[ADWD Spoilers] Jon, Stannis, Melisandre

[wvlr]

Yeah, sure, what I was trying to say is that maybe Varamyr doesn't know everything about warging, because he seem to be less skilled than a boy without a fullfilled train and to know only what his trainer said him. And maybe (just maybe) there is a possibility, with external help (Melisandre) and a body newly alive, to warg again in your own body :uhoh:

Sorry, I can't explain myself very well, my English is not enough :bawl:

Does Varamyr know about Red Priests - no.

Does Varamyr know about dead bodies (Zombies) retaining some of their old memories - no.

I think that - as others said above - Jon spirit left his body between the Third blow and the Fourth blow. He may (I hope) float around a little, but shortly he will go ing Ghost's body. And if left there for a long time, he would slowly "disapate".

Now we have never seen Mel, give the "Last Kiss" to anyone. She like Thoros may be quite suprised by the results. It may be the first time she ever tried it since Fire Magic returned with the dragons.

Now if there is a big fight after Jon's death, I think that there will be lots of bodies. If there are lots of bodies, they would have to burn them rather quickly, before they are Zombiefied. I do not see any way that they would burn everyone elso, but not Jon.

But is he was the only one killed, it would be a little strange that they do not burn him, but it could happen.

If they burn him quickly, Mel would have to do the Kiss soon. But if they put him in the Ice Cells is body would be presurved like Maester Amond said "Ice Preserves".

So Jon could spend some time as Ghost, but when Mel gives him the Kiss, his body would "pull" him back because it still has parts of his memories.

[Whatever]

my problem with the "Kiss of fire" is that i don't think mel KNOWS it actually works. I mean, she's more powerful than Thoros, that's made quite clear, but Thoros said the Kiss is given to the dying, not to the deads, and that he'd never heard about the kiss bringing somebody back to life. So, i don't think mel would know that she *could* use the kiss to bring jon back. It doesn't strike me as something the red priests usually do.

[elanmorin]

my problem with the "Kiss of fire" is that i don't think mel KNOWS it actually works. I mean, she's more powerful than Thoros, that's made quite clear, but Thoros said the Kiss is given to the dying, not to the deads, and that he'd never heard about the kiss bringing somebody back to life. So, i don't think mel would know that she *could* use the kiss to bring jon back. It doesn't strike me as something the red priests usually do.

Well, Jon is actually dying, not dead. The stabs he receives will be fatal, but IF Mel is quick enough she can save him before he dies for good. And Mel knows he is important (although I guess she would be quite shaken by the letter and the claims of Ramsay Snow)

[Fredwin]

I believe Mel knows Stannis is alive.. because the first thing she learned to detect was any threats against herself. Well, there is no bigger threat to her survival than Stannis dying.

[Bing]

It's interesting that so many people think Melisandre is evil. I think she's more or less sincere in what she's saying and has no ulterior motives. If anything she's somewhat blinded by her conviction that Stannis is AA reborn. When in the fire, she asked for AA, it responded with Jon Snow, yet she completely disregarded the possibility of Jon as AA and even said something like "Why are you showing me Jon Snow when I'm asking about Azor Ahai?."

I think it would be quite idiotic if Jon doesn't come back, and I would probably stop reading the series. He's not even one of my favourite characters. I ffall into the camp that finds him a little on the dull side (although he's getting more interesting as Lord Commander). It would seem like all his character development was a bit of a waste of time if he just killed randomly in a mutiny.

[MyDogIsNamedDanerys]

I think it would be quite idiotic if Jon doesn't come back, and I would probably stop reading the series. He's not even one of my favourite characters. I ffall into the camp that finds him a little on the dull side (although he's getting more interesting as Lord Commander). It would seem like all his character development was a bit of a waste of time if he just killed randomly in a mutiny.

Eh, I don't see this at all. Robb and Ned had a lot of character development too. And the mutiny wasn't "random" at all. It was a direct consequence of Jon's actions . One of the big points in GRRM's writing is that actions have (sometimes fatal) consequences.

I think bringing Jon back in his original form would be weak writing because it would undermine this core principle. I really hope that if he comes back at all, he's almost unrecognizable, ala UnCat.

[Fredwin]

It's interesting that so many people think Melisandre is evil. I think she's more or less sincere in what she's saying and has no ulterior motives. If anything she's somewhat blinded by her conviction that Stannis is AA reborn. When in the fire, she asked for AA, it responded with Jon Snow, yet she completely disregarded the possibility of Jon as AA and even said something like "Why are you showing me Jon Snow when I'm asking about Azor Ahai?."

I think it would be quite idiotic if Jon doesn't come back, and I would probably stop reading the series. He's not even one of my favourite characters. I ffall into the camp that finds him a little on the dull side (although he's getting more interesting as Lord Commander). It would seem like all his character development was a bit of a waste of time if he just killed randomly in a mutiny.

Well, how do you define evil? Evil people always think they are doing the right thing, or they always have some plan to improve the world or save the world from so and so. The truth is that to attain the ends of these means she is willing to sacrifce children.. in FIRE.. think about that. There is no more heinous crime.

[Whatever]

@MyDogIsNamedDanerys: i don't think you can compare Robb (who wasn't even a POV, and no developed at all) to Jon. Ned had a lot of character development, i agree, but his death was necessary. IMO, killing jon at the end of dance would be the same thing of killing jaime when he escapes from riverrun, or killing dany right after she invaded astapor.

[Gogossos]

I agree that killing Jon at this juncture would be rather pointless (or making an entirely unnecessary point). However, bringing him back as UnJon, or warging into Ghost permanently is similarly unsatisfying. The only solution I see is a coma situation ala Bran. If Jon survives supposedly fatal wounds but remains the Jon I've been reading about I'd be happy.

[Coldhand Luke]

So, where were all the skulls that Mel kept seeing in the flames? I thought it might have been in reference to the Bridge of Skulls, and something would happen to Jon there, but as far as I can remember there are no skulls in Hardin's Tower.

Does anyone think it possible that Ghost could have gotten out of the armory? John does whisper "Ghost" before he "feels" the cold. Maybe Ghost will get out and tear that POS Marsh's throat out. As far as we know, there were at least 4 stab wounds and only 2 were of any consequence. One in the gut and one in the back. It doesn't seem that a couple knife wounds could be certain deathl if help were around the corner. It would be too gimmicky to have another "kiss of fire' resurrection for such a major character. GRRM loves cliffhangers where the reader assumes (with Bran twice, when he fell, and with Theon) that someone is dead, but comes back with a relatively simple explanation or 'fix'. Maybe I am just in denial!

my problem with the "Kiss of fire" is that i don't think mel KNOWS it actually works. I mean, she's more powerful than Thoros, that's made quite clear, but Thoros said the Kiss is given to the dying, not to the deads, and that he'd never heard about the kiss bringing somebody back to life. So, i don't think mel would know that she *could* use the kiss to bring jon back. It doesn't strike me as something the red priests usually do.

I'm not sure I agree that Mel is that much more powerful than Thoros. Other than her visions what power has she demonstrated other than trickery? Thoros has pulled off RESURRECTION on multiple occasions which is pretty freaking otherworldly if you ask me. Even Dondarrion's sword is way more legit than Stannis'.

It's interesting that so many people think Melisandre is evil. I think she's more or less sincere in what she's saying and has no ulterior motives. If anything she's somewhat blinded by her conviction that Stannis is AA reborn.

I'm with you here. GRRM portrays the Red Religion in many ways. Sure, many things we, in modern society, classify as evil are a part of the religion, i.e. human sacrifice, but that seems to be more like errors in Dogma, for none of the sacrifices have resulted in anything earth shattering. There is no denying that R'hllor and the religion has some serious power now that the dragons are back. And also the biggest threat to GRRM's world are the Others and the darkness. Fire and R'hllor and dragons may be the only hope against the denizens of the dark. Does that mean humans have interpreted the idea of only ONE god correctly? Much like real life, I certainly don't think so, but there seems to be some insights that the followers of R'hllor posses that will be of much use in the upcoming battle.

[MyDogIsNamedDanerys]

I agree that killing Jon at this juncture would be rather pointless (or making an entirely unnecessary point). However, bringing him back as UnJon, or warging into Ghost permanently is similarly unsatisfying. The only solution I see is a coma situation ala Bran. If Jon survives supposedly fatal wounds but remains the Jon I've been reading about I'd be happy.

LOL I have the exact opposite reaction! If Jon comes back as his normal self with no consequences that would show that he's a special unicorn and untouchable, unlike everyone else in the series. Very disappointing.

[borwin]

I think that someone will have to die to bring Jon back to life. Maybe Mel, or Maybe Tormund will sacrfice himself. Ghost os also possible becouse of his connection with Jon

Some people forget though that the sacrifice's dont have to be willing in order to work, and that there are 3 killers at large that the wildlings and Mel are more than happy to sacrifice.

[Tagganaro]

There's too many hanging plot threads for me to truly believe Jon is actually dead for good. He has to live on in some form.

1) George would be crazy to never reveal Jon's parentage, especially if Jon is in fact half Targ it would seem Jon has a major role to play somehow.

2) Too much time spent with Jon to kill him off like that. There was a good amount of leadup to the assassination attempt, but I think it has to be just a failed attempt and nothing more.

3) Jon= AA theory is somewhat strong. Killing him off would put an end to that.

4) We need a POV on the Wall. I think it's likely that the Wall will eventually fall. Perhaps that will just be in the Prologue, but I think Jon still has to work to do.

5) Hanging plot threads- We have relationships that Jon built up with several characters that would be ended particularly prematurely if he was to die permanently. Other characters who have died had typically fulfilled most of their storyline purposes and/or character purposes, Jon is still very unfinished. He has built up an antagonistic relationship with Mance whereby I think he has to beat Mance in a fight at some point to make up for his ass-kicking in ADWD. We've seen that Stannis likes him as much as Stannis can like anyone, same goes for Melisandre. We've seen that Jon and Val had some sort of flirting thing going on, we've seen that Jon has good ideas as far as killing and banding against the Others goes but is too limited by the NW's narrow ideology to actually implement these changes to the full of their ability. I don't think his story is finished at all, I just think a way was needed to get him to break his vows to the NW and get him more involved with the affairs of the realm in time to fight the Others when they eventually attack.

[Black Crow]

As far as we know, there were at least 4 stab wounds and only 2 were of any consequence. One in the gut and one in the back. It doesn't seem that a couple knife wounds could be certain deathl if help were around the corner. It would be too gimmicky to have another "kiss of fire' resurrection for such a major character. GRRM loves cliffhangers where the reader assumes (with Bran twice, when he fell, and with Theon) that someone is dead, but comes back with a relatively simple explanation or 'fix'. Maybe I am just in denial!

Essentially this is what I've been arguing for a while now; that Jon is only wounded and will recover without Mel the Succubus doing her foul magick, but thank you for citing the two precedents of Bran. I agree both are significant. This is a cliffhanger, not an opening for a bit of fire magick which is not only going to be gimmicky, already has people groaning and is in any case flatly contradicted by all the dreams/prophecies which explicitly link him with ice rather than the fire which Mel and the other Red Priests deal in.

[MyDogIsNamedDanerys]

5) Hanging plot threads- We have relationships that Jon built up with several characters that would be ended particularly prematurely if he was to die permanently. Other characters who have died had typically fulfilled most of their storyline purposes and/or character purposes, Jon is still very unfinished. He has built up an antagonistic relationship with Mance whereby I think he has to beat Mance in a fight at some point to make up for his ass-kicking in ADWD. We've seen that Stannis likes him as much as Stannis can like anyone, same goes for Melisandre. We've seen that Jon and Val had some sort of flirting thing going on, we've seen that Jon has good ideas as far as killing and banding against the Others goes but is too limited by the NW's narrow ideology to actually implement these changes to the full of their ability.

Well that's what happens when people die - their relationships with the living end... it's not like people in real life stop having relationships a few years prior to dying to make things "clean".

I can think of an analog to every type of relationpship you listed for Ned, Robb, and Catelyn, and they are dead (or... dead-ish). That's what people do - they make connections with others... that's what makes their passing meaningful.

Such as... Cat was getting kinda flirty with that Lord she was going to be hostage with (the Seaguard guy). And she had tons of unresolved connections - basically with all of her children, and with Jon. And we had Dacey Mormont crushing on Robb like the day before she and Robb get killed. Was it pointless to put in these bits of characterization just because the character died later? No I think it was the point. Anyway just some examples that popped into my head.

I don't think his story is finished at all, I just think a way was needed to get him to break his vows to the NW and get him more involved with the affairs of the realm in time to fight the Others when they eventually attack.

This kinda feels like cheating. But I think you are probably right. I just hope he's not really Jon but is definitely... changed. Like he wargs into another person or comes back as a cold-hands or R'hllor style undead.

I think that if Jon's role is to be AA, it doesn't really matter what form he comes back in. His purpose if he is AA is to destroy the others and probably die in the attempt. It is not to become King Jon. His parentage is still important even if he can't continue the Targaryen line - he had to be born Rhaegar and Lyanna's son in order to become who he would be - through his rebirth into AA on The Wall.

[MyDogIsNamedDanerys]

@MyDogIsNamedDanerys: i don't think you can compare Robb (who wasn't even a POV, and no developed at all) to Jon.

He is a lot of first-time readers' favorite character, and he has tons going on with him so his death has a lot of consequences. Just check out tumblr or the still reading thread. I think all this about Robb's downfall being "obvious" is mostly retconning by people trying to protect themselves from the pain of the red wedding. :rolleyes: And Robb actually has quite a bit of character development despite the fact we only see him from Cat's perspective (you have to read between the lines because she has some trouble being objective about him, for obvious reasons). Ned actually has almost no character development, IMO. He's the man he is and stays that way to the end, really.

[Ice Turtle]

He is a lot of first-time readers' favorite character, and he has tons going on with him so his death has a lot of consequences. Just check out tumblr or the still reading thread. I think all this about Robb's downfall being "obvious" is mostly retconning by people trying to protect themselves from the pain of the red wedding. :rolleyes: And Robb actually has quite a bit of character development despite the fact we only see him from Cat's perspective (you have to read between the lines because she has some trouble being objective about him, for obvious reasons). Ned actually has almost no character development, IMO. He's the man he is and stays that way to the end, really.

Well, I didnt really like Robb during first reading, I thought he was uninteresting and weak, but now I think he just needed few more years to learn he hadn't been given. Well, I'm starting to be more surprised by people that are still alive. Edmure Tully is on the top of that list.

[Tagganaro]

Well that's what happens when people die - their relationships with the living end... it's not like people in real life stop having relationships a few years prior to dying to make things "clean".

I can think of an analog to every type of relationpship you listed for Ned, Robb, and Catelyn, and they are dead (or... dead-ish). That's what people do - they make connections with others... that's what makes their passing meaningful.

Such as... Cat was getting kinda flirty with that Lord she was going to be hostage with (the Seaguard guy). And she had tons of unresolved connections - basically with all of her children, and with Jon. And we had Dacey Mormont crushing on Robb like the day before she and Robb get killed. Was it pointless to put in these bits of characterization just because the character died later? No I think it was the point. Anyway just some examples that popped into my head.

This kinda feels like cheating. But I think you are probably right. I just hope he's not really Jon but is definitely... changed. Like he wargs into another person or comes back as a cold-hands or R'hllor style undead.

I think that if Jon's role is to be AA, it doesn't really matter what form he comes back in. His purpose if he is AA is to destroy the others and probably die in the attempt. It is not to become King Jon. His parentage is still important even if he can't continue the Targaryen line - he had to be born Rhaegar and Lyanna's son in order to become who he would be - through his rebirth into AA on The Wall.

We know that Cat pretty much thinks all her children were dead. She thought Bran and Rickon were both dead, and Arya as well. That left Sansa who she didn't even want to think about being a prisoner, and we know how obsessed she became with Robb. The second he was going to die, it was foreshadowed that her arc would end as well (at least her non-zombie arc). I have to reread her chapters I guess, but I don't recall any sort of flirting going on with her, and all we really had left was her desire to protect Robb, and the awful sense of foreboding that began once Robb married Jeyne, and of course the second the Stark party arrived at the Twins and it was clear something was very, very wrong. And while you're right she still has some unresolved issues, they aren't nearly as numerous as Jon's and secondly she probably will get to resolve those issues as she has been given a second life.

As for Robb, firstly he's not a POV character so he's much easier to kill off. Secondly, it became clear well before the RW that he was essentially fighting a losing battle. The whole Jaime/Karstark issue, the fact that despite winning every battle he was barely making any progress in terms of defeating the Lannisters or winning the war, and of course the nail in the coffin of breaking his marriage to the Freys. I thought Robb actually did have some remaining storylines of course, but him not being a POV was dispositive of him being killed. I wasn't a huge fan of killing him off to be honest, I thought it hurt in AFFC to not really have him to root for, but it became clear well before the RW that he was in trouble.

And we do seem to agree that Jon has some kind of role left. You just think/hope that it will be some kind of undead thing, where as I'm 50/50 as to him being somehow "changed" or just surviving.

[Black Crow]

There's too many hanging plot threads for me to truly believe Jon is actually dead for good...

...I just think a way was needed to get him to break his vows to the NW and get him more involved with the affairs of the realm in time to fight the Others when they eventually attack.

I have to disagree, the whole build-up to the assasination attempt was the story of how he was wrestling with his vows and eventually coming to the conclusion that the only way to achieve the core mission of defending the realms of men was to ditch the vows and set himself up as King of Winter. The argument advanced in the early days after publication that being dead would free him from his vows to do what he liked such as become Lord of Winterfell, is nonsense - a pettifogging lawyer trick that he would rightly regard as beneath him. He's already of his own free will setting up for King and getting involved with the affairs of the realm which is precisely why the traditionalists are sticking the knife in.

Once he's on his feet again he's going to go on as before, the same old Jon - just a little bit madder.

[Lord Garth Formerly Izar]

I have to disagree, the whole build-up to the assasination attempt was the story of how he was wrestling with his vows and eventually coming to the conclusion that the only way to achieve the core mission of defending the realms of men was to ditch the vows and set himself up as King of Winter. The argument advanced in the early days after publication that being dead would free him from his vows to do what he liked such as become Lord of Winterfell, is nonsense - a pettifogging lawyer trick that he would rightly regard as beneath him. He's already of his own free will setting up for King and getting involved with the affairs of the realm which is precisely why the traditionalists are sticking the knife in.

Once he's on his feet again he's going to go on as before, the same old Jon - just a little bit madder.

Agreed , but with a magic flaming sword