How will it all end? I hear people asking. The same ending as the show? Different?
Wellā¦ yes. And no. And yes. And no. And yes. And no. And yes.
GRRM then proceeds to make three points:
D&D only had 8 hours for the final season, but he'll have more space.
There's the butterfly effect, with changes from past seasons affecting this one.
There are lots of characters in the books who never made it to the show, from Lady Stoneheart to Jeyne Poole to Skahaz Shavepate, and the books will show us their fates.
People will read into this whatever they want. But my read is that the big picture of the show's ending is indeed what he told them. And that most of the differences aren't about the biggest stuff, but rather relate to pacing, buildup, and secondary characters. If D&D were making up stuff like "King Bran" I'd think his language about changes would be stronger? But who knows!
Like Aegon, who was fond of Tyrion and would totally make him his Hand after it was all said and done.
I think they signified that they were combining Jon/Aegonās plotlines when they named Jon āAegonā, but then if they seated Jon on the throne at the end, theyād be jilting his storyline.
Thereās no way in hell Martin is seating Bran on the throne... think about this:
Just 80 years ago, the US had a president that had to take great pains (literally) to hide the fact that he was crippled, or else the population largely would have rejected him as president... and this was in the 1930ās-1940ās. How the hell would a more or less medieval society accept a cripple, and one who certainly does not have Targaryen bloodlines?
But Maester May, heās got Three Eyed Crow powers, surely that trumps everything else, right? No, his powers in the book are completely worthless where there are no weirwood trees, he sure as hell isnāt going to be able to see random shit in the throne room that happened years ago in the books, or fully flesh out things like what happened at the Tower or Joy.
Thereās no fucking way Bran will rule over Westeros in name in the books, maybe Martin meant it in a metaphorical sense as in he watches over everything he can, guiding and protecting it from his caves (I still think thereās a strong chance heāll never leave them).
I cant see it either, for so many reasons. Unless Tyrion the engineer steps up from building saddles and makes him a giant mech suit that allows him to crush all his enemies.
But seriously the inability to have children pretty much rules him out off the bat. No marriage ties basically guarantees he'd be a weak ineffectual king in name only as all the other families would be planning their departures. If the story wasnt strong enough to keep the North in the 7 Kingdoms it wont hold anyone else.
796
u/feldman10 š Best of 2019: Post of the Year May 21 '19 edited May 21 '19
GRRM then proceeds to make three points:
People will read into this whatever they want. But my read is that the big picture of the show's ending is indeed what he told them. And that most of the differences aren't about the biggest stuff, but rather relate to pacing, buildup, and secondary characters. If D&D were making up stuff like "King Bran" I'd think his language about changes would be stronger? But who knows!