Jump to content
Suzanna Stormborn

[Book Spoilers] R+L=J, A+J=T and other theories on HBO V.4

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, JordanJH1993 said:

 

I can't see the point in the show going with the A+J=T theory at this point. The revelation that he has been a secret Targaryen would be massively underwhelming compared to when Jon was revealed to have been one to the viewers and when he is eventually revealed to be one to the main characters in the show. With Jon, the implications involve the possibility of him having a claim. With Tyrion, he would most definitely be a bastard. At best, it may be that he could ride a dragon, but I still don't take the 'dragon must have three heads' too literally, plus I am unsure how heavily the show have play on this, if at all.

Tyrion being revealed as a Targaryen wouldn't even be 'nice' for him. He would realise the true reason his father hated him, but is the true reason of Tywin hating Tyrion because he is Aerys' child instead of his any better than him hating him because he is a dwarf? And also, despite never knowing his mother, she and Tywin were happily married; he came from a pair of parents in love with one another, so despite it all, he was born out of love. He most likely would be born out of rape if he was Aerys' son.

Yes, it would give him a closer connection to Daenerys, but being her brother doesn't automatically make him better for her. Think Viserys. Although, at the same time, that could be the spin they use on it: Daenerys finally having a brother she can experience something good with.

I don't know if the show is going with AJT -- and unlike Consigliere, I think that the books are headed toward AJT even if the show deviates on that issue.

But asking the question of the "point" of going with AJT just might be the wrong question. GRRM outlined an endgame over 25 years ago. He told that endgame to D&D. But while we have some clues what the endgame will be -- how the White Walkers are defeated most likely will involve some elements that the reader/viewers would have no real way to predict.

So we don't know how Tyrion as a Targ might be central to the endgame. People assumed it was the need for a third dragonrider. And maybe it will be if Jon or Dany are riding the two surviving dragons and one of the dragonriders dies. Or maybe some other element of the story requires Tyrion to be a Targ. We don't know why Rhaegar said that the dragon must have three heads (which prophecy has not been stated in the show, by the way). But Rhaegar said it and seemed fixated on the need for a third child to fulfill the prophecy. Rhaegar obviously misunderstood who the three heads will be -- but the need for the three heads does not seem to be in doubt (at least in the books).

So just because the "point" is not obvious to you does not mean that there is no point. 

A better way to look at the issue, in my opinion, simply is to follow the clues with as little bias as possible. And the clues in the books are fairly strongly in favor of AJT. The only real objections that are given is that people don't like the story implications -- generally either because they don't like how it changes the dynamic between Tyrion and Tywin or because they don't like the existence of two "hidden" Targs as main characters in the story. Those objections, however, are based on personal preference -- not based on clues or foreshadowing from the story itself. So without evidence that GRRM would prefer to leave the Tyrion/Tywin dynamic fixed or that GRRM would not want two "hidden" Targs, those objections are not particularly persuasive to me.

Oh, and your final point about Dany finally have a "good" brother does seem like the kind of story development that GRRM would like. But maybe now I am allowing my subjective bias to influence my interpretation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Shmedricko said:

At the moment, I tend to doubt that the show is going to do A+J=T (even though I think it's almost certainly true for the books), but nevertheless, I did notice a line with potential double meaning in last week's episode, when Tyrion reunited with Jaime:

And he did say this while surrounded by the dragon skulls beneath the Red Keep. But as noted above, they could just be hammering home the angle that Tywin hated Tyrion because he was a dwarf, without any intention of hinting at the idea that Tywin actually hated Tyrion because he knew/suspected that Tyrion was Aerys' bastard.

YES thank you for posting this.  I noticed it when I watched then forgot about it (probably because I was so infuriated with the ridiculous idea of Tyrion sneaking into KL the way he did, that would NEVER happen)

But yes the 'monster' thing is a huge  AJT hint in the books I outlined it in an old thread here 

 

And to the posts above that pointed out some of the other AJT hints in the show above, yes i completely agree those are all AJT stuff from the books, what worries me is that they are all subtle and D&D are not subtle, IMO they could just as easily be adding that stuff in with no purpose. Often when they give hints they are quite blatant about it, nothing like Martin. So if in fact they do go the route of AJT then all props to them for laying the ground work over several season and keeping it low-key like the books.

 

I just wish the scenes with the dragons could be more fluid, but every scene the dragons are in has to be SO EPIC, there is never a casual Drogon scene since they were little. I want to see a human go up to the stables and interact with them while they are calm, like Tyrion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How convenient.

If the show reveals AJT - theory confirmed!

If the show does not reveal AJT - it doesn't mean anything!

Bottom line is this: If AJT is true then the importance of such a development should be on par with RLJ. The show did not leave out the latter so I don't see why they would leave out the former if the theory is indeed correct.

On another note: while I came around to AJT after the world book, I don't consider the theory to be as compelling as RLJ. Would I like for the theory to be correct? Sure, but the story works just as well with Tyrion as a true born Lannister.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

I don't know if the show is going with AJT -- and unlike Consigliere, I think that the books are headed toward AJT even if the show deviates on that issue.

But asking the question of the "point" of going with AJT just might be the wrong question. GRRM outlined an endgame over 25 years ago. He told that endgame to D&D. But while we have some clues what the endgame will be -- how the White Walkers are defeated most likely will involve some elements that the reader/viewers would have no real way to predict.

So we don't know how Tyrion as a Targ might be central to the endgame. People assumed it was the need for a third dragonrider. And maybe it will be if Jon or Dany are riding the two surviving dragons and one of the dragonriders dies. Or maybe some other element of the story requires Tyrion to be a Targ. We don't know why Rhaegar said that the dragon must have three heads (which prophecy has not been stated in the show, by the way). But Rhaegar said it and seemed fixated on the need for a third child to fulfill the prophecy. Rhaegar obviously misunderstood who the three heads will be -- but the need for the three heads does not seem to be in doubt (at least in the books).

So just because the "point" is not obvious to you does not mean that there is no point. 

A better way to look at the issue, in my opinion, simply is to follow the clues with as little bias as possible. And the clues in the books are fairly strongly in favor of AJT. The only real objections that are given is that people don't like the story implications -- generally either because they don't like how it changes the dynamic between Tyrion and Tywin or because they don't like the existence of two "hidden" Targs as main characters in the story. Those objections, however, are based on personal preference -- not based on clues or foreshadowing from the story itself. So without evidence that GRRM would prefer to leave the Tyrion/Tywin dynamic fixed or that GRRM would not want two "hidden" Targs, those objections are not particularly persuasive to me.

Oh, and your final point about Dany finally have a "good" brother does seem like the kind of story development that GRRM would like. But maybe now I am allowing my subjective bias to influence my interpretation.

I apologise, I was trying to think of it with as little bias as I could.

If I was responding to it with my own bias, I would be 'hoping' that AJT was going to happen in the show, as I believe, like you do, that it is heading that way in the books. I was trying to take into account that one of the reasons a lot of people believe it needs to happen in the books is in relation to the three heads of the dragon and three dragon riders, but as the show hasn't touched on that, I was looking at is as a possible hint that they are leaving AJT out of the show.

I am going by the fact that, while there are some 'hints' in the books that Tyrion may be a Targaryen, there are fewer of these in the show. Also, and importantly, in my eyes, is that there aren't many episodes left of Game of Thrones altogether, so for AJT to happen, it would almost have to be thrown in. Given the lack of hints, this may look forced and the viewers at home may look at as 'who isn't a secret Targaryen?' which the writers may want to avoid. I know the counter to that would be with the vast amount of ridiculous things we have seen in this season already, surely people could accept Tyrion being a secret Targaryen. But I believe something like AJT may be harder for the casual fan to chew than something like Jaime swimming in full armour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It might also be that the author is going to leave it unresolved....and not give a definitive answer, which would give the show leeway to leave it out.  It would be a little weird to create all of those hints in the world book only to do nothing with it in the end...but it's possible.  There are a lot of dead ends in the books as it is.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't buy that explanation either. This is usually an argument used by people attempting to defend crackpot rubbish i.e. 'X is absolutely true but the author will never reveal it'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JordanJH1993 said:

I can't see the point in the show going with the A+J=T theory at this point. The revelation that he has been a secret Targaryen would be massively underwhelming compared to when Jon was revealed to have been one to the viewers and when he is eventually revealed to be one to the main characters in the show. With Jon, the implications involve the possibility of him having a claim. With Tyrion, he would most definitely be a bastard. At best, it may be that he could ride a dragon, but I still don't take the 'dragon must have three heads' too literally, plus I am unsure how heavily the show have play on this, if at all.

I tend to agree with that. In the books the Tyrion story seems to be much more tied into the overall plot in Slaver's Bay and camp Dany, not to mention Tyrion's own unresolved issues with his family. His murder of Tywin goes quite differently there, he is much more and deeper estranged from Jaime due to the Tysha reveal, he is a much uglier and meaner creature, given to fits of rage and depression, and he is insanely ugly creature, both by birth and by injury.

The 'Targaryen bastard revelation' can help him leave much of that behind. He could become a dragonrider - something he most likely is going to become in books, never mind whether he has Targaryen blood or not - he could develop a link with Daenerys before he is actually able to prove his worth to her. He could get in the inner circle of her people in Meereen and Slaver's Bay, etc.

The show played that in their usual moronic way - it just happened - but in the books chances are that this ugly dwarf would receive even a colder welcome at Dany's court than Quentyn Martell got - and his family are undoubtedly Targaryen loyalists. Tyrion, son of Tywin, becoming a dragonrider should actually set him up to suffer the fate of Hugh and Ulf pretty quickly. People loyal to Daenerys would mistrust him, not respect him.

But if Selmy knows or suspects who he actually is he is not going to be executed on sight, and he should also be able to free himself from the Second Sons and become an independent player again. 

Even if he lived long enough to finally meet Daenerys upon her return (or whenever that's supposed to happen) I still don't see her forgiving a convicted kingslayer and kinslayer. I mean, you really don't want to trust people who are capable of that, and there is little reason that Tyrion's ugliness will convince her to sit down and hear and truly understand the sad story of his life and the emotional turmoil that led to the murder of Tywin and Shae - assuming Tyrion would ever be willing to talk to her (or anyone) about that, which he clearly is not.

In that sense, I've strong difficulties to ever see Tyrion becoming the Hand of the Queen in the books without any revelation about his true parentage.

That could give him back his own self-esteem and actually help him cope with Tywin's own treatment of him. He might even be able to deal with the murder itself when he understands why Tywin could never love him. In addition, it could establish some sort of link with Daenerys. She thinks she is the last Targaryen, and she still would be. Tyrion would be just a Targaryen bastard. But if he becomes a dragonrider she could certainly legitimize or perhaps even marry him.

After all, we do know that she thinks the other two dragon heads are men she is going to marry. And I'm pretty sure she is going to believe that those men are also going to ride her other two dragons.

6 hours ago, JordanJH1993 said:

Tyrion being revealed as a Targaryen wouldn't even be 'nice' for him. He would realise the true reason his father hated him, but is the true reason of Tywin hating Tyrion because he is Aerys' child instead of his any better than him hating him because he is a dwarf? And also, despite never knowing his mother, she and Tywin were happily married; he came from a pair of parents in love with one another, so despite it all, he was born out of love. He most likely would be born out of rape if he was Aerys' son.

But Tyrion needs to get over the Tywin thing. And the mirror-image there is just brilliant. We would have Jaime murdering Tyrion's father and Tyrion murdering Jaime's father. That would set these two on equal ground when they meet again.

Not to mention that there is really no point at all to those Aerys-Joanna allusions in the books if this hasn't anything to do with Tyrion's true parentage. TWoIaF simply gave us too much in this regard.

But even the Joanna story in ADwD is pointless if it isn't buildup for the Tyrion reveal. We already had enough information on the Tywin-Aerys relationship to know why they fell out eventually. We didn't need Joanna in that mix, too. We had Aerys being jealous of Tywin's competence and that so many people admired him for that, we had the information that people were giving credit to real competent guy at court, laughing about the king behind his back. We had Aerys brusquely rejecting the idea to marry Cersei to Rhaegar. And we have the final Kingsguard fiasco.

Joanna actually complicates the thing even more, especially if it doesn't lead to Aerys > Tyrion. After all, why remained the proud Tywin friends with a man who treated his bride the way he did during his own wedding in the 260s? Why did he continue to serve him as Hand? Why didn't Tywin go through with his resignation after Joanna was publicly humiliated by the king in 272 AC?

If Tywin was so in love with Joanna then any attack on her should have made Tywin even more angry than the rejection of Cersei or even the Kingsguard thing. Joanna was the love of his life, apparently.

But if that whole relationship was much more complex than we know at this point - some sort of menage à trois in the past - with Joanna, at times, preferring Aerys II over her husband then this could help explain this conundrum. And the logical endpoint there is Aerys II fathering Tyrion 272 AC.

If you check the books George usually doesn't plant so many seeds without them eventually bearing fruits. Even Joffrey as the guy behind the attempt on Bran is already there in AGoT.

6 hours ago, JordanJH1993 said:

Yes, it would give him a closer connection to Daenerys, but being her brother doesn't automatically make him better for her. Think Viserys. Although, at the same time, that could be the spin they use on it: Daenerys finally having a brother she can experience something good with.

Well, Tyrion could never become a brother who could dominate her. He would be basically be at her mercy. It could be that George ends up playing out this 'love triangle' he had there in the original outline between Jon-Arya-Tyrion with Jon-Dany-Tyrion. They would be the three heads of the dragon, eventually riding the three dragons, and Dany is going to marry both the guys, just as Aegon the Conqueror married both his sisters.

Tyrion-Dany could be begin as a platonic brother-sister relationship with the (eventual) marriage only serving as a way to keep House Targaryen together and the dragons in the family and under Dany's control. But Tyrion could develop strong romantic feelings for her that are not exactly returned. Prior to that, they could also form a strong sibling bond - Dany because she has another (half-)brother after all, and Tyrion because he learns he has another sister, one that treats him much better than Cersei ever would. Even if they never have sex Tyrion could still get closer to Daenerys than any other character. That is, until Jon comes around.

They play with Tyrion's love for Dany in the show, too, but since their Tyrion has basically nothing in common with the real one, the real Tyrion's story with Daenerys would simply not happen in the show. Even if it turned out that George is not making Tyrion Dany's half-brother their relationship would be much different in the books than it is in the show. George is going to make that part interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way - guys, we should keep in mind that twist George has been telling us about some years ago he has decided to go along with in TWoW. He has confirmed he going with this as well as that the show won't because he never told them about that.

Perhaps he really only came up with Tyrion as Aerys' son while writing the story. The Tywin talk about Tyrion the bastard could just have been meant as insults, the dragon dreams could originally have been nothing but the dreams of power an ugly, helpless dwarf child had. But then George began to think about Joanna, putting the wedding story into ADwD. And from there it went to TWoIaF.

At the same time he built the back story of the Targaryens and the dragons and the dragonriders, establishing the rules how this works, etc. If he always wanted to have Tyrion as a dragonrider it would also make great sense to have him as a Targaryen descendant in the mix - especially if that fit naturally with the way most of the story played out anyway. And thus we get to a twist for which there might have been some (unintended) foreshadowing in the early books.

And it is quite clear that we don't know everything about the events leading up to the murders of Shae and Tywin. If Varys/Illyrio knew the truth about Tyrion's parentage it would also help explain their interest in working with Tyrion.

But there is also a very strong hint that this particular plot was planned from the start considering that George had the comic guys keep the particular exchange between Jon-Tyrion about Tyrion being a trueborn Lannister, etc. Jon being the prince disguised as a bastard and Tyrion being the royal bastard disguised as the son of a great lord would make for a rather interesting turn of events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, GRRM said last month that there will be major plot twists in the books which won't be in the show:

Quote

danihinze

Is there any major plot twists which will be in the books but not on the show?

grrm

Yes

-Not A Blog

AJT could be one such twist. Or not.

Edited by Shmedricko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

It might also be that the author is going to leave it unresolved....and not give a definitive answer, which would give the show leeway to leave it out.  It would be a little weird to create all of those hints in the world book only to do nothing with it in the end...but it's possible.  There are a lot of dead ends in the books as it is.  

 

18 hours ago, Consigliere said:

I don't buy that explanation either. This is usually an argument used by people attempting to defend crackpot rubbish i.e. 'X is absolutely true but the author will never reveal it'.

Perhaps he gave such hints in the world book because it was a good way to drum up discussion about the world book.  I know, blaspheme!  But I agree with Genco - stop moving the goal posts.  If AJT is true, it will be in the show.  If it's not, it won't.  Dinklage is far too important an actor for them to "overlook" such a huge part of his story.  Y'all twisting yourself in pretzels to convince yourselves otherwise is half sad and half funny.  Could still totally happen next season - look how quick and nonchalant they just revealed Jon's legitimacy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an unnerving question about book/show similarities: do you guys think that Harry the Heir will try to take advantage of Sansa in the books? I still think Sansa marrying Ramsay was a terrible idea on the showrunner's part, but they do tend to use a kind of convoluted logic in their writing (ex. Victarion goes to Dany because he wants to marry her, Yara goes to Dany so she can help her overthrow her uncle, but either way a Greyjoy is bringing a fleet to Dany; Stannis will likely win Winterfell in the books, Jon took Winterfell back on the show, but in both cases someone kicks the Boltons out of Winterfell). It's a frightening prospect if true, but I've seen people speculate on it before, and I'm interested in hearing your takes on it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Here's an unnerving question about book/show similarities: do you guys think that Harry the Heir will try to take advantage of Sansa in the books? I still think Sansa marrying Ramsay was a terrible idea on the showrunner's part, but they do tend to use a kind of convoluted logic in their writing (ex. Victarion goes to Dany because he wants to marry her, Yara goes to Dany so she can help her overthrow her uncle, but either way a Greyjoy is bringing a fleet to Dany; Stannis will likely win Winterfell in the books, Jon took Winterfell back on the show, but in both cases someone kicks the Boltons out of Winterfell). It's a frightening prospect if true, but I've seen people speculate on it before, and I'm interested in hearing your takes on it. 

Not sure if that's the right point to discuss but - no, the Sansa plot won't go in that direction. They came up with that Sansa-Ramsay idea after ADwD came out, basically. Harry has yet to become the Lord of the Vale, and Littlefinger eventually wants Sansa for himself. Unlike Gillen he might actually get Sansa in the books, at least for a time. The real Littlefinger isn't a moron.

In addition, Sansa basically gets the same story Dany does in the books. She gets sold to and raped by some man and then this somehow empowers her and makes her stronger (which was already a ridiculous plot line with Daenerys, but a tidbit more believable because Dany is also guided by prophecy and destiny, unlike Sansa). Why would George want to tell the same basic story with Sansa and Dany?

That said, the show seems to be sticking to George's own plot ideas these days mostly because the writers cannot write and aren't creative or a competent enough to come up with good plot ideas of their own. I mean, their genuine stuff - like Jon's expedition to Craster's or the Theon plots in the third and fourth season - is usually horrible.

At this point they use George's material basically as some sort of creative quarry. They break out certain pieces and put them back together they want it to 'make sense'.

You can see this tendency best last season, I think, when they stretched out the theater scene in Braavos to the extreme. How many episodes did that cover - two or three, I don't recall? And their own contribution to that - Arya bonding with the actress there for no good reason - was just horrible. Or how they brought back the siege of Riverrun at a point in the story when this didn't make any sense.

It is things like that that make it clear that they don't have really good information on the future plot lines of the books because then they could actually take a few very good plots George actually has in his head already and work them into some decent episodes or scenes. But the thing we are getting is basically their take on the characters they have created/twisted, their dialogue, and their plot. There are certain echoes or parallels to the planned book plots that we might be able to identify but nothing that is really based on a particular plot in any meaningful sense.

Competent writers would actually think about the story from the ending, would streamline it when necessary for various production reasons, and actually cut a lot of things. But these guys don't really think things through. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked the Braavosi scenes well enough, it was merely the confrontation with the Waif (with Arya getting stabbed for real, yet not really suffering for it) that came out wrong. The theathre troop was a highlight.

If AJT is correct, I think it was always intended to be and will also be in the show, even if it may have to wait till the very final episode.

If Tyrion has royal blood, this should be a big deal, with or without dragonriding.

ASOIAF isn't that easy to predict, on various forums I have heard lots of different opinions as to what would happen with Dany and Jon, and those opinions are mixed on who (either, one, neither) will survive and rule. Without knowing the answer to that question, the place of the other characters is difficult to determine as the removal of either or both of our Targaryens would bring about a game of musical chairs as replacements move up.

It does look on the show as if they may deal with the Walkers first and leave Cersei for last, a la the scouring of the Shire. Could this be the case in the books as well, and if so with (f)Aegon or with Cersei herself? The Valonqar prophecy may indicate Cersei will last a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wouter said:

I liked the Braavosi scenes well enough, it was merely the confrontation with the Waif (with Arya getting stabbed for real, yet not really suffering for it) that came out wrong. The theathre troop was a highlight.

Well, I watched that only once and I'm not going to revisit it. But if you take the chapter is it is based upon and the season as sort of an adaptation of TWoW (I know how ridiculous that sounds) then the space this small element from the Mercy chapter got in relation to the entire Arya plot in the next book this doesn't reflect well on the intention of the writers to actually properly adapt her storyline.

They were basically milking the theater plot completely dry and then some. That doesn't mean that this wasn't the better part of the Braavos scenes - it sure as hell was as far as I can recall. And this whole thing thankfully gets more and more blurred in my mind.

2 hours ago, Wouter said:

If AJT is correct, I think it was always intended to be and will also be in the show, even if it may have to wait till the very final episode.

If Tyrion has royal blood, this should be a big deal, with or without dragonriding.

I'm not so sure. If gist of the political plot for Tyrion in the show is to have him end up as Hand of the Queen then he doesn't have to be Dany's half-brother for that. The point of that plot in the books is most likely not so narrow since it would also involve Tyrion becoming a dragonrider and most likely him being one of the three dragon heads.

But there is no sign that the dragon has three heads in the show, nor is there any sign that there will be three fixed dragonriders in the show.

And the writers certainly could decide that they don't like the idea of another secret Targaryen. The cut Aegon and they could sure as hell also cut Tyrion's true heritage. He could still end up at exactly the same point in the show as he is in the books, just with less of a journey and (much) less of a back story.

We have seen to what level of ridiculousness they can sink with 'High Septon Maynard' and the diary entry about the annulment. That is not going to be George's way to introduce the back story of Rhaegar and Lyanna and Jon's true parentage. And thus the show is telling us a completely different story there.

2 hours ago, Wouter said:

ASOIAF isn't that easy to predict, on various forums I have heard lots of different opinions as to what would happen with Dany and Jon, and those opinions are mixed on who (either, one, neither) will survive and rule. Without knowing the answer to that question, the place of the other characters is difficult to determine as the removal of either or both of our Targaryens would bring about a game of musical chairs as replacements move up.

Well, if Tyrion ended up as king the show could get him on the Iron Throne easily enough. They don't have to make him a Targaryen for that. Just remember that Cersei rules the Seven Kingdoms as Queen Regnant right now, something that literally cannot happen in the books.

In the books Tyrion could - as a (legitimized) Targaryen bastard and dragonrider - also end up on the Iron Throne but not as a Lannister. But the show sure as hell could make that happen. They can and do whatever the hell they want.

Things don't have to make sense there. The show isn't exactly a coherent or consistent universe, nor does anyone give the pretense that it is supposed to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I'm not so sure. If gist of the political plot for Tyrion in the show is to have him end up as Hand of the Queen then he doesn't have to be Dany's half-brother for that. The point of that plot in the books is most likely not so narrow since it would also involve Tyrion becoming a dragonrider and most likely him being one of the three dragon heads.

If Tyrion becomes a dragonrider in the books, what is the reasoning for leaving it out in the show?  If there's one thing the showrunners love, it's big moments - and the downtrodden imp (who's been rightly criticized as a saintly version of book-Tyrion) mounting a dragon is one of the biggest TV moments one can conjure.

5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

And the writers certainly could decide that they don't like the idea of another secret Targaryen. The cut Aegon and they could sure as hell also cut Tyrion's true heritage. He could still end up at exactly the same point in the show as he is in the books, just with less of a journey and (much) less of a back story.

Cutting out Aegon, on its face, was not a bad idea.  Especially considering their ridiculous race to the finish.  But equating that with Tyrion's lineage is a faulty premise.  Tyrion is one of the main characters of the show.  Despite their rush, they found time to include scenes last season of him playing drinking games with Missandei and Grey Worm just to remind you he was still around.  

If he's going to end up at "exactly the same point," why would they leave out such a salient aspect of that process.  Too many Targs?  They've already shot their load with Jon this season - in deplorable fashion.  What big reveal or twist does anyone anticipate for the final season?  In other words, if AJT was available to them, why wouldn't they exploit it?

To be clear as I can (at my current state), here is the logic laid out:  AJT will only happen if it serves a purpose to the plot.  The most likely purpose is to ride a dragon.*  The showrunners know the endgame for the main characters.  Tyrion is both a main character in the books and the show.  Therefore, if Tyrion rides a dragon in the books, the showrunners have a vested interest in depicting the same in their abomination.  Where in this logic have I gone wrong?

*If the purpose of AJT is for Tyrion to eventually take the throne - which I find incredibly unlikely - I suppose you could argue he'll just take it in the show.  Then again, you could argue the same could be true in the books since everyone else could be dead.  I don't find this to be a fruitful discussion. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Tyrion ends up as king in the show without a further hint of A+J=T, then this may be a sign that D&D changed things because it is very unlikely that Tyrion would end up on the throne without support of the Targaryen name and/or with a dragon behind him. The combination of being a dwarf, being hated and not having his own power base (he's not popular in his father's lands and Dany's power base isn't simply his without the familial tie) is not a good one.

However, the show did include Tyrion's backstory as far as his dragon obsession goes, going out of their way to include the scene with him freeing the dragons. The purpose of that scene is still unclear to me if there is not a shred of Targaryen blood in Tyrion, unless the only purpose was to give Dinklage a meaty scene.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Wouter said:

If Tyrion ends up as king in the show without a further hint of A+J=T, then this may be a sign that D&D changed things because it is very unlikely that Tyrion would end up on the throne without support of the Targaryen name and/or with a dragon behind him. The combination of being a dwarf, being hated and not having his own power base (he's not popular in his father's lands and Dany's power base isn't simply his without the familial tie) is not a good one.

However, the show did include Tyrion's backstory as far as his dragon obsession goes, going out of their way to include the scene with him freeing the dragons. The purpose of that scene is still unclear to me if there is not a shred of Targaryen blood in Tyrion, unless the only purpose was to give Dinklage a meaty scene.

+ The special saddle for Bran IIRC - which is a strong clue for many (including me) that Tyrion will use the same design to mount a dragon.

My view on this has always been that AJT will not be explicitly confirmed - not unlike Nettles' true origin in tPatQ, Tyrion riding Viserion will just almost confirm it. And yes, it would make sense that it will only happen at the very end (the closing of the penultimate episode of the last season?), because if true it would be paramount to the end game. I actually believe only Sansa + Tyrion will survive as the sole "normal" political leaders - probably elected by the people, as the show strongly hints at during the Dany / Tyrion discussion about her succession.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having recently come around to the idea of AJT - and taking into account the frantic pacing that the show has adopted - I'm now expecting to see it happen in Season Eight.

What has convinced me is the decision to have Varys planted like a benign tumour on Dragonstone. My prediction is that Tyrion will mount a dragon in a moment of desperation, which prompts the Spider to offer detailed exposition regarding Aerys and Joanna.

I doubt there could ever be the sort of concrete proof that we'll eventually get with Jon, but then the fact that Tyrion would only be a bastard reduces the need for it anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, dmc515 said:

If Tyrion becomes a dragonrider in the books, what is the reasoning for leaving it out in the show?  If there's one thing the showrunners love, it's big moments - and the downtrodden imp (who's been rightly criticized as a saintly version of book-Tyrion) mounting a dragon is one of the biggest TV moments one can conjure.

I honestly don't know. But then, it is quite clear that the show cut all the important dragonrider scenes we are going to get in the books during/after the battle of Meereen. I mean, Dragonbinder is there, right? If Tyrion doesn't have Targaryen blood then Victarion and/or Brown Ben Plumm will claim a dragon. The books have Tyrion, Victarion, and Brown Ben set up as potential dragonriders. Unlike the show unclaimed dragons that are growing ever larger have to be claimed to accompany anyone to Westeros. They are not going to follow Dany or anyone just out of the goodness of their animal hearts.

The best explanation I have for this is that 

- the writers don't give a shit about the intricacies of the dragonbonding/dragonriding plot as it is build up in the books.

- the writers don't particularly care for Tyrion's Targaryen ancestry. Perhaps they will include that detail, perhaps they won't.

If you check the way they adapted Dany-Drogon it is also quite clear that this had nothing to do with the way the scene was written in the books. In the show you had a submissive Drogon essentially present himself to Dany to jump upon. There was no fight for control there, no danger, no anything.

7 hours ago, dmc515 said:

Cutting out Aegon, on its face, was not a bad idea.  Especially considering their ridiculous race to the finish.  But equating that with Tyrion's lineage is a faulty premise.  Tyrion is one of the main characters of the show.  Despite their rush, they found time to include scenes last season of him playing drinking games with Missandei and Grey Worm just to remind you he was still around.

Which was a huge waste of screen time. Thank you not for reminding me that I had to watch stuff like that.

Cutting Aegon might have been wise if they had not replaced him with Cersei. Cersei as Queen Regnant is sort of the nail in the coffin of a believable and captivating storyline because it makes no sense that she can seize power and it creates no tension that she is Dany's main enemy now. I mean, does anybody believe she will prevail in the end? No.

With Aegon it would have been completely different.

7 hours ago, dmc515 said:

If he's going to end up at "exactly the same point," why would they leave out such a salient aspect of that process.  Too many Targs?  They've already shot their load with Jon this season - in deplorable fashion.  What big reveal or twist does anyone anticipate for the final season?  In other words, if AJT was available to them, why wouldn't they exploit it?

They could come around doing that in the end. But then it wouldn't have anything to do with the dragons. Which would sort of cheapen the storyline. Again - the book Tyrion needs some way to really win the trust and support of Dany's people and eventually herself. Else he would just end up as her court jester, or the buy they ask stuff when they want to know things about the dragons and some of the Westerosi players. They would not grant him a voice on any council nor give him any power in the political or military field.

7 hours ago, dmc515 said:

To be clear as I can (at my current state), here is the logic laid out:  AJT will only happen if it serves a purpose to the plot.  The most likely purpose is to ride a dragon.*  The showrunners know the endgame for the main characters.  Tyrion is both a main character in the books and the show.  Therefore, if Tyrion rides a dragon in the books, the showrunners have a vested interest in depicting the same in their abomination.  Where in this logic have I gone wrong?

For one, at the point where the show runners

Spoiler

decided to kill Viserion at the hands of a character who doesn't really exist in the books - during a plot, we are not going to see in the books even remotely in the same fashion because it is utter stupidity.

With two Targaryens left - Daenerys and apparently 'Aegon' - we also have two dragons left - Drogon and Rhaegal. There is simply no dragon left for Tyrion.

As I've said, it is quite clear that Dany's dragons will all get riders before Dany's people get to Westeros. Else they wouldn't go with them (unless we imagine you can imprison them in a ship - which they simply can't anymore). But we never got that plot in the show because the writers didn't care about that.

Instead of making scenes about Tyrion the dragonrider - which they could have done with or without making Tyrion a Targaryen descendant - they gave us stupid drinking games.

7 hours ago, dmc515 said:

*If the purpose of AJT is for Tyrion to eventually take the throne - which I find incredibly unlikely - I suppose you could argue he'll just take it in the show.  Then again, you could argue the same could be true in the books since everyone else could be dead.  I don't find this to be a fruitful discussion.

In the show anyone can take the Iron Throne since nobody cares all that much about legal claims or anything, really. In the books it should be a lot harder. The Lords of Westeros wouldn't want a dwarf king, especially not one who murdered his own father. A Targaryen bastard and dragonrider who rose high in the service of Queen Daenerys could pull it off. Just as Bloodraven could have become king if some freak accident had killed all of Daeron II's sons and grandsons.

But just some Lannister dwarf - that's simply not likely in the books. It would be far too controversial not to mention mostly against the premise of the entire series. I mean, we are likely to see one of the children growing up taking the throne, not some older guy.

5 hours ago, Wouter said:

If Tyrion ends up as king in the show without a further hint of A+J=T, then this may be a sign that D&D changed things because it is very unlikely that Tyrion would end up on the throne without support of the Targaryen name and/or with a dragon behind him. The combination of being a dwarf, being hated and not having his own power base (he's not popular in his father's lands and Dany's power base isn't simply his without the familial tie) is not a good one.

Exactly. That wouldn't really work in the books. It wouldn't be a plot George is going to tell because it is full of holes.

5 hours ago, Wouter said:

However, the show did include Tyrion's backstory as far as his dragon obsession goes, going out of their way to include the scene with him freeing the dragons. The purpose of that scene is still unclear to me if there is not a shred of Targaryen blood in Tyrion, unless the only purpose was to give Dinklage a meaty scene.

Again, that could be part of them actually adapting the source material somewhat adequately without getting/understanding every ounce of foreshadowing they are putting into the story there. I mean, those guys don't really get all the subtleties of the story, right? Nor do they care about those.

And they had their talk with George about the endings only somewhat later. I doubt George told them about that when they were writing season 1. You see how George sort of had them to retcon Selyse and Shireen into the story after he told them what Shireen's ultimate fate would be. That's why they put her in there, that's clear from the start since they are building up to that for a really long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A dragon wont die like that in the books. That was Tyrions dragon. They gave it to the Night King (Matty Ice). So now they could easily leave out AJT, just like fAegon.

books and show have seriously diverged more than I thought they would. None of this episode will happen in the books at all!

Edited by Suzanna Stormborn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×