Jump to content
Free Northman Reborn

Master thread on what the Show means for the book plot

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

The show’s ending was a witless travesty but we can still glean something of the proper story's plot from it. However, I think some characters' endings are still very murky; I don’t think we can be confident about Tyrion or Arya from the show.

To go by character first:

The essence of Jon and Dany’s ending is surely correct. I think we now know the following: that Jon and Dany will fall in love, Dany will become crueller and more tyrannical, Jon will come to see his choice as yet another question of whether to put duty above love and he will play the major role in her death.

The main reasons to believe this are that it is not something the showrunners likely made up on their own as it is far too controversial and daring (although I guess you could say this about Sansa and Ramsay …). Moreover, it also fits very well with Dany and Jon’s arcs and the essential conflicts that compose the dynamics of their stories. It has long been speculated that Dany could become a very brutal conqueror if she lets her anger predominate and takes Jorah’s advice on the need to be dishonourable. Jon seems destined to be continually tempted to put love before duty to the realm and to be always thwarted if he tries to do so. This has included having a hand in his lover’s death before. So in the broadest sense, everything fits. Consider yourselves spoiled.

I repose no confidence in the specific way this happens in the show. In particular I don’t think we know Jon goes through the stages he did on the show, i.e. KitN, abdication, revelation of parentage, growing conflict with Dany leading to her death. For instance, I think Jon may never become KitN, or if he does it could be much later than in the show, as Stannis is likely to win the battle at the beginning of the Winds. I also don’t necessarily trust the way the show used R+L=J to further the conflict between Jon and Dany. Varys rightly highlighted in the show that Jon is too weak to act as a break on Daenerys but his book counterpart is a different story, so marriage is an option in the books.

We now also know that Bran becomes king. The question is king of where because the other thing we know is that the ending in the show can’t possibly happen in the books. Bran as king of the south with Sansa as queen of an independent North is nonsensical and a completely witless piece of writing. However, again I don’t think it makes sense for Benioff and Weiss to have Bran become king of anywhere if this wasn’t GrrM’s plan. Bran’s elevation to kingship was handled so poorly it is clearly something that they felt obliged to do while having no idea of how to do it. And for those who can't see how this can happen, look at Jon's elevation to LC.

So, either Bran becomes KitN and we just weren’t told what the situation in the south will be (possibly the showrunners felt it was too complicated), or he becomes king of all westeros and the north does not become independent. Sansa can’t become QitN unless both Bran and Rickon are dead, and as we know Bran won’t be dead, as he’ll be a king, northern independence under Sansa can’t happen at all.

I suspect what happened here is that Sansa ends up ruling the Vale, or being a major southron powerbroker and the show couldn’t set this up, as Winterfell and King’s Landing are the only locations viewers care about. So things got moved around to represent Sansa ruling and having a big influence over the north even though the actual way the show portrayed this was wrong. In any case, we can be confident that Bran becomes a king, somewhere and Sansa ends up in position of political power, somewhere.

We also now know Bran does leave the cave as he becomes king. I was one of those who thought he would remain there forever, so I got that wrong.

As regards Tyrion I have no confidence at all that his ending is right. The character has been completely whitewashed in the show – he’s basically a shorter Ned Stark with a dirty mouth. Obviously, he’s in a very different place in the books, even if Penny has brought him back from the darkness slightly. This represents such a big change in the character I don’t think we could expect the show to do Tyrion’s ending properly – I am not convinced he survives in the books and I think he could even get greyscale.

I do think it is probable he plays a similar role in the books as in the show in so far as he serves as Daenerys’ advisor but his motives will be darker and more complicated than the desire to make the world a better place or whatever sentimental mush he spouted on the tv. He may even form part of a Jon-Dany-Tyrion love triangle and play a role in setting Jon on Dany ...

Arya is the other major character for whom I have no real confidence in the show’s ending. We can say, with some confidence, that her main plot beats in the show such as butchering the Freys and killing the Night King either won’t happen at her hand or won't happen at all in the books. I see no real reason to think she will play a role in the downfall of Littlefinger, that looks like Sansa’s battle. So, given her entire story looks to be different I don’t think we assume her show ending is going to be the same as the books. It might be but we can’t really tell either way.

There is a hint during her conversation with the Hound prior to the battle of the Cleganes that her arc will end with her forsaking revenge and channelling her energies into something adventurous but not murderous (necessarily) i.e. exploring but I can’t really say whether I think this is GrrM or D&D.

The plot:

The show plot runs like this: Jon and Sansa come to rule the North by beating the Boltons, Dany wins partially in the south but there is a ceasefire with Cersei and Euron, the White Walkers are then beaten by an alliance between Dany and Jon + Sansa (but really by Arya), this victorious alliance then defeats Cersei and Euron who benefitted from sitting out the battle with the Night King, Dany falls off the deep end and Jon kills her.

What I take from it is Asoiaf ends not with the defeat or repulse of the Others but a human conflict. GrrM has hinted as much by praising Tolkein’s scouring of the shire. And it seems clear that this human conflict must be the one between Jon and Daenerys who presumably meet sometime during (or before) the battle against the Others. In the show we have another human conflict after the fight against their version of the Others, namely that between Dany + Jon and Euron + Cersei. I’m not sure we can say for certain whether this represents how things will go down in the books, or whether it stems from the show being more comfortable with the political than magical aspects of the series. So it is possible Jon vs Dany will be the only conflict after the battle with the Others.

Overall though I am slightly inclined to think Euron does ally with Cersei and is defeated after the Others are and that the way in which he is beaten sets up the Jon/Dany conflict. I think it is more likely Jon and Dany fall out over how to handle human foes than the Others. This means something like half of Dream will have to take place after the defeat of the Others. This compresses the Long Night into about one book, assuming it doesn’t start until halfway through Winds. I think this raises the likelihood that what we will see in the books won’t be the permanent defeat of the Others but rather the repulse of an initial invasion and the preparation of the Seven kingdoms to survive the Long Night.

Edited by Chaircat Meow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/22/2019 at 10:02 PM, divica said:

You could say that the children found some others from some ancient time and used magic to release them because they were losing the war. Then things got out of control...

Yes. But if the CotF created the Others, there is no human fault. Nothing wrong with what they did. Just like a meteor falling on Earth.

But the humans, first of them, the kings and the lords, did things wrong. Both Old Gods and Seven followers talk of divine punishment. Even Tywin, not shy of killing princesses, children and unborn, not shy to massacring innocents, will balk at killing his son. OK the gods seem powerless. OK the rivalries didn't help prepare for the Long Night. But I feel it would be more fitting if the humans were the cause the LN and the coming of the Others. As is explained in the legends.

Quote

He turned his back on the gods of Yi Ti and began worshiping a black stone that had fallen from the skies, took a tiger-woman as wife, practiced cannibalism and necromancy, and enslaved his own people. Horrified at the Blood Betrayal, the Maiden-Made-of-Light turned her back upon the world and the Lion of Night came forth in all his fury to punish the wickedness of man.

ETA:

Besides, the war with the CotF was hundreds or thousands of years before the LN. The Others would have been created, but powerless and unknown for hundreds of years? And come to light (if so to speak) much later, when men and CotF were at peace? Not the most likely possibility.

Edited by BalerionTheCat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

They accepted Joffrey and Tommen due to them being the acknowledged heirs of Robert Baratheon. Both being healthy, both marrying early, neither thought of as being impotent and both having the backing of much of the kingdom. Both were also anointed by the High Septon, something that seems unlikely to happen with Bran. 

In the first few books we witness what other characters think of Bran, his father's closest friend and his distant Karstark cousins all pity him and think he would be better off dead. This is the mentality of the world they live in. They are not going to nominate him as King. The Same is true for Bronn and the Reach, unless he is married to Margaery and her father and brothers are all dead there is zero chance the Reach lords accept him as their Lord.

I'm not ruling out the books following the show, but that ending was pure pandering, its the type of ending that is wished for on these kind of forums. The Starks ruling both the North and the South can be pulled from any fan fantasy ending to the series.  Arya and Jon can't be in their shadow so they both leave and do their own thing.

Not only that the realm accepting Tyrion, the kingslayer, kinslayer hated dwarf as the de facto ruler is also not going to wash. Brienne is a worthy knight but the realm would see her appointment as a joke. Having two commoners on the Small Council just exacerbates the problem.

Its hard to see GRRM going with the majority of these choices as King and Council.

 

Ahhh you might have read my message and thought I'm for everything that happened in the show to be so in the book. I'm not. I can see King Bran, Dany's madness and Jon ending her being so though - but happening in a totally different more logical way. At the end of the day you can make arguments fore/against every character being accepted in a position of power until you're blue in the face. It's all about how Martin lays out the plot and turn of events. One of the sad things about GOT is that we still (really) have no idea how the story is going to unfold (because what the show did was incomprehensible).

The small council at the end of GOT I largely think is folly though.   

Share this post


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

The show’s ending was a witless travesty but we can still glean something of the proper story's plot from it. However, I think some characters' endings are still very murky; I don’t think we can be confident about Tyrion or Arya from the show.

To go by character first:

The essence of Jon and Dany’s ending is surely correct. I think we now know the following: that Jon and Dany will fall in love, Dany will become crueller and more tyrannical, Jon will come to see his choice as yet another question of whether to put duty above love and he will play the major role in her death.

The main reasons to believe this are that it is not something the showrunners likely made up on their own as it is far too controversial and daring (although I guess you could say this about Sansa and Ramsay …). Moreover, it also fits very well with Dany and Jon’s arcs and the essential conflicts that compose the dynamics of their stories. It has long been speculated that Dany could become a very brutal conqueror if she lets her anger predominate and takes Jorah’s advice on the need to be dishonourable. Jon seems destined to be continually tempted to put love before duty to the realm and to be always thwarted if he tries to do so. This has included having a hand in his lover’s death before. So in the broadest sense, everything fits. Consider yourselves spoiled.

I repose no confidence in the specific way this happens in the show. In particular I don’t think we know Jon goes through the stages he did on the show, i.e. KitN, abdication, revelation of parentage, growing conflict with Dany leading to her death. For instance, I think Jon may never become KitN, or if he does it could be much later than in the show, as Stannis is likely to win the battle at the beginning of the Winds. I also don’t necessarily trust the way the show used R+L=J to further the conflict between Jon and Dany. Varys rightly highlighted in the show that Jon is too weak to act as a break on Daenerys but his book counterpart is a different story, so marriage is an option in the books.

We now also know that Bran becomes king. The question is king of where because the other thing we know is that the ending in the show can’t possibly happen in the books. Bran as king of the south with Sansa as queen of an independent North is nonsensical and a completely witless piece of writing. However, again I don’t think it makes sense for Benioff and Weiss to have Bran become king of anywhere if this wasn’t GrrM’s plan. Bran’s elevation to kingship was handled so poorly it is clearly something that they felt obliged to do while having no idea of how to do it. And for those who can't see how this can happen, look at Jon's elevation to LC.

So, either Bran becomes KitN and we just weren’t told what the situation in the south will be (possibly the showrunners felt it was too complicated), or he becomes king of all westeros and the north does not become independent. Sansa can’t become QitN unless both Bran and Rickon are dead, and as we know Bran won’t be dead, as he’ll be a king, northern independence under Sansa can’t happen at all.

I suspect what happened here is that Sansa ends up ruling the Vale, or being a major southron powerbroker and the show couldn’t set this up, as Winterfell and King’s Landing are the only locations viewers care about. So things got moved around to represent Sansa ruling and having a big influence over the north even though the actual way the show portrayed this was wrong. In any case, we can be confident that Bran becomes a king, somewhere and Sansa ends up in position of political power, somewhere.

We also now know Bran does leave the cave as he becomes king. I was one of those who thought he would remain there forever, so I got that wrong.

As regards Tyrion I have no confidence at all that his ending is right. The character has been completely whitewashed in the show – he’s basically a shorter Ned Stark with a dirty mouth. Obviously, he’s in a very different place in the books, even if Penny has brought him back from the darkness slightly. This represents such a big change in the character I don’t think we could expect the show to do Tyrion’s ending properly – I am not convinced he survives in the books and I think he could even get greyscale.

I do think it is probable he plays a similar role in the books as in the show in so far as he serves as Daenerys’ advisor but his motives will be darker and more complicated than the desire to make the world a better place or whatever sentimental mush he spouted on the tv. He may even form part of a Jon-Dany-Tyrion love triangle and play a role in setting Jon on Dany ...

Arya is the other major character for whom I have no real confidence in the show’s ending. We can say, with some confidence, that her main plot beats in the show such as butchering the Freys and killing the Night King either won’t happen at her hand or won't happen at all in the books. I see no real reason to think she will play a role in the downfall of Littlefinger, that looks like Sansa’s battle. So, given her entire story looks to be different I don’t think we assume her show ending is going to be the same as the books. It might be but we can’t really tell either way.

There is a hint during her conversation with the Hound prior to the battle of the Cleganes that her arc will end with her forsaking revenge and channelling her energies into something adventurous but not murderous (necessarily) i.e. exploring but I can’t really say whether I think this is GrrM or D&D.

The plot:

The show plot runs like this: Jon and Sansa come to rule the North by beating the Boltons, Dany wins partially in the south but there is a ceasefire with Cersei and Euron, the White Walkers are then beaten by an alliance between Dany and Jon + Sansa (but really by Arya), this victorious alliance then defeats Cersei and Euron who benefitted from sitting out the battle with the Night King, Dany falls off the deep end and Jon kills her.

What I take from it is Asoiaf ends not with the defeat or repulse of the Others but a human conflict. GrrM has hinted as much by praising Tolkein’s scouring of the shire. And it seems clear that this human conflict must be the one between Jon and Daenerys who presumably meet sometime during (or before) the battle against the Others. In the show we have another human conflict after the fight against their version of the Others, namely that between Dany + Jon and Euron + Cersei. I’m not sure we can say for certain whether this represents how things will go down in the books, or whether it stems from the show being more comfortable with the political than magical aspects of the series. So it is possible Jon vs Dany will be the only conflict after the battle with the Others.

Overall though I am slightly inclined to think Euron does ally with Cersei and is defeated after the Others are and that the way in which he is beaten sets up the Jon/Dany conflict. I think it is more likely Jon and Dany fall out over how to handle human foes than the Others. This means something like half of Dream will have to take place after the defeat of the Others. This compresses the Long Night into about one book, assuming it doesn’t start until halfway through Winds. I think this raises the likelihood that what we will see in the books won’t be the permanent defeat of the Others but rather the repulse of an initial invasion and the preparation of the Seven kingdoms to survive the Long Night.

This is a really nice summing up/ evaluation and along the lines of what I think.

If Sansa does take power in the Vale, what you think to Bran legitimising Jon to carry on the Stark name in Winterfell (can he even breed?) as Warden of the North? I still also half suspect Jorah will be the 2,000 commander at Castle Black - I can imagine people thinking all this is a little to neat at this stage though.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Lion of the West said:

I suppose this is one of the few times I feel that I am in a serious disagreemen with you. My credientals as a Lannister fanboy should be impeccable and I still love this endning and was totally ok with the Starks taking home the end game.

Don't get me wrong, I liked the last three episodes and have no real problem with the ending (the first two of the season bored me and the third was too dark but the last three were very entertaining). But the show and the books are quite different. The show is not as fleshed out as the books, and what they can get away with in the show will, in my opinion, not translate to the books due to the huge amount of source material and GRRM's pains to establish it as more akin to our own middle aged than a fairytale.

Cersei and Bran becoming rulers of Westeros should not be viable options in the book, neither have claims and at the time neither had heirs. Every Lord would be looking over their shoulders now that a precedent had been set that blood no longer mattered. The only way someone like Bronn could get the Reach is through marriage. And Gendry becoming ruler of the Stormlands is also a nonstarter.

As a Lannister fanboy I was OK with it, the House was intact, a Lannister basically rules the realm and Cersei and Jaime's ending was quite poetic and given Dany's actions the Lannisters becoming the villains of history seems unlikely. It was actually a great ending for the Lannisters, or as good as they could have expected given that they were the main protagonists of a fantasy series. 

But in the books I'd be disappointed with the realm being carved up between Starks, Lannisters and their allies. The North and Riverlands are currently in no position to be calling the shots, things obviously will get worse in the next two books.

48 minutes ago, Lion of the West said:

 

 

To start with Bran I think that the reason as to why he would work is that does have his magical powers, and I think that we will see them put into action as well as he being able to confirm that it is indeed he who wields those powers.

Possibly. However my counter is unless the great battle happens in the South I have my doubts that any of the Lords will believe it. They'll take it as more grumpkins and snarks and convince themselves that the Others were just another Wildling tribe and the people in the North are exaggerating their claims.

48 minutes ago, Lion of the West said:

Also I think that you ascribe to much "win" to Jon and Arya's endings.

Not so much win, but they are in no ones shadows, the most important people in their corner of the world and expect lives of importance. Arya Columbus setting out to find the New World is both exciting and sets her up as a potential major player in that world's history. Jon is likely to become the Lord Commander again, ruling his own section of the world. All four Starks are the most important people in their section of the world.

48 minutes ago, Lion of the West said:

 

As for Arya I think that he decision to leave Westeros for the seas to the west don't seem all to happy for her.

Much happier than the alternative. She has regained her humanity, her sense of adventure and stopped being a killing machine. Which is a happy ending and one I think will happen in the books. But they felt the need to sugar coat it with the further adventures on the high seas.

The writers wanted all the remaining Starks to be great, so having them all remain at Winterfell means three will be in the shadow of one. So they split them up and made them 'rulers/captains' of their own world. Many shows do this, its setting up potential spin offs.

 

48 minutes ago, Lion of the West said:

To start with Tyrion is, to my knowledge, more contempted than hated outside of the West and probably King's Landing.

That was before the kingslaying and kinslaying. GRRM has stressed what these mean in Westeros and he's admitted to both.  Kinslaying is worse than breaking Guest Rights in the South, should Walder be named as Hand there would be outrage and he denies his crimes.

Remember when Davos lands on the Three Sisters and news of Tyrion's deeds has Lord Sunderland(?) talking about how dwarves are a curse and talks of how they should be killed at sea like they were in the good old days.

Tyrion was hated and despised before killing his father and nephew, he's never going to be trusted again. A dwarf Hand and a Cripple King is simply not going to work in a world where most Lords are more Randyll/Robert than they are Sam.

48 minutes ago, Lion of the West said:

 

As for Brienne might be considered a joke to many, but we know she's been teaching chavunists the opposite since she was introduced to the story, I don't see why she shouldn't be able to continue doing this in grand style after she takes on a white cloak.

Who has she taught? Jaime is the only real one we know that has changed his mind on her and she had to save his life and best him in battle to do just that.  Most nobles still see her as a joke come AFFC.

If she does somehow kill Stannis maybe this might change, if its in battle and there are witnesses, but I don't think Brienne is about to be accepted in the sexist medieval world of Westeros. The Suffragette movement took decades to get incremental change, GRRM is enough of a history buff to know that having Westeros suddenly accept Brienne would be odd.

So should she be made a Kingsguard for a normal King it could be tolerated, but the trifecta of Bran, Tyrion and Brienne is a recipe for rebellion. Especially once Bran gives away a third of the realm. Two of the least popular British monarchs, John and Mary, were hated during their own reigns for giving away parts of France.

48 minutes ago, Lion of the West said:

Also who would be the two commoners on the Small Council? Both Davos and Bronn may have been knighted in their life times but they are still nobles.

They were born common, one a smuggler the other a sellsword.  Littlefinger is a noble and still looked down upon because of his birth.

Having one or even two commoners on the Council is not the problem if was in isolation. Just as having a cripple with no claim to the throne as King would be fine if it was in isolation or having a hated kingslaying/kingslaying dwarf as Hand or the very first ever female knight as Lord Commander. All are fine in isolation, maybe even two are passable. But for a new dynasty this is a recipe for disaster.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, HouseLancaster said:

This is a really nice summing up/ evaluation and along the lines of what I think.

If Sansa does take power in the Vale, what you think to Bran legitimising Jon to carry on the Stark name in Winterfell (can he even breed?) as Warden of the North? I still also half suspect Jorah will be the 2,000 commander at Castle Black - I can imagine people thinking all this is a little to neat at this stage though.   

As long as Rickon, Sansa or Arya survive there is no need to legitimise Jon to carry on the Stark line so I don't see much reason for this to happen. I also should have said in my earlier post that the other piece of the Jon ending they almost certainly got right was what happens after Jon kills Dany - I think he will go back to the wall, presumably as Lord Commander, as a penance. I don't think the circumstances have to be the same; it might be voluntary for instance but I don't think Jon will ever be a king or a lord of anything, at least for long anyway. 

This would also imply the Others are not defeated, just repulsed, because the Nights Watch is still needed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm wondering what it means for the blue rose symbolism in the books.

I guess it means the blue rose symbolizes Jon Snow, and nothing more than that? I always thought it might be foreshadowing a new dynasty founded at the end of the story, with a blue rose as its sigil; another nod to the War of the Roses from GRRM.

But there doesn't seem to be any new dynasty, or anything else at the end of the show that could justify the use of the blue rose to represent anything other than a symbolic substitute for Jon Snow in the books. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, BlueNightzx said:

i don't think bran is ever leaving that cave.

He neither did in the show. Meera literally states it "Brandon Stark died in that cave". The artist formerly known as Bran is the 3ER, a being with the conciousness of all the 3ER existing before him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

As long as Rickon, Sansa or Arya survive there is no need to legitimise Jon to carry on the Stark line so I don't see much reason for this to happen. I also should have said in my earlier post that the other piece of the Jon ending they almost certainly got right was what happens after Jon kills Dany - I think he will go back to the wall, presumably as Lord Commander, as a penance. I don't think the circumstances have to be the same; it might be voluntary for instance but I don't think Jon will ever be a king or a lord of anything, at least for long anyway. 

This would also imply the Others are not defeated, just repulsed, because the Nights Watch is still needed. 

IF Rickon dies though - Sansa and Arya would be married off to other Houses right (IF they were to marry)? That would certainly carry on the line but not the Stark name ...I might be confusing this with modern marriage, and the bigger House actually takes president(??)

In truth I see Ayra more likely to marry than Sansa, which I suppose wouldn't bode well... always thought George's plan was to role reverse their destinies; the girl who dreams of marrying a prince ends up a loner, and the Stark who wanted to be a warrior gets the love story (I guess with a prince of sorts if it's Gendry) and ends up a Lady. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, T and A said:

He neither did in the show. Meera literally states it "Brandon Stark died in that cave". The artist formerly known as Bran is the 3ER, a being with the conciousness of all the 3ER existing before him. 

let me be more especific then, i don't believe that the physical body that once belonged to Bran will ever leave that cave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, HouseLancaster said:

IF Rickon dies though - Sansa and Arya would be married off to other Houses right (IF they were to marry)? That would certainly carry on the line but not the Stark name ...I might be confusing this with modern marriage, and the bigger House actually takes president(??)

In truth I see Ayra more likely to marry than Sansa, which I suppose wouldn't bode well... always thought George's plan was to role reverse their destinies; the girl who dreams of marrying a prince ends up a loner, and the Stark who wanted to be a warrior gets the love story (I guess with a prince of sorts if it's Gendry) and ends up a Lady. 

 

 

if sansa becomes queen, even if she marries her husband would just be a king consort, so she would keep the stark name, and any offspring would be a stark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Bran is chosen King, it will probably be because he is a compromise choice who is regarded as someone who is relatively weak and easily influenced.  Whether it will play out that way, who knows.  I suspect that Bran's elevation is true simply because D&D didn't do much with him otherwise, so his elevation seems unlikely unless it was required by the actual ending.

If Bran is a weak compromise choice, then the North being independent makes a lot of sense.  And Sansa is the best choice to rule it. She is likely to learn politics from Littlefinger, so she should be capable by this time.

Arya heading off on a voyage of exploration makes sense as well.  If you recall, her wolf, Nymeria, is named after someone who did something similar (led her people into the unknown after an invasion).   I can easily see Arya as feeling as she doesn't really belong.

Daenerys going a bit crazy and Jon killing her also seems logical.  Daenerys has been walking thin line between sanity and madness, so slipping over the edge is certainly plausible.  And as far as it goes, for daenerys, it is the IT or death.  Apparently, death wins out.  Jon will most likely exile himself, though.  And I'm not convinced that there will be no reason forthe Nights Watch.  I have m doubts that the Others will be wiped out.  At least, not in such a manner that a return is not a possibility.

Tyrion becoming Hand is something that I have expected for some time, so if he does, it won't surpriseme.  Yes, he is a dwarf.  but, if he i able to prove himself in Meereen and elsewhere, it could work.

Gendry and Bronn are non-starters.  Gendry is likely taking Edric Storm's story, and Edric is likely to become Lord of Storms end.  And there are way too many Tyrells for the family to go extinct.  And giving the Reach to a former sellsword makes little sense, as well.

Cersei and Jaime I can see dying together.  But who is the valonqar?  Daenerys, who is Viserys's little sister, and younger and more beautiful?

Brienne becoming a Kingsguard is possible, I suppose.  But she would probably have to do something spectacular to be seriously considered for it.

That's all I have for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, BlueNightzx said:

if sansa becomes queen, even if she marries her husband would just be a king consort, so she would keep the stark name, and any offspring would be a stark

But if Sanaa isn't a Queen and marries, what then for her Stark name?? We're talking in terms of whether there would be any need for Bran to legit Jon as a Stark if the only Stark's left are the gals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, HouseLancaster said:

But if Sanaa isn't a Queen and marries, what then for her Stark name?? We're talking in terms of whether there would be any need for Bran to legit Jon as a Stark if the only Stark's left are the gals

No need for that. So far Rickon is not dead. He is somewhere, likely Skagos. Not in traitor hands.

Share this post


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

At the end of the day you can make arguments fore/against every character being accepted in a position of power until you're blue in the face. It's all about how Martin lays out the plot and turn of events.

While that is true to a point, it should be noted that the series is almost 2/3rds through and he's introduced a pretty detailed history of the first 150 years of Royal rule in Westeros. He's established a rich history which he can't really ignore. The reason why the last three books have taken him far longer to complete than the first three is precisely because he is trying to perfect it and make it seem logical. I genuinely can't see him abandoning that in the final book.

Jaehaerys I was not in a position to appoint a commoner as his Hand or a foreigner as his Master of Coin until he was firmly established as King a decade later. He had to obey certain conventions, appointing men who were trusted by the realm.  Both Jahaerys and Daeron II had women in mind for the position of Master of Coin but both had to obey the conventions of the day and hire their husbands to be officially on the Small Council.

Westeros in the books is not going to become woke over night. The end of the series is still going to resemble our own middle ages society.

2 hours ago, HouseLancaster said:

One of the sad things about GOT is that we still (really) have no idea how the story is going to unfold (because what the show did was incomprehensible).

See I don't really think what the show did was incomprehensible. The show and the book are two interpretations of the same story, but the show is far less burdened with history, rules and customs as the books are.  It just about works for the show as there has always been a looseness with what is and is not possible in their world. its not weighed down with greater nuance of the books.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2019 at 9:02 PM, Free Northman Reborn said:

On a serious note, though, I think the idea of a Great Council selecting a King has been carefully set up by George and will take place. However, I can so no realistic way in which Bran emerges as the Council’s choice of King.

I too think a Great Council will almost certainly choose the last monarch of Westeros in the books.  I don't know why it's so unrealistic for Bran to be the Council's choice, or at least the logic isn't so bereft as to repeatedly insist there's no possibility of this happening.  You cite first and foremost that Bran can't have kids, but to say there's no logic for a group of lords to choose him for precisely this reason is simply a lack of imagination on your part.  

Power-wise, it makes perfect sense because it allows those lords to retain the power of choosing his successor.  Hell, they could officially invest this power, putting in something like "upon King Stark's 30th nameday this Council will reconvene to name a 'Crown Prince' (or some other non-hereditary title) as the official successor so as to begin preparing him for rule."  Moreover, Bran indeed will be a rather weak ruler with little allies in the South.  In this respect he's more of a placeholder there to just ensure no-one else embarks on dynastic designs.  With such an inherently weak king, that decentralizes influence to the lords that named him.  It's not "inventing democracy" (which is a silly thing the internet says), but it is creating something reminiscent of the Parliament of England (or the House of Lords), which indeed has at least tried to assert power for (checks notes) a very long time.

Plotwise it even makes more sense to not want to raise another dynastic monarch.  They just went through three (if you count Dance 2) major wars in ~20 years, each of which basically revolved around succession crises.  Show Tyrion finally got something right in pointing this out.  That the surviving Lords would be like, you know what, we'll put this guy in and choose again when he dies (or maybe even a timeframe, I dunno), there's certainly a logic to that - at least regarding the Lords' perspective.  Will it work, or is this exactly how it will play out?  Who knows and probably not (certainly not exactly).  But to say there's no logic that could possibly explain this being plausible in ASOIAF is just your own bias.

 

Anyway, regarding the endings, I do (obviously) think Bran will be chosen by a council, Arya will go off into the unknown, Jon will kill Dany, and Sansa will rule the North (ambivalent whether it will be independent).  I still think Jon may die, but if not yeah I think he'll def end up beyond the wall - just it'll be self-imposed exile as I don't think the NW will continue to exist.  As for Tyrion, eh, I suppose a lion is a cat, so maybe he has nine lives?  It just seems outlandish because I do agree he's probably going to betray Dany at least in some way.  So for another regime to install him as hand after that?  Doesn't really track for me, wouldn't be surprised if he dies.  Other than that, I don't really care.  I mean, of course Bronn is not going to rule the Reach - have you seem the Tyrell family tree?  But that's the type of stuff it's just like, no, don't think D&D cared about getting this close to right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/21/2019 at 4:08 PM, Cas Stark said:

I wonder if it's at all possible that KL is utterly destroyed, and they would move the capitol to the North?

Bran rules from the Twins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, DMC said:

Bran rules from the Twins.

As someone pointed out above, it makes no sense for Sansa to be Queen in the North if Bran still lives and is King in the South. He is the Lord of Winterfell. Sansa can at best be his heir or Hand or some such arrangement. I suspect Bran becomes King in the North. You cannot just discount the religious aspect here. He   is not of the Faith. He is a greenseer of the Old Gods.

(Now, I wonder if an alternative is him ending on the Isle of Faces. But that’s a long shot.)

Another obvious logical flaw is: imagine you have medieval Europe coming together and wanting to pick a King to rule them all. Then Russia says no they don’t want to be part of this deal, they want to rule themselves. It is nonsensical for the remaining kingdoms to then say OK, you go, but let’s pick your Tsar to be our King, despite Russia not being party to the whole deal.

That’s just stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Another obvious logical flaw is: imagine you have medieval Europe coming together and wanting to pick a King to rule them all. Then Russia says no they don’t want to be part of this deal, they want to rule themselves. It is nonsensical for the remaining kingdoms to then say OK, you go, but let’s pick your Tsar to be our King, despite Russia not being party to the whole deal.

I was not arguing both that Bran will be King and the South and Sansa will be Queen in the North.  As I said, ambivalent on the latter.  I suppose it's possible, but in such a case I'd expect many other Kingdoms gaining their independence as well, and Bran "rebuilding" the remnants of the others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×