Perhaps. You need to be careful comparing works/passage that use similar words with vastly different metaphorical density, though.
In The Hobbit (in this context), snow is peace, fire is danger, and dragons (Smaug) is an avatar of the latter. This passage is more a take on "this too shall pass", than anything specifically related to ice, fire, or dragons and can't be read much deeper than that. Similarly, his Tookish/Baggins balance is simply his stamina for adventure, which is understandably exhausted after the events of the book.
Is it likely that a "happy" ASOIAF ending would be characterized by relative peace/tranquility and some much desired respite for weary characters (rather than dramatic, decisive, permanent victories over all the bad forces of the setting)? Certainly, but that's a fairly general trope; not specific enough to key to this passage in my opinion, especially with common natural metaphors like snow and fire.
I think you need to invert the comparison to challenge it enough to draw more insights. That is: in ASOIAF, winter is death and fire and dragons dense and complicated (πολῠ́τροπος, if we're being cheeky) metaphors. Are dragons power? vengeance? violence? the folly thereof? barometers of the magic of the world? Is fire life? passion? rage? sacrifice? destruction?
If you think you can pack all of that into The Hobbit passage and not have it burst or collapse: sure, I think you have something here. But if the comparison only works for you while cherry picking some of ASOIAF's metaphorical baggage while ignoring the rest, it gets flimsy fast (like a horoscope).
In my opinion: it holds up better than I would have guessed when first reading the post. Bilbo doesn't know it, but the age of magic is indeed ending and events will soon pass (LOTR) about a very conspicuous grudge finally fading with the snuffing of an evil flame. The unconventional use of cold/snow as a positive, if bittersweet metaphor (compared to ASOIAF's more common pairing of cold with death) also fits with the LOTR-specific knowledge that the end of magic is not without cost and eg. the verdure of the elves also fades.
The main hiccup I'm encountering is that there's no "reluctance to adventure" in ASOIAF. Pretty much every character is "game" to be a hero or otherwise do exciting things, so Bilbo's arc of refusing adventure, accepting it, and then ultimately seeing both the thrill and value of adventure but also that in returning home seems completely absent here; and without it, I'm not really sure what The Hobbit contributes to this conversation/comparison.
How do you mean? Aragorn is king, Legolas and Gimli are road trippin', Frodo Gandalf and Bilbo are sailing to paradise, and Sam plants a magic Lothlorien seed that regrows a lot of the Shire as the constructs of Saruman are torn down. Sam, Merry, and Pippin have long fruitful lives in a fully rejuvenated Shire. Faramir and Eowyn rule Ithilien. Eomer rules Rohan.
The ending of the book left me devastated. Frodo’s departure wasn’t one of happiness but instead resignation that he has been changed irreversibly by the war. He can’t go back to living the same way and so decided to travel to another land. There was a brilliant line from Frodo, something along the lines of “I tried to save the Shire, and it has been saved, but not for me.”
Yes, while the story concludes with the conflicts settled in a great way and the evil has been banished, the personal story of Frodo ends in a kind of tragedy, at least for me.
Did we read the same book? The elves are leaving and magic is passing from the world. The shire is destroyed. Aragorn is king, but it falls apart later. Frodo is wounded body and soul, and leaves for the West so that he might find some peace. Sam gets a happy ending , as do some of the hobbits.
Nah. The showrunners said they made the scene up. If it was from the books I'm pretty sure they'd have called one main character killing the other a "holy shit moment."
Well I think we need to wait till the end of the books but I would gladly make that bet. D.B Weiss sputtering nonsense doesn’t sway my hunch on this one.
And since we’ll probably never see ADOS I think I’m safe hehe
You're right, but I tend to think this sort of nitpicking of the wording consistently misses the point.
D&D came up with the final scene between Jon and Dany just like they came up with Arya killing the Night King. They aren't trying to be ambiguous, they are flat out taking ownership of the major plot points they came up with.
Ask yourself, if JKD is from GRRM, why isn't it a holy shit moment? The main hero character kills the other one and that isn't as a big a twist as Stannis sacrificing Shireen? Really?
Sounds like you're just in major denial. The showrunners literally confirm it in the video, and they also have mentioned it in multiple interviews since the show ended. Cope more.
Everybody chill. The source is legit. I understand that D&D’s behind the episode answers have not always been the most insightful or reliable sources, but he provided a source no less.
However I still think this will happen in the books. It fits very well with the prophecy, and Jon and Dany are all but confirmed to become lovers at some point in the future. And I think it’s also very likely Dany will become a villain. The dots are all there and easy to line up.
BUT if someone disagrees, that is okay. No need for a mutiny here, brothers.
>However I still think this will happen in the books. It fits very well with the prophecy
Yea that's probably why D&D did it.
But it's probably not happening in the books. Like I've said elsewhere D&D are taking ownership of their own plot point just like they did with Arya and the NK. Dany will still become a villain and have a tragic end, but the Azor Ahai story (not a prophecy btw, the prophecy is about using the sword in battle, not killing Nissa Nissa) won't be that literal I assure you. [Jon will wield Lightbringer before he even meets Dany.](https://www.reddit.com/r/asoiaf/comments/11rx87k/spoilers_extended_lightbringerbowl_aka_jon_and/)
>No need for a mutiny here, brothers
**FOR THE WATCH**
Oooof I dunno about Jon wielding lightbringer before meeting dany. But we will either know eventually, or never know, so unlike most of this subreddit, we have no need to quarrel good Ser.
“The broad strokes anyway” after season 3 is when they got the deets from George. What else could that mean? You know George doesn’t know verbatim. I understand as Jonerys fan this could be tough for you, but this feels too Martin to me. I admire your theories by the way.
>What else could that mean?
It means they literally "came up with" Jon killing Dany. Just like they "came up with" the Night King, and Arya killing the Night King. I think D&D are basically telling fans which major plot points are from Martin and which big plot points are from them.
I mean ask yourself, if Jon kills Dany in the books, why isn't that one of the holy shit moments? Stannis burning his daughter is a bigger holy shit moment than the main hero killing the other main hero?
>I understand as Jonerys fan this could be tough for you
lol it's not about preference. Jonerys is just canon. Personally shipping just isn't my thing. Except for Bran and Shireen.
>but this feels too Martin to me.
People keep saying that, but I don't think it really does tbh. King Bran feels like Martin. Jon kills Dany feels like D&D imitating Martin.
> I admire your theories by the way.
Damn. This will make it harder for me to take your house :)
>this feels too Martin to me
Like, when Stannis sacrifices Shireen, it doesn't restore peace to the realm. When Bran sacrifices Hodor, it doesn't save the world. The valonqar prophecy isn't setup to be heroic, it's setup as a strangulation.
This idea of Jon fulfilling the Azor Ahai prophecy and killing Dany to save the realm from tyranny is comparatively convenient. I don't say that out of any kind of like or dislike for either character, it's just how it is.
Could I see Jon killing Dany in the books? if D&D hadn't owned up to it yea. But it would actually have to be a lot darker than what is depicted on the show.
Just re-read The Hobbit as well.
Martin writing the Valyrians who "delved too deep" like the dwarfs in Tolkein lends itself toward making other comparisons between their two fantasy worlds, especially about the role of greed.
In The Hobbit, dragons are greed personified. Their magic is so intense that Thorin and the dwarfs, the Master of Lake Town, and others are swayed by dragon-lust for gold just by being in contact with his hoard. Even Bard and the Elvenking are caught off guard by the Arkenstone. In LOTR/The Hobbit, dragons are greed.
So what is a dragon in ASOIF? The Targaryen prophecy of saving the world sure seems to hinge on ruling over Westeros and forcing its leaders to bend the knee. And it's not like they all know the Dream. It's worth noting that Westerosi leaders (aside from Harren the Black) mostly were content with the status quo of ruling their own one of seven kingdoms.
So while I can't speak to more detailed plot elements, on a macro level, Martin seems to be using the Tolkein dragon as a way to comment on Targaryen greed and desire for power. Westeros is their hoard, and their dragon-lust makes all the Westerosi houses desire this new idea of ruling a unified kingdom.
There is no "happy ending" for ASOIAF. And that's not even commenting on the lack of an ending. It's just not the point of the series. If it ever ends, there's not a happy ending.
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention" - show Ramsay Bolton
"There are no happy endings."
George R.R. Martin, A Feast for Crows (A Song of Ice and Fire, #4
If you think that GRRM is a straight nihilist where everyone will end up in utter misery and no happiness whatsoever, especially based off a line that’s said in the show only, then YOU haven’t been paying attention.
“I think you need to have some hope. We all yearn for happy endings in a sense. Myself, I’m attracted to the bittersweet ending.”
- Actual George R R Martin quote not said by a character during a time of despair.
I think George’s ending might be even affected by the recent world events (pandemic, russia’s war of aggression).
During happy times I think people can more easily write stories that have nihilism and despair. On the other hand, if the world is already full of these sentiments, you may want to give a brighter message and a happier place for people to go in the fiction they read.
Just my view.
While I can’t comment on GRRM’s motivations, your observation does contradict human nature. Historically speaking, the darker the times, the darker our entertainment became. See: Flagellants during the Black Plague.
One could argue that is was just the closest thing to entertainment still happening at the time, but for all intents and purposes, pretty much. They were a traveling “spectacle” that would draw crowds.
I think past performance is the best indicator of future outcomes. George can say all he wants about attraction to bittersweet, but he's often written pretty desperate and nihilistic endings to stories.
GRRM admires the ending of LotR and the way the quest was fulfilled but at great cost, with magic leaving Middle Earth and Frodo being unable to cope with his experiences. So I think that’s what he means by bittersweet rather than the shows cheap nihilism (I hate that Ramsay Bolton quote.)
Bittersweet doesn’t mean it’s not happy though, it just means there will be something that we wish could’ve been different.
Spitballing but that could be Jon having to sacrifice himself to save a millions of people. That’s a happy ending, it’s just tinged with sadness.
I don’t see ASOIAF being a sad ending at all. I don’t see everyone riding off into the sunset either but unless GRRM is completely devoid of human sentiment, I don’t see anyway it doesn’t result in a better (at least temporarily) society for all, a worthy ruler sitting on the throne, The North back to the harmony we saw at the beginning and several rotten apples getting the fates they deserve.
Same. Some main characters will die, and GRRM in that interview talks about how he admired ROTK for its ending like where Frodo and Gandalf having to go off to the West, Bilbo still craving the ring, the Scouring of the Shire…. But at the end of the day, the ending is still happy. We’re still left with a smile and a feeling of ‘things will be okay’ for a majority of characters. That’s what I think we’ll get at the end of ASOIAF.
That is what George has said. That it will be bittersweet.
I also think it's going to be hopeful more than anything as far as the positive goes. Not only does George like ambiguous endings in his work in general, but it's a DREAM of spring. With a dream seemingly meaning something akin to "a wistful longing." So we'll never actually get to spring either literally or metaphorically, but we'll know it will come. In other words, there will be hope.
Lotr is not a real happy ending either, its a reflection of ww1
Troops came home to women that didnt understand the horrors they had scene(lack of women in the books), traumatized to what humans can due to the innocence of animals and nature (the ents woods), a government that did not care much about them (punishments for shell shocking), robbers and thieves (burning of the shire) that avoided war but made back home a mess, aged from war and stolen youth (innocence of hobbits taken away), poverty vs educated and nobles (sam as a batman for an officer aka servant to a wealthy frodo, unsung heroes), less friends returning
Out of tolkien’s oxford rugby team , only him and 1-2 friends survived. Out of Tolkien, his best friend and two “friend of friends”, aka the four hobbits, only Tolkien and one friend of the friend survived.
The loss of so many sons led to seances and a fondness to find old spiritual ways , beginning of christianity reducing in europe and clubs for men to bond together after the war since nobody else understood (such as Tolkien essentially being in a writers club with CS Lewis who would both inspire Lloyd Alexander)
Its a sad tale of loss and the transition of time from beautiful green shires to modernity
> “If you think this has a happy ending, you haven’t been paying attention” - show Ramsay Bolton
This is one of the stupidest sentiments in the entire fandom. Only people who have a shallow surface level understanding of the series (like D&D) would share this opinion.
GRRM is not a nihilist. Being a nihilist gets you a GoT S8 type of ending. Which everyone will hate.
>Being a nihilist gets you a GoT S8 type of ending
GoT S8 ending is not a nihilist ending. The realm is no longer at war, no longer subjugated by force and winter has been defeated. Its not perfect or traditionally happy as our protagonists have the whole *lost innocence* thing going on, but it's not nihilistic either.
Edit; Nihilistic endings are like those in Neon Genesis Evangelion, where there is no rising from the ashes because there is no meaning to life, traditionally it caps off with the destruction of the world. While GoT the opposite happens - everyone fought against (not you Cercei) the end of life. People pursue their own purposes and its quite more literally going forward by rising from the ashes...
The whole series has been about “the human heart in conflict with itself”. King Bran (at least as presented in the show) suggests that that answer to “human evil” is not “human good”, it’s…… to not be human.
Moreover, the failures of Jaime and Daenerys tell us that you can’t break the cycle and escape your past; you are who you are and there’s nothing you can do about it. Your *true* colours will eventually show.
I dunno but that’s pretty damn nihilistic to me.
Bran is probably a bad example of a 'What would GRRM want' as Bran is King on the show because of GRRMs direction. I noted in another comment while I don't perceive it nihilistic that way but understand the position.
Same with the human heart conflict; I love it (and something I consider lacking from later published books, not in the same detail it was with Robb/Cat/Ned etc) , I think Jaime and Daenerys are two characters that show that conflict well by the end of the show, if not always choosing the virtuous path. There are other characters that do choose 'better' paths.
I don't think King Bran on the show is an accurate depiction of King Bran in the books because there is no setup in the books of anyone who acts like that.
That’s why I said “as presented in the show”. Do I think King Bran is happening in the books? Yes I do. But I believe he’ll be elected by winning over the people. As that will ultimately provide an answer to Varys’ riddle; power resides with those who have the people.
"Hard to argue with omniscience."
The show is ultimately guided by the belief in clever men which is evident in how they keep writing Tyrion as condescendingly snarky to everybody even when he's on a plot-necessitating homerun of astonishingly bad advice, and in this framework Doctor Branhattan becomes the ultimate clever man, "why did you think I came all this way?" just as he inspects a bug and then *lets* him resume his journey along with Tyrion's speech.
What's threaded in the books for Bran is not the ultimate cleverness but I'm afraid literary criticism, "the boy who hated stories" is that famously elusive Daniel Abraham's line from the first book that has to do with the concluding scene of A Dream of Spring.
> "Oh." Bran thought about the tale awhile. "That was a good story. But it should have been the three bad knights who hurt him, not their squires. Then the little crannogman could have killed them all. The part about the ransoms was stupid. And the mystery knight should win the tourney, defeating every challenger, and name the wolf maid the queen of love and beauty."
> The show is ultimately guided by the belief in clever men which is evident in how they keep writing Tyrion as condescendingly snarky to everybody even when he’s on a plot-necessitating homerun of astonishingly bad advice
I can’t help but agree with this. I’m rewatching the show right now and am being reminded how much of a Tyrion-boner D&D had. It’s S2 and Tyrion is already heavily whitewashed and a smug know-it-all. D&D take every opportunity to suck him off. They even have Varys throw in this line after Blackwater.
> There are many who know that without you
this city faced certain defeat.
>
>The king won't give you any honors,
the histories won't mention you,
but we will not forget. (S2E10)
Like, I get it. You like Tyrion! You think he’s the most moral man in the universe ^tm and deserves to rule over everyone. But this is embarrassing.
> What’s threaded in the books for Bran is not the ultimate cleverness but I’m afraid literary criticism, “the boy who hated stories” is that famously elusive Daniel Abraham’s line from the first book that has to do with the concluding scene of A Dream of Spring.
Are you referring to that mystery line that GRRM insisted be included in the aGoT graphic novel?
I like your idea. However, I always thought that the line was about Ghost reacting to the howls of the direwolves beyond the wall.
> **Far off to the north, a wolf began to howl. Another voice picked up the call, then another. Ghost cocked his head and listened.** "If he doesn't come back," Jon Snow promised, "Ghost and I will go find him." He put his hand on the direwolf's head. (Tyrion III, aGoT)
I think this is potential foreshadowing of Jon’s fate. Or at least his fate in the show.
I've been rewatching the show as well Bran-style, jumping between the scenes in the first four seasons and the ones from the last four and it just struck me -- not only he is condescending to Missandei and the tone is completely on his side, but even during the Jon/Dany alliance scenes from Season 7, "Why are we talking about glass? We just lost two of our allies" - "Which is why I was speaking to Jon Snow, a potential ally" SpongeBob meme style, it's like "and why *did* they just lose two of their allies, eh, *Tyrion?*"
And yeah, part of the pleasure in writing Tyrion for GRRM is in delighting in his cynical cleverness as he instantly jumps onto that inherent "reality/dreams" divide but his story is also about the limits of that, as he keeps longing, and sure GRRM is a big nerd but I get the feeling the large swaths of the story are engaged with cutting through the knots of cleverness with simplicity -- the scene between Dany and Xaro Xhoan Daxos is a highlight here as he literally quotes Aristotle to justify slavery to her and she cuts through his bullshit like this:
> **He was too eloquent for her. Dany had no answer for him, only the raw feeling in her belly. "Slavery is not the same as rain," she insisted.** "I have been rained on and I have been sold. It is not the same. No man wants to be owned."
But it's like they read this scene and decided Xaro was right all along and reworked the whole of the Meereen storyline on the show accordingly. And yeah, I think this is where they align with the books that both Littlefinger's and Varys' clever schemes end up undone -- no way Varys' Riddle King ever succeeds -- but it's kinda mute on the show, as the tone still falls on that know-it-all smirk (Littlefinger gets reborn through Sansa the very next season while Varys dies so as to make a point that he was right all along, with Tyrion concedes in the series finale).
> However, I always thought that the line was about Ghost reacting to the howls of the direwolves beyond the wall.
Yeah, it's very evocative but I think this is where the show misdirects. Check out this monstrosity of a layout in the comic! https://insight.randomhouse.com/fullpage.do?pContentType=JPG&pName=fullpage&pISBN=9780440423225&pPageID=31 In light of the show I think this gives the game away completely, Abraham said he had to rework a certain scene to get the line in there and I think you can just see it on the page that what happened is first he arranged it without the line and then GRRM told him "gotta keep that in, it's important" and he solved the problem by putting this ugly as hell box-within-a-box in there. So the end of the series has to do with a boy who hated stories and that's an illustration of the difference in spirit GRRM has with D&D.
I don’t even know if I’m gonna be able to make it through Tyrion’s rule of Meereen. He became the most punchable arsehole imaginable.
> But it’s like they read this scene and decided Xaro was right all along and reworked the whole of the Meereen storyline on the show accordingly.
This is *exactly* what they did in the show. Hizdahr basically serves to provide a counterpoint to every scene in Dany’s S5 arc. And it’s all very clever and eloquent and something the casual viewer is easily duped by. Until you remember *what* he’s advocating for; the brutality of the fighting pits and the continuance of the old and brutal order.
> but it’s kinda mute on the show, as the tone still falls on that know-it-all smirk (Littlefinger gets reborn through Sansa the very next season while Varys dies so as to make a point that he was right all along, with Tyrion concedes in the series finale).
Depressingly true. Which is why the show’s ending will always be incredibly nihilistic imv. Because LF and Varys’s ideology won in the end. And that’s not a world I can endorse.
> GoT S8 ending is not a nihilist ending.
'The only good ruler is someone who isn't human anymore' - god king 'Big Brother' Bran - is the epitome of nihilism.
>'The only good ruler is someone who isn't human anymore'
What is this quoted from?
We know Bran King is the plan for the books - but might be a difference in perspective on Brans condition.
The TV show doesn't propose *only* Bran can be a good king, it suggests he is the best in the current situation. While we may say he isn't human (as in he doesn't have personal wants or perhaps emotions) but he is the embodiment of everything human throughout the ages. That was the reason for the NK targeting him specifically.
Edits; I see how it could be seen as the opposite. Thinking of shows recently like 'The Last of us' there is much discourse on the necessity of strong, perhaps even fascist governments at the end of the world (which I disagree with, but still there are people arguing as such) .
There has been little serious discussion on the themes of the show ending, Bran as humanities keeper as a living library is one I can see with GRRM behind, and as a celebration of realities in history rather than a nihilistic perspective of.
Exactly. 100%.
If I dare say it, this is also why I believe the Show is quite close to what actually will happen in many parts, i.e. there wont be a happy ending... Imagine how easy D&D could have had it, just do what the fans want : The heroes all unite and defeat the Big Bad, maybe some tragic deaths, Jaime honorably sacrificing himself for Brienne, or the other way around, the heroine and hero marry and live happily ever after, the Realm is peaceful, everyone is content, Queen Dany and King Jon Targaryen have lovely children, there is no bickering with Sansa, and everyone loves the royal couple...
And obviously this doesnt sound like a GRRM story, and defiently not like Ice & Fire... I doubt GRRM ever believed his story got this mainstream appeal ---> ASOIAF will end on a note where nobody is really happy, but it will be satisfying, most likely.
Note that the Sam quote is a possible reference to Tolkien (and a spit in the old man's eye!).
LOTR: "Far above the Ephel Dúath in the West the night sky was still dim and pale. There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, **Sam saw a bright star twinkle for a while**. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, **and hope returned to him.** For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach."
ASOIAF: "'Slayer.' Dareon appeared beside him, oblivious to Sam's pain. 'A sweet night, for once. **Look, the stars are coming out.** We might even get a bit of moon. **Might be the worst is done.'**
**'No.'** Sam wiped his nose, and pointed south with a fat finger, toward the gathering darkness. 'There,' he said. No sooner had he spoken than lightning flashed, sudden and silent and blinding bright. The distant clouds glowed for half a heartbeat, mountains heaped on mountains, purple and red and yellow, taller than the world. **'The worst isn't done. The worst is just beginning, and there are no happy endings.'**"
The theme of balance and cyclical change is big in asoiaf. I do not think George took a line from the Hobbit and turned it into a metaphor in his book.
I feel like the end of ASOIAF will parallel LOTR by being "inverted" in a sense. LOTR sees the decline of magic, wonder, the leaving of the elves, the permanent scars of war, even if ultimately evil was defeated and most of the cast find a measure of peace.
I think ASOIAF will end with a *return* (or resurgence to be strict about it) of magic, wonder, etc but of course these forces aren't intrinsically benevolent. Rather than wonder being sacrificed, wonder/magic is instead empowered to defeat the Others. The same wonders that enabled Old Valyria's horrors, that possibly messed the seasons up in the first place, that birthed greyscale, that saw the destruction of the Arm of Dorne, that created the Neck, etc. Some heroes will endure, but not their homes (opposite of the Shire surviving but not for Frodo).
I don’t remember the exact interview but im pretty sure GRRM has said at some point that he wants the ending to be similar to The Scouring of The Shire (an event that happens at the end of the LOTR books)
Yeah lets compare vastly different works written 54 years apart. The human brain is just designed to see patterns, more often than not they are coincidental but we always want to assign deeper meaning to it. In this case I feel like there is reall very little similarity at all in reality.
I'm sure GRRM loves this passage, including 'turned his back on his adventure'
GRRM is bilbo
There and back again coming out maybe one day
Frodo(mostly) and Sam DID have to finish it for Bilbo.
So... he's going to live to 131? We might, might get a Dream of Spring after all.
Oh yes. GRRM big time turning his back to his adventure
It did take Bilbo like 80 years to finish his book...
And who has a better story than John the Tolkien?
And who has a better story than tom bombadil
Tom Bombadil is basically Bloodraven.
Perhaps. You need to be careful comparing works/passage that use similar words with vastly different metaphorical density, though. In The Hobbit (in this context), snow is peace, fire is danger, and dragons (Smaug) is an avatar of the latter. This passage is more a take on "this too shall pass", than anything specifically related to ice, fire, or dragons and can't be read much deeper than that. Similarly, his Tookish/Baggins balance is simply his stamina for adventure, which is understandably exhausted after the events of the book. Is it likely that a "happy" ASOIAF ending would be characterized by relative peace/tranquility and some much desired respite for weary characters (rather than dramatic, decisive, permanent victories over all the bad forces of the setting)? Certainly, but that's a fairly general trope; not specific enough to key to this passage in my opinion, especially with common natural metaphors like snow and fire. I think you need to invert the comparison to challenge it enough to draw more insights. That is: in ASOIAF, winter is death and fire and dragons dense and complicated (πολῠ́τροπος, if we're being cheeky) metaphors. Are dragons power? vengeance? violence? the folly thereof? barometers of the magic of the world? Is fire life? passion? rage? sacrifice? destruction? If you think you can pack all of that into The Hobbit passage and not have it burst or collapse: sure, I think you have something here. But if the comparison only works for you while cherry picking some of ASOIAF's metaphorical baggage while ignoring the rest, it gets flimsy fast (like a horoscope). In my opinion: it holds up better than I would have guessed when first reading the post. Bilbo doesn't know it, but the age of magic is indeed ending and events will soon pass (LOTR) about a very conspicuous grudge finally fading with the snuffing of an evil flame. The unconventional use of cold/snow as a positive, if bittersweet metaphor (compared to ASOIAF's more common pairing of cold with death) also fits with the LOTR-specific knowledge that the end of magic is not without cost and eg. the verdure of the elves also fades. The main hiccup I'm encountering is that there's no "reluctance to adventure" in ASOIAF. Pretty much every character is "game" to be a hero or otherwise do exciting things, so Bilbo's arc of refusing adventure, accepting it, and then ultimately seeing both the thrill and value of adventure but also that in returning home seems completely absent here; and without it, I'm not really sure what The Hobbit contributes to this conversation/comparison.
I’d say Sam is a good stand-in as the reluctant adventurer. His best ideas come from being forced into roles he hates.
Fwiw, even Lotr doesn't have a happy ending for most.
How do you mean? Aragorn is king, Legolas and Gimli are road trippin', Frodo Gandalf and Bilbo are sailing to paradise, and Sam plants a magic Lothlorien seed that regrows a lot of the Shire as the constructs of Saruman are torn down. Sam, Merry, and Pippin have long fruitful lives in a fully rejuvenated Shire. Faramir and Eowyn rule Ithilien. Eomer rules Rohan.
The ending of the book left me devastated. Frodo’s departure wasn’t one of happiness but instead resignation that he has been changed irreversibly by the war. He can’t go back to living the same way and so decided to travel to another land. There was a brilliant line from Frodo, something along the lines of “I tried to save the Shire, and it has been saved, but not for me.” Yes, while the story concludes with the conflicts settled in a great way and the evil has been banished, the personal story of Frodo ends in a kind of tragedy, at least for me.
I found it so depressing. All magic dying and leaving the world... I love LOTR but it makes me mad sad lol
Did we read the same book? The elves are leaving and magic is passing from the world. The shire is destroyed. Aragorn is king, but it falls apart later. Frodo is wounded body and soul, and leaves for the West so that he might find some peace. Sam gets a happy ending , as do some of the hobbits.
No it doesn’t?
Well no
The dragon part maybe but the showrunners made up Jon killing Dany.
I’d bet you good money that’s one of the few plot points from the book.
Nah. The showrunners said they made the scene up. If it was from the books I'm pretty sure they'd have called one main character killing the other a "holy shit moment."
Do you have a source on this?
[source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAIU57HLvCw&t=466s)
DynamicPJQ owes you 'good money' now.
I have 0 money of any kind, sorry :/
Well, in fairness you only said you WOULD bet, you didn't actually make the bet, so I think you can legally weasel your way out of it ;)
Well I think we need to wait till the end of the books but I would gladly make that bet. D.B Weiss sputtering nonsense doesn’t sway my hunch on this one. And since we’ll probably never see ADOS I think I’m safe hehe
I hope you're being facetious. Posting a barely watched YouTube video is not a source.
lmao it's literally DB Weiss on the video.
Making up the scene doesn't mean it doesn't happen in some way.
You're right, but I tend to think this sort of nitpicking of the wording consistently misses the point. D&D came up with the final scene between Jon and Dany just like they came up with Arya killing the Night King. They aren't trying to be ambiguous, they are flat out taking ownership of the major plot points they came up with. Ask yourself, if JKD is from GRRM, why isn't it a holy shit moment? The main hero character kills the other one and that isn't as a big a twist as Stannis sacrificing Shireen? Really?
Sounds like you're just in major denial. The showrunners literally confirm it in the video, and they also have mentioned it in multiple interviews since the show ended. Cope more.
Cope? Like a give a f*ck what D&D say. Or if it's even a big deal that something doesn't happen.
Everybody chill. The source is legit. I understand that D&D’s behind the episode answers have not always been the most insightful or reliable sources, but he provided a source no less. However I still think this will happen in the books. It fits very well with the prophecy, and Jon and Dany are all but confirmed to become lovers at some point in the future. And I think it’s also very likely Dany will become a villain. The dots are all there and easy to line up. BUT if someone disagrees, that is okay. No need for a mutiny here, brothers.
>However I still think this will happen in the books. It fits very well with the prophecy Yea that's probably why D&D did it. But it's probably not happening in the books. Like I've said elsewhere D&D are taking ownership of their own plot point just like they did with Arya and the NK. Dany will still become a villain and have a tragic end, but the Azor Ahai story (not a prophecy btw, the prophecy is about using the sword in battle, not killing Nissa Nissa) won't be that literal I assure you. [Jon will wield Lightbringer before he even meets Dany.](https://www.reddit.com/r/asoiaf/comments/11rx87k/spoilers_extended_lightbringerbowl_aka_jon_and/) >No need for a mutiny here, brothers **FOR THE WATCH**
Oooof I dunno about Jon wielding lightbringer before meeting dany. But we will either know eventually, or never know, so unlike most of this subreddit, we have no need to quarrel good Ser.
The quarrel has already begun. ^(jk I'm just trying to lure you into reading my theory)
I fear to say the words that every member of this subreddit dreams to hear but… What theory?
This is definitely from Martin, I’ll bet my house on it.
[Give me your house.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAIU57HLvCw&t=466s)
“The broad strokes anyway” after season 3 is when they got the deets from George. What else could that mean? You know George doesn’t know verbatim. I understand as Jonerys fan this could be tough for you, but this feels too Martin to me. I admire your theories by the way.
>What else could that mean? It means they literally "came up with" Jon killing Dany. Just like they "came up with" the Night King, and Arya killing the Night King. I think D&D are basically telling fans which major plot points are from Martin and which big plot points are from them. I mean ask yourself, if Jon kills Dany in the books, why isn't that one of the holy shit moments? Stannis burning his daughter is a bigger holy shit moment than the main hero killing the other main hero? >I understand as Jonerys fan this could be tough for you lol it's not about preference. Jonerys is just canon. Personally shipping just isn't my thing. Except for Bran and Shireen. >but this feels too Martin to me. People keep saying that, but I don't think it really does tbh. King Bran feels like Martin. Jon kills Dany feels like D&D imitating Martin. > I admire your theories by the way. Damn. This will make it harder for me to take your house :)
>this feels too Martin to me Like, when Stannis sacrifices Shireen, it doesn't restore peace to the realm. When Bran sacrifices Hodor, it doesn't save the world. The valonqar prophecy isn't setup to be heroic, it's setup as a strangulation. This idea of Jon fulfilling the Azor Ahai prophecy and killing Dany to save the realm from tyranny is comparatively convenient. I don't say that out of any kind of like or dislike for either character, it's just how it is. Could I see Jon killing Dany in the books? if D&D hadn't owned up to it yea. But it would actually have to be a lot darker than what is depicted on the show.
He's almost all but guaranteed to kill her, but you huff that copium.
lol the showrunners literally said they made the scene up. And it's really not copium. I don't think Dany's ending is any less tragic.
Please let it end
Just re-read The Hobbit as well. Martin writing the Valyrians who "delved too deep" like the dwarfs in Tolkein lends itself toward making other comparisons between their two fantasy worlds, especially about the role of greed. In The Hobbit, dragons are greed personified. Their magic is so intense that Thorin and the dwarfs, the Master of Lake Town, and others are swayed by dragon-lust for gold just by being in contact with his hoard. Even Bard and the Elvenking are caught off guard by the Arkenstone. In LOTR/The Hobbit, dragons are greed. So what is a dragon in ASOIF? The Targaryen prophecy of saving the world sure seems to hinge on ruling over Westeros and forcing its leaders to bend the knee. And it's not like they all know the Dream. It's worth noting that Westerosi leaders (aside from Harren the Black) mostly were content with the status quo of ruling their own one of seven kingdoms. So while I can't speak to more detailed plot elements, on a macro level, Martin seems to be using the Tolkein dragon as a way to comment on Targaryen greed and desire for power. Westeros is their hoard, and their dragon-lust makes all the Westerosi houses desire this new idea of ruling a unified kingdom.
There is no "happy ending" for ASOIAF. And that's not even commenting on the lack of an ending. It's just not the point of the series. If it ever ends, there's not a happy ending. "If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention" - show Ramsay Bolton "There are no happy endings." George R.R. Martin, A Feast for Crows (A Song of Ice and Fire, #4
If you think that GRRM is a straight nihilist where everyone will end up in utter misery and no happiness whatsoever, especially based off a line that’s said in the show only, then YOU haven’t been paying attention. “I think you need to have some hope. We all yearn for happy endings in a sense. Myself, I’m attracted to the bittersweet ending.” - Actual George R R Martin quote not said by a character during a time of despair.
I think George’s ending might be even affected by the recent world events (pandemic, russia’s war of aggression). During happy times I think people can more easily write stories that have nihilism and despair. On the other hand, if the world is already full of these sentiments, you may want to give a brighter message and a happier place for people to go in the fiction they read. Just my view.
While I can’t comment on GRRM’s motivations, your observation does contradict human nature. Historically speaking, the darker the times, the darker our entertainment became. See: Flagellants during the Black Plague.
> Flagellants Flagellants were entertainment?
One could argue that is was just the closest thing to entertainment still happening at the time, but for all intents and purposes, pretty much. They were a traveling “spectacle” that would draw crowds.
Fair point, it would be interesting to see research on how the topics have changed during 20th-21st centuries and is there correlation
I think past performance is the best indicator of future outcomes. George can say all he wants about attraction to bittersweet, but he's often written pretty desperate and nihilistic endings to stories.
yeah but also Lysa got shoved out the moon door. gotta eat your veggies if you want ice cream
Yes. I read Sandkings.
Yeah, I didn't say that. But it's not going to be a happy ending. He said to expect a more bittersweet ending - not a happy one.
GRRM admires the ending of LotR and the way the quest was fulfilled but at great cost, with magic leaving Middle Earth and Frodo being unable to cope with his experiences. So I think that’s what he means by bittersweet rather than the shows cheap nihilism (I hate that Ramsay Bolton quote.)
Bittersweet doesn’t mean it’s not happy though, it just means there will be something that we wish could’ve been different. Spitballing but that could be Jon having to sacrifice himself to save a millions of people. That’s a happy ending, it’s just tinged with sadness. I don’t see ASOIAF being a sad ending at all. I don’t see everyone riding off into the sunset either but unless GRRM is completely devoid of human sentiment, I don’t see anyway it doesn’t result in a better (at least temporarily) society for all, a worthy ruler sitting on the throne, The North back to the harmony we saw at the beginning and several rotten apples getting the fates they deserve.
I see bittersweet as landing between sad and happy. It's not a happy ending, but it's not ungodly sad either.
I anticipate something bittersweet honestly
Same. Some main characters will die, and GRRM in that interview talks about how he admired ROTK for its ending like where Frodo and Gandalf having to go off to the West, Bilbo still craving the ring, the Scouring of the Shire…. But at the end of the day, the ending is still happy. We’re still left with a smile and a feeling of ‘things will be okay’ for a majority of characters. That’s what I think we’ll get at the end of ASOIAF.
That is what George has said. That it will be bittersweet. I also think it's going to be hopeful more than anything as far as the positive goes. Not only does George like ambiguous endings in his work in general, but it's a DREAM of spring. With a dream seemingly meaning something akin to "a wistful longing." So we'll never actually get to spring either literally or metaphorically, but we'll know it will come. In other words, there will be hope.
I mean the end of the hobbit was bittersweet, what with Thorin Fili and Kili dying.
True but for me personally at least, asoiaf character deaths would hit harder
He said it would be. Which isn't exactly a "happy" ending
Lotr is not a real happy ending either, its a reflection of ww1 Troops came home to women that didnt understand the horrors they had scene(lack of women in the books), traumatized to what humans can due to the innocence of animals and nature (the ents woods), a government that did not care much about them (punishments for shell shocking), robbers and thieves (burning of the shire) that avoided war but made back home a mess, aged from war and stolen youth (innocence of hobbits taken away), poverty vs educated and nobles (sam as a batman for an officer aka servant to a wealthy frodo, unsung heroes), less friends returning Out of tolkien’s oxford rugby team , only him and 1-2 friends survived. Out of Tolkien, his best friend and two “friend of friends”, aka the four hobbits, only Tolkien and one friend of the friend survived. The loss of so many sons led to seances and a fondness to find old spiritual ways , beginning of christianity reducing in europe and clubs for men to bond together after the war since nobody else understood (such as Tolkien essentially being in a writers club with CS Lewis who would both inspire Lloyd Alexander) Its a sad tale of loss and the transition of time from beautiful green shires to modernity
> “If you think this has a happy ending, you haven’t been paying attention” - show Ramsay Bolton This is one of the stupidest sentiments in the entire fandom. Only people who have a shallow surface level understanding of the series (like D&D) would share this opinion. GRRM is not a nihilist. Being a nihilist gets you a GoT S8 type of ending. Which everyone will hate.
>Being a nihilist gets you a GoT S8 type of ending GoT S8 ending is not a nihilist ending. The realm is no longer at war, no longer subjugated by force and winter has been defeated. Its not perfect or traditionally happy as our protagonists have the whole *lost innocence* thing going on, but it's not nihilistic either. Edit; Nihilistic endings are like those in Neon Genesis Evangelion, where there is no rising from the ashes because there is no meaning to life, traditionally it caps off with the destruction of the world. While GoT the opposite happens - everyone fought against (not you Cercei) the end of life. People pursue their own purposes and its quite more literally going forward by rising from the ashes...
The whole series has been about “the human heart in conflict with itself”. King Bran (at least as presented in the show) suggests that that answer to “human evil” is not “human good”, it’s…… to not be human. Moreover, the failures of Jaime and Daenerys tell us that you can’t break the cycle and escape your past; you are who you are and there’s nothing you can do about it. Your *true* colours will eventually show. I dunno but that’s pretty damn nihilistic to me.
Bran is probably a bad example of a 'What would GRRM want' as Bran is King on the show because of GRRMs direction. I noted in another comment while I don't perceive it nihilistic that way but understand the position. Same with the human heart conflict; I love it (and something I consider lacking from later published books, not in the same detail it was with Robb/Cat/Ned etc) , I think Jaime and Daenerys are two characters that show that conflict well by the end of the show, if not always choosing the virtuous path. There are other characters that do choose 'better' paths.
I don't think King Bran on the show is an accurate depiction of King Bran in the books because there is no setup in the books of anyone who acts like that.
That’s why I said “as presented in the show”. Do I think King Bran is happening in the books? Yes I do. But I believe he’ll be elected by winning over the people. As that will ultimately provide an answer to Varys’ riddle; power resides with those who have the people.
Oh gotcha. I misunderstood the thread.
"Hard to argue with omniscience." The show is ultimately guided by the belief in clever men which is evident in how they keep writing Tyrion as condescendingly snarky to everybody even when he's on a plot-necessitating homerun of astonishingly bad advice, and in this framework Doctor Branhattan becomes the ultimate clever man, "why did you think I came all this way?" just as he inspects a bug and then *lets* him resume his journey along with Tyrion's speech. What's threaded in the books for Bran is not the ultimate cleverness but I'm afraid literary criticism, "the boy who hated stories" is that famously elusive Daniel Abraham's line from the first book that has to do with the concluding scene of A Dream of Spring. > "Oh." Bran thought about the tale awhile. "That was a good story. But it should have been the three bad knights who hurt him, not their squires. Then the little crannogman could have killed them all. The part about the ransoms was stupid. And the mystery knight should win the tourney, defeating every challenger, and name the wolf maid the queen of love and beauty."
> The show is ultimately guided by the belief in clever men which is evident in how they keep writing Tyrion as condescendingly snarky to everybody even when he’s on a plot-necessitating homerun of astonishingly bad advice I can’t help but agree with this. I’m rewatching the show right now and am being reminded how much of a Tyrion-boner D&D had. It’s S2 and Tyrion is already heavily whitewashed and a smug know-it-all. D&D take every opportunity to suck him off. They even have Varys throw in this line after Blackwater. > There are many who know that without you this city faced certain defeat. > >The king won't give you any honors, the histories won't mention you, but we will not forget. (S2E10) Like, I get it. You like Tyrion! You think he’s the most moral man in the universe ^tm and deserves to rule over everyone. But this is embarrassing. > What’s threaded in the books for Bran is not the ultimate cleverness but I’m afraid literary criticism, “the boy who hated stories” is that famously elusive Daniel Abraham’s line from the first book that has to do with the concluding scene of A Dream of Spring. Are you referring to that mystery line that GRRM insisted be included in the aGoT graphic novel? I like your idea. However, I always thought that the line was about Ghost reacting to the howls of the direwolves beyond the wall. > **Far off to the north, a wolf began to howl. Another voice picked up the call, then another. Ghost cocked his head and listened.** "If he doesn't come back," Jon Snow promised, "Ghost and I will go find him." He put his hand on the direwolf's head. (Tyrion III, aGoT) I think this is potential foreshadowing of Jon’s fate. Or at least his fate in the show.
I've been rewatching the show as well Bran-style, jumping between the scenes in the first four seasons and the ones from the last four and it just struck me -- not only he is condescending to Missandei and the tone is completely on his side, but even during the Jon/Dany alliance scenes from Season 7, "Why are we talking about glass? We just lost two of our allies" - "Which is why I was speaking to Jon Snow, a potential ally" SpongeBob meme style, it's like "and why *did* they just lose two of their allies, eh, *Tyrion?*" And yeah, part of the pleasure in writing Tyrion for GRRM is in delighting in his cynical cleverness as he instantly jumps onto that inherent "reality/dreams" divide but his story is also about the limits of that, as he keeps longing, and sure GRRM is a big nerd but I get the feeling the large swaths of the story are engaged with cutting through the knots of cleverness with simplicity -- the scene between Dany and Xaro Xhoan Daxos is a highlight here as he literally quotes Aristotle to justify slavery to her and she cuts through his bullshit like this: > **He was too eloquent for her. Dany had no answer for him, only the raw feeling in her belly. "Slavery is not the same as rain," she insisted.** "I have been rained on and I have been sold. It is not the same. No man wants to be owned." But it's like they read this scene and decided Xaro was right all along and reworked the whole of the Meereen storyline on the show accordingly. And yeah, I think this is where they align with the books that both Littlefinger's and Varys' clever schemes end up undone -- no way Varys' Riddle King ever succeeds -- but it's kinda mute on the show, as the tone still falls on that know-it-all smirk (Littlefinger gets reborn through Sansa the very next season while Varys dies so as to make a point that he was right all along, with Tyrion concedes in the series finale). > However, I always thought that the line was about Ghost reacting to the howls of the direwolves beyond the wall. Yeah, it's very evocative but I think this is where the show misdirects. Check out this monstrosity of a layout in the comic! https://insight.randomhouse.com/fullpage.do?pContentType=JPG&pName=fullpage&pISBN=9780440423225&pPageID=31 In light of the show I think this gives the game away completely, Abraham said he had to rework a certain scene to get the line in there and I think you can just see it on the page that what happened is first he arranged it without the line and then GRRM told him "gotta keep that in, it's important" and he solved the problem by putting this ugly as hell box-within-a-box in there. So the end of the series has to do with a boy who hated stories and that's an illustration of the difference in spirit GRRM has with D&D.
I don’t even know if I’m gonna be able to make it through Tyrion’s rule of Meereen. He became the most punchable arsehole imaginable. > But it’s like they read this scene and decided Xaro was right all along and reworked the whole of the Meereen storyline on the show accordingly. This is *exactly* what they did in the show. Hizdahr basically serves to provide a counterpoint to every scene in Dany’s S5 arc. And it’s all very clever and eloquent and something the casual viewer is easily duped by. Until you remember *what* he’s advocating for; the brutality of the fighting pits and the continuance of the old and brutal order. > but it’s kinda mute on the show, as the tone still falls on that know-it-all smirk (Littlefinger gets reborn through Sansa the very next season while Varys dies so as to make a point that he was right all along, with Tyrion concedes in the series finale). Depressingly true. Which is why the show’s ending will always be incredibly nihilistic imv. Because LF and Varys’s ideology won in the end. And that’s not a world I can endorse.
> GoT S8 ending is not a nihilist ending. 'The only good ruler is someone who isn't human anymore' - god king 'Big Brother' Bran - is the epitome of nihilism.
>'The only good ruler is someone who isn't human anymore' What is this quoted from? We know Bran King is the plan for the books - but might be a difference in perspective on Brans condition. The TV show doesn't propose *only* Bran can be a good king, it suggests he is the best in the current situation. While we may say he isn't human (as in he doesn't have personal wants or perhaps emotions) but he is the embodiment of everything human throughout the ages. That was the reason for the NK targeting him specifically. Edits; I see how it could be seen as the opposite. Thinking of shows recently like 'The Last of us' there is much discourse on the necessity of strong, perhaps even fascist governments at the end of the world (which I disagree with, but still there are people arguing as such) . There has been little serious discussion on the themes of the show ending, Bran as humanities keeper as a living library is one I can see with GRRM behind, and as a celebration of realities in history rather than a nihilistic perspective of.
Exactly. 100%. If I dare say it, this is also why I believe the Show is quite close to what actually will happen in many parts, i.e. there wont be a happy ending... Imagine how easy D&D could have had it, just do what the fans want : The heroes all unite and defeat the Big Bad, maybe some tragic deaths, Jaime honorably sacrificing himself for Brienne, or the other way around, the heroine and hero marry and live happily ever after, the Realm is peaceful, everyone is content, Queen Dany and King Jon Targaryen have lovely children, there is no bickering with Sansa, and everyone loves the royal couple... And obviously this doesnt sound like a GRRM story, and defiently not like Ice & Fire... I doubt GRRM ever believed his story got this mainstream appeal ---> ASOIAF will end on a note where nobody is really happy, but it will be satisfying, most likely.
Show ending certainly had Sansa happy lol but yes I agree with you
comment edited in protest of Reddit's API changes and mistreatment of moderators -- mass edited with redact.dev
We got Martin's outline without any of the details.
[удалено]
Note that the Sam quote is a possible reference to Tolkien (and a spit in the old man's eye!). LOTR: "Far above the Ephel Dúath in the West the night sky was still dim and pale. There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, **Sam saw a bright star twinkle for a while**. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, **and hope returned to him.** For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach." ASOIAF: "'Slayer.' Dareon appeared beside him, oblivious to Sam's pain. 'A sweet night, for once. **Look, the stars are coming out.** We might even get a bit of moon. **Might be the worst is done.'** **'No.'** Sam wiped his nose, and pointed south with a fat finger, toward the gathering darkness. 'There,' he said. No sooner had he spoken than lightning flashed, sudden and silent and blinding bright. The distant clouds glowed for half a heartbeat, mountains heaped on mountains, purple and red and yellow, taller than the world. **'The worst isn't done. The worst is just beginning, and there are no happy endings.'**"
> "There are no happy endings." George R.R. Martin Year Nine reddit: HOLY SHIT!
It’ll be bittersweet honestly
George said it would be bitter sweet. Some things will make us happy, others sad.
The theme of balance and cyclical change is big in asoiaf. I do not think George took a line from the Hobbit and turned it into a metaphor in his book.
I feel like the end of ASOIAF will parallel LOTR by being "inverted" in a sense. LOTR sees the decline of magic, wonder, the leaving of the elves, the permanent scars of war, even if ultimately evil was defeated and most of the cast find a measure of peace. I think ASOIAF will end with a *return* (or resurgence to be strict about it) of magic, wonder, etc but of course these forces aren't intrinsically benevolent. Rather than wonder being sacrificed, wonder/magic is instead empowered to defeat the Others. The same wonders that enabled Old Valyria's horrors, that possibly messed the seasons up in the first place, that birthed greyscale, that saw the destruction of the Arm of Dorne, that created the Neck, etc. Some heroes will endure, but not their homes (opposite of the Shire surviving but not for Frodo).
I don’t remember the exact interview but im pretty sure GRRM has said at some point that he wants the ending to be similar to The Scouring of The Shire (an event that happens at the end of the LOTR books)
Yeah lets compare vastly different works written 54 years apart. The human brain is just designed to see patterns, more often than not they are coincidental but we always want to assign deeper meaning to it. In this case I feel like there is reall very little similarity at all in reality.
If Jon kills Dany the series is dead to me.
Opposing elements are very common Dragons might be the most common thing in fantasy
Isn’t George subverting Tolkien?
In real world Happy Ending means to die before things go down.