The "Dragon Rider" [aDwD Spoilers]

[Fearsome Fred]

For what it's worth, it appears that Dany's encounter with Drogon in Draznak's Pit is a second "fire resistant" event for Dany, similar to the birth of her dragons. Remembering the birth of her dragons, she thinks (p. 932):

The fire burned away my hair, but elsewise it did not touch me. It had been the same in Draznak's Pit.

[Nev yn]

If you must postulate that Cersei's "other task" is really a reference to TWO other tasks, both of which are secret

You're assuming that the task to return Myrcella was secret. There is absolutely no statement in the text that this is the case. Swann did not try to speak to Doran about it secretly, which means the entire Dornish court now knows she will be moving and vulnerable. You know, the Dornish court that everyone knows hates the Lannisters and is bound to them by barely a thread, to the point where Cersei allowed Tyrion's engagement of Myrcella to Trystane to stand even though she was absolutely furious? If it was a secret, him announcing his intentions in front of the Dornish court would be infinitely more stupid than telling the King's Council.

obvious troll is obvious

Yeah. I really need to stop clicking "View it anyway". My ignore instincts during the whole Bronn/Shae kerfuffle have been sufficiently vindicated.

The fire burned away my hair, but elsewise it did not touch me. It had been the same in Draznak's Pit.

And yet, from the beginning of the same chapter:

The rocks had scraped her hands raw. They are better than they were, though, she decided as she picked at a broken blister. Her skin was pink and tender, and a pale milky fluid was leaking from her cracked palms, but her burns were healing.

Bold mine. She had been climbing down the hill for "half the morning", so it seems impossible that she's somehow referring to sunburn or something similar, as even if she developed sunburn in couple hour climb there is no way it would already be healing. Is Dany deluding herself and working towards self-immolation while she thinks she's immune to fire?

[Fearsome Fred]

You're assuming that the task to return Myrcella was secret.

I'm assuming that, at that moment, she decides to let that task "remain unsaid".

There is absolutely no statement in the text that this is the case.

She does indeed let it "remain unsaid", at that moment.

And yet, from the beginning of the same chapter:

The rocks had scraped her hands raw. They are better than they were, though, she decided as she picked at a broken blister. Her skin was pink and tender, and a pale milky fluid was leaking from her cracked palms, but her burns were healing.

Okay. So she had a fire resistant event, but had burns anyway. And people saw her burning. She survived. All I have suggested is the possibility that Quentyn may have had a roughly analogous experience, just with more panic.

[solarbear]

You certainly make a good argument, I am on the fence. If this theory is true, I hate that a rider is introduced so late in the story. If it is false, It was a terrible waste of pages.

I have to agree. Seems a waste of so many pages at this point.

[Fearsome Fred]

Bran Vas wrote:

The theory that Myrcella is dead is intriguing. In particular because we know that she has a body double, Rosamund, and they have exchanged identities when they were in Braavos. Rosamund will play a role at some point.

Following up on your thought, I found this quote, from "The Queenmaker", which struck me as particularly "foreshadowy". First Aryanne, then Arys, is speaking:

"And the handmaid? Is she convincing?"

"From a distance. The Imp picked her for this purpose, over many girls of nobler birth. Myrcella helped curl her hair, and painted the dots on her face herself. They are distant kin. Lannisport teems with Lannys, Lannetts, Lantells, and lesser Lannisters, and half of them have that yellow hair. Dressed in Myrcella's bedrobe with the maester's salve smeared across her face ... she might even have fooled me, in a dim light."

If some maester's salve and some dim light make Rosamund convincing to her own bodyguard, how much more to someone who knows her less well? Who has not seen her in a longer time? And suppose, on top of the salve, you throw in some horrible scarring, and perhaps some facial swelling, and some bandages.

[Fearsome Fred]

Bran Vas wrote:

To return to the topic of Quentyn and the dragons. I'd like to advertise an interesting, little-noticed fact. When Arianne is emprisonned in the tower, she has at her disposal a large book on dragons (of the scientific type, not a collection of tales). We know from the Tyrion chapters in ADwD that books about dragons are rare and important. Correct me if I am wrong: there is no sign that Quentyn has ever heard about that book.

Oops, sorry. I did not write this interesting thought. Bran Vas did. But I cannot re-edit my last post from my current computer.

In response: I suspect the Quentyn mission was rather hurriedly put together in response to the emergency situation following the death of the Red Viper. Were Doran not frightened that he could not hold back the tide of war, he might have allowed Quentyn more time to prepare.

[Bran Vras]

In response: I suspect the Quentyn mission was rather hurriedly put together in response to the emergency situation following the death of the Red Viper. Were Doran not frightened that he could not hold back the tide of war, he might have allowed Quentyn more time to prepare.

Thank you for the suggestion, that I haven't heard yet. But I do not think it fits.

A maester was summoned to participate in the mission, a maester apparently skilled in the languages of the Free Cities and Slaver's bay. So some thinking has been devoted to what kind of knowledge would be useful for the mission. Moreover maester Kedry had given books to Quentyn, that Quentyn dutifully read on the Meadowlark. (Some of those all important books were about the Volantene political system.) Since the dragon book was deliberately given to Arianne, it was not a tome accumulating dust in some disaffected library, but something very much in Doran Martell's mind. Moreover, it was known from the start that the mission was about dragons. So, no, it can't be explained as an oversight in an underprepared journey.

There is concurrent thread running on the topic, and more: "Ten things..."

[Fearsome Fred]

ManyFacedOne wrote:

4. He has no reason not to trust her with something like that.

He has every reason. In addition to the reasons already mentioned (that she is actively plotting to start the very war he is attempting to prevent), there is this:

Arianne, your nature ... to you, a secret was only a choice tale to whisper to Garin and Tyene in your bed of a night. Garin gossips as only the orphans can, and Tyene keeps nothing from Obara and the Lady Nym. And if they knew ... Obara is too fond of wine, and Nym is too close to the Fowler twins. And who might the Fowler twins confide in? I could not take the risk."

ManyFacedOne wrote:

She wanted to crown Myrcella, but that was before she knew his plans for her and Dorne. It would make no sense for her to do so afterwards.

I think it would help, here, to get the sequence of events straight.

(1) She asks him if Myrcella is dead.

(2) He says she is not (which is, I postulate, a lie).

(3) She then asks him about Quent's mission.

(4) He then lies about that too.

(5) She presses him on Quent's mission, voicing her suspicion that Quent and Doran are plotting to steal her birthright. (Note that, until this point, Doran did not understand why Arianne was plotting against him).

(6) Doran relents, and tells her the truth about Quent's mission.

(7) The chapter ends, without the subject of Myrcella coming up again.

[The Oncoming Storm]

But if he survived, then NO ONE SLIGHTLY IMPORTANT died in this book... (Jon lives or will live. Stannis will eat Ramsay for breakfast.)

I would feel good if Quent lived but I think he's dead. His role was to show how a naive boy who believes himself a high fantasy hero fares in ASoIaF. Also, to be the sun that has risen in the west and set in the east.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Is Dany deluding herself and working towards self-immolation while she thinks she's immune to fire?

I think she might be. There's a moment with Drogon in the pit where she thinks, "He's fire made flesh, and so am I." Well obviously not, sweetheart. It also looks like she ducked under the worst part of his flames, and still took a breath blast in the face that was hot enough to blister skin. So I'm confused as to how she thinks she's fire-resistant when Drogon did burn her at least somewhat. Maybe she is deluding herself or doesn't know that a few inches in another direction would have caused her to roast? She can't have had a "fire-resistant event, but had burns anyway." That makes no sense. If it was a true fire-resistant event, she would have no burns. If she had burns, it wasn't truly a fire-resistant event.

Maybe she'll take a nice big swig of wildfire like Aerion Brightflame (who thought he was a living dragon).

[Fearsome Fred]

I think she might be. There's a moment with Drogon in the pit where she thinks, "He's fire made flesh, and so am I." Well obviously not, sweetheart.

It is not so "obviously not" to me. Nor am I sure why it seems that way to you. Perhaps you are being overly literal about what is obviously a mystical/metaphorical statement. And if it is obvious that Dan is not "fire made of flesh" why is it not obvious that dragons are not either. Edit: To a literal mind, "fire" and "flesh" are obviously different things.

It also looks like she ducked under the worst part of his flames, and still took a breath blast in the face that was hot enough to blister skin. So I'm confused as to how she thinks she's fire-resistant when Drogon did burn her at least somewhat. Maybe she is deluding herself or doesn't know that a few inches in another direction would have caused her to roast? She can't have had a "fire-resistant event, but had burns anyway." That makes no sense. If it was a true fire-resistant event, she would have no burns. If she had burns, it wasn't truly a fire-resistant event.

No. "Fire resistant" is not the same as "fire immune". And even if it were, one could still have burns, as long as the "event" was not constant.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

It is not so "obviously not" to me. Nor am I sure why it seems that way to you. Perhaps you are being overly literal about what is obviously a mystical/metaphorical statement. And if it is obvious that Dan is not "fire made of flesh" why is it not obvious that dragons are not either.

Dany is a human being, not a dragon. Even if dragons are "fire made flesh," she's a human, not a dragon. She is not "fire made flesh." She burns like everyone else. Ask Martin. She may be being "symbolic," but it's a small step in that nutty family to go from being "symbolically" fire made flesh to thinking that you ARE fire made flesh.

No. "Fire resistant" is not the same as "fire immune". And even if it were, one could still have burns, as long as the "event" was not constant.

If you were "fire immune," you would not burn. Drogon merely breathed in her face and still blistered skin. If he'd actually flamed up in her face he would've incinerated her.

[Fearsome Fred]

If you were "fire immune," you would not burn.

You might, if you were "fire immune" only part of the time. But in any event, we need not posultate total fire immunity.

Drogon merely breathed in her face and still blistered skin. If he'd actually flamed up in her face he would've incinerated her.

He "merely" breathed in her face? How do you know this would not have killed someone else? Nor do we know what caused her blisters. It could come from the time when he "actually" breathed on her.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

You might, if you were "fire immune" only part of the time. But in any event, we need not posultate total fire immunity.

The dragons are enough of a Staples easy button without the magically fireproof Dany whenever Martin feels like it. He already said it was a one-time thing on the funeral pyre, what more do you want? Do you think he's lying?

He "merely" breathed in her face? How do you know this would not have killed someone else? Nor do we know what caused her blisters. It could come from the time when he "actually" breathed on her.

Um, yes? When it says that his breath is hot enough to blister skin, I'm going on the assumption that it was his ... breath that blistered the skin. Crazy, right?

[Fearsome Fred]

He already said it was a one-time thing on the funeral pyre, what more do you want? Do you think he's lying?

No. Where was the lie? When he said "Probably not" to a second fire-IMMUNE event? "Probably not" means the same as "possibly yes." All I am saying is that the event in the Pit was (apparently) a second fire-RESISTANT (not necessarily fire-IMMUNE) event.

Also, you are being an awful bully with your insistance that GRRM's words mean exactly what YOU think it means. If Dany's bonfire was a "unique" event, does that mean it was the only bonfire in the entire history of Westeros? The only dragon hatching in the entire history of Westeros?

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

No. Where was the lie? When he said "Probably not" to a second fire-IMMUNE event? "Probably not" means the same as "possibly yes." All I am saying is that the event in the Pit was (apparently) a second fire-RESISTANT (not necessarily fire-IMMUNE) event.

I think probably not means probably not.

I don't think it was a fire-resistant event because she had burns.

Also, you are being an awful bully with your insistance that GRRM's words mean exactly what YOU think it means. If Dany's bonfire was a "unique" event, does that mean it was the only bonfire in the entire history of Westeros? The only dragon hatching in the entire history of Westeros?

A unique event to her. Meaning that just because Dany walked into a fiery pyre one time and survived doesn't mean it will happen again to her.

I think you're being an awful troll so hey, we're even.

[Fearsome Fred]

I don't think it was a fire-resistant event because she had burns.

Fire-RESISTANT simply does not mean that. If the burns were less severe than they would otherwise be, then it is a fire-resistant event.

A unique event to her.

Oh. And the italicized words are GRRM's, are they?

Meaning that just because Dany walked into a fiery pyre one time and survived doesn't mean it will happen again to her.

Does not mean it won't either.

[Ser Loudmouth]

Since I'm one of the (apparently few) people who actually liked Quentin, I would really wish your theory to be true. But we'll have to wait and see.

[7V3N]

What if Dany conquers the free cities and creates a New Valyria? We do not know what GRRM's intentions are, so we cannot assume "this should happen by this point." There was certainly a lot to suggest that there was more to what we read. I just think that with both dragons acting the same, Quent screaming when he realizes he is burning, and other stuff shows that he was scorched. Most people would die immediately from the flames Quentyn took, but he lived for three days. His dragonblood is what kept him alive so long. Too many things point to Quent failing.

[Sam-The-Slayer]

I must admit that after reading ADWD, I did not have even the slightest idea that Quentyn might still be alive. I took the text at face value when I read that Quentyn was burning and later that "the Prince is dead". But the OP does an excellant job of reading between the lines and formulating a very fantastical but believable theory (in that it follows closely with the story that we have been presented thus far).

The main problem with this theory is that it tries to use textual evidence to back up an idea that is directly contradicted in the actual text of the book. Most people will come to the same conclusion that I did, that Quentyn is dead, because that is what it "says" in the book. But in an attempt to further flesh out this theory, I will try to use as much non-textual evidence as I can.

First of all, authors/writers absolutely love to mislead their audience (for evidence, see every single episode of every detective show ever made). GRRM has already done this numerous times throughout his story, for example, Ned's death in AGOT. He knew that the audience would expect Ned to live because he was such an important player, and he even gave him an out with the Night's Watch, but GRRM killed him anyway, because he knew the audience would never expect it (among other reasons). Also, Bran's "death" in ACOK was done with a great deal of misleading.

Next I would like to focus on the layout of the story. AGOT, ACOK, & ASOS in my opinion form the first act of the story. AFFC & ADWD form the second act. There are several differences in style between these two acts. First of all, GRRM introduces a whole bunch of new POV characters in the second act. He also starts naming the chapters a little differently, instead of just using names, he uses titles or phrases that refer to certain characters. But the main difference, in my opinion, is that he introduces two completely new areas, namely the Iron Islands and Dorne. In fact the first two chapters of AFFC (not including prologue) are an introduction to these two areas. And if you think of AFFC and ADWD as two sides of the same coin, there is a huge focus on the characters from these areas. Why would GRRM do this? Just to add more filler to the story? No I don't think so. He was introducing a new set of endgame players. And what is the endgame? I don't know, but I'm pretty sure it has something to do with dragons.

With that said, I would like to focus on the characters of Quentyn and Victarion. Both are slowly introduced from the POV of other characters, and both seem easily forgettable at first, but both of their homelands have been a huge focus since the beginning of AFFC. Again, why would GRRM spend so much time on these previously unnecessary storylines if there was not a significant payoff in the near future? In my opinion, it is because these two men will become dragonriders. If the OP's theory is correct and Quentyn is still alive with a tamed dragon, this only leaves one untamed dragon left. And with Victarion and his dragon horn lurking in the background somewhere, it doesn't seem like much of a stretch to assume that he will be able to tame the remaining dragon. I know we all want to see Jon, Bran or Arya become dragonriders, but this could still happen. I merely propose that Quentyn and Victarion will ride/guide the dragons to Westeros. Many people want/expect Aegon or Jon or whoever to be the other heads of the dragon, but they are already in Westeros. How else will the dragons get there?

My final argument is in the title of the book, A Dance With Dragons. Many people have voiced their confusion over this title, because of the lack of actual dragons in the story. But if this theory is correct, many of the POVs in this act will actually have very strong ties to dragons. Dany (obviously), Jon (possibly), Connington (mummers dragon) and presumably the Ironborn and Dorne storylines as well.