Master thread on what the Show means for the book plot

[Saer]

Things I think will be in the books:

• Bran leaving the cave and heading south of the Wall again. [Remember how everyone used to think he'd stay in place for the rest of the story? I do!]
• Jon's fire resurrection. [That's a gimme.]
• Daenerys going to Vaes Dothrak and uniting the Dothraki to her cause.  [Just more, uh, consensually.]
• Stannis burning Shireen as a sacrifice
• Lots of Freys dying
• Brienne and Jaime survive to the endgame
• Jon x Dany in some form
• Arya going directly back to Westeros
• ...Jon riding a dragon?
• The Others being defeated
• Kings Landing burning down
• The Iron Throne melting

Things I think won't be in the books:

• Cersei blowing up the Great Sept and holding the throne in her own right
• Ramsay beating Stannis's army, Brienne killing Stannis, and Sansa & Jon retaking Winterfell from the Boltons
• Daenerys landing on Dragonstone then spending two seasons on everything but attacking King's Landing
• Tyrion as stupid moral Hand of the Queen
• The Night King.
• Rhaegar and Elia's consummated marriage that produced two children being "set aside" and Rhaegar marrying Lyanna
• Rhaegar's other son named Aegon Targaryen 
• C-l-e-g-a-a-a-n-e-bowl

One thing in a category of its own: King Bran. I don't think they thought of that themselves: they've said as much, and they care so little about Bran they left him out of a season, and left him nothing to do otherwise. If they were picking someone random, they coulda gone for Bronn, lol. And there are king-y themes in Bran's story, especially in Clash. But... idk. Maybe it's just because I don't like it. But it feels like something where the garden could grow in a different direction that intended.

1 hour ago, Gendelsdottir said:

A major rewrite is mooted, in order that the main characters do not end up yada yada.

Bran in King's Landing while Sansa is queen of the independent North is 0% going to happen so, like, there's a pretty obvious possibility you're skipping over.

[Gendelsdottir]

1 hour ago, Saer said:

One thing in a category of its own: King Bran. I don't think they thought of that themselves: they've said as much, and they care so little about Bran they left him out of a season, and left him nothing to do otherwise. If they were picking someone random, they coulda gone for Bronn, lol. And there are king-y themes in Bran's story, especially in Clash. But... idk. Maybe it's just because I don't like it. But it feels like something where the garden could grow in a different direction that intended.

Bran in King's Landing while Sansa is queen of the independent North is 0% going to happen so, like, there's a pretty obvious possibility you're skipping over.

Not disagreeing one bit. When I say "major rewrite," though, I'm talking about a complete, gut the place to the bare walls, floor-to-ceiling renovation. Inlcuding, but not limited to, the notion of Bran & Sansa divvying up Westeros betwixt the two of them. I, too, find that idea quite silly.

[Lady Anna]

I think we should not confuse ''Bran will be king'' with ''Bran will be king exactly like in the show''. The former may be the only thing D&D knew, but just by itself it's a completely decontextualized spoiler. It's like, for example, ''Rhaegal will die''. We have no ideia about the how, why, or even when. And I guess they didn't either? But it will happen, just not like they showed.

[kissdbyfire]

10 hours ago, Saer said:

I don't think they thought of that themselves: they've said as much, and they care so little about Bran they left him out of a season, and left him nothing to do otherwise.

With good writers Under normal circumstances, I would agree. But we’re talking about David and Dan, who rely more on unexpected, unearned, and shocking twists than on telling a story. So, if they’ve learned about Bran becoming king (in whatever form) say, in 2013 (or 2014?) when they had those talks w/ Martin about the endgame, it makes perfect sense for them to leave him out a whole season and do as little as possible w/ him. Well, that and the fact that they clearly don’t care about/can’t handle the fantasy/magical aspects of the story. Because then it’s that much more unexpected and “OMFG!!!”, which is all they seem to aim at now. 

[Saer]

19 hours ago, Gendelsdottir said:

Not disagreeing one bit. When I say "major rewrite," though, I'm talking about a complete, gut the place to the bare walls, floor-to-ceiling renovation. Including, but not limited to, the notion of Bran & Sansa divvying up Westeros betwixt the two of them. I, too, find that idea quite silly.

The possibility I'm alluding to is that the show deviates massively from what GRRM is already planning, such that having large differences doesn't require a "rewrite", just telling the story he means to tell.

 

10 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

So, if they’ve learned about Bran becoming king (in whatever form) say, in 2013 (or 2014?) when they had those talks w/ Martin about the endgame

Yeah, that's what I'm saying: that it came from Martin.

[Aldarion]

On 6/4/2019 at 6:13 AM, CrypticWeirwood said:

The reason it was so important for Jon to have been the so-called rightful king yet not come to rule is because it shatters the hackneyed hidden-prince trope, just like killing off Eddard Stark, his protagonist of Game of Thrones shattered that hackneyed trope as well. 

It also proved Dany's whole life-mission goal to "take back" the Iron Throne because she was "the rightful heir" was always full of hot air.

Then when she tried to keep living what she now knew to be a lie, she outed herself as always having been on a mission of wrathful revenge, never of righteousness, because she had no such right but didn't care.

These were critical elements of the art form that Martin created. Lose that and you lose his messaging.

Thing is, Martin already has Aegon in the books. As well as Daenerys herself. So there are already two "rightful rulers" - three if you include Stannis, who was rightful ruler at the time - that will likely never come to rule.

EDIT: Though I do see how Martin could make Bran a king.

Edited June 6, 2019 by Aldarion

[Lord Aegon The Compromiser]

On 6/4/2019 at 4:43 PM, TheFirstofHerName said:

Today I read some enlightening essays on Untangling the Meerenese Knot.   The 2nd essay argues that the purpose of Dany’s stay in Meereen was to set up a series of tests that will test her values.  One of the most interesting things I found in the 3rd essay was the essayist referring to an early draft of Dany for ADWD which reportedly GRRM read at conventions in the early 2000’s. In fact....it was paraphrased here on the forums.    It appears that Dany is already struggling with her self identity and that she fears herself (going mad like her father or full blown Fire & Blood).  The writing for the chapter was later changed so that the language wasn’t as explicit.  Here are the quotes for comparison:

My fears were burned away the day I came forth from the fire. Only one thing frightens me now.” “And what is it that you fear, sweet queen? “I am only a foolish young girl.” Dany rose on her toes and kissed his cheek. “But not so foolish as to tell you that.” (ADWD DANY III)

She looks at Ser Barristan and tells him that she told Xaro that she feared only one thing, though she would not tell the merchant what. Ser Barristan guesses that she only fears her dragons. “Myself,” Dany tells him. (PARAPHRASED EARLIER DRAFT OF ADWD DANY III)s

Here is the link to the essay which I highly recommend. https://meereeneseblot.wordpress.com/2013/10/02/untangling-the-meereenese-knot-part-iii-danys-struggle-with-herself/

Thank you very much for this link. I read every part (I'm now reading the Jon essays).

Of the Meereen essays, Part IV in particular is a must read for anyone thinking "Mad Queen Dany" (not burning KL specifically, but her burning thousands and thousands of innocents with her dragons, for sure) isn't already well foreshadowed in the books. 

[Lord Aegon The Compromiser]

On 6/5/2019 at 8:44 AM, Lady Anna said:

I think we should not confuse ''Bran will be king'' with ''Bran will be king exactly like in the show''. The former may be the only thing D&D knew, but just by itself it's a completely decontextualized spoiler. It's like, for example, ''Rhaegal will die''. We have no ideia about the how, why, or even when. And I guess they didn't either? But it will happen, just not like they showed.

True, Bran could be King of Winter, King of the North, or more symbolically, forever infused in his Weirwood Throne.

[Plain, Simple Tailor]

“Who has the best story?” 

Yeah, Bran’s story was SO GOOD that the show wrote him out for two seasons 

[Free Northman Reborn]

The North’s independence is supported pretty clearly by the books. As in, should it happen there will be a lot of references in the books which in hindsight makes it an outcome with a strong and foreshadowed buildup. Much more so than Bran becoming King of Westeros, that’s for sure.

 

[SeanF]

On 6/7/2019 at 5:47 AM, Lord Aegon The Compromiser said:

Thank you very much for this link. I read every part (I'm now reading the Jon essays).

Of the Meereen essays, Part IV in particular is a must read for anyone thinking "Mad Queen Dany" (not burning KL specifically, but her burning thousands and thousands of innocents with her dragons, for sure) isn't already well foreshadowed in the books. 

I think it's always been plain from Dany's last chapter in ADWD, that she will take a dark turn in the next book.

The lesson she has internalised is that it is better to be feared than to be loved, because it is easy to betray those whom you love, whereas fear imposes a dread of punishment which never fails.

[Ser Hedge]

4 hours ago, SeanF said:

I think it's always been plain from Dany's last chapter in ADWD, that she will take a dark turn in the next book.

The lesson she has internalised is that it is better to be feared than to be loved, because it is easy to betray those whom you love, whereas fear imposes a dread of punishment which never fails.

Yes, in the books it looks like she's arriving at a conscious decision to live up to the words of her house. In the show, oh, you know what, let's just leave that ....

In the books a change in direction is clearly signalled. She tried to plant trees, make compromises, locked up her dragons and see where that got her: Narrowly survived an assassination attempt, her husband (whom she married to keep the peace) calling for the Dragon to be slain and now she's wandering around in the wilderness. Well, now she's riding a Dragon and there will be fire and blood! Seems like a logical enough progression.

[CrypticWeirwood]

On 6/7/2019 at 12:19 AM, Lord Aegon The Compromiser said:

True, Bran could be King of Winter, King of the North, or more symbolically, forever infused in his Weirwood Throne.

No. Bran's destiny is linked to the name of his wolf, Summer.

“Now is the winter of our discontent made glorious summer by this sun of York”

For “sun of York” read of course “son of Stark”.

[Lollygag]

Bran as Plato's Philosopher King 

I will say that while the show shoe-horned in Bran as King, he's a great fit thematically for the books. I'm not sure that GRRM is pushing the Philosopher King as an ideal ruler as his m.o. is treat things more grey, present pros and cons, and instill debate among the characters and readers. But perhaps Bran who understands history better than any becomes king to break the wheel of history repeating itself through knowledge of history finally allowing Westeros to progress.

https://www.inverse.com/article/56007-game-of-thrones-finale-plato-reference-tyrion-bran-philosopher-king

Forgotten History - A massive point in the books is how history is forgotten and it's explored in multiple ways. The wildlings are more closely linked to old ways and they tell Jon that he knows nothing. The Starks follow traditions without knowing why, and there's hints at other things they've forgotten entirely. The Royces can't get their runes right. The Isle of the Faces and the Pact are important, but no one can say why anymore. Singers tell of historical events, but in an effort to tell a good story, the actual events are lost. GRRM's in-world histories are filled with what they've forgotten. biases, guesses, etc. 
 

Those who don't know their history are doomed to repeat it. Westeros has been stagnated in their Medieval period for thousands of years. Checked that box. The books are filled with parallels upon parallels of the current events which mirror past events in a repeat of history. And we're getting ready to repeat the Long Night because of what we've forgotten. In Westeros, forgetting history and its lessons can have grave consequences which can't be overstated. [Insert STEM rant here.]

 

Enter Bran, the holder of the most complete accounting of history available. Arya sailed for "America", Bran was dressed in Renaissance-influenced clothing at the end, and Tyrion argued to "elect" Bran for his "stories" as D&D eloquently called it (ugh), but it would have been more accurate to say he was chosen for his knowledge - another Renaissancey idea. Under Bran, Westeros will finally no longer be doomed to repeat their history and they can now begin to leave their Medieval period, or the un-pc term, their Dark Ages. The show underscored the importance of Bran in Brienne's writings on Jaime's deeds. In her affection for him which is a bias, she records that he killed Aerys without mentioning that he did so to save the city, and he died saving his queen, not mentioning which queen or the context of either. Sam writes a work titled ASOIAF, but he neglects to mention Tyrion. Both forgotten history. 

The idea of the philosopher king prioritizes knowledge and experience as the best qualifier for a ruler over random luck-of-the-draw birth or rule by uneducated masses. Plato compares society to the mutinous crew of a ship who fight with each other to become captain despite none of them having knowledge of navigation (heh - The Game of Thrones). They dismiss the captain's ability to navigate as useless star-gazing (again heh, Bran). An idea like this is already recognizable in the books as this is how Aegon was trained, so some version of this idea is already at work in the series and it's escalated for Bran as one of the most important points the idea of the philosopher king makes is that rulers be free of conflicting interests, biases, and promoting the self. 

Along with the philosopher king, we have Plato's cave, also from The Republic. According to this, all men live in a dark cave facing a wall. Their entire understanding of the world is created as shadows on wall created by puppeteers. In ASOIAF/GoT we have Varys the mummer/puppeteer who says power lies where men think it lies. The shadows are cast by a fire behind the men and this reminds me of Mel who says that without light, there can be no shadows which puts R'llhor into the same category as Varys/LF. There may be more aspects, because these cast shadows on the wall of the cave that we understand to be reality are the creation of powerful people, religion, culture, tradition, the people who have influenced us, etc. At one point, the cave dweller (us) must turn around to look into the fire behind us to see the source of what we think to be our understanding of the world, and to finally turn our eyes to the sun and leave the cave and its cast shadows (our culture and experience which dictates our understanding of the world) behind. So Bran will have to leave the cave. 

ADWD Bran III

"A man must know how to look before he can hope to see," said Lord Brynden. "Those were shadows of days past that you saw, Bran. You were looking through the eyes of the heart tree in your godswood. Time is different for a tree than for a man. Sun and soil and water, these are the things a weirwood understands, not days and years and centuries. For men, time is a river. We are trapped in its flow, hurtling from past to present, always in the same direction. The lives of trees are different. They root and grow and die in one place, and that river does not move them. The oak is the acorn, the acorn is the oak. And the weirwood … a thousand human years are a moment to a weirwood, and through such gates you and I may gaze into the past." 
 

 

 

 

[Free Northman Reborn]

@Ran

I'm just watching your and Linda's Youtube discussion around Bran as King.

Of course, I agree that Bran as King makes no sense from a books perspective, and I don't think that this will be the case. However, I find some of your arguments in this debate a bit questionable.

Specifically, your opposition to the idea of Bran making it out of the Cave. I honestly don't understand why THIS of all things appears so unlikely to you. You point out some far out ways for him to make his way back to the South, almost as if to demonstrate how implausible it is. These include a dragon flying him back, or him possessing someone else's body and therefore only making it back in spirit (that other body variously being Hodor, Jon Snow or even Euron).

Honestly, why go to such lengths? There are at least two, maybe three much easier ways for him to make it South, none of which involves a dragon giving him a lift or him possessing Euron.

First scenario:

The journey up was very difficult, true, but the Bran that journeyed North was a crippled, powerless boy, while the Bran who will be returning will be the Last Greenseer. We see the Cave is warded, so is it really a leap to think that Bran could ward his party's campsite every night on the way back to the Wall?

You say they had no food on the way up, having to resort to cannibalism. Well, on the way back Bran could skinchange any animal for a thousand miles around, and have it come and lie down at their campsite to be slaughtered for food.

So option 1 to get back to the Wall would be in the same way they came before, just with Bran using his magic to protect them from the Others.

Scenario 2:

We know there is a fast flowing river below the Cave. We also know of Gendel and Gorne's story. Is it that big a leap to have them take this underground river South, to emerge either much closer to the Wall, or maybe on the other side altogether? Certainly a more plausible theory than Bran skinchanging Euron, or having a dragon come fetch him.

Scenario 3:

The Cave may be quite far from the Wall, but it would seem to be much closer to Hardhome.  Could the backdoor be pretty close to the shrieking caves at Hardhome? From where a ship could pick him up, at the right moment? Again, this isn't any more implausible than a dragon fetching Bran etc.

So in short, these are three scenarios that provide quite a plausible way for Bran to get back from the Cave, without invoking extremely weird hypothesis. I think it was always obvious that Bran was heading back south after his Training Montage. And am on record for stating as much.

Of course, I still don't believe he will be King of Westeros. But this brings me to the other issue I have with your and Linda's discussion. You briefly discuss options of Bran being King Beyond the Wall, or King of the Children or even King of the Weirwood Throne instead of King of Westeros. But why not the most obvious scenario of all - Bran as King in the North?

If the Show stuck to the truth by making the North independent, then Sansa as Queen in the North above a returned and live Bran is illogical, and clearly a flawed outcome.  What would make much more sense is Bran back as King indeed, but King in the North, not King of Westeros.

That would even combine some of your other options, namely that Bran could be both King in the North, and King on a weirwood Throne, in Winterfell's godswood. Perhaps below the Godswood, in a chamber among the Heart Tree's roots, similar to Bloodraven's Throne in the Cave.

That really is the most logical outcome.

1. It shows how he will be accepted - given that no southron lords will need convincing as he is the rightful Stark heir to Winterfell, and only the Northern lords matter in that regard.

2. It shows why he would be held in high esteem as a greenseer of the Old Gods, given that his realm worships the religion to which he is the High Priest, effectively. So no need to convince the Seven, their septons and their millions of southron followers.

3. It deals with his inability to have an heir - as far from needing to elect a new heir once he dies, either Rickon or Sansa and then Arya will be his heirs by default.

4. It also deals with the weird setup of how the North gets independence, but somehow the rightful King in the North becomes King in the South, which is just non-sensical. In this case the North gets independence, gets ruled by the rightful King in the North, and the South either chooses someone else, or they all become independent too. (Which would make sense given that the Iron Throne is apparently getting melted down).

4. And I have already addressed the non-issue of the supposed difficulty of how he gets back from the Cave. As I demonstrated, there are fairly easy, and not at all implausible - ways of getting him back to Winterfell.

I am only halfway into your and Linda's discussion, but so far it seems you are steering very far from the above, most obvious, solution to the whole predicament. And I can't understand why?

Edited June 9, 2019 by Free Northman Reborn

[Alexis-something-Rose]

I don't think things are as complicated as that and granted, I've watched only one episode since season 4. Bran is already king in his own right in the books. Bran became king when Robb died without issue. And we can argue that Robb left a will naming Jon as his heir, but he did that because he thought his trueborn brothers had been murdered and he did not want the north to pass to some Vale lordling or to a Lannister through Sansa's marriage to Tyrion.

Rickon is set to reemerge which will change things. And if and when Bran leaves the cave and makes it south of the Wall, then he will be the one with the claim to Winterfell and to the north. 

I can easily see D&D going, so Bran will be king in the north, but let's make him king of westeros and give Sansa the north. It's not like they haven't hacked story arc to pieces to distribute among characters for reasons.

[JBM]

I've always thought an interesting way to resolve the Jaime/Brienne/Lady Stoneheart stand-off would be for Thoros to see that Bran was alive/stuck past the Wall and for them to be agree to rescue him to escape being executed, with some of the BWB members going with to make sure they stay on task and probably yell at them a lot and so forth.  We see that Jaime, having resolved the Riverlands situation, is eager to get back to KL and Tommen (and still a bit torn about Cersei - he's rejected her but still longs for her), so having that delayed would be a good source of tension for his character, and of course he owes Bran, so it is an interesting task to give him plot-wise.  And I like the idea that having sent him away against his wishes - both to be there to protect Tommen and to keep his promise to Catelyn not to take up arms against the Tullys - Cercei will have sealed her own fate and die without ever seeing him again (I think she has pretty much out-lived her usefulness as a character at this point and should die midway through Book Six).  

It's pretty unlikely (by which I mean extremely extremely extremely unlikely) this is what George intends b/c if it was I think we would have seen it in the show since they had nothing else to do with Jaime anyway, but I like it!  I think it has a very pleasant closing the circle quality for some of these characters.  Brienne fails to save Sansa but saves Bran instead, Lady Stoneheart finds out that one of her biggest reasons for her fairly disastrous decision to free Jaime (that Bran/Rickon were dead and Arya/Sansa were her only living children other than Robb at the time) was false, and Jaime has to face up to the reality of what he has done to Bran in a much more tangible and physical way.  

In general I think if he could get TO the cave he can get back FROM the cave.  We may just not have seen how yet.  What is really improbable to me is him ending up as King of Westeros.   

[DanaKz]

Something interesting I just noticed: three Great Houses were obliterated by the show. Targaryens, Tyrells and Martells. Well, we don't know new Dornish Prince's name but I suspect he is not Martell, it would be said so if he was.

Tyrells and Martells were only Great Houses who openly sided with Targaryens during Robert's Rebellion.

[BalerionTheCat]

1 hour ago, DanaKz said:

Something interesting I just noticed: three Great Houses were obliterated by the show. Targaryens, Tyrells and Martells. Well, we don't know new Dornish Prince's name but I suspect he is not Martell, it would be said so if he was.

Tyrells and Martells were only Great Houses who openly sided with Targaryens during Robert's Rebellion.

The IT was destroyed. And the 7K now 6. But I was expecting everything made by Aegon erased. King Landing, destroyed and the kingdoms returned to their former self.

[DanaKz]

7 minutes ago, BalerionTheCat said:

The IT was destroyed. And the 7K now 6. But I was expecting everything made by Aegon erased. King Landing, destroyed and the kingdoms returned to their former self.

Yeah, probably.

But you know why I noticed this part?

There was a theory about Gods punishing all those scoundrels who wronged Targaryens: Jon Arryn was first to rebel - he died first, Robert died after him, Ned was next, then Hoster Tully, Tywin the last. They betrayed Aerys the Saint (yep, there are people who think Aerys was absolutely right in everything) and they were punished by gods, and all their Houses will be destroyed as well (and in the books they all are on the brink of destruction).

Well, TV-series gods definitely play for other team. Only those Houses who didn't support Bobby B are destroyed. Tough titties

 

Disclaimer - I am kidding. I don't believe any of those things