Discussion in 'A Song of Ice and Fire' started by Liadan, May 31, 2006.
just another day at The Fantasy Forum in the ASOIAF sections.
Got that in one.
i don't think it will not have anything to do with tyrion...
it will be daenerys and jon most definetly. tha third head will be bran or arya. it will be a person of some mystical significance, not anything rational or politica.
i just thought of something.
if it's true that aegon targaryen, rhaegar's son, is still alive, could it be possible that he would make the third head of the dragon, with jon and daenerys?
GRRM has not confirmed that baby Aegon is alive, but neither has he confirmed that Aegon is dead, as he has with Aegon's elder sister Rhaenys. It depends on which theory you favor - that someone switched another baby with Aegon and saved him, or that GRRM is just throwing us another red herring.
could be either with him. He's too devious.
but some things wouldn't really make sense then...
i mean, what is purpose of bran stark as a carachter, then? or of jon snow? just to show us the life on the wall? there MUST be something more to them both.
but i firmly believe that third head will be either aegon or bran. more likely aegon.
Thats a very poor reason to sustect them, only a poor writer has characters only essential to the plot as a whole.
why not question other characters like brienne or jaqen hygar. its not a story of the dragons/targs its a story of westeros. the wall is essential in protecting the realm, the others the only supernatural theat so the wall is part of the story. we dont need jon to be a targ, but there is a chance he might be.
main carachters are always essential to a plot. if jon is to be only on the wall, then he would be no more than a simple (so to say) "useless" carachter as rob stark, who was discarded as soon as his role was over.
what do you think is his purpose for the plot, then?
rob stark discarded when his role was over? what role was that then?
the thing is the story as a whole isnt 'the return of the taergaryens' or some such thing, its a story of westeros as a whole, a stroy of the lives of the characters we see and how they interact, their presence in the story can simply be their contribution, not what they do.
The plot is too wide and diverse to attribute these things, that jon must be a targ or else his presence is useless, part ofthe plot is the wall and the fight witht he others, there in lies justification enough for his character.
Besides GRRM loves to keep us guessing on whats going on. If all the characters turned out to do exactly what we want them to or so what we think they're going to do what fun would reading this series be? It's so great because while we all may have some idea of whats going to happen we don't really know. There's so much going on and the story so far has more than just 2 sides to every battle.
exactly, so under the same principal, we're all suspecting jon to be a targ, after R + L = J, but what if he isnt........
keeps us guessing
Ya well that one I'll believe until it says otherwise in print.
That's quite correct. What about Catelyn, Ned, Arya, etc. then? The point of ASoIaF is to tell the story of WESTEROS, not just of Dany and the Targs.
The appocalypse must be getting closer. Cru and LSD agreeing with eachother again?
I think its a sign she is beginning to accept my infallibility.
Not bloody likely
still, you keep on not reading what i write.
if i speak about the targaryen come-back it doesn't neccessarily mean that i believe that it's the only thing the book is about.
jon isn't only here to fight the others. since i've studied literature quite a lot, i really know the way writer thinks when he writes a book. if nothing else, i am one myself, so i know psychology of the matter quite well. jon is too much of a carachter, and indicia to his role are too numerous simply to make him stay on the wall and guard the wall. i'm kind of surprised you being such a fan, and not sensing that. prototype of a man fighting the others and describing the wall situation is samwell tarly, but surely not jon snow. still, the very name of the book indicates it: a song of ICE- snow and FIRE- fire and blood.
western politics maybe is the main topic of the book, but it kind of surprises me to see you think that targaryens will play an insignificant role in it. if you describe western politics, and know that the targaryens are planning on coming back, than it is quite obvious that it will be a MAJOR thing when it comes to pass.
rob stark's role.
you are aware of the fact that he was killed? the freys killed him, as his uncle was marrying the frey girl. you know about that, don't you?
well, his role was to help rip aprat robert baratheon's kingdom. just as stannis baratheon, renly baratheon and balon greyjoy did. so, when kingdom was ripped apart, and when george martin needed these carachters not, he discarded them. otherwise, they would just take needles pages, or be discarded anyway simply by not be written about anymore. it comes to the same thing in the end.
am i making myself a bit more clear now? :duh:
Hah, funny how your saying im not reading what your saying when your doing the exact same thing.
I never said the targs coming back wasnt major, not that jon snow WOULDNT be a targ and wouldnt run off with dany etc.
LDH understands this, i do it with her a lot, I play devils advocate. I play the other side of the game to inspire interesting debate.
My argument isnt against jon being a targ, its against your reasoning that 'there has to be something mrore to him.
You can make all your quotes about studying literature but your not fully explaining the plot theyre all dancing to, and to some extent all of us dont know what it is (which makes the notion even more ridiculous)
It is a story of politics yes, of westeros as a whole (as i said) in the form of the lives of the characters we see. westeros is under threat from the wildling invasion and the others hence that alone is enough to base a large percentage of the stories importance in the wall, hence jon can function as a character on the wall alone (and as a character its clear he is devoted to his oats, sam tarly on the other hand? COME ON that is a shoddy example, his character is about living up to persecution, seen as a coward by his father and others and evetually achieving all the things that make him a good person, slaying others, becoming a maester etc, the wall is never something he wanted, but tis a way for him to achieve what he couldnt before)
And dont patronise me witht he rob stark facts.
Saying that rob starks role was just ripping apart the kingdom......no he was in the story as a character people liked, while the story ad as whole, westeros, politics etc is the main plot, its not everything in why characters are there, a good writer puts thiings in that arent essential otherwise it doesnt seem real or diverse enough. Rob stark was a character for people to back behind in the war, and GRRM used him to deal a crippling blow to the readers, he wasnt gotten rid of just because he wasnt useful (to be honest the character is a little drab from the start, if anything he was gotten rid of before he got tedious) he was gotten rid of to extend the story not because he ceased doing that.
Stannis is still around, shouldnt he have expired once the realm was ripped apart? the ironmen are still ripping thing apart more than they did under balon. And even more people are surfacing to do ripping, the bastard of bolton etc.
Your treating the story like its a machine, things are only there for a specific reason, when thats gone they cease being neccesary. this is only true to storytelling on a MINOR level when describing the plot in its meager simplicity, but as a story is fleshed out much more is needed, depth and evironmental details. useless things are more essential to good writing than useful ones.
This time, I'm agreeing with you.
Neither of us said anything of the sort. All we're saying is that the Targs are not THE book.
Also, you claim to know how a writer thinks. If you're talking about anyone but GRRM, I'd accept that. But if you're saying that you know GRRM's mind, I'm afraid that none of us can accept that. Simply put, GRRM is a twisty bastad (sorry, but it's true.) We can't predict his actions.
Change "interesting debate" to "overwhelming urge to go after you with an ax" and it'll be a tad more accurate.
Being serious, though, he does take the opposing side (usually from me) so that we can have a good debate. I yell at him a lot and generally hurl insults at him, but it's all in good fun.
Nicely argued, but I loved this point the best:
Now I'm going to say that it's a headache working through both of your posts. I hate it when people mistype every third word...
Separate names with a comma.