Game Of Thrones Season 5 TV Only Discussion (Spoilers)

[Bisz]

I do not say he should have gone to Kings Landing and campaigned there for a defense plan against the WW invasion, what I'm saying he, of all people, should have known to save his strength until the final hour.
That would have been acting in the interest of the Realm.

So he should have sat on Dragonstone till the WW overran the kingdoms and everyone was ready to cooperate? He could have rode in on a white horse and... sorry, no, I'm still not buying your version of what he should have done.

 

[Bisz]

Neither the Baratheon's nor the Lannister's are the rightful heirs. Baratheon claimed the throne only after taking it from the Targaryens. They are all pretenders.

The Baratheons deposed the Targeryens; the Baratheons are the rightful kings by right of conquest. That is the law in Westeros as well as in our world.

 

[intrinsical]

...the only problem with the whole 'Jon-and-Dany-team-up-to-wipe-out-the-Walkers-and-save-the-day' process, which they certainly seem to be setting us up for, is this:


How can we expect that the showrunners and GRRM are going to give us any sort of happy ending? Wouldn't that be a betrayal of the very guiding spirit of the series lol? I'm expecting something like the last act of Hamlet, but not so cheerful.

If this was a typical fantasy genre series, then this is what's going to happen:

1) Walkers breech the wall. The crows and wildlings fight a retreating battle down Westeros.
2) Danerys or Stannis rallies all the Westeros houses AND other nations to a combined army against the walkers, essentially creating a world war where every nation has troops in the fight.
3) A final siege at Winterfel, where there is a very tough fight but ultimately the walkers are defeated through the combined might and magic of the forces of "good". Lots of people die.
4) Either Jon or Danerys (or perhaps Jon AND Danerys?!!!) become the ruler of Westeros.

Of course, GoT isn't a typical fantasy genre series so what I said likely won't happen. XD

 

[Beagleman]

Yeah, that's too chliche for GoT. I'd rather expect Dany or John to get up one morning, slip in the shower and die.

 

[Captaindemotion]

IIRC, Martin has said that the ending will be bittersweet.

 

[Beagleman]

As long as it isn't a 'valentine for the fans'...

 

[137th Gebirg]

"We're all very pleased..."

 

[ManOnTheWave]

Martin joked that everyone dies in the second to last book and the last book is a thousand pages of the description of the wind and snow blowing on their graves.

 

[Beagleman]

Another thing I'd like to find out, do the people of Westeros and Essos (and espicially Dany) know that the White Walkers actually exist, would the people of Essos even care (those in trading with Westeros probably would)?

 

[theenglish]

You're misunderstanding Stannis's base motivations. He believes he is entitled to be King and that he is the rightful heir, because he is. Tommen is bastard-born and lacks any of the blood that the Baratheon claim was built upon. Stannis is a man of law and justice. In his narrow interpretation of that law, he not only should be king, he must be king.

Neither the Baratheon's nor the Lannister's are the rightful heirs. Baratheon claimed the throne only after taking it from the Targaryens. They are all pretenders.

The whole point of this story, inspired by the Yorks and Lancasters, is that the divine right of kings is bullshit. At this point there is no rightful ruler and, like in England, it will only be the most ruthless who take the throne and then write the history of the kingdom in their favor.

Robert won the throne by conquest, which was always a legitimate tactic in medieval Europe. He used his matrilineal descent from the Targaryans as an excuse, but his crown truly rested on the death of Rhaegar on the Trident and the death of Aerys by the Kingslayer, and was propped up by the victorious armies in the field and the gold from Casterly Rock.

Technically, after Robert was established in his rule, Viserys became a pretender. (Think the Glorious Revolution. James II fled the oncoming William III, and though he claimed to be the rightful king, history remembers him and his sons as pretenders, simply because they never regained their throne.)

The bigger question now is who is left as an heir? Tommen obviously has no children, and neither does his sister Myrcella. Should they both die, or their illegitimacy be proven, that leaves Stannis as proper heir to Robert. As we saw last weekend, he no longer has an heir, so he would be a temporary solution at best, unless he remarries and has a son. After Stannis, the only remaining heir is Dany, who has been informed by a semi-reliable source that she is barren. The future of the Iron Throne looks rather unstable...

My point being that the War of the Roses is a classic example that there is no "divine right" of rulers. Forget the rules of conquest--the point of the story is that everyone believes they are the rightful heir to the throne. Stannis may currently have the rule by right of inheritance right now but that is not the way the War of the Roses turned out and that is what the story is based on. It all depends on who Henry Tudor and Richard III are in this story.

 

[Bisz]

I don't think you are taking the "based on" too far.

In the world of Westeros Stannis is the rightful king.

Robert had no legitimate children; Joff and Tommen's claim is illegitimate.

Robb never wanted the Iron Throne, neither did Balon, so they don't even enter into this equation.

Renley is Stannis younger brother, so he can't inherit before Stannis.

 

[Karzak]

Could it be that after all is said and done, only Myrcela is left alive and she gets the throne after marrying Tristayne from Dorne, and HE becomes the king?

 

[Cyrus]

It would be cool if the Dr Bashir dude becomes the king. He is the most level headed of all the leaders in the show.

 

[Anwar]

Stannis and Tyrion both have elements of Richard III to them, but we don't know who fits as the House of Tudor.

 

[crookeddy]

It would be cool if the Dr Bashir dude becomes the king. He is the most level headed of all the leaders in the show.

Which means he will die shortly.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

why did John and company come walking to Castle Black from north of the wall, they had ships, why march 100 miles through possibly Wight infested territory?

I was thinking the exact same thing myself. They still had all their boats. They could have easily sailed south, towards Eastwatch-by-the-Sea and landed south of the wall. The rest of the Watch knew they were out there, what they were doing and expected them back (where did the boats come from in the first place if not Eastwatch?) and wouldn't have attacked them.

I think that was just an inexplicable scene designed solely to establish that Thorne is starting to develop a newfound, yet begrudging, respect and trust for Snow, allowing them through the gate. It was pretty contrived and unnecessary otherwise, IMO.

In the book Tormund's group of Free Folk (except the giants and mammoths who go around Eastwatch because the latter are too big to fit through the gate) passes through the gate in the Wall, so I think they're combining that with the people being rescued from Hardhome for the show.

Lord Commander Jon Snow sends his friends Grenn and Pypar from Castle Black to Eastwatch. In order to save thousands of wildlings trapped at Hardhome, Cotter Pyke leads eleven ships from Eastwatch in a rescue mission. Bowen Marsh is tasked with collecting the treasures of wildlings crossing the Wall south and having the tolls sent to Eastwatch. Because their mammoths are too big to travel through the Wall at Castle Black, the giants are sent east to round the Wall at Eastwatch.

http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Eastwatch-by-the-Sea

Jon treats with Tormund Giantsbane. His four thousand wildlings will be allowed past the wall, including mammoths and giants. They must leave one hundred boys as hostages at Castle Black, and yield all valuables to pay for food. The mammoths are to go the long way around through Eastwatch while the rest are allowed to go through the gates.

http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/A_Dance_with_Dragons-Chapter_53

Out of universe, the obvious answer is that having them pass through the gate creates a dramatic "Will Thorne open the gate for Jon?" moment, as you say.

In-universe, I can think of a few reasons why they might have wanted to go through the gate instead of sailing to Eastwatch and crossing by land south of the Wall:

- They were worried that the refugee fleet might be attacked by Skagosi raiders.

- The winter storm might have created exceptionally rough seas that forced them back to shore or made landing at Eastwatch a difficult prospect.

- The terrain north of the Wall might be more flat and forgiving than that south of the Wall, especially when marching thousands of desperate refugees.

- The Free Folk had to leave their homes in a hurry due to the White Walker attack, so they might have had to leave a lot of supplies behind and had to live off the land. And they know how to hunt and forage better on their side of the Wall (the South probably has a very different ecosystem after all this time with the Wall separating the continent).

- Jon might not have fully trusted the Free Folk to remain under his control once he got them south of the Wall, and he was worried they might scatter in the lands of the Gift or raid local villages and outposts. At least going through Castle Black, he has some control of them.

- Perhaps the only way the Knight's Watch would agree to let the Free Folk come south is if they were "processed" at Castle Black first. Head counts and names are recorded, taxes are taken to pay for their feeding and housing, "hostages" are taken to serve at Castle Black and ensure loyalty, their new places of residence in the Gift are handed out, etc. That way they can at least somewhat keep track of them if need be.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Nobody on this show is as smart as they think they are.
Except Tyrion.

I would say Tiwyn, Varys and Littlefinger are as smart as they think they are. Not to mention Millisandre, who knows just what she's doing, leading all her lambs to the slaughter. Giving just the right information to just the right people to combine with her magic to get them to do what she wants.

We've also seen a lot of non-political sort of shrewdness of Jon Snow, Bronn, and a handful of other minor characters.

Neither the Baratheon's nor the Lannister's are the rightful heirs. Baratheon claimed the throne only after taking it from the Targaryens. They are all pretenders.

The Baratheons deposed the Targeryens; the Baratheons are the rightful kings by right of conquest. That is the law in Westeros as well as in our world.

If we're going to consider real world morality, no King has the right to rule if the people have no peaceful means to depose him.

And if we're going to consider in-universe morality, nobody not named Stark gives a damn about the rightful line of succession except in the cases when it works in their favor.

Stannis was always a pretty awful guy. What he did to Shereen is the most shocking thing he's done but it was never outside the realm of what he knew he was willing to do. I don't think the fact that he did it moves him to the same level of awfulness as baddies like Jaffrey, Ramsay, and the walkers. Remember every single powerful character has blood on their hands.

SAY IT! YOU RAPED OBERYN'S SISTER! YOU MURDERED HER! THEN YOU MURDERED HER CHILDREN! Tiwyn, Robert, and even the paragon Ned Stark were responsible for all the innocent deaths that happened during that battle and Jamie is the only one he can claim he actually did anything noble that day. Killing Elya and her daughters, and all the Targaryen children, isn't any less evil than killing Shereen. We just never got to know them so it's less shocking to the audience.

Other than a small handful of characters, all characters in the show are equally evil by real world standards.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

SAY IT! YOU RAPED OBERYN'S SISTER! YOU MURDERED HER! THEN YOU MURDERED HER CHILDREN! Tiwyn, Robert, and even the paragon Ned Stark were responsible for all the innocent deaths that happened during that battle and Jamie is the only one he can claim he actually did anything noble that day. Killing Elya and her daughters, and all the Targaryen children, isn't any less evil than killing Shereen. We just never got to know them so it's less shocking to the audience.

Other than a small handful of characters, all characters in the show are equally evil by real world standards.

How is Ned responsible for that? He wasn't even present at the time and was appalled by the rape and bloodshed visited upon the Targaryen family by the Lannister forces when they sacked King's Landing, and by Jaime's betrayal of the king he was protecting, however justified it was. Robert's after-the-fact approval of some of those acts was the reason they were estranged for a time.

I'm not saying Ned is a saint by any means, but it's unfair to paint him as culpable for crimes he had no part in and didn't approve of. If you're saying he's responsible because he helped start the rebellion that lead to those events, he had justifiable reasons for doing so, but that doesn't make him responsible for every war crime committed as a result of that revolt.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Ever heard of felony murder?

I guess the Starks are the only house who actually had the consent of the people they ruled. Other than Denerys until she executed that guy.

 

[M.A.C.O.]

She kept the Stag. T_T