|
Post by min on Sept 10, 2016 21:08:30 GMT
I'm just wondering what Martin considers an extremely subtle and obscure clue. “I want to surprise and delight my reader and take them in directions they didn’t see coming. But I can’t change the plans… So many readers were reading the books with so much attention that they were throwing up some theories and while some of those theories were amusing bulls**t and creative, some of the theories are right. At least one or two readers had put together the extremely subtle and obscure clues that I’d planted in the books and came to the right solution… So what do I do then? Do I change it?! I wrestled with that issue and I came to the conclusion that changing it would be a disaster, because the clues were there. You can’t do that, so I’m just going to go ahead. Some of my readers who don’t read the [online fan] boards, which thankfully there are hundreds of thousands of them, will still be surprised and other readers will say: ‘See, I said that four years ago, I’m smarter than you guys’.” The Butler did it. www.themarysue.com/george-r-r-martin-on-book-secrets-and-brienne/I haven’t written the ending yet, so I don’t know, but no. That’s certainly not my intent. I’ve said before that the tone of the ending that I’m going for is bittersweet. I mean, it’s no secret that Tolkien has been a huge influence on me, and I love the way he ended Lord of the Rings. It ends with victory, but it’s a bittersweet victory. Frodo is never whole again, and he goes away to the Undying Lands, and the other people live their lives. And the scouring of the Shire—brilliant piece of work, which I didn’t understand when I was 13 years old: “Why is this here? The story’s over?” But every time I read it I understand the brilliance of that segment more and more. All I can say is that’s the kind of tone I will be aiming for. Whether I achieve it or not, that will be up to people like you and my readers to judge. www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2015/08/george-rr-martin-dishes-some-clues-on-how-game-of.html
|
|
|
Post by jnr on Sept 11, 2016 3:52:30 GMT
I'm just wondering what Martin considers an extremely subtle and obscure clue. In my opinion, he's not kidding around when he rolls out a phrase like that. But exactly what subject he has in mind is not at all clear to me. There seem to be several major possibilities besides Jon's parents.
|
|
|
Post by Maester Flagons on Sept 11, 2016 6:22:05 GMT
Jon's parentage is not the central mystery and not the key to the answer of Ice and Fire. Not to say he isn't important, I'm just saying he's another piece of the conclusion.
|
|
|
Post by jnr on Sept 11, 2016 16:21:11 GMT
And GRRM did not, in his original remarks, even say that some fans had predicted the ending, as far as I can tell.
He seems to have been his usual ambiguous self in discussing how "one or two" fans has interpreted his "clues," back in the nineties... and the concept of "the ending" being what he meant, and RLJ being that ending, was just painted on top by an over-eager fandom. He meant some mystery of some sort, but that's about as far as I could go with confidence.
|
|
|
Post by Ser Duncan on Sept 11, 2016 17:15:15 GMT
So many readers were reading the books with so much attention that they were throwing up some theories and while some of those theories were amusing bulls**t and creative, some of the theories are right. At least one or two readers had put together the extremely subtle and obscure clues that I’d planted in the books and came to the right solution… First off I'm not nearly as convinced as the writer of this article that Martin is referring to RLJ. He said he read theories, plural. So while one may be about Jon's parentage, there are other mysteries he's talking about here. I'd be inclined to think he's referring more to central mysteries, such as who are the Others, why are the Others attacking, and why do the Children of the Forest need Bran specifically? Additionally, unless Martin is far less skilled than I think, RLJ is not extremely subtle and obscure. For as much as jnr and I will argue over how we interpret the text, I think we'll both agree that on the surface, RLJ is too obvious to qualify as either subtle or obscure.
|
|
|
Post by min on Sept 11, 2016 18:13:13 GMT
So many readers were reading the books with so much attention that they were throwing up some theories and while some of those theories were amusing bulls**t and creative, some of the theories are right. At least one or two readers had put together the extremely subtle and obscure clues that I’d planted in the books and came to the right solution… First off I'm not nearly as convinced as the writer of this article that Martin is referring to RLJ. He said he read theories, plural. So while one may be about Jon's parentage, there are other mysteries he's talking about here. I'd be inclined to think he's referring more to central mysteries, such as who are the Others, why are the Others attacking, and why do the Children of the Forest need Bran specifically? Additionally, unless Martin is far less skilled than I think, RLJ is not extremely subtle and obscure. For as much as jnr and I will argue over how we interpret the text, I think we'll both agree that on the surface, RLJ is too obvious to qualify as either subtle or obscure.
|
|
|
Post by Some Pig No Doubt on Sept 11, 2016 19:26:51 GMT
Additionally, unless Martin is far less skilled than I think, RLJ is not extremely subtle and obscure. For as much as jnr and I will argue over how we interpret the text, I think we'll both agree that on the surface, RLJ is too obvious to qualify as either subtle or obscure. I have said before and will say again, GRRM's concept of great mysteries and whodunits stems from the works of Agatha Christie and Ellery Queen - two authors VERY skilled at planting extremely subtle and obscure clues that lead to a great shocking twist reveal at the end. RLJ clues are more like Scooby and the Gang. And the scouring of the Shire—brilliant piece of work, which I didn’t understand when I was 13 years old: “Why is this here? The story’s over?” But every time I read it I understand the brilliance of that segment more and more. All I can say is that’s the kind of tone I will be aiming for. I am still so intrigued by this. The scouring of the Shire is dark, and I'm eager to see what GRRM works into the series reminiscent of this ending. I'm assuming it's related to Winterfell, ending things where it all begin, but what? Does Bran die? Does Winterfell...fall? So many possibilities.
|
|
|
Post by jnr on Sept 11, 2016 19:49:12 GMT
GRRM's concept of great mysteries and whodunits stems from the works of Agatha Christie and Ellery Queen - two authors VERY skilled at planting extremely subtle and obscure clues that lead to a great shocking twist reveal at the end. RLJ clues are more like Scooby and the Gang. Bingo. More than that... at the time GRRM designed the series, the notion of Jon as RLJ portrays him was an extreme cliche. Specifically, teen male with mysterious past who suffers in difficult social circumstances, but eventually is revealed as the heir to a great kingdom. It was done over and over unapologetically in the genre. The most obvious possible example then, and for many years after then, would be the #1 bestselling fantasy series of the whole nineties: Wheel of Time. And immediately prior to it, the Tad Williams series. And immediately prior to it, the Belgariad. So GRRM would have known his readers would expect that sort of thing yet again. IMO, he gave them an easy opportunity to find it, since they'd be looking anyway. That the field has become far more diverse and less predictable since then is irrelevant; he couldn't have known that would happen more than twenty years back. Rather than being based on extremely subtle or obscure clues, RLJ is like looking at a crust and a can of cherries and shrieking in ecstasy "Aha! Soon there will be a cherry pie! I have solved the mystery!!"
|
|
|
Post by jnr on Sept 11, 2016 20:05:14 GMT
For as much as jnr and I will argue over how we interpret the text On this point, consider that Snowfyre has known for months that the Knight of the Laughing Tree was Ned, whereas it's just as plain to me it was Howland.
|
|
|
Post by ac on Sept 12, 2016 18:16:24 GMT
I am still so intrigued by this. The scouring of the Shire is dark, and I'm eager to see what GRRM works into the series reminiscent of this ending. I'm assuming it's related to Winterfell, ending things where it all begin, but what? Does Bran die? Does Winterfell...fall? So many possibilities. ...and then Jon sails west across the Sunset Sea and lives out the rest of his years there?
|
|
|
Post by snowfyre on Sept 13, 2016 3:46:10 GMT
On this point, consider that Snowfyre has known for months that the Knight of the Laughing Tree was Ned, whereas it's just as plain to me it was Howland. (It was Ned.)
|
|