 2016-04-25 at 7:46 PM, The Truth said:

The aftermath and the reasoning for some of the people is too complex and down the line. In order to get to that they have to know its not from ramsay for starters. 

I have been reading this thread with some confusion, because - for me with no stakes in this discussion there seems to be one side taking the logical position of Occam´s razor, questioning that which seem unlikely and instead of speculation tries to go back to what´s "logical", which is very subjective thing but at least I am able to form an intersubjective reality with their thoughts.

Then one side, your side, tries to find an explanation to something that doesn´t really need to be seen in a different way and, as you say in your post I quoted, requires you to basically religiously straight off accept the argument without support. you said it yourself - In order to understand that Ramsay didn´t write the Pink Letter, you need to know he didn´t (!) and suddenly it makes sense.

Sorry for my old-fashion, but theories that are based that you need to take someones word for it in order to "get it" or simply see some kind of objective truth (there aren´t any) usually tell me that there is little but feelings and misguided conviction behind it. 

[Lord Varys]

@Free Northman Reborn

Theon dying at the tree (assuming he ever gets to the tree) seems to be pretty unlikely now that we know that George has recently worked on another TWoW Theon chapter. It might be that he has reworked Theon 1, or course, but assuming Theon is actually sacrificed at the weirwood tree one would also assume that said chapter would be written from Asha's POV (making it Asha 1) rather than Theon's because Theon 2 would not be able to shed any details on what happened immediately after Theon's death (which could be quite important if this is a sacrifice that works).

I see no reason to believe in weirdo life force transfer stuff across long distances as long nothing of this sort is proven. I think Bran might show himself to Stannis/Theon through the face in that tree talking to them, preventing Theon's sacrifice and revealing that he is still alive. Another version could be that Bran would only be able to speak through the tree so that people can see and hear him in the carved face after a blood sacrifice. But that would mean Theon's death then and there which would be rather unlikely right now.

Of course, Arnolf Karstark and his surviving sons and grandsons might be executed there, so there might actually be enough blood spilled for Bran to show some power.

As to the Ent thing:

Well, this kind of thing is actually mentioned in ADwD. Whether you find it great or not isn't the point. It has been established as a potential magical power possessed by the ancient greenseers. It has nowhere been introduced that greenseers can resurrect the dead (and neither has it been established blood magic involving blood sacrifice actually can physically bring back the dead - Drogo wasn't dead, the dragon eggs may have been not completely without life, and nobody died to bring back Beric or Catelyn).

As to Melisandre:

She is not concerned about Stannis' death in the last Jon Snow chapter. And even if she was, she has no reason to jump to the conclusion that Jon Snow is suddenly Azor Ahai. Perhaps she'll doubt everything she has ever believed if she truly believes Stannis is dead? Or she ends up concluding that the Great Other has already won and resistance is futile. The woman is completely entangled in her silly religious beliefs.

As to Shireen:

Theon 1 shows that Stannis has no intention to sacrifice Shireen right now. In my opinion, the best interpretation for Shireen's death in the show is that events were contracted and a lot of stuff was cut/changed. Stannis is supposed to sacrifice his daughter in the books, too, but at a much later point in the story when things are really desperate and the choice is not between 'Shireen' and 'bad weather' but between 'Shireen' and 'the life of all the people of Westeros/humanity itself'.

In general, I find it really breathtaking irritating how many people try to use the cliffhangers to predict the outcome of the entire story. Just because Shireen and Stannis aren't together at the end of ADwD doesn't mean they will be still apart in the end of next book. And it has nowhere been indicated that Shireen has to/will die early on in the next book.

As to the Northern power in general:

For any Stark restoration project to take effect people will need time to coordinate their efforts. For that the Boltons have to get out of the picture. If that happens then people can begin to unite behind this or that guy acting in the name of the Starks. In my opinion Stannis is set up to do this for at least some time simply because there is no other adult and experienced male military commander with sufficient authority in the North. If Stannis died now in battle against the Boltons and Roose wins then the Starks would either be done (because that would almost certainly also include a weakening of House Manderly and the other hidden Stark loyalists at Winterfell) or things would descend into chaos because many people wouldn't know what was going on whom to turn to. The news about Jon Snow's assassination will spread before anyone learns anything about his miraculous resurrection.

Not to mention that the North could get another civil war if the wildlings really take Jon's murder as an opportunity to leave the Wall and head south as quickly as they can, plundering and looting as they go. There is nobody left to protect the smallfolk from them in many places. And as I've said earlier - ADwD hinted at that the Weeper was coming again with a sizable host. With Jon out of the picture and the NW in chaos he could easily take the Bridge of Skulls this time pushing on into the North with fire and sword.

If George wanted to make things better in the North for the Starks things would have gone completely different in ADwD. Jon would have accepted his appointment as Lord of Winterfell, a majority of the Northern Lords had declared for Stannis, Stannis would have died in some battle during which Roose and Ramsay had been defeated, and subsequently the North would have gathered around Jon Snow. But nothing of this sort happened. Instead Jon Snow as Lord Commander was the only guy who could, perhaps, keep a wildlings/NW/Northmen alliance together and he was assassinated. In any realistic scenario this will mark the end of everything he has accomplished so far. He might come back to life but he'll have to work all over again or take a completely different approach to things.

[Jasta11]

The letter's aim is to piss off Jon. To me, that much is crystal clear. It's a 101 course of how to get everyone's favorite not-bastard angry. All it is missing is a mention that Ned was a filthy traitor. Whoever wrote it knew Jon, or had had someone who knew Jon help him. To me that is undisputable.

This leaves us with only a few people who can write it. Mance is the most likely to be privy to all the information in the letter, and he knows Jon better than anyone else in the story IMO. But he lacks a clear motive and his handwriting probably isn't anything to boast of, so he probably had the help of a Maester. The other plausible alternative I see are the mutineers at Castle Black, who want to push Jon into rash action in order to depose him the old-fashioned way. They have a lot of information on Jon, and a Maester on hand; however, that leaves open the question of where they heard about Reek and Mance's party.

 

Theon seems highly unlikely, what are his motives for pissing off Jon? Plus, he has flayed fingers, so his handwriting would probably be atrocious. Stannis has no motives that I can see, and unless he writes the letter immediately after capturing Theon doesn't have access to half the information in the letter. Ramsay wouldn't know anything of Jon unless he managed to capture Mance himself and make him talk which seems unlikely. And do they have Maesters and/or ravens capable of going to CB at Winterfell?

[Free Northman Reborn]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

@Free Northman Reborn

Theon dying at the tree (assuming he ever gets to the tree) seems to be pretty unlikely now that we know that George has recently worked on another TWoW Theon chapter. It might be that he has reworked Theon 1, or course, but assuming Theon is actually sacrificed at the weirwood tree one would also assume that said chapter would be written from Asha's POV (making it Asha 1) rather than Theon's because Theon 2 would not be able to shed any details on what happened immediately after Theon's death (which could be quite important if this is a sacrifice that works).

I see no reason to believe in weirdo life force transfer stuff across long distances as long nothing of this sort is proven. I think Bran might show himself to Stannis/Theon through the face in that tree talking to them, preventing Theon's sacrifice and revealing that he is still alive. Another version could be that Bran would only be able to speak through the tree so that people can see and hear him in the carved face after a blood sacrifice. But that would mean Theon's death then and there which would be rather unlikely right now.

Of course, Arnolf Karstark and his surviving sons and grandsons might be executed there, so there might actually be enough blood spilled for Bran to show some power.

As to the Ent thing:

Well, this kind of thing is actually mentioned in ADwD. Whether you find it great or not isn't the point. It has been established as a potential magical power possessed by the ancient greenseers. It has nowhere been introduced that greenseers can resurrect the dead (and neither has it been established blood magic involving blood sacrifice actually can physically bring back the dead - Drogo wasn't dead, the dragon eggs may have been not completely without life, and nobody died to bring back Beric or Catelyn).

As to Melisandre:

She is not concerned about Stannis' death in the last Jon Snow chapter. And even if she was, she has no reason to jump to the conclusion that Jon Snow is suddenly Azor Ahai. Perhaps she'll doubt everything she has ever believed if she truly believes Stannis is dead? Or she ends up concluding that the Great Other has already won and resistance is futile. The woman is completely entangled in her silly religious beliefs.

As to Shireen:

Theon 1 shows that Stannis has no intention to sacrifice Shireen right now. In my opinion, the best interpretation for Shireen's death in the show is that events were contracted and a lot of stuff was cut/changed. Stannis is supposed to sacrifice his daughter in the books, too, but at a much later point in the story when things are really desperate and the choice is not between 'Shireen' and 'bad weather' but between 'Shireen' and 'the life of all the people of Westeros/humanity itself'.

In general, I find it really breathtaking irritating how many people try to use the cliffhangers to predict the outcome of the entire story. Just because Shireen and Stannis aren't together at the end of ADwD doesn't mean they will be still apart in the end of next book. And it has nowhere been indicated that Shireen has to/will die early on in the next book.

As to the Northern power in general:

For any Stark restoration project to take effect people will need time to coordinate their efforts. For that the Boltons have to get out of the picture. If that happens then people can begin to unite behind this or that guy acting in the name of the Starks. In my opinion Stannis is set up to do this for at least some time simply because there is no other adult and experienced male military commander with sufficient authority in the North. If Stannis died now in battle against the Boltons and Roose wins then the Starks would either be done (because that would almost certainly also include a weakening of House Manderly and the other hidden Stark loyalists at Winterfell) or things would descend into chaos because many people wouldn't know what was going on whom to turn to. The news about Jon Snow's assassination will spread before anyone learns anything about his miraculous resurrection.

Not to mention that the North could get another civil war if the wildlings really take Jon's murder as an opportunity to leave the Wall and head south as quickly as they can, plundering and looting as they go. There is nobody left to protect the smallfolk from them in many places. And as I've said earlier - ADwD hinted at that the Weeper was coming again with a sizable host. With Jon out of the picture and the NW in chaos he could easily take the Bridge of Skulls this time pushing on into the North with fire and sword.

If George wanted to make things better in the North for the Starks things would have gone completely different in ADwD. Jon would have accepted his appointment as Lord of Winterfell, a majority of the Northern Lords had declared for Stannis, Stannis would have died in some battle during which Roose and Ramsay had been defeated, and subsequently the North would have gathered around Jon Snow. But nothing of this sort happened. Instead Jon Snow as Lord Commander was the only guy who could, perhaps, keep a wildlings/NW/Northmen alliance together and he was assassinated. In any realistic scenario this will mark the end of everything he has accomplished so far. He might come back to life but he'll have to work all over again or take a completely different approach to things.

Hmm.

The whole point is that the Stark restoration was only meant to occur after the 5 year gap. And Stannis was meant to occuppy the Boltons attention during the 5 year gap, which would have bought the time necessary for Arya to complete her training, Sansa to rise to power in the Vale and Bran to complete his greenseer initiation. Jon's resurrection is the major turning point in this story, and was only meant to occur after the 5 year gap as well, starting the Stark return to power. If it happened sooner, and things went the Stark way early on as you suggest, then Sansa and Arya would have been able to return to the safety of Winterfell before completing their arcs in the Vale and Braavos respectively.

The Boltons and Stannis had to keep the North in a state of limbo for long enough that the Stark children could grow up and master their various skills. And the catalyst for everything to move forward from that limbo was likely Jon's death and resurrection.

All of which could not happen too soon, else it would not tie up with Dany's return either.

You view Jon's assassination as a low point for him, as punishment for his failures and in effect a demotion of his status in the story, asserting that he will have to start from the bottom again to gain some position of minor influence at the Wall. In contrast I see quite clearly that Jon's entire arc has been building up to this climax, and it will be the moment where he shakes himself loose from his past issues and is able to leap to the heights his arc was always meant to achieve.

Far from being a setback, his assassination and resurrection will be the key to unlock his true potential, and springboard him to the leadership position that the miserable and largely forgotton Watch never could provide to him.

Stannis, Roose, Ramsay and even Mellisandre were merely plot tools to set the scene for him to take this path.

 

[Greg B]

8 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, what can I say? Jon Snow was stupid to actually declare war on the Boltons without actually waiting for an independent source to confirm that Ramsay did not lie. But I'm not so sure he had all that much choice to wait. He intended to go on the Hardhome ranging, after all, and if he had done that know he might have found Ramsay or Roose at the Wall and in charge of things there upon his return. Any wait on his part would have given Ramsay/Roose the time and opportunity to actually learn that he effectively had a wildling army, and had he not been killed marching down south would have helped uncover the real truth anyway.

That's not the point. Maybe going warlord was stupid, maybe it wasn't. Maybe Jon weighed his options and the associated risks, discussed it all with Tormund, and decided he had to act, now, because enough of the letter was true that he had no other good choices. None of that is the point. The point is that Jon believes Stannis is dead, and for no other reason than the Pink Letter told him so. He doesn't think Stannis might be dead; he thinks Stannis is dead and that he should have told the queen. Now we might assume that Jon's assessment of his options and their risks was based, in part, on this belief. But we don't have to make that assumption. Maybe it's irrelevant to his decision-making process.

The point is that Jon's thinking Stannis is dead is a flatly unjustified and unwarranted belief. There is no support for it whatsoever in the text. Jon literally (in the fullest sense of the word) has no reason at all to believe it.

But he does. So if Stannis is dead and the Pink Letter is just a plot device that allows Jon to react to that catastrophic turn of events after it was cut from the book, okay. Clunky, but okay. If Stannis is in fact alive and Jon believed he was dead because...well, I can't imagine any reason he would believe it...but if Jon believed Stannis was dead for whatever reason and he's actually alive, if Jon's really that unutterably stupid, foolish and gullible, then Martin has made Jon to TSTL simply as a plot contrivance and he should remain deceased, in one reader's humble opinion.

I'm betting on the plot device explanation, and that sure enough, Stannis is dead. I'm dearly hoping for it. The alternative is too hackish to contemplate.

[Free Northman Reborn]

2 minutes ago, Greg B said:

That's not the point. Maybe going warlord was stupid, maybe it wasn't. Maybe Jon weighed his options and the associated risks, discussed it all with Tormund, and decided he had to act, now, because enough of the letter was true that he had no other good choices. None of that is the point. The point is that Jon believes Stannis is dead, and for no other reason than the Pink Letter told him so. He doesn't think Stannis might be dead; he thinks Stannis is dead and that he should have told the queen. Now we might assume that Jon's assessment of his options and their risks was based, in part, on this belief. But we don't have to make that assumption. Maybe it's irrelevant to his decision-making process.

The point is that Jon's thinking Stannis is dead is a flatly unjustified and unwarranted belief. There is no support for it whatsoever in the text. Jon literally (in the fullest sense of the word) has no reason at all to believe it.

But he does. So if Stannis is dead and the Pink Letter is just a plot device that allows Jon to react to that catastrophic turn of events after it was cut from the book, okay. Clunky, but okay. If Stannis is in fact alive and Jon believed he was dead because...well, I can't imagine any reason he would believe it...but if Jon believed Stannis was dead for whatever reason and he's actually alive, if Jon's really that unutterably stupid, foolish and gullible, then Martin has made Jon to TSTL simply as a plot contrivance and he should remain deceased, in one reader's humble opinion.

I'm betting on the plot device explanation, and that sure enough, Stannis is dead. I'm dearly hoping for it. The alternative is too hackish to contemplate.

One intermediate alternative is that Jon will not be the only one to believe in Stannis's death. Meaning that Stannis has faked his own death, or has disappeared from the scene after being wounded or has been removed through Bran or some other supernatural intervention.

So that Jon, together with the entire North, will believe Stannis dead. Then, retrospectively, Jon's belief in the contents of the letter will look more justifiable, as it evidently fooled everyone in the Seven Kingdoms. I totally agree with you that based on the letter alone Jon should never have come to this conclusion.

But if Martin subsequently makes it seem like a reasonable conclusion, with a lot more going for it than just the letter, it will mitigate the weirdness of Jon's decision somewhat. What will however look very foolish, is if Jon was simply conned by Ramsay, who fabricated the entire letter. That will simply not fit with the narrative that Martin has developed over the course of 5 books.

[Chaircat Meow]

I sometimes wonder that anyone honestly thinks Ramsay didn't write the letter ... The board has chewed over this for a while now, and the only theory that fits the facts is the one postulating that Ramsay wrote the letter, hoping to recover farya and in the false belief that most of what he wrote was actually true.

I also rather like the fact that Stannis's battle winning deception had the unintended consequence of getting Jon killed.

Disagree strongly with FNR's ideas about Jon's future role. I think Jon will now never leave the Wall (and certainly not to go south). He repeatedly had the chance to leave, and refused, in some way, each time, until the last when he got himself killed. Given what George has said about resurrections, and their cost, Jon won't just pick up where he left off and go south. Moreover, his death and rebirth will likely make him more effective against the Others, while rendering him less able to relate to his fellow men.

Also we know that FNR's (spoiler for TV programme)

 

 

 

version of events is going to happen in the show. However, tellingly, in the show, Stannis is already dead, while in the books he seems very likely to win the battle at the frozen lake and seize Winterfell. This suggests, to me, that Jon uniting the north and fighting the Starks' enemies is not something that's going down in the books, because D&D had to change things up to make it possible for the TV.

 

 

Sansa, Arya, Rickon and maybe Bran will be dealing with House Stark's enemies, not Jon. I think Stannis, although initially victorious over the Boltons, will find his hold over the north contested by Manderly (with Rickon) and Littlefinger with Sansa. There will be ongoing chaos and eventually the Stark children will reassert their house.

[Greg B]

9 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

One intermediate alternative is that Jon will not be the only one to believe in Stannis's death. Meaning that Stannis has faked his own death, or has disappeared from the scene after being wounded or has been removed through Bran or some other supernatural intervention.

I'd like for this to help (me), but I don't see how it does. If Stannis faked his own death, or disappeared or whatever, other people might have good reasons to believe he's dead. But Jon doesn't -- he only has the Pink Letter. Something like this might allow Jon to hide his embarrassment in-story ("LOL, yeah, I was fooled too!"), but it doesn't do anything for us, the readers.

[Free Northman Reborn]

2 minutes ago, Greg B said:

I'd like for this to help (me), but I don't see how it does. If Stannis faked his own death, or disappeared or whatever, other people might have good reasons to believe he's dead. But Jon doesn't -- he only has the Pink Letter. Something like this might allow Jon to hide his embarrassment in-story ("LOL, yeah, I was fooled too!"), but it doesn't do anything for us, the readers.

Agreed. Just trying to see how Martin might try to play it to soften the blow.