WearyTraveler

Wasn't Selmy the one who rescued Aerys from some kidnapping plot which in turn is pointed out to be where his (Aerys') paranoia started? I think this is mentioned only in passing in ASOIAF, but more in detail in other books from GRRM. Maybe Selmy's guilt stems from the fact that he didn't rescue Aerys in time to avoid all the paranoia that came later.

It's the song of Jenny of Oldstones, according to AWOIAF

The Night's Watch men didn't go to Hardhome with Jon, but Stannis' men did, and some of them must have survived the battle with Ramsey. Also, many NW men were at the Fist of the First Men, when they were first attacked by an army of WW and retreated to Craster's. Unless you have just arrived at the Wall, you know the Walkers are real.

ahahaah!!! That's what happens when you rush through a post!

I don't think this is a book prediction, Jon was teasing Arya about her not liking to saw like Sansa. It's the joke that later allows for both of them to name her sword. I wouldn't read too much into it.

(1) Yes. It works exactly the same way. KG serve for life. Dismissing Barristan Selmy was a first in the history of Westeros after Aegon's conquest. I believe there were no KG before that. So, unless Jaimie is dismissed by Tommen and fired from the KG, the heir to Casterly Rock should be Tyrion, but, since he killed his father and has also been convicted of regicide, he won't get it. The Crown can take his lands because he's a traitor and give them to whoever the Crown wants, just as they give away Harrenhall to anyone they need to reward. But since Cersei is still alive, she's the current heir to Casterly Rock right now. (2) They don't have to make a decree if they want the line of succession to apply as is customary. But, if they don't, which is what Tywin has said, then they need to name a successor. By the end of Tyrion's Trial by Combat, Tywin knew that the one next in line to inherit CR was Cersei. I agree that he might have been hoping that Jaimie would renounce his vows and/or that the Crown would fire him, like they did with Selmy, but he's either overconfident on his ability to manipulate the situation, or in large barge sailing down The Nile.

You are right. I meant that Tywin's back up plan was Tommen and his backup-backup plan was Myrcella's children, probably. Or it may all just be that Martin wanted Tywin to remain single, and we are looking for explanations when there are none. LOL!

I think Tywin's plan was that Tommen rule Casterly Rock.

I think that leaving the KG behind to protect Lyanna and Jon may be an indication that Rhaegar did marry her (aside from marrying siblings, the Targs were also allowed polygamy, at least as far as the Royal family was concerned). If that was the case, then they were protecting the second Queen and a Crown Prince, not just some mistress and her bastard.

I think that's Martin's attempt at misdirection. If I'm not mistaken, we only read that Jaimie is younger once in all five books, after that it's reminder after reminder that Tyrion is the youngest, in the hopes that perhaps we have forgotten Cersei and Ned's conversation. Just as Ashara Dane was misdirection on the R+L=J plot. It's really quite amazing that almost everything we need to know to understand this story was laid out in book 1. On the one hand I think it's kind of brilliant; OTOH, I think "holy shit! five books and the Walkers are still north of the Wall?" :D I mostly enjoy the Tyrion chapters (before his adventures in Essos began, that is). He's quite a fascinating character in that I think he has both, an inferiority and a superiority complex at once. I think part of the sting here on his role in Blackwater being celebrated is that they are happy to congratulate him behind closed doors, but no one stands up for him when the smallfolk call him a devil and what not. The Tyrells are more than happy to let people think that they are the saviours of KL, Tywin too, for that matter. And while they do congratulate him, they don't reward him for any of it. They have just divided all the plunder, distributing castles and titles left and right, and Tyrion didn't even get a weirwood stump, only a faint promise that he could, maybe, if the time was right, at some point in the future, claim Winterfell for his son. He knows his father is not going to give him Casterly Rock, so what does he get for his service? Also, I think he's pissed because they only thank him for the chain, when he did so much more than that. It's like they are deliberately trying to diminish his merits, so they can look better, smarter, savvier. The praise sometimes border in the patronising: "the chain was a great idea, I'll grant you that" has the unspoken part "but it was not enough to win, you silly dwarf who knows nothing about fighting wars". So, yeah, Tyrion is bitter about that. But I do agree that his desire for love and admiration does sometimes make him petty.

I understand your point. I myself wish they had kept some of the things that make Jon a leader in the books. But, I think I cut them a bit more slack than I used to because they have so little time left. So, I kind of forgive them for it if it gets me to the end of the story. Like, in my head I know why the Northerners would name Jon KitN, I can see the qualities that would motivate them to follow him, so, I go with it.

I didn't mean it has happened in history. I meant that our history is so long, someone, somewhere, has already written a character like this. Because as long as our history is, that is how long artists have expressed their thoughts and ideas in some way. So, there is, off course, an archetype for every single character we see today. I don't hold that against any writer. Bad plotting, unearned developments for the sake of surprise, illogical leaps? That, I would complain about. But not that a character is a trope. All characters are tropes.

Jon and Sansa's conversation is private, but Tormund is talking to all the Wildings, so, it appears to be known. I have a hard time believing is not known, actually. The guy was dead for three days and then resurrected, how is that not something everyone is talking about? How often does that happen? (in the North)

I don't get all the competition. "My character is better than yours".... Don't get it. And I'm sick and tired of people calling EVERYTHING a trope. I see the word and I cringe. Writing, television, cinema, painting, all forms of artistic expression really, are a reflection our shared human characteristics. No matter who you are, where you were born, how you were raised, you will experience what they call the Universal emotions (like love, fear, sadness), writing that taps into that is universal, read everywhere, understood everywhere and praised. These are things we share as the human race. Our history spans over 100,000 years (since the first Homo Sapiens walked the Earth), so, guess what? Everything has already been done, and said and painted, and acted. There's nothing new under the sun. And because we all share our universal characteristics, every character is a Mary Sue. Every.Single.Character. They are all an expression of the author's myriad emotions and creativity. They all represent a part of him. If we go by logical story structure (the one they teach as the thing that would make most sense). Jon, Dany and Tyrion are the stars in this story, and everyone else is the supporting cast. Arya and Bran may be close to stardom, but they are not IT. Everyone else is peripheral and expendable before reaching the end of the story. I hope no more Starks or direwolves die before then, but that's just my personal preference. One thing that is cool is that I don't know what Dany and Jon's roles are in the upcoming war (and believe you me, I read so much, that I don't have a hard time seeing the patterns of the story and its direction most of the time). All the talk about romance and who is Queen and who is going to have whose baby bores me to death, TBH. For me, the most important plot in the series is the WW threat and who is the one that will take the motherfuckers down. Jon, Dany or both? And there's no one other than Jon or Dany to lead this fight in the text; anyone else would be unearned by the writing that came before. One could set no groundwork for a character to take point on this and that would be a surprise, and earn a writer the apparently coveted "trope subverter" (not a word, I know) title, but it would be bad writing. You have to set the foundation and build the road for the reader to walk, not just plop him into the story after 2,000+ pages. Right now everyone's fates are undecided and in the balance, and all the characters have many possible roads in front of them. I don't see the point of fighting to establish that the character will follow "this" road, when many are still possible.

No. The ones that have left the Watch and survived always went beyond the Wall (like Mance Rayder). When Jon thinks of leaving, after he took his vows, he always thinks about how he'd be hunted down, and how he'd have to hide, steal clothes and lie until he finds his way to Robb. He actually wonders if Robb himself would sentence him to die for breaking his oath and take his head. After Jon comes back from his attempted escape, Mormont tells him he's not the first, and that there are so many, he never bothers sending people after them anymore because more often than not, they return after their crises of faith. He also admits that the knows many men in the NW go to the brothel in Mole Town, which is also breaking their vow (or at the most a very grey area; one could argue that they are not breaking their vow to father no children because the whores would drink moon tea, but that's for another thread), but he lets that one slide. I get the sense that once you say your vows, your only escape is Essos or living with the Wildings. I can see a scenario where through some political scheming someone tried to get someone else freed from their vows, but I think that for something like that to happen there have to be talks, and plans, and all sorts of maneuvers and behind the scenes manipulations, to make it happen (like, when they broke Sansa's engagement to Joffrey). It wouldn't be easy, but I suppose if the political influencers are strong, it could happen. I don't think any of that has happened on the show either, and they have given us no indication that the Northmen are just forgetting / forgiving Jon for breaking his promise. Several times there was dialog to indicate that Jon's resurrection had been discussed off camera: Tormund said "he died for us", Jon tells Sansa that his brothers murdered him, and so on. I think these are indications that, for all intents and purposes, on the show, we should assume two basic tenets: 1) That Jon's death and resurrection are vox populi 2) That people are willing to believe the Walkers are back.

There's enough in the books to think that Rhaegar was not a rapist.

Santa would never, ever, lie!!! (sorry, couldn't resist)

Sometimes we don't hear about things that are important because there's simply no time, in the TV world. It wouldn't be the first time this happened on the show either. We didn't see all the noble houses outside of KL find out about Joffrey's death, but we know they did. We never saw Ramsey hear or read any stories about Jon, we never saw anyone from any other house, Northern or Southern, hear about Jon's prowess with a sword, but, after the parley with Ramsey, we know that Jon is apparently a legendary swordfighter. People talk, ravens fly, gossip spreads; but, more importantly, time in the TV version of this story is fluid, very, very fluid. We don't know how long Jon and Sansa had been campaigning, but we know how long it took Jon and Tyrion to reach the Wall the first season, and we know they have been sending ravens like crazy to all the Northern houses, and it's implied on the show, I think, that they visited more than the two we saw on screen. Heck! we are supposed to surmise by the almost imperceptible comment about people painting the sails of the ships and making them ready that enough time has passed for Varys to have travelled back to Meereen in order to sail with Dany. So, I think it's very possible that someone at the Wall, let's say, Edd, has sent ravens to the Northern houses notifying them that Jon Snow's watch has ended on account of his being dead, and then resurrected. While Sansa was making those awesome clothes, I'm sure some people from Castle Black went to Mole's Town and talked about how the Red priestess resurrected Jon Snow. Pretty much like the smallfolk around the Riverlands were always talking about how Lord Beric Dondarrion couldn't be killed. If Jon's resurrection in the books is handled in any way like Beric's comebacks, and doesn't ever result in a problem for Jon with the Northern Lords, then I think D&D might just skip all the show and tell, and move along. They only have 13 episodes left, after all. ----------------- I don't mind Ned's sense of honor, his duty bound attitude, or his commitment to always do the right thing. I wish we had more people like that in the world. I don't understand why characters like Ned are sometimes despised for their mistakes, even more so than darker, more "evil" characters. What is it about people trying to be good, trying to live with honor and do their duty, and trying to always do the right thing that inspires so much disdain? Is it a sense that we could never be as good (of heart, conviction, and soul) as he is? Maybe, if we had more people obsessed with doing the right thing, we would have a lot less shootings, murders, and corruption cases. Long live Ned Stark! :)

I don't know about TV Jon, but I think book Jon wouldn't want the throne. He did admit to himself he had wanted Winterfell, but not because he wanted the seat and the power that came with it, not because he wanted to rule. He wanted WF because, most of all, he wanted to be acknowledged as his father's son. He wanted the legitimacy that in the society he grew up in made people somehow more worthy. He even remembers how he was better than Robb at everything, and that still didn't matter. He was still somehow tainted, less than all his brothers because of something he had no hand in. He worked hard to earn Ned's approval and admiration, but most of all, he wanted to be Ned's son, not his bastard, not someone who made Ned feel ashamed. He wanted to be able to call Ned father, just as his brothers and sisters did, and yet he had to call him "my Lord", because that was his place. When they found the direwolves, he was the one who said to Ned that he had 5 children (not 6), "my Lord", and that there were 5 direwolves. His own wolf was away from the others, alone, separate, discarded, almost dead. That's exactly how Jon felt all his life. WF was a symbol of his father's love, of having a place in this society, of being able to call his father by that name without feeling ashamed. He accepted the position of LC, mostly because he felt it was his duty, since his brothers chose him. If book Jon accepts the position of KitN, I suspect it will also be out of a sense of duty to lead the armies of the North against the Walkers and defend the realm, not because he craves admiration, power or a crown upon his head. I think he would refuse the Iron Throne, if there's one to be refused once this is all said and done. And if he doesn't die saving the world, he might be the only guy in the history of Westeros to be the 998th and the 1,000th Lord Commander.

I wasn't convinced either, but as a Jon fan? Damn if I didn't cheer along with the Northmen! (at almost 3:00 in the morning, which is when we get to see the show)

I don't think Jaimie would kill himself after(if?) he kills Cersei. But I think the people who think that go by that little speech Cersei made to Ned, I believe, where she talked about how she and Jaimie had done everything together, how they came into the world together, him holding onto her ankle, how they had their first sexual experiences together, and so on. I think she even mentions that they would leave this world together, and so, people may think she's right, at least where Jaimie is concerned.

It's not hard in the books, but I can see how non-book readers wouldn't get the nuances of the "I'll kill your baby if you don't handle me your castle" plot, for example. The show hasn't really done a good job with this character since he arrived at King's Landing after his captivity in Riverrun. Not at all. Inheritance goes by paternal bloodline. Jon's father was a Targaryen, and if he was legitimate (i.e. Rhaegar married Lyanna before going to the Trident), then his children's claim to WF comes after Ned Stark's bloodline is exhausted. Jon's children would have a direct claim to the Iron Throne, but they would come after Bran, Sansa and Arya's offspring for WF. I agree. Maybe not democracy, but I do believe Dany is intent in changing the system, one way or another

I think that's possible, and considering that the last time we saw him he was heading North, where there's an impending zombie invasion, even more so.

Regardig the face magic, I seem to remember that when Jaqen first changed his face in front of Arya on the show, it wasn't as dramatic as what we have seen Arya do. Just like in the books, he moved his hand over his face and it changed. In the books, he explains at some point that your face "learns" to change, and that, once it does, it never forgets. So, I think the way it works is that you put the face on once, your muscles "learn" the shape, and then you give the face back so others can learn that shape/form. In the future, you can adopt any of the faces you have already learned, without having to put them on again.

I think at first Ned didnt tell her because he didn't know her. They were married and off he went, almost the day after, to fight the war. He didn't know if he could trust her. Then he fell in love with her, and I think he didn't tell her precisely because he loved her. By lying to Robert and keeping Lyanna's secret, Ned was committing treason, if he had told Cat and asked her to keep the secret too, he would be asking her to commit treason right along with him. IMO, Ned could take the responsibility and the consequences (if they came) of being a lawbreaker, but he could not ask others to break the law with him, much less people he loved. He was too honorable for that.