Jump to content

Master thread on what the Show means for the book plot


Recommended Posts

Is murdering your lover and kinslaying your father worse than mass murder of an entire city?  I don't know but this sounds exactly like the kind of red meat GRRM would throw out to the fans to debate. Problem is, many of us are tired. It's been 85 years of debate already.

He even wanted us to debate the ethics of Oelenna killing Joffrey. I dont see anyone doing that. :rolleyes: He really just seems to write from the perspective of "have fun debating this!"  :wacko:

I know we love assigning blame so I'll just do that now, in show universe. I blame Tyrion for not seeing the signs sooner. Jon for pushing his men too far when he was advised that they needed time to recover. Both ended with some degree of culpability in the horror. In modern day they'd be charged with war crimes. GRRM might go with "they live, but it will haunt them." To his credit he does write trauma really well. Jon's arc would be a fall arc, combined with a choice that Ned never had to make.

Tyrion dying is something most of agree should happen - but I dont think the author has the guts. Tyrion is (supposedly) the perfect creation of darkness and light that GRRM is most proud of. I'm willing to admit that I might not have read Tyrion's arc the way the author intended. At the same time the author may have made mistakes in writing to cause fans to believe things he didn't intend.

Maybe by having so many Hands end in ~death~ it's a hint that Tyrion isn't on the track to a great life security plan? lol

But if all 3 "heads of the dragon" died because they faced the consequences of their terrible actions, I'd accept that too. I just don't think it would foment the "debate!!!" that the author seems to love.

Edited by Rose of Red Lake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 7/29/2020 at 3:32 AM, Rose of Red Lake said:

Is murdering your lover and kinslaying your father worse than mass murder of an entire city?  I don't know but this sounds exactly like the kind of red meat GRRM would throw out to the fans to debate. Problem is, many of us are tired. It's been 85 years of debate already.

He even wanted us to debate the ethics of Oelenna killing Joffrey. I dont see anyone doing that. :rolleyes: He really just seems to write from the perspective of "have fun debating this!"  :wacko:

I know we love assigning blame so I'll just do that now, in show universe. I blame Tyrion for not seeing the signs sooner. Jon for pushing his men too far when he was advised that they needed time to recover. Both ended with some degree of culpability in the horror. In modern day they'd be charged with war crimes. GRRM might go with "they live, but it will haunt them." To his credit he does write trauma really well. Jon's arc would be a fall arc, combined with a choice that Ned never had to make.

Tyrion dying is something most of agree should happen - but I dont think the author has the guts. Tyrion is (supposedly) the perfect creation of darkness and light that GRRM is most proud of. I'm willing to admit that I might not have read Tyrion's arc the way the author intended. At the same time the author may have made mistakes in writing to cause fans to believe things he didn't intend.

Maybe by having so many Hands end in ~death~ it's a hint that Tyrion isn't on the track to a great life security plan? lol

But if all 3 "heads of the dragon" died because they faced the consequences of their terrible actions, I'd accept that too. I just don't think it would foment the "debate!!!" that the author seems to love.

You don't think that GRRM has the guts to kill Tyrion off? At the end of the story? :wacko:

No way; after everything GRRM has pulled off already...no way. If it doesn't happen (A BIG IF), it won't be because he had no guts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BlackLightning said:

You don't think that GRRM has the guts to kill Tyrion off? At the end of the story? :wacko:

No way; after everything GRRM has pulled off already...no way. If it doesn't happen (A BIG IF), it won't be because he had no guts.

 

Quote

"What a fraud you are, Imp. You let a hundred guardsmen rape your wife, shot your father through the belly with a quarrel, twisted a golden chain around your lover's throat until her face turned black, yet somehow you still think that you deserve to live."

He is writing Tyrion now as a character who wants to live - and he'll give him that. And even worse I think he's giving him the rare redemption arc. Because he's a "survivor." It's banal and trite. 

Edited by Rose of Red Lake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

 

He is writing Tyrion now as a character who wants to live - and he'll give him that. And even worse I think he's giving him the rare redemption arc. Because he's a "survivor." It's banal and trite. 

I agree. It is very banal and trite. Why would he write yet another redemption arc for Tyrion when he is already writing at least five of them already? (and all five are infinitely more interesting because the characters themselves are coming from interesting places)

A redemption arc doesn't even make sense for Tyrion. As you say, Tyrion wants to live; he doesn't want to be a better person unlike Jaime nor is he slowly coming to the realization that he was wrong all along like Melisandre.

But GRRM doesn't really give the characters what they want. If he does give them what they want, it's either a twisted version of what they originally wanted or they no longer want it by the time they get it.

As a matter of fact, which characters have gotten exactly what they wanted?

Edited by BlackLightning
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

I agree. It is very banal and trite. Why would he write yet another redemption arc for Tyrion when he is already writing at least five of them already? (and all five are infinitely more interesting because the characters themselves are coming from interesting places)

A redemption arc doesn't even make sense for Tyrion. As you say, Tyrion wants to live; he doesn't want to be a better person unlike Jaime nor is he slowly coming to the realization that he was wrong all along like Melisandre.

But GRRM doesn't really give the characters what they want. If he does give them what they want, it's either a twisted version of what they originally wanted or they no longer want it by the time they get it.

As a matter of fact, which characters have gotten exactly what they wanted?

I think he will get to the point where he’s fucked up so much that he want to hide as a little person like Penny. He will see the appeal in Penny’s simple life and want that, only to be yanked back into ruling. I think GRRM is going to put him to work when it’s the last thing he will want at that point. That’s why it’s a form of redemption. Tyrion is his history buff and political wunderkind. It’s Tyrion Stu.

I don’t think that many characters are on redemption arcs. When fans say “this ending destroyed X characters arc” it’s a bit presumptuous. Maybe they were wrong about the arc in the first place. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

I agree. It is very banal and trite. Why would he write yet another redemption arc for Tyrion when he is already writing at least five of them already? (and all five are infinitely more interesting because the characters themselves are coming from interesting places)

A redemption arc doesn't even make sense for Tyrion. As you say, Tyrion wants to live; he doesn't want to be a better person unlike Jaime nor is he slowly coming to the realization that he was wrong all along like Melisandre.

But GRRM doesn't really give the characters what they want. If he does give them what they want, it's either a twisted version of what they originally wanted or they no longer want it by the time they get it.

As a matter of fact, which characters have gotten exactly what they wanted?

Bronn’s gotten what he’s wanted: money, moving up socially. And for the next 16 years until Tyrion Tanner comes of age he should be set up nicely as Lord Protector of Stokeworth.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/9/2020 at 3:19 PM, Angel Eyes said:

Bronn’s gotten what he’s wanted: money, moving up socially. And for the next 16 years until Tyrion Tanner comes of age he should be set up nicely as Lord Protector of Stokeworth.

 

I knew someone would bring up Bronn. Here's where you are wrong:

  1. Bronn is not the type who just wants money; people who just want money will take it any which way you give it to them under any circumstance. Cue Dontos Hollard. What Bronn wants income. He wants to be put on retainer. That's why he followed Catelyn Stark and then Tyrion Lannister; both individuals had the power to make him a permanent part of their household.
  2. Bronn never cared about being a lord or a knight. In fact, Bronn's chances of becoming lord of anything were laughably low; his chances of becoming Lord of Stokeworth was almost just as laughable until Cersei interfered.
  3. Bronn never was seeking to have a wife and children of his own.
  4. The story is not over yet. For one, Daenerys Targaryen is coming. Two, Old Nan's stories of the Long Night seems to suggest that a lot of the highborn will starve and/or freeze to deaths in their own castles. Three, no one knows what Varys will do when he reveals himself. Four, what will Aegon do to anyone who profited from the Lannister-Baratheon regime. Five, Cersei is not going to forgive or forget Bronn and she's still in the game.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/9/2020 at 3:08 PM, Rose of Red Lake said:

I think he will get to the point where he’s fucked up so much that he want to hide as a little person like Penny. He will see the appeal in Penny’s simple life and want that, only to be yanked back into ruling. I think GRRM is going to put him to work when it’s the last thing he will want at that point. That’s why it’s a form of redemption. Tyrion is his history buff and political wunderkind. It’s Tyrion Stu.

I don’t think that many characters are on redemption arcs. When fans say “this ending destroyed X characters arc” it’s a bit presumptuous. Maybe they were wrong about the arc in the first place. 

Melisandre, Theon, Jaime, Victarion, Arianne and Barristan are on redemption arcs. Even Sansa is in the middle of something of an redemption arc. We don't know a lot about Coldhands but he might be on a redemption arc; we'll find out soon enough.

Depending on how you feel about Jon Snow's actions at the end of Dance and your predictions for Jon in Winds, Jon has to have a redemption arc of sorts. 

If Arya gets any more bloodthirsty, either she too will be on a redemption arc or the character will have a bad end.

If UnCatelyn gets any better or rational, then by default UnCatelyn will be on a redemption arc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/11/2020 at 8:38 AM, BlackLightning said:

Melisandre, Theon, Jaime, Victarion, Arianne and Barristan are on redemption arcs. Even Sansa is in the middle of something of an redemption arc. We don't know a lot about Coldhands but he might be on a redemption arc; we'll find out soon enough.

Depending on how you feel about Jon Snow's actions at the end of Dance and your predictions for Jon in Winds, Jon has to have a redemption arc of sorts. 

If Arya gets any more bloodthirsty, either she too will be on a redemption arc or the character will have a bad end.

If UnCatelyn gets any better or rational, then by default UnCatelyn will be on a redemption arc.

I think who is on what arc is debatable and every fan has their own opinion on it. I think these characters are having a messy time of it and instead of putting them on a simple redemption arc it will be a lot less clear about if they were redeemed and by whom. In other words we'll be left with redemption questions for most of these characters. Only 1 or 2 will get a clear cut one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/9/2020 at 8:37 PM, BlackLightning said:

I agree. It is very banal and trite. Why would he write yet another redemption arc for Tyrion when he is already writing at least five of them already? (and all five are infinitely more interesting because the characters themselves are coming from interesting places)

A redemption arc doesn't even make sense for Tyrion. As you say, Tyrion wants to live; he doesn't want to be a better person unlike Jaime nor is he slowly coming to the realization that he was wrong all along like Melisandre.

But GRRM doesn't really give the characters what they want. If he does give them what they want, it's either a twisted version of what they originally wanted or they no longer want it by the time they get it.

As a matter of fact, which characters have gotten exactly what they wanted?

 I think Tyrion is GRRM's Richard III, and since GRRM is a Ricardian (he believes Richard III was framed) he'll use Tyrion as an outlet for his Richard III fanboyism.

So a good chance Tyrion does end up as Hand at the end, despite all he's done, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/14/2020 at 9:55 AM, Darryk said:

 I think Tyrion is GRRM's Richard III, and since GRRM is a Ricardian (he believes Richard III was framed) he'll use Tyrion as an outlet for his Richard III fanboyism.

So a good chance Tyrion does end up as Hand at the end, despite all he's done, IMO.

GRRM is certainly a fan of Richard III, there are four characters based off of him in the books.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/14/2020 at 9:55 AM, Darryk said:

 I think Tyrion is GRRM's Richard III, and since GRRM is a Ricardian (he believes Richard III was framed) he'll use Tyrion as an outlet for his Richard III fanboyism.

So a good chance Tyrion does end up as Hand at the end, despite all he's done, IMO.

That's a depressing, especially since people like Ned, Robb and Catelyn are butchered for doing the right thing most (if not all) of the time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

That's a depressing, especially since people like Ned, Robb and Catelyn are butchered for doing the right thing most (if not all) of the time

I like Richard III too.  One part of me is rooting for him, but it would still have been an unsatisfactory ending to the play had her really got away with it.

Edited by SeanF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I'm sure this has already been mentioned, but the show did quite, emphatically (and probably accidentally) make it clear that events have finished off the Stark lineage. Rob dead. Rickon dead. The Last of the Starks are Arya - sailing away from love and marriage. Sansa - traumatised and no love interest on the horizon. Bran (won't be having kids). Jon goes not count.

The Starks may have "won", but it is a pyrrhic victory if there is no heir. That is the way their line ends - not with fire, not with ice, but without issue.

As to what this means for the books? Well, I think much of a Dream of Spring is the pressure on Sansa to produce an heir, much like there was for Elizabeth I.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Timm said:

I'm sure this has already been mentioned, but the show did quite, emphatically (and probably accidentally) make it clear that events have finished off the Stark lineage. Rob dead. Rickon dead. The Last of the Starks are Arya - sailing away from love and marriage. Sansa - traumatised and no love interest on the horizon. Bran (won't be having kids). Jon goes not count.

The Starks may have "won", but it is a pyrrhic victory if there is no heir. That is the way their line ends - not with fire, not with ice, but without issue.

As to what this means for the books? Well, I think much of a Dream of Spring is the pressure on Sansa to produce an heir, much like there was for Elizabeth I.

 

As far as i can see Starks got a pretty happy ending:
- Arya doing whatever she want to do
- Sansa - Queen also not sure what do you mean by traumatized, she was smiling when Ramsey died
- Jon - he counts?
- Bran - King robot..

DoS older name was "A Time for Wolves" - so you have to imagine that in general Starks will have a decent finish. Anyway...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bluntt said:

As far as i can see Starks got a pretty happy ending:
- Arya doing whatever she want to do
- Sansa - Queen also not sure what do you mean by traumatized, she was smiling when Ramsey died
- Jon - he counts?
- Bran - King robot..

DoS older name was "A Time for Wolves" - so you have to imagine that in general Starks will have a decent finish. Anyway...

Fair comment.

But my point was not about the end point for the characters, but about the future of the Stark house itself.

Little points:

- I think anyone who enjoys seeing their serial rapist eaten by dogs might be said to be mentally and emotionally scarred (the dogs are irrelevant here, she has suffered horror). - Jon may have Stark blood, but he is still a bastard in the public eye (unless there are proper records / witnesses to the annulment from Elia and the marriage to Lyanna*). - Many think that "A Time for Wolves was intended to be ambiguous; did it refer only to the Starks, or also / only to actual wild animals in the same way as A Feast for Crows, that is, a bad outcome for all humans.

*I suppose that the word of the King Robot may be enough. But Jon is now a Queenslayer, pretty much a Kinslayer and a socially disgraced member of the Night's Watch. The chances of him siring an acceptable heir appear vanishingly small.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Timm said:

Fair comment.

But my point was not about the end point for the characters, but about the future of the Stark house itself.

Little points:

- I think anyone who enjoys seeing their serial rapist eaten by dogs might be said to be mentally and emotionally scarred (the dogs are irrelevant here, she has suffered horror). - Jon may have Stark blood, but he is still a bastard in the public eye (unless there are proper records / witnesses to the annulment from Elia and the marriage to Lyanna*). - Many think that "A Time for Wolves was intended to be ambiguous; did it refer only to the Starks, or also / only to actual wild animals in the same way as A Feast for Crows, that is, a bad outcome for all humans.

*I suppose that the word of the King Robot may be enough. But Jon is now a Queenslayer, pretty much a Kinslayer and a socially disgraced member of the Night's Watch. The chances of him siring an acceptable heir appear vanishingly small.

As damaged as Sansa may or may not be, she's going to be expected to marry and mother an heir. This isn't Queen Elizabeth of Henry VIII's line who had a cousin in place when she never had a child to take over. Sansa will have to give birth, whether political or for love. Otherwise who will be the next ruler? Some distant cousin who is somewhere in the Vale? Or Edmure's son who may have a claim based on Edmure being Cat's brother? Sansa will have a child eventually. I'm sure she will want to be a parent again in the future but if she refuses, the northerners may overthrow her.

Edited by Ghostlydragon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Timm said:

Fair comment.

But my point was not about the end point for the characters, but about the future of the Stark house itself.

Little points:

- I think anyone who enjoys seeing their serial rapist eaten by dogs might be said to be mentally and emotionally scarred (the dogs are irrelevant here, she has suffered horror). - Jon may have Stark blood, but he is still a bastard in the public eye (unless there are proper records / witnesses to the annulment from Elia and the marriage to Lyanna*). - Many think that "A Time for Wolves was intended to be ambiguous; did it refer only to the Starks, or also / only to actual wild animals in the same way as A Feast for Crows, that is, a bad outcome for all humans.

*I suppose that the word of the King Robot may be enough. But Jon is now a Queenslayer, pretty much a Kinslayer and a socially disgraced member of the Night's Watch. The chances of him siring an acceptable heir appear vanishingly small.

Well my view is different:

All of them but Bran can continue house Stark technically.
Sansa might be scarred but time heals.
Arya could decide to do whatever she wants, she might even come back to Westeros with a foreign man that she loves.
Nobody(except for the people who made him do it) knew that Jon is a kinslayer(one of the bigger sins in the world of Ice and Fire) and for the public he just murdered Daenerys, the mad queen, who burned 500k people and basically was a tyrant going crazy with dragon...

To me it seems the future of house Stark is very bright... in fact they are ruling over the whole of Westeros(Jon - king beyond the wall, Sansa - Queen of the North, Bran - King of the 6 kingdoms, and even Arya - exploring whats west of Westeros(basically becoming Columbus).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/30/2020 at 2:37 PM, Timm said:

Fair comment.

But my point was not about the end point for the characters, but about the future of the Stark house itself.

Little points:

- I think anyone who enjoys seeing their serial rapist eaten by dogs might be said to be mentally and emotionally scarred (the dogs are irrelevant here, she has suffered horror). - Jon may have Stark blood, but he is still a bastard in the public eye (unless there are proper records / witnesses to the annulment from Elia and the marriage to Lyanna*). - Many think that "A Time for Wolves was intended to be ambiguous; did it refer only to the Starks, or also / only to actual wild animals in the same way as A Feast for Crows, that is, a bad outcome for all humans.

*I suppose that the word of the King Robot may be enough. But Jon is now a Queenslayer, pretty much a Kinslayer and a socially disgraced member of the Night's Watch. The chances of him siring an acceptable heir appear vanishingly small.

Frankly, that is the reason why I think Jon will die in the books.

To be a kingslayer, a kinslayer and a disgraced member of the Night's Watch.....Jon would be toast. Especially since he was offered guest right and had killed his king and kin in their own home (!!!). It becomes even more egregious if Jon and Dany are husband and wife by that point as well. Oof!

If Jon lets Tyrion backdoor him into killing Dany in her own home, Jon might as well kill himself because he will be doomed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...