Unconventional opinions dumpsterfire of a thread

[Aemon Darkbrother]

8 minutes ago, Vaith said:

I dislike this "everything is going to happen because of some bloodline that goes back 10,000 years that some people may have."

Craster being a Targaryen scion doesn't seem especially necessary and him being Some Guy who has some weird relationship with the others is good enough for me.

My personal story taste is one where one becomes, not is born special, and does not need some 10,000 year old bloodline to be important.

Bloodline is at centre of this entire series, I think. Which is fine as people are still individuals with their own free will. You can tell the story of a giant blood line while still exploring the heart in conflict.  

[Vaith]

26 minutes ago, Aemon Darkbrother said:

Bloodline is at centre of this entire series, I think. Which is fine as people are still individuals with their own free will. You can tell the story of a giant blood line while still exploring the heart in conflict.  

Partly, but Dany for example is special because of what she chooses to do on the pyre. I do not think every interesting character needs to be predestined for greatness based on some heritage. All that these grand unifying theories do for me is wrap up every disparate thread in the world with a neat little bow when I think it's not as easy as that.

Besides, it is pretty hard for me to accept the contrivance where only one valid "great empire of the dawn" line of descent still exists in this world.

[Aemon Darkbrother]

1 hour ago, Vaith said:

Partly, but Dany for example is special because of what she chooses to do on the pyre. I do not think every interesting character needs to be predestined for greatness based on some heritage. All that these grand unifying theories do for me is wrap up every disparate thread in the world with a neat little bow when I think it's not as easy as that.

Besides, it is pretty hard for me to accept the contrivance where only one valid "great empire of the dawn" line of descent still exists in this world.

I think it really is that easy. I think George's attempt with asoiaf is to mask what would be considered a traditional sci-fi story as a traditional fantasy. "Magic" thus has to be a little more sensible in his world than simply being the power of unnamed faceless "gods" in the traditional sense. "Magical" power thus must be born though the passing or manipulating of genes which George loves to write about anyways. Grrm has woven this system into the political landscape via "Royal blood" and the nobility as a whole, though I won't claim to be an expert at this stuff, i'm just kind of calling as I see it.

Mind you a lot of this stuff is hidden under the surface and most likely will never be wholly understood or acknowledged by those involved. Are the Lannisters descended from the Gemstone emperors? probably....is westeros littered with the children of Aerys? probably , though I doubt many of these characters would ever understand or outwardly acknowledge these things. Not everyone who's blood of the dragon is necessary destined for greatness . Is it a bit contrived? yeah, similar thoughts have crossed my mind but ultimately I'm not bothered by it, its fiction after all and frankly its just so obvious to me that I find it hard to ignore.

 

[Vaith]

1 hour ago, Aemon Darkbrother said:

I think it really is that easy. I think George's attempt with asoiaf is to mask what would be considered a traditional sci-fi story as a traditional fantasy. "Magic" thus has to be a little more sensible in his world than simply being the power of unnamed faceless "gods" in the traditional sense. "Magical" power thus must be born though the passing or manipulating of genes which George loves to write about anyways. Grrm has woven this system into the political landscape via "Royal blood" and the nobility as a whole, though I won't claim to be an expert at this stuff, i'm just kind of calling as I see it.

Mind you a lot of this stuff is hidden under the surface and most likely will never be wholly understood or acknowledged by those involved. Are the Lannisters descended from the Gemstone emperors? probably....is westeros littered with the children of Aerys? probably , though I doubt many of these characters would ever understand or outwardly acknowledge these things. Not everyone who's blood of the dragon is necessary destined for greatness . Is it a bit contrived? yeah, similar thoughts have crossed my mind but ultimately I'm not bothered by it, its fiction after all and frankly its just so obvious to me that I find it hard to ignore.

 

As a fictional story my own personal engagement is "what have the characters done to earn their role in the story" more than "oh, they have the magic genes now, everything falls into place as to why they have these superpowers and narrative importance."

Frankly I find such a neat solution to the great magical mysteries to be a bit boring. The magic in the world is so esoteric because so much is unknown and even characters who seem to be knowledgeable like Melisandre are going off guesswork for a lot of the time. A large component to be "well, the people who are going to save the world need this special gene." 

[Nevets]

On 4/24/2020 at 1:12 PM, Lord Varys said:

doubt that the Starks will end up supporting each other that - Bran might end up supporting everybody, of course, but Sansa and Arya and Rickon aren't exactly close nor are they likely to enjoy being around each other again.

Both Arya and Sansa think about each other several times.  I think they would be happy to see each other, and to know the other is alive and well.

7 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Not yet, that is. I mean, Sansa and Arya and Bran were also a huge waste of time from AGoT-ASoS. Arya started to become interesting when she went to Braavos, Bran when he met Bloodraven, and Sansa when she arrived in the Vale. Prior to that they were pawns and spectators, giving us their views on the stories and events shaped by other people.

This seems to be a not uncommon misconception.  They are among the main characters of the series.  As such their experiences are important in and of themselves.  Plus they help mold the characters into the people they are and will be.  For example, Arya is the fucked-up mess she is in large part due to her experiences at Harrenhal.  Their main importance is them, not what they happen to see.

[kissdbyfire]

56 minutes ago, Vaith said:

As a fictional story my own personal engagement is "what have the characters done to earn their role in the story" more than "oh, they have the magic genes now, everything falls into place as to why they have these superpowers and narrative importance."

Frankly I find such a neat solution to the great magical mysteries to be a bit boring. The magic in the world is so esoteric because so much is unknown and even characters who seem to be knowledgeable like Melisandre are going off guesswork for a lot of the time. A large component to be "well, the people who are going to save the world need this special gene." 

Yeah, I agree. I mean, it does seem certain groups of lineages have different innate abilities but that will only take them so far. Also, I don’t believe it’s just a handful of chosen ones but lots of people; and I say this mostly b/c magic is a thing in universe. 

I also don’t buy for a second the idea that ASoIaF is sci fi disguised as fantasy. Firstly b/c there’s absolutely nothing that points to that IMO. But also, and more importantly, b/c Martin has said many times (one of several available quotes below) it’s a fantasy story, not science fiction (even if he doesn’t make much distinction between the fantasy, sci fi and horror and says it’s mostly the furniture that changes: swords, spaceships, vampires was the example he used. 

“Someone asked why the seasons are so messed up. Martin said he couldn't give an answer necause that would be telling! He did say that there would eventually be an answer in one of the books, and the answer would be a fantasy (as opposed to a science fiction/science based) (answer.” (X)

 

[Aemon Darkbrother]

53 minutes ago, Vaith said:

As a fictional story my own personal engagement is "what have the characters done to earn their role in the story" more than "oh, they have the magic genes now, everything falls into place as to why they have these superpowers and narrative importance."

Frankly I find such a neat solution to the great magical mysteries to be a bit boring. The magic in the world is so esoteric because so much is unknown and even characters who seem to be knowledgeable like Melisandre are going off guesswork for a lot of the time. A large component to be "well, the people who are going to save the world need this special gene." 

Eh vagueness for the sake of vagueness doesn't really do much for me . Thats more in line with stuff like Harry potter where one can turn a goblet into a rat because...magic. But just because George has a system in place to explain how things work doesn't mean those things aren't a mystery in it of themselves. I sure as hell wouldn't have come to see ASOIAF the way I do now if it wasn't for the collective work of the fandom. Hell, something as simple as R+L=J went completely over my head when I first read through the series and damn if it wasn't an awesome feeling when finally understood it. As far as  earning ones place in the story...well thats a tricky thing to ask because this entire story focuses on nobility. Dany didn't hatch dragons because she earned it, she hatched dragons because she was Aerys's daughter and blood of Aegon. I guess this just circles back to my original point that this fictional Sci-fantasy story about noble bloodlines at war can only be so spontaneous. Its kind of doomed to be a little contrived and i'm OK with that. Whats great is that even if you or anyone else  shared my interpretation of the mythos you wouldn't really have to pay attention to any of it to enjoy the story, at its core  ASOIAF is about the human heart in conflict. George's masterful skill at storytelling  is probably why ASOIAF has such worldwide appeal and why GOT made such a good show for mainstream audiences.

[Vaith]

10 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Yeah, I agree. I mean, it does seem certain groups of lineages have different innate abilities but that will only take them so far. Also, I don’t believe it’s just a handful of chosen ones but lots of people; and I say this mostly b/c magic is a thing in universe. 

I also don’t buy for a second the idea that ASoIaF is sci fi disguised as fantasy. Firstly b/c there’s absolutely nothing that points to that IMO. But also, and more importantly, b/c Martin has said many times (one of several available quotes below) it’s a fantasy story, not science fiction (even if he doesn’t make much distinction between the fantasy, sci fi and horror and says it’s mostly the furniture that changes: swords, spaceships, vampires was the example he used. 

“Someone asked why the seasons are so messed up. Martin said he couldn't give an answer necause that would be telling! He did say that there would eventually be an answer in one of the books, and the answer would be a fantasy (as opposed to a science fiction/science based) (answer.” (X)

 

As is true with a lot of things, this kind of thing works well in moderation.

Perhaps heritage will help you out in being a dragonrider, or whether you are born with an innate ability to be a greenseer. But these proposals about everything coming back to people being descendants of some group 10,000 years ago... it takes away from a lot of personal growth these characters have, especially when people throw in common characters like Craster and Melisandre into the mix (because we can't have these strange, magical characters who became like that through their own choices, it's all part of these bloodlines). Like, what's next, Mirri Maz Duur is a Blackfyre because she can use magic too (there's probably already a theory like that out there...)

And yes. GRRM has written science fiction, but I would actually call his sci-fi works "science fantasy" on some level, where there is an element of magic despite all the spaceships and journeys across galaxies. It is certainly not hard science fiction where everything is within the realm of our universe's scientific plausibility. How does resurrection work if this is a science fiction story: R'hllor emits some time particle that makes the body reverse the processes of death? Something like that would be more contrived than the infamous example of midichlorians spoiling an esoteric magical force.

So for sci-fi, I don't see any unless the Wall is actually a spaceship like some theorists believe.

1 minute ago, Aemon Darkbrother said:

Eh vagueness for the sake of vagueness doesn't really do much for me . Thats more in line with stuff like Harry potter where one can turn a goblet into a rat because...magic. But just because George has a system in place to explain how things work doesn't mean those things aren't a mystery in it of themselves. I sure as hell wouldn't have come to see ASOIAF the way I do now if it wasn't for the collective work of the fandom. Hell, something as simple as R+L=J went completely over my head when I first read through the series and damn if it wasn't an awesome feeling when finally understood it. As far as  earning ones place in the story...well thats a tricky thing to ask because this entire story focuses on nobility. Dany didn't hatch dragons because she earned it, she hatched dragons because she was Aerys's daughter and blood of Aegon. I guess this just circles back to my original point that this fictional Sci-fantasy story about noble bloodlines at war can only be so spontaneous. Its kind of doomed to be a little contrived and i'm OK with that. Whats great is that even if you or anyone else  shared my interpretation of the mythos you wouldn't really have to pay attention to any of it to enjoy the story, at its core  ASOIAF is about the human heart in conflict. George's masterful skill at storytelling  is probably why ASOIAF has such worldwide appeal and why GOT made such a good show for mainstream audiences.

Dany hatched the eggs because of narrative circumstances. She chose to walk into the pyre -- and she doesn't have some eternal immunity against fire, GRRM has said as much that it is a one-off mystery. Her heritage was a factor, but her own choices ultimately led her to the dragons hatching.

ASOIAF being the conflict of the human heart is actually why I don't really like these theories as much. These characters, their emotions, their personal journeys should be able to stand on their own rather than being viewed as some predestined conflict of bloodlines.

[kissdbyfire]

20 minutes ago, Vaith said:

As is true with a lot of things, this kind of thing works well in moderation.

Yup. Martin said something along the lines of, “magic in a story is like a pizza w/ anchovies: a little adds flavour, but too much spoils everything”. 

20 minutes ago, Vaith said:

Perhaps heritage will help you out in being a dragonrider, or whether you are born with an innate ability to be a greenseer. But these proposals about everything coming back to people being descendants of some group 10,000 years ago... it takes away from a lot of personal growth these characters have, especially when people throw in common characters like Craster and Melisandre into the mix (because we can't have these strange, magical characters who became like that through their own choices, it's all part of these bloodlines). Like, what's next, Mirri Maz Duur is a Blackfyre because she can use magic too (there's probably already a theory like that out there...)

Irt the bold: exactly! That is also why everyone is someone else! Mance is Rhaegar, Qhorin is AD, Daario is Euron, and on and on it goes. 

Irt the underlined: I love it! MMD is a Blackfyre! And yeah, there probably is a thread about that... 

20 minutes ago, Vaith said:

And yes. GRRM has written science fiction, but I would actually call his sci-fi works "science fantasy" on some level, where there is an element of magic despite all the spaceships and journeys across galaxies. It is certainly not hard science fiction where everything is within the realm of our universe's scientific plausibility. How does resurrection work if this is a science fiction story: R'hllor emits some time particle that makes the body reverse the processes of death? Something like that would be more contrived than the infamous example of midichlorians spoiling an esoteric magical force.

Iirc one of the quotes about fantasy v sci fi was a reply to a question about midichlorians!

 

20 minutes ago, Vaith said:

So for sci-fi, I don't see any unless the Wall is actually a spaceship like some theorists believe.

I thought it was the heart trees that are spaceships... and the red comet?

20 minutes ago, Vaith said:

Dany hatched the eggs because of narrative circumstances. She chose to walk into the pyre -- and she doesn't have some eternal immunity against fire, GRRM has said as much that it is a one-off mystery. Her heritage was a factor, but her own choices ultimately led her to the dragons hatching.

ASOIAF being the conflict of the human heart is actually why I don't really like these theories as much. These characters, their emotions, their personal journeys should be able to stand on their own rather than being viewed as some predestined conflict of bloodlines.

Agreed. And definitely re Dany. She may be the blood of the Dragon, but the eggs didn’t hatch solely b/c of that. Her decisions and probably a combo of other factors played a part as well. That’s why it was “unique, magical, a miracle”, to paraphrase Martin. 

[Aemon Darkbrother]

52 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

I also don’t buy for a second the idea that ASoIaF is sci fi disguised as fantasy. Firstly b/c there’s absolutely nothing that points to that IMO. But also, and more importantly, b/c Martin has said many times (one of several available quotes below) it’s a fantasy story, not science fiction (even if he doesn’t make much distinction between the fantasy, sci fi and horror and says it’s mostly the furniture that changes: swords, spaceships, vampires was the example he used. 

Have given any of his sci fi stories a try? Read In The House of the Worm or Bitterblooms. They are basically precursors to a lot of ideas that formed ASOIAF imo. The descendents of an Aryan race spread across the galaxy, modern day cities reduced to ruin because of nuclear war and have regressed into medieval societies, Worm people (COTF)  waring with aryans  etc. Initially I was in a state of incredulity reading the stuff. I almost felt as if I'd done something wrong reading those books before grrm had a chance at finishing asoiaf.

Your right the furniture rules are definitely a better way of illustrating my point thought i'm sure already know: 

"The answer is simple. Motor cars or horses, tricorns or togas, ray-guns or six-shooters, none of it matters, so long as the people remain. Sometimes we get so busy drawing boundaries and making labels that we lose track of that truth."

We can make up all the definitions of science fiction and fantasy and horror that we want. We can draw our boundaries and make our labels, but in the end it’s still the same old story, the one about the human heart in conflict with itself.

The House of Fantasy is built of stone and wood and furnished in High Medieval. Its people travel by horse and galley, fight with sword and spell and battleaxe, communicate by palantir or raven, and break bread with elves and dragons.
 

The House of Science Fiction is built of duralloy and plastic and furnished in Faux Future. Its people travel by starship and aircar, fight with nukes and tailored germs, communicate by ansible and laser, and break protein bars with aliens.

The Furniture Rule, I call it.
Forget the definitions. Furniture Rules.
Ask Phyllis Eisenstein, who has written a series of fine stories about a minstrel named Alaric, traveling through a medieval realm she never names.. . but if you corner her at a con she may whisper the name of this far kingdom. ‘Germany.’ The only fantastic element in the Alaric stories is teleportation, a psi ability generally classed as a trope of SF. Ah, but Alaric carries a lute, and sleeps in castles, and around him are lords with swords, so ninety-nine readers out of every hundred, and most publishers as well, see the scries as fantasy. The Furniture Rules.
Ask Walter Jon Williams. In Metropolitan and City on Fire he gives us a secondary world as fully imagined as Tolkien’s Middle Earth, a world powered entirely by magic, which Walter calls ‘plasm.’ But because the world is a single huge decaying city, rife with corrupt politics and racial tensions, and the plasm is piped and metered by the plasm authority, and the sorcerers live in high rises instead of castles, critics and reviewers and readers alike keep calling the books science fiction. The Furniture Rules.
"Peter Nicholls writes, ‘... SF and fantasy, if genres at all, are impure genres . . . their fruit may be SF, but the roots are fantasy, and the flowers and leaves perhaps something else again.’ If anything, Nicholls does not go far enough, for westerns and mysteries and romances and historicals and all the rest are impure as well. What we really have, when we get right down to the nitty gritty, are stories. Just stories.
Fantasy? Science fiction? Horror?
I say it’s a story, and I say the hell with it."

[kissdbyfire]

14 minutes ago, Aemon Darkbrother said:

Have given any of his sci fi stories a try? Read In The House of the Worm or Bitterblooms. They are basically precursors to a lot of ideas that formed ASOIAF imo. The descendents of an Aryan race spread across the galaxy, modern day cities reduced to ruin because of nuclear war and have regressed into medieval societies, Worm people (COTF)  waring with aryans  etc. Initially I was in a state of incredulity reading the stuff. I almost felt as if I'd done something wrong reading those books before grrm had a chance at finishing asoiaf.

Yup, I’ve read those and others. And I agree that there’s lots and lots of glimpses into ASoIaF in those stories. But I stand by what I said, ASoIaF doesn’t have science fiction elements IMO. There’s no time travel, no spaceships, etc. Martin does use and reuse many things from his own work, but the furniture he uses in ASoIaF is altogether different and very clearly “swords”, not spaceships nor vampires. Just my 2p worth.

 

[Vaith]

43 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Irt the bold: exactly! That is also why everyone is someone else! Mance is Rhaegar, Qhorin is AD, Daario is Euron, and on and on it goes. 

Irt the underlined: I love it! MMD is a Blackfyre! And yeah, there probably is a thread about that... 

Oh, don't forget Euron is the Dusky Woman. Or is it Tywin = Dusky Woman these days? 

45 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

I thought it was the heart trees that are spaceships... and the red comet?

I'll have to check that one out  but apparently the spaceship under the Wall one comes from that well-known YouTuber by the initials P.J.

Mind you, the one I heard of also had the dragons as genetically engineered dinosaurs, which makes me wonder if they'd just started reading Pern.

[teej6]

2 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Yup, I’ve read those and others. And I agree that there’s lots and lots of glimpses into ASoIaF in those stories. But I stand by what I said, ASoIaF doesn’t have science fiction elements IMO. There’s no time travel, no spaceships, etc. Martin does use and reuse many things from his own work, but the furniture he uses in ASoIaF is altogether different and very clearly “swords”, not spaceships nor vampires. Just my 2p worth.

 

I agree that GRRM won’t introduce spaceships or aliens in ASOIAF, but he could introduce concepts that we find in both the sci-fi and fantasy genre. For instance, a concept like time travel, which is very sci-fi, could also be used in a fantasy setting. Bran’s visions, although not fully explained in the books right now, could be borrowed heavily from sci-fi concepts. The concept that there is only a present for someone who sees through time and space is very sci-fi. Now I don’t know how GRRM will explain Bran’s powers but magic in the ASOIF universe could also be interpreted as a sci-fi concept. GRRM, as a kid, was an avid comicbook fan (Stan Lee being one of his heroes) and comics essentially combine elements of fantasy, myth, and sci-fi. The fantasy and sci-fi genres are to me sometimes interchangeable.

In terms of magical bloodlines, GRRM has already introduced that for the two central families in the story. The Targs and Starks are closely tied to magical ancestry or some form it, and I don’t see how GRRM extricates magic from their storylines now. GRRM wanted the Targs to be associated with fire from the very beginning. He first contemplated pyrokinesis as their magical ability and then settled for dragon riding. The Starks, one can argue, are the antithesis of this. This is why I think Jon has to be central to the balance of the two powers no matter how cliched and trope it feels.

[Aemon Darkbrother]

On 4/25/2020 at 7:16 PM, Vaith said:

I'll have to check that one out  but apparently the spaceship under the Wall one comes from that well-known YouTuber by the initials P.J.

I'll admit there are alot of nonsensical secret identity theories out there but the theme of the blood of the dragon people serving as the foundation of the asoiaf world is completely different than the Euron memes lol.  Also PJ is very insightful and definitely on track with the "Sci fi" stuff but I think that in an effort to differentiate himself from other youtubers actually does himself a disservice. His anti-R+L=J interpretation of the Brandon ashara stuff is needlessly convoluted.

Storms end is not an f-ing spaceship in fact there are no spaceships because even if they had existed on planetos spaceships are metal and would be long eroded.  I do think however that dragonbreath was used to make the castle, kind of like cement. Think the walls of volantis, the base of the Hightower or even maybe even the five forts.  

On 4/25/2020 at 6:54 PM, kissdbyfire said:

Yup, I’ve read those and others. And I agree that there’s lots and lots of glimpses into ASoIaF in those stories. But I stand by what I said, ASoIaF doesn’t have science fiction elements IMO. There’s no time travel, no spaceships, etc. Martin does use and reuse many things from his own work, but the furniture he uses in ASoIaF is altogether different and very clearly “swords”, not spaceships nor vampires. Just my 2p worth.

Yeah I agree no vampires and yeah swords are swords. However I'd argue that the closet thing to gods in asoiaf are the greenseers and the hive minded weirwood net. I'd even say that those types of organisms are "alien" to planetos just like dragons are. Dragons are described as wormlike and are often described as bat like. Sounds like genetical engineering to me. During the DotD Sunfyre is described as having been wounded and unable to fly, only to mysteriously disappear. The implication here I believe is that sunfyre resorted to its pre-dragon Worm (or Wyrm) instincts and burrowed underground....like in In The House of the Worm. Dragons are basically a cooler version of the worms Georges other stories. Creatures that burrow beneath the earth that are imbued with telekinetic abilities and bond with others who share their blood (Skin changers/targs).  The myth of Qarth in which the moon explodes and brings down meteors is imo the story of how alien organisms came to planetos. Dragons themselves are GRRMs moon Martians.

On 4/25/2020 at 6:29 PM, kissdbyfire said:

Agreed. And definitely re Dany. She may be the blood of the Dragon, but the eggs didn’t hatch solely b/c of that. Her decisions and probably a combo of other factors played a part as well. That’s why it was “unique, magical, a miracle”, to paraphrase Martin. 

She didn't even understand what was going on. Her blood did all the work. Her dragons are at the root of all her power, its how she was able to amass all the strength she has now. 

A better example of character outshining lineage would be Jon. I don't think he'll ever be acknowledged as a Targaryen until after his death, say for instance if Samwell were to write a book.

"He was who he was; Jon Snow, bastard and oathbreaker, motherless, friendless, and damned. For the rest of his life—however long that might be—he would be condemned to be an outsider, the silent man standing in the shadows who dares not speak his true name. Wherever he might go throughout the Seven Kingdoms, he would need to live a lie, lest every man's hand be raised against him."

Jon will live his life beyond the wall as the king of the freefolk and as an outlaw in the eyes of the 7 kingdoms. I imagine similar outcomes for other targs. Like I said before, just because these people are blood of the dragon doesn't mean can make their own choices with the power that blood affords them. Blood is only half the equation in defining who you are, we this time and time again with most characters. Tywin's predisposition to aggression is teased at his birth but he's also defined by the trauma of what his family went through in his youth. Rhaegar is said to be a gifted fighter while also being clever, likewise Jon is a skilled fighter and was even a gifted student ( to Catelyn's shagrin)  but his personality and actions are deeply influenced by Eddard as well. 

[kissdbyfire]

On 4/25/2020 at 11:24 PM, teej6 said:

I agree that GRRM won’t introduce spaceships or aliens in ASOIAF, but he could introduce concepts that we find in both the sci-fi and fantasy genre. For instance, a concept like time travel, which is very sci-fi, could also be used in a fantasy setting. 

I completely agree it could be used in a fantasy setting, but I don’t think we will see any type of time travel in ASoIaF. 

Quote

Bran’s visions, although not fully explained in the books right now, could be borrowed heavily from sci-fi concepts. The concept that there is only a present for someone who sees through time and space is very sci-fi.

I agree. But the whole visions and seeing things through time also a very fantasy-y.  IMO.

 

Quote

Now I don’t know how GRRM will explain Bran’s powers but magic in the ASOIF universe could also be interpreted as a sci-fi concept. GRRM, as a kid, was an avid comicbook fan (Stan Lee being one of his heroes) and comics essentially combine elements of fantasy, myth, and sci-fi. The fantasy and sci-fi genres are to me sometimes interchangeable.

Totally, to me too! It’s the furniture thing again... but I’m basing my opinions on this on my understanding of the text - which could be 100% off - and in things Martin has said over the years. Paraphrasing: “There won’t be an explanation for the magic”, “It’s not science”, “If I wanted to write a sci fi story, I would write a sci fi story, this is fantasy”, etc etc.  

Quote

In terms of magical bloodlines, GRRM has already introduced that for the two central families in the story. The Targs and Starks are closely tied to magical ancestry or some form it, and I don’t see how GRRM extricates magic from their storylines now. GRRM wanted the Targs to be associated with fire from the very beginning. He first contemplated pyrokinesis as their magical ability and then settled for dragon riding. The Starks, one can argue, are the antithesis of this. This is why I think Jon has to be central to the balance of the two powers no matter how cliched and trope it feels.

Oh I don’t think he will even try to extricate magic like this. No way. But it’s clear that the story is very character-driven, and then there’s “the human heart in conflict with itself”, and actions have consequences, and all that jazz. So, I think magical characters - for lack of a better term - will still have to go through the motions of making mistakes, learning - or not - and having to live w/ the consequences of their decisions. The magical abilities are there and will most definitely play a part, but ultimately it’s up to the individual. Did that make any sense at all?

On 4/25/2020 at 11:42 PM, Aemon Darkbrother said:

I'll admit there are alot of nonsensical secret identity theories out there but the theme of the blood of the dragon people serving as the foundation of the asoiaf world is completely different than the Euron memes lol. 

Yeah, and it’s getting worse the longer we go w/o a new book. At this rate, we’ll get to a point where no one is who they say they are. And I’ll touch on this a bit more further down. 

I’m not sure what you mean by the theme of the blood of the dragon being the foundation of the ASoIaF world. Care to elaborate? I mean, we know Martin had just started working on a different story when the scene w/ Gared’s execution by Ned and subsequent scene where the Stark kids find the direwolf pups came to him and he couldn’t let it go. 

On 4/25/2020 at 11:42 PM, Aemon Darkbrother said:

Also PJ is very insightful and definitely on track with the "Sci fi" stuff

PJ seems like a very nice person, and he usually starts well enough, but everything eventually goes completely off the rails. I’m of course talking only of those theories of his that I have seen the videos for. Also, wholeheartedly disagree on PJ being “definitely on track with the sci fi stuff”. 

I will say though, PJ’s reviews of the abomination were totally spot on, brilliant and hilariously funny. 

On 4/25/2020 at 11:42 PM, Aemon Darkbrother said:

but I think that in an effort to differentiate himself from other youtubers actually does himself a disservice. His anti-R+L=J interpretation of the Brandon ashara stuff is needlessly convoluted.

Well, to be fair, I think PJ has been at it longer than most if not all “famous” vloggers out there. Part of problem IMO is that the vast majority (I actually think it’s all of them, but b/c I am not sure it’s indeed “all”, I’ll use vast majority. But I do mean all I can think of) of “famous” theorists out there came into the whole thing too late. If I’m to haphazard a guess, I’d say most came into the books via the show. And of course, by then, too many things had been “figured out”. Most of the mysteries from the first 3 books already had, if not a confirmed answer, quite a few viable and likely explanations. So, what’s a new theorist to do but try to come up w/ original content? And therein lies the problem. Because there’s only so many reasonable solutions that make sense. But these new theorists have to come up w/ new ideas. No one is going to follow someone who is just repeating stuff that is being said for over a decade. And then they start to come up w/ completely new ideas. And in some cases these ideas are not that new, and in other cases they are downright ridiculous and total crackpotish fan fic. 

On 4/25/2020 at 11:42 PM, Aemon Darkbrother said:

Storms end is not an f-ing spaceship in fact there are no spaceships because even if they had existed on planetos spaceships are metal and would be long eroded.  I do think however that dragonbreath was used to make the castle, kind of like cement. Think the walls of volantis, the base of the Hightower or even maybe even the five forts.  

Don’t necessarily buy it, but don’t have any major issues here. 

On 4/25/2020 at 11:42 PM, Aemon Darkbrother said:

Yeah I agree no vampires and yeah swords are swords. However I'd argue that the closet thing to gods in asoiaf are the greenseers and the hive minded weirwood net. I'd even say that those types of organisms are "alien" to planetos just like dragons are.

Even though we have been told that the CotF are the original inhabits of Westeros? That they are Westeros’ native people? And that once dragons were everywhere? 

This is more or less what I was talking about above. “There has to be a different explanation, something that is less mainstream”. And quite frankly, I don’t understand why. In the case of the CotF, giants, dragons, direwolves, etc, we are explicitly told they have been there since forever. To try and fit a different explanation is unnecessary IMO. This world has magic, and magical creatures. They don’t have to be aliens from a galaxy far, far away for the story to make sense. 

On 4/25/2020 at 11:42 PM, Aemon Darkbrother said:

Dragons are described as wormlike and are often described as bat like. Sounds like genetical engineering to me. During the DotD Sunfyre is described as having been wounded and unable to fly, only to mysteriously disappear. The implication here I believe is that sunfyre resorted to its pre-dragon Worm (or Wyrm) insintcts and burrowed underground....like in In The House of the Worm. Dragons are basically a cooler version of the worms Georges other stories. Creatures that burrow beneath the earth that imbued with telekinetic abilities hence they're ability to bound with others who share their blood (Skin changers).  The myth of Qarth in which the moon explodes and brings down meteors is imo the story of how alien organisms came to planetos. Dragons themselves are GRRMs moon Martian.

And? Sorry, I’m not sure where you were going w/ this. 

On 4/25/2020 at 11:42 PM, Aemon Darkbrother said:

She didn't even understand what was going on. Her blood did all the work. Her dragons are at the root of all her power, its how she was able to amass all the strength she has now. 

I disagree. But I already covered the reasons why in a previous reply, so won’t repeat the same thing here. 

On 4/25/2020 at 11:42 PM, Aemon Darkbrother said:

A better example of character outshining lineage would be Jon. I don't think he'll ever be acknowledged as a Targaryen until after his death, say for instance if Samwell were to write a book.

"He was who he was; Jon Snow, bastard and oathbreaker, motherless, friendless, and damned. For the rest of his life—however long that might be—he would be condemned to be an outsider, the silent man standing in the shadows who dares not speak his true name. Wherever he might go throughout the Seven Kingdoms, he would need to live a lie, lest every man's hand be raised against him."

Jon will live his life beyond the wall as the king of the freefolk and as an outlaw in the eyes of the 7 kingdoms. I imagine similar outcomes for other targs. Like I said before, just because these people are blood of the dragon doesn't mean can make their own choices with the power that blood affords them. Blood is only half the equation in defining who you are, we this time and time again with most characters. Tywin's predisposition to aggression is teased at his birth but he's also defined by the trauma of what his family went through in his youth. Rhaegar is said to be a gifted fighter while also being clever, likewise Jon is a skilled fighter and was even a gifted student ( to Catelyn's shagrin)  but his personality and actions are deeply influenced by Eddard as well. 

This seems like how the abomination handled stuff. Not much of it makes sense to me. I will say, though, that IMO Jon already is the de facto king of the Free Folk. I also think he won’t ever go by any other name, and I’ve been saying this literally since Dance came out:

Jon Snow, King of Winter. 

 

 

I want to reply to your post. But it’s been a looooong day and I need my beauty sleep. I’ll get back to you tomorrow.

ETA: @Aemon Darkbrother I have edited my post to add my reply to you.

[chrisdaw]

Tyrion probably killed Joffrey.

The biggest (only) sticking point is him thinking in his cell who must have done it.

Quote

Assuming Joffrey had not simply choked to death on a bit of food, which even Tyrion found hard to swallow, Sansa must have poisoned him. Joff practically put his cup down in her lap, and he'd given her ample reason. Any doubts Tyrion might have had vanished when his wife did. One flesh, one heart, one soul. His mouth twisted. She wasted no time proving how much those vows meant to her, did she? Well, what did you expect, dwarf?

And within Tyrion's mind the text appears emphatic that he didn't do it.

For him to have killed Joff he must either be lying to himself or forgotten, and the text provides decent grounding for both.

Quote

Tyrion grinned at him. "That's good, bastard. Most men would rather deny a hard truth than face it."

Self-denial is a part of Tyrion's character. Denying he is so evil as to murder his own child nephew, that he is particularly the monster Cersei accuses him to be is in keeping with the character and keeping with the theme.

Quote

"You poor stupid blind crippled fool. Must I spell every little thing out for you? Very well. Cersei is a lying whore, she's been fucking Lancel and Osmund Kettleblack and probably Moon Boy for all I know. And I am the monster they all say I am. Yes, I killed your vile son." He made himself grin. It must have been a hideous sight to see, there in the torchlit gloom.

And then when he does finally admit to it its in a fit of anger and the motivation for doing so is to hurt someone. In that instance the anger is more important to him than denying the shame, he embraces being the monster.

Quote

The accusation stung, coming so hard on the heels of Jorah Mormont's words. "His blood is on my sister's hands, and the hands of the brutes who killed him. My hands …" Tyrion turned them over, inspected them, coiled them into fists. "… my hands are crusted with old blood, aye. Call me kinslayer, and you won't be wrong. Kingslayer, I'll answer to that one as well. I have killed mothers, fathers, nephews, lovers, men and women, kings and whores. A singer once annoyed me, so I had the bastard stewed. But I have never killed a juggler, nor a dwarf, and I am not to blame for what happened to your bloody brother."

And once he's admitted to it and so in his own mind confronted it, he doesn't go back on it.

With regarding forgetting, short term memory loss is a side effect of drunkenness. 

Quote

Tyrion resolved to get very, very drunk tonight. "Very well, young Podrick, let us go make me festive."

Get very drunk was his plan, and that he does to the point of feeling sick.

Conventionally everything else is in favour of Tyrion being the culprit. His motivation is anger, he didn't like Joffrey, and Joffrey particularly humiliated him before his death. But Tyrion also had a new very real reason to fear Joffrey, he had drunkenly exposed to Joff that he knew he was responsible for the attack on Bran.

The means would be as Pycelle alleges, which is exactly as GRRM has Tyrion do in ADWD.

And it explains why he tipped the wine.

[Your Mummer]

Bloodraven is not that powerful. He and Bran are prisoners of the Children; feeding them info. He wasn't a very good King's Hand and a bit of an a-hole. 

Qaithe's predictions are not useful. She is just trying to get Dany to Asshai. 

Aegon's DNA does not matter. He is a reckless fool who is going to be defeated in time. 

Sansa will not rule the North. Rickon is on his way and the Manderleys will join team Stannis. 

[Eli Cross]

9 hours ago, Your Mummer said:

Bloodraven is not that powerful. He and Bran are prisoners of the Children; feeding them info. He wasn't a very good King's Hand and a bit of an a-hole. 

Qaithe's predictions are not useful. She is just trying to get Dany to Asshai. 

Aegon's DNA does not matter. He is a reckless fool who is going to be defeated in time. 

Sansa will not rule the North. Rickon is on his way and the Manderleys will join team Stannis. 

Most of what you said is okay.  Bloodraven was good as Hand of the King though.  He handled Peake and Butterwell very nicely.  

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

11 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

The biggest (only) sticking point is him thinking in his cell who must have done it.

I disagree this is the only sticking point. If you believe he killed Joff then we must also have to believe that either he helped facilitate Sansa's escape (extremely unlikely) OR Petyr & company knew Tyrion was going to do this & thus planned the escape around this commotion without Tyrion's knowledge (also extremely unlikely, bordering impossible because it would have been an impulse decision by Tyrion if he did do it, I would think) OR Petyr & co had a plan to cause a diversion but got lucky in that Tyrion created one for them (not as unlikely as the rest but still highly unlikely, not to mention redundant & very coincidental) AND Petyr still took the credit for it knowing it was Tyrion (again, extremely unlikely) 

11 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

For him to have killed Joff he must either be lying to himself or forgotten, and the text provides decent grounding for both.

I disagree with this also but will take a look at your evidence & give my opinion. 

11 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

Tyrion grinned at him. "That's good, bastard. Most men would rather deny a hard truth than face it."

This is evidence that Tyrion does not typically delude himself, not the opposite. 

11 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

Self-denial is a part of Tyrion's character. Denying he is so evil as to murder his own child nephew, that he is particularly the monster Cersei accuses him to be is in keeping with the character and keeping with the theme.

I don't see much self-denial in Tyrion's character. The only thing he seems to have trouble understanding is when someone truly loves him vs when they are being paid to love him. This is pretty understandable though, considering the trauma he experienced as a child. Where else does he show self-denial? 

In order for it to be true that he is denying that he is so evil as to murder his own nephew it would also have to be true that he is evil enough to murder his own nephew & he isn't, he hasn't. I think you have the cart before the horse here. 

Cersei accuses him to be a monster long before he could have committed any atrocity. Cersei accuses him of killing their mother, something that is irrational & unfounded as Tyrion had no choice to be conceived or born & certainly didn't do so to kill his mother. He literally cannot possibly be the monster Cersei accuses him of being.

I think this goes against every bit of his character & the theme. 

11 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

And then when he does finally admit to it its in a fit of anger and the motivation for doing so is to hurt someone. In that instance the anger is more important to him than denying the shame, he embraces being the monster.

He doesn't embrace being the monster that killed Joff though, he embraces being the monster that is hurting his brother. For revenge. I don't see any evidence to indicate in that instance the anger is more important than the shame. There is no shame where Joff is concerned. He lashes out at his brother to retaliate against the truth Jaime just told him. 

11 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

Call me kinslayer, and you won't be wrong. Kingslayer, I'll answer to that one as well.

I think it's important to note here, he doesn't say you wouldn't be wrong to call him a Kingslayer, only that he will answer to it. 

11 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

And once he's admitted to it and so in his own mind confronted it, he doesn't go back on it.

Right, he claimed it & so now he is owning it but part of the story is that we know he didn't kill Joff & that he is in this self-loathing period of hatred. He is attempting to be the monster he has been treated like his entire life. He hasn't been that monster before though. 

11 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

Get very drunk was his plan, and that he does to the point of feeling sick.

 

11 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

With regarding forgetting, short term memory loss is a side effect of drunkenness. 

He does get very drunk but that is no indication he has forgotten something. For starters, do we have one other instance where he has gotten very drunk & forgotten his own actions? Not that I recall, maybe you recall something I don't. I don't recall a single instance of anyone in the series getting so drunk they forgot their own actions. I know plenty of people irl who have been very drunk plenty of times & not suffered short term memory loss. While it can be a side effect I don't know that I've ever know it to be to this level. I would say someone who gets drunk & forgets they killed someone have more issues than the drinking. 

Also, though, and more importantly IMO, supposing your theory is true; Wouldn't we have some internal revelation going on when Tyrion suddenly "remembers" he killed Joff? I just can't see that being glossed over by GRRM. 

11 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

Conventionally everything else is in favour of Tyrion being the culprit. His motivation is anger, he didn't like Joffrey, and Joffrey particularly humiliated him before his death. But Tyrion also had a new very real reason to fear Joffrey, he had drunkenly exposed to Joff that he knew he was responsible for the attack on Bran.

I disagree everything else points to Tyrion, as I explained above but when did he expose to Joff he knew he was responsible for Bran? IIRC that was a very vague situation where Tyrion thought for a second maybe he had cued Joff into something but then disregarded it. I may be mistaken but would be interested in the quote if you have it. 

Another thing is I think we would have some clues leading up to this. What you are suggesting is a premeditated murder, if I'm not mistaken. Would we not have had something in Tyrion's thoughts or actions indicating this was his plan? We do have his POV after all. 

 

[Alyn Oakenfist]

13 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

Tyrion probably killed Joffrey.

Every day in in every way, the opinion of those radical against Tyrion in regarding to Tyrion draw closer and closer to the Demon Monkey... Like for beeps sake...

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

13 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

Tyrion grinned at him. "That's good, bastard. Most men would rather deny a hard truth than face it."

This is evidence that Tyrion does not typically delude himself, not the opposite. 

13 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

Self-denial is a part of Tyrion's character. Denying he is so evil as to murder his own child nephew, that he is particularly the monster Cersei accuses him to be is in keeping with the character and keeping with the theme.

I don't see much self-denial in Tyrion's character. The only thing he seems to have trouble understanding is when someone truly loves him vs when they are being paid to love him. This is pretty understandable though, considering the trauma he experienced as a child. Where else does he show self-denial? 

In order for it to be true that he is denying that he is so evil as to murder his own nephew it would also have to be true that he is evil enough to murder his own nephew & he isn't, he hasn't. I think you have the cart before the horse here. 

Cersei accuses him to be a monster long before he could have committed any atrocity. Cersei accuses him of killing their mother, something that is irrational & unfounded as Tyrion had no choice to be conceived or born & certainly didn't do so to kill his mother. He literally cannot possibly be the monster Cersei accuses him of being.

I think this goes against every bit of his character & the theme. 

I would add more but honestly what you said contains pretty much all the important counter arguments.

13 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

And then when he does finally admit to it its in a fit of anger and the motivation for doing so is to hurt someone. In that instance the anger is more important to him than denying the shame, he embraces being the monster.

Are you serious??? How about this, he pulls it right out of his arse in an attempt to kill Jaime

13 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

he embraces being the monster

You are actually half-right here about the half-man, he does at least desire to be the monster everyone think he is, as he can no longer live with all the hate, and self loathing (the last one especially because of Tysha, Shae and Tywin)

Quote

I did not do it. Yet now I wish that I had. ... I wish I had enough poison for you all, You make me sorry I am not the moster you would have me be, yet there it is.

.He isn't the monster and he didn't do all the things the pin on him, but now he wishes that he did.

13 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

His motivation is anger, he didn't like Joffrey, and Joffrey particularly humiliated him before his death.

Alright allow me to call bs on several things.

- The murder wasn't done in the heat of the moment, it was premeditated. Either that or Tyrion carried the strangler (which he probably didn't have regardless) around constantly just in case.

- Seeing as the murder was premeditated, how the beefs would Tyrion not think about it in any of the chapters before or during the wedding?

- Tyrion would not be stupid enough to do such a murder, at least not in this way.