|
SPOILER WARNING If you only watch the show, this thread will spoil you of future events in HBO's Game of Thrones. Thread contains discussion of all books of the series A Song of Ice and FireClick Here for the spoiler-free thread. |
On June 23 2013 21:49 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2013 14:45 SKC wrote:On June 22 2013 11:02 Nebuchad wrote:On June 22 2013 08:28 SKC wrote:On June 22 2013 08:23 Brosy wrote:On June 22 2013 01:53 Nebuchad wrote:On June 20 2013 20:09 Adron wrote:On June 20 2013 10:32 NPF wrote:On June 20 2013 10:07 Adron wrote:On June 14 2013 03:14 moopie wrote:
[quote]
Worst ending ever. Actually one of my top most likely endings... I IS called....fire and ice after all The thing is Jon is Fire and Ice, Fire = Targaryan, Ice =Stark. This is the Jon Snow show boys and girls. Okay then, one more just to keep it going, combining theories. 3 dragons, 3 riders. Aegon had 2 sisters, and married em both. Dany has 2 brothers (possibly), Jon and (F)aegon. Well, there ye go! Oh and, its in my list of most likely endings, so it isnt my prophecy or something. Nor do i htink im the first one to think of it. Aegon isn't Dany's brother, he's Dany's nephew. Also every one is assuming that the three heads of the dragon must be the three dragonriders. I think that's a mistake; you don't need to be a Targ to ride a dragon, as George said himself. Three heads of the dragon simply means that there must be three branches of the Targaryen house for a specific prophecy to be fulfilled, a prophecy that we haven't heard yet. Rhaegar and Aemon, when they read that in his own little prophecy book that Sam will probably find in Oldtown, became concerned that there were only two branches (Aegon and Viserys), so Rhaegar went after Lyanna to create a third (Jon). Now all the bastard topics become really important, because we have potentially more than three heads. If Tyrion is the bastard of Aerys, which seems likely, then that's a head that Rhaegar didn't know of. If Aegon is a fake, then he's no head. Now if Aegon is alive and Tyrion is a Targ also, then that's four heads of the dragon, one too many, and Rhaegar pwned the prophecy he was trying to accomplish by fathering Jon where there was no plan in prophecy for Jon to be fathered. I've never understood this particular theory, in the book it mentions Aerys taking liberties during the bedding, which makes Tyrion a Targ impossible since he was last. It just seems like Tyrion fanboys hoping that he is a Targ because they want him to be one. It's based on the fact it's not physically impossible and that some people would like Tyrion to fulfill some prophecies in a certain way. There little to no information actually inside the current books supporting it, so saying it is likely is a big stretch. Depends how much you count foreshadowing as information. - Tyrion's hair is so blond that it looks white. - Tyrion has mismatched eyes. The only other character known in the world who had mismatched eyes was Shiera Seastar, a Targ bastard. - "And since I cannot prove that you are not mine" - Tywin got really angry when Gemma told him Tyrion was his one true son... Could it be because he wasn't? - Lannisters view descendants of women as part of the family, just like descendants of men (they say they descend from Lann the Trickster through a female line). That probably influences his view of Joffrey & co: illegitimate as they might be, they are still Cersei's children. Similarly, that could influence his view of Tyrion: he would still be a part of family. - Tyrion dreamed of dragons as a child, which is common for Targs. - There is foreshadowing to Tyrion being a king. - There is foreshadowing to Tyrion being amongst dragons. - We know Aerys had taken a liking to Joanna. Tywin went back to Casterly Rock while still being hand of the king. I think a reason was given, but I can't remember what it was... Either way, could be a fake reason. - A ton of Tyrion's interactions would be "switched": like when he's talking to Jon about being a bastard ("all dwarves are bastards in their father's eyes", now imagine if Jon is the legitimate son of R&L, while Tyrion is the bastard) There is the "little information" we have. I'd be amazed if you could find much more hints that R+L=J, yet basically everyone agrees that R+L=J is true. The supposedly wishful thinking that has been referred to earlier is this: - Three heads of the dragon could be three Targ descendants from different lines: Dany, Jon and Tyrion. - Those three people killed their mother when they were born, which is such a good coincidence. - Those three people had direct interaction with fire during aGoT, and were the only three (Tyrion making a fire in the Vale, Jon fighting the wights and Dany birthing her dragons). Again, such a good coincidence. People tend to react badly to this theory mostly because "it would ruin Tywin's relationship to Tyrion, because Tywin has a legitimate reason to hate Tyrion now". First, that's not a good reason to say it's false. Second, that doesn't ruin their relationship at all. Tyrion still killed Tywin thinking he was his father. Tywin still acted as Tyrion's father (or sortof) during his childhood. Nothing changes. I'm not arguing that this is necessarily true. It's obviously a theory. But saying it's wishful thinking or that it comes from hope is basically just wrong. Actually, it's the other way around. People against it are doing the wishful thinking, because they don't want Tyrion and Tywin's relationship to be altered. On the other hand, Cersei + Jaime = Targs is a crackpot. There is no evidence in the books to support it, only circonstancial stuff and hopes. There's the difference. Half of those, the ones relating to the dragons, the dreams, etc. are just evidence that he will be one of the "three heads of the dragon", and as Martin himself said, they don't have to be all Targs. If you consider he is a true Lannister, all those things could still just be foreshadowings about his future. They are only evidences that he is a Targ if you believe that all three heads must be Targs. The other issue is wether Tywin and him knew about it. Most of the remaining evidences rely on Tywin knowing about it, and for me that's very unlikely. He doesn't seem to be the guy that would take such an insult without doing anything, and his whole relationship with Tyrion makes much more sense if he believes he is his son. Martin said you don't have to be a Targ to ride a dragon, if I'm not mistaken. But since I don't believe the three heads of the dragon will be the three dragonriders, that doesn't change much for me. I think Tywin has doubts about being his father, and I also think it's been made extremely obvious that he does. If you're right and he's a Lannister, I think the plot will use the possibility of him being a Targaryen in a clever way, for example he could pretend to be one based on the fact that it's plausible (note "so blond it seemed white", not "white"), or he could believe to be one himself at some point. We know that GRRM likes to subvert tropes and it's pretty obvious that he's going to subvert the trope of "someone who apparently has nothing special suddenly turns into the righteous king of all & everything". I tend to think he will do that with Jon, which is why I need Tyrion to take his place as the last prophecized badass. But it's also totally possible that he does it with Tyrion instead, in which case Tyrion for sure wouldn't be a Targaryen.
His exact words were "Three heads of the dragon... yes... but the third will not nessesarily BE a Targaryen...". Of course this is just a sentence without context, I wouldn't pay much attention to the fact he used "third", that's probally related to the original question, even though there's a really good chance at least 2 of them will be Targs, and he could just be trying to plant some doubts in everyone's heads. This was all way before any talk of Tyrion being a Targ as well, before ADWD and the introduction of (F)Aegon as well.
I really don't feel it's clear Tywin has doubts he is his father. I feel it's clear he wishes he wasn't, and he expresses that quite often, but he does try to give Tyrion a lot of responsability (just on certain ocasions, of course) and even treats him with more respect than Cersei. I don't think that would happen if he was so sure he wasn't his son.
|
Damn my memory sucks :z
I guess that means the heads of the dragon must be the three dragonriders, then? I don't see another way around it (or do you?). I had my personal favorite for third dragonrider, guess that won't happen^^
|
On June 24 2013 06:12 Nebuchad wrote:
Damn my memory sucks :z
I guess that means the heads of the dragon must be the three dragonriders, then? I don't see another way around it (or do you?). I had my personal favorite for third dragonrider, guess that won't happen^^
I may be forgetting something, but I don't remember the necessity of three characters actually being dragonriders. Dany could end up being the only one riding them. Someone could Warg into them instead of riding them, if that counts.
I still do believe it's more likely there will be three dragon riders, but I don't think it's impossible for it not to be the case.
|
On June 24 2013 06:12 Nebuchad wrote:
Damn my memory sucks :z
I guess that means the heads of the dragon must be the three dragonriders, then? I don't see another way around it (or do you?). I had my personal favorite for third dragonrider, guess that won't happen^^
I believe the current consensus is that the three heads indeed refer to the dragon riders.
|
On June 23 2013 23:18 Drowsy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2013 11:55 FrostedMiniWheats wrote:On June 23 2013 10:04 Drowsy wrote:This eloquently sums up why I despise Dany so much in the books and the show: http://www.returnofkings.com/12594/how-game-of-thrones-depicts-the-ultimate-feminist"Daenerys, similarly, can’t persist without men, particularly the two advisers she has threatened with redundancy. She would not be alive now without them and she wouldn’t last long in their absence. It isn’t hard to see the appeal of this particular scene or of Daenerys in general to female viewers. They’re anxious to see signs of female power, and Daenerys seems to offer them. She wields tremendous influence and she scolds grown men like children. Her threat against Mormont and Selmy conveyed this quite well: two experienced, powerful fighting men left browbeaten by a dainty little girl who then goes off with a female slave by her side and tells her this as those men follow along sheepishly in the background:" Obviously a lot of you will dismiss this because of the author's ideological leanings(or maybe you just like Dany anyway, that's cool), however it can't be denied that Dany really treats those who were responsible for her rise to power like total shit, especially Jorah. Her whole character still feels like dumb "you go girl pandering", just like Tyrion feels like "physically inedpt but witty nerd" pandering. Arya's where its at for strong female characters. I'd of 100% agreed up until the last book (which is why ADwD was imo the best of Dany). The character starts in a demeaning position gains a bit of power, goes through a short period of adversity, and then it's just total smooth sailings. It's like for the longest time, her good fortune feels too simplistic, or owed heavily to others (Joray, Barristan, Daario), unlike Arya she doesn't really face many challenges directly and get the opportunity to show her worth as a character. It's largely just idealistic dreaming and bossing people around. Until ADwD! Now, I feel like things are going terribly for her and she is having to make difficult choices with opportunities to truly show herself as a capable leader when the chips are down. I actually look forward to where she goes in the next book (less Victarion flies in and saves the day...). I was about to shit on the article for what seems to be an insecurity towards women, but then I realized what the site was all about. All I will say instead is that he's not entirely fair to Dany's character. It isn't even really the Targaryen name that empowers Dany at all. It's the fact that she has pulled off, what is perceived to be a miracle. She birthed dragons and did so by surviving a baptism in fire. It is that which gives her that aura of divinity that instills her confidence and makes people flock to her. Being of royalty in Westeros is just something additional to make her claim to the throne more legit. I mean Targaryen alone didn't help Viseries worth a damn, now did it? I totally agree on Arya though. I find it fascinating that a little highborn girl has gone through probably the most badass journey of any character, probably the most violent as well. She never really breaks either, she just gets more pissed off. Her story is far less in your face about female empowerment as well, but I suppose that's just the way her story is. She isn't in a position of power like Dany. Book 5 is a lot of her sitting around reverting to the traditional life of a young princess. Pretty much exactly my thoughts/reaction. Yeah, the ideology of the website is clearly a little tinged, but Dany just owes her success soooooooo heavily to her high birth and the fact the people who let themselves be bossed around by her and sometimes de-facto enslaved to her. She's privileged, narcissistic, blind to her own hypocrisy, entitled, ungrateful, and spoiled. Basically everything I think of when I hear the phrase "14 year old wealthy white girl". If Visaerys had hatched the egsgs, taken over the Doth'Raki, and Jorah+Selmy had still served him, I really doubt any of the outcomes would have been all that different. She is pretty much just like him minus the creepy incest rape fantasies, and nobody has a problem calling him an entitled monster.
This just makes no sense at all, to me at least. You're individualizing fictional characters. These are not real people. They cannot make real choices. They are just devices for the author to further the overall story.
Ask yourself if you were the author, how would you have written Dany differently so that she comes off as a strong character with accomplishments that she can call her own, in a way that is realistic to her background and position she's in and progresses the story in a reasonable amount of pages?
She has no martial prowess of her own. No education and no experience in terms of warfare, strategy or governing (as her character often points out in the books in fact). Objectively, her role is limited to that of a symbol, a charismatic leader and a figurehead. Her story arc in Essos is written in a way to build up her character as a future candidate for the throne by focusing on those roles. Having her play any other role would be character-breaking.
The author went to the great lengths to convey the differences between Viserys and Dany. Viserys is the symbol of the corrupt side of the Targaryens, and the only reason Viserys is in the story at all is to convey all the flaws that led to the fall and exile of their dynasty. Dany represents the other side of the Targaryen dynasty, a mix between Aegon the Conqueror and Rhaegar as a popular hero. She is meant to have Dragons to be viable as a conqueror, and she is meant to have a regal aura and a captivating personality combined with inherent ability to sway people to follow her (or as you say, be bossed around by her). This is why those things are in the story.
The only reason why there are so many Dany chapters is to illustrate the hardships she's gone through and her ability to overcome them, and observe the whole process of forging her into an actual ruler. We certainly don't have those chapters just so we can admire the characters and skills of Jorah, Barristan and Daario who are all only there as sidekicks, nor are these chapters written to teach us about the political and socio-economic situation in Essos.
I can obviously only guess, but I would bet anything on the assumption that Martin didn't want Dany to come off as a character that you describe, let alone as being "the same as Viserys". At the same time, the character flaws that she has work very well for the purpose of making her more Rhagear-esque (he shared many of the same flaws himself).
The bottom line is, her character makes sense as it is. If written differently, it would probably have made less sense and it would have made the character less believable. What you're doing is ripping off the character from the context of the story and it's actual purpose, then judging it as if it were a real person. It's just like hating villains for being villains, which is what people normally stop doing when they're like 12 years old.
|
about theon being castrated, did grrm say/mention anywhere that this is what he had in mind in the multiple times he wrote "not even a man"? It's one of the things that aren't really crystal clear.
|
On June 25 2013 01:53 IshinShishi wrote:
about theon being castrated, did grrm say/mention anywhere that this is what he had in mind in the multiple times he wrote "not even a man"? It's one of the things that aren't really crystal clear.
It's hinted at when he says "not even a man" but for me it was all but confirmed when Ramsay asks him to get "Arya" started for him during their bedding ceremony, and Theon hesitates, saying something along the lines of "but I can't."
|
On June 25 2013 01:53 IshinShishi wrote:
about theon being castrated, did grrm say/mention anywhere that this is what he had in mind in the multiple times he wrote "not even a man"? It's one of the things that aren't really crystal clear.
grrm didnt make that clear, only hints, maybe he is trolling the readers...and then the show producers went full castration.
watch theon fuck a girl in the next book and the producers will be scratching their head.
|
On June 25 2013 01:53 IshinShishi wrote:
about theon being castrated, did grrm say/mention anywhere that this is what he had in mind in the multiple times he wrote "not even a man"? It's one of the things that aren't really crystal clear.
I think that's one of the clearest things. There's a few quotes which make it very certain that Theons penis was in fact taken (and maybe even flayed beforehand :/):
"Ramsay rose, the firelight shining on his face. "Reek, get over here. Get her ready for me." For a moment he did not understand. "I... do you mean... m'lord, I have no... I..." "With your mouth," Lord Ramsay said."
""But you’re no lord, are you? Only Reek. Not even a man, truth be told."" (I could see that "not being a man" as part of the Reek-brainwash, though)
"[..] he'd taken fingers and toes and the other thing [...]"
|
On June 25 2013 03:25 hns wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 01:53 IshinShishi wrote:
about theon being castrated, did grrm say/mention anywhere that this is what he had in mind in the multiple times he wrote "not even a man"? It's one of the things that aren't really crystal clear. I think that's one of the clearest things. There's a few quotes which make it very certain that Theons penis was in fact taken (and maybe even flayed beforehand :/): "Ramsay rose, the firelight shining on his face. "Reek, get over here. Get her ready for me." For a moment he did not understand. "I... do you mean... m'lord, I have no... I..." "With your mouth," Lord Ramsay said." ""But you’re no lord, are you? Only Reek. Not even a man, truth be told."" (I could see that "not being a man" as part of the Reek-brainwash, though) "[..] he'd taken fingers and toes and the other thing [...]"
I know the passage, that's not clear, at all.
|
Reek still "being a full man" would be the biggest red herring in the books. I can't think of another theory with more obvious hints.
|
On June 25 2013 05:05 IshinShishi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 03:25 hns wrote:On June 25 2013 01:53 IshinShishi wrote:
about theon being castrated, did grrm say/mention anywhere that this is what he had in mind in the multiple times he wrote "not even a man"? It's one of the things that aren't really crystal clear. I think that's one of the clearest things. There's a few quotes which make it very certain that Theons penis was in fact taken (and maybe even flayed beforehand :/): "Ramsay rose, the firelight shining on his face. "Reek, get over here. Get her ready for me." For a moment he did not understand. "I... do you mean... m'lord, I have no... I..." "With your mouth," Lord Ramsay said." ""But you’re no lord, are you? Only Reek. Not even a man, truth be told."" (I could see that "not being a man" as part of the Reek-brainwash, though) "[..] he'd taken fingers and toes and the other thing [...]" I know the passage, that's not clear, at all.
Most people think it is quite clear, and so did the TV series on the episode written by GRRM no less.
|
On June 25 2013 05:05 IshinShishi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 03:25 hns wrote:On June 25 2013 01:53 IshinShishi wrote:
about theon being castrated, did grrm say/mention anywhere that this is what he had in mind in the multiple times he wrote "not even a man"? It's one of the things that aren't really crystal clear. I think that's one of the clearest things. There's a few quotes which make it very certain that Theons penis was in fact taken (and maybe even flayed beforehand :/): "Ramsay rose, the firelight shining on his face. "Reek, get over here. Get her ready for me." For a moment he did not understand. "I... do you mean... m'lord, I have no... I..." "With your mouth," Lord Ramsay said." ""But you’re no lord, are you? Only Reek. Not even a man, truth be told."" (I could see that "not being a man" as part of the Reek-brainwash, though) "[..] he'd taken fingers and toes and the other thing [...]" I know the passage, that's not clear, at all.
i wonder if u can elaborate more why u dont think its clear... i mean the 3rd passage (he'd taken fingers and toes and the other thing) is so obvious... what ELSE can the other thing be? its seems to be something he had only one off, and there arent exactly many of those.
also, "m'lord, I have no..." when he's asked to 'prepare' the girl, what would any man normally use for that?
i really think grrm couldnt have been clearer about this without actually stating he lost his dick.
|
On June 25 2013 05:08 SKC wrote:
Reek still "being a full man" would be the biggest red herring in the books. I can't think of another theory with more obvious hints.
Loras and Renly as lovers. Illyrio and Varys as conspiracy partners (pre book 5 of course), maybe? Maybe Bloodraven as the three eyed crow, once again pre-Dance.
It was very, very likely but not certain. The show input seems to be enough to place it at 100%.
The show as a source of evidence for book ideas has some inherent validity, but I wonder about the limitations. How much can we use the show as evidence and how much might the answer to that question be changing over time as the show departs from the books?
The best example to discuss with right now probably has to be Robb's will. It still comes up a lot in Jon/battle of Winterfell fallout talk but the show didn't do it. If it is to be a deciding factor in any of those things then they either needed to have included it or that is a new large departure from the books that is in the works.
|
Why is Theon's dick such a big issue anyway? I dont quite get it.
|
On June 25 2013 06:46 Redox wrote:
Why is Theon's dick such a big issue anyway? I dont quite get it.
At this point it ought to be a non-issue 
|
On June 25 2013 06:52 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 06:46 Redox wrote:
Why is Theon's dick such a big issue anyway? I dont quite get it. At this point it ought to be a non-issue
Dat punchline.
Also, now that you guys have me thinking of Reek again and the many hints of castration in ADWD, I realized how his sleeping with the dogs may have another disturbing connotation. :\
|
On June 25 2013 06:10 Irrelevant Label wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 05:08 SKC wrote:
Reek still "being a full man" would be the biggest red herring in the books. I can't think of another theory with more obvious hints. Loras and Renly as lovers. Illyrio and Varys as conspiracy partners (pre book 5 of course), maybe? Maybe Bloodraven as the three eyed crow, once again pre-Dance. It was very, very likely but not certain. The show input seems to be enough to place it at 100%. The show as a source of evidence for book ideas has some inherent validity, but I wonder about the limitations. How much can we use the show as evidence and how much might the answer to that question be changing over time as the show departs from the books? The best example to discuss with right now probably has to be Robb's will. It still comes up a lot in Jon/battle of Winterfell fallout talk but the show didn't do it. If it is to be a deciding factor in any of those things then they either needed to have included it or that is a new large departure from the books that is in the works.
Yeah, Renly and Loras may be more obvious, but it's not exactly a theory, Martin himself stated he intented the characters to be gay years ago, so it's not really something up to discussion. I don't remember if Martin said anything regarding the state of Reek's penis though. For theories that could still technically be true, I think it's the most obvious one.,
I think you could even argue about their relationship being openly stated in books, with quotes such as “Now sheathe your bloody sword, or I’ll take it from you and shove it up some place even Renly never found.”
|
On June 24 2013 08:47 Serek wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 06:12 Nebuchad wrote:
Damn my memory sucks :z
I guess that means the heads of the dragon must be the three dragonriders, then? I don't see another way around it (or do you?). I had my personal favorite for third dragonrider, guess that won't happen^^ I believe the current consensus is that the three heads indeed refer to the dragon riders.
It is very strongly implied by the repeated reference to the original conquest of Westeros, when there were 3 dragons, and 3 dragonriders. While this doesn't mean it has to be so again, the prophecy mentioned in conjunction with this history, foreshadows pretty clearly what we're supposed to think it means.
|
On June 25 2013 06:10 Irrelevant Label wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 05:08 SKC wrote:
Reek still "being a full man" would be the biggest red herring in the books. I can't think of another theory with more obvious hints. Loras and Renly as lovers. Illyrio and Varys as conspiracy partners (pre book 5 of course), maybe? Maybe Bloodraven as the three eyed crow, once again pre-Dance. It was very, very likely but not certain. The show input seems to be enough to place it at 100%. The show as a source of evidence for book ideas has some inherent validity, but I wonder about the limitations. How much can we use the show as evidence and how much might the answer to that question be changing over time as the show departs from the books? The best example to discuss with right now probably has to be Robb's will. It still comes up a lot in Jon/battle of Winterfell fallout talk but the show didn't do it. If it is to be a deciding factor in any of those things then they either needed to have included it or that is a new large departure from the books that is in the works.
i didnt realize that Renly and Loras were gay until the show, but it was obvious for me that Theon had lost his guy o.o
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
