Master thread on what the Show means for the book plot

[BlackLightning]

On 12/7/2019 at 11:45 AM, SeanF said:

Dany's dream at Astapor suggests that the final defeat of the Others will be on the Trident.

Well, to be honest, her dream does nothing to suggest that the final defeat of the Others will be on the Trident.

What her dream does suggest is that there is going to be a epic battle fought on the Trident. I expect there to be some parallel connection with Robert's Rebellion. And we all know that Robert's Rebellion did not end with the duel of Rhaegar and Robert at the Ruby Ford. It ended much later than that...either with Jon Arryn's visit to Sunspear, Robert's marriage to Cersei or both.

On 12/7/2019 at 2:38 PM, Lord Varys said:

Although I'm actually inclined to believe that the real victory over the Others can't be won in a battle. I think somebody has to go to the Heart of Winter and destroy it - or reason with whoever/whatever is controlling things there. I mean, in the end nobody will be able to rule out that all the Others have been destroyed just because they lost a last battle. I don't see George ending the story with the mere assumption/claim that evil has been defeated. He'll give us some sort of real closure on that subject, I'd think, at least if he wants to have the series a proper and not some kind of opening end which implies the Others come back next winter or next century or so.

This is why I think the lords, knights and smallfolk of Westeros would be inclined to make Bran their king. Bran will be the key to the defeat of the Others (I think he'll be kidnapped by the Others at some point in The Winds of Winter and taken to the Heart of Winter)

With the dragons gone, all of Westeros (maybe even all of the world) will be counting on the direwolf to protect them just in case the Others pop back up. Bran will be their security blanket. And Jojen said that the direwolves would be the last to leave the mortal plane...

I also think this is one of the core reasons why Melisandre is not only included in the story but why she became a POV character. While she's not Bran, I think she'll also play a key role in understanding the Wall and Others both as well as playing a key role in both of their destruction/downfall.

But yeah...while 99% of the characters will likely never know for sure if the Others will ever return (or, in my opinion, if winter will ever end), I think will George will make it clear that they were victorious and that there will never be another Long Night again.

On 12/6/2019 at 6:46 PM, Lord Varys said:

Sure, there might also be a pandemic up at the Wall/in the North. And it might be the Others who unleash the plague/awaken it in Shireen. Perhaps Patches is going to do that somehow if he has been touched by evil forces.

Interesting.

I think Patchface is linked with Euron Greyjoy, the mermen and other submarine beasts and the Drowned God. That said, Moqorro says the Drowned God is a servant of the Great Other so we'll see.

On 12/6/2019 at 6:46 PM, Lord Varys said:

That sounds like show-based fan fiction. I don't buy for a moment that the Others are not the final climax of the book series. It is A Song of Ice and Fire not Game of Thrones. The ultimate theme is not mundane politics - it was in the show but it won't be in the books. In fact, GoT was conceived as a show adapting ASoIaF with downplaying/ignoring most magical/fantasy elements.

I mean, just think how little the story moved in ADwD or ASoS. There is no chance at all that the Others are going to be defeated in passing in the middle of a book and we then get some other political plot line. There might be some sort of wrapping up after that, some sort of last betrayal, some sort of backstabbing, some sort of surprising vengeance, etc. but no new conflict.

I used to think that way. I don't know what I think anymore. I can see it going either way with the Others being routed/destroyed/defeated in Act Three and the Stark/Targaryen feud transpiring in Act Five. Kind of like how in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, Julius Caesar is assassinated in Act III and the story's true climax occurs in Act Five with Mark Antony's victory over Brutus and Cassius at Philippi. 

But I am pretty sure that the Others are not pure evil. And that a simple battle will not be nearly enough to beat them. I, for one, don't even think they can be defeated in battle. There are only three dragons coming, there isn't enough Valyrian steel in Westeros to even arm a dozen elite warriors and there won't be enough time to mine dragonglass and then forge them into weapons.

That's the thing. I don't think the conflict between Jon and Daenerys (if it's real conflict at all, that is, and not the result of some elaborate lie or a complete misunderstanding) will be new. I think Daenerys will fall madly in love with Jon but no one will really know if Jon feels the same way. Jon might continue on as a POV in Ghost's body but, by the time he returns to his body, I don't see him being a POV anymore. While he might be caught somewhere in between living and undead, I see him being damaged in more ways than one. In any case, I can see Dany growing more and more desperate and angry at Jon's coldness and Jon being even more recalcitrant due to Dany's fiery, emotional nature. There'll be enough room for someone like Tyrion to turn the two against each other and seek to profit off of them...or even someone like Sansa who naively instigates a conflict that she is powerless to stop.

Remember, the Second Long Night will happen at the same time as the Dance of Dragons so to speak. George seems like the type to make this Second Dance a twofold dance: a hot war between Dany and Aegon and a cold war between Dany and Jon. Whereas Team Dany and Team Aegon will be openly hostile to each other and violently duke it out on the battlefields, Team Dany and Team Jon will have some hidden hostilities at play and will square off in more intimate, private spheres: ballrooms, bedrooms, backrooms. Moqorro did speak of a lion snarling in the midst of dancing/dueling dragons. Never said that there would only be two dragons involved.

On 12/6/2019 at 6:46 PM, Lord Varys said:

I expect them to get this far, too, but if they do they cannot advance this far just in two books (or rather: 1-1 1/2 books). At this point they haven't yet made an attempt on the Wall, and it is not very likely that they will just breach the Wall with no buildup - we do have the entire Stannis-Shireen plot, the Hardhome plot, the Nightfort plot, the Horn of Winter plot. All those have to play out at the Wall before the Others can make their final move. And they have no need to rush things. They will take their time.

And once they have crossed the Wall they will also not just race down south for no reason. They are quite methodically and they are in no rush. They would spread out and first take over the entire North before they push through the Neck which is likely going to be major line of defense for the living after the Wall has fallen.

I think the Nightfort is where the Others will breach.

I kind of have developed a slightly tinfoil theory that Stannis will win the Battle of Winterfell but:

• Roose (or maybe Ramsay but not both) will escape and fall back on the Dreadfort
• Shireen and Selyse will die
• Davos will still be MIA
• most of his forces will be destroyed or broken beyond repair
• Aegon will have both the Iron Throne and Storm's End
• Dragonstone will be impossible to reach, much less re-claim
• and the vast majority of people in the North will reject him in favor of the Starks (including Melisandre)

He'll become super bitter and retreat to Nightfort where he will meet Brienne who intends on avenging Renly. Only the Others interrupt and take Stannis for their own. Stannis - more or less - will allow it. And Noye called it a long time ago: Stannis is the iron and iron will break before it bends. That way, Dany's dream about a blue-eyed king with a red sword who casts no shadow (referring to both Stannis and Lightbringer while also referencing a characteristic of vampires) and the Usurper's host armored in ice at the Trident (a host of Others and wights headed by a Baratheon) can come true.

It's a bit tinfoily but it's a theory I have developed. From the moment I finished reading A Dance with Dragons and started thinking about what's next, I always thought of Stannis as a dead man walking and would out of the picture by the end of The Winds of Winter. But I've only recently began thinking that there's way too much to do with Stannis...

The Horn of Winter plot? I'm beginning think that that's intertwined with what's going to happen with Euron Greyjoy, the Citadel, the Hightower and the Faceless Men in Oldtown.

[BlackLightning]

On 12/8/2019 at 5:32 AM, Mithras said:

GRRM talked about the butterfly effect of deviating from the source material. I think it should be clear how even smallest changes necessitate even larger changes to keep the whole thing afloat. For example, the moment D&D dropped the valonqar part of Maggy’s prophecy (probably because they did not want this “ugly end” for their favorite actors), a lot of things automatically change. The act of burning King’s Landing is given to Dany to show her dark turn. They would not have needed to do this if they incuded Dany’s civil war with fAegon or her bloody campaign in Essos while coming to Westeros. And so on.

Totally agree.

On 12/8/2019 at 5:32 AM, Mithras said:

fAegon: He conquers major parts of Stormlands, Dorne and the Reach throughout TWoW. By the end of TWoW, he grows strong enough to threaten the Casterly Rock and the King’s Landing. However, this is also when Dany finally arrives. Their bloody civil war war continues for the best part of ADoS. Many cities and towns are sacked. Thousands are slain. Wherever the dragons dance, people die. Neither side attempts to take King’s Landing from Cersei while the Dance is still going on. Eventually, fAegon dies and Dany wins.

This is where I really disagree.

I think Aegon will take King's Landing and sit the Iron Throne by the end of The Winds of Winter. With both her children dead by that time, Cersei will run for the hills (pun intended) because she'll view Arianne as the YMBQ and Aegon as the valonqar. She'll fall back on Casterly Rock where she will rule as a rebel queen much like Renly.

[Mithras]

Quote

“Tell Lady Sansa why I keep you by us,” said Cersei.

Ser Ilyn opened his mouth and emitted a choking rattle. His pox-scarred face had no expression.

“He’s here for us, he says,” the queen said. “Stannis may take the city and he may take the throne, but I will not suffer him to judge me. I do not mean for him to have us alive.”

“Us?”

“You heard me. So perhaps you had best pray again, Sansa, and for a different outcome. The Starks will have no joy from the fall of House Lannister, I promise you.” She reached out and touched Sansa’s hair, brushing it lightly away from her neck.

Cersei spent almost all her life at King’s Landing. She has no real connection to Casterly Rock. Power flows from King’s Landing and Cersei is addicted to it. She did not flee during the Blackwater and she will not flee ever. In fact, after the tragedies she suffered since Blackwater and will further suffer in the Winds, she will be even more resolved to make her last stand at the seat of ultimate power. She will not go down meekly. She will not give the joy of victory to whoever comes to overthrow her. She will just want to see the city burn.

Thus, either Cersei burns King's Landing at the end of TWoW or fAegon does not take King's Landing ever.

Edited December 12, 2019 by Mithras

[Lord Varys]

47 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

Well, to be honest, her dream does nothing to suggest that the final defeat of the Others will be on the Trident.

What her dream does suggest is that there is going to be a epic battle fought on the Trident. I expect there to be some parallel connection with Robert's Rebellion. And we all know that Robert's Rebellion did not end with the duel of Rhaegar and Robert at the Ruby Ford. It ended much later than that...either with Jon Arryn's visit to Sunspear, Robert's marriage to Cersei or both.

The fact that her enemies are armed in ice is definitely a giveaway. It might not be the best of clues but it definitely is a clue.

47 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

This is why I think the lords, knights and smallfolk of Westeros would be inclined to make Bran their king. Bran will be the key to the defeat of the Others (I think he'll be kidnapped by the Others at some point in The Winds of Winter and taken to the Heart of Winter)

I doubt the Others would ever kidnap anyone. They would kill Bran, like they do with all humans - or they would make him one of they own if they can do that with male children as well as male infants.

Bran is not going to get out of that cave, especially not in winter. And there is no chance he would ever consider becoming a mundane king.

47 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

But yeah...while 99% of the characters will likely never know for sure if the Others will ever return (or, in my opinion, if winter will ever end), I think will George will make it clear that they were victorious and that there will never be another Long Night again.

He cannot really do that convincingly unless he actually makes it clear this is the case. Which means a battle is not going to be what defeats the Others for good.

47 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

I think Patchface is linked with Euron Greyjoy, the mermen and other submarine beasts and the Drowned God. That said, Moqorro says the Drowned God is a servant of the Great Other so we'll see.

Patches is definitely going to do something - Mel is not afraid of him for no reason.

47 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

I used to think that way. I don't know what I think anymore. I can see it going either way with the Others being routed/destroyed/defeated in Act Three and the Stark/Targaryen feud transpiring in Act Five. Kind of like how in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, Julius Caesar is assassinated in Act III and the story's true climax occurs in Act Five with Mark Antony's victory over Brutus and Cassius at Philippi. 

That doesn't work for me. The Others are the main show of the books, and the whole prophecy stuff, too. There can be some sort of cleaning up/vengeance business after the Others are defeated - things people didn't get to before because they had to unite to defeat the Others, but there won't be any major mundane conflict after that. People wouldn't even read that. I'd not continue with ASoIaF if I had to read a boring book who would be king in the end.

47 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

That's the thing. I don't think the conflict between Jon and Daenerys (if it's real conflict at all, that is, and not the result of some elaborate lie or a complete misunderstanding) will be new. I think Daenerys will fall madly in love with Jon but no one will really know if Jon feels the same way. Jon might continue on as a POV in Ghost's body but, by the time he returns to his body, I don't see him being a POV anymore. While he might be caught somewhere in between living and undead, I see him being damaged in more ways than one. In any case, I can see Dany growing more and more desperate and angry at Jon's coldness and Jon being even more recalcitrant due to Dany's fiery, emotional nature. There'll be enough room for someone like Tyrion to turn the two against each other and seek to profit off of them...or even someone like Sansa who naively instigates a conflict that she is powerless to stop.

I don't think Dany will give a damn about Jon if he were just a cold fish. She does like her men older than her, more flamboyant, and more manly.

I certainly can see Tyrion betray Dany and Jon in the end - killing them or one of them, out of jealousy, etc. In fact, it is that plot line that was sort of hinted at in the last scene of season 7 when Tyrion looked rather ominously at cabin when they had their boat sex. If they had gone with Cersei as the Mad Queen - which seems to have been the plan until they scrapped Cersei's miscarriage - then there would have been another exit for Daenerys and/or Jon in the show.

The idea this thing devolves into some sort of weird 'He doesn't love me enough' soap nonsense is very far-fetched to me. In fact, I'm not even sure both of them do survive the fight against the Others. If Jon is the one to save everyone he is most likely not going to survive because that will require the ultimate sacrifice. And the idea that he'll ever live a mundane life after his death is not very likely, either. It might be that Dany and he get a fortnight or a moon of love and passion, and then reality is going ensure nothing whatsoever comes of that. Not for political reasons, but simply because Jon is no longer completely human.

47 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

Remember, the Second Long Night will happen at the same time as the Dance of Dragons so to speak. George seems like the type to make this Second Dance a twofold dance: a hot war between Dany and Aegon and a cold war between Dany and Jon. Whereas Team Dany and Team Aegon will be openly hostile to each other and violently duke it out on the battlefields, Team Dany and Team Jon will have some hidden hostilities at play and will square off in more intimate, private spheres: ballrooms, bedrooms, backrooms. Moqorro did speak of a lion snarling in the midst of dancing/dueling dragons. Never said that there would only be two dragons involved.

I don't think that's going to happen. There is not going to be a Second Dance in the middle of a Long Night. Once the Others come down south (i.e. cross the Neck) people will stop fighting each other). And even the Second Dance we get might not really be a war between Dany and Aegon considering she is not likely to even reach Westeros in TWoW. Aegon might long be dead by then - or no longer be in a position to offer meaningful resistance. Euron is going to eat the lad alive.

47 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

I think the Nightfort is where the Others will breach.

I kind of have developed a slightly tinfoil theory that Stannis will win the Battle of Winterfell but:

• Roose (or maybe Ramsay but not both) will escape and fall back on the Dreadfort
• Shireen and Selyse will die
• Davos will still be MIA
• most of his forces will be destroyed or broken beyond repair
• Aegon will have both the Iron Throne and Storm's End
• Dragonstone will be impossible to reach, much less re-claim
• and the vast majority of people in the North will reject him in favor of the Starks (including Melisandre)

He'll become super bitter and retreat to Nightfort where he will meet Brienne who intends on avenging Renly. Only the Others interrupt and take Stannis for their own. Stannis - more or less - will allow it. And Noye called it a long time ago: Stannis is the iron and iron will break before it bends. That way, Dany's dream about a blue-eyed king with a red sword who casts no shadow (referring to both Stannis and Lightbringer while also referencing a characteristic of vampires) and the Usurper's host armored in ice at the Trident (a host of Others and wights headed by a Baratheon) can come true.

That is far too tin-foily for me. Clichéd stuff like Brienne confronting Stannis is hopefully never going to happen.

Stannis is a fake savior, not a real villain. He will make things worse, sure, but not intentionally. He is not going to join the Others, nor are Mel or the North likely to reject him - if he prevails. If Ramsay makes him to a cloak all bets are off.

There will be some attack by the Others at the Black Gate between the Nightfort (it is where I think the Hodor scene is going to happen, with Hodor-Bran merging/connecting with the gate to stabilize it, creating a feedback loop that shatters Hodor's mind all the way back to him as an infant). A human being cannot experience time like a weirwood and survive this with his mind intact.

47 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

The Horn of Winter plot? I'm beginning think that that's intertwined with what's going to happen with Euron Greyjoy, the Citadel, the Hightower and the Faceless Men in Oldtown.

That would be very strange since the horn would then not ever bring down the Wall since it won't affect it all if it is blown down there. The horn causes an earthquake, presumably only in a limited area (say, in the region where the sound is heard plus how far away an earthquake is felt from its epicenter). We do know it was blown before because it was the Horn of Joramun who lived only after the Wall was built (or its building begun) and because people know it is going to wake the giants in the earth (which is an expression for causing an earthquake).

Thus - if the Wall would care if it was blown far away from the Wall then it would have come down back in Joramun's day.

My best guess is that the horn is still out there beyond the Wall and somebody is going to find it - the Weeper, perhaps, somebody at Hardhome, the Others themselves.

Jaqen is after the hidden dragon book in the Citadel - and he likely wants that to figure out a way how to kill dragons without leaving any traces.

[SeanF]

@Lord VarysThe more I think about it, the more I suspectTyrion is Iago to Jon and Dany.

[Lord Varys]

5 hours ago, SeanF said:

@Lord VarysThe more I think about it, the more I suspectTyrion is Iago to Jon and Dany.

I'd more expect a spurned lover/brother. If Tyrion becomes a dragonrider and they reach the conclusion that they are half-siblings (regardless whether that's the truth or not) then neither of them will be alone in the world anymore. That could establish some sort of intimate bond, even if it is not sexual - or perhaps it will be: Dany slept with Hizdahr whom she did not love, she could also sleep with Tyrion to continue House Targaryen - but once Dany establishes a real romantic and much deeper bond with Jon Snow he might not be able to handle that all well.

In fact, his entire relationship with Shae and his inability to cope with jealous feelings and the whole thing there might be to there to pave the way for such a betrayal.

I don't expect any Iago stuff there, more a real betrayal which is supposed to get Jon killed, even if it greatly endangers the war effort/the survival of mankind. Something petty like that, not him doing something directly himself.

But we'll have to wait and see ... assuming the story ever gets to that point in the very, very distant future.

[SeanF]

2 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I'd more expect a spurned lover/brother. If Tyrion becomes a dragonrider and they reach the conclusion that they are half-siblings (regardless whether that's the truth or not) then neither of them will be alone in the world anymore. That could establish some sort of intimate bond, even if it is not sexual - or perhaps it will be: Dany slept with Hizdahr whom she did not love, she could also sleep with Tyrion to continue House Targaryen - but once Dany establishes a real romantic and much deeper bond with Jon Snow he might not be able to handle that all well.

In fact, his entire relationship with Shae and his inability to cope with jealous feelings and the whole thing there might be to there to pave the way for such a betrayal.

I don't expect any Iago stuff there, more a real betrayal which is supposed to get Jon killed, even if it greatly endangers the war effort/the survival of mankind. Something petty like that, not him doing something directly himself.

But we'll have to wait and see ... assuming the story ever gets to that point in the very, very distant future.

Yes, Tyrion does have a real problem with women who turn him down.

[Lord Varys]

10 hours ago, SeanF said:

Yes, Tyrion does have a real problem with women who turn him down.

And while the Jon-Arya-Tyrion love triangle from the original outline is crap, I'm pretty sure that the whole point of 'the dragon having three heads' is that George can include a love triangle there, one that involves the main characters and has a slow careful buildup rather than just being dumped at us in medias res like George did back in the 1970s.

There is a pretty good buildup for the Shae thing, we have the Jon-Ygritte fallout (sort of) and he is taking his time with the slow erosion of the love between Jaime and Cersei.

It is going to take a lot of pages to buildup Tyrion-Dany and eventually Jon-Dany but he will take his time for all that, too. Even if all is going to happen very fast, he still must make it happening fast convincing. That is all not going to be easy.

[The Bard of Banefort]

I had made a post wondering if the original Daenerys' death from the Shivers was maybe a hint that our Dany would be killed by a re-forged Ice, but now I'm thinking that, as someone else on this thread suggested a while back, that it's foreshadowing that Dany will be killed by Jon, who is symbolic of/symbolized by winter and ice.

[BlackLightning]

On 3/14/2020 at 11:52 PM, The Bard of Banefort said:

I had made a post wondering if the original Daenerys' death from the Shivers was maybe a hint that our Dany would be killed by a re-forged Ice, but now I'm thinking that, as someone else on this thread suggested a while back, that it's foreshadowing that Dany will be killed by Jon, who is symbolic of/symbolized by winter and ice.

Dany did have a dream that sat somewhere between a sex dream and a nightmare. Remember the one where she laid down with a man with blue lips whose manhood was hard and cold as ice. Blue lips = death, ice-cold erect penis = dagger

That may be a bit tinfoily but I really do think that there's going to be an Iago-Othello-Desdemona triangle of tragedy in between Tyrion, Jon and Dany. I do believe that Dany will be unjustly killed by Jon due to Tyrion's schemes.

• Tyrion is, after all, very clever, very manipulative and has a deep, dark issues with rejection (especially from women) and abandonment; he has always had a lustful, envious personality too.
• Dany is the definition of unpredictable; she has a tendency of doing things that scare/shock people, not because the things she does are scary but because the things she do are go against the grain completely. It's like Dany has this power to make the unthinkable reality. And to have that ability and to be a woman....I imagine that she is going to be very intimidating and make the people of high Westerosi society very uncomfortable. Even after saving them.
• I fully expect Jon to be much darker, ominous character post-resurrection. Not trusting by half and probably more wolf than human. 

Sansa and Bran may even play the part of part of Emilia and Cassio respectively. Cassio removes Iago and replaces Othello as the captain and Emilia is the one who does all of the detective work necessary to expose Iago.

[The Bard of Banefort]

7 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

Dany did have a dream that sat somewhere between a sex dream and a nightmare. Remember the one where she laid down with a man with blue lips whose manhood was hard and cold as ice. Blue lips = death, ice-cold erect penis = dagger

That may be a bit tinfoily but I really do think that there's going to be an Iago-Othello-Desdemona triangle of tragedy in between Tyrion, Jon and Dany. I do believe that Dany will be unjustly killed by Jon due to Tyrion's schemes.

• Tyrion is, after all, very clever, very manipulative and has a deep, dark issues with rejection (especially from women) and abandonment; he has always had a lustful, envious personality too.
• Dany is the definition of unpredictable; she has a tendency of doing things that scare/shock people, not because the things she does are scary but because the things she do are go against the grain completely. It's like Dany has this power to make the unthinkable reality. And to have that ability and to be a woman....I imagine that she is going to be very intimidating and make the people of high Westerosi society very uncomfortable. Even after saving them.
• I fully expect Jon to be much darker, ominous character post-resurrection. Not trusting by half and probably more wolf than human. 

Sansa and Bran may even play the part of part of Emilia and Cassio respectively. Cassio removes Iago and replaces Othello as the captain and Emilia is the one who does all of the detective work necessary to expose Iago.

Someone wrote a really great essay about Daenerys as a tragic figure, with Shakespeare's work serving as the main inspiration. 

https://themanyfacedblog.wordpress.com/2019/04/19/daughter-of-death-a-song-of-ice-and-fires-shakespearean-tragic-hero/

A lot of people were miffed that Cersei was killed by rubble on the show, but it got me thinking about the valonqar prophecy, and how it could be more abstract than we realized (and thus hard to adapt for a television series). If Tyrion is the one who urges Dany to attack King's Landing in the books, then Cersei could suffocate on the smoke from the fires, thereby "choking her" to death. (And I do think Tyrion is the most likely culprit for the valonqar. If Jon kills Dany in the books, GRRM isn't going to have two main characters assassinate their lovers).

[BlackLightning]

For the record, I do think that the Iron Throne will be destroyed.

Aegon the Conqueror built the Iron Throne with the dragonfire of Balerion. Dany will tear down the Iron Throne with the dragonfire of Drogon.

Aegon was the first. Daeenrys will be the last.

[BlackLightning]

2 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Someone wrote a really great essay about Daenerys as a tragic figure, with Shakespeare's work serving as the main inspiration. 

https://themanyfacedblog.wordpress.com/2019/04/19/daughter-of-death-a-song-of-ice-and-fires-shakespearean-tragic-hero/

Oh I definitely see Shakespeare all over Dany. Not just Dany; but Melisandre, Cersei, Jaime, Jon, Tyrion and Arya are all Shakespearean to the bone.

Quote

A lot of people were miffed that Cersei was killed by rubble on the show

A lot of people should be miffed. We have the right to be.

• Ned Stark -- a good man -- was decapitated for telling a lie (he was blackmailed into telling the lie to begin) after he had tried to tell the truth and hold the original liars accountable.
• Robb Stark -- a good man -- was betrayed and murdered because he married the wrong woman...under the protection of a peace banner and hospitality. 
• Margaery Tyrell -- a relatively good woman -- was blown to smithereens after she paid her dues so that another person wouldn't be punished for something they actually did.
• Tywin Lannister -- a bad man -- was shot to death half-naked on the toilet by the son he's always mistreated.
• Ramsay Bolton -- a bad man -- was fed to the same dogs that he would unleash on people.
• Jaime Lannister -- a confusing case but for this example I'm using, let's say he's a good man -- saves 1 million people from death by wildfire and he is ostracized and lambasted for betraying his king.
• Shireen Baratheon -- a good girl -- was betrayed by her parents and was burned to death on a stake so that her father had a chance of winning one battle.
• Bran Stark -- a good boy -- was thrown out of a window because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Technically though, he could never be in the wrong place at the wrong time because he was in the safety of his own home.
• Lysa Arryn -- a bad woman -- was thrown out of a window by the man who manipulated her into thinking that she loved him so that she would destroy her own family. The man who killed her, killed her to save one of her own family members. 
• Cersei Lannister -- a bad woman -- died from a cave-in while being comforted and held by the love of her life.

but it got me thinking about the valonqar prophecy, and how it could be more abstract than we realized (and thus hard to adapt for a television series). If Tyrion is the one who urges Dany to attack King's Landing in the books, then Cersei could suffocate on the smoke from the fires, thereby "choking her" to death. (And I do think Tyrion is the most likely culprit for the valonqar. If Jon kills Dany in the books, GRRM isn't going to have two main characters assassinate their lovers).

It. Does. Not. Compute.

And that's not the only place where we disagree. I don't think the valonqar has anything to do with either of Cersei's younger brothers.

Maggy the Frog said THE valonqar not A valonqar not YOUR valonqar. Cersei merely assumed that it was talking about Tyrion. But that's too easy; no prophecy is ever that easily deciphered. Least of all by someone as simple-minded as a twelve-year-old Cersei.

I think the valonqar will be Arya, Victarion or Euron (who I am 98% sure that Cersei will have the displeasure of marrying).

All of the above are younger siblings and it's already been established that High Valyrian is gender-neutral. Valonqar can mean little brother or little sister.

If Euron takes the Iron Throne while the heroes are away fighting the Others and Euron has already attacked or threatened Dany already, then Dany doesn't NEED to be pushed to attack King's Landing. Especially not if Euron has already left Oldtown ruin and DOUBLE especially not if Euron is a skinchanger (a lot of people think that he is).

Euron is already established to be a slaver; not only that but he treats his slaves -- or anyone lowborn -- just as bad as the Dothraki khals and the masters in Slaver's Bay treated the slaves. You think Daenerys is going to hear and see that and not be reminded of Astapor's the Plaza of Punishment, the 163 miles to Meereen or how Eroeh was tortured and brutalized before she was killed?

No; Euron's reputation is bound to proceed him, especially where Daenerys is concerned. Tyrion, Marwyn, Moqorro and Victarion are on a collision course with Dany and all of them (along with Barristan Selmy) will have something to say about Euron. None of it will be good.

So, again: if (or rather when) Euron takes King's Landing, sits himself on the Iron Throne and tortures the people he now rules (read the Aeron POV from the Winds sample), Daenerys does not need to be urged to attack King's Landing. In fact, people may have to urge her to exercise caution and NOT attack King's Landing. But since this is Dany we are talking about, she will either do the exact opposite of what's she's told or she will pull a creatively legendary hat-trick out of her ass that no one will see coming.

Edited April 2, 2020 by BlackLightning

[The Bard of Banefort]

27 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

Oh I definitely see Shakespeare all over Dany. Not just Dany; but Melisandre, Cersei, Jaime, Jon, Tyrion and Arya are all Shakespearean to the bone.

A lot of people should be miffed. We have the right to be.

• Ned Stark -- a good man -- was decapitated for telling a lie (he was blackmailed into telling the lie to begin) after he had tried to tell the truth and hold the original liars accountable.
• Robb Stark -- a good man -- was betrayed and murdered because he married the wrong woman...under the protection of a peace banner and hospitality. 
• Margaery Tyrell -- a relatively good woman -- was blown to smithereens after she paid her dues so that another person wouldn't be punished for something they actually did.
• Tywin Lannister -- a bad man -- was shot to death half-naked on the toilet by the son he's always mistreated.
• Ramsay Bolton -- a bad man -- was fed to the same dogs that he would unleash on people.
• Jaime Lannister -- a confusing case but for this example I'm using, let's say he's a good man -- saves 1 million people from death by wildfire and he is ostracized and lambasted for betraying his king.
• Shireen Baratheon -- a good girl -- was betrayed by her parents and was burned to death on a stake so that her father had a chance of winning one battle.
• Bran Stark -- a good boy -- was thrown out of a window because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Technically though, he could never be in the wrong place at the wrong time because he was in the safety of his own home.
• Lysa Arryn -- a bad woman -- was thrown out of a window by the man who manipulated her into thinking that she loved him so that she would destroy her own family. The man who killed her, killed her to save one of her own family members. 
• Cersei Lannister -- a bad woman -- died from a cave-in while being comforted and held by the love of her life.

 

 

It. Does. Not. Compute.

And that's not the only place where we disagree. I don't think the valonqar has anything to do with either of Cersei's younger brothers.

Maggy the Frog said THE valonqar not A valonqar not YOUR valonqar. Cersei merely assumed that it was talking about Tyrion. But that's too easy; no prophecy is ever that easily deciphered. Least of all by someone as simple-minded as a twelve-year-old Cersei.

I think the valonqar will be Arya, Victarion or Euron (who I am 98% sure that Cersei will have the displeasure of marrying).

All of the above are younger siblings and it's already been established that High Valyrian is gender-neutral. Valonqar can mean little brother or little sister.

If Euron takes the Iron Throne while the heroes are away fighting the Others and Euron has already attacked or threatened Dany already, then Dany doesn't NEED to be pushed to attack King's Landing. Especially not if Euron has already left Oldtown ruin and DOUBLE especially not if Euron is a skinchanger (a lot of people think that he is).

Euron is already established to be a slaver; not only that but he treats his slaves -- or anyone lowborn -- just as bad as the Dothraki khals and the masters in Slaver's Bay treated the slaves. You think Daenerys is going to hear and see that and not be reminded of Astapor's the Plaza of Punishment, the 163 miles to Meereen or how Eroeh was tortured and brutalized before she was killed?

No; Euron's reputation is bound to proceed him, especially where Daenerys is concerned. Tyrion, Marwyn, Moqorro and Victarion are on a collision course with Dany and all of them (along with Barristan Selmy) will have something to say about Euron. None of it will be good.

So, again: if (or rather when) Euron takes King's Landing, sits himself on the Iron Throne and tortures the people he now rules (read the Aeron POV from the Winds sample), Daenerys does not need to be urged to attack King's Landing. In fact, people may have to urge her to exercise caution and NOT attack King's Landing. But since this is Dany we are talking about, she will either do the exact opposite of what's she's told or she will pull a creatively legendary hat-trick out of her ass that no one will see coming.

You make a good point about it being "the" valonqar rather than "your" valonqar. I do, however, think Cersei's death will be more fulfilling if it is caused by her own actions. For Tyrion, the ultimate irony would be that she tried to have Tyrion killed, thus giving him a reason to hate Cersei and want her dead in turn. But it certainly could be someone else. Though at this point, I am fairly convinced that it won't be Jaime.

If it is Arya in the books, I'm guessing that they changed it on the show since they wanted her to kill the Night King, and having her kill both of them in one season would have been overkill (no pun intended).

[SeanF]

6 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

Dany did have a dream that sat somewhere between a sex dream and a nightmare. Remember the one where she laid down with a man with blue lips whose manhood was hard and cold as ice. Blue lips = death, ice-cold erect penis = dagger

That may be a bit tinfoily but I really do think that there's going to be an Iago-Othello-Desdemona triangle of tragedy in between Tyrion, Jon and Dany. I do believe that Dany will be unjustly killed by Jon due to Tyrion's schemes.

• Tyrion is, after all, very clever, very manipulative and has a deep, dark issues with rejection (especially from women) and abandonment; he has always had a lustful, envious personality too.
• Dany is the definition of unpredictable; she has a tendency of doing things that scare/shock people, not because the things she does are scary but because the things she do are go against the grain completely. It's like Dany has this power to make the unthinkable reality. And to have that ability and to be a woman....I imagine that she is going to be very intimidating and make the people of high Westerosi society very uncomfortable. Even after saving them.
• I fully expect Jon to be much darker, ominous character post-resurrection. Not trusting by half and probably more wolf than human. 

Sansa and Bran may even play the part of part of Emilia and Cassio respectively. Cassio removes Iago and replaces Othello as the captain and Emilia is the one who does all of the detective work necessary to expose Iago.

I don't think it's tinfoily at all.  The show dropped hints of resentment on the part of Tyrion towards Jon and Daenerys.

Book Tyrion is vicious towards women who reject him.  If the tale ends with Tyrion persuading Jon, or someone else, to kill Daenerys, it will likely be out of jealousy.

[SeanF]

6 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Someone wrote a really great essay about Daenerys as a tragic figure, with Shakespeare's work serving as the main inspiration. 

https://themanyfacedblog.wordpress.com/2019/04/19/daughter-of-death-a-song-of-ice-and-fires-shakespearean-tragic-hero/

A lot of people were miffed that Cersei was killed by rubble on the show, but it got me thinking about the valonqar prophecy, and how it could be more abstract than we realized (and thus hard to adapt for a television series). If Tyrion is the one who urges Dany to attack King's Landing in the books, then Cersei could suffocate on the smoke from the fires, thereby "choking her" to death. (And I do think Tyrion is the most likely culprit for the valonqar. If Jon kills Dany in the books, GRRM isn't going to have two main characters assassinate their lovers).

Daenerys might very well be a tragic heroine in the books (and the character arcs of tragic hero/heroine and villain are very different ones).  I don't see her final chapter in ADWD as the turning point that Adam Feldman does, because I think a good Queen must be both Mhysa and Dragon. She must care about her people, but she must also be willing to kill those who threaten them, and threaten her rule.  She simply went too far in ADWD in trying to compromise with people who make unreasonable demands.

I think the peace with the Masters was built on sand for two reasons:

1. Many of them are just waiting for the Volantenes to turn up and flatten free Meereen.  Adam Feldman has never addressed that issue convincingly.  The Old Blood of Volantis realise, correctly, that a free state is an existential threat to them.  Sooner or later, revolution will break out in their city.  They have to bring Daenerys and her followers in chains back home, and execute them brutally in front of their slaves, to destroy their hopes.  A feature of any slave society, where the slaves are 85% of the population,  is that you must keep the slaves in a state of abject terror in order to keep them in their place.  Forget D & D's efforts to show that slavery isn't all that bad. 

Feldman suggests that Dany could negotiate a peace with the Volantenes when they turn up.  If you think that, well, I've got some swamp land in Florida I'd like to sell you.  Of course, the Masters would swing behind the Volantenes.

2. The peace is shameful.  Allowing people to bring slaves into a free city,  to operate a slave market outside the walls of that city, and presumably, to return fugitive slaves is just not going to work.  It didn't work in the USA and led to a civil war.  In that sense, the Old Blood are right.  Slave and free cannot coexist.  One or other must prevail.  

WRT the show, I don't think D & D were able to work out whether Daenerys was villain or tragic heroine.  So, they gave us a mess.  If Daenerys is brought down by some fatal flaw, it's not excessive ambition, but rather excessive self-doubt.  In the books, if not the show, she beats herself up endlessly, blaming herself, second-guessing her decisions, condemning herself for all the lives she failed to save, while overlooking the lives she did save.

 

 

 

Edited April 2, 2020 by SeanF

[BlackLightning]

9 hours ago, SeanF said:

I don't think it's tinfoily at all.  The show dropped hints of resentment on the part of Tyrion towards Jon and Daenerys.

Book Tyrion is vicious towards women who reject him.  If the tale ends with Tyrion persuading Jon, or someone else, to kill Daenerys, it will likely be out of jealousy.

That'll be another interesting thing to see. What happens when Tyrion and Sansa reunite? We know FOR A FACT that Sansa will never tell Tyrion, "You were the best out of all of the men I had." And Tyrion is likely to try to force himself back into Sansa's life not be kind and gentle. Tyrion wanted to marry her both for her claim and because he's that desperate.

LOL

I wonder how Arya, Jon and Bran will react to Tyrion's demands that Sansa return to him....

13 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

You make a good point about it being "the" valonqar rather than "your" valonqar. I do, however, think Cersei's death will be more fulfilling if it is caused by her own actions. For Tyrion, the ultimate irony would be that she tried to have Tyrion killed, thus giving him a reason to hate Cersei and want her dead in turn. But it certainly could be someone else. Though at this point, I am fairly convinced that it won't be Jaime.

I'm also convinced that it won't be Jaime. I think that once Jaime leaves Cersei for good in the books, it will be for good. He might stand by her as a sibling for a little but not as a lover and definitely not forever.

The problem that I have with Tyrion being the one to kill Cersei is that I feel like it's a retread of what happened to Tywin. The fact that Tyrion killed Tywin while he had his pants down after Tywin abused and mistreated him for years (and almost had him killed as a baby) is the ultimate irony. Why do it all over again with Cersei?

 

[Rose of Red Lake]

The idea of Dany being a threat to Jon's sisters is the real heart in conflict, I can't see it being written any other way. Whatever Tyrion's motives, if Dany is objectively looking to punish Jon's family or the North for resisting her, then Jon has to choose. Tyrion doesn't even need to be in the room. The only reason he would need to tell Jon what's up is if Jon's resurrection made him dumber than shit. If he couldn't figure this out after she burned a million people then he just might be the stupidest character in all of fantasy. 

[BlackLightning]

On 4/17/2020 at 1:57 PM, Rose of Red Lake said:

The idea of Dany being a threat to Jon's sisters is the real heart in conflict, I can't see it being written any other way. 

Not necessarily.

Dany has no reason to threaten Jon's sisters. If she had a reason, what would it be? The book version of Dany very kind and thoughtful when it comes to the welfare of others (particularly girls and young women). She repeatedly goes out of her way to put the welfare of people before herself. Keep in mind that these are people that she doesn't even know from a can of paint. Dany will know Sansa and Arya like she knew Ereoh and like she knows Irri and Jhiqui.

Besides, Dany is not an airhead. She understands politics. It makes no political sense for her to bully or antagonize allies or the family of her allies. It also makes no political sense to defy, disrespect or endanger the livelihood of her husband/partners.

Unless you're suggesting that Dany suddenly becomes another character, I don't see this happening. Even if she became legitimately insane, Dany would be more like Baelor the Blessed (stuck in la-la land, self-destructive in the name of religion) or Dowager Queen Rhaena (self-isolating, unresponsive, spiteful, difficult, socially self-destructive) as opposed to Aerys the Mad and Maegor the Cruel.

On 4/17/2020 at 1:57 PM, Rose of Red Lake said:

Whatever Tyrion's motives

You can't just dismiss his motives.

If he is mistaken and/or his motives are impure or even sinister, then that changes everything.

On 4/17/2020 at 1:57 PM, Rose of Red Lake said:

If Dany is objectively looking to punish Jon's family or the North for resisting her, then Jon has to choose. Tyrion doesn't even need to be in the room. The only reason he would need to tell Jon what's up is if Jon's resurrection made him dumber than shit. If he couldn't figure this out after she burned a million people then he just might be the stupidest character in all of fantasy. 

You're acting as if the show plot as if it was well-written and true to the source material. This paragraph is full of contradictions.

1. If Dany is objectively looking to punish the North for resisting her, then Dany would be right to do so. Why do I say that? Because you use the term "objectively." Meaning that subjective things such as emotions and whatsoever are not even entering the equation. Logically, impartially, without bias, justly, soberly, squarely, evenhandedly, equitably, fairly, actually are all synonyms for objectively. So if she is objectively looking to punish the North for resisting her, then Jon is no position to deny her of that.
2. Why would she want to punish Jon's family and/or the North for resisting her? You seem to be assuming that it is for some unjust or stupid reason. What if it's for a good reason?
3. Jon still holds a massive amount of influence over the North and Jon's family is after all his family. If the North and/or Jon's family is resisting their rightful queen, then North and/or Jon's family is resisting their rightful king which would be Jon. The show f---ed this up but Jon is Dany's husband and king. Jon and Dany rule together because they are effectively married. If you operate under the presumption that they are not ruling together, then Jon -- as the son of Rhaegar Targaryen -- is the king and what he says is law. Jon tells them that Dany is their queen and that they will obey. If they fail to do that, then they are defying Jon. There is no defying or resisting Dany without defying or resisting Jon.
4. Again: Jon still holds a massive amount of influence over the North and Jon's family is after all his family. If Jon cannot get them to submit to Dany, then Jon has failed. If Jon has failed to do his job and if he has failed to prevent the unnecessary escalation of a problem between his sister(s) and Dany, then the problem lies with Jon and his sister. Not with Dany. Especially if she is doing so objectively.
5. Like come on...have you not read the books? Have you only seen the show? If so, why would Jon be that stupid? Catelyn Stark and Beric Dondarrion both died and were resurrected and not one iota of intelligence was lost to them. If anything, they became smarter. Jon Snow is smart and he would never just sit back and let such a situation occur before his death. Why would he just let it happen after his death? The only reason why he would is if his death and resurrection made him evil or amoral.
6. Jon's family is her family. The people of the North are her people. Daenerys has already won. She didn't treat the people in Slaver's Bay poorly and she had practically no connection to them. She didn't treat the people of the Dothraki Sea poorly and she had only a tangential, forgone connection to them. Why would she treat the people of the North poorly when she has a strong connection to them and their land? Make it make sense.
7. You seem to assume that Dany is actually going to just kill a million people at the flip of a coin without blinking an eye. Why? Why would she do all of that for no reason? She gains nothing and unnecessarily puts her own troops at risk. The American government nuked not one but two Japanese cities and that was after firebombing sixty-seven other Japanese cities and no one faults the American government for doing that. Even the Nanjing Massacre had a military purpose.

A lot of your arguments seem to be based on the belief that Daenerys Targaryen is clinically insane and has a history of behavior that is not only is completely devoid of rationality but that makes absolutely no emotional sense. It doesn't even make sense on a primal, survivalist, animalistic level. Daenerys destroying King's Landing and killing millions of people after she has already taken the city makes Aerys the Mad seem sane.

Ironically, your entire stance on this is also insane as there is nothing in the books that suggests that Daenerys Targaryen is mentally ill.

Edited May 13, 2020 by BlackLightning

[SeanF]

@BlackLightningBurning cities in war happens for a reason.  It might be a horrible reason, but there's still a reason.  The burning of Hamburg, Tokyo, the Ruhr etc. in WWII was done to break resistance and punish the enemy.  Genghis Khan burned cities that resisted, so that others would surrender without a fight.

The problem with the burning of Kings Landing is it was done for no reason.  Dany had reason to burn the Red Keep (to kill Cersei and her followers).  She had reason to kill Lannister soldiers.  It might be unpleasant, but it makes sense, militarily, and emotionally.  But she had no reason to swerve away from the Red Keep and burn random civilians (and risk her own soldiers).  And D & D know this, because they've come up with a string of alternative explanations, none of which fit (it was like Hiroshima and Nagasaki - it was not, those bombings were done to finish off resistance;  she was cold when she saw her brother being killed;  she was triggered by the bells;  she wanted to conquer the world;  it was the same thing as killing slavers and rapists in Essos etc.)

All the debate, prior to this, between Dany and the rest, was about the level of civilian casualties to be incurred when she burned the Red Keep.  No one was discussing burning their own capital city, the most valuable piece of real estate in the world.  Burning a capital is the act of a loser, not a winner.

If Dany burns Kings Landing in the books, there will be a reason.  For example, her soldiers might be bogged down in street fighting, and taking huge casualties;  or the surrender of the city might be botched (eg someone lets off a bolt that injures her or Drogon, leading her to believe it's a sham);  or the fire runs out of control as caches of wildfire get ignited in a wooden city.

The Sack on the ground would have made enough sense on its own.  The Northern soldiers in particular would all have friends and relatives who died at the Red Wedding, and they would be itching for revenge for that, and the deaths of Ned Stark and his men.

Edited May 13, 2020 by SeanF