POV "Deaths" and Implications for Jon Snow

[intheswamp]

You forgot Davos supposedly losing his head to Manderly. Who cares about Quentyn and Oakheart? They were throw away characters, developed to die.

In my opinion, Jon is likely to survive in some form, because his story arc is incomplete. It would be piss poor writing for him to die now. Then again, the plot in Feast and Dance was awful at times, so maybe the story will continue to crumble.

[Zachary Snow]

i hope Jons alive... i like Jon

[YUNG LYANNA]

The question I was asked is how Jon could be dead with an incomplete narrative arc and my response was that it's only incomplete if you think he's a secret Targaryen and that somehow that gives him claim to the Iron Throne or Winterfell or whatever. Otherwise, Jon's done his job, narrative arc wise. I've laid it out in detail before but it probably should be repeated here. Jon Snow's story is about the Night's Watch's fall from grace.

So, at the beginning of AGOT, the Watch seems to be in pretty good shape. Benjen is First Ranger and he's a Stark of Winterfell and all around nice guy. Jeor Mormont is Lord Commander. He's wise, he's tough and he knows how to maximize the potential of the people he has. Aemon Targaryen is Maester and is about the wisest Maester around. We also meet a band of misfits who could, in a classic Hollywood Mighty Ducks type deal, turn into a really good Wight fighting force. Jon wins all of these guys over and everyone is learning. Then, the fall begins. Benjen Stark goes missing. Then, the Old Bear decides to lead a mass ranging North of the Wall to figure out what the heck is going on. We meet Craster and learn that the NW tolerates this monster. Qhorin Halfhand, the grizzled veteran, is killed in a scouting mission. The main force of the NW is destroyed by the White Walkers. Then, the Watch turns on itself. They leave Sam to die. They stage a coup against Jeor Mormont and break the laws of hospitality by killing Craster. After all this, Jon manages to save the watch from the attacks of the Wildlings. Sam manages to broker a temporary internal peace by making Jon LC. It seems that the Watch may last after all. Then Jon starts making mistakes. He sends away his allies including an aged Maester Aemon who clearly won't survive the journey. He does this because he can't stand up Stannis and Melisandre. He gives away the Gift. He lets Wildlings into the Watch even though they have absolutely no stake in defending the Seven Kingdoms. He weakens the strength of the NW by trying to man the abandoned towers when he doesn't have enough men to do the job. He kills a respected and powerful member of the Night's Watch because he defied him. He takes part in Westerosi politics by marrying Alys Karstark to a wildling. He orders a doomed ranging to relieve Hardhome. Finally, he plans to lead a Wildling army against the current Lord of Winterfell in the middle of a terrible blizzard.

When he's stabbed repeatedly, the Night's Watch is pretty much at a low point. Jon's story is only not complete if you assume his story is a comedy (this would include the Dany/Jon wedding that's so popular around here). If, however, you assume that his story is tragedy, that he is a Julius Caesar figure bound to destroy everything around him and be destroyed in turn, then his narrative arc is finished. He's done all the damage he can do.

i'm torn. Part of me understands this & feels that this rings true, but like a lot of readers I like Jon & don't want him to die this way. when i start thinking of him as a cautionary tale or a tragic figure then his arc starts to resemble Robb's in a sense. They both start out with good intentions & seem to be making positive progress until they make a few questionable decisions which later lead to betrayal. I just don't want to see Jon go out like that. I also feel that since the question of his parentage hasn't been resolved, and because i am a believer in the R+L=J theory, that he has enough plot-armor to somehow survive the stabbing. but now that i think about it, i worry that R+L=J could still be true even if his death is permanent, which would be even more tragic than what you have already described :bawl:

[The Wolves]

I don't want Jon to be dead he's my favorite character but at the same time I'm okay if he dies now. I wouldn't be surprised if he was actually dead than I can root for the Others to rule Westeros.

[Black Wolf Smith]

The big thing, that no one brought up is GRRM being ask a question about the death of Jon Snow, and his response IIRC was "oh you think his dead" and then laughing added to him saying many times that a character isn't dead until you seem his death scene, IMO means he isn't dead.

[Techelles]

I agree, it's a book forum. However, if we're looking for hints as to what is and isn't important, the show can provide some spoilers. For instance, I'm far more convinced that Jeyne Westerling had a miscarriage after watching the show version of the Red Wedding. If Robb's son was going to be a major factor in the last two books, they probably don't kill him off on the show. Excluding Wyllas Tyrell is probably another hint that his character isn't as important as book readers may have assumed. I brought up the point about the lack of R+L=J evidence on the show because I wanted to undermine the assumption of its importance that people take from the pitch meeting.

My point here, is about the books. The question I was asked is how Jon could be dead with an incomplete narrative arc and my response was that it's only incomplete if you think he's a secret Targaryen and that somehow that gives him claim to the Iron Throne or Winterfell or whatever. Otherwise, Jon's done his job, narrative arc wise. I've laid it out in detail before but it probably should be repeated here. Jon Snow's story is about the Night's Watch's fall from grace.

So, at the beginning of AGOT, the Watch seems to be in pretty good shape. Benjen is First Ranger and he's a Stark of Winterfell and all around nice guy. Jeor Mormont is Lord Commander. He's wise, he's tough and he knows how to maximize the potential of the people he has. Aemon Targaryen is Maester and is about the wisest Maester around. We also meet a band of misfits who could, in a classic Hollywood Mighty Ducks type deal, turn into a really good Wight fighting force. Jon wins all of these guys over and everyone is learning. Then, the fall begins. Benjen Stark goes missing. Then, the Old Bear decides to lead a mass ranging North of the Wall to figure out what the heck is going on. We meet Craster and learn that the NW tolerates this monster. Qhorin Halfhand, the grizzled veteran, is killed in a scouting mission. The main force of the NW is destroyed by the White Walkers. Then, the Watch turns on itself. They leave Sam to die. They stage a coup against Jeor Mormont and break the laws of hospitality by killing Craster. After all this, Jon manages to save the watch from the attacks of the Wildlings. Sam manages to broker a temporary internal peace by making Jon LC. It seems that the Watch may last after all. Then Jon starts making mistakes. He sends away his allies including an aged Maester Aemon who clearly won't survive the journey. He does this because he can't stand up Stannis and Melisandre. He gives away the Gift. He lets Wildlings into the Watch even though they have absolutely no stake in defending the Seven Kingdoms. He weakens the strength of the NW by trying to man the abandoned towers when he doesn't have enough men to do the job. He kills a respected and powerful member of the Night's Watch because he defied him. He takes part in Westerosi politics by marrying Alys Karstark to a wildling. He orders a doomed ranging to relieve Hardhome. Finally, he plans to lead a Wildling army against the current Lord of Winterfell in the middle of a terrible blizzard.

When he's stabbed repeatedly, the Night's Watch is pretty much at a low point. Jon's story is only not complete if you assume his story is a comedy (this would include the Dany/Jon wedding that's so popular around here). If, however, you assume that his story is tragedy, that he is a Julius Caesar figure bound to destroy everything around him and be destroyed in turn, then his narrative arc is finished. He's done all the damage he can do.

You remind me a lot of Bowen Marsh.

[Newstar]

The big thing, that no one brought up is GRRM being ask a question about the death of Jon Snow, and his response IIRC was "oh you think his dead" and then laughing added to him saying many times that a character isn't dead until you seem his death scene, IMO means he isn't dead.

That was my take on that quote.

...although GRRM has been known to troll his audience. I saw not long ago (on these boards, maybe) a post stating that GRRM was asked about the problem of Arya and Sansa's actresses outpacing their characters' aging for adapting future books way down the line, and he said something like "Who knows if [Arya and Sansa] will even live that long?" Ha! (Not that I would be surprised if one of the Stark girls got killed off in the remaining books.)

[TheNorth's1stKnight]

jon snow will rise

[Not Dead Just Broken]

You remind me a lot of Bowen Marsh.

For the Watch. Lol.

I think my bias on this is that, if you couldn't tell by my screen name and signature, I'm very much a Bran supporter. I think he's the key to winning the war against the White Walkers. I think Brynden Rivers and the CotF know better than anyone how to fight the White Walkers, and if they are going to be destroyed, their chosen champion seems like a good bet. I understand he's paraplegic but he is connected with the magical in a way that Jon is not and I think that's the way to defeat the WW. So, if you view Bran as the key, Jon becomes a lot more expendable. He's even an obstacle to that plot line.

As for the SSM stuff, I'm less convinced by it than most people around here. First, I think he understands his fan base and that everything he says will be over-analyzed on these boards. Making vague comments about a cliffhanger from ADWD is a great way to keep the fan interest alive (look at this forum) while he takes his time with TWOW. He wants it to be an open question. I don't think it tells us anything about whether or not he is alive. Second, I don't think he's above straight out misdirection. If you look at all of the false deaths that I laid out in this thread, you can see he's used it throughout the books. Why wouldn't he use similar tactics in interviews/readings? In every interview I've seen, he always seems to choose his words very carefully when he's talking about future plot points. I can just see him saying something like "well, I never said he wasn't dead" if Jon does in fact turn out to be dead.

[Ser Creighton]

The Ned-Jon scene serves as foreshadowing for Ned's death. We'll talk when we meet again = we'll never meet again. Prophesy is dangerous. Rhaego was to be the Stallion that Mounts The World, remember. I'm not entirely sure why we need a NW POV at this point. The Watch is decimated. Mel and Bran give us plenty of perspective on the war on the wall. Plus, there's always the possibility of Theon Greyjoy ending up there as well.

I'm trying to remember the "corn" theory. Three corns. Can they be interrupted? Or do they have to be in direct succession?

Well it's not so much about corn as about 3. and linear succession is important, along with caps and punctuation. And no he has not been coded, well not exactly, part of him was coded.

[jenerationx]

For the Watch. Lol.

I think my bias on this is that, if you couldn't tell by my screen name and signature, I'm very much a Bran supporter. I think he's the key to winning the war against the White Walkers. I think Brynden Rivers and the CotF know better than anyone how to fight the White Walkers, and if they are going to be destroyed, their chosen champion seems like a good bet. I understand he's paraplegic but he is connected with the magical in a way that Jon is not and I think that's the way to defeat the WW. So, if you view Bran as the key, Jon becomes a lot more expendable. He's even an obstacle to that plot line.

As for the SSM stuff, I'm less convinced by it than most people around here. First, I think he understands his fan base and that everything he says will be over-analyzed on these boards. Making vague comments about a cliffhanger from ADWD is a great way to keep the fan interest alive (look at this forum) while he takes his time with TWOW. He wants it to be an open question. I don't think it tells us anything about whether or not he is alive. Second, I don't think he's above straight out misdirection. If you look at all of the false deaths that I laid out in this thread, you can see he's used it throughout the books. Why wouldn't he use similar tactics in interviews/readings? In every interview I've seen, he always seems to choose his words very carefully when he's talking about future plot points. I can just see him saying something like "well, I never said he wasn't dead" if Jon does in fact turn out to be dead.

Bran's important to the story, there's no doubt about that. And he may even be key to defeating the White Walkers. But like many people, I don't think it's going to be up to any one character. There's absolutely zero reason to kill off an important character like Jon at this stage, to "boost" the importance of Bran. That's like saying in order for Jon to accomplish what he needs to accomplish, Bran needs to die -- which is not the case at all.

If you look at the number of chapters that each POV has gotten, especially for the primary characters, which is time and investment that GRRM has spent in them, it seems fairly certain that Jon is a very important character who is unlikely to die in this manner.

[Not Dead Just Broken]

Bran's important to the story, there's no doubt about that. And he may even be key to defeating the White Walkers. But like many people, I don't think it's going to be up to any one character. There's absolutely zero reason to kill off an important character like Jon at this stage, to "boost" the importance of Bran. That's like saying in order for Jon to accomplish what he needs to accomplish, Bran needs to die -- which is not the case at all.

If you look at the number of chapters that each POV has gotten, especially for the primary characters, which is time and investment that GRRM has spent in them, it seems fairly certain that Jon is a very important character who is unlikely to die in this manner.

How many POV chapters did Eddard have before he lost his head in AGOT? How many did Catelyn have before the Red Wedding in ASOS? Prominence in POV's is not necessarily a sign of longevity.

We have in the books two different approaches to the White Walkers. The Wildling/Melisandre approach is burn it all. The CotF/Brynden Rivers approach is less clear but appears to involve lots of magic: warding, warging and greenseeing. With Mel intent on burning down weirwood trees, it doesn't seem like these approaches are compatible. Jon has clearly thrown his lot in with the Melisandre/Wildling camp. Bran is in the CotF/Brynden Rivers camp. I don't think both approaches will be effective at stopping the White Walkers. One or the other is going to be the better long term strategy. My money is on the CotF and Brynden. That's why I think Bran is going to be successful. Jon is being guided by a religious fanatic and a superstitious bunch of Wildlings. I don't think he succeeds.

[jenerationx]

How many POV chapters did Eddard have before he lost his head in AGOT? How many did Catelyn have before the Red Wedding in ASOS? Prominence in POV's is not necessarily a sign of longevity.

This is true. Five books in, though, GRRM has invested far more in the characters that now top that list than when Ned died, and Catelyn "returned" in some form. There's nothing that says Jon has to be the one that stays dead.

We have in the books two different approaches to the White Walkers. The Wildling/Melisandre approach is burn it all. The CotF/Brynden Rivers approach is less clear but appears to involve lots of magic: warding, warging and greenseeing. With Mel intent on burning down weirwood trees, it doesn't seem like these approaches are compatible. Jon has clearly thrown his lot in with the Melisandre/Wildling camp. Bran is in the CotF/Brynden Rivers camp. I don't think both approaches will be effective at stopping the White Walkers. One or the other is going to be the better long term strategy. My money is on the CotF and Brynden. That's why I think Bran is going to be successful. Jon is being guided by a religious fanatic and a superstitious bunch of Wildlings. I don't think he succeeds.

I'm not sure why you think the two approaches are mutually exclusive. Dany's also going to bring magic with her dragons, and I think she'll be involved with the defeat of the Others as well. Having a literal warrior on the ground killing them while the magic mojo stuff is happening with Dany and Bran seems like a really well-rounded way to take care of their enemy. It seems to me that you want Bran to be the all-out hero of the piece, and I just don't think he is. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that point.

[Blackaz01]

I think Jon is alive and or will be reborn, but I don't think we will get another POV out of him. I don't think we have had the POV of any King so if he is reborn as AA he won't get a POV either.

[elybe]

I think Jon is alive and or will be reborn, but I don't think we will get another POV out of him. I don't think we have had the POV of any King so if he is reborn as AA he won't get a POV either.

Dany's "The Queen Across the Narrow Sea" and an AA candidate. We still get her POV. Plus, the king non-POVs all started out that way; they weren't demoted. The only character who lost a POV is Cat, but she and Jon are not in the same league.

There's a hierarchy of protagonists in this series, even if some either don't grasp it or won't accept it. It's easy to mask on the show by giving certain characters more screen time or making slight, misleading alterations to their stories, but in the books it's so obvious that it threw me when I was reading them.

People are comparing Jon to a false protagonist who died in what was originally to be the first third of the first book of a trilogy, to the only non-POV Stark above the age of four (who was absent for nearly an entire book, no less), and to a resurrected character with no mysterious parentage, prophetic dreams, supernatural abilities, or any of the other half-dozen Chekhov's guns Jon has waiting to go off.

In reality, Jon is second only to Tyrion in chapter and page count, and not by very much. As in, GRRM has invested nearly as much time and effort into Jon's story as he has in his self-admitted favorite character's. The notion that one is untouchable while the other will either prematurely bite it or become a background character is grounded in the kind of logic that...isn't.

[WhineHaus]

To be fair, Jon isn't dead yet.

[Dead Wolf]

Or George is trying to lull us into a false sense of security, so that he can actually kill off Jon. We didn't get a Mel POV for no reason

[elybe]

Or George is trying to lull us into a false sense of security, so that he can actually kill off Jon. We didn't get a Mel POV for no reason

1. Jon's an endgame player, not a false protagonist. I know, I know, presumptions, final books not out yet, blah, blah...but no, really, he is. You don't have to be GRRM's editor to see that Jon's story isn't anywhere near done. It's just one of those distinctions you can make if you're capable of differentiating between subtext/foreshadowing and misdirection. When you pull the rug out from under your readers, you do it in a way that makes sense. Unless you were a writer on Lost.

2. GRRM has stated repeatedly that he want readers to mourn characters who die. He's the same guy who had to save the Red Wedding for last because it was too difficult to write. He's not going to deprive readers of the opportunity to come to grips with the death a fan favorite by refusing to confirm his fate in interviews...all so he can "surprise" them. He's a writer, not a sociopath.

3. GRRM has also stated that he was originally going to tell the entire story through only the original POVs. He's not suddenly going to replace one with a tertiary character no one cares about. He eventually settled on giving Mel ONE chapter after going back and forth on whether or not he could give her a POV without revealing too much. Not sure what about that screams, "New primary Wall POV, effective immediately!" to some people.

[jenerationx]

Jon's an endgame player, not a false protagonist. I know, I know, presumptions, final books not out yet, blah, blah...but no, really, he is. You don't have to be GRRM's editor to see that Jon's story isn't anywhere near done. It's just one of those distinctions you can make if you're capable of differentiating between subtext/foreshadowing and misdirection. When you pull the rug out from under your readers, you do it in a way that makes sense. Unless you were a writer on Lost.

:agree: Especially the part about Lost. :lol:

Or George is trying to lull us into a false sense of security, so that he can actually kill off Jon. We didn't get a Mel POV for no reason

Precisely, and I thought it was super obvious why he gave Mel that single chapter in her POV: So that we, the readers, could see her visions and her thought process in interpreting them. Or more specifically, the one vision in which she sees "Snow" after asking her Lord of Light to show her Azor Ahai.

[IRON BANK]

But it is backed up by the books. As a pattern, people don't die (and stay dead) in their own POVs unless it's an epilogue or a prologue. And having this cliffhanger with Jon only for him to die in Melisandre's POV in the next book is pretty terrible writing. If he was dead, it'd be explicit and there'd be no need for the cliffhanger. You don't have a cliffhanger just to see the guy fall off the cliff.

I could not have put it better. I mean this story mainly ciircles around two main characters I doubt Jon will die because with out him you have alot of unfinished story, hence plot armor.