George R. R. Martin Gives Meaty Update on The Winds of Winter

George R.R. Martin

Calling all Game of Thrones fans and A Song of Ice and Fire fans: He’s done it! The Maestro has done it! George R. R. Martin has completed(!!!)…a blog post detailing his latest updates on the definitely-not-yet-complete but hopefully-further-along-than-it-was-prior-to-quarantine The Winds of Winter. Its predecessor A Dance with Dragons came out NINE years ago next month. Yes, readers, that is correct. Understandably, fans have been getting a little antsy for good news, what with the state of the world in constant flux and all. Hopefully, George’s latest post is a welcome relief of stress. Rest assured that he is, as ever, working, on it. How much so? Let’s check out what he says.

“I finished a new chapter yesterday, another one three days ago, another one the previous week. But no, this does not mean that the book will be finished tomorrow or published next week. It’s going to be a huge book, and I still have a long way to go.”

Oh, do you? Still a long way to go? How many ‘ways’ to go are we talking? 10 pages? 100 pages? 600 pages? We’ll never know! But one thing is clear. He would like those many websites speculating on his progress to simply stop. Martin says, “Please do not give any credence to any of the click-bait websites that like to parse every word of my posts as if they were papal encyclicals to divine hidden meanings.” Given the article I’m writing here, I’d hate for my name to show up on one of those lists. So I’ll make it clear that this is not speculating. Just commenting. And observing. And adding my thoughts. Is that speculating? Dammit.

With CoNZealand canceled, George’s plans to go there fell through, which means more time to rush and get the book out this year…right? “I can always visit Wellington next year, when I hope that both Covid-19 and THE WINDS OF WINTER will be done.” Next year?! Isn’t that what he said last year? Now, remember that we’re in a different place than we were in 2011 when the last book came out. Back then, we were only one season in to what would soon become the biggest show on the face of the planet. Now that the show is over, and everyone all over the Internet loved the ending unreservedly, we’re past all the hype. And yet, the fates of certain characters in the book are still in question.

Will their journeys unfold and conclude the way of the show? Will TV show conclusions that frustrated longtime fans conclude the same way or even similarly in the book? Will Stannis eat it? These are very important questions. One thing’s for sure – George is working on it: “Of late I have been visiting with Cersei, Asha, Tyrion, Ser Barristan, and Areo Hotah. I will be dropping back into Braavos next week. I have bad days, which get me down, and good days, which lift me up, but all in all I am pleased with the way things are doing.” We are thrilled that you are pleased. Now, we would also like to be pleased, so please please your way into the published pile!

But I digress. I know he’s working on it. And as someone who has at most written a short story two pages long, the last time of which was probably in 5th grade, I am definitely not one to speak or even rush him. I’d rather it take a long time and be good than be rushed and be bad. The only question is, how long will it take? “I do wish they would go faster, of course. Way way back in 1999, when I was deep in the writing of A STORM OF SWORDS, I was averaging about 150 pages of manuscript a month. I fear I shall never recapture that pace again. Looking back, I am not sure how I did it then. A fever indeed.”

So what can I say? He’s working on it, and it will be completed at his own pace.  For the hot goss on what else George is up to in quarantine, including, but not limited to his latest book recommendations, check out his original post.

720 responses

Jump to (and Always Support) the Bottom

    1. IMO, there’s really no purpose in giving an update at this point. It’s either done or it’s not.

      Updates are just going to provoke nerd rage. Stop with the updates until it’s done.

        Quote  Reply

    2. “Please do not give any credence to any of the click-bait websites that like to parse every word of my posts as if they were papal encyclicals to divine hidden meanings.”

      And yet.. that’s exactly what this article title is, not to mention the opening sentence 🤨

        Quote  Reply

    3. Apollo:
      “Please do not give any credence to any of the click-bait websites that like to parse every word of my posts as if they were papal encyclicals to divine hidden meanings.”

      And yet.. that’s exactly what this article title is, not to mention the openingsentence 🤨

      Yea, I have to admit I’m surprised how click-baity this is.

        Quote  Reply

    4. One can only hope.

      Ser Barristan (Selmy!) lives! Last we read, he was shouting “Sound the attack!” as infected corpses rained down upon his knights and soldiers, crazed dragons razed the city, and the battle of Meereen kicked into full gear.

      (hope)

        Quote  Reply

    5. Apollo:
      “Please do not give any credence to any of the click-bait websites that like to parse every word of my posts as if they were papal encyclicals to divine hidden meanings.”

      And yet.. that’s exactly what this article title is, not to mention the openingsentence 🤨

      This author can only hope you read the entire article making fun of internet culture before jumping to conclusions assuming he induced “clickbait.”

        Quote  Reply

    6. so was anyone else disappointed that GRRM wasn’t working on Arya’s scenes? He did say he will get back to Braavos next week..

      “George is working on it: “Of late I have been visiting with Cersei, Asha, Tyrion, Ser Barristan, and Areo Hotah. I will be dropping back into Braavos next week.”

      So does that mean that Arya is still in Braavos? Hopefully she has a major journey in Braavos to accomplish in the 1000 pages of TWOW. I’m hoping Braavos won’t be Arya’s Meereen (as it was for Dany in ADWD). I suppose it could be Iron Bank drama.

      At least he is writing chapters. So I think that’s good news. Hopefully his publisher won’t make him split TWOW into two books again like the last time. Just publish one 1000 page book instead of screwing things up again by splitting them…

        Quote  Reply

    7. Tron79:
      so was anyone else disappointed that GRRM wasn’t working on Arya’s scenes?He did say he will get back to Braavos next week..

      “George is working on it: “Of late I have been visiting with Cersei, Asha, Tyrion, Ser Barristan, and Areo Hotah. I will be dropping back into Braavos next week.”

      So does that mean that Arya is still in Braavos?Hopefully she has a major journey in Braavos to accomplish in the 1000 pages of TWOW.I’m hoping Braavos won’t be Arya’s Meereen (as it was for Dany in ADWD). I suppose it could be Iron Bank drama.

      At least he is writing chapters.So I think that’s good news.Hopefully his publisher won’t make him split TWOW into two books again like the last time. Just publish one 1000 page book instead of screwing things up again by splitting them…

      In the last line of his blog post, he does mention Arya is calling 😉

      I agree, it’s good GRRM is writing chapters but I’m admittedly still more wary than hopeful at this point ^^;

        Quote  Reply

    8. Adrianacandle,

      Yes I agree. I should have said one two thousand page book. I think it likely it could be 1500. I said awhile back I calculated at least 3000 pages to finish the story. Anyhow I am glad to hear that Arya was calling to him.

        Quote  Reply

    9. Tron79: Yes I agree. I should have said one two thousand page book. I think it likely it could be 1500. I said awhile back I calculated at least 3000 pages to finish the story. Anyhow I am glad to hear that Arya was calling to him.

      Maybe that would be an interesting draw — guess how many pages TWOW will be? 🙂 To the digit!

      This part from his post made me laugh imagining the long emails he gets in response to the stuff he posts:

      So far, no rats at my cabin. Sid did catch a couple of mice last year, but she made pets of them. And Timmy and TomTom were no help whatsoever with WINDS. (Please don’t send me long emails about the dangers of mice, we know all that stuff).

        Quote  Reply

    10. This is slightly more detailed than his former blog posts, but only slightly. As expected, we’re not seeing Winds any time soon, or ever. I’m disappointed, but only for those who are actually excited about reading it. I was perfectly satisfied with the show’s ending and accept that it will most likely be the only ending we ever get.

        Quote  Reply

    11. Tron79: Ok. I want some of those GOT Oreos if I win. Perhaps Ten Bears still has a few he can spare.

      Oooh, that’d be a nice prize! (Although, if Ten Bears is anything like me, an Oreo would barely last 12 hours).

        Quote  Reply

    12. Hodors Bastard:
      One can only hope.

      …. Last we read, he was shouting “Sound the attack!” as infected corpses rained down upon his knights and soldiers, crazed dragons razed the city, and the battle of Meereen kicked into full gear…

      Wait. Is that a review of the Tulsa rally?

        Quote  Reply

    13. Tron79:
      so was anyone else disappointed that GRRM wasn’t working on Arya’s scenes? He did say he will get back to Braavos next week..

      “George is working on it: “Of late I have been visiting with Cersei, Asha, Tyrion, Ser Barristan, and Areo Hotah. I will be dropping back into Braavos next week.”

      So does that mean that Arya is still in Braavos?Hopefully she has a major journey in Braavos to accomplish in the 1000 pages of TWOW. I’m hoping Braavos won’t be Arya’s Meereen (as it was for Dany in ADWD). I suppose it could be Iron Bank drama…

      As someone who has only read the TWOW “Mercy” sample chapter, I took that as

      Arya’s farewell to Braavos. Her last internal monologue thoughts made it sound like she was going to miss all of her theatre troupe friends. Unless, of course, like on the show, the FM punish her and give her a second chance…

      What do you think? Has our girl worn out her welcome in Braavos?

        Quote  Reply

    14. Tron79,

      ”At least he is writing chapters. So I think that’s good news. Hopefully his publisher won’t make him split TWOW into two books again like the last time. Just publish one 1000 page book instead of screwing things up again by splitting them…”

      I still say he should release what he’s writing in serialized form, e.g., a chapter at a time, like Charles Dickens. Fans would gladly subscribe.

        Quote  Reply

    15. Adrianacandle: Oooh, that’d be a nice prize! (Although, if Ten Bears is anything like me, an Oreo would barely last 12 hours).

      I must confess. I scarfed down the GoT Oreos several months ago. I didn’t intend to. They were in my GoT memorabilia drawer. I just went on a feeding frenzy one night…and they were gone.

      I did send a few packages to friends as gifts. Even if they still have them, I suppose it would be tacky to ask to buy them back…

      P.S. They weren’t that great anyway. I’d rather spend my money on more GoT Royal Mail stamps if they’re still being sold.

        Quote  Reply

    16. Ten Bears: I did send a few packages to friends as gifts. Even if they still have them, I suppose it would be tacky to ask to buy them back…

      P.S. They weren’t that great anyway. I’d rather spend my money on more GoT Royal Mail stamps if they’re still being sold.

      I did look on eBay and they’re still available there! I am a total sucker for that Oreo taste (it’s my favourite Dairy Queen blizzard and McFlurry flavour apart from Skor) so I doubt I’d have the strength to send a few packages to friends — even very very very very very good friends 😉 So that was very very very very nice of you!!

      (I also have a GoT Royal Mail stamp set – Jon Snow!)

        Quote  Reply

    17. I wish we had more on the method of writing. If I were a journalist, I’d ask him about that.
      We know that he immerses in the world for being able to write, so distractions don’t help. But does he write his characters from beginning to end in a book, or stops at a good point of the story to come back later, or does he finish the chapters and then gets into another PoV?
      He says he had been visiting with “Cersei, Asha, Tyrion, Ser Barristan, and Areo Hotah”, does that mean that he finished Brienne, Jamie, Jon, Theon, Daenerys, Sansa?

      I know he wouldn’t want to answer such questions, but I’m really curious about the method, considering that I haven’t read any other book were structure is so careful, embroidering information in it is so meticulous, symbolism permeats the text from page 1 to the very last (a headache!) and words are chosen tortuously considering that none is there by chance.

      On the speculation level, a chapter per week is a good pace, because chapters can be very long (twenty or even thirty pages, depends on the character and the narrative). Very few chapters are less than that. Tyrion’s, Jon’s and Daenerys’ chapters tend to be the longest, and from his post it seems he’s not over with Tyrion. On the other hand, Areo and Barristan and Asha have very few chapters, and not that long.
      If the book is about two thousand pages (I suppose that’s where it’s going) then to have the book ready in a year (he started sometime last autumn) he’d need to write about forty pages a week, which would bring him a over his own pace in ASoS. That’s exhausting for an author even if one writes the first thing that pops up in his head!

      So all in all, yes, it seems that he’s in a good place, even if that means twenty pages per week. Not all chapters need a week to finish, which allows time for two a week, if he has “good days”.

      Keep up the good work, George! We’re not going anywhere, anyway…

      But we can make our fanfic, can’t we?
      How about speculating on our own preferred ending?

      Or, how about who is it that Arya kills next?

        Quote  Reply

    18. Efi,

      But does he write his characters from beginning to end in a book, or stops at a good point of the story to come back later, or does he finish the chapters and then gets into another PoV?

      He says he had been visiting with “Cersei, Asha, Tyrion, Ser Barristan, and Areo Hotah”, does that mean that he finished Brienne, Jamie, Jon, Theon, Daenerys, Sansa?

      Somebody mentioned on asoiaf that he doesn’t write chronologically (and from what little I’ve gathered, I think that might be true) so he might be writing chapters he’s feeling at the time? I know he’s mentioned having to get into certain head spaces for characters so it could be dependent on that — what headspace he can get into on any given day…?

      If the book is about two thousand pages (I suppose that’s where it’s going) […]

      Care to make a guess? 😀 Tron’s is 1506, mine is 1542!

        Quote  Reply

    19. Efi:
      Ten Bears,

      Ohhhh, I think this line

      “Now you will have to excuse me. Arya is calling. I think she means to kill someone.”

      is a wink-wink to you, TB!

      Well good! I hope Arya is roaming around Big G’s Brain. It’s time she snuffs out a[nother] bad guy and hightails it out of Braavos.

      I loved Mercy/Arya’s final scene in the TWOW “Mercy” sample chapter.

      If Big G can pick up where he left off writing Arya, he’ll do just fine.

      Hey, I know he was toying with a five-year gap at one point before ditching it. Perhaps he should revisit that idea in light of all the time that’s passed since his last book. (Nine years ago, isn’t it?) Age up Arya five or ten years, and Maisie can star in the sequel as soon as G publishes the next book and a motivated screenwriter adapts it for TV.

      “The Continuing Adventures of Arya Super Ninja Assassin Warrior Princess.” ™️

      ™️ talvikorppi (2018)
      ©️ HBO 2022

        Quote  Reply

    20. Efi,

      ” But we can make our fanfic, can’t we?
      How about speculating on our own preferred ending?

      Or, how about who is it that Arya kills next?”

      Ooh! Ooh! Can I play?

      Let’s see…
      Well she just

      exsanguinated that Raff jerkoff and fed him to the canal eels, so maybe his fellow guard will come looking for him and Arya will have to terminate him too. Or better yet, the visiting emissary from KL (Master of Coin?) they were guarding.

      Wouldn’t that be fun? Lannister Secretary of the Treasury travels to Braavos to secure financing from Iron Bank. Returns with no head and no gold.

        Quote  Reply

    21. Adrianacandle,

      ”I also have a GoT Royal Mail stamp set – Jon Snow!)”

      I think I may have mentioned once that I make my own Arya and Sandor “stamps” with a color printer and address labels. I don’t counterfeit the Royal Mail stamps; they’re not good for postage in the U.S. anyway.

      And that was an epic fail by the U.S. Postal Service: The USPS issued Star Wars stamps about twenty years ago. It often jointly issues stamps with other countries, e.g., Greta Garbo stamps with Sweden and fairly recently (I think) hockey stamps with Canada.

      How could USPS not issue GoT stamps??? They would have sold like hot cakes!

        Quote  Reply

    22. Ten Bears,

      I think I may have mentioned once that I make my own Arya and Sandor “stamps” with a color printer and address labels. I don’t counterfeit the Royal Mail stamps; they’re not good for postage in the U.S. anyway.

      I think that’d be beautiful 🙂 One of the reasons I splurged for stamps I know I would/could never use to send mail was because I thought the design of each was so pretty. Ideally, I’d get them all but I had to settle for just one set 🙁

      And that was an epic fail by the U.S. Postal Service: The USPS issued Star Wars stamps about twenty years ago. It often jointly issues stamps with other countries, e.g., Greta Garbo stamps with Sweden and fairly recently (I think) hockey stamps with Canada.

      Yeah, that sounds about right with the hockey stamps! I would have loved if USPS issued their own GoT stamps too 🙁 I also really love stamp designs — the challenge of designing artwork for a ≈25 mm x 25 mm space, I love seeing what different designers/companies do with this tiny art board 🙂

        Quote  Reply

    23. Efi,

      We know for a variety of reasons that he jumps from character to character: in particular, his different updates at different times document this.

      He’s been pretty open about his methods, too. It’s not just that he immerses himself: but he’s also working towards particular endings for the overall plot and the individual character arches. He’s known for nearly decades what endings Daenerys, Jon, Bran, Arya and Tyrion have: it’s the details of getting them there on which he works. (He’s obviously added numerous 2ndary protagonists since then: he’s never discussed how quickly their endings were cemented in his heads.)

      Of course, this might be one of the delays at this point. The world is and was, to put it mildly, highly unimpressed with how the show ended. GRRM has made it pretty clear that that was the ending he has had in mind: the “differences” that he’s promising are that minor characters cut by the show (or that got killed off early) might be around. Moreover, at this point, it is much, much too late to have anything more than cosmetic differences between his intended ending and his final one: after all, he wrote the first 5 books with that ending (those endings) in mind.

      My suspicion is that the TV series revealed another reason why it’s taken GRRM so long. Given the nature of the story, he clearly wants some “Catch-22” of the sort that Straczynski had for Babylon 5. Fans have been speculating about what that might be since the late 90’s at least. (And possibly earlier: but that is when I first partook in such online discussions!) And then the show delivered…. nothing. There is always the conspiracy theory “he withheld the choice bits for his books” but that means both that Martin has been lying to us and that Martin was very foolish: after all, even if he finishes the last book, then the show will still be the only way that most people ever witness his story. This is consistent with the idea that either his initial ideas didn’t work once he thought them through clearly or that he never really nailed down a good “gotcha!” for this. (I do think that the entire “Scouring of the Shire” calamity might have been more tolerable if there had been that Faulkneresque “We’re boned either way” lynchpin story-moment at the climax of Walkers plot line.)

      At any rate, I fully expect that I’ll make my annual “When are we getting our apology for no book this year?” in January 2022! (Of course, given how infrequently I visit this site anymore, and given how completely GoT has disappeared from general entertainment news, it’s entirely possible that one year I will make that post and then have someone point out that it actually came out already.)

        Quote  Reply

    24. There were obviously things GRRM should have done differently over the past decade that would have resulted in ASOIAF already being wrapped up. But at least GRRM has confirmed that he’s forging ahead as best as he can. So that’s great news. Onward!

      Efi,

      How about speculating on our own preferred ending?

      Okay, based on some real-life world history along with more realistic storyline pacing:

      + Jorah survives the Battle of Winterfell and is present during the subsequent attack on KL.

      + Dany originally torches only the Red Keep.

      + Jaime strangles Cersei as a mercy killing (and turns out to be the prophecised Valonqar) in order to save her from an excruciating death-by-fire, shortly before Dany incinerates both of them at point-blank range.

      + Tyrion later finds only Jaime’s half-melted gold hand, buried amongst his siblings’ ashes.

      + Dany does not initially target KL’s civilian population, but her rule is heavy-handed and has a zero-tolerance attitude towards perceived threats.

      + Dany’s forces — especially the Unsullied — engage in an increasingly brutal and oppressive military occupation of KL. The other lords across Westeros observe events with mounting alarm, especially as Dany exhibits an increasingly high-handed “imperial” attitude towards them too.

      + There are repeated incidents of Dothraki raping women in KL and nearby areas. Dany is either unwilling or unable to stop this.

      + Some of KL’s population attempt to retaliate against the occupying forces, resulting in escalating tit-for-tat violence and eventually the murder of a number of the Unsullied and Dothraki.

      + Dany decides to “teach the civilians a lesson” and publicly executes the culprits. Perhaps this involves Dany deliberately crucifying them and then burning them as “human torches”, Nero-style. She also randomly crucifies & burns a number of other civilians in order to “send a message”.

      + Dany is becoming impervious to Jon, Tyrion and Jorah’s objections. She also reminds them of Lady Olenna’s advice to “Be a dragon”.

      + Some of KL’s civilians — possibly also surviving Lannister soldiers — decide to launch an outright rebellion. It takes a while for the conspiracy to unfold, but they try to assassinate Dany by igniting the Mad King’s stores of wildfire near/beneath wherever Dany normally holds court.

      + Dany survives the attack, but Grey Worm is wounded (not mortally), a number of his officers are killed, Jon is caught in the explosion but “mysteriously” does not suffer any burns, and Jorah is killed while trying to shield Dany with his body.

      + *This* is what finally convinces a griefstricken, enraged Dany to pull the trigger. She overrides Jon and Tyrion’s objections and proceeds to nuke KL.

      + The other lords of Westeros also realise this is what awaits them and their populations if Dany ever decides to “teach them a lesson” too. They find ways to make their concerns clear to Jon.

      + For her part, Dany also makes it clear that she now has no problem nuking cities across the rest of the world during a planned campaign of global conquest if she perceives any targets to be “rebellious” or “refusing to bend the knee”.

      + Jon’s agonising over whether to kill Dany is also partly driven by his own experience of death; as someone who was resurrected but found there to be no afterlife whatsoever for humans, he knows more than anyone else that he will be literally wiping Dany out of existence if he kills her.

      The rest of the story happens as on the show, except with better dialogue, more nuanced debating between Jon and Tyrion, and definitely a much better speech from Tyrion explaining why Bran should be elected king.

        Quote  Reply

    25. Jai,

      […]a number of his officers are killed, Jon is caught in the explosion but “mysteriously” does not suffer any burns[…]

      In the books, I don’t think Targaryens are immune to fire — the funeral pyre during which Dany hatches her dragons was a one-time magical thing. Jon has already burned his hand when he grabbed a lamp to throw at a wight while Dany, herself, burned her hand wrenching a burning hot spear out of Drogon. So I think Jon would be toast in that scenario.

      GRRM from So Spake Martin, November 5, 1998:

      Lastly, some fans are reading too much into the scene in GAME OF THRONES where the dragons are born — which is to say, it was never the case that all Targaryens are immune to all fire at all times.

      This snippet from a March 18 1999 chat transcript linked from a 1999 So Spake Martin on westeros.org:

      Granny: Do Targaryens become immune to fire once they “bond” to their dragons?

      George_RR_Martin: Granny, thanks for asking that. It gives me a chance to clear up a common misconception. TARGARYENS ARE NOT IMMUNE TO FIRE! The birth of Dany’s dragons was unique, magical, wonderous, a miracle. She is called The Unburnt because she walked into the flames and lived. But her brother sure as hell wasn’t immune to that molten gold.

      For my part, I’m hoping Dany’s actions and choices are more nuanced and conflicted in the books. Likewise, I’m hoping the Bran as king thing is better set-up and not entirely dependent on a single speech :/

        Quote  Reply

    26. So what he means to say is that the book will definitely be finished by 2023…well actually, 2024…well more than likely 2025-26… surely no later than 2027…

        Quote  Reply

    27. Jai,

      I don’t really like the theory that Jaime will kill Cersei, because it seems to me that Jaime will be throwing his crimes under Cersei’s feet, blaming her for everything he’s done, but I can get behind it if it’s a mercy killing.

      I also like your idea regarding Danerys, but I don’t think it’s necessary. That would be extending the story for no reason. The set up for Danerys torching King’s Landing was already there, no need to drag it out. I feel that one of Martin’s problems in his later books is that he spends too much time on build up, not enough time on payoff.

      I disagree with you on the dialogue. It’s some of the best television has to offer. There’s a reason D&D received an Emmy nomination for Best Writing. In Season 8, we had Jon and Arya’s reunion, Brienne’s knighting, Podrick’s song, Arya and the Hound on the parapets of Winterfell, Sam finding out about his father and brother, Jon finding out about his parentage, Jon telling Danerys about his parentage, Arya and Melisandre reunite, Jon’s eulogy, Jaime says farewell to Brienne, Danerys begs Jon not to tell anyone about his parentage, Stark family meeting, Tyrion and Varys talk about loyalty, Tyrion pleads with Cersei to surrender, Tyrion turns Varys in, Tyrion says goodbye to Jaime, the Hound says goodbye to Arya, Dany’s victory speech, Tyrion quitting as Dany’s Hand, Tyrion’s speech to Jon why he should kill her, Jon talking to Danerys in the throne room, Tyrion tells Jon his sentence, Jon says goodbye to his family, among many others.

      Jon and Tyrion’s conversation was among the best scenes the show has to offer.

      I didn’t hate Tyrion’s speech regarding Bran, but I understand why others do. That wasn’t the point of that scene for me. It was the formation of a new system of government that will progress Westeros into the future.

        Quote  Reply

    28. Jai: Jaime strangles Cersei as a mercy killing (and turns out to be the prophecised Valonqar) in order to save her from an excruciating death-by-fire, shortly before Dany incinerates both of them at point-blank range.

      I think the idea of Valonqar occurring to save Cersei in some form is a neat twist but I don’t think strangulation really fits the bill of mercy killing because it’s such a brutal, literally (sorry TB!) hands-on way of killing. With strangulation, you feel somebody choke to death under your palms for a prolonged period of time and the killer is required to keep that pressure for this period of time. It’s not a fast, sharp arrow/knife to the heart, a gunshot to the head, or even a pillow on the face. Strangling goes beyond that, I think.

      But is a cool twist though 🙂

        Quote  Reply

    29. Ten Bears,

      Isn’t he already in Braavos with Raff? She’s not going to kill him, he’s Tyrell. Besides, and he’s not on the list and I suppose that the episode Martin is referring to is mid-book?
      My guess is

      Trant. Refugees from KL arrive at Braavos after KL has been taken by Aegon and Arianne. It’s Cersei and her sweet escorts, Trant, the Kettleblacks. Arya doesn’t know the Kettle idiots (LF’s men) but she knows the rest of them. She kills Trant but she fails to kill Cersei. When Cersei departs for the Riverlands, with Casterly Rock as her ultimate destination and her chests full of the Iron Bank’s gold, Arya decides to leave The House of Black and White. She has learned from them that the North has been re-gained for the Starks by Jon, Sansa and Stannis.

        Quote  Reply

    30. Okay, first of all, THANK YOU David for such a fun and insightful article, it had me in stitches the whole way through, such a witty writing!

      And, let’s be honest, did anyone truly expect George to finish TWOW this year? Well, me tbh, but I will dramatically cry in a corner for an hour and get on with my “life”.

      I feel sad for George though, he must be very frustrated with his book, he is such a perfectionist that he will melt his brains thinking and programming and rewrite half a book if necessary just to give us the best he can, and I respect that.

      Do I want the book to be realised as soon as possible? SURE but I also want him to be in a good health, both mentally and physically, and the books will be finished, some day.

      when will that day come? I’m not entirely sure but what I do know is that I’ll be waiting as long as it takes, unless there is another awful pandemic, a Third World War or the world Explotes, because given the year that we have been having…

        Quote  Reply

    31. As expected, another TWOW “update” like countless others in past years. Well to be honest, I pretty much forgot this book needs to be released in first place so it’s not really a difference for me 😂

        Quote  Reply

    32. Wimsey,

      I don’t think that Martin withheld anything of importance from the producers. From what we know it’s not like he gave it to them in bulletpoints, they visited his house and stayed there for days, so they had lots of details and they discussed it through. But I do believe that at some point the show story diverged significantly since there’s the avalanche effect and since, and they have said it themselves, “they made the story their own”. And as I understand, Martin was at peace with that because he’s very experienced with TV and how it works and because this way he gets to guard some of his secrets for the book.

      For example, they kept Beric alive with the particular purpose to save Arya in the battle of the Dawn and made use of the early Arya-Melisandre scene in 8.3 which does not exist in the books. Arya kills the NK, but perhaps there will be no NK in the book either. This might imply that she kills someone else of equal importance. Cersei, or even Daenerys. And leaving Westeros for exploring? No way. In the chapter I was reading yesterday she contemplates that Braavos is not her home. Home is Winterfell. Arya is homesick, she won’t leave WF once she returns to it. She contemplates that her pack is dead; she has no brothers, she has no sisters. How will she leave them as soon as she finds them again? Not to mention that Arya, unlike other characters in the book (Tyrion, Bran), has no curiosity about the rest of the world. Braavos becomes her univerisity and she studies people, not places; she doesn’t want to see Asshai or sail through Valyria and doesn’t ever wonder “what’s west of Westeros”.

      So the show ending for Arya is significantly different from what book Arya is showing us. If they did that for Arya, who is a main, why would I believe that they didn’t do it for the other characters? The producers made choices for the ending that left much of the audience less than happy. I can believe that the broad strokes are there, as has been stated; this means that the Starks rule everything (which is turning the story on its head), Daenerys and Cersei are dead, Westeros is utterly destroyed shore to shore (which didn’t become clear in the show). But the rest? Imo there will be great differences even if Jon is exiled and Bran sits the IT. The show messed up the messages because de-characterization of the mains started veeeery early, but characterization in the books is very consistent.
      As you said, if there is a motive for Martin to write, it’s this, that the show left the audience with the feeling that saving the world is futile since you’ll be condemned by the establishment and damned by the gods, if you’re a savage criminal you’ll pay community service while actually getting to rule and Big Brother surveillance solely secures stability, if you’re a woman you can’t have both family and power, if you’re a misfit there’s no place for you so you must roam the world as an explorer.
      Whaaaaat? Is that the message? Eight seasons were all for this? I somehow doubt it. The ending may very well be the same (apart from Arya, because she’s too young in the books) but Martin will bring it about sweetly, even if its bitter.
      If we ever get that book ending though, I guess that it will become a nice trilogy or even tetralogy on the big screen within a decade of the publication of ADoS, so the non-book readers will get it. [I wish it would be Christopher Nolan to direct it]
      If ever….

        Quote  Reply

    33. Efi,

      1658 of rather 1858.
      There’s lots of plots there!

      I’m hoping for a longer book myself! 🙂

      So the show ending for Arya is significantly different from what book Arya is showing us. If they did that for Arya, who is a main, why would I believe that they didn’t do it for the other characters?

      I don’t think this is evidence that the book ending for Arya will be significantly different (or other select mains). Arya leaving Westeros may be set up differently in the books — especially if Westeros becomes a significant source of pain for Arya or there’s a specific reason she’s sailing away. There might be another compelling reason for Arya to want to leave Westeros (at least for a time, maybe not forever).

      Arya has also felt restless and occupied an outsider role in Winterfell where she feels she didn’t quite fit in. She misses her family, of course, and they’ve become even more precious in hindsight but I don’t know if this alone is enough to keep her tied to Winterfell forever in a role she may not feel satisfied in or in a place that may have become too painful to be in considering all of her experiences — and there are at least two more books to go still, during which I think things will get even harder.

      The producers made choices for the ending that left much of the audience less than happy. I can believe that the broad strokes are there, as has been stated; this means that the Starks rule everything (which is turning the story on its head), Daenerys and Cersei are dead, Westeros is utterly destroyed shore to shore (which didn’t become clear in the show). But the rest? Imo there will be great differences even if Jon is exiled and Bran sits the IT. The show messed up the messages because de-characterization of the mains started veeeery early, but characterization in the books is very consistent.

      There are some things that I don’t think were set up all that well but I don’t think the endings for the mains (including Arya) were simply coming from the producers of the show. The unpopularity of these endings does more to convince me personally that they were coming from GRRM because D&D were making some very unpopular choices here. To me, it sort of feels like picking and choosing to say Arya’s end will be significantly different (and perhaps the endings for other mains) while the Starks ruling everything and Cersei and Dany dying will be the same.

      I think the show had some of the basic concepts down, concepts I think that will exist in the show too, but I’d say the execution was lacking.

      As [Wimsey] said, if there is a motive for Martin to write, it’s this, that the show left the audience with the feeling that saving the world is futile since you’ll be condemned by the establishment and damned by the gods, if you’re a savage criminal you’ll pay community service while actually getting to rule and Big Brother surveillance solely secures stability, if you’re a woman you can’t have both family and power, if you’re a misfit there’s no place for you so you must roam the world as an explorer.

      I don’t think these are the messages per say but more how some very unhappy viewers are taking the endings to these arcs. The set-up for these same endings may be different in the books and that might make all the difference in reception — or not. Over the past 20+ years, especially with the show resulting in this series becoming even more popular, people have become very attached to specific characters (and have come to hate other characters in equal measure) and I think that’s what makes some of this stuff difficult. A fan’s view of what is an appropriate ending for a character may not be the author’s view. One person’s sweet may be another person’s bitter.

      However, even when saving the world, there are consequences to choices and that’s a very Martin thing to implement and explore in-universe. One might not be rewarded for saving the world but subject to the consequences of the actions it took to get there (something Jeor tells Jon in ACOK).

      I don’t think Arya is leaving because she’s a misfit. I think it’s more that she wants to explore new lands and may not feel there is a role that is suited to her in Winterfell or Westeros (that’s the impression I got). Sansa can start a family if that’s what she wants — Ned, too, was left alone in Winterfell after the deaths of his father, older brother, and younger sister while Benjen left for the Wall. However, he was able to create his own family.

      The ending may very well be the same (apart from Arya, because she’s too young in the books) but Martin will bring it about sweetly, even if its bitter.

      I don’t know if Arya would be too young at approx. 13-15 (by ADOS) in ASOIAF, not with the experiences she’s garnered already. Kids can rule at younger ages, 12-13 year olds can be married off and made leaders in their clans. I think 13-15 would be acceptable, I’d say.

        Quote  Reply

    34. Efi,

      Good point. in case of writing style, I remember George mentioned in one of his interviews that he starts with a character and writes his/her chapters one by one to the end, then goes to meet another character. moreover he does a lot of editing and rewriting. that’s one of the main reasons in my opinion that takes him too long to finish books. I believe he mentioned that he wrote 3 different stories for Quentyn on his journey to meereen, chronologically.
      as for number of book pages, martin has always mentioned that TWOW will be a very large book and probably 1500 pages of manuscript. but manuscript pages are different that published book pages. ASOS, I believe was almost 1500 pages of manuscript, but only 100 pages of book. So we can expect that we will get an approximately a 1000 page of a book.

        Quote  Reply

    35. Adrianacandle: I think the idea of Valonqar occurring to save Cersei in some form is a neat twist but I don’t think strangulation really fits the bill of mercy killing because it’s such a brutal, literally (sorry TB!) hands-on way of killing. With strangulation, you feel somebody choke to death under your palms for a prolonged period of time and the killer is required to keep that pressure for this period of time. It’s not a fast, sharp arrow/knife to the heart, a gunshot to the head, or even a pillow on the face. Strangling goes beyond that, I think.

      But is a cool twist though 🙂

      • No need to apologize! You used “literally” correctly AND made a nice pseudo-pun out of “hands-on.” 😏

      • Allow me to interject a re-whinge of mine: I still say Jaime cannot be the Valonqar because the prophecy says the little brother will wrap his hands (plural) around Cersei’s pale white throat, and Jaime only has one hand (singular). Counting a prosthetic golden hand would be cheating, especially since (on the show, at least) Jaime cannot use that inflexible prosthesis to hold a shovel or grip a sword. How would he be able to “wrap” it around someone’s throat and use it to “choke” the life out of that person?
      Jaime only has one hand. In my book, while he may have started out as a 3-1 favorite among the betting public, I have downgraded him to a long shot in the Valonqar Sweepstakes* – or in horse racing parlance, I predict a DNF (“Did Not Finish”).
      🐎
      I expect GRRM to fulfill the prophecy with a twist upon a twist: Cersei thinks it’s Tyrion; the reader suspects it’s really Jaime; and then GRRM ultimately reveals it’s someone else.
      * (I had elevated a dark horse candidate, Jon Snow aka little brother Aegon T, to the top of the field right before post time. However, I had based that wager on S6 and S7 of the show (including Jon + LF in WF crypts in S7e2), which did not fulfill my prediction in S8. 🤦🏻‍♂️ Mixing and matching show canon and book canon is probably not a good idea anyway, particularly since the show omitted the Valonqar prophecy from the Young Cersei visit to Magy the Frog in the S5 cold open.)

      • Good observation about slow, agonizing death by manual strangulation vs. quick, mercy killing methods. As one noted criminal justice scholar would describe the latter:

      Where’s the punishment in that? All over in an instant.”

      – Sandor Clegane, PhD

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvILT4w8mOM

      at 3:15

        Quote  Reply

    36. Ten Bears,

      Allow me to interject a re-whinge of mine: I still say Jaime cannot be the Valonqar because the prophecy says the little brother will wrap his hands (plural) around Cersei’s pale white throat, and Jaime only has one hand (singular). Counting a prosthetic golden hand would be cheating, especially since (on the show, at least) Jaime cannot use that inflexible prosthesis to hold a shovel or grip a sword. How would he be able to “wrap” it around someone’s throat and use it to “choke” the life out of that person?

      Ooooh, that’s a good point — and one I keep forgetting (that Jaime only has one hand). Yeah, I don’t think it’d be possible for Jaime to choke Cersei to death with only the one hand. He’s not Wun-Wun (is Wun-Wun a little brother? 🙂 )

      I expect GRRM to fulfill the prophecy with a twist upon a twist: Cersei thinks it’s Tyrion; the reader suspects it’s really Jaime; and then GRRM ultimately reveals it’s someone else.

      Right, I don’t think it’s Tyrion for these reasons either — or Jaime for the reasons you brought up above. I think it’d be unexpected to have Jon fulfill this and this does make him a good dark horse candidate since he also fits the bill… but I also wonder, in light of the show’s ending, if that’d be assigning Jon too much to do. Jon does hate the Lannisters, yes, but I’m wondering if Volonquar needs to be somebody who has a more personal history with Cersei since the method of killing is so personal and agonizing?

      For that reason, I’ve often thought of Arya as Volonqar — but does she have the physical strength and size to strangle Cersei? Ditto for Dany. Both would fulfill the younger sibling bit but they are also both anatomically small, slender young girls without a ton of muscle and (I’d expect) small hands. I know Dany mercy-smothered Drogo with a pillow but that can be done with small hands and Drogo wasn’t fighting back since he was in a vegetative state.

      I’d speculate Brienne but she’s an only child.

      So I’m stumped with Volonqar :/

      (And thanks for the clip! XD)

        Quote  Reply

    37. Adrianacandle,

      “…Arya leaving Westeros may be set up differently in the books — especially if Westeros becomes a significant source of pain for Arya or there’s a specific reason she’s sailing away.”

      Hmmm. Pondering if Arya will sail away
      Was that a subliminal suggestion to post Track #1 on my Arya Compilation Album (counterpart to final scene in S4e10 + final montage in S8e6)?

      ‘Cause I was going to dedicate today’s Musical Interlude to GRRM himself, in keeping with the theme of the post and comments below it.

        Quote  Reply

    38. Ten Bears: Hmmm. Pondering if Arya will sail away…
      Was that a subliminal suggestion to post Track #1 on my Arya Compilation Album (counterpart to final scene in S4e10 + final montage in S8e6)?

      Yes, it was a subliminal suggestion since the song is now stuck in my head, replacing yesterday’s ‘Psycho Killer’ c/o Heroes 😉

      But I am curious as to what you selected for GRRM!

        Quote  Reply

    39. Adrianacandle:
      Efi,
      […]I don’t think these are the messages per say but more how some very unhappy viewers are taking the endings to these arcs. The set-up for these same endings may be different in the books and that might make all the difference in reception — or not. Over the past 20+ years, especially with the show resulting in this series becoming even more popular, people have become very attached to specific characters (and have come to hate other characters in equal measure) and I think that’s what makes some of this stuff difficult. A fan’s view of what is an appropriate ending for a character may not be the author’s view. One person’s sweet may be another person’s bitter.[…]

      I should amend this part of my post to include that I also share some of these feelings that the ending felt personally a bit more on the nihilistic side to me (I was also a viewer who wasn’t over the moon about the ending of GoT) — but in perhaps different ways than Efi does. However, I don’t think these are messages that the show was trying to send — or even GRRM’s messages should he proceed with these endings. I think there’s a sense in several of the endings (for example, I think it’s realistic within the established laws and customs of Westeros and the ASOIAF universe that there will be consequences to queenslaying, kinslaying, and oath breaking on a social, spiritual, and personal level, thus the exile — even though I don’t love it), even if some are more bitter than I’d like, make me sad, and despite my reservations over how these conclusions came about.

      However, I think there was intent to mix in some hope (or peace or release) among the bitter.

        Quote  Reply

    40. Adrianacandle,

      ”Jon does hate the Lannisters, yes, but I’m wondering if Volonquar needs to be somebody who has a more personal history with Cersei since the method of killing is so personal and agonizing?”

      That is why I had Sandor Clegane as 4:1 runner-up in early odds for the Valonqar Sweepstakes.
      He’s the little Clegane brother, and grew up right next to the Lannisters in Casterly Rock.

      Like my tinfoiling of Jon aka Aegon 2.0 as Valonqar, I could envision Cersei capturing or threatening Sansa or Arya, enraging Sandor so much that he would not hesitate to give Cersei a slow agonizing death once he got his hands on her.

      The only glitch (aside from show! Sandor allowing Cersei to skeedaddle right by him in S8e5, to my great disappointment), is that Sandor would probably be able to choke Cersei to death with one hand while drinking her wine and eating her lunch with the other. 🍷 🐓🐓

      (Cue Arya coaching Sandor by channeling Syrio: “One hand is all that is needed.”) 🙂

        Quote  Reply

    41. Ten Bears: That is why I had Sandor Clegane as 4:1 runner-up in early odds for the Valonqar Sweepstakes.
      He’s the little Clegane brother, and grew up right next to the Lannisters in Casterly Rock.

      Like my tinfoiling of Jon aka Aegon 2.0 as Valonqar, I could envision Cersei capturing or threatening Sansa or Arya, enraging Sandor so much that he would not hesitate to give Cersei a slow agonizing death once he got his hands on her.

      The only glitch (aside from show! Sandor allowing Cersei to skeedaddle right by him in S8e5, to my great disappointment), is that Sandor would probably be able to choke Cersei to death with one hand while drinking her wine and eating her lunch with the other. 🍷 🐓🐓

      (Cue Arya coaching Sandor by channeling Syrio: “One hand is all that is needed.”) 🙂

      I’ve been mispelling ‘Valonqar’ :(!!!

      I’ve entertained the thought of Sandor being Valonqar too (and he’s a speculated candidate on the westeros.org wiki!). Cersei does view Sandor as a “traitor and a brute”, wanting him dead — but not for fear of him being the prophesized Valonqar but for the treason of desertion (although, Cersei publicly claims she dismissed him rather than admitting Sandor ditched Joffrey and King’s Landing) so I don’t think she’d entertain Sandor as a possibility. Sandor barely grazes her thoughts. I think that makes him a good candidate. Cersei wouldn’t see that coming with her thoughts focused on her own younger brother who hates her (and who she hates) — Tyrion 🙂

      The only glitch (aside from show! Sandor allowing Cersei to skeedaddle right by him in S8e5, to my great disappointment), is that Sandor would probably be able to choke Cersei to death with one hand while drinking her wine and eating her lunch with the other. 🍷 🐓🐓

      True, but I’m sure he’d make a concession just to be sure 😉

        Quote  Reply

    42. Ten Bears,

      Yeah. I think the valonqar might be Arya. The prophecy says “the valonqar” not “your valonqar”. It’s all about protecting the family, and Cersei’s obsessed enough to want to hurt e.g. Sansa or Jon Snow. Plus, Arya is Sansa’s sister who imo is the only one who has all the credits for being the younger more beautiful queen (supposing the two prophecies are connected).

        Quote  Reply

    43. Efi,

      The younger more beautiful “queen” should be in quotation marks, because the prophecy doesn’t mention “queen”. So it might be “woman”, “girl”, “brother” (?! lol , this is what actually happened) or sth else entirely (Nymeria?).

        Quote  Reply

    44. Efi: The younger more beautiful “queen” should be in quotation marks, because the prophecy doesn’t mention “queen”. So it might be “woman”, “girl”, “brother” (?! lol , this is what actually happened) or sth else entirely (Nymeria?).

      To this end, since it doesn’t mention gender or this person being a queen, I wonder if Young Griff (younger, who I think is said to be quite handsome), Dany (younger, described as beautiful, is a queen), or perhaps even Brienne (also younger and while not physically beautiful apart from her eyes, she may be more beautiful in spirit or may be seen as more beautiful in a way by Jaime?) might also be this “another” (in addition to Sansa).

      I’m also entertaining the idea that Brienne might be Valonqar. She has the ability to strangle Cersei and could find her motive via Jaime. While I didn’t get the impression that Valonqar was all about protecting family, it might be a motive (depending on who Valonqar is). However, strangulation is a very distinct way of killing so I’m hung up on that…

        Quote  Reply

    45. On the topic of Cersei’s end (who will be the younger, more beautiful one to cast her down and take all she holds dear, who will be Valonqar), I remembered Alt Shift X did a video on this topic that I completely forgot about. It goes over several theories.

        Quote  Reply

    46. Adrianacandle,

      ”…I’m wondering if Volonquar needs to be somebody who has a more personal history with Cersei since the method of killing is so personal and agonizing?

      For that reason, I’ve often thought of Arya as Volonqar — but does she have the physical strength and size to strangle Cersei? Ditto for Dany. Both would fulfill the younger sibling bit but they are also both anatomically small, slender young girls without a ton of muscle…”

      • I eliminated females from my Valonqar Sweepstakes only because:

      (a) As grammarian King Stannis would point out, the prophecy as worded specifically refers to “his hands” (masculine). GRRM could have easily phrased it differently if he intended to embrace both genders, e.g., he could have avoided using the pronoun “his.”

      (b) There is no indication that the Valyrian word for “little brother” is gender-neutral, unlike Book! Aemon’s and Show! Missandei’s translation of the PTWP prophecy to mean “the Prince or Princess” That Was Promised.
      Dragons may be genderless. I don’t think that extends to binary-sexed humans or to all Valyrian words for humans.
      Again, GRRM could’ve left this ambiguous if that’s what he intended. (E.g., in English, words like “doctor” aren’t gender-specific.) He didn’t. He used the masculine word “his,” and I assume the only in-universe translation of “Valonqar” was that it meant little “brother” – not “sibling.”

      (c) As much as I’d enjoy Arya dispatching everyone on her List – and in fact, wiping out every single villain and villainess 🙂 – I’ve always felt that fan speculation that Arya might steal Jaime’s face and kill Cersei masquerading as her twin brother would be a little cheesy. Besides, Arya would still be a “she” even if wearing a guy’s face.

      (d) Now, as I understand it (correct me if I am wrong), in the books Arya has not (yet) whacked anyone while wearing a face mask. On the show, she used that trick three times already. Doing it a fourth time would be [excuse the pun] overkill. I’m glad the show didn’t use that trick again; otherwise any time two or more characters were in a scene together I’d be wondering “Hey, is [Character X] really Arya in disguise?” If book! Arya was going to be Cersei’s strangler (and assuming D&D were aware of GRRM’s intended reveal), I would think the show would not have diluted the impact of Arya’s face-changing by using it, three times, first to enable Arya to exsanguinate Meryn F*cking Trant in S5e10; then to terminate Walder Frey and implicitly, his two “damn moron sons” in S6e10; and yet again to exterminate the rest of House Frey’s Red Wedding perpetrators in S7e1.

      (e) [Excuse the show! + books! conflation]: I would think the reference to “Dark Sister” in Arya’s show-only scene with Tywin would’ve been too enticing to pass up if “Valonqar” could mean a little sister, and Arya was meant to be the one to fulfill that prophecy. (Again, that would also be overkill, since show! Arya was already The Lord’s Chosen and The Princess that was promised who brought the dawn. I mean, she can’t do everything. Or can she? 👸🏻)

      (f) While Sansa certainly has the requisite personal connection to Cersei and every reason to want to snuff her out, I don’t believe (as you pointed out) that Sansa has been portrayed as
      having the physical strength to asphyxiate someone with her bare hands. (Hungry dogs as her proxy, yes. 🐕 🐶 Arya as her executioner, yes. 👸🏻🔪 Hands-on single combat…not so much. 🕊)
      And while Brienne would certainly have the physical strength do the job, I’m not sure she has the personal connection with Cersei or the personal animus to choke the life out of her. If anything, Brienne would execute Cersei in a swift, dignified manner – like show! Brienne did when she foolishly executed the One True King in the name of the treasonous would-be Usurper Renly.

      (g) Even if we assumed for the sake of argument that “Valonqar” could mean any younger sibling of either sex, rather than only the youngest* brother of two or more male siblings, are there any other female characters who’d even qualify as a candidate?

      * I’d also suggest that just like when Margaery told LF she wanted to be “the queen” and not just “a queen,” the use of the definite article in the term “the Valonqar” (as opposed to the indefinite article, e.g., “a Valonqar” or “any little brother”) identifies a specific person rather than a class of persons.
      That, to me, indicated that GRRM might be alluding to someone who’d be identified within a family as “the” little brother, and not merely any one of several younger brothers. (This could be a stretch though. It would, however, readily distinguish Aegon 2.0 from his older, deceased brother Aegon 1.0, e.g., Q: “Which Aegon?” A: “The little brother.”)

      • Oh, and another thing or two about my tinfoil elevation of Jon Snow aka Aegon T 2.0 from early 50:1 long shot to 2:1 odds-on favorite:

      – It was curious that Magy used a High Valyrian word in her prophecy. To me, that suggested that the Valonqar would be a member of a Valyrian family (or as Dany would say, someone who has “the blood of Old Valyria”), i.e., a Targ.
      Or else, why wouldn’t Magy just say “the Little Brother” or some generic English word, instead of using an esoteric Valyrian word that Young Cersei wouldn’t understand without a translator?
      (It’d be like addressing someone in an English-speaking country as “Frau” or “Fraulein”: you’d assume that person was a German or Austrian woman. There’s an old Ricky Nelson song that illustrates this. Maybe I’ll link it some other time. I’m digressing…. Sorry. 🤥)

      – Purely from a narratively satisfying perspective, I thought it’d be a delicious twist if:

      (a) The Lannisters assumed they’d already extinguished House Targaryen’s line of royal succession long ago during the tail end of Robert’s Rebellion, by Jaime Lannister’s assassinating King Aerys, and Tywin Lannister ordering the slaughter of toddler Aegon 1.0, at around the same time his father Prince Rhaegar was killed at the Trident. [I forget who died first: Rhaegar at the Trident or his son in KL?].
      And then of course nutty beggar prince Viserys – Rhaegar’s brother – later got himself killed in a far away land before he could even try to return home to reclaim the throne.

      (b) The Lannisters, first through Jaime & Cersei’s two incest bastard sons, King Joffrey and King Tommen (in furtherance of Tywin’s objective to establish a “dynasty”) and then through Queen Cersi herself, thought that all rival claimants had been eliminated [regicide-by-boar: very creative Cersei; and nice going, Kingslayer Brienne], firmly establishing themselves as the royal family.

      (c) After all that time, for a Targaryen heir – a “little brother” nobody even knew existed – to be the one who’d come along and end Cersei’s life, fulfilling the prophecy she’d been obsessed with avoiding and ending her and her family’s reign once and for all, could be a juicy “Oh, f*ck me!” shock to Cersei – and perhaps the fandom too, if GRRM sets it up that way.

      • Afterthought: I remain convinced that there is no way that Random Brick #235 will turn out to be the Valonqar. GRRM has got to have something different in mind. Besides, as other commenters have reminded me (thanks for the snark! 😎) I did not include Random Brick #235 or its little brother Ceiling Tile #428B in my Valonqar Sweepstakes scorecard.

        Quote  Reply

    47. Ten Bears,

      Those are good speculations and some great points!

      Re: female Valonqar. As you noted, Maggie used a High Valyrian word in her prophecy. This from the wiki:

      As supporting evidence, a translation error discussed in A Feast for Crows is often cited. According to Maester Aemon, the prophecy about the prince that was promised, which thus far had been interpreted to indicate a man, could have been incorrectly translated. Aemon, because of this, comes to believe that the prophecy could refer to a woman, stating “The error crept in from the translation. Dragons are neither male nor female, Barth saw the truth of that, but now one and now the other, as changeable as flame. The language misled us all for a thousand years.”.[33] Readers have taken this to indicate that the word used in the prophecy concerning the prince that was promised is gender-neutral, and thus, that there might be more gender-neutral words in the old Valyrian language, with “valonqar” being their candidate.

      David Peterson, who created the High Valyrian used on HBO’s Game of Thrones, has commented on the assumption, claiming that “[Aemon’s quote] says nothing whatever about the gender system of High Valyrian”. He stressed that Aemon, in A Feast for Crows, was speaking about biological gender (i.e., dragons being able to change their gender from male to female, or vice versa), not grammatical gender, and that grammatical and biological gender need not be tied to one another. To explain further, Peterson stated “English is a gender neutral language. We have gendered third person singular pronouns, but outside of that, English has no grammatical genders the way Spanish, French and Italian do. “Prince” is grammatically gender neutral. Semantically, though, it’s male, just as the words “man”, “bachelor”, “father” and “son” are. That these words exist says nothing about the grammatical gender system of English.” According to Peterson, the High Valyrian word originally used in the prophecy that was translated as “prince” in the Common Tongue (i.e. English) can refer to both men and women, with Aemon’s comment referring to the assumption, given the context, that the person prophesied must be male.[34]

      The use of “his” might point to a male, yes. However, it could be an assumption or interpretative translation on Maggy’s part (which is also noted in the show).

      It was curious that Magy used a High Valyrian word in her prophecy. To me, that suggested that the valonqar would be a member of a Valyrian family (or as Dany would say, someone who has “the blood of Old Valyria”), i.e., a Targ.

      Perhaps but it may be just the ancient language from which the prophecy originates in rather than the usage of Valyrian indicating the Valonqar must be a person who has Valyrian blood (sort of like The Prince That Was Promised, a prophecy I gather that also originated in the language of Valyrian(?) since Maester Aemon believed there was a translation error).

      I’d also suggest that just like when Margaery told LF she wanted to be “the queen” and not just “a queen,” the use of the definite article in the term “the Valonqar” (as opposed to the indefinite article, e.g., “a Valonqar” or “any little brother”) identifies a specific person rather than a class of persons.

      That, to me, indicated that GRRM might be alluding to someone who’d be identified within a family as “the” little brother, and not merely any one of several younger brothers. (This could be a stretch though. It would, however, readily distinguish Aegon 2.0 from his older, deceased brother Aegon 1.0, e.g., Q: “Which Aegon?” A: “The little brother.”)

      Yes, that may be what it’s indicating but I think it could also mean that there exists only one valonqar in all the world rather than pointing to this person needing being the youngest in the family.

      If the phrasing was a valonqar, it would make it seem like there are multiple valonqars running around when there is only one to fulfill this role.

      Or else, why wouldn’t Magy just say “the Little Brother” or some generic English word, instead of using an esoteric Valyrian word that Young Cersei wouldn’t understand without a translator?

      I’d imagine because a) sounds fancier, more ominous (to the reader) and b) it adds another piece for Cersei to suss out (the meaning of valonqar).

      [I forget who died first: Rhaegar at the Trident or his son in KL?]

      I think it was Rhaegar who died first because the Battle for the Trident occurs before the Sack of King’s Landing, during which is when Aerys gets news of Rhaegar’s death. This prompts Aerys to send his heir (Viserys) and wife to Dragonstone but refused to let Elia, Aegon, and Rhaenys go as well to prevent Dorne from rebelling.

      (c) After all that time, for a Targaryen heir – a “little brother” nobody even knew existed – to be the one who’d come along and end Cersei’s life, fulfilling the prophecy she’d been obsessed with avoiding and ending her and her family’s reign once and for all, could be a juicy “Oh, f*ck me!” shock to Cersei – and perhaps the fandom too, if GRRM sets it up that way.

      Sure and while I’m not opposed to Jon being the valonqar, the only thing is that if Jon is killing Dany too, I think Jon killing Cersei as well would be a bit too much, even if the methods, manner, emotion, and circumstances of dispatch differ between the two. I’m not saying this rules out Jon as a possibility but I think it’d be a bit much narratively for the same person to be doing both these killings especially if they’re to happening within (I’m guessing) within the same/similar spans of time.

      Afterthought: I remain convinced that there is no way that Random Brick #235 will turn out to be the Valonqar. GRRM has got to have something different in mind. Besides, as other commenters have reminded me (thanks for the snark! ) I did not include Random Brick #235 or its little brother Ceiling Tile #428B in my Valonqar Sweepstakes scorecard.

      What?? But Younger Brick is my leading contender! (Joking, I agree with you XD)

      Watching that Alt Shift X video, there’s also another item which may bring Jaime back into the game. It’s possible that Jaime may use a chain of hands (the chain used for the Hand of the King) to choke Cersei to death. The westeros.org wiki, which also introduces this possibility, reminds me of this passage:

      “His natural daughter?” Lady Sybell looked as if she had swallowed a lemon. “You want a Westerling to wed a bastard?”

      “No more than I want Joy to marry the son of some scheming turncloak bitch. She deserves better.” Jaime would happily have strangled the woman with her seashell necklace. Joy was a sweet child, albeit a lonely one; her father had been Jaime’s favorite uncle.

        Quote  Reply

    48. Efi:
      Ten Bears,

      Yeah. I think the valonqar might be Arya. The prophecy says “the valonqar” not “your valonqar”. It’s all about protecting the family, and Cersei’s obsessed enough to want to hurt e.g. Sansa or Jon Snow. Plus, Arya is Sansa’s sister who imo is the only one who has all the credits for being the younger more beautiful queen (supposing the two prophecies are connected).

      • Yes, as to the use of the term “the Valonqar” rather than “your Valonqar. As I speculated above,
      GRRM’s use of the definite article “the” rather then the indefinite “a” or “any” was deliberate.
      By the same token, as you pointed out, GRRM
      did not have Magy say “your” Valonqar or “your” brother (or sister).
      Assuming GRRM carefully phrased the prophecy, he likely intended it to be vague enough so that Cersei would readily jump to the conclusion that it had to refer to the little brother she despised so much, and had accused of killing her mom (thanks to the malignant influence of Father of the Year Tywin), when in fact if she’d thought about it dispassionately, she might have logically deduced that the prophecy probably referred to someone else’s little brother, i.e., someone outside her family. Or else – as you observed – Magy could’ve said “Your Valonqar.”

      Despite all of the other shaky or contorted prophecies in the books, which Tyrion described as [something like] donkeys who could suddenly kick you or whores that could bite someone’s member while fellating him*,

      * As you know, I have not read the books, though I am aware from discussions here that book! Tyrion had some colorful analogies to describe unreliable and misleading prophecies. I don’t recall the exact wording of Tyrion’s descriptions. I hope you know what I’m talking about.

      • However, as I also tried to explain above,
      I am not sure how Arya could fulfill the prophecy because she is not a “brother” and her hands are not “his hands.”

      • As poor little androgynous-looking tomboy Arya has had to frequently remind people who mistake her for Ned’s son: “I’m a girl!” Even dullard Polliver, in the Harrenhal scene, thought Arya was a boy until Tywin castigated him: “You idiot! This one’s a girl.”
      I don’t think GRRM would rely on Arya’s gender-defying clothing and physical appearance to shoehorn her into the masculine prophecy. I could be wrong. Perhaps the last thing book! Cersei ever sees – or thinks she sees – is a little boy crushing her windpipe. (“Wait, WTF? Who are you? Arry the orphan boy? I thought that malformed imp brother of mine would be … Get off me! … argh! .. gag … gasp gurgle .”)

      • [Ultra-Tinfoil Alert] Now, I know this will never happen, particularly because it’s unlikely GRRM could envision a way to portray it believably based on medical science decades ago, even if adopted as “magic” or as a mad scientist Qyburn experiment…. I’ll cover this with spoiler coding so as not to offend, though that’s hardly my intention.

      A far-fetched fulfillment of the prophecy would require a gender-fluid or transgender character: perhaps someone Cersei knew as a girl or had just assumed was a girl, who turned out to be a boy.
      For Cersei, who often bemoaned her treatment as a “broodmare” because of her sex, and mused that she should’ve been born a boy because she had more of the Lannister verve than Jaime, perhaps it would be karma to be choked to death by a girl or woman who had successfully navigated that tradition in a patriarchal, misogynistic world.

      That Brienne had often been derided as masculine-looking, or had proved herself more than capable in competing against men in traditionally masculine martial pursuits, could make her a viable candidate for this role of a woman perceived by Cersei to be a man, especially if her gender were obscured by armor and a helmet. However, I’m not aware that Brienne had any brothers or sisters. (I thought she was an only child. I could be wrong.)
      And if I recall correctly, the scene in which Cersei meets Brienne at Joffrey’s wedding party was a show-only creation, even though GRRM scripted that episode.
      Is there anything in the books indicating Brienne would have ample reason to administer to Cersei an an “up close and personal” death by strangulation? From the show, she struck me as someone who’d go about an execution in a business-like manner, without causing unnecessary pain to the condemned person. I also assume someone who aspired to be a knight would not torture a victim; if she had to kill an adversary she would do so with “honor.” Then again, if she didn’t have a sword, I suppose a rock (sorry Sandor) or her bare hands would have to do.

      • I was a little unclear. When you wrote: “Plus, Arya is Sansa’s sister who imo is the only one who has all the credits for being the younger more beautiful queen (supposing the two prophecies are connected)”, I hope you meant that Arya will turn out to be the Younger, More Beautiful Queen. 👸🏻

      If so, that had always been my impression from the show, and from my own two eyes: A critic once described Maisie Williams as “the Many-Faced Goddess” for her chameleon-like ability to change her look from boyish to glamorous. I concur. Even in her mid-S7 – S8 combat suit and pulled-back hairdo, Arya looked beautiful. If show! Lyanna (Aisling Franciosi) was the standard, Arya exceeded it. (I understand and appreciate that the show didn’t give Arya a cliche “makeover” scene, e.g., put Arya in a flowing white dress and take down her hair to look like show! Lyanna Stark in her S7e7(?) flashback wedding scene.)

      From my second-hand knowledge of the books, there are even more indications that horse face “Arya Underfoot” could blossom into a Lyanna Stark doppelgänger, i.e., a “wild beauty.”
      I thought book! Ned told Arya she looked like Lyanna; the “Kindly Man” told her she was attractive; and there was a passage – with Gendry? -in which she had to put on a dress, and looked rather fetching.

      For a reliable show-based assessment, I’ll refer to my go-to primary source for objective reporting:

      I can’t believe I thought you were a boy. You’re pretty!

      – Hot Pie, S7e2

        Quote  Reply

    49. A dance with Dragons should have included the big battle in Meereen. But because of the 5 years gap events there was no more room. The Winds of Winter will contain that battle and it’s safe to say that it was completed since 2011 or even before that.
      George already pre-released 9 chapters from TWoW.
      In this post he told us that he just finished 3 chapters in one month.
      So we know for sure that he already has completed 12 chapters and the battle in Meereen.
      Last year he said he will have TWoW in his hand in July 2020 or else, imprisonment. I think just as Jon Snow though us, “words stopped meaning anything”. What I think George actually says is: “it’s not the right time to publish The Winds of Winter.”
      And he’s right. It would have been a restricted event, with social distancing and so on. Not his heart’s desire.
      Although George, we would read TWoW in this isolation over and over.

        Quote  Reply

    50. Ten Bears,

      However, I’m not aware that Brienne had any brothers or sisters. (I thought she was an only child. I could be wrong.)

      She had one older brother who died at age 8 — something I totally forgot but remembered after the fact.

      Is there anything in the books indicating Brienne would have ample reason to administer to Cersei an an “up close and personal” death by strangulation? From the show, she struck me as someone who’d go about an execution in a business-like manner, without causing unnecessary pain to the condemned person. I also assume someone who aspired to be a knight would not torture a victim; if she had to kill an adversary she would do so with “honor.” Then again, if she didn’t have a sword, I suppose a rock (sorry Sandor) or her bare hands would have to do.

      I don’t think Brienne is the strongest contender for this prophecy but I think she might be able to do so if she’s pushed by some extraordinary circumstances: she hits an emotional breaking point, if her relationship with Jaime is developed enough and something happens to him because of Cersei that drives her to this action in which she reacts out of fury, if she’s suffering exhaustion and at the mental end of her rope, and if circumstances push her to an extraordinary response like this whereas regularly, yes, she’d dispatch the target in a far quicker, cleaner way.

      It’s shaky no doubt and I’m not entirely sold, I have some reservations due to the manner of killing, but I’d say it’s within the realm of entertaining the possibility without knowing what she’ll be experiencing in the next books.

      I do like Jai’s idea of a twist on this (Jaime mercy killing Cersei to spare her a more brutal death) but I don’t think the manner of killing works for that. Strangulation, especially, feels like it’s being driven by a real hatred or an intense in-the-heat-of-the-moment emotion.

        Quote  Reply

    51. Ten Bears: I thought book! Ned told Arya she looked like Lyanna; the “Kindly Man” told her she was attractive; and there was a passage – with Gendry? -in which she had to put on a dress, and looked rather fetching.

      With the dress, are you thinking of this passage? 😀

      It was even worse than before; Lady Smallwood insisted that Arya take another bath, and cut and comb her hair besides; the dress she put her in this time was sort of lilac-colored, and decorated with little baby pearls. The only good thing about it was that it was so delicate that no one could expect her to ride in it. So the next morning as they broke their fast, Lady Smallwood gave her breeches, belt, and tunic to wear, and a brown doeskin jerkin dotted with iron studs. “They were my son’s things,” she said. “He died when he was seven.”

      “I’m sorry, my lady.” Arya suddenly felt bad for her, and ashamed. “I’m sorry I tore the acorn dress too. It was pretty.

      Yes, child. And so are you. Be brave.”

      The other passages I think you’re thinking of?

      “It has a name, does it?” Her father sighed. “Ah, Arya. You have a wildness in you, child. ‘The wolf blood,’ my father used to call it. Lyanna had a touch of it, and my brother Brandon more than a touch. It brought them both to an early grave.” Arya heard sadness in his voice; he did not often speak of his father, or of the brother and sister who had died before she was born. “Lyanna might have carried a sword, if my lord father had allowed it. You remind me of her sometimes. You even look like her.

      “You believe this is the only place for you.” It was as if he’d heard her thoughts. “You are wrong in that. You would find softer service in the household of some merchant. Or would you sooner be a courtesan, and have songs sung of your beauty?

      “Wear this when you are here,” the priest said, “but know that you shall have little need of it for the present. On the morrow you will go to Izembaro to begin your first apprenticeship. Take what clothes you will from the vaults below. The city watch is looking for a certain ugly girl, known to frequent the Purple Harbor, so best you have a new face as well.” He cupped her chin, turned her head this way and that, nodded. “A pretty one this time, I think. As pretty as your own. Who are you, child?”

      However, I don’t know if this makes Arya physically more beautiful than Cersei (in the way Sansa, Dany, and perhaps Margaery are) but a different type of beauty (I think Lyanna might be more striking than conventionally beautiful. I think Cersei, Sansa, Dany, Myrcella, Val, and Margaery, etc. all have conventional beauty while I get the impression that Lyanna is more of a wild beauty but less conventionally so).

      Yet that may not even matter. As noted in the Alt Shift X video above when he references theories suggesting Brienne may be the beautiful “another” to cast Cersei down, it may not be about physical beauty:

      But there’s also another cool possibility in Brienne, the one who takes Cersei’s dear Jaime from her. Brienne is younger than Cersei. But she isn’t more beautiful – in fact in the books, Brienne is very ugly — so ugly that she’s called “the Beauty” as a cruel sarcastic joke. But some fans argue that Brienne has a metaphorical inner beauty – her heroism, loyalty and kindness. Which does sound a bit lame and cliché, but it could make sense for Maggy the Frog.

      Maggy in the show looks like a sexy Halloween witch, but Maggy in the books is very ugly. Maybe she’d want to teach vain young Cersei a lesson by referring to a woman’s inner beauty. Also, Catelyn thinks that Brienne’s eyes are “beautiful”, and she thinks that just after saying she’d like to wrap her hands around Cersei’s “white throat” and choke her — almost the exact wording of Maggy’s valonqar prediction.

      So there’s definitely some connection here between Brienne and Maggy’s prophecy.

      Here is the Catelyn passage from ACOK that is being referred to:

      “You’re wrong,” Catelyn said sharply. “Every morning, when I wake, I remember that Ned is gone. I have no skill with swords, but that does not mean that I do not dream of riding to King’s Landing and wrapping my hands around Cersei Lannister’s white throat and squeezing until her face turns black.”

      The Beauty raised her eyes, the only part of her that was truly beautiful. “If you dream that, why would you seek to hold me back? Is it because of what Stannis said at the parley?”

      Now, I’d still say this is kind of a reach (for both valonqar and the beautiful ‘another’)… but it’s fun to consider all the same 🙂

        Quote  Reply

    52. Efi,

      Edit: (Timer ran out..)

      I meant to condense my last comment, AND to add that despite the in-universe warnings against accepting prophecies at face value, Magy the Frog has a perfect track record. Her predictions have always come true, even if the recipients, like Cersei, made incorrect assumptions and reinterpreted then to fit their own confirmation biases.

      By contrast, Melisandre and to some extent Kinvara, shoehorned prophecies into their own religious template, or simply misinterpreted visions. I also suspect that the “ancient” prophecies recited by Melisandre (e.g., the S2e1 “Warrior of Light” analog to the books’ Azor Ahai prophecy), must’ve been so embellished in their retelling over the millennia that they’re 10% accurate and 90% added-on window dressing.

      By S7e2, when Melisandre showed up on Dragonstone, even she had retreated from taking prophecies at face value. (Not surprising considering her disastrous conviction that Stannis was the Lord’s Chosen and her anointing Stannis as the PTWP, inducing him to doom himself and his family). In S5 she (inexplicably) seized on Jon as PTWP. By S7, instead of committing to a PTWP, Melisandre hedged, admitted prophecies were tricky, and merely said that Dany, like Jon Snow, “had a role to play.”

      Don’t get me wrong. I like it that “prophecies” are revealed to be 9 parts propaganda and misconception, and 1 part fact. I like it that just as in the real world, different cultures have their own iterations of the same prophesies. I like it that what were probably mundane historical events in the distant past involving regular guys, are transformed over time into mythic feats of legendary heroes. (The show had presented the recurring theme of how “official” accounts are often a fictionalized revision or even a total inversion of what really happened, but kind of abandoned this theme by the final two seasons.)

      I also like it that Magy the Frog kind of gives ASOIAF a MacBeth vibe: there’s a prophet who provides 100% accurate predictions, yet the character hearing them either: (a) ensures they come true by trying to prevent them from coming true, or (b) puts his or her own self-serving positive spin on them and doesn’t realize they’re about to come true – literally (apologies, adrianacandle) – until it’s too late.

        Quote  Reply

    53. Ten Bears: In S5 she (inexplicably) seized on Jon as PTWP.

      (I’m sorry for replying to another response of yours!)

      I don’t think this was so inexplicable — I think the idea was that Melisandre realized she was wrong about Stannis, which shakes her faith to the core and she comes to believe the Lord of Light never spoke to her. However, when she is able to bring Jon back from the dead, something Melisandre views as a feat which shouldn’t be possible, this seems to restore her faith in that the Lord of Light is working through her after all and believes the Lord of Light brought Jon back for a reason.

      In the books, it seems Melisandre’s visions are correct but she’s misinterpreting/mistranslating them — all but for one, when she warns Jon about “daggers in the dark” and Jon dismisses this because Melisandre was wrong about Arya, who turned out to be Alys. And then, at the end of that same chapter, he’s shanked.

      When she asks for a glimpse of Azor Ahai:

      Yet now she could not even seem to find her king. I pray for a glimpse of Azor Ahai, and R’hllor shows me only Snow.

      And Melisandre talks about the trickiness of interpreting visions:

      Whenever she was asked what she saw within her fires, Melisandre would answer, “Much and more,” but seeing was never as simple as those words suggested. It was an art, and like all arts it demanded mastery, discipline, study. Pain. That too. R’hllor spoke to his chosen ones through blessed fire, in a language of ash and cinder and twisting flame that only a god could truly grasp. Melisandre had practiced her art for years beyond count, and she had paid the price. There was no one, even in her order, who had her skill at seeing the secrets half-revealed and half-concealed within the sacred flames.

      But she does get things wrong and that may be due to seeing what she expects to see rather than understanding what she’s being shown.
      _____

      Don’t get me wrong. I like it that “prophecies” are revealed to be 9 parts propaganda and misconception, and 1 part fact. I like it that just as in the real world, different cultures have their own iterations of the same prophesies. I like it that what were probably mundane historical events in the distant past involving regular guys, are transformed over time into mythic feats of legendary heroes.

      Yes, it’s true that different cultures all have their own version of the legend Azor Ahai. However, I don’t know if these legends are totally all down to mundane historical events turning these guys into legends (especially because the original Long Night was a supernatural event with supernatural creatures and I’d think it’d need a supernatural aspect to combat it) — but I think there is a twist somewhere.

      Given the prevalence of magic and prophecy in the books vs. the show, in which the magical elements are significantly downplayed (and I’d say they are more an unpredictable force of nature than anything else), I think there is truth to these prophecies in some respect but they may be misinterpreted/mistranslated/unanticipated. I also think these prophecies would have a certain set of attributes to be met in order for a prophecy’s outcome to be realized as well or it’s a bit too loose — but perhaps under unexpected/unanticipated circumstances or with another unexpected feature/outcome/etc.

      GRRM described magic like this:

      Fantasy needs magic in it, but I try to control the magic very strictly. You can have too much magic in fantasy very easily, and then it overwhelms everything and you lose all sense of realism. And I try to keep the magic magical — something mysterious and dark and dangerous, and something never completely understood. I don’t want to go down the route of having magic schools and classes where, if you say these six words, something will reliably happen. Magic doesn’t work that way. Magic is playing with forces you don’t completely understand. And perhaps with beings or deities you don’t completely understand. It should have a sense of peril about it.

      This sort of sounds like trying to harness forces of nature but even there, in our world, there are things about our natural world (like outer space, the deep sea, theories over how life started on earth, what happened to the dinosaurs, etc.) we don’t totally understand, elements and aspects that are unpredictable, mysterious, and are out of our control.

        Quote  Reply

    54. Adrianacandle,

      • Thank you for those excerpts and quotes!
      It looks like I might have been on the right track with some of what I postulated (e.g., that “Valonqar” wasn’t intended to be gender neutral), and barking up the wrong tree on other things.

      • I guess I shouldn’t realistically expect Jon to be the Valonqar. If that’s what GRRM intends, he’d have to set that up in the books – through a threat to Arya or Sansa, or something else that would cause Jon to confront Cersei, in anger, and motivate him to choke the life out of her.

      • I suppose I put too much tinfoil stock in things like the S7e2 LF + Jon scene in the WF crypts. I had thought that scene was in there to show how an otherwise laid-back Jon Snow would become enraged to the point of throttling someone who talked sh*t about his sisters.

      Now, in hindsight, I have no f*cking idea why that scene with LF was included at all.
      Jon never saw LF again after that. LF’s ability to piss off Jon (for no apparent reason) never figured into the story. If LF’s intention was to ingratiate himself with Jon, declaring that he “loved” Sansa just like he loved her mother did just the opposite. It only made LF come off as creepy and stupid. (Who in his right mind says that to a young girl’s older brother anyway?) It was no surprise to me that Jon reacted by throwing LF up against the wall, grabbing him by his throat, and threatening to kill him if ever touched his sister. But Jon then left, didn’t face a similar situation, and didn’t come close to choking anyone else.

      • I had thought Cersei might capture Sansa, triggering Jon’s rage buttons (as well as a frustration of his S6 assurance that he could protect her). I had thought that there would be a real justification for Tyrion’s statement in S7e2, when advising Dany to ally with Jon, that Jon Snow had “even more reason” than Dany to “hate Cersei.” (The reasons Tyrion gave at the time were flimsy: Cersei had no part in any of the murders of Starks cited by Tyrion).

      • I must have read too much into Cersei’s cryptic comments to the Iron Banker about using the Golden Company to take back something that was hers; Cersei’s continuing hatred for Sansa even after Jaime told her Olenna was behind Joffrey’s murder; Sansa’s warning to Jon that despite his focus on the impending zombie invasion from the north, Cersei posed a real danger from the south and was relentless in getting what she wants; Sansa (justifiably) declining Cersei’s “invitation” and sending Brienne in her stead; Sansa’s curious response (when Jon suggested that it almost sounded like Sansa admired Cersei) that she’d learned a lot from Cersei; and in general, a sense that Sansa and Cersei had unfinished business.

      • Q: Any ideas why that scene was in that episode? I suppose it could mirror Ned’s scene in S1 when he threw LF against the wall outside the brothel and started choking him… but so what?

      • I should also admit I’m a slave to my own wishful thinking, and my enjoyment of a well-deserved “oh, f*ck me!” type comeuppance for pompous bad guys, and similar dramatic twists and turnabouts that are meticulously set up.

      That could be why I felt that the “secret” little brother Aegon would work.

      • There are only three or four known characters that check off all the boxes for the Valonqar, assuming (as your quoted material indicates) that the the word is male gender specific.

      • I’d want Sandor to fulfill the Valonqar, though I do concede I am terribly biased.*

      Show! Sandor satisfied all of the requirements. He’s got a lifelong history with the Lannisters. He’s publicly announced “F*ck the Queen,” “F*ck the King,” enough times that he thought that’s why there was a bounty on his head. He’s killed Lannister soldiers. He abandoned Joffrey and the defense of KL during the Battle of the Blackwater in glorious fashion. On the show at least, he made his triumphant return to KL – in the retinue of Cersei’s adversaries. There’s bound to be bad blood between them.
      He’s the “little brother” of the two Clegane boys. He’s certainly got the physical strength to choke out Cersei, and the temperament to do so without hesitation or remorse – even if she’s bawling her eyes out.
      He too could be motivated to brutally strangle Cersei if she f*cks with either one of his surrogate daughters. I get the impression Sansa’s relationship with Sandor in the books is a little more nuanced than on the show, while his relationship with Arya was expanded upon in the show. Either way, even if the books left Sandor Clegane “at rest,” Cersei endangering either one of “his girls” could resurrect the violent Hound personna. (The show did that with the slaughter of Ray and his hippie commune. GRRM could conceivably reactivate the Hound via a threat to either or both Stark sisters. I assume GRRM didn’t hint that the Sandor was still alive as a gravedigger if he was just going to leave Sandor to hang out with a bunch of monks the rest of his days. The show repeatedly stressed, through Beric and through Ray, that Sandor was alive because the gods had plans for Sandor Clegane.

      He did serve as Arya’s protector and bodyguard until his incapacitating injury. He did later return to WF and safeguard Arya’s life at a critical moment.

      I do not know if there were such obvious hints and parallels in the books thus far. Nor do I know if there are foreshadowings that Sandor is destined to return to KL for a final showdown with ZombieGregor, i.e., Cersei’s bodyguard, or if Sansa or Arya might be in peril when that happens. Likewise, I don’t know if book! Arya, like show! Arya, will renain fixated on crossing Cersei off her List. (If certain fan theories are true, Sansa will wind up in KL for the final showdown against Cersei while Arya will remain in the North. I have no idea if these theories comport with the books.)

      * I liked show! Sandor so much that I’d want him to be the Valonqar, the Last Hero, the Lord’s Chosen, the Warrior of Light aka Azor Ahai. (If you look hard enough, the salt, the smoke, the rebirth, and most of the other prerequisites for these roles are in the show.)

      The only prophesied role I can’t shoehorn Sandor into is the Younger More Beautiful Queen. 😉
      Whether Sandor has the same prominence in GRRM’s telling as he did on the show is another story. I suspect not.

      • In any event, somebody’s got to strangle book! Cersei. I’d bet the farm GRRM is not going to kill her off in a cave-in. I’d also wager that Magy’s unblemished track record surely means her book! Valonqar prediction will come true. That the prediction was omitted from the show in the S5 cold open with Young Cersei and Magy gave the show leeway to craft its own means for Cersei’s demise. I doubt GRRM will simply blow off the prophecy that Cersei will die at the hands of “the little brother,” whoever that may turn out to be.

      P.S. I am sure I have been misspelling “Valonqar.” I’ll have to look up the right spelling and force feed it to Auto-Correct.

        Quote  Reply

    55. Adrianacandle,

      Thank you for retrieving those Arya passages. Yes, they were the ones I remembered seeing somewhere.
      When I read the Lady Smallwood passage you excerpted, I thought to myself: “So Arya did get a makeover scene!”

      • The Brienne/Catelyn quotes are real interesting, i.e., Cat telling Brienne she’d want to wrap her hands around Cersei’s throat, in language almost identical to Magy’s prophesy.
      What could be the significance of that? It could not have been coincidental on GRRM’s part.

      Q [I cannot scroll back up to re-read your excerpts, so I apologize if the answer is in there]:
      Was there anything specific that provoked Catelyn to muse out loud about wanting to choke Cersei? Other than Cersei being Cersei?
      (Obviously, Catelyn’s gone. Perhaps whatever provoked her will also piss off the Valonqar..)

        Quote  Reply

    56. Ten Bears,

      Q: Any ideas why that scene was in that episode? I suppose it could mirror Ned’s scene in S1 when he threw LF against the wall outside the brothel and started choking him… but so what?

      Bryan Cogman answers this in the commentary for 702!

      This was a scene [Jon in the crypts] that was not in the original outline. Usually the staff, David and Dan, and Dave and myself, we map out every scene and we outline it in great detail. Then we script the episodes from the outlines. Generally, it adheres pretty closely to it.

      But when I was writing the episode, it occurred to me that Littlefinger and Jon had never really spoken. There was obviously a lot of tension there. Littlefinger has been allowed to stay in the castle because Littlefinger essentially saved their lives at ‘The Battle of the Bastards’ but Jon’s well aware of Littlefinger’s role in putting Sansa in the horrible position she was put in, in season 5.

      So, I dreamed up this scene and I’m really happy that the guys didn’t do what they sometimes do when I dream up a new scene and go, “What the hell is this?” and throw it out. But they liked this one.

      So it seems like a scene Cogman wanted to put in because he wanted a LF and Jon confrontation since they had never spoken before and there were clearly issues between them Cogman wanted to play on. And it could also involved some dramatic irony — Jon is depicted to be a lot like Ned, though he’s not Ned’s son by blood.

      I had thought that scene was in there to show how an otherwise laid-back Jon Snow would become enraged to the point of throttling someone who talked sh*t about his sisters.

      I think it’s more than LF just talking sh*t about one of his sisters because Jon isn’t that trigger happy (like you said) — LF is one of Sansa’s abusers — a man who Jon was told by Sansa that sold her to a monster tormented and raped her. For that reason, Jon would reasonably hate Ramsay. Plus, as of season 7, Sansa is the only one of Jon’s remaining family who he knows for sure is alive and he has back. And now LF is perving on his abused sister in the crypts and Jon already hates the guy.

      In one of the clips promoting season 7, Kit Harington talks about Littlefinger and how Jon hates this man, doesn’t trust this man, and views LF as trying to manipulate Sansa. Kit Harington also talks about some discord between Jon and Sansa in this same interview — I saved this clip to one of my hard drives and if you’re interested, I’ll get it off. I just need to get to my other computer.

      I think, realistically, Jon could be driven to throttle somebody who is directly responsible for significant torment against a loved one and/or if it’s somebody who Jon already hates (and Jon does hate the Lannisters in the books) if the circumstances came together just right and Jon had had it. In the books, it’s Arya who Jon was willing to risk everything for, despite his misgivings, while he doesn’t really react to news of the marriage between Tyrion and Sansa (not to say Jon doesn’t love Sansa in the books but they’re missing that factor in the show where they were the only two Starks who managed to reunite and I think that informed a lot).

      In ASOS, Jon does briefly lose it against Alliser Thorne and Janos Slynt when they would not stop insulting Ned and here, Jon knew Janos Slynt had a hand in Ned’s death. Jon nearly throttles Alliser Thorne. He was also pretty heavily injured, sleep deprived, exhausted, and had reached the end of his mental rope.

      Like Brienne, Jon doesn’t lose it as a rule but in this instance, everything came together to create a sort of perfect storm: mental and physical exhaustion, he despises Thorne and Slynt from his very marrow already, and they kept taunting him and trying to provoke him about his father — and Jon responded.

      I had thought Cersei might capture Sansa, triggering Jon’s rage buttons (as well as a frustration of his S6 assurance that he could protect her). I had thought that there would be a real justification for Tyrion’s statement in S7e2, when advising Dany to ally with Jon, that Jon Snow had “even more reason” than Dany to “hate Cersei.” (The reasons Tyrion gave at the time were flimsy: Cersei had no part in any of the murders of Starks cited by Tyrion).

      We know Cersei was not directly responsible for the murders of the Starks because we got to see those scenes but Jon may not. Cersei stood alongside Joffrey when Joffrey had Ned executed (and I think that might be why Cersei is on Arya’s list?) Plus, there’s whatever Sansa told Jon about Cersei, who had a hand in tormenting Sansa and putting her in some pretty awful situations in King’s Landing.

      Sansa (justifiably) declining Cersei’s “invitation” and sending Brienne in her stead; Sansa’s curious response (when Jon suggested that it almost sounded like Sansa admired Cersei) that she’d learned a lot from Cersei; and in general, a sense that Sansa and Cersei had unfinished business.

      I thought so too — but I didn’t think that manifest in putting Sansa in yet another victim role (which is a big problem I have with the Ramsay storyline) but a confrontation in which both were on fairly equal footing.

      He did serve as Arya’s protector and bodyguard until his incapacitating injury. He did later return to WF and safeguard Arya’s life at a critical moment.

      I do think Sandor would be a good candidate if valonqar is male. Arya may figure into it, perhaps Sansa, but we’ll have to see!

        Quote  Reply

    57. Ten Bears,

      I do not know if there were such obvious hints and parallels in the books thus far. Nor do I know if there are foreshadowings that Sandor is destined to return to KL for a final showdown with ZombieGregor, i.e., Cersei’s bodyguard, or if Sansa or Arya might be in peril when that happens. Likewise, I don’t know if book! Arya, like show! Arya, will renain fixated on crossing Cersei off her List. (If certain fan theories are true, Sansa will wind up in KL for the final showdown against Cersei while Arya will remain in the North. I have no idea if these theories comport with the books.)

      I’m hoping if Sansa returns to KL in some fashion, which I’d like to see since I agree they do have stuff between them, that it’s not in a victimized role. Rather, I’m hoping it’s in a role where Sansa has more control, agency, and can use her wits (rather than having to rely on another party to for a rescue as she’s had to do throughout the books — through no fault of Sansa’s but I’m hoping she’ll learn some tools to grant herself more agency and control).

      With Arya, I have trouble foreseeing her crossing Cersei off her list but that doesn’t mean it won’t happen. I just can’t see it happening at this time with the way the story is. But I don’t know when Arya returns North, she may visit KL first per some other theories and suggestions. But it’d be an interesting thing to look up and read other peoples’ thoughts about this!

      The only prophesied role I can’t shoehorn Sandor into is the Younger More Beautiful Queen. 😉
      Whether Sandor has the same prominence in GRRM’s telling as he did on the show is another story. I suspect not.

      Well, neither ‘queen’ nor gender is specified in that part of the prophecy and Sandor may have a beautiful spirit 😉

      In any event, somebody’s got to strangle book! Cersei. I’d bet the farm GRRM is not going to kill her off in a cave-in. I’d also wager that Magy’s unblemished track record surely means her book! Valonqar prediction will come true. That the prediction was omitted from the show in the S5 cold open with Young Cersei and Magy gave the show leeway to craft its own means for Cersei’s demise. I doubt GRRM will simply blow off the prophecy that Cersei will die at the hands of “the little brother,” whoever that may turn out to be.

      I agree, I think it’s too big a thing to overlook and chalk it up to Cersei dying under a pile of bricks.

      P.S. I am sure I have been misspelling “Valonqar.” I’ll have to look up the right spelling and force feed it to Auto-Correct.

      You’ve got the right spelling! (I double checked! Like with the spelling of ‘Daenerys’, I made an active effort today to memorize the spelling of ‘valonqar’ — no second ‘o’ and no ‘u’ after the ‘q’, which have been my common mistakes with word’s spelling)

      • The Brienne/Catelyn quotes are real interesting, i.e., Cat telling Brienne she’d want to wrap her hands around Cersei’s throat, in language almost identical to Magy’s prophesy.
      What could be the significance of that? It could not have been coincidental on GRRM’s part.

      The Alt Shift X video above noted the same thing in that it is nearly identical to the wording of Maggy’s prophecy, which leads me to give it a bit more credence that Brienne is the more beautiful ‘another’. I have some reservations but it’s an interesting possibility to consider.

      Was there anything specific that provoked Catelyn to muse out loud about wanting to choke Cersei? Other than Cersei being Cersei?

      I’ll get the full quote! Catelyn blames Cersei for Ned’s death and wants revenge. She’s sympathizing with Brienne over her desire to kill Stannis for Renly:

      [Catelyn to Brienne] “You mean to kill Stannis.”

      Brienne closed her thick callused fingers around the hilt of her sword. The sword that had been his. “I swore a vow. Three times I swore. You heard me.”

      “I did,” Catelyn admitted. The girl had kept the rainbow cloak when she discarded the rest of her bloodstained clothing, she knew. Brienne’s own things had been left behind during their flight, and she had been forced to clothe herself in odd bits of Ser Wendel’s spare garb, since no one else in their party had garments large enough to fit her. “Vows should be kept, I agree, but Stannis has a great host around him, and his own guards sworn to keep him safe.”

      “I am not afraid of his guards. I am as good as any of them. I should never have fled.”

      “Is that what troubles you, that some fool might call you craven?” She sighed. “Renly’s death was no fault of yours. You served him valiantly, but when you seek to follow him into the earth, you serve no one.” She stretched out a hand, to give what comfort a touch could give. “I know how hard it is—”

      Brienne shook off her hand. “No one knows.”

      “You’re wrong,” Catelyn said sharply. “Every morning, when I wake, I remember that Ned is gone. I have no skill with swords, but that does not mean that I do not dream of riding to King’s Landing and wrapping my hands around Cersei Lannister’s white throat and squeezing until her face turns black.”

      The Beauty raised her eyes, the only part of her that was truly beautiful. “If you dream that, why would you seek to hold me back? Is it because of what Stannis said at the parley?”

        Quote  Reply

    58. Efi: I don’t think that Martin withheld anything of importance from the producers.

      Sorry: didn’t mean to imply that you thought that! It was germane to other things I was writing. The sort of fan who held (and probably still holds) this idea are the same sort that were convinced that Martin had both of the remaining books done but was not releasing them yet for _____ reasons. (Usually these reasons were Martin sharing their hatred of the TV show!) We’ve seen how well that idea panned out! I think that a lot of it also stems from ignorance of how writers write stories. A lot of fans assume that authors are always just making it up as they go: and that the climax of the story occurs to them shortly before they start writing it. However, whenever authors discuss the writing process, they almost always emphasize that the climax of the story is one of the first things and often the first thing that jumps into their head. Martin has talked about this a bit. (Before him, Rowling did the same Other series authors might say the same, but very few series with over-arching plots have gotten anywhere near the attention that GoT and HP received.)

      The other things is that fandoms always attract a “conspiracy theory” crowd, and this fandom is no exception. Amusingly, I’ve heard equally goofy conspiracy theories in the opposite direction: particularly that Martin has never had an ending or an intention to provide one, but that he thought it would be wonderfully funny to provide an entertaining setup with lots of hanging clues, etc., and then crush people by never delivering it! Oddly, those particular conspiracy theorists tend to be fans of other franchises, and the sort of fan who hates all other franchises on principle.

      Ain’t entertainment entertaining? 😀

        Quote  Reply

    59. Ten Bears: There are only three or four known characters that check off all the boxes for the Valonqar, assuming (as your quoted material indicates) that the the word is male gender specific.

      I forgot to add — I think the quoted material from the wiki indicates how the word for valonqar may not be gender specific, thus the reason why some fans are speculating about a female valonqar. It might very well be a male! But I think there’s room for some interpretation based on the quoted material from the wiki over these these High Valyrian words (“prince”, “valonqar”) possibly meaning male and female, introducing the idea that some mistranslation/miscommunication may or may not have not occurred. Maester Aemon is talking about TPTWP — but this may actually apply to valonqar instead.

      Just a theory 🙂

        Quote  Reply

    60. Adrianacandle,

      Good lord, the amount of missing words from sentences in my post. Corrections!

      * LF is one of Sansa’s abusers — a man who Jon was told by Sansa that sold her to a monster *who tormented and raped her.

      * and they kept taunting him and trying to provoke him about his father — and Jon *rose to their bait (Note: Alliser and Janos were trying to get Jon executed here, using this as “proof” Jon is now a wildling. This was after his return to Castle Black from the wildlings).

      * I thought so too — but I didn’t think that *would manifest in putting Sansa in another victim role (*or at least, I hoped not. This is a big problem I had with the Ramsay storyline) but a confrontation in which both were on fairly equal footing.

        Quote  Reply

    61. Adrianacandle,

      Thanks for ferreting out the origin of the S7e2 LF-Jon scene. So it wasn’t in the original script outline. If you ask me, Cogman shouldn’t have decided to add in that scene. It contributed nothing. It detracted from LF’s character. It went nowhere. It wasted precious screen time.

      They could have used those few minutes in S7e2 for… MORE HOT PIE! Or more Arya & Nymeria.

      Anyway, thanks again for solving that little mystery. Now I know why that scene confounded me.

        Quote  Reply

    62. Adrianacandle,

      I’ve been mispelling ‘Valonqar’

      That word has more than one spelling in High Valyrian, Your Grace.

      😉

        Quote  Reply

    63. Adrianacandle,

      ”…We know Cersei was not directly responsible for the murders of the Starks because we got to see those scenes but Jon may not. Cersei stood alongside Joffrey when Joffrey had Ned executed (and I think that might be why Cersei is on Arya’s list?) Plus, there’s whatever Sansa told Jon…”

      Glad you brought that up: I do think Cersei made it onto Arya’s list because Arya (mistakenly) assumed Cersei must have been responsible for Joffrey beheading Ned, though as I recall Joffrey himself publicly announced that Cersei and Sansa had counseled him to show “mercy.” As I understood things, Cersei was prepared to follow through on the prearranged deal with Ned: his false confession for treason in exchange for exile to the Wall. Joffrey blew that up, and even Cersei was blindsided.

      I guess Arya didn’t know that???

      Arya was not aware of any of Cersei’s mistreatment of Sansa at the time Arya started composing her List. Besides, most of Sansa’s torment occurred after Ned’s execution and after Arya had already escaped KL, so Cersei’s abuse of Sansa didn’t earn her a place on the List.

      Or perhaps it was because Cersei demanded Lady’s death after Joffrey lied about tormenting a Mycah? Arya alternatively blamed Joffrey and then Sandor for Mycah’s death; I don’t recall her ever blaming Cersei. I know that after the Joffrey vs. Mycah fiasco, when Sansa played dumb instead of telling Robert what happened, Arya told her father she hated “all of them” – the king, the queen, Joffrey… and Sansa. But again, I don’t recall that Arya later placed any of them on her List because of that early S1 incident.

      I don’t know what to think. Cersei was wicked, alright and yet…is it possible Arya wrongly condemned Cersei, and even years later was laser-focused on her objective “to kill the Queen” all based on a mistaken assumption?

      If so, then Sandor unwittingly prevented her from killing someone who didn’t belong on her hit list to begin with.

      I mean, some folks (like Olenna and other Sept explosion victims’ families) had good reason to want to kill Cersei. Arya was not one of them.

      Am I overlooking something?

        Quote  Reply

    64. GRRM says: “I finished a new chapter yesterday, another one three days ago, another one the previous week. But no, this does not mean that the book will be finished tomorrow or published next week. It’s going to be a huge book, and I still have a long way to go.”

      So now we know the book will be finished…someday.

        Quote  Reply

    65. Ten Bears,

      I guess Arya didn’t know that???

      I found a quote that provides reasoning for the names on Arya’s list and it looks like Arya does blame Cersei for her father’s execution:

      Arya watched and listened and polished her hates the way Gendry had once polished his horned helm. Dunsen wore those bull’s horns now, and she hated him for it. She hated Polliver for Needle, and she hated old Chiswyck who thought he was funny. And Raff the Sweetling, who’d driven his spear through Lommy’s throat, she hated even more. She hated Ser Amory Lorch for Yoren, and she hated Ser Meryn Trant for Syrio, the Hound for killing the butcher’s boy Mycah, and Ser Ilyn and Prince Joffrey and the queen for the sake of her father and Fat Tom and Desmond and the rest, and even for Lady, Sansa’s wolf. The Tickler was almost too scary to hate. At times she could almost forget he was still with them; when he was not asking questions, he was just another soldier, quieter than most, with a face like a thousand other men.

      I think — because Arya wouldn’t have any way of knowing that Cersei was blindsided by Ned’s death since Arya was never privy to these conversations over what Tywin/Cersei/etc. wanted to do with Ned (ie. not execute him) — she’d have no way of knowing the truth. From her perspective, Cersei stood by her demonic son when he cut off her father’s head.

      Arya was not aware of any of Cersei’s mistreatment of Sansa at the time Arya started composing her List. Besides, most of Sansa’s torment occurred after Ned’s execution and after Arya had already escaped KL, so Cersei’s abuse of Sansa didn’t earn her a place on the List.

      I think Arya does become aware of Sansa’s beatings by Joffrey in ASOS via Sandor but that was well after she came up with her list (I think Arya first recites her list in Arya VI).

      I know that after the Joffrey vs. Mycah fiasco, when Sansa played dumb instead of telling Robert what happened, Arya told her father she hated “all of them” – the king, the queen, Joffrey… and Sansa. But again, I don’t recall that Arya later placed any of them on her List because of that early S1 incident.

      Yes, Arya didn’t come up with her list at this time but yes, she did blame all of those people for Mycah’s death:

      “Arya desperately wanted to explain, to make him see. “I was trying to learn, but …” Her eyes filled with tears. “I asked Mycah to practice with me.” The grief came on her all at once. She turned away, shaking. “I asked him,” she cried. “It was my fault, it was me …”

      Suddenly her father’s arms were around her. He held her gently as she turned to him and sobbed against his chest. “No, sweet one,” he murmured. “Grieve for your friend, but never blame yourself. You did not kill the butcher’s boy. That murder lies at the Hound’s door, him and the cruel woman he serves.”

      “I hate them,” Arya confided, red-faced, sniffling. “The Hound and the queen and the king and Prince Joffrey. I hate all of them. Joffrey lied, it wasn’t the way he said. I hate Sansa too. She did remember, she just lied so Joffrey would like her.”

      I mean, some folks (like Olenna and other Sept explosion victims’ families) had good reason to want to kill Cersei. Arya was not one of them.

      Am I overlooking something?

      Not for Ned’s death in any case, Cersei didn’t approve of that, but I’d think there’d be other reasons (Sansa’s torment, Arya herself being hunted, the hunt for Gendry — it’s Cersei who is hunting Robert’s bastards in the books rather than Joffrey, as portrayed in the show — Cersei gunning for the Starks… In AFFC, Cersei tries to have Jon assassinated for aiding Stannis but Arya wouldn’t know about that.)

      That word has more than one spelling in High Valyrian, Your Grace.

      😉

      And I’m going to hold to that! 😉

        Quote  Reply

    66. Adrianacandle,

      I’m overtired and may be hopelessly confused about the chronology. Please bear with me…

      About Melisandre, I stated above that “in S5 she (inexplicably) seized on Jon as PTWP.”

      You replied:

      ”I don’t think this was so inexplicable — I think the idea was that Melisandre realized she was wrong about Stannis, which shakes her faith to the core and she comes to believe the Lord of Light never spoke to her. However, when she is able to bring Jon back from the dead, something Melisandre views as a feat which shouldn’t be possible, this seems to restore her faith in that the Lord of Light is working through her after all and believes the Lord of Light brought Jon back for a reason.”

      • I thought Mel jumped from Stannis to Jon as her designated PTWP in S5, long before she resurrected Jon in S6e2(?).

      • With the understanding that the following timeline is approximate and the dialogue is paraphrased:

      • S4e9: Nights Watch barely holds off Mance’s assault on CB.
      • S4e10: After Jon goes out alone to Mance’s tent to treat with Mance or try to kill him, Stannis & his cavalry arrive on the scene and subdue the Wildling army. At Jon’s suggestion, Stannis takes Mance prisoner. Thereafter, Stannis & Co. take up residence at CB. At some point Mel joins him there.
      • S5e?: Mel escorts “the Bastard of Winterfell” to confer with Stannis, who wants Jon to convince Mance to bend the knee and have the Wildlings join his army.
      • S5e?: Stannis offers to legitimize Jon Snow as Jon Stark to “give me the North.” [Great speech by Stannis/Stephen Dillane]. Jon declines.
      • S5e?: Mel gives Jon weird look through the flames of a funeral pyre; says nothing.
      • S5e?: Jon elected LC.
      • S5e?: Janos Slynt defies LC Jon’s order. Jon beheads Slynt. Stannis nods in approval. [Not really relevant. I just wanted to throw that in.]
      • S5e?: Mel tries to seduce Jon with lap dance + sex as LoL-sanctioned religious ritual spiel. She vaguely alludes to some kind of “power” in Jon.
      Hard to tell if she senses he’s got king’s blood or is somehow special; or if she’s (understandably) just drawn by his pretty hair and washboard abs to try to hook up with him, spouting religious mumbo jumbo as a pretext. (She had successfully used a similar routine to seduce Gendry and extract his king’s blood.) Mel opens her robe, Jon cops a feel, but then turns her down.
      •S5e5: Jon unchains Tormund; agrees to ask Stannis to borrow his ships to sail with Tormund to Hardhome.
      • S5e?: Stannis leaves CB for WF, never to return. Stannis’s forces are snowbound on their way to WF. Stannis sends Davos back to WF to facilitate Shireen’s immolation without Davos interfering.
      •S5e9: At Mel’s suggestion, Stannis roasts Shireen to melt the ice and snow, and free up his forces to continue their march to WF.
      • S5e?: Half of Stannis’s army deserts; horses are killed in Ramsay’s guerrilla attack. Selyse hangs herself. Meanwhile, Melisandre has abandoned Stannis, and rides off to WF.
      [Note: This is where my recollection of the order of events gets really discombobulated.]
      • S5e? or S6?? Mel tells Davos Stannis wasn’t the PTWP but “someone has to be.” Mel designates Jon Snow as (her new) PTWP.
      TB talks back to TV screen, asking: “Why him? Why not Edd? Why not Hot Pie? Why not flaming sword-wielding, 6x resurrected Beric Dondarrion?” Nothing suggests Mel believes Jon is a “Prince.”
      • S5e? [I think Mel makes another Jon = PTWP statement at some point. I am drawing a blank.]
      • S5e9 or e10? For some reason, Davos hitches his wagon to Jon Snow. The pretty hair and the abs?
      • S5e10: Stannis and skeleton crew march on foot to WF. They get wiped out. Brienne commits regicide and treason, executes the One True King in the name of the late treacherous would-be Usurper, Renly.
      • S5e10: Jon gets shanked.
      • S6e1: For some reason, Davos, Edd and a few others safeguard Jon’s corpse.
      • S6e2: Out of the blue, Davos asks Mel if she knows of some kind of magic spell to bring Jon back to life.
      • S6e2: Edd sneaks off to ask Wildlings (at the Gift?) for help against Thorne and his fellow traitors, who are now in charge of CB. Wun Wun makes dramatic gate-crashing entrance just as Thorne and his goons are about to chop down the door with Davos, DeadJon et al. inside.
      • S6e2: Though disheartened by her f*ck-ups, Mel begrudgingly agrees to take a shot at resurrecting Jon. It doesn’t look like it’s working. Everybody starts leaving the room.
      • S6e2: A few minutes later, Ghost wakes up from a nap. Mel proclaims Ghost as TPTWP. [Just kidding]. Jon gasps, sits up. End of episode.
      • S6e3: Resurrected Jon goes outside to greet his fans.
      • S6e3 or e4: Sansa and Brienne arrive at CB. Brienne casually mentions to Davos that she executed the One True King.

      – I would wholeheartedly agree that if Mel didn’t anoint Jon as PTWP until after she (well, the Lord of Light) resurrected him, then you’re right and I’m wrong: Mel seizing upon Jon as PTWP would not be “inexplicable.” It would make logical sense.
      I’ll have to go back and pinpoint when Mel started calling Jon TPTWP, and what exactly she said.

      – By itself, resurrection still wouldn’t explain why Jon would be considered a “Prince” – his true parentage had not been revealed yet – but I won’t quibble over such details.

      – In any event, on the show Jon didn’t turn out to be the Prince That Was Promised anyway.
      That honor was reserved for the Lord’s Chosen, ASNAWPTWP.*

      In show canon, the Lord of Light had kept bringing back Beric so he could give his last life to protect Arya. Likewise, the Lord of Light brought back Sandor after he was clinically dead because the Lord’s plans for Sandor Clegane were for him to join Beric in safeguarding Arya so she could do her savior of the world gig.
      I’m okay with that.😀

      (Incidentally, I’m glad the show kept Beric alive. I understand that in the books Beric had already given his last life to reanimate Catelyn’s decomposing corpse. I liked Richard Dormer’s portrayal, loved his voice, and enjoyed the way Beric laughed off Sandor’s insults. I also thought Beric’s speeches were well-written and well-delivered, especially in S6 – S8.
      I also genuinely appreciated that in a show full of violent religious zealots and hypocrites who used “the gods” as an excuse for personal aggrandizement and arrogating political power (hello, High Sparrow and your forehead-carving imbeciles) or to roast “nonbelievers,” there was a character whose faith compelled him to defend those who could not defend themselves, and fight the forces of evil for the sake of the greater good.)

      *👸🏻 Arya Super Ninja Assassin Warrior Princess That Was Promised who brought the dawn and saved the world from eternal darkness.

        Quote  Reply

    67. Adrianacandle,

      I figured GRRM and TWOW deserved their own musical tribute.

      Next up: Sandor Clegane. Not as easy as I’d hoped. I was gonna go with “Hound Dog” by Elvis, except the lyrics don’t fit and I’m not enamored with the song anyway.

      I don’t think I remember very many love songs or any other songs written about a gruff, foul-mouthed warrior – a misanthrope with “a face like a half-burned ham,” per Hot Pie.

      Hmm. I’ll have to try to focus on the “inner” Sandor, the one who despised knights and yet bravely rescued damsels in distress when “anointed” knights chickened out; spoke through his actions contrary to the hateful words he uttered; and on rare occasions briefly dropped the nasty facade (e.g., with Arya in S4e7, S8e2, and S8e5).

      Well, off to bed…

        Quote  Reply

    68. Ten Bears,

      I would wholeheartedly agree that if Mel didn’t anoint Jon as PTWP until after she (well, the Lord of Light) resurrected him, then you’re right and I’m wrong: Mel seizing upon Jon as PTWP would not be “inexplicable.” It would make logical sense.
      I’ll have to go back and pinpoint when Mel started calling Jon TPTWP, and what exactly she said.

      I believe the times when Melisandre refers to Jon as TPTWP are in 6×03 and 6×04, after Jon is resurrected (but I can’t find a mention of her believing Jon to be this beforehand):

      6×03 (to a newly resurrected Jon, who returns to life at the very end of 6×02):

      Melisandre: The Lord let you come back for a reason. Stannis was not the prince who was promised, but someone has to be.

      6×04:

      Davos: Will you stay here at Castle Black?

      Melisandre: I will do as Jon Snow commands.

      Davos: You serve Jon Snow now?

      Melisandre: He’s the prince that was promised.

      Davos: Forgive me, my lady, I thought that was Stannis.

        Quote  Reply

    69. Ten Bears: I don’t think I remember very many love songs or any other songs written about a gruff, foul-mouthed warrior – a misanthrope with “a face like a half-burned ham,” per Hot Pie.

      Hmm. I’ll have to try to focus on the “inner” Sandor, the one who despised knights and yet bravely rescued damsels in distress when “anointed” knights chickened out; spoke through his actions contrary to the hateful words he uttered; and on rare occasions briefly dropped the nasty facade (e.g., with Arya in S4e7, S8e2, and S8e5).

      My own mental music library is far far far more limited than yours so I’m afraid I can’t offer any suggestions 🙁 Except for this one, which just occurred to me:

      As odd as this is (and this may be totally out of left-field), what you described sounds a bit like Shrek XD;; Maybe that (first) movie would offer some suggestions? 🙂 Or Beauty and the Beast (I’ve seen it written that the relationship between Sandor and Sansa is supposed to be a play on that…).

        Quote  Reply

    70. Adrianacandle,

      Looks like I was wrong and you were right. You found the lines by Mel that I was thinking of. They are in S6, post-resurrection.

      Particularly since Mel had such a dreadful history of interpreting visions in the flames and apparently had gotten only static or silence in response to prayers in the past, for the Lord of Light to actually listen to her prayer and grant her request by bringing a dead person back to life must have been a BFD for her. It would also be a pretty good indication that the resurrected person is super special.

      Great sleuthing! 🕵️

        Quote  Reply

    71. Ten Bears,

      I think Arya blamed Cersei for the Trident incident, Mycah’s death and Lady’s killing. While she doesn’t know that many things, she knows that Sansa would never willingly marry a Lannister –but that is later; Cersei enters her list long before that, so it must be related to the Trident. Also, Ned “confides” in her by telling her that she must be careful in the court, because it’s “winter”. So Arya must have sensed that her father was worried for more things than she could ever imagine and that there was something wrong in KL, unlike Sansa, who is kept in the dark. A kid would be able to put two and two together, even though she doesn’t have the details.
      Arya also learns that Sansa was beaten at the court (Cersei is not responsible for that, hers is another type of abuse) and that she was up for raping (also indicated by what Sandor says about that). While Arya’s reasoning is not that explicit -she is only 11 after all- it’s the bits and pieces that she must put one after the other in her mind, that make the list very firm. I suppose we’re yet to see more about that in her future chapters (some day).

        Quote  Reply

    72. Ten Bears,

      It’s really an over-reliance on the Cmmd+F function 🙂 You had Melisandre’s line right word-for-word.

      Efi,

      I think Arya blamed Cersei for the Trident incident, Mycah’s death and Lady’s killing.

      To amend an above comment I made about this (re: the quote showing Arya’s reasoning and why she put these names on her list), I think Lady specifically is one of the reasons why Arya blames Cersei, as well as her father’s death:

      Arya watched and listened and polished her hates the way Gendry had once polished his horned helm. Dunsen wore those bull’s horns now, and she hated him for it. She hated Polliver for Needle, and she hated old Chiswyck who thought he was funny. And Raff the Sweetling, who’d driven his spear through Lommy’s throat, she hated even more. She hated Ser Amory Lorch for Yoren, and she hated Ser Meryn Trant for Syrio, the Hound for killing the butcher’s boy Mycah, and Ser Ilyn and Prince Joffrey and the queen for the sake of her father and Fat Tom and Desmond and the rest, and even for Lady, Sansa’s wolf. The Tickler was almost too scary to hate. At times she could almost forget he was still with them; when he was not asking questions, he was just another soldier, quieter than most, with a face like a thousand other men.

      And it’s right after this paragraph that Arya develops her list and starts reciting it night after night (Arya VI, ACOK).

      And while Arya isn’t blaming Cersei here, I think it’s evident she does feel Lady’s death quite a bit:

      Arya was glad to hear that the castle of the Darrys would be burned. That was where they’d brought her when she’d been caught after her fight with Joffrey, and where the queen had made her father kill Sansa’s wolf. It deserves to burn.

        Quote  Reply

    73. Adrianacandle,

      Musical moral dilemma!

      I was turned off by Sansa’s speech to Sandor in S8e4, i.e., that she’d still be a little bird were it not for LF, Ramsey and all the abuse she had to endure. Many fans and critics are divided on this. I for one thought it played into a horrible and overused “rape made me a stronger person” cliche. I also find the notion of empowerment through suffering to be boneheaded and lazy. (Girls and women can evolve in ways other than through surviving torture and abuse.) Enough pontificating…

      My problem is that I think I may have found the perfect song for Sansa, but it plays into that trope I find offensive. Maybe it is not even my place to criticize it. If a woman sings about it, who am I to question it?

      I’d better sleep on it. Or plan to post it with a disclaimer.

        Quote  Reply

    74. Ten Bears,

      “Nor do I know if there are foreshadowings that Sandor is destined to return to KL for a final showdown with ZombieGregor, i.e., Cersei’s bodyguard, or if Sansa or Arya might be in peril when that happens.”

      There is foreshadowing in Bran’s chapters, among his visions in GoT.
      Bran sees his sisters in KL. Above them he sees three figures, one golden, shining all over (Jamie) one like a hound (definitely Sandor) and another whose open visor reveals sth very, very bad (the other Clegane).
      I took this from Wiki:
      “one as dark as ash, with the terrible face of a hound, one armoured like the sun, golden and beautiful, and one a giant in armour made of stone with only darkness and thick black blood in his visor looming over them”

      Now, one might think that this is about what will happen in the next months, Sansa’s attempted rape, the events in KL, etc. But there is the problem that Jamie has absolutely no role in the events in the first and second book with regard to Arya and Sansa. Also, Gregor Clegane has no interference with the girls either. He is sent by Tywin to the Riverlands and is absent from KL until a few days before the duel with Martell. For this reason I tend to think that this vision refers to the final events.

      I might be wrong though; I have reservations because I do not think that Sansa will return again in KL. Arya and Sandor might, but I do not find a reason for Sansa to return there before everything is over, meaning before the destruction of KL.

      Also, this vision might not be about one event either. What if it foreshadows the roles of these people in the lives of Arya and Sansa, or in general in the story? But again, I do not see why Gregor as dead and resurrected by Qyburn would have any relevance to Sansa, who has escaped in KL and -imo- won’t return for a long time. (I do believe that Arya will be in KL with Jon)
      Also, Gregor is not important politically. He’s someone to command, not someone who will by himself have any impact on the story. If he’ll pose a threat to the girls it’ll be via Cersei who commands him.

        Quote  Reply

    75. Ten Bears: I was turned off by Sansa’s speech to Sandor in S8e4, i.e., that she’d still be a little bird were it not for LF, Ramsey and all the abuse she had to endure. Many fans and critics are divided on this. I for one thought it played into a horrible and overused “rape made me a stronger person” cliche. I also find the notion of empowerment through suffering to be boneheaded and lazy. (Girls and women can evolve in ways other than through surviving torture and abuse.) Enough pontificating…

      For myself, I agree with what you’re saying here because I felt the same way:

      With my own experiences, I had one counselor throw a similar line of reasoning at me — that I became “stronger” for these experiences but a) it certainly didn’t feel that way to me, I felt quite the opposite, b) this made me pretty angry, and c) this explanation upset me to the point where I dropped this counselor altogether.

      However, that’s not to say everybody feels the way I do because maybe there are some who do feel this way or maybe it’s more complex than this for some.

      I agree especially with this:

      I also find the notion of empowerment through suffering to be boneheaded and lazy. (Girls and women can evolve in ways other than through surviving torture and abuse.)

      While suffering does inform our views, development, and growth — for better or worse, I think you’re right in that it’s not the only vehicle for growth and (positive) development. Suffering can be but it can also do damage in many ways too. Ultimately, and speaking only for myself, I think it’s a pretty complex notion: strengthening through adversity. I think that’s quite possible, I think suffering certainly makes an impact and can stimulate a type of development (and can certainly provide a strong basis for empathy and an ability to relate to the suffering of others) but that impact can also be pretty complex and unwilling to be filtered into wholly good or wholly bad — sometimes, it just results in a… difference.

      However, I’m no psychologist, psychiatrist, MD, or anything else 🙂

        Quote  Reply

    76. Ten Bears,

      “As grammarian King Stannis would point out, the prophecy as worded specifically refers to “his hands” (masculine). GRRM could have easily phrased it differently if he intended to embrace both genders, e.g., he could have avoided using the pronoun “his.””

      As the language geek that I am, I have to point out that for non-english natives who come from countries where nouns have three genders and accusative and pronouns all follow declination and gender, like mine, adjusting a neutral —the/a/one– to the possessive pronoun and vice-versa is a pain in the a**. As in:

      “One should choose math studies if it fits his intellect”

      See what I mean? Why “his” and not “her”? Why not “one’s”?
      You need to know this information in advance, which you don’t, because I did not give you that.
      One of my English Grammar books said that it’s wrong to follow with him/her/his/hers when it’s not indicated which gender is meant. The correct follow-up would be, technically, the same, meaning in this case, “one’s”.
      But the same author admitted that it usually doesn’t happen neither in written nor in spoken language. We tend to use him/her/his/hers without any justification, but admittedly it makes our lives easier.

      Which is why I don’t think that Stannis’ argument is correct. He’s a sophist in reality, set out to prove sth that’s not necessarily there.
      The correct in this case should be “the valonqar shall warp his/her hands around your throat”, since we don’t know what gender a valonqar is. 😁

      [of course Martin couldn’t write his/hers in the text!]

        Quote  Reply

    77. Adrianacandle,

      On the show, I found it strange that during Arya’s table-stabbing argument with Sansa, she blamed Joffrey (not Sandor) for Mycah’s death, because Sandor only does what Joffrey tells him to do.
      Yet, in S3 in the cave with the Brotherhood Arya came right out and accused Sandor of murder.

      That was all complicated when Sandor prevailed in his trial by combat. Afterwards, when she still insisted he was guilty, Beric responded: “not in the eyes of god” or something like that.

      In S5 Game of Faces with Jaqen 2.0 Arya got whacked with his stick several times when she said she had left the Hound to die in the mountains because “I hated him! I wanted him to suffer!” … “That’s not a lie! I hated him!” Jaqen 2.0 retorted: “A girl lies to me, to the Many-Faced God,… to herself.” By S6 Arya admitted to the Waif she had taken Sandor off her list. She did – and she did not – want him dead any longer; she sounded confused because she was confused.

      What I’m getting at is Arya apparently absolved Sandor of slaughtering Mycah – which he had freely admitted, both in the Brotherhood’s cave in S3 and again in S4e10 when he tried to goad her into killing him.

      How then could she continue to blame Cersei for the Mycah incident? Or was suggesting that Lady be killed in place of the missing Nymeria enough to warrant the death penalty for Cersei?

      As much as I love Arya, I wonder if she went overboard in putting Cersei on her list and keeping her there for years, when others who had done far worse were let off the hook. I also wonder if she’d change her mind if she knew what really happened when Joffrey ordered Ned beheaded, scuttling Cersei’s deal with Ned.

      Another thought, based on the book excerpts: I can see how an 11 year-old girl would condemn everybody she saw on the dais without apportioning culpability. Wouldn’t the benefit of a few years of maturity dissuade her from assigning guilt by association? I mean, she did apparently accept that Sandor had killed Mycah because it was not his place to question the Prince’s story or refuse his command.

      Oh, I don’t know. It just seemed to me that Cersei remaining on the List was a function of the story designating Cersei as the Big Bad, more than anything else. Melisandre, Sandor, and Beric all got dropped from the List after a while, and arguably they all did worse things than Cersei.

      Final comment on this subject: Had Arya been assigned to carry out an assassination mission as part of the war effort, that would have been different – even commendable. A stealth infiltration and killing of the enemy’s ruler would have achieved the mitigation of collateral damage that Team Stark + Targ was trying to avoid all along by following Tyrion’s (not so) “clever plans.”
      But killing Cersei motivated by a purely personal and possibly misplaced desire for revenge wasn’t so admirable, was it? That’s why I’m glad Sandor talked her out of it. (Though he should’ve bisected Cersei when she flitted down the stairs right by him. I’m still not sure why they filmed it that way…)

        Quote  Reply

    78. My brief suggestion about the Valonqar has really taken on a life of its own, hasn’t it? 😉

      Great debates everyone. A few more thoughts from me:

      + Jaime would have to strangle Cersei instead of stabbing her if he no longer has a dagger or sword at that point.

      + Without getting into distasteful details about the mechanics of it all, Jaime would only need one working hand to do it. He could use his gold hand to simply hold Cersei’s neck still from the other side.

      + Another explanation: ASOIAF’s Wiki page about Valonqar prophecies has an interesting alternative theory about what “Jaime’s hands” actually means in the context of killing Cersei.

      + Jaime mercy killing Cersei mirrors Cersei nearly mercy killing Tommen at the end of the Battle of Blackwater. You know how GRRM loves that kind of mirroring/foreshadowing etc, as we also saw on GOT.

      However, as Ten Bears has noted, GRRM also loves unexpected twists. So here are some other options:

      + “Younger, more beautiful queen” may refer to Dany overthrowing Cersei. And Dany being the sole surviving “younger sibling” in her family also fits “Valonqar” basically meaning “younger sibling”.

      + However, the prophecies may not refer to the same person.

      + So, while “younger, more beautiful queen” may still refer to Dany, the almost exact wording used in Maggy’s “Valonqar” prediction and Catelyn’s remarks to Brienne could mean that the person that ultimately strangles Cersei is…Lady Stoneheart.

      + This would partly explain why GOT didn’t make a big deal about the Valonqar prophecy; it was because the show completely dropped the Lady Stoneheart storyline.

      + Maggy also says “Your death is here tonight, little one. Can you smell her breath? She is very close.”
      + Someone needs to check the books. Was a young Catelyn anywhere in the vicinity (either nearby or at least in the same kingdom) while Maggy was talking to the 10 year old Cersei?
      + Or, if you want to get time-bendy, was the adult Catelyn anywhere in the same kingdom as the adult Cersei when she was recalling that memory? Does that mean Maggy was actually talking to the future Cersei remembering that childhood experience?

      + It’s possible one of the final books in ASOIAF will mention that Catelyn originally had one or more older siblings who died when she was young (perhaps they were still alive when Maggy made her prophecy), so “younger sibling” could actually refer to Catelyn in that context.

      + But the “Valonqar” turning out to be Lady Stoneheart would be one hell of a twist. Not to mention yet more mirroring etc — Ned died because of Cersei, so Catelyn ultimately ends up being the person that kills Cersei. And you can imagine GRRM doing this.

        Quote  Reply

    79. Ten Bears,

      What I’m getting at is Arya apparently absolved Sandor of slaughtering Mycah – which he had freely admitted, both in the Brotherhood’s cave in S3 and again in S4e10 when he tried to goad her into killing him.
      How then could she continue to blame Cersei for the Mycah incident? Or was suggesting that Lady be killed in place of the missing Nymeria enough to warrant the death penalty for Cersei?

      I would suspect the difference lies in that Arya was able to foster a relationship with Sandor and see him beyond what she thought he was. I don’t really have much to base this on other than my own views/interpretation of the matter but I’m wondering if the time Arya spent with Sandor enabled her to see him as a person with relatable motivations (ie. what he suffered at the hands of his brother) while Cersei remained an enemy to Arya, a stranger whom she had barely any contact with.

      Well, that and Sandor helped Arya survive 😉

      But again, I don’t have any sources to base this on — this is just speculation 🙂

      Another thought, based on the book excerpts: I can see how an 11 year-old girl would condemn everybody she saw on the dais without apportioning culpability. Wouldn’t the benefit of a few years of maturity dissuade her from assigning guilt by association? I mean, she did apparently accept that Sandor had killed Mycah because it was not his place to question the Prince’s story or refuse his command.

      Yes but even Catelyn blamed Cersei for Ned’s death and Catelyn was an adult. In Arya’s view, Cersei had a hand in Ned’s death and unless she is able to access the truth somehow, I don’t know that she’d ever reconsider this position (that Cersei was at the mercy of Joffrey) because by this time, Arya already hated Cersei (before Ned’s death).

      I wouldn’t call this fair but I’d call it a realistic reflection of emotions and sometimes mistaken perception.

      Melisandre, Sandor, and Beric all got dropped from the List after a while, and arguably they all did worse things than Cersei.

      I can’t remember why Melisandre was dropped from Arya’s list. She’s not on Arya’s list in the books simply because Arya hasn’t met Melisandre in the books.

      Final comment on this subject: Had Arya been assigned to carry out an assassination mission as part of the war effort, that would have been different – even commendable. A stealth infiltration and killing of the enemy’s ruler would have achieved the mitigation of collateral damage that Team Stark + Targ was trying to avoid all along by following Tyrion’s (not so) “clever plans.”
      But killing Cersei motivated by a purely personal and possibly misplaced desire for revenge wasn’t so admirable, was it? That’s why I’m glad Sandor talked her out of it.

      Yes, I agree with this :/

        Quote  Reply

    80. Adrianacandle,

      I am not a shrink either. To me it’s common sense that enduring physical or emotional trauma is not a good thing. Surviving it and moving past it is laudable. Better to not have it happen at all.

      I don’t know any women who’d say abuse was worth it, or that all in all it was a positive experience.

      I have never heard an abuse survivor say she is thankful that it happened or else she’d still be naive and innocent. Unfortunately, that’s how I perceived Sansa’s dialogue in that scene.

      Other viewers have different perceptions and different opinions. I am speaking only for myself.

      Frankly, I had been expecting a more rewarding and much longer Sansa + Sandor reunion scene, considering their relationship in S1 and S2 before Sansa decided to stay in KL instead of taking up Sandor on his offer to take her home the night of the Battle of the Blackwater.

      I cringed when Sandor told Sansa he’d heard how she’d been “broken in.” That was nasty and unnecessarily cruel, even for foul-mouthed Sandor. When he tried to convey that he regretted she had not escaped KL with him when she had the chance because she never would’ve been abused by LF and brutalized by Ramsay, Sansa came back with the verbiage I found so offensive.

      And then their scene abruptly ended. That was it. Very unsatisfying, not enjoyable to watch, and no desire to rewatch.

        Quote  Reply

    81. Jai,

      My brief suggestion about the Valonqar has really taken on a life of its own, hasn’t it? 😉

      It really did! And I’ve really enjoyed the valonqar debate! (And getting its spelling right!)

      Someone needs to check the books. Was a young Catelyn anywhere in the vicinity (either nearby or at least in the same kingdom) while Maggy was talking to the 10 year old Cersei?

      I’m pretty sure Catelyn was in Riverrun at the time, she doesn’t mention being in or around Lannisport during her childhood at any point (as far as I can recall. I did a quick check but I can’t see any mentions of Catelyn traveling to Lannisport as a child).

      Or, if you want to get time-bendy, was the adult Catelyn anywhere in the same kingdom as the adult Cersei when she was recalling that memory? Does that mean Maggy was actually talking to the future Cersei remembering that childhood experience?

      We learn about valonqar in AFFC and this is when Cersei is recalling that memory. By this time, however, Catelyn is already dead (having died during the Red Wedding in ASOS).

      It’s possible one of the final books in ASOIAF will mention that Catelyn originally had one or more older siblings who died when she was young (perhaps they were still alive when Maggy made her prophecy), so “younger sibling” could actually refer to Catelyn in that context.

      I don’t know… if that were the case, I think Catelyn would remember and it would have been mentioned in one of her POV chapters by now (like how we know about Brienne’s deceased older brother).

      Lady Stoneheart as valonqar is a really cool idea! She’d certainly have motive to strangle the life out of Cersei (and I think that’d be a gentle method of killing for LSH) but I don’t know that she quite fits. I really like the idea though.

        Quote  Reply

    82. Ten Bears,

      I am not a shrink either. To me it’s common sense that enduring physical or emotional trauma is not a good thing. Surviving it and moving past it is laudable. Better to not have it happen at all.

      I don’t know any women who’d say abuse was worth it, or that all in all it was a positive experience.

      I have never heard an abuse survivor say she is thankful that it happened or else she’d still be naive and innocent. Unfortunately, that’s how I perceived Sansa’s dialogue in that scene.

      Yes, I did feel uncomfortable with this notion.

        Quote  Reply

    83. Jai,

      If you know…

      Who exactly is responsible for the content of “ASOIAF’s Wiki”? Is it a recognized authority for book canon? Does the information come directly from GRRM?

      I ask because I seem to recall a commenter here questioning the manner in which the editor (or head writer, or whatever his title is) unilaterally dictates what’s in the “Wiki” and decides who gets to contribute.

      Also – and I may be mistaken – I thought I had started watching some long-winded, vituperative videos on YouTube by a fellow who said he’s in charge of the Wiki. I say “started watching” because after several minutes of D&D bashing, I couldn’t keep watching. I don’t mind criticism, even negative criticism. Some of it is enlightening. After a while though, a non-stop barrage of insults becomes annoying.

      I could very well be thinking of the wrong “Wiki.” I apologize if I’ve inadvertently confused “ASOIAF Wiki” with something else.

        Quote  Reply

    84. Adrianacandle,

      ”…Someone needs to check the books. Was a young Catelyn anywhere in the vicinity (either nearby or at least in the same kingdom) while Maggy was talking to the 10 year old Cersei?”

      I don’t know about Young Catelyn. But Young Sandor was right next door, on property abutting Casterly Rock where his dad worked as kennel master.

      So perhaps we should ask ourselves: What families with at least two brothers would 10 year old Cersei be familiar with?

      “I’ve been looking at Lannister gold all my life.”

      – Sandor Clegane to Brienne of F*cking Tarth, S4e10

        Quote  Reply

    85. Ten Bears,

      I think I can answer this! 🙂

      The ASOIAF wiki is from westeros.org, one of the earliest sites for ASOIAF on the internet. It’s run by Elio Garcia and Linda Antonsson, two people who co-wrote The World of Ice and Fire with GRRM and GRRM has used them as fact checkers.

      Also – and I may be mistaken – I thought I had started watching some long-winded, vituperative videos on YouTube by a fellow who said he’s in charge of the Wiki. I say “started watching” because after several minutes of D&D bashing, I couldn’t keep watching. I don’t mind criticism, even negative criticism. Some of it is enlightening. After a while though, a non-stop barrage of insults becomes annoying.

      I think you’re thinking of the GoT wiki hosted by fandom.com? That’s a separate wiki run by some different people. That wiki is more for the show while the westeros.org wiki is almost entirely for the books.

        Quote  Reply

    86. Ten Bears: I don’t know about Young Catelyn. But Young Sandor was right next door, on property abutting Casterly Rock where his dad worked as kennel master.

      So perhaps we should ask ourselves: What families with at least two brothers would 10 year old Cersei be familiar with?

      “I’ve been looking at Lannister gold all my life.”

      – Sandor Clegane to Brienne of F*cking Tarth, S4e10

      It’s true that it’s more likely Sandor would have been in the area but I’m not entirely sure of the likelihood that Sandor and Cersei would be in the same vicinity at the very same time when Cersei met Maggy the Frog — it’s possible though! I think it sucks that we don’t get a Sandor POV though :/

      That’s a good question to ponder 🙂

        Quote  Reply

    87. Adrianacandle,

      I’m pretty sure Catelyn was in Riverrun at the time, she doesn’t mention being in or around Lannisport during her childhood at any point (as far as I can recall. I did a quick check but I can’t see any mentions of Catelyn traveling to Lannisport as a child).

      No mentions *yet*. GRRM may have avoided mentioning it in the books so far because it would give the game away too much. Same with any theoretical older siblings.

      Lady Stoneheart as valonqar is a really cool idea! She’d certainly have motive to strangle the life out of Cersei (and I think that’d be a gentle method of killing for LSH) but I don’t know that she quite fits. I really like the idea though.

      The Catelyn/Brienne quote is eventually going to turn out to be either a really blatant clue or sneaky misdirection from GRRM. But it’s fun to speculate about this stuff anyway.

      I think I can answer this!

      Thanks for answering Ten Bears’ question. I wasn’t entirely sure about the specific details.

        Quote  Reply

    88. Adrianacandle,

      Long due reply -but not so overdue because I can’t catch up with this dialog over here! There’s so many things I’d like to comment and I can’t find enough time for it! This is turning out to be a very nice discussion and a meaningful one.

      I should perhaps clarify further what I mean by de-characterization, because in my opinion this is what gives the flavor of the show ending, not the ending per se. Of course the ending comes from Martin and a lot -perhaps most- fans are displeased with the straight-up-portrayed-as-hero of the story turning out to be an evil dictator that has to be assassinated by her ex-lover in order for the story to conclude.
      But for careful viewers like myself and many others who had seen it coming since season 2 it’s perhaps -I keep my reservation because not everybody thinks things as thorougly and deeply as I do- the characterization of the mains that does the trick. That said, of course that last “flavor” of the show -apart, that is, from the ending- can be different from individual to individual too. All estimates and evaluations of the viewers are accepted and appreciated so long as they don’t turn against the producers -because the producers in the process of adaptation have to take other things into cosideration: giving time to the actors (justifying their payments), showing things that exist in the book narrative (not in dialog), satisfy the fans (because there’s also the commercial factor) and, in this case, the minority of many of the mains which was very particular to GoT (and more things that I can’t even begin to think about).

      And so begins de-characterization, that in this case affected the “flavor” that the ending of the mains has given to the viewers (such as myself). I mean that in part de-characterization served to even out the difficulties of the adaptation; but in part it also served the take of the producers on the material, and with a view to the general audience, it also served making something hard on the audience somehow more easily digestible.

      I think that in this case the first is exemplified in the ending of Arya. You mentioned that Arya might be so traumatised that she won’t want to stay in Westeros when all this is done. This might very well be true, but she doesn’t only have negative thoughts about Westeros and home. The only reason she can’t return home is that the country is infested with her family’s enemies. WF is burnt and she trains herself to think that she has no more siblings in Braavos. This, however, is part of her no-one persona. This is a persona that she builds, one which has no attachments whatsoever. But I believe that Needle is not just “Jon Snow’s smile”. In that book abstract she condenses all her happy memories, and Needle, which she refuses to part with as instructed, becomes a symbol of home and family and happy time, before all the loss. She learns that death is part of life and learns to come to terms with that, to accept it. Yes, she has lost mother, father and a brother and forces herself to think that her entire family is dead. But the readers (and the viewers) know that this is not true. She still has two brothers and a sister. These are “her pack” -she calls them that more than once. How plausible will it be that she leaves them as soon as she returns? I’m not saying that she will never leave. At this point in the book she’s only 11 y.o. and will probably be 13 going on 14 by the end of ADoS. She’s far too young and has lost far too many things to leave just because she can. If Martin intends for her to leave, I suppose it makes better sense to have her leave after a few years. But for the producers, cutting that beautiful ending and showing what will be a few years after the events would be anticlimactic. So Arya leaves immediately after things are settled. There’s also other things one can point out regarding Arya’s de-characterization. She’s not becoming any type of Ninja in the books; she’s far older in the show; her love for Jon wasn’t that obvious throughout. And perhaps there’s more that escapes me. But all these things together affected Arya’s characterization in the show.

      I have more things to say. I’d like to speak about Sansa and Tyrion because it relates to the discussion above. But I have to leave now and perhaps I’ll do it later tonight.

        Quote  Reply

    89. Adrianacandle: It’s true that it’s more likely Sandor would have been in the area but I’m not entirely sure of the likelihood that Sandor and Cersei would be in the same vicinity at the very same time when Cersei met Maggy the Frog — it’s possible though! I think it sucks that we don’t get a Sandor POV though :/

      That’s a good question to ponder 🙂

      I’m not sure what you mean by “the same vicinity.”
      Wasn’t Young Cersei in the woods on or near her father’s property (Casterly Rock)? Or did the books place her somewhere else? She’d be quite a rebellious 10 year old if she traveled far from home to seek out a fortune teller.

      I think I missed something in your discussion or theory: What would be the significance of Sandor being in ”the same vicinity at the very same time when Cersei met Maggy the Frog”?

      I was assuming that Magy was telling Young Cersei about a “little brother” she already knew, not a guy she wouldn’t meet until much later in life. The younger of the two Clegane boys fit the bill. He’d be close by, right next door, and likely on the Lannister property quite a bit. I was also assuming a pre-teen highborn girl like Cersei would lead a somewhat sheltered life, and wouldn’t be traveling all over the place meeting strangers.

        Quote  Reply

    90. Efi,

      This is turning out to be a very nice discussion and a meaningful one.

      It is! 🙂

      I should perhaps clarify further what I mean by de-characterization, because in my opinion this is what gives the flavor of the show ending, not the ending per se. Of course the ending comes from Martin and a lot -perhaps most- fans are displeased with the straight-up-portrayed-as-hero of the story turning out to be an evil dictator that has to be assassinated by her ex-lover in order for the story to conclude.

      I think that’s one of the reasons but I don’t know if it’s the reason. From what I’ve seen, many people that I’ve seen are unhappy over how it was set-up and the limited time frame it had to occur in. However, there are fans of the character herself who hate that it happened — and among those, you get a variety: including stans (apologists who can’t accept any moral failings in Dany, deny the burning of KL even happened, cite it as purely D&D’s choice, and also deny any version of it will happen in the books — and I find stans of any character exhibiting similar tendencies) and fans who didn’t want to see this happen, feel this also sends a nihilistic message itself, but who can accept a version of this will happen in the books.

      I’d be interested in the responses of more neutral viewers and how they viewed it because significant bias for and against a character (particularly a stan and an anti) can really affect their reception of the storyline and what ideas/messages they take from it (and these are often the most vocal of viewers). Meanwhile, more neutral viewers may not be so affected by this bias and may view the story more evenly (for example, how would a new viewer without any pre-existing knowledge of the story/any loyalties to the characters prior to viewing receive watching Game of Thrones all at once from the beginning to the end? What would be their take on it?)

      But for careful viewers like myself and many others who had seen it coming since season 2 it’s perhaps -I keep my reservation because not everybody thinks things as thorougly and deeply as I do- the characterization of the mains that does the trick.

      I think other people can think as deeply about this story (I know I ponder it quite a bit) while not coming to these same conclusions. For example, Linda Antonsson — somebody who GRRM consults as a fact checker for his books — has come to some different conclusions which differ from other parts of the fandom who also spend quite a bit of time thinking about this story themselves. It’s the reason why fans debate so much 🙂

      I think this discussion we’re having about valonqar also demonstrates this: there’s a lot of careful assessment going on but people are coming to different conclusions.

      because the producers in the process of adaptation have to take other things into cosideration: giving time to the actors (justifying their payments), showing things that exist in the book narrative (not in dialog), satisfy the fans (because there’s also the commercial factor) and, in this case, the minority of many of the mains which was very particular to GoT (and more things that I can’t even begin to think about).

      I think some of these are definitely considerations (particularly how to transition from a book medium to a television medium) but I’d dispute the producers were doing things with the primary focus of satisfying the fans. D&D made some very unpopular decisions and knew these choices weren’t going to be popular but still stuck with them. Plus, I don’t know about the argument of giving time to actors to justify payments — Lena Headey was one of the top paid actresses and didn’t get a ton of screentime in season 8 😉

      I mean that in part de-characterization served to even out the difficulties of the adaptation; but in part it also served the take of the producers on the material, and with a view to the general audience, it also served making something hard on the audience somehow more easily digestible.

      I think I’d disagree that the choices the producers made softened the harsh aspects of the adaptation but I think there were definitely adaptational choices, yes! And that some content was streamlined, characters like Jeyne Poole and Sansa were melded together because D&D still wanted to incorporate Jeyne’s storyline while showcasing Sansa more — but I don’t think D&D made choices to make storylines easier on audiences. The Ramsay storyline was certainly rough, for example.

      I think that in this case the first is exemplified in the ending of Arya. You mentioned that Arya might be so traumatised that she won’t want to stay in Westeros when all this is done. This might very well be true, but she doesn’t only have negative thoughts about Westeros and home. The only reason she can’t return home is that the country is infested with her family’s enemies. WF is burnt and she trains herself to think that she has no more siblings in Braavos. This, however, is part of her no-one persona.

      Arya doesn’t have just negative memories of Westeros, that’s true. She misses her family and her home — but I don’t think this changes how impacted she’d be by her brutal experiences in Westeros and Braavos and I think the show’s ending can work well for Arya.

      In light of everything that’s happened since she was separated from her family and forced to go on the run in war-torn Westeros, I’d expect Arya to view Winterfell more favourably, and Sansa too. These experiences would put things in a special perspective. But that still doesn’t really change how she doesn’t feel she fits in within Westeros and Winterfell, how she can’t get comfortable with the gender roles these societies are trying to assign her. And it doesn’t really change the impact her experiences may have on her which could prompt her to seek a release from these painful places.

      I think these ideas can coexist: longing to return to a simpler time with her family all together and alive again while possibly needing a release from the painful reminders of her experiences and losses, as well as finding a place in which she feels comfortable, a role she can be satisfied with.

      There’s that saying, “You can never go home again,” and I think that’s true. One can go back to the physical place and the physical people but what it once was is no longer. So much as changed, the returning person has changed. It’s different. And Winterfell is also filled with the ghosts of lost loved ones, loved ones who never returned. Winterfell isn’t really the same place anymore.

      What home becomes may change.

      How plausible will it be that she leaves them as soon as she returns? I’m not saying that she will never leave.

      Maybe not as soon as — but I think after a time, yes.

      Even in the show, Arya didn’t leave home as soon as she returned. She was there for a while — at least half a year.

      At this point in the book she’s only 11 y.o. and will probably be 13 going on 14 by the end of ADoS. She’s far too young and has lost far too many things to leave just because she can.

      I don’t think that’s too young to leave home. For one, this is a universe in which adulthood starts at age 12-14 and secondly, Arya has already been on her own for quite some time. I don’t think she’d leave right away but I think it’s reasonable for Arya to set her sites elsewhere.

      But for the producers, cutting that beautiful ending and showing what will be a few years after the events would be anticlimactic.

      Between Arya’s return in 7×03 and her departure in 8×06, I’d say a minimum of half a year has gone by (for example, Jon’s imprisonment time alone spans weeks). Perhaps even as much as a year — but I think it’s hard to get that sense of time in the latter seasons because characters were traveling to places much faster as we weren’t spending time on those journeys as we did before.

      her love for Jon wasn’t that obvious throughout.

      I think there was trouble in adapting this relationship, yes. I think we definitely had moments of Arya showing her love for Jon, in particular, in the show (like that scene in which she struggles over throwing Needle away) but I do think the depiction of their relationship suffered in a visual medium because, in the books, so much of their relationship was revealed via each character’s inner monologue.

      I don’t know about Arya becoming a ninja but I think the skills she learns in Braavos will play a role somehow 🙂

        Quote  Reply

    91. Ten Bears,

      I’m not sure what you mean by “the same vicinity.”
      Wasn’t Young Cersei in the woods on or near her father’s property (Casterly Rock)? Or did the books place her somewhere else? She’d be quite a rebellious 10 year old if she traveled far from home to seek out a fortune teller.

      Oh, I had meant the idea that Cersei and Sandor were both in the same woods and Sandor was in proximity when Cersei received her prophecy.

      I think I missed something in your discussion or theory: What would be the significance of Sandor being in ”the same vicinity at the very same time when Cersei met Maggy the Frog”?

      I’m sorry for not being clear/mistaken. I think this happened because I thought you were going off of something I said in response to Jai’s comment ([…]”was the adult Catelyn anywhere in the same kingdom as the adult Cersei when she was recalling that memory?[…]”) as part of the theory that Catelyn was physically around when Cersei received her prophecy, asking to check the books. In response, I said I didn’t think so because there’s no mention of Catelyn traveling to Lannisport as a child.

      I was assuming that Magy was telling Young Cersei about a “little brother” she already knew, not a guy she wouldn’t meet until much later in life. The younger of the two Clegane boys fit the bill. He’d be close by, right next door, and likely on the Lannister property quite a bit. I was also assuming a pre-teen highborn girl like Cersei would lead a somewhat sheltered life, and wouldn’t be traveling all over the place meeting strangers.

      I think I see more clearly what you mean! I’m sorry for the misunderstanding! I got my wires crossed 🙁

        Quote  Reply

    92. Jai,

      The Catelyn/Brienne quote is eventually going to turn out to be either a really blatant clue or sneaky misdirection from GRRM. But it’s fun to speculate about this stuff anyway.

      Yes, I think that quote in and of itself is pretty suspicious because it is kind of easy to miss and forget about while, at the same time, it shares so much with the wording of Maggy’s prophecy. I have a feeling it does have something to do with valonqar but I don’t know how.

      Thanks for answering Ten Bears’ question. I wasn’t entirely sure about the specific details.

      No problem!! 🙂

        Quote  Reply

    93. Efi:
      Ten Bears,

      “As grammarian King Stannis would point out, the prophecy as worded specifically refers to “his hands” (masculine). GRRM could have easily phrased it differently if he intended to embrace both genders, e.g., he could have avoided using the pronoun “his.””

      ……
      As the language geek that I am, I have to point out that for non-english natives who come from countries where nouns have three genders and accusative and pronouns all follow declination and gender, like mine, adjusting a neutral —the/a/one– to the possessive pronoun and vice-versa is a pain in the a**. As in:

      “One should choose math studies if it fits his intellect”
      See what I mean? Why “his” and not “her”? Why not “one’s”?
      You need to know this information in advance, which you don’t, because I did not give you that.
      One of my English Grammar books said that it’s wrong to follow with him/her/his/hers when it’s not indicated which gender is meant. The correct follow-up would be, technically, the same, meaning in this case, “one’s”.
      But the same author admitted that it usually doesn’t happen neither in written nor in spoken language. We tend to use him/her/his/hers without any justification, but admittedly it makes our lives easier.

      Which is why I don’t think that Stannis’ argument is correct. He’s a sophist in reality, set out to prove sth that’s not necessarily there.
      The correct in this case should be “the valonqar shall warp his/her hands around your throat”, since we don’t know what gender a valonqar is. 😁

      [of course Martin couldn’t write his/hers in the text!]

      Ooh, grammatical rabbit holes to burrow down into! 🕳 🐇

      • First example:

      “One should choose math studies if it fits his intellect”

      I don’t know why “his” was used. That’s kind of outdated. The correct pronoun ought to be “one’s” like you suggested or “his or her” but both of those sound awkward.

      It gets worse: Lately, more and more journalists and writers (here in the U.S.) are starting to use “their” as a substitute for “his or her” – e.g., when the gender isn’t known. So now a plural form is being used as a stand-in for a singular form. It makes sentences sound silly when read or spoken, and is f*cking confusing.

      🐇 Follow me down a little further if you’re so inclined … 🕳 🐇
      I am ultra progressive. I try to be sensitive to expressions of gender fluid self-identifications. Still, it’s a challenge because nowadays “their” is often the preferred pronoun for folks who transition, or who view the gender spectrum as encompassing multiple gradients rather than simple binary choice of male on one end and female on the other, with nothing in between. (I hope I’m making sense.)
      Adopting “their” as a universal pronoun and ditching “his or her” isn’t a bad idea in theory. I just wish some linguist would come up with a new pronoun so we don’t have to use the plural “their” when referring to a single person of any sex.
      (I remember when “Ms.” was introduced as an alternative to or in addition to “Miss” and “Mrs.” There’s got to be a new one-syllable gender-neutral singular pronoun we can all learn to use, instead of asking “their” to do all the work.)

      • By the way, isn’t “math studies” plural? If so, your sample sentence should start: “One should choose math studies if they fit…”

      Caveat: English is so f*cked up that some plural words are treated like singular words for grammatical purposes. I’m sure I’ve seen a list somewhere…
      A bigger problem is that a certain Twitter user who purports to know “the best words” consistently screws up his pronouns so that a bastardized form of English is infecting 40% of America.

      It’s a sh*tshow, I tell you, a sh*tshow!

      ——
      to be continued…

        Quote  Reply

    94. Efi:
      Adrianacandle,
      Of course the ending comes from Martin and a lot -perhaps most- fans are displeased with the straight-up-portrayed-as-hero of the story turning out to be an evil dictator that has to be assassinated by her ex-lover in order for the story to conclude.

      I don’t understand why some people continue to push this false narrative when all evidence points to the exact opposite. And Danerys was never the hero of the story. She’s done heroic things, but she has also done terrible things.

        Quote  Reply

    95. Ten Bears,

      “By the way, isn’t “math studies” plural? If so, your sample sentence should start: “One should choose math studies if they fit…””

      Yeees, but which does the pulling? 😂
      There is one phenomenon, in my language it is called “the pulling”. It’s about one word defining what follows in terms of plural/singular and declension, ignoring the context where this word is found.
      Although I have to admit that I didn’t think that much of it and the result above came out after lots of cut/pastes and corrections, lol.
      Meaning
      Mathematics is a word in plural (the -s- in the end) because it comes from Greek and there it is plural. However, is “mathematics are” correct in English? I think (🙄) I learned it in singular, because it’s one subject.
      I don’t know, I have to check. But for me it did the pulling. Is also “math studies” one subject, mathematics holding it together? (should it be “holding them”? –what a headache!)
      But I’m most probably wrong because “math studies are” also sounds good to me.

      As for other genders, I have absolutely no idea. I think linguists are picking up such things and there will be some new suggestion in the new books and there will dispute among them about such things.
      The spoken language tends to adapt many things to reality, but not all adaptations are correct and I tend to disagree with many of them. Language always followed nature but now there are those who seek to subject it to subjective perception. I don’t know if it’s right, but I do know that language will not heed the bidings of anyone (linguists included). It just evolves on its own.

        Quote  Reply

    96. Young Dragon: I don’t understand why some people continue to push this false narrative when all evidence points to the exact opposite. And Danerys was never the hero of the story. She’s done heroic things, but she has also done terrible things.

      Dany was not the only character to threaten to burn cities to the ground though. Nor was she the only one to do both good and bad things. The only difference is that Dany was a Targaryen. I can’t speak for anyone other than myself, but I think this is one of the factors that frustrated some people. Cersei threatened to burn cities to the ground and actually did it in season 6 episode 10, yet everyone was still cool with her ruling afterwards and no one was comparing her to Hitler.

      In the season four finale, Cersei has a tense confrontation with her father Tywin. She doesn’t want to marry Loras Tyrell, and she is terrified of leaving Tommen behind in King’s Landing with Margaery. Cersei bursts out: “I will burn our house to the ground before I let that happen.”

      Early in season five, Cersei receives a threatening message from Dorne regarding Myrcella. While telling Jaime that he has to go rescue her, Cersei says “I will burn their cities to the ground if they touch her.” This sentiment was very similar to the threat she gave her father just a few episodes before.

      Later in season five, Cersei has an emotional conversation with Tommen. He is worried because Margaery has been imprisoned and he feels powerless. When Cersei promises to help him, she explains the lengths to which she would go for his happiness. “I would do anything for you,” she says. “Anything to keep you from harm. I would burn cities to the ground.”

      Jaime told Edmure that Cersei would “burn cities to ash” for her children.

      In the end, the difference turned out to be Danys Targaryen genes, which, IMO, isn’t very compelling.

        Quote  Reply

    97. Efi,

      ”…The correct in this case should be “the valonqar shall warp his/her hands around your throat”, since we don’t know what gender a valonqar is.”

      ————
      🐇🐇 🕳

      • Arghhhh! The dreaded slash! (E.g., in “his/her” and “and/or.”) I got reamed out for using it once and have never done it again.
      An expert linguist called it “execrable.” You can’t tell if it’s conjunctive, disjunctive, or both. It can render a simple sentence hopelessly ambiguous.
      Does “his/her” mean “his or her” or “his and her”? Sometimes it’s hard to tell.

      • Like you observed, GRRM couldn’t (and wouldn’t) write “his/hers” in the text. No decent author would write dialogue as if he’s a dime-store ambulance chaser, no self-respecting fortune teller would talk like that, and no fiction reader would stand for that ambiguity.

      Again, if we go back to using “his or her” in your sample sentence, it sounds just as awkward, e.g., “the Valonqar shall wrap his or her hands around your throat.”

      • Young Cersei would get bent out of shape if she heard that:

      F*ck off Magy! Which is it! Girl or boy! One or the other. There’s no middle ground.
      “Can’t say. It’s not gender specific.”
      ”Pffft. Magy the Fraud…”
      “Don’t look at me. It’s not my fau…”
      (Young Cersei impales Magy with stiletto)
      ”When you play the game of pronouns, you win or you die. There’s no middle ground.”

      [Sorry… So so very sorry .😬]

      • If GRRM intended to obscure the gender or leave it ambiguous, he could have phrased the prophecy without using “his or her” or “his/her” as in your corrected version: “the valonqar shall warp [sic] his/her hands around your throat”, since we don’t know what gender.”

      He could’ve written something like this (well, better than this):

      “And after you have drowned in your tears, you will choke to death with the Valonqar’s hands wrapped around your pale white throat.”

      or “…. the Valonqar’s hands will wrap around your throat and choke the life out of you.”

      – Final Comments:

      • GRRM described the Valonqar using “his hands.” Masculine. Nothing ambiguous or deceptive. Plain and simple.
      • The only in-universe translation of the Valyrian word “Valonqar” is “little brother.” Not little sibling. Not little brother or sister. Not little brother and/or sister. Not little brother/sister.
      • That an entirely different Valyrian word for “prince” is gender neutral and can therefore also mean “princess” does not mean that every Valyrian word can “go both ways.” Nothing remotely suggests this is the case.
      • That dragons have no specific biological gender has nothing to do with human beings.
      • Arya to Tywin S2: “Visenya Targaryen was a great warrior. She had a Valyrian steel sword she called Dark Sister.”
      Visenya didn’t call her VS sword “Dark Brother or Sister” or “Dark Sibling.”
      Like virtually every language in every culture, there are distinct words denoting gender to describe a family’s male progeny and female progeny. There’s nothing to suggest that the Valyrians’ language or the Valyrians themselves were unisex.
      • From a pure storytelling standpoint, if this prophecy that on its face refers to one specific “brother” could be contorted, expanded and reinterpreted to encompass just about any male or female, how would that possibly be narratively satisfying?
      That’d make the Valonqar prophecy equivalent to a useless prognostication like: “You will be killed by someone who has or had an older sibling.”

        Quote  Reply

    98. Young Dragon,

      Beats me! I have friends who don’t want to discuss any of it -actually none of them does.
      I say yes, but Daenerys has been threatening… –it doesn’t matter what she said! how could this happen! — but it showed… — nothing showed, not ever in 8 seasons! –end of “discussion”, lol.
      My friends are truly, genuinely hurt by the ending of GoT.

      It’s for laughs, actually. Everything was there, even the Nazi imagery (they didn’t even have to do that, but if they searched for imperial imagery, they’d do something very close to what we’ve seen). I suppose that most people don’t take well to the hero-turn-villain trope. To be fair, it’s a difficult trope designed to shock the reader/viewer. If it’s done well, it can be an excellent ride for a reader/viewer! It can be foreshadowed or not, but I think the bottom line is, people don’t generally like this trope (perhaps because it feels a bit like cheating).
      But if it’s satisfying, why not? It’s fiction after all.
      Also, lots of people tended to identify with Daenerys because they bought into the rhetoric of the victim (think of her speech to Jon in 7.3); Daenerys finally sitting in the Iron Throne would be the vindication of the victim, which is what we all want, right? Justice for the victims. That’s what we want.
      But in this many ignored the threats and the dragons and so many other sings (e.g. the dialog with Hizdar in season 5).
      Martin is telling a much more complicated story. It’s not just about the vindication of the victim, it’s about choice and method; his characters are shaped and forged through choice and method to end up where they will. Sometimes their methods define their choices and vice versa.
      This is why in the end I do not think that any of them will be innocent, I do not think that there will be black and white characters, everyone shall be grey. It works for me and I do like complicated narratives, but that’s just me.

        Quote  Reply

    99. Ten Bears: The dreaded slash! (E.g., in “his/her” and “and/or.”) I got reamed out for using it once and have never done it again.
      An expert linguist called it “execrable.” You can’t tell if it’s conjunctive, disjunctive, or both. It can render a simple sentence hopelessly ambiguous.

      I will remember this (I am also a slasher…) — but would it be okay to use in our mini essays here??? D:

        Quote  Reply

    100. Mr Derp,

      ”In the end, the difference turned out to be Dany’s Targaryen genes, which, IMO, isn’t very compelling.

      No, it wasn’t. Hereditary mental illness? Blah.

      Oh, and there was this supposed difference,
      [paraphrasing] S7e7 Tyrion to Cersei, about Dany:

      “The difference is that she has advisors who can rein in her worst impulses.”
      🤪🤣😂😁😄

      F*ckin’ Tyrion.

        Quote  Reply

    101. Adrianacandle: I will remember this (I am also a slasher…) — but would it be okay to use in our mini essays here??? D:

      Hang on. Let me summon Stannis from the spirit world….

      A: Slashes are fine EXCEPT for “and/or.”

        Quote  Reply

    102. Ten Bears,

      Respect!
      You’re a true sophist, TB!
      I don’t know. I just understand that the prophecies are meant to blur the waters.
      If there is such ambiguity left hanging in the text, it will become apparent in the next books. Someone in-universe will note what this Valyrian language is, and then we’ll know what was the catch! In fact, if Martin is vaguely aware of the debate his prophecies have triggered (I believe he is), he’ll probably make sure to dissolve such doubts by the end of the book (if he ever finishes the damn thing).
      Also, the highborn Westerosi are supposed to know a bit of high Valyrian. It’s like knowing Latin. Tyrion does, so does Arya. Does Cersei? I think she had to ask what “valonqar” was, but I might misremember things.

      However, I’d like the idea that a woman might fit the description -I suppose that’s because Cersei in the books loathes other women, and it’s very obvious in her own chapters. For her arc it would be very unexpected and a payoff to her own crimes against them -and I do mean Sansa and Arya.
      The Lannister brothers both are too obvious, not that I would mind.
      Euron might also fit the description. (just because he can, lol).

        Quote  Reply

    103. Efi: However, I’d like the idea that a woman might fit the description -I suppose that’s because Cersei in the books loathes other women, and it’s very obvious in her own chapters.

      This is something I hadn’t considered and something I’d quite like about a female valonqar 🙂

      (Probably in the same way that I enjoy the idea of Brienne being the more beautiful “another” referring to inner beauty rather than physical beauty, as lame as that sounds, because it also uses Cersei’s own vanity against her).

        Quote  Reply

    104. Ten Bears:
      Mr Derp,

      ”In the end, the difference turned out to be Dany’s Targaryen genes, which, IMO, isn’t very compelling.

      No, it wasn’t. Hereditary mental illness? Blah.

      Oh, and there was this supposed difference,
      [paraphrasing] S7e7 Tyrion to Cersei, about Dany:

      “The difference is that she has advisors who can rein in her worst impulses.”🤪🤣😂😁😄

      F*ckin’ Tyrion.

      🙂

      I think seasons 1-4 Tyrion would’ve pimp-slapped the heck out of seasons 5-8 Tyrion. They were like two completely different people.

      Of course, Tyrion killing his father would contribute to a major change in character development, but I didn’t think it would affect his intelligence and judgement as much as it seemed to me.

      Maybe Varys and Illyrio actually killed Tyrion between seasons 4-5 and we were left with an imposter Tyrion afterwards. Like the McCartney is dead rumors from back in the day.

        Quote  Reply

    105. Mr Derp,

      My argument centers around how Danerys is not the hero of the story, and if you disagree with that, perhaps your best course of action isn’t to compare her to Cersei.

      You’re absolutely right. Danerys isn’t the only character that has done both good and bad things. That’s what makes the series so great! Other characters like this include Jaime, Theon, Stannis, and Arya. I don’t consider any of these characters heroes of the story either.

      Yes, like Danerys, Cersei threatened to burn cities to the ground, and ended blowing up a piece of King’s Landing, but I’m not sure what you’re point is. People most certainly were not cool with Cersei ruling, hence why most of the kingdoms turned against her.

      I’m not sure what you mean by “the only difference is that Danerys is a Targaryen.” Are you talking about why people are upset with her burning down King’s Landing, because that is definitely not the reason.

        Quote  Reply

    106. Ten Bears,

      Re: Arya blaming Cersei for Ned,

      I just remembered a passage that kind of dissolves my argument. In the passage detailing the moments before Ned’s execution:

      A thousand voices were screaming, but Arya never heard them. Prince Joffrey … no, King Joffrey … stepped out from behind the shields of his Kingsguard. “My mother bids me let Lord Eddard take the black, and Lady Sansa has begged mercy for her father.” He looked straight at Sansa then, and smiled, and for a moment Arya thought that the gods had heard her prayer, until Joffrey turned back to the crowd and said, “But they have the soft hearts of women. So long as I am your king, treason shall never go unpunished. Ser Ilyn, bring me his head!”

      The crowd roared, and Arya felt the statue of Baelor rock as they surged against it. The High Septon clutched at the king’s cape, and Varys came rushing over waving his arms, and even the queen was saying something to him, but Joffrey shook his head. Lords and knights moved aside as he stepped through, tall and fleshless, a skeleton in iron mail, the King’s Justice. Dimly, as if from far off, Arya heard her sister scream. Sansa had fallen to her knees, sobbing hysterically. Ser Ilyn Payne climbed the steps of the pulpit.

      So while Arya would not have had access to the conversations going over what Cersei and Tywin wanted to do with Ned, that they didn’t want him killed, she heard this declaration from Joffrey. If she hadn’t heard this, I think it’d make her mistaken perception a bit more understandable — however, I suppose it’s possible that Arya didn’t take this statement in fully when Joffrey said it due to the heightened emotion.

      But I think your point stands (that Arya blaming Cersei for this, at least, isn’t quite fair but I think it has less to do with what’s fair and more to do with some of the irrationality surrounding hatred).

        Quote  Reply

    107. Mr Derp,

      I think the difference turned out to be the dragons. (method)
      Cersei had wildfire (method) and burned the Sept with all the nobility of KL in it. She did it for vanquishing her political adversaries. (motive-answers to the “why”)
      The rest is the producers’ effort to bring out that she was a loving mother, although I do not understand why loving mothers need to burn the world for proving their love for their children. I also do not remember those threats of Cersei coming from the books and I can’t bear to look into her chapters.

      But I do admit that Daenerys’ motive didn’t come through in the show. The method though -oh, what a method! She ploughed the city of KL with dragonfire, street by street.
      By wanting to show that she suffered, that her rage came from what she had been through, they meant to whitewash her -imo only- and soften the blow for her fans; that she didn’t do it because of calculation -which would prove that she was a villain- she did it out of pain, which means that she was “crazy” either because of trauma or because of genes, as you say, which mitigates the circumstances of her crime (the first she can’t cope with, the second she has no control over). Imputation of liability is considerably reduced if the perpetrator is “crazy” (which is why many criminals go for it in their defense).
      The final dialog with Jon made this even worse. Having her remember that she once was “a little girl” after the massacre only baffled the viewers more. Talking about a new world after having wiped out an old world -whaaaat!?

      I think these were unfortunate choices on the part of the producers. They could bring it about better, and I don’t think time was an issue.
      But I disagree when people say that it was unexpected. The difference has always been that Daenerys had dragons and as the dragons grew so did the damage they could cause. Many cheered in the field of fire II (7.4). If you notice, that’s mostly from Jamie’s PoV. Many cheered when she burned the Yunkai’i in 6.9. They also cheered with the “burn the castles” speech in 6.8. (I didn’t cheer any of these, tbh I was seriously at awe)

      Which is why the producers had the “we cheered for her” speech of Tyrion to Jon in 8.6. They meant to point that out too. It was about handling a weapon of mass destruction, not just about genes. Were the genes problematic or was it that Targs had access to that weapon for centuries? That they inbred for maintaining the magic of their blood, which basically means that they refused to mix with the Westerosi society, thereby keeping themselves above all others -pretty much like gods?

      By making it about Daenerys’ pain the producers softened her agency, while it should have been about her choices -choice to march on KL, choice to dracarys the city. For that to happen they needed to have an adversary that doesn’t just sit on a balcony sipping red vintage from the Arbor.

      In the books, Daenerys is a dictator already; she’s cunning, smart, devious, and even cruel. Proof of that is how she took Astapor and how she dealt with Yunkai. People will say “yes, but masters are evil, and she’s freeing slaves”. That’s true, but her reasons don’t change the methods and the deception that betray a very calculating and devious person that makes certain decisions.
      All that didn’t translate well on screen, but that doesn’t mean that it was totally absent. When the time comes, in the books, for Daenerys to burn KL, it won’t be because she’s crazy, or in pain, it will be because she has chosen it; she will have chosen to use the nuclear deterrent.
      However, I believe that they tried to include even this in the show, in her speech to the army after the catastrophe; not very successfully (its impact was again diminished by the “I am in pain”/”I am a little girl” effect), but the logic is “bent the knee or die”, which was said to the Tarlys in 7.5.
      Now the entire world knows what dragons can do, so it boils down to what the North -Jon- will do about this.
      Jon ignored the dragon, he went for its master.

        Quote  Reply

    108. Young Dragon,

      ”…Danerys isn’t the only character that has done both good and bad things. That’s what makes the series so great! Other characters like this include Jaime, Theon, Stannis, and Arya. I don’t consider any of these characters heroes of the story either.“

      What you talkin bout YD!

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le6qeMe7-vM

      When has Arya done “bad things?”

      How can the Hero of Winterfell not be considered a hero of the story?

      Respectfully,
      ASNAWP Anti-Defamation League

        Quote  Reply

    109. Young Dragon: My argument centers around how Danerys is not the hero of the story, and if you disagree with that, perhaps your best course of action isn’t to compare her to Cersei.

      I didn’t say or imply that Dany is a hero. I thought I was pretty clear with what I was trying to get across and I think you’re going a bit out of your way to misunderstand me. This is usually why you and I have problems having conversations.

      Efi seemed to understand me just fine even if there is a disagreement and responded without trying to belittle what I said or repeatedly saying “you’re not sure what my point is”. It’s just rude and initiates acrimony for no reason.

        Quote  Reply

    110. Efi,

      In the books, Daenerys is a dictator already; she’s cunning, smart, devious, and even cruel. Proof of that is how she took Astapor and how she dealt with Yunkai. People will say “yes, but masters are evil, and she’s freeing slaves”. That’s true, but her reasons don’t change the methods and the deception that betray a very calculating and devious person that makes certain decisions.

      Well, Dany is a conqueror but this isn’t all that she is and there’s another side to these traits. Dany also feels deep guilt over what happened with Astapor, that’s one of the reasons why she rejects violence for much of ADWD because she doesn’t want to create another Astapor and spends much of ADWD making compromises and sacrifices that she finds painful on personally moral level. She also goes against Barristan’s advice to sail for Westeros right away because she feels she needs to help Meereen heal and this is her duty. Even Adam Feldman, who predicted a darker Daenerys, acknowledges Dany’s compassion, a genuine desire for peace, and a drive to right the world’s wrongs.

      Quotes to support the above:

      “Your Grace, may I speak frankly?”

      “Always.”

      “There is a third choice.”

      “Westeros?”

      He nodded. “I am sworn to serve Your Grace, and to keep you safe from harm wherever you may go. My place is by your side, whether here or in King’s Landing… but your place is back in Westeros, upon the Iron Throne that was your father’s. The Seven Kingdoms will never accept Hizdahr zo Loraq as king.”

      “No more than Meereen will accept Daenerys Targaryen as queen. The Green Grace has the right of that. I need a king beside me, a king of old Ghiscari blood. Elsewise they will always see me as the uncouth barbarian who smashed through their gates, impaled their kin on spikes, and stole their wealth.”

      “In Westeros you will be the lost child who returns to gladden her father’s heart. Your people will cheer when you ride by, and all good men will love you.”

      “Westeros is far away.”

      “Lingering here will never bring it any closer. The sooner we take our leave of this place—”

      “I know. I do.” Dany did not know how to make him see. She wanted Westeros as much as he did, but first she must heal Meereen. “Ninety days is a long time. Hizdahr may fail. And if he does, the trying buys me time. Time to make alliances, to strengthen my defenses, to—”
      “And if he does not fail? What will Your Grace do then?”
      “Her duty.” The word felt cold upon her tongue.

      The Shavepate disagreed. “If you had taken the Unsullied south to Hazzat, the Sons of the Harpy—”

      “I know. I know. It is Eroeh all over again.”

      Brown Ben Plumm was puzzled. “Who is Eroeh?”

      “A girl I thought I’d saved from rape and torment. All I did was make it worse for her in the end. And all I did in Astapor was make ten thousand Eroehs.”

      “Your Grace could not have known—”

      “I am the queen. It was my place to know.”

      “We curse the rain when it falls upon our heads, yet without it we should starve. The world needs rain … and slaves. You make a face, but it is true. Consider Qarth. In art, music, magic, trade, all that makes us more than beasts, Qarth sits above the rest of mankind as you sit at the summit of this pyramid … but below, in place of bricks, the magnificence that is the Queen of Cities rests upon the backs of slaves. Ask yourself, if all men must grub in the dirt for food, how shall any man lift his eyes to contemplate the stars? If each of us must break his back to build a hovel, who shall raise the temples to glorify the gods? For some men to be great, others must be enslaved.”

      He was too eloquent for her. Dany had no answer for him, only the raw feeling in her belly. “Slavery is not the same as rain,” she insisted. “I have been rained on and I have been sold. It is not the same. No man wants to be owned.”

      D&D too acknowledges Daenerys’s empathy in the Inside the Episode for 4×05:

      Dan Weiss: This scene shows Dany learning a lesson that I think all revolutionaries learned at one point or another, which is that conquering in many ways is a whole lot easier than ruling.

      David Beniof: This is a pivotal moment for Daenerys because for so long, her sole goal was getting back to Westeros, conquering Westeros, sitting on the Iron Throne, and becoming the queen that she believes she has every right to be. And now she has the opportunity.

      Dan Weiss: She’s driven by a kind of a deep empathy — a much deeper empathy than probably anybody else on the show. It’s something that makes her as charismatic as she is to people because they can sense the sincerity of it. Her empathy allows her to look at the people of Westeros and say ‘Why the hell would they ever follow me if I haven’t proven myself through my actions to be somebody worth following? Why would they let me rule if I hadn’t proven myself to be someone who has ruled well somewhere else?’

      Not to say that Dany going dark and razing King’s Landing is impossible but she’s not just a cunning, devious, and cruel dictator who is driven by want for power. Her compassion for the oppressed is genuine, she has experienced it herself, and she’s also looking for a place in the world in which she feels she fits and can wield the power to right the wrongs of the world (as she seems them). However, the question may be who Dany views as the oppressed and deserving of help.

      When the time comes, in the books, for Daenerys to burn KL, it won’t be because she’s crazy, or in pain, it will be because she has chosen it; she will have chosen to use the nuclear deterrent.

      And I’m hoping in the books, it’s not just a matter of Dany choosing violence ala Cersei because she wants the throne. I think this would be making Dany a bit too one-dimensional and flattening her character. I’m hoping it’s far more nuanced and there’s some inner struggle and consideration if this is a decision.

      As Martin said,

      It is certainly a genuine, legitimate topic as the core of fantasy, but I think the battle between Good and Evil is waged within the individual human hearts. We all have good in us and we all have evil in us, and we may do a wonderful good act on Tuesday and a horrible, selfish, bad act on Wednesday, and to me, that’s the great human drama of fiction. I believe in gray characters, as I’ve said before. We all have good and evil in us and there are very few pure paragons and there are very few orcs. A villain is a hero of the other side, as someone said once, and I think there’s a great deal of truth to that, and that’s the interesting thing. In the case of war, that kind of situation, so I think some of that is definitely what I’m aiming at.

      Now the entire world knows what dragons can do, so it boils down to what the North -Jon- will do about this.
      Jon ignored the dragon, he went for its master.

      Well, even here, Jon didn’t want to kill Dany and wanted to give her that last chance, still not feeling killing her was right despite it all. Which I think is another example of a terrible inner struggle. Doing what is right for the rest of the world may not feel right on a personal level.

      However, I believe that they tried to include even this in the show, in her speech to the army after the catastrophe; not very successfully (its impact was again diminished by the “I am in pain”/”I am a little girl” effect), but the logic is “bent the knee or die”, which was said to the Tarlys in 7.5.

      I thought Dany’s speech and her words to Jon afterward were more a case of Extremist Idealism or Utopia Justifies the Means since Daenerys truly believes what she’s done is good, that she has liberated the people, that destruction is necessary to build a better world.

      I don’t think the two scenes necessarily contradict because Dany seems to believe what she’s doing is right, which makes her all the more dangerous since she doesn’t see what she’s done as wrong — which I think adds another layer to this.

      I don’t think this was done to whitewash Daenerys or soften the blow for her fans (I think that ship sailed when she demolished King’s Landing and justified it) but to explore the idea of idealism taken to its most extreme, which might be an idea GRRM could be planning to explore with Daenerys’s storyline. However, I think the execution was kind of jarring in the show.

        Quote  Reply

    111. Ten Bears,

      I figured that would catch your attention. Arya’s “crimes” were more about the execution. Killing Meryn Trant was understandable, but the brutality of it was way over the top. The same with feeding Walder Frey his own sons. She also threatened her sister at Winterfell. But yes, killing the Night King was certainly heroic, but the good doesn’t wipe out the bad, nor the bad, the good.

        Quote  Reply

    112. Mr Derp,

      Like I said, my argument centered around how Danerys wasn’t the hero, and you tried to refute it by comparing her to Cersei. If I misunderstood something, I apologize and would like to understand your point, but you must take some responsibility in not making your message clearer.

        Quote  Reply

    113. Young Dragon,

      ”Arya’s “crimes” were more about the execution.”

      • Okay. So to start with, it’s undisputed the culprits were guilty of grievous offenses and deserved their punishment. You just have a problem with how she imposed their sentences.
      Bear in mind that in her world, “there is no justice in this world unless we make it.”

      ”Killing Meryn Trant was understandable, but the brutality of it was way over the top.”

      Not really. All she had was a little oyster knife. She had to incapacitate him and mute him. She also needed to identify herself and explain to him why his pervfest was turning into his execution.
      In any event, MFT was a sadistic pedophile who liked to beat and rape little girls. He punched Sansa in the face and stomach. Sorry. I have no sympathy for pedophile f*ckwits. He got just and fair punishment.

      ”The same with feeding Walder Frey his own sons.
      Violation of Guest Right is such a grievous crime that you gotta eat your sons. Cut her some slack. They weren’t easy to carve. Especially Black Walder. Rewatch the Red Wedding and take another look at what Walder’s damn moron sons did to Catelyn Stark and pregnant Talisa and her unborn child, and then tell me their punishment didn’t fit their crimes.

      ”She also threatened her sister at Winterfell.”
      That was not Arya. I don’t know who that was.
      Must have been a clone.

      ”But yes, killing the Night King was certainly heroic…”
      Sure was!

      ”but the good doesn’t wipe out the bad, nor the bad, the good.”
      Who says so? That’s a bullsh*t platitude.
      Arya had no “bad” to wipe out anyway.

      👸🏻

        Quote  Reply

    114. Ten Bears,

      Though he should’ve bisected Cersei when she flitted down the stairs right by him. I’m still not sure why they filmed it that way…

      As you of all commenters needn’t any reminding, in the previous Sandor scene he had told Arya — in blunt terms even by the standards of their dialogs!– that Cersei was certainly going to die, very violently, and very soon. He then admonished Arya to waste none of her own precious escape time on pursuing the good-as-dead Cersei.

      Furthermore, Sandor had made it very clear he was going up to kill his brother, and when he finally did lay eyes on Gregor, there was no way he would let his gaze wander. Breaking concentration, to kill a woman he already considered to be dead*, might have cost him his entire reason for going.

      For the audience, Cersei’s light-footed trot past Sandor made for a brief chuckle, at least for our viewing party. By that point, we’d had — what, twenty continuous minutes? — of rape, pillage, and mass slaughter of innocents, with more Dragon strafings in the background. That’s the darkest sequence in a series infamous for them, and we were just about to witness the long-awaited Cleganebowl, another gore-fest horror show of grunting, beatings, and bloodshed. Everyone needed a small laugh at that moment.

      *Thinking about it just now, that’s another great parallel: Sandor tells Arya not to waste her time killing a woman who is as good as dead, and then Sandor throws his own life away trying to kill a man who is already dead! The writing of this story continues to amaze me, a year after it ended.

        Quote  Reply

    115. Young Dragon,

      I think Mr. Derp is saying that the execution of the burning of KL by Daenerys was not satisfying as it portrayed her burning an entire city for absolutely no good reason which could then be attributed to… well, to Targ genes.
      I think it’s a simple way of putting things but you might find that this interpretation encapsulates even though compressed the feelings and interpretations of many fans outside this site (because I think that we’ve taken our interpretations to higher levels).
      I generally agree that this part lacked courage on the part of the producers. They chose the line of “when a Targaryen is born, the gods cast a coin” for building the story on, or at least that’s what many fans might have understood. I will refer you to my post about it for the rest.

      But I have to say that the structure of the story is such, that each character is a foil or a parallel to someone else. The books take the heroes and put them in dire circumstances for the reader to see how they will react and the producers very consciously tried to show that on screen. With the rulers it’s how they will react to holding absolute power. Cersei, Stannis, Joffrey, Daenerys, even Robert in the beginning and certainly Jon are foils and/or (sorry TB!) parallels to each other, so they are bound to be compared.
      Cersei and Daenerys in particular have what others don’t have, power of destructive forces, wildfire and dragons respectively. While Cersei has been threatening to burn the city (I repeat I don’t remember such threats in the book -perhaps someone can enlighten me- and the producers here were obliged to show the author’s intent, meaning that she was that violent), in the end she didn’t do anything -didn’t activate the wildfire- while Daenerys who wanted to “save” it actually bombed it. This, I suppose, is a call on Aerys’ “burn them all” madness. Foils.

      The difference is that Targaryens always had dragons and relied on them for ruling. The country wasn’t unified with friendly negotiations, it was unified with dragons. It’s the nuclear deterrent that Martin has spoken about in his interviews. So Daenerys in the end decided to use that deterrent and show the world what she could do, unlike Cersei, who stood on the balcony sipping wine.

        Quote  Reply

    116. Tensor the Mage, Still Loving the Ending,

      ” As you of all commenters needn’t any reminding, in the previous Sandor scene he had told Arya — in blunt terms even by the standards of their dialogs!– that Cersei was certainly going to die, very violently, and very soon. He then admonished Arya to waste none of her own precious escape time on pursuing the good-as-dead Cersei.”

      Ah, Tensor the Contrarian!

      Okay, I will look at that sequence again.

      The way I saw it, Sandor could’ve swatted her like a fly without averting his gaze from his lunkhead ZombieBrother. Sandor had just cut down three Kingsguard like he was carving a cake. Or as if they were three Meryn Trants.

      Yes, Sandor had just told Arya Cersei was “certainly going to die, very violently, and very soon.” Perhaps the fire would get her; or one of the Dothraki; or maybe the dragon would eat her. (None of which happened, by the way. Had the cave-in not blocked the basement passageway, Cersei might well have escaped.)

      Sandor could’ve quickly administered death to Cersei “very violently, and very soon” as he’d assured Arya.

      Come on now: It would have taken one second for Sandor to bisect her, and maybe two seconds to get off a snarky parting shot. (“The Starks send their regards” was a popular fandom prediction. I’d have preferred a S1 callback, something like “Remember that ‘filthy little animal’ who went poof?”)

      Arya had vowed “I’m going to kill her!” Sandor persuaded Arya – first brusquely (“Look at me!”) and then gently, to abort her mission, telling her “if you come with me, you die here.”

      Fine. He then had a chance to fulfill Arya’s objective on her behalf – with the added bonus of crossing two names off Arya’s List, and one off his own list, as he’d suggested when he first heard her reciting her nightly prayer in S3.

      I was not thrilled with “Cleganebowl” to begin with. I just felt that Cersei scooting right by Sandor unmolested was a head-scratching moment. Why would she even risk it? Why would he not take a shot? Considering the rather cheesy way Cersei later perished, don’t you kind of wish she’d had a more dramatic final exit on that staircase?

      However, I’ll take another look at the scene…

      ___
      P.S. Tinfoil Missed Opportunity:

      Sandor: “Hello, big brother.”
      UnGregor: “Hello, Little Brother.”
      (Cersei freaks. As she tries to run by Sandor, he grabs her by the throat and starts squeezing …)

        Quote  Reply

    117. Young Dragon: I don’t understand why some people continue to push this false narrative when all evidence points to the exact opposite. And Danerys was never the hero of the story. She’s done heroic things, but she has also done terrible things.

      I think when it comes down to mass audience, a significant percentage of people watch TV shows just for their favorites, more than often not even caring about the “grand story aspect”. I generally try to avoid fandoms but I still saw enough comments and such on web in the period from 2011 to 2019 to conclude that. I can give you an example of three of my online friends Ryan, Irene and Monica… all three of them being big Dany fans and they all actively watched GoT. Two of them, Ryan and Irene, loved the ending and they loved “The Bells” as an episode, despite being big Dany fans. I remember having conversation with them about it and they both said they (sadly) felt how Dany’s downfall was bound to happen. But in grand aspect of the story, they appreciated this twist. My other friend Monica on other hand, she pretty much cared for only Jon and Dany… she believed them to be THE story. And at same time, she believes that at the end of every story, no matter how twisted and dark it is overall, there has to be happily ever after because that’s what audience deserves… that all top-tier characters need to survive and achieve firm happines for the rest of their lives while all bad guys, even if they redeemed themselves through the story, need to die because “they dont’ deserve to live”. If one of the main protagonists dies, she would label that “they deserved better” So her only way of how the story should unfold is Dany and Jon marrying and having kids and she’s pissed at writers for “betraying the audience”. ANd I believe there are a lot of people like Monica out there… people who cared only about “what” happens to their favorites.

      Efi,

      You summarized it well here regarding that there’s more than often “what” and not “how” that’s the usual reason for mass audience’s displeasure. Something I wonder about is if people, who were displeased with ending, were asked to rewrite these final chapters of the story to their satisfaction but under condition that Dany’s downfall remains in the story. I’m very much sure a lot of people would struggle or they would just label this as “not a good story”.

        Quote  Reply

    118. Tensor the Mage, Still Loving the Ending,

      ”Breaking concentration, to kill a woman he already considered to be dead*….
      ….

      “*Thinking about it just now, that’s another great parallel: Sandor tells Arya not to waste her time killing a woman who is as good as dead, and then Sandor throws his own life away trying to kill a man who is already dead! The writing of this story continues to amaze me, a year after it ended.”

      Yes, he did throw his own life away trying to kill a man who’d already dead.

      My fanfic ending for Sandor would have been more meaningful, with an element of self-sacrifice, e.g., going out in a literal and figurative blaze of glory defending his surrogate daughters, followed by a tear-jerker moment when the dying Sandor utters his last words to them: “Remember where the heart is”.

      While I’m not sure I’d call the writing of Sandor’s
      wasteful death “amazing,” or that chopping down Cersei would require “breaking concentration,” I don’t necessarily disagree with you about the narrative decision. For me, Sandor’s final talk with Arya impressed upon her that he was too far gone; revenge had fully consumed him. It was too late for him to turn back – but not for her.

      On one hand, it kind of sucked that after his “second chance” at life, he ultimately threw it away in a senseless death. After all, it seemed that he had bought into Ray’s sermon that it was never too late to stop killing people and start helping people; and then was persuaded by Beric’s recruitment pitch: “You can still help a lot more than you’ve harmed, Clegane; it’s not too late for you.”

      On the other hand, if I can steal a line from a movie: “You know, sometimes there ain’t no forgettin’…” As disappointing as it was that Sandor was irretrievably consumed by his desire for revenge, the show made it clear in the post-battle party in S8e4 that Sandor just couldn’t let it go. When he turned down a comely waitress’ no-strings attached invitation to join her for a frolic, that was a signal that he had lost the capacity to enjoy life. Sansa questioned why he rebuffed the waitress: “She could have made you happy.” Sandor’s reply that “only one thing” could make him happy, followed by his pronouncement to Arya as they rode away from WF that he wouldn’t be coming back, pretty much sealed the deal.

      “You don’t want to be like me” was the message imparted to Arya. Sure, he could’ve aborted his mission too and embraced life instead of certain death. He could have helped Arya run through the gauntlet of Dany’s Inferno, and accompanied her on her seafaring adventures. I suppose that kind of Disneyfied ending would have been even more “fan servicey” than Cleganebowl.

      The show chose not to transform the Hound into a neutered puppy dog. Some might say that his fatal obsession with getting even with Gregor (even after Gregor wasn’t really Gregor anymore) made Sandor a tragic figure. I can’t argue with that narrative decision. Just as with Sandor’s attempt to join the peace, love and Frisbee hippie commune (“how did that work out?” – Beric 🤔), a violent death in a brutal fight against his asshat brother had already fixed a long time ago. (I take it that’s what he was referring to when he got in ZombieGregor’s face in the S7e7 dragonpit encounter (“you’ve always known” who (or what) is coming for you.”)

      Oh, to steal another line from a different movie: “People can’t escape their nature.” Even if they know it thwarts a happy ending (or may lead to their doom).

      So yeah, I suppose you may be right that on some level there was a deliberate parallel – or contrast – between Sandor’s “save yourself, she’s as good as dead” advice to Arya, and the contradictory, self-destructive decision he made for himself.

      P.S. I always figured Sandor, having cheated death or having been given a reprieve by the god or gods, was living on borrowed time anyway. His death was a pre-ordained event in-universe, and in his own mind.

        Quote  Reply

    119. Ten Bears,

      The gender issue is moot, isn’t it? Even if it means “little sibling” and not “little brother” (and there is zero evidence to this effect), Cersei does not have any younger sisters. Ergo, a prophecy about little siblings is a prophecy about little brothers for her. And Cersei has two of those.

      How did the idea that “valonqar” meant “sibling” instead of “brother” arise, anyway? It is not from the books or the show. (I hope that people are not confusing “prince” with sibling: Martin got that from Latin, where the word for “prince” [which meant something a bit different than the concept for which it was co-opted] was neutral; Latin obvious has very well-known words for “brother” and “sister”!)

        Quote  Reply

    120. Wimsey,

      Actually, I was wrong about one thing: there is not a Latin word for “Sibling”: you had a “brother” or a “sister.” (I had remember “propinquus” as sibling for some reason, but it just means “relative.”) Latin probably is the inspiration for making prince gender neutral in Valyrian; however, there is no reason to think that Valyrian did not have equivalents of frater and soror: that would be highly unusual.

        Quote  Reply

    121. Wimsey: How did the idea that “valonqar” meant “sibling” instead of “brother” arise, anyway? It is not from the books or the show. (I hope that people are not confusing “prince” with sibling: Martin got that from Latin, where the word for “prince” [which meant something a bit different than the concept for which it was co-opted] was neutral; Latin obvious has very well-known words for “brother” and “sister”!)

      From what I’ve seen, the idea that ‘valonqar’ may be gender-neutral has been around for a long time in the ASOIAF fandom. In this debate, it was me (and I believe Efi) who were arguing the case that it might be possible for there to be a female valonqar.

      Of course, the idea that ‘valonqar’ is female could be totally wrong because it’s true (as Ten Bears brought up) that Maggy says ‘his hands’. If you go to this link, you’ll see the basis for the female valonqar theory if that helps out any 🙂 (This is a link to the westeros.org wiki but they require cookies. If you’d rather not go to that site due to the cookies issue, I can screencap the page for you if you’re interested. This page lists the main theories for valonqar, male and female).

        Quote  Reply

    122. Adrianacandle: From what I’ve seen, the idea that ‘valonqar’ may be gender-neutral has been around for a long time in the ASOIAF fandom.

      I don’t remember that one: but, then, I basically dropped out of the fandom after Crows and didn’t return until the show started. Still, I wonder why “Martin lied in the text with Valonqar” idea arose: nothing in the books hints that this might be the case. And given Cersei’s lack of sisters, it’s still pretty moot! (This is also not like Jamie seeing Robb’s book-wife as having thin hips when Catelyn saw her as having good birthing hips: that is very subjective and Jaime’s idea of “good hips” was a middle-aged woman who’d given birth to 3 kids without the benefit of a C-section.)

      So, making it a woman requires both that the word not only not mean brother, but that it not even mean sibling! The only “out” on it would be if GRRM had provided some group for which the title that Cersei would use is “Brother”. Now, there are brotherhoods such as the Nights Watch and Brotherhood of Banners in which the word is used informally: but Cersei and others would never refer to a member as “Brother Jon” or “Brother Beric” in the way that people (used to) refer to monks as, say, Brother Joseph.

      If nothing else, then it’s not a very parsimonious idea: and one thing that we saw in the show over and over for the “big questions” that the books have not yet answered is that the answers tended to be very parsimonious with regard to the information that we already had. (Put another way, the show/books hung Chekhovian guns, and the show fired them. 😀 )

        Quote  Reply

    123. Wimsey: I don’t remember that one: but, then, I basically dropped out of the fandom after Crows and didn’t return until the show started. Still, I wonder why “Martin lied in the text with Valonqar” idea arose: nothing in the books hints that this might be the case. And given Cersei’s lack of sisters, it’s still pretty moot! (This is also not like Jamie seeing Robb’s book-wife as having thin hips when Catelyn saw her as having good birthing hips: that is very subjective and Jaime’s idea of “good hips” was a middle-aged woman who’d given birth to 3 kids without the benefit of a C-section.)

      Perhaps but it’s just a theory. The idea of a female valonquar might be totally wrong. People reference something Maester Aemon saying in AFFC as possibly pertaining to a female valonqar — which may be the reason you missed these theories since you dropped out of the fandom after AFFC. Would that make sense?

      Anyway, I pulled the text from the westeros.org wiki page for your perusal 🙂

      As supporting evidence, a translation error discussed in A Feast for Crows is often cited. According to Maester Aemon, the prophecy about the prince that was promised, which thus far had been interpreted to indicate a man, could have been incorrectly translated. Aemon, because of this, comes to believe that the prophecy could refer to a woman, stating “The error crept in from the translation. Dragons are neither male nor female, Barth saw the truth of that, but now one and now the other, as changeable as flame. The language misled us all for a thousand years.”.[33] Readers have taken this to indicate that the word used in the prophecy concerning the prince that was promised is gender-neutral, and thus, that there might be more gender-neutral words in the old Valyrian language, with “valonqar” being their candidate.

      David Peterson, who created the High Valyrian used on HBO’s Game of Thrones, has commented on the assumption, claiming that “[Aemon’s quote] says nothing whatever about the gender system of High Valyrian”. He stressed that Aemon, in A Feast for Crows, was speaking about biological gender (i.e., dragons being able to change their gender from male to female, or vice versa), not grammatical gender, and that grammatical and biological gender need not be tied to one another. To explain further, Peterson stated “English is a gender neutral language. We have gendered third person singular pronouns, but outside of that, English has no grammatical genders the way Spanish, French and Italian do. “Prince” is grammatically gender neutral. Semantically, though, it’s male, just as the words “man”, “bachelor”, “father” and “son” are. That these words exist says nothing about the grammatical gender system of English.” According to Peterson, the High Valyrian word originally used in the prophecy that was translated as “prince” in the Common Tongue (i.e. English) can refer to both men and women, with Aemon’s comment referring to the assumption, given the context, that the person prophesied must be male.[34]

      You can take it or leave it! But that’s the basis for this theory.

      For me, the idea of a female valonqar isn’t a hill I’m going to die on. It’s really just an idea I found intriguing but there are also good counterarguments to this idea as well.

      Other than issues with the wording of the prophecy itself, I would doubt that most of theorized female contenders possess the physical strength and hand size to carry out a manual strangulation with their hands (other than Brienne and perhaps the proposed Stoneheart, as theorized by Jai in the above discussion). While I’ve entertained the idea of a female valonqar, I’m more inclined to believe valonqar is likely male.

        Quote  Reply

    124. Adrianacandle,

      Right, but that has nothing to do with the words for “brother” or “sister.” Extending the notion that one gender neutral word that is engendered in other languages means that a language has no engendered words is a classic logical fallacy: i.e., affirming the antecendent. (“If P, then q; q; therefore P!”) Moreover, this premise is easily falsified when applied to real languages: because Latin has “princeps,” either the words “frater” + “soror,” or “puer” + “puella” cannot both exist: there will be just one word for “sibling” or “offspring.” Either my Latin teacher lied to me, or the premise is false!

      At any rate, Cersei has no younger siblings. There is no class of people that she calls “brother.” Assuming that it’s not truly awful writing by Martin, then the statement has to apply to someone that Cersei will think of as “little brother” at the climax: her final thoughts shouldn’t be “I knew Tyrion would kill me!” or “That ‘Little’ brother??”, and not “Woo hoo! The prophecy was wrong. Oh, wait….. *gurgle*”

      That’s the other key: we can’t say “Wait, Cersei, don’t die just yet, and think about it: if we do a few contortions, add in that your translator was wrong about what Valonqar means AND that Maggie basically was wrong, then it makes total sense!” It has to make sense to Cersei and it has to make immediate sense to her. Preferably, it not only will make sense, but there will be an appreciation by Cersei that because she attributed it to the wrong brother, she actually created the circumstances that led to the other one killing her. (I do like my prophecies MacBethian!) Given the Faulknerian theory of writing to which Martin subscribes, that would be the most appropriate outcome.

        Quote  Reply

    125. Wimsey,

      Right, but that has nothing to do with the words for “brother” or “sister.” Extending the notion that one gender neutral word that is engendered in other languages means that a language has no engendered words is a classic logical fallacy: i.e., affirming the antecendent. (“If P, then q; q; therefore P!”) Moreover, this premise is easily falsified when applied to real languages: because Latin has “princeps,” either the words “frater” + “soror,” or “puer” + “puella” cannot both exist: there will be just one word for “sibling” or “offspring.” Either my Latin teacher lied to me, or the premise is false!

      It’s only a speculation in that there has been a mistranslation of ‘valonqar’. There’s also that High Valyrian itself is a fiction language but I don’t know if it’s been as fully realized as other fictional languages have been (could be wrong there though). As a result, there isn’t really set system to rely on, reference, and parallel — High Valyrian isn’t Latin and I don’t know what Martin is basing the language on (unless somebody has information about this?)

      What you say could be true! But I don’t know enough about the language itself to give a strong debate either way.

      So I take it to mean you think valonqar is Jaime since Jaime would fulfill the requirements you are proposing (must make sense to Cersei and that Cersei only has younger brothers, not younger siblings).

        Quote  Reply

    126. I’m not awaiting the next book impatiently anymore. I might wait to see what the critics say before I invest any money in it. Though critics might have a different opinion to me. There’s library loan but it’s not always easy to find the ASOIAF books there – which shows they are popular.

      I read a somewhat abridged version of Robert Jordan’s ‘The Eye of the World’ – first book of ‘The Wheel of Time’ series. I think I might be too old for that series. I didn’t loathe it but it didn’t grab me either. If there are any mega WOT fans I’m really, really not trying to be critical of other folks’ tastes in books (horses for courses and all that).

      Wimsey, English does have its idiosyncrasies indeed. Sometimes ‘they’ which is strictly speaking a third person plural pronoun is used as a singular pronoun in an informal setting where the gender is not known.

        Quote  Reply

    127. Mr Derp: 🙂

      I think seasons 1-4 Tyrion would’ve pimp-slapped the heck out of seasons 5-8 Tyrion. They were like two completely different people.

      Of course, Tyrion killing his father would contribute to a major change in character development, but I didn’t think it would affect his intelligence and judgement as much as it seemed to me.

      Maybe Varys and Illyrio actually killed Tyrion between seasons 4-5 and we were left with an imposter Tyrion afterwards….

      • That’s the way it looked to me too. For whatever reason (maybe the lack of source material?), S1-S4 Tyrion and S5-S8 Tyrion “were like two completely different people. (For the sake of brevity, maybe I should adopt your descriptions and refer to them as Real Tyrion and Imposter Tyrion, respectively. Or Clever Tyrion vs. Faux Tyrion.)

      I’ve suggested in the past that writing witty, intelligent dialogue for a character; crafting jokes with punchlines that land; and constructing intricate plans and schemes for a character; must be among the most difficult and time-consuming challenges for a scriptwriter. GRRM had all the time he wanted to create Real Tyrion. The showrunners did not. Even so, the differences were glaring. It was as if “Varys and Illyrio actually killed” Tyrion, or arranged for a lobotomy.

      • I know some fans felt differently. Speaking only for myself, I almost felt embarrassed for Peter Dinklage, and I almost hurled, when I watched Tyrion drone on and on to Cersei about “Your baby, your baby, your baby.”
      I cringed while listening to that ridiculous “Bran the Broken has the best story” speech. Dinklage tried to make it sound dramatic. He couldn’t.

      I’m sorry. Those speeches were just awful. Real Tyrion would’ve fired crossbow bolts into Faux Tyrion’s bowels to shut him up.

      • Compare Faux Tyrion in those scenes with Real Tyrion in this S2 scene (possibly my all-time favorite Tyrion scene):

      Tyrion & Lancel, S2

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HijFieJNH5k

      Real Tyrion transforms pompous Lancel into a quaking lump of pliable jelly over the course of a few minutes, flipping Lancel into a double agent.
      Vintage Tyrion.

      • I remember the truly clever Real Tyrion who came up with the Wildfire Ghost Ship plan.
      As for Faux Tyrion? Two words:

      Wight Hunt.

      JFC. I cannot believe that the Tyrion who recognized that Cersei’s wildfire pot-flinging plan was a disaster waiting to happen, would ever come up with a harebrained scheme to send a dozen or so men on foot against 100,000 killer zombies just to try to bag one for a show and tell presentation that turned out to be a waste of time.

      For that matter, I still don’t understand why the Tyrion who knew full well his sister despised him and was untrustworthy, would decide to trust her – over and over – only to be deceived each time, like Lucy yanking the football away from Charlie Brown. (Even Sansa called him out for being such a twit for believing Cersei would actually send the Lannister army north.) How could he actually think his appeals to her to think about “your baby, your baby” had changed her into a decent, unselfish person?

      • What I really missed were the quips, jokes, sarcasm and snark of the Real Tyrion. After a while, it seemed Imposter Tyrion’s “jokes” consisted of just saying “c*ck,” “c*ckless,” “no c*ck” – as if just saying it would make us laugh. It didn’t. It got tedious. (The same was true for post-S4 Bronn. Top prize goes to his “not without a c*ck” banter with Jaime in the opening scene of S7e7. Truly awful.)

      • Worst of all was the lame recycling of prior “jokes” – especially the punchline-less “jackass and honeycomb” story that Tyrion spouted again for a third time in the final episode – still without a punch line. I didn’t laugh. I grimaced. That was the best they could come up with for Tyrion’s final lines on the show?
      Maybe I don’t have a sense of humor: Was retelling the opening line of the jackass and honeycomb story and then cutting away without a punchline supposed to be funny in and of itself?

      • Come to think of it, I don’t remember any of Imposter Tyrion’s attempted jokes that made me crack a smile. Do you?

      • I suppose it’s possible Tyrion was dumbed-down on purpose so that when his “clever plans” failed and Cersei duped him, it would all compound Dany’s problems, piss her off, and help drive her off the deep end. Although his tenure as Dany’s Hand started off promising enough (aced the job interview in S5e8), after that it went downhill.

      • In all fairness, I should add that Imposter Tyrion did have a few good moments, including:
      – Going through alcohol withdrawal as Ser Jorah’s captive, and sailing with Ser Jorah past Old Valyria (their poetry-recital duet);
      – Initial scenes meeting and conversing with Dany;
      – Talking her out of exterminating the Masters’ armies and destroying their cities, in favor of a more surgical approach (S6e9);
      – Persuading Dany to let Jon mine dragonglass “Give him something by giving him nothing”)
      – Trying, though not succeeding, to talk her out of barbecuing Tarly father and son.
      – Tyrion and Varys reunion scene in Mereen (“if only….”)

      I can’t think of anything else off the top of my head.

        Quote  Reply

    128. Wimsey,

      I found this Wikipedia article on High Valyrian and it looks like much of the system was created for the TV show by David Peterson because GRRM wasn’t much interested in the language creation:

      The producers gave Peterson a largely free hand in developing the languages, as, according to Peterson, George R. R. Martin himself was not very interested in the linguistic aspect of his works.[4]

      So I don’t know how much of the development Peterson did for High Valyrian applies to the books.

      But if it does and if GRRM himself adopts it, there’s this:

      There are four grammatical numbers in High Valyrian—singular, plural, paucal and collective. For example, vala “man” (nom. sing.); vali “men” (nom. pl.); valun “some men” (nom. pau.); valar “all men” (nom. coll.).[13][14] The collective can itself be modified by number as a new noun declension, for example azantys “knight, soldier” (nom. sing.) → azantyr “army” (nom. coll.); azantyr “army” (nom. sing.) → azantyri “armies” (nom. pl.).[15]

      I think this would indicate ‘valonqar’ is male due to ‘valo’.

      ‘Valar morghulis’ exists in the books and it appears to mean ‘all men must die’ in the books as well. The phrase ‘all men must die’ is spoken in Daenerys’s, Jon’s, Arya’s, Tyrion’s, and Jon Con’s chapters with Daenerys’s, Tyrion’s, and Arya’s chapters saying ‘valar morghulis’ means ‘all men must die’:

      ASOS, Daenerys III:

      “Valar morghulis,” said Missandei, in High Valyrian.

      “All men must die,” Dany agreed, “but not for a long while, we may pray.”

      ASOS, Tyrion IX:

      “Let them. Is it treason to say a man is mortal? Valar morghulis was how they said it in Valyria of old. All men must die. And the Doom came and proved it true.” The Dornishman went to the window to gaze out into the night. “It is being said that you have no witnesses for us.”

      AFFC, Arya I:

      All men must die. That was what the words meant, the words that Jaqen H’ghar had taught her when he gave her the worn iron coin. She had learned more Braavosi words since they left Saltpans, the words for please and thank you and sea and star and fire wine, but she came to them knowing that all men must die.

      However, ‘all men must die’ may not be intended to specify all males must die (since females are mortal too) and can be meant as a term for ‘human’.

      But I don’t know enough about High Valyrian itself to make any certain statements :/

        Quote  Reply

    129. Wimsey,

      ”Extending the notion that one gender neutral word that is engendered in other languages means that a language has no engendered words is a classic logical fallacy: i.e., affirming the antecendent. (“If P, then q; q; therefore P!”)”

      • If I’m not mistaken, Hot Pie provided an example of a “classical logical fallacy” when he was talking about “knights” and “battles” in early S2. I suppose his false logic went something like this [paraphrasing]:

      All knights wear armor. Anyone wearing armor must therefore be a knight.

      (Even after Gendry explained to him that “any idiot can buy armor,” Hot Pie still resisted abandoning his false assumption – which provided moments of levity in later seasons, e.g., assuming that Brienne was a knight because she had armor on.)

      • And yes, about gendered vs. gender-neutral words, in my previous comments I too have been exasperated that theories about a female Valonqar seem to be predicated on the assumption that because a different Valyrian word (for “prince”) is genderless, therefore all Valyrian words can refer to either gender.

      I shouldn’t repeat myself ….

        Quote  Reply

    130. Adrianacandle: So I take it to mean you think valonqar is Jaime since Jaime would fulfill the requirements you are proposing (must make sense to Cersei and that Cersei only has younger brothers, not younger siblings).

      From the perspective of literary theory alone (both general and the one to which Martin subscribes), that would make the most sense. At the very least, it is classic irony: it meant what it said, not what it implied. It also could be very MacBethian if Jaime kills her in part because of things she has done to stop Tyrion from doing so.

      The usual argument against this is sort of reasoning is “But it’s too obvious!” That’s why Jon couldn’t be Lyanna’s son, Melisandre couldn’t be the one to revive Jon, the Pink Letter couldn’t actually be from Ramsay, etc. So, the “it cannot be obvious” idea has an excellent track record!

      (The big problem with that premise is that it assumes that authors set these things up thinking that their works will be group-analyzed for extended periods of time, or that authors even know of a way to write multistory plotlines that do not basically assume that the audience is not reading/watching the whole thing in one sitting!)

      That said, it could turn out to be Tyrion: but that would work only if goes the MacBeth route of the act coming solely from Cersei trying to avoid that fate. It seems that the plot has gone in a different direction from that, however.

      Ten Bears: I shouldn’t repeat myself ….

      I wouldn’t worry until you get to 300 pages of:
      “One gender neutral word does not mean all words are gender neutral.”
      “One gender neutral word does not mean all words are gender neutral.”
      “One gender neutral word does not mean all words are gender neutral.”
      ……

      If you do get there, then stay away from axes and snowbanks. Oh, and wave to any black swans that fly by! 😀

        Quote  Reply

    131. Wimsey,

      From the perspective of literary theory alone (both general and the one to which Martin subscribes), that would make the most sense. At the very least, it is classic irony: it meant what it said, not what it implied. It also could be very MacBethian if Jaime kills her in part because of things she has done to stop Tyrion from doing so.

      The usual argument against this is sort of reasoning is “But it’s too obvious!” That’s why Jon couldn’t be Lyanna’s son, Melisandre couldn’t be the one to revive Jon, the Pink Letter couldn’t actually be from Ramsay, etc. So, the “it cannot be obvious” idea has an excellent track record!

      (The big problem with that premise is that it assumes that authors set these things up thinking that their works will be group-analyzed for extended periods of time, or that authors even know of a way to write multistory plotlines that do not basically assume that the audience is not reading/watching the whole thing in one sitting!)

      I think these are all good points and I agree 🙂 No argument here!

        Quote  Reply

    132. Ten Bears: • That’s the way it looked to me too. For whatever reason (maybe the lack of source material?), S1-S4 Tyrion and S5-S8 Tyrion “were like two completely different people. (For the sake of brevity, maybe I should adopt your descriptions and refer to them as Real Tyrion and Imposter Tyrion, respectively. Or Clever Tyrion vs. Faux Tyrion.)

      I’ve suggested in the past that writing witty, intelligent dialogue for a character; crafting jokes with punchlines that land; and constructing intricate plans and schemes for a character; must be among the most difficult and time-consuming challenges for a scriptwriter. GRRM had all the time he wanted to create Real Tyrion.The showrunners did not. Even so, the differences were glaring. It was as if “Varys and Illyrio actually killed” Tyrion, or arranged for a lobotomy.

      • I know some fans felt differently. Speaking only for myself, I almost felt embarrassed for Peter Dinklage, and I almost hurled, when I watched Tyrion drone on and on to Cersei about “Your baby, your baby, your baby.”
      I cringed while listening to that ridiculous “Bran the Broken has the best story” speech. Dinklage tried to make it sound dramatic. He couldn’t.

      I’m sorry. Those speeches were just awful. Real Tyrion would’ve fired crossbow bolts into Faux Tyrion’s bowels to shut him up.

      • Compare Faux Tyrion in those scenes with Real Tyrion in this S2 scene (possibly my all-time favorite Tyrion scene):

      Tyrion & Lancel, S2

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HijFieJNH5k

      Real Tyrion transforms pompous Lancel into a quaking lump of pliable jelly over the course of a few minutes, flipping Lancel into a double agent.
      Vintage Tyrion.

      • I remember the truly clever Real Tyrion who came up with the Wildfire Ghost Ship plan. As for Faux Tyrion? Two words:

      Wight Hunt.

      JFC. I cannot believe that the Tyrion who recognized that Cersei’s wildfire pot-flinging plan was a disaster waiting to happen, would ever come up with a harebrained scheme to send a dozen or so men on foot against 100,000 killer zombies just to try to bag one for a show and tell presentation that turned out to be a waste of time.

      For that matter, I still don’t understand why the Tyrion who knew full well his sister despised him and was untrustworthy, would decide to trust her – over and over – only to be deceived each time, like Lucy yanking the football away from Charlie Brown. (Even Sansa called him out for being such a twit for believing Cersei would actually send the Lannister army north.) How could he actually think his appeals to her to think about “your baby, your baby” had changed her into a decent, unselfish person?

      • What I really missed were the quips, jokes, sarcasm and snark of the Real Tyrion. After a while, it seemed Imposter Tyrion’s “jokes” consisted of just saying “c*ck,” “c*ckless,” “no c*ck” – as if just saying it would make us laugh. It didn’t. It got tedious. (The same was true for post-S4 Bronn. Top prize goes to his “not without a c*ck” banter with Jaime in the opening scene of S7e7. Truly awful.)

      • Worst of all was the lame recycling of prior “jokes” – especially the punchline-less “jackass and honeycomb” story that Tyrion spouted again for a third time in the final episode – still without a punch line. I didn’t laugh. I grimaced. That was the best they could come up with for Tyrion’s final lines on the show?Maybe I don’t have a sense of humor: Was retelling the opening line of the jackass and honeycomb story and then cutting away without a punchline supposed to be funny in and of itself?

      • Come to think of it, I don’t remember any of Imposter Tyrion’s attempted jokes that made me crack a smile. Do you?

      • I suppose it’s possible Tyrion was dumbed-down on purpose so that when his “clever plans” failed and Cersei duped him, it would all compound Dany’s problems, piss her off, and help drive her off the deep end. Although his tenure as Dany’s Hand started off promising enough (aced the job interview in S5e8), after that it went downhill.

      • In all fairness, I should add that Imposter Tyrion did have a few good moments, including:– Going through alcohol withdrawal as Ser Jorah’s captive, and sailing with Ser Jorah past Old Valyria (their poetry-recital duet); – Initial scenes meeting and conversing with Dany;– Talking her out of exterminating the Masters’ armies and destroying their cities, in favor of a more surgical approach (S6e9);– Persuading Dany to let Jon mine dragonglass “Give him something by giving him nothing”) – Trying, though not succeeding, to talk her out of barbecuing Tarly father and son. – Tyrion and Varys reunion scene in Mereen (“if only….”)

      I can’t think of anything else off the top of my head.

      I can immediately remember two Tyrion scenes I really liked in seasons 5 and 6. One was in 5×03, when he goes to the brothel, just before being captured by Jorah. I liked the conversation he had with that girl, assuming he couldn’t have sex with her. It was a rare moment of genuine honesty in a TV show where characters spend much of their time trying to outplay each other or being careful about what they say in order to survive. I think his behaviour was believable, since he was clearly troubled at that time.

      The other one was the deal with the slavers in 6×04. The scene was played in line with Tyrion’s views on politics and diplomacy. It would be a fine idea to deal with some Westerosi nobles. The deal didn’t work because he had never lived in Slaver’s Bay. He didn’t really know how things were in that corner of the world. Missandei and Grey Worm were concerned because they knew better. The cultural differences among the characters were well exposed.

      I wouldn’t differentiate Tyrion in two different characters. I would differentiate him in three, according to the acts of this story: there’s one Tyrion in seasons 1-4 (the first act), a different Tyrion in the second act (seasons 5-6) and the final version of him (seasons 7-8).

      Almost everyone enjoys Tyrion in the first four seasons. At the end of season 4, he kills his father and the woman he loved. He’s understandably shaken by those events. His arc in season 5 is about finding Daenerys. He isn’t in a context where he needs to be constantly witty to solve problems. In season 6, he returns to a place of ruling a city. I think he does rather well. But not so well as in King’s Landing, because he lacks knowledge about the society he’s in. There’s one or two boring scenes of him in that season, but I think he’s still the Tyrion we know.

      My main gripes with the character reside in seasons 7 and 8. His worst decision happens when Daenerys wants to go after Euron ships to burn them in season 7×03. Tyrion and Varys look at her like “you’re crazy”. Tyrion says the attack is too risky, which is not. She would burn the Iron Fleet like a hot knife through butter and gain completely control of the seas. That decision made no sense strategically. It made sense thematically maybe, based on the ending we’ve had.

        Quote  Reply

    133. As for TWOW, I think we still have to wait some time before it comes to life. The book requires careful work in putting the characters ready to the endgame, sychronizing all the plot points and presenting a good narrative to the reader. And there’s the rewriting. He has characters and material to write more than 1.500 pages. I believe he’ll have to trim that to satisfy the publishers’ needs.

        Quote  Reply

    134. Ten Bears: • That’s the way it looked to me too. For whatever reason (maybe the lack of source material?), S1-S4 Tyrion and S5-S8 Tyrion “were like two completely different people. (For the sake of brevity, maybe I should adopt your descriptions and refer to them as Real Tyrion and Imposter Tyrion, respectively. Or Clever Tyrion vs. Faux Tyrion.)

      I’ve suggested in the past that writing witty, intelligent dialogue for a character; crafting jokes with punchlines that land; and constructing intricate plans and schemes for a character; must be among the most difficult and time-consuming challenges for a scriptwriter. GRRM had all the time he wanted to create Real Tyrion.The showrunners did not. Even so, the differences were glaring. It was as if “Varys and Illyrio actually killed” Tyrion, or arranged for a lobotomy.

      • I know some fans felt differently. Speaking only for myself, I almost felt embarrassed for Peter Dinklage, and I almost hurled, when I watched Tyrion drone on and on to Cersei about “Your baby, your baby, your baby.”
      I cringed while listening to that ridiculous “Bran the Broken has the best story” speech. Dinklage tried to make it sound dramatic. He couldn’t.

      I’m sorry. Those speeches were just awful. Real Tyrion would’ve fired crossbow bolts into Faux Tyrion’s bowels to shut him up.

      • Compare Faux Tyrion in those scenes with Real Tyrion in this S2 scene (possibly my all-time favorite Tyrion scene):

      Tyrion & Lancel, S2

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HijFieJNH5k

      Real Tyrion transforms pompous Lancel into a quaking lump of pliable jelly over the course of a few minutes, flipping Lancel into a double agent.
      Vintage Tyrion.

      • I remember the truly clever Real Tyrion who came up with the Wildfire Ghost Ship plan. As for Faux Tyrion? Two words:

      Wight Hunt.

      JFC. I cannot believe that the Tyrion who recognized that Cersei’s wildfire pot-flinging plan was a disaster waiting to happen, would ever come up with a harebrained scheme to send a dozen or so men on foot against 100,000 killer zombies just to try to bag one for a show and tell presentation that turned out to be a waste of time.

      For that matter, I still don’t understand why the Tyrion who knew full well his sister despised him and was untrustworthy, would decide to trust her – over and over – only to be deceived each time, like Lucy yanking the football away from Charlie Brown. (Even Sansa called him out for being such a twit for believing Cersei would actually send the Lannister army north.) How could he actually think his appeals to her to think about “your baby, your baby” had changed her into a decent, unselfish person?

      • What I really missed were the quips, jokes, sarcasm and snark of the Real Tyrion. After a while, it seemed Imposter Tyrion’s “jokes” consisted of just saying “c*ck,” “c*ckless,” “no c*ck” – as if just saying it would make us laugh. It didn’t. It got tedious. (The same was true for post-S4 Bronn. Top prize goes to his “not without a c*ck” banter with Jaime in the opening scene of S7e7. Truly awful.)

      • Worst of all was the lame recycling of prior “jokes” – especially the punchline-less “jackass and honeycomb” story that Tyrion spouted again for a third time in the final episode – still without a punch line. I didn’t laugh. I grimaced. That was the best they could come up with for Tyrion’s final lines on the show?Maybe I don’t have a sense of humor: Was retelling the opening line of the jackass and honeycomb story and then cutting away without a punchline supposed to be funny in and of itself?

      • Come to think of it, I don’t remember any of Imposter Tyrion’s attempted jokes that made me crack a smile. Do you?

      • I suppose it’s possible Tyrion was dumbed-down on purpose so that when his “clever plans” failed and Cersei duped him, it would all compound Dany’s problems, piss her off, and help drive her off the deep end. Although his tenure as Dany’s Hand started off promising enough (aced the job interview in S5e8), after that it went downhill.

      • In all fairness, I should add that Imposter Tyrion did have a few good moments, including:– Going through alcohol withdrawal as Ser Jorah’s captive, and sailing with Ser Jorah past Old Valyria (their poetry-recital duet); – Initial scenes meeting and conversing with Dany;– Talking her out of exterminating the Masters’ armies and destroying their cities, in favor of a more surgical approach (S6e9);– Persuading Dany to let Jon mine dragonglass “Give him something by giving him nothing”) – Trying, though not succeeding, to talk her out of barbecuing Tarly father and son. – Tyrion and Varys reunion scene in Mereen (“if only….”)

      I can’t think of anything else off the top of my head.

      You know, when I told my girlfriend (who is watching GoT for first time and is currently 6 seasons in) that people started disliking Tyrion after S4 and labeling him as “stupid”, she was actually very surprised to hear that and honestly even “pissed off” in some way as she loves Tyrion in these seasons (and I very much like him myself too). After our discussion, it turned out her interpretation of his character in these seasons is almost identical to mine… that after killing Tywin and Shae and especially after meeting Dany, Tyrion wanted to be a better person… he didn’t want to be the scheming cunning person he was before because meeting Dany (and eventually developing feelings for her as revealed in S8 finale) gave him new hope. She represented him something that he probably didn’t believe could exist in such world. But with his new perspective on everything, with his new pacifist attitude, he pretty much became “too good for this world”, resulting in his emotions starting to cloud his mind and thus in his plans not succeeding. I personally really don’t see him as dumbed down, I see him as someone who didn’t want to be who he was before… someone who really wanted to be good. At the end of the story, I feel he’s one of the most “good” people, along with Jon… the least corrupted in terms of politics and such. Yes, he may have not been the cunning witty person we knew from S1-S4 anymore, but I personally saw his attitude change as inner growth – finding belief in goodness in such corrupt world as GoT-universe is which is rare in my eyes, especially considering how deconstructed almost all protagonists were in final stages of the story. At least that’s how I interpreted it and my girlfriend seems on very much same route. I still live remember I had tears in my eyes during Tyrion’s conversation with Jon before Dany got killed… because I could feel his pain in that moment, I could feel how his belief in this “goodness” was shattered inside him during that moment and knowing my girlfriend and the way she gets emotionally affected during scenes (she said she cried during Dany/Tyrion scene when he gets appointed as hand), I feel she’ll feel similar.

      Also on side note, my girlfriend said she laughed so hard during the “telling the joke” scene in 6×8 and I laugh every time myself too when rewatching.

        Quote  Reply

    135. Tiago: I can immediately remember two Tyrion scenes I really liked in seasons 5 and 6. One was in 5×03, when he goes to the brothel, just before being captured by Jorah. I liked the conversation he had with that girl, assuming he couldn’t have sex with her. It was a rare moment of genuine honesty in a TV show where characters spend much of their time trying to outplay each other or being careful about what they say in order to survive. I think his behaviour was believable, since he was clearly troubled at that time.

      The other one was the deal with the slavers in 6×04. The scene was played in line with Tyrion’s views on politics and diplomacy. It would be a fine idea to deal with some Westerosi nobles. The deal didn’t work because he had never lived in Slaver’s Bay. He didn’t really know how things were in that corner of the world. Missandei and Grey Worm were concerned because they knew better. The cultural differences among the characters were well exposed.

      I wouldn’t differentiate Tyrion in two different characters. I would differentiate him in three, according to the acts of this story: there’s one Tyrion in seasons 1-4 (the first act), a different Tyrion in the second act (seasons 5-6) and the final version of him (seasons 7-8).

      Almost everyone enjoys Tyrion in the first four seasons. At the end of season 4, he kills his father and the woman he loved. He’s understandably shaken by those events. His arc in season 5 is about finding Daenerys. He isn’t in a context where he needs to be constantly witty to solve problems. In season 6, he returns to a place of ruling a city. I think he does rather well. But not so well as in King’s Landing, because he lacks knowledge about the society he’s in. There’s one or two boring scenes of him in that season, but I think he’s still the Tyrion we know.

      My main gripes with the character reside in seasons 7 and 8. His worst decision happens when Daenerys wants to go after Euron ships to burn them in season 7×03. Tyrion and Varys look at her like “you’re crazy”. Tyrion says the attack is too risky, which is not. She would burn the Iron Fleet like a hot knife through butter and gain completely control of the seas. That decision made no sense strategically. It made sense thematically maybe, based on the ending we’ve had.

      I’m jumping into the discussion here. Since the article talks about GRRM’s books, I have to compare book Tyrion. I think there was plenty of source material for D&D, but they decided not to use it. They went their own route in Meereen. I’m not totally unsympathetic to D&D, because GRRM did seem to get bogged down in Meereen. D&D didn’t want to take the same path. (However after reading the Feldman essays recommended by Adrianacandle, I have changed my opinion about GRRM really being bogged down. ) Verging from book Tyrion starting in Meereen is where I see D&D took a wrong turn with Tyrion’s character. Yes, the show goes further than the books with Tyrion, but the shift in Tyrion’s cleverness shifts when D&D veer from book Tyrion.

      Tyrion hasn’t really met Daenerys yet in the books. His journey in Meereen is quite different. He doesn’t get kidnapped by Jorah and he ends up with a totally different cast of characters in Meereen, including Penny and others. He has yet to really meet Daenerys other than seeing her while performing in the pits with Penny. Dany gets very upset that they want to let loose the lions to eat the unsuspecting dwarfs. Luckily Tyrion and Penny live to talk about it. I find Tyrion still very clever in the books and I enjoyed where Tyrion was headed as the battle of Meereen was going into full force at the end of the books.

      You often hear about actors in daily soap operas here in the USA who get upset if the writers write lines that are “out of character”. I have heard actors rebelling with their writers and refusing to say lines that would destroy their character. I wouldn’t be surprised if Peter Dinklage was upset with D&D’s writing of Tyrion when D&D decided to make him “dumb and dumber”. D&D took Tyrion down an unfortunate path of being a horrible advisor. I really don’t see this happening in the books.

        Quote  Reply

    136. Adrianacandle,

      – I don’t go to that site because it requires “cookies” and who knows what else you’re agreeing to when you click “Accept.”

      – I don’t think I’d want to see a fan page explaining the female Valonqar theory, but thank you for offering to screenshot it.

      As you probably know, if there were some basis for this theory I’d be fully on board with it.*

      From what I gather there is no textual evidence that “little brother” in Valyrian can mean “little sister” too. I’m guessing that the fansite theorists made the assumption that since the Valyrian word for “prince” is genderless and can also mean “princess,” the same should apply to the Valyrian word for “little brother.” (As Wimsey described it, that assumption is a logical fallacy.)

      * Aren’t there a whole bunch of books’ passages in which Jon reminisces about mussing Arya’s hair and calling her “little sister”?

      The handful of books’ passages I’m familiar with include Arya’s internal monologue on the Braavos dock (aka “Needle was Jon Snow’s Smile”).
      As I recall, in that internal monologue, Arya herself reminisces about the same thing: Jon mussing her hair and calling her “little sister,” and that’s when her eyes start tearing up.

      So, if there were even the flimsiest basis for it, I’d be the first to make the semantic leap and argue that Valonqar could mean “little sister,” and figure out some way to explain away the use of the masculine pronoun in “his hands.”

      I would gladly elevate Arya to the top of the field as my odds-on favorite to win the Valonqar Sweepstakes.

      Wishful thinking aside, I just don’t see this as a possibility.

      – The overall problem? Too many years (9+ and counting) + too many millions of fans = too much time for too many people to come up with every imaginable tinfoil theory.
      I suspect every possible future storyline and scenario has been extrapolated in one form or another. (Speaking of covering all conceivable permutations and combinations, where’s Kevin1989 been?)

      – Excuse the sarcasm: With all the theories out there about female Valonqars, four-legged Valonqars, one-handed Valonqars, someone’s “sibling” Valonqars, dead Valonqars, reanimated Valonqars, undead Valonqars, fValonqars, avian Valonqars, direwolf Valonqars, Craster Valonqars, half-dead Benjen Valonqars, White Walker Valonqars, headless Valonqars, paraplegic Valonqars, catatonic Valonqars, equine Valonqars, Unsullied Valonqars, shadow baby Valonqars, HotK chain-wearing Valonqars, prosthetic-handed Valonqars, hallucinated Valonqars, Lannister Valonqars, Greyjoy Valonqars, and faceless, face-masked, face-peeling, and face-changing Valonqars…

      …. We’d be better off speculating who cannot be the Valonqar. 🤯

        Quote  Reply

    137. Adrianacandle:
      Wimsey,

      I think these are all good points and I agree 🙂 No argument here!

      Me too.

      What GRRM may have embedded* in thousands of pages of text as subtle clues and fragmentary factoids, have now been picked over and picked apart by so many book readers (and show fans) throughout the years that the obscure has become the obvious. Like Wimsey said, when GRRM wrote the books with clues that Lyanna Stark was Jon’s mom, he didn’t anticipate that millions of fans over so many years would parse every word. Though GRRM may have intended Jon’s parentage to be a surprise reveal, it became canon even before the show confirmed it in S6.

      * I read a GRRM interview a while back. He described how he deliberately “hid” important clues as mundane details within otherwise exciting passages. Or something like that. (I may still have that interview somewhere. I can look.)

      By now, I’m sure every one of those buried clues have been unearthed. In this regard, he’s the victim of his own success.

        Quote  Reply

    138. Adrianacandle,

      ”However, ‘all men must die’ may not be intended to specify all males must die (since females are mortal too) and can be meant as a term for ‘human’.”

      • Interesting excerpt about the creator of the Valyrian language, and your analysis that the root “val-“ is used for masculine words, like Valor Morghulis (sp?) = All men must die.

      • However – and here’s where I may get in trouble conflating show dialogue with stiff from the books….

      On the show, Dany and Missandei had an exchange that went something like this:

      Missandei: “All men must die.”
      Dany: “But we are not men.”

      Was this a throwaway line? Am I making something out of nothing? Could be. 🤫

        Quote  Reply

    139. Ten Bears,

      – I don’t go to that site because it requires “cookies” and who knows what else you’re agreeing to when you click “Accept.”
      – I don’t think I’d want to see a fan page explaining the female Valonqar theory, but thank you for offering to screenshot it.

      No problem 🙂

      This page from the ASOIAF wiki is not arguing for or against any particular theory, pushing the idea of a female valonqar, making assumptions to that end. Rather, it’s more a neutral documentation of the main (fan) theories for valonqar and listing the arguments fans use for and against each theory and referencing its sources. However, the wiki itself isn’t agreeing or disagreeing with any theory

      I find it a good resource for quick summaries of well-known theories because it provides links to sources I can cross-reference.

      – The overall problem? Too many years (9+ and counting) + too many millions of fans = too much time for too many people to come up with every imaginable tinfoil theory.

      Yep, I agree.

      I suspect every possible future storyline and scenario has been extrapolated in one form or another. (Speaking of covering all conceivable permutations and combinations, where’s Kevin1989 been?)

      I did connect with Kevin on Steam but real life has been pretty hectic. However, he has plans to come back when things settle down! I know he has ideas about valonqar 🙂

      What GRRM may have embedded* in thousands of pages of text as subtle clues and fragmentary factoids, have now been picked over and picked apart by so many book readers (and show fans) throughout the years that the obscure has become the obvious. Like Wimsey said, when GRRM wrote the books with clues that Lyanna Stark was Jon’s mom, he didn’t anticipate that millions of fans over so many years would parse every word. Though GRRM may have intended Jon’s parentage to be a surprise reveal, it became canon even before the show confirmed it in S6.

      Yes. And what seems obvious now didn’t seem obvious back then when fans were first receiving these books. But with the popularization of the internet and it becoming mainstream (starting around the mid-late 90s when the first books were being published), the growing numbers of fans connecting and sharing theories in shared virtual spaces, and the explosion of the show bringing more fans in yet, R+L=J had been figured out before it became show canon.

      I remember reading the books for the first time and it certainly didn’t occur to me. It wasn’t until a couple years later when another friend I had recommended the series to asked me, “Hey, have you heard this theory?” that I only became aware of it and thought it was really cool. But it certainly didn’t jump out to me as obvious then — it was only when I connected with other fans and really considered it that I did see stuff lining up for it.

      I think we’ve hit a point in the fandom where some theories themselves are even relying on other theories becoming canon (and treating them as canon) rather than sourcing from the books themselves. I think of those theories as sort of second-level theories in that their basis might be even shakier because they have that much more divide between its speculation and the source material.

      But no, I don’t think GRRM anticipated that every syllable of his text would be parsed over to this degree. Jaime as valonqar might seem obvious to a fandom that has spent 20 years going over every single possible outcome since AFFC (and I think it does make the most sense) — but perhaps not to a fandom which has only lived with the books for a few years and isn’t obsessively combing over every detail.

      It reminds me of GRRM’s response to a question about the outline’s Jon and Arya and how it relates to the published books:

      [question about Jon/Arya]

      GRRM: “Alright, you’ve thought about this more than I have. I mean it’s simple, Jon is very fond of Arya. They were the two odd birds in the Stark family nest, here. They didn’t quite fit in with the others, they look like each other, they both had the brown hair, you know, as opposed to the auburn hair of Sansa and Bran and Rickon and Robb. So there was always that closeness between them. And, you know, Arya didn’t mind that Jon was a bastard, and Jon didn’t mind that Arya was a tomboy, so there is that closeness there.”

      And I think some (myself included) might be overthinking some stuff.

        Quote  Reply

    140. Ten Bears: However – and here’s where I may get in trouble conflating show dialogue with stiff from the books….

      On the show, Dany and Missandei had an exchange that went something like this:

      Missandei: “All men must die.”
      Dany: “But we are not men.”

      Was this a throwaway line? Am I making something out of nothing? Could be. 🤫

      I did search for that line (“But we are not men”) but couldn’t find it in the books. I think this is a show-only line.

      I believe that scene was sourcing the following from the books which happens (as in the show) when Dany frees Missandei:

      “Do you have a name, or must you draw a new one every day from some barrel?”

      “That is only for Unsullied,” the girl said. Then she realized the question had been asked in High Valyrian. Her eyes went wide. “Oh.”

      “Your name is Oh?”  

      “No. Your Grace, forgive this one her outburst. Your slave’s name is Missandei, but…”

      “Missandei is no longer a slave. I free you, from this instant. Come ride with me in the litter, I wish to talk.” Rakharo helped them in, and Dany drew the curtains shut against the dust and heat. “If you stay with me you will serve as one of my handmaids,” she said as they set off. “I shall keep you by my side to speak for me as you spoke for Kraznys. But you may leave my service whenever you choose, if you have father or mother you would sooner return to.”

      “This one will stay,” the girl said. “This one… I… there is no place for me to go. This… I will serve you, gladly.”

      “I can give you freedom, but not safety,” Dany warned. “I have a world to cross and wars to fight. You may go hungry. You may grow sick. You may be killed.”

      “Valar morghuhs,” said Missandei, in High Valyrian.

      “All men must die,” Dany agreed, “but not for a long while, we may pray.” She leaned back on the pillows and took the girl’s hand. “Are these Unsullied truly fearless?”

      Unrelated but Ygritte says ‘all men must die’ to Jon too 🙂

      Wildlings fought like heroes or demons, depending on who you talked to, but it came down to the same thing in the end. They fight with reckless courage, every man out for glory. “I don’t doubt that you’re all very brave, but when it comes to battle, discipline beats valor every time. In the end Mance will fail as all the Kings-beyond-the-Wall have failed before him. And when he does, you’ll die. All of you.”

      Ygritte had looked so angry he thought she was about to strike him. “All of us,” she said. “You too. You’re no crow now, Jon Snow. I swore you weren’t, so you better not be.” She pushed him back against the trunk of a tree and kissed him, full on the lips right there in the midst of the ragged column. Jon heard Grigg the Goat urging her on. Someone else laughed. He kissed her back despite all that. When they finally broke apart, Ygritte was flushed. “You’re mine,” she whispered. “Mine, as I’m yours. And if we die, we die. All men must die, Jon Snow. But first we’ll live.”

      (And so does Mance, who says it twice in ASOS — one time in a song, “The Dornishman’s Wife” but in these contexts, ‘valar morghulis’ is not mentioned.)

        Quote  Reply

    141. Adrianacandle: but perhaps not to a fandom which has only lived with the books for a few years and isn’t obsessively combing over every detail.

      I should change this phrasing to, “but perhaps not to a fandom which has only lived with the books for a few years and *hasn’t had time to obsessively comb over every detail to the degree this one has.”

      (Other fandoms do this as well, and I’ve done it quite a bit too, but I think the waiting time in the ASOIAF fandom has kind of pushed it to the nth degree, resulting in some overthinking and some pretty convoluted theories. But even some of those, I think can be really interesting and cool! And would make great stories in and of themselves.)

        Quote  Reply

    142. Adrianacandle:

      … (Probably in the same way that I enjoy the idea of Brienne being the more beautiful “another” referring to inner beauty rather than physical beauty, as lame as that sounds, because it also uses Cersei’s own vanity against her).

      Since we’ve drilled down pretty thoroughly into the Valonqar prophecy, maybe we ought to go off on a YMBQ tangent?
      Or is it well-settled among book readers that Dany is the one who’ll cast down Cersei and take all she holds dear*?

      * I’ve always wondered if Magy was referring to what Young Cersei held dear at the time, or what Future Cersei would hold dear at the time YMBQ casts her down. I assumed it was the latter…

        Quote  Reply

    143. Ten Bears,

      Edit/addendum to above:

      … Just like I wondered if the “little brother” referred to someone Young Cersei already knew (which narrows the field to Jaime, Tyrion and Sandor), or someone Future Cersei would know (which expands the pool of candidates to include Jon aka Aegon 2.0 and others).

        Quote  Reply

    144. Ten Bears,

      Since we’ve drilled down pretty thoroughly into the Valonqar prophecy, maybe we ought to go off on a YMBQ tangent?
      Or is it well-settled among book readers that Dany is the one who’ll cast down Cersei and take all she holds dear*?

      I think book-readers have many an idea and speculation on who the younger, more beautiful another can be! 🙂 Dany is certainly a popular candidate but there are others!

      For instance, I like the idea of Brienne being this person but that’s just me 🙂 I also think this theory comes with some interesting possibilities!

      * I’ve always wondered if Magy was referring to what Young Cersei held dear at the time, or what Future Cersei would hold dear at the time YMBQ casts her down. I assumed it was the latter…

      Would Jaime count for both Young Cersei and Future Cersei?

      (Yes, I’ve always interpreted this as meaning what Future Cersei would hold dear too as it’s a prophecy of things to come and the younger, more beautiful another would make taking those things from Future Cersei)

        Quote  Reply

    145. Adrianacandle,

      Re: GRRM comments about Jon & Arya –

      • My speculation: The showrunners’ decision to expand Sansa’s role from second tier to first tier, and the significant changes to her storyline and chronology (e.g., “prematurely” heading north instead of hanging out at the Vale + merging Sansa into Jeyne Poole at WF + reuniting with Jon at CB and recruiting an army to retake WF) caused a significant “butterfly effect” or “avalanche” that, among other things, suppressed or cut into Arya’s show! storyline.

      • Just curious: Many book readers now say they visualize Maisie Williams when they read about Arya. Do you think GRRM can’t help but envision “his” Arya the same way?
      I know he was super excited – and relieved – when they found “our Arya” when casting Maisie Williams; and he was gushing over her performance in the S1 Episode Commentary he narrated. (There was at least one Commentary he narrated – with one of Arya & Syrio’s water dance lessons. I’m not sure if there were others.)

      It might be interesting to know if his conceptions and portrayals of his characters are influenced by the performances of the actresses and actors who play them.

        Quote  Reply

    146. Wimsey,

      ”…At any rate, Cersei has no younger siblings. There is no class of people that she calls “brother.” Assuming that it’s not truly awful writing by Martin, then the statement has to apply to someone that Cersei will think of as “little brother” at the climax: her final thoughts shouldn’t be “I knew Tyrion would kill me!” or “That ‘Little’ brother??”, and not “Woo hoo! The prophecy was wrong. Oh, wait….. *gurgle*”

      That’s the other key: we can’t say “Wait, Cersei, don’t die just yet, and think about it: if we do a few contortions, add in that your translator was wrong about what Valonqar means AND that Maggie basically was wrong, then it makes total sense!” It has to make sense to Cersei and it has to make immediate sense to her. Preferably, it not only will make sense, but there will be an appreciation by Cersei that because she attributed it to the wrong brother, she actually created the circumstances that led to the other one killing her. (I do like my prophecies MacBethian!) Given the Faulknerian theory of writing to which Martin subscribes, that would be the most appropriate outcome.”

      • I’m confused. What did you mean that “Cersei has no younger siblings. There is no class of people that she calls “brother.””

      Aren’t Tyrion and Jaime her younger siblings? Doesn’t she call Jaime (proudly) and Tyrion (begrudgingly) her brothers?

      • Yeah, fan theories predicated on contortions that the translator was wrong AND that Magy was wrong, seem way too far-fetched. Cersei wouldn’t be able to go through those mental gymnastics, and besides, I figure that GRRM established that Magy’s got a perfect track record. She won’t be “wrong.” Whether Cersei will pull a MacBeth and misinterpret Magy’s predictions, or unwittingly make them come true by trying to thwart them, is another story.
      (Also, though I’m not a book reader, wouldn’t it be kind of late in the game to introduce the possibility that the translator f*cked up?)

        Quote  Reply

    147. Ten Bears,

      Arya stabbed Meryn Trant half a dozen times, gouged out his eyes, and continued to stab him after he’d been neutralized, before cutting his throat. She certainly made her justice, but she took it to far.

      It was a story, not a rule that those who break Guest Rights must eat their children. Again, Walder Frey deserved to die, but typically heroes in stories don’t stoop to the villains’ level. They deliver justice the right way. A quick knife to the heart as payment would have gotten the same result. The look of pleasure on Arya’s face after slitting Walker’s throat was terrifying. She certainly was going down a dark path. Luckily, the Hound was able to steer her from it.

      Unfortunately, that was Arya. That was how Arya always talked to her enemies, who she believed Sansa had become.

      It was Stannis who said it, actually, and I agree. Good deeds don’t balance out the bad and make them magically disappear.

      Arya is my favorite character as well, and it’s understandable that you want to defend her, but you can’t deny she enjoyed mercilessly killing her enemies. That’s not a good sign, and her story could very well have played out much differently. Danerys fans also ignored the dark aspects of their favorite character, and look how that turned out.

        Quote  Reply

    148. Ten Bears,

      My speculation: The showrunners’ decision to expand Sansa’s role from second tier to first tier, and the significant changes to her storyline and chronology (e.g., “prematurely” heading north instead of hanging out at the Vale + merging Sansa into Jeyne Poole at WF + reuniting with Jon at CB and recruiting an army to retake WF) caused a significant “butterfly effect” or “avalanche” that, among other things, suppressed or cut into Arya’s show! storyline.

      Oh, definitely — but I don’t think this suppressed or cut into Arya’s storyline but rather, expanded Sansa’s storyline and changed it quite a bit to give Sansa more of a role in season 5 and beyond (in giving her Jeyne Poole’s storyline, causing an avalanche — like you said). Had Arya been the one who was actually at Winterfell being forced to marry Ramsay, I’d agree but as of ADWD, she’s still in Braavos like she is in season 6 of the show.

      Just curious: Many book readers now say they visualize Maisie Williams when they read about Arya. Do you think GRRM can’t help but envision “his” Arya the same way?
      I know he was super excited – and relieved – when they found “our Arya” when casting Maisie Williams; and he was gushing over her performance in the S1 Episode Commentary he narrated. (There was at least one Commentary he narrated – with one of Arya & Syrio’s water dance lessons. I’m not sure if there were others.)

      It might be interesting to know if his conceptions and portrayals of his characters are influenced by the performances of the actresses and actors who play them.

      This is a great question! I’m curious to see how other people respond as well!

      This might be deviating from the topic you introduced but for me, some of the book characters in my head don’t resemble the actors and actresses on the show. They’re great and I love them, I wouldn’t have preferred any other cast but there are some differences between some show!characters’ appearances and the book!characters’ appearances in my mind’s eye.

      For example:

      Dany: In my mind, book!Dany is a bit more ethereal looking, shorter hair for the most part (due to it being burned off when her dragons hatched in book 1), and has more of an adolescent appearance.

      Sansa: Darker hair (a browner tone enriched with some tones of red to as per her book auburn hair, looking a bit more like Robb and Catelyn’s hair colour in the show), still a child/very young teen, darker blue eyes. I picture her more like this illustration (by Arantza Sestayo). In my head, I can see the resemblance between her, Robb, Catelyn, Bran, and Rickon whereas in the show, I thought Jon, Robb, (pre-season 4) Bran, and Arya all looked related.

      Jon: Dark hair, dark eyes like in the show but with a longer face, more adolescent, often beardless (quite a few of the ASOIAF illustrations of Jon depict him beardless).

      Robb: In my head, he looks a lot like Richard Madden but a bit more adolescent 🙂

      Arya: I can’t include a second link in this post without it going into moderation but there’s this illustration of her and Jon hugging good-bye (by artist Magali Villeneuve) and this is how Arya appears in my mind.

      However, the Lannisters look pretty much like their show counterparts in my head, and so do the Stark parents — although I know Catelyn, Ned, and Tyrion in particular are quite a bit younger in the books (Catelyn is only in her early 30s, Ned is in his mid-30s and Tyrion is about 25 in the first book).

        Quote  Reply

    149. Young Dragon,

      ”Arya stabbed Meryn Trant half a dozen times, gouged out his eyes, and continued to stab him after he’d been neutralized, before cutting his throat. She certainly made her justice, but she took it to far.“

      Oh, alright. She got a teenie bit carried away. He did hit her with a stick and knocked the wind out of her though.

      Another thing: The show went out of its way to make the audience want MFT to face “extreme justice,” with his rejection of a procession of beautiful young sex workers as “too old.” You could say they “took it too far”, in order to make his enucleation and exsanguination palatable.

      (Pardon the e-words: my go-to euphemisms for Arya gouging out eyes + poking people full of holes so the blood leaks out … and they die.)

      👸🏻🔪 🩸💉

        Quote  Reply

    150. Ten Bears,

      It’s true that Tyrion’s dialogue was less sharp in the later seasons, which was most likely due to their running out of source material. Then again, it was less sharp in Book 5, as well, so maybe Martin ran into the same problem. Tyrion’s cleverness, however, has not changed. With that, I mean people tend to exaggerate his intelligence. You mentioned Tyrion turning Lancelot into a pile of jelly as an example of his intelligence. I mean, it was a great scene, but we’re talking about Lancel Lannister. It couldn’t have been that difficult. Don’t get me wrong, he possesses above average intelligence, but he’s hardly infallible.

      In the earlier seasons, the only times he displayed intelligence was during season 2, as Hand. He made some good political moves, and he managed King’s Landings defenses very well. In seasons 1, 3, and 4, however, he was more witty than intelligent.

        Quote  Reply

    151. Ten Bears,

      I figured him wanting younger girls was a way for the show to set up Arya’s kill, but I see what you’re saying. It’s strange, but Arya’s butchery of the man made me scared for her, not happy that Trant was gone.

        Quote  Reply

    152. Adrianacandle,

      I pulled up Magali Villeneuve’s illustration of Jon and Arya (link below)…

      https://66.media.tumblr.com/dd06324c45b237842864c2ee311ec631/tumblr_ofbjzhGtZC1u2n5cyo1_400.jpg


      I also noticed the same artist’s rendition of
      Cersei with dying Joffrey (link below). Although the backdrop is different from the show setting, the artist’s image of Cersei looks just like Lena Headey. I have to assume it was based on the actress, though none of the other GoT character illustrations looked like their show counterparts.

      https://external-preview.redd.it/L_hvowSN1YBVp3WQAmKhV9TRrtIaB1wnwtfMnVlANaE.jpg?auto=webp&s=981a1bc118321facf9f3bc45c43398aecc13f9ab

      About book! Sansa’s appearance, you wrote:

      ”Sansa: Darker hair (a browner tone enriched with some tones of red to as per her book auburn hair, looking a bit more like Robb and Catelyn’s hair colour in the show), still a child/very young teen, darker blue eyes. I picture her more like this illustration (by Arantza Sestayo). In my head, I can see the resemblance between her, Robb, Catelyn, Bran, and Rickon whereas in the show, I thought Jon, Robb, (pre-season 4) Bran, and Arya all looked related.”

      Nice illustration of Sansa & Sandor. The artist’s rendition of Sandor resembles Rory McCann.
      Sansa in the picture looks different from show! Sansa.

      And on that note, I’m going to segue into my Musical Interlude/Sansa Stark Tribute in a few minutes.

      🕊(Little Bird)

        Quote  Reply

    153. Ten Bears,

      I pulled up Magali Villeneuve’s illustration of Jon and Arya (link below)…

      Yes! That’s the one! (This artist’s rendition of Jon also looks close to the one in my head as well, I also like this one a lot by Tim Teiiku)

      Cersei with dying Joffrey (link below). Although the backdrop is different from the show setting, the artist’s image of Cersei looks just like Lena Headey. I have to assume it was based on the actress, though none of the other GoT character illustrations looked like their show counterparts.

      Thanks for linking that image! Yes, this artist’s rendition of Cersei does have a resemblance to Lena Headey.

      Nice illustration of Sansa & Sandor. The artist’s rendition of Sandor resembles Rory McCann.
      Sansa in the picture looks different from show! Sansa.

      Sandor in this illustration looks identical to Rory McCann. And yes, for me, Sophie Turner’s Sansa never really resembled the one in my head. However, despite the age difference between show!Sandor and book!Sandor (in AGOT, Sandor is 26-27 years old), I didn’t experience such a disparity between my mental image of the Hound vs. the show’s. It’s kind of funny how that works and varies between each reader/viewer (what they imagine vs. how close a show’s/movie’s casting matches this mental image, which can change pretty dramatically from person to person).

      For example, Alan Rickman’s Snape was older than book!Snape as well (in the books, Snape is aged 31-38 throughout the series while Rickman was in his 50s-60s) but Rickman still became Snape to me in many ways. It was an odd case in which Rickman’s image sort of took over the original one in my head.

      And on that note, I’m going to segue into my Musical Interlude/Sansa Stark Tribute in a few minutes.

      🕊(Little Bird)

      Yay!

        Quote  Reply

    154. Ten Bears,

      I don’t know if you’ve seen this or not but I got a kick out of it! 🙂

      Game of Thrones characters reimagined as Disney characters featuring:

      – The Night King channeling Frozen’s Elsa
      – Jon and Ghost (don’t know what Jon is planning on doing with that squirrel…)
      – Dany and Drogon
      – Bran, Hodor, and motivational chicken
      – Cruella deCersei
      – The Adventures of Arya and the Hound
      – Beauty and the Beast with Jaime and Brienne
      – Varys and his Little Birds
      – Oberyn and the Mountain
      – Melisandre and her shadow assassin
      – Tyrion and wine

        Quote  Reply

    155. Adrianacandle,

      The Sansa Musical Interlude is in progress, along with the disclaimer arising out of the “dilemma” I described in my June 26, 2020 comments at 6:41 am and 8:28 am, arising out of my perceptions of Sansa’s scene with Sandor in S8e4. I’m also looking for the best audio track and live version of the song.

      In the meantime, I may post a follow-up musical dedication to GRRM & TWOW, to supplement “Someday Never Comes” (posted a day or two ago).

        Quote  Reply

    156. Tiago:
      As for TWOW, I think we still have to wait some time before it comes to life. The book requires careful work in putting the characters ready to the endgame, sychronizing all the plot points and presenting a good narrative to the reader. And there’s the rewriting. He has characters and material to write more than 1.500 pages. I believe he’ll have to trim that to satisfy the publishers’ needs.

      Musical Dedication to GRRM + TWOW
      (Part 2)

      “Tired of Waiting for You” (1965)
      The Kinks (2:32 long)

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESZ335KtBIQ

      📆

        Quote  Reply

    157. Ten Bears: Musical Dedication to GRRM + TWOW(Part 2)

      “Tired of Waiting for You” (1965)
      The Kinks (2:32 long)

      [link]

      📆

      Just in time before my melatonin kicks in for a few hours! 🙂 🌃🌙

        Quote  Reply

    158. Ten Bears,

      (continued from above)
      Musical Dedication to GRRM + TWOW

      “Tired of Waiting” (1965) The Kinks
      Lyrics Excerpts

      🎼”So tired, tired of waiting,
      Tired of waiting for you.
      So tired, tired of waiting,
      Tired of waiting for you.

      I was a lonely soul,
      I had nobody ‘til I met you.
      But you keep me waiting,
      all of the time,
      What can I do?

      It’s your life,
      and you can do what you want.
      Do what you like,
      but please don’t keep-a me waiting,
      Please don’t keep-a me waiting,

      ‘Cause I’m so tired,
      Tired of waiting,
      Tired of waiting for you…”
      🎶

        Quote  Reply

    159. Ten Bears: Melatonin gives you vivid dreams, right? Or does it help you go to sleep?

      Yes, it does a good job of helping me sleep (and the drowsiness is starting to kick in now!)

      I can’t remember if my dreams are more vivid but I’ll make a mental note to check 🙂

        Quote  Reply

    160. Adrianacandle,

      “Would Jaime count for both Young Cersei and Future Cersei?”

      Cersei killed her friend Melara because her question to the witch was “will I ever marry Jamie Lannister”?
      The nerve! 😂

        Quote  Reply

    161. Ten Bears,

      I definitely see an effort to have the actors resemble Martin’s imaginary characters. Arya in the books will probably become tall and slender. ST’s casting was definitely decided because of her high cheekbones which book Sansa has.
      But the showrunners have taken distance from hair coloring. All the Stark children are red-headed apart from Jon and Arya, which frustrates Catelyn; she’d like her children (in particular Robb, who is heir) to look like Ned. Not because they’re Starks, but she is deeply bothered by the fact that Ned’s illegitimate son looks like him, while she gave him three sons.

        Quote  Reply

    162. Tron79,

      Tyrion did get abducted by Jorah, but he ended up in a different place by the end of ADWD. Did you get that

      he murdered that Yunkai’i master he was sold to? I suppose, apart from treating Tyrion horribly, his reasoning was that he arranged for the lions. I liked that part a lot because at first I didn’t understand what I was reading; it was implied that he used the poisoned mushrooms he keeps in his shoes although the master was dying from the pale mare anyway. This might be the second person he has murdered in the books. The other one was the singer, Shae’s friend. (I’m not counting Tywin’s murder; in total, three, that is. He’s out for revenge!)

        Quote  Reply

    163. Efi,

      Cersei killed her friend Melara because her question to the witch was “will I ever marry Jamie Lannister”?
      The nerve! 😂

      Well, if Melara did indeed ask that… 😉

      But I was more counting Jaime as being important to both Young Cersei and Future Cersei — I think it’d be more a matter about not having him taken away from her in some form. However, I doubt she’d react positively to him being married off to somebody else D:

      But the showrunners have taken distance from hair coloring. All the Stark children are red-headed apart from Jon and Arya, which frustrates Catelyn; she’d like her children (in particular Robb, who is heir) to look like Ned.

      For some of the kids, yeah, the hair colour doesn’t quite align — I think show!Robb’s hair colour is the most accurate since it’s auburn (and looks the same shade as show!Catelyn’s) but show!Sanas’s hair is red-red instead of auburn while Bran is brunette and Rickon looked to be a dirty blonde to light brunette.

      I think Arya’s shade of brown is about right though.

        Quote  Reply

    164. Erik, formerly Lord Parramandas,

      “You summarized it well here regarding that there’s more than often “what” and not “how” that’s the usual reason for mass audience’s displeasure. Something I wonder about is if people, who were displeased with ending, were asked to rewrite these final chapters of the story to their satisfaction but under condition that Dany’s downfall remains in the story. I’m very much sure a lot of people would struggle or they would just label this as “not a good story”.”

      Thanks! I think though this would be an unfair question to put to the fans, for the reason that most of them are in it for their favorites. Not many have the interest or the skills to dissect a story into its components for reaching an ending that would closely resemble the ending of the author/producers (why would the even bother to do that? It’s not their job!). Many are displeased without even knowing what they are displeased about. It doesn’t make their protests any less valid; not being able to finger-point at the thing that makes you uneasy doesn’t cancel your sentiment altogether.
      Also people have a right to not like what they see even if the reason is as shallow as Jon-Daenerys not living happily everafter (or dying heroically saving the world for that matter); after all, why would anyone like an entire show with such a bitter ending? How does one’s life improve if real people’s deepest fears are confirmed in the end? Yes, there’s no happy endings, we already knew that, we don’t need a show to remind us of that. A good ending, on the other hand, either in the direction of the author/producers or the direction the fans wanted it, would make one at least smile, thinking of it fondly. This is why people who didn’t like the ending tend to be angry; they’re frustrated and after a year and more the distance hasn’t really helped them.
      As for me, I was in it for the story itself –with regard to the show, for the particular political story that is very well fleshed out at least in seasons 1-4; the rest somehow fell short. The books have a magic of their own, as they are very carefully structured; the author uses many literary motives and tropes, adapts them, reverses them, baits the readers only to pull the rug from beneath their feet, the language is amazing, there’s symbolism, foreshadowing, and deeper meaning hidden in dialogs that often seem superficial, there’s reason and consequence. It’s fun decoding the books.

        Quote  Reply

    165. I hesitated to address this because I want to avoid the endless debate over whether Dany’s actions in King’s Landing were built up or not but I’d like to respond to proposed reasons of why some are unhappy with her ending.

      Efi: Not many have the interest or the skills to dissect a story into its components for reaching an ending that would closely resemble the ending of the author/producers (why would the even bother to do that? It’s not their job!). Many are displeased without even knowing what they are displeased about. It doesn’t make their protests any less valid; not being able to finger-point at the thing that makes you uneasy doesn’t cancel your sentiment altogether.

      Erik, formerly Lord Parramandas: My other friend Monica on other hand, she pretty much cared for only Jon and Dany… she believed them to be THE story. And at same time, she believes that at the end of every story, no matter how twisted and dark it is overall, there has to be happily ever after because that’s what audience deserves… that all top-tier characters need to survive and achieve firm happines for the rest of their lives while all bad guys, even if they redeemed themselves through the story, need to die because “they dont’ deserve to live”.

      I don’t think viewer displeasure with Dany’s ending only has to do with these reasons and I think some do know why are they are displeased.

      It’s true that some would not accept Dany’s villainy under any circumstances, wanted Dany to die heroically if she had to die at all, wanted Jon and Dany to live happily ever after, wanted their faves to be happy.

      But this doesn’t apply to all viewers displeased with Dany’s ending. Some who are unhappy with how the culmination of her arc was done aren’t Dany fans, don’t believe the mains had to end up happy, don’t think Jon and Dany had to live happily ever after. Some think that the show’s choices for the final episodes of Dany’s arc just didn’t work.

      Some of their reasons share similarities with the reasons Efi cited for why she was displeased with the conclusions of the Starks’ storylines (Efi: “the show left the audience with the feeling that saving the world is futile since you’ll be condemned by the establishment and damned by the gods, if you’re a savage criminal you’ll pay community service while actually getting to rule and Big Brother surveillance solely secures stability, if you’re a woman you can’t have both family and power, if you’re a misfit there’s no place for you so you must roam the world as an explorer.”).

      Which is fair. I came away from the show with a few unhappy messages myself, I also felt the ending was more bitter than sweet. I don’t think this is what the show was going for but it doesn’t change the feeling all the same.

      But others had similar feelings over Dany’s end too. For example, Petra, in her examination of Daenery’s arc. Petra explains how Daenerys isn’t a favourite of hers and thought that potential for a villain arc was established early on (when Daenerys killed MMD because she felt this recontextualized Dany as the villain in MMD’s story). Petra also points out the rigidity of Dany’s worldview, moral superiority, and resulting entitlement, and the issues with imposing a personal worldview on another culture and the problems which come with it (adding that the show and the books were able to justify by making Dany’s opposers evil).

      However, Petra also felt there were problems with Dany’s decision to burn KL in the way she did (an inconsistency with the motives behind her decision to burn KL). And with Dany becoming the villain, questions the messages a villain conclusion to her arc might send:

      What meaning is there in turning Daenerys into a monster? That ambition is wrong? That wanting to help people is bad? That trying to break the wheel of injustice or indeed the cycle of abuse is futile?

      Moreover, Daenerys was a trauma survivor who took control of her own life, who rose from the ashes to carve a place for herself in a world that didn’t want her, and that meant a lot to a lot of people. Ending her story this way feels deeply deeply cynical.

      And I think this is valid too.

      She also had an alternative way for this storyline to go down which would have worked for her:

      Slavery and rape are technically illegal in Westeros, after all… except on the Iron Islands.

      Okay — what if, instead of relegating the Iron Islands to the background after Yara’s rescue, we found out that the reforms Daenerys demanded Yarra institute didn’t actually go over that well amongst the Ironborn. Iron Island history is full of failed reforms after all. What if, after Daenerys took the throne peacefully in King’s Landing, she found out that the people of this archipelago were still practicing a lot of the awful things she put a stop to in Essos, not only defying her authority but also her “correct” worldview.

      From there, events can unfold more or less the same way they did in episode 5. But on the Iron Islands, with Daenerys raining fire and blood down on the Ironborn because, well, they had their chance to change and they squandered it: maybe salt wives refused to leave when Daenerys gives them the chance because their children have grown into respected Ironborn whom Daenerys intends to burn — an indication that the values and practices Daenerys wants to eradicate are so deeply embedded in Ironborn culture, she can’t separate out the good victims from the bad oppressors like she used to. So she burns them all and we get a scene similar to ones we’ve had before in which Daenerys purges a land of bad people but this time, we’re seeing it from the perspective of those who don’t actually want it to happen.

      You can take or leave this however you like, I’m not saying this is the only right way to do this, and if the way the show executed Dany’s decision to burn KL worked for anyone, that’s awesome! 🙂

      But I’d say reasons for view dissatisfaction are varied and some do have valid points.

      For instance, I do believe the show endings of the mains will more or less happen in the books as well. And I think there are some solid concepts behind many of them — even Dany’s and the burning of KL, however much I may not personally like it because Efi is right, it doesn’t feel good. Yet that doesn’t mean there isn’t a viable idea being explored by Dany’s descent into villainy.

        Quote  Reply

    166. Efi:
      Tron79,

      Tyrion did get abducted by Jorah, but he ended up in a different place by the end of ADWD. Did you get that

      Efi:
      Tron79,

      Tyrion did get abducted by Jorah, but he ended up in a different place by the end of ADWD. Did you get that

      Thanks Efi for reminding me just how much I need to do a re-read. I think doing a re-read of ADWD POV style is something I should do this summer. I’ll follow Tyrion’s chapters in order as well as Arya’s, Jon’s, etc….

      Yes, Jorah does eventually show up, but…

      Griff is the one that jumps in the water and gets greyscale in the books.
      You’re right that Jorah does eventually kidnap Tyrion, but Tyrion’s journey is far different. I guess I was thinking more that some of Jorah’s show role was really
      Jon Connington in the books. Tyrion’s path was more about deducing that he’s traveling with Prince Aegon (Young Griff) while playing cyvasse. Although Cyvasse is not the same game as chess, it reminded me that Tyrion was always strategic with his moves and was still very clever. I just thought D&D traded in some of Tyrion’s cleverness for plot points they thought might be better for TV. I quite enjoyed the way Tyrion ends with making a deal to fight with the Second Sons. I remember thinking it was quite clever.

      I believe it is “Nurse” that Tyrion kills with the mushrooms as payback for the lions, and also to aid in his escape. I think some have said that Nurse may have lasted longer than Yezzan. I hope I have the names right, but I think I do! If I messed up my memory, I really do think I will do a POV re-read this summer starting with Arya! But then going through each POV one at a time, and I might take my own notes this time as I do the re-read. I’ll have to treat it like being back in school which has been many many years, but I care a bunch about paying more attention to GRRM’s clues this time and seeing what I missed. I read both AFFC and ADWD as one big book, and with 2000 pages I think you don’t always take the time to let it all sink in and figure out the hints along the way.

        Quote  Reply

    167. Efi,

      Adrianacandle,

      I mean, I remember there was this debate here and probably somewhere else how it’s “How” and not “What” that’s the issue with why people dislike the ending. But when it comes to mass audience, I’m very much sure Dany’s turn to antagonist would have always been polarizing to audience and that’s what I want to point out with that rethoric question. I personally haven’t been a big Dany fan and I had doubts about her character as early as when she burned Mirri Maz Duur – to the point that I started wondering whether I’m watching something wrong as everyone cheered for her but I kept questioning her actions over and over. Even more in sack of Astapor where entire non-slave population was put to the sword under her orders (honestly not that different situation than KL when I look at it now, only we were spared the ugly picture there). So maybe I was more “fond” of the ending than majority of fandom exactly because I was glad my doubts proved right. Also, I’m a big fan of dark stories in general… all my other favorite TV shows (LOST, TWD, Sopranos, Breaking Bad) deal with twisted stories and various descents and their endings are almost never “happy-happy” in full sense… so when I watched “The Iron Throne”, I saw the ending as this most peaceful as it could be in such twisted and traumatising story that GoT was. To be honest, the ending was more peaceful and more “light” than I thought it could be after “The Bells”. When I look overall, GoT was never a happy story and majority of seasons were quite traumatising for main protagonists, S6 maybe being an exception. Maybe I deep down felt that the tables can’t just fully turn at the end… it just wouldn’t be GOT-like in my head.

      I don’t know… maybe I already can’t and probably will never understand how it is to be actively disappointed by conclusion because out of everything I watched, the very only TV show I didn’t really enjoy was “Leftovers” (and ironically, I started watching it because my fellow LOST fans kept praising it to immense heights). Everything else I watcehed, rewatched or am still watching, I’m fully emotionally invested and can’t even see me getting “disappointed” with any of them. Yes, there are usually bits I’m less fond of (although GoT is pretty much devoid of them in my case as I’m fully invested in every episode here) but these bits usually barely affect my overall journey. So, I don’t know.

        Quote  Reply

    168. Adrianacandle,

      I see that we basically agree here, rather than disagree. I’m also with Eric, thinking that the burning of KL in particular was a very polarizing ending.
      [and I see that. I was displeased with how the Starks were treated as protagonists, but most were in it for Daenerys, not the Starks, who seemed rather boring especially after season 6]
      I was just saying that people’s reasons needn’t be as complicated as ours, or even Petras’ who’d like it to be more explicit.
      Petra seems to be confounding books and show; in the show it is not said that the Ironborn engaged in slavery, so such a story at the end would have made little sense to the audience. But in general Daenerys’ attempt to harness the aspects of the civilization of Essos which she didn’t like was not included in the show, with the sole exeption of the fighting pits (there’s more, the floppy ears, dog eating, the tokar garment…). Slavery is sth like a “banner” for Daenerys’ fans, but they haven’t taken much time to think that the people freed by Daenerys in Essos had no choice but to follow her, just like -in the books- Victarion and perhaps even Asha think about their captives following them as “not being exactly slavery” because slavery is not accepted in Westeros. In other words, why is it that incorporating the Ironborn’s captives into the Iron Islands culture “slavery” and Daenerys’ freedmen are free?
      All in all, the questions posed during this discussion of decodifying show and books are very difficult to answer and the replies may vary according to individual perceptions.

      As for me, I think that what most people missed when they dislike the ending -Daenerys’ burning of KL and her subsequent death- was the vindication of the victim, as in my post above. Petra wrote this:

      “Moreover, Daenerys was a trauma survivor who took control of her own life, who rose from the ashes to carve a place for herself in a world that didn’t want her, and that meant a lot to a lot of people. Ending her story this way feels deeply deeply cynical.”

      We all sympathise with the victims and Daenerys was a victim herself. But in this most people missed that she came as a conqueror with the purpose to sit on a throne that didn’t belong to her in the first place, that she tended to confuse with “home”, swaying power over a nuclear deterrent, although she had chances to create another home for herself (in the Dothraki Sea, in Meereen, even in Pentos). But she decided to chase the chimaira that was Westeros and the throne/home.

      And also this (Petra’s again):

      “So she burns them all and we get a scene similar to ones we’ve had before in which Daenerys purges a land of bad people but this time, we’re seeing it from the perspective of those who don’t actually want it to happen.”

      With all due respect, but we’ve seen this already in the Field of Fire II. We saw this battle from the PoVs of Jamie and Tyrion, who didn’t want the country to burn; we saw Bronn struggling to reach through fire and Dothraki to the scorpion. How different was that from what Petra is proposing? Just because we hate the Lannisters? Don’t we hate the Ironborn the same, or are they suddenly sympathetic just because Yara offered alliance to Daenerys? Moreover, the effect of FoF II is discussed again in the presence of Bronn, although the unfortunate set up with all the nudity might have distracted people from the discussion about burns and burned eyelids. I don’t think a repetition of the FoF II in season 8 was needed.
      [and FoF II was carefully directed; at some point we don’t see Daenerys, the bomber, we only see the victims, which is the same technique applied to 8.5].

      Of course people felt cheated by this ending. But it was an ending Daenerys’ own choises brought her to. This is why careful watchers were not surprised. It was all there. Could it have been better? Sure. Would it make any difference if it was better? That’s a tough one, but imo rather not, because nothing would have softened the blow for those who expected the victim’s vindication.

      [I have to say that 8.5. was one of the best eps I ever saw on TV, ever. I don’t remember what I voted, but I left it out because it was so emotionally charged, but that doesn’t change my appreciation].

        Quote  Reply

    169. Erik, formerly Lord Parramandas,

      I mean, I remember there was this debate here and probably somewhere else how it’s “How” and not “What” that’s the issue with why people dislike the ending. But when it comes to mass audience, I’m very much sure Dany’s turn to antagonist would have always been polarizing to audience and that’s what I want to point out with that rethoric question. I personally haven’t been a big Dany fan and I had doubts about her character as early as when she burned Mirri Maz Duur – to the point that I started wondering whether I’m watching something wrong as everyone cheered for her but I kept questioning her actions over and over. Even more in sack of Astapor where entire non-slave population was put to the sword under her orders (honestly not that different situation than KL when I look at it now, only we were spared the ugly picture there). So maybe I was more “fond” of the ending than majority of fandom exactly because I was glad my doubts proved right. Also, I’m a big fan of dark stories in general… all my other favorite TV shows (LOST, TWD, Sopranos, Breaking Bad) deal with twisted stories and various descents and their endings are almost never “happy-happy” in full sense… so when I watched “The Iron Throne”, I saw the ending as this most peaceful as it could be in such twisted and traumatising story that GoT was. To be honest, the ending was more peaceful and more “light” than I thought it could be after “The Bells”. When I look overall, GoT was never a happy story and majority of seasons were quite traumatising for main protagonists, S6 maybe being an exception. Maybe I deep down felt that the tables can’t just fully turn at the end… it just wouldn’t be GOT-like in my head.

      I don’t know… maybe I already can’t and probably will never understand how it is to be actively disappointed by conclusion because out of everything I watched, the very only TV show I didn’t really enjoy was “Leftovers” (and ironically, I started watching it because my fellow LOST fans kept praising it to immense heights). Everything else I watcehed, rewatched or am still watching, I’m fully emotionally invested and can’t even see me getting “disappointed” with any of them. Yes, there are usually bits I’m less fond of (although GoT is pretty much devoid of them in my case as I’m fully invested in every episode here) but these bits usually barely affect my overall journey. So, I don’t know.

      I would agree that Dany’s turn would always be polarizing to the audience, no matter what, and for various reasons. For many, emotion does figure into it (and for me too). We’ve been living with these characters for years, we’ve developed feelings (good, bad, and everything in between about them), and with some characters, we’ve related to them on personal levels (maybe this would have a different impact for a view with no prior knowledge or experience of the series binge-watching all eight seasons in one go?) Other reasons involve more character-based or plot-related aspects not lining up for these viewers personally while for some viewers, like yourself, this did work.

      I think people are going to feel how they feel about some things and for different reasons. I don’t think it’s just a matter of people wanting a happy story. For some, like your friend, that very well may be the case. For others, there are different issues.

      Myself, I do love me some twisted stories (I couldn’t not watch The Human Centipede for instance and one of my favourite shows is Breaking Bad!). I definitely didn’t expect a happy ending for many characters in GoT/ASOIAF because I don’t think that’s what this story is. I think this is a story exploring fantasy types in more realistic settings and that may mean less-than-happy endings. I had the expectation that while the main characters would suffer to get to the conclusion, the ‘sweet’ part would be a hopeful turn for the world they’re living in (ie. hope for the world and its survivors, misery for characters on a personal level in order to get to that point).

      The show’s ending worked for you and I think you have reasons which make your feelings as to why just as valid as the reasons of one who didn’t like the ending. I think there are a myriad of reasons for this, probably too many to explain in this post, but it comes down to the individual.

        Quote  Reply

    170. Efi:
      Adrianacandle,

      Of course people felt cheated by this ending. But it was an ending Daenerys’ own choises brought her to. This is why careful watchers were not surprised. It was all there. Could it have been better? Sure. Would it make any difference if it was better? That’s a tough one, but imo rather not, because nothing would have softened the blow for those who expected the victim’s vindication.

      [I have to say that 8.5. was one of the best eps I ever saw on TV, ever. I don’t remember what I voted, but I left it out because it was so emotionally charged, but that doesn’t change my appreciation].

      (The bold part) – This is exactly my point. In the midst of all reasons and arguments that people may have for liking or not liking the scene, I just don’t see how this story chapter would unfold without being polarizing. I can honestly say that I was 50/50 on Dany snapping or not snapping all the way to the Bells but I can say really alarming signs started to happen for me in “Knight of the Seven Kingdoms”, after me kind of accepting after S6 that she’s likely to end up “good”. I remember complaints from book readers in previous seasons that the producers are toning down Dany’s flaws too much… I’m not sure about that because I personally still saw scenes where her actions were questioned in my head.

      I still need to rewatch the show one day (I’m intentionally waiting in order for it to feel fresh again) and I wonder how will I see Dany’s story now, knowing where her story is headed. I definitely feel S6 will now seem more dark to me, regarding Dany’s decision to depart. Because that’s the moment when she was at her “peak” regarding her achievements… of course ignoring that she needed to be there for battle against White Walkers. That’s the beauty of rewatches for me – how scenes feel more meaningful, knowing the full story.

        Quote  Reply

    171. Efi,

      (Part 1 — long due to quotes 🙁 )

      [and I see that. I was displeased with how the Starks were treated as protagonists, but most were in it for Daenerys, not the Starks, who seemed rather boring especially after season 6]

      I don’t know if that’s true — that most were in it for Daenerys. To me, this feels like a bit of an assumption simply because we don’t know that or have the data to back an assertion like this up. Yes, there are people who are in it for Daenerys and she’s among the most popular characters but I don’t think I’d boil it down to that alone or that this encompasses why viewers felt dissatisfaction over her ending. I don’t think it’s entirely fair to generalize, even with the more general viewership.

      Plus, Dany, too, was a protagonist as well. She was a lead character in this, somebody whose journey we followed along on day 1. People were drawn to her for varied reasons like people are drawn to Jon or Arya or Tyrion or Sansa. But I don’t think that Dany being a villain in the end discounts what messages they felt in ending her arc as a villain.

      I was just saying that people’s reasons needn’t be as complicated as ours, or even Petras’ who’d like it to be more explicit.

      I don’t think that’s at the heart of Petra’s argument, I think it’s a matter of motive and what Dany’s fatal flaw is:

      We could have had 10 whole episodes between Missandei’s death and those ill-fated bells and it still wouldn’t have worked because there’s no coherent narrative throughline connecting the Daenerys Targaryen of the first seven and a half seasons to the villain we got in the last two episodes.

      Episodes four and five lean heavily into the notion that it’s madness that Daenerys is succumbing to hereditary insanity but the final episode reframes the destruction of King’s Landing as merely an escalation from her practices in Essos. Some have argued that she didn’t actually go mad when she destroyed King’s Landing but rather acted out of grief anger and rejection, which might have worked except that in episode six, Daenerys reprises rhetoric from earlier seasons in such a way that makes her seem delusional. If the show had only settled on one fatal flaw for Daenerys and followed through on that to the end, things might have panned out differently.

      The other fatal flaw the show optioned for Daenerys — her sense of moral superiority and her consequential sense of entitlement had a lot more potential and not coincidentally, was the reason I could never join the Danny bandwagon, much as I wanted to.

      And I think there might be something to be said for Dany trying to impose her worldview onto others, trying to make the world into how she wants it to be based on what she views as moral and right, going to extremes to achieve her ideals in a Utopia Justifies the Means fashion (and I think this is what they were going for in 8×06). She’ll punish those who don’t ascribe to her worldview

      Petra seems to be confounding books and show; in the show it is not said that the Ironborn engaged in slavery, so such a story at the end would have made little sense to the audience.

      There is thralldom though. It’s not the same as slavery, thralls have more rights than slaves do, but they do represent a class of oppressed people, which Dany might very well be opposed to because they are captives. This also depends on who she views as the oppressed and what cultural practices she finds morally reprehensible like she did in Meereen (ie. the fighting pits).

      Slavery is sth like a “banner” for Daenerys’ fans, but they haven’t taken much time to think that the people freed by Daenerys in Essos had no choice but to follow her, just like -in the books- Victarion and perhaps even Asha think about their captives following them as “not being exactly slavery” because slavery is not accepted in Westeros.

      I’m not sure how these slaves weren’t given a choice. Not all the slaves entered her service, Dany did give them a choice. Some chose to follow her (like Missandei and the Unsullied) but not all the slaves have. These people weren’t Dany’s captives.

      In contrast, the thralls in the Iron Islands are bound to their captors and are required to perform tasks, some of which are not suitable for “free men”:

      From The World of Ice and Fire:

      The reavers brought more than gold and grain back to the Iron Islands; they brought captives as well, who would henceforth serve their captors as thralls. Amongst the ironborn, only reaving and fishing were considered worthy work for free men. The endless stoop labor of farm and field was suitable only for thralls. The same was true for mining. Yet those thralls who were set to field work counted themselves fortunate, Haereg writes, for many and more of them lived to grow old and were even allowed to marry and have children. Such could not be said of those condemned to work the mines—those dark, dangerous pits beneath the hills where the masters were brutal, the air was dank and foul, and life was short.

      Most of the male captives brought back to the Iron Islands spent the remainder of their lives at hard labor in the fields or mines. Some few, the sons of lords and knights and rich merchants, were ransomed for gold. Thralls who could read, write, and do sums served their masters as stewards, tutors, and scribes. Stonemasons, cordwainers, coopers, chandlers, carpenters, and other skilled craftsmen were even more valuable.

      Some, like Missandei and the Unsullied chose to follow Dany. However faulty her methods, Daenerys does have a genuine desire to free the oppressed and, in the books, it goes back to how she was once oppressed. This is also something Adam Feldman’s essays go over. Plus, Dany having to go back on her reforms for the sake of peace is a a contributing element which escalates Dany’s frustration and anger.

        Quote  Reply

    172. Efi,

      In other words, why is it that incorporating the Ironborn’s captives into the Iron Islands culture “slavery” and Daenerys’ freedmen are free?

      Unless they’ve sworn themselves into Dany’s service, they are free. They aren’t be forced into Dany’s service unlike the Ironborn’s captives.

      We all sympathise with the victims and Daenerys was a victim herself. But in this most people missed that she came as a conqueror with the purpose to sit on a throne that didn’t belong to her in the first place, that she tended to confuse with “home”, swaying power over a nuclear deterrent, although she had chances to create another home for herself (in the Dothraki Sea, in Meereen, even in Pentos). But she decided to chase the chimaira that was Westeros and the throne/home.

      I don’t think people are missing this. For better or worse, I think some are sympathizing with this and her efforts to take back a throne that was taken from her family and relating to that struggle because we are seeing her journey from her perspective.

      With all due respect, but we’ve seen this already in the Field of Fire II. We saw this battle from the PoVs of Jamie and Tyrion, who didn’t want the country to burn; we saw Bronn struggling to reach through fire and Dothraki to the scorpion. How different was that from what Petra is proposing? Just because we hate the Lannisters? Don’t we hate the Ironborn the same, or are they suddenly sympathetic just because Yara offered alliance to Daenerys?

      No, it’s not about hating the Lannisters or feeling more sympathy for the Ironborn because Yara and Daenerys allied.

      The Field of Fire was a battle with soldiers vs soldiers. Dany hadn’t won the throne, she was battling for the throne as Cersei was, as Stannis was, as Renly was, and using all her might to do it.

      What Petra is proposing is different. She and Yara came to an agreement for the Ironborn’s independence (no raping, reaving, or raiding). In Petra’s scenario, the Ironborn don’t take this well and return to their ways regardless of these terms. This is what ignites Dany, the violation of this agreement (her authority) and the Ironborn resuming practices she told Yara that were not permitted because they conflict with (Dany’s) worldview — so Dany punishes everyone: the oppressors violating this policy and victims alike.

      Moreover, the effect of FoF II is discussed again in the presence of Bronn, although the unfortunate set up with all the nudity might have distracted people from the discussion about burns and burned eyelids. I don’t think a repetition of the FoF II in season 8 was needed.

      There are severe injuries incurred on the battlefield, yes. That’s always been true. People are maimed by all sorts of weapons, left to agonizing deaths on battlefields. But Petra’s proposal wouldn’t be a repeat. It’s not a battle on the battlefield. It’s the Ironborn rejecting Daenerys’s worldview by returning to the practices she does not approve of in spite of the terms she and Yara made and violating the terms of this agreement (Dany would allow them to remain independent and lend support in the war against Euron while Yara and her forcs would help Dany and abide by the terms of their alliance). It would be a failed reformation on Yara’s part, a rebellion on the Ironborn’s part, and an attempt to eradicate practices she doesn’t approve of on Dany’s part.

      Of course people felt cheated by this ending. But it was an ending Daenerys’ own choises brought her to. This is why careful watchers were not surprised. It was all there. Could it have been better? Sure. Would it make any difference if it was better? That’s a tough one, but imo rather not, because nothing would have softened the blow for those who expected the victim’s vindication.

      For some, no, absolutely nothing could have softened the blow — but for others, yes. It would have. A love for Daenerys and her character, wanting her to be a hero, isn’t only the reason why those who felt dissatisfaction with Daenerys’s ending were unhappy.

        Quote  Reply

    173. Adrianacandle,

      Something a bit off-note: There’s been this random observation regarding storytelling that I made some time ago but I forgot on which thread… just like I feel S1 deconstructed fantasy genre and grounded the story in bleak cruel world where characters aren’t safe and such, I kind of feel S7/S8 did another deconstruction – deconstruction of protagonists. As much as the story initially seemed to be so not-fantasy-like, I kind of feel that at the end of S6, the story was very much at stage where it could unfold (or technically conclude) as this straightforward fantasy story. “Good guys vs bad guys”. Because at that stage we have Dany and the North as “good guys” and Cersei and White Walkers as bad guys. The story could have easily unfolded as Dany teaming up with Jon, possibly marrying and then causing Cersei’s downfall (I remember people were labeling Cersei as Mad Queen there and expected how she’ll be toast in matter of episodes) and then uniting the world against White Walkers. Yes, there would obviously be casualities in GoT spirit but this was shaping up as very “typical” conclusion. But what S7/S8 did was very much shake things up, mainly deconstructing protagonists and giving them a lot of tension towards each other despite being on same side and shifting several storylines around (compared to predictions). So it’s interesting when I look at it and I don’t really see it as that different than for example Ned’s beheading and Red Wedding – two occasions when I feel audience were forced to let go of fantasy-genre expectations and experience the harsh nature of GoT story. I really need to rewatch the show and observe characters’ behavior with their endpoints in mind… I think it will be additionally enlightening for me in order to understand their messed nature more.

        Quote  Reply

    174. Erik, formerly Lord Parramandas,

      Something a bit off-note: There’s been this random observation regarding storytelling that I made some time ago but I forgot on which thread… just like I feel S1 deconstructed fantasy genre and grounded the story in bleak cruel world where characters aren’t safe and such, I kind of feel S7/S8 did another deconstruction – deconstruction of protagonists. As much as the story initially seemed to be so not-fantasy-like, I kind of feel that at the end of S6, the story was very much at stage where it could unfold (or technically conclude) as this straightforward fantasy story. “Good guys vs bad guys”. Because at that stage we have Dany and the North as “good guys” and Cersei and White Walkers as bad guys. The story could have easily unfolded as Dany teaming up with Jon, possibly marrying and then causing Cersei’s downfall (I remember people were labeling Cersei as Mad Queen there and expected how she’ll be toast in matter of episodes) and then uniting the world against White Walkers. Yes, there would obviously be casualities in GoT spirit but this was shaping up as very “typical” conclusion. But what S7/S8 did was very much shake things up, mainly deconstructing protagonists and giving them a lot of tension towards each other despite being on same side and shifting several storylines around (compared to predictions). So it’s interesting when I look at it and I don’t really see it as that different than for example Ned’s beheading and Red Wedding – two occasions when I feel audience were forced to let go of fantasy-genre expectations and experience the harsh nature of GoT story. I really need to rewatch the show and observe characters’ behavior with their endpoints in mind… I think it will be additionally enlightening for me in order to understand their messed nature more

      Without going into my own issues with the plotting of season 8 since I think that discussion has been done to death (and I don’t think we’d get anywhere), yes, I never believed this story was one that was straight-up good vs. evil, no. I even think the war against the dead might not be so clear-cut either in the books. I think much of this story involves the struggle to do the right thing, to identify what the right thing even is in situations with more than one compelling side, to realize that it’s actually not quite-the-right thing, struggling with the “conflict of the human heart” and its impact on choices, the impact of trauma on choices and motivations, what power is and how to utilize it, the various ways its utilized and the consequences of that, and exploring actions (even heroic actions) and their various consequences both in-universe and to the story/character. And I think the story is meant to explore fantasy under more real-life circumstances.

      I don’t know if it’s really about deconstruction or subversion for deconstruction or subversion’s sake but about exploration of these traditional fantasy ideas. Like how GRRM talks about Jon getting shanked in book 5:

      When [James Hibberd] asked Martin what was Jon’s biggest “mistake,” the author thoughtfully replied, “Were they mistakes? I guess they were mistakes in some ways since they led to him losing control of part of his group. But it might have been wise and necessary decisions in terms of protecting the realm and dealing with the threat of the White Walkers. I’m a huge student of history, and all through history there’s always this question of what’s the right decision. You look back with benefit of hindsight at a battle that was lost and say, ‘The losing general was such an idiot.’ Was Napoleon a genius for all the battles he won? Or an idiot for losing at Waterloo? Partly I’m reacting to a lot of the fantasy that has come before this. Ruling is difficult whether you’re a Lord Commander of the Night’s Watch or the King of England. These are hard decisions and each have consequences. We’re looking at Jon trying to take control of Night’s Watch and deal with The Wildlings and the threat beyond The Wall, and we’re looking at Cersei and Dany in their kingdoms and their choices.”

        Quote  Reply

    175. Adrianacandle:
      I hesitated to address this because I want to avoid the endless debate over whether Dany’s actions in King’s Landing were built up or not but I’d like to respond to proposed reasons of why some are unhappy with her ending.

      I don’t think viewer displeasure with Dany’s ending only has to do with these reasons and I think some do know why are they are displeased.

      It’s true that some would not accept Dany’s villainy under any circumstances, wanted Dany to die heroically if she had to die at all, wanted Jon and Dany to live happily ever after, wanted their faves to be happy.

      But this doesn’t apply to all viewers displeased with Dany’s ending. Some who are unhappy with how the culmination of her arc was done aren’t Dany fans, don’t believe the mains had to end up happy, don’t think Jon and Dany had to live happily ever after. Some think that the show’s choices for the final episodes of Dany’s arc just didn’t work.

      Some of their reasons share similarities with the reasons Efi cited for why she was displeased with the conclusions of the Starks’ storylines (Efi: “the show left the audience with the feeling that saving the world is futile since you’ll be condemned by the establishment and damned by the gods, if you’re a savage criminal you’ll pay community service while actually getting to rule and Big Brother surveillance solely secures stability, if you’re a woman you can’t have both family and power, if you’re a misfit there’s no place for you so you must roam the world as an explorer.”).

      Which is fair. I came away from the show with a few unhappy messages myself, I also felt the ending was more bitter than sweet. I don’t think this is what the show was going for but it doesn’t change the feeling all the same.

      But others had similar feelings over Dany’s end too. For example, Petra, in her examination of Daenery’s arc. Petra explains how Daenerys isn’t a favourite of hers and thought that potential for a villain arc was established early on (when Daenerys killed MMD because she felt this recontextualized Dany as the villain in MMD’s story). Petra also points out the rigidity of Dany’s worldview, moral superiority, and resulting entitlement, and the issues with imposing a personal worldview on another culture and the problems which come with it (adding that the show and the books were able to justify by making Dany’s opposers evil).

      However, Petra also felt there were problems with Dany’s decision to burn KL in the way she did (an inconsistency with the motives behind her decision to burn KL). And with Dany becoming the villain, questions the messages a villain conclusion to her arc might send:

      And I think this is valid too.

      She also had an alternative way for this storyline to go down which would have worked for her:

      You can take or leave this however you like, I’m not saying this is the only right way to do this, and if the way the show executed Dany’s decision to burn KL worked for anyone, that’s awesome! 🙂

      But I’d say reasons for view dissatisfaction are varied and some do have valid points.

      For instance, I do believe the show endings of the mains will more or less happen in the books as well. And I think there are some solid concepts behind many of them — even Dany’s and the burning of KL, however much I may not personally like it because Efi is right, it doesn’t feel good. Yet that doesn’t mean there isn’t a viable idea being explored by Dany’s descent into villainy.

      It’s remarkable how a year and a month after the end of Game of Thrones, fans continue to debate the fate of Daenerys. It seems all the comment sections in this site always end there one way or another.

      I gave my opinion in this site right after the end of the show. It hasn’t really changed since then. I was one of the fans who liked the character. In fact, I like all the main characters of this story and try to understand them the best I can. I was always puzzled by fans who skip scenes in the middle of episodes, just because they don’t like one character. The one exception might be Bran after season 4, as his humanity fades. One of the reasons I like GoT and ASOIAF are the very human struggles and dilemmas the characters fade.

      As for Daenerys, I don’t like her ending, because I think extermining an entire population, street by street, after the battle is won and the throne is ensured doesn’t fit her previous course of action. The most sensible explanation to what happened resides on her complete loss of self-awareness and declining mental health. For a character who was at the heart of the political dimension of this story, her being brought down like that isn’t very compelling, in my opinion. There’s a world apart between comitting genocide and flying straight to the Red Keep to kill Cersei, which would be the most understandable decision. Furthermore, Daenerys isn’t one of the most intelligent characters on GoT, but it was always one of those more resourceful in finding solutions to the problems she had to face.

      We see none of that in season 8. In my opinion, season 8 Daenerys looks like an entirely different character in comparison to the previous seven seasons. Her demeanor is remarkably different from 7×07 to 8×01. One of the most clear examples of that difference is, in my point of view, the first scene in the Winterfell hall: when the northern lords almost insult Jon for giving up the crown, what did Daenerys do? Nothing. She’s simply there, with straight face. In previous seasons, Daenerys had her speeches as a resort to win the hearts and minds of the people she wanted to convince. At Winterfell, that attitude is simply non-existent. I found it very strange.

      I understand Daenerys’ turn thematically and all the talk of having nuclear weapons that sooner or later would be triggered. That means she was doomed since the dragons were born. But her ending felt like something that the plot dictated, rather than an organic conclusion to her story. For example, it’s very convenient that everything goes wrong for her in season 8. It makes me feel like the writers are trying too hard to justify what will happen in “The bells”. They even put foreshadow in the preview just right before the episode begins, a thing I’ve never seen before.

      The other problem with her ending is how the other characters are bent to fit in Daenerys ending. It’s almost like they don’t have a life of their own. Jon, Sansa, Tyrion, Cersei are only there to make Daenerys goes wrong. We’re talking about characters we’ve followed for eight years, whose role is reduced to influence another character’ ending.

      It was created an idea that Daenerys’ fans don’t like the ending, because it didn’t feel good. That idea is true for some fans, but not all of them. On the same way, there are fans who are happy with the ending because they just hate the character. This emotional behaviour lie on the both sets of fans. It applies to all main characters, in fact. I’ve seen season 8 twice. I’ve tried to analyze how the characters endings fit in the stories told until that point, remembering all the scenes they were in. I liked Daenerys, but her ending wasn’t the only one I cared about. I didn’t like the ending of Sam and Gilly. I was bothered to see him dressed as a maester in the small council.

        Quote  Reply

    176. Tron79: I’m jumping into the discussion here.Since the article talks about GRRM’s books, I have to compare book Tyrion.I think there was plenty of source material for D&D, but they decided not to use it. They went their own route in Meereen. I’m not totally unsympathetic to D&D, because GRRM did seem to get bogged down in Meereen.D&D didn’t want to take the same path.(However after reading the Feldman essays recommended by Adrianacandle, I have changed my opinion about GRRM really being bogged down. ) Verging from book Tyrion starting in Meereen is where I see D&D took a wrong turn with Tyrion’s character. Yes, the show goes further than the books with Tyrion, but the shift in Tyrion’s cleverness shifts when D&D veer from book Tyrion.

      You often hear about actors in daily soap operas here in the USA who get upset if the writers write lines that are “out of character”.I have heard actors rebelling with their writers and refusing to say lines that would destroy their character. I wouldn’t be surprised if Peter Dinklage was upset with D&D’s writing of Tyrion when D&D decided to make him “dumb and dumber”. D&D took Tyrion down an unfortunate path of being a horrible advisor. I really don’t see this happening in the books.

      I’m aware that Tyrion’s path in the book is different. I’ve read them long ago. I need to reread them to acknowledge many of the details usually discussed here that escape me at the moment. It remains to be seen what GRRM has in store for us on Tyrion.

        Quote  Reply

    177. Tiago: I understand Daenerys’ turn thematically and all the talk of having nuclear weapons that sooner or later would be triggered. That means she was doomed since the dragons were born. But her ending felt like something that the plot dictated, rather than an organic conclusion to her story. For example, it’s very convenient that everything goes wrong for her in season 8. It makes me feel like the writers are trying too hard to justify what will happen in “The bells”. They even put foreshadow in the preview just right before the episode begins, a thing I’ve never seen before.

      The other problem with her ending is how the other characters are bent to fit in Daenerys ending. It’s almost like they don’t have a life of their own. Jon, Sansa, Tyrion, Cersei are only there to make Daenerys goes wrong. We’re talking about characters we’ve followed for eight years, whose role is reduced to influence another character’ ending.

      It was created an idea that Daenerys’ fans don’t like the ending, because it didn’t feel good. That idea is true for some fans, but not all of them. On the same way, there are fans who are happy with the ending because they just hate the character. This emotional behaviour lie on the both sets of fans. It applies to all main characters, in fact. I’ve seen season 8 twice. I’ve tried to analyze how the characters endings fit in the stories told until that point, remembering all the scenes they were in. I liked Daenerys, but her ending wasn’t the only one I cared about. I didn’t like the ending of Sam and Gilly. I was bothered to see him dressed as a maester in the small council.

      Yes, you’ve articulated some of my issues too. For those who felt this plot and these developments worked well, I think that’s great and I enjoy reading your reasons why. However, I had some issues.

      Tiago, I especially agree with your last paragraph. I think, for some, it’s a matter of emotion and preference on both sides (disclaimer to all: that’s not to say that all who felt satisfied with Dany’s end did so because they hate her or always saw her as this kind of monster, they can have other, non-emotional reasons for feeling the culmination of Dany’s arc made sense. But I think Tiago is right that this argument goes both ways for some fans).

        Quote  Reply

    178. Ten Bears: Musical Dedication to GRRM + TWOW(Part 2)

      “Tired of Waiting for You” (1965)
      The Kinks (2:32 long)

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESZ335KtBIQ

      📆

      Great band.

      Since we’re discussing again season 8 ending, I answer to you with the following song (dedicated to all the critics and whiners of season 8, where I’m, in part, included, recognizing however that there were some good things in it).

      “You can’t always get what you want”, The Rolling Stones (1969)

        Quote  Reply

    179. Ten Bears,

      Considering the rather cheesy way Cersei later perished, don’t you kind of wish she’d had a more dramatic final exit on that staircase?

      I thought Cersei’s final exit was grand, romantic, and sadly inevitable, given that Jaime essentially chose to die with her. Finding her last exit blocked was the physical analog to her dead-end path of killing everyone to sit the Iron Throne, and thus having no way out when Dany & Dragons came a-callin’. Her death was thematically appropriate in multiple ways: with her twin brother (their incestuous relationship was the first step to them having “no way out”), in the city she’d refused to leave, with her title an empty farce.

      If any character had a ‘cheesy’ death on those stairs, it was Qyburn, dying of a very sudden onset of Creator-Monster Cliche Syndrome. (At what prior point in FrankenGregor’s miserable existence had he shown *any* hint of disobedience?) Having Qyburn escape, disguised as a simple laborer, would have been more fitting — even in the better Westeros, under King Bran and Hand Tyrion, corruption remains, hidden and lurking, awaiting an opportunity…

        Quote  Reply

    180. Adrianacandle: Yes, you’ve articulated some of my issues too. For those who felt this plot and these developments worked well, I think that’s great and I enjoy reading your reasons why. However, I had some issues.

      Tiago, I especially agree with your last paragraph. I think, for some, it’s a matter of emotion and preference on both sides (disclaimer to all: that’s not to say that all who felt satisfied with Dany’s end did so because they hate her or always saw her as this kind of monster, they can have other, non-emotional reasons for feeling the culmination of Dany’s arc made sense. But I think Tiago is right that this argument goes both ways for some fans).

      Exactly. I think it’s perfectly fair that some fans have expected Daenerys to be a political leader who goes too far in trying to do something good. It’s a reasonable guess. Others predicted she would be a Mad Queen, based on her inheritance. I’m not a big fan of telling or showing her story from that perspective. Your family doesn’t determine your whole self, although it can be a part of it. If that was the case, the development that characters experience from their struggles wouldn’t be so relevant. They would be reduced to a mirror of their family values, traits or even stereotypes. All in all, I respect and enjoy reading any opinion favourable to season 8, if it is well reasoned.

        Quote  Reply

    181. Ten Bears:
      Tiago,

      Ah, very good! A Rolling Stones musical reference for S8.

      Then there’s also this for our Mad Queen and Episode 5…

      🎶 Ooh, see the fire is sweeping
      Our very street today
      Burns like a red coal carpet
      Mad bull lost your way.”
      🎵

      from The Rolling Stones, “Gimme Shelter.”

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbmS3tQJ7Os
      🔥

      Oh yes! I love that song. Merry Clayton’s backing vocals are dope. Daenerys surely listened this song out of her vinyl collection in Dragonstone, before attacking KL. She thought angrily: “I will burn you all”.

        Quote  Reply

    182. Tiago: Exactly. I think it’s perfectly fair that some fans have expected Daenerys to be a political leader who goes too far in trying to do something good. It’s a reasonable guess. Others predicted she would be a Mad Queen, based on her inheritance. I’m not a big fan of telling or showing her story from that perspective. Your family doesn’t determine your whole self, although it can be a part of it. If that was the case, the development that characters experience from their struggles wouldn’t be so relevant. They would be reduced to a mirror of their family values, traits or even stereotypes. All in all, I respect and enjoy reading any opinion favourable to season 8, if it is well reasoned.

      Yes, I agree (particularly about the inheritance bit — not to say it’s impossible. However, I have personal issues with the idea that blood /family defines who you are although, yes, it certainly can be part of one’s self). And one of my favourite ASOIAF bloggers predicted a dark turn for Daenerys in the books 7 years ago — this was something I wasn’t thrilled about, something I was hoping wouldn’t happen, but something that he made a good, strong case for all the same and he appeared to come at it from a pretty neutral, unbiased stance.

      And yes — I also enjoy reading a well-reasoned pro-season 8 opinion/argument too. I’ve read some good ones on Reddit/YouTube and I’ve guilded (gave a Reddit gold/silver/platinum to) a few posts. Like you, I respect those who enjoyed season 8 and I enjoy hearing their opinions as to why, I’m truly, truly glad it worked for some of us! I also think those who found problems with season 8 can make some good arguments and points as well.

        Quote  Reply

    183. Adrianacandle: Yes, I agree (particularly about the inheritance bit — not to say it’s impossible. However, I have personal issues with the idea that blood /family defines who you are although, yes, it certainly can be part of one’s self). And one of my favourite ASOIAF bloggers predicted a dark turn for Daenerys in the books 7 years ago — this was something I wasn’t thrilled about, something I was hoping wouldn’t happen, but something that he made a good, strong case for all the same and he appeared to come at it from a pretty neutral, unbiased stance.

      Are you referring to Adam Feldman’s essay? He writes good stuff about ASOIAF. The dark path he envisions for Daenerys is understandable.

        Quote  Reply

    184. Tiago: Are you referring to Adam Feldman’s essay? He writes good stuff about ASOIAF. The dark path he envisions for Daenerys is understandable.

      Yes! And I agree. I think he also wrote good stuff on Jon, Tyrion, Dorne, and made a good case for King Bran being set up from his first chapter.

      I don’t love the idea of King Bran but maybe it’ll be better set up and feel more organic in the books (should they ever come out).

        Quote  Reply

    185. Just a note about the “valonqar” business. While I’ve enjoyed the dialogs here, we should mayhaps consider a wee thing or three:

      + The memory comes to Cersei in a dream, decades after she heard it from Maggy. Given that Cersei may well be an unreliable narrator in the first place, we have multiple reasons to doubt we’ve even read anything close to a true account of what — if anything — Maggy said.

      + Jaime could be her “little brother” in the sense he may have been born shortly after she was.

      + If he was born first, girls grow faster than boys, so Cersei could have been physically larger than Jaime at the time Maggy spoke; he would be her “little brother” in the physical sense.

      + Jaime mercy-killing Cersei as they are both about to die would satisfy the prophecy, and align with what we saw in the television version.

      + The dream of Maggy appears late in A Feast for Crows, the epilogue of which has Maester Marwyn schooling newly-arrived Sam on how prophecy is completely unreliable, warning Sam that even speaking of prophecy in The Citadel might get Sam some “poison in your porridge.”

      + “Prophecies coming true” in fantasy literature would make a BIG target for an author who delights in subverting tropes and confounding expectations of the genre.

        Quote  Reply

    186. Off-note: my girlfriend started watching S7/S8 today after a few weeks of break since wrapping up S6 for first time (I told her to treat these two seasons as one 13-episode long season). She’s two episodes in (7.1 and 7.2) and according to her statements, she’s completely in love with the story and she loved these two episodes.

        Quote  Reply

    187. Tensor the Mage, Still Loving the Ending,

      + The memory comes to Cersei in a dream, decades after she heard it from Maggy. Given that Cersei may well be an unreliable narrator in the first place, we have multiple reasons to doubt we’ve even read anything close to a true account of what — if anything — Maggy said.

      Was it during a dream? I think we first hear about Maggy in AFFC, Cersei III during Tommen and Magaery’s wedding:

      Whenever Cersei looked at the old crone [Olenna], the face of Maggy the Frog seemed to float before her eyes, wrinkled and terrible and wise. All old women look alike, she tried to tell herself, that’s all it is. In truth, the bent-back sorceress had looked nothing like the Queen of Thorns, yet somehow the sight of Lady Olenna’s nasty little smile was enough to put her back in Maggy’s tent again. She could still remember the smell of it, redolent with queer eastern spices, and the softness of Maggy’s gums as she sucked the blood from Cersei’s finger. Queen you shall be, the old woman had promised, with her lips still wet and red and glistening, until there comes another, younger and more beautiful, to cast you down and take all that you hold dear.

      Or are you thinking of something else? (I think there is something to be said for unreliable narrator though)

      + Jaime could be her “little brother” in the sense he may have been born shortly after she was.

      Yes — I think Jaime is slightly younger than Cersei:

      She and Jaime were twins, but Cersei had come first into the world, and that was all it took.

      ____

      + If he was born first, girls grow faster than boys, so Cersei could have been physically larger than Jaime at the time Maggy spoke; he would be her “little brother” in the physical sense.

      This reminds me of that Arrested Development scene in which they suddenly put in “evidence” Lindsay is adopted and not Michael’s twin as everyone — except for the parents (who orchestrated the whole thing) — believed XD (And also unbeknownst to Lindsay or Michael, Lindsay is secretly three years older than him… so she’s about a foot taller and far more developed 😉 ):

      Young Lindsay: I’m a giant, fat pig.

      Young Michael: I don’t know why you say stuff like that. Girls just grow faster than boys.

      Lucille: Dinner’s ready. We’re having Lindsay chops. What? I want her to be prepared in case some bully at school is as clever as I am.

      Narrator: No bully ever would be.

        Quote  Reply

    188. Adrianacandle,

      That’s probably not intention but Petra’s comments does sound entitled. Why is wrong for the story to be cynical? To say tha ambition is wrong and that trying to break the wheel of injustice or the cycle of abuse is futile?

      Because it makes her feel bad? I don’t get that. GoT and Benioff and Weiss have every right to believe that every revolution is wrong and that every person who wants to change the world with violence will inevitably become monster.

      We live in age when ideas and themes are wrong because they are offensive. But good art should be offensive and aks hard questions.

        Quote  Reply

    189. Adrianacandle,

      Petra’s alternative version is not really good. Even if we ignore that climax of the story is on Iron Islands and no one cares about that place, just like with Stannis, every rewrite of Dany’s crime involes putting her in a situation where mass killing is almost justified.

      So it’s all about putting her in a position where people can continue to make excuses for her brutality like they did in the first 7 seasons. But the story refused to give any excuse. She doesn’t need to burn KL. Her violence is pointless and that’s the whole point of it.

        Quote  Reply

    190. Erik, formerly Lord Parramandas,

      I agree that it was always meant to be polarizing and to punch you in the face. But I don’t think that’s wrong.

      I find that creative choice to be very brave, powerful and meaningful. Especially now in the age of populism. The message is – notice the red flags around politicians you support because real life will smack you in the face.

        Quote  Reply

    191. I think people waste too much time on the fact that KL surrendered. I don’t see why would Daenerys care about that, why would she even trust in their surrender after everything?

      And her war was much bigger than just taking KL. It was about ruling the entire world so destroying city to establish her dictatorship and supremacy is something conqueres do. And it’s also punishment. She was humiliated too many times by Cersei. Her enemies need to see what happens when you cross Daenerys Stormborn.

      Also I think her care for civilians is overrated. She wanted to burn cities and castles a lot of times in the past. I don’t see how you can do that without mass murder?

      If I have to compare her with someone from history it would probably be communists and Stalin. Very noble goals to help poor and oppressed working class but also using very brutal ways.

        Quote  Reply

    192. Tiago,

      The other problem with her ending is how the other characters are bent to fit in Daenerys ending. It’s almost like they don’t have a life of their own. Jon, Sansa, Tyrion, Cersei are only there to make Daenerys goes wrong. We’re talking about characters we’ve followed for eight years, whose role is reduced to influence another character’ ending.

      I really like your way of putting that, and I agree, to a certain extent, with the “bent” feeling. Some of that comes from the structure Martin created, with the obvious existential threat of the Others/WW/Army of the Dead dispatched before the hidden and larger existential threat, Dany, even emerges from the false trappings of a hero in which he’d presented her. Once the undead are buried, the story simply must conclude relatively quickly, else the audience will wonder why they are still watching/reading.

      Martin also failed to provide Benioff and Weiss any actual story after the death of Jon Snow. They finally had to travel to his home and wrest from him an outline of the remaining story, and then figure out for themselves how to finish their version. If he’d produced another actual *book* (or two) after they’d produced Winter is Coming, they might have had enough material for the additional seasons HBO offered (or begged, more likely) them to have. The larger amount of story they had before dispatch of the undead could have allowed them to tell more story after it as well, by having more character’s stories, and longer arcs to conclude for existing characters, before reaching Dany’s Downfall.

      As for the rest of that “bent” feeling, well, take Jon Snow as an example. He joined the Night’s Watch to prove he was as good as a true-born Stark, and he succeeded in spades (ha!). He became the greatest Lord Commander the Night’s Watch ever had! He orchestrated the end of the threat the Night’s Watch existed merely to contain. Once he’d performed that godlike task, what else was there for him to do? Well, in the story, to end the other great threat to humanity. His arc actually was complete with Dany’s death, and as Tyrion pointed out, his killing her fit perfectly with his mission to guard the Realms of Men; thematically, his arc was complete. He feels “bent” only if you declare his arc was finished when the undead were buried, and that was not the case. Remember, Martin set the audience up all along to believe that ending the undead was Jon Snow’s main purpose in the story, so this “bent” feeling was to some degree intentional on Martin’s part.

        Quote  Reply

    193. Tiago,

      ”It’s remarkable how a year and a month after the end of Game of Thrones, fans continue to debate the fate of Daenerys. It seems all the comment sections in this site always end there one way or another.”

      Has no one heard of the ancient Roman adage, “All Roads Lead to Arya”?

        Quote  Reply

    194. mau,

      Why is wrong for the story to be cynical? To say tha ambition is wrong and that trying to break the wheel of injustice or the cycle of abuse is futile?

      I don’t think she’s saying it’s wrong, she’s questioning what meaning there is in ending Dany’s arc as a villain, how it feels deeply cynical, and explains why. I don’t think that’s entitled, I think that’s a fair question worthy of exploration.

      Maybe there is meaning in it… but it does feel cynical.

      You said, “GoT and Benioff and Weiss have every right to believe that every revolution is wrong and that every person who wants to change the world with violence will inevitably become monster.”

      Alright, it’s true Benioff and Weiss can believe what they want about revolutions and how to change the world, that it can’t be done with violence and this violence changing somebody into a monster. And in turn, I think people have a right to question these ideas, messages, and how they executed this with Daenerys.

      She also had this to say about Sandor and the Hound’s endings:

      I’m not saying every character has to end up as the best version of themselves. I see value in Jamie and Sander’s endings because they both demonstrate that redemption is ultimately a choice. The things that happen to you, the people you meet, they don’t redeem you. You redeem you. Sandor had the chance to turn away from his path of violence and revenge and live but instead, he chose to let his hatred of his brother destroy him.

      Jamie had the opportunity to stay with the person who brought out his best self but chose to return to his toxic sister.

      I don’t like their endings but they do have meaning. What meaning is there in turning Daenerys into a monster? That ambition is wrong? That wanting to help people is bad? That trying to break the wheel of injustice or indeed the cycle of abuse is futile? Moreover, Daenerys was a trauma survivor who took control of her own life, who rose from the ashes to carve a place for herself in a world that didn’t want her, and that meant a lot to a lot of people. Ending her story this way feels deeply deeply cynical.

      And I think that’s valid. You may not. (And I realize I also forgot to link the source of this essay here is the original post and thread).

      We live in age when ideas and themes are wrong because they are offensive. But good art should be offensive and aks hard questions.

      Okay, and people will still respond to these ideas: positively, negatively, critically, the whole gamut. When art is released into the public, it creates dialogue and it should. This is how ideas are discussed and explored. Often time, that involves criticism over the message a viewer/reader feels the work is sending and what problematic ideas they feel are arising from it. I think this deserves consideration as well.

      Petra’s alternative version is not really good. Even if we ignore that climax of the story is on Iron Islands and no one cares about that place, just like with Stannis, every rewrite of Dany’s crime involes putting her in a situation where mass killing is almost justified.

      So it’s all about putting her in a position where people can continue to make excuses for her brutality like they did in the first 7 seasons. But the story refused to give any excuse. She doesn’t need to burn KL. Her violence is pointless and that’s the whole point of it.

      Okay and that’s your view on Dany’s decision to burn KL, that her violence is pointless, and I’m glad this conclusion worked for you. You can take or leave Petra’s suggestion, that’s fine. Erik asked above, Something I wonder about is if people, who were displeased with ending, were asked to rewrite these final chapters of the story to their satisfaction but under condition that Dany’s downfall remains in the story. I’m very much sure a lot of people would struggle or they would just label this as “not a good story,” and I posted Petra’s suggestion in response.

      But from the video itself, I don’t think Petra is putting Dany into a position in which people can make excuses for her brutality — that’s not what Petra is about with Dany. She has found problems with Dany’s behavior and world views ever since Dany burned MMD in season 1:

      I stopped rooting for Daenerys back in season 1 when she killed Mirri Maz Duur because I was on Mirri’s side. I found Daenerys’s and, by extension, the fandom’s nonchalance at Drogo’s promise to rape Westerosi women disturbing and Dany’s horror at the rape of the Lazzarini women naive and her assumption that Mirri owed her loyalty for saving her from rape, absolutely infuriating.

      I thought Mirri’s speech in the season 1 finale did a great job at recontextualizing Daenerys as the villain of Mirri Maz Duur’s story and that recontextualizing Mirri Maz Duur as the heroine who killed her world’s baby. I actually planned to do a video essay before season 8 premiered about how Daenerys’s relationship with Mirri Maz Duur could have set up Daenerys as an eventual villain, which I didn’t think was ever actually going to happen because it demonstrated the rigidity of Daenerys’s worldview. She is right: if she wants to sack your village if she wants her son to take over the world — well, that’s her prerogative. If you oppose her if you resent her for killing your friends or you prevent her son from achieving world domination, then you’re wrong and subject to whatever punishment she sees fit. We see this rigid worldview put into effect throughout Daenerys’s campaign in Essos in which she imposes her worldview on other people by dismantling their bad cultures in order to fix them and considering the lives of those who oppose her forfeit. The show in the books both justify this by making the culture she dismantles and the men she kills cartoonishly evil (credit to the show for humanizing his doors of lorac) but it would not have been difficult to reframe this as a bad practice when Daenerys arrived in Westeros and thus reveal how problematic Daenerys’s moral justification for conquering has always been. But the show didn’t.

      So I don’t think it’s about putting Dany into a position where she can be excused again (even as it Dany’s destruction of KL was portrayed, it didn’t stop some stans from still excusing Dany by saying the people of King’s Landing deserved it or it was a blip). Rather, it seems to me that Petra is putting forth a proposed scenario that would make sense in continuing some of the behaviors she saw Daenerys exhibiting in the past (imposing a worldview on another culture from a rigid sense of moral superiority, punishing those who don’t/refuse to comply but this time, it would be oppressors and victims alike: “she can’t separate out the good victims from the bad oppressors like she used to”) .

      It seems to mean Petra doesn’t have an issue with Dany becoming the villain but with Daenerys’s motives in burning King’s Landing and how they lacked a consistency:

      We could have had 10 whole episodes between Missandei’s death and those ill-fated bells and it still wouldn’t have worked because there’s no coherent narrative through line connecting the Daenerys Targaryen of the first seven and a half seasons to the villain we got in the last two episodes.

      Let’s put this in terms of harmatia, a word I think I’m pronouncing correctly which, in dramatic literature, has come to refer to the protagonist’s fatal flaw, which leads to their downfall. Othello’s harmatia is jealousy, for instance. Hamlet’s is in action. Ned Stark’s is honor. So what is Daenerys’s harmatia?

      Episodes four and five lean heavily into the notion that it’s madness that Daenerys is succumbing to hereditary insanity but the final episode reframes the destruction of King’s Landing as merely an escalation from her practices in Essos. Some have argued that she didn’t actually go mad when she destroyed King’s Landing but rather acted out of grief anger and rejection, which might have worked except that in episode six, Daenerys reprises rhetoric from earlier seasons in such a way that makes her seem delusional. If the show had only settled on one fatal flaw for Daenerys and followed through on that to the end, things might have panned out differently.

      I can’t really imagine a scenario in which I would be okay with Daenerys becoming a villain by succumbing to madness as I am sick of stories using mental illness as a shorthand for evil. However, I thought Targaryen madness was dealt with in a really interesting way in season one, where it’s established that King Aerys was mentally ill.

      [Topic about the portrayal of mental illness and madness in GOT/ASOIAF]

      The other fatal flaw the show optioned for Daenerys — her sense of moral superiority and her consequential sense of entitlement had a lot more potential and not coincidentally, was the reason I could never join the Dany bandwagon, much as I wanted to.

      You can take this or leave this, you can disagree. I think these are valid points.

        Quote  Reply

    195. Ten Bears,

      —-
      Part 2 of 2 [Cont. from 10:28 pm]
      Musical Interlude

      Arya Stark Tribute

      👸🏻🎼”Sunny came home with a list of names.
      She didn’t believe in transcendence.
      It’s time for a few small repairs she said. 🔪
      Sunny came home, with a vengeance.
      🎶

      Shawn Colvin, “Sunny Came Home” (1997)
      music video at 1:25 – 1:47

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

      ————————
      Shawn Colvin (live on The Late Show, 1997)
      at 1:44 – 2:04

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsWCjCX2vdA

      👸🏻🏰

        Quote  Reply

    196. Ten Bears: Part 2 of 2 [Cont. from 10:28 pm]
      Musical Interlude
      Arya Stark Tribute

      👸🏻🎼”Sunny came home with a list of names.
      She didn’t believe in transcendence.
      It’s time for a few small repairs she said. 🔪
      Sunny came home, with a vengeance.🎶

      Shawn Colvin, “Sunny Came Home” (1997)
      music video at 1:25 – 1:47

      Wow! Nice job with this one and with making this connection to Arya! I remember this song from eons ago, it takes me back to my childhood, but I never made the linked this song to Arya until now!

        Quote  Reply

    197. Adrianacandle,

      Corrections to errors in my transcriptions above (there may be other errors too but these are errors on my part in transcribing Petra’s comments):

      *“[…]I thought Mirri’s speech in the season 1 finale did a great job at recontextualizing Daenerys as the villain of Mirri Maz Duur’s story and that recontextualizing Mirri Maz Duur as the heroine who killed her world’s baby *Hitler[…]”

      *“Yarra” to “Yara”

      *“Danny” to “Dany”

      *“harmatia” to “hamartia”

      *“[…]Episodes four and five lean heavily into the notion that it’s madness, that Daenerys is succumbing to hereditary insanity, but the final episode reframes the destruction of King’s Landing as merely an escalation from her practices in Essos.[…]”

        Quote  Reply

    198. Adrianacandle: Wow! Nice job with this one and with making this connection to Arya! I remember this song from eons ago, it takes me back to my childhood, but I never linked this song to Arya until now!

      Thanks! I was in the process of finishing up the “Sansa Dedication” and looking for the best audio and live versions of the song for that one, when the YouTube recommendations included Shawn Colvin’s song.

      As soon as that jogged my memory and I remembered the verse “Sunny came home with a list of names,” I couldn’t resist. 😋

      There are not many revenge ballads that win Grammy Awards for Song of the Year and Record of the Year.

      P.S. Upcoming Musical Interludes:
      – Sansa Dedication with Disclaimer
      – Sansa & LF S4e8 scene “soundtrack”
      (Sansa: “I know what you want”)
      – Sandor Clegane Tribute

        Quote  Reply

    199. Ten Bears: As soon as that jogged my memory and I remembered the verse “Sunny came home with a list of names,” I couldn’t resist. 😋

      There are not many revenge ballads that win Grammy Awards for Song of the Year and Record of the Year.

      Definitely! And I liked this line in application to Arya: “It’s time for a few small repairs she said.” I think that works with the various motives for Arya’s list 🙂

        Quote  Reply

    200. Erik, formerly Lord Parramandas,

      I don’t think that they toned Daenerys down that much. What they did was that they gave the solutions to the men in her environment, while in the books it’s Dany that gives the solutions. And then -show wise- she has the bursts of “burn them all” to which the men around her must remind her that using dragons is generally not a very good idea. This choise was dictated by the fact that they needed to give more lines to the other actors. If the dialogs from the books are tampered, stripped down to their own essentials, her followers would have to have some of them for their screen time. In the books it’s different, as Dany listens to them and then decides, but the plans are all hers. How to move forward, what to do, how to take a city. She’s a clear-cut leader, not a little girl to be schooled.
      That said, a few more things from the books could be included in the show, i.e. the crucifiction of the masters, or the handling of the Astapori refugees. But I’m still not sure that it would have helped, because it was meant to be that trap for the viewers/readers. It was designed to deceive people from the point of the conception of the idea. Deceiving the readers/audience was part of the plan, and it was a successs in that respect.
      I suppose though that for the producers it took a life of its own; the fans were mesmerized by Daenerys, they cried “justice” with every enemy she removed and ignored all the rest. They expected to see the dragons triumph as if they were the RAF in WW II. Well, what about those below where the RAF is bombing? Enemies, right? What if they’re Lannisters though? What if it’s Jamie? What if it’s Bronn? What if it was that singer in 7.2? It was really disturbing to listen to Daenerys’ fans boasting about her accomplishment at the Blackwater Rush battle. It was seriously disturbing to applaude as she demanded the subjection of the kingdom whose leader and heir her own father cooked alive, believing that a brief “romance” would change everything.
      At this point I don’t think that showing anything else would have changed the attitude of the viewers after the show ending. But I do think that what was lacking in season 8 was, in the end, a serious opposition to Daenerys’ plans -because, let’s face it, Varys wasn’t enough and Cersei was drinking wine. Give her a real motive to bomb a surrendered city, because otherwise it seemed like it was her genes that made a difference.

        Quote  Reply

    201. Efi,

      That said, a few more things from the books could be included in the show, i.e. the crucifiction of the masters, or the handling of the Astapori refugees. But I’m still not sure that it would have helped, because it was meant to be that trap for the viewers/readers. It was designed to deceive people from the point of the conception of the idea. Deceiving the readers/audience was part of the plan, and it was a successs in that respect.

      The crucifixion of the masters was included in the show and it was something I did not wholly agree with since it was deciding the deaths based on class and title rather than executing people for crimes Dany was sure they committed. The show did question Dany’s actions here when Hizdahr came to Dany and said that his father, one of the men she crucified, spoke against the masters crucifying the slave children. This isn’t enough to make Dany question her crucifixion of the masters, but she is moved enough by Hizdahr’s pleas to bury his father properly despite her earlier refusal based on the masters letting the slave children rot in the sun.

      However, in the books, Dany does have an uneasy reflection over crucifying the masters in the books the morning after, whereupon the site makes her sick and she doesn’t feel like an avenging dragon anymore and she must convince herself it was right but she doesn’t sound very certain.

      She had them nailed to wooden posts around the plaza, each man pointing at the next. The anger was fierce and hot inside her when she gave the command; it made her feel like an avenging dragon. But later, when she passed the men dying on the posts, when she heard their moans and smelled their bowels and blood…

      Dany put the glass aside, frowning. It was just. It was. I did it for the children.

      As for the handling of the Astapori refugees in the books, what do you mean? Dany wasn’t being cruel there. She was helping the refugees, she wanted to let them into the city but she was advised against it because they carried the bloody flux, which would infect Meereen as well. However, she refused to stop helping or feeding them and when Yunkai was marching toward Meereen, it was greatly upsetting for her to have to close the gates to protect Meereen. She still couldn’t let the Astapori in because if she did, the Meereenese would become infected.

      I suppose though that for the producers it took a life of its own; the fans were mesmerized by Daenerys, they cried “justice” with every enemy she removed and ignored all the rest. They expected to see the dragons triumph as if they were the RAF in WW II. Well, what about those below where the RAF is bombing? Enemies, right? What if they’re Lannisters though? What if it’s Jamie? What if it’s Bronn? What if it was that singer in 7.2? It was really disturbing to listen to Daenerys’ fans boasting about her accomplishment at the Blackwater Rush battle. It was seriously disturbing to applaude as she demanded the subjection of the kingdom whose leader and heir her own father cooked alive, believing that a brief “romance” would change everything.

      I, for one, didn’t expect Dany to be triumphant. And to be honest, I didn’t love the dragons or feel much affection for them. But is the difference here that Dany was using dragonfire in battle (as she did against the Lannisters in 7×05) rather than limiting her arsenal to swords and other weapons? The Lannister soldiers who were defeated by Robb’s forces and the Bolton soldiers Jon was impaling on the battlefield didn’t seem to die gently or kindly either.

      The show made an effort to humanize the Lannister forces in Dany’s case by providing scenes of Arya coming across a group of gathered Lannister soldiers, in which Ed Sheeren talks about his character’s daughter and that he may not be able to return home to see her, as well as the scenes with Jaime, Bronn, Randyll and Dickon. Yet, are the Bolton forces who opposed Jon and Sansa, the Lannister forces who opposed Robb, are they less human? Don’t they have families too who they’d like to return to? The Bolton forces were fighting for Ramsay, a sadistic figure — but I wouldn’t say Cersei is much better either.

      Yes, Dany came to conquer the 7K. Stannis likewise wanted all 7K. It’s true that nobody needs a throne, Dany certainly felt the throne belonged to her, and I did find her to be lacking some self-awareness in that 7×03 scene — but she’s not who burned Rickard and Brandon alive so I’m not sure why she should make concessions for the North for that reason (but, by that turn, it shouldn’t be her expectation that Jon hold true to an oath made by his ancestor over which faith was broken by Aerys). Would it make a difference if Aerys was not Dany’s father? If she belonged to a different family but still wanted to conquer the 7K for her own?

      In regard to the idea that conquerors (or contenders for the throne) take their relatives’ crimes into account (ie. exempting the North from being one of the kingdoms she intends to rule from the Iron Throne because of her father’s crimes) when planning to take a crown or even keep a crown, I think there are two sides to this idea: unnecessarily brutal crimes were also committed against Dany’s family as well when her family was overthrown by the Lannisters/Baratheons/Starks. While we know Ned did not approve of this violence against Rhaegar’s family whatsoever and that Aerys was justifiably killed/overthrown, the crimes against Rhaegar’s family (Elia being brutally raped and murdered by her children were slaughtered) were committed under the orders of Tywin Lannister and were approved of by Ned’s best friend Robert Baratheon who Ned supported (but not in this). Robert also went on to hunt Dany and Viserys for Dany’s entire life (until mid-season 1). Would the Lannisters (under Cersei) and Gendry be expected to make concessions for Dany on this basis? Is it fair to blame Ned for Robert’s approval and attempts to eradicate all Targaryens, even the children?

      Admittedly, I did find it kind of odd that Dany was willing to accept the Iron Islands’ independence when it was requested by Yara (though under conditions) but she didn’t seem willing to consider Sansa’s own want for independence after the wars were finished. I wouldn’t say this was an impossible transition but it would have been nice to see what changed Dany’s mind between 6×09 and 8×02.

        Quote  Reply

    202. Ten Bears: I’ll have you know his doors of Iorac was the name of my Toad the Wet Sprocket cover band.

      His doors of Iorac is a real thing? It wasn’t the transcription feature in Google docs making stuff up? (I was certain Google was just hearing the audio phonetically).

        Quote  Reply

    203. Ten Bears: I’ll have you know his doors of Iorac was the name of my Toad the Wet Sprocket cover band.

      Oh god, I just reread your post — I’m a dumbass 🤣(Ignore my first response to this!) Also: LOL!

      Between this and my horrible typo above, I’m really doing well with reading and writing today 😉 Going to be a good day T___T

        Quote  Reply

    204. Adrianacandle,

      I’m not saying she doesn’t have right to complain. I’m saying it almost feels like she is denying autonomy to the writers. If they want cynical story that’s what the story is. Show belongs to Benioff and Weiss and they can do whatever they want.

      And when it comes to execution it all comes to this false idea that Daenerys really cares about other people. She is like Stalin. She cares about oppressed. In an abstract way. But what she really cares about is absolute power. She wanted to burn cities and castles too many times for us to really believe that she cares what happens with common people.

        Quote  Reply

    205. mau,

      I’m not saying she doesn’t have right to complain. I’m saying it almost feels like she is denying autonomy to the writers. If they want cynical story that’s what the story is. Show belongs to Benioff and Weiss and they can do whatever they want.

      I don’t think Petra is doing that. She’s pointing out problems she found with the plotting (and while I agree with many of them, there are some points I don’t entirely agree with) and offering suggestions — I don’t think that’s denying writer autonomy. Rather, I think that’s offering a constructive form of criticism, pointing out where she found weak spots in the writing, problems with the messaging, and offering suggestions for how she thought these problems could be improved.

      When I studied visual arts for seven years, this happened throughout. Sometimes, it was hard to hear and there were many times I had to start from scratch — but it was helpful. It’s how we got better and it’s how we learned to respond to criticism. Sometimes, the suggestions were not always taken but they were considered. It wasn’t blind hate. Petra isn’t getting personal with D&D, she’s not blindly hating. She’s pointing out specific issues she had, explaining them in the context of the show and in other forms of literature, and offers suggestions. She also points out what she did find meaningful.

      While Benioff and Weiss can do whatever they want, viewers — including Petra — can respond in what ways they want. And I appreciate Petra’s response because it was considered and I thought it was constructive.

      And when it comes to execution it all comes to this false idea that Daenerys really cares about other people. She is like Stalin. She cares about oppressed. In an abstract way. But what she really cares about is absolute power. She wanted to burn cities and castles too many times for us to really believe that she cares what happens with common people.

      Well, I’d dispute this idea is false and that this is people’s only complaint with the execution of this storyline. Yet, as I said above, I don’t want to get into another discussion over whether or not Dany’s actions in KL were built up or not. Maybe that’s a battle I’ll pick later but not at this time.

        Quote  Reply

    206. mau:
      Adrianacandle,

      That’s probably not intention but Petra’s comments does sound entitled. Why is wrong for the story to be cynical? To say tha ambition is wrong and that trying to break the wheel of injustice or the cycle of abuse is futile?

      Because it makes her feel bad? I don’t get that. GoT and Benioff and Weiss have every right to believe that every revolution is wrong and that every person who wants to change the world with violence will inevitably become monster.

      We live in age when ideas and themes are wrong because they are offensive. But good art should be offensive and aks hard questions.

      👏👏👏👏👏👍👍✌️ Thank you for that!

        Quote  Reply

    207. Adrianacandle,

      But that’s the problem. There is only lack of consistency in what she thinks Daenerys is.

      The story is not even that complicated. You have character that wants to commit mass murder for 7 seasons and she never did it because people around her had to stop her and at the end there is no one around her and she does it.

      Her reading of the story is wrong. You don’t get to lecture writers what they can and can’t do in their stories. They can use madness if they want and I don’t think they should card if someone finds that offensive. Good. Be offended.

      They can write her decision to be emotional and not cold-hearted.

      And I fundamentally disagree with the idea that ideas can be problematic. Ideas can’t be problematic. That’s road to censorship.

      If you want to discuss execution then discuss it, but you can’t criticize the idea of madness or emotional reasoning because writers have absolute autonomy to decide that. If they want emotional decision it will be that. Everything else is fan entitlement and I can’t agree with that.

      Debate execution. But ideas can’t be debated. There are no wrong ideas.

        Quote  Reply

    208. Adrianacandle,

      Yes she is doing that when she says that using madness is wrong. That has nothing to do with plotting. She is attacking the idea of madness.

      Also she is completely in denial over Daenerys. We are talking about character that had to be stopped many times from burning things and she says there is nothing in the first 70 episodes that suggested that? That even 10 more episodes after Missandei’s death wouldt be enough.

      Sorry but that’s ridiculous.

        Quote  Reply

    209. mau,

      Her reading of the story is wrong. You don’t get to lecture writers what they can and can’t do in their stories. They can use madness if they want and I don’t think they should card if someone finds that offensive. Good. Be offended.

      So if we don’t like a story or have a problem with its messaging, what should we do?

      Ideas can’t be problematic. That’s road to censorship.

      Wikipedia defines censorship as, “the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or ‘inconvenient.'”

      Encyclopedia Britannica defines censorship as “the changing or the suppression or prohibition of speech or writing that is deemed subversive of the common good. It occurs in all manifestations of authority to some degree, but in modern times it has been of special importance in its relation to government and the rule of law.”

      I’m not sure how feeling some ideas are problematic is a road to censorship? Ideas themselves can definitely be problematic and they can be discussed/criticized/agreed with/disagreed with/explored, etc. but I’d say it’s the forbidding of these ideas from being expressed, presented, explored, discussed, criticized, etc. that is censorship.

      If you want to discuss execution then discuss it, but you can’t criticize the idea of madness or emotional reasoning because writers have absolute autonomy to decide that. If they want emotional decision it will be that. Everything else is fan entitlement and I can’t agree with that.
      Debate execution. But ideas can’t be debated. There are no wrong ideas.

      This was a discussion of execution…. And criticism is often part of that. Sure, the writers can do whatever we want and we can discuss these writers’ choices. If these ideas can’t be debated, how can we discuss them or the execution of a plot? Are we to be limited to discussing technical details?

      I think the idea of forbidding us from criticizing certain ideas (or debating ideas) on the basis that writers have absolute autonomy and can do whatever we want so it’s not our place to debate the ideas behind it… that does sounds a bit like censorship (unless I’m misunderstanding you!)

      Yes she is doing that when she says that using madness is wrong. That has nothing to do with plotting. She is attacking the idea of madness.

      But even if Petra was attacking the idea of madness, I don’t think that’s wrong. It’s a response. However, I think she was more focused on how it was portrayed. Because I can’t argue Petra’s POV for her, I can include what she says about the portrayal of madness in GoT:

      But in a world that didn’t understand mental illness, the topic of madness is difficult to address because insanity is no longer a medical diagnosis in our world but still functions as an informal umbrella term for a range of disorders none of which are moral failures to have but, of course, society hasn’t always understood this so many monarchs whom historians now theorize may have suffered from bipolar disorder and schizophrenia or mercury poisoning were mythologized into monsters in their time.

      Elizabeth Báthory, who likely suffered from a neurological disorder, is largely considered the historical inspiration for the idea that vampires need blood for sustenance. Caligula, who likely had schizophrenia, was depicted as the first vampire in Dracula Untold.

      This is what I thought Game of Thrones was getting at with Aerys: that people with a limited understanding of the world around them, who see PTSD as cowardice, who vilify young women for outliving their old sick husbands, and remember warrior queens as witches would surely view a man living with untreated schizophrenia or psychosis as just plain evil this was a poignant and insightful approach to Martin’s admittedly vague concept of Targaryen madness, which the show then completely dropped when it came to Daenerys.

      [7×04 scene of Tyrion and Dany on the beach — Tyrion: “If I’ve underestimated our enemies–” Dany: “Enemies? Your family, you mean!”] Ah yes the early signs. No, this is called anger. It is a perfectly healthy emotion to feel when one’s allies fuck up. Other characters have experienced it — it’s almost like those guys had something Daenerys didn’t that made their anger seem rational. Anyway, this conflation of anger and madness feels like a semantic mix-up. Anger has nothing to do with mental illness and as it is, it’s not even that dominant of a trait in Daenerys.

      [Tyrion to Dany: “And you’ve been known to lose your temper from time to time.”]

      No, she hasn’t. She’s been known to make controversial decisions. That
      was a decision, that was a decision, that was a decision. They weren’t always good decisions and I’ll get to that in a second but to cite these as examples of encroaching mental illness fairly, we’d have to make the same argument for every other character who ever did a mean thing.

      My point is that Game of Thrones never had a handle on what Targaryen madness was: mental illness, anger, pyromania, so it’s kind of hard to make that a character’s hamartia. The other fatal flaw the show optioned for Daenerys — her sense of moral superiority and her consequential sense of entitlement had a lot more potential and not coincidentally, was the reason I could never join the Danny bandwagon, much as I wanted to.

      You can agree or disagree but I don’t think it’s wrong to explore or question the show’s portrayal of madness either.

        Quote  Reply

    210. mau,

      Also she is completely in denial over Daenerys. We are talking about character that had to be stopped many times from burning things and she says there is nothing in the first 70 episodes that suggested that? That even 10 more episodes after Missandei’s death wouldt be enough.

      No, she didn’t say that. She disagreed with the motives presented for Dany’s decision to burn KL and felt they were inconsistent. She offers what she thinks could have been Dany’s fatal flaw. If you read the transcription or go to the essay itself, you’ll see that Petra had issues with Dany since she killed MMD and thought this introduced the idea of Dany being an eventual villain.

      Her reasoning for thinking that even 10 episodes between Missandei’s death and the burning of KL wouldn’t be enough wasn’t about it being impossible for Dany to be the villain. It was about feeling there was no consistent motivation connecting her from her previous behaviors to her motives for burning down King’s Landing:

      We could have had 10 whole episodes between Missandei’s death and those ill-fated bells and it still wouldn’t have worked because there’s no coherent narrative through line connecting the Daenerys Targaryen of the first seven and a half seasons to the villain we got in the last two episodes.

      Let’s put this in terms of harmatia, a word I think I’m pronouncing correctly which, in dramatic literature, has come to refer to the protagonist’s fatal flaw, which leads to their downfall. Othello’s harmatia is jealousy, for instance. Hamlet’s is in action. Ned Stark’s is honor. So what is Daenerys’s harmatia?

      Daenerys is succumbing to hereditary insanity but the final episode reframes the destruction of King’s Landing as merely an escalation from her practices in Essos. Some have argued that she didn’t actually go mad when she destroyed King’s Landing but rather acted out of grief anger and rejection, which might have worked except that in episode six, Daenerys reprises rhetoric from earlier seasons in such a way that makes her seem delusional. If the show had only settled on one fatal flaw for Daenerys and followed through on that to the end, things might have panned out differently.

      My point is that Game of Thrones never had a handle on what Targaryen madness was: mental illness, anger, pyromania, so it’s kind of hard to make that a character’s harmatia. The other fatal flaw the show optioned for Daenerys — her sense of moral superiority and her consequential sense of entitlement had a lot more potential and not coincidentally, was the reason I could never join the Danny bandwagon, much as I wanted to.

      Again, you are free to disagree with this but I don’t think it was a case of denial.

        Quote  Reply

    211. Sometimes I feel like crazy person because I would burn KL for less than what Dany had to endure lol.

      How much shit a person had to take before she can snap? I don’t know. Maybe I am a sociopath, but these people sound like monks with their endless tolerance.

      She is already brutal, she already had burning cities and destroying shit in mind for a veeery long time and she lost everyone and everything. People thought that Cersei would destroy KL once she looses everything and never had any problem with it. Why? Because she is villain?

      I mean Dany even before KL destruction killed far more people than Cersei ever did and in a more brutal way. Before Sept explosion Cersei only killed her abusive husband and yet no one said that Sept explosion makes no sense and that Cersei would never do something like that.

      It’s all about perspective and framing. The story plays with that. Daenerys is hero and Cersei is villain and that’s why no one cared when Cersei killed so many people “out of nowhere”.

        Quote  Reply

    212. Adrianacandle,

      Ofc I’m going to disagree because what she is saying makes no sense. Danerys’ fatal flaw was her messianic complex and that’s why she could make excuses for every move she made.

      I mean we literally had

      606 – Dany to her army – let’s go and kill my enemies destroy their houses

      805 – They do that

      806 – Speech that is copy paste from 606 where she thanks them

      Some fans: Out of nowhere. No motivation. I don’t see anything here.

        Quote  Reply

    213. mau,

      Or too explain this better. I believe there is a limitation in which audience can attack the story. In a age of petitions and angry twitter mobs autonomy of writers is in danger and everything will turn into MCU where no one will take any risks with the story.

      We saw that with The Last Jedi or right now with The Last of Us 2.

      Enough is enough. Angry mob will destroy art.

      Or to make it very simple. You can debtae the ways in which Dany becomes mad or extremely angry but I don’t think debating the idea and turning idea into something wrong and forbidden is acceptable.

        Quote  Reply

    214. Also I think that writers who try to do something different even if they fail should be praised and not harassed and cancelled. We saw how mob works. We see that now with Last of Us creator. Final goal – destruction of personal and professional life and making sure that they never work again.

      That is what you get when you try to do something original and brave. And yeah GoT had flaws I’m not blind but just the ambition of Dany’s downfall is greater than any of that.

      Writing something different and unconventional is much harder and it’s much easier to fail and do something wrong.

        Quote  Reply

    215. mau,

      “So if we don’t like a story or have a problem with its messaging, what should we do?”

      Write your own story.

      Okay, so:

      We can…

      Discuss some aspects execution (ie. the ways in which Dany becomes mad or extremely angry)
      Write our own story if we don’t like a story or have problems with its messaging (what if we like some aspects of a story and not others?)

      We can’t…

      Debate ideas
      Criticize ideas
      Think some ideas are problematic
      Can’t criticize the idea of madness or emotional reasoning because writers have absolute autonomy to decide that

      (If I’ve misunderstood you on any of the above, please correct me)

      I’m sorry, mau. I don’t think I can abide by this — for Game of Thrones or any other media. If that makes me an entitled fan who takes away writer autonomy, I accept that.

      Or to make it very simple. You can debtae the ways in which Dany becomes mad or extremely angry but I don’t think debating the idea and turning idea into something wrong and forbidden is acceptable.

      I think we are debating the ideas in which Dany becomes mass. However, you feel Petra’s ideas to this end don’t make sense. Okay. That’s your right. But she offers ways in which Dany can be led to her downfall and what can ignite her.

      And I still think people can disagree with ideas or their portrayal — but who is saying they are forbidden?

      Or too explain this better. I believe there is a limitation in which audience can attack the story. In a age of petitions and angry twitter mobs autonomy of writers is in danger and everything will turn into MCU where no one will take any risks with the story.

      I think that’s very different from questioning/debating ideas and feeling some messaging is problematic or offering suggestions on improvement. Nobody (here) is getting personal or gathering their pitchforks and torches to go after D&D. We are examining their work and that’s where the criticism is levied at. Not at D&D as people or demanding they rewrite the show due to viewer displeasure. I think we can question their ideas, what messages we feel we’re getting from some concepts/plots, and some of their choices.

      Even here, I’m not saying what D&D have stated and their intentions are not canon. I certainly consider D&D the ultimate authority on their work and consider what they have to say about the show as canon. However, I think I can still debate/question/examine their choices and the ideas behind some of the plots.

        Quote  Reply

    216. mau: Angry mob will destroy art.

      I think the problems with new Star Wars trilogy was entirely the fault of the writers.
      They caved into PC Culture.

      Specifically, the character of Rey. Everything comes so easy to her. She never goes through any difficulties, there’s no real training that shows any progression of her character like we had with Luke in the original trilogy. She’s basically a boss with cheat codes because “the Force is Female” now according to the writers and everything has to be given to her with the greatest of ease. The entire thing is vomit inducing.

      I’m sure some of the nerd rage it caused went too far. There’s always somebody that has to take it too far, but those Star Wars films deserved every bit of criticism they got, IMO.

        Quote  Reply

    217. Adrianacandle,

      I agree with you.

      Art is meant to not only be consumed, but it’s also there to be evaluated, analyzed, debated, and discussed. It’s not there to tell us what to think or how to feel. It’s simply there to suggest, and it’s up to us to do what we want with it.

      Stifling debate over an artistic choice is much more dangerous for society than having an open dialogue. Obviously, lines must be drawn and people should be able to state their opinions without getting personal. It should be kept respectful on both sides. I recall some of the writers for Star Wars were openly antagonistic to their own fans. Like that “force is female” comment. When that drew criticism with comments like “the force is genderless” the writers just accused those people of being misogynists without really thinking about the message being conveyed. It’s become an openly antagonistic experience for both the writers and fans.

      We can debate the ending and Dany’s downfall in perpetuity. Obviously, I didn’t care for the way Dany’s downfall went, but that’s not even my biggest issue with the ending.

      My biggest issue is that I’m honestly not sure what the writers are trying to say. Are they trying to say that the pursuit of power is too corrupt, so no one should even try? Power corrupts, so therefore the only solution for humanity is to have an omniscient Superman as king like Bran, which is completely unrealistic? I just…I don’t know what I’m supposed to do with that. IMO, it’s a deeply cynical ending without any real reason for optimism.

        Quote  Reply

    218. Hey…it has been minute.

      What was I saying last time?

      Okey, Dokey…….Can we all agree that the writing for GOT Season 8 was poor, particularly 8.4, 8.5, 8.6? (Ok, 8.2 was good! and if you could see it, 8.3 looked like a lot of work!) If we can agree that, then maybe we would have made some productive use of 2020 to date? Yeah, I can feel a consensus forming. Really bad? Yeah? I see heads nodding.

      Good, I will be back soon. Other things to sort…

      Chili, are you OK?

      Ok peeps, Carry on!

        Quote  Reply

    219. Mr Derp,

      Art is meant to not only be consumed, but it’s also there to be evaluated, analyzed, debated, and discussed. It’s not there to tell us what to think or how to feel. It’s simply there to suggest, and it’s up to us to do what we want with it.

      Yes and often, art is a comment on something: what’s going on around us, concepts, ideas, personal issues, social issues, political issues, spirituality, feelings, lifestyle, what is art itself, etc. (I know I’m missing a whole bunch)… and comments are replied to in some form. And those comments are replied to. And these ideas are discussed/debated/explored/even experimented with. And in this way, sometimes entire movements are formed and with it, progression (hopefully).

      Stifling debate over an artistic choice is much more dangerous for society than having an open dialogue. Obviously, lines must be drawn and people should be able to state their opinions without getting personal. It should be kept respectful on both sides.

      Exactly. And while there are times things go too far (there’s a debate raging on about cancel culture right now and how it can get pretty extreme and angry mob-ish), if we keep it about the work and debate respectfully without attacking anyone with accusations, assumptions, personal judgements, or mob-mentality, I think debate is good, as is respectful disagreement. And I think it’s important.

      We can debate the ending and Dany’s downfall in perpetuity. Obviously, I didn’t care for the way Dany’s downfall went, but that’s not even my biggest issue with the ending.
      My biggest issue is that I’m honestly not sure what the writers are trying to say. Are they trying to say that the pursuit of power is too corrupt, so no one should even try? Power corrupts, so therefore the only solution for humanity is to have an omniscient Superman as king like Bran, which is completely unrealistic? I just…I don’t know what I’m supposed to do with that. IMO, it’s a deeply cynical ending without any real reason for optimism.

      I agree. Alt Shift X, who I felt was fair to season 8 for the most part, said this, which also echoes my own sentiments.

      This whole story was about ambitious noble families fighting and scheming for power.

      But now, in one scene, all the great houses agree to give up their power to a weird psychic kid cause ‘he has a good story’. Maybe everyone’s just too tired and confused to argue right now. But Sansa set a precedent for kingdoms to secede, so there could be rebellions in the future.

      This brave new realm is delicate and uncertain, but there is hope. King Bran represents a different kind of ruler. Past kings have been bad because they’ve been proud or cruel or power-hungry. Bran doesn’t care about power. He has no pride or cruelty. He barely has a personality — so in theory, he’ll be fair and unbiased.

      He’ll be a good ruler because he’s inhuman — which is a very depressing message.

      Game of Thrones was always about the struggle between human good and human evil within each person. Bran being king suggests that the solution to human evil isn’t human good, it’s being not human.

      And with the failure of Jaime and Daenerys, this whole season feels deeply cynical about the very possibility of human good.

        Quote  Reply

    220. Adrianacandle: This whole story was about ambitious noble families fighting and scheming for power.

      But now, in one scene, all the great houses agree to give up their power to a weird psychic kid cause ‘he has a good story’. Maybe everyone’s just too tired and confused to argue right now. But Sansa set a precedent for kingdoms to secede, so there could be rebellions in the future.

      Yes, and the kid who has a “good story” is one that pretty much every kingdom would find hard to believe, especially because they don’t know what a 3 Eyed Raven is or why it’s important. Since the WW story ended in the North, the rest of the kingdoms still believe it’s a bunch of b.s., right? If the story was consistent, then the leaders of the individual kingdoms would find Tyrion and Bran’s story laughable at best. Especially since Tyrion is also on trial for treason.

      Adrianacandle: He’ll be a good ruler because he’s inhuman — which is a very depressing message.

      That’s exactly what I’m saying. I’m not sure what to do with the message being conveyed other than to weep for our future. Or hope that Superman will emerge as contender for the U.S. Presidency this Fall. Don’t get me wrong, I wasn’t expecting some type of Earth-shattering revelation. I was just hoping for something a little more substantial than “power corrupts unles you’re a Three-Eyed Raven”.

        Quote  Reply

    221. Mr Derp,

      Yes, and the kid who has a “good story” is one that pretty much every kingdom would find hard to believe, especially because they don’t know what a 3 Eyed Raven is or why it’s important. Since the WW story ended in the North, the rest of the kingdoms still believe it’s a bunch of b.s., right? If the story was consistent, then the leaders of the individual kingdoms would find Tyrion and Bran’s story laughable at best. Especially since Tyrion is also on trial for treason.

      Yep and I don’t know how credible it is to choose a new king on the basis of how interesting his life story has been. And yes, why would they believe it? As you said, the WW didn’t make it past Winterfell and were defeated in a single night. A handful of southerners fought (like Jaime and Brienne) but not a single southern army showed up so it’s not like a bunch of Crownslanders can verify the undead’s existence. It remains another crazy Northern story, a myth, a legend that might have once happened and serves as the source for many scary children’s stories.

      That’s exactly what I’m saying. I’m not sure what to do with the message being conveyed other than to weep for our future. Or hope that Superman will emerge as contender for the U.S. Presidency this Fall. Don’t get me wrong, I wasn’t expecting some type of Earth-shattering revelation. I was just hoping for something a little more substantial than “power corrupts unles you’re a Three-Eyed Raven”.

      Yes. And while I do think Bran will be king in the books, I can only hope that it’s set up better and it doesn’t have quite this same message — that we’re too corrupt to rule ourselves and that our best chance is somebody with supernatural powers.

      In this way, it feels a bit like a medieval dystopian message.

        Quote  Reply

    222. Adrianacandle: In this way, it feels a bit like a medieval dystopian message.

      That’s a good way of putting it.

      Also, I understand that the move away from a Hereditary Monarchy is considered a good thing, but there’s no clear succession plan for Westeros anymore. Once Bran dies, if he dies at all, it’ll be up to the Patricians to choose a new king. That could get messy very quickly. Whose to stop any one particular family from a violent coupe? Then Westeros is right back to where it started. The show began with families fighting and squabbling for power. Once Bran dies, there’s no reason why this would change. Besides, what if Bran was lying the whole time? Not that I think he was, but no one in all of Westeros or Essos could stop him if he was lying and he’d be a bigger problem for Westeros than Dany ever was.

      IMO, the lack of a clear plan creates a power vacuum and nature abhors a vacuum. It’s going to be chaos once Bran dies.

        Quote  Reply

    223. Mr Derp,

      Also, I understand that the move away from a Hereditary Monarchy is considered a good thing, but there’s no clear succession plan for Westeros anymore. Once Bran dies, if he dies at all, it’ll be up to the Patricians to choose a new king. That could get messy very quickly. Whose to stop any one particular family from a violent coupe? Then Westeros is right back to where it started. The show began with families fighting and squabbling for power. Once Bran dies, there’s no reason why this would change. Besides, what if Bran was lying the whole time? Not that I think he was, but no one in all of Westeros or Essos could stop him if he was lying.
      IMO, the lack of a clear plan creates a power vacuum and nature abhors a vacuum. It’s going to be chaos once Bran dies.

      I had wondered that if Bran dies, another Three-Eyed Raven is selected — in the way Bloodraven trained and selected Bran and transferred all his powers to Bran upon his death (is that right?). Then that Three-Eyed Raven becomes king.

      But then it’s not really an election in which anyone (from a small, limited, select group) can run. It must be a Three-Eyed Raven for the purposes of Three-Eyed Raven powers.

      And yes, these problems weren’t really addressed — it’s not an unlikely chance a house could feel marginalized or unhappy with a decision made by the council/Bran. I suppose the prospect of war could stop them from acting out but maybe they get to the point where they decide war is worth it? Or somebody from that house may try to assassinate Bran, which may very well start another war and they need to decide a new monarch again.

      Or can Bran foresee these problems and prevent them in advance? But then again, that may churn up more hostility…

      I know the road from a hereditary monarchy to democracy is messy, bumpy, long, and hard but I’m hoping there will be some sort of plan or preparation for such situations in the books. It doesn’t have to be perfect, I don’t think there is a perfect plan for this, but if it just involved some addressing and preparation for these issues you’ve brought up.

        Quote  Reply

    224. mau,

      ”…606 – Dany to her army – let’s go and kill my enemies destroy their houses

      805 – They do that

      806 – Speech that is copy paste from 606 where she thanks them

      Some fans: Out of nowhere. No motivation. I don’t see anything here.”

      While we’re at it, let’s not forget:

      609: Dany’s plan (until Tyrion talks her out of it): Exterminate all of the Masters’ soldiers and return all of their cities to the dirt (with all of their civilians)

      705: Dany to Lannister POWs: Kneel or fry! (i.e., join my army or … Dracarys!🔥)
      [I mean, saying she wasn’t there to put people in chains was a lame excuse. Executing surrendered soldiers has still got to be a war crime, even if you give them the “option” of becoming turncloaks and fighting against their own comrades.)

      50? or 60? [Not sure if this qualifies, though I did find it shocking]: Feeds an arbitrarily selected Mereenese nobleman to dragons for a snack.

      Burn them all!” was kind of her default setting. That’s a problem when you give a nuke to someone with impulse control “issues.”*
      Just like cops with tasers and abusive spouses with handguns, there’s always a temptation to use your cool toy, particularly in a fit of rage.

      * Nice job Tyrion. You told the Mother of Madness you joined Team Dany because Dany
      had advisors who could “rein in her worst impulses.” How did that work out for you? 🤔

        Quote  Reply

    225. Adrianacandle,

      ”…Or somebody from that house may try to assassinate Bran, which may very well start another war and they need to decide a new monarch again.

      Or can Bran foresee these problems and prevent them in advance? But then again, that may churn up more hostility…”

      It didn’t look like Bran could foresee problems, or if he could, he did nothing to prevent them in advance.

      The only indication that I saw that Bran could read the future was his own ascension to the throne, when he made that cryptic comment to Tyrion: “Why do you think I came all this way?”

      The other alternative was that he let a lot of bad sh*t happen without trying to prevent it.

      I don’t know. The show really didn’t provide much clarity about Bran’s (greenseer?) powers. We saw that Jojen was able to “see” future events. I don’t recall any vivid demonstrations that Bran was able to do that, beyond fragmentary images in his slide-show “visions.”

      Oh, and nothing I saw impressed me with King Bran the Broken’s leadership skills. In the last episode he seemed more like a disinterested figurehead than a wise, hands-on, concerned ruler: He got wheeled into the Small Council meeting, didn’t say or do much, and got wheeled right back out a minute later.

      I’d rather have King Robert. He didn’t care much for governing either. At least he threw good parties.

        Quote  Reply

    226. Ten Bears:
      Tiago,

      ”It’s remarkable how a year and a month after the end of Game of Thrones, fans continue to debate the fate of Daenerys. It seems all the comment sections in this site always end there one way or another.”

      Has no one heard of the ancient Roman adage, “All Roads Lead to Arya”?

      When Ten Bears speaks, they surely lead 🙂

        Quote  Reply

    227. Mr Derp</stro
      Mr Derp,

      ng>,

      Oh I’m not going to open nerd black hole know as Star Wars debate. But I wasn’t talking about Rey. Main problem for many in TLJ was Luke Skywalker.

      And I think Rian’s idea was really interesting and original, but mob destroyed it. And who will ever dare do do anything interesting with a character like that? Only role people wanted for him was old wise teacher.

        Quote  Reply

    228. Tensor the Mage, Still Loving the Ending:
      Tiago,

      The other problem with her ending is how the other characters are bent to fit in Daenerys ending. It’s almost like they don’t have a life of their own. Jon, Sansa, Tyrion, Cersei are only there to make Daenerys goes wrong. We’re talking about characters we’ve followed for eight years, whose role is reduced to influence another character’ ending.

      I really like your way of putting that, and I agree, to a certain extent, with the “bent” feeling. Some of that comes from the structure Martin created, with the obvious existential threat of the Others/WW/Army of the Dead dispatched before the hidden and larger existential threat, Dany, even emerges from the false trappings of a hero in which he’d presented her. Once the undead are buried, the story simply must conclude relatively quickly, else the audience will wonder why they are still watching/reading.

      Martin also failed to provide Benioff and Weiss any actual story after the death of Jon Snow. They finally had to travel to his home and wrest from him an outline of the remaining story, and then figure out for themselves how to finish their version. If he’d produced another actual *book* (or two) after they’d produced Winter is Coming, they might have had enough material for the additional seasons HBO offered (or begged, more likely) them to have. The larger amount of story they had before dispatch of the undead could have allowed them to tell more story after it as well, by having more character’s stories, and longer arcs to conclude for existing characters, before reaching Dany’s Downfall.

      As for the rest of that “bent” feeling, well, take Jon Snow as an example. He joined the Night’s Watch to prove he was as good as a true-born Stark, and he succeeded in spades (ha!). He became the greatest Lord Commander the Night’s Watch ever had! He orchestrated the end of the threat the Night’s Watch existed merely to contain. Once he’d performed that godlike task, what else was there for him to do? Well, in the story, to end the other great threat to humanity. His arc actually was complete with Dany’s death, and as Tyrion pointed out, his killing her fit perfectly with his mission to guard the Realms of Men; thematically, his arc was complete. He feels “bent” only if you declare his arc was finished when the undead were buried, and that was not the case. Remember, Martin set the audience up all along to believe that ending the undead was Jon Snow’s main purpose in the story, so this “bent” feeling was to some degree intentional on Martin’s part.

      You’re right that Jon’s arc in the show ends when he kills Daenerys. I also concede that it’s much easier to avoid that “bent” feeling in a book where you have the POV of the main characters. In a TV series, you can only induce what’s going on in the characters minds from the way they act. Thoughts aren’t described like in the books.

        Quote  Reply

    229. Adrianacandle,

      At the end of the day you can do whatever you want but your criticism is not beyond criticism. And my opinion is that Petra’s opinion dances too close to censorship and “forbidden ideas” narrative where you can’t do something because it’s cynical or offensive.

      There is a backlash against backlash in popular culture debate in general right now. That’s why Cinema Wins is becoming more and more popular. People are just tired of negativety and toxic fandoms. People are just tired that whenever something is not popular it’s turned into crime againts humanity. People are tired of that sort of nerd culture way of looking at things because now with twitter and YT nerds are not contained in their online places they are everywhere with their screeching and people are just tired of it. Look at subbredits for The Last of Us 2. It’s beyond ridiculous.

      It’s like race in extremism. There is hysteria in Westworld fandom right now. Dramatic and over the top like every other drama. And problem is that these people don’t want to stay in their places. They will screech everywhere, attack people, reviewers, review bomb RT, IMDB, be in every comment section, invade every place and turn it into shit.

      There is no reasonable debate if someone is offended by art.

        Quote  Reply

    230. Ten Bears,

      The only indication that I saw that Bran could read the future was his own ascension to the throne, when he made that cryptic comment to Tyrion: “Why do you think I came all this way?”

      There’s also a scene in 4×02 where Bran has glimpses of the future (including the shadow of a dragon pass over King’s Landing):

      But ultimately, yes, I think you’re right. I doubt Bran can see the future. Even Isaac Hempstead Wright seemed unsure (from Harper Bazaar, Did Bran Stark Know He’d Be King All Along?, July 19, 2019. Link not included to ensure post avoids moderation phase):

      “I don’t think Bran knows exactly what will happen in the future,” the actor said at San Diego Comic Con 2019 months after the finale. “His vision of the future is slightly cloudier.”

      Re: Bran telling Sam to tell Jon the truth about his parentage when Sam has just found out Dany executed Sam’s father and brother (from The New York Times, ‘Game of Thrones’: Bran on His Future and the Night King’s Ultimate Fate, May 5 2019):

      That might just be for dramatic tension. But yeah, good point. [Laughs] This is all conjecture on my part. I’ve never actually gone through a very detailed analysis of what exactly Bran’s powers are with [the showrunners David Benioff and Dan Weiss]. To be honest, I don’t think they really want to do that. It would become like a superhero movie, if we knew every way that Bran’s powers worked and what exactly he can do. It’s best to keep that sense of mystery and an unknown to it.

      Bran doesn’t care. It’s totally irrelevant to Bran that Samwell Tarly’s family has died, unfortunately. The Three-Eyed Raven doesn’t see things in terms of personal sadness. He just sees things in terms of the way things must unfold, or the way time goes. He’s not going to go, “Oh, I’m sorry, Sam. I hope you feel better in a minute.” He just sees things that have to happen next, and the importance of those things far outweighs any personal tragedies that might occur. It sounds brutal! But that’s been the role of the Three-Eyed Raven for millennia. To sit there, watching, carefully. He doesn’t sit there judging. He doesn’t sit there advising. He just sits there keeping an eye on history and time.

      ____

      Oh, and nothing I saw impressed me with King Bran the Broken’s leadership skills. In the last episode he seemed more like a disinterested figurehead than a wise, hands-on, concerned ruler: He got wheeled into the Small Council meeting, didn’t say or do much, and got wheeled right back out a minute later.

      We never got to see the leadership skills of King Bran the Broken either. But yes, he did seem pretty removed from human concerns anyhow. I saw a few people here posit (in past threads) that Bran might be acting as a figurehead/final judge while the council goes about the business of discussing what to do and bringing it to Bran.

      I’d rather have King Robert. He didn’t care much for governing either. At least he threw good parties.

      And he also let his council rule for him too, in which they came to him for the final say as king 😉

      I had the impression Robert liked the fighting/war bits but not so much the ruling part.

        Quote  Reply

    231. Mr Derp,

      None of these things with Star Wars writers ever happened. But I don’t blame you. It is a goal of toxic nerds to repeat the same thing over and over until people forget the truth. Like D&D leaving GoT for Star Wars.

      That was Nike campaign. And writers of SW never attacked any fans.

      But toxic fandom needs to create these false narratives that these people in charge are not only bad writers but also horrible people so they can completely dehumanize them at then everything is allowed if you want to attack them.

        Quote  Reply

    232. Mr Derp,

      ”Yes, and the kid who has a “good story” is one that pretty much every kingdom would find hard to believe, especially because they don’t know what a 3 Eyed Raven is or why it’s important. Since the WW story ended in the North, the rest of the kingdoms still believe it’s a bunch of b.s., right? If the story was consistent, then the leaders of the individual kingdoms would find Tyrion and Bran’s story laughable at best…”

      Right. I would expect “the leaders of the individual kingdoms” to react to Bran’s story the same way the Citadel Masters did in S7: getting a big laugh out of a story about “a crippled boy talking to magic birds,” and dismissing whatever he had to say as likely some kind of ruse.

      Particularly since the scene abruptly cut away when Bran was about to tell his “story” to Tyrion in S8e2, neither we nor the electors were shown why Bran had the “best” story, or why that qualified him to lead a war-torn kingdom.

      Frankly, I was disappointed that after all the sacrifices made to insure Bran’s survival (e.g., by Hodor, Leaf, Summer, et al.), and all the hints that he would be indispensable in the showdown against the AotD, neither Bran nor his powers really played any vital part in the big battle. (And no, I don’t want to hear about the silly Bran Bait Plan, or how important it was to preserve his database of “memories.”) I thought Bran would use his time traveling powers to find some critical information in the past. Nope. Didn’t happen. Nor did he provide any valuable reconnaissance information to the WF defenders in S8e3 (or to Team Dany for the assault on KL in the ensuing episodes). Telling people after the fact stuff like “You were exactly where you were supposed to be” didn’t cut it. Hot Pie could’ve come up with that pearl of wisdom. Or Kinvara (“everything happens for a reason”).

      Seriously, a one or two minute scene illustrating how Bran/3ER 2.0 would be a decent king would have been reassuring – to the viewer and to the people he was going to rule. Instead, he was an enigma. As you intimated, all they saw was a weird kid with a bizarre story relayed by an prisoner accused of treason. If there was a reason why they would all buy that story, it could have been shown on screen.

        Quote  Reply

    233. mau,

      At the end of the day you can do whatever you want but your criticism is not beyond criticism.

      Yes, people are free to criticize my opinion too. I’ve never objected to that. I may respond and disagree but I’d never say, “You can’t disagree with me. That’s not allowed.” Discussion and respectful disagreement is what creates a dialogue.

      And my opinion is that Petra’s opinion dances too close to censorship and “forbidden ideas” narrative where you can’t do something because it’s cynical or offensive.

      Alright, and I’m disagreeing with your opinion in turn — I’m not telling you you’re not allowed to have it. I, myself, didn’t see anything where Petra was forbidding anybody from expressing ideas, but pointing out problems she saw in their portrayal. There, I’m not seeing what you’re seeing but I’m not saying, “You can’t say this or dispute this.” I think that would be censorship.

      There is a backlash against backlash in popular culture debate in general right now. That’s why Cinema Wins is becoming more and more popular. People are just tired of negativety and toxic fandoms. People are just tired that whenever something is not popular it’s turned into crime againts humanity. People are tired of that sort of nerd culture way of looking at things because now with twitter and YT nerds are not contained in their online places they are everywhere with their screeching and people are just tired of it. Look at subbredits for The Last of Us 2. It’s beyond ridiculous.

      I’m not part of The Last of Us fandom and I think the angry mob culture can go too far when it gets personal and I think people do make reaches.

      But I think, as long as people discuss and debate respectfully, avoid getting personal, avoid attacking the writers/actors/etc. and each other, as long as we don’t accuse, and don’t dismiss, we can discuss these ideas and good can come out of that.

      I don’t agree with all criticisms of the final season of Game of Thrones and I’ve seen some voice some opinions I, personally, think are reaching. But other criticisms, yes, I do agree with.

      It’s like race in extremism. There is hysteria in Westworld fandom right now. Dramatic and over the top like every other drama. And problem is that these people don’t want to stay in their places. They will screech everywhere, attack people, reviewers, review bomb RT, IMDB, be in every comment section, invade every place and turn it into shit.

      Oh, there is extremism no doubt and I think some on a certain subreddit for GoT go way too far because they do make it personal, they do attack the writers themselves, they do engage in angry mob mentality. And I think review bombing and attacking others (writers, actors, other reviewers/fans) is wrong.

      But I think this is a matter of crossing a line. It’s not respectful or healthy debate.

      There is no reasonable debate if someone is offended by art.

      I think there is if they’re willing to do so respectfully, explain their views, and engage in a dialogue in which their views are challenged (rather than ranting into an echo chamber).

      I do agree with Petra’s criticisms of how GoT portrayed mental illness. I’m part of the mental illness community and it was a focus of my grad thesis. It is also a stigma I’ve suffered myself. One of the supervisors for my thesis wrote a book entitled, “Remembrance of Patients Past: Patient Life at the Toronto Hospital for the Insane, 1870-1940” and taught a course called “A Mad People’s History”. It looked at some of the stuff Petra was examining (not with Game of Thrones specifically but in media and how mental illness was represented and portrayed).

      There are valid concerns over the portrayal of madness in media and I think Petra addresses those concerns. You don’t have to agree and nobody is telling you to agree, really! But I think that debate is an important one to have since mental illness is so stigmatized.

        Quote  Reply

    234. mau: There is a backlash against backlash in popular culture debate in general right now. That’s why Cinema Wins is becoming more and more popular. People are just tired of negativety and toxic fandoms. People are just tired that whenever something is not popular it’s turned into crime againts humanity.

      I wanted to add — I think this, too, is an important debate to add because I think it asks a good question: “How far is too far when expressing anger?” Not just in fandom, but in real life too. For instance, when does cancel culture become toxic?

      There’s a debate currently going on with Jenna Marbles and she is being attacked for a video she did 9-10 years ago on her YouTube channel (and has been made private for quite some time by now). It’s been years since she’s done/said anything similar and has made quite a few apologies for it in the past. However, this latest round had Jenna leave YouTube altogether. It’s prompted a debate discussing when cancel culture goes too far (I’d say some YouTubers definitely deserve to be called out but if you’re interested in this debate, you can look up reactions to Jenna Marbles quitting and the video she is being attacked over).

        Quote  Reply

    235. Adrianacandle,

      Sadly internet is not like this place, and if you use twitter or reddit it becomes obvious how debate around almost everything in pop culture that is not universally loved is ruined. Westworld, Star Wars, The Last of Us, Game of Thrones,… Whenever there is some controversy it becomes race in extremism as I said. Who will say something more extreme and who will be more outraged about something. If you listen to people talk about Westworld you will assume they just watched child pornography. That’s the level of disgust they express. And how you can have reasonable debate with someone who wanted to punsh TV and can’t watch a second of GoT anymore without emotional breakdown. These people had meltdown when D&D appeared in Westworld. Lol

      And they just lie all the time. Just now there is fake script of the Bells online, claiming that evil D&D changed the ending in post production to ruin Daenerys.

      Fun fact: The current nerd rage is abour the Last of Us 2 and Benioff appears there as well. At least his book does in one scene lol Last of Us is inspired by his book City of Thieves.

      And I DO think that last season and GoT as a whole has flaws. I think Bran as a character is the biggest fail in the show. I think S7 needed one more episode and S8 two more. But at some point I just want to talk about things that I liked about the show. Isn’t that the point of fandom of a show that is over? Nothing will ever be changed. I will never get those 3 episodes that last two seasons needed and I just don’t want this state of endless frustration where we just as fans talk about things we didn’t like.

        Quote  Reply

    236. mau,

      Sadly internet is not like this place, and if you use twitter or reddit it becomes obvious how debate around almost everything in pop culture that is not universally loved is ruined. Westworld, Star Wars, The Last of Us, Game of Thrones,… Whenever there is some controversy it becomes race in extremism as I said. Who will say something more extreme and who will be more outraged about something. If you listen to people talk about Westworld you will assume they just watched child pornography. That’s the level of disgust they express. And how you can have reasonable debate with someone who wanted to punsh TV and can’t watch a second of GoT anymore without emotional breakdown. These people had meltdown when D&D appeared in Westworld. Lol

      Oh, definitely. I think parts of this fandom can get way too extreme and way too stannish and way too personal (and sometimes, when it gets really personal, it borders on downright scary). I’ve seen it — on Twitter, on Tumblr, on YouTube, on Reddit. And some of it is alarming.

      But at some point I just want to talk about things that I liked about the show. Isn’t that the point of fandom of a show that is over? Nothing will ever be changed. I will never get those 3 episodes that last two seasons needed and I just don’t want this state of endless frustration where we just as fans talk about things we didn’t like.

      You’re right — the dye is cast, the ink is dry (as far as the show goes) and I think you can still talk about the things you liked about the show! For instance, in the David Nutter thread, Ten Bears introduced a topic asking, “Just to balance things out, should we start nominating Best Ever Scene(s): a more difficult task because there were so many great scenes over the course of 73 episodes?” and people responded with their own lists 🙂

      Maybe that’s something we can do more of?

      But I also there will always be talk over the more frustrating aspects as well because people do care, this show was/is important to them. If we didn’t care, we wouldn’t be here (especially not a year+ after the show’s ended).

      I think I get where you’re coming from. I can understand the exhaustion over the negativity, it’s something I feel too with certain debates — they’re endless, they get nowhere new. But I don’t think they should be put in a box and never discussed/brought up again either.

      But I think I understand where you’re coming from and I think there’s definitely validity with feeling frustrated by all the negativity.

        Quote  Reply

    237. Adrianacandle,

      Yeah. I will research about that.

      But I do think this is a huge problem. They have this sense of power that is very dangerous. You would be shocked to see how many people still think that last season will be remade.

      We created a culture where if you whine enough online, if you review bomb games, shows and movies, write petitions and just in general create a lot of noise you will get what you want.

      And the biggest problem, these people lie all the time. And some of these lies are now accepted as truths and you can’t even debate them anymore.

      So when I see even this place turned into whine fest sometimes it is disappointing. Because no matter how respectful you are or nice or whatever I just don’t want to her D&D BAD no matter how eloquent or respectful it is.

      It’s been more than a year. It’s enough.

        Quote  Reply

    238. mau:
      Adrianacandle,

      I’m not saying she doesn’t have right to complain. I’m saying it almost feels like she is denying autonomy to the writers. If they want cynical story that’s what the story is. Show belongs to Benioff and Weiss and they can do whatever they want.

      And when it comes to execution it all comes to this false idea that Daenerys really cares about other people. She is like Stalin. She cares about oppressed. In an abstract way. But what she really cares about is absolute power. She wanted to burn cities and castles too many times for us to really believe that she cares what happens with common people.

      Writers have all the right to write a story that is or feels cynical in its heart. Fair enough. And fans have the right to say that a story like that is not for them. They can say that ending X made them feel the whole story is pointless. That’s rather trivial, if they express it politely, without crossing the line of civility.

      As for the idea that Daenerys doesn’t really care about other people, many of her actions are really strange, not to say stupid, if that’s the case. If she only cares about power, she incurs into unnecessary costs to her goals too many times. The sack of Astapor is one clear example. She doesn’t have any need to free the slaves. In fact, the decision of releasing had a lot of potential problems to her Westerosi goals. She did it anyway. Was she brutal? Yes, she was. But killing the slaves and starting a revolution in that region was more right than sealing the deal with Kraznys and simply go to Westeros as if it was business as usual. That attitude would be much more of a red flag to me about Daenerys having the Iron Throne as her only goal. The problem with slavery wasn’t just slavery in itself. Daenerys knew beforehand she would find a city of slaves. The main problem was that the majority of them were victims of a completely subhuman treatment. The effort of humanizing the dehumanized must be cherished, although with care, because Daenerys, as her dragons grow, has the potential to do great good but also great harm. The decision of staying in Meereen, after he hears the consequences of leaving Astapor behing with no solid system of government, is another example.

      Caring about common people and desiring power don’t have to be mutually exclusive traits. They are in this story, because it seems the writers want to highlight that as conclusion of the story. In fact, caring about people and desiring power are the mix that makes the best politicians in the real world. Politicians who only desire power, without caring by whom they rule are dangerous. People that care about common people, but don’t want power aren’t politicians. The political game inside a democratic party can be really harsh. Only people that really want it reach those forefront positions.

      I saw you have commentated that the ending of Daenerys was especially relevant at the age of populist politicians. But the majority of populist politicians we see today advocate ideas rather different to the ones associated with Daenerys. They are more in line with Cersei and her Mad Queen speech (7×02) and the philosophy of Randyll Tarly: see everything foreign as inferior or dangerous. In fact, if we analyse GoT characters and societies in a 21st century light, we conclude that all of them, more or less, suck.

        Quote  Reply

    239. mau:
      Adrianacandle,

      Yeah. I will research about that.

      But I do think this is a huge problem. They have this sense of power that is very dangerous. You would be shocked to see how many people still think that last season will be remade.

      We created a culture where if you whine enough online, if you review bomb games, shows and movies, write petitions and just in general create a lot of noise you will get what you want.

      And the biggest problem, these people lie all the time. And some of these lies are now accepted as truths and you can’t even debate them anymore.

      So when I see even this place turned into whine fest sometimes it is disappointing. Because no matter how respectful you are or nice or whatever I just don’t want to her D&D BAD no matter how eloquent or respectful it is.

      It’s been more than a year. It’s enough.

      While there’s no new ASOIAF book or news about the HotD, we still discuss GoT’s ending. People will eventuallly move on. I’m perfectly fine with the ending, even if, in my opinion, could be better. It doesn’t cause me any angry feelings. Even if we were all emotionally invested in this TV series, it’s important to remember that it’s just it… good entertainment.

        Quote  Reply

    240. mau,

      Yeah. I will research about that.

      Here’s one video that I think does some thoughtful critique over cancel culture (in response to the Jenna Marbles debate. However, as a note, Jenna didn’t actually wear blackface ie. wear make-up to make her skin specifically darker for this video, it was the darker spray tan she was using regularly at the time from 2010-2011 and with the pastel wig she wore, it gave the impression of blackface) and if you’re interested, I’d suggest definitely looking up her own video in which she addresses this stuff and other reaction/response videos.

      But I do think this is a huge problem. They have this sense of power that is very dangerous. You would be shocked to see how many people still think that last season will be remade.

      We created a culture where if you whine enough online, if you review bomb games, shows and movies, write petitions and just in general create a lot of noise you will get what you want.

      Oh, yes, I know there are still quite a few people who are demanding the final season be remade! I don’t participate in these communities but I do lurk.

      But I think this is an example of when things going too far and I think it really reflects badly on fandom. I find it embarrassing — especially when it reaches the point of bullying actors (Sam Heughan recently came out about how he’s been cyber bullied and harassed by fans, and he’s has received death threats from fans, which I find mortifying. This behavior embarrasses me as a fan of Outlander), personally disparaging the writers/actors, and coming up with conspiracy theories blaming actors for certain storylines.

      I think this goes beyond simple whining though.

      And the biggest problem, these people lie all the time. And some of these lies are now accepted as truths and you can’t even debate them anymore.

      So when I see even this place turned into whine fest sometimes it is disappointing. Because no matter how respectful you are or nice or whatever I just don’t want to her D&D BAD no matter how eloquent or respectful it is.

      It’s been more than a year. It’s enough.

      I think I can understand this and empathize with it on a certain level (I remember feeling a similar way with Buffy, though I really disliked the last season of that show) but I don’t think we can ask people to stop voicing their frustrations, discussing them, or putting a time limit on them.

        Quote