• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

A Song of Ice and Fire -- **Unmarked Spoilers For All Books including ADWD**

Status
Not open for further replies.

KingGondo

Banned
Gonaria said:
Yea, I think both books would have been better if Jamie and Cersei's chapters were all in AFFC. I think it would have left us with a better Brienne/Jamie cliffhanger and given Cersei's arc in AFFC a little more meaning/character development, etc.

Shit is definitely going to go down in TWoW, and I can't wait
True, there's really not much point in having 1-2 chapters each of Jaime/Cersei in ADWD, nothing really happens to either one of them.

I'm sure there's some kind of logic to it (I guarantee GRRM has a huge dry-erase board with character arcs next to timelines in his house), but it seems extremely cruel to leave fans hanging like that with Jaime, one of the best characters in the series.
 

tokkun

Member
KingGondo said:
Re: Jon's final chapter: After re-reading it, this seems like a classic Brienne-style GRRM way to make you think a character's dead. It also reminds me of the axe hitting Arya's head in ASOS, when it's really just the flat of the axe.

Or like Tyrion sinking to the bottom of the river. Or like Asha getting brained by a knight. Yeah, he has gone to that well a few too many times.
 

KingGondo

Banned
tokkun said:
Or like Tyrion sinking to the bottom of the river. Or like Asha getting brained by a knight. Yeah, he has gone to that well a few too many times.
It's like in the show 24, when an important character is helpless and about to be shot... *BANG* someone else shoots the gunman from off-screen.

There's absolutely no way that Jon is dead. GRRM leaves little doubt when he wants to convey a character's death.

In fact, the only character I can think of (besides prologue characters, who drop like flies) that dies during their POV chapter is Catelyn, and even THAT is a red herring since she's resurrected by Beric.
 

apana

Member
What do you think of the idea that Jon Snow's mother is actually some fisherwoman. I know it's likely just a false lead but I kind of like the idea that after all the speculation about him being Rhaegar and Lyanna's son that he was just born off some random lady.
 
apana said:
What do you think of the idea that Jon Snow's mother is actually some fisherwoman. I know it's likely just a false lead but I kind of like the idea that after all the speculation about him being Rhaegar and Lyanna's son that he was just born off some random lady.



He's certainly stupid enough to be Ned's son.
 
LocoMrPollock said:
He's certainly stupid enough to be Ned's son.

I actually thought a lot of Jon's decisions made a lot of sense and he sort of knew that he personally was screwed because of them. The Ned of the recent book really seemed to be Dany, all her decisions seemed terrible.
 
Jon is dead, there's no debate about it, there are now two options.

1) Melisandre brings him back to life (Bad idea, the Night's Watch has a thing about people coming back to life).

2) His mind jumps to Ghost, possibly to take another body later. <- The best option.

Doesn't he even say "Ghost" as he dies or something? The dude's a warg and we know what happens to wargs when they die so...

forgeforsaken said:
I actually thought a lot of Jon's decisions made a lot of sense and he sort of knew that he personally was screwed because of them. The Ned of the recent book really seemed to be Dany, all her decisions seemed terrible.
Yeah, Dany really frustrated me at some points in the book, but ultimately I have to go with Barry's assessment of her--that she's a strong, clever, thoughtful young woman but is still a teenage girl, and teenagers do stupid, stupid things (i.e. Daario).
 

tokkun

Member
forgeforsaken said:
I actually thought a lot of Jon's decisions made a lot of sense and he sort of knew that he personally was screwed because of them. The Ned of the recent book really seemed to be Dany, all her decisions seemed terrible.

Ned's problem was that he was an unbending idealist.

Jon is a pragmatist, as demonstrated by his willingness to threaten to murder a baby and choice to use Mance Rayder. Although he is more soft-hearted, he reminds me more of Tywin Lannister than Ned.

Dany starts out an idealist like Ned and remains that way for most of the book, although she does eventually agree to reopen the fighting pits. So she did eventually swerve away from the course that killed Ned, but not until too late.
 

apana

Member
Dave Inc. said:
Jon is dead, there's no debate about it, there are now two options.

1) Melisandre brings him back to life (Bad idea, the Night's Watch has a thing about people coming back to life).

2) His mind jumps to Ghost, possibly to take another body later. <- The best option.

Doesn't he even say "Ghost" as he dies or something? The dude's a warg and we know what happens to wargs when they die so...


Yeah, Dany really frustrated me at some points in the book, but ultimately I have to go with Barry's assessment of her--that she's a strong, clever, thoughtful young woman but is still a teenage girl, and teenagers do stupid, stupid things (i.e. Daario).

Well apparently a purple beard and golden teeth makes you irresistible to women, if only I had known earlier.
 
apana said:
Well apparently a purple beard and golden teeth makes you irresistible to women, if only I had known earlier.
No it's the confidence required to pull off a purple beard and golden teeth that makes you irresistible to women, so you're still out of luck.
 

KingGondo

Banned
apana said:
Well apparently a purple beard and golden teeth makes you irresistible to women, if only I had known earlier.
That, and constantly fondling the woman-shaped hilts of your fighting blades.

Re: Jon, I thought most of his decisions in ADWD were understandable, but idiotic nonetheless. Letting himself be pulled along by Stannis and Selyse was dumb, as well as isolating himself from his men because Ned Stark told him that lords have to maintain distance from underlings--this only serves to further warp his perspective and alienate the Black Brothers.

Two straws broke the camel's back: his foolish idea to try to rescue the wildlings from Hardhome over land, and his open willingness to break his vows because of Ramsay's letter. His leadership had taken a severe hit by that point and I understand why the Night's Watch would mutiny.
 

tokkun

Member
KingGondo said:
Two straws broke the camel's back: his foolish idea to try to rescue the wildlings from Hardhome over land, and his open willingness to break his vows because of Ramsay's letter.

I still don't really get the latter. We have a major point early on about Jon overcoming his desire to ride south to war with Robb. We have a major point about Jon rejecting the offer to become lord of Winterfell. We have Jon agonizing over how he has broken his vows by banging a wildling.

After all that, he suddenly decides that he will break the Watch's neutrality by having a Lord Commander lead a war party against a Westerosi lord - a much more significant and dangerous violation of the oaths and traditions of the Watch than any of those other things. Sure, he was provoked and may have felt that the Watch were going to be attacked anyway, but it still doesn't sit right.
 

John Harker

Definitely doesn't make things up as he goes along.
tokkun said:
I still don't really get the latter. We have a major point early on about Jon overcoming his desire to ride south to war with Robb. We have a major point about Jon rejecting the offer to become lord of Winterfell. We have Jon agonizing over how he has broken his vows by banging a wildling.

After all that, he suddenly decides that he will break the Watch's neutrality by having a Lord Commander lead a war party against a Westerosi lord - a much more significant and dangerous violation of the oaths and traditions of the Watch than any of those other things. Sure, he was provoked and may have felt that the Watch were going to be attacked anyway, but it still doesn't sit right.

He's not breaking the Watch's neutrality. Just his own. He specifically say's he's sending the Watch North to Hardhome, and asks the Widlings for help going South.

It's that they don't like... the Watch doesn't want to help the Wildlings, especially if the majority of them go South with Jon and the crows have to march North under his orders while he personally is the deserter.
 

KingGondo

Banned
tokkun said:
I still don't really get the latter. We have a major point early on about Jon overcoming his desire to ride south to war with Robb. We have a major point about Jon rejecting the offer to become lord of Winterfell. We have Jon agonizing over how he has broken his vows by banging a wildling.

After all that, he suddenly decides that he will break the Watch's neutrality by having a Lord Commander lead a war party against a Westerosi lord - a much more significant and dangerous violation of the oaths and traditions of the Watch than any of those other things. Sure, he was provoked and may have felt that the Watch were going to be attacked anyway, but it still doesn't sit right.
I guess I understand why he did it to a degree, considering the open hostility he had been facing from his "brothers," the agonizing conscience-rending decision to try to rescue the wildlings, as well as the constant second-guessing and interference from Melisandre and Selyse... With all of that bubbling under the surface, the letter could have easily pushed him over the edge.

Although he could have been much more discreet about it, certainly. Tormund could have easily mustered a sizeable force without alerting the Watch.
 
Since Ramsay threatened him, though, isn't the wall kind of defending itself? I mean, if someone had sent a raven to the Wall that said they were going to kill Mormont (when he was still the Lord Commander), wouldn't taking that person down kind of just be self-defense? I mean, it'd be kind of tough to get back to the business of guarding the realm if there's a hit out on your leader.

Then again, I guess in Mormont's case, it would probably be Ned Stark's job to deal with whoever was threatening the Lord Commander. And since the threat on Jon came from the new Lord of Winterfell... hell, I don't know. It kind of seems like all the rules are off right now anyway. Stannis is a fake king, Ramsay is a fake Warden of the North, nobody knows what the hell is going on in King's Landing... Tommen is kind of a fake king, too. It's all kind of post apocalyptic, and the rules need to be interpreted to fit the new world they're suddenly living in. But if the Night's Watch is being threatened by this creep in the south who wants to kill the Lord Commander, I think there's at least some legitimacy to the idea that he needs to be dealt with so the NW can keep looking North.

Also, I thing the conspiracy to take Jon out was in motion before he read the letter out loud. It seemed a little too organized to have just happened after he walked outside.
 
That's an interesting comparison of Jon and Ned. Ned was acting to 'save the realm', but did so within the boundaries of his own honour and that of his office. And he trusts his 'allies' to a fault. This all gets him killed.

Then you have Jon, who believes he is too actining within the boundaries of his own honur and that of his office. The difference is Jon does everything he really shouldn't have done as a commander of the Night's Watch. He breaks his vows/honour almost whenever he can, and never heeds the advice of his council. This all gets him killed.

Another thing about his death: Ned was decapitated, and so was Robb. But Catelyn wasn't, and she was resurrected. I think the nature of his death is yet another clue that he'll be back in some form.
 

tokkun

Member
Duane Cunningham said:
Since Ramsay threatened him, though, isn't the wall kind of defending itself? I mean, if someone had sent a raven to the Wall that said they were going to kill Mormont (when he was still the Lord Commander), wouldn't taking that person down kind of just be self-defense? I mean, it'd be kind of tough to get back to the business of guarding the realm if there's a hit out on your leader.

Let's not forget what provoked Ramsay to write that letter. He caught Mance + spearwives, presumably tortured them, and got them to confess that they were sent by Jon to get fake Arya. So from Ramsay's point of view, the Lord Commander has sent this spec ops team to infiltrate his castle, murder a significant number of his supporters, and kidnap his wife.

Even if you give him a pass on the whole Stannis thing, Jon is clearly the one who started the conflict.
 

tokkun

Member
Freshmaker said:
He says he did. I doubt he actually has them all.

Well, whether he has them all doesn't really matter. He has at least one of them since he learned Mance's identity and Jon's involvement in the kidnapping.
 
tokkun said:
Let's not forget what provoked Ramsay to write that letter. He caught Mance + spearwives, presumably tortured them, and got them to confess that they were sent by Jon to get fake Arya. So from Ramsay's point of view, the Lord Commander has sent this spec ops team to infiltrate his castle, murder a significant number of his supporters, and kidnap his wife.

Even if you give him a pass on the whole Stannis thing, Jon is clearly the one who started the conflict.


True, but the people who Jon read the letter to (crows and wildlings alike) don't know that. They saw Mance burn in front of them, so to them, the part of Ramsay's letter that accuses Jon of sending Mance probably just makes Ramsay seem even more like some crazy asshole*.

BUT, yeah, you're right, from Ramsay's point of view, Jon was in the wrong.

(* Which is a universally held opinion among anyone who knows anything about Ramsay, including his own father, and the entirety of the North.)
 

Freshmaker

I am Korean.
tokkun said:
Well, whether he has them all doesn't really matter. He has at least one of them since he learned Mance's identity and Jon's involvement in the kidnapping.
I think who he has means a lot further on down the line though. If he doesn't actually have Mance captured, he's in trouble.
 

Rubashov

Member
I'm still trying to reconcile Jon's last chapter in my head. Where the Red Wedding was such a "holy shit" moment, this scene became more of a "wtf?"

Even setting Jon's questionable decisions aside, how the hell does the Watch hope to survive his death? Jon notices in the meeting that the wildlings outnumber the watch 5 to 1, Tormund himself has brought scores of real fighters with him, and I think it was the Builder who mentioned that wildlings now occupy castles to each side of Castle Black, effectively cutting them off from the rest of the Wall.

You would think that the immediate aftermath of Jon's assassination would be a brutal scene with the wildlings having the advantage. The Queen's crew will probably side with the Watch on this, but it still doesn't look good for them. There's also an enraged giant causing havoc in the middle of this.

Who's going to be manning the Wall if Jon does came back to life?
 

tokkun

Member
Freshmaker said:
I think who he has means a lot further on down the line though. If he doesn't actually have Mance captured, he's in trouble.

Mance Rayder POV in the next book. First chapter: "The King Behind the Wall".
 

John Harker

Definitely doesn't make things up as he goes along.
Rubashov said:
I'm still trying to reconcile Jon's last chapter in my head. Where the Red Wedding was such a "holy shit" moment, this scene became more of a "wtf?"

Even setting Jon's questionable decisions aside, how the hell does the Watch hope to survive his death? Jon notices in the meeting that the wildlings outnumber the watch 5 to 1, Tormund himself has brought scores of real fighters with him, and I think it was the Builder who mentioned that wildlings now occupy castles to each side of Castle Black, effectively cutting them off from the rest of the Wall.

You would think that the immediate aftermath of Jon's assassination would be a brutal scene with the wildlings having the advantage. The Queen's crew will probably side with the Watch on this, but it still doesn't look good for them. There's also an enraged giant causing havoc in the middle of this.

Who's going to be manning the Wall if Jon does came back to life?

Unless Melisandrae got to Bowen and basically says, I'll make you a new Lord Commander if you off the current one. Don't worry, I'll bring him back, but we'll vote you LC and his death frees him from his vows. He never intended to actually kill Jon, though it's never easy to stab your boss, so he cries a bit. Who knows. Even if Bowen wanted to end the treaty with the Wildlings, they likely wouldn't revolt outright of Jon were still alive, just not LC.
 

bathala

Banned
haven't finished the book, but Theon's escape was intense. Considering how things never plan out in GRRM's novel and any character can die.
 

Pollux

Member
John Harker said:
Unless Melisandrae got to Bowen and basically says, I'll make you a new Lord Commander if you off the current one. Don't worry, I'll bring him back, but we'll vote you LC and his death frees him from his vows. He never intended to actually kill Jon, though it's never easy to stab your boss, so he cries a bit. Who knows. Even if Bowen wanted to end the treaty with the Wildlings, they likely wouldn't revolt outright of Jon were still alive, just not LC.
Bowen and the Night's Watch is screwed, and it serves them right for forgetting about their real enemy. The Wildling's are people....just as Jon said, the Other's are not.
 

tokkun

Member
zmoney said:
Bowen and the Night's Watch is screwed, and it serves them right for forgetting about their real enemy. The Wildling's are people....just as Jon said, the Other's are not.

OK, but consider:

Thus far, the Others have shown no sign that they are willing or even capable of attacking the Wall.

The Wildlings just finished launching a massive assault on the Wall. Once Stannis's knights are gone, the Wildlings could easily obliterate the Watch if they wanted to. It's really a fairly reckless move, and just another example of Jon being too fixated on the long-term battle to see more immediate threats.
 

apana

Member
Jon's actions make sense from our perspective because we know the whole narrative. From the perspective of Bowen Marsh I can kind of see how he would want to stab Jon, still a dick move though mostly fueled by ignorance and fear. Anyways I have a feeling Jon is not dead or will be revived. It would be kind of a dick move if Jon died permanently and George waits 5 years until the next book to tell us for certain. I think Melisandre is going to ressurect him and send him out to hunt after the Bloodraven. It's there that he will find Bran and maybe team up with him to kill the White Walkers.

Also it's kind of interesting how you can tell what is going to happen in the story just by reading the first book. Nan's story to Bran in the first book: "The Others had slaughtered many, and couldn’t be stopped, so the last hero of the First Men set out to find the children. He left with his sword, a dog, his horse and twelve companions. When only he was left, in despair of ever finding the Children, the Others closed in. " Bran is kind of like the last hero.

edit: In that chapter I think Bran also mentions how he thinks the children of the forest will save Benjen Stark. Coldhands may be Benjen, perhaps he was turned into a wight but stopped from transforming fully because of the children.
 

ultron87

Member
Oh yeah, there were Bran chapters in this book.

Have there been other instances of people (and specifically people Bran knows) hearing voices from the Weirwood like we got in that Theon chapter in earlier books?
 
apana said:
Do you guys think the Others/White Walkers are actually evil or just misunderstood?
I have a feeling GRRM is gonna write some sort of perspective next book that will make the Others seem not as evil as we think they are. But if he does that, I'm not really sure which side to take.

Though... perhaps that's not a bad thing. I'd love an ending where you don't even know who you want to win.
 

q_q

Member
apana said:
Do you guys think the Others/White Walkers are actually evil or just misunderstood?
They seem pretty evil. But I hope GRRM portrays them as a sympathetic antagonist. Like it would be cool if maybe they once ruled Westeros but were driven out by the Children and are only trying to reclaim what was originally theirs.
 

duckroll

Member
apana said:
Do you guys think the Others/White Walkers are actually evil or just misunderstood?

I don't think they are either. I think they're just an elemental force. Left to their devices, are dragons evil? or just misunderstood? I don't think there's any misunderstanding that they don't really care for human society, or the well being of other living things, but it's just in their nature.
 

Dresden

Member
ZephyrFate said:
I have a feeling GRRM is gonna write some sort of perspective next book that will make the Others seem not as evil as we think they are. But if he does that, I'm not really sure which side to take.

Though... perhaps that's not a bad thing. I'd love an ending where you don't even know who you want to win.
I hope not. Sounds like shonen-manga bullshit where every villain has a sob story.
 

apana

Member
duckroll said:
I don't think they are either. I think they're just an elemental force. Left to their devices, are dragons evil? or just misunderstood? I don't think there's any misunderstanding that they don't really care for human society, or the well being of other living things, but it's just in their nature.

Well one difference is that White Walkers have a humanoid form, which suggest to me that they have some higher form of intelligence. Dragons are like most animals, they kill in order to defend themselves and to eat. I guess the more important question is what do the White Walkers gain through their actions? Is it as simple as they hate all "warm" life and want to wipe it out?
 

diunxx

Member
tokkun said:
I still don't really get the latter. We have a major point early on about Jon overcoming his desire to ride south to war with Robb. We have a major point about Jon rejecting the offer to become lord of Winterfell. We have Jon agonizing over how he has broken his vows by banging a wildling.

After all that, he suddenly decides that he will break the Watch's neutrality by having a Lord Commander lead a war party against a Westerosi lord - a much more significant and dangerous violation of the oaths and traditions of the Watch than any of those other things. Sure, he was provoked and may have felt that the Watch were going to be attacked anyway, but it still doesn't sit right.

He did it because a notorious psychopath was after his little sister.
 

jett

D-Member
duckroll said:
I don't think they are either. I think they're just an elemental force. Left to their devices, are dragons evil? or just misunderstood? I don't think there's any misunderstanding that they don't really care for human society, or the well being of other living things, but it's just in their nature.

What do they plan to do anyway, they're incapable of crossing the wall. I bet GRRM doesn't even know.
 

duckroll

Member
jett said:
What do they plan to do anyway, they're incapable of crossing the wall. I bet GRRM doesn't even know.

What do apes plan to do? What do direwolves? plan to do? What do mammoths plan to do? I really don't think there is a "plan" other than to just spread the cold and turn as much of the world as possible into the sort of environment they survive in, like how it is beyond the Wall.

I really don't think they are completely sentient beings like humans who have a social structure, have names, have identities, and talk to each other and discuss plans.
 
duckroll said:
What do apes plan to do? What do direwolves? plan to do? What do mammoths plan to do? I really don't think there is a "plan" other than to just spread the cold and turn as much of the world as possible into the sort of environment they survive in, like how it is beyond the Wall.

I really don't think they are completely sentient beings like humans who have a social structure, have names, have identities, and talk to each other and discuss plans.

Dunno if I agree, they do have a level of sentience, I mean they build weapons and armor, and have a language.
 

duckroll

Member
bishopcruz said:
Dunno if I agree, they do have a level of sentience, I mean they build weapons and armor, and have a language.

Are you sure? Or is that just the perception from a human observer?
 
duckroll said:
Are you sure? Or is that just the perception from a human observer?

From the Ice and Fire Wiki:
They have only been seen at night, and seem to bring unnatural cold with them. Objects struck by their swords can become so cold that they shatter. The Others move with a silent, fluid grace, exhibiting a mastery of swordsmanship. They speak a language other than the Common Tongue of Westeros with voices that sound like cracking ice.

their armor is also kinda like Predator cloaking armor, so they are also hard as hell to see.

Now the wights aren't very intelligent, but the others definitely are. Reread the prologue to GoT, it's all pretty much there from the beginning.
 

tokkun

Member
duckroll said:
Are you sure? Or is that just the perception from a human observer?

Well, if you want to get all solipsist on us, every piece of information in the books is just the perception of a human observer.
 

apana

Member
Dresden said:
I hope not. Sounds like shonen-manga bullshit where every villain has a sob story.

In this series most "villains" do have sob stories. Everyone except for Ramsay and a few others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom