Jump to content
Kaapstad

Did the writers confirm Jon’s ending?

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, AryaNymeriaVisenya said:

Well half the kids of that generation were killed so only Ned and Benjen were left.

Per Ned, his father Lord Rickard said that Lyanna and Brandon had "the wolf blood" in them in describing their wildness. That very wildness ultimately got them both killed.

Where else have we heard about people with animal blood? The Targaryens' "blood of the dragon".

This doesn't seem like a coincidence to me. 

Edited by CrypticWeirwood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, King Jon Snow Stark said:

Only person Sansa tried to manipulate was Tyrion. Sansa seemed concerned about Jon. If it was up to her Jon wouldn’t have gone south to meet Dany in season 7. And he definitely wouldn’t have gone down after the Long Night. 

Jon is older and doesn’t listen to his little sister. Which is why she did told Tyrion. 

You're right Sansa didn't want Jon to go south and meet Dany. Until Jon said she'd rule the North until he gets back. Then she seemed okay with the idea, if I remember correctly...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/8/2019 at 5:51 AM, Kaapstad said:

I never understood that conversation in that context. I thought what it meant was that in that scene Jon was a depressed man. Dany was dragging him South into a war for a throne he did not care about. That’s why he says that to Tormund in a longing sort of way as he doesn’t want to go south. He would be happy just staying in Winterfell.

 They may throw a few lines here and there but I never really got the impression he liked staying with the wildlings. His only good interactions were with Tormund and really Ygritte.

They never showed that Jon liked hunting and wandering about and drinking which is what the wildlings do all the time. Show Jon seemed to care about his family when he asked them to visit at Castle Black. The show failed to sell that ending to me if that’s what they really intended. Maybe if he had made a few more wildling friends like Sam and Edd and the other 3-4 guys like in the Nights Watch( those who died fighting the giants in the wildling invasion) I would have believed it. But just Tormund. Nah. 

As I said before LOTR has a similar ending where Frodo leaves Middle Earth forever but still has Gandalf, Celebron, Galadriel, Elrond with him at the end. In the Inheritance cycle (a LOTR rip-off and not that good), Eragon leaves Alagaesia forever never to return but he has his dragons and 5 other close friends. 

It’s a tired old trope which all fantasy series use and is nothing new (I honestly think him staying in the North would be breaking the trend) but Jon’s case especially strikes me as especially sad amongst the peers  

 

It's not the Wildlings, per se, it's the entire idea of the Night's Watch. It's where he fits in the best way - where he "belongs". Jon is a leader who has an empathy and affinity with the out-of-place. The Night's Watch is out-of-place in that it's off the grid, as it were. It's away from the machinations of the realm as a whole. It's an out-of-place locale for out-of-place people. Think about Jon's main relationships and they're all with out-of-place people. Arya, Sam, Tormund, Dany - they're all misfits like Jon. These are the people (personified in the Night's Watch and the Wildlings) that are Jon's people, as it were. Jon can be a leader, a protector, a helper of the people who don't have a place in the world. This is why the last shot we see of him is aiding the misfits (Wildlings) who don't have a place to belong, in finding a home.

Jon is a brooder so it's difficult I suppose to tell when he's happy, but if you look at his reaction to being elected Lord Commander in the earlier season it makes him happy. There's no better place for him, and no place he'd be happier. Again, the narrative itself informs us of this through Bran.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/7/2019 at 4:20 PM, AryaNymeriaVisenya said:

Problem being, they have never shown us that the Starks would be happy to never see each other again. Where was that in the text? We are meant to believe that curiosity about the West or going to the Wall or being Queen matters more to these characters than each other? Where is that supported? We are left to suppose they really don't care about each other that much. 

I think we all would have said that the trajectory of their stories was to get back home to each other. 

Going separate ways doesn't mean they don't care about each other that much. This happens with families in real life. When people move from home it doesn't mean they no longer care for their family. It just means they're taking different paths through life. 

When you say "I think we all would have said" I can't really comment on what goes on in the minds of others; all I can really do is comment on the narrative of the story. In this narrative, they wanted to reunite and that happened. Afterward, they each went in the direction of life which would make them happiest and in which direction they were supposed to go.

Edited by John Meta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/10/2019 at 3:28 AM, John Meta said:

Going separate ways doesn't mean they don't care about each other that much. This happens with families in real life. When people move from home it doesn't mean they no longer care for their family. It just means they're taking different paths through life. 

When you say "I think we all would have said" I can't really comment on what goes on in the minds of others; all I can really do is comment on the narrative of the story. In this narrative, they wanted to reunite and that happened. Afterward, they each went in the direction of life which would make them happiest and in which direction they were supposed to go.

I don’t think that in real life, family members leave the family never to return. Because this is what is implied to happen here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/8/2019 at 4:08 PM, Kaapstad said:

 Clearly. I mean I can't see in any single way how Sansa manipulated him. That Vale thing is stupid as she really had no idea of Littlefinger would bring his army and if he did, turn on Jon at the last moment. Bran manipulating him is arguable as he told him his identity. But maybe he saw alternate scenarios and chose the best one?

All you have to do is look at the facial expressions of Sansa (Sophie Turner) when the Vale rides in during Battle of the Bastards. She's got a smug look of contentment when the Vale smashes into the Bolton forces, but then she sees Jon squirting from the scrum and the look of satisfaction vanishes to one resembling disbelief. I am of the opinion that Sansa would have been perfectly content had Jon died as well as Rickon during the battle, leaving her the de facto Stark in Winterfell.

 

Combine that with her later revealing Jon's heritage to Tyrion she's again putting Jon in danger. She has to know that if word of his heritage gets out that Daenerys or one of her supporters would end up trying to kill Jon. 

The only thing I never understood was why somehow between the end of Season 7 and Season 8 Arya no longer gave Jon the benefit of the doubt and became a devout follower of Sansa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/13/2019 at 9:35 AM, Kaapstad said:

I don’t think that in real life, family members leave the family never to return. Because this is what is implied to happen here. 

What do you think happened when America was discovered? Many people left their families behind in droves, never to return. This happens even today, and happens constantly in life. And we don't even know that the Starks will "never return", for all we know they can meet up frequently - save Arya of whom it is still entirely possible she return after a time of exploring - as did virtually every person who ever took to the sea to explore. 

Believe it or not, there are people who pursue their own path through life even when it diverges from the paths of their loved ones. They're all over the place. The only difference with our present day is, fast travel by means of cars and planes and such. But before those things existed, people would depart from the loved ones never to return.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, John Meta said:

What do you think happened when America was discovered? Many people left their families behind in droves, never to return. This happens even today, and happens constantly in life. And we don't even know that the Starks will "never return", for all we know they can meet up frequently - save Arya of whom it is still entirely possible she return after a time of exploring - as did virtually every person who ever took to the sea to explore. 

Believe it or not, there are people who pursue their own path through life even when it diverges from the paths of their loved ones. They're all over the place. The only difference with our present day is, fast travel by means of cars and planes and such. But before those things existed, people would depart from the loved ones never to return.

 

 

People usually feel forced to do that though. Talking about America, there were families on the Mayflower and religious idealists who felt like they had nowhere else to go but they knew there was something on the other side. It was a risk but they were an end point. Then there were the convicts who were forced over there.  But even then, a boat to the US takes 2 months in the 17th century. If you want to come back, its risky to cross of course but the option is there, tradespeople did it over and over. A lot of the original English colonies were set up by tradespeople. I can't think of anyone today who willingly leaves there family never to return. Syrian refugees?

I think the problem here is the writing. It doesn't explain Arya's choice. She is reduced to catchphrases that don't mean much in season 8. She once said she was curious about the west, that is it. A passing comment to a stranger 3 seasons ago and we are meant to now think this is a life goal of hers? Not only that she has to throw away her previous primary motivation of home and family without explanation. Then there is the arc Arya goes on when she gets back from Braavos in becoming human again. The soldiers in season 7, Hot Pie, Jon, Gendry, Sandor, they reconnect her with who she is. So in her big revelation in 8x06 is to abandon civilisation and never see any of these people again? Not to mention the arc is about her choosing life after death and going on a voyage we suspect is suicide, the antithesis of choosing life. Its bizarre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/14/2019 at 1:30 AM, wvchemteach said:

The only thing I never understood was why somehow between the end of Season 7 and Season 8 Arya no longer gave Jon the benefit of the doubt and became a devout follower of Sansa. 

You are implying Arya cannot think for herself. She is a Stark and she agrees with Sansa about the North and not trusting Dany. The only reason she questions Jon is because she can see that he is blind where Dany is concerned.

2 hours ago, AryaNymeriaVisenya said:

I think the problem here is the writing. It doesn't explain Arya's choice. She is reduced to catchphrases that don't mean much in season 8. She once said she was curious about the west, that is it. A passing comment to a stranger 3 seasons ago and we are meant to now think this is a life goal of hers?

Arya's choice is explained multiple times early in the show. Her life goal was always adventure, just as Sansa's was to be a lady. For Arya to choose to adventure westward made total sense to me, cuz I could never figure out what the heck she was going to do when the NK and Cersei were taken care of. Can you really see her just hanging around WF, or being Lady of Stormsend? She couldn't even have been Master of Arms 1) men in that society would not have taken kindly to being taught swordsmanship by a women, even if it was the hero of WF and 2) they fought with broadswords which is not the kind of training Arya had.

I agree that the ending was bittersweet, and just plain bitter for Jon, but I am surprised by the desire expressed by many for more of a happy Disney ending. Isn't one of the things people like so much about GoT the trope busting? Jon is not the first hero to have an unhappy ending, to sacrifice his life for the greater good. I just wish Bran would have legitimized Jon as a Stark. I know his father was a Targaryen, but most people didn't know that, and he still had as much Stark blood as all the other Stark children.

Edited by SansaJonRule

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/14/2019 at 1:30 AM, wvchemteach said:

All you have to do is look at the facial expressions of Sansa (Sophie Turner) when the Vale rides in during Battle of the Bastards. She's got a smug look of contentment when the Vale smashes into the Bolton forces, but then she sees Jon squirting from the scrum and the look of satisfaction vanishes to one resembling disbelief. I am of the opinion that Sansa would have been perfectly content had Jon died as well as Rickon during the battle, leaving her the de facto Stark in Winterfell.

 

Combine that with her later revealing Jon's heritage to Tyrion she's again putting Jon in danger. She has to know that if word of his heritage gets out that Daenerys or one of her supporters would end up trying to kill Jon. 

The only thing I never understood was why somehow between the end of Season 7 and Season 8 Arya no longer gave Jon the benefit of the doubt and became a devout follower of Sansa.

 

Another, equally valid interpretation:  Sansa has a smug look of contentment when the Vale smashes into the Bolton forces, because Sansa's pleased to see Ramsay's defeat, especially if they killed (as she might assume) Jon as well as Rickon.  Her look of disbelief might be because she thought that Jon might be dead, not that she's unhappy that he's alive.  There's absolutely no proof in Sansa's words or actions that she would have been pleased by the deaths of Rickon and Jon.

Sansa could also have decided to tell Tyrion about Jon's heritage to make Jon a valid alternative to Daenerys as Queen; and out of fear that Daenerys would burn Winterfell eventually if she succeeded in becoming Queen of Westeros (and probably end up burning Jon and the other Starks as well).  I think Sansa hoped that Tyrion and Varys would rally other lords to Jon's cause - and it could have worked if Varys had not attempted to poison Daenerys.  I think Sansa erred in breaking her promise to Jon not to tell, though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/15/2019 at 2:44 PM, AryaNymeriaVisenya said:

 

People usually feel forced to do that though. Talking about America, there were families on the Mayflower and religious idealists who felt like they had nowhere else to go but they knew there was something on the other side. It was a risk but they were an end point. Then there were the convicts who were forced over there.  But even then, a boat to the US takes 2 months in the 17th century. If you want to come back, its risky to cross of course but the option is there, tradespeople did it over and over. A lot of the original English colonies were set up by tradespeople. I can't think of anyone today who willingly leaves there family never to return. Syrian refugees?

I think the problem here is the writing. It doesn't explain Arya's choice. She is reduced to catchphrases that don't mean much in season 8. She once said she was curious about the west, that is it. A passing comment to a stranger 3 seasons ago and we are meant to now think this is a life goal of hers? Not only that she has to throw away her previous primary motivation of home and family without explanation. Then there is the arc Arya goes on when she gets back from Braavos in becoming human again. The soldiers in season 7, Hot Pie, Jon, Gendry, Sandor, they reconnect her with who she is. So in her big revelation in 8x06 is to abandon civilisation and never see any of these people again? Not to mention the arc is about her choosing life after death and going on a voyage we suspect is suicide, the antithesis of choosing life. Its bizarre.

And there were people who came to America just to follow a dream and a new beginning. They still do it to this day. Then there are people who just hear the proverbial call to explore new lands. Arya happens to be one of them.

What's to explain in a self-explanatory situation? She wants to travel and see unknown places. Pretty common desire even today. The fact that she gets on a ship and heads to sea informs us of that. Would you believe people used to leave their families and go exploring on the seas? And sometimes they never came back. It's surprising (not really) that I have to ask that question but here we are.

Just out of curiosity, could you provide a couple of examples of the "catchphrases" which "don't mean much" to which Arya was "reduced"? I'd like to see if what you're saying here actually makes sense, or, is just baseless rhetoric of the order someone might say "Oh, Breaking Bad season 5 is awful writing. Everyone was just reduced to catchphrases." 

You say "she once said she was curious about the west" and, right - that's called expressing interest.

Her primary motivation of making it back home was accomplished when she made it back, home. Like when Bilbo or Frodo made it back home. Then left again. Was that "bad writing" too? It's funny how when I bring up direct parallels from other well-liked stories like LotR, the critics here don't address them. I think that's telling.

It's pretty much when you say "going on a voyage we suspect is suicide" that you go completely off the rails of anything resembling reason and tip your hand in a pretty major way. The hand that says "I'm biased, and have an agenda. I have no interest in saying anything other than creating baseless rhetoric in an attempt to justify my criticism of other people." It becomes really transparent.

Edited by John Meta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Ayra naming her direwolf after the Rhoynish  warrior queen Nymeria who sailed 10 thousand ships across the Narrow Sea to Dorne was also a clue as to what Ayra might do.  Maybe she will explore and find new lands just like Nymeria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/17/2019 at 11:11 PM, John Meta said:

And there were people who came to America just to follow a dream and a new beginning. They still do it to this day. Then there are people who just hear the proverbial call to explore new lands. Arya happens to be one of them.

What's to explain in a self-explanatory situation? She wants to travel and see unknown places. Pretty common desire even today. The fact that she gets on a ship and heads to sea informs us of that. Would you believe people used to leave their families and go exploring on the seas? And sometimes they never came back. It's surprising (not really) that I have to ask that question but here we are.

Just out of curiosity, could you provide a couple of examples of the "catchphrases" which "don't mean much" to which Arya was "reduced"? I'd like to see if what you're saying here actually makes sense, or, is just baseless rhetoric of the order someone might say "Oh, Breaking Bad season 5 is awful writing. Everyone was just reduced to catchphrases." 

You say "she once said she was curious about the west" and, right - that's called expressing interest.

Her primary motivation of making it back home was accomplished when she made it back, home. Like when Bilbo or Frodo made it back home. Then left again. Was that "bad writing" too? It's funny how when I bring up direct parallels from other well-liked stories like LotR, the critics here don't address them. I think that's telling.

It's pretty much when you say "going on a voyage we suspect is suicide" that you go completely off the rails of anything resembling reason and tip your hand in a pretty major way. The hand that says "I'm biased, and have an agenda. I have no interest in saying anything other than creating baseless rhetoric in an attempt to justify my criticism of other people." It becomes really transparent.

What agenda? You've left a big post so I'll take it bit by bit.

I don't agree that most people went to America just because they could and left everyone they cared about behind. People don't just choose to leave their families without reason, be that crippling poverty or persecution. The show never provided Arya sufficient motivation to take that step. You suggest here she has urge to travel, we've never seen that before beyond a passing comment 3 seasons ago. I'd like to go to Rome one day, is that my destiny now mapped out forever? That is what you took from that scene. I've seen others argue that Arya is disconnected from humanity. The range of interpretations of that scene to me indicates its failure. We don't really know why she goes. She never tells us why she wants to get on a boat and never see Jon or Sansa again. 

What is to explain is Arya's priorities. She's not booking Air BnBs online. This is a HUGE life changing choice where she will leave everything and everyone she knows behind. What for? I don't think 'I want to travel' is good enough. Especially for a character whose journey has been the antithesis of that. Arya has wandered around trying to get home, to get to her family again? Why? So she can do a head count and leave? This conclusion is a massive 180 from that and it needs some explanation. Just saying she's curious about the west is not good enough for such a massive shift. And to add to that, no one seems to worry or care about what she's doing. Nor do they try to stop her. That doesn't seem natural if one of my family says they are leaving to never return. 

OK, catchphrases. When she has to tell Sansa how to use a knife. Why would Sansa need to know how to stab something? A contrived excuse to use 'Stick em with the pointy end'. It could have been a meaningful goodbye between the two sisters. No, catchphrase. Same episode 'Not Today'. To be fair I thought that one fit but its part of the trend. Thirdly, 'That's not me'. This is nonsensically brought up last season with Nymeria the wolf too. Why would Nymeria the wolf not go home to protect her family? Nymeria being a reflection of Arya. Again, seems to be their set up of Arya's conclusion. A lousy one considering Arya doesn't end up like Nymeria the wolf at all. But remember when that happened and people were wondering whether it meant it wasn't Nymeria at all? Well she reiterates it in 8x04 to similar fan debates as to its intended meaning. Why not just say something straight? Its not like anyone else knows that is what you said to your dad when you were pre-pubescent. It may need a bit more. The point is collectively these are all things Arya said when she was 11. I don't know about you but I don't want to be held to crap I said when I was 11. Why are the writers doing this? Can you imagine if Sansa was saying the same nonsense she said when she was 12? Sansa was allowed to grow. Arya remains stuck. The Hound has to tell us she has changed because she doesn't talk as much? To be honest I had not noticed a difference in that regard but I guess they assumed silence gave her some badass gravitas. 

Your example of Frodo and Bilbo doesn't hold up if you think this is a positive ending for the character. Those characters were broken by their experiences. Going to the West was a purgatorial experience to get to heaven. Now Arya is an 18 year old woman in the show, she has been through a great deal and if they showed she was broken like Frodo then so be it.  Tolkein explains why he leaves, that scar he got on Weathertop was a continuing reminder of his trauma that would never go away. Arya doesn't have that arc, its meant apparently to be seen as the opposite, Arya was meant to realise her life has worth beyond her vendettas. That she was to live again. A Frodo like ending doesn't work for her. She is saved from a Frodo like fate.

We do suspect the voyage is suicide because we know of 2 people who have attempted it and never returned. What else are we to think? Again, I'm not sure as to the agenda. I think her arc in season 8 was rather well mapped out until that curveball of a last scene. As I said before, I never really thought about her ending because the books don't seem to be ending. All I assumed is that she would be home. That she would be like Nymeria, having been cast out of home by her enemies she wanders the world, finds her place and family and never goes back. However we didn't see that. Arya's story didn't conclude. If we are to assume her story is still about finding home we either have to think she'll never find a place or her journey has only just begun making what we actually saw unsatisfying as a conclusion. Even Nymeria the wolf follows this trajectory, she's cast out of her home, wanders, finds a new one and a new family. Arya doesn't. She is cast out of her home, she wanders, she's still wandering with no indication there is an end point.

I also read a criticism a few weeks back that stuck with me about how Arya rejects patriarchy but instead of being like Nymeria and instigating change she is exiled. She doesn't fit in, won't play the system, doesn't want to change the system and so she needs to leave.  Arya is probably the most overtly feminist character in the series, books and show, so that is jarring too. I hate this ending on a whole number of levels to be fair, I could be here all day. There is my agenda, to monopolise your time! 

Edited by AryaNymeriaVisenya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wishing and hoping that the Starks would reunite during the long slog of this story, only to have them never see each other again, is pretty darn depressing, so I choose to disregard it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Wishing and hoping that the Starks would reunite during the long slog of this story, only to have them never see each other again, is pretty darn depressing, so I choose to disregard it. 

Yup. And you can do that anyway. The ending is open-ended and we are never getting a sequel so we can do whatever we want with the story. Had they shown an epilogue with Jon in the Far North as an adult, Arya on some distant island somewhere and Sansa staying single then we didn’t have the authority to change the ending. But we didn’t get that nor are we ever getting a sequel so we get the right to finish it as we choose. 

Edited by Kaapstad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What agenda?

An agenda which causes you to make absurd claims in order to criticize. You're equating Arya's journey west with suicide. Do I really have to explain why that is an absurd attempt at equivalence? The fact that you're willing to go that far indicates there is an agenda which is at the wheel, doing the driving.

I don't agree that most people went to America just because they could

I didn't say "most people" so this is another false equivalence. I said there were people who left their loved ones behind and came to America if only to start anew in a new and unknown place. Everyone who ever went to sea in times past had to leave their families behind; including all great explorers. 

You suggest here she has urge to travel, we've never seen that before beyond a passing comment 3 seasons ago.

I don't suggest she has the urge to travel, the narrative does. It does that with the "passing comment" which informs the audience that Arya has a desire to travel west. So your statement is "We've never seen [that Arya has an urge to travel] beyond the narrative informing us [that Arya has an urge to travel]". Just like Jon's "passing comment" that he wanted to join the Night's Watch, or Sam's "passing comment" that he wanted to be a Maester.

I'd like to go to Rome one day, is that my destiny now mapped out forever?

No, it's not "mapped out forever" but if you ended up going to Rome one day, it would make sense, wouldn't it? Since you made a "passing comment" that you'd like to do it some day?

The range of interpretations of that scene to me indicates its failure.

You're seriously suggesting the presence of a range of interpretations indicates "failure"? You're basically saying that every piece of art in existence is "failure"? You do realize that every piece of art - be it music, story, poetry, painting, anything - inspires a range of interpretations through the variety of subjective lenses of the perceivers? This you would say "variety of interpretation" indicates "failure" only indicates you have little understanding of the medium of artistic expression.

We don't really know why she goes.

Because she wants to. She stated as much, just as did everyone who ever stated what they wanted to do. What is left for her in Westeros? A scattered family? What should she do? Stay to knit with Sansa in Winterfell? 

This is a HUGE life changing choice where she will leave everything and everyone she knows behind. What for? I don't think 'I want to travel' is good enough.

So why did any explorer in the real world do it?

Arya has wandered around trying to get home, to get to her family again? Why? So she can do a head count and leave? This conclusion is a massive 180 from that and it needs some explanation.

Bilbo did the same thing. Why did Bilbo leave the Shire at the beginning of LotR? Because he wanted to travel. That is the explanation. The same explanation of any person who has ever wanted to see new places. Like Arya. Arya made it home to her family. And that family scattered to the four corners of Westeros. Suppose you wanted to get home, and you did. And then your family all went separate ways. Now what? 

Nor do they try to stop her. That doesn't seem natural if one of my family says they are leaving to never return.

Who tried to stop Jon from leaving to the Night's Watch in season one? Who tried to stop Sansa from leaving to live in the south? Who tried to stop Bilbo from leaving the Shire in FotR? Arya's a big girl. She can make her own decisions. Your "criticism" is just based on nonsense.

OK, catchphrases. When she has to tell Sansa how to use a knife. Why would Sansa need to know how to stab something? A contrived excuse to use 'Stick em with the pointy end'.

A "catchphrase" is something that is frequently repeated. Like "I'll be back" coming from Schwarzeneggar. None of these are catchphrases. You bring up three lines of dialogue (one of which you say "fits") to support your statement that "Arya was reduced to catchphrases in season eight"? Two bits of dialogue? Arya restates two bits of dialogue and that, to you, renders her "reduced to catchphrases" for an entire season? And you're questioning how I'm proposing an obvious agenda here?

But remember when that happened and people were wondering whether it meant it wasn't Nymeria at all?

I remember when people were wondering if Bran was the Night King and if Snoke was Boba Fett. What's that got to do with anything? People wonder the dumbest things.

Why not just say something straight?

You mean like "I'd like to travel west"?

The point is collectively these are all things Arya said when she was 11. I don't know about you but I don't want to be held to crap I said when I was 11. Why are the writers doing this? Can you imagine if Sansa was saying the same nonsense she said when she was 12? Sansa was allowed to grow.

You mean like Sansa wanting to be a queen - and then, later becoming one?

Arya remains stuck.

Like Sansa? Like every kid in every story who wants to do something and then, does it? Like Sam who always wanted to be a Maester and then? Does?

To be honest I had not noticed

You didn't notice and had to be told? So much for "show don't tell" eh? To be equally honest, I always have to smile with a bit of irony when I hear people say that. "Show don't tell" and then when it happens "I don't understand. Why didn't they tell?" Ah, is it comedy? Tragedy? A bit of both?

Your example of Frodo and Bilbo doesn't hold up if you think this is a positive ending for the character.

I stated that because they both made it home as they desired, but then they left. Their primary motivation was to make it home - but they left. Why? Because they changed. Like Arya changed? Remember when the Hound "straightforward" told you that? But you "honestly hadn't noticed"? That Arya had changed? Is it irony that Arya is the one who changed, yet you call Arya "stuck"? Your whole argument is asking "Why did Arya change?" yet you write about how Arya isn't allowed to "change" but is "stuck" and yet, you don't see that everything you're saying is a huge mass of contradictory nonsense?

Tolkein explains why he leaves

You realize books and movies are entirely different mediums? One is based on "telling" the other on "showing"? In the movie LotR, Tolkien doesn't explain anything. Frodo leaves because his road changed him, and there was no place for him in Middle Earth anymore. Arya had no place in Westeros. Her journey had changed her. Her family was scattered. She wanted to explore west. That's what she did. The end.

We do suspect the voyage is suicide

I presume by "we" you're talking about you and the mouse in your pocket?

Again, I'm not sure as to the agenda.

That makes one of us.

I also read a criticism a few weeks back that stuck with me about how Arya rejects patriarchy

Yawn.

There is my agenda, to monopolise your time!

I appreciate you providing me with something to do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think they done it the wrong way round. Should have took Kings Landing first, whilst this happens the wall is destroyed by NK and they have to travel North with whats left and battle the AOTD - who were the real threat. Jon kills NK by sacrificing Dany and then has to live as King of Westeros, a title he doesn't want, a role never considered miserable and alone. Its good for the Kingdom but awful for Jon. That's your bitter sweet ending, seems great on paper but really it isn't. Jon sacrifices everything for everyone else, AA fulfilled.

Plus they could have spent the rest of the episodes actually having the WWs do damage instead of being the ultimate hypejobs. Arya should have killed Cersei as her death was rubbish and that was Aryas storyline conclusion that made sense, well everything makes sense if you switch it round but they wanted to do Mad Queen dany despite no attempt to build to it and it ruined the show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No more dumb Azor Ahai sacrifices, please. If that's in the books, the show will have done it better. 

Jon killing Dany to save the world from Dany makes the most sense in terms of character, theme, plot, and dramatic irony.

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

×