The problem with Bran being king narrative wise

[Rose of Red Lake]

Skynet Bran is creepy. If he wants a historian to be king, just have Bran study it like a normal person.

[BlackLightning]

I think this is why we end up with a bittersweet ending.

Big Brother Bran, King of all of what's left of Westeros, is scary because that's probably eerily close to what the CoTF, the Great other and/or the old gods intended but he's probably that the best chance that the humans have in surviving the Long Night after Daenerys and Jon are removed from the picture.

And no, I don't think the Long Night (or winter for that matter) will end as soon as the Others are dealt with.

It's not an ideal situation; in fact, most people will be uncomfortable and terrified.

[Lord_Ravenstone]

Bran is the Fisher King. 

 

He protects Westeros from the threats and Tyrion along with his successor Hands are the ones doing the ruling. 

It’s more of technocracy lead by a benevolent god. 

[neutralbhad]

I think it makes sense narrative wise, since he was the first main POV character. Also the realm being ruled by a council is much more realistic, I would say Daeny's, Joffrey, and Cersei's arcs are GRRM's way of showing why a pure autocracy eventually fails.

 

I feel like in the books Cersei is more likely to be guillotined if she does blow up the Sept, in Fire and Blood at one point King's Landing is in a state of total revolt with like 5 people claiming to be king/queen.

[Queen‍‍‍‍‍‍ Alysanne‍‍™]

My problem with Bran being King is that the show is trying to sell the idea that a good leader is someone who doesn't want to be a leader...and I call BS on that. In my life, my occupation is a leadership position and I am also involved in hiring people that fill other leadership positions and the last thing I want is someone who doesn't "want it". 

[teej6]

18 hours ago, Queen‍‍‍‍‍‍ Alysanne‍‍™ said:

My problem with Bran being King is that the show is trying to sell the idea that a good leader is someone who doesn't want to be a leader...and I call BS on that. In my life, my occupation is a leadership position and I am also involved in hiring people that fill other leadership positions and the last thing I want is someone who doesn't "want it". 

To me, a good leader is one that doesn’t seek power for power itself but leads out of a sense of civic duty and desire to better society and people’s lives. That doesn’t mean he/she should not want to rule but instead see ruling as a privilege and not a right, and should be humble about it. Bran is wanting as a leader because (at least on the show) he has become indifferent to everything including the suffering of the people he means to rule. D&D implied that Bran knew in advance of the destruction of KL. If that is the case, and he did nothing about it, then he has no business ruling, no matter how omniscient he is. If we take it a step further (based on the show), we can say Bran manipulated events to end up on the throne. BookBran, on the other hand, is still kind and sympathetic to the needs of others and let’s hope he remains that way if and when he becomes King. 

[Faera]

To me, the idea of someone like Bran being chosen as king at a Great Council isn't in itself a bad idea. The problem for me is that he did nothing to really earn the throne nor did the nobility have any reason to choose him over anyone else. At best, had Sansa not randomly decided "not to play", you could argue the North, Vale and Trident would choose him through nepotism... but the Reach, Dorne and Westerlands really have no reason to pick him at all. Had the Long Night actually affected the whole of Westeros and Bran had been instrumental in organising the plan to defeat the White Walkers thanks to his powers and, y'know, he was S6 Bran rather than that plank of wood they replaced him with... I can certainly see him being picked.

But none of that happened so yes - it's stupid. Skynet Bran is the only Bran in the show. I hope to God that was just D&D's lazy means of getting Jon's heritage out there without Howland Reed's help and that Bran will remain Bran in the books. I can't imagine anything worse than what the show did to him.

[BalerionTheCat]

They built Jon as the promised prince. Putting his people before his pride and ambitions. But nonetheless the true heir, if that matter for some. Loved by people, contrary to Daenerys. Of unquestioned integrity. Ready to sacrifice himself by the end, to save the kingdom from a tyrant.

And we get what? Someone who never did anything to help. Who doesn't care about anything. And who can take control of any one body. Who knew in advance he would be king. The new Warg King the Starks fought during the Age of Legends.

And with nothing forshadowing it:

Quote

“I’ve been planting all these clues that the butler did it, then you’re halfway through a series and suddenly thousands of people have figured out that the butler did it, and then you say the chambermaid did it? No, you can’t do that,”

 

[Angel Eyes]

On 7/14/2019 at 8:08 PM, Queen‍‍‍‍‍‍ Alysanne‍‍™ said:

My problem with Bran being King is that the show is trying to sell the idea that a good leader is someone who doesn't want to be a leader...and I call BS on that. In my life, my occupation is a leadership position and I am also involved in hiring people that fill other leadership positions and the last thing I want is someone who doesn't "want it". 

Not to mention we had a leader who didn't want to be a leader... Robert Baratheon. And that turned out so well for everyone.

[BalerionTheCat]

7 hours ago, Angel Eyes said:

Not to mention we had a leader who didn't want to be a leader... Robert Baratheon. And that turned out so well for everyone.

Was it better with Joffrey or Cersei or Daenerys? These wanted to be king or Queen.  All were unfit. But their ambitions did great harm.

BTW, it was Cersei, not Robert who started the shitstorm.

[Rose of Red Lake]

Jon also didnt want it. Both crowns, actually, and the LC position. It seemed like he was a shoe in to get promoted again against his will.

 

[BlackLightning]

On 7/12/2019 at 8:22 PM, Lord_Ravenstone said:

Bran is the Fisher King. 

 

He protects Westeros from the threats and Tyrion along with his successor Hands are the ones doing the ruling. 

It’s more of technocracy lead by a benevolent god. 

This is the biggest problem.

Everyone who has ever made a mistake in this show has paid for it dearly. Except for Tyrion. Or should I say St. Tyrion because he is this perfect angel who can do nothing wrong.

That is not a good ending. It's not feasible according to the show's own rules and it's not even realistic in real life.

On 7/22/2019 at 1:42 AM, BalerionTheCat said:

Was it better with Joffrey or Cersei or Daenerys? These wanted to be king or Queen.  All were unfit. But their ambitions did great harm.

BTW, it was Cersei, not Robert who started the shitstorm.

Well, technically it was Robert who started it. Because Robert's Rebellion basically communicated the message that any one can make a claim (personally or vicariously) on the Iron Throne if they have the motive and the means to do so.

On 7/15/2019 at 3:04 PM, teej6 said:

To me, a good leader is one that doesn’t seek power for power itself but leads out of a sense of civic duty and desire to better society and people’s lives. That doesn’t mean he/she should not want to rule but instead see ruling as a privilege and not a right, and should be humble about it. Bran is wanting as a leader because (at least on the show) he has become indifferent to everything including the suffering of the people he means to rule. D&D implied that Bran knew in advance of the destruction of KL. If that is the case, and he did nothing about it, then he has no business ruling, no matter how omniscient he is. If we take it a step further (based on the show), we can say Bran manipulated events to end up on the throne. BookBran, on the other hand, is still kind and sympathetic to the needs of others and let’s hope he remains that way if and when he becomes King. 

You do realize that Daenerys, Arya and Sansa all fit your definition of a good leader as well.

 

[teej6]

1 hour ago, Jabar of House Titan said:

You do realize that Daenerys, Arya and Sansa all fit your definition of a good leader as well.

Dany in the show and the books seeks power because she things its her right. She also has a savior complex. In the show, she also has her whole breaking the wheel speech, although what that meant to her and D&D, I never fully understood.

I have no idea what Sandra and Arya wants on the show. Sandra has split personality, she’s inconsistent and all over the place.  Sansa in the books, on the other hand, is still trying to figure out what she wants. Arya in the books, IMO, just wants to be safe. Yes, she wants vengeance and has her list, but her ADWD chapters also show that she’s more afraid of being chucked out of the HoBaW than anything else. 

[Darryk]

I saw someone on Reddit suggest that Bran is supposed to be the "philosopher-king" that Plato wrote of as the ideal ruler in Republic. This does seem like something GRRM would do; as a lot of people have said, Bran as king makes sense as a concept in many levels, but was so horribly executed in the show that it comes across as farcical.

And the script for the finale reveals that D+D didn't have the slightest interest in making it work.

The meeting where GRRM told them the broad strokes of the story reportedly happened in 2013, after they'd finished filming season 3? So they had five seasons to set up Bran as king in a convincing way, but apparently chose not to because they prefer surprising audiences rather than having the story make sense.

[Lord Varys]

There is nothing in either books or show that can make the idea of a 'King Bran' make sense. One can, perhaps, imagine George originally wanted to make Bran king in the end.

But guess what: Once he failed to actually make his story move slower so that the various characters could grow older and become adults while the story is progressing it makes simply no sense that that 10-11-year-old crippled boy becomes king in a world that's known for denigrating cripples and backstabbing their leaders as soon as they show any weakness.

Whatever George does with Bran, he will always remain a child in a child's broken body. There is no way around that.

And one can only hope that the reactions the end of the show got him thinking whether he actually wants to go with those small details the end of show was, perhaps, based on. Because, frankly, no matter how you spin it, the show ending in even very broad strokes would still suck on so many levels that it would ruin the book series, too. There are plot elements there that suck no matter how well they are executed.

[SeanF]

14 hours ago, teej6 said:

Dany in the show and the books seeks power because she things its her right. She also has a savior complex. In the show, she also has her whole breaking the wheel speech, although what that meant to her and D&D, I never fully understood.

I have no idea what Sandra and Arya wants on the show. Sandra has split personality, she’s inconsistent and all over the place.  Sansa in the books, on the other hand, is still trying to figure out what she wants. Arya in the books, IMO, just wants to be safe. Yes, she wants vengeance and has her list, but her ADWD chapters also show that she’s more afraid of being chucked out of the HoBaW than anything else. 

The one does not preclude the other.  Daenerys believes that she is entitled to rule Westeros but also sees it as her duty, and desires to better her subjects lives.  

I can't think of anyone less suited to be King than Bran, who spends his time examining pill bugs in preference to listening to his advisors. 

[teej6]

54 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I can't think of anyone less suited to be King than Bran, who spends his time examining pill bugs in preference to listening to his advisors. 

I agree completely with the above statement. Show!Bran will be a terrible King. In the books, however, we’ll just have to wait and see.

Bran in the books is still, IMO, a good person with empathy for others and someone who has demonstrated extreme courage and resourcefulness. His increasing powers has not diminished his humanity in any significant way so far. He’s far from the wooden, emotionless, detached from everything and everyone character seen on the show. My problem with Bran being King in the books has to do primarily with his age and physical handicap. For rest of Westeros to acknowledge Bran as King, he needs to do something visibly powerful, magical and heroic... it has to be common knowledge that he saved Westeros. Besides everyone must somehow suddenly be okay with a boy King. How GRRM is going to sell that, I do not know.

[BlackLightning]

16 hours ago, teej6 said:

Dany in the show and the books seeks power because she things its her right. She also has a savior complex. In the show, she also has her whole breaking the wheel speech, although what that meant to her and D&D, I never fully understood.

I have no idea what Sandra and Arya wants on the show. Sandra has split personality, she’s inconsistent and all over the place.  Sansa in the books, on the other hand, is still trying to figure out what she wants. Arya in the books, IMO, just wants to be safe. Yes, she wants vengeance and has her list, but her ADWD chapters also show that she’s more afraid of being chucked out of the HoBaW than anything else. 

I'm mainly talking about the books.

Dany does not solely seek power because she thinks its her right. And she doesn't really have a savior complex. That's deliberate mischaracterization and honestly, every highborn person in this world has that issue of "it's my birthright." And you can't blame them because they are correct. Dany is as entitled to Dragonstone, King's Landing, the Iron Throne and all Seven Kingdoms as much as Sansa, Arya and Bran are entitled to Winterfell and all the North.

But that's another topic. Dany's primary motivation for seeking power is because she feels that it's her best chance of survival (which is true) and because she wants everyone -- herself included -- to live in peace. The only way to ensure that they can all live in peace and be happy is to make a peaceful, happier world.

I didn't say that Sansa and Arya want leadership. They just exhibit the qualities that good leaders (according to you) must have. The two of them are close to wanting to take leadership -- especially Sansa -- but they just aren't there yet.

4 hours ago, Darryk said:

I saw someone on Reddit suggest that Bran is supposed to be the "philosopher-king" that Plato wrote of as the ideal ruler in Republic. This does seem like something GRRM would do; as a lot of people have said, Bran as king makes sense as a concept in many levels, but was so horribly executed in the show that it comes across as farcical.

And the script for the finale reveals that D+D didn't have the slightest interest in making it work.

The meeting where GRRM told them the broad strokes of the story reportedly happened in 2013, after they'd finished filming season 3? So they had five seasons to set up Bran as king in a convincing way, but apparently chose not to because they prefer surprising audiences rather than having the story make sense.

I totally agree.

But instead of saying philosopher-king, I would've said that Westeros is going to become a theocratic federation that Bran is supposed to oversee as the priestly judge-king. Think of Samson, Samuel or Deborah from the Bible. Someone who leads the people in matters of religion and spirituality and whom people go to for protection, comfort and/or wisdom

3 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

There is nothing in either books or show that can make the idea of a 'King Bran' make sense. One can, perhaps, imagine George originally wanted to make Bran king in the end.

But guess what: Once he failed to actually make his story move slower so that the various characters could grow older and become adults while the story is progressing it makes simply no sense that that 10-11-year-old crippled boy becomes king in a world that's known for denigrating cripples and backstabbing their leaders as soon as they show any weakness.

Whatever George does with Bran, he will always remain a child in a child's broken body. There is no way around that.

And one can only hope that the reactions the end of the show got him thinking whether he actually wants to go with those small details the end of show was, perhaps, based on. Because, frankly, no matter how you spin it, the show ending in even very broad strokes would still suck on so many levels that it would ruin the book series, too. There are plot elements there that suck no matter how well they are executed.

Well, I think that the characters were too young anyways. One thing the show did right was age up the child characters: Daenerys starting off the story at age 16-17 makes much more sense than 13. And Bran being all of 7 years old was always ridiculous.

I think a King Bran can make a lot of sense. But Bran has not been an actual main character since A Clash of Kings. He became pushed to the background and became a secondary character (think Davos and Samwell) in A Storm of Swords and only had three chapters in A Dance with Dragons. And the Bran POV chapters in Dance ends prematurely.

In other words, GRRM hasn't laid made any progress in the King Bran lane since the beginning of A Storm of Swords. 

But I disagree, Lord Varys. King Bran does make a lot of sense.

1. If Jon is the one true heir to the Iron Throne, he marries Daenerys and they both are taken out of the picture, then Bran would be the one to inherit the Iron Throne and the Seven Kingdoms. (Well, Dany is likely to have the Iron Throne destroyed but you get what I mean). Why would Bran be the one to inherit the Iron Throne? Because Bran is male, Jon's closest blood relative and Daenerys' sole male relative by virtue of marriage and proximity. As far as the line of succession goes, Bran is ahead of Rickon, Sansa, Arya, Sweetrobin and Edmure.
2. Bran is the most powerful skinchanger in the entire series and he will be the only greenseer. It is also likely that Bran will have his somewhat merry band of CotF as his honor guard from here on out. Given some more time for him to develop his powers, he will have Daenerys beat as the most powerful person in the entire world. He'll be able to command loyalty and respect from men three and four times his age. And it would be very hard for anyone to successfully plot against him

There's also the fact that Bran's mind will likely be broken along with his body. Like Bran might have tremendous amounts of psychological damage resulting from the Hodor hat trick and any other similar feats. Bran might also be put through the ringer that will cause his mind/soul to age while slowing down the aging of his body.

39 minutes ago, teej6 said:

I agree completely with the above statement. Show!Bran will be a terrible King. In the books, however, we’ll just have to wait and see.

Bran in the books is still, IMO, a good person with empathy for others and someone who has demonstrated extreme courage and resourcefulness. His increasing powers has not diminished his humanity in any significant way so far. He’s far from the wooden, emotionless, detached from everything and everyone character seen on the show. My problem with Bran being King in the books has to do primarily with his age and physical handicap. For rest of Westeros to acknowledge Bran as King, he needs to do something visibly powerful, magical and heroic... it has to be common knowledge that he saved Westeros. Besides everyone must somehow suddenly be okay with a boy King. How GRRM is going to sell that, I do not know.

I think Bran is going to be instrumental in both the defeat of the Others and the defeat of Euron Greyjoy. Euron, as many of us already know, is also a skinchanger and a warlock.

How will everyone suddenly be okay with a boy king? I'm not quite sure because I think Westeros would rather have an healthy adult female be their "king" than a prepubescent crippled boy.

But I think Bran will be king in only the vaguest sense of the word. From what I can discern, Daenerys is going to be the anti-Aegon. Whereas Aegon united the seven kingdoms into one continent and created the Iron Throne via Balerion, I think Daenerys is going to break the wheel. Break the wheel meaning she will have Drogon destroy the Iron Throne and she will cause the Seven Kingdoms to disintegrate and splinter.

So, in the end, all the regions of Westeros will be ruling themselves but they will ultimately answer to Bran who will either make Harrenhal or the Isle of Faces his royal seat. There will be a massive religious revival; everyone will be worshipping the old gods by the end of it all and Bran have the power to enforce the law, the clout to preside/interpret the law and wisdom to have his own Great Council that will help him make new laws and revise old ones.

It's a bit creepy to live in a surveillance quasi-mystical police state but hey. Although the Others will be gone, the night and winter will linger on. I don't think any of the characters will live to see spring or even sunlight ever again.

2 hours ago, SeanF said:

The one does not preclude the other.  Daenerys believes that she is entitled to rule Westeros but also sees it as her duty, and desires to better her subjects lives.  

I can't think of anyone less suited to be King than Bran, who spends his time examining pill bugs in preference to listening to his advisors. 

In the TV show, yes.

[Lord Varys]

44 minutes ago, Jabar of House Titan said:

I think a King Bran can make a lot of sense. But Bran has not been an actual main character since A Clash of Kings. He became pushed to the background and became a secondary character (think Davos and Samwell) in A Storm of Swords and only had three chapters in A Dance with Dragons. And the Bran POV chapters in Dance ends prematurely.

Bran is a child character who is written like a child. He has the mental and emotional development of a child, and that's why George struggles so much writing him. There has been basically no development in the Bran character since AGoT aside from him accepting that he is a cripple by the time of ADwD.

His magical abilities and the knowledge he gains by those cannot emotionally mature him in another 1-2 years (the series is not likely to cover more time than 1-2 years, regardless how many books it might take to wrap it up).

Any character maturing enough from ADwD Bran to a Bran who could run a kingdom in his own right by the end of the series is utterly realistic in the kind of setting George has given us.

It might be he once wanted to make Bran king in the end - perhaps he still wants to do that right now. But I honestly doubt he would go through with that now that he has seen how ridiculous that looked in the show.

Bran can become a greenseer and a god in the books, but he cannot really become a proper king. That just doesn't fly. While people might worship him when he speaks through the tree, they would never follow or bow to a crippled boy on the Iron Throne.

I cannot imagine a scenario that can make sense of such a plot development within George's setting. George has changed a lot things along the way because they simply didn't work - he wanted a five year gap, he wanted to have a Shrouded Lord, he wanted Jaime to be an ambitious villain, he wanted Drogo to be 'evil' and Viserys to be 'good', etc. All that didn't work and he came up with better solutions.

And considering the number of characters he has created so far - and the potentiality of some of them (Jon, Dany, Aegon, Arianne, Sansa, etc.) to have children of their own by the end of the series - there is going to be a much larger pool of people to pick a king from if one is needed to wrap things up.

[BlackLightning]

1 minute ago, Lord Varys said:

Bran is a child character who is written like a child. He has the mental and emotional development of a child, and that's why George struggles so much writing him. There has been basically no development in the Bran character since AGoT aside from him accepting that he is a cripple by the time of ADwD.

Well, there are two things that I believe really hurts George when it comes to writing Bran are two things.

1. George has no children nor does he have any experience working with children.
2. George is old. It has been decades since anyone has seriously considered him young or youthful. He's so far removed from childhood at this point (particularly prepubescence), I bet it's hard for him to remember enough to evoke those feelings and intellectualizations on the page. 

This is another area where J.K. Rowling flourished.

But I disagree: Bran has had character development since Game. There was a lot of development in Clash and a little whiff of it in Storm.

8 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

His magical abilities and the knowledge he gains by those cannot emotionally mature him in another 1-2 years (the series is not likely to cover more time than 1-2 years, regardless how many books it might take to wrap it up).

Any character maturing enough from ADwD Bran to a Bran who could run a kingdom in his own right by the end of the series is utterly realistic in the kind of setting George has given us.

It might be he once wanted to make Bran king in the end - perhaps he still wants to do that right now. But I honestly doubt he would go through with that now that he has seen how ridiculous that looked in the show.

Bran can become a greenseer and a god in the books, but he cannot really become a proper king. That just doesn't fly. While people might worship him when he speaks through the tree, they would never follow or bow to a crippled boy on the Iron Throne.

I cannot imagine a scenario that can make sense of such a plot development within George's setting. George has changed a lot things along the way because they simply didn't work - he wanted a five year gap, he wanted to have a Shrouded Lord, he wanted Jaime to be an ambitious villain, he wanted Drogo to be 'evil' and Viserys to be 'good', etc. All that didn't work and he came up with better solutions.

And considering the number of characters he has created so far - and the potentiality of some of them (Jon, Dany, Aegon, Arianne, Sansa, etc.) to have children of their own by the end of the series - there is going to be a much larger pool of people to pick a king from if one is needed to wrap things up.

That's the thing.

I think the whole concept of kinghood is going to change by the time Bran becomes king. Part of the reason why is going to be attributed to Aegon, Varys, Euron, Jon and Daenerys. I feel like those five individuals are going to end up watering down the kingship to the point where it becomes something very different. For example, I am now convinced that Daenerys is going to melt down the Iron Throne and destroy most of the Red Keep (if not all of it) via Drogon. Dany is all about breaking the wheel: she's going to want to take Westeros in a very modern direction very quickly in the most off-the-wall ways imaginable. And yeah, it's more than likely going to get her killed but her laws/tax policies/etc. will nevertheless still be upheld by Bran.

I feel like the type of king Bran will be will be miles apart from the type of kings we are used to both in fiction and in real-life.

A god-king.

So yeah, while I agree with you that people are not going to want to bend the knee to a crippled 9 year old who has been so far removed from the political sphere for so long. But they will bend the knee if said boy has telepathic powers that allow him to exert absolute control over all life forms.

I think the Shrouded Lord is still a possibility; I think it will just be changed. Maybe there really is a book version of the Night King and it's the Shrouded Lord.

In any case, I feel as if the very last chapter of the series will be a Bran POV that will take place over a 100 year time period.