WearyTraveler

Oooh! Can you point me to a link, pretty please? Since Jorah and Daario went off to look for Dany, I figure it's a clue she left, Hansel & Gretel style, for them to find. It seems convoluted to me that they'd find such a small piece of jewelry in the Dothraki sea, but there you have it.

I don't either! I started watching the show after my cousins recommended it. Binged seasons 1 and two in like a weekend. Then I read all the books before season 3. And I read all the spoilers all the time. Hello, my name is WearyTraveler and I'm a spoiler addict.

For the record, I think it's telling they had Mel return to the Wall. I wouldn't count Jon out just yet. Now, it's off to check the filming spoilers. That will tell us book walkers the answer to Jon's fate before TWOW is released (finally!).

So far they think he's dead. One person said that they hope Mel revives him next season

That was rough. The profile shot of Jon looking up at Olly was beautiful, though.

I think the

But the source material doesn't give one. The book this is based on ends without explaining the disappearances, how is it fair to demand an answer from the show?

It makes perfect sense. Joffrey was King, he had the most valuable name, yet Tywin made the alliance to have him marry Margaery of House Tyrell, why? Because the Crown was in debt up to its ears and the people were restless and hungry in KL's. One has the title, the other the resources. Sansa has the Stark name, which would give Boltons legitimacy (but Sansa doesn't know this, as explained below), LF has the army, Roose has the North. Sansa had no way of knowing how many restive Northern Lords there are out there. So far, none have risen to defend her family, all bent the knee to the Boltons. She only hears "the North remembers" from an old serving woman, and nothing more. There are no banner men out there asking to see her, none came to her wedding, no one of any power has made any attempt to contact her, and, more importantly, she wasn't privy to any of the Boltons' conversations about their problems holding the North. For all she knows, everyone is towing the party line happily. What does the marriage get her? Access. Something she couldn't have by doing anything else. There's no Moon Door in Winterfell, but there might be stray knives, or, as it happens, a misplaced corkscrew. ETA: I was typing my response while the mod posted, so, I'll respectfully bow out now because I agree.... fiction.

It's true that Lysa's abortion wasn't included but what LF perceived to be Cat's betrayal was, and in the show it's perfectly clear that LF seduced Lysa so that she would send Cat the letter blaming the Lannisters for Jon Arryn's death, knowing that would spring them to action and get Ned to KL's where LF could get at him. In the show he married Lysa to gain power he didn't have, so suggesting that Sansa marry into the Boltons so she could get power she didn't have and eventually become the Wardeness (TM LF) of the North makes it a more than apt comparison. IMO, off course. She had a plan that made sense in the context of Westerosi society: if you want a castle / title, you marry into the family that owns that castle / can give you the title. For examples see: Cersei marrying Robert, Margaery marrying Renly, Joffrey and Tomen, LF marrying Lysa. As for demonstrating brains, I think she has. I think trying to play Ramsay against his father and creating chaos from within is not stupid. It has worked wonders for LF, her teacher. Trying to snap Theon out of his Reek persona is also smart. What s she going to do? Try to convince a Bolton soldier? Seduce the stable boy? She freely lets him kiss her now, so, in retrospect, it could be. My point was that the scene was open, and that your particular interpretation wasn't the only possible one, ergo, one can't build an entire argument out of it. She is making the attempt. When she tells Ramsay that Walda's baby is a danger to him, that's her trying to manipulate the Boltons. You may think her attempt is not that good, or too dangerous, given who Ramsay is, but you can't say she wasn't trying. See? Now I agree with most of this. I don't think her plot this season was terrible, but I'd say it would have been better had some of these things you mentioned been included.

I've tried to stay away from the Sansa controversy because it seems to be such a hot button, but... That is playing the game. That is how LF gained the Vale, by marrying Lysa who had aborted his son and married Jon Arryn choosing not to defy her father for him. Justified or not, it is clear that LF feels that the Tullys wronged him and he set out to get revenge. He set in motion the wheels that got Catelyn and Ned involved, got Ned imprisoned, seduced Lysa, married her, swiftly murdered her and got named Lord Protector. If Sansa is learning from LF that's one lesson he would teach: "marry your enemy so you can betray him/her from within" So, one play paid off, the other hasn't, so far. Playing the game and winning the game are two different things. As to using her sexuality to manipulate Baelish, that's one interpretation, but I don't think it's the only one possible from that scene. It could be that it was supposed to represent her leaving behind her childish notions of Knights and Ladies. It could be that it was supposed to represent her growing up, or her falling for LF who, up to that point had been her savior (never mind that he created the circumstances that put her in peril in the first place). She is seeing her ancestral home, the place of so many happy memories burnt and flying the Bolton banners. All her people, and her father's people gone, why isn't she allowed to sulk? I think many people want Sansa to be a certain way, cunning like Olenna, badass like Danny, a leader like Jon, and it may be that she will eventually be all those things,; but I will say this: had she been all those things this season, I wouldn't have bought it. It's true her character had some interesting developments last year, but those were nowhere big enough to make her this cunning player so many people want her to be.

I don't think that's how Ned's mind works, though. He believes in the right to rule by blood deeply. This is why he told Robert that he should sit the Iron throne, instead of Ned, because "you had the better claim". Moral choices are never easy when a situation is strained. I think I would equate Ned's moral choice here with that of a person who is against the death penalty but suddenly finds himself in a situation where his brother's killer is going to be sentenced to death. How strong is his moral conviction then? Does speak on behalf of his brother's killer asking the judge to give him a life sentence instead of the needle or does he let his brother's killer fry in an "eye for an eye" fashion? Making the right moral choice is easy when the result will benefit us or when the alternative is worse. But making the moral choice when we know it will cause us problems, when we know the road will be hard, or when the alternative is better for us; when the moral choice is the difficult choice, that's, IMO, what makes a good person. Had he supported anybody but Stannis (or Dany, if he could get to her), he would have been a hypocrite, as low in the moral scale as any of the people whose game he didn't want to play. He would have betrayed his conscience and himself and the lesson for his children would have been that it's ok to bend your moral code if upholding it becomes too difficult. I don't think I would have liked Ned as much as I do if he had gone that way.

Ned's mistake was assuming people would be honorable. It's sad that they are not. And I feel it's a very jaded world when we support behaving like the bad guys in order to survive.

Tyrion told Yoren he'd see him in the morning, so the plan was always to continue traveling with the NW. Robb didn't speed up or delay their trip.

I had the same thought about the direwolves and Tyrion. I like Tyrion, but I definitely thought when reading this book that something was up beause of the way the direwolves act around him. Robb also reminded me of Ned, but while Robb was mistaken in his prejudice, Ned was not. Littlefinger relished the thought of having Cat in a brothel and taking the honorable Ned Stark to one to meet his wife there. And he was mocking Ned the whole way from the castle to the brothel. Also, while LF was telling Ned the truth about Cat's location, he then lied to both Ned and Cat about the dagger. Ned's fears were entirely justified.

Welcome, Last Time Lord! Be aware that since this is a re-read thread, we sometimes talk about events that happen later in the book openly (no spoiler tags). Enjoy!

Also, FWIW, I give you the summary of the book AGOT, posted in Martin's official website (bolding is my own):

True, but as an avid reader since I was 4 (I have never been without a book since I learned to read), I don't feel these stories and legends are too far removed from the truth. I don't know how to explain it. It may be the fact that we have the same story spoken by different characters, or that the story is recalled by several characters at different times in the novels or the context where the story is mentioned. It has the ring of truth, like I can strip some of the more mythical aspects and still see the kernel that originated it. Why would the people of Essos, where the Red religion originated, who have never seen a WW, been under their threat or experienced a long winter be aware of the Long Night and basically fear the same threat that the Westerosi lore has? I get it that some people think it would be more surprising if the Others were not a big evil menace, and that they would love t if the usual trope about epic battles between good and evil were completely subverted here; but honestly, if this whole thing is a misunderstanding because men violated some pact made 8,000 years ago, this would feel un-earned to me. There has been absolutely no indication in the past 5 books that would lead to this conclusion. It's convoluted and it would necessitate a long expository explanation in books 6 and 7 to inform the reader. Nothing in the books is building to this, whereas, everything in the books is building to the generally held belief that the Others are bad news. If we look at the theory that R+L=J, that feels earned. There are clues sprinkled throughout, some more obvious than others, but it's there. I can't see anything of the sort in support of this theory. Tropes are tropes for a reason. They work. I may know where something is going, but that doesn't diminish my enjoyment of the story. Furthermore, I don't think it's good writing to suddenly spring on the reader this 180 turn where the Others are just defending their territory because of some misunderstanding related to a pact signed 8,000 years ago of which not a single character is aware. That would be a surprising development for the sake of the surprise, for the shock value. It would not be organic, given the text of the first 5 books. But, off course, that's only my humble opinion. I reserve the right to be wrong :D

Why do you think was the original post edited? That post doesn't mention anything about

Well, I'm excited about

There are a few problems with this theory. The man was already a Lord Commander before he married the woman with white skin and blue eyes. The books say he pursued her, so she wasn't just given to him as a wife to seal a pact. The Wall had already been up for a while, as he was the 13th Lord Commander. If The Wall had been erected by The Others as part of an agreement with the King of the North, then why would Brandon the Breaker have gone after the Night's King (who according to old Nan was Brandon's actual brother)? Brandon and Joramun, The King Beyond the Wall, were the ones that defeated the Night's King, so, there was a King Beyond the Wall even back then, which wouldn't jive with the theory that the Others are coming south because there are men (Wildlings) north of the Wall. After the Night's King was defeated, it was discovered that he had been sacrificing babies to the Others, why would he need to do that if they had an alliance? Cold Hands had to have Sam open the weirwood door for him because the magic in The Wall was keeping him out. If The Others build The Wall, why wouldn't they or their wights be able to pass through it?

As someone who watched Lost from beginning to end and watched all of the episodes of this show the first season, I think the two shows couldn't be any more different. As for getting answers, while I will agree that Lost promised them and the ones they delivered might have been disappointing for some, the source material for this doesn't give any answers, so, I'm not sure it's fair to ask the show to do so. I view this show as an exploration of the human condition, sometimes more successfully than others, but I'm not expecting answers. I'm perfectly fine with never knowing why 2% of the world's population disappeared.

There are several advantages of a face-to-face scene, among which is the fact that Jaime would have a reason to verbalize his internal monologues from the books. It would certainly make more sense for the show to do it that way.

Not sure why you quoted me here on the "Dani didn't have many choices when it came to Drogon" comment because I have been agreeing with those who say that. If you quoted me for the book reference, I remember it being very clear in the books that Drogon came drawn by the noise and the blood. I'll dust off the chapter in my Kindle and search for the text, but, in the meantime, here's the summary from AWOIAF: Whatever else these guys are, they are precise about the details of the written work. That's the way I remember it happening. _______________________________________ Moving on to other topics being discussed here. As to why people suspect Hizdahr, it didn't sit well with me that he was so insistent on Dany trying the fried insects (crickets or locusts, I forget) and refused to have any himself. That's when I started suspecting that he was fishy. But, maybe that was misdirection. I suppose we'll know for sure Martin's intent with the character once TWOW is published.

Maybe this town will be happier because no one disappeared?

That tweet from Linda is believed to be a fake.