|
Let's not forget that the last dozen times a POV has died at the end of their chapter they've turned up later, including Catelyn Stark. I don't trust a death unless we've seen the head part the shoulders, or we've seen them burned alive. I mean even loving Quentyn came back for a little while.
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 18:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 02:23 |
|
|
chellesandcheese posted:If I had to guess, I'd say that the smoke is going to be from something Melisandre does, and I'm really not sure where the salt will come from. Many of the powders she uses for her fire tricks are probably salts, chemically speaking. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 18:19
|
|
|
Hamiltonian Bicycle posted:Many of the powders she uses for her fire tricks are probably salts, chemically speaking. Illusions. I'm holding out for Wun Wun rescuing Jon and nursing him back to health and then they go on adventures together in the haunted forest and live happily ever after 
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Something completely unrelated that's been bugging me, which I was reminded of just by hearing Maester Aemon's name: How exactly is the Targaryen "Ae" supposed to be pronounced anyway? Aegon is pronounced "Egg on", Daenerys is pronounced "duh-nerries", Aerys is pronounced "airies", and Aemon is apparently pronounced "aimin'". I'm getting mixed signals all over the place. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%86#Latin would be my assumption
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 18:28
|
|
|
NihilCredo posted:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%86#Latin would be my assumption That was my initial assumption, but it would mean the show is wrong on every single name which in retrospect doesn't actually seem that unlikely so okay nevermind.  Also it'd mean I could go back to pronouncing "maester" like "meister" which always seemed more appropriate anyway! e: VVVVVVVVVVVVVV This both makes internal sense and matches up with the way I always wanted to pronounce it to begin with and so is 100% acceptable to me VVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 18:31
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Something completely unrelated that's been bugging me, which I was reminded of just by hearing Maester Aemon's name: How exactly is the Targaryen "Ae" supposed to be pronounced anyway? Aegon is pronounced "Egg on", Daenerys is pronounced "duh-nerries", Aerys is pronounced "airies", and Aemon is apparently pronounced "aimin'". I'm getting mixed signals all over the place. If we go by the constructed languages in the show, the way that Dany / Grey Worm say it while speaking High Valyrian is the proper pronunciation, close to English 'aye' (if you're familiar with IPA you can check http://wiki.dothraki.org/High_Valyrian_Phonology). In Westeros people say it all sorts of different ways since the names have been bastardized in the translation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 18:31
|
|
|
Thanks for the input. I guess I am terrible at reading... These books are too big, I feel like I missed a lot of stuff. But I read them over a span of years though, I did AFFC and ADWD together recently, after giving up on AFFC half way into it a few years ago.  I think I need to reread the whole drat thing. Probably will closer to when the next book comes out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 18:34
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Something completely unrelated that's been bugging me, which I was reminded of just by hearing Maester Aemon's name: How exactly is the Targaryen "Ae" supposed to be pronounced anyway? Aegon is pronounced "Egg on", Daenerys is pronounced "duh-nerries", Aerys is pronounced "airies", and Aemon is apparently pronounced "aimin'". I'm getting mixed signals all over the place. Most of the pronunciation guiding seems to be damage control for the fact that GRRM only has a limited understanding of phonetics and transliteration. My best bet is he thought the names looked kind of cool that way, as many fantasy (and scifi) authors do.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 18:36
|
|
|
I always thought he was sort of a Canadian Pokemon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 18:36
|
|
|
Dirt posted:Thanks for the input. I guess I am terrible at reading... Don't feel bad. There were plenty of details I missed my first and even my second time reading. Then I see theories online and go back and read again and I'm like "OH...that makes so much more sense!" The pink letter being possibly written by someone other than Ramsay being the biggest one I missed while reading. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 18:40
|
|
|
the jizz taxi posted:Most of the pronunciation guiding seems to be damage control for the fact that GRRM only has a limited understanding of phonetics and transliteration. My best bet is he thought the names looked kind of cool that way, as many fantasy (and scifi) authors do. I realize that referencing Neal Stephenson in a thread about the works of George R.R. Martin is basically the gooniest thing it's possible to do, but this reminds me of the Apostropocalypse from REAMDE. Basically about a third of that book is about Stephenson's dream-job world-beating super-MMORPG, and the majority of its lore was written by a super-schlocky R.A. Salvatore stand-in who loved dropping a bunch of meaningless apostrophes into all his made-up words ("maj'yyk" etc) because it made them look cool, but then later a hyper-pretentious Tolkien stand-in takes over the job and changes more or less every proper noun to make it less ridiculous because he actually knows linguistics, and the most pronounced effect is getting rid of all the apostrophes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 18:50
|
|
|
You remember when people were half-seriously suggesting that ending the book with the Others winning and then revealing in the last chapter that The Prince That Was Promised was Rhaegar all along, and they were doomed from the start? It might actually be interesting if Jon stayed dead after this stabbing while actually being the Prince that Was Promised, R+L = J and all. Have people like Sam piece together who he was and what he was supposed to do, then desperately try to triage the prophecy back into some interpretation where the Others can still be defeated. The view that A Song of Ice and Fire is a daring series where everyone, even the apparent hero can die stemmed from what happened to Ned in the first book, but taking the long view of the whole series it's actually been very protective of the development of major characters and the correct unfolding of their arcs. If Martin wanted to reclaim that reputation of unpredictability right here at the end, he couldn't do much better than pick off the designated protagonist and see if the story is robust enough to compensate and still end with victory over the great enemy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 18:53
|
|
|
Dolash posted:You remember when people were half-seriously suggesting that ending the book with the Others winning and then revealing in the last chapter that The Prince That Was Promised was Rhaegar all along, and they were doomed from the start? "reclaim reputation of unpredictability?" A fairly common criticism that people make of ASOIAF is that it cares more about subverting expectations than doing stuff that is organic to the story.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 19:54
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:"reclaim reputation of unpredictability?" A fairly common criticism that people make of ASOIAF is that it cares more about subverting expectations than doing stuff that is organic to the story. Which is a pretty funny complaint in itself since basically every major twist organically evolved from the story (except I guess Varys freeing Tyrion to crossbow his dad and the whole Aegon thing).
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 20:07
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Which is a pretty funny complaint in itself since basically every major twist organically evolved from the story (except I guess Varys freeing Tyrion to crossbow his dad and the whole Aegon thing). Or Ramsay surviving this long to become heir to the north despite being a bastard who pissed off every single major northern house. I am not saying that there are many things like that, or even that I agree with any/most of them. Just that if there is one thing about GRRM that is never in question, it is his "reputation of unpredictability."
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 20:12
|
|
|
It kind of is. Maybe it's just a product of the long waits between books giving people time to excavate every possible theory and scrap of foreshadowing coupled with earlier plot points seeming more obvious in light of where the story was going, but much of what Martin does is actually quite grounded. He's not just killing characters arbitrarily by throwing darts at a board, and the surprises mostly involve us misunderstanding who's really the hero or the villain. These last two books are set to be his most by-the-numbers so far, since all the prophecies and foreshadowing is set to be delivered upon. It'll be harder and harder for him to serve up twists and upturn expectations unless he's willing to start attacking characters who seem to have the most "plot armor". It's easy to say "hah! I killed the protagonist, didn't see that coming did you?" In book one of a seven-book series when you've got six more books to turn someone else into the real hero. It's much bolder to do it in the sixth book and cast about for a backup right before the climax.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 20:45
|
|
|
Maarak posted:More than any of that though, is that he tries to mimic Ned's macho stoicism, but in practice that means barely telling anyone what his plans, motives, or reasoning for playing nice with Stannis and the Wildlings. Like Robb, he assumes the leadership style of father will work outside of Winterfell. The few people who knew Jon well enough to trust him he sends away or refuses to socialize with anymore.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 20:50
|
|
|
Maarak posted:More than any of that though, is that he tries to mimic Ned's macho stoicism, but in practice that means barely telling anyone what his plans, motives, or reasoning for playing nice with Stannis and the Wildlings. Like Robb, he assumes the leadership style of father will work outside of Winterfell. The few people who knew Jon well enough to trust him he sends away or refuses to socialize with anymore. He also gets got after making a decision that goes against his duty, like Neds confession, in an attempt to protect "his sister".
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 20:54
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Which is a pretty funny complaint in itself since basically every major twist organically evolved from the story (except I guess Varys freeing Tyrion to crossbow his dad and the whole Aegon thing). Jaime forced Varys in to helping free Tyrion because of Jaime's role with Tysha and his guilt over his part. Varys didn't try very hard to stop Tyrion visiting the Tower of the Hand because murdering Tywin does play into Varys' long game of weakening the realm for the Targs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 20:54
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:And his casting aside of his ready-made officer corps was just fatal as hell. Have dinner with your men, Jon, for fucksakes. They might remember that they like you. I'm trying to remember, any some of you guys have a much better recall of the books than I do: we know that Rob and, I think, Bran were specifically included when Ned would have his various men to dinner with him - talking about raising horses with the guy in charge of the stables, talking about smithing with the smith, etc. - to show them how to gain the loyalty of men. Unless it's indicated otherwise, it seems possible that Jon was excluded from these (since the plan wouldn't be to ever put in a position of command, and it might be disrespectful to have his bastard there) and never got to see the unquestioned authority he demanded in public was supported by the respect he built with his men by listening to them in private.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 20:58
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:I'm trying to remember, any some of you guys have a much better recall of the books than I do: we know that Rob and, I think, Bran were specifically included when Ned would have his various men to dinner with him - talking about raising horses with the guy in charge of the stables, talking about smithing with the smith, etc. - to show them how to gain the loyalty of men. Unless it's indicated otherwise, it seems possible that Jon was excluded from these (since the plan wouldn't be to ever put in a position of command, and it might be disrespectful to have his bastard there) and never got to see the unquestioned authority he demanded in public was supported by the respect he built with his men by listening to them in private. I don't think Jon was included but most likely should have noticed. Atleast Jon knew enough Ned's efforts to visit the Mountain clans and break bread with them was part of Ned's reputation and was enough for Stannis to capitalize on to retake Winterfell to return it to the Starks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 21:02
|
|
|
I think Jon was pissed at the royal feast in winterfell because it was not normal for him to be away from the high table, so probably he knew of that practice.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 21:02
|
|
|
jsoh posted:I think Jon was pissed at the royal feast in winterfell because it was not normal for him to be away from the high table, so probably he knew of that practice. "Kill the child" was just bad advice, and Jon took it the worst way possible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 21:12
|
|
|
chellesandcheese posted:There's also the fact that he's quite possibly Azor Ahai based on Mel's POV chapter. Considering that entire prophecy is about being reborn among smoke & salt, you have to die and be brought back. Smoke and salt. Maybe they try to burn his body so it won't turn into a wight (smoke) and they do it while weeping (salt).
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 21:43
|
|
|
I think Jon was still too childish and naive, he assumed everyone around him had the best intentions and that when push came to shove they would 'do the right thing' rather than act upon their prejudice. He assumed that his brothers at the watch were good people at their core rather than a ragtag band of castaways and rapists. At the end it were Jon's controversial decisions that got him shanked, not his leadership style. If he were more paranoid could have perhaps avoided the mutiny but I don't think Aemon's advice led him down that particular path.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 21:46
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:At the end it were Jon's controversial decisions that got him shanked, not his leadership style. If he were more paranoid could have perhaps avoided the mutiny but I don't think Aemon's advice led him down that particular path.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 22:13
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:If he had a single advocate among the rank-and-file, if anyone at all understood what he was doing instead of it coming of as Lord High-And-Mighty Snow, who was brought in as a ringer to take command and has acted like it's his birthright since his first minute at Castle Black, who turned traitor and then came back expecting everyone to act like it didn't happen, and who once he got his "birthright" has been lording it up above us and is too good to even take a meal with lowborn scum like us, and so on, and so forth... People would've been uneasy with Jon helping Stannis so much regardless. And I don't think there was any coming back from declaring he was going to ride south. At best, he would've been imprisoned, declared a traitor and executed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 22:28
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:I think Jon was still too childish and naive, he assumed everyone around him had the best intentions and that when push came to shove they would 'do the right thing' rather than act upon their prejudice. He assumed that his brothers at the watch were good people at their core rather than a ragtag band of castaways and rapists. It's nothing to do with him letting the wildlings through the wall. They turn on him for announcing that he's marching to war, jeopardizing the continued existence of the nights watch and breaking all his oaths. Also they were right to kill him.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 22:49
|
|
|
That was a planned assassination, they didn't throw it together in the fifteen minutes between when Jon started giving his speech and when he stepped outside. Pinning it all on the march south is foolish; sure, that was the last straw, but they were clearly conspiring to kill him way beforehand.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 22:54
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Something completely unrelated that's been bugging me, which I was reminded of just by hearing Maester Aemon's name: How exactly is the Targaryen "Ae" supposed to be pronounced anyway? Aegon is pronounced "Egg on", Daenerys is pronounced "duh-nerries", Aerys is pronounced "airies", and Aemon is apparently pronounced "aimin'". I'm getting mixed signals all over the place. I dunno but I laugh every time I see someone mention Aenys Targaryen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 23:25
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:That was a planned assassination, they didn't throw it together in the fifteen minutes between when Jon started giving his speech and when he stepped outside. Actually I think that is exactly what happened. There was an interlude between Jon reading the letter and Jon getting stabbed where he talks with Tormund. Jon notices the conspirators walking out of the hall as soon as they see the wildlings rallying to Jon's cause. I think there was probably a conspiracy to oust Jon from power, but killing him? The entire assassination seemed haphazard and like a desperate last attempt to save the Watch. If Jon had managed to draw Longclaw he probably would have fought them off since he's a trained fighter and they are a bunch of fat stewards.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2013 01:57
|
|
|
A bunch of fat stewards with daggers. The assassination is a clusterfuck. If ghost was there or literally anyone friendly to Jon they would have been cut down really fast.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2013 03:23
|
|
|
jsoh posted:A bunch of fat stewards with daggers. The assassination is a clusterfuck. If ghost was there or literally anyone friendly to Jon they would have been cut down really fast. It's kind of interesting that Jon made the same fatal mistake his "brother" Robb made: failing to keep his pet direwolf at his side at all times despite being repeatedly counselled to not do that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2013 03:49
|
|
|
CumFart Gurantee posted:It's kind of interesting that Jon made the same fatal mistake his "brother" Robb made: failing to keep his pet direwolf at his side at all times despite being repeatedly counselled to not do that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2013 03:55
|
|
|
So, basically...reasons?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2013 04:01
|
|
|
Reasons... that are in direct contradiction to your giant reach of a statement. They were both oath breakers. That's why they were killed. Not because they didn't keep their pets around them 100% of the time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2013 04:15
|
|
|
In It For The Tank posted:Actually I think that is exactly what happened. There was an interlude between Jon reading the letter and Jon getting stabbed where he talks with Tormund. Jon notices the conspirators walking out of the hall as soon as they see the wildlings rallying to Jon's cause. Yeah there's something to be said too though for multiple assailants coming at him from multiple angles, with intent lethal intent. We like the idea of Jon cutting people down and riding off to victory but I couldn't see it happening. Also, I think Jon did receive a fair bit of instruction from his father and others, like men at arms and captains of the guard. He understands at the very least how to administer a castle, command on a battlefield and lead when necessary. He is also adept at speaking to plebs and the upper class alike which I'm guessing Mormont saw and understood given his idea to groom Jon for command. Where Jon failed is that he didn't speak to his lesser commanders and fully inform them of his plans. He was also foolish in renouncing his vows. At that point even if people were somewhat mutinous they would've still found some solace in the fact that they'd elected him and was improving the way they were being trained and deployed. When he broke his vow it meant that all bets were off. i.e. "This dick lets the wildlings in, gets half of us killed on a rescue mission and then loving up and leaves!" A good chunk of the ill-will could've been removed had he explained his actions to some of the members of the watch so they understood his motives, but in not doing so and then leaving the watch you can understand the reasons he was attacked. I think he'll come back in some manner, what that manner is, when or how is the question.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2013 04:38
|
|
|
escape artist posted:
Why can't it be both? Jon could have risked it, and if he had managed to keep control of the drat thing it would have saved his rear end. Hell even Arya could have probably done better having her direwolf with her, if she had Syrio might yet live. I'm not saying they didn't die principally because of breaking oaths, but that doesn't exclude factoring in the fact that they have magic guardian animals who would be VERY useful in a large variety of situations, and are universally absent when poo poo hit's the fan, often because of their master sending them/keeping them away.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2013 05:01
|
|
|
Can someone please point out the oath that Jon broke? "Live and die at my post", maybe.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2013 05:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 02:23 |
|
|
Jon played rules lawyer. He adhered to the letter of his oath but not the spirit. He knew what he was doing was wrong, he thinks that by allying with wildlings and marching south at least he will not force any of his brothers to break their oath as well. Jon is not an oath breaker in the a technical sense, but at the end of the day he is violating the neutrality of the Night's Watch and declaring war on the Boltons (which comes after a series of concession throughout ADWD where he abuses his powers as Lord Commander to interfere with politics in the North). If nothing else, by concerning himself with secular matters he is violating his most sacred duty: defending the realms of men from the Others. You can’t be the watcher on the walls if you’re constantly looking south. The guy who wrote about Dany in Meereen is also currently doing an analysis of Jon's story in ADWD. People should read it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2013 05:18
|
|