Book Five and Hindsight.

[Punchslap]

I'll cut off your manhood and feed it to the goats!

Does anyone ever wonder why goats are so interested in eating someone's manhood?

I found both AFFC and ADWD slow. I liked the character progression in AFFC, but thought characters regressed in ADWD and a lot of the secondary plots, while not superfluous, were simply uninteresting. But I don't want to derail the thread with that--it just came to mind with the discussion of ADWD above.

[jjames36]

You're not wrong. Tbh, ADwD has turned me off this series.

That's what I thought I was reading.

You're right that a situation where Jon's rebuilding of the wall failed could have worked, but the point is it didn't.

I agree with that point. In the end. Truth be told, I'm not far away from you in terms of turned off-ishness. I'll start Winds of Winter, but if it doesn't move the story forward right quick, I won't finish it.

j

[Cuthbert Allgood]

Take away Arienne and Quentyn chapters, some people say.. and overtime I heard a lot of "xxxx chapters are unnecessary " "they should have cut down the meaningless xxxx " chapters..but .but I, for example love Martell chapters.. My girlfriend thought Brienne's chapters were great. ( I didn't agree) .. To me Bran's chapters in ADWD are the best. I saw some people saying the were bored to hell in Bran's chapters...everybody loved Tyrion when I didn't. And now in ADWD people hate his chapters while I wonder "why didn't I love Tyrion before he is great"...

I understand "I didn't dislike ADWD/AFFC because of my expectations, I disliked them because they were bad" only if the person who claims this can explain the difference from earlier books. "Story didn't move forward" doesn't hold water. It just doesn't.

I can't take someone who suggest "removing Quentyn's chapter" or "skipping all Ironborn chapters" seriously, while discussing the ups and downs of these books. I'm glad Martin or his editors didn't listen to his fans after AFFC and turned ADWD into ASOS v.2. The time for that will come later

[Bran the Weirwood]

I don't know man, I absolutely loved aDwD and I still felt the Quentyn plot could have been better accomplished without him being POV. The only real plus to his chapters was the one involving the Tattered Prince. I always love trying to put the non-POV character pieces together in these novels, and a I believe that between this book and the next almost all of Quentyn's story would have been clear with or without his POV.

Either way, I'm still being nitpicky by bringing that up, and the only reason I'm being nitpicky is because this particular book has been so polarizing. I enjoyed it enough that my all of my little nitpicks would be forgotten if not for people bringing them up all the time. Most books contain flaws, life is more enjoyable when focus is not placed on them.

[Tagganaro]

I actually loved Quentyn's chapters. The ending was absolutely epic. I think the bigger problem was Dany. I just feel like GRRM could have told the story in half the amount of chapters he ended up using. And if he saved up those chapters, then maybe we could have gotten some resolution to the Battle of Winterfell, which would have made ADWD so much better.

But I completely agree with the earlier post. While I could understand not liking ADWD as much as earlier books, I still think it was a very strong effort and don't get how anyone could totally dislike the book. The Theon/Reek chapters were great, Barristan was awesome, and Victarion's chapters were surprisingly hilarious and good as well.

I do understand why it was underwhelming though....the long wait after AFFC for Tyrion and Dany chapters, and imo those were the 2 weakest plots of the book. Tyrion's chapters in particular felt particularly meandering and pointless, I would have been much happier had he stuck with YG to give us a POV there to actually be invested more in what happens with YG.

But again, I thought there was enough goodness involved to still be a very good book. The chapters I mentioned, Frey Pie was simply amazing, Manderley became a stealth great character "The North Remembers.". There was a lot to like imo.

[The Dornishman's Wife]

I actually loved Quentyn's chapters.

Especially also considering the two posts above, this might be a good opportunity to just interject that I absolutely adore how favourite POVs differ so greatly throughout the fandom and how different people find so different facets to appreciate.

[The Lost Lord]

What I think the narrative needed was scenes wherein we see Jon struggle, on a human level, with what he is doing, scenes where, in one way or another, he ponders whether or not his decisions are wrong… Said another way, the trouble is Martin gave us no scenes illustrating Jon's transition from committed to watchman at the end of Storm to Dance's deserter about to lead an army against the realm he is supposed to protect. Martin gave us many, many scenes showing us how Jon reacted to external stimuli, but he gave us very few scenes wherein we see Jon's humanity.

Well, I guess this is where we'll have to agree to disagree. Because I see Jon's "humanity" in all the passages I posted above -- when he backs Stannis, sends Mance to save Arya, arranges the Karstark wedding, etc. Acting to preserve innocent life is a very human act. Even if we don't see a fully-narrated, lengthy internal conflict about it.

I am contending, apparently badly, that by not prioritizing Jon's character arc over the northern plot-line, Martin made Jon's path in Dance feel like a regression that nullified most of his growth in earlier books.

Perhaps I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but I'll mention again that I think you are wrong to define Jon's arc as a regression. Jon is learning how to hold and use power in a way he's never done before. This will prove very important when he returns to power and is a necessary intermediate step toward his next stage of wielding power.

I will say that all of these actions are acceptable for someone putting his own desires above those of the people he is sworn to protect.

And these actions would all also be acceptable for a king or a Warden of the North. Just not a Lord Commander.

For all of his good intentions, Jon's leadership is very short sighted. He doesn't remember what the real goal is (defeating the Others)

I would just point out that he's more focused on the Others than any single other character in the entire Northern area. 90% of his ADWD decisions were about the coming conflict with the Others. 10%, his most controversial decisions, may have not been entirely about the Others. But most importantly, he perceives and acts on the imperative to enlist the wildlings in the fight against the Others when no one else in the Watch can conceive of such a thing.

[Ben amido]

I dunno why ppl keep on commenting that jon bends his vows constantly for achieving greater good. fellows he is just disregarding age old non-written night's watch traditions.

Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come.

yeah the idea of helping stannis some might say he is breaking or bending oath but hink again he is doing nothing but helping a guest at his castle. he is nt sure stannis may be successful @ the end or nt but he is giving him an advice. taking it or following it up is stannis's prerogative. ppl have made good call on the fact that all characters are going through a constant develpment. dany isin't the sweet child we met first in agot or tyrion is the fun loving drunk whoring dwarf but a man on a revenge mission.

so in the end i think the decisions that jon made were right but his assassination was done my cowards who feared to much change might bring doom. u c these cowards lacked the sight to see past their own selfish need to survive. in the true sense the one's who tried to kill him are the ones who broke their vows.

[DurararaFTW]

Take away Arienne and Quentyn chapters, some people say.. and overtime I heard a lot of "xxxx chapters are unnecessary " "they should have cut down the meaningless xxxx " chapters..but .but I, for example love Martell chapters.. My girlfriend thought Brienne's chapters were great. ( I didn't agree) .. To me Bran's chapters in ADWD are the best. I saw some people saying the were bored to hell in Bran's chapters...everybody loved Tyrion when I didn't. And now in ADWD people hate his chapters while I wonder "why didn't I love Tyrion before he is great"...

I understand "I didn't dislike ADWD/AFFC because of my expectations, I disliked them because they were bad" only if the person who claims this can explain the difference from earlier books. "Story didn't move forward" doesn't hold water. It just doesn't.

First of all, it REALLy gets on my nerves that everyone has a catchphrase stuck in their heads now. Reek Reek it rhymes with weak. You know nothing Snow. Wherever whores go. Lancel Kettleblack and probably Moonboy for all I know.

One, two characters going through this I'm okay with, but not almost the entire male cast.

Also, I'm fond of the POV system. it limits our perception of events. AFFC and ADWD I feel cheat around this. Aeron/Victarion/Asha or Aero/Arys/Arianne all having consecutive POV chapters makes it unneccesary. We know almost everything there is to know this way anyway. You might as well just have a normal general viewpoint every chapter instead.

And yeah. The story moved too slowly for me. I think less time passed in AFFC+ADWD then in AGOT, and these books were the ones that were suppose to have a big timeskip. That readers detect something is off isn't something to wonder at. Clearly this is where Bran, Arya, Sansa, Jon and Dany have their training arcs. But AFFC+ADWD neither really touches on Brans or finishes the others. (Unless you think Dany and Jons were suppose to end in faliure).

Brienne's chapter were just depressing. She's the ugliest creature on the planet yet everyone wants to rape her. Her story going nowhere is one thing but the worst part is we always knew it was never gonna go anywhere because we know exactly where Sansa and Arya are and Brienne never ever even remotely gets on the right track.

[jjames36]

And these actions would all also be acceptable for a king or a Warden of the North. Just not a Lord Commander.

It is bad leadership, because it is bad leadership, not because of the office he holds. He was short sighted and self righteous, and he prioritized individuals over the group. That is not something you want a king or warden doing anymore than you want a military officer.

Think about Troy. Go with the version that Paris kidnapped and raped Helen, not the version that Paris and Helen loved one another. By taking his troops to war, Agamemnon was trying to save a young girl from a terrible fate. That's well intentioned, but, over a ten year span, it also resulted in countless thousands of deaths, horrible amounts of emotional and physical pain, and the destruction of an entire civilization. Do you really think that Agamemnon was a good king for trying to rescue Helen? Really? Was it smart to destroy thousands' of people's lives just to help one girl?

There's a reason the United States doesn't go to war every time a foreign dictator kidnaps an American journalist. There's a reason our leaders use diplomacy, not trickery and violence, to free that person. Because they're prioritizing the entire country over the one or two kidnapped souls. By comparison, Jon uses trickery in sending out Mance. He uses another form of trickery in marrying Alys. And he proposes violence to deal with Ramsay. In so doing, he is begging for war, and he is begging for thousands to suffer so that he can feel like he's helped a single individual.

I would just point out that he's more focused on the Others than any single other character in the entire Northern area. 90% of his ADWD decisions were about the coming conflict with the Others. 10%.

Where did you get these numbers?

Let's take a look at his six biggest decisions over the course of Dance.

With the fight against the Others in mind:

1. Letting the wildlings behind the wall.
   
2. Hardhome.
   

With good intentions that prioritized self-righteousness:

1. Helping Stannis plan a battle.
   
2. Sending Mance to get Arya.
   
3. Marrying Alys to a wildling.
   
4. Taking the very wildlings he brought into the realm to attack part of the realm. Never mind he admitted these wildlings to fight the Others. Now he has something more important to do.
   

By my count that's two times as many decisions that had nothing to do with the Others. And one of the "Other-based" decisions (Hardhome) was ridiculously stupid, could never succeed and resulted in many deaths of people who could have helped in the fight with the Others. Oh and there's also the fact that all of those people give the Others many more Wights with which to attack the wall.

So I ask again. Where is this "90% focused on the Others statistic" coming from? He started by focusing on them, and then progressed further and further away from them throughout the book.

But most importantly, he perceives and acts on the imperative to enlist the wildlings in the fight against the Others when no one else in the Watch can conceive of such a thing.

Shortly thereafter, he was going to take many of those very wildlings and use them to attack the realm. So much for having them help in the fight that matters.

I think the text goes through pretty painstaking detail to illustrate the point Chirios (maybe) made earlier in this thread: Good people do not always make good leaders. Jon is a good, even a heroic, person. But Martin goes to every length possible to illustrate just how horrid a leader he is.

j

[Yeade]

jjames36, I really object to your view of Jon's decisions in ADWD. Let's review the four you list as having nothing to do with the fight against the Others.

1) Offering strategic advice to Stannis on his war against the Boltons.

First of all, when ADWD opens, Stannis is squatting on the Wall, after having pulled the NW's bacon from the fire Mance Rayder starts, with three times the number of men Jon has at his command. Pray tell me how, exactly, Jon is supposed to stop Stannis from simply using force to take whatever he wants from the NW should Jon refuse his every demand without any attempt to appease him.

Now, what does Stannis want? Stannis wants to legitimize Jon as Lord of Winterfell with Val as his wife on the condition that he denounce his father's gods. Jon (rightly) refuses, even before being elected Lord Commander. Stannis wants the NW to arm and supply his southron men as well as new wildling levies. Jon cooperates because, again, he has no choice and the NW isn't totally ungrateful for Stannis saving their collective skins in ASOS. Stannis wants to grant the Wall's unoccupied castles to his lords and knights in reward for their service. Jon (rightly, too) refuses and, by dint of stubborn insistence that those castles belong to the NW, manages to argue Stannis to an ultimatum that he will take those castles by force if Jon doesn't have them manned in a year.

With no expectations of reinforcements from the North, much less anywhere below the Neck, Jon has only one source of manpower available to him--the wildlings. And he first co-opts Stannis's wildling conscripts in Mole's Town, who are originally slated for sacrifice in the vanguard of Stannis's army on the way to Deepwood Motte. Do you believe Stannis would've been willing to hand over those wildlings to the NW had Jon not given him the northern clansmen in exchange? I doubt it.

Additionally, Stannis is convinced he must defeat the Others to win the Iron Throne. If he is victorious over the Boltons, he's almost certain to return to the Wall, hopefully with northmen in tow, to fight his destined war for the dawn. You can't see how this just might be in the NW's best interests? Compare the Lannisters: Who do nothing in response to the NW's pleas for help against the wildlings in ASOS because the Wall being breached would create another problem for the King in the North. Who also try to pressure the black brothers to vote Janos Slynt Lord Commander and plan to send false recruits to assassinate Jon. Compare the Boltons: Who may very well have to make their own assassination attempt against Jon as he's the only Stark still alive with whereabouts known who can expose their Arya deception, thereby destroying what little legitimacy they can claim in ruling the North. And neither recognizes the Others even exist!

Lastly, Jon does sign a paper shield drafted by Maester Aemon declaring the NW doesn't support Stannis in his bid for the Iron Throne, though grudgingly and despite how flimsy such excuses will seem. If the Lannisters or Boltons ever send the NW reinforcements who aren't given secret orders to murder Jon, lol, I expect Jon would swallow his hatred and accept the help, as he's prepared to work with Slynt. Except this has not happened and will not. Stannis is the one authority in all of Westeros offering the NW a hand.

I honestly can't figure out how you feel Jon could've handled the situation better. Please enlighten me!

2) Abetting Melisandre's scheme to send Mance Rayder south to retrieve fake!Arya.

By far the least defensible of Jon's actions in ADWD and, IMO, the only point that actually belongs on this list of yours. Even so, there's at least one mitigating circumstance: When Mance Rayder and the six spearwives are dispatched south, Melisandre and presumably Jon as well as Mance himself believe Arya to have already escaped Winterfell on her own, fleeing to the Wall and presently or soon to be somewhere in the vicinity of Long Lake halfway between those two points. Nothing particularly risky about sending escorts to meet a person in the wilderness, right?

That said, I think Jon does err in not setting operational limits on the mission or, if these are impossible to enforce, stopping it from going forward at all. I'm not certain Jon has any conception that Abel and his washerwomen infiltrate Winterfell until he receives the Pink Letter. His love for his little sister clouds his usually good tactical judgment. Jon himself later realizes he makes the wrong decision here.

3) Arranging for Alys Karstark to wed the Magnar of Thenn.

The Thenns have refused Jon's offer to man the Wall under his command and are held in Mole's Town, eating the NW out of stores and generally causing trouble Jon's trying to work out a solution to when Alys Karstark arrives at Castle Black, needing a small army to take back her rightful inheritance of Karhold. Seems to me this is a marriage made in the heaven of political expediency, lol. In return, Jon reaps the benefits of 1) removing from the Wall the restless Thenns and a useless drain on the NW's precious resources as well as 2) one of the major northern houses being in debt to him and the NW, should Alys succeed in retaking Karhold, which is likely.

What's more, same as his advising Stannis, Jon's involvement can't be definitively proven because Selyse sponsors the marriage with Melisandre officiating; he can easily claim he gives Alys's hand away and hosts the ceremonies as a personal favor to the lady, a childhood acquaintance. The one man who'd accuse otherwise is Cregan(?) Karstark, imprisoned in an ice cell for attacking the black brothers on their own lands, the Gift. And, as an extra cherry on top, Jon rescues a genuine damsel in distress.

Where's the downside in all this? Unless you're Arnolf or Cregan Karstark, I suppose.

4) Marching south with a wildling army to face Ramsay Bolton after the Pink Letter.

I've written on this topic at length elsewhere.←

Basically, I ask that you consider what Ramsay's reaction would be if his threats in the Pink Letter are serious and Jon doesn't reply or agree to his demands. Jon cannot know for sure the first isn't the case, and he cannot comply with the second because he either doesn't have a clue where the would-be hostages are (Theon, Jeyne) or would incite violence on the Wall attempting to secure them for Ramsay (Melisandre, Selyse, Shireen, Val, "Monster").

Probably the most common counterargument to the above logic is that Ramsay's forces are bound to have suffered casualties in defeating Stannis and face the attrition of a winter march to the Wall. All I can say to this is that my admittedly limited understanding of military strategy gives me the impression that no general worth his salt would sit around waiting in an indefensible position in hopes his enemy has perished on the march without preparing contingency plans in the event there's still a battle to be fought. For example, despite their confidence in General Winter, I don't remember the Russians in World War II not bothering to challenge the Nazis for every inch of their territory and instead holing up in Moscow or Stalingrad from the beginning of the invasion.

Jon has his faults as a leader, to be sure, but he largely acts in the interests of the NW or, more specifically, the defense of the realm against the Others, IMO. Furthermore, while he breaks with tradition left and right, the case for oathbreaking is a great deal less clear. Not only is Jon himself uncertain as to this in his internal monologue following his speech in the Shieldhall, but members of this here forum have been arguing heatedly about the issue since ADWD was published. Don't be so quick to assume GRRM intends for Jon to be read as a "good person but horrid leader" when plenty of folks got from the same text that Jon's a visionary, cowardly murdered by a bunch of shortsighted idiots who won't be appreciated by the majority of those on the Wall for the deed any more than Caesar's assassins are lauded as heroes by the people of the Roman republic for theirs.

[The Lost Lord]

Hmm good post jjames36, very convincing. I don't know how I ended up arguing a straightforward defense of Jon's actions as good leadership (I used to have a very different view). I think you have the right of it below, though I would note this is very different than simply "arrogant brat":

I call it noble. I call it well-intentioned. I might even call it admirable and heroic. I do not call it good leadership.

This in fact makes me even more curious as to where Jon is headed going forward. I do think Martin will put a capable ruler on the Iron Throne at the end. You've convinced me that if Jon is going to be that ruler, he's going to have to learn to compromise on his beliefs in ways he's so far been unwilling to do. So will he learn to do so or not? How will he react to his own assassination? Seems to me like it will amplify his worst traits when he sees the carnage that ensues at the Wall without him to keep it in check -- his arrogance and belief in his own indispensability will increase -- which will affect how he responds to the R+L=J revelation. He could go in some very interesting and unexpected directions.

[jjames36]

Hmm good post jjames36, very convincing. I don't know how I ended up arguing a straightforward defense of Jon's actions as good leadership

Thank you. :-)

I do think Martin will put a capable ruler on the Iron Throne at the end.

He might. I'm less convinced of that than you seem to be. It's very possible this series isn't going to have a happy ending, given that neither its beginning nor its middle have had much happiness. Time will tell.

You've convinced me that if Jon is going to be that ruler, he's going to have to learn to compromise on his beliefs in ways he's so far been unwilling to do. So will he learn to do so or not? How will he react to his own assassination? Seems to me like it will amplify his worst traits when he sees the carnage that ensues at the Wall without him to keep it in check -- his arrogance and belief in his own indispensability will increase -- which will affect how he responds to the R+L=J revelation. He could go in some very interesting and unexpected directions.

Assuming Rhaegar plus Lyanna is true (and I think Dance came very close to cementing that theory), you have asked some interesting questions. Could be a compelling story. I hope the next book is better than this last one, so that I see in what directions he heads.

j

P.S. It was talked about earlier in this thread when Errant Bard (I think) said Feast was his favorite of the series. It was also mine, in retrospect and upon the third reread when I finally realized I needed to stop viewing this series as the Starks' story. So it really is only one bad book for me. But oh my how I think that book was bad.

[Yeade]

Jon Snow? A man who believes himself to be indispensable? I gotta say my impression is exactly the opposite. While us readers are sounding Jon out to be king of everyone from the wildlings to the northmen to all of Westeros, I don't think the guy has any conception that his qualities are uncommon or that he's the linchpin in an ever growing alliance against the Others. Actually, I figure the aftermath of the ADWD assassination attempt is intended in part to drum this lesson into Jon's head, even if he never quite accepts the fact of his own importance.

Not only do I feel Jon's stressed and depressed to the point of having a bit of a death wish, he's demonstrably careless of his own safety. Jon doesn't understand why personal guards are necessary, either because he can't conceive of assassins lurking about Castle Black or simply doesn't rate his protection that highly relative to his other problems, and tends to dismiss them in his discomfort at being tailed. He doesn't seem to consider what would happen to the fragile truces on the Wall should he go ranging to Hardhome and not return either. And my preferred theory of how Jon plans to respond to the Pink Letter even incorporates his possible death as a strategy to slake Ramsay's aggression.

And Jon's supposed arrogance? Don't mistake reasoned confidence for arrogance. Jon isn't opposed to taking advice on principle, listening to and acting on various reports by his subordinates over the course of ADWD, including Bowen Marsh's suggestion to immediately put the men on rations. It's not Jon's fault that the rest of Marsh's counsel is kind of crap. Nor is Jon necessarily foolish to expect more respect for the chain of command or, hell, even common sense than one of his ranking officers stabbing him in such a suicidal fashion, one almost guaranteed to precipitate a bloodbath that may be the ruin of the NW.

Finally? Hardhome? Not a ridiculous kamikaze run, IMO. See my discussion with Goldenfox the Unjust, beginning with the linked post.←

[skins7778]

Great point jjames as looking past ASOIAF as a "Stark" story it took myself a reread to come to the same conclusion, which allowed me to enjoy Feast as much as I do.

That being said I do believe it to be a story of Westeros, which is why I get so frustrated with Dance in regards to the Dany chapters. I really dont care about Mereen or anything in Slavers Bay or Essos that being said I enjoyed Arya's chapters because It didnt drag on and pushed her plot forward. If I remember correctly Arya had 4 chapters, significantly less than Dany but her story actually progressed where with Dany they juat kind of fizzled out.

Actually Arya had 2 chapters, and before I get jumped on because of the feast / Dance timeline she only had 3 in feast....... so 5 total compared to Danys 10

[Brucolac]

I understand "I didn't dislike ADWD/AFFC because of my expectations, I disliked them because they were bad" only if the person who claims this can explain the difference from earlier books.

In the first two books and to a certain extent the third book, he would skip over events(even huge events) and have them revealed in the other POVs contextually or as conversation. Now, he includes a new POV just to convey minutia. That is the major difference, though there are numerous smaller ones I have pointed out before. People change with time, and a lot of time has passed since ASoS. GRRM isn't the same writer and he has gone in the wrong direction since then instead of maturing. He isn't hungry and he is blocked to all hell. Sadly, I expect things to get worse, not better.

[The Lost Lord]

He might. I'm less convinced of that than you seem to be. It's very possible this series isn't going to have a happy ending, given that neither its beginning nor its middle have had much happiness. Time will tell.

"Bittersweet" is what Martin said the ending will be. I do feel strongly that at the very least the Others will be gone and some stability will return to Westeros under a new regime. It won't necessarily mean a "victory" in the game of thrones for our main characters. But I think the series will end with a "capable" ruler/regime -- not necessarily a "good" or "moral" one, but not vicious tyranny or utter anarchy either (because those would be purely "bitter" and would leave things unresolved).

Jon Snow? A man who believes himself to be indispensable? I gotta say my impression is exactly the opposite.

It's very clear throughout ADWD that Jon thinks everyone around him is a short-sighted idiot and that only he, Jon, has his eyes on the big picture. And he's not entirely wrong in this assessment! But yes, this logically leads to a mindset that he is indispensable, that no one else can be trusted with the reins of power. Note how he went from a constant "You know nothing, Jon Snow" to, for the first time ever, in his last chapter, "They know nothing, Ygritte, and never will." In TWOW when he's stuck in Ghost and helplessly watching as wildlings, Night's Watch, and Queen's Men all kill each other, he'll surely be infuriated and resentful toward the "fools" (again, somewhat justifiably) and this will feed his sense that he's the only person who can be trusted to lead.

[skins7778]

He isn't hungry and he is blocked to all hell. Sadly, I expect things to get worse, not better.

Thanks for peeing in my cornflakes

[Brucolac]

Things don't get better if everyone pretends they are okay. If Martin thinks he is at the top of his game because ADwD sells better than his other books and he finally wins his hugo because the only competition is "Embassytown" which is far less popluar, we will get more books like ADwD. If people call a spade a spade, maybe he will start listening instead of calling them trolls.

[jjames36]

"Bittersweet" is what Martin said the ending will be. I do feel strongly that at the very least the Others will be gone and some stability will return to Westeros under a new regime. It won't necessarily mean a "victory" in the game of thrones for our main characters. But I think the series will end with a "capable" ruler/regime -- not necessarily a "good" or "moral" one, but not vicious tyranny or utter anarchy either (because those would be purely "bitter" and would leave things unresolved).

Didn't know he had said that. Now I see where your conclusion came from. :-)

We'll see if it's right!

j