Ser Creighton Posted September 30, 2013 Share Posted September 30, 2013 My apologies, that part I wasnt agreeing with. I just was saying that it was likely meaning KotIT not KitN that legitimizing Jon would grant. Oh ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Icefyre Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 I am with you and sticking with three, it goes along with his theme of not having one main character. Aside from the fact it actually fits 3 people better than one person with three aspects, as people always have more than 3 aspects. Plus 3 is the magic number with this guy, it's all over the books. It's simpler, it's cleaner and it makes more sense and goes along with pretty much everything he has done with the number 3, which I am guessing is his favorite number ever. May go back to his days at Northwestern when he and his buddy Jon I think his name was lived with a woman and Martin has very fond memories of those days. :agree: Well said buddy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 I am with you and sticking with three, it goes along with his theme of not having one main character. Aside from the fact it actually fits 3 people better than one person with three aspects, as people always have more than 3 aspects. Plus 3 is the magic number with this guy, it's all over the books. It's simpler, it's cleaner and it makes more sense and goes along with pretty much everything he has done with the number 3, which I am guessing is his favorite number ever. May go back to his days at Northwestern when he and his buddy Jon I think his name was lived with a woman and Martin has very fond memories of those days. Let's not forget that GRRM also grew up with two sisters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Humblepie Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 I'm sure this has been clarified before but i'm confused about something. When Ned arrives at the TOJ, and has the oft quoted conversation with Arthur Dayne, does he know the Lyanna has given birth to (or is giving birth to) Jon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 I'm sure this has been clarified before but i'm confused about something. When Ned arrives at the TOJ, and has the oft quoted conversation with Arthur Dayne, does he know the Lyanna has given birth to (or is giving birth to) Jon? It's not clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Creighton Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Let's not forget that GRRM also grew up with two sisters.Did not know that. Me too, I wonder how many times he has killed them in the books? Wait never mind a brother would never do that to his sisters. Or would he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Did not know that. Me too, I wonder how many times he has killed them in the books? Wait never mind a brother would never do that to his sisters. Or would he? Well, it's just that it wouldn't surprise me if the final heroes are supposed to be a guy and his two sisters; Jon + Sansa & Arya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ygrain Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 I'm sure this has been clarified before but i'm confused about something. When Ned arrives at the TOJ, and has the oft quoted conversation with Arthur Dayne, does he know the Lyanna has given birth to (or is giving birth to) Jon? It can only be inferred that he knew he would find Lyanna in circumstances that had better not become public knowledge and this is why he took along only several friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Creighton Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Well, it's just that it wouldn't surprise me if the final heroes are supposed to be a guy and his two sisters; Jon + Sansa & Arya.I could never leave Bran out of the mix, Martin gave him the first chapter in the series, the most significant chapter any author gives. It all starts with Bran. Besides those are not Jon's sisters, they are his cousins. Those are Bran's sisters. In a way they are his sisters, that I understand, much the way Eddard was his father, and Cat was his, ummmm person voted least likely to be any kind of mother to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 I could never leave Bran out of the mix, Martin gave him the first chapter in the series, the most significant chapter any author gives. It all starts with Bran. Besides those are not Jon's sisters, they are his cousins. Those are Bran's sisters. In a way they are his sisters, that I understand, much the way Eddard was his father, and Cat was his, ummmm person voted least likely to be any kind of mother to him. Okay, Jon and his "sisters." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Creighton Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Okay, Jon and his "sisters."Hahaha, that's right his "sisters." Lets just hope Sansa doesn't put the whole cousins are ok thing together in Westeros.I am actually really worried about the girls I have hope with Arya because she keeps refusing 3, but if she gets into the whole assassination thing she could be a young female version of Walter White. Laying on the floor of the red keep smiling after killing all her enemies and bleeding out with needle in her hand while Baby blue plays.Sansa is in LF land and I don't view that as a good place, and I am not sure what her big play would be against the Others. Plus Harry the Heir, really? I would kind of like to see her with someone a little interesting, like a plank of wood would be an upgrade. Though I can't think of who she would actually like or who compliments her character. Sansa would probably do best with an intelligent puckish rouge who loosens her up a bit and is fun. I got it, Ramsay Snow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 If the Winterfell crypts extend beneath the godswood, the placement of her tomb may have another meaning. Another meaning? Could you explain that? Sorry just got up and my brain doesn't work properly yet. edit :bang: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost's Shadow Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Oh, it's not that, I think... :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alia of the knife Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 On the question of Dany as a possible contentder as tPtwP, did she actually wake them, or hatch them? And were they actually from stone, because they were somehow fossilized in the egg? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alia of the knife Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Ser Creighton, What if Sansa decided to stay with Tyrion in the end? (Is there something wrong with the board? I've been having issues with quoting. I had to edit this to ask you this question). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtnLion Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 What? Apples and Oranges? Bloodraven is both a greenseer and can skin change, so what am I missing? Is he not using animals anymore? How is there a conflict? He does both so I can address both subjects with him. According to the books, 1 person in a 1000 is a warg, and 1 skinchanger in a thousand is a greenseer and that greenseers are all in fact wargs. While the common use for warg is wolf or dog, that does not mean they are limited to one animal. Martin said all the Stark children were Wargs, that did not stop Arya from skinchanging with a cat. While some wargs are limited to an affinity with one animal that does not relate to all skinchangers and it comes down to the individual and warg tends to be a general term tossed around. Jon is a warg but does that mean Jon is limited to one type of animal, or Sansa? Probably not, given the strength Jon is said to have. Arya and Bran both have used multiple types animals but were referred to as Wargs by the writer himself. So while warg should be a specific thing it is often tossed around in a less specific manner. How this is apples and oranges I am not sure? As it's stated Skinchngers are in fact related to greenseers and warg is tossed around in a general manner by the author. How any of this means Bloodraven can only use a raven I do not know. Because that was the original point I was making, I don't doubt he can do pretty much any animal he wants. Sixskins entered a person for a short time, a weirwood, a sparrow, a squirrel an oak. A horned owl, a hare, earthworms, "I am the wood and everything that is in it." Then finally his wolf One eye. All listed in the prologue of Dance. I am just going out on a rather strong limb and saying Bloodraven is more powerful than him. I believe that if you go back and reread these examples thinking "skin-changer" with the exception of Varamyr and the Stark children there are no "wargs". I did not say that a greenseer was not a skin-changer, I said not all skin-changers are wargs. It seems that wolves are a special circumstance. Now, once again, there is skin-changing. There is greenseer. One in a thousand can skin-change, and one in a thousand skin-changers are greenseers. Skin-changers are not necessarily wargs. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dio Forel Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 I believe that if you go back and reread these examples thinking "skin-changer" with the exception of Varamyr and the Stark children there are no "wargs". I did not say that a greenseer was not a skin-changer, I said not all skin-changers are wargs. It seems that wolves are a special circumstance. Now, once again, there is skin-changing.There is greenseer. One in a thousand can skin-change, and one in a thousand skin-changers are greenseers. Skin-changers are not necessarily wargs. ;)And as Ive mentioned before, sadly, only one in a thousand scenes on hbo got even touch on these concepts so far. All of this needs to be portrayed on screen since it clearly is relevant to the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mladen Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Ser Creighton, What if Sansa decided to stay with Tyrion in the end? Don't say that even as a joke. And btw, I have been thinking about Sansa/Jon possibility but I had to simply reject the idea due to the fact I doubt that relationship could morph into romantic one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of Winters Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Don't say that even as a joke. And btw, I have been thinking about Sansa/Jon possibility but I had to simply reject the idea due to the fact I doubt that relationship could morph into romantic one...I hate it when people say because Jon and Sansa are cousins they have a chance. They grew up as brother and sister! It would feel very weird for them being in a romantic relationship even if they knew they are cousins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Creighton Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 On the question of Dany as a possible contentder as tPtwP, did she actually wake them, or hatch them? And were they actually from stone, because they were somehow fossilized in the egg?Well you know Martin said the Ptwp and AA come again are the same right? At least I recall that being said by posters. But he never said the prophecies were correct in who was named. Jon appears to be fulfilling one prophecy about LB and Dany fulfilled one about waking the Dragons. Outside of name use the two are distinctly different, with both major and minor differences. One appears to be a Targaryen or Valyrian prophecy and the other is from the books of Asshai. The Prince and Azor have never been mentioned in the same sentence in the books. Would not surprise me if Martin gave a typical historical explanation for this. As throughout history religious orders have adopted names and symbolism's of other orders and then changed them to fit there own interpretations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.