anamika December 2, 2016 Share December 2, 2016 Sansa turning against LF after knowing about his role in Bran's assassination attempt makes more sense than her turning on him for his betrayal of Ned - considering her affection for the Hound in the books despite knowing his role in taking down Ned and the Stark men for the Lannisters. Still, it's disappointing that she needs to get an info dump from Bran and Arya's throat slitting abilities to finally get rid of LF. Like what does she contribute? Surely as Lord and heir to WF, Bran can as well order LF executed. But the scene will probably focus on Sansa's 'I am a bad ass' face with triumphant music playing and we will get an 'inside the episode' interview from David and Dan talking about how much of a smart player she has become and that will be the narrative peddled about in media and fandom. There's a new interview with Sophie https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxSddcCh36I&feature=youtu.be and around 18 minutes she get asked about Jon. And she talks about Jon 'not listening to her as much anymore and he's not respecting what she's been through and I think she feels a little disheartened by Jon' Now as far as season 6 is considered, I didn't think that Jon disrespected what Sansa had gone through in any way. Could this be season 7 stuff that Sophie is hinting at? Anyways, I think the Jon Vs Sansa conflict will carry on next season. Only instead of Jon, Arya will act as his proxy and stand in for him as Jon has to go do his book story. 1 Link to comment
GrailKing December 2, 2016 Share December 2, 2016 I was wondering if Bran was revealing LF betrayal of Ned. Sansa in that brief clip totally looks pissed I didn't think he maybe show Jamie push him out the window, that make her pissed at Cersei and Jamie not LF. Maybe the letter and Jon Arryn's death. Link to comment
SeanC December 2, 2016 Share December 2, 2016 1 hour ago, anamika said: Now as far as season 6 is considered, I didn't think that Jon disrespected what Sansa had gone through in any way. Could this be season 7 stuff that Sophie is hinting at? I think she probably means when (and this is just the show framing) Jon didn't ask her for any advice about Ramsay. 2 hours ago, Eyes High said: There are two other things that LF may be blamed for in the show (one non-book, one hinted at in the books): 6. Ordering the assassination attempt on Bran's life. (Tyrion believes Joffrey did this in the books, although it's never confirmed.) Ever since the show omitted Tyrion and Jaime's simultaneous deductions of Joffrey's culpability, I've thought there were two possible explanations: 1) The show's writers decided to omit the explanation because it's not a great twist (probably the weakest plot payoff in the books, in my opinion) nor, at that point, really relevant to the story anymore, and just leave it unresolved (it's not like most casual viewers even remember that plot point anymore, so I expect they could get away with it; indeed, in that sense they already are). 2) The show's writers decided to do the common fan fix for people who didn't like GRRM's explanation (or else, because they found it unsatisfactory, assume there will be further twists) and have Littlefinger be responsible. That theory is, in the books anyway, full of holes, but I doubt the writers care about that (indeed, I'd be sure of it). Link to comment
Wouter December 2, 2016 Share December 2, 2016 2 hours ago, anamika said: Sansa turning against LF after knowing about his role in Bran's assassination attempt makes more sense than her turning on him for his betrayal of Ned - considering her affection for the Hound in the books despite knowing his role in taking down Ned and the Stark men for the Lannisters. LF was not behind the assassination attempt on Bran, in the books. While the show may have changed this (this remains to be seen), it cannot be the main or only motivation for book-Sansa to turn on book-LF, a move which will likely mirror what plays out on the show. You keep harping on Sandor; Sandor was a known Lannister supporter. Even when he protected Sansa (when she wanted to push Joffrey from the battlements, when she was in the angry mob, when he kept his mouth shut and even lied for her in relation to her nightly meetings with Dontos), he never pretended to not be her jailer; but in spite of being a nominal enemy he helped her more than anyone else in KL (with only Tyrion and Margaery as competition-of-sorts). After reading the impressive list put forward by Eyes High, you should realise that LF has done the opposite: pretended to be a friend while being nothing of the sort. Those four points alone, even without his involvement in Ned's execution, are so damning: 2. Getting Lysa to send a letter to Catelyn claiming that the Lannisters murdered Jon Arryn. 3. Lying about having lost his dagger to Tyrion Lannister. 4. Colluding with Ned and then betraying him. 5. Blabbing about Sansa's planned betrothal to Loras Tyrell to Cersei. What can Sandor put against that, that he was a Lannister man fighting for the Lannisters? He is supposed to do that. He was also supposed to tell the Lannisters about Sansa's attempted regicide/suicide and about her efforts to arrange an escape with Dontos, but he didn't. Just imagine, a montage with Bran showing all those moments to Sansa in a very vively fashion (like one of Jojen's visions on the show), culminating in him convincing Joffrey to execute Ned "a bold king can show no weakness". Link to comment
Eyes High December 2, 2016 Share December 2, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, anamika said: Sansa turning against LF after knowing about his role in Bran's assassination attempt makes more sense than her turning on him for his betrayal of Ned - considering her affection for the Hound in the books despite knowing his role in taking down Ned and the Stark men for the Lannisters. (...)[1] and around 18 minutes she get asked about Jon. And she talks about Jon 'not listening to her as much anymore and he's not respecting what she's been through and I think she feels a little disheartened by Jon' Now as far as season 6 is considered, I didn't think that Jon disrespected what Sansa had gone through in any way. Could this be season 7 stuff that Sophie is hinting at?[2] 1. I agree. LF could probably spin his betrayal of Ned to Sansa as an attempt to save himself from Ned's suicidal stupidity, since Ned had already doomed himself by warning Cersei. Something like LF trying to have Bran killed, though, could not be explained so easily. 2. This could be a reference to the supposed 7x01 scene with the Karstark and Umber heirs from the leaks: Sansa wants to strip them of their lands but Jon refuses. Sansa could be fuming at Jon overruling her. Sometimes, Sophie Turner gives preseason interviews where it sounds like she's talking about the whole season, but it turns out (because of spoilers) she's only referring to the developments of one or two episodes. This could be an example of that. We know any direct Jon/Sansa conflict will be pretty much dead in the water in Season 7 since Jon leaves Winterfell very early on and appeases Sansa by leaving her in charge. 1 hour ago, GrailKing said: I was wondering if Bran was revealing LF betrayal of Ned. Sansa in that brief clip totally looks pissed I didn't think he maybe show Jamie push him out the window, that make her pissed at Cersei and Jamie not LF. Maybe the letter and Jon Arryn's death. It could be any number of things: the letter, Jon Arryn's murder, "I did warn you not to trust me," LF convincing Joffrey to execute Ned, etc. The only thing that makes me wonder whether it involved the attempt on Bran's life is Arya using that same dagger to execute LF. Arya's a Needle girl through and through; why would she use LF's own weapon to execute him? She would if there was some particular significance attached to that dagger, and the only reason any of the Starks would attach any significance to that dagger is if they knew either that LF lied about it to stir up conflict, or that he was behind the attempt on Bran's life in the first place. Maisie Williams saying that Season 7 made her want to go back and rewatch the whole show in light of Season 7--or words to that effect--made me wonder whether the Starks will be getting a bigger infodump about everything LF has done to fuck them over, though. I'd personally find that more satisfying that Sansa's mind getting changed by just one piece of the puzzle. 1 hour ago, SeanC said: Ever since the show omitted Tyrion and Jaime's simultaneous deductions of Joffrey's culpability, I've thought there were two possible explanations: 1) The show's writers decided to omit the explanation because it's not a great twist (probably the weakest plot payoff in the books, in my opinion) nor, at that point, really relevant to the story anymore, and just leave it unresolved (it's not like most casual viewers even remember that plot point anymore, so I expect they could get away with it; indeed, in that sense they already are). 2) The show's writers decided to do the common fan fix for people who didn't like GRRM's explanation (or else, because they found it unsatisfactory, assume there will be further twists) and have Littlefinger be responsible. That theory is, in the books anyway, full of holes, but I doubt the writers care about that (indeed, I'd be sure of it). I never thought LF was responsible in the show for the murder attempt before the leaks, and GRRM pointed to Joffrey in the books as a way of tying off that loose end, but the leaker's claim that Arya uses the Valyrian steel dagger to execute LF is bugging me. It would have to mean something to Arya, who slit Walder's throat the way Catelyn's was slit, who killed Polliver (?) the same way he killed Lommy, for her to decide to use that weapon and not Needle...Or maybe not, and the writers just wanted a convenient way to hook Arya up with a sweet, sweet Arya-sized Valyrian steel weapon right before the WWs invade. Still, the tidbit about Arya using that dagger to execute him sticks out to me. Edited December 2, 2016 by Eyes High Link to comment
GrailKing December 2, 2016 Share December 2, 2016 The Dagger was one used on Bran, wasn't it also used against Ned ? Could be something in the books that we haven't seen yet ? Link to comment
Eyes High December 2, 2016 Share December 2, 2016 (edited) 35 minutes ago, GrailKing said: The Dagger was one used on Bran, wasn't it also used against Ned ? Could be something in the books that we haven't seen yet ? I think LF uses a different dagger against Ned, in the show, anyway. At the risk of reading too much into Maisie Williams' comment about rethinking everything etc. etc., it almost makes me think the audience is going to learn some new information about LF. The Starks may not know about LF betraying Ned, LF lying about the dagger or LF foiling Sansa's Tyrell marriage, but the viewers certainly do. (I'm less clear on whether non-reader viewers realized that Lysa murdered Jon Arryn and blamed the Lannisters for it.) That points to some new revelation about LF: LF convincing Joffrey to execute Ned or LF sending the assassin after Bran would fit the bill. I'm a bit skeptical about LF convincing Joffrey to execute Ned being part of the revelations, because the only way the writers could credibly show that in my opinion would be to include a flashback scene of LF persuading Joffrey, and given how Jack Gleeson has made it clear that he is 1,000% done with GOT, I doubt he could be persuaded to come back for a cameo. I don't know that Sansa in hindsight would begrudge Littlefinger foiling her Tyrell marriage, though, given what became of them. Edited December 2, 2016 by Eyes High Link to comment
Wouter December 2, 2016 Share December 2, 2016 28 minutes ago, Eyes High said: I'm a bit skeptical about LF convincing Joffrey to execute Ned being part of the revelations, because the only way the writers could credibly show that in my opinion would be to include a flashback scene of LF persuading Joffrey, and given how Jack Gleeson has made it clear that he is 1,000% done with GOT, I doubt he could be persuaded to come back for a cameo. I don't know that Sansa in hindsight would begrudge Littlefinger foiling her Tyrell marriage, though, given what became of them. The scene with Gleeson could have been filmed years ago, or he could just come back for a one-off, if they pay him enough. As for the Tyrell marriage, LF didn't do that because he thought the marriage would be bad for her. He could not predict the fall of the Tyrells at that time. Link to comment
GrailKing December 2, 2016 Share December 2, 2016 8 minutes ago, Wouter said: The scene with Gleeson could have been filmed years ago, or he could just come back for a one-off, if they pay him enough. As for the Tyrell marriage, LF didn't do that because he thought the marriage would be bad for her. He could not predict the fall of the Tyrells at that time. Yeah, he did that for his own gain. Link to comment
GreyBunny December 3, 2016 Share December 3, 2016 If the show tries to claim Littlefinger put the hit on Bran, that would strain the credulity of even LF's teleporter. LF was in King's Landing, and the attempt happened just days after Robert and his caravan left. No time to get a message to KL about Bran' s condition, have LF come up with a plot, and then hire a catspaw to do his dirty work. Link to comment
OhOkayWhat December 3, 2016 Share December 3, 2016 Obviously Littlefinger and Sandor did different terrible things, but, as I said, Sandor DID terrible things. He is my second favorite character, but I am glad Show-Sansa never romantized him. Link to comment
FemmyV December 3, 2016 Share December 3, 2016 20 hours ago, Wouter said: As for the Tyrell marriage, LF didn't do that because he thought the marriage would be bad for her. He could not predict the fall of the Tyrells at that time. Considering how he freely gave Cersei the info she needed to get Loras picked up by the FM, it's safe to assume he had future plans for the Tyrells, as well. Link to comment
Wouter December 3, 2016 Share December 3, 2016 2 hours ago, FemmyV said: Considering how he freely gave Cersei the info she needed to get Loras picked up by the FM, it's safe to assume he had future plans for the Tyrells, as well. That would not make his intentions towards Sansa any better. Sansa liked (some of) the Tyrells. Link to comment
GrailKing December 3, 2016 Share December 3, 2016 1 hour ago, Wouter said: That would not make his intentions towards Sansa any better. Sansa liked (some of) the Tyrells. I don't remember Sansa book or show actually hating any of the Tyrells. Link to comment
Wouter December 3, 2016 Share December 3, 2016 Sansa certainly liked Margaery and Garlan, maybe Loras and Olenna, too. Margaery's cousins (which dropped her right away) are probably not too high in her esteem, though. Sansa thought in the Vale that "she had liked Margaery's grandmother", which leaves it a bit ambiguous whether she changed her mind after most of the Tyrells dropped her, post-Tyrion. Garlan didn't and Margaery at least showed a certain regret. 1 Link to comment
GrailKing December 4, 2016 Share December 4, 2016 2 hours ago, Wouter said: Sansa certainly liked Margaery and Garlan, maybe Loras and Olenna, too. Margaery's cousins (which dropped her right away) are probably not too high in her esteem, though. Sansa thought in the Vale that "she had liked Margaery's grandmother", which leaves it a bit ambiguous whether she changed her mind after most of the Tyrells dropped her, post-Tyrion. Garlan didn't and Margaery at least showed a certain regret. The cousins, just reminded Sansa of herself , she pitied them more then anything, I think. Link to comment
GreyBunny December 4, 2016 Share December 4, 2016 Plus Sansa liked the idea of marrying Willas and didn't think any less of him because he has a permanently crippled leg. Olenna says he's "not the least bit oafish" which is high praise for a male coming from her. Petyr calls says Willas would be boring for Sansa, but considering the other drama she got plunged into, boring would probably be a huge relief for her. Link to comment
anamika December 4, 2016 Share December 4, 2016 (edited) So since we are not going to get the next book for another 2 years, here are some of things GRRM mentioned in Guadalajara international book fair (From Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/asoiaf/comments/5g7vef/spoilers_extended_grrms_second_talk_at_the/) - Littlefinger and Varys are adversaries, both know a lot about the others' plans, so they're at a stalemate. LF knows more about Varys's motives than Varys does about LF. - This tells me that LF and Varys are going to clash sometime in the future - so maybe the fAegon story will meet the Vale story - could be a reason why they changed LF's story on the show considering that fAegon is non-existent . Thinks Arthur Dayne would make for an excellent champion. Followed by Jaime with two hands and then Brienne. - The show making out Jon Snow to be some great fighter is such nonsense. -Ending of ASOIAF will be as much bittersweet as happy. In real life the good guys don't always win. He calls the ending of LotR "bittersweet at best". He lauds the Scouring of the Shire and hints at a similar ending for ASOIAF. - This is useful for gauging what his notion of a "bittersweet ending" is. - Brienne and Jaime's relationship is evolving. Began as antagonistic, but they're getting to know each other. So you'll have to continue to read the books to see where that ends up. - Some hope here for Jaime/Brienne shippers! I think they are more or less a confirmed ship and the show seems to be focusing on them as well. - The Forsaken is a dark chapter, but there are a lot of dark chapters in TWOW right now. Winter is when things die. Cold and ice and darkness fills the world. This is not going to be the happy feel good book that people may be hoping for. Some of the characters are in very dark places. Things get worse before they get better. Things are getting worse for a lot of people. - Jon is not going to be very pleasant to be around! "If you could ask any question to Tolkien, what would that be?" -- "Why did you bring Gandalf back from the dead? He should have stayed dead." - Does not sound too good for Jon. And since he talks about Frodo never being the same with wounds that don't heal, I think Jon will end up as a tragic character at the very end if he lives. Not sure if the show will go this route since resurrected Jon seems to be a-okay and is having a good time with boat sex and all that! - George likes all his characters. Even likes bad guys like "Theon, the Hound, that little shit Joffrey." - Interestingly he considers the Hound a bad guy. And as a reader, I find Theon to be a more sympathetic character than Jaime. - GRRM states jokingly that his wife would leave him if he killed her favorite character (Ed. Note: This is Arya) - I think Arya is safe - GRRM won't give away what Lyanna told Ned at the Tower of Joy. Read the books! - Who deserves the IT? The IT does not go to who deserves it, but to who has the power to take and hold it. But there are things in the books to indicate what a king should be , what separates a good king from a bad king. A king maybe seduced by power and wealth, but he should serve the public and the land. - Interestingly he never uses the word 'Queen' even though we have had examples of Dany helping the common man in Essos - As for Kings in the books we have had Stannis and Jon thinking of the greater good and fAegon who has been taught how to be a good king. - He speaks of "increasing difficulty" maintaining the many plotlines and avoiding loose ends. He hopes to leave no loose ends at the end of the book. Some things maybe left ambiguous for readers to debate about. Some things may not be neatly tied up with a bow. - Tyrion would be a good candidate to be a leader in this day and age - very smart, ruthless, intellectual ability and understanding of politics and experience in the dark side of humanity, not too naive for the job. Dany would also be an interesting choice if we could bring her dragons along! - Having no royal lineage would it be possible to ask Sansa out on a date? (LOL!) Stark family won't be interested in Sansa dating non-nobles. Sansa does not fool around with peasant boys! Sophie Turner may however date you! - He does not see the finish line yet for ASOIAF :( He is hoping that if he does see that line, he can write faster and finish the books. - Meanwhile the show is barrelling towards the end. - Anything he would change in the early books? He probably should have given Robb a POV because maybe people guessed he was going to die. He does not like to be predictable. - A tale of two cities is one of his favorite books - 'it's a far, far better thing I do than I have ever done' - I have always felt that Sydney Carton was his inspiration for Jaime (I mentioned this in an earlier post on here) and I think Jaime will have more or less a similar ending in the books. - He thinks Melisandre's religion is the most powerful - bringing people back from the dead - could become popular. But the Seven is good for standing in society. We should also probably pay attention to the FM Gods. All in all, I thought it was a pretty good interview. Worth listening to. Edited December 4, 2016 by anamika Link to comment
Wouter December 4, 2016 Share December 4, 2016 7 hours ago, anamika said: So since we are not going to get the next book for another 2 years, here are some of things GRRM mentioned in Guadalajara international book fair (From Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/asoiaf/comments/5g7vef/spoilers_extended_grrms_second_talk_at_the/) - Littlefinger and Varys are adversaries, both know a lot about the others' plans, so they're at a stalemate. LF knows more about Varys's motives than Varys does about LF. - This tells me that LF and Varys are going to clash sometime in the future - so maybe the fAegon story will meet the Vale story - could be a reason why they changed LF's story on the show considering that fAegon is non-existent . Thinks Arthur Dayne would make for an excellent champion. Followed by Jaime with two hands and then Brienne. - The show making out Jon Snow to be some great fighter is such nonsense. -Ending of ASOIAF will be as much bittersweet as happy. In real life the good guys don't always win. He calls the ending of LotR "bittersweet at best". He lauds the Scouring of the Shire and hints at a similar ending for ASOIAF. - This is useful for gauging what his notion of a "bittersweet ending" is. [...] "If you could ask any question to Tolkien, what would that be?" -- "Why did you bring Gandalf back from the dead? He should have stayed dead." - Does not sound too good for Jon. And since he talks about Frodo never being the same with wounds that don't heal, I think Jon will end up as a tragic character at the very end if he lives. I think the fAegon story will meet the Vale story in the sense that both will be political powers in the south, before and during Dany's coming invasion. LF and Varys being adversaries (and LF having a decent idea of Varys' motives - Blackfyre-related?) points to a LF-controlled Vale opposing Aegon, which in turn may mean that LF plans to support Dany when she returns. This would allow him to get rid of the Lannisters, the Tyrels and Varys in one move (assuming Dany wins, grateful for his assistance). One problem: he wouldn't have been counting on Tyrion being in her camp. Jon Snow can be as great a fighter as the showrunners like - they don't have to follow the books to a T. Allthough show-Jon has been on the losing end of fights at times (against the Thenn, for example) and book-Jon doesn't seem to be that bad either, though not up to Arthur Dayne levels. Bittersweet ending: for LOTR, he talks about the scouring of the Shire and Frodo's never-healing wound (and exit) on the one hand, but he also mentions The One Ring being destroyed, Sauron being defeated and Aragorn taking the throne. Taken with Jon being resurrected without an obvious price (in the show, at least; it could be that in the books, Shireen will be the prize) may point to Jon and/or Dany falling in the end, after saving the world as (a) messianic hero(es). Link to comment
anamika December 4, 2016 Share December 4, 2016 (edited) 45 minutes ago, Wouter said: One problem: he wouldn't have been counting on Tyrion being in her camp. Which could mess up his Harry the Heir plot since he was counting on Tyrion being dead to get Sansa married off. 45 minutes ago, Wouter said: Bittersweet ending: for LOTR, he talks about the scouring of the Shire and Frodo's never-healing wound (and exit) on the one hand, but he also mentions The One Ring being destroyed, Sauron being defeated and Aragorn taking the throne. Taken with Jon being resurrected without an obvious price (in the show, at least; it could be that in the books, Shireen will be the prize) may point to Jon and/or Dany falling in the end, after saving the world as (a) messianic hero(es). I don't know. His reply to who deserves the IT was interesting. He first states that the IT goes to whomever has the power to take it and hold it - that's definitely Dany. But then he talks about Kings and how he has indicated in the books what it takes to be a king. The likely candidates as far as I can see are Stannis, Jon and fAegon. Stannis is not going to last long, fAegon is likely doomed and that leaves only Jon to whom GRRM has given a governance arc in the last book. We also know that there will be an IT and someone sitting on it at the very end. Jon could be very messed up like Rand Al Thor in the Wheel of Time books who walked around with injuries and madness or like Leto and Leto II in the Dune series. But he could still be alive - an Aragorn who ascends the throne. Who else is left as King material? Tyrion? That's possible. Maybe Tyrion and Sansa end up on the IT after all! Edited December 4, 2016 by anamika Link to comment
Eyes High December 4, 2016 Share December 4, 2016 (edited) Quote - This tells me that LF and Varys are going to clash sometime in the future - so maybe the fAegon story will meet the Vale story - could be a reason why they changed LF's story on the show considering that fAegon is non-existent . Hard to see how that could realistically happen in the books, but Aegon as yet another potential suitor for Sansa is a theory that has some traction in the fandom. Quote Thinks Arthur Dayne would make for an excellent champion. Followed by Jaime with two hands and then Brienne. - The show making out Jon Snow to be some great fighter is such nonsense. I don't blame D&D for playing to the fact that Kit Harington is incredibly good at the combat scenes. Quote - The Forsaken is a dark chapter, but there are a lot of dark chapters in TWOW right now. Winter is when things die. Cold and ice and darkness fills the world. This is not going to be the happy feel good book that people may be hoping for. Some of the characters are in very dark places. More torture porn from GRRM. Yippee. Quote "If you could ask any question to Tolkien, what would that be?" -- "Why did you bring Gandalf back from the dead? He should have stayed dead." - Does not sound too good for Jon. No, it does not. It's not clear yet that Jon actually dies in the books, though, just that he passes out from blood loss. Quote - George likes all his characters. Even likes bad guys like "Theon, the Hound, that little shit Joffrey." - Interestingly he considers the Hound a bad guy. And as a reader, I find Theon to be a more sympathetic character than Jaime. He has called the Hound a villain before. I think he lumps him in with Theon and Jaime, though. Quote - GRRM won't give away what Lyanna told Ned at the Tower of Joy. Read the books! Too bad the show spoiled it. Womp womp! Quote - Tyrion would be a good candidate to be a leader in this day and age - very smart, ruthless, intellectual ability and understanding of politics and experience in the dark side of humanity, not too naive for the job. Kind of a dumb comment from GRRM, given what a visual culture we now have and how looks-obsessed people are nowadays. Quote - A tale of two cities is one of his favorite books - 'it's a far, far better thing I do than I have ever done' - I have always felt that Sydney Carton was his inspiration for Jaime (I mentioned this in an earlier post on here) and I think Jaime will have more or less a similar ending in the books. Isn't Tyrion more likely to pull a Sydney Carton than Jaime? The shrewd, self-indulgent, self-pitying drunk, in love with a woman lost to him (Tysha/Lucie), who finally makes good by heroically sacrificing himself? Quote Bittersweet ending: for LOTR, he talks about the scouring of the Shire and Frodo's never-healing wound (and exit) on the one hand, but he also mentions The One Ring being destroyed, Sauron being defeated and Aragorn taking the throne. Agreed. LOTR had plenty of sweet in with the bitter. 4 hours ago, anamika said: Which could mess up his Harry the Heir plot since he was counting on Tyrion being dead to get Sansa married off. I don't know. His reply to who deserves the IT was interesting. He first states that the IT goes to whomever has the power to take it and hold it - that's definitely Dany. But then he talks about Kings and how he has indicated in the books what it takes to be a king. The likely candidates as far as I can see are Stannis, Jon and fAegon. Stannis is not going to last long, fAegon is likely doomed and that leaves only Jon to whom GRRM has given a governance arc in the last book. We also know that there will be an IT and someone sitting on it at the very end. Jon could be very messed up like Rand Al Thor in the Wheel of Time books who walked around with injuries and madness or like Leto and Leto II in the Dune series. But he could still be alive - an Aragorn who ascends the throne. Who else is left as King material? Tyrion? That's possible. Maybe Tyrion and Sansa end up on the IT after all! I think the throne is Jon's to lose at this point, and we can expect that Dany will die conveniently along the way to clear the way for Jon to rule unimpeded. The only sticking point is the fact that TV Jon is a zombie like Beric; if anyone is on borrowed time, it's him. If Dany and Jon die, though, theoretically anyone could make a pitch for the position: Sansa, Arya, Gendry, etc. etc. After all, TV Cersei set a precedent for taking the throne with no blood claim by, well, just claiming it and daring anyone to speak against it. In essence, she did what she told Ned he should have done in Season 1 (take the throne for himself instead of holding it for Robert). Still, given how short the list of characters will be at the end of Season 7, with what we can imagine will be further casualties in Season 8, the list of potential claimants is going to be an awfully short one no matter what, and of those potential claimants, who would want the job? If there's one thing ASOIAF/GOT has indicated, it's that anyone worthy to sit the throne is intelligent enough to want nothing to do with it. I go back and forth on Tyrion as endgame king. On the one hand, there have been hints in the show and books that seem to leave open the possibility, although of course they're dwarfed (so to speak) by the huge Jon=king signposts. The show has also bent over backwards to portray Tyrion in the most favourable light possible to the point of rewriting or eliminating key character moments from the books, which would make sense if it were an attempt to render an endgame king Tyrion more palatable. On the other hand, the books and the show have reminded the readers/audience constantly that the people would never accept Tyrion as a leader. TV Tyrion even says "I will never sit the Iron Throne" and he and Varys have an entire conversation about how Tyrion and Varys would never be accepted as leaders because they're viewed as freaks. TV Varys says that the right leader will be loved by millions and have the right family name; Tyrion is a big fail on those two counts. It could all be misdirection from D&D to throw the viewers off the scent, but how likely is that? Going back to the books, even if the people were willing to overlook his dwarfism, they'd still have his believed kingslaying and acknowledged kinslaying to consider, and at least in the books the latter is considered a very big deal. Having Tyrion end up as king in the would represent GRRM taking an axe to the world he constructed, where he spent several books telling us how much something mattered only to take it all back at the end to suit his narrative purpose, and the same goes for D&D, I think. Not to say it won't happen, of course, but it would be a huge copout. To play devil's advocate, Tyrion is already Hand and Sansa is already Lady of Winterfell as of the beginning of Season 7. These are unlikely to be the endgame positions that they will be holding in 13 episodes' time, assuming they live that long. However, that doesn't mean that they'll be ruling Westeros instead. More likely Tyrion heads back to Casterly Rock or starts up his winery, and Sansa cedes her LOW title to Bran and is named QITN. It's very unlikely that Sansa will ever leave Winterfell of her own volition again or that Tyrion would do anything other than make a beeline for Casterly Rock once the war is over and Dany is (presumably) dead. Possible, of course, but very unlikely. Edited December 4, 2016 by Eyes High Link to comment
whateverdgaf December 4, 2016 Share December 4, 2016 8 minutes ago, Eyes High said: He has called the Hound a villain before. I think he lumps him in with Theon and Jaime, though. Honestly, out of the three of them, I find the Hound the most villanous. Or at least the least sympathetic. I don't think any of them are meant to be complete villains or heroes, just people all stuck in the middle with conflicting loyalties and desires. But I think I like the Hound the least because he killed a defenceless boy simply to order avenge Joffrey being humiliated. All three of them are child murderers or attempted child murderers, but I found the Hound's motivations in doing so the most unsympathetic. 2 Link to comment
Wouter December 4, 2016 Share December 4, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, Eyes High said: [1] Hard to see how that could realistically happen in the books, but Aegon as yet another potential suitor for Sansa is a theory that has some traction in the fandom. [2] No, it does not. It's not clear yet that Jon actually dies in the books, though, just that he passes out from blood loss. [3] Isn't Tyrion more likely to pull a Sydney Carton than Jaime? The shrewd, self-indulgent, self-pitying drunk, in love with a woman lost to him (Tysha/Lucie), who finally makes good by heroically sacrificing himself? [4]I think the throne is Jon's to lose at this point, and we can expect that Dany will die conveniently along the way to clear the way for Jon to rule unimpeded. The only sticking point is the fact that TV Jon is a zombie like Beric; if anyone is on borrowed time, it's him. [5]To play devil's advocate, Tyrion is already Hand and Sansa is already Lady of Winterfell as of the beginning of Season 7. These are unlikely to be the endgame positions that they will be holding in 13 episodes' time, assuming they live that long. However, that doesn't mean that they'll be ruling Westeros instead. More likely Tyrion heads back to Casterly Rock or starts up his winery, and Sansa cedes her LOW title to Bran and is named QITN. It's very unlikely that Sansa will ever leave Winterfell of her own volition again or that Tyrion would do anything other than make a beeline for Casterly Rock once the war is over and Dany is (presumably) dead. Possible, of course, but very unlikely. [1] GRRM's very recent interview in Spain indicates the opposite: LF and Varys are adversaries, who only stopped short of destroying each other because they knew it would be mutually assured destruction. No way that Varys is going to give his own king to someone he must realise is a puppet of LF. And no way that LF would be content to play second fiddle (or even worse) in an Aegon-regime. Furthermore, Sansa Stark would not be well liked by Jon Connington, who dislikes Starks in general and is probably particularly pissed off with Lyanna. LF is well informed and he talked about "the three queens" right after he received word from the east (through the "Merlin King" returning from its voyage). He is very likely aware of Dany, a much better bet if he wants to overthrow not only Varys, but Lannisters and co as well. He could assume that she would be easier to manipulate, at least until he becomes aware Tyrion is in her camp. The fact that Aegon is not at all in the show also makes it very unlikely that Sansa would end up with him. Same goes for Harry The Heir, but that never seemed a terribly likely prospect in the books, either. [2] I think most people accept that Jon died at the end of ADWD. Only magical healing could still help him after receiving such vicious stab wounds. [3] A last ditch redemption by heroic act seems fairly likely for Jaime, IMO. With the Valonqar prophecy, it seems he may be the one to finish Cersei (allthough that is tricky prophecy so we'll see). In the leaks for S7, he leaves Cersei to go fight the WW army, which seems a good way to redeem himself and a good way to die, too. Allthough then again, if he is to strangle Cersei he has to survive the WW, I suppose. [4] Dany and Jon remain favourites for the throne. They could take it together, but one (or even both) of them dying also seems a possibility. Jon's resurrection and Dany's fertility question marks (and maybe a vague sense that she may not want the throne in the end, a notion which I think I got mostly from the show version of the vision in the House of the Undying) remain possible problems for them. By going for two messianic figures, GRRM keep us guessing. And by not finishing his story, of course. [5] It seems unlike to me there will be a queen/king of the north in the end. The Iron Throne will want unification, and no matter if its Jon/Dany or Tyrion/Sansa (this only if Jon and Dany die and/or give up on the throne), it would be a marriage aimed at keeping the north in the 7K. I always thought that Rickon would be lord paramount/warden of the north in the end, but given his death on the show that position is up for grabs. If Bran is unable or unwilling to take his place as Ned's heir, Sansa would be next in line so it could be her endgame. if Bran does take up his birthright, then Sansa may marry a lord in the Vale or the Riverlands. For Tyrion, with a dragon and/or Targaryen blood he would take the throne if Dany and Jon would be out of the picture, but the leaks put question marks over that. Lord of Casterly Rock (without Sansa, in that case) seems a safe bet if he does not become a dragonrider at some point. Edited December 4, 2016 by Wouter 1 Link to comment
GreyBunny December 5, 2016 Share December 5, 2016 Jon isn't unconscious from blood loss, he's dead. He'll probably be resurrected by Mel with an assist from Ghost (I fear they may need to kill Ghost's body to put a combined Ghost-Jon spirit back into Jon's body). I doubt fAegon would marry Sansa because that's a dead end story for her. Her bazillion bethrothals are getting ridiculous at this point. If fAegon marries anyone it would probably be Arianne and then they're both going to bite it when Dany comes along and kicks fAegon off the throne. The Martells are going down hard. 1 Link to comment
anamika December 5, 2016 Share December 5, 2016 (edited) 10 hours ago, Eyes High said: Hard to see how that could realistically happen in the books, but Aegon as yet another potential suitor for Sansa is a theory that has some traction in the fandom. I think the LF story could go two ways : 1. Focused North. But, I think that is unlikely in the books considering that the North story is moving ahead full speed and winter is already there. The Vale is going to be occupied with the HH plot while Jon/Rickon possibly end up in charge of WF at the end of TWoW. Now after this, it's possible that LF/Sansa may oppose them and move the Vale army North, but I don't see that happening with the winter conditions Stannis was already facing in ADwD. I think that if the Vale story clashes with the North, it's when the North/WF inhabitants move south after the Others and a harsh winter takes over the North. 2. Focused south. GRRM has hinted at the Varys/LF rivalry and I think LF can do more in the southern game of the thrones than in the Northern one where the factions are already set, the clans are marching for Arya, Bran and Rickon are in play and Jon has been named Robb's heir. Bringing a disinherited Sansa into that scenario is not going to get him anything and as I mentioned, I don't think it's possible for the Vale army to get North in Winter. Maybe he learns about Rickon, hears about fAegon and turns his focus south. GRRM has mentioned that he knows more about Varys' plots than Vary does about him. 10 hours ago, Eyes High said: He has called the Hound a villain before. I think he lumps him in with Theon and Jaime, though. I just found it interesting because so very often Hound apologists paint him as this good guy who had no choice but to follow orders in mowing down little children, killing Jeyne Poole's father and other Stark men and taking down Ned Stark. Not to mention sexually assaulting a 12 year old Sansa, assaulting and kidnapping Arya and making vile rape threats. The notion that Sansa turns against LF because the Hound tells her about what LF did in KL is rather hilarious considering the Hound's list of misdeeds. 10 hours ago, Eyes High said: Isn't Tyrion more likely to pull a Sydney Carton than Jaime? The shrewd, self-indulgent, self-pitying drunk, in love with a woman lost to him (Tysha/Lucie), who finally makes good by heroically sacrificing himself? Tyrion starts out as the underdog, treated horribly for being a dwarf but still a good guy all the same. When we meet him, he is portrayed as the only good Lannister, who befriends the Stark children and tries to outwit the snakes in KL. It is only later that he slowly descends into darkness, indulging in rather dark acts. I don't think Tyrion is on a 'redemption arc' and I don't see him sacrificing himself for the greater good. Jaime on the other hand is the witty, self indulgent, self pitying character who had everything - the golden boy - his father's favorite, heir to Casterly Rock. And he throws it all away for the love of his sister. He keeps whining about no one recognizing his saving of KL and yet he sits on the throne grinning at Ned while Rhaegar's wife is raped and her children slaughtered. He complains about being disillusioned by the oaths but he never took them seriously in the first place considering that he joined the KG to commit adultery and shag his sister. He thinks he is Golden hand the Just because he hangs some outlaws and the BlackFish rightly mocks him for his lack of honor. From the moment we get his POV in the books, his self pity act reminded me of Sydney Carton. And he has yet to do anything meaningful to make up for all the death, destruction and suffering he has caused. If we do get more Jaime/Brienne stuff, I think we will see Jaime try to redeem himself for all the shit he has done - maybe even end up sacrificing himself for Bran or something. Edited December 5, 2016 by anamika 2 Link to comment
SeanC December 5, 2016 Share December 5, 2016 4 minutes ago, anamika said: I think the LF story could go two ways : 1. Focused North. But, I think that is unlikely in the books considering that the North story is moving ahead full speed and winter is already there. The Vale is going to be occupied with the HH plot while Jon/Rickon possibly end up in charge of WF at the end of TWoW. Now after this, it's possible that LF/Sansa may oppose them and move the Vale army North, but I don't see that happening with the winter conditions Stannis was already facing in ADwD. I think that if the Vale story clashes with the North, it's when the North/WF inhabitants move south after the Others and a harsh winter takes over the North. 2. Focused south. GRRM has hinted at the Varys/LF rivalry and I think LF can do more in the southern game of the thrones than in the Northern one where the factions are already set, the clans are marching for Arya, Bran and Rickon are in play and Jon has been named Robb's heir. Bringing a disinherited Sansa into that scenario is not going to get him anything and as I mentioned, I don't think it's possible for the Vale army to get North in Winter. Maybe he learns about Rickon, hears about fAegon and turns his focus south. GRRM has mentioned that he knows more about Varys' plots than Vary does about him. I'd argue, conversely, that Sansa being disinherited under Robb's will is most dramatically relevant if they do go North, in a lot of ways. As far as TWOW goes, at least, I expect it'll mostly be set in the Vale (GRRM has gone to some lengths to make it a fairly isolated ecosystem). If he is going to leave the Vale, though, I do think going North is more likely. The Aegon/Varys plotline ultimately relates to Daenerys and Tyrion, and Littlefinger's modus operandi in this situation would be to watch his enemies destroy each other. He doesn't really gain anything by intervening in the conflict, particularly as Varys wouldn't want Aegon allied with him anyway. Let the Lannisters, the Tyrells, the Martells, the Golden Company et al. slug it out while he sits safely in the Vale, its forces unblooded. Link to comment
anamika December 5, 2016 Share December 5, 2016 7 hours ago, SeanC said: I'd argue, conversely, that Sansa being disinherited under Robb's will is most dramatically relevant if they do go North, in a lot of ways. As far as TWOW goes, at least, I expect it'll mostly be set in the Vale (GRRM has gone to some lengths to make it a fairly isolated ecosystem). If he is going to leave the Vale, though, I do think going North is more likely. The Aegon/Varys plotline ultimately relates to Daenerys and Tyrion, and Littlefinger's modus operandi in this situation would be to watch his enemies destroy each other. He doesn't really gain anything by intervening in the conflict, particularly as Varys wouldn't want Aegon allied with him anyway. Let the Lannisters, the Tyrells, the Martells, the Golden Company et al. slug it out while he sits safely in the Vale, its forces unblooded. But again, the question arises - how is he going to take his Vale army North? Winter has come in ADwD, stranding Stannis and his men. If you think that his plot will be set in the Vale in TWoW, the North is going to be impassable by ADoS. If anything, I see Jon and the Northerners retreating south by ADoS or even TWoW. We have Dany's dragon dreams of the Trident: Quote That night she dreamt she was Rhaegar, riding to the Trident. But she was mounted on a dragon, not a horse. When she saw the Usurper’s rebel host across the river they were armored all in ice, but she bathed them in dragonfire and they melted away like dew and turned the Trident into a torrent. It could be that the Vale plot in TWoW could involve elements of fAegon. The fAegon plot is still rather muddled. We hear from Varys that he orchestrated the whole thing, but how much does Connington know and how much control does Varys have over Aegon. Or we could get LF/Sansa Vs Jon taking place down south in ADoS. 1 Link to comment
SimoneS December 5, 2016 Share December 5, 2016 21 hours ago, Eyes High said: I think the throne is Jon's to lose at this point, and we can expect that Dany will die conveniently along the way to clear the way for Jon to rule unimpeded. The only sticking point is the fact that TV Jon is a zombie like Beric; if anyone is on borrowed time, it's him. I don't expect Daenerys to die, certainly not before the show is over. Rather I expect that both Daenerys and Jon will sit on the Iron Throne and rule together as a couple or one will succeed the other. 2 Link to comment
Eyes High December 5, 2016 Share December 5, 2016 20 hours ago, Wouter said: [4] Dany and Jon remain favourites for the throne. Jon, quite possibly. Dany, no. D&D have tipped their hands a few times that she's not meant to rule Westeros. According to the leaks, Dany burns both Randyll and Dickon over Tyrion's--admittedly the same Tyrion who burned hundreds of Stannis' men alive at Blackwater--horrified objections, causing Varys and Tyrion to worry about her. Although they're not going the mad queen route, D&D wouldn't have Dany burn the Tarlys and Varys and Tyrion wring their hands about it if she was going to be the endgame queen. It's a tell, and not a terribly subtle one at that. 13 hours ago, GreyBunny said: I doubt fAegon would marry Sansa because that's a dead end story for her. Her bazillion bethrothals are getting ridiculous at this point. If fAegon marries anyone it would probably be Arianne and then they're both going to bite it when Dany comes along and kicks fAegon off the throne. The Martells are going down hard. I agree about Aegon/Arianne and the Martells' downfall. I think it's significant that D&D planned on scrapping Dorne as a storyline altogether until Bryan Cogman persuaded them to keep it in for Jaime's plotline in Season 5, and that when they did write in Dorne, they omitted Arianne. I don't think the Aegon/Sansa betrothal theory is at all likely, but when has that stopped anyone from speculating? Some fans still think Sansa's going to end LF by shoving him out the Moon Door, even though in the books the Eyrie has been closed down for the winter and abandoned. 1 hour ago, SimoneS said: I don't expect Daenerys to die, certainly not before the show is over. Rather I expect that both Daenerys and Jon will sit on the Iron Throne and rule together as a couple or one will succeed the other. In light of the leaks, it seems very unlikely that Dany's going to make it until the end. Link to comment
Edith December 5, 2016 Share December 5, 2016 13 minutes ago, Eyes High said: Jon, quite possibly. Dany, no. D&D have tipped their hands a few times that she's not meant to rule Westeros. According to the leaks, Dany burns both Randyll and Dickon over Tyrion's--admittedly the same Tyrion who burned hundreds of Stannis' men alive at Blackwater--horrified objections, causing Varys and Tyrion to worry about her. Although they're not going the mad queen route, D&D wouldn't have Dany burn the Tarlys and Varys and Tyrion wring their hands about it if she was going to be the endgame queen. It's a tell, and not a terribly subtle one at that. I agree about Aegon/Arianne and the Martells' downfall. I think it's significant that D&D planned on scrapping Dorne as a storyline altogether until Bryan Cogman persuaded them to keep it in for Jaime's plotline in Season 5, and that when they did write in Dorne, they omitted Arianne. I don't think the Aegon/Sansa betrothal theory is at all likely, but when has that stopped anyone from speculating? Some fans still think Sansa's going to end LF by shoving him out the Moon Door, even though in the books the Eyrie has been closed down for the winter and abandoned. In light of the leaks, it seems very unlikely that Dany's going to make it until the end. Agree! I think she either die with her dragons or in childbirth. But definitely not going to sit in the throne. Like Daario said last season, she's a conqueror not a ruler. I would also add that she's a Savior. Also according to the leaks when Jon offers to bent the knee, he apparently says something about not wanting to be the king of a dead kingdom, wich is exactly what I think is going to happen in the end. Link to comment
GreyBunny December 5, 2016 Share December 5, 2016 53 minutes ago, Edith said: he apparently says something about not wanting to be the king of a dead kingdom, wich is exactly what I think is going to happen in the end. I think so too. When Dany had her vision of walking through a destroyed throne room that's probably what it meant. Someone will get the throne in the end but they'll be the king or queen of ashes. 1 Link to comment
SimoneS December 5, 2016 Share December 5, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, Eyes High said: In light of the leaks, it seems very unlikely that Dany's going to make it until the end. Nothing in the leaks comes close to suggesting this as far as I see. There are no leaks for season 8 when the decisive actions will occur. Edited December 5, 2016 by SimoneS 2 Link to comment
Eyes High December 5, 2016 Share December 5, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, SimoneS said: Nothing in the leaks comes close to suggesting this as far as I see. There are no leaks for season 8 when the decisive actions will occur. Dany burning Dickon Tarly as well as Randyll despite Tyrion frantically trying to talk her out of it and Tyrion and Varys, Dany's biggest supporters, later being all "This bitch had better not be Aerys 2.0" over the ambush is an extremely strong suggestion, in my opinion. D&D telegraph future plot developments all the time, and it sounds like they're once again showing their hand. It's not the first time D&D have hinted that Dany will never rule Westeros, of course--Dany turning away from the throne in the HOTU vision, Dany's dumb stated intention of "breaking the wheel," Daario saying she's a conqueror, etc. etc.--but it seems like confirmation to me. Jon has the best shot of ruling Westeros in the end despite the whole zombie thing, although I would roll my eyes at the hypocrisy of GRRM bitching about Gandalf's resurrection only to pull the same with one of his own characters. It seems pretty clear to me that Dany will die and clear the way for him. Edited December 5, 2016 by Eyes High 1 Link to comment
Wouter December 5, 2016 Share December 5, 2016 17 hours ago, SeanC said: I'd argue, conversely, that Sansa being disinherited under Robb's will is most dramatically relevant if they do go North, in a lot of ways. As far as TWOW goes, at least, I expect it'll mostly be set in the Vale (GRRM has gone to some lengths to make it a fairly isolated ecosystem). If he is going to leave the Vale, though, I do think going North is more likely. The Aegon/Varys plotline ultimately relates to Daenerys and Tyrion, and Littlefinger's modus operandi in this situation would be to watch his enemies destroy each other. He doesn't really gain anything by intervening in the conflict, particularly as Varys wouldn't want Aegon allied with him anyway. Let the Lannisters, the Tyrells, the Martells, the Golden Company et al. slug it out while he sits safely in the Vale, its forces unblooded. He could leave his forces unblooded - until the decisive moment, when he could act like Tywin in Robert's Rebellion (or maybe a little earlier than that). Then, Dany should be grateful to him for his intervention. And he is not impartial: he would rather have Dany win instead of Varys. Especially if he would commit to siding with her before he realises what a certain dwarf is up to. Or he could just end up supporting her with food - which may well be invaluable at that point, and he has been hoarding. LF is a villain, but he is also smart. In AFFC, LF talks to Sansa about the "the three queens" taking whatever peace and quiet the war of the five kings had left, suggesting he is already aware of the Margaery/Cersei situation and adding a third, IMO likely to be Dany (which he could reasonably expect to invade, in due time). If so, it doesn't take a genius to bet on the dragons and once he is aware of (f)Aegon, he will realise Varys is behind him. The north - as Anamika wrote, it just seem too frozen at this time to have Vale soldiers there. And this is not likely to end until the WW invasion is over, which is likely endgame material. 4 hours ago, Eyes High said: Jon, quite possibly. Dany, no. D&D have tipped their hands a few times that she's not meant to rule Westeros. According to the leaks, Dany burns both Randyll and Dickon over Tyrion's--admittedly the same Tyrion who burned hundreds of Stannis' men alive at Blackwater--horrified objections, causing Varys and Tyrion to worry about her. Although they're not going the mad queen route, D&D wouldn't have Dany burn the Tarlys and Varys and Tyrion wring their hands about it if she was going to be the endgame queen. It's a tell, and not a terribly subtle one at that. GRRM did say though, that the Iron Throne doesn't go to someone who deserves it, it goes to whoever has the power and the will to take and keep it. Dany may fit that, maybe even because of her occasional cruelty. IMO it's too early to write her off as possible winner at the end - even though I agree signs like the show-vision of the Undying seem to point to another path. Tyrion killed those sailors and soldiers in battle, horrible but not the same as an execution. Link to comment
SeanC December 5, 2016 Share December 5, 2016 49 minutes ago, Wouter said: The north - as Anamika wrote, it just seem too frozen at this time to have Vale soldiers there. As far as travel conditions go, I don't know how all of this is going to work out, but I don't think the North is going to be abandoned (Winterfell is an important location in the series), and so, one way or another, I expect to see a lot of characters heading northward in the coming books. Link to comment
SimoneS December 5, 2016 Share December 5, 2016 (edited) 3 hours ago, Eyes High said: Dany burning Dickon Tarly as well as Randyll despite Tyrion frantically trying to talk her out of it and Tyrion and Varys, Dany's biggest supporters, later being all "This bitch had better not be Aerys 2.0" over the ambush is an extremely strong suggestion, in my opinion. D&D telegraph future plot developments all the time, and it sounds like they're once again showing their hand. It's not the first time D&D have hinted that Dany will never rule Westeros, of course--Dany turning away from the throne in the HOTU vision, Dany's dumb stated intention of "breaking the wheel," Daario saying she's a conqueror, etc. etc.--but it seems like confirmation to me. Jon has the best shot of ruling Westeros in the end despite the whole zombie thing, although I would roll my eyes at the hypocrisy of GRRM bitching about Gandalf's resurrection only to pull the same with one of his own characters. It seems pretty clear to me that Dany will die and clear the way for him. I don't interpret any of those events that we haven't even seen played out on the screen as you do. Monarchs might listen to and be guided by their advisors, but they certainly do not have to listen to or obey them so I don't see how Daenerys killing the Tarlys means that she will never sit on the Iron Throne. It isn't like Jon is some genius in comparison to Daenerys. He was the one who led his troops into a slaughter because he could not control his emotions on the battlefield. That alone should mean that he never sits on the Iron Throne if we go with your interpretation. I bet Jon will be doing tons more that nonsense Davos, Tormund, Sam, Tyrion, and Varys don't approve of at some point. I certainly don't think that any of this means that he won't be sitting on Iron Throne. As for Daario, I love him, but he would say or do anything to hold on to Daenerys. It is clear that until the moment that she stood in the fire in the building, he didn't understand that Daenerys is a Dragon. I don't think that Daenerys' intention of breaking the wheel is dumb at all. I expect that she will do just that. There will be no more Game when she and Jon are done. The Targaryens will be back on the Iron Throne. Frankly, I think that GRRM is full of shit. Every sci fantasy novel that I have ever read has elements of Tolkien in them and his books are no different. His problem is that his writing is more convoluted and less compelling than Tolkien. He also needs a better editor. Edited December 5, 2016 by SimoneS 2 Link to comment
Avaleigh December 6, 2016 Share December 6, 2016 18 minutes ago, SimoneS said: I don't interpret any of those events that we haven't even seen played out on the screen as you do. Monarchs might listen to and be guided by their advisors, but they certainly do not have to listen to or obey them so I don't see how Daenerys killing the Tarlys means that she will never sit on the Iron Throne. It isn't like Jon is some genius in comparison to Daenerys. He was the one who led his troops into a slaughter because he could not control his emotions on the battlefield. That alone should mean that he never sits on the Iron Throne if we go with your interpretation. I bet Jon will be doing tons more that nonsense Davos, Tormund, Sam, Tyrion, and Varys don't approve of at some point. I certainly don't think that any of this means that he won't be sitting on Iron Throne. As for Daario, I love him, but he would say or do anything to hold on to Daenerys. It is clear that until the moment that she stood in the fire in the building, he didn't understand that Daenerys is a Dragon. I don't think that Daenerys' intention of breaking the wheel is dumb at all. I expect that she will do just that. There will be no more Game when she and Jon are done. The Targaryens will be back on the Iron Throne. Frankly, I think that GRRM is full of shit. Every sci fantasy novel that I have ever read has elements of Tolkien in them and his books are no different. His problem is that his writing is more convoluted and less compelling than Tolkien. He also needs a better editor. I'm not sure if it's a case of him have a poor editor so much as it seems like the editor makes suggestions that go ignored. To me it seems like the power dynamic is off and GRRM just doesn't hear the word 'no' very often. I honestly think that he's still not over the shock that HBO wasn't willing to mollycoddle his ass the way that his publishers and most die hard fans seem willing to do. I agree that the Tarly situation doesn't take Dany out of contention for the Iron Throne, but think that she's full of shit when it comes to her stupid breaking the wheel speech. She has contempt for the other great houses and doesn't seem interested in working with them, but still wants everyone to bow down and respect the shit out of House Targaryen. She's been running on her name for most of her life and she wants to criticize other people for doing the same thing. I'd say that Jon and Dany are even in terms of issues like maturity, self control, and overall intelligence. I think they complement each other well and ideally would be co-rulers, but think that Dany seems like she's fated to die young. Since Jon has already died, I lean towards him staying alive for the rest of the series. 2 Link to comment
anamika December 6, 2016 Share December 6, 2016 1 hour ago, SeanC said: As far as travel conditions go, I don't know how all of this is going to work out, but I don't think the North is going to be abandoned (Winterfell is an important location in the series), and so, one way or another, I expect to see a lot of characters heading northward in the coming books. Winterfell is going to be overrun. Or do you think that the Others will be defeated at the Wall itself? There has to be some big defeats and losses or the Others are going to be an empty threat after hyping them up for 5 books. Maybe individual characters can move North with great difficulty (Like Alys Karstark), but armies? Yeah no. Reason: See Stannis' army. Is there any mention in the books of the Vale army being able to trek through extreme winter conditions? If the answer is no, I don't see them moving North. Link to comment
SeanC December 6, 2016 Share December 6, 2016 35 minutes ago, anamika said: Winterfell is going to be overrun. I don't think so. Winterfell is Bran the Builder's seat of power. The Starks reclaiming it will be important for the Long Night. 1 Link to comment
GrailKing December 6, 2016 Share December 6, 2016 On 12/4/2016 at 1:26 PM, whateverdgaf said: Honestly, out of the three of them, I find the Hound the most villanous. Or at least the least sympathetic. I don't think any of them are meant to be complete villains or heroes, just people all stuck in the middle with conflicting loyalties and desires. But I think I like the Hound the least because he killed a defenceless boy simply to order avenge Joffrey being humiliated. All three of them are child murderers or attempted child murderers, but I found the Hound's motivations in doing so the most unsympathetic. Most?, maybe, maybe not, he had choices and he used some and did not on others, he could have let Micah go free and tell Cersei he could not find him, I don't know why people ship him with Sansa; worst people called Sansa stupid for not leaving with a drunk who held a knife to her throat threaten rape to get a song when at the time of her choices Stannis was winning and at the gates of KL. He has feelings for the Starks, he has rethought his life I'm not sure if it's enough though, at best he serves the Starks at worst he dies maybe killing his brother in the process. Link to comment
anamika December 6, 2016 Share December 6, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, SeanC said: I don't think so. Winterfell is Bran the Builder's seat of power. The Starks reclaiming it will be important for the Long Night. So the Others are going to be defeated at the Wall? They are not going to go beyond the North? That's going to be rather silly and anti-climatic. Of course the Starks will reclaim WF if it gets overrun. After the Others are vanquished. At the end. Before that, I see the Northerners retreating south. The Trident could be where we get the last stand. Edited December 6, 2016 by anamika Link to comment
Eyes High December 6, 2016 Share December 6, 2016 (edited) 3 hours ago, SimoneS said: I don't interpret any of those events that we haven't even seen played out on the screen as you do. Monarchs might listen to and be guided by their advisors, but they certainly do not have to listen to or obey them so I don't see how Daenerys killing the Tarlys means that she will never sit on the Iron Throne. It isn't like Jon is some genius in comparison to Daenerys. He was the one who led his troops into a slaughter because he could not control his emotions on the battlefield. That alone should mean that he never sits on the Iron Throne if we go with your interpretation. I bet Jon will be doing tons more that nonsense Davos, Tormund, Sam, Tyrion, and Varys don't approve of at some point. I certainly don't think that any of this means that he won't be sitting on Iron Throne. What matters is not what we judge the characters, but how the writers indicate they want us to see the characters. I think that Sansa made a lot of political blunders in Season 6, but the writers have constantly yammered on about how Sansa has finally come into her own as a political force to be reckoned with, blah blah blah. So which is more significant in terms of predicting Sansa's prospects as a political player and her future storyline: my opinion, or the writers'? The same thing goes for Jon. He makes a catastrophic, impulsive mistake on the battlefield, but do any characters sigh and shake their head at how this is a sign that Jon is unfit to lead? No. Do Davos and Tormund privately gripe about the dangers of following a leader prone to such catastrophic foolishness, even though they both could have died as a result? No. Does Sansa upbraid Jon for doing exactly what she warned him against doing and fret about the North following such an idiot? No. Does anyone in the Northern lords powwow chew Jon out for his stupidity on the battlefield? No. Even Littlefinger in sneering at Jon's unworthiness to lead the North merely calls him a "motherless bastard," not a brainless fool who nearly got everyone killed. Instead, we have the Northern lords praising Jon to the skies for "avenging the Red Wedding" and Lyanna, who rightly called out Jon the first time she met him, standing up to support him as KITN. D&D are not subtle. They know exactly what they want the audience to feel about certain characters, and they do not hesitate to tell the audience how to feel, often by having sympathetic characters express horror or shock at another character's actions, or, conversely, by having sympathetic characters let those characters off the hook (such as Varys when he airily handwaves Tyrion's murders of Shae and Tywin with "I never said you were perfect"). There are shows where the writers let viewers draw their own conclusions as to how they feel about characters, but GOT is not one of those shows, at least not in recent seasons. That brings us back to Dany in the leaks. It's not so much that she burns the Tarlys; whatever, she's burned people before. It's how D&D have Tyrion react in the moment (in horror, apparently), and how Varys and Tyrion react (with fear that Dany's turning out to be just as power-hungry and impulsive as Aerys). That is D&D's tell. If Varys and Tyrion had no discernible reaction to Dany's decision, just as Jon's entourage readily shrugs at his battlefield foolishness, it would be one thing, but apparently, they have a strong negative reaction. If D&D go to some pains to make sure that the audience knows that Dany's biggest and most politically savvy supporters are doubting her, that's a strong indication that she's not Iron Throne material. Also, more generally, when you watch enough TV, even with far subtler shows than GOT, you can get a bit of a sixth sense as to whether writers want you to get attached to a character or storyline, even if that storyline or character seems to be written in such a way that it looks appealing or rootable. With Dany, in between her very sympathetic moments and motivations and her more questionable moments over the seasons, I get the sense that D&D want the audience to like her and want her to succeed...but not too much. That's why we get moments like Dany threatening Hizdahr and burning the Tarlys thrown in every now and then: as a reminder. "Love Dany, enjoy her storyline...but don't get too attached." Quote I don't think that Daenerys' intention of breaking the wheel is dumb at all. I expect that she will do just that. There will be no more Game when she and Jon are done. The Targaryens will be back on the Iron Throne. That's stopping the wheel on "Targaryen," not breaking it; "Targaryen" is one of the spokes in the wheel. To break the wheel, she'd have to kill all the remaining nobles--the same thing she did with the khals, pretty much--or strip them of any source of power (their wealth, their armies, their lands, etc.). Given that she's already cutting deals with leaders accepting their independence in exchange for their assistance--the deal with Yara--which is pretty much the opposite of "breaking the wheel," she seems to have tacitly acknowledged that breaking the wheel is a dumb pipe dream anyway, but it was always a foolish idea. Edited December 6, 2016 by Eyes High 4 Link to comment
GrailKing December 6, 2016 Share December 6, 2016 10 hours ago, Wouter said: He could leave his forces unblooded - until the decisive moment, when he could act like Tywin in Robert's Rebellion (or maybe a little earlier than that). Then, Dany should be grateful to him for his intervention. And he is not impartial: he would rather have Dany win instead of Varys. Especially if he would commit to siding with her before he realises what a certain dwarf is up to. Or he could just end up supporting her with food - which may well be invaluable at that point, and he has been hoarding. LF is a villain, but he is also smart. In AFFC, LF talks to Sansa about the "the three queens" taking whatever peace and quiet the war of the five kings had left, suggesting he is already aware of the Margaery/Cersei situation and adding a third, IMO likely to be Dany (which he could reasonably expect to invade, in due time). If so, it doesn't take a genius to bet on the dragons and once he is aware of (f)Aegon, he will realise Varys is behind him. The north - as Anamika wrote, it just seem too frozen at this time to have Vale soldiers there. And this is not likely to end until the WW invasion is over, which is likely endgame material. GRRM did say though, that the Iron Throne doesn't go to someone who deserves it, it goes to whoever has the power and the will to take and keep it. Dany may fit that, maybe even because of her occasional cruelty. IMO it's too early to write her off as possible winner at the end - even though I agree signs like the show-vision of the Undying seem to point to another path. Tyrion killed those sailors and soldiers in battle, horrible but not the same as an execution. I thought he said the final person to sit the IT will be a surprise? My personal thought it be young Robert Arryn, because everyone thinks he's weak and sickly, yet in book he's actually doing well under Sansa ( except for the SS she gave him to get him down the mountain safely) and unlike in the show he's not really under LF thumb, he's into Sansa. Link to comment
Wouter December 6, 2016 Share December 6, 2016 22 hours ago, SeanC said: As far as travel conditions go, I don't know how all of this is going to work out, but I don't think the North is going to be abandoned (Winterfell is an important location in the series), and so, one way or another, I expect to see a lot of characters heading northward in the coming books. 21 hours ago, anamika said: Winterfell is going to be overrun. Or do you think that the Others will be defeated at the Wall itself? There has to be some big defeats and losses or the Others are going to be an empty threat after hyping them up for 5 books. 20 hours ago, SeanC said: I don't think so. Winterfell is Bran the Builder's seat of power. The Starks reclaiming it will be important for the Long Night. 19 hours ago, anamika said: So the Others are going to be defeated at the Wall? They are not going to go beyond the North? That's going to be rather silly and anti-climatic. Of course the Starks will reclaim WF if it gets overrun. After the Others are vanquished. At the end. Before that, I see the Northerners retreating south. The Trident could be where we get the last stand. I think Winterfell may get besieged by the Others, but it won't necessarily be taken (the heat present in the castle, as well as whatever magic Bran may utilise, could save it). The wall will be breached or circumvented and a number of towns/castles will fall (maybe even down to White Harbor), but I would expect Winterfell to hold out until the main force of the Others is defeated. If those leave a fraction of their power to besiege Winterfell, their main host could continue south and be defeated near the Trident (or at some other location, maybe somewhere in the north instead). I don't think such a scenario would mean the Others would have proven to be toothless - damage and casualties could be enormous, still. And Winterfell has already fallen (and in the show, the Starks already retook it) - I doubt GRRM would play that card again. I also doubt that Bran is going to be a casualty against the Others. 13 hours ago, GrailKing said: I thought he said the final person to sit the IT will be a surprise? That has been claimed for a long time (and a discussion about it led to me thinking about Tyrion for a first time), but I've never seen a direct source or link to where/when GRRM would have said that. It seems an unlikely thing to give away, anyway, unless he considers Jon or Dany to be surprising - otherwise he would be excluding them. His comments on "not deserving it, but being able to hold and take it" were made in the very recent interview in Spain, referenced by Anamika a few posts ago. Link to comment
anamika December 7, 2016 Share December 7, 2016 (edited) On 6/12/2016 at 8:55 AM, Eyes High said: That brings us back to Dany in the leaks. It's not so much that she burns the Tarlys; whatever, she's burned people before. It's how D&D have Tyrion react in the moment (in horror, apparently), and how Varys and Tyrion react (with fear that Dany's turning out to be just as power-hungry and impulsive as Aerys). That is D&D's tell. If Varys and Tyrion had no discernible reaction to Dany's decision, just as Jon's entourage readily shrugs at his battlefield foolishness, it would be one thing, but apparently, they have a strong negative reaction. If D&D go to some pains to make sure that the audience knows that Dany's biggest and most politically savvy supporters are doubting her, that's a strong indication that she's not Iron Throne material. This is true. I am sure we are not going to get Bronn side eyeing Jaime for sacking Highgarden and killing Olenna but we will get Tyrion - the man who burned people with wildire - being horrified that Dany burned the enemy Tarlys. But maybe Tyrion's reaction is what makes Dany realize that the true threat lies North. After all, Stannis nearly burns Edric Storm to death before understanding what it really takes to be King. At the same time, I don't think that show stuff can be taken as book canon. When Sophie says things like Jon is incompetent and Sansa is the better ruler, this is because the show is writing it that way. The show wrote Jon as needing Sansa to save his ass. The show wrote him as unable to make arguments requiring Davos and Tormund to do so. The show frames it as Jon being naive and Sansa being smart. How does all this compare to book stuff where Jon has been given a leadership, governance and political arc at the wall and Sansa is yet to do anything of note? And we are going to see more of this next season. I bet that when we get the scene where Jon decides not to punish the children of the Karstarks and Umbers , the non- Sansa fans will be like - yeah that sounds about right. Why punish the children? But then we will get David and Dan talking about how Jon is naive and too honorable and should have really listened to Sansa. And they will frame the scene that way as well - after all Lyanna Mormont is siding with Sansa on this issue. Should we take this to mean that Jon is too honorable in the books (where he takes child hostages) or should we take it to be a badly written conflict between Jon and Sansa because Sansa needs something to do in season 7? Show Jon is not pragmatic book Jon. The show Arya for whom Needle represents revenge is not book Arya (Needle was Winterfell's grey walls, and the laughter of its people. Needle was Jon Snow's smile), plot device show Bran is not book Bran. Saint Tyrion on the show is not dark Tyrion from the books. It's possible that the writing for show Dany is also wacky in order to give Tyrion something to do or portray him as the wise advisor. The reason for the 'burning the Khal' scene was (as per one of the DVD commentaries) so that Dany could rescue herself instead of depending on her dragons or the men. So to get a 'girl power, yeah!!' scene they made Dany immune to fire - never mind that Jon is not immune to fire. But even if they are hinting at Dany being a bit too 'aggressive' I don't think that rules her out on the IT. Book Dany is sometimes ruthless, there's no arguing against that. A dragon plants no trees. She has had people tortured (Something that the show omitted). But that does not then directly lead to the conclusion that she is not Iron Throne material. As GRRM mentioned, the IT goes to whomever has the power to take and hold it, not to who deserves it. The early Targs were not cuddly bears. Remember the Field of Fire? Aegon Targaryen ruled for a very long time. 13 hours ago, Wouter said: I think Winterfell may get besieged by the Others, but it won't necessarily be taken (the heat present in the castle, as well as whatever magic Bran may utilise, could save it). The wall will be breached or circumvented and a number of towns/castles will fall (maybe even down to White Harbor), but I would expect Winterfell to hold out until the main force of the Others is defeated. If those leave a fraction of their power to besiege Winterfell, their main host could continue south and be defeated near the Trident (or at some other location, maybe somewhere in the north instead). If the Others take the North, they will take WF, IMO. There has to be some massive losses on the human side. And the Others can bring down the Wall, but they can't break into WF? Hmm. The thing is - with only 2 books left the Others have to make a big entrance in TWoW. Maybe the Others make their move while the North is battling for Winterfell. We already know how harsh the Winter is near there. Perfect climate for the Others to make an appearance. Or maybe just as Stannis wins back WF, the wall falls and they have to move everything into attack position. There are theories that the wall is about to fall in the last Jon chapter as he lies dead. Or maybe you are right and WF holds, with Bran carrying out his 3ER role in defeating the Others from the WF Godswood. Edited December 7, 2016 by anamika Link to comment
Edith December 7, 2016 Share December 7, 2016 (edited) 3 hours ago, anamika said: This is true. I am sure we are not going to get Bronn side eyeing Jaime for sacking Highgarden and killing Olenna but we will get Tyrion - the man who burned people with wildire - being horrified that Dany burned the enemy Tarlys. But maybe Tyrion's reaction is what makes Dany realize that the true threat lies North. After all, Stannis nearly burns Edric Storm to death before understanding what it really takes to be King. At the same time, I don't think that show stuff can be taken as book canon. When Sophie says things like Jon is incompetent and Sansa is the better ruler, this is because the show is writing it that way. The show wrote Jon as needing Sansa to save his ass. The show wrote him as unable to make arguments requiring Davos and Tormund to do so. The show frames it as Jon being naive and Sansa being smart. How does all this compare to book stuff where Jon has been given a leadership, governance and political arc at the wall and Sansa is yet to do anything of note? And we are going to see more of this next season. I bet that when we get the scene where Jon decides not to punish the children of the Karstarks and Umbers , the non- Sansa fans will be like - yeah that sounds about right. Why punish the children? But then we will get David and Dan talking about how Jon is naive and too honorable and should have really listened to Sansa. And they will frame the scene that way as well - after all Lyanna Mormont is siding with Sansa on this issue. Should we take this to mean that Jon is too honorable in the books (where he takes child hostages) or should we take it to be a badly written conflict between Jon and Sansa because Sansa needs something to do in season 7? Show Jon is not pragmatic book Jon. The show Arya for whom Needle represents revenge is not book Arya (Needle was Winterfell's grey walls, and the laughter of its people. Needle was Jon Snow's smile), plot device show Bran is not book Bran. Saint Tyrion on the show is not dark Tyrion from the books. It's possible that the writing for show Dany is also wacky in order to give Tyrion something to do or portray him as the wise advisor. The reason for the 'burning the Khal' scene was (as per one of the DVD commentaries) so that Dany could rescue herself instead of depending on her dragons or the men. So to get a 'girl power, yeah!!' scene they made Dany immune to fire - never mind that Jon is not immune to fire. But even if they are hinting at Dany being a bit too 'aggressive' I don't think that rules her out on the IT. Book Dany is sometimes ruthless, there's no arguing against that. A dragon plants no trees. She has had people tortured (Something that the show omitted). But that does not then directly lead to the conclusion that she is not Iron Throne material. As GRRM mentioned, the IT goes to whomever has the power to take and hold it, not to who deserves it. The early Targs were not cuddly bears. Remember the Field of Fire? Aegon Targaryen ruled for a very long time. If the Others take the North, they will take WF, IMO. There has to be some massive losses on the human side. And the Others can bring down the Wall, but they can't break into WF? Hmm. The thing is - with only 2 books left the Others have to make a big entrance in TWoW. Maybe the Others make their move while the North is battling for Winterfell. We already know how harsh the Winter is near there. Perfect climate for the Others to make an appearance. Or maybe just as Stannis wins back WF, the wall falls and they have to move everything into attack position. There are theories that the wall is about to fall in the last Jon chapter as he lies dead. Or maybe you are right and WF holds, with Bran carrying out his 3ER role in defeating the Others from the WF Godswood. Taking away the lands from the traitorous houses who didn't support House Stark and giving then to those that did doesn't sound that crazy or bad. It's pretty much 101 of what happens to those in the losing side. Of course putting children as the heads of that houses complicates it, but I don't think neither Jon or Sansa (and Lyanna) are wrong. About who takes the throne at the end. I think it depends wether we believe this tale is about the restoration of the Targaryen dynasty. I personally don't think it is, but that's just my opinion. The WW weren't able to take the cave while 3ER was there until Bran screw up. I don't think he's going to do it again. Edited December 7, 2016 by Edith 1 Link to comment
SeanC December 7, 2016 Share December 7, 2016 3 hours ago, anamika said: And we are going to see more of this next season. I bet that when we get the scene where Jon decides not to punish the children of the Karstarks and Umbers , the non- Sansa fans will be like - yeah that sounds about right. Why punish the children? But then we will get David and Dan talking about how Jon is naive and too honorable and should have really listened to Sansa. And they will frame the scene that way as well - after all Lyanna Mormont is siding with Sansa on this issue. Should we take this to mean that Jon is too honorable in the books (where he takes child hostages) or should we take it to be a badly written conflict between Jon and Sansa because Sansa needs something to do in season 7? There are two separate issues there, I think. The first is a purely rational policy debate. In that sense, I think it's a situation where there are fair arguments for both sides. It sounds like Jon is meant to be practising conciliatory politics, which has its share of successes throughout history and is often a wise course of action. Conversely, within the feudal system, there's nothing particularly unusual or cruel about confiscating the lands of traitors (if Sansa and Lyanna were arguing that the children should be executed or something, that's a whole other matter). The whole premise of the feudal system is land in exchange for loyal service; the Umbers and the Karstarks violated that contract. Moreover, it's fair to question how much, e.g., Umber Jr. is ever going to be conciliated to the Starks when they killed his dad(?). The second is, how is the show going to present this? Because there have been plenty of occasions on this show where both sides have a reasonable point and the show has ignored one of them in favour of the other being clearly right. It doesn't really sound to me, just going by the information we've been given, that the audience is meant to see Jon as naive. First, making the two heirs a 10-year-old boy and a teenage girl is an immediate tilting of the scales in favour of Team Mercy, since neither of them could have had any real part in their families' treason. Second, there's no indication from the spoilers that Jon's forgiveness leads to any negative consequences, e.g., if Umber Jr. stabbed him in the back later, then Jon would look foolish, but nothing of the sort happens. Though if the show does, as it appears, favour Jon's stance here, that adds to the deep muddle of their presentation of politics. The vast majority of the time the showrunners exalt Tywin-style politics and regard any show of mercy or honour as inherent weakness that leads to bad things happening, so I understand people being skeptical on this point. 3 Link to comment
YaddaYadda December 7, 2016 Share December 7, 2016 Jon just saw his youngest brother taken out right in front of him. I think that also plays in him being merciful towards the Umber and Karstark children. His brothers were basically forced out of their home, one is now dead, the other one is crippled and he has no idea if he's alive or dead. His sister was held hostage in KL, beaten, destitute and sold to a psycho. He has no idea what happened to the other one. I could see him taking these things into consideration when he makes his decision. Plus even Allisair Thorne said that Jon has a good heart. It's not exactly weird that he would be merciful towards a child and a teenager. Link to comment
Eyes High December 7, 2016 Share December 7, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, SeanC said: The second is, how is the show going to present this? Because there have been plenty of occasions on this show where both sides have a reasonable point and the show has ignored one of them in favour of the other being clearly right. It doesn't really sound to me, just going by the information we've been given, that the audience is meant to see Jon as naive. Awayforthelads seemed to think that Sansa came off as "vindictive" in the Umber/Karstark heir scene, at least as compared to Jon. As someone who was imprisoned and abused because of her father's actions, who repeatedly had her family's treasons thrown in her face, and who was beaten and abused on Joffrey's orders for what Robb supposedly did, one would think Sansa would be just a tad sympathetic to the Karstark and Umber heirs' plight, but LOL, I guess not. Edited December 7, 2016 by Eyes High 1 Link to comment
anamika December 7, 2016 Share December 7, 2016 (edited) 3 hours ago, Edith said: Taking away the lands from the traitorous houses who didn't support House Stark and giving then to those that did doesn't sound that crazy or bad. It's pretty much 101 of what happens to those in the losing side. Of course putting children as the heads of that houses complicates it, but I don't think neither Jon or Sansa (and Lyanna) are wrong. But if we agree with Sansa, then Dany would also be entirely justified in taking away the lands of the children of the 'Usurper's dogs' for the role they played in Robert's rebellion. The Mother of Dragons could kick Sansa out and hand over Winterfell to the allies who help her - Tyrells, Martells etc. But thus far, Dany has made Tyrion her hand and allies with Jon next season. So the person dubbed the 'Mad Queen' is seemingly more merciful than Sansa. It's a complicated issue I agree. But it seems that we are against taking away the lands of traitorous houses if we like them and for it if we don't. Robb rebelled against the crown, so the Lannisters gave away WF to the Boltons. 101 of what happens to the losing side. But we were still cheering for the Starks to get back their lands. 1 hour ago, SeanC said: The second is, how is the show going to present this? Because there have been plenty of occasions on this show where both sides have a reasonable point and the show has ignored one of them in favour of the other being clearly right. It doesn't really sound to me, just going by the information we've been given, that the audience is meant to see Jon as naive. First, making the two heirs a 10-year-old boy and a teenage girl is an immediate tilting of the scales in favour of Team Mercy, since neither of them could have had any real part in their families' treason. Second, there's no indication from the spoilers that Jon's forgiveness leads to any negative consequences, e.g., if Umber Jr. stabbed him in the back later, then Jon would look foolish, but nothing of the sort happens. Though if the show does, as it appears, favour Jon's stance here, that adds to the deep muddle of their presentation of politics. The vast majority of the time the showrunners exalt Tywin-style politics and regard any show of mercy or honour as inherent weakness that leads to bad things happening, so I understand people being skeptical on this point. If Sansa is going to be involved in this, I think we all know how this is going to be presented. We have seen how this will be presented from season 6. From the last few seasons we know that being honorable = being dumb, Jon is only good at fighting and Sansa is a 'superb diplomat' and a master player of the game. It remains to be seen if the show is interested in portraying Jon as any kind of 'good' ruler, but considering their track record of writing for him, I am not optimistic. Now we can argue that mercy is the right way to go, but it does not matter what we think - if the writers want one character to be right and the other wrong, they will frame it that way - cue the tent argument where Sansa did not speak up about Ramsay like she did in an earlier episode and Jon had to apologize to Her Highness for not specifically asking her - it left me scratching my head - but apparently that's about Jon disrespecting Sansa. Or the whole Vale army debacle. Or Jon making blunders so that Sansa comes off as being wiser. Which is why I don't put much stock in Tyrion being horrified at Dany burning people. First it's bad writing again - Tyrion has burned his enemies to death before. The Tarlys are traitor enemies who just aided in the sack of Highgarden. Second , it could be they are using Dany to prop up Tyrion as the wise advisor who counsels Dany on being a wise Queen. That's the only scene where Tyrion is horrified and then, as far as the leaks are concerned, it's back to business. Dany (Jon and Tyrion) then tries to ally with Cersei towards the end - which apparently turns out to be a mistake. Can we see Tyrion allying with Cersei in the books? As for the North, we will probably not get Umber Jr stabbing Jon or anything that drastic, but we still get Sansa and Arya disagreeing over how to rule WF. What would they disagree on? Maybe the Umber kids do something wrong? Two things that will be interesting to see - how they frame and present the Sansa - Arya arguments. Will it be as one-sided as Jon-Sansa last season. And how they deal with Arya in a 'ruling' capacity. It's finally good to see Arya in a leadership position at WF and I am hoping they do her some justice at least. Edited December 7, 2016 by anamika 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts