The winds of winter predictions

[Mister Smikes]

47 minutes ago, StarksInTheNorth said:

Did you even bother to read the rest of my post, or did you decide to jump straight to condescension?

Yes.  I read the rest of your post.  And I did not see the point of any of it.  But I guess it depends on what you are trying to prove.

What are you trying to prove, anyway?

And I read the rest of this post too.  And I agree that GRRM made the wall too high.  But by no logic that I can see does it prove to me that he can't count past 10, or that BryndenBFish and $erPounce know more about the book he is writing than he does.

[Mister Smikes]

3 hours ago, StarksInTheNorth said:

if we go by the rigid numbers set in your initial post re 13 POVs, It could very well be 11 confirmed, since we also know that there will be a prologue that shows Jeyne Westerling. F

GRRM does not include prologue and epilogue in his POV counts.  His count for ADWD was 16 POVs.

Quote

We also know Davos is semi-confirmed because of multiple comments that we will see unicorns, and he’s the POV known to be heading to Skaagos where there are unicorns.

GRRM never said we would see unicorns in TWOW.  Check the sources yourself and see. 

Even if he did (he didn't) that would not mean we would see them from Davos' POV.

Even if we saw them, it might only when Davos returns to Westeros, riding a unicorn, in another character's POV.

That said, I'm not ruling out a Davos POV in TWOW.   I just don't think that the total POVs will be too far off from GRRM 13 POV estimate.

Quote

Asha is semi-confirmed since we have seen a screenshot of a page narrated by her, and he was “visiting” her in 2020.

The only screenshot I know of is illegible to my eyes, and I don't have any faith in the magical powers of the fan who claimed to decipher it.

But if Asha can be deemed confirmed on the basis of GRRM "visiting" her, then that makes it (to my mind) all the less likely we will see Sam and/or Brienne and/or Jaime.  Which was my original point.

Quote

He’s also stated there’s a complementary chapter between Arianne II and III,

A Hotah chapter, maybe.

Quote

and that’s he’s decided to show the battle of Storms End on page.

Could be a prologue chapter featuring a one-off.

Quote

JonCon is the only POV 100 leagues from Storms End, so we can consider him confirmed  

Sure.  "Confirmed" by you and Mr. Fish.  But not confirmed by GRRM.

Quote

There, 13 POVs. Guess we’re not going to see Bran or Dany, but who cares? It’s not like they’re important to the plot, anyway. Or maybe 13 was an off-the-cuff number thrown out because he didn’t feel like counting how many POVs there are. 

Even if I give you Cersei, Asha and Hotah on the basis of GRRM "visiting" them, plus the 8 confirmed Sample Chapter POVs, that only brings us to 11. 

But for the sake of argument, lets assume 13 POVs are confirmed.  And let's assume we can't do without Dany and Bran (which is not self evident to me, especially in Bran's case, though I am slightly more confident we will see a Dany POV).  That brings us to 15.  15 is still closer to GRRM's guestimate than 16, 17, or 18 POVs would be.

Which means that GRRM's guestimate is still evidence against us seeing POVs for Sam, Jaime and/or Brienne.

I can see GRRM's guestimate being off by 1.  I can see (though it is more of a stretch) his estimate being off by 2.  But if you stretch it to 16, 17 or 18 because GURM is stupid, can't count, and you can't trust that crazy GURM, and because you think that Mr. Fish knows more about GURM's book than stupid GURM does, the less sense you will make to me.  And if you are really right about Bran and Dany being essential, then that (to my mind) makes it all the less likely that we will see Sam and/or Jaime and/or Brienne.  Which, again, was my original point:  that GRRM's 13-pov estimate kinda weighs against Sam, Brienne or Jaime appearing as POVs, and especially against all 3 appearing as POVs.

[Daenerysthegreat]

2 hours ago, StarksInTheNorth said:

 

There, 13 POVs. Guess we’re not going to see Bran or Dany, but who cares? It’s not like they’re important to the plot, anyway. Or maybe 13 was an off-the-cuff number thrown out because he didn’t feel like counting how many POVs there are. 

Dany and bran are the two most important characters. We need to have them. I highly doubt that is going to change. 

[StarksInTheNorth]

34 minutes ago, Daenerysthegreat said:

Dany and bran are the two most important characters. We need to have them. I highly doubt that is going to change. 

My comment was sarcasm.

[WhatAnArtist!]

Considering that Martin is well known for his extensive rewrites of his books, I'm surprised that people here are sticking so dogmatically to the believe that what he said in this interview or that is gospel and something that he will strictly adhere to. The guy has practically rewritten entire books and restructured the series in the past, midway through writing a book. Why is it so hard to believe that at some point he'll have changed his mind about how many PoVs will be included in Winds?

1 hour ago, Mister Smikes said:

Which missed by a mile of course.

Only to people unable to read things carefully, it seems. I picked up on it instantly. Only someone that hasn't read the books would say that Dany and Bran aren't important. 

[Daenerysthegreat]

39 minutes ago, WhatAnArtist! said:

 

Only to people unable to read things carefully, it seems. I picked up on it instantly. Only someone that hasn't read the books would say that Dany and Bran aren't important. 

You don't know how many people I've met here. Some believe in the most ridiculous theories. 

40 minutes ago, WhatAnArtist! said:

Considering that Martin is well known for his extensive rewrites of his books, I'm surprised that people here are sticking so dogmatically to the believe that what he said in this interview or that is gospel and something that he will strictly adhere to. The guy has practically rewritten entire books and restructured the series in the past, midway through writing a book. Why is it so hard to believe that at some point he'll have changed his mind about how many PoVs will be included in Winds? 

I think he has added more pov than reducing them. I'm thinking about one of the two sand snakes in kings landing

[Mister Smikes]

1 hour ago, WhatAnArtist! said:

Only to people unable to read things carefully, it seems. I picked up on it instantly. Only someone that hasn't read the books would say that Dany and Bran aren't important. 

Are you insinuating I have taken the position that Dany and Bran aren't important?  Or are you accusing me of not having read the books?

Okay, maybe his sarcasm did not miss by a mile, seeing as it has convinced you I said things I never said.

[Mister Smikes]

1 hour ago, WhatAnArtist! said:

Considering that Martin is well known for his extensive rewrites of his books, I'm surprised that people here are sticking so dogmatically to the believe that what he said in this interview or that is gospel and something that he will strictly adhere to.

I don't think any person here has taken such a position.

[Mister Smikes]

48 minutes ago, Daenerysthegreat said:

I think he has added more pov than reducing them. I'm thinking about one of the two sand snakes in kings landing

Surely Cersei's POV suffices for the murder of her children by evil Sand Snakes.

[Daenerysthegreat]

36 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

Surely Cersei's POV suffices for the murder of her children by evil Sand Snakes.

But cersei has lost all her power. She is now reduced to nothing. She is planned to be sent back to casterly rock if she wins. 

And the sand snakes are not evil

[Mister Smikes]

10 minutes ago, Daenerysthegreat said:

But cersei has lost all her power. She is now reduced to nothing. She is planned to be sent back to casterly rock if she wins. 

The guy who was planning that just got offed by Varys, who I guess thinks Kings Landing more vulnerable to invasion with unstable Cersei in charge.  And Cersei does have Ser Gregor.

Quote

And the sand snakes are not evil

Wanna bet?  I think they are about to murder children, and especially Tommen.  How many dead children would be enough for you to suspect they are maybe a bit evil?

[Sigh]  It takes the fun out of betting, when it will probably take another 5 years. 

[WhatAnArtist!]

3 hours ago, Daenerysthegreat said:

I'm thinking about one of the two sand snakes in kings landing

I would be very surprised if Martin added any new PoVs, and even if some were to be added, I highly doubt it'll be a Sand Snake. We already have Cersei's PoV in King's Landing, and we will soon have two that are nearby (JonCon and Arianne in the Stormlands). 

3 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Are you insinuating I have taken the position that Dany and Bran aren't important?  Or are you accusing me of not having read the books?

Okay, maybe his sarcasm did not miss by a mile, seeing as it has convinced you I said things I never said.

You said that @StarksInTheNorth's sarcasm about Dany and Bran being unimportant "missed by a mile". I said that it didn't, since I picked it up immediately. I implied that you hadn't read his comment carefully enough, if you thought he wasn't being sarcastic, since anyone claiming that Dany and Bran are unimportant obviously hadn't read the books, which surely isn't the case for anyone posting here.

 

2 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

I don't think any person here has taken such a position.

This entire argument has been about exactly how many PoVs will be in Winds based on claims that Martin has made. My point was that it's futile to debate such things, since Martin constantly changes his plans and rewrites his books. He may have said there'll be 13 PoVs a while ago, but that could change any time. We won't know until we have the books in our hands.

2 hours ago, Daenerysthegreat said:

And the sand snakes are not evil

Yes they are. They want to murder innocent children and start a war which will kill many other innocent people. The people actually responsible for the crimes they want "justice" for are already dead. They just have a bloodlust.

[Mister Smikes]

2 hours ago, WhatAnArtist! said:

This entire argument has been about exactly how many PoVs will be in Winds based on claims that Martin has made. My point was that it's futile to debate such things, since Martin constantly changes his plans and rewrites his books. He may have said there'll be 13 PoVs a while ago, but that could change any time. We won't know until we have the books in our hands.

Nobody said "exactly" except the people trying to straw man my position.  There is a middle ground between claiming, on the one hand that 13 POVs has no margin of error and is engraved in stone forever; and claiming, on the other hand, that it is completely meaningless information because GRRM is a big fat stupid who knows less about his own book than we fans do.

Margin of error or no, GRRMs statement to Le Nouvel Observateur indicates he is planning a different sort of book than many fans are planning for him.  And that remains true even if the POV count ends up being 15, exclusive of prologue and epilogue.

[$erPounce]

14 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

BBFish's leaps of logic extend far far beyond not considering GRRM changing his mind.

I admit, BryndenBFish does sometimes have leaps in logic in certain essays he writes, for example he has confirmation bias in the essay in which he wants to prove that the Battle of Bastards from the show will also happen in the books. Many of his essays are more or less "informed speculation" and it is quite possible that some of his findings will turn out to be wrong

However, none of that applies in his overview of The Winds of Winter. It is pretty much just a recap of everything George R. R. Martin said about The Winds of Winter over the years. The vast majority of what is mentioned in the article comes directly from his NotABlog, interviews with newspapers or Westeros.org's own So Spake Martin. Objective information, in other words.

Quote

You can't trust that crazy GURM - trust us, the enlightened and orthodox fan community" seems a common attitude on these forums.
I'm not saying GRRMs statement was not a bit tentative.  But I'll trust GRRM tentative estimate of 13 POVs before I will trust $erPounce's absolute certainty of 18-20 POVs.  And if it ends up being off, I would expect it to be off by maybe 1 or 2 POVs, not 5-7 POVs.
The odds of a translation error seem minimal.  Le Nouvel Observateur is not an amateur outfit.

I didn't say you can't trust George, I'm saying that in the interview he temporarily underestimated how many POVs he has. It's nothing more than a small human error that is very understandable due to the pressure of the interview. Try counting all the POVs from FeastDance by memory, odds are you'll forget a few POVs.

And before you insinuate that I have claimed that George can't count, George has misstated before in interviews how many living POVs he has after the end of FeastDance:

People complain that the Dothraki are this one-dimensional barbarian society.
GRRM:    I haven't had a Dothraki viewpoint character though.
I guess it's too late to introduce one now.
GRRM:    I could introduce a Dothraki viewpoint character, but I already have like sixteen viewpoint characters. (…) (source)

One interview mentions 13 POVs, another mentions 16 POVs. FeastDance ends up with 20 living POVs.

You can easily doubt that of the 13 POVs, because George has already confirmed a larger number of POVs than that number:

1. Aeron (TWOW Preview chapter)
2. Arianne (TWOW Preview chapters)
3. Arya (TWOW Preview chapter)
4. Barristan (TWOW Preview Chapters)
5. Sansa (TWOW Preview Chapter)
6. Theon (TWOW Preview Chapter)
7. Tyrion (TWOW Preview Chapters)
8. Victarion (TWOW Preview Chapter)
9. Areo (NotABlog,)
10.  Asha (NotABlog)
11. Cersei (NotABlog)
12. Melisandre (NotABlog)
13. Samwell (NotABlog)

These are all the POV that have been fully confirmed on his NotABlog. Furthermore, we have clear indications of other POVs, although not 100% confirmed:

•  Davos. George has said several times that we are going to have unicorns in TWOW. As well as "no sex near unicorns". Although not fully confirmed, we can assume in that case that we will have a Davos POV in Skagos. (Source 1, Source 2)
• Jon Connington: George said at a Worldcon that he plans to bring the Battle of Storm's End on-page. (A battle on the battlefield will not be narrated by Arianne, who will not be present on site, but by an experienced commander such as Jon Connington. Seems logical).
• Bran: George R. R. Martin plans for Hodor's death to happen on-page and that is only possible from Bran's POV.

GRRM: "I thought they executed it very well, but there are going to be differences in the book. They did it very physically - 'hold the door' with Hodor's strength. In the book, Hodor has stolen one of the old swords from the crypt. Bran has been warging into Hodor and practicing with his body, because Bran had been trained in swordplay. So telling Hodor to 'hold the door' is more like 'hold this pass' - defend it when enemies are coming - and Hodor is fighting and killing them. A little different, but same idea." (Source: book "Fire Cannot Kill A Dragon)

So we already have thirteen characters that are 100% confirmed. We have three characters for whom there are clear indications in George's own interviews that they will likely get a POV. In addition, it is very unlikely that characters like Daenerys and Jon Snow will not get a POV (although it is possible).

Remarkably, Brienne and Jaime are not confirmed yet, but I would be surprised if neither of these two will have a POV in TWOW.  
Based on George's NotABlog and other interviews, we can rule out that TWOW will only have 13 POVs. (Almost) every living POV from FeastDance will make an appearance in TWOW. That one interview of 13 POVs contradicts other interviews and sources.

Quote

I guess people will just have to travel about, and/or receive ravens, or discuss sailors rumors.

It can be done, if worked out properly. But should there be just 13 POVs in TWOW (which is actually disproven), there is a lot of off-screen information that needs to be covered in this way. Overuse of these techniques is not ideal, but it is obviously an option.

Quote

Entire complex novels have been written from a single POV.  But somehow the fan community has convinced itself that you can't possibly tell a story with "only" 13 POVs.  Bizarre.

Bad argument. There are of course books with one POV. It's perfectly possible for most books (and you could probably write all of TWOW completely just from Bran's POV if you wanted to). But that doesn't mean The Winds of Winter should do the same. The book is simply different from other books and requires a specific approach, fitting in with the story the book is telling.

I don't see any necessity for a large amount of POVs from FeastDance not to appear in TWOW. It is perfectly feasible for George to have more than 13 POVs in a book. I don't see a problem that can only be solved by reducing the number of POVs in TWOW to 13. There are probably more efficient and less drastic solutions than that.

Quote

It depends on where you think these storylines are going.

It is clear based on your post that you have a very different view of where the story is going and the relevance of certain storylines. I am of the opinion that the story arcs of many characters are not yet complete, but apparently you disagree.

[WhatAnArtist!]

2 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Nobody said "exactly" except the people trying to straw man my position.  There is a middle ground between claiming, on the one hand that 13 POVs has no margin of error and is engraved in stone forever; and claiming, on the other hand, that it is completely meaningless information because GRRM is a big fat stupid who knows less about his own book than we fans do.

Margin of error or no, GRRMs statement to Le Nouvel Observateur indicates he is planning a different sort of book than many fans are planning for him.

I tire of this already. It's clear you seem to relish in this type of argument, hence why you seem unwilling to call a truce here and accept the obvious: This is a pointless debate, because any one of us could be entirely correct or entirely incorrect about everything. Even Martin's own statements aren't even a guarantee of accuracy, since the man has repeatedly over the last two decades rewritten large chunks of the books and restructured the PoVs drastically in the process of writing them. This pointless argument is just a symptom of the extraoardinarily long wait for Winds; nobody would sit here arguing semantics and the difference between one or two PoVs if the wait hadn't been as long as it is. You and @$erPounce can continue this argument for months and it won't matter - not until we actually have the book in our hands and can count up the number of PoVs.

[Mister Smikes]

5 hours ago, WhatAnArtist! said:

I tire of this already. It's clear you seem to relish in this type of argument, hence why you seem unwilling to call a truce here and accept the obvious: This is a pointless debate, because any one of us could be entirely correct or entirely incorrect about everything. Even Martin's own statements aren't even a guarantee of accuracy, since the man has repeatedly over the last two decades rewritten large chunks of the books and restructured the PoVs drastically in the process of writing them. This pointless argument is just a symptom of the extraoardinarily long wait for Winds; nobody would sit here arguing semantics and the difference between one or two PoVs if the wait hadn't been as long as it is. You and @$erPounce can continue this argument for months and it won't matter - not until we actually have the book in our hands and can count up the number of PoVs.

You don't owe me your time.  You don't have to engage.  You say you are tired of arguing, and then proceed to argue anyway.  I suppose if I respond to your points you will feel ill used?  Never mind.  I will respond to $erPounce, and you don't need to be interested.  Fair?

[Mister Smikes]

14 hours ago, $erPounce said:

I admit, BryndenBFish does sometimes have leaps in logic in certain essays he writes, for example he has confirmation bias in the essay in which he wants to prove that the Battle of Bastards from the show will also happen in the books. Many of his essays are more or less "informed speculation" and it is quite possible that some of his findings will turn out to be wrong.

However, none of that applies in his overview of The Winds of Winter. It is pretty much just a recap of everything George R. R. Martin said about The Winds of Winter over the years.

I'm not interested in an ad-hominem discussion of the faults or lack thereof of Mr. Fish.  My position is merely that many of the POVs and other information he claims as "confirmed" are not in fact "confirmed" IMHO.  We can move on to the specifics without any unnecessary discussion on how this does or does not reflect on Mr. Fish.

Quote

And before you insinuate that I have claimed that George can't count, George has misstated before in interviews how many living POVs he has after the end of FeastDance:

Well, I guess I don't need to insinuate anything, do I?  Okay, let's move on to your latest proof that GRRM can't count and knows nothing about his own book:

Quote

People complain that the Dothraki are this one-dimensional barbarian society.
GRRM:    I haven't had a Dothraki viewpoint character though.
I guess it's too late to introduce one now.
GRRM:    I could introduce a Dothraki viewpoint character, but I already have like sixteen viewpoint characters. (…) (source)

One interview mentions 13 POVs, another mentions 16 POVs. FeastDance ends up with 20 living POVs.

He has 16 POVs remaining (give or take a POV or 2), anticipates 13 POVs in TWOW (give or take a POV or 2).  All of which is perfectly consistent with my flexible approach to his words; and may suggest the possibility that one, two or three POVs may take a book long hiatus before they reappear in A Dream of Spring.

You say GRRM is obviously wrong (even allowing a reasonable margin of error of 1 or 2 POVs) because (according to you) he has 20 POVs (a count that leaves off Eddard, Catelyn, Arys and Quentyn).  But wait a minute.  Was not Jon assassinated?  Was not Brienne hanged?  Was has not Jaime been missing for weeks after someone with a mission to slay him lured him off into the woods?   And was not Sam being "put to bed" by a faceless assassin?   Aside from these "cliffhanger 4", there's also Mel and JonCon, who may have been introduced for a limited purpose, and GRRM may be done with them in his own mind.   Which leaves room for 1 or 2 of the "cliffhanger 4" to turn out to be alive in POV chapters in WINDS (and again, they could appear in the POVs of other characters in WINDS, or have their POV resume in  DREAMS).    And if we allow GRRM's estimates to be off by a reasonable 1 or 2 POVs, it could be that all 4 of the "cliffhanger 4" will later turn up in POV chapters. 

Quote

You can easily doubt that of the 13 POVs, because George has already confirmed a larger number of POVs than that number:

1. Aeron (TWOW Preview chapter)
2. Arianne (TWOW Preview chapters)
3. Arya (TWOW Preview chapter)
4. Barristan (TWOW Preview Chapters)
5. Sansa (TWOW Preview Chapter)
6. Theon (TWOW Preview Chapter)
7. Tyrion (TWOW Preview Chapters)
8. Victarion (TWOW Preview Chapter)

These are confirmed, yes

Quote

1. Areo (NotABlog,)
2.  Asha (NotABlog)
3. Cersei (NotABlog)

I would call these maybe semi-confirmed.  That "visiting with" necessarily implies "POV chapter" is maybe not an unreasonable inference, but it is not 100% to me.  I think with Cersei he may have actually referenced a "Cersei chapter" IIRC, which is a bit clearer, though it would be even clearer if he said he had actually finished it.

Quote

1. Melisandre (NotABlog)
2. Samwell (NotABlog)

Maybe you posted the wrong link?  The only thing this has is a "visiting Oldtown" reference, which does not to my mind confirm any Sam chapter, and there is no reference to Melisandre at all.

Maybe you're thinking of this:

Back in Westeros | Not a Blog (georgerrmartin.com)

Anyhow, if you're referring to what I think, "spending the days in Westeros with my pals Mel and Sam and Vic and Ty" is too ambiguous for me.  Is not Ty the actual name of one of his writing assistants?  Maybe Sam is helping him with a Mel chapter, and Ty his helping him with a Vic chapter.  And does "spending time" necessarily mean "writing a POV chapter for"?   And maybe Sam met Mel in Mel's POV, or in Sam's POV; or Sam (or Fake Sam) showed up in Meereen in Vic's POV, or maybe Tyrion flew his dragon to Oldtown, picked up Sam or Fake Sam, and flew him to the Wall to see Mel, etc., etc.

Quote

These are all the POV that have been fully confirmed on his NotABlog. Furthermore, we have clear indications of other POVs, although not 100% confirmed:

•  Davos. George has said several times that we are going to have unicorns in TWOW. As well as "no sex near unicorns". Although not fully confirmed, we can assume in that case that we will have a Davos POV in Skagos. (Source 1, Source 2)

Your "source 1" is his July 24, 2014 interview with Le Nouvel Observatuer, where he says "There are unicorns in my next book ..."   His next book, at this point, was TWOIAF, which came out 3 months later, and did indeed discuss unicorns to some extent.  One thing we learned is that they are not only on Skagos.  The "and probably sex near unicorns" part is just a joking reference to the fact that he does not feel bound by Rowling's rules about unicorns.

Your "source 2" is a 4/30/19 interview in The Guardian.  It does not mention WINDS at all.  It does not promise unicorns will "appear".  It merely promises an "interesting take" on unicorns, in future "books".  Besides WINDS there is also DREAM OF SPRING, FIRE & BLOOD 2, and DUNK & EGG.   It is a good guess that Asha and/or Rickon and/or Davos will return from Skagos some day, and will tell Sansa (or whoever) all about GRRM's "interesting take" on unicorns.  They might even bring a unicorn or two with them, and we will see them when (for instance) Sansa sees them.  Or maybe Danaerys will ride a unicorn some day.   Three mounts will she ride, after all, and she's already done the horse and the dragon.  Note also that we have already glimpsed a unicorn through a wolf-dream, and we did not need a Davos-POV for it.

Quote

• Jon Connington: George said at a Worldcon that he plans to bring the Battle of Storm's End on-page. (A battle on the battlefield will not be narrated by Arianne, who will not be present on site, but by an experienced commander such as Jon Connington. Seems logical).

Like I said, this could be a one-off prologue.  He wasn't originally planning to do it, but when DANCE ended where it did, tradition gives him an opportunity to throw in a random POV as long as he dies.

Quote

• Bran: George R. R. Martin plans for Hodor's death to happen on-page and that is only possible from Bran's POV.

GRRM: "I thought they executed it very well, but there are going to be differences in the book. They did it very physically - 'hold the door' with Hodor's strength. In the book, Hodor has stolen one of the old swords from the crypt. Bran has been warging into Hodor and practicing with his body, because Bran had been trained in swordplay. So telling Hodor to 'hold the door' is more like 'hold this pass' - defend it when enemies are coming - and Hodor is fighting and killing them. A little different, but same idea." (Source: book "Fire Cannot Kill A Dragon)

Might not happen til A DREAM OF SPRING.  Or Meera will tell the story to Sansa (or whoever).

Quote

So we already have thirteen characters that are 100% confirmed.

By my count, 8 are 100% confirmed, 3 more are likely-confirmed.   But, as I said, the more "confirmed" POVs you pile on, the less plausible it is that his count is meant to include Jaime, Brienne and/or Sam.

Quote

We have three characters for whom there are clear indications in George's own interviews that they will likely get a POV.

I disagree.  But if I accept your argument, this brings your count up to 16.

Quote

In addition, it is very unlikely that characters like Daenerys and Jon Snow will not get a POV (although it is possible).

Which brings your count up to 18.

Quote

Remarkably, Brienne and Jaime are not confirmed yet, but I would be surprised if neither of these two will have a POV in TWOW.  

I would guess not.  Especially under your logic.  To say "13" when you meant "20" is a pretty big mistake, and far too big a mistake for me to swallow.  But if we realize that many of the "confirmed" POVs of you and Mr. Fish are not really confirmed, there is perhaps slightly more room for them, though I would say not much.

Quote

Based on George's NotABlog and other interviews, we can rule out that TWOW will only have 13 POVs. (Almost) every living POV from FeastDance will make an appearance in TWOW. That one interview of 13 POVs contradicts other interviews and sources.

Again, I disagree, since only 11 POVs (or maybe 8) are actually confirmed, leaving room for 2 more.  And with (IMHO) a reasonable margin of error of 1 or 2 POVs, maybe there is room for 4 more, without completely disregarding the author's own words.

Quote

It can be done, if worked out properly. But should there be just 13 POVs in TWOW (which is actually disproven),

13 POVs is not actually disproven.  And even if it were, a reasonable margin of error (such as 14 POVs or 15 POVs) is not actually disproven.  You want me to accept he said 13 when he meant 18+.  That's the sticking point for me.  It's a bridge too far.

But maybe you see my point to some extent, since you are not pushing too hard on Jaime or Brienne, which was my original point -- that TWOW was unlikely to contain all 3 of Brienne, Jaime and Sam.

[WhatAnArtist!]

9 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

You don't owe me your time.  You don't have to engage.  You say you are tired of arguing, and then proceed to argue anyway.  I suppose if I respond to your points you will feel ill used?  Never mind.  I will respond to $erPounce, and you don't need to be interested.  Fair?

The fact that you've consistently failed to respond to my actual point says as much as I need to know, and says a lot about you. Enjoy your pointless arguing about something that can't be confirmed either way. If that's the type of thing that makes your day feel fulfilling, go right ahead. 

What a joke.

[Daenerysthegreat]

4 minutes ago, WhatAnArtist! said:

The fact that you've consistently failed to respond to my actual point says as much as I need to know, and says a lot about you. Enjoy your pointless arguing about something that can't be confirmed either way. If that's the type of thing that makes your day feel fulfilling, go right ahead. 

What a joke.

What was your point? It's difficult to notice

And I think we should not take Mr Martin's words too literally. And predicting pov chapters is a guesswork. There's a lot of chance that the chapters might be different. 

And stop taking his words literally. Neither is a he a liar who likes to deceive the readers nor is he a person who will give definite estimates on what will be what in the next book

A last point, be optimistic, from what I've seen on the internet the book may come out next year

[Mister Smikes]

5 hours ago, WhatAnArtist! said:

The fact that you've consistently failed to respond to my actual point says as much as I need to know, and says a lot about you. Enjoy your pointless arguing about something that can't be confirmed either way. If that's the type of thing that makes your day feel fulfilling, go right ahead. 

What a joke.

Okay.  I guess now you want to argue.  Please explain what was the point you are challenging me to address?