Endgame Discussion and Speculation

[SeanC]

9 minutes ago, Eyes High said:

Update from Bryndenbfish: Elio's looking into it.

It does read similar to GRRM's style, so someone went to a lot of effort to come up with a convincing fake. Bryndenbfish dug up some defensive posts from the person who supposedly interviewed GRRM, though, so right now he's leaning against it being real. 

If it is fake, the strangest aspect of it is that typically the point of creating fake stuff like this is to rile people up, but this is mostly innocuous (unless they're just looking to annoy pro-Starkcest fans, but I should think that most of the online readership knows that Jon isn't going to bang Arya or Sansa).

[Eyes High]

3 hours ago, SeanC said:

If it is fake, the strangest aspect of it is that typically the point of creating fake stuff like this is to rile people up, but this is mostly innocuous (unless they're just looking to annoy pro-Starkcest fans, but I should think that most of the online readership knows that Jon isn't going to bang Arya or Sansa).

Yeah, that's the curious part. Why go to all that trouble? Once I get confirmation that the interview isn't real, I'll scrub the info from the previous post. No confirmation yet, though.

ETA: Looks like it's fake.

Edited October 31, 2017 by Eyes High

[WindyNights]

3 hours ago, SeanC said:

If it is fake, the strangest aspect of it is that typically the point of creating fake stuff like this is to rile people up, but this is mostly innocuous (unless they're just looking to annoy pro-Starkcest fans, but I should think that most of the online readership knows that Jon isn't going to bang Arya or Sansa).

I've seen plenty of crazy Jon x Arya fans left 

[anamika]

12 hours ago, doram said:

Lots of pro-Jonsa fans on tumblr are upset about this and it really boggles the imagination why they are.

I mean, have you read some of their posts? They think that the Jon-Dany relationship is show only fan-fiction while GRRM is actually building up to Jon-Sansa in the books. When I am bored, I read their 5 page 'metas' on why Jon/Sansa is going to happen in the books - it's a lot of fun! Reminds me of the old 'Pawn to Player' Sansa threads on Westeros.org - there was that popular P to P essay connecting Sansa to Jon because she ate a pomegranate that one time and Bowen Marsh at the wall was called the Old Pomegranate.

6 hours ago, WindyNights said:

I've seen plenty of crazy Jon x Arya fans left 

Jon/Arya at least has some basis in the books. These are two characters who actually have a relationship in the books and whose stories overlap and affect each other. Jon dies for Arya in the books. Sure, it is a purely platonic, sibling relationship but the release of the original outline indicates that this is where GRRM was originally heading and that some of the writing and foreshadowing he did in the first book maybe indicative of this. It's clear that at some point he exchanged Arya with Dany - when he did this and why will probably remain a mystery.

But Jon/Sansa shipping is one of the strangest things I have seen come out of this fandom.

[herbz]

It's so widespread on Tumblr as well! A quick glance at A03 shows it's the most popular fanfic pairing over Jaime/Brienne and Arya/Gendry (pairings with actual basis in canon!). It sprung out of absolutely nowhere after S6. Their most consistent belief is that Jon is somehow 'undercover' and playing Daenerys to win her support for the war while simulataneously repressing feelings for Sansa. If the theory about Talisa being a Lannister honeypot amounted to nothing, I really do not see this one panning out. 

Edited November 1, 2017 by herbz

[glowbug]

5 hours ago, herbz said:

It's so widespread on Tumblr as well! A quick glance at A03 shows it's the most popular fanfic pairing over Jaime/Brienne and Arya/Gendry (pairings with actual basis in canon!). It sprung out of absolutely nowhere after S6. Their most consistent belief is that Jon is somehow 'undercover' and playing Daenerys to win her support for the war while simulataneously repressing feelings for Sansa. If the theory about Talisa being a Lannister honeypot amounted to nothing, I really do not see this one panning out. 

Actually, the Jon/Sansa pairing was popular prior to season 6. I learned about it on this forum after season 5 and I was surprised it was a thing because I saw nothing suggesting it in the books or show. The fans of that ship were so insistent that I began to worry it might actually happen given that Jon was originally supposed to have a romantic relationship with Arya. The other theory that, based on the show, looks like it probably won't happen is Tyrion being a secret Targaryan, which I also wasn't a fan of. A lot of the crazier theories (the ones that require the reader to pick out small details and view them as subtle clues) are not panning out. I expect that the story is going to be more straightforward than some fans are anticipating. 

Edited November 1, 2017 by glowbug

[herbz]

31 minutes ago, glowbug said:

Actually, the Jon/Sansa pairing was popular prior to season 6. I learned about it on this forum after season 5 and I was surprised it was a thing because I saw nothing suggesting it in the books or show. The fans of that ship were so insistent that I began to worry it might actually happen given that Jon was originally supposed to have a romantic relationship with Arya. The other theory that, based on the show, looks like it probably won't happen is Tyrion being a secret Targaryan, which I also wasn't a fan of. A lot of the crazier theories (the ones that require the reader to pick out small details and view them as subtle clues) are not panning out. I expect that the story is going to be more straightforward than some fans are anticipating. 

Gosh, really?! I don't see anything at all pre-S6 that could've sparked that, had they even been onscreen together before then? In the books they think of each other in passing once or twice and Jon is canonically attracted to women who are the complete opposite of Sansa. Idgi. Also, ick. They were raised together as siblings! Jaime and Cersei are not #couplegoals. 

I hate hate hate hate the Tyrion is a Targaryen theory (I think all three Lannisters are trueborn, but if any aren't it makes way more thematic sense to be the twins IMO) so I'm glad that one is unlikely to happen. D&D have got to tell this vast story with 35467 named characters for a huge audience, 85% of whom aren't obsessive book readers. At this point, if a theory or pairing hasn't been foreshadowed with the subtlety of a brick, it's probably not happening. 

Edited November 1, 2017 by herbz

[tangerine95]

I assumed Sansa/Jon shipping existed because there are shippers for pretty much every combination especially with Sansa in the fandom.but I wasn't aware it was so popular and that a lot of people on tumblr mostly think it's an actual possibility after season 6 and that the popular theory among them is that Jon is playing Dany to get her dragons and army and basically being the Littlefinger to her Lysa which I found so ridiculous lol

[WindyNights]

1 hour ago, glowbug said:

Actually, the Jon/Sansa pairing was popular prior to season 6. I learned about it on this forum after season 5 and I was surprised it was a thing because I saw nothing suggesting it in the books or show. The fans of that ship were so insistent that I began to worry it might actually happen given that Jon was originally supposed to have a romantic relationship with Arya. The other theory that, based on the show, looks like it probably won't happen is Tyrion being a secret Targaryan, which I also wasn't a fan of. A lot of the crazier theories (the ones that require the reader to pick out small details and view them as subtle clues) are not panning out. I expect that the story is going to be more straightforward than some fans are anticipating. 

Eeeeh, the show's not a good foundation to base these things on.

 

Like GRRM is still coming up with big twists while he's writing. 

 

I think there's pretty good basis for Tyrion being a Targaryen in the books but it seems more like GRRM isn't committing to it. He's just leaving the door open for it. He may never conclusively answer it and just leave it ambiguous.

Like there's prettygold  basis that Robert Arryn is LF's son too but I don't think GRRM is going to answer that one way or the other.

[OhOkayWhat]

3 hours ago, herbz said:

D&D have got to tell this vast story with 35467 named characters for a huge audience, 85% of whom aren't obsessive book readers

I suspect not even 1% of the audience are obsessive book readers.

3 hours ago, herbz said:

At this point, if a theory or pairing hasn't been foreshadowed with the subtlety of a brick, it's probably not happening.

I kinda agree with what you say about the pairings here. Some fans look mostly for "hints" of certain endgame pairings or "ships", and usually that is not the way the show works. Does it mean it is not possible those fans are right and the show writers actually developed a pairing only with hints? Well, everything is possible, so maybe they are right.

Edited November 2, 2017 by OhOkayWhat

[glowbug]

2 hours ago, herbz said:

Gosh, really?! I don't see anything at all pre-S6 that could've sparked that, had they even been onscreen together before then? In the books they think of each other in passing once or twice and Jon is canonically attracted to women who are the complete opposite of Sansa. Idgi. Also, ick. They were raised together as siblings! Jaime and Cersei are not #couplegoals. 

I hate hate hate hate the Tyrion is a Targaryen theory (I think all three Lannisters are trueborn, but if any aren't it makes way more thematic sense to be the twins IMO) so I'm glad that one is unlikely to happen. D&D have got to tell this vast story with 35467 named characters for a huge audience, 85% of whom aren't obsessive book readers. At this point, if a theory or pairing hasn't been foreshadowed with the subtlety of a brick, it's probably not happening. 

The fact that Jon and Sansa hadn't spent any significant time with or thinking about each other in the books or on screen was used as evidence that they were going to end up together. The reasoning was that it lessened their sibling connection, which would make the pairing more palatable to the general audience/readership. They also used Jon's attraction towards redheads as more evidence even though the women Jon is attracted to resemble Arya more than Sansa in terms of their personalities. Thankfully Jon doesn't look like he'll end up with either of them. Although Dany is more closely related by blood the icky psychological factor isn't there, which I find more disturbing. 

I agree about Tyrion and the secret Targaryan theories. Hate that theory with a capital H. I think GRRM likes to troll the fans so he hasn't provided any confirmation that it's not true (ex. according to the World Book Tyrion was likely conceived in King's Landing) unless this interview is real, but I doubt it will actually happen in the books if it doesn't in the show and if it were going to happen in the show I think there would have been anvil sized hints by now.  

[anamika]

3 hours ago, glowbug said:

The fact that Jon and Sansa hadn't spent any significant time with or thinking about each other in the books or on screen was used as evidence that they were going to end up together.

I think this is pretty much the opposite of what George is doing. For instance, when Stannis mentions Sansa and Tyrion's marriage to Jon, he spends time wondering about Tyrion rather than the sister who has been forcefully married off to the enemy. I don't think this is meant to imply that Jon does not care about Sansa. Just that his story arc and journey will have nothing to do with Sansa as a character. On the other hand GRRM has him thinking about Tyrion, possibly indicating that these are two characters who are going to meet again.

It's the same with Robb. We never see Jon's thoughts when he learns about Robb's death despite them being very close siblings. All the Stark siblings have the same 'Robb with snowflakes on his hair at Winterfell' memory, but that's about it. Even though Robb's will may have a big effect on his story, Robb himself is not a central character in Jon's story.

That's why I still think that Arya and Jon's relationship is significant in the books considering that as recently (lol!) as book 5, they continue to be central to each other's story. I think Arya leaves the FM after hearing about Jon from Justin Massey in Braavos and gets to the Wall.  Different roads sometimes lead to the same castle after all.

And even though Jon and Dany are yet to meet, we have confirmation from the show folks that they are the ice and fire of the A Song of Ice and Fire. We have ' A blue flower grew from a chink in a wall of ice, and filled the air with sweetness ' and Jon falling for girls like Ygritte and Val and Dany's prophetic dragon dreams. We have Jon wishing for 'another thousand men, and maybe a dragon or three'.  More connection than Sansa eating a pomegranate.

I think that Dany, Jon, Arya, Bran and Tyrion will continue to be the central characters in the books and build strong relationships with each other and play an important role in how Westeros will be shaped in the future. Some of them may end up dying - I think Jon will die. But the books were after all supposed to be their coming of age story - " Five central characters will make it through all three volumes, however, growing from children to adults and changing the world and themselves in the process. In a sense, my trilogy is almost a generational saga, telling the life stories of these five characters, three men and two women." His story may have expanded to include more characters and side stories, but at it's core, I think this is what he is writing about. With the exception of Bran, these characters have the most chapters in the books.

As for Bran, with GRRM stating that 'And what lies really north in my books—we haven't explored that yet, but we will in the last two books' and the Others coming into the picture, I predict that Bran will start getting the most chapters in the last two books. The story began with him and it will end with him.

In fact, one of the possible tragic endings of the books I have seen mentioned is that it will end the way it began - only this time as Warden of the North, Bran has to execute a NW deserter. The deserter is Jon. Bran looks Jon in the eyes, passes the sentences and takes off his head! Morbid, I know. But possible. The show ignored the whole Jon leaving the NW debacle and there were no consequences. I doubt that happens in the books. Jon may end up saving the world, but be a deserter of the NW and Bran has to serve justice! 

Someone on Freefolk linked to an old interview (1999, before the release of ACoK) of GRRM's:

https://web.archive.org/web/19991013131915/http://cyberhaven.com/books/sciencefiction/martin.html

Where he calls Tyrion a 'Villain'

Quote

Amazon.com: Do you have a favorite character?

Martin: I've got to admit I kind of like Tyrion Lannister. He's the villain of course, but hey, there's nothing like a good villain.

Now admittedly this interview is nearly 20 years old, but Tyrion did get villainous in the last book.  I wonder if he will continue on that path in the show. The show was rather wishy washy about Tyrion's feelings for Dany with the script and some directors indicating that he was in love with her and some indicating that he was not. With the original Jon-Arya-Tyrion love triangle turning acrimonious, I do think there is a good possibility that Tyrion maybe Dany's betrayal for love.

In the last Cersei-Tyrion scene, it seems like Tyrion admitted to holding back Dany to protect the Lannisters. In which case, he has already started on the path to betrayal...

Edited November 2, 2017 by anamika

[WindyNights]

1 hour ago, anamika said:

I think this is pretty much the opposite of what George is doing. For instance, when Stannis mentions Sansa and Tyrion's marriage to Jon, he spends time wondering about Tyrion rather than the sister who has been forcefully married off to the enemy. I don't think this is meant to imply that Jon does not care about Sansa. Just that his story arc and journey will have nothing to do with Sansa as a character. On the other hand GRRM has him thinking about Tyrion, possibly indicating that these are two characters who are going to meet again.

It's the same with Robb. We never see Jon's thoughts when he learns about Robb's death despite them being very close siblings. All the Stark siblings have the same 'Robb with snowflakes on his hair at Winterfell' memory, but that's about it. Even though Robb's will may have a big effect on his story, Robb himself is not a central character in Jon's story.

That's why I still think that Arya and Jon's relationship is significant in the books considering that as recently (lol!) as book 5, they continue to be central to each other's story. I think Arya leaves the FM after hearing about Jon from Justin Massey in Braavos and gets to the Wall.  Different roads sometimes lead to the same castle after all.

And even though Jon and Dany are yet to meet, we have confirmation from the show folks that they are the ice and fire of the A Song of Ice and Fire. We have ' A blue flower grew from a chink in a wall of ice, and filled the air with sweetness ' and Jon falling for girls like Ygritte and Val and Dany's prophetic dragon dreams. We have Jon wishing for 'another thousand men, and maybe a dragon or three'.  More connection than Sansa eating a pomegranate.

I think that Dany, Jon, Arya, Bran and Tyrion will continue to be the central characters in the books and build strong relationships with each other and play an important role in how Westeros will be shaped in the future. Some of them may end up dying - I think Jon will die. But the books were after all supposed to be their coming of age story - " Five central characters will make it through all three volumes, however, growing from children to adults and changing the world and themselves in the process. In a sense, my trilogy is almost a generational saga, telling the life stories of these five characters, three men and two women." His story may have expanded to include more characters and side stories, but at it's core, I think this is what he is writing about. With the exception of Bran, these characters have the most chapters in the books.

As for Bran, with GRRM stating that 'And what lies really north in my books—we haven't explored that yet, but we will in the last two books' and the Others coming into the picture, I predict that Bran will start getting the most chapters in the last two books. The story began with him and it will end with him.

In fact, one of the possible tragic endings of the books I have seen mentioned is that it will end the way it began - only this time as Warden of the North, Bran has to execute a NW deserter. The deserter is Jon. Bran looks Jon in the eyes, passes the sentences and takes off his head! Morbid, I know. But possible. The show ignored the whole Jon leaving the NW debacle and there were no consequences. I doubt that happens in the books. Jon may end up saving the world, but be a deserter of the NW and Bran has to serve justice! 

Someone on Freefolk linked to an old interview (1999, before the release of ACoK) of GRRM's:

https://web.archive.org/web/19991013131915/http://cyberhaven.com/books/sciencefiction/martin.html

Where he calls Tyrion a 'Villain'

Now admittedly this interview is nearly 20 years old, but Tyrion did get villainous in the last book.  I wonder if he will continue on that path in the show. The show was rather wishy washy about Tyrion's feelings for Dany with the script and some directors indicating that he was in love with her and some indicating that he was not. With the original Jon-Arya-Tyrion love triangle turning acrimonious, I do think there is a good possibility that Tyrion maybe Dany's betrayal for love.

In the last Cersei-Tyrion scene, it seems like Tyrion admitted to holding back Dany to protect the Lannisters. In which case, he has already started on the path to betrayal...

Tyrion's not going to be on any villainous path in the show. 

The thing that makes Book Tyrion a villain is how much his family betrayed him and he wants revenge back on them and the rest of Westeros

Show Tyrion still loves Jaime and Cersei and wants to improve Westeros and help people.

Out of all the main characters, Tyrion isn't even remotely the same person.

 

He stopped being the same character after season 4. He absorbed Book Barristan's character.

[MarySNJ]

12 hours ago, anamika said:

I think this is pretty much the opposite of what George is doing. For instance, when Stannis mentions Sansa and Tyrion's marriage to Jon, he spends time wondering about Tyrion rather than the sister who has been forcefully married off to the enemy. I don't think this is meant to imply that Jon does not care about Sansa. Just that his story arc and journey will have nothing to do with Sansa as a character. On the other hand GRRM has him thinking about Tyrion, possibly indicating that these are two characters who are going to meet again.

It's the same with Robb. We never see Jon's thoughts when he learns about Robb's death despite them being very close siblings. All the Stark siblings have the same 'Robb with snowflakes on his hair at Winterfell' memory, but that's about it. Even though Robb's will may have a big effect on his story, Robb himself is not a central character in Jon's story.

That's why I still think that Arya and Jon's relationship is significant in the books considering that as recently (lol!) as book 5, they continue to be central to each other's story. I think Arya leaves the FM after hearing about Jon from Justin Massey in Braavos and gets to the Wall.  Different roads sometimes lead to the same castle after all.

And even though Jon and Dany are yet to meet, we have confirmation from the show folks that they are the ice and fire of the A Song of Ice and Fire. We have ' A blue flower grew from a chink in a wall of ice, and filled the air with sweetness ' and Jon falling for girls like Ygritte and Val and Dany's prophetic dragon dreams. We have Jon wishing for 'another thousand men, and maybe a dragon or three'.  More connection than Sansa eating a pomegranate.

I think that Dany, Jon, Arya, Bran and Tyrion will continue to be the central characters in the books and build strong relationships with each other and play an important role in how Westeros will be shaped in the future. Some of them may end up dying - I think Jon will die. But the books were after all supposed to be their coming of age story - " Five central characters will make it through all three volumes, however, growing from children to adults and changing the world and themselves in the process. In a sense, my trilogy is almost a generational saga, telling the life stories of these five characters, three men and two women." His story may have expanded to include more characters and side stories, but at it's core, I think this is what he is writing about. With the exception of Bran, these characters have the most chapters in the books.

As for Bran, with GRRM stating that 'And what lies really north in my books—we haven't explored that yet, but we will in the last two books' and the Others coming into the picture, I predict that Bran will start getting the most chapters in the last two books. The story began with him and it will end with him.

In fact, one of the possible tragic endings of the books I have seen mentioned is that it will end the way it began - only this time as Warden of the North, Bran has to execute a NW deserter. The deserter is Jon. Bran looks Jon in the eyes, passes the sentences and takes off his head! Morbid, I know. But possible. The show ignored the whole Jon leaving the NW debacle and there were no consequences. I doubt that happens in the books. Jon may end up saving the world, but be a deserter of the NW and Bran has to serve justice! 

Someone on Freefolk linked to an old interview (1999, before the release of ACoK) of GRRM's:

https://web.archive.org/web/19991013131915/http://cyberhaven.com/books/sciencefiction/martin.html

Where he calls Tyrion a 'Villain'

Now admittedly this interview is nearly 20 years old, but Tyrion did get villainous in the last book.  I wonder if he will continue on that path in the show. The show was rather wishy washy about Tyrion's feelings for Dany with the script and some directors indicating that he was in love with her and some indicating that he was not. With the original Jon-Arya-Tyrion love triangle turning acrimonious, I do think there is a good possibility that Tyrion maybe Dany's betrayal for love.

In the last Cersei-Tyrion scene, it seems like Tyrion admitted to holding back Dany to protect the Lannisters. In which case, he has already started on the path to betrayal...

I would call book Tyrion dark, but not villainous. He wants revenge on Cersei and rapes Illyrio's servant, but he's not plotting against the "heroes" of the story; at least not yet. TV Tyrion is much less "dark" than his book counterpart. Also, I think GRRM changed his mind about who the end villain(s) will be from the original story outline, and  at this point I doubt it will be Tyrion (book or show). That being said, I think it's plausible that Tyrion will fall in (unrequited) love with Dany which will cause problems and that TV Tyrion could have made a side deal with Cersei offscreen in the show to try to save her child in the event that Daenerys wins the war for the throne. I guess it depends on personal perspective but I don't see that as significantly villainous. 

As for Bran executing a NW "deserter" (Jon), this assumes a lot about how Jon's sacrifice will be perceived by the various parties.  It appears that Jon has already paid the ultimate price - his life, for trying to do the right thing which happened to run counter to the NW's practice of seeing the wildlings as the enemy, rather than the Others/White Walkers. If Jon died,then his watch ended.  If he's resurrected, his watch was still ended when he died. He's no deserter.  

And also, I sincerely doubt that the Lord Commander would be executed for retiring from service, even if BookJon doesn't die from his injuries; because the powerful get away with things ordinary people do not. Like it or not. And also, because the NW's mission is to protect the realms of men, Jon would still be doing so only in a different position, as say King in the North or Lord of Winterfell, or heir to the Iron Throne. Who's really going to suggest executing Jon who is a man of considerable ability in protecting the realm on an arguable technicality, when most people in the southern kingdoms consider the Nights Watch to be no more than a dumping ground for criminals, bastards and other unwanted or excess sons?  

[WindyNights]

7 hours ago, MarySNJ said:

I would call book Tyrion dark, but not villainous. He wants revenge on Cersei and rapes Illyrio's servant, but he's not plotting against the "heroes" of the story; at least not yet. TV Tyrion is much less "dark" than his book counterpart. Also, I think GRRM changed his mind about who the end villain(s) will be from the original story outline, and  at this point I doubt it will be Tyrion (book or show). That being said, I think it's plausible that Tyrion will fall in (unrequited) love with Dany which will cause problems and that TV Tyrion could have made a side deal with Cersei offscreen in the show to try to save her child in the event that Daenerys wins the war for the throne. I guess it depends on personal perspective but I don't see that as significantly villainous. 

As for Bran executing a NW "deserter" (Jon), this assumes a lot about how Jon's sacrifice will be perceived by the various parties.  It appears that Jon has already paid the ultimate price - his life, for trying to do the right thing which happened to run counter to the NW's practice of seeing the wildlings as the enemy, rather than the Others/White Walkers. If Jon died,then his watch ended.  If he's resurrected, his watch was still ended when he died. He's no deserter.  

And also, I sincerely doubt that the Lord Commander would be executed for retiring from service, even if BookJon doesn't die from his injuries; because the powerful get away with things ordinary people do not. Like it or not. And also, because the NW's mission is to protect the realms of men, Jon would still be doing so only in a different position, as say King in the North or Lord of Winterfell, or heir to the Iron Throne. Who's really going to suggest executing Jon who is a man of considerable ability in protecting the realm on an arguable technicality, when most people in the southern kingdoms consider the Nights Watch to be no more than a dumping ground for criminals, bastards and other unwanted or excess sons?  

Side note: Jon is an actual deserter of the NW in the books. He deserted the NW before he died, that's why he was killed.

 

Anyways, Tyrion's goals and motivations are all villainous. You're thinking of an antagonist who is there to fight the heroes. "Aegon" is a heroic antagonist. Tyrion is a villain protagonist.  But that's not to say that Tyrion can't be heroic. GRRM doesn't believe people are always heroic or always villainous.

And it's not really true that he scrapped this idea. Tyrion's ASOS arc is about breaking him so he can begin his transformation to become the monster that everyone thinks he already is. 

Tyrion spells it out to the audience : "[to Tywin] I am you writ small." 

He's assuming the mantle of Tywin and ADWD is him mid-transformation with TWOW likely being Tyrion at his worst. I do think that he's going to throw off Tywin's mantle by the end and do something heroic.

[anamika]

9 hours ago, MarySNJ said:

I would call book Tyrion dark, but not villainous. He wants revenge on Cersei and rapes Illyrio's servant, but he's not plotting against the "heroes" of the story; at least not yet. TV Tyrion is much less "dark" than his book counterpart. Also, I think GRRM changed his mind about who the end villain(s) will be from the original story outline, and  at this point I doubt it will be Tyrion (book or show).

Is a character only a villain if he plots against the heroes of the story? A villain is someone who engages in evil deeds and I think him raping that slave moves him into villain territory. In ADwD we see Tyrion becoming more embittered and changing not for the better. In 1999 GRRM calls him a villain and in 2013 he said this:

Quote

So people have this idea that back when Ice and Fire started as a trilogy, you had an outline where there was a single line that went, “And meanwhile, nobles squabble over power in Westeros.” And that single line turned into the middle three or four books of the series. Is there any truth to that?

It’s a grotesque exaggeration — but there’s at least a nugget of truth to it, yeah. You introduce characters, and sometimes they take on a life of their own.

Some major characters — yes, I always had plans, what Tyrion’s arc was gonna be through this, what Arya’s arc was gonna be through this, what Jon Snow’s arc is gonna be. I knew what the principal deaths were gonna be, and when they were coming. That would be the closest thing.

So if Tyrion is going to take a turn into villainy in the books, I would not be surprised. He is already there in my opinion. The show is all together almost a different story right now. The only villains there are the mustache twirling types like Ramsay, LF and Cersei. So while Tyrion may become Dany's betrayal for love in the books,  I can see the show just skipping all that or just making a passing reference to it. It's like Sansa and Arya trying to kill each other last season - no big deal, all is forgiven!

Anyways, it all depends on where you draw the line I guess. For instance, I view attempted child killer Jaime and child killer Sandor as villains because trying to kill or killing innocent children is evil IMO. I have seen many people go as far as calling them both heroes.

10 hours ago, MarySNJ said:

And also, I sincerely doubt that the Lord Commander would be executed for retiring from service, even if BookJon doesn't die from his injuries; because the powerful get away with things ordinary people do not. Like it or not. And also, because the NW's mission is to protect the realms of men, Jon would still be doing so only in a different position, as say King in the North or Lord of Winterfell, or heir to the Iron Throne.

There's no retiring from the NW and desertion gets punished according to the rule of law - powerful person or not. If GRRM makes a case for Jon leaving the NW legally then it's fine. But for now, he has left it very vague. The terms of the oath does not make it clear as to how a person can leave:

Quote

Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come."

If Jon is brought back to life, does it satisfy that part. He is after all still alive...Unless he is a zombie or a fire wight - in which case how would he have children... Robb thinks he can get Jon released from the NW by exchanging him for some men. Stannis thinks a king can get Jon released from his vows.

Anyways, I agree that Jon getting executed by Bran as a deserter is a bit far fetched. But I don't think that leaving the NW is that easy either. If Jon survives the series, there is a possibility that he goes back to being the LC of the NW.

2 hours ago, WindyNights said:

Side note: Jon is an actual deserter of the NW in the books. He deserted the NW before he died, that's why he was killed.

I would not call Jon a deserter there. He had no intention of deserting the NW. He was fully intending to come back and serve as LC. But he did break his oaths by interfering in the affairs of the realm by helping Stannis, sending Mance to WF and assembling a Wildling force to attack the Boltons. All that, plus his allowing the Wildlings past the wall is why he was killed.

[Katsullivan]

On 10/10/2017 at 7:38 PM, WindyNights said:

But besides that.....I don't think GRRM is trying to return to the status quo where a Targaryen rules over Westeros once again. I don't think we're witnessing the rebirth of House Targaryen but the sacrifice of House Targaryen to save the world. I mean even House Plantagenet ended after 359 years on the throne. It's House Stark that'll be the ones to rebuild the new world.

If there is one thing I'm sure of from watching GRRM spend years on novellas, short stories about dragons young and old --- basically coloring every blank Targaryen corner of this world with red words while neglecting every other House in Westeros...  it's that there's no way he's not ending this series with the Targaryens at the top. 

[WindyNights]

4 hours ago, Katsullivan said:

If there is one thing I'm sure of from watching GRRM spend years on novellas, short stories about dragons young and old --- basically coloring every blank Targaryen corner of this world with red words while neglecting every other House in Westeros...  it's that there's no way he's not ending this series with the Targaryens at the top. 

If I knew you irl, I'd put $1000 on me being right.

 

Besides, I've written a couple short stories. I have favorites but that only encourages me to give them a good story not a happy ending or them triumphing over everything.  It's erroneous to think that authors don't kill their favorites off. It's like when someone cites that Tyrion or Arya can't die because GRRM likes them too much. 

Nowhere do the books foreshadow that Daeneys ends up ruling the throne. If anything, the books are saying that she's going to be a hero with bad publicity in Westeros. 

KL is going to blow up too and the bonds between the throne and vassals have been fragmenting more and more.  It's possible she may have a kid but the clues are pointing at her dying after that.  If she does end up with a kid then I doubt that kid ends up ruling on the throne either. I don't think that GRRM is looking to retell LOTR.

15 hours ago, anamika said:

 

I would not call Jon a deserter there. He had no intention of deserting the NW. He was fully intending to come back and serve as LC. But he did break his oaths by interfering in the affairs of the realm by helping Stannis, sending Mance to WF and assembling a Wildling force to attack the Boltons. All that, plus his allowing the Wildlings past the wall is why he was killed.

That's not really valid." I'm not deserting, I'm just leaving the Wall for several months to go rescue my sister, the King Beyond the Wall and free Winterfell. And I'll be taking a band of wildilings with me. Laters."

If Jon thinks he can keep his position as LC after then he's pretty much turning the NW into his own personal lordship.

Edited November 3, 2017 by WindyNights

[SimoneS]

3 hours ago, WindyNights said:

If I knew you irl, I'd put $1000 on me being right.

And if you lost, what then? We will know for sure at the end of next season.  If you lose that bet and every ending you have stated in certainty turns out to be wrong, what then?

3 hours ago, WindyNights said:

Besides, I've written a couple short stories. I have favorites but that only encourages me to give them a good story not a happy ending or them triumphing over everything.  It's erroneous to think that authors don't kill their favorites off.

What sci fantasy authors have killed off all their lead characters before the main story ends?

[glowbug]

The Targaryen dynasty can survive even if Dany doesn’t. There’s Jon and their heavily foreshadowed (by both the show and the books) child. The show has been dropping anvils and the last condition of MMD’s prophecy is that Dany must bear a living child before Drogo returns to her. 

[WindyNights]

2 hours ago, SimoneS said:

And if you lost, what then? We will know for sure at the end of next season.  If you lose that bet and every ending you have stated in certainty turns out to be wrong, what then?

What sci fantasy authors have killed off all their lead characters before the main story ends?

Then nothing. -shrugs-  If you're wrong then you're wrong. It doesn't do anything.

Anyways no one is saying that GRRM is going to kill off all his lead characters. Sansa and Bran Stark are safe. Arya and Tyrion are maybes. 

 

Jon is an orange zone and Daenerys is in the red zone.

11 minutes ago, glowbug said:

The Targaryen dynasty can survive even if Dany doesn’t. There’s Jon and their heavily foreshadowed (by both the show and the books) child. The show has been dropping anvils and the last condition of MMD’s prophecy is that Dany must bear a living child before Drogo returns to her. 

The bloodline may survive but Jon isn't going to walk around calling himself Aegon Targaryen and it remains to be seen what is done with the kid if Daenerys has it. Maybe it's a girl. Maybe Jon or someone else decides to hide its parentage. 

[SimoneS]

On 11/3/2017 at 10:13 PM, WindyNights said:

Anyways no one is saying that GRRM is going to kill off all his lead characters. Sansa and Bran Stark are safe. Arya and Tyrion are maybes. 

Jon is an orange zone and Daenerys is in the red zone.

I should have been more specific. Which sci fantasy authors have killed off their two main lead characters before the main story ends? Martin confirmed that Jon and Dany are the two main characters in this story. 

Edited November 5, 2017 by SimoneS

[Wouter]

About Jon getting murdered by his own men: their motivations for that aren't 100% clear, but I think that the main reason is the fear of lord Bolton, as held by the rest of the leadership of the NW, probably combined with resentment over him letting the wildlings pass the wall. 

It's not desertion - Ramsay had explicitly threatened the night's Watch unless Jon would produce Arya (and he didn't even have her) as well as Stannis' wife and daughter. One way or another, the lord commander would have to deal with that situation. Presumably the mutineers hope to sway the Boltons by delivering Jon's body, as well as Selyse, Shireen and Melisandre, while swearing they haven't seen Arya. 

I doubt Tyrion will be a full-fledged villain by the end.

[screamin]

7 hours ago, Wouter said:

About Jon getting murdered by his own men: their motivations for that aren't 100% clear, but I think that the main reason is the fear of lord Bolton, as held by the rest of the leadership of the NW, probably combined with resentment over him letting the wildlings pass the wall. 

It's not desertion - Ramsay had explicitly threatened the night's Watch unless Jon would produce Arya (and he didn't even have her) as well as Stannis' wife and daughter. One way or another, the lord commander would have to deal with that situation. Presumably the mutineers hope to sway the Boltons by delivering Jon's body, as well as Selyse, Shireen and Melisandre, while swearing they haven't seen Arya. 

I doubt Tyrion will be a full-fledged villain by the end.

While I do think that anger about the wildlings and fear of Bolton provided the impetus, I really do think that Jon's declaration that he would go to war with Ramsey while carefully saying he was NOT doing it as Lord Commander of the Watch gave the conspirators the excuse they needed to say he was deserting and put him to death. The wildlings was not a clear violation of the NW vows. But Jon explicitly saying he was leaving his LC post to engage in a private vendetta - though he intended it to reassure the fearful ones that the NW could not be blamed for his actions - CAN be taken as a declaration of desertion, which IS a clear violation of the rules. The timid accountant who spearheaded the conspiracy probably felt he needed that t crossed and i dotted before he could proceed in clear conscience against Jon.

Not that I think that the show is going to relitigate that at this late date. But IMO, the books will probably make it clear eventually.

[WindyNights]

13 hours ago, SimoneS said:

I should have been more specific. Which sci fantasy authors have killed off their two main lead characters before the main story ends? Martin confirmed that Jon and Dany are the two main characters in this story. 

They're not his two main characaters. They're two of his six main characters. That's how he described the story. The story is about 6 main characters who get to the end although whether they survive the end is up for debate.

[SimoneS]

Just now, WindyNights said:

They're not his two main characaters. They're two of his six main characters. That's how he described the story. The story is about 6 main characters who get to the end although whether they survive the end is up for debate.

Martin told Alan Taylor that Jon and Dany are the two main lead characters of the story (see below). 

Quote

“When we were shooting Season 1 and no one had seen the show yet, we were in Malta. Back then, there was not a lot of secrecy because nobody was paying attention, and George R.R. Martin came to visit and he was being quite open about his plans,” Taylor told the New York Times.

“He said something: That it really is all about Dany and Jon. I was surprised because at the time, you know, I thought, well Robb Stark’s going to be king next, probably,” he continued. “And who knows where this story’s going? But it was absolutely clear to him that within this sprawling scale the whole story was coming down to this partnership.”

[WindyNights]

8 hours ago, Wouter said:

About Jon getting murdered by his own men: their motivations for that aren't 100% clear, but I think that the main reason is the fear of lord Bolton, as held by the rest of the leadership of the NW, probably combined with resentment over him letting the wildlings pass the wall. 

It's not desertion - Ramsay had explicitly threatened the night's Watch unless Jon would produce Arya (and he didn't even have her) as well as Stannis' wife and daughter. One way or another, the lord commander would have to deal with that situation. Presumably the mutineers hope to sway the Boltons by delivering Jon's body, as well as Selyse, Shireen and Melisandre, while swearing they haven't seen Arya. 

I doubt Tyrion will be a full-fledged villain by the end.

I mean as LC, Jon would've been expected to hand over Stannis' daughter and wife and explained that they don't have Farya and Reek. Jon went straight to war not diplomacy.

His internal dialogue even makes it explicit that he's doing this for "Arya". 

 

Heh. Robb and Jon both died for two different Jeynes.

3 minutes ago, SimoneS said:

Martin told Alan Taylor that Jon and Dany are the two main lead characters of the story (see below). 

You're getting your info through a second person.

GRRM has explicitly said that Jon, Arya, Bran, Daenerys and Tyrion (and later Sansa) were the main characters.

 

Quote

Five central characters will make it through all three volumes, however, growing from children to adults and changing the world and themselves in the process. In a sense, my trilogy is almost a generational saga, telling the life stories of these five characters, three men and two women. The five key players are Tyrion Lannister, Daenerys Targaryen, and three of the children of Winterfell, Arya, Bran, and the bastard Jon Snow

Edited November 6, 2017 by WindyNights

[SimoneS]

6 minutes ago, WindyNights said:

You're getting your info through a second person.

The director of GoT episodes who the writer told his story is an authoritative source, not some fan off the street. We know that Martin told D&D and the others on the set about many secrets about the story. He confirmed this.

[WindyNights]

5 minutes ago, SimoneS said:

The director of GoT episodes who the writer told his story is an authoritative source, not some fan off the street. We know that Martin told D&D and the others on the set about many secrets about the story. He confirmed this.

And GRRM has said differently in his own words to his editors so whose word has more power GRRM's or a GOT director that says this is what GRRM said?

[SimoneS]

2 minutes ago, WindyNights said:

And GRRM has said differently in his own words to his editors so whose word has more power GRRM's or a GOT director that says this is what GRRM said?

I would go with what Martin said told the director of the show with which he has a contract that is making him millions.

[WindyNights]

3 hours ago, doram said:

lol. OMG, I'm a Targ fan but really... how many povs of the Dance of Dragons do we need? 

Meanwhile, there's no guarantee the next Book comes out in 2018... but here are some shiny new Targaryen Anthologies to bide our time with! 

Also, probably coincidence but appropriately amusing in context, GRRM postponed Dunk & Egg travelling North for 2 books, and the 4th book "The she-wolves of Winterfell" has been held up for years. He finally got round to telling a story that details Stark history.... and he promptly got Writer's Block! 

According to GRRM, he doesn't really get writer's block. He just doesn't have enough time in the day and is a perfectionist.

 

If anything, he probably has too many ideas which leads him to  rewrite over and over again and adds more subplots and twists to the story than is probably necessary.

[WindyNights]

7 hours ago, SimoneS said:

I would go with what Martin said told the director of the show with which he has a contract that is making him millions.

First off , AGOT was likely not making him millions in season 1 just yet.

 

Second, Alan Taylor is operating off of memory and doesn't share much of the context.

 

 Third,I think he would be more forthright with his editors to whom he was pitching his story to. 

Fourth, we see GRRM's outline where he specifically calls the series as coming of age stories for Arya, Bran and Tyrion as well as Jon and Daenerys 

Fifth, he's gone on record saying that he planned to have the whole story told only from the AGOT POVs because they were the most important ones.

If you can't accept that then you're just not willing to have an open mind and there's no point in arguing further.

[bubble sparkly]

After watching season 7 I would definitely agree that Dany and Jon are the main 2. I don’t know how everyone compares in screen time for the season, but to me it felt like DJ were A grade, Arya, Tyrion, Sansa, Jaime and Cersei were B grade, then Bronn, Brienne, Davos etc were C grade in terms of storyline importance.

Maybe the books will keep things more even between the main 5 or so, but I won’t be shocked if DJ are the main focus of the last season. With Jon’s paternity reveal, DJ fallout of the Targ-bomb, Dany’s inevitable pregnancy, Night King battle etc., most of the major stuff will involve them.

[screamin]

10 hours ago, WindyNights said:

First off , AGOT was likely not making him millions in season 1 just yet.

 

Second, Alan Taylor is operating off of memory and doesn't share much of the context.

 

 Third,I think he would be more forthright with his editors to whom he was pitching his story to. 

Fourth, we see GRRM's outline where he specifically calls the series as coming of age stories for Arya, Bran and Tyrion as well as Jon and Daenerys 

Fifth, he's gone on record saying that he planned to have the whole story told only from the AGOT POVs because they were the most important ones.

 

Even so, GRRM could very well have changed his concept of the story a VERY great deal in between pitching it to his editors years ago as a much shorter series than it ended up being, and much later when discussing it with the producers of the series, when he at least has the end in sight and MUST be clear and 'forthright' about it, because the producers have to show the concrete endpoint on the screen. GRRM could have been telling the truth of what he saw the ultimate result of the series on pitching it to editors before he wrote most of it, and ALSO telling the truth as he saw it to the show producers, years and 4 books later and having realized in that time just who he wants to focus most on in the ending - something that might not have been as clear to him in the beginning.

Edited November 6, 2017 by screamin

[WindyNights]

3 hours ago, screamin said:

Even so, GRRM could very well have changed his concept of the story a VERY great deal in between pitching it to his editors years ago as a much shorter series than it ended up being, and much later when discussing it with the producers of the series, when he at least has the end in sight and MUST be clear and 'forthright' about it, because the producers have to show the concrete endpoint on the screen. GRRM could have been telling the truth of what he saw the ultimate result of the series on pitching it to editors before he wrote most of it, and ALSO telling the truth as he saw it to the show producers, years and 4 books later and having realized in that time just who he wants to focus most on in the ending - something that might not have been as clear to him in the beginning.

While that's true, I don't see much evidence of it in the books. It's an ensemble piece. 

In most cases, the protagonist is a defining element of fiction. It is he whom the plot revolves around and, usually, the one the audience is supposed to empathize with most.However, some shows decide to do something different—there is no one protagonist. The plot and its narrative don't revolve around a single, "most important" main character. Instead, it shares a cast of characters with (almost) equal screentime and importance to the plot. This is called an Ensemble Cast. This type of narrative is interesting because it highlights the relations between different characters by taking away the importance of a single character.In addition, it allows the writers to focus on different characters in different episodes freely, without worrying about giving the main character not enough screen time.On the other hand, it can also result in a work that lacks focus and drive. Something must unite the events other than the main character. Most of these works therefore fix on a restricted setting and stick to it like glue.

 

Like Tyrion is more focused on than Jon and Arya has more chapters to her name than Daenerys. 

[Wouter]

21 hours ago, WindyNights said:

I mean as LC, Jon would've been expected to hand over Stannis' daughter and wife and explained that they don't have Farya and Reek. Jon went straight to war not diplomacy.

His internal dialogue even makes it explicit that he's doing this for "Arya". 

 

The Boltons would never have believed that he didn't have Arya and Reek, nor that he wouldn't be plotting revenge against them. I think the mutineers did what they felt they needed to do to save the Watch from the Bolton's wrath - but Bowen Marsh was almost weeping when he did it, which seems to show he doubted it was the right thing to do.

[WindyNights]

7 hours ago, Wouter said:

The Boltons would never have believed that he didn't have Arya and Reek, nor that he wouldn't be plotting revenge against them. I think the mutineers did what they felt they needed to do to save the Watch from the Bolton's wrath - but Bowen Marsh was almost weeping when he did it, which seems to show he doubted it was the right thing to do.

Roose could. 

I don't think he doubted that it was the right thing. I think he realizes that he's going to die after he does it and that he didn't want to kill Jon but he felt his hand was forced 

[screamin]

On ‎11‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 6:27 PM, Wouter said:

The Boltons would never have believed that he didn't have Arya and Reek, nor that he wouldn't be plotting revenge against them. I think the mutineers did what they felt they needed to do to save the Watch from the Bolton's wrath - but Bowen Marsh was almost weeping when he did it, which seems to show he doubted it was the right thing to do.

I don't think Bowen was weeping because he doubted what he was doing was the right thing - dude was very self-righteous. I think he felt that killing Jon was the right thing due to the desertion and the violation of longstanding custom with the wildlings and the danger to the watch of the Boltons - but that it hurt him to do it because he was aware of Jon's good points, the same way an employee at a company in financial trouble might feel bad about firing a colleague who hasn't been as productive as the others, even though he knows the employee has his reasons for not being at his best...but the good of the company reigns supreme.

Note well that I think Bowen was completely WRONG about that, just that I think that's what his thought process was.

[Meredith Quill]

Mod Note:

Please remember this topic is for endgame spec not analysis of past events. A little detour here and there is fine but be careful not to derail the topic completely.

Also, the tone of some posts sail dangerously close to coming off as dismissive sneering (you know who you are); let's not do that - treat others the way you wish to be treated.

Thanks.

[Eyes High]

Does anyone else think Isaac Hempstead Wright may have accidentally dropped a spoiler as to the nature of the  ending with this quote from a recent Hollywood Reporter interview?

We're all so confident in the way this story goes and the message it gives and how the whole story arc works. Season seven was a marvel in terms of epic, fast-paced, exciting storytelling. As long as we can reconcile with ourselves that we're happy with how it ends, it won't matter what anyone else thinks, really. As long as we feel we've done the story justice, and have done justice to George's universe and David and Dan's vision, then that's really all we can hope for.

It won't go the way some people want. It will be too happy for some people, or too sad, or too whatever. That's the nature of an ending. Midway through a season, there's always the idea that this is going to continue and somewhere along the way we'll make up for it all. When it comes to a conclusion, this is the end. Nothing more is coming, and the certainty of it being over will definitely bother people. But overall, I think we're going to smash it. (Laughs)

What drew my attention is that he said "it will be too happy for some people" first and then "too sad" after, meaning that the anticipated complaint that the ending is too happy was more prominent in his mind than that of the ending being too sad. That suggests to me that the ending will be tend to be on the happier side.

[SeanC]

5 hours ago, Eyes High said:

Does anyone else think Isaac Hempstead Wright may have accidentally dropped a spoiler as to the nature of the  ending with this quote from a recent Hollywood Reporter interview?

 

What drew my attention is that he said "it will be too happy for some people" first and then "too sad" after, meaning that the anticipated complaint that the ending is too happy was more prominent in his mind than that of the ending being too sad. That suggests to me that the ending will be tend to be on the happier side.

Could be.

I've thought the conclusion will be happier than a lot of people expect for a while, ever since that GRRM interview where he talks about Tolkien as an inspiration for his idea of a bittersweet ending.  Because LOTR, while there are finer points that are sad (especially in an elegiac way), has what I think the average person would view as a broadly happy ending.  The rightful king is restored and rules wisely and well for a long time (albeit with no indications as to his tax policy), the Shire, while damaged, is liberated, and if Frodo never quite recovers from his experiences with the One Ring, the cure is to sail off to heaven.  It's bittersweet mainly in that the heroes don't cartoonishly shrug off their experiences and the world will never be the same.

[anamika]

Sophie Turner said something similar in her Hollywood reporter interview:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/game-thrones-sophie-turner-previews-final-season-1066499

Quote

Beloved shows have come and gone, and more often than not, there's at least a vocal minority of fans who are unhappy with the ending. Is there something freeing in knowing some people will be inevitably disappointed with how Game of Thrones ends, even if you find the ending satisfying?

Absolutely. It almost puts all of our minds to rest, just knowing the ending and being happy with that, no matter if anyone likes it or not. There have been so many theories and so many discussions with what people think is going to happen — where they would like things to go, and who they would like to see in power, and who they want to see die. Finally, just knowing. And for the people, when they watch it, I hope there's going to be some satisfaction in that it's come to an end and that's how it goes. There will be some people who are disappointed, I'm sure, because they will want certain people to end up in certain places. But at this point, I'm just happy with whatever David and Dan choose to do with the story. I've trusted them for the past nine or 10 years of my life with this. However they decide to end it is fine by me.

No mention of GRRM, considering it will be his story ending that David and Dan will be going for, presumably.

Edited December 21, 2017 by anamika

[WindyNights]

On 12/20/2017 at 2:51 PM, SeanC said:

Could be.

I've thought the conclusion will be happier than a lot of people expect for a while, ever since that GRRM interview where he talks about Tolkien as an inspiration for his idea of a bittersweet ending.  Because LOTR, while there are finer points that are sad (especially in an elegiac way), has what I think the average person would view as a broadly happy ending.  The rightful king is restored and rules wisely and well for a long time (albeit with no indications as to his tax policy), the Shire, while damaged, is liberated, and if Frodo never quite recovers from his experiences with the One Ring, the cure is to sail off to heaven.  It's bittersweet mainly in that the heroes don't cartoonishly shrug off their experiences and the world will never be the same.

Eh. I'm going to have to direct you again at what part of the ending that GRRM actually likes. He's not actually really ooking at Aragorn whose ending he kind of has a problem with. It's Frodo's that he is always raving about:

 

Quote

As I read Return of the King, I didn't want it to be over. That last book blew my mind, particularly the scouring of the Shire. I didn't like that when I was in high school. The story's over, and they destroyed the ring — but he didn't write "and now they lived happily ever after." Instead, they went home and home was all fucked up. The evil guys had burned down some of the woods; a fascist-like tyranny had taken over. That seemed anticlimactic to me. Frodo didn't live happily ever after or marry a nice girl hobbit. He was permanently wounded; he was damaged. As a 13 year old, I couldn't grasp that. Now, every time I re-read The Lord of the Rings — which I do, every few years — I appreciate the brilliance of the scouring of the Shire. That's part of what lifts the book from all its imitators. There was a real cost to Tolkien's world. There's a tremendous sadness at the end of Lord of the Rings, and it has a power. I think that's partly why people are still reading and re-reading these books."

 

What GRRM is talking about here is a separation of heroism and being rewarded. Frodo went through all that and he still ended up a depressed mess that metaphorically dies. He loves the ending because of what happens with Frodo not Aragorn. The Scouring of the Shire is what makes LOTR better to him than the copycats.

 

Plus GRRM has a love for poetic sorrow. Just take a look at how he ends most of his POVs.

 

Cat= Died believing she was the root cause of all her children's deaths and goes insane and then was resurrected as a monstrosity of revenge 

 

Quentyn= Burned to death via the dragon he tried to steal because life isn't a fairy tale and while he was a prince, he wasn't the hero that he wanted to be

 

Ned Stark= The most honorable man in Westeros died a traitor with a broken promise 

 

Arys Oakheart = An honorable man that dishonored himself and committed suicide via Areo Hotah because he couldn't face up to what he's done.

Edited January 19, 2018 by WindyNights

[SeanC]

1 hour ago, WindyNights said:

Eh. I'm going to have to direct you again at what part of the ending that GRRM actually likes. He's not actually really ooking at Aragorn whose ending he kind of has a problem with. It's Frodo's that he is always raving about:

What GRRM is talking about here is a separation of heroism and being rewarded. Frodo went through all that and he still ended up a depressed mess that metaphorically dies. He loves the ending because of what happens with Frodo not Aragorn. The Scouring of the Shire is what makes LOTR better to him than the copycats.

He's talked about LOTR as a whole as bittersweet.  The stuff you cite, I already mentioned:  the point is that the world (and characters) will never be the same and be uncomplicatedly happy.  Which is hardly surprising to anybody reading this series.

[BitterApple]

Between the huge gap between seasons and the eventual spoilers that will be leaked, I fear the end will be somewhat of a letdown, regardless of what happens. 

[Happy Harpy]

13 hours ago, BitterApple said:

Between the huge gap between seasons and the eventual spoilers that will be leaked, I fear the end will be somewhat of a letdown, regardless of what happens. 

I was pretty certain that R+L=J was going to be anti-climatic no matter what, because years and years of speculation. It was all but that, and I was spoiled. I didn't even think "YASSSSS take that you its-too-easy-and-too-stupid blowhards" until way after the episode ended.

The ending could be a letdown. And if it is, the huge gap will definitely multiply it by a factor of a hundred. But I don't think it will be a letdown regardless what happens. It might not surprise, it should not shock imo, but it can manage to make sense and be satisfying for most of the audience.

Edited January 20, 2018 by Happy Harpy

[nikma]

Dany and Jon will transform the Seven Kingdoms and rule at the end. They will lose friends and dragons and direwolves in the war, but they will win and rule together. Some people will hate this ending, but I think majority will like it. 

We know there will be another scene at Dragonpit in S8. I think there will be a big meeting there in the last eisode after the war to decide the future of Westeros. The Great Council to tie all loose ends. who rules where and so on. 

Edited January 20, 2018 by nikma

[WindyNights]

8 hours ago, nikma said:

Dany and Jon will transform the Seven Kingdoms and rule at the end. They will lose friends and dragons and direwolves in the war, but they will win and rule together. Some people will hate this ending, but I think majority will like it. 

We know there will be another scene at Dragonpit in S8. I think there will be a big meeting there in the last eisode after the war to decide the future of Westeros. The Great Council to tie all loose ends. who rules where and so on. 

That's pretty much what most fans suspect and I think that was Maisie's idea for the ending but she says she got it wrong and wasn't even close:

Before she read the Thrones scripts, she and her mother “cracked open a bottle of wine and made predictions about how it was going to end. And neither of us was right.”Was either of them close? “No. I don’t know if it’s gonna surprise people, but it’s just different to what you think it’s gonna be.”

And one of the top guys implied there won't be an Iron Throne by the end in addition to Daenerys having huge death flags.

 

And Emilia Clarke apparently being in a daze after she read the season 8 scripts and had to go on a walk for hours because of it.

[nikma]

I would love to see a darker ending, but I'm not expecting it. Maisie is not that involved with the fandom I think. I remember that she was very shocked when she read S7 script, and except  Olenna's death, fans expected majority of big moments. I think Maisie speaks more like GA. 

 

And she said  "I don’t know if it’s gonna surprise people, but it’s just different to what you think it’s gonna be". So for the first part( I don’t know if it’s gonna surprise people) I think that means that  that Jon and Daenerys will be alive at the end, but the second part ( it’s just different to what you think it’s gonna be)  means there won't be the Iron Throne and the system will be changed.  As you said  one of the top guys implied there won't be an Iron Throne by the end.

[SeanC]

6 hours ago, WindyNights said:

And one of the top guys implied there won't be an Iron Throne by the end in addition to Daenerys having huge death flags.

No, he didn't.  He simply declined to say anything about the ending.