A different destiny for Jon

[Marvin]

I always thought that "A Song of Ice and Fire" is a nod towards the impending war between Rhellor and the Others.

That's what the books are about, no?

No. So far there is no evidence for R'hllor's existence. It's the Others vs mankind.

The Old Gods are just memory stored in weirwood trees.

[Whatever]

I always thought that "A Song of Ice and Fire" is a nod towards the impending war between Rhellor and the Others.

That's what the books are about, no?

not necessarily. As far as we know, the endless war between R'hllor and the Great Other is just in Melisandre's mind

[Kennit]

No. So far there is no evidence for R'hllor's existence. It's the Others vs mankind.

The Old Gods are just memory stored in weirwood trees.

No, there is no evidence for R'hllor's existence, but "ice vs fire" is the main theme in the series.

The Old Gods(well, the greenseers, who are the manifestation the Old Gods power, of sort) can warg into any animal they want with ease, have access to thousand of years of human history(the weirwood trees' memories), can contact people in dreams, pull an Atlantis(arm of Dorne) and many other things we don't know of yet.

Sounds pretty godlike, if you ask me.

[Gemini]

not necessarily. As far as we know, the endless war between R'hllor and the Great Other is just in Melisandre's mind

a "song of ice and fire" is also mentioned by Rhaegar in regards to the PtwP. He says, "his will be the song of ice and fire," whom he believed to be his son Aegon. So if Jon is actually Rhaegar's son, being the combination of Lyanna (ice) and Rhaegar (fire), it would be quite fitting.

[RickD]

I always thought that "A Song of Ice and Fire" is a nod towards the impending war between Rhellor and the Others.

That's what the books are about, no?

I thought Jon Snow was the Ice and Daenerys Targaryen was the Fire.

[SerFelixCulpa]

No. So far there is no evidence for R'hllor's existence. It's the Others vs mankind.

The Old Gods are just memory stored in weirwood trees.

Some people are confusing just what "no evidence" means. Unreliable, uncertain, or "bad" evidence =/= no evidence.

There is evidence that R'hllor exists. First, people in the novels claim he exists. Now, that may be unreliable, it may be hearsay, it may be a lie or a mistake. But, the fact people believe he exists and state the belief is evidence, however weak, that he does exist.

Furthermore, allegedly based on the supposed belief and the power it gives them, a number of people (including Thoros, Melisandre, and Moqorro) are able to perform feats of magic. This is actually good evidence that R'hllor exists. Again, this is not dispositive: they could be mistaking the provenance of or nature of their powers, it may have nothing to do with "R'hllor" at all. In other words, just because they think it comes from R'hllor does not mean it actually does. (Indeed, contra, Melisandre's POV clearly demonstrates she does not always interpret her visions correctly.)

But, to say there is no evidence R'hllor exists is demonstrably false: this is certainly an open question and one we are meant to speculate on.

[northern eagle]

I also belive Jon is going to become King of the North in some way, and that's why he needed to die first: this way he's free from the NW's oath (It shall not end until my death)

Also because Robb made him a Stark by royal decree, and therefore second in the line of succession (or I'm I remembering wrong?).

[Maria26]

The only thing I'm sure of is that Jon's life and Dany's life are intertwined. They both have a role to play in each other lives and I can't wait to see that happen. I've been longing their first meeting for a while now and I pray for it to happen in the next book rather than the last one.

I can't get out of my hear that part which was said to Danny while in The House Of The Undying..."a blue flower growing from a chink in a wall of ice". It HAS to be Jon right? Couldn't it be about the three mounts she'll ride? Or the three fires she'll light? Not sure about the treason part. Even Kit knows that the goal is for Danny/Jon to meet.:)

[jon rr stark]

I always thought that "A Song of Ice and Fire" is a nod towards the impending war between Rhellor and the Others.

That's what the books are about, no?

:agree:

[sara_stk]

not necessarily. As far as we know, the endless war between R'hllor and the Great Other is just in Melisandre's mind

:thumbsup: i agree.

[Bronn is God]

Jon was AA and now is dead. The world is doomed.

Leave it like that please.

[Greg B]

But, to say there is no evidence R'hllor exists is demonstrably false: this is certainly an open question and one we are meant to speculate on.

There is "evidence" in the same way that thunder is evidence of the existence of Thor. There is absolutely no verifiable evidence that R'hllor or any other god exists. This is much stronger than the simple absence of verified evidence -- none of the evidence you present is even capable of being verified. The "evidence" is just belief -- people believe R'hllor exists, people with magic powers believe those magic powers come from R'hllor, others disagree, etc. There is no more evidence for the existence of R'hllor than for grumpkins.

Indeed, the sheer number and diversity of exclusive religions is exactly what you'd expect to see if religions were cultural artifacts rather than competing truth claims/descriptions of reality that could be tested against each other. It's just that in Martin's world, those cultural artifacts are sometimes used to explain both natural phenomena (e.g. thunder) and supernatural powers (e.g. clairvoyance, resurrection).

Note that saying "There is no real evidence that R'hllor exists" is not the same as saying "R'hllor does not exist." Grumpkins might exist -- it's just that in the absence of real evidence, there's no particular reason to think they do.

[longlivestark]

Jon was AA and now is dead. The world is doomed.

Leave it like that please.

Can't, another author already wrote that story.

[NotToday]

Indeed, the sheer number and diversity of exclusive religions is exactly what you'd expect to see if religions were cultural artifacts rather than competing truth claims/descriptions of reality that could be tested against each other. It's just that in Martin's world, those cultural artifacts are sometimes used to explain both natural phenomena (e.g. thunder) and supernatural powers (e.g. clairvoyance, resurrection).

The only religion that is definitively false would be the Faith of the Seven. Their followers dont have any powers and don't seem to be having things going their way. As for the old gods, it could just be that all the weirwoods just store memories and act like eyes for the Children of the Forest. All the magic (like same being allowed through the wall through that weirwood door) could just be the magic of the children. But their religion seems to be one of the most tolerant in all of Westeros. The followers of the Seven call the others blasphemers, the followers of the Red god burn the other gods, its the followers of the old gods who tolerate the other two.

The powers of the Red Priests doesnt seem too different from the blood mahic performed by Mirri Maz Dur, and I dont think that was very religious.

[NotToday]

The Old Gods(well, the greenseers, who are the manifestation the Old Gods power, of sort) can warg into any animal they want with ease, have access to thousand of years of human history(the weirwood trees' memories), can contact people in dreams, pull an Atlantis(arm of Dorne) and many other things we don't know of yet.

Sounds pretty godlike, if you ask me.

But the children of the forest were still losing their war with the First Men (who were just savages with bronze weapons). If they were actually so powerful, they might have done a better job defending themeselves and their lands.

[NotToday]

a "song of ice and fire" is also mentioned by Rhaegar in regards to the PtwP. He says, "his will be the song of ice and fire," whom he believed to be his son Aegon. So if Jon is actually Rhaegar's son, being the combination of Lyanna (ice) and Rhaegar (fire), it would be quite fitting.

If Jon is indeed the child of Lyanna and Rhaegar, then what you said could make sense. But I feel that Dany has to somehow end up in the North. The Others and the Wights are both vulnerable to fire; the dragons breath fire. The title of the series could be referring to the battle between Dany's Dragons (Fire) and the Others(Ice).

As for Jon, I think he will survive, either Mel the Red Witch will heal him, or she will resurrect him like Thoros did to Cat. His skinchaning abilities could be useful in controlling the dragons. He could communicate with them, or maybe even control them. Too bad he doesn't have the fire-resistance that Dany has though.

[longlivestark]

If Jon is indeed the child of Lyanna and Rhaegar, then what you said could make sense. But I feel that Dany has to somehow end up in the North. The Others and the Wights are both vulnerable to fire; the dragons breath fire. The title of the series could be referring to the battle between Dany's Dragons (Fire) and the Others(Ice).

As for Jon, I think he will survive, either Mel the Red Witch will heal him, or she will resurrect him like Thoros did to Cat. His skinchaning abilities could be useful in controlling the dragons. He could communicate with them, or maybe even control them. Too bad he doesn't have the fire-resistance that Dany has though.

According to GRRM the title is meant to have more then one meaning so it could very well mean both and more, also Dany may not end up in the North by the time she shows up I can see the wall having fallen and the North basically conquered by others.

[Guest]

Fans speculate that Jon will become a villain, but what about an anti-hero? (as opposed to Stannis who is an anti-villain) Jon Snow could align with a rich history of tragically-fated antiheroes like Elric, Corwin, and Turin--all leaders of men, but cursed. For example, Turin seduced his sister, brought ruin upon his family, threw himself on his sword, but killed the evil dragon in the end. Jon has all the elements in place to go down this road: he's a "traitorous" bastard, a figure who by nature trucks in betrayal and doom. After ADWD he could embrace this imposed identity to the fullest, as he embarks on increasingly morally questionable actions, justified in his mind as payback for all the wrongs he's nursed over the years, while overall not doing much to improve the bastard image .

Lit critics love to point out the origins of the antihero in Kullervo, from Finnish mythology. Here's an interesting summary of one of the Finnish myths:

The death poem of Kullervo, like Macbeth in which he interrogates his blade, is famous. Unlike the dagger in Macbeth, Kullervo's sword replies, bursting into song: it affirms that if it gladly participated in his other foul deeds, it would gladly drink of his blood also. This interrogation has been duplicated in J.R.R. Tolien's The Children of Húrin with Túrin Turambar talking to his black sword, Gurthang, before committing suicide.

It's not a stretch to see the parallel between Gurthang, Stormbringer, and Lightbringer: they kill both enemies (Others, dragons) but also friends, family, lovers, and the owners themselves. Jon's not going to be a hero with a capital H, nor is Lightbringer going to be the Consequence-Free Magic Sword. Moreover antiheroes are people who lead complicated emotional lives. Heroics (a dirty word in ASOIAF?) are subtly masked under layers of entitled psychology and outwardly awful actions, which lends anti's a tragic quality instead of a triumphant one. For example, a reviewer of Children of Hurin brings up an interesting point about Tolkien's notion of tragedy that no doubt influences Martin:

[The tale of Turin] is a tragedy, not in the Aristotelian sense (for there is precious little catharsis here) but in the northern-European sense of humans encountering an overwhelming fate with defiance. And that is at the heart of Tolkien's conception of heroism; precisely not achievement, but a particular and noble-hearted encounter with failure; not how you triumph, but the spirit with which you resist the fate you know to be unavoidable.

In other words the story isn't about "Jon as AA," its about his process of resisting the role as a "cursed" figure (whether a bastard, a traitor, or AA himself), acting "heroically" (but only in his own mind), and by the very act of resisting his fate/nature, he inflicts great personal misery on himself and others.

[Bran the Builder]

Once he separates his consciousness from Nighteyes, Jon will be too busy plotting his revenge on Prince Regal to worry about the Others.

Very well done sir

[kg1982]

In other words the story isn't about "Jon as AA," its about his process of resisting the role as a "cursed" figure (whether a bastard, a traitor, or AA himself), acting "heroically" (but only in his own mind), and by the very act of resisting his fate/nature, he inflicts great personal misery on himself and others.

I think that Jon ends up deciding that he is a Stark and Ned's son even if he is a magical hero and rightful heir to multiple thrones. The Jon storyline has been all about slowly breaking every single one of Jon's many fantasies and assumptions about life; in many ways, his plot arc is similar to Sansa's. When we're first introduced to Jon, we learn that he sulks quite a bit about being a bastard, that he wants to inherit Winterfell, that he wants to be a bad a** ranger and leader that people make songs about, etc. So Martin went one by one through different scenarios to show Jon the reality.

1. The Night's Watch - not the bunch of competent warriors he thought - get ready to spend your life serving in Siberia with criminals.

2. The neat society that doesn't care about your birth (the Wildings) - well, there are as many issues with it as there are with Westros and as many bad and good people. Plus, your new girlfriend ends up getting killed.

3. The leadership post that you always wanted - well, that involves preparing for a massive apocalyptic war and leads to you being assassinated.

I'm assuming that Martin is going to deal with the final three - the Lord of Winterfell, the Azor Ahai, and the Targaryen heir in the last two books. I'm assuming that there is a huge but associated with the Azor Ahai. Melisandre's version of the Azor Ahai is quite dark grey based on the fact she is dark grey herself.

The culmination of the Jon arc I think involves him learning from Reed about Lyanna and Rhaegar and that he really is the true heir, not a bastard. And then ultimately rejecting it despite the fact that it was all that 14 year old Jon ever wanted.