How controversial is the Quentyn being alive theory on here?

[sifth]

1 hour ago, Gilbert Green said:

After Tyrion re-emerged from the tent, something has happened and apparently the Windblown had switched sides.  What did he miss?  My guess is, Viserion reappeared in the sky with a rider, streaming a distinctive tattered cloak.  And did something that caused the Windblown to switch sides.

It would mean that Ser. Barry's plan to get the Windblown on Dany's side worked. Not that Quentyn suddenly showed up with a dragon. You're playing 3D chess with this type of logic.

Edited July 24, 2023 by sifth

[Gilbert Green]

1 hour ago, Alester Florent said:

• The body is the Tattered Prince: no evidence for this except that the burned body is referred to as "prince". We have nothing to suggest he was inside the pyramid. Given that apparently he thought the plan was kind of nuts, it would be surprising if he were.

Again, if you want absolute proof, I can't give them to you.  If you want subtle hints, they are there. 

Tatters actually tells Frog, for no particular reason, that he likes to remove his cloak to maneuver incognito, which he can do because he is so ordinary-looking.  At the dragonpit, Frog asks where Tatters is, and is told he is at the ship.  And this is evidently a lie, since the Windblown have no plans that involve a ship.  Their plan, as it turns out, is to kill the dragons.  And of course, there are several non-descript ordinary-looking Windblown present at the dragonpit.  And they are all wearing masks.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Gilbert Green

[Gilbert Green]

2 minutes ago, sifth said:

It would mean that Ser. Barry's plan to get to get the Windblown on Dany's side worked. Not that Quentyn suddenly showed up with a dragon. You're playing 3D chess with this type of logic.

Okay.  But what was Gerris secret objection to Barry's scheme?  And what was Archie's secret solution to Gerris' objection?

[Alester Florent]

10 minutes ago, Sandy Clegg said:

We should look at these things from a storytellers point of view rather than all this meaningless PhD 'research thesis' terminology, too. I don't know from null hypotheses and don't care to.

 

Well from a storyteller's perspective I think it would be awful. By treating it as a theory rooted in what's actually in the text and evidenced therefrom I think I'm doing it a favour.

Moreover, it was Gilbert who was talking about proof and evidence and quality of argument. If we're going to do that, then let's at least apply the right standard and burden.

[Sandy Clegg]

2 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

Well from a storyteller's perspective I think it would be awful. By treating it as a theory rooted in what's actually in the text and evidenced therefrom I think I'm doing it a favour.

 

I can't argue against feelings I guess. I think whatever George has in mind, he'll make it work. If we all mutter a cry of 'wtf' when he reveals Quentyn is alive? I think George can live with that - his background is in TV writing. Cliffhangers and manipulating audience reactions are his strong points. And like I said, he can still kill off Quentyn just when we think he's safe. There's hundreds of permutations of this that can be satisfying. We've just lived with the reality of Quentyn's death for so long that we'd feel cheated if it were otherwise. Yet we want to be cheated. To be surprised. George can't win either way. Which is why I still think it could go 50/50.

But I appreciate @Gilbert Green being willing to riff imaginatively on the possibilities, and thank him for sticking with the thread. Except - there's no way he's riding Viserion, Gilbert. Sorry. It has to be Rhaegal.

Rhaegal is the one burning the ships - and who is Quentyn? A Dornish descendant of Nymeria. Burning ships is kind of their thing ...

 

[Frey family reunion]

Easily one of my favorite theories of the story.  While I don't think Quentyn "survived" the fire, I do think he's living a second life in one of the dragons.

It goes back to Quentyn's main theme, the story of the frog prince.  Quentyn is the frog who with a kiss from his true love was transformed into the prince that was promised, ... a dragon.  Quentyn's consciousness was transferred into one of the dragons, literally making Quentyn one of the three "heads" of the dragon.

Quentyn's true desire wasn't Dany, it was Dany's dragons.  And in an attempt to woo a dragon, he got a kiss from Rhaegal, a kiss of fire.

LIke Bran Stark before him, Quentyn is put in a state where he is hovering between life and death.  For three days Quentyn is in this state, while Missendei tends to him and reads to him.  (I'd love to know what she was reading).  Then on the third day, Quentyn's consciousness permanently transfers into one of the dragons.

My guess is, that there is something special about Dany's dragons, perhaps because of their special birth.  Their eggs were present in the tent where Mirri cast her spell over Drogo, transferring the spirit of Drogo's horse into him.  I think this magic imbued into the eggs, priming these dragons into accepting the soul/spirt of certain bloodlines.

And I think Quentyn may be one of those special bloodlines.

So yes, Quentyn is dead, and yes Quentyn is alive, living a second life as a dragon.  Presumably to be joined by two more consciousnesses before the story is over.

[sifth]

48 minutes ago, Gilbert Green said:

Okay.  But what was Gerris secret objection to Barry's scheme?  And what was Archie's secret solution to Gerris' objection?

I think Gerris is just being stubborn and blaming Dany for what happened to Quent. That's always how I interpreted that part of the story. Classic case of projection; "we didn't do anything wrong, you're the real ones at fault".

I imagine Archie will be using force to get Gerris to go along with the plan, that and reminding him that it's his duty to return Quent's remains to Dorne. 

 

[Gilbert Green]

1 hour ago, Alester Florent said:

Moreover, it was Gilbert who was talking about proof and evidence and quality of argument. If we're going to do that, then let's at least apply the right standard and burden.

Context, man.  Context. 

The text gives us a burnt-beyond-recognition-man (BBRM).  I have pointed out that this man is not necessarily Frog.  And GRRM seems to have gone to considerable trouble to set up this ambiguous situation.

People howl and scream and say there is no way BBRM is not Frog.  The evidence does not match their assertions.  If they were more humble and less strident, they would have less to prove.

Aside from that there is no "right standard and burden" of proof.   Only possibilities.  Which we are free to consider and discuss.  And the more humble we are about how little we know, the less we will have to prove.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Gilbert Green

[Gilbert Green]

9 minutes ago, sifth said:

I think Gerris is just being stubborn and blaming Dany for what happened to Quent.

But he already said that openly.  In front of Barristan.  He does not need a private conversation with Archie to say that.  He has said it already.

[Nathan Stark]

22 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

To each his own.  I just don't think GRRM should be writing a multi-chapter paen to nihilistic despair when he is supposed to be trying to finish the series.  I don't suggest Frog being alive will necessarily be good writing either.  I'm just saying, we noticed some clues, and these clues suggest Frog is still alive.

I think it is more nihilistic for George to kill off a character whose already had a tragic ark and faced consequences, and then pull a fast one on us by having that character be secretly alive the whole time. I don't think Quentyn's story is a multi-chapter pean to nihilistic despair. I think it is a melancholy rumination on how in over his head Quentyn is. He wasn't prepared, mentally, physically or emotionally for the kind of toll adventure would have on him. Quentyn is just a guy, quiet, sad, and sweet-natured, who would have been far happier had he told Doran to go pound sand and just married and read his books. Gerris Drinkwater himself tells Quentyn that "men's lives have meaning, not their deaths." Quentyn's life mattered, and he threw it away in service of a quest he didn't really believe in for a father he was not close to. The story we are given is a tragedy because it didn't need to happen. Quentyn could have turned back at any point, and he would be alive and well. Or George could just say "psych!" and pull Quentyn out of his hat. I think that would rob Quentyn's previous story of any meaning.

The thing about finding "clues" in literary text is that since its all subjective, you can find evidence for any theory you might have. In ASOIAF, readers often find "clues" in support of pet theories. Just think back to the recent "Who was the real catspaw" thread, where several readers argued that clues in the text proved that Joffrey wasn't responsible for the catspaw. I'm not saying we shouldn't look for clues, or theorize about them. I am saying this can be tricky. Because one mans clues are often insignificant to another. And that's where we are. All of the evidence you've provided in support of Quentyn being alive has other explantions that don't point to that outcome. Gerris and Arch might not be hiding anything at all from Barristan; they might just distrust him because he's loyal to Dany and they are in a prison cell. Maybe that person on the bed is Quentyn after all, and we don't get a pov into his last moments alive ruminating on his failures because that's basically been his entire story up to this point.

23 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

This is just "NO NO NO -- we don't WANT" stuff.

I get it. You don't want Quent to be dead. Neither do I. I liked the poor sad Frog. If George R. R. Martin could pull off a "somehow Prince Quentyn is alive" moment that didn't undercut what Quentyn's whole narrative ark was about, I'd be happy to read it. I don't think that's what he is going to do, and I am not convinced by the evidence often presented arguing the alternative. I admit I find the theory silly, but I don't hate it. I just find it unlikely.

[Springwatch]

3 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

No they wouldn't.  You are attacking a straw-man version of the theory.  For whatever reason.

The guards mistook burnt-beyond-recognition-man ("BBRM") for Frog.  A&G just go along with it.  Because the alternative is to say "You're wrong, our buddy Frog is still at large, and trying to steal a dragon, and making some progress, and if you hurry, you might be able to do something about it,"  And why would they say that?

That makes no sense.

The guards find FOUR people (1) dead crossbowman; (2) Archie; (3) Gerris; (4) BBRM.

There are only 2 possibilities here.  Either BBRM is Frog; or BBRM is not Frog.

In neither case do Archie and Gerris have to do any smuggling.

In both cases two dragons and several humans have successfully left the scene without encountering the guards.  They smuggled themselves.  The only question is:  were they all Windblown, or was one of them Frog?

The theory holds that one of them was Frog.  He left with Viserion.  He came to try to tame a dragon.  That's even the name of the chapter.  And Viserion is quite a handful.   He is not trying to fake his death, any more than Dany was trying to fake her death when she took off on Drogon.  (But her death, too, was falsely reported, in the resulting chaos).

I thought it couldn't get any worse. If Quentyn leaves with a dragon, there is really no point in A&G independently faking his death. Dragons attract all eyeballs.

And at what point did Quentyn tame Viserion? After this? -

Quote

When he raised his whip, he saw that the lash was burning. His hand as well. All of him, all of him was burning.

Oh, he thought. Then he began to scream.

So he's on fire and screaming, and this when he subdues not one but two dragons, the one in front of him and the one behind. Not even Dany did that. And Viserion has already been shot with a crossbow and won't be in the best of moods.

3 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

I owe you nothing.  So drop your arrogance, apologize, and say please. 

Find the damned quote yourself.  It is there.  Or ask nicely.  I don't need your attitude.

Have you any idea how rude you are yourself? Probably not.

Well one of your statements is wrong anyway. You say,

Quote

It appears, per the theory, that Frog may have actually tamed a dragon, which, BTW, she explicitly invited him to do.

The actual quote is,

 

Quote

 

“The dragon has three heads,” Dany said when they were on the final flight. “My marriage need not be the end of all your hopes. I know why you are here.”

“For you,” said Quentyn, all awkward gallantry.

“No,” said Dany. “For fire and blood.”

 

 

That's not explicit, and Dany can see Quentyn is scared of the dragons. She doesn't expect him to tame one. Probably your other statements are wrong too, but if you won't back them up, who knows?

 

3 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

I never said that the theory was true because people hate it.  I merely mentioned that people hate it.  Which they do.

This is obvious to everyone except the haters themselves.  So please don't try to gaslight me by saying that people don't hate the theory.  And stop trying to convince I am a bad person because I notice that people hate the theory.

As you know perfectly well, what I actually said was, I doubt many people care enough to actually hate this theory

So who's gaslighting who?

3 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

This has nothing to do with whether the theory is true or not.  I never claimed it did.  So it cannot be an "ad hominem" fallacy or any other kind of fallacy.

An 'ad hominem' attack does precisely that. Avoids the argument. Discredits the person who argues it.

3 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

And the problem is not that you hate the theory.  The problem is that you cannot restrain your hate enough to be civil.  Would you like to start now?  It is never too late.

I said I wished you provided more quotes than insults, and you took offence. Why? 'Haters' is an insult, isn't it?

3 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

If the theory does not interest you, find another thread.  If you wish to discuss the theory in a civil manner, then please remain. 

And the next time you want someone to dig up quotes for you, ask nicely.

It's more impressive if statements can be backed up from the text.  And it's not totally nice of you to expect all readers to do their own fact checking.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Springwatch
deleted 'like she did'

[Gilbert Green]

1 hour ago, Nathan Stark said:

I think it is a melancholy rumination on how in over his head Quentyn is.

Call it a melancholy rumination if you like.  It still seems rather pointless for GRRM to spend several chapters on the melancholy ruminations of a minor character, when he is supposed to be trying to finish the series.  GRRM is in a tough spot no matter how you look at it.  But a dragon with a rider at least gets Dany one step closer to Westeros.

1 hour ago, Nathan Stark said:

I think that would rob Quentyn's previous story of any meaning.

And I call that more subjective than any clue.  I also think we will be in a better position to judge the meaning of the story when the story is finished.

1 hour ago, Nathan Stark said:

The thing about finding "clues" in literary text is that since its all subjective, you can find evidence for any theory you might have. In ASOIAF, readers often find "clues" in support of pet theories.

1 hour ago, Nathan Stark said:

 

Are you trying to prove that some theories are bad?  Or that all theories are bad?

I don't know why "Sandor is alive" is such a popular theory; or why "Frog is alive" is so unpopular.  But the clues have a subjective and deniable quality in either case.

1 hour ago, Nathan Stark said:

And that's where we are. All of the evidence you've provided in support of Quentyn being alive has other explantions that don't point to that outcome.

You could say the same of almost any theory.  Including the popular ones.

1 hour ago, Nathan Stark said:

Gerris and Arch might not be hiding anything at all from Barristan; they might just distrust him because he's loyal to Dany and they are in a prison cell.

I'd call that an unsatisfactory explanation to the little mystery the text raises.  More like you are trying to dismiss the clues rather than following them.

1 hour ago, Nathan Stark said:

Maybe that person on the bed is Quentyn after all, and we don't get a pov into his last moments alive ruminating on his failures because that's basically been his entire story up to this point.

Could be.  Anything is possible.

But the fact remains that the only real evidence that BBRM is Frog is that Barristan and his underlings ASSUME that BBRM is Frog.  And when you point out that BBRM might not be Frog, because GRRM seemingly went out of his way to set up precisely that possibility, people get mad.

2 hours ago, Nathan Stark said:

I get it. You don't want Quent to be dead. Neither do I. I liked the poor sad Frog.

I never particularly liked Frog.  I just noticed what looked to me like clues.  And I followed my nose.

 

[sifth]

2 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

But he already said that openly.  In front of Barristan.  He does not need a private conversation with Archie to say that.  He has said it already.

Archie is going to privately convince him to help Ser. Barry. I don't know how more cut and dry GRRM can make this. Listen I liked Quentyn as well, but this isn't some report another character got from a person half a world away, that he was killed, like was the case with Davos in AFFC or Brienne shouting out one final word as she's being lifted up to be hanged, in that same book. Literally the last time we're in Quentyn's mind, he's lit on fire and screaming. Dragon fire is suppose to be insanely hot and we have a body of a person of his same height and measurements who was burnt and who both of Quentyn's friends confirm is his own. Things aren't looking good for our noble frog. 

Can you please give me a logical reason for Quentyn to want to fake his death? With a dragon of his own, I doubt the Tattered Prince is much of a thread to him.

Edited July 24, 2023 by sifth

[Gilbert Green]

1 hour ago, Springwatch said:

If Quentyn leaves with a dragon, there is really no point in A&G independently faking his death.

Again, no faking is involved, other than playing along with a mistake.

There is certainly a point to not telling Barristan that Frog is at large or what he is trying to do.  If people knew what Frog was trying to do, all sorts of people would want to stop him.

Tatters already wants the dragons dead.  And nobody has even tamed them yet.  If someone were to actually try to tame one, and make progress, the situation would become critical.

1 hour ago, Springwatch said:

And at what point did Quentyn tame Viserion? After this? -

At what point did Dany tame Drogon?  When they take off together, Dany is not completely in control.  But she is certainly made a significant step.

1 hour ago, Springwatch said:

So he's on fire and screaming, and this when he subdues not one but two dragons, the one in front of him and the one behind. Not even Dany did that. And Viserion has already been shot with a crossbow and won't be in the best of moods.

Frog seemed to be making progress with Viserion when Rhaegal attached Frog.

I'm just guessing, but I would imagine the next thing that happened is that Viserion defended Frog by attacking Rhaegal.

I see no reason to suppose that Frog succeeded in taming two dragons. 

1 hour ago, Springwatch said:

Have you any idea how rude you are yourself?

Not interested in that topic.

1 hour ago, Springwatch said:

The actual quote is,

 

“The dragon has three heads,” Dany said when they were on the final flight. “My marriage need not be the end of all your hopes. I know why you are here.”

“For you,” said Quentyn, all awkward gallantry.

“No,” said Dany. “For fire and blood.”

 

That's not explicit, and Dany can see Quentyn is scared of the dragons. She doesn't expect him to tame one.

There is alot more than that.  And no, it's not explicit.  It's implicit. 

And yes, at the end of the passage, she gives up hope in Frog and tells him to go home.  She does not think he has it in him.

But he remembers.

1 hour ago, Springwatch said:

1 hour ago, Springwatch said:

1 hour ago, Springwatch said:

 

 

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Gilbert Green

[Gilbert Green]

Yes, Dany does hint to Frog that he could become a dragon rider, though she eventually decides he does not have it in him.  Frog even remembers the hint, when deciding on his course of action.  Is there another interpretation of the following?

(Context - Dany SECRETLY escorts Frog to see her dragons, after telling her handmaids that she is answering a call of nature.  4 guards come only because Barristan insists.) 

(While descending).

DANY:  The dragon has three heads,  My marriage need not be the end of all your hopes. I know why you are here.

FROG:  For you.

DANY:  No.  For fire and blood.

(At the pit, she leads Frog ALONE into the Pit.  She orders the guards to remain behind.  Frog turns white the instant he enters).

DANY: They frighten me as well. There is no shame in that. My children have grown wild and angry in the dark.

FROG:  You … you mean to ride them?

DANY:  One of them.[....] Balerion had other riders after Aegon died … but no rider ever flew two dragons.

FROG: They are ... they are fearsome creatures.

DANY: They are dragons, Quentyn.  (kisses Frog on both cheeks)   And so am I.

FROG:  I … I have the blood of the dragon in me as well, Your Grace. I can trace my lineage back to the first Daenerys, [....]

(Unfortunately, this leads to a discussion of Water Gardens, which is not what Dany wants to hear.  She leads him away from the pit, thinking, he does not belong here, he never should have come).

Later, Frog takes the hint.

FROG (to Archie): “The dragon has three heads,” she said to me. “My marriage need not be the end of all your hopes,” she said. “I know why you are here. For fire and blood.” I have Targaryen blood in me, you know that. I can trace my lineage back—

GERRIS:  Fuck your lineage.

[Gilbert Green]

2 hours ago, sifth said:

Archie is going to privately convince him to help Ser. Barry.

 

True.  But what's the secret?

2 hours ago, sifth said:

I don't know how more cut and dry GRRM can make this.

Well, he could have cut out these mystery lines.  Or just allow the conversation to continue in front of Barristan.  Why make a mystery of it?

2 hours ago, sifth said:

Listen I liked Quentyn as well, but this isn't some report another character got from a person half a world away, that he was killed, like was the case with Davos in AFFC or Brienne shouting out one final word as she's being lifted up to be hanged, in that same book.

Distance is irrelevant.  The main proof that BBRM is Frog is that Barristan & Co. (guards, missandei) assume that BBRM is Frog.  I'm questioning that assumption.

2 hours ago, sifth said:

Literally the last time we're in Quentyn's mind, he's lit on fire and screaming.

Just like Dany being on fire and not screaming.  The screams might be misdirection.  Those might be screams of panic, and not pain.

2 hours ago, sifth said:

Dragon fire is suppose to be insanely hot ....

He is not engulfed in dragon fire.  He is just ... on fire.  Like Dany was, when Drogon took her.

2 hours ago, sifth said:

 and we have a body of a person of his same height and measurements who was burnt and who both of Quentyn's friends confirm is his own.

Dude.  At least 4 such people were present.  Frog is an ordinary guy.  The world is full of ordinary guys.  Tatters is one.

And when exactly did Archie, or Gerris, confirm that the burnt man was Frog?  I missed that part.  The best that can be said is that they did not go out of their way to deny it.

2 hours ago, sifth said:

Can you please give me a logical reason for Quentyn to want to fake his death?

This is tiresome.

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

Is it sinking in yet?

What's the point of me even saying anything if you're not going to listen?

2 hours ago, sifth said:

With a dragon of his own, I doubt the Tattered Prince is much of a threat to him.

Is Frog invulnerable to crossbows or something?

If people knew Frog were in the process of successfully bonding with a dragon, all sorts of people would want to stop him.  Including Barristan.

The bonding process is not necessarily instantaneous.  And what if Frog were injured and needed to rest and heal?

Archie and Gerris are under arrest.  They have reason to believe that the same, or worse, will happen to Frog if they tell Barristan where to find him.

Edited July 25, 2023 by Gilbert Green

[sifth]

12 minutes ago, Gilbert Green said:

This is tiresome.

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

Is it sinking in yet?

What's the point of me even saying anything if you're not going to listen?

 

Dude, you're being just rude. News flash I don't read every post you make, only the ones you made to reply to my posts. Anyway, wish I could say this was fun, but if you're going to keep insulting those who don't agree with you, I'm done with this chat.

Edited July 25, 2023 by sifth

[Gilbert Green]

19 minutes ago, sifth said:

Dude, you're being just rude. News flash I don't read every post you make, only the ones you made to reply to my posts.

I already explained this TO YOU in reply to YOUR POSTS.

So you want me keep repeating myself while you talk past me?  How is that polite?  If you're not interested in the conversation, then yes, maybe you should go away.

19 minutes ago, sifth said:

Anyway, wish I could say this was fun, but if you're going to keep insulting those who don't agree with you, I'm done with this chat.

I did not insult you.

PS:  I don't recall that Frog ever faked his own death in ANY version of the theory.

Edited July 25, 2023 by Gilbert Green

[Nevets]

35 minutes ago, Gilbert Green said:

True.  But what's the secret?

Well, he could have cut out these mystery lines.  Or just allow the conversation to continue in front of Barristan.  Why make a mystery of it?

Distance is irrelevant.  The main proof that BBRM is Frog is that Barristan & Co. (guards, missandei) assume that BBRM is Frog.  I'm questioning that assumption.

Just like Dany being on fire and not screaming.  The screams might be misdirection.  Those might be screams of panic, and not pain.

He is not engulfed in dragon fire.  He is just ... on fire.  Like Dany was, when Drogon took her.

Dude.  At least 4 such people were present.  Frog is an ordinary guy.  The world is full of ordinary guys.  Tatters is one.

And when exactly did Archie, or Gerris, confirm that the burnt man was Frog?  I missed that part.  The best that can be said is that they did not go out of their way to deny it.

This is tiresome.

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

FROG DOES NOT FAKE HIS OWN DEATH IN MY VERSION OF THE THEORY

Is it sinking in yet?

What's the point of me even saying anything if you're not going to listen?

Is Frog invulnerable to crossbows or something?

If people knew Frog were in the process of successfully bonding with a dragon, all sorts of people would want to stop him.  Including Barristan.

The bonding process is not necessarily instantaneous.  And what if Frog were injured and needed to rest and heal?

Now I'm confused.  Either Frog is dead, or he faked his death, or he's wandering around oblivious to the fact that he is supposed to be dead.  Since he was present when someone got fatally burned, I think the final option is out.  So in what way is he not faking his death?

[Gilbert Green]

1 minute ago, Nevets said:

Now I'm confused. 

Well, you could read the thread, rather than asking people to repeat themselves. 

2 minutes ago, Nevets said:

Either Frog is dead, or he faked his death, or he's wandering around oblivious to the fact that he is supposed to be dead.

A fourth option is that he finds out that he is supposed to be dead, and does not bother to correct the error.

But whether that is so or not, Frog does not fake his death in any version of the theory that I ever heard.  Frog has already left the scene when the confusion occurs.

6 minutes ago, Nevets said:

So in what way is he not faking his death?

In the same way that Bran and Rickon did not fake their deaths.  They didn't do it.  They were just hiding.