Fire Cannot Kill a Dragon Book

[Ran]

GRRM noted that his distance from GoT was such that by the last season, he wasn't reading the scripts at all, wasn't involved in the season break downs, and was watching the episodes just like normal folks (except I guess for the premiere, which I think he attended). He did say he has a broad sense of the final plans (presumably from the discussions back after S3?), but whether his understanding of what was being conveyed to him matched his expectations, only George could say.

[Dalinar]

2 hours ago, SeanF said:

Did he play any part in the production after Season 4? You think Martin watched Season 8, and thought, these guys came up with a better ending? You seem quite confident you know his mind more than anyone else on this forum, after all.

I don't know his mind. And I don't know him. But I know that he was an executive producer there and the chances are pretty low that he does not know how the show will end. Not saying he knew the scripts. But he knew the broad storyline.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Cas Stark said:

Martin is eccentric, but he isn't stupid, it beggars belief that he would go on TV and do interviews praising the show for being faithful when he had NO IDEA what the show's ending was, when in fact, he gave it to them and they always said they would use it.   Additionally, of course, he's part of the production team even if only in name and still working with HBO, so I mean, why keep it secret from him?? It isn't an issue of knowing anyone's mind but of evaluating the existing evidence and statements and probabilities of how people normally behave and what is a reasonable take-away.  GRRM doing 60 Minutes praising the show when he had no idea of what the season that was already wrapped included is not among the reasonable take aways.

Man, you really have to think about this being a business. George is under contract with HBO and wants to make multiple new shows with them after GoT. Even if he were not bound by contract to not publicly deride the show ... it would be a stupid act to do so if he wants to continue to work with HBO.

Not to mention that George has gone on record repeatedly that he considers it very bad form to collect a shitload of money by selling your stuff and then bitch about the people who allowed you to make even more money.

1 hour ago, Cas Stark said:

Martin himself has praised some very questionable actions taken by the show in the past, such as saying he liked their version of the HookerWithTheHeartOfGold Shae better than his own.

I hang out with George and Sibel once, about five years ago, and he jokingly said that everybody liked Sibel's Shae much better than his own version who, as he put it, wasn't much of a character. And he is sort right there, you know (although I had a rather strong impulse to defend his Shae there). Shae is a pretty vapid creature in the books while Sibel's character actually had more of a story of her own.

But that doesn't mean that the way the Tyrion-Shae-Tywin story was better in the show than in the books - especially with the whole Tysha reveal being cut.

George generally seems to find the fact that a good chunk of his published novels was adapted rather faithfully to a very successful TV show to be quite an accomplishment.

He never went on record and said that AFfC/ADwD were faithfully adapted, nor did he ever say anything of substance as how he liked the parts of the show which covered unpublished and unwritten material.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Ran said:

GRRM noted that his distance from GoT was such that by the last season, he wasn't reading the scripts at all, wasn't involved in the season break downs, and was watching the episodes just like normal folks (except I guess for the premiere, which I think he attended). He did say he has a broad sense of the final plans (presumably from the discussions back after S3?), but whether his understanding of what was being conveyed to him matched his expectations, only George could say.

He seems to have cut his ties with the entire creative process after season 4 when the credits changed and he decided to stop writing scripts.

We all know how enthusiastic he was about the show back when the first season was made. And I think I've said it before that if he were even remotely as passionate about the project from season 4 onwards, if he had felt they were doing his story justice, he may used the show properly tell certain points of his story in television he would only have a chance to write in ADoS (or whatever will be the last volume of the series).

The show certainly was a curse in some sense, overtaking the books and all, but it could also have been a blessing if it had continued to be sort of a faithful adaptation allowing George to write certain high points for television he has been thinking about since the 90s. It could have been very great for him to script the Shireen sacrifice or the Hodor moment himself, considering he must have thought about those points since he first invented those characters.

That he decided to not do this tells us something implicitly about how he viewed the show. If he had still felt about the show the way he did in the start, he would have found the time to do this.

[Cas Stark]

16 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Man, you really have to think about this being a business. George is under contract with HBO and wants to make multiple new shows with them after GoT. Even if he were not bound by contract to not publicly deride the show ... it would be a stupid act to do so if he wants to continue to work with HBO.

Not to mention that George has gone on record repeatedly that he considers it very bad form to collect a shitload of money by selling your stuff and then bitch about the people who allowed you to make even more money.

I hang out with George and Sibel once, about five years ago, and he jokingly said that everybody liked Sibel's Shae much better than his own version who, as he put it, wasn't much of a character. And he is sort right there, you know (although I had a rather strong impulse to defend his Shae there). Shae is a pretty vapid creature in the books while Sibel's character actually had more of a story of her own.

But that doesn't mean that the way the Tyrion-Shae-Tywin story was better in the show than in the books - especially with the whole Tysha reveal being cut.

George generally seems to find the fact that a good chunk of his published novels was adapted rather faithfully to a very successful TV show to be quite an accomplishment.

He never went on record and said that AFfC/ADwD were faithfully adapted, nor did he ever say anything of substance as how he liked the parts of the show which covered unpublished and unwritten material.

I wish he was more focused on finishing his book series than making more HBO shows, but the fact remains that no once forced him to go on 60 Minutes and extol the show as a more faithful adaptation of his story than 97% of other adaptations.  He has always tried to play it cute with his deeply silly Scarlet O'Hara talking point, but that actually only re-enforces how similar the show and the books ended up, because the number of Scarlet's children is an irrelevant detail.

But, this is all just talk because we all know he's not ever going to finish the book series, GOT is the only ending anyone will ever have.

As for Shae, both Shae's were superficial stereotypical characters, but at least book Shae being a selfish hard hearted bitch is supported by the back story he gave her, show Shae, with the same back story, risking herself for Sansa, falling in love with her john, throwing away a bag of money for 'reasons' was completely unrealistic, and a trope.

[Lord Varys]

1 minute ago, Cas Stark said:

I wish he was more focused on finishing his book series than making more HBO shows, but the fact remains that no once forced him to go on 60 Minutes and extol the show as a more faithful adaptation of his story than 97% of other adaptations.  He has always tried to play it cute with his deeply silly Scarlet O'Hara talking point, but that actually only re-enforces how similar the show and the books ended up, because the number of Scarlet's children is an irrelevant detail.

But he is right there, you know. GoT is a very faithful adaptation compared to 97% of other adaptations. That is a true statement. It is your decision to interpret this as him praising the show.

And you can even say that show and books have pretty much the same ending in the sense of the villains being defeated, humanity being saved, and some good guys surviving. On a structural level a completely different ending would be the Others winning, monarchy being replaced by democracy or a people's republic, the Hrangans invading, etc.

1 minute ago, Cas Stark said:

But, this is all just talk because we all know he's not ever going to finish the book series, GOT is the only ending anyone will ever have.

As I said in the other post - if this were the case (and the risk is there, of course) then George deciding to not focus on the show during the later seasons is a telltale sign that he didn't want to do that because he felt the show sucked.

1 minute ago, Cas Stark said:

As for Shae, both Shae's were superficial stereotypical characters, but at least book Shae being a selfish hard hearted bitch is supported by the back story he gave her, show Shae, with the same back story, risking herself for Sansa, falling in love with her john, throwing away a bag of money for 'reasons' was completely unrealistic, and a trope.

Book Shae is a traumatized young woman forced into prostitution by her own father, causing her to make very ugly comments directed at Lollys. However, we do not know what book Shae felt for Tyrion. The idea that she actually loved him or was fond of him isn't that far-fetched considering how she reacted immediately before Tyrion strangled her. She didn't seem to view her testimony as a deep betrayal but a role she had to play to survive. Her talk about being afraid of Tywin doesn't seem to be lies.

The show could have given TV Shae the same kind of role there. The problem wasn't her character, it was how Tyrion's character and the Tysha backstory were changed.

[Cas Stark]

I read that scene entirely differently, that she was still trying to play him, and this is what sent him into the murderous rage and why he killed her.  I had never had any inkling that Shae had any feelings for Tyrion at all in the book.

It would have been nice of the book had actually lent some insight onto such things as what really caused GRRM to pull out of the show, what were the issues, incidents, etc. that caused what seems to be some level at least of 'bad blood' what ratio of D/D arrogance and assholery to GRRM pedantic obsessions with irrelevant issues, etc.  That would have been enlightening, as would the real nuts and bolts of how the two showrunners somehow churned out the most popular show on the planet while not having many tangible managerial skills or TV experience.  Instead, we got a lot of not very important details and not much substance.

 

[Lord Varys]

42 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

I read that scene entirely differently, that she was still trying to play him, and this is what sent him into the murderous rage and why he killed her.  I had never had any inkling that Shae had any feelings for Tyrion at all in the book.

Her feelings are not clear. Which is a problem for her character because it is not developed to the point that we see her independent of Tyrion's warped incel-freak mind.

The problem of the show is that Dinklage never properly played Tyrion Lannister as a character. It is not Shae's character but the nonexistence of Tyrion's incel issues, his misogyny and capability/tendency to rape and murder if they 'disappoint him' or do not caper to his whims.

And that's an issue with the writing. Dinklage might not look like George's ugly Imp, but insecurities are subjective. It would have been not that hard to write and play Tyrion the way the character actually is.

42 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

It would have been nice of the book had actually lent some insight onto such things as what really caused GRRM to pull out of the show, what were the issues, incidents, etc. that caused what seems to be some level at least of 'bad blood' what ratio of D/D arrogance and assholery to GRRM pedantic obsessions with irrelevant issues, etc.  That would have been enlightening, as would the real nuts and bolts of how the two showrunners somehow churned out the most popular show on the planet while not having many tangible managerial skills or TV experience.  Instead, we got a lot of not very important details and not much substance.

Well, that thing is more or less promotional material written by a journalist with access to the crew and producers, not investigative journalism.

One could also imagine that George didn't really want to work closely with people who wanted Davos to perv Missandei and other such crap.

[SeanF]

I think I would take @Ran’s comment as being as definitive as anyone who is not George himself can be.

[Dalinar]

What do you guys think of the ending of Jamie and Cersei? You think it will have the same pointless ending as in the show?

[SeanF]

13 minutes ago, Dalinar said:

What do you guys think of the ending of Jamie and Cersei? You think it will have the same pointless ending as in the show?

Well, I think Jaime has broken with Cersei for good.  There won’t be the same desperation to back to her.  Nor do I expect him to destroy his backstory, by saying he never cared about the people of Kings Landing.

[Le Cygne]

I put a bunch of quotes from GRRM and Benioff/Weiss about how the ending of the books and show will be different here:

 

[Cas Stark]

18 hours ago, Dalinar said:

What do you guys think of the ending of Jamie and Cersei? You think it will have the same pointless ending as in the show?

I doubt they die wordless with bricks falling on their heads, but I would imagine they probably  die together and that there is somehow, presumably, going to be a twist of some sort to the prophecy.  I was never totally sold on Jamie's redemption, but I'm still inclined to believe that its more likely he kills his sister to stop more genocide than that he does a full reversal and goes back to her like he did in the show...although I didn't dislike that decision as much as others, in RL, many people seek redemption but ultimately fail and fall back. 

[Dalinar]

2 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

I doubt they die wordless with bricks falling on their heads, but I would imagine they probably  die together and that there is somehow, presumably, going to be a twist of some sort to the prophecy.  I was never totally sold on Jamie's redemption, but I'm still inclined to believe that its more likely he kills his sister to stop more genocide than that he does a full reversal and goes back to her like he did in the show...although I didn't dislike that decision as much as others, in RL, many people seek redemption but ultimately fail and fall back. 

I agree there with you. A redemtion arc can also be interesting (maybe even more interesting) if it is a failed redemption arc. Important is how it is told. I mean you can not tell it worse than the show. Most of us - myself included - just thought that Jamie will die a heroic death by killing Cersei. But if we assume for a second, that what happend in the show might happen in the books, that changes the whole prophecy storytelling. 

[Rose of Red Lake]

On 10/18/2020 at 7:49 AM, Cas Stark said:

I doubt they die wordless with bricks falling on their heads, but I would imagine they probably  die together and that there is somehow, presumably, going to be a twist of some sort to the prophecy. 

The twist was that Maegor was Aeneys’s little brother and his holdfast is what choked the life out of her.

[The Bard of Banefort]

On 10/19/2020 at 10:15 PM, Rose of Red Lake said:

The twist was that Maegor was Aeneys’s little brother and his holdfast is what choked the life out of her.

That would be the greatest troll move from GRRM ever, and for that reason alone, I hope it's true. 

[Jay21]

On 10/7/2020 at 5:46 AM, Lord Varys said:

Interesting to see that George really wants to play around with time travel/time warp stuff in ASoIaF. I'd be surprised if 'Hold the Door' was the only context in which that plot is going to be explored. The man did write 'Unsound Variations', after all.

The way the abomination sat Varys' conversation with the red priestess about the voice in the flames amongst the 'hold the door' scenes got me wondering if it wasn't Varys himself that she was intimating was the source of the voice, not Rhollor

. The show was kind of just freestyling by then so I don't know how much weight to put on something that may or may not have been intentionally in there, but it struck me that Varys could have been setting events in motion from some time in the not too distant future and may in fact require that his own young balls get torched in order to get it done.  The guy that cut young Varys was working for old Varys and with any luck we'll get to see the look on his face when he realizes he's about to give the order.

[Wicked Woodpecker of West]

Quote

Yeah, and if I had known all that....the history of unfinished stories and the terrible, nihilistic, tragic endings I probably wouldn't have ever picked up GOT in the first place

I deeply disagree GRRM writing is nihilistic, and tragic and terrible yes, often yes, but from that to nihilistic there's a long long way.
(Also in terms of unfinished stories - Tuf Voyaging is series of short stories - so it's not ASOIAF case really, there were like stand alones film about one hero, not some strict one narrative, so lack of definite ending is not a bad thing).

 

Quote

But what's also clear to me is that the show ending as such - meaning political nonsense as the grand finale - won't happen. Jon and Dany and many other people might die, but if they do, it will be in the fight against the Others, their minions, or crucial mad dark lord characters like Euron-Cersei-Qyburn, but we won't get a story where mundane childish politics serve as an epilogue to the final battle between good and evil.

That I doubt Lord Varys. I mean I'm quite sure main event will be long and complicated struggle to avert Apocalypse (although I'd not call it battle between good and evil - because really for that we need more data), but overall it's quite often epic stories have mundane epilogues, and in terms of GRRM it's not uncommon in his stories - that terrible revelation and struggle against some nightmarish disaster won't change human nature at all, and just as soon as monsters shall die, struggle to be the winner of aftermatch shall start.
See "In the House of Worm" when main hero changed profoundly after discovering true nature of his world and society, yet overall he is unable to change a world as whole.

So I'd say 50:50 chances for Apocalypse being big enough to annule chance of mundane dirty epilogue.

 

Quote

but the story and the characters are what the audience is invested in, not the final battle against an enemy with no POV.

And that's audience mistake. GRRM warned you in book one "Gods save us, boy, you’re not blind and you’re not stupid. When dead men come hunting in the night, do you think it matters who sits the Iron Throne?”

 

Quote

 

D&D always portrayed Daenerys' violence as female empowerment and they're full of sh*t to claim otherwise. They absolutely led the audience to believe that Dany was a hero by taking out her enemies, and those of us who thought she was cruel were considered killjoys or, God forbid, bad feminists 

But then on the other hand - Dany in books is not shown as particularly more cruel than anyone of main heroes. Definitely not Insane-Murderer-Cruel, though some of her actions are well bad and overly vindictive. 
 

Quote

But then - as I asked repeatedly: Does anybody think Shireen can burn in TWoW if her sacrifice revolved around Others business and a severe threat?

I think sever threat from Others can be quicker than we think. Or Melisandre's gonna exagerate thing a lot.

 

Quote

I'd only be surprised if he had a proper seat. He will be a living god and would have no need whatsoever to allow his subjects-worshippers to look on his frail and broken human body. He would be everywhere and could make his voice heard and obeyed without even possessing other people.

But would he? Unlike TV-series where Bran is basically omniscient and can see anything - in books powers of even powerful greenseers seems to be limited to weirwood-net-records, and enthralled beasts, eventually humans.
But Bran's power would have to go like literally thousands levels of magnitude above Brynden, to really use it as a terror machine.


 

Quote

That question is totally moot considering we can now be reasonably sure that the Dany ending is not one of the three big moments the morons took from the books.

I think all D&D get from GRRM was that "Jon will have to kill Daenerys". I doubt it will be simmilar overall aside of who stabs who in the end.

 

Quote

If the evil red witch did it all by herself it would be much weaker as a plot point. Especially since Melisandre is, according to George, actually not that bad a person. 

Of course book Mel is not a bad person. Still she is person who would sacrifice Shireen if she believed it's necessary. Without much of second thought - even if it was unpleasant experience and made her sad. Now I agree Stannis doing it would be more interesting - as we see Stannis for most part sceptical, utilitarian towards Mel powers, putting Westeros Law above her religious shenaningans, even when we see him last time - he is willing to put to sacrifice only people who are basically guilty of capital crime who should be executed anyway. So his cold, Lawful Neutral personality being maybe not corrupted by crushed by oncoming events would give strong story.

But I'd not mind if Melisandre would burn Sheeren to ressurect Jon Snow, as she seems to get in her visions that Jon is more and more important.
And then it would work - which would be really really dark, and would leave Jon and Stannis in quite interesting situation, especially Jon knowing he can live only due to sacrificing of little child.

Both are fine for me. Second was more probable till those news - as it seems GRRM does not have enough time and place to start moving Stannis across enitre North to do it.

 

Quote

I hang out with George and Sibel once, about five years ago, and he jokingly said that everybody liked Sibel's Shae much better than his own version who, as he put it, wasn't much of a character. And he is sort right there, you know (although I had a rather strong impulse to defend his Shae there). Shae is a pretty vapid creature in the books while Sibel's character actually had more of a story of her own.

But then makin shallow characters DEEPER is IMHO... poor storytelling. In case of Shae it only added artificial pointless drama.
If she was just adding more mysterious courtesane rather than teen whore vibe like in Season 1 - she would seem more attractive to viewers without drastic change of personality and modus operandi, merely panache.

Some people - many people in RL are shallow, many real people are not nuanced.
Making such characters deeper usually is bad for a story. (Just like with Cersei)
 

Quote

Not to mention that George has gone on record repeatedly that he considers it very bad form to collect a shitload of money by selling your stuff and then bitch about the people who allowed you to make even more money.

Same with Sapkowski who refused to comment on Netflix "Witcher" in details, saying he cannot criticise adaptation as it has his name on cover, and he won't point his favoured elements for the same reason.

 

Quote

Her feelings are not clear. Which is a problem for her character because it is not developed to the point that we see her independent of Tyrion's warped incel-freak mind.

The problem of the show is that Dinklage never properly played Tyrion Lannister as a character. It is not Shae's character but the nonexistence of Tyrion's incel issues, his misogyny and capability/tendency to rape and murder if they 'disappoint him' or do not caper to his whims.

I mean that's sounds bit overexaggerated overall. Tyrion has his issues but him going to the dark side is in large way caused by trauma we experienced - though it's shame D&D whitewashed DwD Tyrion in most blatant way. Before that I'd not call him someone who murder women for not capering to his whims. Even in DwD it seems weakening with time.

(Now of course part should be there from the get go - low self-esteem, seeking girlfriend experience, it was all telling elements),

 

Quote

That would be the greatest troll move from GRRM ever, and for that reason alone, I hope it's true. 

 

I'd totally like to see valonqar as neither Tyrion or Jaime. (Although Tyrion would still be better than Jaime). But Maegor the Cruel is bit too much.
Make it Rickon. Or Loras. Or Trystane. Or Blackfish. Or Theon. Or Euron.

[outfast]

On 10/7/2020 at 11:58 AM, SeanF said:

Had she simply flown for the Red Keep, and torched Cersei (along with the soldiers and human shields) it would have made far better narrative sense.  And that would have been the comparison with Aegon's torching Harrenhall.  It might be considered as horrible, but frankly, no different to the behaviour of any modern commander.

Jon killed her, because he feared for Sansa, Arya, and Bran.  My suspicion is that D & D realised, at a late stage, that torching the Red Keep and saving the Stark siblings would not be considered sufficient justification for him to kill her, so they had her swerve away from the Red Keep to massacre people at random.

Except the fact that practically ever since we were introduced to Dany [on her own, after her brother’s demise), she has threatened over and over and over and over to burn entire cities to the ground, women, children, pets, livestock, stick and stone “to the ground”.  SHE CONSTANTLY threatens and seems to fantasize about genocide has entire ancient and proud civil actions into

the dirt.  Anyone who didn’t see King’s Landing burning to the ground wasn’t paying attention or didn’t wanna see it coming.  It was so crustal clear and constantly shoved into the audience’s face that Dany was and ALWAYS WAS a villain and he most dangerous threat to innocent life in the entirety of Essos and Westeros to appear in centuries, at least since her ancestor Aegon cleansed and conquered an innocent continent of any resistance in fire and blood.

[SeanF]

On 12/22/2020 at 12:00 AM, outfast said:

Except the fact that practically ever since we were introduced to Dany [on her own, after her brother’s demise), she has threatened over and over and over and over to burn entire cities to the ground, women, children, pets, livestock, stick and stone “to the ground”.  SHE CONSTANTLY threatens and seems to fantasize about genocide has entire ancient and proud civil actions into

the dirt.  Anyone who didn’t see King’s Landing burning to the ground wasn’t paying attention or didn’t wanna see it coming.  It was so crustal clear and constantly shoved into the audience’s face that Dany was and ALWAYS WAS a villain and he most dangerous threat to innocent life in the entirety of Essos and Westeros to appear in centuries, at least since her ancestor Aegon cleansed and conquered an innocent continent of any resistance in fire and blood.

You’re giving D & D far too much credit.  They certainly did not portray her as villainous, prior to Season 8, whatever they may now claim.  We can all go back to Inside the Episodes where they said she was heroic.

I don’t subscribe to the view that slave drivers and rapists were innocents who fell victim to her bloodlust, and that therefore it was obvious she would slaughter women and children.  To do so just lets D & D off the hook for their poor  story-telling.