Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Apprently, books say Bran should be able to see the Future, as the previous Three Eyed Raven could.

But I very much accept your point we've no evidence of that in the show

Its ages ago but did the previous raven guy not predict Bran would be the next one and had seen it ect? Might not be remembering correctly as this part of the show never really interested me.

Well, previous guy being able to do it, and Bran being able to do it doesn't necessarily follow?

But yeah. Old Dude knew Bran was his replacement, hence sending him Crazy Old Man Bat Signals in dreams of a Three Eyed Raven.

Just because Max Van Sydow can do something doesn't mean anybody can . Also, it doesn't mean, at least as I understand, that he can see the future, only all of the present. He knows what Bran is/can do, not what he will. Incidentally, Sam Jackson has been cited as having the highest grossing films under his belt as an actor. Van Sydow cannot be far behind.

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
Just because Max Van Sydow can do something doesn't mean anybody can . Also, it doesn't mean, at least as I understand, that he can see the future, only all of the present. He knows what Bran is/can do, not what he will.

Yup. And in the books bran cannot even see whatever he wants. He can only see through the faces in the weirwood trees. His only past vision in the book is a young ned stark in the godswood in winterfel after he came home with jon.

Also, don't forget, this isn't the first time he faced the literal incarnation of death. Not exactly a subtle reference to one of the more iconic symbolic representations of humanity's fate.

 Lance845 wrote:
R+L=J isnt symbolism. They all but say it in the clues of the first book.

No symbolism needed.

Textual clues supported by symbolism like Ghost, the white-haired pup found away from the rest of the litter. So are you claiming you had R + L = J right off the bat, before anyone? I don't believe that.


And I wasn't really talking about 'worldbuilding'. It really isn't hard to make up places and names and fake histories. What's really smart about GRRM's writing is the way events are foreshadowed or explained through deliberately placed clues, and through the POV perspective.

At one point in the books, a story is told to a character about the history of a sign in front of an inn. Taken at face value, it's a story about a sign. But if you read just beneath the surface, that story is hinting that another character isn't who he says he is. I appreciate that level of thoughtfulness in the writing.

 Lance845 wrote:
R+L=J isnt symbolism. They all but say it in the clues of the first book.

No symbolism needed.

I'm not sure you really get what symbolism is. The fact that you used symbols and put it in an equation tells me that. Math is based on symbods. So is the written word. It isn't some sort of mythological esoteric thing that only nerdy people talk about with Joyce. It is something you use everyday. In order for you to express your thoughts in your post, symbolism needed. If you reply in the negative, oh look, you used symbols to do so.

I've broadly enjoyed the books, but for me they aren't startlingly-layered, symbolism-laden narrative genius. They're delightfully-detailed world-building and an interesting story marred by endless sledgehammered red herrings and meandering threads that desperately need an editor.

I don't think GRRM will ever finish TWOW or ADOS but if he does I don't expect much to come of the potential he's set up for the magical history of the Starks. Probably for the best because it gives the gang that love the books and love griping about the show free-reign to enjoy assuming that it would have been a beautifully realised literary masterpiece, and that'll help gloss over the disappointment of it never arriving.

 gorgon wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
R+L=J isnt symbolism. They all but say it in the clues of the first book.

No symbolism needed.

Textual clues supported by symbolism like Ghost, the white-haired pup found away from the rest of the litter. So are you claiming you had R + L = J right off the bat, before anyone? I don't believe that.


And I wasn't really talking about 'worldbuilding'. It really isn't hard to make up places and names and fake histories. What's really smart about GRRM's writing is the way events are foreshadowed or explained through deliberately placed clues, and through the POV perspective.

At one point in the books, a story is told to a character about the history of a sign in front of an inn. Taken at face value, it's a story about a sign. But if you read just beneath the surface, that story isparentsg that another character isn't who he says he is. I appreciate that level of thoughtfulness in the writing.

It wasnt long before anyone. I started reading the books around when the 3rd came out. Every clue about it is in the first book. It was a theory back then.

Let me spell it out.

Ned stark is the best guy in the books who does everything, including marrying caitlyn, because of duty. He is the single least likely person to cheat on his wife under any circumstance.

There is only one time he raised his voice to cait. It was when she asked about jons mother and ned said "dont you ever ask me about jon!. Ever!"... The sub text being because he doesnt and wont lie to his wife.

When he gets stabbed in the leg fighting jamie he has fever dreams and remebers the tower. How 7 stood agaisnt 3 and only 2 survived. The smell of blood and blue rose. His sister saying "promise me ned. Promise me." Also, that tower was directly after the red keep seige. Reagar was long dead on the trident. Danny (not born yet) her brother and their mom the queen were at dragon stone ready to sail east if the red keep fell. Jamie was left to protect the king.

So why the feth were 3 of the remaining 6 kingsguard protecting this gak tower? Because the crown prince was being born inside.

The only other survivor was howland reed. The father of mira and jogen reed. Who after the tower went home to the cranog and never left his seat again. The subtext being they went to war on a lie for all the wrong reasons. Seeing lyana die in childbirth was the last straw. He vowed to keep his mouth shut and went home.

Everyone besides robert says reagar was the greatest dude in the land and nothing implies he was a rapist.

When reagar won the jousting tourney he gave his token (traditionally given to the most beautiful woman) to lyana instead of his wife.


All of that is in the first book. Its not symbolism. Its the clues that lay it all out. And since ned and howland are the only people alive at the tower, howland is the only person alive who knows jons parentage after the first book. In 4 other books all you get is a few references to reinforce how good a dude reagar was.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gordon Shumway wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
R+L=J isnt symbolism. They all but say it in the clues of the first book.

No symbolism needed.

I'm not sure you really get what symbolism is. The fact that you used symbols and put it in an equation tells me that. Math is based on symbods. So is the written word. It isn't some sort of mythological esoteric thing that only nerdy people talk about with Joyce. It is something you use everyday. In order for you to express your thoughts in your post, symbolism needed. If you reply in the negative, oh look, you used symbols to do so.

Symbolism in the arts context is using things as metaphors for other things. Ghost being white while dannys hair is SILVER in the books COULD be symbolism to represent his true heritage. (Also ghosts eyes are red because hes an actual albino. The targaryens eyes are violet so its gak symbolism). But its not what i used to figure out the theory of jons parents.

A symbol is something that has a meaning inherent to itself and has a meaning beyond itself, it doesn't matter if you are talking about the arts or any other field of study (I'm a linguist by training, but I teach lit. and film in my profession.). You can take that as basic language (universal symbols like letters or stop signs or crosses), or natural items that carry meaning because they are precharged (ravens as death or owls as wisdom) or charged symbols (where an artist uses techniques like repetition or emphasis to create a link between ideas and don't carry any weight beyond the text). It isn't something that needs to be mystified. We do it every single day of our lives. That said, to paraphrase Freud, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. In which case one needs evidence to support the claim that a particular image/thing should be interpreted in some sort of symbolic manner.

Read once, most of the clues are hard to spot because you lack the context to recognize its importance. They answer questions you’re not yet asking. Reading the first book again after the third makes a lot of the clues pretty obvious.

The initial trilogy is pretty brilliant and sets up the ending pretty phenomenally. Unfortunately instead of time skipping past most of the stuff that makes up the 4th and 5th books, things dragged in trying to set the stage which gave people plenty of time to solve the puzzle, which lead to stuff added to try and keep people guessing which dragged things out even longer.

Had Arya handed over the coin and not be seen until she fed Greyjoy the Greyjoy’s.... we’d have a series as strong as it’s first half through to the end. Hopefully given how much of the end is in the first book, we’ll still get a finale that lives up to the start.

What he said. The first 3 novels set up something pretty great. Probably the best lead up I ever read. And most of the signs of where it was going were there upon rereading. I think that's what made me so mad at 4 and 5. They were some of the most pointless and meandering novels on par with some of Jordan's worst works.

I've been pretty happy with most of the TV show. Especially with the changes regarding Dani. It's not a surprise to me the worst seasons were the one that covered books 4 and 5. The seasons on the show runners own aren't as good as the first 3 books based shows but they are so amazingly better than Martin's latest work its unreal.

Sorry for the rant. Book 4 and 5 pissed me off because they squandered something special.

So seeing this, I totally see Dany leaving the fight on Drogon, but Rheagal staying with Jon. Dany seemed really upset at the Idea of someone with a claim to the throne, So I bet she will leave and try to take the throne and fortify the south.

I think the theory of the other targarian kid being Sam would be fun, but it's so clearly Jon.

I also think Briene will stick around, I think they "finished" her story as a fake out to make us think she's gonna die. But she's still sworn to protect Sansa and Arya and I think she'll do that forever and be like the #1 bestest knight in winterfel after the war.

Was kinda surprised that Sansa liked Theon so much, I know he helped her escape and stuff but I didn't see the kinda romantical stuff coming.

...so that pretty much dooms Theon then doesn't it ?

I didn't see Theon and Sansa as romantic scenes?

He's practically her brother, given they were raised together, and then her rescuer from the hands of the Boltons, which directly lead to their defeat and the end of their house, and the Starks retaking Winterfell.

That's family, man. Not boot-knocking.

 Hulksmash wrote:
What he said. The first 3 novels set up something pretty great. Probably the best lead up I ever read. And most of the signs of where it was going were there upon rereading. I think that's what made me so mad at 4 and 5. They were some of the most pointless and meandering novels on par with some of Jordan's worst works.

I've been pretty happy with most of the TV show. Especially with the changes regarding Dani. It's not a surprise to me the worst seasons were the one that covered books 4 and 5. The seasons on the show runners own aren't as good as the first 3 books based shows but they are so amazingly better than Martin's latest work its unreal.

Sorry for the rant. Book 4 and 5 pissed me off because they squandered something special.

Totally agree in all respects - books 4 aqnd 5 are absolutely awful.

I don't think Dany is not going to fly off in a sulk (again) although its possible now that Bran and Sam have fethed things up.

Theon has done very bad things - but who hasn;t.....

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

That's family, man. Not boot-knocking.

This is Game of Thrones. Those two are generally one and the same.

 Mr Morden wrote:


Theon has done very bad things - but who hasn;t.....

It's pretty high calibre bad things, though. Almost everyone in the show is pretty grey, but there are plenty characters who haven't ever gotten close to Theon's depths.

I'm all for redemptive arcs in fiction, but the efforts they (on the show and I suspect in the books should the last two ever arrive) put in to painting Jaime and Theon as reformed folks deserving of pretty blanket forgiveness (in universe with people they've really done over) I think is a stretch.

I have not read the books, so my knowledge of that is non-existent, but the hints from the beginning of the show about Jon were fairly apparent. Also, in speaking with people that did read the books, GRRM was pretty heavy handed in most of his references to point the readers towards a certain conclusion in most respects. This does not include the frequent surprise death/action clearly not part of the big puzzle.

IRT symbolism, I will agree this is not so much symbols to mean something, but clues that lead you to the truth. I think there are definitely a few symbols here and there to stand for something without coming out and saying it; however, most are clues and breadcrumbs leading the reader/viewer to an exact conclusion, not up for interpretation like a symbol would be.

I dunno, maybe the way it was shot or something, but I felt like there was more then brotherly love with sansa and theon. I guess Theon would need to get a special attachment installed if they take that any further.

Well, as Tyrion threatened Joffrey.....

nfe wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:


Theon has done very bad things - but who hasn;t.....

It's pretty high calibre bad things, though. Almost everyone in the show is pretty grey, but there are plenty characters who haven't ever gotten close to Theon's depths.

I'm all for redemptive arcs in fiction, but the efforts they (on the show and I suspect in the books should the last two ever arrive) put in to painting Jaime and Theon as reformed folks deserving of pretty blanket forgiveness (in universe with people they've really done over) I think is a stretch.

Yeah you are right about that - neither reached Ramsey's level of wonderfully cheerful evil - or indeed delighted in it - although Jamie came close with his quip as he dropped a child to his apparent death. And at least Tyrion called him out on his relationship with Cersei - he knew what she was, what she did and why - he didn't care.

Its amusing how often people get excited about the "bad" things Dany does (and she is def no angel) but she has not raped anyone or thrown children out or windows.....or burned her daughter....

Are Theon and Jamie on Aryas list? Maybe she will deal with issue once the NKing is ash.

Theon has always had a thing for Sansa (even now he doesnlt have a.thing ) what she feels is less clear.

Maybe that will be the perfect union - Sansa, so abused by men she does not want a physical relationship like that - Theon fits the bill perfectly!!

I did consider that myself, and it is a genuinely interesting point.

But I still don’t see those scenes as of anything approaching a romantic nature. Just a trusted friend, who worked hard to redeem himself (don’t underestimate Theon breaking free from his conditioning) being welcomed back into the fold.

And Theon’s suffering is part of his redemptive arc. His actions prior are reprehensible - but did he really deserve all he got? All his life he’s been a victim of circumstance, and sought to make his distanced Father proud, especially when he was cast off so cruelly. Yes he’s a buttmunch, but not because he’s an inherently bad egg.

He’s been to hell and back, arguably suffering just as much as Sansa (both were horribly and repeatedly violated by Ramsay). Yet when it came to the crunch, he did the right thing. So I’ve empathy and even sympathy for him, without excusing his crimes.

So, I saw an genuinely interesting article speculating on the next few episodes of the show.

Basically, the article posits that the lack of any showing of the Night King in next week's previews is because he's not with the army of the dead. The group at Winterfell will probably win, with horrific casualties, but it won't matter.

Because the Night King took his dragon and flew to Kings Landing, who have no defenses and is basically ripe for the plucking.

It coincides with two earlier visions that Bran and Dany had - Bran's vision of the shadow of a single dragon flying over Kings Landing, and Dany's vision of a destroyed throne room with snow drifting down.

I hadn't tought of that idea.

The R+L=J theory has been around since book 1 was published in 1996.

It's unfortunate that while I love those books I don't think GRRM will ever properly finish them. His garden is just too overgrown.

Just thinking... since Bran had that power to mind control Animals and Hodors, could he also mind control an undead thing to backstab the night king when he least expects it? Or possibly an undead dragon to gobble him up, also when he least expects it?

If Bran does not know the future how does he know its the right time for Sam to tell Jon he is a Targayrian.

Logic. Which Jon himself doesn't have as evidence by his decision to tell Dany minutes before the big battle.