[ADwD Spoilers] Who is the main character?

[JeremyReed]

I don't know about everyone else, but when I first opened GOT I thought Bran was the main character because he had the first POV. Then, I thought that there is no main character. Now I'm just confused. After reading ADWD it seems that my first thought may be correct, maybe Bran will be the hero, or anti hero, of the story. It would certainly be an interesting way to develop the main character through such a small amount of chapters. Anyway, what do you think: Is Bran the main character? Is it someone else? Is there a main character?

[Candor]

Personally, I think of it as this: look at how the books are written. A multitude of POV's, so many interconnecting stories........It's like life. There is no main character.

[Jem]

Hodor is the main character. It is known.

[Chalais]

The main character is... YOUR MOM! :)

[Candor]

The main character is... YOUR MOM! :)

Everyone would drop like flies if that were true.

[Faint]

My impression has always been that Jon, Daenerys and Tyrion are the main characters, with Sansa, Arya and Bran not far behind. Those six, though, are the very core of the story.

[Dont Call me Bastard]

I pretty much agree with the six of Jon, Dany, Tyrion, Bran, Arya, and Sansa, although i wouldn't seperate the latter 3 from the first so much as they have very big roles to play ahead i think

[Glyn Tarvoke]

The books are often organized loosely around people laden geography. GRMM is moving us around his Westoros and in Essos continents. I'd say the world politics are the main characters. Or Candace above summed it up.

[mike_s_6]

I think it's denial if you think that there are no main character/s in the book. Clearly so much focus is given on Jon, Dany, and Tyrion and they're always surviving the odds they are put in. They are also heroic in their own way, in means that other characters may find hard to top.

[Candor]

:shrug: Nothing off my back. Denial is a strong word, however.

It's an opinion. I believe there is on one main character because A: so many are central the story, and B: in the scheme of life, we are all the main character of our own story, no one else's.

[iamthedave]

:shrug: Nothing off my back. Denial is a strong word, however.

It's an opinion. I believe there is on one main character because A: so many are central the story, and B: in the scheme of life, we are all the main character of our own story, no one else's.

Actually very few are central in the story.

The plot arcs of Jon and Dany (and arguably Tyrion now he's converging on Dany) render the plot arcs of almost every other character irrelevant.

If the Others come, every character who is involved in the intrigue in Kings Landing will die. One hundred per cent guaranteed, they're dead, dead, dead.

That's really how you can tell who the central characters are. The plot centers on the events which happen in those three POVs, and everyone else's just provides colour and context and in some cases obstacles for those three characters to overcome.

[kephv]

Actually very few are central in the story.

The plot arcs of Jon and Dany (and arguably Tyrion now he's converging on Dany) render the plot arcs of almost every other character irrelevant.

If the Others come, every character who is involved in the intrigue in Kings Landing will die. One hundred per cent guaranteed, they're dead, dead, dead.

How so? You think everyone's just going to die off that easily? Also, even if that was the case, just because there's some imminent danger involved in one arc doesn't render the other ones irrelevant. Each character has a story and are essential to their own plot or those of others they're wrapped up in. It's a character journey as much as it is pure plot points.

That's really how you can tell who the central characters are. The plot centers on the events which happen in those three POVs, and everyone else's just provides colour and context and in some cases obstacles for those three characters to overcome.

Nonsense. Some characters are isolated from those events entirely and don't provide any context for them at all.

[mike_s_6]

:shrug: Nothing off my back. Denial is a strong word, however.

It's an opinion. I believe there is on one main character because A: so many are central the story, and B: in the scheme of life, we are all the main character of our own story, no one else's.

Yes, maybe 'denial' is a strong word especially how some use it, but here I was using it to show my own opinion that it is glaring that the narrative focuses with clear bias on a few characters (two IMO, considering the book's title and the prevalence of these characteristics in two characters), that I find it difficult to believe that others don't see it. I respect your opinion though I don't agree.

[Candor]

All right then, as long as you're not at my throat, I can respect a different take. I don't think that the Others deal negates other plot lines though, and I certainly don't believe George RR would be thinking that way as he wrote. Some character may have an epic role to play, but that's their "story" Some have a lesser role to play, and that's their story. I am of the opinion that it matters not how epic a role a character has, they are still important while reading. To me how the books are written, we are invested in at the very least our surviving POV characters and to say that they are not main just because Jon and Dany (who I believe you were getting at, perhaps with the Ice and Fire?) have great destinies is off the mark. If we consider it even these handful of people who are the figureheads of important story arcs would have never gotten there with no support from anyone else, or anyone else to give them the experiences that shaped them. The small folk or lesser characters, indeed even characters who are now dead have had their own importance at stages, so why are they not main characters?

[The Lost Lord]

My impression has always been that Jon, Daenerys and Tyrion are the main characters, with Sansa, Arya and Bran not far behind. Those six, though, are the very core of the story.

Yes. As I just posted in another thread, Martin intended the AGOT POVs to be the only ones for the series.

George said that at first he was just going to use the original POVs from AGoT for the entire series, then he realized that he needed to see what Stannis was doing, but did'nt want to use Stannis as a POV. So he created Davos. Davos was his first added POV. The rest followed.

This to me is a huge tell that those 6 surviving POVs from AGOT are the characters central to the endgame of the series. All the other POVs flesh out the world and help us get a broader perspective on events, but their stories are not crucial for the larger plot.

Actually very few are central in the story. The plot arcs of Jon and Dany (and arguably Tyrion now he's converging on Dany) render the plot arcs of almost every other character irrelevant.

Bran and Arya are very relevant because of their powers. Sansa is more debatable, but IMO she is clearly being kept around because the game of thrones and human machinations will affect the larger magical conflict.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

The three primary characters throughout the entire story are, in my opinion, Jon, Dany and Tyrion. Everyone else, including Arya, Bran, Sansa, Jaime, Cersei, Theon, Stannis and so on, is ultimately secondary.

[tze]

The three primary characters throughout the entire story are, in my opinion, Jon, Dany and Tyrion. Everyone else, including Arya, Bran, Sansa, Jaime, Cersei, Theon, Stannis and so on, is ultimately secondary.

But then how do you explain A Feast For Crows? GRRM wrote and released an entire book that didn't contain POVs of Jon, Dany, or Tyrion. Granted, Jon appears via Sam's POV, but neither Tyrion nor Dany appears at all. I don't see how we can consider those three as the "primary" characters, the most integral characters in the story, when the author himself felt comfortable writing an entire book without them.

[brashcandy]

But then how do you explain A Feast For Crows? GRRM wrote and released an entire book that didn't contain POVs of Jon, Dany, or Tyrion. Granted, Jon appears via Sam's POV, but neither Tyrion nor Dany appears at all. I don't see how we can consider those three as the "primary" characters, the most integral characters in the story, when the author himself felt comfortable writing an entire book without them.

Just because he wrote an entire book without them doesn't mean anything. It was about upping the suspense for readers and also focusing more narrowly on KL. He didn't feature Sansa in ADWD either and she's a pretty big character.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

But then how do you explain A Feast For Crows? GRRM wrote and released an entire book that didn't contain POVs of Jon, Dany, or Tyrion. Granted, Jon appears via Sam's POV, but neither Tyrion nor Dany appears at all. I don't see how we can consider those three as the "primary" characters, the most integral characters in the story, when the author himself felt comfortable writing an entire book without them.

And many people, including me, think that the story suffered somewhat from their absence. Even though they weren't included, their presence was very much felt, and much of the action in the story revolved around them and their influence in some way or another: Sam's trip to Oldtown was at Jon's insistence, everyone in the capital and in the Riverlands and Vale is still reeling from something Tyrion did, and Dorne is making plans based on what Dany's doing. They don't have to physically BE THERE to have an impact on the story, and ultimately, regardless of what happens in any one book (which was, I might remind you, divided up GEOGRAPHICALLY, not based so much on plot necessities; if you think of Feast and Dance as two halves of the same book, your point is largely negated), I still think that when it comes down to it, it's really "about" the three of them.

Nonsense. Some characters are isolated from those events entirely and don't provide any context for them at all.

This is really impossible to say for certain until you know exactly how everything ends up. What looks like it's of no relation now might look very different down the line. For example, the Iron Bank of Braavos and the Braavosi banker provide a link, however tenuous, between Arya in Braavos and Jon on the Wall.

[Lord Damian]

The Iron Throne and the Wall are the main characters. I know that makes no sense but the story of all things seem to revolve around their possession.