WearyTraveler

I'll remain stubbornly optimistic :D

Okay, what if all the actors' talk refers to So, I'm going to just wait and see.

Well, the site doesn't say anything about , at least not the article that was linked by the OP of the spoiler. That article says, and I quote, . For all we know,

Every time someone calls Brienne "Brie" I think of cheese. LOL!!!

He, he! I'll have an order of frozen, epic hero to go, please! I think they wouldn't do that in the books since that's what they did with the bodies of the rangers who later rose as wights and almost killed LC Mormont. I don't see it happening on the show either because it would delay things too much and they only have a few episodes left to wrap it all up. I think Jon's resurrection will either happen at the end of this season, as a closing shot that will leave the unsullied wondering if Jon is a wight, or in the first episode next season. Regarding Jon's resurrection, I think it would be a thousand times better, in the books and on the show, if Melissandre had nothing to do with it. Just as no one had anything to do with Dany becoming the Mother of Dragons (Mirri told her the rules, but Dany, who was no sorceress and had never done magic, did it all by herself). In the books we finally got some insight into Melissandre, and she's starting to question her interpretation of her visions, which are not all that straightforward. I think it would be extremely powerful if Jon rose all by himself because he just IS Azor Ahai, and he doesn't need Melissandre's help to be reborn. The fact that the show has Melissandre leaving with Stannis makes me think that this is the way it will happen on the show.

But we are told many stories that serve as background info and help us understand current events without repeating the story exactly. Everything having to do with the Children of the Forest, the First Men, or the history of the Stark family, for example. I think the only events we could expect to be reproduced word by word are the prophecies specially those related to AA and Dany's visions in The House of the Undying. The rest just seems historical background to better explain current events. To me, anyway. Also, Jon wouldn't suddenly realize he has a magic sword, because it will not be magic until he is reborn. The sword will only respond to AA reborn, so, Longclaw will not become the magic sword until then. I like Oathkeeper as a contender too, but can't imagine how that would happen in the books, since Brienne and the sword are in the Riverlands when Jon is being stabbed. I think that Jon's resurrection needs to happen pretty quickly after his death, otherwise, his body would be in decomposition stages, and that's not a pretty sight for "the prince that was promised", who will deliver the world of the zombie apocalypse. Furthermore, we have seen that any resurrection that leaves the risen one in functional order (Beric Dondarrion, Lady Stoneheart) happen pretty close to death, I think we are supposed to feel that unless the magical resurrection event happens close to death, it won't have a satisfactory result. I also feel that the sword, being such a huge identifier of AA (so much so that Melissandre feels the need to trick Stannis sword to appear as Lightbringer and it's only Master Aemon who realizes it is not because it's a cold sword) would have to be at hand when Jon is reborn. Ergo, the sword must be close at hand when Jon is resurrected, and that only leaves Longclaw, which is the only Valyrian steel sword in close proximity to him when he's stabbed. As for Jon's dragon, I think that since he is literally the product of Fire (Rhaegar) and Ice (Lyanna), his animals would have to represent those elements and their houses; so, white for the direwolf (ice) and red for the dragon (fire).

That's what I'm thinking. It was given to Jon in a very special moment and he's been very careful not to lose it, even in the most dire situations North of the Wall, and after he escalated it with the Wildlings and escaped to Castle Black. I think those details are important. It may be that the sword doesn't activate (for lack of a better word) until AA is reborn, that is, when Jon resurrects after being stabbed.

Why do people think the AA sword needs to be forged again? The story never says the sword was destroyed. AA will be reborn, that's clear in all the prophesies but the sword was forged once, it doesn't need to be forged again. I think it's more likely that the sword was given to the Mormonts (the House that lives furthest North) for safe-keeping and that through the years its history was forgotten. Jon already has the sword he needs, he just doesn't know it yet.

Well, I'm not thrilled or disappointed, just theorizing, given the amount of anvils this episode had regarding Jon's parentage. I'm trying to tie the possible confirmation of R+L=J with the story for the other characters given what we see on the show and what we know from the books. While we are at it, we don't know if Rhaegar grew tired of Ellia, or if he married Ellia to fulfill the prophesy (Dany sees him and Ellia with baby Aegon, saying Aegon was the prince that was promised) and then wanted to move on with his life, having fulfilled his duty. We don't know how Ellia felt about the whole thing either way; according to the books, she and Oberyn were supposed to marry Jaimie and Cersei respectively, but that didn't happen because Tywin wanted something else. Ellia might have hated the idea of being married to Rhaegar, for all we know. Also, Ellia was raised in Dorne, were they are very much sexually liberated (at least in the books) and it's not uncommon for people to have multiple partners of any gender; the idea that she might be offended / felt cheated by Rhaegar loving, and even being sexually active with, someone else doesn't correspond to her liberated upbringing. It seems important for the story, set in the fictional world of Westeros where a trueborn son is somehow "better" than a bastard, that Jon be a legitimate heir. It doesn't matter to me, personally, if he is. Finally, I'd like to add that I couldn't look at this story through a 21st century sensibility lens because it would be downright aggravating; I think if we're going to analyze this world and try to make inferences based on what happens on the show (like this episode's anvils about Jon's parents) and what we know from the books, we have to see it through the eyes of the Westerosi culture, applying the rules established by the creators (Martin and D&D). You can't argue the morality of the characters choices using our standards because they are not the characters' standards.

I'm not sure what Bloodraven said on the show. In the books, the three eyed crow from Bran's dream said that, I can't recall if Bloodraven himself said it again. But if he did, Bloodraven also said that Bran couldn't communicate with anybody through the trees, yet he was able to say Theon's name, and Theon heard him. I think Bloodraven is projecting his limitations onto Bran, but as we know, Bran is a pretty special boy. It may be that Bloodraven doesn't know exactly how powerful Bran can be. It's just a theory, though, but I have to believe Bran still has a major role to play in this story, as the story opened with him and his journey has been very epic. I know Martin meanders a bit, but there's got to be a point to Bran's journey and his abilities. What good is he growing roots and watching everything without intervening? In the first book, after Bran sees beyond the Wall in his comatose dream, the three eyed crow tells him he needs to survive because "winter is coming"; that seems to strongly suggest that Bran has some major role to play in the upcoming war. I don't see what role he could play stuck in a tree without being able to affect the events he sees.

My new theory regarding the R+L=J is that Bran is going to see the events of The Tower of Joy, including a marriage, which would make Jon legitimate, not a bastard (remember that the rules were bent for the Targs, allowing them to marry their siblings, and Aegon The Conqueror was allowed to marry his two sisters). This vision will be the trigger for Bran wanting to leave the tree and head back to The Wall to tell Jon all about it, because Jon is "the prince that was promised" and the only one capable of stopping the White Walkers. Bloodraven was too merged with the tree to leave, but Bran could do it, since he would not have been merging with the tree for too long. And, I think Bran might actually be able to walk again, because his experience with the tree will enable him to do so. If that doesn't happen in the books, I think it could still happen in the show. It would be a great way to get Bran back into the main story.

IIRC, there is at least one more mention of her hand having permanent damage when she's with Robb in the second book. I remember being surprised that it supposedly belonged to Tyrion, but I also thought that LF was slimy and Varys cunning (that the weakling thing was an act), so, I thought there was something fishy going on, but I didn't guess what it was. What I didn't recall from the first read was that LF had sent the City Watch to bring Catelyn to him. As early as that he had them in his pocket. Had I kept this detail in my mind until the end of the last chapters of the book, I might have guessed Ned's fate when he tried to challenge Cersei.

I liked what they did by having Bran open his eyes the moment Lady was killed. I bet a few people got freaked out by it. He, he! I thought this chapter did a good job of hinting what a special boy Bran is with his seeing everything all the way to "dragons stirring" in the east. I didn't understand (still don't) why he named the direwolf Summer. What am I missing?

I didn't find anything shocking in it. She's learned a lot from LF and is intent on making Harry the Heir fall for her, she flirts with him, but it's nothing outrageous. Her internal monologue is more mature, but I'd say she's farther along on the show.

Those masks the Sons of the Harpy wear are downright scary!

Maybe they (show Roose and Ramsay) are not afraid of a young woman? Women have very little agency in Westeros. Maybe they think LF has brainwashed Sansa, which, given who LF is, anyone who knows him knows he's capable of it. Or maybe they don't quite trust her but think they can pretty much neutralize her if she tries anything.

Maybe the show knows something we don't? Many people theorize that Margaery Tyrell will be found guilty during her trials because Cersei, although punished harshly, was not sentenced to death. They believe that one of the Queens could be spared but not two, ergo, Margaery must die in the books. But maybe D&D know that she doesn't and so they will not even go down that road. I think Theon will try to warn Sansa, eventually, and she will refuse him. He will then try to show her how awful Ramsay can be by having her spy on Ramsay punishing Myranda for getting out of line (her reaction to Sansa was a huge anvil, IMO, that she will complain and act out, prompting Ramsay to punish her). This will then lead to Sansa enlisting Theon in whatever her revenge plans are. She must have some revenge plan, given her conversation with LF at Moat Cailin, and her subsequent decision to go to Winterfell, to be engaged to Ramsay, no less. I don't think we are theorizing that he will be one of the ones to stab Jon, we're saying he will take the Bowen Marsh role during that event. If you recall, Bowen was the first one to stab Jon saying "For the Watch" while he stabbed him and crying. That's different from being one of those who stab Jon. It's being the one in the lead and it was a pretty sad/powerful moment in the books.

Jeyne wasn't Sansa, though. She was a girl far more traumatized than Sansa (in books and in show), and Roose knew she wouldn't run away. The situation here is different. Sansa came with Vale guards, some of whom I presume will stay with her, and she appears to have the servants' loyalty (The North Remembers). So, while he might attempt to hurt her, I don't think he will succeed. Or some clever misdirection. There was plenty of foreshadowing going on for Sansa taking revenge in a spectacular way a la Red Wedding too, given all the many times the script bothered to remind us of that event and the role the Boltons played, right down to LF mentioning it was Roose who stabbed Robb in the heart. Right now, I can see it going either way, but I'm leaning toward Sansa being perfectly safe from Ramsay.

I think they might use the slaves dislike for her actions as the leverage to get her to open the fighting pits again.

I think Ollie will be the one. They did an interesting shot of his face when Jon said that many people in the NW weren't fond of the Wildlings. It's also been twice in as many episodes where we get a budding relationship of mentor-mentee going on between Jon and Ollie, which would make it even more poignant when the stab is delivered. That's what I was thinking too!

I think LF and Roose's conversation covers all your questions here: 1) LF said that Sansa and Tyrion had not consummated their marriage and that "by the law of the land" they are not married at all because of this, he even asks Roose to have her checked, if he wants. To which Roose replies he cares more about her name than her virtue. So the show is going with No Consummation = never married. 2) I think it's obvious that both, Roose and LF expect Cersei to find out, but as Roose said to Ramsay during their meal (pre-Sansa's arrival), the Lannisters have never sent their armies that far north, so, they probably don't expect them to do so now. Going back to Roose and LF's convo, Roose asks LF why he's risking angering the Lannisters (mainly Cersei) by bringing Sansa to him, when he (LF) got everything he did through the Lannisters. LF says everything is a gamble and that he has The Vale, pointing out that the last time the Vale and the North joined armies they toppled the Targs. So, I think the message here is that they are expecting Cersei to find out, but that they are sure they will defeat her as Ned, Robert and the Arryns managed to defeat the Targs, who had been in power way longer than the Lannisters. ETA: cross posted with Black Knight. Do I owe you a Coke or something?

I think they're heading to something like that, too. After all, it was Sansa's choice to go, intent on taking her revenge for her family. I don't think the show is setting her up to be a victim. Not with that dialog she had with LF overlooking MC. I think she has a plan. Also, wouldn't LF leave some Vale guards with her if he leaves? (Those falcons on their shields as they went through the gate were very prominent) I think those might give Ramsay pause.

I want to add that I don't think Sansa will get the Jeyne treatment. It seemed very clear to me that Roose will not let Ramsay torture her, and that even Ramsay knows he can't mess with Sansa because she's his gateway to holding the North's loyalty. I do think Sansa might witness some bad shit go down with Myranda, who acted incredibly miffed at Ramsay's betrothal. This might be what prompts Theon into action. I also got chills with "The North remembers". I think the show might do all right for this storyline, after all, even without Jeyne or Frey pie! (I don't know if they'll have Frey pie or not, just saying in case they don't. It's one of those details that while awesome in the books might not make it to the show) No, they didn't. In the books Tommen is still playing with his kittens

I thought KH did a splendid job on this one. And I also enjoyed the subtext in all of Cersei and Margaery's interactions. How many people do you think will mistake Jorah's "I'm taking you to the Queen" for Cersei?

Wooooo-hoooooooo!!!! Break a leg Addlepated!