Jump to content

Crackpot Debunking Thread


Corvo the Crow

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Odej said:

And a hint doesn't have to explain everything. It can merely point the reader towards the truth that may not be totally clear with just the hint, but will be in the future.

This:  

According to this Q&A with his editor Anne Groell, GRRM foreshadows all the time as part of his "three-fold revelation strategy":

Q: Anne, although you're the envy of many a GRRM fan, do you ever wish you didn't have to edit the books so that you could be surprised by them all at once along with the rest of us?

A: No. As above, he doesn’t tell me a lot. He feels I am most effective at my job if I am surprised along with everyone else. And it is easier to tell when he’s overplaying a hand and revealing things too early if you don’t actually know going in what will happen. That said, now that I’ve realized his three-fold revelation strategy, I see it in play almost every time. The first, subtle hint for the really astute readers, followed later by the more blatant hint for the less attentive, followed by just spelling it out for everyone else. It’s a brilliant strategy, and highly effective.

game of thrones - How much does George R R Martin foreshadow? - Science Fiction & Fantasy Stack Exchange

 

I put Meera's greathelm in the same category.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Ran is not GRRM.  People are allowed to disagree with him.

GRRM saying Larra and Serenei are not the same people should be debunking enough.  If Ran claims to have inside info from GRRM himself, I am happy to trust him.  But if Ran is making no such claim, no-one need defer to his authority.

Do you wish for me to provide a link to the exact page where Ran says that he had the instructions from GRRM for both women and how they're not the same people? 

Literally, the only proof for that theory is that the two women have the "same hairlines." Hair for a little bit of art is not enough. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jaenara Belarys said:

Do you wish for me to provide a link to the exact page where Ran says that he had the instructions from GRRM for both women and how they're not the same people? 

Literally, the only proof for that theory is that the two women have the "same hairlines." Hair for a little bit of art is not enough. 

why do people even discuss the speculation that a guy's mother and mistress are one and the same?!!!!!:dunno::D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Jaenara Belarys said:

Do you wish for me to provide a link to the exact page where Ran says that he had the instructions from GRRM for both women and how they're not the same people? 

I already said that if GRRM says it, I will believe GRRM.  And I already said that if Ran says that GRRM said it, I will believe Ran (though, perhaps, others should be free to distrust Ran if they wish).  Feel free to provide the link if you wish, but it does not much matter to me.  I'm not that interested in the Larra/Serenei issue, and have no interest in any theory that they are the same person.  I am merely objecting to the idea that Ran should have the unilateral power to veto opinions he disagrees with.  Like anyone else, he should provide evidence, even if the evidence is a claim to possess inside information.  If you are saying he did provide evidence in this case, that is fine.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Odej said:

I strongly disagree. I don't think this is a small thing, at all, I actually believe it's the closest thing to what Martin said about it when he was asked if we would ever know who Duncan's descendent is. He said, "I gave a pretty strong hint in the new book (AFFC)". The set of traits you cited about Bonifer Hasty are not only vague, it also doesn't look like "a hint". A hint is something punctual. Your theory it's more like a character study with several allegadly hints. 

And a hint doesn't have to explain everything. It can merely point the reader towards the truth that may not be totally clear with just the hint, but will be in the future.

My main point was that GRRM never confirmed your theory.  Yes but I am already certain of my theory because reasons.  Yes, I know.  That's why GRRM's totally non-committal statements are being interpreted as confirmation of what you already believe.

He said, "I gave a pretty strong hint in the new book (AFFC)".   Right.  And because you already believe Brienne is Dunk's descendant, you interpret this as somehow proving that Brienne is Dunk's descendant.   Confirmation bias.

"The set of traits you cited about Bonifer Hasty are not only vague, it also doesn't look like "a hint"."  Whoever said a hint has to look like a hint?  Many authors go out of their way to make their hints NOT look like hints.  You are just refusing to consider possibilities other than those you already believe.  Which again is just confirmation bias.

"A hint is something punctual."     ???

"And a hint doesn't have to explain everything."  I never said that it did.  A hint could be all kinds of things.  You are the one with a vested interest in arguing GRRM's vague statement can only possibly mean one thing.  Because confirmation bias.

Here are indications from AFC that might be clues

"... solemn stork of a man ..."  (indicating Bonifer is very tall).

"... purple doublet, embroidered with the white bend cotised of his House ..."  (Suggesting that the arms of House Hasty include a sort of white streak against a purple backdrop, which could be meant to represent a shooting star at twilight -- hence, not implausibly descended from Dunk's original coat of arms).

"...Ser Bonifer himself had been a promising knight in his youth, but something had happened to him, a defeat or a disgrace or a near brush with death, and afterward he had decided that jousting was an empty vanity and put away his lance for good and all."  (That sure sounds like a clue to something.  And even if it only connects Bonifer to Rhaella, without also connecting him to Summerhall, it still places him at court at the same time as Duncan the Tall; and if it suggests that Bonifer could be Rhaegar's father, it raises the question of whether it also establishes a link from Duncan to Bonifer to Rhaegar to any descendant of Rhaegar).

"... someone found me in the shallows, stripped me of my armor, boots, and breeches ..."  (Looks like a certain tall block-headed man lost a shield at some point, while fighting against Stormland forces, such as maybe the Lord of Tarth, which might explain why Dunk's damaged shield is sitting in Evenstar's armory).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

He said, "I gave a pretty strong hint in the new book (AFFC)".   Right.  And because you already believe Brienne is Dunk's descendant, you interpret this as somehow proving that Brienne is Dunk's descendant.   Confirmation bias.

I believe Brienne is Duncan's descendant because of the hints. Not the other way around. I'm not using the hints to confirm something I've already established in my mind. I would never have thought Brienne was a descendant of Duncan if wasn't the shield and the writer's lines.

Martin interview made me searching for it in the books, and Duncan's shield in Tarth, Brienne's home, is one specific thing about Duncan that can't be found in other character. Unlike being tall, good, a great fighter, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Odej said:

I believe Brienne is Duncan's descendant because of the hints. Not the other way around. I'm not using the hints to confirm something I've already established in my mind. I would never have thought Brienne was a descendant of Duncan if wasn't the shield and the writer's lines.

Martin interview made me searching for it in the books, and Duncan's shield in Tarth, Brienne's home, is one specific thing about Duncan that can't be found in other character. Unlike being tall, good, a great fighter, etc.

That's fine.  You believe what you believe because reasons.  And I believe what I believe because reasons.  And neither one of us has any obligation to be convinced by each other's arguments.  And neither one of us has the right to demand that the other shut up and go away.

But can we at least agree that GRRM did not "confirm" your theory when, at a busy book signing, he deflected a fan question with the words "eventually all will be revealed in time"?  Surely we can agree that that, at least, is taking confirmation bias a bit too far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

It makes sense only in the sense of not being unimaginable.   But one would not ordinarily leave a shield to a daughter, because she would not ordinarily fight herself.  And if she married, her sons would have their own coats of arms, which would not be his.  And if it was meant to be treasured forever as a family heirloom, because Dunk assumed his descendants would be big fans of the Dunk & Egg stories, well, that isn't exactly what ended up happening.

But again, what you are saying makes sense given that Brienne’s mother died… if she is the connection that would have treasured it as a keepsake

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Mourning Star said:

But again, what you are saying makes sense given that Brienne’s mother died… if she is the connection that would have treasured it as a keepsake

You know, I'm of the mind that Brienne is descended from Dunk, but I must say, it is a bit strange that Brienne's father wouldn't have ever mentioned that heritage to Brienne given the renown of Ser Duncan the Tall. I would chalk that up to an oversight by GRRM, but I'll admit it's a weakness for the theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

You know, I'm of the mind that Brienne is descended from Dunk, but I must say, it is a bit strange that Brienne's father wouldn't have ever mentioned that heritage to Brienne given the renown of Ser Duncan the Tall. I would chalk that up to an oversight by GRRM, but I'll admit it's a weakness for the theory.

Easy to explain for story telling reasons though… mom died, dad doesn’t like to talk about her… her family is all dead and/or it makes Brienne Dragonspawn in the eyes of Robert, so why advertise it.

I hear your point, but in this story I feel like it isn’t an outlier. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mourning Star said:

Easy to explain for story telling reasons though… mom died, dad doesn’t like to talk about her… her family is all dead and/or it makes Brienne Dragonspawn in the eyes of Robert, so why advertise it.

I hear your point, but in this story I feel like it isn’t an outlier. 

True enough. I have other such quibbles that amount to differences in preference of execution. Nothing huge, thankfully, just minutiae like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, EggBlue said:

why do people even discuss the speculation that a guy's mother and mistress are one and the same?!!!!!:dunno::D

Because this is ASOIAF forum and apparently, getting familiar with their family is what people expect of every other character. I wanted to point this as well but reluctant to do so in fear of the explanations to rationalize I'd get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mourning Star said:

But again, what you are saying makes sense given that Brienne’s mother died… if she is the connection that would have treasured it as a keepsake

Would she?  She might, I suppose, if you go out of your way to construct such a scenario.  There is nothing inherently impossible about it.   

But I don't think it is usual for Westerosi women to treasure their maternal grandfather's shield as a family heirloom.  Shields are not normally treasured as heirlooms.  They are simple and practical pieces of military equipment.  The heraldric devices painted on them are not meant to be priceless works of art, but simple and recognizable patterns and emblems that can be repainted at will.  These devices can be preserved on paintings, in books, on jewelry, on tapestries, which conveniently allows a woman to preserve her heritage without the need to go lugging around heavy oaken shields.

And again, my point is not the scenario you envision is impossible.  Merely that it does not naturally and inevitably follow from the alleged "clue"; such that we can declare the matter resolved forever and shut down all discussion.

Let us also imagine a future Dunk & Egg story where Dunk is busy boinking the Lord of Tarth's wife,  but the Lord of Tarth comes home early and Dunk flees and leaves his shield behind.  "Gosh, what's this shield doing in my bedroom", says the Evenstar, and puts it in the armory.  9 months later, the next Evenstar is born.  "Ah, now we see the connection", say all the uber-fans.  But again, while it is possible to invent this amusing scenario, it does not naturally and inevitably follow from the clue.

One could invent any number of scenarios explaining how Dunk's shield got in the Evenstar's armory.  And while some of these scenarios might involve Brienne being a descendant of Dunk, it could just as easily or more easily be otherwise.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, EggBlue said:

why do people even discuss the speculation that a guy's mother and mistress are one and the same?!!!!!:dunno::D

Oh, sweet summer child

Spoiler

The batshit here is nothing compared to Archive of our Own (fanfiction website). There's stuff like Jon forces himself on Dany, Dany beds her own son, Jon, of all people, beds his own daughter.......this is nothing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/5/2022 at 4:04 PM, Odej said:

And as for Bonifer being moral and decent, I don't think highly of a man who blames women for men's misbehavior. He seems to me just another conservative guy with no sense of humor.

At the risk of going off topic, I will respond to the above.  

Bonifer is a character in a book.  He is not meant to be perfect.  He is the Westerosi equivalent of an old-school traditional Christian.  I am sure that GRRM, who is very progressive and describes himself as a "sex positive feminist", as well as being agnostic, is not 100% on board with Bonifer's ideas.  Nonetheless, I do not think that GRRM, when he thinks of Bonifer, gnashes his teeth in partisan rage at this avatar of Our Enemies in the Current Culture War.  I believe he sees such characters in their quasi-historical context, and his outlook is a bit more balanced.

So let's explore how you are not being entirely fair to Ser Bonifer.

Bonifer has been celibate for 40 years.  Maybe that's not a choice that you or I or GRRM would make, but it isn't necessarily easy.  One must make efforts to avoid temptation.  A natural side effect of such a decades long effort is that one might become a little sniffy about promiscuous women.  But it is not as though Bonifer does not practice what he preaches.  He has apparently been behaving himself for the last 40 years.

Pia is promiscuous.  We've known that since forever.  Bonifer knows this and does not want her around his men.   He's not blaming Pia for men's behavior, but for her own.  GRRM probably disagrees with Bonifer's "sex negativity", but that does not mean it is hypocritical for Bonifer to apply his sex-negative standards to both sexes, as he apparently does.

Bonifer has a point.  It is a medieval period, and there are no modern pharmaceuticals to deal with STDs.  Lord Tarly's solution to this issue is to inflict horrific punishments on the prostitute who gives the STD to the soldier.  Bonifer does not want to inflict horrific punishments on anyone.  He just wants to keep Pia away from his men, and he wants to keep his men away from Pia.  I prefer Bonifer's approach.

Bonifer despises Gregor and his men, and clearly considers them the worst of the worst.  Nothing he says about Pia should in any way be construed as justifying the mistreatment of Pia by Gregor and his men.

And Bonifer, again, is the leader of just about the only military force in Westeros that does not rape.   So the suggestion that he does not discipline his men, but merely blames women for men's misbehavior, is not justified by the evidence.

He apparently uses the carrot as well as the stick, with a sort of "family values" approach to compensating his men for their service, granting bonuses upon marriage and the birth of the first child.  When you serve Bonifer, you get incentives for being loyal to your sweetheart.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

So let's explore how you are not being entirely fair to Ser Bonifer.

 

I think that's a fair defense of Ser Bonifer.

I just thought I should mention, in defense of Brienne being the one with a special connection to Dunk, she seems to be written with significant parallels with Dunk. It's not simple a matter of height and a shield. They both start as not-officially-knights who prove themselves to be the truest knights around. They both reluctantly take in a youth who they start to mentor and protect. Brienne is first seen by Catelyn in a tourney melee in which she wins by bringing her opponent to the ground, very similar to how Dunk wins his melee trial in The Hedge Knight.

It just makes more sense for GRRM to grant that connection to Brienne rather than a minor character like Bonifer Hasty. It's not like this will be plot-relevant information at all, and probably won't even be revealed to the ancestor. So if the familial connection to Dunk serves any sort of purpose, it's probably to highlight for readers the common links of their stories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

I think that's a fair defense of Ser Bonifer.

I just thought I should mention, in defense of Brienne being the one with a special connection to Dunk, she seems to be written with significant parallels with Dunk. It's not simple a matter of height and a shield. They both start as not-officially-knights who prove themselves to be the truest knights around. They both reluctantly take in a youth who they start to mentor and protect. Brienne is first seen by Catelyn in a tourney melee in which she wins by bringing her opponent to the ground, very similar to how Dunk wins his melee trial in The Hedge Knight.

I think there are such parallels.  But I think they are related to, and ultimately secondary to, the Sandor-Brienne parallels and (eventually) the Sandor-Dunk parallels.  Not to mention the striking Ned Dayne / Pod Payne parallels.

The Sandor-Brienne Parallels are very striking.  But I'll just give a couple of examples that relate to the examples you cite.  Both win a tournament for reasons relating to a "dirty trick" played involving Loras Tyrell.  Both join a kingsguard despite not being knights.  Sandor has not yet taken up with a shy 12 year old squire yet, but the way things are going, I fully expect that to happen.   

I think GRRM has set it up that when Sandor and Ned appear, they will be mistaken for Brienne and Pod.  And that is the reason for the striking parallels -- to confuse the reader.  The Sandor/Dunk parallels will likely be thematic, though, because I think Sandor's ironic fate is to become a True Knight.

Of course, Sandor could be a descendant of Dunk too for all I know.   Maybe all the Cleganes are descendants of Dunk.  And maybe Brienne is the long-lost Clegane sister, adopted by the Lord of Tarth.

3 hours ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

It just makes more sense for GRRM to grant that connection to Brienne rather than a minor character like Bonifer Hasty.

The purpose of Bonifer would be merely to provide a link between the present and the past.  He would be father of Rhaegar and grandfather of [INSERT THEORY HERE], who of course are also descendants of Dunk.

The relevant comparison is not that Bonifer is a more minor character than Brienne.  The relevant comparison is that Bonifer and Rhaella are far more significant characters than Brienne's grandfather and grandmother.

3 hours ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

It's not like this will be plot-relevant information at all, and probably won't even be revealed to the ancestor. So if the familial connection to Dunk serves any sort of purpose, it's probably to highlight for readers the common links of their stories.

But what if there were a sort of plot relevance?  What if Bonifer were at Summerhall and knows something about it?  Why does GRRM have this tragedy-haunted 60+ year old knight prancing around Westeros if not to provide a link to the past?What if it were Bonifer's fault that Rhaegar does not unite the lines of Aerys and Rhaella, resulting in the failure of the ritual and the tragedy?  What if Rhaegar had to unite the lines of Aerys and Rhaella by uniting with a by-blow of Aerys (Elia? Lyanna?). 

Or what if it were something none of us have thought of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

I think there are such parallels.  But I think they are related to, and ultimately secondary to, the Sandor-Brienne parallels and (eventually) the Sandor-Dunk parallels.  Not to mention the striking Ned Dayne / Pod Payne parallels.

I agree that Sandor has a link to Brienne and to Dunk as being a not-actually-a-knight who proves to be truer and more heroic than most actual knights. Or at least, he has shown some promise in that respect, and following his recovery/rebirth on the Quiet Isle, will likely take greater steps in that direction. He is also quite tall. 

But, I think, the parallels stop there. For Brienne, her "establishing shot" in the ASOIAF story is one that, visually, would look almost identical to the conclusion of the legendary Dunk melee. For Sandor, he has several scenes in AGOT before the tourney, and in that key scene gallantly intervenes to protect Loras the trickster. For Dunk and Brienne, there is the possible interpretation that knighthood has been made to be beastly. For Sandor, it's the opposite: the Hound, who we know to be an angry cynic who hates knights and wants to kill his brother, in fact looks quite chivalrous in this scene (it's even noted that he avoids making any swipes at Gregor's unprotected head). Structurally, visually, and thematically, it's quite different from the other two. 

Sandor, Brienne, and Dunk are all used by GRRM to explore the question "what is a true knight anyway?," but I think Brienne and Dunk are used to explore the question in ways that are closer to one another than they are to Sandor's narrative. Potentially, Brienne is somewhere in between the other two, connecting them, though that will be clearer by the next book.

Sandor is the long-disillusioned Romantic who eventually learns that ideals are important to have after all; his arc seems to be largely one of redemption and renewal. Brienne is the young idealist who seriously risks losing her ideals amidst the punishing ordeals of her reality: a potential Hound (or Pretty Meris)-in-waiting. But Brienne is also someone who adopts the role of a knight despite a severe social disadvantage: her gender. This is similar to Dunk, who adopts the role of a knight despite his severe disadvantages relating to class. And this similarity gives their respective arcs a similar structure, at least in terms of establishing and proving themselves. Not to mention that Brienne can be a bit clueless in reasoning sometimes, and has even been called "thick as a castle wall." However, given that we know that the D&E series will end with the tragedy of Summerhall, I am guessing that Dunk's narrative arc will be how his role and responsibilities as protector will change and grow more complicated as he, and especially his charge Egg, will rise in power. So they all seem unique, but Brienne's story just seems to have deep connections to Dunk, whereas Sandor does not.

I guess what you say about Bonifer Hasty is technically possible, but there are so many unknowns in that sense, that I don't feel comfortable resting on so many assumptions. It doesn't feel parsimonious to me, though I acknowledge that we don't know everything that GRRM has in mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

I agree that Sandor has a link to Brienne and to Dunk as being a not-actually-a-knight who proves to be truer and more heroic than most actual knights. Or at least, he has shown some promise in that respect, and following his recovery/rebirth on the Quiet Isle, will likely take greater steps in that direction. He is also quite tall. 

But, I think, the parallels stop there.

I think that the True Knight theme is an important one to GRRM.  It is a theme that he can explore with more than one character.  There is no particular need for a laundry list of superficial similarities.  Moreover, although I believe it is Sandor's destiny to become a True Knight, this has not happened yet, and I don't think GRRM wants it to be obvious that this is where he is headed.  Sandor is savage, tormented, and more-than-half a monster.  GRRM even makes a half-hearted effort to convince the careless reader that Sandor has died in this condition, and that his story is over.  

But with Sandor / Brienne there ARE a laundry list of similarities and parallels.  And many of these certainly ARE superficial -- more of appearance or of potential appearance than of underlying reality --

  • Each is referred to as "The Hound" [Jaime jokes that Brienne is "the Hound with teats, except she has no teats".]
  • Each is a superior fighter, typically using sword, shield and metal armor.
  • Each is thought by some to be hideous; wears hair long; is very tall, is about 6'8" to 6'10"; is muscular. 
  • Each appears to be about 29 years old [Sandor is 29, Brienne 19, but Brienne appeared to have aged 10 years when Jaime last sees her]. 
  • Each has pale eyes that would appear grey in dim light [Brienne's eyes are blue; Sandor's eye color is unknown except that they appear grey at night by torchlight when dilated by drunkenness and rage].  
  • Each has suffered severe injuries on one side of the face, with flesh missing; has sustained a sword wound to the upper thigh; and an injury to the forearm.
  • Each has served on a kingsguard, but is not a knight.
  • Each has fled from prior kingsguard employment, and is considered a criminal and fugitive by some; each has been falsely accused of at least one crime.
  • Each won a tournament, attended by each's king.  Loras Tyrell was the other finalist.  In the last combat of the tournament, an incident occurred involving Loras and an alleged dirty trick.  As a result, each was declared the victor.
  • At this same tournament, each seized an opportunity to fight, in hand-to-hand combat, a fierce landed knight, against whom each bears a bitter grudge.  This grudge relates to a hurt each sustained years ago, when still a child. [Brienne fought Red Ronnet at Bitterbridge; Sandor fought Ser Gregor at the Hand's tourney].
  • Each was nearby with Lady Stark [Arya in Sandor's case; Catelyn in Brienne's case] when a young king, freshly crowned and newly wed, was murdered.  Each had no involvement in the murder but nonetheless had to flee with Lady Stark for their lives. 
  • Each was severely injured in a fight at the Crossroads Inn.  Afterwards, each begged Lady Stark [Arya in Sandor's case; Stoneheart in Brienne's case] for mercy.  But she had no mercy.
  • At the Crossroads Inn, each was with a child, dressed like a boy, aged about 10-12.  Each had earlier captured this skinny, underfed child outside a ruin, during a rainstorm.  Each had then traveled together, and sometimes helped each other in combat.  Each had been searching for surviving relatives of Lady Stark [again Arya / Catelyn].
  • Each has been captured by the Brotherhood without Banners.  Each was subjected to a trial held in a cave, before their undead leader, who held a fiery blade.   Thoros was present.   Lem Lemoncloak, one-eyed Jack and Lady Stark [again Arya / Stoenheart] were among the accusers.  Each was accused of being a traitor and a Lannister servant.  Each was offered a chance of vindication by the sword.  
  • Each is in love with a reputed kingslayer who was formerly a romantic idealist and idealized knighthood until experiences at Kings Landing taught disillusionment.  The age difference is about 16 years.
  • The one who injured each person's face was a monster in human form.  He was enormous.  He spent time in the black cells below the Red Keep.  At one point, he became silent and never spoke thereafter.  He was slain with a spear.  He was associated with "the Hound" [Biter is associated with Rorge, the new Hound; Gregor is the former Hound's brother, and is himself associated with the Clegane coat of arms]
  • Each has defeated Jaime Lannister in combat [Sandor unhorsed Jaime at a Tourney; Brienne defeated Jaime in single combat].  
  • Each has an older brother and at least one younger sister.  All siblings have died.
  • A poor companion of each, of short acquaintance, was slain by a Bloody Mummer.  Each buried him in a quiet isolated place by the sea, near a cave, and among walls of un-mortared stone. [Sandor buried Brother Clement who was slain by Rorge, on the Quiet Isle; Brienne buried Dick Crabbe, slain by Shagwell, at the Whispers.  I assume here that the gravedigger is Sandor, which is technically theory, and therefore a slight cheat].
  • Each has a savage vengeful streak.  [Dominant and obvious in Sandor's case; non-dominent and less obvious in Brienne's case].

Because so many of these parallels are superficial, I don't think the intent is thematic.  Brienne is not really 29, she just  looks that way.  Brienne's "dirty trick" incident with Loras and Sandor's "dirty trick" incident with Loras were really very different, even though it is possible to describe them in similar language.  I think the intent is to fake out the reader.  What this signifies to me is that if a mystery warrior shows up (perhaps wearing the hound helm), and briefly mentions an incident from her past, the reader will assume it is Sandor referring to his past, when it is actually Brienne referring to her past  Conversely, if another mystery warrior shows up (perhaps with a shy 12 year old mystery squire), and briefly mentions his past or his squire's past, the reader may assume this is Brienne and Pod, when it is actually Sandor and Ned.

I have not yet listed the odd Pod/Ned parallels.  I will if you are curious.

7 hours ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

For Sandor, it's the opposite: the Hound, who we know to be an angry cynic who hates knights and wants to kill his brother, in fact looks quite chivalrous in this scene (it's even noted that he avoids making any swipes at Gregor's unprotected head). Structurally, visually, and thematically, it's quite different from the other two. 

Indeed.  Brienne is chivalrous, with a subtle undertone of savagery.  Sandor is savage, with a subtle undertone of chivalry.  We have lost track of both, and both may have continued to change.  Sandor may have become a True Knight while we were not looking.  Brienne may have become a monstrous fire wight while we were not looking.  Sandor may have died and been reborn in one sense (as the Elder Brother hints).  Brienne may have died and been reborn in another sense (as her meeting with Stonheart and Thoros hints).

7 hours ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

Sandor, Brienne, and Dunk are all used by GRRM to explore the question "what is a true knight anyway?," but I think Brienne and Dunk are used to explore the question in ways that are closer to one another than they are to Sandor's narrative. Potentially, Brienne is somewhere in between the other two, connecting them, though that will be clearer by the next book.

Yes.  Brienne seems to be much closer to the True Knight ideal than Sandor is.  This is intentional on GRRM's part.  He is setting up the expectations he intends to mess with.  IMHO.

7 hours ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

This is similar to Dunk, who adopts the role of a knight despite his severe disadvantages relating to class.

Let's not carry that too far.  Any knight can make a knight.  Arlan just never knighted Dunk.

7 hours ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

I guess what you say about Bonifer Hasty is technically possible, but there are so many unknowns in that sense, that I don't feel comfortable resting on so many assumptions. It doesn't feel parsimonious to me, though I acknowledge that we don't know everything that GRRM has in mind.

It's only a theory.  One of many.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...