Television Vs. Book: Why'd They Make [Spoiler] Such A [Spoiler]?

[Eyes High]

A poster on the r/asoiaf subreddit, Fizzywhizz, has a very interesting claim about Fire & Blood: GRRM buried the ending to ASOIAF in Fire and Blood (and the resolution of the Dance of the Dragons). This ground had been canvassed before (in AWOIAF and in The Princess and the Queen), but Fire and Blood adds some details that make the comparison very striking:

In the first DOTD, a bloody conflict between the female claimant (Rhaenyra) and the male claimant (Aegon II) resulted in Aegon II feeding Rhaenyra to her dragon, but not long surviving her as ruler. Rhaenyra's son, Aegon III, ended up ascending the throne at the age of 11 after all the other potential claimants were killed off in the DOTD. Aegon III was able-bodied, but according to Fire and Blood he was dubbed the Broken King by a Grand Maester due to his melancholy nature and is remembered as a "shadowy monarch who did little and said less." 

Aegon III's first Hand (after Cregan Stark who only served briefly as Hand before resigning the office), Tyland Lannister, was a disabled and disfigured man called the Hooded Hand, since he wore a hood to hide his mutilated face. During the DOTD, Tyland had served Aegon II and was an active participant in the Rhaenyra/Aegon II conflict, and Rhaenyra's torturers blinded, gelded, and disfigured him for his trouble. Tyland didn't last long as Hand (only two years before he died of illness), but Aegon III's last Hand was his brother Viserys, who served several kings and later briefly ruled as king himself, and who was notoriously later rumoured to have poisoned his nephew Baelor to claim the throne (as Tyrion was once accused of poisoning Joffrey). Oberyn and Tyrion have a discussion about Viserys in ASOS where Oberyn slyly compares Baelor to Joffrey.

...Interestingly, in Fire and Blood, a council of regents was set up to rule when Aegon III first ascended the throne. Tyland as Hand was supposed to be beholden to them, but he gradually took more and more power for himself and the council became more or less irrelevant. Maybe a similar council will be established at the end of ADOS, with a similar end result.

I very much doubt Jon or (f)Aegon will end up feeding Dany to Drogon, but it sounds like the same end result: the original rival claimants dead (or out of the picture, as in Jon's case), a checked-out, "broken" boy king who ascends the throne by virtue of outlasting the others, and a cunning Lannister Hand who rules in all but name.

As a bonus, Fire and Blood also introduced Elissa Farman, who ended up sailing west of Westeros and was never heard from again (although it's hinted that she ended up back in Essos eventually, since her old ship was believed to have been seen in Asshai).

Edited June 5, 2019 by Eyes High

[rmontro]

Obviously GRRM's ending will feature a lot of details that the TV show missed out.  Aside from that, there are a few changes I'm wondering about.  Like will Arya kill the Night King in the books?  From interviews I've seen that sounds like it was a D&D invention.

There's also speculation that the battle with the Night King will be the climax of the book, and that the battle for King's Landing will precede it.  I'm curious to see if that is true.

[MrWhyt]

1 hour ago, rmontro said:

Obviously GRRM's ending will feature a lot of details that the TV show missed out.  Aside from that, there are a few changes I'm wondering about.  Like will Arya kill the Night King in the books?  From interviews I've seen that sounds like it was a D&D invention.

There's also speculation that the battle with the Night King will be the climax of the book, and that the battle for King's Landing will precede it.  I'm curious to see if that is true.

there is no Night King in the books, at least as portrayed on the show. There is the mythical Night's King, but he has not made an appearance in the flesh.

[rmontro]

20 hours ago, MrWhyt said:

there is no Night King in the books, at least as portrayed on the show. There is the mythical Night's King, but he has not made an appearance in the flesh.

Oh that's right, I forgot about that.

[nikma]

Yes it should have. If he was able to finish his books.

[Leila6]

On 5/31/2019 at 4:41 PM, nikma said:

On 5/31/2019 at 4:22 PM, Umbelina said:

It's one of his peeves about fantasy writers, so it's very hard for me to believe he doesn't know the magical elements backwards and forwards.

Just like Aragorn's tax policy and learning how to rule. But he still put a wizard on the throne. 

I agree with Nikma. I doubt GRRM’s solution, if he ever finishes the books, will be all that much more satisfying than the show’s end. I’m sure it will be developed better, but some of the central plot points, like Bran as king, flat-out suck. The way it played out in the show, the wizard king is seemingly meant to be one of the sweet elements of the bittersweet ending, but it’s a fatalistic endgame and sends a terrible message about humanity. It makes me question how well GRRM really thought everything out.

[John Potts]

1 hour ago, Leila6 said:

I agree with Nikma. I doubt GRRM’s solution, if he ever finishes the books, will be all that much more satisfying than the show’s end. I’m sure it will be developed better, but some of the central plot points, like Bran as king, flat-out suck.

I'm not sure who it was who said it (maybe Preston Jacobs? Alt-Shift-X? I forget), but assuming the end point (Bran as King) is the same in the Books, his thesis seems to be that even the most well intentioned leader (Danerys) will ultimately be corrupted by attaining power - unless you're an inhuman tree wizard. Which as a depressing view of human nature, because we don't have any inhuman tree wizards available IRL (that we're aware of, anyway)! Even the downer ending of having Cersei (or worse, Euron) ending up on the throne would at least say something about human nature - it's just a rather depressing message.

[Umbelina]

I tend to agree.

The magical solution (even in a magical story) tends to disappoint, and this was not purely a magical story.

Obviously, GRRM will make us understand Bran, and certainly to care more about him than this rushed ending, with almost no real interest in or fleshing out of Bran.

I think (hope) it will be much more complex than that, IF he ever finishes, which hello?  Doubtful.

For example, IF Bran's eventual detachment from human motivations and faults, as well as his main goal of simply the survival of the human race plays out in the books in a similar way?  I can see Bran as simply "the wise Councillor" who only steps in if humans are about to destroy themselves.  I can't see him caring about the day to day details of running a country, as long as it doesn't interfere with what MAY be his prime mission (but really, that's IT?)  I sincerely doubt that is all there is to Bran or rather, the 3 eyed raven.

I'm also not convinced that all the other versions of "mankind" are wiped out in the books, for example, the children of the forest, or a full blood "first men," or Giants, the Targereans, and all the other various versions of "people" mentioned in the books, often thought extinguished or isolated in remote places, hell even the White Walkers might not be completely gone.

Bran (if indeed his mission is as described on the show) may feel responsible for those people as well, at least as far as protecting them from being wiped out completely.  Also, though the books are HEAVY with various religions, the show has ignored most of that lately, and I can't imagine GRRM doing the same.  There are so many Gods and beliefs in this world, and we all know that religions are a great cause of wars and human suffering.

So, I see it more as (and again, this is assuming the show is even close to GRRM's intentions about Bran) something like a budding democracy, with Bran as facilitator.  The show also left out all of GRRM's sympathy for, and descriptions of the masses, and he obviously cared about their fates, while the show cared about those with more interesting stories. 

The ending should address all of these things, and I seriously doubt the WW are wiped out before they devastate Westeros and possibly even cross the waters.  Either way, there will be massive clean up and starvation and desperation in Westeros, which could, of course, leave it vulnerable to invasions.  Bran's spying abilities may come in handy there to at least buy time for the humans.

There are so many areas completely skipped over or slashed to being nearly unrecognizable in the show (Dorne anyone, to name just one.)  Dorne may end up being quite important as a source of food and refugees if the WW winter progresses as I expect in the books.  Bran being able to mediate since his position isn't supporting any particular faction, and his value as "spy" unquestionably useful? 

Could work. 

Do I think Bran then retires to parts unknown and lets the human(s) fuck things up after the initial save, only showing up when things get too dangerous?  I do.  I don't see him sitting around KL "ruling."  At all.

[Azi]

I'm just simply tired of "unexpected person who didn't want it lands on the throne" resolutions (now, who knows what old 3 Eyes actually wants tho). I really thought the reason why we had several people actually WANT the throne - and not all of them evil - was so we could have a fantasy where someone who actually trained for the job AND wanted it would win in the end. I think that would have been really nice. Didn't have to be Dany. Hell, I actually didn't expect it to be Dany. 
Why can't there be good people who seek power without turning out cartoonishly evil in the end?

I agree that GRRM's ending will probably be better crafted, should it ever come out but it's not just that I simply hated HOW D&D did it (tho, I hated it plenty just for that), I plain just didn't like the ending period.

At this point I think if it had to be someone ~unexpected, it should have been Margaery. Smart, popular, ruthless enough and knows how to manipulate people. I mean. Compared to Bran...

[Umbelina]

There is no throne.

Which frankly, many of us have predicted for quite a while.

The show, which short-cut everything near the end, and always gave wordy scenes to a very few actors?  Wanted Dinklage to make another speech.  Period.

While Jon barely said more than "She's ma Qween" over and over again?  While the Starks didn't even have a real conversation one they were finally back together?  While we were constantly TOLD, not shown that Dani and Jon were in love?  (I could go on here, but you get the idea)  They, once again, gave another long monologue to Peter.

That monologue made absolutely no sense at all.  None.  Zip.  It was borderline idiotic really.

Do I think Tyrion stands up (let alone at his "trial") and proclaims the next King?  Do I think his reason is "he has the best story?"  Do I think what's left of the elite in Westeros all just say, "OK whatever you say dwarf!"  Do I even think there IS a King at the end?

Of course not.  It's bizarrely stupid, sloppy, and idiotic.

Do I think Bran will act as some kind of "wise counselor"  that whatever remains of the powerful mutually agree to defer to if needed as THEY work things out?  Sort of like a judge in a way, or a judge/priest/psychic/spy combination?  Yeah, that could work if done well. 

Either way, I do believe most of Westeros is destroyed.  I think the "leaders" will have their hands full with those issues, and I think there will be incremental change in how the small folk participate in government.  My guess is there will be other "Bronns" among the new leader community.  People who were not born to previous but now respected Bronn-type ancestors (all the big families in the story.)

For example, I think some of Dorne's philosophies will probably influence the new "government" because I think Dorne will be the most intact at the end, and will have food.  So a change for both bastards and women there.  I think there will be other's who were instrumental in defeating the WW, or in recovery, who will be recognized and elevated, be they that devout, honest, and sincere priest the Hound runs into, or any one of the multitudes of other characters the show basically ignored, but GRRM didn't. 

The show writers were sick of it, they wanted out, they wanted to move on, they didn't want to turn it over to anyone else who still actually gave a damn.  I don't fault them for the first part, but I do for the last.  Screw them.

What I'm trying to say is that I don't believe "their ending" though it's probably the only one we will ever get.  What I can believe (if I fill in all the holes) is my version (or something similar) of what Bran being "King" means.  Even there though?  I don't think that will be his title, and obviously, the throne is gone. (That part I think is probably in the books.)

[John Potts]

5 hours ago, Umbelina said:

I do believe most of Westeros is destroyed.  I think the "leaders" will have their hands full with those issues, and I think there will be incremental change in how the small folk participate in government.

Which would make it more like England post the Black Death (which hit England around the mid 14th Century, so pre Wars of the Roses - though it did kill the Black Prince so did help set off the succession crisis that caused all the trouble). Which is reckoned to have ended the Feudal system within England. The English House of Commons was established roughly the same time, though it was a long way from being democratic (more of a wider based oligarchy).

...which doesn't have a lot to do with ASoIaF, but we might see the formalising of some sort of Council of Lords as a ruling council presided over by their God-King Bran as a sort of Chairman of the Board. I really hope we don't end up with a Dune rip off where Bran/Bloodraven/The 3-Eyed Raven end up as the eternal ruler of Westeros (of course that would require the final Book to ever be published!).

[Umbelina]

Yes, if they are ever published, so many things the books did well and the show left out will have to be resolved as well.

Honestly, my favorite parts of GRRM's writing in the books, probably the things that kept me reading?  The parts that showed the effects of all these supposedly great houses on the masses of Westeros.  They were poetic, and felt so real to me, in great contrast to what other people seemed to like most, the huge battles, the gigantic world building and back stories of the elite.

Westeros, in the books, is already devastated by wars, and because of the horrible disregard the "great houses" have for the masses, and how much they only care about their own accumulation of wealth and power, the countryside itself is ruined.  Tywin deliberately insured that the lands would not be able to produce food for years, and also killed every last man, woman, and child, whether they surrendered or not.  All with the threat of Winter coming, he and other "Kings" burned houses, and crops, and left a devastated Westeros to face Winter.

I don't think "Winter" is over in one night and stopped in Winterfell either.  That's just ridiculous to build up to a giant Big Bad, and then "whoosh!  gone!"  So on top of the devastated masses and ruined lands, Winter WILL come.

Dorne and The Eyrie, IMO, are set up to be the two strongest areas after the wars and Winter end, so I can't believe they don't play a huge part in the ending/recovery.

The show also just skipped over the whole "religions at war for their power" resolve as well, and I also don't believe GRRM doesn't address all of the religious set ups he created.  That, IMO, won't be one religion "being true" either, since we know how GRRM feels about religions, but there is no chance that the end doesn't include some, probably negative, religious involvement in the ending.

[tabularasa]

I hate D&D with passion but GRRM didn't make their job any easier. Bran being the king. Terrible idea overall and almost impossible to execute well. The actor was also annoying and well, didn't have any emotions. It's also totally not dramatic ending. Basically some magical vegetable sitting on the throne. No war, no outsmarting each other. Voila. He has a story. I also wonder about Dany. If the writers indeed knew she'd go mad and they were left with weak characters, bad leaders and monsters (Cersei) they needed a team of good guys to fight the NK and how to do that without Dany? They didn't have time and didn't want to spoil these precious moments of "togetherness".

[Umbelina]

On 9/24/2019 at 12:41 PM, tabularasa said:

I hate D&D with passion but GRRM didn't make their job any easier. Bran being the king. Terrible idea overall and almost impossible to execute well. The actor was also annoying and well, didn't have any emotions. It's also totally not dramatic ending. Basically some magical vegetable sitting on the throne. No war, no outsmarting each other. Voila. He has a story. I also wonder about Dany. If the writers indeed knew she'd go mad and they were left with weak characters, bad leaders and monsters (Cersei) they needed a team of good guys to fight the NK and how to do that without Dany? They didn't have time and didn't want to spoil these precious moments of "togetherness".

They didn't bother to really write for Bran, I'm sure GRRM will correct that.

[Leila6]

On 9/24/2019 at 3:41 PM, tabularasa said:

I hate D&D with passion but GRRM didn't make their job any easier. Bran being the king. Terrible idea overall and almost impossible to execute well

I’m with you there. I have no doubts David and Dan would never have made Bran king if GRRM hadn’t told them that’s how his story ends. It’s boring and nonsensical at best, and highly, highly problematic at worst. (I’m talking omniscient godking who planned this whole thing to end up on the throne, will likely live hundreds of years as a compassionless dictator, and has no good succession plan following his eventual death.) Honestly, I think GRRM is considerably overrated as a writer. He is absolutely fantastic at world building, but his plotting, to put it mildly, could use some work. It seems like he came up with his ending decades ago without a clear idea how to get there, and now that his story and his characters (and modern culture, if we can judge by his treatment of female characters) have grown beyond that ending, he’s still stubbornly sticking to it even though it no longer works. And that’s why he’s struggling so hard to finish. He can’t get the characters to those endings in a satisfying way because those endings are no longer satisfying in the context of the narrative. 

[screamin]

22 hours ago, Leila6 said:

(I’m talking omniscient godking who planned this whole thing to end up on the throne, will likely live hundreds of years as a compassionless dictator, and has no good succession plan following his eventual death.)

I tend to doubt he'd live hundreds of years if he isn't actually plugged into a weirtree the way Bloodraven was - and doing so would likely put a crimp in his ruling.

Otherwise, I totally agree with your points that Bran the Omniscient sociopath who planned his ascent to the throne and has no succession wouldn't make a good ruler.

[Colorful Mess]

Bran as king is just GRRM's personal quirk. From what I can tell from interviews, he is really into history and deep time, and as a sci-fi author prides himself on making wise decisions for the future based on historical knowledge (like Hari Seldon in Asimov's Foundation). He calls himself a "timebinder" meaning that as a science fiction writer he can imagine what society was like in the deep past and the deep future and as a result, make more informed decisions about how to improve society. Currently, he is afraid of nuclear war (symbolized by Targaryens/Valyrians) and climate change (symbolized by the Others/White Walkers) and hopes we prevent future catastrophe. He also talks about how a king who attempts to bring peace is probably better for the people in the long run (you can see this with the creation of Garth Goldenhand). Also he seems critical of rulers who can't suppress their passions and just lets them run hog wild...and Bran appears to be the asexual dispassionate ruler. Tyrion would appear to run counter to that (Shae), but Dinklage said something about Tyrion going on a growth/maturity arc. Since GRRM has consistently said Tyrion is his favorite and that he would even want to BE him, I think he does have plot armor. Tyrion is also the "bad man but good ruler" who is smart and knows history as well. While I get his perspective, all of this is a very specific type of ruler and this doesn't speak to audiences very well. 

Edited December 5, 2019 by Colorful Mess

[jeansheridan]

I wasn't quite as mad at the ending as others but I see so much potential for the book ending. Dorne has a stable and deep leadership. I see them being real actors in the end.

I also like the second prince (Aegon?) who has just landed on the east coast of Westeros. He has the backing of Varys (who is so much more effective in the book too). 

Martin has so much wiggle room to change everything really. Part of me hopes he does. I do not need to see Sansa married off and raped. I would like to see Highgarden play a bigger role rather than being blown up. I want to see Cercei's maimed daughter play a role rather than dying beautifully.

It's a bit wrong to hope Brandon Sanderson gets to finish the series, right? I do hope now the nonsense of the show is over Martin can just write again.