The House of the Undying

[Megorova]

9 hours ago, Silver Bullet 1985 said:

What is the point of the visions if they are all destined to happen? 

And what is the point of movie trailers? -> Spoilers.

9 hours ago, Silver Bullet 1985 said:

Why does Quaithe go through the trouble of warning Daenerys if it will all happen anyway? 

The Undying didn't showed to Dany, what will happen between three fires, treasons and lies <- Those 9 events are important for Dany's future, and for her path towards The End, but other events (such as Dany's future encounters with Victarion, Moqorro, Tyrion, etc.,) is not something, that will define the final outcome of Dany's battle against the Others. So those events are not set in stone.

There are certain things, that are unavoidable, they are predetermined. They will happen, no matter what anyone will be doing, to prevent or avoid them. Such as appearance of the Prince that was promised, return of the dragons, birth of the Stallion that will mount the world, Second Long Night, appearance of new Azor Ahai, etc.

And there are events, that are insignificant for a bigger picture. Such as death of Trystane Martell, Jorah betraying Dany, thousands of slaves dying from pale mare <- Yes, this one is also insignificant. Because who are those slaves? They are no one. Thus even if thousands of them will die, it won't influence anything on a greater scale.

Though those deaths could have been avoided, if only Dany just listened to Quaithe, and burned that man, that came to Meereen on pale horse, and died from disease. Quaithe did warned Dany - soon will come the pale mare, and after her the others. So Dany should have done with that man's body and his horse, what Dothraki and Valyrians do with their dead - burned them both on funeral pyre. In that case, the pale mare (infection) would have been stopped, prior other people also got infected.

So some things are not set in stone, and they can be changed, so the damage from those events could be lessened. Thus there was a point to warn Dany about those avoidable things. And probably the reason, why Quaithe didn't told Dany in plain text, what is comming, because no matter whether Dany will manage to avoid those events or she won't, it won't affect the outcome of important events on the bigger picture. So the point of avoiding those things, is to lessen personal damage. Lessening of that damage wouldn't in any way affect important events, such as Long Night, but if Dany will manage to avoid those misfortunes, then she will suffer less pain and losses. The point of Quaithe's warnings, is for Dany to improve her own wellbeing. Quaithe cared about Dany, to certain extend, but not enough, to risk leading Dany astray of her destined path. She interfered on certain level, but tried to keep her influence on events as minimal as possible, not to get in the way of Fate. Otherwise, she herself could have suffered, because of her attempts to change natural course of important events.

Dany is the Mother of Dragons, and her final destination is predetermined, but what will happen to her on the way there, isn't. Certain key points of her path are also unavoidable, same as The End, but the rest of her path could be changed. Even though in the end, she will arrive to the same end point, no matter what she will be doing on her way there. Even if she will try to change direction, and to avoid that final destination, she will still arrive there, exactly how it was planned for her by Fate/Gods.

[Lady Fevre Dream]

On 10/3/2018 at 6:11 PM, Damon_Tor said:

The men listed are the ones who sire children on her. Hizdahr did not, and will not.

I don't get why people are so against by this. Daenerys very clearly has "a type". She likes large, strong, violent men. This is entirely consistent throughout the series. When she meets Quentyn she instead eyeballs his large brutish companion and thinks to herself "now, if only he looked more like this guy."

Victarion isn't a good guy. Neither was Drogo. Neither is Daario. They're all aggressive, murderous brutes, and that's exactly what gets Daenerys going. And Victarion is about to show up as the answer to her prayers, with a ton of ships to get her forces over the sea, covered in  the blood of her enemies. Frankly, I can't imagine a scenario where she DOESN'T fall for him.

EDIT: Now, it's entirely possible that Victarion is where she learns better; Drogo and Daario have love to give beneath their barbaric exteriors, and treated her well enough, but at his core Victarion is filled with self-loathing and seems to think very little of women. And I'm reasonably certain that Euron maintains a psychic link with Victarion via the dusky woman and will extend that link to Daenerys when Victarion and she begin have sex. To what end, I'm not entirely sure, and I don't think Daenerys or Victarion will really understand what's happening to them (neither will most readers, for that matter) but having evil magic float around every time you have sex probably isn't good for a relationship.

As far as the one Dany eyed up instead of Quentyn, it was Drink, who is good looking, not the friend that was the Big Man.  Victarion is stupid as a box of rocks while murdering and sacrificing the people Dany would protect, I don't see his physical type overriding his stupidity and overall personality in Dany's eyes.  I don't see him living past the Battle in Mereen, quite frankly, well, if we ever find out. 

The idea of the three being about children is interesting, but.......it also seems that Dany had a miscarriage on the Dothraki Sea, I wonder how that would figure in it.  That would make two pregnancies but no children, well, human children. 

 

[Damon_Tor]

On 10/7/2018 at 7:45 PM, Lollygag said:

but I don't see any point to it either.

The point, I think, is that this is a story about the birth of Dany's three (human) children. But a writer is faced with a challenge with that sort of story: if the entire purpose of the story is the birth of three children by a single woman, then the time involved would have to mean that the climax of the story would be split into three parts, at least one of those parts happening fairly early in the story. That's not good storytelling.

Instead, hide the birth, reintroduce him to the story soon after child #2 is born. This way all three children get to be revealed in Act 3, and all three get to be a part of the "conclusion" of the story, which can all fit into a span of a year instead of three years.

 

[Megorova]

13 minutes ago, Damon_Tor said:

But a writer is faced with a challenge with that sort of story: if the entire purpose of the story is the birth of three children by a single woman, then the time involved would have to mean that the climax of the story would be split into three parts, at least one of those parts happening fairly early in the story.

Or first child, Rhaego, thought by everyone to be dead, will return into the story years later. And it's possible, that when Dany will get married to Jon Snow, she will give birth to twins - a boy and a girl, brother and sister, that will later marry and continue Targaryen bloodline, as rulers of 7K, while Rhaego will stay in Essos, to rule there over Dothraki and ex-slaves.

[Lollygag]

1 hour ago, Damon_Tor said:

The point, I think, is that this is a story about the birth of Dany's three (human) children. But a writer is faced with a challenge with that sort of story: if the entire purpose of the story is the birth of three children by a single woman, then the time involved would have to mean that the climax of the story would be split into three parts, at least one of those parts happening fairly early in the story. That's not good storytelling.

Instead, hide the birth, reintroduce him to the story soon after child #2 is born. This way all three children get to be revealed in Act 3, and all three get to be a part of the "conclusion" of the story, which can all fit into a span of a year instead of three years.

 

By story, do you mean ASOIAF is about the birth of Dany's three human children? Why bother with Starks, Lannisters, Greyjoys and the rest? The Game of Thrones? TWOIAF? Why any of it because if this is the point of the whole story, so much of the rest becomes filler. What role would 3 kids all under 5 have to the story? Dany cares about not having human kids, but she doesn't mull over it much. She chose to give up Rhaego and I've not seen where she ever regretted this. Why should the reader care more than she does? This whole series is about a teenager's fertility problems?

I feel like I'm missing something...

Again, this seems to go against themes brought up in Cersei's arc about the role of women in that world which Dany is supposed to be above when she finds her Bride of Fire self.

ASOS Tyrion III

"Three children is quite sufficient. I am Queen of the Seven Kingdoms, not a brood mare! The Queen Regent!"

 

[Damon_Tor]

3 hours ago, Lollygag said:

By story, do you mean ASOIAF is about the birth of Dany's three human children? Why bother with Starks, Lannisters, Greyjoys and the rest? The Game of Thrones? TWOIAF? Why any of it because if this is the point of the whole story, so much of the rest becomes filler.

At least some of those bloodlines play into the Song. The Starks and the Greyjoys most directly.

And not filler: prologue.

3 hours ago, Lollygag said:

What role would 3 kids all under 5 have to the story?

You misunderstand. The children won't be born and then have an impact on the story. Their birth is the whole point. The story doesn't end when the children do something, the story ends when they're born. They are the story. Christ doesn't have any impact as a child, but we still tell the story of his birth, then we pop back in 30 years later and talk about what he did when he was all grown up. To be clear, I'm not saying there will be a time skip. I'm saying that the story won't end with the Others being defeated. Quite the contrary, the most plausible ending for the last novel is the sun rising, just barely, in the southern sky, peeking over the horizon for a moment before setting again. The last sunrise and sunset in a generation.

a generation

You notice how that phrase gets used when they talk about the Long Night? Did you never stop to think what that meant? It doesn't simply mean "a long time".

Quote

But the last novel is called "A Dream of Spring"

A dream. That's the bittersweet ending we're left with: Winter with a capital "W" is upon the world but the prophecy is in fulfillment, and we have a glimmer of what that means. But just a glimmer: a dream.

[Darth Sidious]

On 10/5/2018 at 7:25 PM, Wolf's Bane said:

I don't think he has any evidence for it.  Just like he doesn't have credible evidence for Rhaego still being alive.  I don't hold that against him.  He's just another fan who leans towards an idea and tries to build a theory around it.  

I don't believe Shiera guided Dany on how to hatch those dragons.  Mirri Maz Duur provided the motivation and the justification for the needed trade.  A life for a life.  

The sword of pale fire is one of the ideas presented in a theory here.  

https://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?/topic/150476-daenerys-is-azor-ahai/&tab=comments#comment-8137799

There is actually not any good evidence for Shiera Seastar to still be alive.  It is possible but the evidence is actually not any good.  Just because Bloodraven is still alive is not evidence for Shiera to still be alive.  The odds are against Shiera still kicking.  

So how did Dany know how to hatch her dragons?  That is a mystery.  It is alright to have mysteries.  If I had to guess it is probably because she is special.  It is possible, but I will admit the evidence is slim, that she has the talent for prophetic dreams like her great ancestor, Daenys the Dreamer.

 

On 10/6/2018 at 10:40 AM, Unacosamedarisa said:

Jorah tells Dany that Rhaego never lived, and that "the women say" this. Not just Mirri, but likely Dany's handmaidens, or other Dothraki women. It's never contradicted, or hinted that there was something else going on. Rhaego has never appeared again, except as a vision... In the HotU. And, that vision is one of the 3 deaths that have made Dany who she is at that time... Rhaegar, Viserys, and Rhaego. 

Unless there's evidence, in the form of quotes from the text, that show this continent spanning conspiracy for Shiera to plant people in Dany's way to kidnap her baby, I'm not going to buy it. 

Just because something could be a lie, doesn't mean that it is a lie.

But look at that vision, in context. Here is the vision of (apparently) Rhaego, along with Viserys and Rhaegar... 

 These are visions of Viserys, who is dead, Rhaegar, who is dead, and Rhaego, who is also dead. The vision is not proof that Rhaego is alive... it's there to show Dany where she has come from... she's the product, in a way, of all these dead relatives, and must take on all of their roles, all the destinies attached to them, are now attached to her... In place of Viserys she has to reconquer Westeros for the Targaryens and reclaim her families birthright. In place of Rhaegar she has to bring about the return of Dragons, find the other 2 heads, and lead them for whatever they're needed for. And, in place of Rhaego she has to unite the Khalasars together, and become the greatest Khal. 

Also, we should know by now that prophecy is never simple, rarely literal, not absolute, and can't be interpreted just like that. Maybe, the Dosh Khaleen were wrong or lying... the whole Stallion thing was just to curry favour with Drogo, one of the greatest Khals. Maybe, the prophecy was wrong all along, just like the PtwP got hung up on the gender and became Prince in place of Dragon (referring to a Targaryen of either gender), and it shouldn't be "the Stallion who mounts the world" but something without gender. Maybe they got it wrong, and it referred to Dany, not Rhaego. Or to Drogo, or to Drogo and Dany together. Whatever the case, just because the prophecy exists, doesn't mean Rhaego is protected by it in any way... Rhaegar also thought he was protected by prophecy, until Robert caved his ribs in on the Trident. 

And it's said that Bloodraven could turn into mist, or a one eyed dog, and that Wildlings are slavers and Giants eat people etc. Doesn't mean these things are true. Shiera Seastar has been mentioned once in the main novels, and that one time it's in relation to Bittersteel and Bloodraven's rivalry. She may be revealed later, or be revealed to be someone we've met already, but there really doesn't seem to be any of the usual clues and breadcrumbs for that identity. 

Also, I'm not 100% certain, but I don't think George had conceived of the Blackfyre situation until after writing ACoK (certainly after AGoT), so I do not think there's any intentional clues to Shiera's kidnap conspiracy in Dany's AGoT chapters. 

 

Rhaego is dead.  His death allowed Dany to focus on her goals.  Dragging a little boy around the Dothraki Sea would have been inconvenient.  Rhaego would not survive the crossing of the Red Waste.  Dany traded motherhood to become the Mother of Dragons, Khaleesi of the Great Grass Sea, and future ruler of Westeros.  Drogo got her pregnant at the wrong time in her life.  Rhaego's death will allow her to fulfill her destiny.  The book is very clear in saying family attachments compromise judgment.  

[The Lord of the Crossing]

On 10/3/2018 at 2:25 PM, Keep Shelly in Athens said:

I'm all for Dany going fire crazed in the end to conquer, but if she tries to burn Jon and Tyrion to hatch more dragons she will have become her father. Is this what you're saying will happen?

They will deserve it if they commit treason against her.  So yeah, I would love to have them roasted if they commit the treason.

[The Lord of the Crossing]

On 10/6/2018 at 7:55 PM, Victor Newman said:

 

The idea came from Daenerys herself.  Mirri might have accidentally given a clue when she said "only death can pay for life" statement.  This one little clue was enough for a smart kid like Dany to put the complex puzzle together.  The dragons are her lightbringer.  

I will even say MMD herself doesn't know how to hatch dragons.  Something she said was the final piece of the giant jigsaw puzzle.  Or maybe Daenerys figured it all out on her own.  MMD committed treason and the blood of magi just happened to be a needed ingredient in the recipe for waking the dragons.  Traitors get the execution that they deserve.  

[Starkz]

1 hour ago, The Lord of the Crossing said:

They will deserve it if they commit treason against her.  So yeah, I would love to have them roasted if they commit the treason.

 So they would firstly accept Dany as their ruler, making her their sovereign leader, then betray her and burn for treason?  

 

[Lollygag]

16 hours ago, Damon_Tor said:

At least some of those bloodlines play into the Song. The Starks and the Greyjoys most directly.

And not filler: prologue.

You misunderstand. The children won't be born and then have an impact on the story. Their birth is the whole point. The story doesn't end when the children do something, the story ends when they're born. They are the story. Christ doesn't have any impact as a child, but we still tell the story of his birth, then we pop back in 30 years later and talk about what he did when he was all grown up. To be clear, I'm not saying there will be a time skip. I'm saying that the story won't end with the Others being defeated. Quite the contrary, the most plausible ending for the last novel is the sun rising, just barely, in the southern sky, peeking over the horizon for a moment before setting again. The last sunrise and sunset in a generation.

a generation

You notice how that phrase gets used when they talk about the Long Night? Did you never stop to think what that meant? It doesn't simply mean "a long time".

A dream. That's the bittersweet ending we're left with: Winter with a capital "W" is upon the world but the prophecy is in fulfillment, and we have a glimmer of what that means. But just a glimmer: a dream.

This feels like a completely different series to me but .

[Guest]

15 hours ago, The Lord of the Crossing said:

They will deserve it if they commit treason against her.  So yeah, I would love to have them roasted if they commit the treason.

 

14 hours ago, Starkz said:

 So they would firstly accept Dany as their ruler, making her their sovereign leader, then betray her and burn for treason?  

 

Well technically to commit treason this (bolded) has to happen first, but I'm just wondering if maybe. . .perhaps. . . possibly. . . Tyrion and Jon would have rational reasons for committing treason.