Completely Unspoiled Speculation Thread

[ChocButterfly]

Ok, I'm a bit late for the Reaghar-Lyanna discussion, but I want to chime in. I can't quote right now, but I've seen some of the objections of this theory:

 

*Jon being Reaghar and Lyanna's son would be too perfect, too cliche for the bastard boy to have royal blood: Well, maybe it is kind of cliche, but I don't know what's the big depart from now, since we already know Jon does presumably have noble blood from Ned. And not just any noble blood, one of the most important families in all Westeros. That doesn't keep people from treating him like crap, even though Ned has recognized him as his son.That he also has Targaryan's blood is inconsequential either way, he's still  bastard, he has NO claim to the throne whatsoever. It doesn't change a thing. Not to mention, that the Targaryans are not even ruling right now. And he's in the freaking NW! It wouldn't matter if he'd be a rightful heir, like Aemon, his lineage doesn't mean anything anymore!!! So, it's not too perfect at all, it doesn't change any circumstances at all, except for given us a more probable explanation than the official story.

 

*Reaghar was horrible to his wife and children running away with Lyanna: For all we know, Elia maybe knew of the affair and she didn't care! After all she was Dornish, they have different standards there. Ellaria seemed to have a very open relationship with Oberyn, she even takes care of his children with other women. So maybe they also had an open relationship, or maybe she wasn't that interested in him after having her children and she let him have his thing on the side. Heck, maybe even the Starks knew of the affair, and they went to talk sense to both of them.

 

The other thing is I don't necessarily think Reaghar was such a horrible human being for causing all of this all because he was in love with Lyanna. First, we don't know what happened, we don't know anything. One thing is for sure, they were selfish, but stupid youngsters are selfish, specially when they think they're in love. We don't know how old Reaghar was, but he could have been very young, since he apparently had infant children. Teenagers are stupid.

 

*Reaghar should have returned after the Mad King burned his family instead of starting a war: how do we know they didn't just try that? Maybe when they found out her family had come for them they had decided to confront and talk to them, but by the time they went there, the Mad King had already burned the Starks and all hell had broken loose. Maybe they tried talking some sense into the the King, but again, MAD. Maybe when they wanted to fix things, troops were already fighting, after all, when you father burns your lover's dad and brother there's no much more to mend after that.

 

Maybe Reaghar did try talking to Robert before, but knowing Robert, he wouldn't buy it and he refused to abandon his theory of his lover being kidnapped and rape.

 

*Their whole sexcapade cause the terrible war: I'm not even sure about this. The supposed kidnapped was the trigger, but I think a war was about to come either way. The Mad King had been burning nobles and important families for some while, it seemed. Heck, he wanted to burn the whole city! A war, an assassination attempt, a national revolt, something would have started sooner or later, it was just a matter of time. Probably the circumstances and sides involved would have been different, but there would have been conflict either way. Also,the Lannisters were just buying their time to seize the throne.

 

The other thing is that since we don't know the timeline, maybe Lyanna was already pregnant with Jon when Reaghar "kidnapped" her. Maybe she asked for him to hide her because she was afraid of her family's reaction. Maybe she was afraid her father would kill her or exiled her for "dishonoring" the family name. I can see that happening, since the Starks appear too rigid on stupid rules and family honor. So maybe he had no choice but to hide her and they really didn't know what to do. Maybe they thought they'd hide for a while, till the baby came and then, I don't know, hide him?? Who knows, it seems like they didn't think their plan through very well, but that doesn't make them such horrible people, just incredibly nearsighted. People are stupid when they're desperate.

 

I know these are just speculations, but either of these theories are logic, more logic than honorable Ned went to war, had time to cheat and had time to track down the baby (after 9 months, how did he know?!), came with the bastard baby, who he refused his entire life to tell him who his mother is, just because. And oh, why did he have to take the baby home and not just provide him and his mom with everything necessary?

 

Thing is, we don't know anything, there are a lot of circumstances and every day more and more details appear to sustain the theory that Reaghar didn't kidnapped Lyanna. And I don't believe it's a convoluted plot at all. I find more convoluted the Crazy Lyza and LF killed Arryn story. Or the LF tried killing Bran story (how would he have done that, by the way, is he Omnipresent?). Or, for fuck's sake, the fucking necklace gate!!! I find it more convoluted that Jon would be really Ned's, it doesn't make any sense. But that's just my opinion.

Edited May 7, 2015 by ChocButterfly

[stillshimpy]

I'm not even going to go back into why I continue to disagree, Chocbutterfly.  The "for all we know" defense is not a debatable point because, sure.  Maybe Rhaegar's wife had insane body odor falls under the "for all we know" , but here's what we do know:  It started a rebellion according to every time it has been mentioned in the story and if tens of thousands of people died because of it, there goes my benefit of the doubt for the twue Wuv defense.  

 

Besides, this is not a real situation.  It's a story, so what we're told is likely all we will ever know of it and the extenuating circumstances that might exonerate all concerned are not part of the story, unless it takes the time and trouble to actually go into them. 

 

Again, another objection that I have is simply that the story needs to cut to the fucking chase on this one.  They've been having characters avoid definitive statements on this shit for way, way too long.  If Jon is Lyanna's son then Catelyn performed contortionist feats of language abuse in her tale to Talisa, if nothing else.  There's been a lot of artifice that goes beyond what even fantasy fiction can bear to sustain this "Oh , oh, oh....could he be...." boondoggle.  

 

Make it so or clear it up.  However, they've been fucking around for so long with this one, it's obvious there's more to the story and suspense can only be sustained for so long until drawing it out feels cowardly.  We're in the fifth season.  They're two seasons passed cowardly for me.  

 

Also on this: 

 

 

 

Well, maybe it is kind of cliche, but I don't know what's the big depart from now, since we already know Jon does presumably have noble blood from Ned. And not just any noble blood, one of the most important families in all Westeros. That doesn't keep people from treating him like crap, even though Ned has recognized him as his son.That he also has Targaryan's blood is inconsequential either way, he's still  bastard, he has NO claim to the throne whatsoever. It doesn't change a thing. Not to mention, that the Targaryans are not even ruling right now. And he's in the freaking NW! It wouldn't matter if he'd be a rightful heir, like Aemon, his lineage doesn't mean anything anymore!!! So, it's not too perfect at all, it doesn't change any circumstances at all, except for given us a more probable explanation than the official story.

 

I'm sorry, I disagree again and for specific reasons:  It does change things materially.  Catelyn hating Jon, for instance, makes more sense if he's a product of a relationship that led to her betrothed being burned alive.  That is a hideous way to go and no matter how much someone might not want to blame the byproduct of that union, most people would not wish to be around them on a daily basis at a bare minimum.  .  

 

 

Also, it very much changes something in Jon's backstory:  He's not proof of Ned Stark's fallibility and ability to be like all other men.  It practically makes the slow-witted, but good Ned saintly rather than believably flawed.  Not only was he so pure of heart that he'd take the kid with him and conceal his Targaryen parentage, presumably to spare his life from...whomever. Robert presumably.  Cersei was convinced that Robert would kill her children if she knew.  Hell, NED was convinced Robert would kill her children.  

 

So Ned took a lifelong hit to his honor and let all the kingdom think he had ...well, fallen and thereby stained the family name. 

 

I like Ned, but that would make him one hell of a martyr and that's not the case if Jon is actually his son.  

 

Also, Jon's perception of all of these events would change wildly and radically.  

 

It's actually not about a claim to the Throne, in terms of how ....again, I just find it sort of saccharine on so many levels.  Sure, some people are good and pure, but that does remove human failings from Ned on a level that's a tad irksome and -- again for me -- starts to wander into "that's officially too much and my suspension of disbelief along with my willingness to emotionally invest just snapped like a wet carrot".   

 

Then absolutely changes something very key in the story if Jon becomes a leader of men and active in any kind of war:  As Ned Stark's bastard son he's clearly Dany's enemy.  

 

As Rhaegar's son he's her nephew and that changes kind of a lot if she ends up knowing about it.  

 

Mostly I'm just ticked off with the narrative stalling on the issue though.  Truthfully, it might lead to a really interesting story -- particularly as regards the history of the Rebellion -- but man alive, get to it already.  That's really my main sense of frustration as much as my complaints about the cliches of fantasy and scifi. 

 

"Luke, I am your father!"  kind of stuff.  

 

However, sure, go for it.  Go there. Make it interesting and I'll officially be on board.   Rip the narrative bandaid off or don't, show.   

 

You know what it really reminds me of, and is part of the reason for a sense of rage on my part?  Scifi shows had the most difficult time committing to stories about relationships.  So I could name a laundry list of shows that just screwed with shippers of various pairings, in a seemingly gleefully wicked way.  

 

This has started to feel that way.   There's another thing that bugs me about it, but I won't go into that here. 

Edited May 7, 2015 by stillshimpy

[ChocButterfly]

If Jon is Lyanna's son then Catelyn performed contortionist feats of language abuse in her tale to Talisa, if nothing else.  There's been a lot of artifice that goes beyond what even fantasy fiction can bear to sustain this "Oh , oh, oh....could he be...." boondoggle.

I'm sorry, I disagree again and for specific reasons:  It does change things materially.  Catelyn hating Jon, for instance, makes more sense if he's a product of a relationship that led to her betrothed being burned alive. 

 

Because Catelyn didn't know, that much is obvious. I don't think Ned would put on her that secret when it was a matter of life and death. He wasn't very open about anything. She always believed Jon was Ned's son.

 

Also, it very much changes something in Jon's backstory:  He's not proof of Ned Stark's fallibility and ability to be like all other men.  It practically makes the slow-witted, but good Ned saintly rather than believably flawed.  Not only was he so pure of heart that he'd take the kid with him and conceal his Targaryen parentage, presumably to spare his life from...whomever. Robert presumably.  Cersei was convinced that Robert would kill her children if she knew.  Hell, NED was convinced Robert would kill her children.

 

It doesn't prove Ned was a sSaint, it continues to prove Ned was an idiot in regards to his blind sense of duty and doing whatever is supposed to be right, damn the consequences, which falls exactly into what Ned is and has always been. Ned is very flawed already, in my opinion, he doesn't need to have cheated on Cat for that. And of course Robert would have killed Jon, and of course Ned would have tried to protect the only thing left from her sister, his own blood. That is not difficult to believe at all.

 

Mostly I'm just ticked off with the narrative stalling on the issue though.  Truthfully, it might lead to a really interesting story -- particularly as regards the history of the Rebellion -- but man alive, get to it already.

That's where we mostly agree, the story is taking fooooooooooooorever to be unveiled. I have a feeling that it'll never be cleared.

[stillshimpy]

Because Catelyn didn't know, that much is obvious.

 

No, it's actually not, Choc, that's part of my frustration with the story at this point.  When Catelyn talked to Talisa about the Jon and the night he nearly died, the wording was infuriating because it very specifically danced around the issue.  

 

When Catelyn talked to Ned she said, "When you came home with another woman's son" ....that's why I am just ticked at the darned story at this point.  It's gotten far too cutesy with never definitively wording it.  There was never a "your son" or "his son" either because Jon is Ned's son and Cat could never bring herself to say that, or because he wasn't and she knew.  

 

It's really maddening.   We parsed this out during that Talisa and Catelyn exchange, everything she said could have supported Catelyn knowing in either direction.  

 

Makes me want to yodel like the Swiss Miss and do a shot of tequila for the hell of it at noon.  Just drives me bonkers. 

[gingerella]

I think it bears remembering that technically none of us knows what the fuck is going on in this story, nor what might be contained in the books that is not being shared in A Show, so some hypothesizing just might actually be revealed in the books, but we don't get to know that in A Show. Yes, that sucks, but it's also the deal we made by taking our Unsullied oath.  Ergo, IMO everyone's theories here have validity until proven otherwise.

 

And now, for something completely different:

That he also has Targaryan's blood is inconsequential either way, he's still  bastard, he has NO claim to the throne whatsoever. It doesn't change a thing.

I was thinking about this issue of being a bastard and the whole Roose "I now anoint thee my legitimate heir..." bullshit. Did anyone else smell something rotten there, I mean aside from the stench that is the Bolton's?  I mention this because it seems that one can just suddenly anoint a bastard to legitimacy just like that. It apparently doesn't even have to be the father of said bastard because Stannis offered to do the same for Jon Snow, nee Jon Stark.  It seems odd that one can make a bastard a non-bastard just by saying it is so. Either you are, or you aren't, how can you be one then suddenly the other? It makes no sense to me, and in the context of A Show, it makes even less sense because one thing we've learned in these worlds is that people have long ass memories and just because someone suddenly says, "Nee, ye are no longer a bastard!" doesn't mean that the people will accept that person as now a legitimate heir to whatever family they are attached to. That's some weird ass shit right there, IMO of course.

 

[stillshimpy]

I think it bears remembering that technically none of us knows what the fuck is going on in this story, nor what might be contained in the books that is not being shared in A Show, so some hypothesizing just might actually be revealed in the books, but we don't get to know that in A Show. Yes, that sucks, but it's also the deal we made by taking our Unsullied oath.  Ergo, IMO everyone's theories here have validity until proven otherwise.

 

Right, but it's the shows job to convey the story fully.  We shouldn't have to refer to source material and god knows they bring it up often enough to have achieved some fucking clarity on the issue.  So "for all we know" dude....get it into the script or don't, but tell the full story already.  

 

It's like Pretty Little Liars "Who is A" ....after a while all we really know is that the writers are messing with everybody on purpose.  

 

It pretty much has to be clearer in the books, right? (this is a rhetorical question, do not answer me anyone, please) Because if the books jerk this issue around on purpose then it has achieved the impossible in the Irritation "Cut to the Chase Already" Olympics.  

 

You can hint at something for five seasons or seventeen books or whatever, but sooner or later -- and it's usually sooner -- the longer you try to prolong suspense the less likely it is to satisfy.  At least in my experience.  

 

Sure, that's part of the bargain we've made, but what Stumbler and I talked about all the way back in the first season, in terms of what we were doing and why we were doing this is that basically, we're trying to see if a story based on such vast source material can possibly be fully conveyed on the screen.  So we're basically trying to reconstruct the tale with what is offered and the offerings on this one have just been enough -- for me personally -- to want to pitch a cantaloupe at the screen about half the darned time. 

 

Luckily I never buy cantaloupe.  Listeria concerns, but sooner or later I'm going to be purchasing a melon if they don't get the hell on with it.  

 

*GROG* 

 

*MORE GROG*   

 

Make it stop, show.  Make it stop already.  Gah.  

Edited May 7, 2015 by stillshimpy

[stillshimpy]

*Somewhere in an alien observation room some Ray Bradburyesque alien scientist comments to two others* 

 

Alien 1:  We appear to have broken one of them at long last. 

Alien QP*:  Excellent work! Which one has rounded that crucial bend into complete and utter madness? 

Alien #:  The verbose one with the rapid, if inaccurate typing speed. 

Alien QP:  < pauses blankly> 

Alien 1:  The one with the daft theories. 

Alien #:  And the strange sense of humor. 

Alien QP:  Uhhhhh.....

Alien #: The one that appears to drink far too much grog, sir. 

Alien QP:  Still nothing.  

Alien 1:  It was Pigshit, captain.  Pigshit the Knifey theorist.  

Alien: QP:  Didn't that one come broken?  

Alien #:  She appears to be even crazier than usual...? Okay. Never Mind.  

 

* you didn't really expect an alien number system to make sense, right? 

[ChocButterfly]

Right, but it's the shows job to convey the story fully.  We shouldn't have to refer to source material and god knows they bring it up often enough to have achieved some fucking clarity on the issue.  So "for all we know" dude....get it into the script or don't, but tell the full story already.

Completely agree! I don't care what has been revealed or explained in the books, this is a TV show, and should be complete by itself. I wish they'd explain more things that are just left in the air like that, like that Smoke Baby thing, or how they casually threw the Stone Men thing (!?). Why no one is paying attention to the freaking White Walkers, even when many of the NW have seen zombies. Or why it has taken them 5 years to cover a distance that most wildlings walk every day. Why did Mel wanted to kill Gendry so badly, and then just forgot about it, like no big deal.

 

Ufff, so many unexplained things, I am afraid they will never revealed the Jon's parentage mystery ever!

[gingerella]

I don't care what has been revealed or explained in the books, this is a TV show, and should be complete by itself. I wish they'd explain more things that are just left in the air like that

Yes, that would be nice, and I totally understand the sentiment, however, do you really think TPTB who put A Show together ever anticipated that there would be a group, or groups of viewers who refused to read the books, or wall themselves off from any back stories and/or spoilering of this story, other than what A Show shows A Viewer? I highly doubt they counted on having viewers like us. They probably expected everyone to run out and read the books so hey, who cares if they have to cut out huge swaths of important shit or totally re write stuff to make it more interesting for a TV show?  The point is, we have chosen to become entangled with A Show, and only A Show, and I just don't know that anyone in show-runner land cares about the fact that large chunks of this make no fuckin' sense to us. We Unsullied are a small wee clan right now, we are less in numbers than the Dothraki Dany hauled across the sea (well, maybe we are actually larger than that crew, but who knows since we haven't had a Dothraki headcount in a long time). I just don't think the gaps in the story are necessarily a problem for others, I think they are an issue for us because we only have to go on, what A Show shows us.

 

Man, that entire para had the word "show" in it way too many times!

[janjan]

Alien 1:  It was Pigshit, captain.  Pigshit the Knifey theorist.

Earth to Alien 1. Earth to Alien 1. Come in please. Come in you little green sucker. Come in and face the music. <mournful cello sounds>. The Knifey theorist is the mighty Stumbler, first of his name, King of the Annals. Pigshit dates from Season 1, when a poor farmer from the Riverlands recounts to "Your, er, Hand" that a Mountain coated his children with a flammable substance and set them on fire and, not being dragonettes, they went poof, and a daft lady turned to her long-suffering but amazingly indulgent husband and said, "Did he just say 'pigshit'?".If you're gonna conquer us, you have to keep us straight or we'll confuse the hell outta you and your conquest will die a'birthing. Confusion is our specialty.

Edited May 8, 2015 by janjan

[stillshimpy]

The Knifey theorist is the mighty Stumbler, first of his name, King of the Annals

 

I must lay claim to my own insanity.  It was me, not Stumbler.  The reason I remember is that I had pulled a muscle in my back and couldn't work out, so I was going NUTS and I embarked on the biggest off-topic march ever seen on TWoP, in which I wrote a theory that included dialogue for Knifey.  

 

Hence, the Knifey Theories were born.  That and Cersei's wigs, but since they've gone away, we mention them less.  But it was me that originally accused Knifey of being behind it all, complete with descriptions of hopping up to the Hapless and Unwashed Would-Be (and chatty) Assassin for Bran and propositioning him.  

 

Janjan, you wound me by disregarding my long history of mental breakdowns on the Wall.  Ulle saved me that day by pulling me into a PM conversation before anyone banned my off-topic ass ...but it was actually when Dietrich was still the mod and he presumably just wondered how much pot I actually smoked (none, I was still on responsible parent duty).  

 

Although, you got the stuff about my patient and indulgent husband (who laughed at me until he cried) right, so maybe I really was just bouncing off Stumbler that day.  Hard to say.  The cotton-wool that I packed my sanity in for safe-keeping sometimes alters my memory too.    

 

I wish they'd explain more things that are just left in the air like that, like that Smoke Baby thing, or how they casually threw the Stone Men thing (!?). Why no one is paying attention to the freaking White Walkers, even when many of the NW have seen zombies. Or why it has taken them 5 years to cover a distance that most wildlings walk every day. Why did Mel wanted to kill Gendry so badly, and then just forgot about it, like no big deal.

 

One of my favorites -- if we bend the meaning of the word 'favorite' to include 'crazy making inattention to details they actually freaking included in the story -- will always be that Alaister Thorne set off for King's Landing at the end of the first season with the Monkey's Paw of the White Walker, to present to Jolly King Joffrey.  To provide proof that the Shambling Army O'death was headed their way.  

 

Never.Mentioned.Again.  So much worse than that is that Thorne just rejoined the damned story without any explanation.  What the pluck, Story?  

 

So yes, they actually bring up stuff and then pretend it never happened and I don't really know why.  There are things that don't bug me as much.  Like Face Tile Lady.  Don't know her story.   For me it's not a nagging detail.  

 

gingerella, I really just can't agree that HBO just expected the audience to go out and read the books.  TV networks pretty much count on people not being conversant with the source material all the time.  What I think they were counting on was that if anyone was that invested, then by all means, go read the books (or their site material) and they couldn't envision that there would be an ever-dwindling group of people just hellbent on sticking to what was on the screen as the sole source of having this shit make sense.   So on that, I agree.  

 

BUT having said that, that doesn't pass as any kind of excuse for a lack of story coherency for me.  They have ten hours a season.  They routinely engage in farting around forever with certain stories.  It took Jon a full season to get to Mance Rayder and then the bloody season ended with "You're going to meet him! See you next year, Suckas!"  

 

Some of this shit is intentional stalling and if you've got time as a writer to purposefully stall, you've got time to fill-in with all sorts of elucidating materials and are just choosing not to.  

Edited May 8, 2015 by stillshimpy

[DirewolfPup]

For me, this show is either excellent at revealing mysteries or horrible/non-existent. Maybe some of these developments (smoke baby, necklace) would seem more believable in print. Like the dumb necklace thing. Maybe the way it was written seemed like an awesome plot that could conceivably happen. In the show? Convoluted plot aside, there was absolutely zero, none, nadda chance that Olenna managed to get that fucking poison into Joffrey's cup or food. I've watched that scene about 37.5 times*. Olenna strolled quickly past his cup exactly one time since taking the jewel from Sansa. They showed her walking by. It was. not. possible. Jesus, show, this was an easy fix. Show her standing there for 5 seconds while the rest of the guests talked to the jester or some shit. This isn't hard... I'm not even going to get into how you attach a jewel securely enough to not randomly fall off, yet easy to rip off without the wearer noticing at all. God, I hate that plot point.

 

Part of me would be happier if we started with the whole history of the wars and dragons from the get-go. Piecing together Rhegar's story alone has taken 5 seasons. We just got a small taste of Cersei's childhood (even that didn't make sense. 3 or 4 children?). The whole "how could Jon Arryn really be THAT big of an idiot?" bit.  These little reveals about the past are interesting, but we're trying to focus on the stories of these people in this land as it stands right now. There's enough going on right now, that we don't need to worry or care about how exactly the Targaryans were killed off. If Lyanna was kidnapped or in love. Does it even matter? These characters are long dead. We will (probably) never see them on the screen. We just get to hear other people talk about them. Plus, in the grand scheme of the show, it doesn't matter at all if Rhegar was just a misunderstood puppy-love, starry-eyed optimist. What matters is Westeros has a view of him because of the wars that followed.

 

*I'm sure I shut it off in frustration at least once

[stillshimpy]

Convoluted plot aside, there was absolutely zero, none, nadda chance that Olenna managed to get that fucking poison into Joffrey's cup or food. I've watched that scene about 37.5 times*. Olenna strolled quickly past his cup exactly one time since taking the jewel from Sansa. They showed her walking by. It was. not. possible. Jesus, show, this was an easy fix. Show her standing there for 5 seconds while the rest of the guests talked to the jester or some shit. This isn't hard... I'm not even going to get into how you attach a jewel securely enough to not randomly fall off, yet easy to rip off without the wearer noticing at all. God, I hate that plot point.

 

It is well known how much I hate that and everything surrounding that misbegotten, bastard thing so this is quoted for gospel freaking truth.  

 

Also, there was no damned way for Olenna to know that Tyrion would be standing there, holding a cup and the wine-bearer business as well as Littlefinger having the court jester standing by to get Sansa out of town with what we were shown.  

 

For all we know, in the book, it's the coolest thing Olenna ever does for anyone and she conspired with Littlefinger to have it go down and for Sansa to be rescued during the commotion and she really was striking one for girl power.  As depicted?  White Stumbler's annals have a crossover with the singular N version in exactly where that plot-as-shown was screwed.  

 

I also still suspect that Tywin must have been in on the whole damned thing too, but the show never really made clear why Tywin had zero interest in figuring out who had really killed the bloody Lannister king.  He wasn't in the least disturbed by the "our enemies, within the gates!" and only a hysterical Cersei would believe that nonsense about Tyrion killing Joffrey in a way where he'd be suspect number one.  

Hey you know what that does bring up though?  Littlefinger and Olenna were in on this.  Clearly, he had to have known that Tyrion would be blamed, because he was having Sansa snatched. 

 

What does Littlefinger have specifically against Tyrion?  It must be something huge, because if Littlefinger killed Jon Arryn, or rather had him killed (and we know that to be the case) and Knifey, the world's most distinctive knife, was used in the attack on Bran...it does become reasonable to assume that Littlefinger was behind that attempt on Bran.  

 

But the thing that was always the problem with that was what Tyrion pointed out to Catelyn:  Why the hell would I use a knife known to belong to me?  (and employ a moron)

 

So, if LF tried to have Bran killed and was also behind the great wine framing, what the.....what specifically does he have against Tyrion?   

Edited May 8, 2015 by stillshimpy

[janjan]

The Shimp: Janjan, you wound me by disregarding my long history of mental breakdowns on the Wall.

I was just being polite. My mama told me not to pick on the handicapped and deranged. :-)  But I proffer my deepest apologies for not crediting you with the origin of Knifey. WS put him on a milk carton, and I forgot he had a longer history than that. <hangs head in shame>

 

I don't see how Olenna could have poisoned the Joff, but she did admit to Margie that she had dunnit. No reason not to believe her, so I just figure it was too hard to film or ended up on the cutting room floor or something.

 

This week's ep title is scary. Who's the boy? Tommen is too obvious. Olly? Bran or Rickon? No, I guess Tommen is most likely to go plop in the Death Pool, thanks to Cersei's unclever plotting. Poor kid, but at least he got one good night before dying.

[stillshimpy]

I know, right?  I read that episode title and immediately assumed a crash position. 

 

This week's ep title is scary. Who's the boy? Tommen is too obvious. Olly? Bran or Rickon? No, I guess Tommen is most likely to go plop in the Death Pool, thanks to Cersei's unclever plotting. Poor kid, but at least he got one good night before dying.

 

Tommen is too obvious, I think.  

Olly:  Who would order him to be killed and why? 

Bran: He's practically past boyhood.  

Rickon: Oh boy, I hope not, but he seems likely.  

 

Pod?  Would Pod be called "A boy"?  

 

Oh boy, how spectacularly would Dany lose her stuffing if both Grey Worm and Selmy are dead?  Because what if it is Dany going all "Kill the boy" to Dario trying to find the Sons of Harpys?  (Guys, there was an impressive lake of blood under Grey Worm, I don't think he's going to make it).  

 

Is there anyone else?  Bolton deploying Ramsay to kill Rickon, perhaps?  They do know that Bran and Rickon are alive.  

 

Oh shit it's Rickon, isn't it? 

[janjan]

Shimpy, you stop that right now! Not Greyworm! Noooooooooooooooooooooo. <sobs unconsolably>

 

Rickon is definitely a possibility, since he's in the way of Bolton's plans. Maybe Ramsay found him while out on IRS duty. But Rickon still has Osha and Shaggydog, so there's hope for him. Also, I have this sneaky suspicion that he will be the last Stark standing.

[stillshimpy]

Well, I guess one thing to keep in mind in the "Kill the boy" thing is....just because it gets said, ordered, suggested, or sung about doesn't mean it's going to work.  

 

Also, maybe Greyworm will ....clot well...?? 

 

I was just being polite. My mama told me not to pick on the handicapped and deranged. :-)

 

Never fear, I embrace my crazy.  I encourage it.  I goad it along and feed it vitamins to keep it thriving.  

 

The Lunacy is Strong in this One and I take all due pride in that :-D

Edited May 8, 2015 by stillshimpy

[WhiteStumbler]

"The Lunacy is Strong in this One and I take all due pride in that :-D"

It is known.

[gingerella]

Some of this shit is intentional stalling and if you've got time as a writer to purposefully stall, you've got time to fill-in with all sorts of elucidating materials and are just choosing not to.

Okay this I can totally understand!

 

I don't think the Boy is anyone we know of, that would be too obvious, though I've no clue what Boy the title refers to.

[Pallas]

I don't think the Boy is anyone we know of, that would be too obvious, though I've no clue what Boy the title refers to.

 

I think you're probably right, gingerella.  Good guess.  I don't think it's Roose to Ramsey about Rickon, telling him to stop eating and set about the unfinished Stark-hunting business from last season, since it's "Kill the boy."  As far as Roose knows, the two boys are still together.  

 

And even if we do know this boy, the title is so on-the-nose.  They are usually more allusive. "Baelor," not "This Was a Man."  "The Lion and the Rose," not "Jubilee."  "The Rains of Castamere," not  "Stabbed in the Baby," or "It Was in the Book!"   

 

Still, some other possibilities...

 

Speaker: Melisandre.  Subject: Stannis.  Object: Jon.

Speaker:  Littlefinger.  Subject:  Mercenary or Arryn bannerman.  Object: Robyn.   

Speaker: Aliser Thorne.  Subject: Subordinate.  Object: Olly, or Gilly's baby Sam.

Speaker: Ja'qen.  Subject: Arya.  Object: Someone not worth calling A Boy.

[WhiteStumbler]

Or part of some saying? "Kill the boy and release the man" or something like that?

Maybe Barn (eta: Bran!) makes his return?

Edited May 9, 2015 by WhiteStumbler

[Pallas]

Or part of some saying? "Kill the boy and release the man" or something like that?

Maybe Barn (eta: Bran!) makes his return?

 

Good one: it does make sense that the title is only part of a phrase.  But who's left north of the Wall to ferret out Bran?  So maybe "Kill the boy and release the woman"?  Back to shimpy's speculation above, about Pod?  Ugh: especially since, in what will be the immediately preceding episode, we got -- UGH! -- A Quiet Moment with Pod and Brienne, Pod's backstory, and Brienne's promise of much better things ahead for him?  "Starting tomorrow morning, I'll teach you to ride; I'll teach you to fight."  Along with -- every UGH!!! there is -- Brienne's lament that the worst thing in life is to fail to protect someone you care for? 

 

We know that Pod and Brienne are outside Winterfell (if Brienne guessed right) and that Littlefinger is about to leave there.  Brienne managed to save Pod once from Littlefinger's mercenaries, and his own bad riding and fighting.  And of course, it was Pod who advised her not to confront Littlefinger in the tavern.  If A Show teaches us anything, it's that confrontations between women and men in remote roadhouses rarely work to the advantage of the woman.  And since Littlefinger forgets nothing, he may still have it in for Pod, who his King's Landing whores were delighted to serve pro bono.  He's not even sacrificing a paying customer.  

 

But as shimpy also said, just because the order's given, doesn't mean it can be carried out. 

[ChocButterfly]

I still think it's going to be Tommen, although like you guys said, he won't be killed this episode, or even maybe this season. But I think we're on the verge of something here. There's no way this religious fanatics aren't going to turn on Cersei. I'm actually very excited about it, I don't even mind Tommen getting killed, if just to see Cersei really suffer the consequences of her stupidity.

[Pallas]

I don't even mind Tommen getting killed, if just to see Cersei really suffer the consequences of her stupidity.

 

Yes, her stupidity: or no, her essence.  Long ago, while we Unsullied were debating Catelyn's actions at the tavern, shimpy made the point that people's greatest strengths are also their weaknesses (and often, vice versa).  Ever since, that insight has informed my view of far more than A Show, and I think it illuminates this story.   

 

Tommen is doomed, surely.  As surely as Cersei might have kept him, Joffrey and Myrcella safe with her in exile, had she heeded Ned.  Had she taken to heart the warning and advice Ned gave her -- Ned's "stupidity," as more than a few posted at TWoP.  Which to me, was simply Ned's Nedness, the crux of what Ned believed, and what made him unique among all characters in this world: he tried to save children entangled in their elders' wars, misdeeds, ideologies or passions.  It wasn't all Ned did, or all he cared for, but I think that whenever that crisis arose, he put all else aside to take it on.  The same way he took off the badge of the Hand when Robert ordered that the young Targareyns -- Vicerys and the pregnant child-bride Daenerys -- be killed.  

 

It's something Robb learned from Ned, and which similarly doomed him: acting in defense of the young Lannister hostages, before and even after Karsark had them killed.  The Karstarks' defection made Robb's strategy dependent on seeking favor from Walder Frey, so that his marriage to Talisa became what seemed to have brought about his death.  But in fact, Robb's seeking to protect the young hostages is what turned the tide against Robb in the war, just as Ned's warning Cersei -- in order to save her as well as her children -- is what prompted Cersei to kill Robert, and launch the War of the Five Kings.  Of which Ned and his household became the first casualties, along with his own children's childhoods.  

 

Anyways. Tywin undertook and achieved great things in the name of the Lannister legacy, while forgetting that this "legacy" is just a fancy word for "family" -- the three heirs to whom he turned either a blind or a murderous eye, all their lives.  Cersei's one redeeming trait seems to be her love of her children. Yet it is not even ironic that the much greater weight of her faults, disappointments and disorders corrupted that love into the bloody-mindedness that will end in her seeing each one of them dead.  Just as if she had done it herself: as if she had poisoned them, one by one, on the Iron Throne.  

 

I once thought it was Catelyn whose terrible fate was to survive to see her family destroyed.  I was wrong.  And the story got it right.

[Anothermi]

Well put Pallas. That is one thing this story regularly reminds us of, the complexity and complicity of each person in the over all Game. It can be fascinating to observe how each person's actions interconnect with the actions of - and outcomes for -  each other. 

 

While thinking on your point regarding Cercei's children's fate, it dawned on me that another "boy" (I'm on about next episode's title now) we've seen is the one who Mycella is betrothed to in Dorne. There is another candidate. Jaime or Bronn could be actors in that scenario? 

Edited May 10, 2015 by Anothermi

[90PercentGravity]

So, how much does Sansa actually know about the fall of Winterfell? Does she know the Bolton's sacked it? Does she know very much about Theon's involvement?

[WhiteStumbler]

Sansa knows that Roose killed Robb. Cat knew that her (Sansa's) two younger brothers disappeared when Winterfell was put to the torch and haven't been heard from since, and that Theon and the Iron Born were responsible for both, so I assume Sansa has heard that also. Other than that, who knows what rumors she might have heard.

Edited May 10, 2015 by WhiteStumbler

[gingerella]

Speaking of the hideous waste of carbon that is known as "the Bolton's", I have a sneaking suspicion that Sansa is going to have yet another marriage on her hands where it is also unconsummated. Why? Because lil Bolt is like Joffrey in that he seems unable to have normal sex with normal people. His fuck buddy girl, she looks normal but she's as demented as he is and I suspect she wont let him go, nor will he let her go. I think Sansa will end up in basically the same marital situation as with Tyrion, except the no sex wont be because he is respecting her, it'll be because he's a demented fuckwit.

 

And...the "kill the boy" thing, could it refer to a baby boy that Sansa might have - should they actually have sex - that lil Bolt would kill because he would feel that a child with half-Stark blood would become the darling of Winterfell and the North, and he'd never be able to take over from Daddy Dearest?  And speaking of Roose, anyone else think that his bastard kid would kill him in an instant if the opportunity presented itself, so he could take over the North, at least in his addled mind?

[stillshimpy]

And speaking of Roose, anyone else think that his bastard kid would kill him in an instant if the opportunity presented itself, so he could take over the North, at least in his addled mind?

 

Actually, whereas I truly despise Ramsay and see no worth in him as a character, I think the relationship he set up between Theon and himself parallels how he feels about Roose Bolton.  So Theon is to Ramsay as Ramsay is to Roose.  He's absolutely devoted to that cruel piece of shit, but fears him also.  It's like every Freudian nightmare, after smoking Meth, I assume.  He wants to see Theon (yeah, I'm not playing the "oh his name is now...." game because the day I do what Ramsay Bolton wants is the day I leap from the biggest damn thing I can find) to view him in the same way he views Roose:  All powerful.  Possessing all the validation and approval , but rather than bestowing affection and validation, he's usually just cruel.  Making Theon just pathetically grateful for any crumb of mercy or decency.  

 

Let's just say I was pretty far from shocked that Ramsay was the product of a particularly sadistic rape, because that makes sense for Roose's character.  God, he's just so grotesque.  Both of them really.  

Edited May 11, 2015 by stillshimpy

[DirewolfPup]

Or part of some saying? "Kill the boy and release the man" or something like that?

 

Slow clap to WhiteStumbler for hitting this nail directly on it's fucking head!

Edited May 11, 2015 by DirewolfPup

[90PercentGravity]

Slow clap to WhiteStumbler for hitting this nail directly on it's fucking head!

Burn the witch!

[DirewolfPup]

So I'm guessing that the Bran Muffins are just not going to be shown this season. Perhaps in the season finale.

 

It's been two episodes since we've seen Arya. Maybe Starks prefer to dissolve away (see: Benjen, Rickon, Bran, Arya).

[stillshimpy]

Yeah, Stumbler, you nailed that sucker right between the eyes.   

 

In anyone else, I might find that worthy of raising an eyebrow, in you I can just say, "Well done!" with great confidence and offer you grog :-)  It's one of the benefits of hanging with the same Insane Unsullied Posse for five years :-D 

[gingerella]

So I'm guessing that the Bran Muffins are just not going to be shown this season. Perhaps in the season finale.

It's been two episodes since we've seen Arya. Maybe Starks prefer to dissolve away (see: Benjen, Rickon, Bran, Arya).

Dire, I don't think we're getting deprived of Arya, I mean, she just arrived at Jaquen's Training Camp for Holy Killers, so I'm sure we'll get to see where she's at with her apprenticeship/training soon. We have to, I don't think A Show would FINALLY reunite Arya with A Man only to backburner them for the rest of the season, no way.

About the only thing I really, REALLY want an update on though, is where Nymeria is! I know Ghost is with Jon at Castle Black, Summer (is that the right name) is with the Bran Flakes, right? And Shaggy Dog is with Rickon, or in the nearby vicinity, probably, though we don't know that for sure...but we did last see Shaggy with Rickon when the boys, Osha and Hodor were hiding out at that rocky tower place, right before they separated, yes? Or am I misremembering that? Wasn't Rickon with them at that point in time, then they separated into the two groups, one Umbers-bound, the other bound for the Wall?

Edited May 13, 2015 by gingerella

[WhiteStumbler]

Gingerella: I think you are correct on all the direwolf 411. Thanks. Good recap.

[Pallas]

Wait -- what if Nymeria returned to the area near Winterfell (where she was whelped, and not too far from where Arya drove her off), and it's Sansa who finds her?  The Wolf Remembers.  Come on, Show: throw the girl a bone!

[DirewolfPup]

Nymeria could jump out and kill Ramsey's creepy girlfriend. A Girl can wish.

[gingerella]

Nymeria could jump out and kill Ramsey's creepy girlfriend. A Girl can wish.

Hmmm, this is interesting...Have we ever seen any of the Direwolves interacting with normal dogs? I ask because it would be cool if Nymeria was in the surrounding area of Winterfell and somehow knew Sansa was there, and went to protect her. She could integrate with the dogs in the kennel and since bitchy mcbitchster is the daughter of the kennel master, that would be sweet, sweet justice for her to be killed by all the dogs, goaded on by Nymeria somehow...A Girl can wish indeed!

[Pallas]

Aww, I know the kennel-keeper's daughter is bad news, and she set her cap for Ramsay even before she could have dreamt of being Mrs. Lord Bolton.  But with both Roose and Ramsay on the scene, I kind of hate to ramp up the drama around one relatively powerless young woman's scheming against another, climaxed by the schemer's gruesome death.  

 

Remember, the direwolf siblings have their own grudge against the Boltons.  Just ask the head last seen wearing Robb Stark's body.

[gingerella]

Pallas, have you forgotten that this girl was responsible for that awful, gruesome death-by-dogs of her supposed friend she took into the woods a couple of seasons back? AFAIC, her being ripped apart by the dogs would be fitting since she has helped others meet that same trrifying fate. Bleh, dont like the bitch.

[tjmookie]

The primary target should be Ramsay but I don't mind if the crazy girl gets mauled as collateral damage.  Direwolves are large and could probably easily wipe out Ramsay and a number of his freaky friends.

[stillshimpy]

But with both Roose and Ramsay on the scene, I kind of hate to ramp up the drama around one relatively powerless young woman's scheming against another, climaxed by the schemer's gruesome death.

 

Dude, I only wish they could resurrect her in order to "do it again, do it again" [/Drusilla] if it comes to that.  The Kennel-keeper's daughter isn't powerless.  She already had a rival ripped to shreds for no other reason than she was jealous of her. 

 

That girl isn't powerless.  She's probably Ramsay's soul-mate as it is.  Sansa's the one who gets passed around like the pretty hot potato and all Miranda (was that her name?) could think of was how to make sure she emotionally tortured her at the very first opportunity.  That's young woman isn't just scheming in the only ways she can in a patriarchal society:  She's Ramsay's equal in wanting to torment creatures just to watch them suffer.  

 

Her death doesn't need to be gruesome, but that poor excuse for a person of my own gender needs to die with a blinding quickness before she and freaking Ramsay produce a child.  

Edited May 15, 2015 by stillshimpy

[Pallas]

Good point, gingerella.  I hadn't forgotten about Never Boring's escapades on the hunt with her true love and supposed friend.  I'm more thinking about how, in real life, The Wife or The Girlfriend of a powerful figure often seems to draw a level and tenor of loathing spared even the man in charge.  Within our culture -- the kind of invective thrown at some First Ladies by opponents of their husband's policies -- or within our families.  Blaming the mother for abuse or neglect meted out by father.  I've been guilty of it too, and still am. 

 

I realize that it's human nature to expect a mother to protect the children she bore.  That's innate and universal.  And that a woman or even a girl can be held responsible for allying herself with a jerk or a miscreant or an abomination.  But wIthin this story and in many contemporary cultures as well, females have really only this one choice to make -- their mate -- and this one opportunity to secure their futures.  We judge them based on their own judgment.  On a choice most often made while they are still young and, deliberately, kept innocent of any chance to develop real judgment: kept pristine from experience of other people or the world. (Sansa and Dany.)  Or alternately, already beaten down within their own families. (Dany again, as well as Gilly, probably Walda, and perhaps, this kennel girl.)  And of course, as we've seen, the choice may not be theirs to make: Sansa, Dany, Gilly, Walda, Lady Cersei in her teens and even Queen Cersei in her 40's.   

 

Finally, life within this story and in much of the real world too, offers a man a lifetime of chances for redemption through his own continuing choices, among his many ongoing opportunities, on a real field of action.  Look at all Jaime's been given to do, all the places he's gone, all the people he's been able to meet along the way.  Not so much, the women.  One and done for them, if they're lucky.  And in this story? We'd have better luck wishing for Ned's return, than wishing luck on any lady.

[stillshimpy]

Everything you say is true, Pallas, but in Miranda's case, I think it is more likely going to be a case of "if you encourage your sadistic bastard of a boyfriend to tear women to shreds....don't be surprised when he eventually turns that personality trait on you." 

 

That's the problem for me.  Miranda is not a product of the patriarchy, fighting the only game in town by trying to win over her rivals.  She's Ramsay's equal in cruelty.  

 

I think the story already told us her fate and told Miranda her ultimate fate also:  I think Ramsay will find her jealousy "boring" and the story made a special point of telling us that Ramsay also flays women, living.  

 

Eventual eating by dogs might at least be swifter.  

 

 

 

Finally, life within this story and in much of the real world too, offers a man a lifetime of chances for redemption through his own continuing choices, among his many ongoing opportunities, on a real field of action.

 

These would all be good points if we were talking about Cersei or Elaria or any of the characters who haven't simply proven actual psychosis.  She had a woman hunted down and torn to shreds, alive.  There's no redemption from that because that isn't working within the only power structure available to her.  

 

There's no redemption offered Ramsay for all the sick shit he's done because he's a dude.  He's crossed the irredeemable event horizon through his actions that would never be warranted.  So has she.  

 

This isn't holding women to a different standard because audiences tend to be harsher on female characters (Betty and Megan on Mad Men, for instance), this is holding a woman to the EXACT SAME STANDARD. 

Edited May 15, 2015 by stillshimpy

[ChocButterfly]

Death to Miranda & Ramsey!!! Horrible death on both of them!!

[DirewolfPup]

I agree, Pallas. Female characters always seem to be judged more harshly. In the case of Miranda, I only thought it would be fitting to kill her via dog/direwolf because of the other girl she killed in the exact same way. It seemed poetic.

 

GOT is a little bit better about portraying their female characters than most other shows I love. The first three that come to mind are Mad Men, The Walking Dead, and Breaking Bad. Women are generally written horribly in all of these shows. AMC must be run by all men.There are exceptions (Peggy, Michonne, and... are there any women on Breaking Bad that weren't hated? Marie maybe).  GOT has well-rounded female characters like Cersei. Some even that people root for like Dany and Arya. There's still some remnants of irrational lady-hate. Sansa comes to mind of course. Yet Stannis can burn people alive and be loved. If Sansa burned one person on accident, not even killing them, she would be hated even more. It's unfair for sure. I keep trying to remind myself while watching shows that imagine this happened and you were in Lady A's shoes. I'd probably try to stop my drug kingpin husband, too.

Another cool example of GOT's semi-fairness to women. Walda Frey = awesome. Walder Frey = die a thousand slow deaths. We haven't even seen him for 15 episodes now, and I still have a bleeding hatred for him. Same goes for Balon Greyjoy vs Yara Greyjoy.

[Pallas]

Well said, shimpy and direwolf pup.  Grog all around.  And I agree, there's no way Miranda survives death by Ramsay -- and that it's a little unsatisfying that her death will come through less fault of her own than she possesses.  Not for her actual sins but due to Ramsay's nature, and thereby further magnifying his (evil) stature.

 

That alone, though, speaks to her inequality.  Ramsay is only vulnerable to Miranda insofar as he allows her access.  She is permanently and fatally vulnerable to his madness -- just like anyone else in his vicinity, and much more so than most.  She may have made the choice of drawing his attention; she undoubtedly made the choice of enthusiastically partaking in his sadism.  (Contrast, of course, to Sansa.)  

 

So there's the issue of relative power, and then there's the issue of circumstance.  I think it's safe to say that if Miranda received no ethical education -- by teaching or example -- from  her elders, she still comes out ahead of Ramsay and what he would have received from Roose.  Ahead, and so, more culpable.  What we do know is that, whatever her upbringing, Miranda exhibits the same soul-sickness as Ramsay, son of (1) Roose and (2) rape.  So, with less excuse: biological, environmental or narrative.  

 

All that to say, you're both right.  I was too quick to wince when the discussion turned from a Bolton's meeting his end, to his girlfriend's suffering the same fate.  She doesn't just run with the dogs.

[stillshimpy]

Not too quick, Pallas.  I think issues of internalized misogyny being a large part of audience reaction to characters is a pretty prevalent thing in a lot of stories.  Including this one.  I think reaction to Sansa are often informed by how much a typical-girl-wedded-to-gender-roles-an-expectations character she is.  Including most of her story line, by the way. 

 

So I personally think you shot an accurate arrow, just into the wrong tree in a the forest.  Sansa's entire story seems to be "punish all that we think of as girlish, while blaming it for existing!"  Time and again Arya is praised (Arya who shot in the "that's not me" direction of gender roles) for what she has done to survive, while Sansa is referred to in far more condemning terms and her treatment within the story is never harsher than when any trait traditionally associated with a feminine gender role is mentioned.   When Miranda approaches her she admires her dress.  Asks who taught her to sew.  Admires how tiny and fine the stitches are.  

 

This story has tremendous contempt for Sansa wanting what she was told to want, being good at what she was expected to be good at.  It's not surprising that you deployed that "Aren't we being  a bit harsher on this character because she is a woman?" thing because it's absolutely present within the story.  Not just an invitation to judge Sansa and somehow believe that she brings bad things down upon herself, the story literally just used that "Wow, you're good at the girl stuff!  I'm now going to throw you to the dogs. Woo! Meta-meta-meta-overt-overt messages!" 

 

One super slick thing that the story has done though, I think, is that whereas it seems clear that the story invites the audience to approve of the gender-role-bucking Arya....she's constantly getting saved by some dude with a sword.  Syrio. Yoren. Jaqen. The Hound.  Arguably Gendry (a name so close to the word gender it seems unlikely to be an accident).  The Sailor with great coin respect.  Sure, her story is just as often brutal, but she's practically been gifted with fairy godfathers.  

 

That's always been one of the most fascinating elements of this story, because again, it's fairly overt.  Sansa, the girl who loved pretty fantasy stories, gets the boogers beaten out of her fairly frequently and stitches beautifully.  Meanwhile, trend-bucker Arya meets up with a series of male protectors, at least two of whom practically qualify as genies themselves and a Third is like some escapee from a buddy movie.  

 

Anyway, what I really came in here to talk about and then distracted myself with something else has to do with the paint-by-numbers quality of some of the plotting this season.  

 

That and by the time we see Bran again, at least he'll be old enough to buy us all a round, so there's that.  

 

But I had Arya on my mind for a very specific "So, that is likely going to show up again and it was too obvious..."  Arya adds Trout to her kill list while sitting on the steps of the House of Black and White.  Trout is deployed to Bravos to 'guard' the Maester of the Coin Lord Tyrell.   

 

It was just the rather awkward addition of the name and then practically drawing an arrow over Trout's head later.  

Edited May 18, 2015 by stillshimpy

[janjan]

So I personally think you shot an accurate arrow, just into the wrong tree in a the forest.

I hope it's not the tree the Blackfish was peeing against. We need him to come back and avenge his niece and his in-laws.

 

I was wondering about soon-to-be-if-not-already-dead Mace Tyrell when his children faced the sparrows. Not that he could do anything about it, but it did remind me of his mission and Trant's meeting up with Not!Arya. That will be fun. But, Like Shimpy, I'm hoping that Jaqen's promise to make her into someone else doesn't mean we lose Maisie.Williams. She's too good to lose.

[ChocButterfly]

Aren't we ever going to see the Blackfish again? He seemed like an important character just to have him disappear like that.

 

And where the fuck is Theon's sister? Although I'd rather not see her again if we don't have to see the dreadful Iron Island again.