#anyway I do think that Jon will be an endgame king - king of what is the million dollar question

[nightswatchdisbandmentera]

Bastards & Arms, Girls and Swords (& vice versa)

“The Lannisters are proud,” Jon observed. “You’d think the royal sigil would be sufficient, but no. He makes his mother’s House equal in honor to the king’s.”

“The woman is important too!” Arya protested.

Jon chuckled. “Perhaps you should do the same thing, little sister. Wed Tully to Stark in your arms.”

“A wolf with a fish in its mouth?” It made her laugh. “That would look silly. Besides, if a girl can’t fight, why should she have a coat of arms?”

Jon shrugged. “Girls get the arms but not the swords. Bastards get the swords but not the arms. I did not make the rules, little sister.”

- Arya I, AGOT

This is a very iconic passage as far as contextualizing the ways in which Jon and Arya are outsiders in the established feudal society, all the while being insiders in some way. Jon’s quote (which establishes how the rules be) is the most recognizable part of this conversation due to what comes later (the gifting of Needle) but Arya’s preceding question is what jumped out to me as I was doing a reread of this chapter. This is mostly because it seems to get to the matter of feudal legitimacy.

Because Arya’s question had me thinking: beyond having marital ability, does possession of a sword establish legitimacy in the feudal system? Obviously the possession of arms does equate to legitimacy since one would get them by being born to a recognized legal union. But what does it mean to have one over the other? And what does it mean to have both? Can a person only be half legitimate? And where would that even matter?

As I was thinking about this, I immediately thought of Daemon Blackfyre, who was one of Aegon IV’s legitimized bastards. If memory serves me right, part of Daemon’s claim to kingship was that he held Aegon the Conqueror’s sword, Blackfyre (hence his dynastic name). His nickname was even “The King Who Bore the Sword” and many were inclined to follow him since his possession of the legendary sword seemed to signify kingship; and by passing the sword down to him, Aegon IV officially acknowledged him as his son. But the sword alone wasn’t legitimizing. That happened later when his father legitimized him and his other half siblings on his deathbed. After that, Daemon had both the sword and the arms and he could push his claim for the throne. So if we go back to Jon and Arya’s conversation, Daemon the bastard managed to get the two keys of legitimization (insofar as kingship goes): the sword and the arms.

Now, let’s go back to Jon and Arya. At this point in the story, Arya has the arms which were passed down to her by her father. She doesn’t have the sword here but a few chapters later (in Jon II) she is gifted Needle - her very own sword which specifically made for her. Over time, this sword becomes an integral part of her development and her identity. It’s interesting that Arya gets the arms from her father and the sword from her brother - almost like legitimacy is being passed down patrilineally; even more interesting when you consider that GRRM originally intended for Jon to be her husband.

Jon, on the other hand, arguably has neither. As a bastard, he has no right to any arms. And though he has the martial ability, he does not have the sword; the family sword, Ice, was going to go to his half-brother who was the heir. Even if Jon managed to get a sword, it probably would be inconsequential; meaning that it would not be as legendary as Ice is. But things change as the story progresses. Several chapters later, he is given his very own sword (which he earned on his own merit) when he is gifted Longclaw by Lord Commander Mormont. Jon thinks that this act is like Mormont recognizing him as a son; he is giving Jon his son’s sword. Then two books later, Jon gets the arms when he is legitimized by Robb’s royal decree; though one has to wonder if GRRM initially intended for Arya to be the one to give him the arms as he gave her the sword. Still, legitimacy passed down patrilineally for Jon as it did for Arya. It’s even flipped: one gets the arms from a father and the sword from a brother, while the other gets the arms from a brother and a sword from a (surrogate) father. Both go through situations where they have to assume some sort of leadership (though Jon’s is far more extensive than Arya’s). However, these situations of leadership (big or small) come not because they were passed down as demanded by feudal succession, but because they were earned.

So now we have to wonder, what does this mean for Jon’s and Arya’s futures given that they hold both signs of legitimacy (as it might relate to kingship if we consider the Daemon Blackfyre example)? They both have the sword and the arms. In addition to that, Jon has a plethora of king foreshadowing and symbolism in the text, despite being a bastard. And he is quite skilled as a warrior. Arya may not have Jon’s martial ability, but she has learned some that is relevant to her strengths as a young girl (so she’s not totally hopeless). She also has some queen foreshadowing in the books; her wolf is even named after a warrior queen and she claims to assume a shortened version of Nymeria in ACOK.

Could they mirror Daemon Blackfyre, who was an outsider who came to be recognized as king? It’s hard to tell what will happen given that we still have two books left, but it’s just some food for thought. In any case, this chapter and Jon II (where Arya got the sword) could serve as seeding for what’s in store for Jon’s and Arya’s ultimate journeys.

[zenkindoflove]

Elucien Parallels: Eddard and Catelyn Stark's Arranged Marriage/Marriage of Convenience Trope

I'm back again with more ACOTAR and ASOIAF/GOT parallels. You can go read this post where I breakdown my thoughts on comparing Elain Archeron and Sansa Stark as representing similar character archetypes in fantasy.

Today I want to talk about one of my favorite ASOIAF/GOT ships - Ned and Cat. What I want to do with this post is sort of breakdown the dynamics of their relationship and story arc and apply it to some common criticisms of Elucien and why in order to get the kind of tension Elucien have in canon, you need to have an understanding of how this particular trope works and the way these types of characters inhabit it.

So, a quick rundown on Ned and Cat and their relationship, just to get anyone reading this up to speed. Catelyn Tully was betrothed to Brandon Stark, Ned's older brother. Their betrothal represented a political alliance between the Starks of Winterfell and the Tullys of Riverrun - the liege lords of their respective regions. Despite being betrothed for political reasons, Catelyn fell deeply in love with Brandon anyways. And when he was tragically murdered by the Mad King, alongside his father, she was heart broken. Enters Ned, now the Lord of Winterfell, who has to secure this political alliance because he is about to wage a rebellion alongside his friend Robert Baratheon against the Targaryens. It makes perfect sense for him to marry his brother's betrothed. Ned and Cat get married quickly and off to war he went. When he returned a year later, he brought home his bastard, Jon Snow. He and Cat now have to figure out their marriage on top of not only being effectively strangers, but also with this betrayal looming over their relationship. When we enter the story of Game of Thrones, they have 5 children, the oldest Robb who was conceived just before Ned left for war, is 16. Cat and Ned are very much in love, showing open affection and devotion to each other. Cat is quoted later in the series telling her son Robb (show canon):

"Love didn't just happen to us. We built it slowly over the years, stone by stone, for you, for your brothers and sisters, for all of us. It's not as exciting as secret passion in the woods, but it is stronger."

Okay, so where does Elucien come into all of this and why should you care if you ship them?

Well, I think Cat and Ned's story illustrates a lot of things and disproves many doubts that are thrown at Elucien being endgame.

Betrayal

First is this issue of betrayal - that Lucien's involvement with Tamlin and his inevitable association with the situation in Hybern (though he did not know the extent of the deal with Hybern nor at all that Feyre's sisters had been kidnapped) will be such a huge breach of trust that Elain will never be able to get over it. That the relationship is dead before it even started.

Ned and Cat are a perfect example of how many anti-Eluciens are wrong when they think that Elucien are essentially dead before they start. By bringing home Jon Snow and raising him in his home amongst his trueborn children, Ned inflicted a huge betrayal onto his wife before they ever truly started their relationship. Although, at least in show canon, we know this ends up being quite a noble lie by Ned, this is never something that he reveals to Cat. So, Cat must swallow her pride and her jealousy and continue to be Ned's wife. This does not mean she has to fall in love with him, as it is not expected of her to, but she does all the same. Why? Because of Ned's inherent goodness and devotion to her. Cat sees that Ned is a good, honorable man - which is why she ultimately believes the rumors that Jon must be Ashara Dayne's son and that he is a love-child that Ned cannot bear to abandon. Because as she comes to know Ned, she sees his heart and his moral standing.

Which is all to say, that regardless of whether Elain begins her journey angry and blaming Lucien for association with her being Made and the end of her engagement, by getting to know him and spending time with him, she too will be able to see Lucien's inherent goodness. It is unavoidable and undeniable. Lucien, much like Ned, is honorable, loyal, and stands up to the face of evil, even if it will stupidly get him killed. He takes ownership over the people in the lands he runs and cares for that responsibility and their well being deeply. He commits violence when he must but he does not enjoy it. These are all traits that suited Cat well and why she ended up having such a loving marriage to Ned through many, many years. And likewise, suit Elain well and why she and Lucien will have a healthy and loving mating bond.

Reluctant Tension

Many anti-Eluciens do not understand the romantic tension presented in their situation. They see their distance, polite exchanges, and reactions as a sign of indifference or discomfort. It is a far cry from the explosive anger and deliberate pushing away that Nesta displayed with Cassian. Sometimes it's easier to understand Nessian's romantic tension because passion can exist both in anger and desire. But what about the stilted interactions of Elucien?

This is also where I will draw parallels to Ned and Cat. Ned and Cat did not go to the alter kicking and screaming. They were not political rivals or enemies. Catelyn did her duty with her head held high, living her house words (Family, Duty, Honor). Catelyn is often described as the picture of a noble lady - well-mannered, kind, diligent, dutiful, and respected. She held a high place of honor at Riverrun, effectively serving as Lady of the house after her mother's passing at a young age, and then taking over the role of Lady of Winterfell. She earned loyalty and respect amongst her subjects. We don't know much about the dynamic of Ned and Cat at the early days of their relationship. But what we can infer based on how Cat describes this time period, is that Cat hid her reluctance and anger behind silent pride. It was over time, as she grew to know Ned that this distrust and distance was thawed and she fell in love with him.

Similarly, Ned is not a hot head. He is grounded and stone-faced, a trait that Cat actually did not like initially because it was so different from his brother who she was in passionate love with. Brandon was a hot-head, charming, and funny. He was a showboat and is basically how he came to duel Petyr Baelish in the first place. But Catelyn eventually realizes the wisdom in loving a man like Ned, rather than the girlish love she had for Brandon.

Now Elain and Lucien are not mirror images of this. Lucien is certainly much more savvy and charming than Ned. And Elain is not forced into a romantic relationship with Lucien at all even with the mating bond. She has been given total freedom to choose, unlike Cat. But, my point here is that the presentation of their romantic tension, which is more quiet and understated and can confuse some readers who have a preference for the more passionate displays of tension, is very similar to Ned and Cat in the beginning of their relationship.

Now, as we learn both in the books and the show, Cat and Ned at the start of the series are well into their 16+ year marriage and are quite passionate now. They have many loving physical displays with one another, often passionately kissing or referencing passionate lovemaking they just had. They speak to each other with such warm affection others have to look away. It is clear they have deep love for each other that goes beyond duty. The passion certainly developed between them along the way. With Elucien I'm sure this will play out much differently given the presentation of the mating bond and how we know it affects people. It's very likely both of them are deeply desiring each other already, and very likely that they will have some dramatic rows between them, as it is likely Ned and Cat had as well, once they start really talking about the hard topics. But the point is that passion and the potential for passion does not have to be readily observable right from the start. If anything, there is something very delicious in the steady build-up to it through many of the tropes we see in historical romances where there are rules and etiquette to courtship (which many suspect Elucien will play with some regency era tropes).

Conclusion:

I really love finding parallels between ships of my favorite series, and there is of course a lot to draw from when its two fantasy series. In the end, my bigger point is that great love can come from Arranged Marriage/Marriage of Convenience Tropes which Elucien inhabit with the nature of their bond snapping right when they met. It's not for everyone, but for those of us who get it... we really get it. Fortunately for us, Elucien exist in a romance with HEAs and not the world of ASOIAF/GOT so they won't meet the same tragic fates as Ned and Cat *sobs*.

[catofoldstones]

its my personal opinion that it will be arya that ends up killing dany and jon killing the king of the white walkers. a lot of reasons towards this idea is that d&d fliped around the ending that grrm showed them and the fact that arya has more plot and relevance with slavery and jon has more relevance with white walkers. also i believe jon will uploaded neds beliefs of sparing dany leaving it up to arya to actually killing her to protect her family and the north

The theory definitely has merit! Arya training with the Faceless Men and then assassinating Dxny when she sits the Iron Throne a-la-Maegor style is very compelling. Dxny apparently being killed by a blade of the same Iron Throne she had been running after her whole life is such smooth storytelling. It is something that we have foreshadowing and compelling evidence for as well. Not to mention Robert thinks of sending one of the Faceless Men as assassins to slay her in the first book. A Faceless Man ending the act to its true satisfaction is a well written storyline if I know one. Moreover, it would be such a rich conclusion to the story arc that Dxny has slowly started on since the end of AGoT and is more apparent since ASoS & ADWD.

However, I have been recently thinking that Dxny dying in a fire would also be interesting. It would form a parallel with the first book wherein she emerged from a fire, literally rebirthed with her dragons. She might trigger the wildfire in KL and die in it as a crazy twist to the adage “fire cannot hurt a Targaryen” which we all know is untrue. It also aligns well with her tragic antagonist status. She is someone who tries her best to solve a situation only to find herself in a sticky situation of the same making, or worse. So I believe that if she (accidentally, unknowingly, not knowing better, thinks is for the good) sets off the KL wildfire, that would be very in-character for her. Not only will the wildfire take down the Iron Throne with it (which will 100% not exist by the end of the series), it will also burn down Kings Landing, which also is foreshadowed to not survive the ending by way of getting burned down.

I don’t believe that Jon will leave it to Arya to kill Dxny in any capacity simply because he doesn’t have that authority over her. More than that, I don’t think Jon & Dxny’s arcs will intertwine as much as they did in the show or even enough that Jon will think it a personal duty to eradicate Dxny. Although, I do think that the show very obviously exchanged Arya and Jon and Bran’s endgame. It definitely makes more sense for Bran and Jon to be ones to defeat the Others - the Ice Threat- finally (though there is no Night King in the books, which is sad because I miss my frosty man :,( sigh anyway) and Arya to defeat the Fire Threat given her training and motivations. Idk what d&d were thinking, seriously.

But what can I say, some of my opinions are still crystalizing and shaping as I reread the books and interact with other meta.

[norakbubbles]

I just finished the final episode of Game of Thrones about two hours ago and....*sighs*

I have many feelings and I'm going to list them:

1. Braime and Theonsa could have been endgame couples if the writers weren't COWARDS-

2. "Bran the Broken" makes me giggle bc they literally couldn't find any other nickname for him

3. I still low-key think Gendry should have been king in the end, given he technically was supposed to have the iron throne after Robert died in the first place

3. Yaayyy Jon, Tormund and Ghost are together again (if s8 ended with me not being able to see Tormund for one last time I would've thrown hands)

4. Literally poor tyrion being made another hand of someone he barely knows when he doesn't want to

5. Bronn wanting to prioritize rebuilding brothels over ships makes me laugh

6. Robin Arryn's glow-up shocked me bc he actually doesn't look like an iPad kid anymore 👏👏

7. Sandor being one of the casualties in the final fight saddened me more than Jaime I'm sorry but it did

8. Ngl I forgot who Edmure Tully was for a hot minute when he showed up

9. Dany's death did not make me upset but Drogon's reaction to her death did idk why

10. Did anyone else go "Now what?" during the last few minutes? Like Sansa being crowned queen of the North and Jon and Tormund going off with the wildlings and Ghost? Like what are they gonna do now? There really aren't any more threats. If anyone does know of any still existing threats by the end of the series let me know

Anyway, I'm pretty sure my mom is tired of hearing me yap about Braime all the time and my sis and I both agree that Theon should have been there with Sansa as she was crowned. I loved the series, and will most likely be moving on to HotD next bc I've heard it's good. Yes season 8 could have been better but in the end, we just have to accept that that's how the series ended and there's nothing we can do about it....

that's what fanfiction is for... 😗

[cappymightwrite]

I don't think Jon gonna love Dany in books if jonsa is endgame. Even if he is conflicted about his feelings for his half sister, the torment isn't suddenly going away if he would meet Dany. It's because those feelings are going to be strong. Dany is basically foil to Sansa character and even starks in general. Considering he had met people who reminded Jon of dany but in negative light going to affect his viewpoint. He had to forget everything to love her.

This is a very old ask, apologies! I'm going to attempt to catch up with a few of them, now that I've got a free weekend 😅 Anyway...

I think more and more now, I agree. They are fundamentally too different for love to grow there, certainly from Jon's side because through the characters of Stannis and Melisandre, especially, we start to get a real sense of how D*ny and Jon's politics will likely rub each other the wrong way. Death by fire is truly horrifying and it's through Jon's eyes that we see that horror firsthand:

Jon watched unblinking. He dare not appear squeamish before his brothers [...] The horn crashed amongst the logs and leaves and kindling. Within three heartbeats the whole pit was aflame. Clutching the bars of his cage with bound hands, Mance sobbed and begged. When the fire reached him he did a little dance. His screams became one long, wordless shriek of fear and pain. Within his cage, he fluttered like a burning leaf, a moth caught in a candle flame. – ADWD, Jon III

The imagery of the burning of the glamoured Mance used above goes some way to mask its real horror by describing his writhing in excruciating pain as like "a little dance," his catching on fire as like "a burning leaf" or a "moth caught in a candle flame." These are far more palatable images, small, inconsequential things to make this horror smaller too, to make it easier to withstand and to watch, unblinking. It's a very human response, on Jon's part, because how else to you go on, having witnessed something so horrifying, if you don't attempt to minimise it in some way, if only for yourself?

And this is just one person. One burning. I think you're quite right, Jon would have to erase this experience from his mind in order to love a person so cavalier with fire. And actually, even if he hadn't witnessed this, I don't think it's in his character to fall in love with D*ny, especially because Jon has also had the experience of somewhat being part of a democratic system at the Watch. I say somewhat because obviously it's flawed, but you know, they attempt to vote fairly on things, decisions aren't always down to one person. With D*ny, there is no taking a vote, it is her judgement at the end of the day and if she thinks you deserve to burn, then honey, you're burning, without any need to busy about setting up a pyre too.

I'm a Jonsa truther, but even excluding that... I think some readers are a little too happy to discount the politics of individual characters and families in favour of what would be "cool" for their fave — I'm talking about D*ny and Arya, D*ny and Arianne, getting along like besties, or just generally the idea of a Targ restoration.

You know, Ned had a very defined set of personal politics, of principles, an adherene to an "older way", and in Jon, as well as the rest of the Starklings, we see a continuation of those principles.

"King Robert has a headsman," he said, uncertainly. "He does," his father admitted. "As did the Targaryen kings before him. Yet our way is the older way. The blood of the First Men still flows in the veins of the Starks, and we hold to the belief that the man who passes the sentence should swing the sword. If you would take a man's life, you owe it to him to look into his eyes and hear his final words. And if you cannot bear to do that, then perhaps the man does not deserve to die. "One day, Bran, you will be Robb's bannerman, holding a keep of your own for your brother and your king, and justice will fall to you. When that day comes, you must take no pleasure in the task, but neither must you look away. A ruler who hides behind paid executioners soon forgets what death is." – AGOT, Bran I

Now, D*ny doesn't have a paid executioner, but like Targ kings before her, she is not the one swinging the sword either. It is her dragons who are her executioners with fire as their sword, and it makes you wonder... "a ruler who hides behind [dragons] soon forgets what death is." Contrast this with Ned and the Stark boys at the very beginning of AGOT, and then again, with Jon not only witnessing the burning of (the latter revealed to be glamoured) Mance, but also ordering archers to mercy kill him:

One arrow took Mance Rayder in the chest, one in the gut, one in the throat. The fourth struck one of the cage's wooden bars, and quivered for an instant before catching fire. A woman's sobs echoed off the Wall as the wildling king slid bonelessly to the floor of his cage, wreathed in fire. "And now his Watch is done," Jon murmured softly. Mance Rayder had been a man of the Night's Watch once, before he changed his black cloak for one slashed with bright red silk. Up on the platform, Stannis was scowling. Jon refused to meet his eyes. – ADWD, Jon III

And to bring this back round to Jonsa:

The smile that Lord Janos Slynt smiled then had all the sweetness of rancid butter. Until Jon said, "Edd, fetch me a block," and unsheathed Longclaw. – ADWD, Jon II

So... I'm sorry but, ya know, Targs and Starks, they're chalk and cheese really, and Jon is a true Stark, no matter his name or parentage. As the story progresses, D*ny is leaning more and more into the exceptionalist T*rg, fire and blood way, whereas Jon will always adhere to that "older way," a way that reveres ones duty to others, to what is fair and just, above all, and often the following of these principles comes at the cost of your own personal longings:

He wanted it, Jon knew then. He wanted it as much as he had ever wanted anything. I have always wanted it, he thought, guiltily. May the gods forgive me. It was a hunger inside him, sharp as a dragonglass blade. – ASOS, Jon XII Jon said, "Winterfell belongs to my sister Sansa." – ADWD, Jon IV

You're right, D*ny and the T*rgs are very much foils to the Starks and we know how much Jon loves the Starks through his execution of Janos Slynt (who took part in Ned's execution), his defence of Sansa's inheritance, he striving to save (who he believes to be) Arya etc., etc. D*ny could be the messiah with bells on and even then she wouldn't come out on top over Jon's loyalty to and love of the Starks. It's just in him, deep in the very marrow of him:

"[...] you must do what needs be done," Qhorin Halfhand said. "You are the blood of Winterfell and a man of the Night's Watch." – ACOK, Jon VI

Jon knows who he is in the sense that he knows what kind of man he is, what kind of man he hopes to be (one like Ned). A lot of people have fallen under D*ny's dragon goddess spell, both in the books and outside of them, but I don't think Jon is going to be one of them.

Thanks for the ask and apologies for taking so long to answer it!

[agentrouka-blog]

My favourite thing when anons want to stir trouble is that like, inevitably they have consistent misspelling habits which mean you know exactly who it is sending repeat asks. So unself-aware.

Anyway, I do think there is a balanced path between the text and what the author says. GRRM's comments about Sansa are about as light as they could come. I love when people want to ungenerously frame the debate as if she's tantamount to Tyrian or Daenerys, come on. Girl took a steak knife to see a drunken knight in the godswood. The most harm she's going to inflict is driving Jon crazy with the incest. I'm trying to be lighthearted here.

Anyway, Rouka, what's your opinion on author vs. text? How much is too much, relying on the former? On the other hand, with the Daenerys is a tragic hero fandom, there's a lot of outright twisting of the text. Does relying on the author's comments provide some clarity or just make the conversation harder, since one would want to reason based on the text? Thank you for your time and your graceful handling of us terrible anons 🥰

(The posts referenced: one and two)

(I'm chronically bad at recognizing these individuall spelling patterns. Unless they make it obvious, every anon is a newborn dawn to me.)

Hello and thank you!

For me, the actual text of the books should always be central when it comes to actually analyzing the books. (You know. Obviously.) Interviews can be nice, but should be absolutely optional to any of it. If you NEED an interview to support your position, you're not analyzing the text.

Perhaps I am biased because I can't be bothered to follow GRRM interviews, let alone dig up ancient ones - unless I am feeling especially motivated.

But also, most of the time we don't have a lot of good context for GRRM's quotes. How exactly a question was phrased, what direction the conversation went before it, how distracted or rushed was GRRM when answering, how likely is it he actually managed to get across exactly what he meant, and how easily can it get twisted around? Who edited and published it? Worse, did it go through a translation process?

Take the "Aragorn's Tax Policy" quote that still has people frothing at the mouth. People hear him mention Tolkien and lose all sense of nuance. No, he's not describing how his endgame king will be elected on his tax plan. He's giving context for parts of ADWD. That's it. Still people wail about what an evil hypocrite GRRM supposedly is because Bran was crowned king in the show without a single published treatise on his taxation policy.

Same with some commentary on the show, specifically Dany with Drogo. I've had people in my Inbox arguing for Rhaegar/Lyanna because GRRM is obviously okay with adult men preying on teenaged girls based on that interview. Which... you know, actually read Dany's chapters? Please?

The books, on the other hand, were not blathered out in a hurry. They are not a commentary on a text, they are the text. A labor of many hours of writing, editing, rewriting and more editing. They are complete and fully intentional in their form. They are the message.

So, while I admire how someone who knows what they are doing is able to create a brilliant body of supporting evidence on book content by compiling quotes in a meaningful way, often with good sources and context - looking at you here, @kellyvela - these lovely metas should never be considered necessary to understanding the text, and they should certainly neither replace nor supercede it. They augment the experience of it.

Knowing GRRM approved on the Meereenese Blot essays is nice.

But you don't need to know them, nor what GRRM thinks of them, in order to arrive at the same conclusion.

Knowing GRRM agrees with the statement that "Brienne is Sansa with a sword" is nice.

But you need never have heard of that quote in order to understand the similarities between these two idealistic, dutiful female characters.

He called Tyrion a villain, which is nice.

But you can arrive at that same conclusion by reading the books.

On the other hand, you can take one quote about the Key Five Characters from a decades-old outline that deviates from established plot in multiple significant instances, and then try and justify dismissing the importance of other characters. You just need to ignore the published text in order to do it!

So I just can't take that anon seriously when they gesture wildly at some quote about Sansa while ignoring the way it's entirely contradicted by the actual body of the text.

And if some members of the fandom have a habit of very selectively reading the text then this makes their analysis suspect, so what's really the point of arguing with someone who isn't really interested in analysis in the first place?

If "she burned a slave alive" or "she is ordering her servant to please her sexually" or "she condons torture even while she knows its useless" or "she ordered the murder of children" isn't going to convince them, an interview snippet isn't going to do it, either.

[janiedean]

I read your metas on why you think GRRM always meant for Bran to be KITN, not King of the 7K as per what he told Benioff and Weiss during their decades-long intimate working relationship on the show adaptation and I have to say I disagree lol. I don't really understand how someone can think that Benioff and Weiss were told 'yeah Jon sits the throne and the irrelevant 8 year old fourth son of the Stark family becomes KITN' and D and D were like, 'ummm no we're going to blow our legacy by putting BRAN of all characters on the IT, and not giving our fan favorite character his shining moment on the IT.' I don't like Bran as King and neither did D and D, but they had to maintain that GOT was some semblance of an adaptation so they had to use Martin's endgames. It blows my mind that people still deny this. I do think the north being independent and Sansa being QITN was fanservice tho. She will likely be Lady of Winterfell, not queen. Anyone that thinks she ends her story in the Vale is deeply unserious.

Jon's a chosen one deconstruction because once he finds out about his parentage, it's not going to be a good thing that gives him a renewed sense of self like in the thousands of other chosen one fantasy arcs. It will be a devastating revelation for him and cause a very negative identity crisis. Also, his parentage was always meant to be a red herring, why do you think GRRM set it up in a way that there is literally no way for Jon to prove he's actually R and L's son? Much less prove he's a legitimate son born from a valid, legal marriage? I don't think anyone outside of Jon's very close inner circle will ever know the truth about who his real parents are, it's not something he will want to ever be made known lmao. The show conflating Jon with YG, not adapting YG, and basically being a Jon Snow is So Great Fanservice vehicle in the last few seasons has made the fandom think that's where his arc is leading, it's not. Not that GRRM will ever publish another book, but anyway.

Also, Jon is not AA, it is Dany. The thing is.....that's not a good thing lol. The AA prophecy is basically prophesizing the coming of Khal Stalin, not a savior lmao. That's the twist and the double edge sword with prophecies that is so very Martin. The constant debates among the fandom as to who is AA is so hilarious because they fundamentally don't understand that it's a negative prophecy. The dramatic irony of house targ thinking they need to bring about the AA prophecy to save humanity when in actuality they are unleashing a new evil that needs to be defeated is deeply delicious dramatic irony. But the fandom is too bogged down into the most basic fantasy tropes to see it and refuses to acknowledge that GRRM is cynically deconstructing these tropes. Almost as if he's trying to say that being the son of the crown prince actually sucks and will make the supposed 'chosen one's' life hell, the ethereal looking princess with the sympathetic backstory is actually an authoritarian tyrant who's bloody conquest for the iron throne using her hordes of brainwashed killing machines will cause destruction not restore some great dynasty, and the 'broken' disabled boy with special mind powers who is able to look into all of history to learn from the mistakes of all the monarchs that came before him is the 'best' ruler for a 'broken' realm.

I'm uuuuh, gonna try and reply to this as briefly as I can but like with the premise that everyone can agree or disagree with anything and text interpretation can't be set in stone until like the entire thing is over... in order

I don't really understand how someone can think that Benioff and Weiss were told 'yeah Jon sits the throne and the irrelevant 8 year old fourth son of the Stark family becomes KITN' and D and D were like, 'ummm no we're going to blow our legacy by putting BRAN of all characters on the IT, and not giving our fan favorite character his shining moment on the IT.'

anon I don't wanna sound rude but.... they lit set jon up to kill the night king and then made arya of all ppl do it NONSENSICALLY just to make ppl surprised, they literally shat all over the entire text since S2 if not S1 already, just the robb storyline shows they didn't understand anything about the point of the red wedding which they said they WANTED to adapt and they basically made shit up since s4 onwards without anything making literal sense including making c*rsei the ultimate boss when there is no shred of text evidence she's that important and grrm is pissed with the ending so like... I can 100% think that both of them didn't gaf about what grrm had to say and just understood what they wanted to, also because we're talking abt the ppl who made stannis go agamemnon on shireen because they hated his ass when if shireen dies like that no way it's stannis ordering it by any shred of textual sense so I absolutely will say dnd didn't gaf about what grrm said and threw their legacy in the trash, that because.... everyone thought the finale was trash and they haven't had a gig like that since bc no one wants them after got, with good reason, so like ppl can say that because there is nothing dnd have done as showrunners that shows they gaf about the og text, end of story

I don't like Bran as King and neither did D and D, but they had to maintain that GOT was some semblance of an adaptation so they had to use Martin's endgames. It blows my mind that people still deny this. I do think the north being independent and Sansa being QITN was fanservice tho. She will likely be Lady of Winterfell, not queen. Anyone that thinks she ends her story in the Vale is deeply unserious.

except the jc endgame is obviously not the book endgame, lit no one's endgame except imvho jon's (hahaha) and possibly tyrion/davos is the actual book endgame and I'd like everyone to remember there's no shred of textual evidence rickon doesn't die in the books but anyway like... sorry but dnd not wanting to put jon on the IT for shock value (which is obvious since everyone expected it) and not giving bran kitn to give it to sansa so ppl who wanted her to be queen would be happy makes absolute sense to me, also like... again I'm not gonna go over it again bc you said you read the meta but: bran is a deconstructed version of a kingly arthurian archetype which by himself means that he has to become king while being disabled/in virtue of having lost his legs so like sorry but bran being king is absolutely in the text but no way it makes sense it's 7k since he's directly tied to his land and its magic same as the fisher king so......

Jon's a chosen one deconstruction because once he finds out about his parentage, it's not going to be a good thing that gives him a renewed sense of self like in the thousands of other chosen one fantasy arcs. It will be a devastating revelation for him and cause a very negative identity crisis

I agree and I wrote a longass meta about jon being a chosen one deconstruction but being AA/his inheritance absolutely does not rule out it being a deconstruction imvho

Also, his parentage was always meant to be a red herring, why do you think GRRM set it up in a way that there is literally no way for Jon to prove he's actually R and L's son?

howland reed was there when he was born and lyanna could have told him and ned they were married, also bran can lit travel in time and prove it/see it happen, but even if he's not legitimate wrt rhaegar it doesn't matter because in the book he's legitimate wrt robb's will so he's gonna get kitn title at some point even just for that but like... point is if howland reed corroborates it and he gets a pet dragon or smth and no one has reasons to disagree esp because they'll need to kill zombies whether r/l were married doesn't matter at all

Much less prove he's a legitimate son born from a valid, legal marriage? I don't think anyone outside of Jon's very close inner circle will ever know the truth about who his real parents are, it's not something he will want to ever be made known lmao. The show conflating Jon with YG, not adapting YG, and basically being a Jon Snow is So Great Fanservice vehicle in the last few seasons has made the fandom think that's where his arc is leading, it's not. Not that GRRM will ever publish another book, but anyway.

we can't know about wrt grrm publishing something else or not but again: howland reed knows and he's still around and kicking and there is no reason for people to not make it known especially when it comes out and they have to treat with dany, also the show conflated young griff with both jon and cersei and jon connington with jorah and daenerys which makes no sense whatsoever so like that argument holds zero water bc they didn't know what they were doing and it shows

Also, Jon is not AA, it is Dany. The thing is.....that's not a good thing lol. The AA prophecy is basically prophesizing the coming of Khal Stalin, not a savior lmao. That's the twist and the double edge sword with prophecies that is so very Martin.

anon the second maester aemon said on page AA is daenerys out loud it went out of the window, the way asoiaf prophecies are structured everyone who's rumored to be X by other people/themselves before it actually happens won't be that, and jon only ever was deemed a candidate by a vision melisandre had... which she immediately discarded bc she didn't understand what the hell her own god was telling her so sorry but I don't agree and it's not gonna happen

The constant debates among the fandom as to who is AA is so hilarious because they fundamentally don't understand that it's a negative prophecy. The dramatic irony of house targ thinking they need to bring about the AA prophecy to save humanity when in actuality they are unleashing a new evil that needs to be defeated is deeply delicious dramatic irony. But the fandom is too bogged down into the most basic fantasy tropes to see it and refuses to acknowledge that GRRM is cynically deconstructing these tropes. Almost as if he's trying to say that being the son of the crown prince actually sucks and will make the supposed 'chosen one's' life hell, the ethereal looking princess with the sympathetic backstory is actually an authoritarian tyrant who's bloody conquest for the iron throne using her hordes of brainwashed killing machines will cause destruction not restore some great dynasty, and the 'broken' disabled boy with special mind powers who is able to look into all of history to learn from the mistakes of all the monarchs that came before him is the 'best' ruler for a 'broken' realm.

anon I don't even disagree with all of this but:

i do not think that in any way shape or form jon is not AA - there is no way he's not, he's lit the only one who actually came back to life in the show if we wanna show truth and there's no other character who lit resurrected and no one else will so there's that, he died according to the prophecy and no one in text would ever put a cent on AA being him, like.,........ what we know is not what they do and for westeros jon snow is the least likely candidate soooo like sorry but I don't think it makes sense that anyone else is AA, you can think it's dany but idt there's a chance in hell

I think the evil is already there and it's zombies, like... ik the show made it look like the long night was nothing but it's the actual ultimate big bad so there's no need for AA to be another evil, rhaegar would have misunderstood the og prophecy well enough as it is without getting that far

jon being the chosen one and AA would still make his life hell

idt dany is written in the book as an authoritarian tyrant and idt it's where she's headed and I'm saying it as someone who doesn't gaf about dany and doesn't care either way but the show version was just ridiculous and nothing in the text says she's headed there whatsoever

I also agree this fandom cannibalizing itself over who is AA is ridiculous... because it's jon and there's no reason to further argue over that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

bran can absolutely be the best ruler for a broken realm,..... the north, which has been mauled and will be further mauled by the zombies, and it makes no sense he is 7k anyway given his background and stuff, again you can disagree with it as you want but idt anything that happened in the show except an extremely selected amount of things which are absolutely out of context has a chance in hell of happening in the books and from the way grrm reacted to the finale it seems obvious to me, then... again you can agree or disagree with me but I wrote so much meta on the topic I honestly feel like I'd be rehashing myself over and over if I went about it again but like

of course everyone believes in their own interpretation but there's no way I'm gonna be swayed by any argument agains kitn!bran and 7k!jon who then abdicates and goes to the wildlings by anything that's not grrm publishing ados and writing differently, godspeed and that's mvho ;)

[alaynasansa]

My opinion on some asoiaf ships

Jal ->

* They aren't gonna be endgame. Val is kinda a blank slate, even Harry Hardyng has more personality and he only appeared in a sample chapter + Jon dreams of an idyllic life with Val, but based on his own tastes, in his own image of what Val should be, and this imagined future is shattered the moment Val declares that Shireen, an innocent child, should be killed. Jon is rightfully disgusted "this was a Val that Jon had never seen before", this Val is the real one, not the one he had imagined, and Jon isn't attracted to the real Val

Stardyng ->

* I kinda ship them. Listen Harry isn't perfect, far from it, but he isn't significantly older than Sansa, he didn't abuse her, he didn't sexualised her (guys she's 13), he geniunely admires her qualities (her intelligence and humor), he apologized for his classism (and he hates LF so it's no wonder he didn't want to marry LF's "bastard daughter")

Starkpoole ->

* They're perfect, okay ? They need to heal and get justice and then to be happy together in Winterfell thank you very much

Ned x Ashara ->

* I'm of the opinion Ashara was Ned's teenage love. Cat was the love of his life, but in my headcanon he geniunely cared about Ashara and he repressed his memories of her. Just like his eldest daughter, Ned repressed a lot of his trauma because it hurts him too much. He only thinks of Lyanna when he's triggered by traumatic events like Sansa pleading for Lady or when he's injured and anesthetized by the milk of the poppy and he barely thinks of his own father and brother so it wouldn't be surprising

Jaime x Addam ->

* Why not ? Childhood friends and sparring mates. He's the only speaker Jaime trusts with his secret

Arianne x Daemon ->

* I don't mind them they seem happy together (though it's complicated since Arianne is the crown princess of Dorne and Daemon's a bastard)

Sansa x Dickon ->

* We know next to nothing about Dickon but why not perhaps it could work in an au

Robb x Jeyne ->

* Perhaps Robb is Sleeping Beauty. He's the one with the evil step-mom who wants to kill him and his family. Old Fairy Walder Frey is offended by the Stark-Tully family and curses 16 YO Robb. Seventh Fairy Edmure tries to save the day but it doesn't work. Anyway. Robb was young, he made a ton of mistakes, especially towards his own family, but he didn't want any of this, he didn't want to be king, he wasn't ready, he wanted to save Jeyne's honor, he wanted to do the right thing (unlike the show version). I want Jeyne to make it at the end but I'm pessimistic. They deserved better. I kinda ship them

[esther-dot]

I sent the anon about the white saviorism. So I think Martin's intentional plot points and characterizations are very obvious and in your face because he tends to be very repetitive about his foreshadowing and symbolism, which is why Dark Dani and being a foil to Jon completely having gone over peoples heads sends me on every level. That being said, I think his endgame is fundamentally what happened in GOT just the path to get there would have been wildly different - tho he will never never admit it after seeing the unhinged reactions by the fandom, but he's not ever going to finish the rest of the books so it's all moot anyway.

Aria - goes off west to explore (tons of foreshadowing for this and Elio revealing that Martin would have liked to do a spin off book with a post-series Aria and her adventures in Braavos or wherever the fuck confirms it lol).

Sansa - I think will became Lady of Winterfell and Warden of the North. IDK about Queen, that may have been a show invention. But I do think she will be back North in a leadership position.

Bran - We all know his intent is King Bran (incredibly stupid imo, but it is what it is lmao. Side note, someone mentioned that there has only been three Bran chapters since the Clinton administration lmao. Those books will never finish because Martin has no idea how to get to the endpoints he wants).

Dani - Going dark, will be the final baddie who Starks will team up against and she's a goner. I do think Martin envisioned Jon being the one to kill her - apparently this is a call back to the Dark Phoenix comics he was a fan of.

Rickon - I think his original endgame was to become a High Septon based on that line in AGOT that basically foreshadowed all the Starks endgames lmaooo.

Jon - He will be a 'Ghost' in the North, a shell of himself, and will end up alone beyond the wall. The Targ line will die with him. Possibly the 1000 lord commander of the watch if foreshadowing is to be believed as well.

It’s thoughts like this that make me grateful we aren’t getting the last book 😂 Jon’s fate I mean, so much misery might be in store for him. I was never into comics, but some of the Dark Phoenix stuff gives me GoT flashbacks. Thanks for that. 😐

Of course, if the show’s ending for Jon is Martin’s, I find the idea of a sequel even weirder! Are you a jonsa btw? I had convinced myself that theirs would be something they didn’t act on because so much of what we consider foreshadowing can be read as R+L=J hints, then I switched to thinking secret wedding/secret son so that Jon experiences exactly what Aemon spoke of. Once I thought the Targ line had to die with Jon, but there are a lot of people with Targ blood so I’m not sure Martin could justify preventing Jon from having kids on those grounds. 🤔 I guess if Jon were to be legitimate (a point of contention) I could see him joining the Watch again to make Bran’s rule entirely secure/remove himself / potential children for the equation. Do you think there will be a J/D romance voluntarily or by coercion? Because if Jon is forced into a relationship there, even a short one, I could see him being too traumatized by it/killing D to ever act on feelings for Sansa.

King Bran…I think there’s a lot of humor there. If we take away all of the questions about how that’s gonna happen, I find it a fun twist for it to be someone so unexpected. I don’t see how it can be written, but it makes me smile, now that the shock has worn off.

[hellsbellschime]

Why Will Dany Burn King’s Landing?

Although most fans of A Song of Ice and Fire and Game of Thrones understandably aren't keen on revisiting the sloppy final season of the TV series, season 8 of the show is actually home to some of the most interesting indications of where the book series may or may not be going.

Season 8 was largely so confusing because the series was attempting to get across the finish line as fast as possible, but many of the messier aspects of the show were also clearly driven by the fact that Game of Thrones had already significantly deviated from the story that George RR Martin was trying to tell. So, when the time came for the TV series to end, the show had to push its characters into their decided endgames despite the fact that many alterations to their prior arcs now made those endings somewhat nonsensical.

George has already directly stated that the broad strokes of the ending will be the same in the books, but I think it stands to reason that the most controversial aspect of the series end, Daenerys' decision to burn King's Landing, will likely be significantly different within the books.

There are a lot of theories about how Dany's dark, or at least slightly darker, turn is going to go in the novels. Many fans unsuprisingly have come up with speculations that alleviate most of Dany's responsibility for the destruction of the city, but I think the notion that someone else will burn King's Landing or that Daenerys will burn the capitol by accident are extremely unlikely.

I can't envision a world where George RR Martin lets any of his main characters off the hook for the most destructive choice in the entire series, and frankly it has always been completely in character for Daenerys to justify any amount of devastation and destruction if it's in service of reclaiming the Iron Throne. And honestly, despite the fact that Game of Thrones retconned most of Dany's darkest book decisions and characteristics, even within the TV series itself, burning King's Landing was largely a logical extension of Dany's habit of killing anybody who gives even the slightest indication that they might not follow her.

However, it also seems undeniable that the burning of King's Landing is almost certainly going to come about due to different circumstances. And, it seems extremely likely that the omission of one significant character in the books, Young Griff, will be one of the key differences in the destruction of King's Landing and the entire Targaryen dynasty.

While I don't think Young Griff's non-Targaryen heritage is nearly as undeniable as many other fans do, one thing that seems very probable is that regardless of whether or not Aegon is really Aegon Targaryen, Daenerys will not believe that he is the long lost son of Rhaegar Targaryen.

Cersei becoming Dany's greatest rival never really made sense considering how few legitimate supporters she had. But on the other hand, someone like Young Griff, who has spent his entire life training to become the best king possible, seems like the kind of person who will likely win at least a significant amount of support among the lords of Westeros and the common people, who at this point would honestly prefer anyone other than Cersei anyway.

But, if Dany arrives in Westeros and there is a Targaryen who she doesn't believe is a Targaryen already sitting on the Iron Throne with the backing of a multitude of kingdoms as well as the common people, clearly she's going to be pissed. And obviously she's going to have a huge axe to grind with the boy who she believes has usurped her throne.

Dany has always been prone to violence to begin with, but now that she seems to have decided to go full fire and blood, it's not that difficult to figure out how she is likely going to handle Aegon the Sixth. But, I think that the penultimate episode of Game of Thrones may have already explained exactly how that is going to happen.

Like most fans, as soon as any information about the final season of Game of Thrones was released, I thought about what it could possibly be referring to or what it would mean. And one aspect of season 8 that seemed to not quite fit into anything within the rest of the series was the title of the episode "The Bells".

What initially interested me about that name was that not only was it the title for arguably the most important episode in the entire show, but that it referred to something that has a lot of thematic relevance within the books but that has been barely mentioned within the TV series. Bells are mentioned constantly in A Song of Ice and Fire, but they've only gotten a few nods within Game of Thrones. And I was even more surprised that, when the show actually aired, the ringing of the bells didn't seem to be hugely relevant to the episode itself either.

Yes, the bells do seem to trigger Dany's decision to burn the entire city down, but they aren't important before or after that, and when there are so many possible titles that are more connected to the series and the story, it still seems strange that "The Bells" was called "The Bells".

However, while bells are a bit of a perennial theme within A Song of Ice and Fire, I think one particular bell-themed subplot might be the exact history that is going to repeat itself when King's Landing burns to the ground, and I think that Daenerys might defeat Aegon in the second Battle of the Bells.

Jon Connington is another fantastic character who was completely omitted from the TV series, but it's interesting that the most fervent supporter of House Targaryen who was on the front lines fighting for Rhaegar in Robert's Rebellion seems to believe that the war wasn't actually lost in the Trident, but in Stoney Sept when Jon failed to root out Robert Baratheon.

JonCon's perspective on Rhaegar and on the entire war is undeniably warped, and in retrospect House Targaryen's dynasty was always destined to fail. Rhaegar may not have had the violent impulses of Aerys, but a dude who lets the entire realm devolve into chaos because he really needs to impregnate a teenager who is dubiously consenting at best was not going to bring peace and prosperity back to the realm. And in a broader sense, the Targaryen values of isolationism, superiority, subjugation, and consolidation of power seem to indicate that no matter what happened, as long as the Targaryens stuck to their beliefs then they were never going to hold on to the Seven Kingdoms.

But still, it seems incredibly important that Jon Connington believed that the Targaryens lost the Iron Throne in the Battle of the Bells, and it's even more important that he's almost certainly wrong. A Song of Ice and Fire has been pretty consistent in its portrayal of brutality. It has proven to be an effective tool in the short term, but it seems to have disastrous results in the long run. And, given that George RR Martin is an ardent pacifist, it's obvious that JonCon's belief that if he had only been crueler and more violent in Stoney Sept then the war would have been won for House Targaryen is a belief that is bound to be undermined.

The fact that Prince Aegon's greatest Westerosi supporter is so strong in this belief though seems to be an obvious setup for a clash in the future. It seems unlikely that the boy who Varys wanted to be the perfect king would be as brutal as someone like Tywin Lannister, and honestly, most people are not that violent nor do they believe that the only goal is winning no matter the cost.

But, it also seems to be a setup for a clash between Young Griff and Daenerys. After all, while most people wouldn't do absolutely anything to get what they believed was their birthright, Dany absolutely would. She internally justifies every action that she takes in service of getting the Iron Throne, and there doesn't seem to be a limit to the violence that she would excuse if it meant taking what she believes is rightfully hers.

The descriptions of the Battle of the Bells in Jon Connington's POV chapters are all very interesting, and it's telling that even in these few glimpses into his mind, this battle is so vitally important. But, Jon's memories are at their most interesting in the chapter "The Griffin Reborn," when he discusses his failings with Myles Toyne.

Jon tells himself that even Tywin Lannister couldn't have done anything more than what he did, but Toyne disagrees. Blackheart says “Lord Tywin would not have bothered with a search. He would have burned that town and every living creature in it. Men and boys, babes at the breast, noble knights and holy septons, pigs and whores, rats and rebels, he would have burned them all. When the fires guttered out and only ash and cinders remained, he would have sent his men in to find the bones of Robert Baratheon."

And while Myles is undoubtedly right that this is exactly what Tywin Lannister would have done, the particular description of the violence sounds undeniably Targaryen in nature. It literally sounds like fire and blood. And frankly, it sounds pretty close to what Daenerys did in Game of Thrones and is likely to do in King's Landing in A Song of Ice and Fire.

Conceptually, it's actually quite simple. Jon Connington will fight the Battle of the Bells once again, except this time he's going to be on the side of the new Robert Baratheon. If Young Griff is a remotely capable ruler who wins the hearts of the people, then it's entirely believable that the citizens of King's Landing would give him quarter when the dragon queen comes looking for him. And given Daenerys' typical patience level, it seems incredibly likely that Dany would just burn the traitors and find the bones of the usurper in the ashes.

Jon Connington has returned to Westeros operating under the belief that he is going to have to be tougher and more brutal to ensure that Young Griff ascends to the Iron Throne like Rhaegar never did, and to ensure that he's never overthrown like the Mad King was. So then, it would be a pretty perfect twist of fate if everything that Jon believes now winds up being proven wrong and he finds himself and the boy who he has vowed to defend to his last breath relying on the kindness of strangers to hide them from the Targaryen ruler and her armies who are searching for them.

And ironically, Jon will not do what he has set out to do, succeed for the son where he failed for the father, precisely because the enemy that he's facing now will be ready and willing to use the brutality that JonCon originally shied away from in Stoney Sept. If Young Griff and the elder Griffon were actually dealing with a rival who was similar to the younger Jon Connington, someone who wasn't willing to wreak havoc and destruction in order to find their enemy at all costs, then they might have a chance at at least surviving.  

But, because Dany is the type of person who serves up fire and blood to anyone she thinks even might be her enemy, any of King Aegon's protectors will be treated with the brutality that Jon currently believes is necessary to win, and Young Griff will be killed anyway. And of course, while Daenerys will almost certainly win the battle against Aegon the Sixth, her decision to be as violent and swift as possible in order to root out her enemies will also lead to her ultimate downfall and a truly irrevocable end to the Targaryen dynasty.

Thematically, the repetition of past mistakes, the false belief that great violence in service of a supposedly greater good is worthwhile, and the false belief that brutality is strength, all fits in well with A Song of Ice and Fire and George RR Martin's political point of view. But obviously, given that Aegon Targaryen, Jon Connington, and their entire branch of the story was omitted in Game of Thrones, none of this could have ever happened in the TV series. And perhaps the title of the penultimate episode was a subtle nod to the climax that the writers know will be coming in the books.

[fedonciadale]

Hello fedon, recently discovered ur tumblr and wanted to ask. I believe if D arrived in westeros she will do a great damage in KL i mean having 3 nuclear weapons and an army of barbarians and no damage? wouldn’t even happen on Dream lane anyway i also believe she will play a part on defeating the others, They are ICE all the weapons that are described to be useful on defeating the ICE are fire-dragons Related and dany IS fire herself why do u believe she won’t be a help ? I think there is others that will play a part on defeating the others like jon and bran. Why in ur opinions think dany is wouldn’t help save the world ? can u elaborate ?

Hi there!

I can understand where you come from: There was a time where I thought it would go that way: Dany sowing destruction in Westeros and yet playing a role in the defeat of the of the Others and dying in the process (because there is no way back from doing something like the burning of King's Landing). That was back in the day when I though Jon would fall for his aunt and feel terrible for it, and seeking death himself.

I don't believe this any longer, for several reasons. For once, Ice and Fire are not direct opposites. Fire melts Ice, but then that turns to water and may quench the fire. Another reason is that I think GRRM left a lot of red herrings in regard to the weapons that might help to destroy the Others. Fire seems to be a solution: You are right. We see wights that can be defeated with fire, we see dragonglass - connected with dragons that can slay the Others. And it makes sense, it makes so much sense that Jon even wants dragons at the wall.

BUT....

Proceed with caution when it comes to prophecy. Rhaegar got a prophecy about a song of ice and fire and considering how almost everyone is wrong about prophecy we should definitely not take them at face value.

Another red herring are the 'teachers' that the Stark children have. I think all Stark children will separate from their mentors, Littlefinger, Bloodraven and the kindly Old Man and will find their own way, because they'll have to find their own solution.

I think Ice and Fire are set opposite to each other but not in a way that one can defeat the other, more like they are both on ends of the scale and for the world to exist they have to be in balance. Eternal Winter is as bad as Eternal Summer.

I think it is interesting that magic grows once Dany has birthed their dragons, and I bet that the Others woke, when Aegon V tried to wake dragons and the tragedy of Summerhall happened.

I made a post on how I think Fire and Ice magic came to be (x): The Children of the Forest (Earth and Water magicians) made the Others and losened Ice magic on the world. The Others are a weapon gone awry and they do not obey the Children any longer. Their ice magic awoke the Fire magic that was practiced in Valyria, and both magics can coexist although they are juxtaposed to each other. Sometimes the Ice magic tips the scales (like the Long Night) sometimes the Fire magic (like the doom of Valyria). The trick is to stop the swings of the scales. Neither side can be allowed to win - It might still mean that the good guy will be deluded into thinking that dragons are a solution. But they are not. We know from the Blood and Fire book that dragons wilt in the North. They won't be of use.

This fits with what we know of Martin's endgame from the Original Outline (as much as I dislike drawing on this, because it is not a 'neutral' document). He states there that Ice and Fire are both a threat to Westeros and that both have to be defeated - this does not mean that Ice and Fire cannot effect each other, because they obviously do. But humans are caught in between.

And Dany is not just using fire and fire magic. She is the champion of Fire. She is Azor Ahai (look at @trinuviel's metas on that) and as such she brings Eternal Summer (a huge red flag). So even if someone would think to use her and her dragons this might not be a good idea (and it is possible that Jon will try that). I think it will be Bran's task to bring balance to magic. And it might well be that the solution is to give up magic so that Ice and Fire Magic can die.

This would tie in with a possible ending for Bran: If Bran's ending is like the show he would be an almost omniscient God king, but if he gives up the Weirwoods, the remains of the magic of the Children of the Forest to ensure that neither the Ice nor the Fire threat will ever come again. If he sacrifices magic (including his own) for the good of the world he would be a better king.

Another reason why I think Dany will not be of help is the following: Dany is not a real saviour. Her whole arc is about how she is a pseudo-saviour. She uses the propaganda of freedom and changing society but her goal is ultimately selfish: She wants to be on top of a changed society. She wants slaves be freed so that they can serve her. She is not a person who tends to sacrifice her own goals for others - as can be seen at the end of the first book. So, her sacrificing herself for others would be out of character, just like it would be for Tyrion.

So, I have several reasons for believing Dany will not be of help against the Others: Some pertain to the overall arcs of the danger of all magic and all prophecy, some pertain to the arcs of the Starks and some pertain to Dany's character. All in all, I think you can make a strong argument, that Dany won't be a saviour.

Thanks for the ask!

[gwidhiel]

Bran in Season 8

A modest proposal

I get why many people found GoT’s treatment of Bran - and his endgame - in S8 to be completely baffling and frustratingly unjustified. As with many all of the characters, the show collapsed a lot of Bran’s development and made some significant alterations to his story, e.g. by making his nemesis be the show-only character The Night King, whose apparent motivation for getting past the Wall and attacking Winterfell was specifically to get to Bran. I too was very frustrated by how little attention was paid to Bran, even in S8 when they knew he was going to end up King in the South.

But as I reflected on what few tidbits they did give us about Bran’s journey to becoming the Three-Eyed Raven, a version of Bran’s story that comports with what happened in the show started to come into focus, with motivations that would have made sense for Bran. The important tidbits I see are:

The Night King’s mark on Bran’s wrist: in S6 when the NK surprised Bran while he was greenseeing, he grabbed Bran’s wrist, which left a burn-like scar. And that seemed to allow the NK, in the real physical world, to precisely locate the Three-Eyed Raven’s lair and to break its warding spells. That set Bran fleeing back south of the Wall, which was still an effective barrier against the NK (but not for long). In S8 the show went to the trouble of visually reminding us about Bran’s scarred wrist, which led some fans to erroneously conclude that Bran was the Night King. So what was the show trying to convey?

My interpretation is that they were implying that a psychic link existed between Bran and the NK, one which allowed the NK to always know exactly where Bran was, and quite possibly to eavesdrop on conversations that Bran participated in or listened to. Perhaps the NK could even spy on Bran while Bran was greenseeing. This would explain a few things that happened in S7 & S8:

Why Bran very coldly sent Meera back home after they’d reached Winterfell. He didn’t tell her “hey, we’ve only got a temporary reprieve from the White Walkers because my dumb-ass half-brother cousin is about to give the Night King what he needs to get past the Wall and then he’ll make a beeline for Winterfell.” He didn’t mention any danger at all, but he was most insistent that Meera shouldn’t stay at Winterfell. Why not mention the coming danger?

Speaking of the coming danger, Bran could have but didn’t let Sansa know with plenty of lead time about the NK coming, which would have allowed her to evacuate all of the non-combatants from places like Last Hearth, and Winterfell itself. Why?

For that matter, why didn’t Bran try to warn Jon and Team Daenerys that their wight expedition would end disastrously and make the situation in the North far more perilous?

Why was Bran so casual when he gave Arya the Valaryian steel dagger, not even mentioning its effectiveness against White Walkers?

And why didn’t Bran mention that the Winterfell crypts probably weren’t the best place for the women and children to shelter?

In the pre-battle planning meeting, Bran sat and listened as Jon laid out their defensive plans, and then interjected to make it clear exactly where he would be and exactly what kind of guarding he’d have. The takeaway from that discussion was that Bran was going to be beneath the weirwood tree with a handful of archers to protect him because they were all pretty confident in their defensive plans and in the ability of the dragons and the assembled fighters to keep the Night King’s forces at bay.

So my take is that, by never letting on that he knew the Night King would end up able to breach the Wall, or that he understood how easily the Night King could overpower Winterfell’s planned defenses (even bolstered by dragons!), Bran lured the Night King into believing he’d be able to get to Bran with ease and to underestimate the risk he was taking to do so. The show made it clear that the White Walkers themselves weren’t deployed in the fight, they were just standing idly by. By doing nothing, Bran set and sprang the perfect trap for the Night King. “Doing something by doing nothing” had been foreshadowed, first by Tyrion in S7 and then by Sansa in S8. There are also echoes of what Robb did in the Whispering Woods to lure Jaime into an enormous tactical blunder.

If I’m right, that was rather clever of Bran - and rather clever of the show. So why wouldn’t they have explained this after the fact? Why not have that all revealed so that the audience could enjoy it too, instead of being puzzled about what the heck Bran was supposedly doing during the Battle of Winterfell?

I think the problem the show faced was that, if they revealed that Bran was smart and was able to know in advance what was going to happen and made calculated moves based on his enemy’s overconfidence, they’d have to address why he didn’t then try to prevent Daenerys’s destruction of King’s Landing.

To be clear, in-universe I think from Bran’s perspective it would have made sense to let The Mother of Dragons, aka the other monstrous magical force that threatened Westeros, go South to her doom once she’d conveniently served her purpose in the North as a diversion for the Army of the Dead. Her armies were depleted and one of her dragons was wounded and was about to be killed. She was still bad news for Kings Landing, but not as bad as she’d have been with two healthy dragons (or three!), and her original Dothraki and Unsullied forces.  But:

if the show had made it clear that Bran had known what would happen, or could have easily known if he’d wanted to, there would have been a huge fuss about why he didn’t stop Daenerys “before she turned dark.” D&D might have realized that, if they’d made it clear that Bran could have at least warned Daenerys about what might lie ahead for her, many in the audience would have grasped at pinning the blame for the genocide she committed on Bran rather than on Daenerys herself. I’ve seen people try to do that anyway!

D&D had decided they didn’t want to devote more time to fleshing out the story, they wanted to wrap it up quickly. And they were unwilling to show their hand about Dark!Dany until the 11th hour, so they couldn’t have shown too much about what Bran was up to or capable of before then, because it would have spoiled their Big Surprise. Yet another way that their blinkered approach to storytelling yielded a very unsatisfying end.

This is all obviously speculation but this read of what D&D showed us about Bran, and why they didn’t show more, leaves me much more reconciled to his end game. I could be very wrong, of course. And even if I’m right in part or whole, I don’t think the show handled his story well at all.

[silverducks]

Jaime Lannister – A theory on his ending in the books

So, as you can probably tell from my blog, I’m not quite yet over the ending of Game of Thrones, which I binged watched and finished about a month and a half ago now.

The main issue is the ending, or the last 3 episodes to be more precise, where so many things didn’t make a whole lot of sense. The main one being, for me, how the story ended for Jaime Lannister.

So, whilst writing all my super long character analysis for Jaime is definitely helping, (I’m about half way through the next one), I’ve also been reading about possible ways his story could go, and how it might end in the books.

And today I came across a theory I really, really like. It’s become my new headcanon for what will happen in the books and I’ve added a mix of other theories I’ve read to it as well.

Now, show and book spoilers beneath the cut.

First off, I’d like to say I haven’t yet read the books, so this post is based on the show and what I’ve read happens in the books. None of these theories are my own, but I’ve combined them all together in a way that actually makes a lot of sense to me. So until the books prove me wrong – or I come across an even better theory, this is my new headcanon.

(I don’t have any links as they’re random posts/comments etc I’ve found on the net on my phone, but I’m not claiming these ideas as my own, just putting it all together, so I hope the lack of links to source is ok.)

So without any further preamble, the theory is that Jaime and Tyrion’s story arcs and endgame in the book were reversed in the show. This would mean that the main plot points the writer, George R.R. Martin (GRRM) told the screenwriters (D&D), were swapped around between the two characters.

That would mean that it would be Jaime who became the hand of the King, not Tyrion, and Jaime who put forward the idea of the Bran becoming King.

And I love this theory, because it would be such a fitting end for Jaime. And below I will explain why.

Firstly, the idea of Jaime becoming the Hand of the King for Bran is a wonderful final step in his character arc – he’s gone from throwing this kid out of a tower to try and kill him, to serving as his main advisor, trusted with the power and command of the King. Jaime and Bran’s character arcs are already connected, much more than Tyrion’s ever was, and for the similar reason why Bran gave it to Tyrion, he could give it to Jaime – in fact it makes more sense!

And rather than a redemptodeath for Jaime, he doesn’t have to die, and can instead have a fulfilling life, continually making up for past wrongs as the Hand, and with the real love of his life, Brienne. She could still be Lord Commander of the Kingsguard, as per the show, but married to Jaime (they’d change that outdated celibacy/non marriage rule easily enough), giving her a much more satisfying ending. And why does Jaime have to die? He’s atoned for his past wrongs, lost that darn hand that (symbolically in the show), did push Bran out the window, and it doesn’t serve any other higher story telling purpose… And by becoming the Hand of the King, after he lost the hand that hurt said King, is even more symbolic.

I know Jaime has refused to be Hand before, but that was old Jaime. And if we assume Jaime continues on his road to self-betterment, then he can continue to learn and improve the skills that would make a good Hand. He’s becoming more honourable, but has seen enough of the world to know sometimes there’s a conflicting choice (unlike Ned in series one). He’s been learning to rely on his own wits and brains much more since he can’t now just fight his way out of everything – and is proving pretty smart. He is proving to be a good commander of the army and has been a Lord Commander for the Kingsguard. And has enough Lannister cunning, but with actual mercy and honour, to make it work. A stark King with a Lannister Hand!

Imagine, ending the very first episode of the show with Jaime pushing Bran out that window, to ending with Jaime by his side, advising (and also of course) protecting him. How good is a full circle/reflection piece for Jaime as that!

And in a similar vein, Jaime can be the one to put forward to the council of Lords (I assume something similar happens in the books, but much better written), that Bran should be King. That being the all-knowing Three Eyed Raven means he’s a good match. And surely the other Lords would more likely listen to Jaime – who is a good commander – than Tyrion, who hasn’t really won over many of the Lords in Westeros. After all, he was sentenced to death for killing a King (they don’t know it was a set up), and also killed his father and escaped. He’s been in a foreign land serving a foreign (to them anyway) ruler who has just sacked their Capitol city. Doesn’t it just make so much more sense that they’d listen to an alive Jaime? Yes he killed the King too, but he also did a lot of other good stuff as per his redemption arc etc.

Anyway, I just think it makes more sense – and then the Kingslayer Jaime, becomes the Kingmaker Jaime – again another wonderful full circle arc for him.

So, from a storytelling theme, symbolism and arc perspective, I think it just makes so much sense!

But when you also look at the show itself, in comparison to the books and where the show sort of went wrong, it makes more sense too.

So, just to give a bit of background on it, the theory I read today about Jaime and Tyrion’s role reversal was in a post mainly looking at how Tyrion’s character seems to be going in a very different direction in the books versus the show.

The idea is that book Tyrion is in a much darker place in the books than show Tyrion, and this, in the upcoming books, could continue. This could send book Tyrion down a difficult, morally dark path, which could result in him becoming more of a villain type character, perhaps taking on more and more of his father’s bad traits. This makes sense to me, as Tyrion was most like his father and was certainly cunning. And where the books start to properly deviate from the show, after series four, Tyrion could go either way. He has just killed his father and his lover. And in the books he also falls out with Jaime when Jaime tells him the truth about his first wife (that she wasn’t a whore like Tywin said). Being in this foreign land with all these dark thoughts and deeds haunting him, I can definitely see him turning into more of a bad guy.

So, basically, a completely different story arc for Tyrion.

In terms of his endgame? Well, if he’s swapped with Jaime’s then I guess it means he might die. Maybe after killing Cersei, hence them dying “together.” Or at least be punished such as sent to the Wall or something. I don’t think GRRM said either Lannister brother actually dies in Cersei’s loving arms, so I’m guessing they took some differences in both Jaime’s and Tyrion’s endgame, if the theory is correct.

And I’m tempted to believe it is, because it helps explain Tyrion’s kind of dodgy characterisation in the later series of the show. He just wasn’t really the same after series four, which at the time, I just put down to D&D not being clever enough writers to write a clever character such as Tyrion. But with this theory, it actually makes more sense. Tyrion was such a fan favourite character in the show, the underdog, clever, snarky good guy, I can understand why D&D didn’t want to take him down this other, darker path. In the books, there’s much more time and details and PoVs to make it work, whereas the show would struggle, especially against such a popular fandom character.

It also explains why Jaime never told him the truth about his wife, or they had their big fall out in the show.

And by changing Tyrion’s story arc so much, they didn’t really know what to replace it with (I think we all agree D&D are not the best writers), so his characterisation was not only off in later series, but it meant they took Jaime’s end game and gave it to Tyrion instead. And this further makes sense as they might have thought having just Cersei (a female) the only bad Lannister at the end was too much, especially when one of the other main female characters, Dany, was also going bad. So, they made Jaime “hateful” in the end to better match and even out Cersei, because it was supposed to be Tyrion…

(I do think D&D were also unhealthily obsessed with Cersei and Twincest, so they probably thought it have them an extra good reason.)

And there’s a really good reflection in this between the two brothers – Jaime starts out the villain, but ends up the underdog hero, Tyrion starts out the underdog hero, but ends up the villain.

But, in changing Tyrion’s character, if indeed it does, it then also has a knock on effect for so many other things.

The theory also said that he might negatively influence Dany, when they meet. For example, help to slowly bring out her suppressed mad/dark side, encourage her to take Kings Landing (which the theory points out Tyrion actually ends up hating because of how the people there view him.) So perhaps if Tyrion’s influence is so vengeful in the books, maybe’s Dany’s own turn to madness makes much more sense. And the lack of Tyrion’s negative influence in the show, undermines this. And this could then make Jon’s decision to have to kill her much harder etc.

So, I do think it’s quite possible, looking at Tyrion’s side, that they gave him a very different story arc, and so had to swap it up with Jaime’s endgame.

The show has certainly mixed and matched up characters from the book, so this would help explain why the main beats are still GRRMs, but why they didn’t just work for some of the characters. So not completely made up and ruined, but they just weren’t able to make the pieces fit together properly in their changed version. (And I do think they could have easily done a much better job, so I’m not letting D&D off the hook.)

Now, back to Jaime, because as much as I love all the characters, I’ll be honest, it’s only really Jaime and Brienne who I obsess enough over to properly theorise about.

Why do I think this works so well for Jaime? Well, first off, the whole him dying in Cersei’s arms just does not make any sense at all to me (hence all my super long posts about it). Especially if we take into account how over Cersei show Jaime seems in series 8, until that scene in episode 4. He behaves like he’s completely cut ties with her, fallen out of love with her and has fallen truly in love with someone else instead – Brienne. This is even more obvious in the books, where Jaime actually burns Cersei’s letter where she’s begging for help. And when he looks back on it later, he’s dreading retuning to Kings Landing and facing her. In fact, he thinks that Cersei might well die, but there’s nothing he can do anyway and perhaps she deserves it. Granted we do have 2 more books to go, but this is like the complete opposite of his ending in series 8, that I think it’s highly unlikely it was meant to happen in the books. A LOT of stuff would have to happen for book Jaime to change his mind now.

But as they gave Jaime’s ending to Tyrion, as per our theory, then what do they do with Jaime? Well, why not have him die in Cersei’s arms and fulfil their Twincest fix. Have Jaime be the bad brother Lannister, not Tyrion.

In fact, I don’t think D&D knew what to do with Jaime either, as he changes so abruptly in the show. It’s like they had to try to cover Jaime’s actual plot points from GRRM (which I’d assume were things like fighting the dead, getting together with Brienne), but then suddenly have him change his mind and rush back to Cersei... Also, as much as I loved Jaime in early series 8, he doesn’t really do anything pivotal. If you take him out of the equation and have him never even in series 8, the actual storylines all stay the same anyway. So, for me, this further adds weight to the idea that, in swapping Jaime’s endgame with Tyrion, they were left with the same problem, what do we then do with Jaime?

It’s like other aspects – they try to change one thing, but by changing that, it affects everything else so what you’re left with doesn’t make sense for the characters.

Now, so far I’ve talked mainly about the show, because overall I do think the main plot points in the show will happen in the books. And if you consider the role reversal between Tyrion and Jaime, it makes more sense why what happened did happen (which makes no sense in the show story itself).

But this is where I start to tie the various theories I’ve read together – it also makes a lot of sense in the books, for Jaime to not die, but instead be Bran’s Hand.

Other than the wonderful symmetry we’d get, as mentioned above, there’s a few things that happen in Jaime’s arc just in the books that make it even more possible, which I’ll talk about now.

So, most of this comes from Jaime’s fever dream, or also called his Weirwood dream. Now, there’s lots of analysis on this dream on the net, and there’s lots of ideas, some conflicting, of what it could mean. It’s not all relevant to this particular theory, so I’ll just summarise it. Basically, in the books, Jaime doesn’t go back to save Brienne from the bear straight away. Instead he travels quite far away with Bolton’s men, and goes to sleep on, what we assume, is a Weirwood stump. At the same time, Jaime is also suffering from a fever due to his hand becoming infected. Now, that means he’s potentially delirious, but also the dream is potentially prophetic. The Weirwood trees are those magic trees that Bran uses to have visions and to find the first Three Eyed Raven. I’m sure there’s more about them in the books as well. But it’s this potential for it being prophetic that I’m most interested in here.

Ok, so the dream starts a bit like a nightmare – Jaime is led somewhere underground that’s dark and feels dangerous by lots of ghosts. He first assumes it’s under Casterly Rock, and indeed he thinks he’s surrounded by the ghosts of the Lannister family. He’s scared and naked (eg vulnerable) and his father, sister and Joeffrey come. Cersei is holding a torch – the only light in the world for Jaime, but they leave and Jaime is left scared again in the dark. Before they go, he begs them for a sword, which Tywin says he gave him, and he begs Cersei to not leave him. Jaime finds a sword and as he touches it, the blade flames blue, providing some light. Now, a lot of analysis on this part of the dream tie it to Jaime’s metaphorical death, (ie of the old Jaime going to Hell) or breaking away from his family so they leave him. The light of Cersei’s going out, and instead a new light on Jaime’s sword coming, could also then symbolise that he’s breaking away (or about to) from Cersei and finding himself, his own light, instead. I also think, as we know Tywin and Joeffrey die later in the books and show, that it’s also foretelling their deaths. Which means it’s likely that Cersei dies before Jaime in the books, hence why he leaves her and he can’t follow. So this firstly means Jaime can’t die in Cersei’s arms.

Now, the next bit of the dream gets interesting, because who shows up next, after Cersei and his family has gone? Brienne of course! She appears (also naked) and Jaime imagines she looks not only more like a woman now, but also that in the light she could also be beauty, and a knight. This is generally taken to show Jaime’s growing (and so far subconscious) attraction to Brienne – and that he sees her as both a warrior and a woman. Now she asks for a sword, and also asks to be able to keep him safe, as she has pledged this and must keep her oath. A sword appears and Jaime gives it to her, and it also starts burning with blue flames.

Now, I think these two swords represent Oathkeeper (the one Jaime gives to Brienne in series four) and Widow’s Wail, which Jaime gets after Tommen dies in series 7. And these are two Valyrian steel swords that were from the melted down sword Ice, which used to be Neds. Now, I don’t think this is coincidental, but again I’ll come back to this.

Brienne is there to help protect Jaime, but she also asks him what’s down in this dark place (which may or may not still symbolise Casterly Rock or another place). Jaime says doom, and Brienne is worried it’s a bear (foreshadowing her being in the bear pit later). We hear, but don’t see Cersei saying that if the flames go out, Jaime will die.

In the next part of the dream ghostly, mist like figures appear and Jaime recognises them as his former Kingsguard and then Rhaeger, the heir to the throne before he was killed in Robert’s rebellion. These ghostly figures accuse Jaime of not keeping his oaths and seem about to attack. Jaime tries to plead with them and give his reasons, and Brienne is still there ready to defend him. These ghosts likely represent the internal guilt and self-hatred Jaime still has for killing the Mad King, but also for not saving Rhaeger’s own children, which were murdered on Tywin’s orders. As the ghost like figures continue to accuse Jaime, the flame on his own sword goes out, and the ghosts rush in, and then Jaime wakes up. As soon as he wakes up, pretty much, he demands Bolton’s men take him back to Harrenhal, where he then saves Brienne just like in the show.

Now, I read a lot of people saying this foretells Jaime’s death, that his flame goes out, but I disagree. I think the fact that Brienne has a matching flame, on a twin sword to his, means that Jaime doesn’t die – after all Cersei says flameS. Instead, I think this ending to the dream foretells that Brienne will actually save Jaime – that as long as she is alive, Jaime will also be.

Now, onto more foreshadowing theories from this dream – I think the ghostly, mist like figures also represent the White Walkers, and that him and Brienne are there facing them means that they will indeed (just like in the show) stand together to fight them in the books. As this has also happened after Cersei has left Jaime with his now dead father and son, I think it means she’ll already have died by this point.

I also think his guilt and the mention of Rhaegar’s children, which Jaime feels guilty about failing to protect, will also tie into Jon’s storyline. As the only surviving child of Rhaegar, I think once Jaime finds out, and Jon, Jaime will pledge himself to protect/serve Jon to make up for this guilt. I then think, based on this, that Jaime will effectively save Jon’s life in the battle with the White Walkers and then, Brienne will have to save Jaime’s. After all, she says in the dream she pledged to protect and save Jaime.

Now, the reason I think the end of the dream means Brienne saves Jaime, is not only because her flame keeps burning in the dream, but also because, as soon as Jaime wakes up, he decides he has to save Brienne. As we are going with the idea that this dream is prophetic from the Weirwood stump, it seems very important that Jaime rescues Brienne, so she can be there to fight with him. And what better reason than having to save him, when his own light (the sword flames) has failed?

And those swords – two halves of one whole, from Ice, the Stark’s sword. Turning into blue flames and helping them in the battle against the dead. Likely at or near Winterfell like in the show… When the books have a theory about a special sword called Lightbringer, wielded by the hero Azor Ahai to defeat the Others..

Soooo, perhaps this is really going into the realms of fan theory, but I definitely think that ICE could be Lightbringer, and that Brienne and Jaime, with Jon (who imo is the Azor Ahai character) will be imperative in helping to defeat the White Walkers. And that Jaime will fall in this battle, and Brienne will have to be there to save him so he doesn’t die.

Now, you might ask, what does all this random dream theorising mean for Jaime becoming the Hand of the King? Well, first of all I think it foreshadows that both Jaime and Brienne have a major part to play in the battle against the dead – much more than in the show. And that as Jaime is near death, it was super important for Brienne to be there to save him. And that it was super important for Jaime to give Brienne the sword Oathkeeper, and have Widow’s Wail himself – two halves of the same sword. So, all this must happen, and Brienne must save Jaime, which is why Jaime was given the prophetic dream in the first place. After all, if he hadn’t of saved Brienne, none of the above could go as it should…

And, this is where Bran comes in and this is more my own idea than anything else, so forgive me if I’m just not understanding the books properly. But as Bran himself sees visions through the Weirwood trees, which I suspect are due to them being sent either by the old Three Eyed Raven, or markers from Bran himself in the future, or perhaps fate or another unseen magical force. Then I wonder if the reason why Jaime was sent this vision, is because of Bran – and also the White Walkers. That Jaime had to help in the fight, but also had to be saved by Brienne. (Maybe even because it’s through his interactions with Brienne that he does become a better person and chooses to fight). And he had to be saved, because it was his destiny to be the Hand of the King to Bran. And also to save Jon so Jon can defeat the White Walkers. And that perhaps, this saving of Jon by Jaime is another reason why he is chosen as the Hand of the King.

I would also like to add in here, my other theories for book Jaime, which can lead him up to being Hand of the King, and tie up other loose ends in his story arc. So, the books and the show deviate a lot for Jaime after series four – he breaks away from Cersei much earlier and he’s currently off on an adventure in the Riverlands with Brienne in the books. A story arc not put into the show, featuring Lady Stoneheart (LSH). Now, she is a re-resurrected, zombie like version of Catelyn Stark, who is hell bent on revenge for the Freys and the Lannisters for the Red Wedding. She’s threatened Brienne with the death of Pod, unless she brings her Jaime. (At least that’s what most people infer from the books, it’s left open ended on a bit of a cliffhanger.

Now, my theory on this is that somehow Jaime and Brienne will have to fight each other in a trial by combat (echoed in the show itself by Brienne’s line about maybe having to fight Jaime). Of course they won’t be able to kill each other and will somehow be able to escape from, or kill Lady Stonehart.

So, why am I mentioning this? Well, GRRM himself has said he was disappointed they didn’t include the LSH plot in the show. Instead, D&D completely cut it out and sent Jaime to Dorne instead (as in series 5, which isn’t in the books). But for GRRM to say he wanted it in the show, makes me think there’s something very significant that is going to happen from it – either to the characters, or their relationship. Something which will later prove to be important in the rest of the story. This makes me think that Jaime and Brienne have a much bigger impact on the overall story arc than they were given in the show. And if it is more important, it makes the idea they’d have an important ending as well – Hand and LC of Kingsguard respectively – make more sense. And perhaps add more weight to the idea that Jaime HAD to save Brienne.

Now, after LSH, my idea is that Jaime will have to go back to Kings Landing and Cersei – but not in a romantic way. I think, like in the show, Jaime’s going to have a story arc that takes him on the role of commanding the Lannister’s forces against Dany’s when they get to Westeros. And if we assume Cersei does die before the battle with the undead, maybe this is also when Jaime kills Cersei – if he is the Valanqar, the one prophesised to kill Cersei. Or it could be someone else…

I then think the battle for Kings Landing will happen before that of the White Walkers, so Jaime then goes to help in the North, and catches up with Brienne again, who has been busy saving Sansa after her and Jaime parted ways (on good, but still unrealised and not yet acknowledged romantic terms) after LSH. I then think, like in the show, Jaime and Brienne will get together near the end, but this time not only will there be no Cersei for Jaime to rush back to (and throwing his character arc out the window like he does in the show), but he will still live to then become King Bran’s hand.

Of course, there’s still so many unknowns, and all, none or bits of this could happen, so I really hope we do get to see the last two books and find out what really happens.

But until then, I’m going to stick with the idea that Jaime marries Brienne, and becomes the Hand of the King and survives!

There, that’s the end of my theory – several all tied together really. I’d be interested to know what people think.

I know that my later reasons are more random ideas, but I do think, above all, the idea that Jaime is going to be the Hand of the King, not Tyrion, helps explain why the show didn’t really make sense for those characters (Jaime's 180 change at the end being the main one). But also just the wonderful symmetry of a redeemed Jaime fulfilling the role of Hand, for a King he once tried to kill, after he became a better person after losing his own hand…

[jackoshadows]

Maybe this is me being naive and hopeful but I don't see the point of Dany dying in the books, yeah, I know what happened in the show, but nothing that happened in s8 made sense anyway. Martin spent a ot of time in ADWD with the political and economic aspects of Meereen, with all the problems that making a new system has to erase at the end the character that has that storyline and that will be needed at the end of the book for Westeros rebuilding.

I have to agree. This was what was so disappointing for me as well with season 8. That GRRM spend an entire book on characters like Dany and Jon being leaders and having to make the tough decisions and getting actual experience and the show ending just gets rid of these characters.

I mean, we had Jon spend a chapter literally counting grain and barley and veggies in the store room. Why? We had to read Dany making the hard decisions, right and wrong decisions, compromise, lose and win. All for nothing.

The writing the show gave it’s endgame leaders was abysmal. Tyrion turned into an idiot, they didn’t care about Bran and Sansa’s qualification was making snarky comments. 

In Bran’s case, I could see GRRM taking him down the path of Leto II Atreides from Children of Dune, in which scenario he could make King Bran of Westeros work in the books. But D&D did not write ANYTHING at all for Bran. On the other hand, they were really invested in Sansa as a character, they wanted her to be more important on the show, they took story arcs and characterization from other characters in the books for show Sansa and they still could not make queen Sansa work on the show.

And the show’s ending does not gel with GRRM’s take on ruling:

We had GRRM’s entire spiel on what ruling means:

One thing that I am trying to get at in the books, the political aspect if you would, is to kind of show that this stuff is hard. I think that an awful lot of fantasy and even some great fantasy falls under the mistake of assuming that a good man would be a good king and all that is necessary is to be a decent human being and then when you are king everything will go swimmingly. Tolkien is great but we never get into the nitty gritty of Aragorn ruling. What is his tax policy? How does he feel about crop rotation?

How does he handle land disputes between two nobles, both of whom think that they should have the village, so they burn it down to establish their claim. This is the hard part of ruling be it in the middle ages or now. It’s not enough to be a good man to be an effective ruler. It’s complicated and it’s hard and I wanted to show that with repeated examples in my books with my kings and hand of the kings - the prime minister if you would - trying to rule. And whether it be Ned Stark or Tyrion Lannister or Tywin Lannister or Daenerys Targaryen or Cersei Lannister trying to deal with the real challenges that affect anyone trying to rule the 7K or even a city like Meereen and it’s hard.

You know, we can all read the books or read history and say oh, so and so was stupid and made a lot of mistakes and look at all these stupid mistakes they make. But these kind of mistakes are always much more apparent in hind sight than when you are actually faced with the decision about, oh my God, what would I do in this situation. How do I resolve this thing? Do I do the moral thing? But what about  the political consequences of the moral thing? Do I do the pragmatic, cynical thing and kind of screw the people who are screwed by it? I mean, it is HARD. And I want to get to all of that - GRRM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJCb3xyWyAg

This statement here?

If I am ever a queen I will make them love me

is an antithesis of everything GRRM says above. This quote shows, to a certain extent, Sansa’s naivete at this point. The Tyrells deliberately cut off food to KL and then Margaery Tyrell distributes food to the people to win their favor.  It has  nothing to do with the well being of the people here.  Sansa sees this and thinks that when she is queen, she will make people love her and some folks think that this points to Sansa being the most compassionate, best queen ever.

That’s why Queen Sansa is so attractive to people who subscribe to the simplistic notion that all ruling entails is being beloved by the people. She’s a blank slate who has yet to negotiate or hash out deals with adults, or make a single decision that affects the lives of the people under her. She’s perfect because she has yet to do anything. The Disney fairy tale version - ironically something Sansa believed in at the start of the books. That’s why Jonsas think that we will get King Jon and Queen Sansa ruling happily ever after.

Dany should by all rights be a popular, beloved leader in Meereen. But it’s not easy. She has to hand out justice which is complicated. She has to start building up an economy from scratch - one not based on slavery. She has to deal with an insurgency, famine, disease. She has to make hard choices and she has to do it surrounded by enemies. The former slaves want her to reopen the fighting pits. Does Dany do the moral thing or what her people want?

Both Jon and Dany make mistakes. They make some emotional decisions that are not right. But to quote Leto II Atriedes when he gives his father’s ring to Stilgar in Children of Dune:

To remind you that all humans make mistakes, and that all leaders are but human.                              

Dany is not in a similar situation to the rich Tyrells who can ‘buy the vote’ so to speak, by handing out food to the starving populace of KL. Starvation that happened because the Tyrells closed off the Roseroad during the WOT5K. But Sansa is not thinking like the Tyrells here. She genuinely thinks that all it takes to be a good queen is to make her people happy - and it’s that simple.

Jon Snow at the wall, being the head of a military institution, has it easier than Dany. But, not having Dany’s charm and charisma, he has a harder time convincing people that he is making the right decisions.  By the time we reach the end of ADwD, Jon knows that he is hated by a majority of the watch.

Jon is not making decisions that are popular or liked by his men. He is making decisions based on defending the realm. Save the lives of the freefolk - and not provide more dead to the Others, save the men he send to Hardhome, prepare the watch, prepare the castles, get more food, train more people etc. He too makes mistakes - fails to read the mood of the people. Fails to take warnings seriously. Undermines the neutrality of the watch by interfering in the affairs of the realm.

Doing a re-read of the Wheel of Time series before the TV adaptation premieres, I am reminded of this line from Rand al’Thor returning to one of the kingdoms he conquered. This is the hero of the story, the good guy.

The pair gathered themselves, drew deep breaths — and saw Rand over the Maidens’ heads. Their eyes nearly popped out of their faces. Each man glanced sideways at the other, and then they were on their knees. One stared fixedly at the floor; the other squeezed his eyes shut, and Perrin heard him praying under his breath. “So am I loved,” Rand said softly. - A Crown of Swords

Ruling is not always about being popular, beloved, compassionate, always being right etc. I doubt GRRM intends it to be that way. He has given several instances of rulers and leaders in his books and as he points out none of them has had it easy. Hindsight is 2020 and all that and leader often times make unpopular decisions.

I am torn on Dany’s ending. On the one hand, I find it hard to believe that GRRM is going to kill off a character that he spend so much time building up as a ruler. She is also one of the big 5, who is mentioned as surviving till the end along with Jon, Arya, Bran and Tyrion in the original outline. Why would he kill off just Dany from the big 5?

But would Benioff and Weiss really kill off Daenerys if she does not die in the books? That’s a really big departure for a central book character. I think GRRM knows the endings of the big 5 - in interviews he has always stated that he knows Jon, Arya and Tyrion’s endings.

So whether Dany lives or dies in the books? I don’t know. It will indeed be very disappointing if she does die though. I want the big 5 to make it and have decently good endings.

[agentrouka-blog]

Though Sansa has Queen foreshadowing, do you think she will be the lady of Winterfell to King in the North Bran ? It's actually quite head scratching to have both of them end as monarchs when you could have Eddard Stark's true born sun rule the North . Do you think Bran will have kids , I know he is way too young but any hint of fathering children something that the show glossed over ?

One thing that still bothers me is why the North wanted to go independent when they already had a Stark elected as King ? And what about Jon, he also has king foreshadowing ?

For the second question: A Stark king in the South lasts maybe a couple of decades. Northern Independence is a joy to be treasured for millenia.

For the first: Sansa as Lady of Winterfell only works if Bran is out of the picture, anyway. The only reason she was Lady of Winterfell after Jon was named King in the North in the tv show is because Jon is not eligible to inherit Winterfell as a bastard. He was a landless king, and Sansa was his first liege lady as the Stark in Winterfell. The moment Bran returned, the castle should have been his, and it only wasn’t because he rejected it. The best Sansa could hope for is a regency as long as he is underage, but she is only 4 years older, so...

If Bran were KitN by right of inheritance, he would be Lord of Winterfell, as well. Sansa would be sister to the king, and she might be acting Lady of Winterfell until she marries and leaves, but she would hold no power. That is simply not her endgame.

Somehow, Bran will opt out of his entire Northern inheritance. Likely related to his role in ending the Ice Threat. If he marches the Army of the Dead past the Wall down to Winterfell like Dany marches the Dothraki to the Mother of Mountains, if he destroys the Wall or even parts of Winterfell to enable an epic magical negotiation, it may seem like a good next move to bow out in the aftermath and leave it to Sansa to rebuild as foreshadowed. Unlike Dany, who will unite the khalasars to descend upon the rest of the world as the Stallion (aka Horned Lord) to “claim her birthright”, probably.

Bran having kids is less important when you consider the concept of elections. Especially if a permanent Great Council gains the kind of power that renders the monarch a slightly more ceremonial than all-powerful figure. This might actually be the reason they elect Bran, now that I think about it. He is not nearly powerful enough to mess with that system, but he may live long enough to allow it to stabilize and become a solid institution?

[janiedean]

Do you think Jonsa is going to happen? I did read some meta about foreshadowing and it's a "squint if you miss it" but there is stuff. For example. Jonnel/Sansa stark in the family tree. People say the fact that Jon didn't care about Sansa being wed to Tyrion, compared to Arya being wed to Ramsay means he his repressing his painful memories and how he has a secret crush on her.

... tldr and sorry for the harshness: no, but if you want to go into the details, with no offense to anyone shipping it of course:

as I already recently ranted, jon and sansa are in two totally different brackets - jon is a main five, sansa is in the following bracket, jon has the entire chosen one storyline plus being the center of the entire story going on, sansa has the I want the love story and I'll get it plotline which does not mesh with jon's so there's that;

sansa's story arc is admittedly painfully clear in the beginning as in: if she thinks she's going to marry a beautiful gallant pretty prince and she thinks it's joffrey who is like attractive and LOOKS gallant but we all know how it went, then she's going to end up with someone who is the total opposite, also if she wanted to be queen in the beginning then it means she's absolutely not going to be in the end bc her entire arc is about realizing that everything she wanted in the beginning is not what she truly wants, and since jon is absolutely poised to get kingship, divide the kingdoms and fuck off to the wildlings after there is no way that her storyline meshes with his like that;

sansa's only viable love interests at this point on page are sandor and tyrion, the end, which by the way are, guess what, not standard attractive and are two people who need to overcome their trauma but never treated her unfairly, and like... denying that in the text sansa is attracted to sandor (she MAKES UP that he kissed her, she dreams he comes to her on her wedding night, she's all like AH BUT JUST *I* KISSED THE HOUND etc like sorry but that's a thing never mind all the knightly investment subtext) and that sandor is her love interest on text is imvho absolutely senseless - you can ship whatever you want and realize that canon isn't going there and write fanfic, no one is gonna stop you, and I can accept the endgame theory from sansa/tyrion shippers even if I think sansa/sandor is it, but sansa/anyone else is absolutely out of the question;

also sandor is the only one sansa thinks about using all the criteria ned used to describe the knight he would find her which was better than joffrey bless whoever went and did the search (brave gentle and strong) and she doesn't use neither of those terms to think about jon, like there's more evidence for littlefinger based on that and idt lf is gonna be her intended;

they think they're siblings and like I know that saying 'BUT THE INCEST' in these books is not like an automatic NO because there's canon incest and the rival ship ie j*nerys also would be incest but like one thing is jc which is not endgame and plainly described as abusive/unhealthy, one thing is targ incests which like the narrative generally is like HEY THIS WAS NOT A GOOD IDEA ABOUT and one thing is falling in love with someone you thought was your sibling and you grew up with like that the moment you find out you're cousins - that... doesn't work like that. and like while I don't have a horse in this race and j*nerys is hardly my ideal endgame sorry but it's a lot more likely that jon would end up getting with someone who he never met before, was the sister of a father he never knew and doesn't even consider his father and he had no relation with before than with... someone he actually thought was his sister, even if he finds out she's his cousin that doesn't change it;

'repressing painful memories' jon has zero issue thinking about catelyn or sansa not treating him great so idk what he should be repressing;

arya vs sansa question: .... well that's like getting close to the entire point but not getting it, in the sense that while jon didn't take wf because it belonged to sansa - but he said he would have if ygritte had been alive and stannis said he could marry her and not val which I mean... says all honestly - technically he made vows saying he renounced his family which is the entire fucking point re arya - the point is that he didn't give those vows up for robb but he would for arya which was the one he was closest to which is what makes everyone else kill him and no he wouldn't have done that for sansa because she was the only one who kept him at a distance, but...

the entire damned point is that they have to reconnect as siblings. sansa going back north (which is gonna happen) and jon being there and most likely getting legitimized/getting robb's will etc means that they have, as adults (or at least... well not kids) realize that how she treated him was wrong and that they can build a relationship which means that each single text reference to each other which is really nothing romantic™ is posed to tell you THESE TWO WILL BE THE STARK SIBLINGS MEETING FIRST and since they didn't have a close rship before they will forge one now, but that doesn't mean that they're going to be romantic endgame, because jon's point isn't having the uber romantic storyline and sweeping a maiden off her feet and sansa already has at least one love interest posed to do exactly that and while their sl are absolutely meant to intersecate on a sibling finding each other again level they are off when it comes to romance;

also a j*nsa endgame would... imply that she becomes queen of the seven kingdoms and they stay reigning there when sansa is absolutely posed to stay in the north and do her own thing and jon is posed to destroy the united-westeros-because-a-targ-did-it legacy (which like... great bookend bc first legit targ king unites it, bastard stark-targaryen king who most likely is keeping the bastard name undoes it) and he is going to hate each second of it, so it doesn't add up with sansa getting her happy love song fairytale romance... which again she can get from other people that the text strongly pointed at already.

so: no because it makes no sense thematically for either of them and for that matter I don't even think jon*erys is eventual endgame tho I guess it has to happen at this point given the show mess idk but if either of them had to be j*nerys would make a load more sense and I still think that a targ restoration with two monarchs keeping on being monarchs is not what a dude who is obviously anti-monarchy has in mind for the endgame. like no offense to anyone into it ofc but again it has zero textual basis for being romantic endgame and it wouldn't even make either of them happy bc jon is not sansa's gentle brave strong knight and sansa isn't the kind of woman jon is actually into (ygritte reminded him of arya I mean) and idt he'd get romantic feelings for his sister who he's going to think of in that terms anyway so there's my two cents. and I understand that it's not smth that a lot of people would agree with but take it up with grrm because he's the one putting that in the text and not me X°D