What exactly is the point of Quentyn?

[Dreadscythe95]

On 12/2/2022 at 4:19 AM, Gilbert Green said:

Ironic.  I don't see why we can't happily agree that you expect Quentyn to be dead, and expect Jon Snow and Brienne to be alive.  It's obviously your stance.  But you seem to want to contradict for the sake of ... something or other.

Yeah, you take this to a personal level but the points I am giving are considered by the big majority of people that have read the books. Everywhere you see the same point. The discussion is not about our subjective understanding of the books but about whaat the book plot guides the reader into believing (at this point). And noone says that these opinions can't or won't be wrong but they are still the perception of the majority, dont' try to make them just my personal belief and make a counterpoint based on that.

[Gilbert Green]

51 minutes ago, Dreadscythe95 said:

Yeah, you take this to a personal level but the points I am giving are considered by the big majority of people that have read the books. Everywhere you see the same point. The discussion is not about our subjective understanding of the books but about whaat the book plot guides the reader into believing (at this point). And noone says that these opinions can't or won't be wrong but they are still the perception of the majority, dont' try to make them just my personal belief and make a counterpoint based on that.

What I said was that people generally expect Brienne and others to be alive and Quentyn to be dead.  I numbered you among them, because you said so yourself and I believed you.  I never said it was just you who expects these things.  I said the complete opposite of that.

I honestly have no idea why you are accusing me of personally attacking you.  The closest I came was when you accused me of contradicting for the sake of contradicting, and I threw it back in your face.  As far as I know, we are both in happy agreement about what people generally seem to expect.

I do have some reservations about whether what people generally expect will turn out to actually be true.  Perhaps that is what is annoying you.  But GRRM does like to surprise his readers.

[Dreadscythe95]

19 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

What I said was that people generally expect Brienne and others to be alive and Quentyn to be dead.  I numbered you among them, because you said so yourself and I believed you.  I never said it was just you who expects these things.  I said the complete opposite of that.

I honestly have no idea why you are accusing me of personally attacking you.  The closest I came was when you accused me of contradicting for the sake of contradicting, and I threw it back in your face.  As far as I know, we are both in happy agreement about what people generally seem to expect.

I do have some reservations about whether what people generally expect will turn out to actually be true.  Perhaps that is what is annoying you.  But GRRM does like to surprise his readers.

I don't accuse you of attacking me. All I am saying is that you have tunneled on the idea of debating and have completely lost the essence of this debate which is about Quentin. I mean at this point I don't even know what was the argument, xD. Yes, people expect things but from a story perspective some things are kinda more obvious and The Brienne/Jaimie arc is nothing in nature to the Quentin arc, there is no point for Brienne to die there but there is a point for Quentin to die from narrative and a plot perspective. Anyway, it's ok to have reservations, it's not like I am a friend with Geroge and he gives me inside info but with the info we already have I don't think that what you are implying is the realistic approach. Occam's Razor definitely cuts you here.

[hnv]

- to explain why Dorne would side with f/Aegon and yet another kingdom will spend its force before the new long night

- to show that the blood of the dragon needs close linage. So Q and Brown Benn can't be dragonriders, the third head must be a Targaryen as well

- I think George like the sad touch in this story of the prince who came too late.

[Gilbert Green]

6 hours ago, Dreadscythe95 said:

I don't accuse you of attacking me. All I am saying is that you have tunneled on the idea of debating and have completely lost the essence of this debate which is about Quentin. I mean at this point I don't even know what was the argument, xD.

I'm saying that I don't think the point of Quentyn (this thread's titular question) is "to subvert expectations".  I don't think that the fans generally ever had any particularly strong expectations that Prince Frog would succeed or survive.   I don't think GRRM builds up any such expectations, so he can subvert them.  Rather he makes a mockery of poor Prince Frog, and the other characters all sneer at his vague hopes of success.  And Prince Frog's vague hopes are based more on a humble sense of duty than upon any confidence in himself or his abilities.

So, as far as I'm concerned, whatever the point of Quentyn's arc might be, it ain't this.

6 hours ago, Dreadscythe95 said:

Yes, people expect things but from a story perspective some things are kinda more obvious and The Brienne/Jaimie arc is nothing in nature to the Quentin arc, there is no point for Brienne to die there but there is a point for Quentin to die from narrative and a plot perspective.

How can you be sure, though, that there is no point for Brienne to die?  It is not as though the fans, generally, are interested in exploring the question.

If more people thought that Brienne was dead, we would have threads entitled "What Exactly Was the Point of Brienne?", and various fans would present various theories speculating on what exactly her point would be if we start with the assumption that she was not cut down alive.  And most of these theories would be wrong (even if one were possibly right).   And surely someone would say "The point of Brienne was to subvert our expectations".   And I would dislike that theory, just as I dislike it here.  But at least I would face a stronger argument that GRRM had set up actual expectations of Brienne's survival to be subverted.

6 hours ago, Dreadscythe95 said:

Anyway, it's ok to have reservations, it's not like I am a friend with Geroge and he gives me inside info but with the info we already have I don't think that what you are implying is the realistic approach. Occam's Razor definitely cuts you here.

I don't know how Occham's Razor comes into the question.

[Angel Eyes]

The point of Quentyn is to subvert expectations about the Hero's Journey, where the quest was for nothing since the princess (or Queen) is already married and wouldn't want the hero anyways because she prefers the dashing mercenary.

[Gilbert Green]

1 hour ago, Angel Eyes said:

The point of Quentyn is to subvert expectations about the Hero's Journey, where the quest was for nothing since the princess (or Queen) is already married and wouldn't want the hero anyways because she prefers the dashing mercenary.

Why on earth would GRRM want to "subvert" the silly ideas of Joseph Campbell?  Why would he even want to read them?

[BlackLightning]

18 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

Why on earth would GRRM want to "subvert" the silly ideas of Joseph Campbell?  Why would he even want to read them?

Maybe because it tells an engaging story and it serves to make the plot in the later books a lot more engaging. As we see from the show, the exclusion of fAegon and the corruption and then minimization of Dorne had widespread negative consequences for the integrity to the story and its characters.

But to answer question...I don't know. Why wouldn't GRRM want to subvert idea of the Hero's Journey? This is GRRM's magnum opus and he is highlighting, subverting and exploring a lot of fantasy tropes and stoytelling devices with this saga.

We have princesses in towers; "evil" stepmothers and evil queens; crippled forgotten boys who either want to become "a real boy" or who want to become powerful; flying, fire-breathing dragons, different types of psychics, and all-seeing trees; witches and wizards who whisper in the ears of kings; demonic forces reanimating dead bodies and turning them into armies; trolls and hunchbacks who are mistreated by society; and a chosen one with a magical sword...he's explored all these.

Why not the hero's journey?

[Gilbert Green]

1 hour ago, BlackLightning said:

Maybe because it tells an engaging story and it serves to make the plot in the later books a lot more engaging.

GRRM did not tell compelling stories because he followed the hero's journey or because he subverted it, but rather because of his familiarity with history and folklore and attention to detail and some skill in the story-teller's art. 

When it comes to telling stories, the devil is in the details.  Tolkien understood that.  Lovecraft understood that.  But all Campbell ever did was spout empty blather about broad generalities.  He never told a compelling story in his life, and would not know where to begin.  Campbell's stories are not worth subverting, because they don't exist.

Campbell's formulae should not be followed.  They should not be subverted.  They should be ignored.

1 hour ago, BlackLightning said:

Why wouldn't GRRM want to subvert idea of the Hero's Journey?

Because he has better things to do, I hope, than the nihilistic subversion of the non-stories of a complete non-entity.

[Craving Peaches]

I feel like there must be more to Quentyn's character than just subverting the Hero's Journey. Creating an entire character and using chapters of writing just to subvert a trope seems silly, there has also already been plenty of subversion. If he is dead it would drive a wedge between Dorne and Daenerys, which builds up the potential conflict between her and Aegon.

[Corvo the Crow]

He is to Dany’s dragons what a newborn baby and puppy is to Unsullied.

[BlackLightning]

23 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

GRRM did not tell compelling stories because he followed the hero's journey or because he subverted it, but rather because of his familiarity with history and folklore and attention to detail and some skill in the story-teller's art. 

When it comes to telling stories, the devil is in the details.  Tolkien understood that.  Lovecraft understood that.  But all Campbell ever did was spout empty blather about broad generalities.  He never told a compelling story in his life, and would not know where to begin.  Campbell's stories are not worth subverting, because they don't exist.

Campbell's formulae should not be followed.  They should not be subverted.  They should be ignored.

Because he has better things to do, I hope, than the nihilistic subversion of the non-stories of a complete non-entity.

 

22 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

I feel like there must be more to Quentyn's character than just subverting the Hero's Journey. Creating an entire character and using chapters of writing just to subvert a trope seems silly, there has also already been plenty of subversion. If he is dead it would drive a wedge between Dorne and Daenerys, which builds up the potential conflict between her and Aegon.

 

I'm sorry but why would Quentyn not be dead?

I'm a bit confused because it seems obvious that Quentyn is the Jon Arryn of the second half of the story. It triggers the conflict between the Martells, fAegon and Dany...which is crucial as the Others, Varys, the Martells, fAegon, Euron Greyjoy and the Faith Militant (basically all the new characters and groups introduced in Feast and Dance) will be Dany's principal enemies when she comes to Westeros - not the Lannisters, not Littlefinger, not the Starks.

[Craving Peaches]

10 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

I'm sorry but why would Quentyn not be dead?

I agree he's dead, though I am aware there are some 'theories' that he's not, which is why I said 'if', in case someone was going to bring that up again.

10 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

I'm a bit confused because it seems obvious that Quentyn is the Jon Arryn of the second half of the story. It triggers the conflict between the Martells, fAegon and Dany...which is crucial as the Others, Varys, the Martells, fAegon, Euron Greyjoy and the Faith Militant (basically all the new characters and groups introduced in Feast and Dance) will be Dany's principal enemies when she comes to Westeros - not the Lannisters, not Littlefinger, not the Starks.

I agree. I think that is the main point of his death. What I was trying to say is that I doubt he was created purely to subvert the hero's journey.

[Gilbert Green]

2 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

I'm sorry but why would Quentyn not be dead?

Burnt beyond recognition.