#'the cat is plot relevant' the cat is Jon

[rookfeatherrambles]

Apparently the commission from @dcartcorner about my unnamed cozy fantasy Jmart AU is at like 400 notes of people just screaming about how much they want it so! Introducing: (It still doesn't have a name yet), the cozy (ish) fantasy au!

Jon is an archmage in training at the Magnus Institute of Arcana, (I gotta think of a better name) where he is apprenticed under Elias Bouchard, the actual Archmage of London. That's an important figure who keeps the balance of magic (and more)

Being close to the Archmage, Jon is learning some pretty incredible magic. But when he accidentally discovers Elias harnessing power from ancient, Eldritch and forbidden gods, Jon realizes that the magic he's been taught to use is furthering some kind of ritual to bring those terrifying creatures into their world and he's been helping all along without realizing it.

With knowledge that could throw London into chaos, Jon seals the knowledge away somewhere safe and then curses himself to become a cat, permanently, and flees the Institute for the city streets as a stray.

It was supposed to be permanently, anyway.

Meanwhile, Martin's moved away from his very overbearing and at the same time distant family. Heir to the powerful magic of the Lukas/Blackwood bloodline, Martin throws away all his prestige for the quiet of a cafe somewhere in the city and a modest life as a Hearthmage. It's a rundown place he's bought to make his own, but he's up to the task of fixing it up.

After a few months of living there, established and settled, he starts noticing that some of his fruits and vegetables are being eaten by a mysterious animal. After many stakeouts, he finally catches the culprit in the act. It's a scrawny black cat with green eyes and a crooked tail, and it has a fondness for tomatoes! Try as he might though, Martin cannot catch the cat. And then, one day, Martin opens the door to start the day and there it is. Sitting outside the door as if its an impatient customer. And there is a tomato in its mouth! Martin's tomato.

He is too stunned to speak, and just watches the cat saunter into the cafe, cool as you please and hop up on a chair to eat it's breakfast.

This is how the war of the veggie patch ends. With a tomato, some warm cream, and some cautious chin scritches.

[dcartcorner]

Commission for @rookfeatherrambles and their as of yet unnamed cozy magic fantasy AU, featuring Hearthwitch Martin and Archmage Jon, and a plot relevant cat! Thank you for the support!

[ariamariastark1]

Why do Arya stans focus so much on her appearance?

Well, the truth is that, in one way or another, Arya's appearance is relevant to and essential to her characterisation, the Stark family dynamics and related book plots.

In the family dynamics, Arya is the only 'legitimate' child with the Stark looks, which puts Arya apart from her other full siblings and closer to Jon; her appearance is also an important factor in her relationship with Sansa because Sansa uses her northern looks to bully Arya. It also influences the way that Ned and Cat treat Arya, as we know that Catelyn is deeply insecure about the fact that Robb, Bran and Rickon are southern looking, and because Ned more often than not ends up projecting his guilt and trauma into Arya because of how much she looks like Lyanna.

It's also relevant to the book plot in a few ways: through Lyanna and Jon because we can't understand Lyanna without Arya and we can't correlate Lyanna to Jon without Arya and the biggest connection that the two have is their appearance-- ned claims that Arya acts and looks like her and Bran, when seeing the past, couldn't distinguish the two if it wasn't for the hair length.

Another way that Arya's appearance is relevant to the books is because of the Great Northern Conspiracy more specifically because the only reason why Littlefinger was able to convince people that the girl marrying Ramsey Bolten was Arya despite it being Jane Pool was that Arya Stark (the real one) has a deeply traditional northern look.

And finally, it is because Arya's own insecurity with her appearance is directly impacting Arya's growth and development.

Actually a lot of things that the fandom interprets as related to femininity are about her insecurity and appearance, which is incredibly ironic because, at the same time, the fandom makes things that are about feminity about appearance, like the fact that Arya blends in the common folk something that exists to point out how Arya understands them and how she lives like them but the fandom made it about Arya being ' ugly' (she isn't)

[thelemonsnek]

Lmfao @ tmau: There must be a bit of an adjustment period for the strange new things that keep happening around the bosses since they got back. Emmet just shows up to work like a zombie out of the floor sometimes. How does boss Ingo seem to always be in the other room when we need him/ gossip about him?? I didn't even know we had a room there. I swear that room was not there before.

Also. Apocalypse ds. How did that pan out for Jon and the crew?

Yup! There's a bunch of stuff that the commuters, challengers and staff all need to get used to shdjd for example, Curio and I made it canon that Ingo eats paperwork if he's not paying attention, as a reference to a fic we both read!

Cameron: hey if you have a moment I'd really appreciate your feedback on this form,

Ingo, not paying attention: [eats the form]

Cameron:

Cameron: hey Ingo could you check out this other form too,

To keep things even Emmet gets to have dirt snacks. As a treat <3

And YEAHDJDJ Ingo just always being in the perfect place (for him)

Isadore voice guys I think Ingo has been gaslighting me, I don't know how he's doing it but he is

Ingo peeking around a doorway that definitely was never there before: what?

Isadore: HW-

And godd the idea of Emmet just rising up like a classic horror movie zombie in their office is SO funny

But yeah to be clear, despite the joking around it's not. Good. And the only ones who know how bad it really is are Ingo, Emmet, and their victims

And the apocalypse ds

[image id: an edit of a cat's face that has been heavily edited. The eyes are edited onto the ears, and nose and mouth are both vastly larger, taking up the majority of the face and giving it a big ol dopey smile. A few heart emojis surround it. End id]

Gonna be so real we haven't developed this as much as everything else, except we definitely know that there's just a beat up old ds cartridge spinning at the center of it all. Honestly maybe it's still kiiind of the eye reigning over everything, since it's Jon's game?

Ingo and Emmet do get domains btw :3c which becomes plot relevant later on in the story

@curiositykilledtheradiostar is there anything else we developed about the apocalypse that I forgot about?

Actually also. Wouldn't it be so funny if the equivalent for the pupil were just. Someone playing the game. To be king of a ruined world you've gotta give in and become a gamer, Jonah 😤

[abysskis]

i just finished season 3 of TMA and i have some Thoughts:

-Tim and Sasha did Not deserve that also FUCK Elias all my homies hate Elias

-The one episode where Jon was staying at Georgie’s and petting her cat was very nice like yes. He deserves to pet a cat after constantly experiencing the horrors

-Melanie, Martin and Basira deserve the whole world actually

-I kinda want a filler episode where they all just relax and hang out or something like i know it wouldn’t be plot relevant and there wouldn’t be a reason for them to be recording themselves but idk. I Think It Would Be Nice

-Really cool/interesting how the dream Jon was having at the end of season 3 was various people’s statements being woven together into one surreal narrative

-Theres a couple statements that i still think about that haven’t been really woven into the overall story (at least not yet), like the guy eating his computer and the priest possessed by demons and Hill Top Road and aaaaggghgh

-I just want to listen to the last 2 seasons all at once but i have a “job” or whatever

[agentrouka-blog]

Ehem. How is Sansa a camera?

Ned decides to take both girls south, agreeing to a betrothal to the crown prince. In that moment, Sansa is the second most important northerner and an honoured guest of the KL’s court while Arya is prancing around picking wild flowers and playing with peasants. This isn’t Arya’s hate, I happen to like her, it’s just plain book canon that Arya at this point is not relevant to the plot. Sorry, not sorry.

When Ned f*cks everything (I love him but argh. Telling Cersei what you are going to do? Really, Ned?)...he leaves both his daughters unprotected. Arya scapes for plot reasons, Sansa remains a hostage. As a hostage she is our eyes and ears in KL. She is an instrument in Joffrey’s death, by telling the Tyrells the truth and unknowingly to her wearing the hairnet that carries the poison. Tell me how that is not relevant anon. Arya? She is whacking pidgeons in Flea Bottom. Advancing the plot much?

Tyrion and LF need Sansa to get Winterfell. LF even thinks he can reach the IT eventually by marrying Sansa at his convenience.

I agree the Vale plot might seem “irrelevant” at the moment, but GRRM keeps banging on our heads how the Vale is untouched by war, and how much all the men wish to fight. I have a feeling it is going somewhere and guess whose POV we have in the Vale? The irrelevant camera girl, Sansa.

I like Arya, she deserves a happy ending. And so does Sansa. It’s ok if you don’t like Sansa and skip all her chapters in the books but it is a bit much to call her camera, anon.

Due to being young girls, very realistically, neither Sansa nor Arya have actively contributed to any plot relevant shenanigans, really. Remove them both, have Ned travel South alone, and he would have ended up dead once again, most things go down the same way, because Sansa and Arya are not in a position to actively influence anything.

Contrast Robb and Jon and Theon who are given the actual power and means to influence events on their own.

If Arya had never gone South, or if she had been murdered in Flea Bottom, still nothing of the bigger plot would change so far. Her journey is still preparing her for when she takes on a role of active, plot-relevant influence, same as Sansa. The story is about their journeys and how they shape their eventual choices.

Sansa's status as Northern heiress and her resemblance to Cat likely have passively influenced a lot of plot, though, since her physical presence in KL may have motivated some of Littlefinger's decisions from the first, and because it hands a "key to the North" to Stark enemies, and motivates Cat's liberation of Jaime. She is the leverage that gets Ned to confess to treason and the catalyst for Lysa's murder, which causes rising activity in the Vale.

This is all done passively by how she motivates the actions of others, but even so it makes her character plot relevant already. And she is bound to become an active player before long.

(Actually, never mind, saving Lancel's life had a direct influence on the fate of the new High Septon, who heard his confessions and thus became a threat to Cersei. Heh.)

My point is, Sansa's presence actually has more bearing on the actual larger plot in the books than Arya's, no matter how fascinating her journey. This has no bearing on the importance of either character to the narrative, which is about more than overall plot.

But it makes it simply preposterous to pretend that GRRM is somehow trapped into keeping Sansa around as a "camera" when most of what she simply witnesses could theoretically be conveyed through Tyrion from ACOK. Without her presence there, events in the Vale are much tamer and easily reported by letter. Her chapters simply have more bearing on her own character development, same as Arya.

We are witnessing their character development because it is important, because both are important, and we need to understand how their experiences shape their future decision-making.

[cappymightwrite]

I think what is important is that many of the plot points he described in that outline are more or less going to take place but the characters involved in those have changed . Tyrion was meant to capture Winterfell and burn it but in the books it's Theon and later Ramsay who carried out the deed. Bran was suppose to go North of the Wall with Cat but he ends up going there with the Reed siblings. Arya flees to the Wall from Lannister soldiers and in the books you have Lannister regime placing a bounty on Sansa. Even original outline Sansa very much clearly mirrors to that of Elia and Tywin is more or less the Jaime of the original outline.

Another thing that really interested me was how GRRM decribed that Arya would find out to her horror that she had fallen in love with Jon , the psychology here is how she buries her thoughts deep inside and lies to herself before the world comes crashing down to horror and this kind of self denial is really evident in Sansa's character. The fact that she is already married to one of the trios in the love triangle looks now quite promising.

Hello!

Sorry for the very late reply — trying to do a little tidy up of my inbox. I think your ask is in response to this one, also from you, about the original outline where I go into some detail about GRRM's history of writing romantic red-heads?

Without question, lots of things in the series are wildly different to what was laid out in that publishers outline. But perhaps what it does reveal more than anything is the certain themes he was interested in exploring, and which have been carried over into asoiaf as we know it. So, that is why you get a switching/altering of characters, but as you detailed, certain events or themes still occuring.

But moving on to the second part of your message...

Arya will be more forgiving... until she realises, with terror, that she has fallen in love with Jon, who is not only her half-brother but a man of the Night's Watch, sworn to celibacy. Their passion will continue to torment Jon and Arya throughout the trilogy, until the secret of Jon's true parentage is finally revealed in the last book. – GRRM, circa 1993

I completely agree with you that this theme of realisation and supression is very present in Sansa's arc, on a psychological level. We see realisation through her disillusionment arc, which parallels your classic bildungsroman structure, and then suppression in how she deals with her trauma, e.g. 'the Unkiss,' but also in her dynamic with gentle Petyr vs. cunning Littlefinger, amongst other things. Add to that Sansa's very romantic nature and the romance associations in her arc, her involvement with Tyrion, the lack of an established dynamic between her and Jon... and it's got all the right ingredients to explore what was first briefly alluded to in this outline.

So, like I said, even though the characters have changed, been switched, and in Sansa's case been promoted to more narrative relevancy, GRRM's interest in the incest motif (see the Lannisters and Targaryens) remains very present. It makes sense to me, from the ongoing Byron investigation I've been doing, that he is also very interested in a dynamic that strongly emulates the relationships found in Lord Byron's work (The Bride of Abydos + Manfred), and this paragraph above very much testifies to that interest.

At some point I plan to do a more general look at GRRM's interest in Romanticism and his Romantic sensibilities because it really is very interesting to me... and maybe not discussed all that much?

GRRM: I was always intensely Romantic, even when I was too young to understand what that meant. But Romanticism has its dark side, as any Romantic soon discovers... which is where the melancholy comes in, I suppose. I don't know if this is a matter of artistic influences so much as it is of temperament. But there's always been something in a twilight that moves me, and a sunset speaks to me in a way that no sunrise ever has. [source]

Thanks for the message! x

[eldritchqueerture]

It's Finally Here! The Time Hath Come!

Rating: Teen And Up Audiences Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply Relationships: Martin Blackwood/Jonathan "Jon" Sims | The Archivist Characters: Martin Blackwood, Jonathan "Jon" Sims | The Archivist, Basira Hussain (guest appearance) Additional Tags: Character Study, Hurt/Comfort, Emotional Hurt/Comfort, Fluff and Angst, Angst with a Happy Ending, Lonely Avatar Martin Blackwood, The Lonely as a Metaphor for Dissociation, The Lonely as a Metaphor for Depression (The Magnus Archives), Canon-Typical The Lonely Content (The Magnus Archives), Minor plot if you squint, Getting Together, the author projects a lot, Canon Asexual Character, which is not really relevant but i like putting it here, Trans Martin Blackwood, Autistic Martin Blackwood, Jon is also autistic because he's a human form of a cat and all cats are autistic, Stargazing, Kissing, Tea-Making as a Literary Device, I really overcompensate with the fluff at the end there, like it gets self-indulgent but honestly they deserve it, there's some jon angst for flavour, Set in Episodes 159-160 | Scottish Safehouse Period (The Magnus Archives), mainly Summary: The Lonely reaches deep into his soul, seeping through the cracks of his broken mind, chilling his blood, his muscles, and bones. The fog clouds his eyes as days pass, each less remarkable than the last, and when Jon eventually wakes up, he needs to remind himself that he's supposed to care. This chills him to the core, plants cold dread in his gut; the fog feels too comfortable for his own good. Does it though? Maybe it is where he belongs. Maybe it was always there, just waiting for an opportune moment, and he just needs to accept it instead of fighting the inevitable. With an aching heart and frigid fingers, Martin decides to stay in his office, picturing Peter Lukas' satisfied smile.

Hope you guys enjoy it!!! 💜

[amuelia]

How do you think Roose will meet his demise? Or will he survive? What's your best Roose end game predictions?

Thank you for the question! This will be a long post under the readmore, going into my thoughts on the show ending and exploring what the books may have set up in regards to themes and characterization, as well as a bit of general analysis of Roose' story arc in a Dance with Dragons (and some speculation about Ramsay as well).

If you click on the readmore i will have divided the post into sections with bolded Headers, if you want to only read my specific endgame ideas you can skip ahead to the "His Endgame?" section.

In The Show

The show had him get killed by Ramsay in s6, which informs a lot of the fandom speculation about this storyline.

I am not a fan of the show's scenario as it was both similar to tywin and tyrion as well as a mirror of robb's death; it would also be offscreen in the books since neither of the characters are PoVs and Ramsay would need to do the act in secret. This would ultimately undercut Roose' role and impact, being a death scene that is not very unique and also isn't shown to the reader directly. Since no PoV is even in Winterfell currently, we would just hear of it from afar and not witness the consequences.

The show also has a different dynamic in the Bolton storyline, emphasizing Ramsay as the "main character" of this arc, and elevating him to the main villain for s5-6 to fill Joffrey's shoes as an evil character played by a very charismatic actor. Ramsay's show writing is informed by the needs of a TV setting that wants shocking moments and capitalizes on "fan favourite" actors; his rising importance in the show thus is not necessarily an indicator of his book importance. The show was also missing many central characters like the northern lords and the Frey men in Winterfell.

The show had a tendency to kill off characters early when they wanted to cull storylines or had no plans to adapt more of the character's story (like Stannis, Barristan, possibly the Tyrells...); In Mance Rayder we have the most obvious example, where they killed him off for real in a scene that in the book was a misdirection. We also have characters like Jorah where it appears the showrunners had their own choice of how they want his storyline to end, even if Grrm has his own ending in mind.

"For a long time we wanted Ser Jorah to be there at The Wall in the end," writer Dave Hill says. "The three coming out of the tunnel would be Jon and Jorah and Tormund. But [...] Jorah should have the noble death he craves defending the woman he loves." - Dave Hill for Entertainment Weekly

So a death in the show does not need to be an indicator that the books will feature an equivalent scene, even if it gives a hint as to what may happen. By s5 the show has become its own beast, and the butterfly effects from radical changes they made as well as the different characterizations results in the show having to cater to its own needs in many cases when it gets to resolving a plotline.

"We reconceived the role to make it worthy of the actor's talents." - Benioff and Weiss for the s5 DVD commentary, on Indira Varma's casting as Ellaria

In The Books

(Since this post was getting out of hand in length a lot of these arguments are a little shortened/not as in-depth as i'd like! Feel free to inquire more via ask if something is unclear or you disagree)

In the books i find it hard to make a concrete guess as to how it will end. Occam's razor would be to assume the show sort of got it right and that it will vaguely end the same, which could very well happen and i will not discount the possibility; Ramsay is cruel, desires the Dreadfort rule, and is a suspected kinslayer and has no qualms to commit immoral violence.

"Ramsay killed [his brother]. A sickness of the bowels, Maester Uthor says, but I say poison." - Reek III, aDwD

Reek saw the way Ramsay's mouth twisted, the spittle glistening between his lips. He feared he might leap the table with his dagger in his hand [to attack his father]. - Reek III, aDwD

Arguments against this or for a different endgame come down to interpretations of the themes in the story arc and opinions on dramatic structure/grrm's writing, and are thus very subjective.

The way the story currently is going, Ramsay killing Roose treats Roose almost as a plot device; his death brings no change or development to Ramsay's character as we already know his motivations and cruelty align with such an act, and we can assume that he would feel no remorse about it either. The results of such a scene would be firmly on a story level, as it brings political changes and moves the plot along into a specific direction. Roose himself cannot have any relevant character development about it as he does not have a PoV and we would not be able to witness his reaction from the outside.

“The only thing worth writing about is the human heart in conflict with itself.” - William Faulkner, often quoted by Grrm

Further, killing his father is very difficult to pull off in secret (Roose is frequently described as very cautious, and employs many guardsmen). And even if Ramsay pulls it off (people often interpret Ramsay as Roose' blind spot, assuming he might be caught by surprise, not expecting Ramsay would bite the hand that feeds him), Roose is the one that holds his entire alliance together; The Freys would be alienated by Ramsay who would antagonize Walda and her son as his rivals, The Ryswell bloc appears to dislike Ramsay (especially Barbrey), and the other northmen are implied to not even like Roose himself. Killing Roose would quickly combust the entire northern faction, and hinder Ramsay's further plans (another reason why I am not convinced of a book version of the "Battle of Bastards"). Though this might of course, if we look at it from the other side, be grrm's plan to quickly dissolve this plot and move the northern story forwards.

"Ramsay will kill [Walda's children], of course. [...] [She] will grieve to see them die, though." - Reek III, aDwD

"How many of our grudging friends do you imagine we'd retain if the truth were known? Only Lady Barbrey, whom you would turn into a pair of boots … inferior boots." - Reek III, aDwD

"Fear is what keeps a man alive in this world of treachery and deceit. Even here in Barrowton the crows are circling, waiting to feast upon our flesh. The Cerwyns and the Tallharts are not to be relied on, my fat friend Lord Wyman plots betrayal, and Whoresbane … the Umbers may seem simple, but they are not without a certain low cunning. Ramsay should fear them all, as I do." - Reek III, aDwD

Roose' death at Ramsay's hand also removes him thematically from the Red Wedding, as we can assume such a death might have happened regardless of his participation in the event (seeing as Ramsay is getting provoked by Roose constantly in normal dialogue, and has a general violent disposition). Roose already took Ramsay in before aGoT started, and married Walda very early in the war, which is already most of the buildup that the show's scenario had. It also has little to do with the The North Remembers plot except set dressing, since the northmen are presumably neither collaborating with/egging on Ramsay nor would they appreciate the development.

Themes: Ned Stark and the rule over the North

Roose is treated as a foil to Eddard; They are often contrasted in morals and ruling styles, while also having many superficial similarities that further connect them (they are seen as cold by people, grey eyed, patriarchs of rivalling northern houses, etc...).

Pale as morning mist, his eyes concealed more than they told. Jaime misliked those eyes. They reminded him of the day at King's Landing when Ned Stark had found him seated on the Iron Throne. - Jaime IV, aSoS

They both have a "bastard son" that they handle very differently; Roose treating Ramsay in the way that is seen as common in their society. Ramsay and Jon as a comparison are meant to show that Catelyn had a reason to see a bastard as a threat (since Domeric was antagonized by his bastard brother), but also shows that her suggested plan for Jon would not have stopped any danger either (as Ramsay being raised away from the castle didn't help).

And if his seed quickened, she expected he would see to the child's needs. He did more than that. The Starks were not like other men. Ned brought his bastard home with him, and called him "son" for all the north to see. - Catelyn II, aGoT

"Each year I sent the woman some piglets and chickens and a bag of stars, on the understanding that she was never to tell the boy who had fathered him. A peaceful land, a quiet people, that has always been my rule." - Reek III, aDwD

It appears to me that Roose' story functions in some ways as an inversion to Ned. He makes an attempt to grab a power he was not destined to (becoming warden of the north), where Ned did not want the responsiblity thrust upon him ("It was all meant for Brandon. [...] I never asked for this cup to pass to me." - Cat II, aGoT). Where Ned rules successfully and his northmen honor his legacy ("What do you think passes through their heads when they hear the new bride weeping? Valiant Ned's precious little girl." - The Turncloak, aDwD), the Boltons are largely hated and there are several plots conspiring against them ("Let me bathe in Bolton blood before I die." - The King's Prize, aDwD).

It seems possible to me that in terms of their family and legacy, Roose might also live through an inverted version of Ned's story; where Ned died first, leaving his family behind, Roose already lived to see the death of his wives and trueborn heir, and might thus also live to see Ramsay's death. Ned leaves behind well raised children and a North who still respects his name, and even though he dies it will presumably all be "in good hands" in the end (in broad strokes, obviously this is all much more morally complex). Roose however built up a bad and toxic legacy, and also built his way of life around evading consequences; it makes sense to me that he would be forced by the story to finally endure all the consequences of his actions and witness the fall of his house firsthand. After all we already have Tywin who fulfils the purpose of dying before his children while his legacy falls to ruins, and a Feast for Crows explores this aspect thoroughly.

Roose' arc in A Dance With Dragons

The story repeatedly builds up the situation unravelling around Roose, and him slowly losing a grip on it and becoming more stressed and anxious.

Reek wondered if Roose Bolton ever cried. If so, do the tears feel cold upon his cheeks? - Reek II, aDwD

Roose Bolton said nothing at all. But Theon Greyjoy saw a look in his pale eyes that he had never seen before—an uneasiness, even a hint of fear. [...] That night the new stable collapsed beneath the weight of the snow that had buried it. - a Ghost in Winterfell, aDwD

Lady Walda gave a shriek and clutched at her lord husband's arm. "Stop," Roose Bolton shouted. "Stop this madness." His own men rushed forward as the Manderlys vaulted over the benches to get at the Freys. - Theon I, aDwD

It also directly presents him as a parallel to Theon's rule in aCoK, who similarly experienced a very unpopular rule and his subjects slowly turning against him. Presumably, the point of this comparison will not just be "Ramsay comes in at the end and unexpectedly whacks them on the head". Both Theon and Roose invited Ramsay into their lives, giving him more power than he deserves, and causing Ramsay to make choices that increasingly alienate others from them (the death of the miller's boys for example has repercussions for both Theon and Roose). Grrm is likely steering this towards a difference in how they will deal with this situation.

It all seemed so familiar, like a mummer show that he had seen before. Only the mummers had changed. Roose Bolton was playing the part that Theon had played the last time round, and the dead men were playing the parts of Aggar, Gynir Rednose, and Gelmarr the Grim. Reek was there too, he remembered, but he was a different Reek, a Reek with bloody hands and lies dripping from his lips, sweet as honey. - a Ghost in Winterfell, aDwD

"Stark's little wolflings are dead," said Ramsay, sloshing some more ale into his cup, "and they'll stay dead. Let them show their ugly faces, and my girls will rip those wolves of theirs to pieces. The sooner they turn up, the sooner I kill them again." - The elder Bolton sighed. "Again? Surely you misspeak. You never slew Lord Eddard's sons, those two sweet boys we loved so well. That was Theon Turncloak's work, remember? How many of our grudging friends do you imagine we'd retain if the truth were known?" - Reek III, aDwD

Roose' arc is deeply connected to the relations he shares to the other northern lords, which has been heavily impacted by the Red Wedding. It stands to reason that they are going to be an important part of his downfall, and we see many hints of them plotting to betray him.

The north remembers, Lord Davos. The north remembers, and the mummer's farce is almost done. My son is home." - Davos IV, aDwD

Themes: Stannis and kinslaying

The books set up Roose and Stannis as foils as well; Both lack charisma and have trouble winnning the people's support, Stannis and Roose both parallel and contrast Ned, Stannis appears as a "lesser Robert" where Roose is a "lesser Ned", Stannis represents the fire where Roose represents the ice, both struggle over dominion in a land that doesnt particularly want either of them, etc... What i find interesting is how they are contrasted over kinslaying:

"Only Renly could vex me so with a piece of fruit. He brought his doom on himself with his treason, but I did love him, Davos. I know that now. I swear, I will go to my grave thinking of my brother's peach." - Davos II, aCoK

"I should've had the mother whipped and thrown her child down a well … but the babe did have my eyes." [...] "Now [Domeric's] bones lie beneath the Dreadfort with the bones of his brothers, who died still in the cradle, and I am left with Ramsay. Tell me, my lord … if the kinslayer is accursed, what is a father to do when one son slays another?" - Reek III, aCoK

Stannis is set up as someone who is very thorough and strict in following his own code and his "duty", even if he does not like what it forces him to do.

Stannis ground his teeth again. "I never asked for this crown. Gold is cold and heavy on the head, but so long as I am the king, I have a duty . . . If I must sacrifice one child to the flames to save a million from the dark . . . Sacrifice . . . is never easy, Davos. Or it is no true sacrifice. Tell him, my lady." - Davos IV, aSoS

The armorer considered that a moment. "Robert was the true steel. Stannis is pure iron, black and hard and strong, yes, but brittle, the way iron gets. He'll break before he bends." - Jon I, aCoK

Roose however is frequently characterized as someone who tries to get as much as he can while avoiding negative consequences, and who does not have a consistent moral code and instead bends rules to his benefit to be the most comfortable to him.

It is often theorized that Stannis will end up burning his daughter Shireen; the Ramsay issue might then serve to contrast the two men. If Grrm intends it to be compared by the reader, I can see it going two ways: Either Roose will be forced to finally act in a drastic way after avoiding his responsibility in regards to Ramsay and he will be forced to get rid of his son, making him break the only moral hurdle he has presented adhering to during the story (though analyzing his character, the kinslaying taboo is probably less a sign of moral fortitude and more him using the guise of morals to explain a selfish motivation). Or he might not act against Ramsay and suffer the consequences, presenting an interesting moral situation where some readers might consider his action "better" or more relatable than Stannis', breaking up the otherwise very black and white moral comparison between the two men. It serves as an interesting conflict of the morality of kinslaying compared to what readers might see as a moral obligation of getting rid of a monster such as Ramsay; contrasting Shireen whose death would not be seen as worth it by most. Ramsay as a bastard (who was almost killed at birth if he hadnt been able to prove his paternity) also makes for an interesting verbal parallel with the bastard Edric Storm, and might be used for a look at the utilitarian principle of killing a child (baby ramsay/edric) to save countless people from suffering that underpinned Edric's story.

"As Faulkner says, all of us have the capacity in us for great good and for great evil, for love but also for hate. I wanted to write those kinds of complex character in a fantasy, and not just have all the good people get together to fight the bad guy." - Grrm

"Robert, I ask you, what did we rise against Aerys Targaryen for, if not to put an end to the murder of children?" - Eddard VIII, aGoT

"If Joffrey should die . . . what is the life of one bastard boy against a kingdom?" - "Everything," said Davos, softly. - Davos V, aSoS

However Grrm decides to present these conflicts or which actions the characters will take in the end, it will result in interesting discussion and analysis for the readers.

His Endgame?

Looking at the trends of the past books, it is probably going to be hard to predict any specific outcome; every book introduces new characters and plot elements that were impossible to predict from the last book even if their thematic importance or setup was aptly foreshadowed.

Roose has a lot of plot importance and characterization that has, in my opinion, not yet been properly resolved in a way that would be unique and poignant to the specific purpose his character appears to fulfil. However I also have a bias in that i did not like the show's writing of that scene which makes me averse to see a version of it in the books, and i really like Roose as a character and want to see him have more scenes in the next book(s). This leads me to discount plot speculation that cuts his character arc short offscreen early. Roose is only a side character; however, i have trust in grrm's writing abilities and that he would give him a proper sendoff that feels satisfying to a fan of the character.

"…even the [characters] who are complete bastards, nasty, twisted, deeply flawed human beings with serious psychological problems… When I get inside their skin and look out through their eyes, I have to feel a certain — if not sympathy, certainly empathy for them. I have to try to perceive the world as they do, and that creates a certain amount of affection." — George Martin

Considering my earlier analyis, there is a case to be made for Roose killing Ramsay; however it appears grrm might have a different endgame in mind for Ramsay, foreshadowed in Chett's prologue:

There'd be no lord's life for the leechman's son, no keep to call his own, no wives nor crowns. Only a wildling's sword in his belly, and then an unmarked grave. The snow's taken it all from me . . . the bloody snow . . . - Chett, aSoS

I tend to think something might happen to Roose/the Bolton bloc later in the book that would cause Ramsay to attempt to flee the scene again like he did back in aCoK fleeing Rodrik's justice; perhaps Ramsay is sent out to battle but then flees it like a coward, or he sees his cause as lost. This time, the fleeing and potentially disguised Ramsay would not make it out to safety though, and get killed without being recognized as Ramsay, dying forgotten. This would serve as dramatic irony since Ramsay so strongly desired to be recognized and respected as a Lord of Bolton, without being too on the nose.

As for Roose, i could see him getting captured and somehow brought to justice (either when someone takes Winterfell or in some sort of battle). I see it unlikely that he will be backstabbed like Robb was, because it seems very "eye for an eye" and ultimately doesn't teach much of a lesson except "he had it coming"; But the various people conspiring against him could lead to his capture by betraying him (giving a payoff to the northern conspiracies and the red wedding). I would find a scene of him standing trial interesting since i believe we didn't have one of these for a true non-pov villain yet, and it would be an interesting confrontation that he cannot escape from (he also loves to talk so it would be a good read to see him make a case for himself).

I assume Roose will be out of the picture when the Other plot finally properly kicks into gear (whether dead or "in prison"). With Stannis as a false Azor Ahai and Roose as a false Other (with his pale, cold features), their struggle in the north seems to be a representation of the false "Game of Thrones" that distracts people from the "real threat" of the Others.

As always this is just my opinion, and it could all go very differently in the books! There could always be something that completely uproots my analysis and goes into a direction i did not expect from the material we had; But i have fate that Grrm as a writer will deliver and give me something i can be satisfied with.

[esther-dot]

Do you think Robb cared about Sansa? It's pretty sad to me that all the memories or discussions of them don't particularly seem so. There's the ghost memory, where he and Jon scared her, and she ran away screaming, and then no one went looking for her. There's also his angry comments about her not mentioning Arya in her letter when she's a literal hostage. It just seems like Robb didn't have a strong bond to her.

I think the trueborn Stark kids are meant to have a strong familial bond, even if they don’t have particularly close personal relationships. In spite of whatever issues they have one-on-one, imo it is accurate to say that they love each other, that the author wants us to know that they deeply care. I know as a Sansa fan, I get overheated at times in defending her, and sometimes that involves griping about other characters, but as much as I might think they failed her, it’s a mistake to take it to the extreme of “they don’t love her.” The author is fascinated by where relationships fray, not all the strengths/upsides, so I think with the Starks, it’s easy to allow those negative moments to define the relationship (because we don’t have many depictions of them happy together) when to Martin, those tension filled moments are plot relevant/points of interest, not the all-encompassing reality.

I interpreted Robb’s decision not to trade for the girls as an attempt to put aside his personal desires to do what was best for his people. I think conflicting obligations, family vs honor vs duty vs love vs what is right is something the author wants to talk about, and I am sure that Bran ends up endgame king because he learns how to balance it in a way that Robb and Jon fail to (they’re kinda on two different ends of the spectrum). I have a problem when writing that I like my characters to be good/smart/right, but in literature, that’s not terribly interesting, and I think, Martin likes to address an issue by presenting it over and over in different contexts, talking about it the same thing from different angles, so I wouldn’t take Robb’s failure to prioritize Sansa to mean he didn’t care. It is more a part of the larger discussion of Martin’s themes. Poor Cat even has that line, “She could not even say that Robb was wrong.” (ACOK, Catelyn VI).

Even that ghost scene, I think it serves characterization, fearless Arya who stands her ground and decides to fight a ghost. She didn’t think “this is Jon,” she specifically punches the spirit, I mean, hilarious. Love it! But, likewise, we need Sansa to be in character, and Sansa is not someone who would fight. She doesn’t just love her songs, she believes in them, that she is the damsel who needs to be rescued. We’re also given the impression just being down there was terrifying to her, poor thing, so running makes sense. I know for an idealized big brother/little sister dynamic Robb would comfort her, but I have siblings and we tried to scare each other too. I was usually on the receiving end, and some of the shit they pulled was a bit much, but I don’t ever remember being comforted after. I have no complaints though. I think this scene is cute. I don’t think the boys were being cruel to the girls. It’s just what siblings do.

Anyway, I guess my point is, the author isn’t writing random stuff for the sake of it, he’s including scenes to establish who characters are and talk about his larger themes. Because we’re attached to the character while reading we focus on how it’s impacting us emotionally, simply experiencing the work, but when we have questions like this it’s helpful to take a step back and ask, “what is the writer doing here?”

Also, I think that the fandom has a tendency to expect modern family dynamics in a world that prohibits that. They have no issue with accepting dragons, but for some reason they can’t wrap their heads around the different gender roles/gender segregated education/that these people lived in a castle and not a 21st century house and what all of that means for family bonds. As in, there are some major obstacles to Sansa spending significant time with her brothers. Arya runs away from what she is meant to be doing to spend time with Jon and gets in trouble for it. We can assume Sansa doesn’t do that, just as we can assume Robb and Bran aren’t coming to the sewing circle. So, do they love her? Yes. But, I tend to agree that she likely had no truly, deep connection with Robb (or any sibling) through no fault of her own, or even theirs. If I ever do a reread, I might change my mind, but I don't think anyone in the family was particularly close to her or truly knew her inner life because what she loves/wants isn’t really something anyone else can relate to.

[an-aries-that-is-on-fire]

TMA Archivist theory

I’ve had this theory since around the beginning of season 5, had no plans to post it, but due to potential plot relevance, thought it would be a fitting time to do so.  The general gist is though the Archivist is an avatar of the eye, their behavior acting as an archivist is most influenced by the first non-eye fear they are marked by.

Example 1: Gertrude Robinson. Fear: desolation

Favors arson/general property destruction as main mode of problem solving

More willing to put assistants in danger (destroying potential)

Focused on thwarting the fears more than documenting them

Didn’t leave much of a trail, she didn’t record many statements and was disorganized on purpose.

Did not use compulsion all that often ( a power also associated with the web)

Example 2: Jonathan Sims. Fear: web

Uses compulsion and beholding as main mode of problem solving

Values his relationship with archive assistants a lot more

Is more interested in learning about the fears than thwarting them (at first)

Not confrontational until absolutely necessary

Documents his work incessantly

Also both Gertrude and Jon supposedly joined the Magnus Institute because they were harmed by their respective fears (desolation killing Gertrude’s cat and Guest for Mr. Spider encounter). If this theory is true, that means the archivists mentioned last episode won’t be purely eye, but also have a secondary fear. 

[bibliocratic]

Highlights from the TMA interview

Highlights from the VHC interview this morning/afternoon

Alex and Jonny's discussion about planning TMA

Archivist Jon's character as moving from Cryptkeeper figure to narratively engaged character

The planning stages starting with The World (the lore), the Ending, and Season plots. (with minor adjustments, esp both of them saying the Lonely played a bigger role than initially planned)

Jonny still being a little gutted that they couldn't throw the S4 finale of the apocalypse into an out of nowhere shift in early S5, while acknowledging it was narratively a better choice)

Them both discussing that they wanted S5 to look at 'transitional apocalypse' narratives.

Martin's character

Before they even figured out the Powers of TMA, they knew they'd need a foil for the Archivist

Jonny: “He needs to hate someone”

S4 was originally going to focused more on how Martin engaged with fear, and wasn't going to originally be tied to the Lonely so much.

Jon and Martin's relationship intended to be the emotional arc of the story, though not necessarily in the early S1 stages as plot-relevant.

Other stuff

Jonny's book from Orion / Gollancz coming out this year in August called Thirteen Storeys ( described as 'tonally similar but not connected to the Magnus Archives)

The interviewer, Ian Muller's cat appearance

Jonny: “You can't hide cats from us”

Alex's favourite NPCs to play being Einstein ('a roaming id') and Ed ('everything that is lovely).

Everyone throwing shade on DND 3rd ed.

Alex and Jonny's really interesting discussions on tabletop gaming, RPGs and their background and experiences with them (both of them being GMs, and obviously Jonny and Sasha Sienna's Maguffin & Co.)

Sasha was also on the VHC's Horror and Comedy panel if anyone wants to check that out.

[ao3feed-themagnusarchives]

Though recent books are bolder

by imperfectcircle

Martin returns from the village to find Jon crouching down on the wet grass outside the safe house, locked in a battle of wits with a small, very scruffy cat. The cat appears to be winning.

Words: 4124, Chapters: 1/1, Language: English

Series: Part 22 of Stories by theme: Romance, Part 2 of An inevitable collection of post-159 one shots

Fandoms: The Magnus Archives (Podcast)

Rating: General Audiences

Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply

Categories: M/M

Relationships: Martin Blackwood/Jonathan "Jon" Sims | The Archivist

Additional Tags: MAG 160, No S5 spoilers, Scottish Safe House, Canon Asexual Character, trans!Martin (not plot relevant), Fix-It, accidental animal acquisition, a love letter to non-sexual physical affection, and to cats

source https://archiveofourown.org/works/24982906

[tanoraqui]

yooo so my dash is Poppin with TMA content like all day every day and it sounds engaging as hecks but also i don't???get it???at all??? how long is it how long are the episodes where can i listen who are the characters and what the heCK is the plot like can you pls explain this podcast to me using v small words i Am gonna listen but what iS it

it’s a horror anthology podcast with a framing device that develops plot, characters, and a lot of emotional trauma - and additional horror - as it goes. The basic of it is, Jonathan Sims has recently been appointed Head Archivist of the Magnus Institute, a paranormal research institute that collects statements of supernatural experience from basically anyone who wants to give one. His predecessor, Gertrude Robinson, left the statement archive in total disarray. Also, she died on the job. 

At the end of s1, Jon finds out that she died via murder. He learns this on the heels of the Institute being invaded by a woman who was a walking hive of worms. It gets more horrific and paranoia-inducing from there. Killer clowns! Endless twisting hallways! And old guy who likes roller coasters! All of these are recurring characters (well, the old guy has only appeared once in person, but he features in several statements. Sending people to terrified deaths!) You, as well as Jon and the other characters, gradually realize that all the statements are connected by delightfully elaborate-but-comprehensive worldbuilding and a very skillfully crafted multi-season plot. 

Episodes are generally 20-25 minutes, most consisting of a recorded statement (short horror story, varying degrees of plot-relevant) and a scene or two of the characters doing things. As you may guess, s1 is almost entirely just statements, but the character actions ramp up. There are 4 seasons of 40 episodes each; the s4 finale was today. Of note, the plot tends to develop/worldbuilding gets unveiled very slowly each season, until suddenly shit gets really real, really fast for the last few episodes.

Main characters include:

Jonathan Sims, Head Archivist of the Magnus Institute, permanently curious and occasionally kind

Martin Blackwood, an Archival Assistant with a crush on Jon

Sasha James, an Archival Assistant who is actually competent

Tim Stoker, an Archival Assistant who’s the designated The Hot One

Elias Bouchard, Head of the Magnus Institute, consummate bureaucrat and - spoilers you definitely know from my posts - manipulative bastard

Melanie King, YouTuber and eventual Archival Assistant; will fight you, fight that ghost, fight herself

Basira Hussain (s2 onward), police detective, Daisy’s partner, wants answers

Alice “Daisy” Tonner (s2 onward), police detective, Basira’s partner, wants to kill monsters

Georgie Barker (s3 on), Jon’s ex-girlfriend but still kind of friend, only consistant owner of a brain cell

the Admiral (s3 on), Georgie’s cat, whom we have been PROMISED will survive. 

We do not have any such promise about any other character. We have in fact been repeatedly promised a No Happy Ending. (It is a horror story.)

There’s other people who are pretty relevant later on, but I think I’ll leave it there for now. Generally I’ve left out the monsters. There’s going to be one more season, starting in April 2020.

[daenerys-targaryen-moved]

But, truly... Narrative-ly speaking, why IS Jon a half Targaryen after all? If there will be a 3rd dragon rider who isn't a Targ, then that wasn't necessary or relevant. If he is still a bastard then his life is just the same. If he is legitimate, then Dany is the real heir anyway and I would hate it if GRRM did the show thing with "THERE'S ALSO A MAN HEIR" drama especially since it's not believable for the masses after FAegon anyway, so what's the point????

I still believe in the three heads of the dragon theory they can pry that from my cold dead hands.

Hopefully GRRM remembers that Aerys made Viserys his heir after fearing that Rhaegar had been turned against him by the Dornish. Hopefully he remembers that after Viserys died, the throne went to his sister. Hopefully GRRM isn’t a dumbass who pulls “He has a cock.”

The thing with book!Jon is that he is very very ambitious. They made show!Jon this...... washed out version of his actual character.

Show!Jon: “You all made me your king, I never wanted it.”

Me, thinking back to how book!Jon dreaming about being Lord of Winterfell: Are you sure about that???

The main five all have their own story and play such very important roles in the plot. Jons entire identity is about him being a bastard. He was miss treated by pretty much everyone except Robb, Arya, Bran and Rickon simply because of his supposed birth status. He was sent to the wall. He was known as Ned Starks bastard. Jon does value his father and his honor (not to the extent of the dumb ass show) and his entire fucking world will be rocked once he finds out he’s not actually Ned Starks biological son. He’s going to be angry. He’s going to be resentful. He’s going to have an identity crisis at the age of 20. If him and Daenerys are together at that point in the series, he’s most likely going to push her away momentarily simply because his entire world is crumbling before his eyes.

Daenerys however, already thinks that there is someone claiming to be her brothers son. Jon and Daenerys will probably be together together at this point in the story, more than allies that is, and she will not be more worried about the throne than she will him. Like Jon, she will be in shock to learn that her lover is her brothers son, but eventually will most likely see it as fate or destiny that the world brought them together.

I don’t think Jon will just full on accept his Targaryen line, like, he’s not going to just put on Targaryen amour saying “with fire and blood!” but he will have to learn to accept both sides of his heritage. Stark and Targaryen. He isn’t Ned Starks son, but he’s Lyanna Starks son, therefore, still a Stark.

I think part of Jons story being that he’s not Ned Starks son is it tells a story that even the most honorable person can lie for someone they love. Ned lied to everyone, his best friend, his king, his wife, his children for years to keep Jon safe from Roberts wrath. He loved his sister so much that he did something not honorable in order to keep her son alive. He couldn’t tell anyone, not even his wife. Because he knew that if he told Cat that Jon is his sisters son, she wouldn’t have treated him as harshly as she did which would have raises suspicion. If it ever got out that Jon was Rhaegars true son, Ned and his family would have been traitors and most likely killed for it. 

It tells the story that the winners truly do write the history books. Robert had told everyone that Rhaegar kidnapped and raped Lyanna when that is further from the truth. It tells the story that even the most honorable person can lie to keep those they love safe.

Anyways I went on a tangent but yeah.

[qqueenofhades]

I know you dont watch GoT anymore. And that Braime and Sansa are your favorites. But I know you've read the books and are obviously really interested in the story. And I was just wondering what your thoughts are on the whole Jon killing Dany thing? Is that something you can see happening in the books? And if it is do you think it'd be in the same context as the show did it?

Ahaha, welp. Just jumping right in there.

(Also, you never have to apologise for asking GOT/ASOIAF questions. I obviously have been a fan for 16 years and wrote fuckin’ TNR with its half-million-plus words, so I clearly do have Thoughts on the story/characters, especially with the bag of lukewarm cat vomit that was s8 of the show.)

I already answered this ask discussing how much I hated the Mad Queen Dany thing, both because a) it was horrifically badly handled and b) these mediocre misogynist douchegobblers have managed to outdo themselves in terms of the gross messages they’ve sent about women, after 8 seasons of that. (These are the same people who made Sansa say that she was grateful for her rapes and who claimed that Dany’s turn into madness was foreshadowed by her having a “chilly” reaction to the death of her abuser, Viserys, in s1, so…. make of that what you will.) I’m not saying that it was narratively impossible, especially since GRRM has been toying with the same thing in the books and has more than his own share of Male Author Syndrome. But at the start of 8x04, Dany is in Winterfell, perfectly sane, toasting Arya as hero of the battle. By the end of 8x06, she’s crazy, a war criminal, and dead, murdered by her boyfriend, because… well, something something plot reasons. Even if you didn’t like Dany or were rooting for her to go mad or whatever, that was wildly badly handled.

I personally think it would be pretty gross for GRRM to also go down the Mad Queen route, though at least if he does, we will have had Dany’s POV chapters beforehand and presumably something resembling a justification and a building narrative momentum toward it. But she also got stuck in Meereen for so long because by his own admission he didn’t know what to do with her there or how to get her out of the situation and moved onto Westeros, which remains, theoretically, her outstanding goal in the books. It would obviously not be outside the realm of possibility for this to happen, given GRRM’s focus on “grittiness” that the show took to max factor 5000. I would still find it reductive and trying to make a Clever Postmodern Point and etc if it happened in the books, because literally why invest us in a character this long, especially one who has tried so hard to overcome the circumstances of her past/to not be her father, and then just do exactly that? Obviously there would be elements of Shakespearean tragedy to it, and if done well it could be compelling, but I personally just have a different approach to fiction and what people want out of a story (especially one now as famous as GOT/ASOIAF and how universally betrayed everyone seems to feel by the ending). I’m not saying Dany’s ultimate ending needs to be sunshine and roses and getting what she wants, because often character arcs and resolutions become all the more powerful for being subverted and thwarted (think the “I said I wanted [x] but [y] was there instead” sort of endings). But whatever it is, it needs to be…. not that.

Also, Jon in both books and especially show has been the epitome of Mediocre White Man. I stopped watching in s4, but Kit Harington’s acting was so wooden and the writing for him was very much Standard Misunderstood Brooding Fantasy Hero that I could barely pay attention to his scenes. I find him somewhat more interesting in the books, though ADWD dragged for everyone and it was obvious GRRM was writing in circles. But everyone has noticed that especially in the show, Jon does absolutely bupkis. His ass is constantly saved by the women in his life, he makes an absolute hash of any power that he is given and doesn’t want it anyway, and his ultimate ending was…. going back to the Night’s Watch (as their idea of satisfying narrative storytelling is to literally put everyone back where they were in the very first episode, apparently). Never mind the fact that there’s no need for the Night’s Watch, but the point is, even the fact that Jon is Rhaegar and Lyanna’s son ended up being relevant for like half an episode. That has been one of the major plot points/secrets of the books (although not so much anymore) and it just…. fizzled out like a damp squib. Dany actually TRIED for multiple seasons to be a good ruler and to learn how to handle power and become a queen, so for her to have to be the one to die for Jon to once again do diddlysquat is… well, as I have said before, the misogyny leaps out. They ended up wasting so much potential and so many other things that were also foreshadowed (and far more convincingly than “wah wah she was gonna go evil!”). For this? So Jon can just go brood in the snow again? Cool.

Not to mention, I find it gross on principle that Dany’s boyfriend had to be the one to kill her, especially after rape/sexual violence/loss of agency was such a big part of her early-season storylines (and how horrifyingly and grossly that has been handled on the show overall). We’re obviously supposed to sympathize with Jon in this scenario and to feel that it is justified to “stop a tyrant” or whatever. Also, if the episode was going to be called “Queenslayer,” why the fuck wasn’t it Jaime fulfilling the valonqar prophecy, another thing they forgot about, and killing Cersei, at great personal grief/cost, to once more stop an insane monarch from burning down King’s Landing? But that, of course, would be actual character development/overall arc, and they preferred to also trash that by having Jaime “killed Aerys Targaryen literally to save half a million innocent people and lived with his reputation being destroyed ever after” Lannister unironically claim that he never cared about the lives of the innocent and only wanted Cersei. After she again tried to kill him and Tyrion like three days ago, not even to mention what they did to Brienne and with that whole arc, but I will have a ragestroke if I think about it too much. 

Basically, the ending wasn’t “bittersweet.” It was tragic, reductionist, ham-handed, hugely disappointing for everyone who put years of investment into these characters, and ended up in the amusing position of making Bran Stark the younger and more beautiful queen who comes to cast Cersei down. He became king because… reasons? Whatever? And he knows literally everything about everyone thanks to being the Three-Eyed Raven, so there’s no way that can go horribly wrong. He has basically done nothing except sit in a wheelchair and look creepy for several years now, his arc has never been remotely about being king, and Isaac Hempstead-Wright himself is apparently on record as saying he genuinely thought it was a joke script when he read it. This after both Emilia Clarke and Kit Harington broke down over learning what happened to their characters/Kit apparently realized it for the first time at the read-through and was horrified. Emilia already talked about wandering for five hours and having a crisis and calling her mom and asking to be talked off the ledge like….. fictional choices/characters completely aside, that’s a gross thing to do to your actors. I know they’re all proud of their work and they have apparently and understandably been defensive about the existence of the petition to rewrite s8, but they’ve all been pretty clear, while still being professional and supportive, that there is stuff that they’re just as much WTF about as we are.

Basically, as everyone keeps saying, the acting, cinematography, visual effects, music, etc was clearly up to as high a standard as ever, but was betrayed fundamentally and comprehensively by this god-awfully shit writing by a couple of hacks who clearly rushed the final season to get on to ruining working on Star Wars. They have also been on record about saying “you can’t do what the audience expects or it’ll get boring blah blah blah,” which is a profoundly flawed storytelling strategy if you’re paranoid and trying to outsmart your audience and do something that nobody has ever thought of because you’re an Intellectual Postmodern Commentator On Our Violent Society. If your audience can guess where a story is going, but are still surprised by major twists along the way that then make sense in hindsight, you’ve done your job. If you’re relying on grimdark and cramming in gimmicky plot twists and deus ex machinas and Shocking Moments rather than authentically developing your story, it’s going to bite you in the ass in a big way, as was just proven. 

Nobody expected a completely happy ending from GoT. But the fact that they went to such lengths, especially in s8, to build up characters/ships (Jonerys, Braime, Gendrya were all torched after major canon moments completely unexpected by fans, especially the latter two – why even include it unless to just be more Tragique, and Gendrya is the only one that has even a chance in the future since half of it didn’t end up idiotically dead) and then just wrecked all of it…. as I’ve said, good endings don’t need to be rainbows and unicorns and kittens. But if you’ve asked eight years of audience investment, there has to be something that makes it worth it and that doesn’t make everyone feel like they were duped and stupid to get involved in the first place. They have been beating the “it’s a hard world and bad things happen to the characters” drum for all they’re worth, but… it’s just bad. You can analyse and ask why the hell they did things and so forth, but it’s bad. At this rate, the show should have either ended after 8x03, or they should have taken the money HBO offered and done the proper 10 episodes and let Bryan Cogman write all of them. He was the only one who appeared to remotely give a shit about the characters, and since D&D wrote the last four episodes themselves, yeah, this disaster is on them.

Fortunately, I left the show years ago and have TNR and am used to ignoring their version of things. And I knew all along that they never really got the characters or the story. But I feel really bad for everyone who has had this thrown back in their face, and it seems like a communal disenchantment with this ending is going to enter the pop-culture consciousness on a possibly unprecedented level. So if GRRM does do the Mad Queen Dany killed by Jon in the books (though he has apparently called the show’s ending “traumatic”), I’ll probably still not like it. He has a chance to sell me it on/justify it to me narratively, which the show categorically failed to do. I don’t think I will, just because as I said, I don’t like anything about it, but yes.

Anyway. This is a long post already, and I probably have more to say still, but it’s pretty obvious I think it’s just really, really bad, and that’s about the essence of it.