#grrm and his literary influences
Text
Regarding the original outline + some thoughts on Jon & Sansa…
This is a long one. Buckle up.
If there is one thing I have picked up on in the ASOIAF fandom, it’s the knee-jerk negative reaction towards any theory/parallel/connection between Jon and Sansa. This was exacerbated by the show, of course but even now - five years later, there is an insane amount of vitriol that my brain is unable to comprehend. And here’s the rub; the infamous 1993 outline is the irony of it all.
In a fandom that is a-okay with *certain* incest ships (r.e D@enerys x Jon, D@emon x Rh@enyra, Jon x Aria), as well as blatantly pedophilic ships (Sansa x S@ndor, Sansa x Littlefinger, Sansa x Tyrio*), how is Jon x Sansa the worst of them all? I’m going to pin it down to audience engagement with the show, particularly around the later seasons when Jon + Sansa reunite and people began to ‘ship’ them. So many believe that is how the ship took off, and thus it is mere crack - but there are posts tracking back to 2012/2013 theorising the possibility of Jon x Sansa. Was it spurred by the show? Certainly! But it does not take away from the fact that people were making valid arguments and essays before the general fandom was even comprehending a Jon and Sansa reunion on screen. And people were open to discussing/debating it with general civility (a far cry from today).
I’m 90% certain people weren’t criticising those who began to believe in Jon x Aria when the outline was leaked…(though there were most definitely shippers before). But we never see the same level of vitriol towards Jon x Aria shippers, which is strange.
In any case, let’s talk about said outline, some of the key points - and how I believe GRRM made the switch from Jon x Aria to Jon x Sansa. I’ll be drawing from GRRM’s past works, interviews, art, and his personal life - as well as other potential literary influences. I'll be linking metas along the way, but without further ado - let's go.
In October 1993, GRRM wrote a pitch outline for a publishing company. It was three pages long and conveyed alongside the first thirteen chapters of AGOT (170 pages). The three paged letter was leaked on twitter in February 2014, though there were multiple aspects parts blacked out. Keep in mind though, this may not be the *only* outline that exists. There are multiple outlines that have never been publicly released (and will likely remain that way).
But let’s just focus on the 1993 outline, since we’re privy to the details. The thirteen chapters attached to the outline did *not* yet have a Sansa POV, and that’s because in this outline, she wasn’t listed as a key character.
The key characters were; Bran, Jon, Tyrion, D@enerys, and Aria.
The first thirteen chapters were; Prologue; Bran I, Catelyn I, D@enerys I, Eddard I, Jon I, Catelyn II, Aria I, Bran II, Tyrion I, Jon II, D@enerys II, Eddard II, Tyrion II.
I’ve seen people claim that Sansa isn’t an important character since she wasn’t listed as a key character, but they conveniently leave out the fact that a) her chapters were not yet written, b)she was given an entirely different more passive storyline in this outline, c) she dies, d) this was far far before GRRM fleshed out his characters entirely - Sansa took on a life of her own and she became her own solid complex character with an arc in 4 out of 5 of the books; 25 chapters.
In fact, since the books have been published GRRM has regarded Sansa and the Starks as a main character as well;
Collider: In creating this world, did you start out with one family and then branch off into the rest of the world?
GRRM: Well, the Starks are certainly the centre of the story, when it begins. It all begins at Winterfell, with occasional cuts to Daenerys across the ocean, because there was no way I could get her into Winterfell. But, we bring all the characters together at Winterfell, and they’re all there for a while before they start to go their separate ways ... .But, the Starks are the centre of the book and, to a lesser extent, the Lannisters. They are still the major players.
Collider: When you went into this, did you intentionally take the children, put them in an adult setting and force them to be in very adult and complex situations?
GRRM: Yeah, the children were always at the heart of this. The Stark children, in particular, were always very central. Bran is the first viewpoint character that we meet, and then we meet Jon and Sansa and Arya and the rest of them. It was always my intention to do that.”
Collider report.
May 2016 - Balticon.
(…) George said he was “pissed” that the outline was posted in the office building and that someone took photos and shared them. He said it was a letter for him and the publisher only. He was very firm when telling this and it showed on his face.
He then said that he is not good with writing outlines, making book deadlines, and that often in outlines he was “making shit up”, and “characters changed along the way”.
He went straight from talking about the references in the actual books, to the “differences” in the outline from then to now. He did say that he still knows who sits the iron throne and the end game of the main 5, but also included Sansa, but did not give any details (for obvious reasons).
[question if he is still going with the 1991 ending]
“Yes, I mean, I did partly joke when I said I don’t know where I was going. I know the broad strokes, and I’ve known the broad strokes since 1991. I know who’s going to be on the Iron Throne. I know who’s gonna win some of the battles, I know the major characters, who’s gonna die and how they’re gonna die, and who’s gonna get married and all that. The major characters.
….
“So a lot of the minor characters I’m still discovering along the way. But the mains-”
[question if he knows Arya’s and Jon’s fates]
“Tyrion, Arya, Jon, Sansa, you know, all of the Stark kids, and the major Lannisters, yeah.”
Balticon report:
“Ah, how innocent I was… little did that guy in the picture imagine that he would be spending most of the next two decades in the Seven Kingdoms of Westeros with Tyrion, Daenerys, Arya, Sansa, Jon Snow, Bran, and all the rest.”
GRRM's live journal:
So Sansa has clearly developed into an important character from GRRM’s words, and the key-characters argument can cease, because It’s very tiring to dispel that when the characters and story took on a life of its own. (I mean, Jaime was meant to remain a villain, but he was clearly given somewhat of a redemption arc in the main series).
I paraphrased what was written here for this whole section, so go check out the longer post!
The Aria in the original outline:
*NOTE: I am blacking out her actual names in case the wrong people find this post. None of this anti her, please keep that in mind.*
Five central characters will make it through all three volumes, [...] The five key players are Tyrion Lannister, D@enerys Targaryen, and three of the children of Winterfell, Aria, Bran, and the bastard Jon Snow.
Joffrey will not be sympathetic and Ned [what appears to say] will be accused of treason, but before he is taken he will help his wife and his daughter Aria escape back to Winterfell.
Tyrion Lannister, meanwhile, will befriend both Sansa and her sister Aria, while growing more and more disenchanted with his own family.
When Winterfell burns, Catelyn Stark will be forced to flee north with her son Bran and her daughter Aria. Wounded by Lannister riders, they will seek refuge at the Wall, but the men of the Night's Watch give up their families when they take the black, and Jon and Benjen will not be able to help, to Jon's anguish. It will lead to a bitter estrangement between Jon and Bran.
Aria will be more forgiving ... until she realises, with terror, that she has fallen in love with Jon, who is not only her half-brother but a man of the Night's Watch, sworn to celibacy. Their passion will continue to torment Jon and Aria throughout the trilogy, until the secret of Jon's true parentage is finally revealed in the last book.
Abandoned by the Night's Watch, Catelyn and her children will find their only hope of safety lies even further north, beyond the Wall, where they fall into the hands of Mance Rayder, the King-beyond-the-Wall, and get a dreadful glimpse of the inhuman others as they attack the wilding encampment. Bran's magic, Aria's sword Needle, and the savagery of their direwolves will help them survive, but their mother Catelyn will die at the hands of the others.
Exiled, Tyrion will change sides, making common cause with the surviving Starks to bring his brother down, and falling helplessly in love with Aria Stark while he's at it. His passion is, alas, unreciprocated, but no less intense for that, and it will lead to a deadly rivalry between Tyrion and Jon Snow
Observations:
Exactly how old is Aria? Is she a warrior princess who cries at songs like her aunt? Does she enjoy/yearn for romance? Is she a stunningly beautiful maiden rivalling that of Cersei? How close were she and Jon? Did they have a good sibling relationship? Or were they distant? Does she look physically different to Jon? Does she have red hair?
The Sansa of the Original Outline:
‘Each of the contending families will learn it has a member of dubious loyalty in its midst. Sansa Stark, wed to Joffrey Baratheon, will bear him a son, the heir to the throne, and when the crunch comes she will choose her husband and child over her parents and siblings, a choice she will later bitterly rue.’
Tyrion Lannister, meanwhile, will befriend both Sansa and her sister Aria, while growing more and more disenchanted with his own family.
Jaime Lannister will follow Joffrey on the throne of the Seven Kingdoms, by the simple expedient of killing everyone ahead of him in the line of succession and blaming his brother Tyrion for the murders.
More observations:
How old is Sansa? Is she 16? 17? She’s conveyed as a less important character in this outline - why? Queen of the Seven Kingdoms? She dies? Jaime kills her? What is her relationship with Aria like? Are/were they close? Or was Sansa initially meant to be a two-tone villain who betrayed her family? Is she overwhelmingly beautiful? Or is she the plainer sister?
It’s quite clear that both ASOIAF Aria and ASOIAF Sansa are entirely different characters to their outlined counterparts.
In the outline, Tyrion sacks and burns Winterfell. In ASOIAF, It’s Theon and later Ramsay who does this. In the outline, it’s Bran, Aria, and Catelyn who go beyond the Wall. In ASOIAF, it’s Bran, Meera, and Jojen (and Hodor). There are a couple of other changes made here, but there seems a pattern where certain acts *still* occur in the main series, they’re just given to different characters (which makes sense, as GRRM grows organically with his characters.)
So, when we take into account the fact of ASOIAF Sansa being considered a main/key character, her marriage to Tyrion, and the possibility of her being the first to reunite with Jon - perhaps GRRM did keep a Stark x Snow romance - but gave it to a different sister.
In the 2016 Balticon report, GRRM stated he wished that ‘some past things didn’t have such strong foreshadowing and that newer things had stronger foreshadowing.’ You can make a case for J0nrya foreshadowing in the first book, but I’d argue that ACOK/ASOS is where the Jon/Sansa clues and foreshadowing is rife. (and there are certainly Jon/Sansa clues in the first book as well.)
Now to circle back. The Aria of this outline doesn’t have a personality - none of the characters do, really. We don’t know how old she is. Is she a teenager? Is she close in age to Jon? We know she has her needle, so can infer she is a fighter and spirited, but is there a soft romantic side to her? Does she cry at songs like her aunt Lyanna? Does she yearn for love? Is she immensely beautiful? For a narrative like this? It'd be likely if Jon and Tyrion are fighting to the death over her, sort of like gallant knights fighting each other to win the heart of a fair maiden (very romantic and idealistic, mirroring the songs and the stories).
(This is how I am certainly inferring such a scene would have gone).
The ASOIAF Aria we know and love took on a life of her own. She’s described as plain looking (some envision her to be more beautiful than characters like D@ny, Cersei, and Sansa though). - But just quickly on that matter, Aria is indeed compared to Lyanna in looks and spirit, though Lyanna’s beauty was described as wild and implied as non-conventional; different perspectives have different opinions on her. For example, Cersei, Jaime, Devan, the Maester who wrote the WOIAF don’t consider her anything special. Whereas Ned, Robert, and Rhaegar do. So it’s one of those instances where you aren’t exactly sure. In any case, Aria's looks aren't a driving factor in her arc, and I don’t see ASOIAF Tyrion (as creepy as he is) suddenly falling in love with her due to mere attraction because presently, Aria is all knobbly knees and elbows, stick thin, a child, not a maiden, who will still be a pre-teen at the end of the series, if there is no massive time jump.
SHE'S JUST A BABY.
But then, Tyrion did lust after Sansa, so there’s that… however ….
Sansa’s beauty is a driving force in her narrative arc. She is objectified for her beauty. Preyed upon because of her beauty; in many ways it causes her to suffer. It’s largely why LF is grossly infatuated with her - she’s beautiful like Catelyn. Tyrion is attracted to Sansa and wishes to bed her, the H0und intends to rape her during the Blackwater battle, he also comments on her breasts growing, Joffrey sexually humiliates her in court, Ser Dontos has a pervy infatuation with her, Cersei despises Sansa because she is younger, more beautiful etc which she views as a threat.
So, beauty is pertinent to Sansa’s narrative, and it isn’t vain or shallow to say so because it’s a large part as to why she suffers. And her physical beauty is meant to compliment her indulgence in romantic idealism; knights, chivalry, courtly love, beautiful appearances thus equating to good people. It also contributes to perceptions of Sansa; nothing more than a pretty, stupid girl with naive dreams.
So back to ASOIAF Aria: Her arc largely surrounds nature & nature, mercy, war trauma and survival, friendship, belonging, and family. For the majority of the story, she is a traumatised 10 year old travelling through a war torn country, witness to awful horrors, forced to assume multiple identities, until she goes to Braavos and begins her faceless man arc. But this is obviously not her endgame - she is going to go home eventually, that is quite clear.
You can argue she had a little crush on Gendry (as a 10 year old would) (and perhaps something may happen with him when she is older, I think GRRM has played with it.) But other than that, romance is not a central part of Aria's arc insofar. For outline Aria it was, but current ASOIAF Aria is on a completely different tangent all together.
(and that poor poor child is suffering immensely while this is all occurring). Currently, she has no time for/interest in it. She hasn’t been involved in betrothals/marriages, or had men lusting after her (save ‘Mercy’ and people men making brutalising sexual comments towards her). She disguises herself as a boy for a good chunk of the story as it is safer to travel.
No, I’m not trying to reduce any sexual trauma/objectification she suffers, she’s a little girl for heaven’s sake - I’m merely stating that what she is going through is in some ways similar and different to what Sansa is going through. (Who currently is in a in a very Lolita type situation with LF and men sexually intimidating/abusing her has been a key part of her arc - as I said, she suffers significantly due to her beauty. She is something to possess, she isn't real or tangible, she is a beautiful maid with a vast claim to the North.)
Anyway, ASOIAF Aria finds songs and romance ‘stupid.’
“Sansa would have shed a tear for true love, but Arya just thought it was stupid.” (Arya VIII ASOS)
(but that doesn’t mean she won’t encounter it later in life, it just means that at this point of the story, she isn’t interested/likely won't encounter some epic grand romance that outline Aria was likely destined for. (And she’s 11 for god’s sake!).
‘But Sansa was dreaming of love at that age!’
Sansa has been a romantic idealistic dreamer since she was a little girl. She adored those stories and is the literal embodiment of the mediaeval pre-raphaelite maiden depicted in art. It’s central to her story arc, to her qualities, and how she functions/copes with things around her. “Life is not a song.” Is so fundamental to that.
So to reiterate ASOIAF Aria is a completely different character to outline Aria- for all we know OG Aria was 15 years old, very beautiful to the point of men duelling over her, (just as depicted in art above) likely a romantic heroine, had consistent memory lapses that would cause her to “realise in terror, she had fallen for Jon,” and based off of GRRM’s past works - was probably a redhead.
“But OG Aria has a sword named needle!”
Indeed, but as I stated, we don’t know anything else about her beyond that. Many have theorised that D@ny and Jon are the epic romance of the series, but it’s clear from this particular outline that GRRM intended for it to be Aria and Jon as the epic major romance of the series. That would mean Aria would have to be a somewhat romantically-inclined character, for this development to appear natural and not forced. Based on her current ASOIAF arc, it doesn’t track for her character to make a sudden 180. Her softness and vulnerable moments come from thinking of her family and home. Insofar, this isn’t equated to yearning for love, romance, children, as Sansa has done from the beginning of the series.
Now, we know GRRM is a self-proclaimed romantic, and ASOIAF Sansa exists very much as a deconstruction of romanticism.
“He said he is a romantic, in the classical sense. He said the trouble with being a romantic is that from a very early age you keep having your face smashed into the harshness of reality. That things aren’t always fair, bad things happen to good people, etc. he said it’s a realistic world, so romantics are burned quite often. This theme of romantic idealism conflicting with harsh reality is something he finds very dramatic and compelling, and he weaves it into his work.” (2005 interview).
Sansa is arguably, the embodiment of this dismantling. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that love isn’t real, or that it doesn’t deserve to exist in a gritty world such as Westeros. There were many couples who had good, happy marriages, even after war and loss and trauma. For example, apart from the Jon Snow situation, Ned and Catelyn had a remarkably healthy relationship. So it is possible - the takeaway from the series is not that hoping is meaningless, dreams are meaningless, love is meaningless. More so that it is complicated, and it must coexist alongside all the chaos in order to achieve a sort of
equilibrium. A literal ‘Dream of Spring’ a hope for happiness, rather than happiness itself. It tracks with the bittersweet conclusion to the series ; it is a grimdark story, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it’ll be a grimdark ending where everyone good and noble dies and wishes/dreams/innate desires remain unfulfilled.
In fact, I argue that a lot of them will come true - but at what cost? It’ll be at the cost of loss and grief, of suffering upon suffering, but what’s inherently more powerful, what’s more subversive is having those characters persist and rebuild, regenerate, create a new world where love and chaos undoubtedly exist alongside each other, but just because there is chaos, that does not mean the love is miniscule or cancels out entirely.
Because if all these characters have the most unsatisfying, awful conclusions known to man, well - what was the point of everything? What was the point of their journeys? This isn’t a nihilistic story, and it won’t have a nihilistic ending like everyone assumes. It’s far more difficult for an author to craft such an ending, balancing things out whilst acknowledging all the loss and still holding out hope for a better future to come. That brighter days will arrive. That winter will end, and spring will be on the horizon.
“We may lose our heads, it’s true. But what if we prevail?” (Davos I ADWD).
And that right there, sums it up perfectly.
So you need characters like Sansa, characters like Brienne, D@ny, (you know what let’s just add all the Stark children of the series to the list, because every single character arc is about remaining resilient and prevailing in some way or another).
But it’s Sansa who exists as the meta character that embodies/indulges in all those romantic ideals that GRRM is intent on exploring - it thus makes perfect sense for it to be her that experiences the romance arc. Many people think she’ll end up with the H0und, or Harry the douchebag, because it’s a part of her growing up, maturing, learning from her negative biases etc etc but she shouldn’t have to be with abusive or douchy men to learn that. She’s already learned and suffered enough.
“It is my claim they want. No one will ever marry me for love.”
And how utterly heartbreaking that she has resigned to think this, with her arc only mid-way. But importantly, just a few chapters later she enters the garden of undisputed beauty and equates the snow landing on her face with romantic kisses, she dreams of innocence and winterfell, despite lamenting how she doesn’t belong in such a pure world, she steps out into it all the same. And she builds her home in the snow, content and for once - she’s the child she is, the child she is yearning to be.
So Sansa falling in love with Jon makes sense on a characteristic level. It’s something she never would have considered as a sheltered child, not just because he’s her bastard half brother but because he just didn’t exist in her idea of how the world works. He didn’t fit in with her idea of knights, and courtly love and chivalry. He wasn’t a gallant golden prince, he was dark, sulky and brooding. He existed on the parameters of her life, and she was comfortable with that distant association - but she still loved him, and he her.
Falling in love with Jon would equate to a dismantling of these previous prejudices she held; he’s utterly unconventional, the opposite of what she has shown attraction to (despite her first ‘love’ being Waymar Royce, who resembles Jon strikingly). The man she never really considered beyond courtesy and some scarce, fond memories - to be the one who restores her faith in men, in love, in dreams.
“Realising with terror that she has fallen in love with Jon… their passion will continue to torment them.”
tracks with Sansa’s characterisation particularly, her memory lapses, her clouded judgement, and inability to interpret things correctly (and something as confusing as this would certainly cause her to have some cognitive dissonance going on).
Not to mention caution around well… men. Because who would ever marry her for love? Who would ever take her for true? Love her without expectations and judgement? It’s Jon. Who has been there since the very beginning, who has been a silent unconscious hero, the answer to her prayers, who embodies all those romantic and knightly ideals she has so desperately wanted - despite her being unaware. Who has advocated for her claim - above everyone else.
“No one will ever marry me for love.” And that infamous Jon chapter follows. Jon who is never quite far from Sansa’s suitors. Jon, who has a similar dream of rebuilding Winterfell, of having children named after lost siblings, who wants to woo a girl by giving her a rose and loving beneath the heart tree - the heart of Winterfell. Who would undeniably want to have that beautiful soul-nourishing love he never received as a child, that he believes is perpetually unavailable to him.
Above all, they just fit together. It fits with GRRM’s William Faulkner-esque “the human heart in conflict with itself".” And this is a perfectly subversive way of encapsulating that Jon confusing brotherly love and affection with romance, struggling with the shame of it all - especially post-resurrection, the religious disillusionment that would occur, the notion of Jon being loved by the kind of girl he believed he never had the right to, who his deeply romantic heart is yearned for. (There is a reason GRRM let us know how badly Jon yearns for domesticity, Winterfell love, children, and a wife. He associates his love for Ygritte with her singing, her hair, her smile. He dreams of her tending to him with gentle hands) The simple yet meaningful things that have been denied to him because of his bastardry. And god, what better way to torment these two than by having them fall for each other - realising they fit each other so perfectly, yet tormented by their familial relation. Until, as the outline puts, the parentage is revealed.
Do I believe they will act on their feelings pre-parentage reveal? No. It’ll likely exist in the subtext, in private thoughts and actions. Angst, guilt. Again, the stuff that GRRM loves - the human heart is in conflict with itself.
Much like Lord Byron’s ‘The Bride of Abydos.” Where half-siblings fall in love with each other until they realise they are actually cousins. Lord Byron, who was famously in love with his half sister Augusta, who was a stranger to him for a good portion of his life until they properly got to know each other and fell in love. (Who does that sound like?’)
And if you’re wondering how Jon and Sansa could possibly connect to Lord Byron, well there is a ‘Byron the Beautiful’ in Alayne II AFFC, and Alayne I TWOW. GRRM has further instilled characters by the name of “Manfred” which is in reference to Lord Byron’s infamous work of the same name. (I urge you to check out all of Cappy's Byron metas, they are fantastic.
And, Jon has been called a “Brooding, Byronic, romantic heroine whom all the girls love.” GRRM knows what Byronic is inferring - he isn’t daft, he’s a writer - he reads other works and takes influence and sprinkles in so many things.
A Byronic character involves:
. . romantic melancholy, guilt for secret sin, pride, defiance, restlessness, alienation, revenge, remorse, moodiness, and such noble virtues as honor, altruism, courage, and pure love for a gentle woman. (Poetry Foundation, Lord Byron)
“GRRM: I was always intensely Romantic, even when I was too young to understand what that meant. But Romanticism has its dark side, as any Romantic soon discovers… which is where the melancholy comes in, I suppose. I don’t know if this is a matter of artistic influences so much as it is of temperament. But there’s always been something in the twilight that moves me, and a sunset speaks to me in a way that no sunrise ever has.”
Infinity plus:
And isn’t that exactly what he would be exploring with Jon and Sansa? It isn’t a conventional romance by any means. It could never exist normally until Jon’s parentage is revealed. And that is the tormented nature of it, that is the “bittersweetness” of it - it is rooted in realism, yes - and that to me, is Sansa receiving her true love, countering that no one would ever marry her for love. The gods will grant it to her, - but it’s wrapped up in this darker, morally ambiguous thing that is confusing for her, even though Jon would be her dream come true - he isn’t this neat little courtly golden package, but he embodies all those ideals more than any man she’s actually met.
It’s subversive to what both the characters and the readers expect, and it’s just a brilliant plot twist that screams unpredictability whilst fitting together like a perfect puzzle. It creates internal conflict and evokes those themes that GRRM loves to explore. By giving the ‘heroes’ of the series a motif such as incest is extremely bold; because it challenges the reader greatly. Some people don’t want Jon to end up with Sansa because it contradicts the image that they have of him in his head - the heroic male who will save the world with his heroic counterpart and together they shall rule the seven kingdoms. To embrace his father’s family, claim a dragon, fulfil the prophecy, be the third head of the dragon, reject his stark-ness. Very predictable. Done to death a thousand times over, and yet - it is what the general audience wants/expects. It’s what the dudebros who call him the ‘GOAT’ want, it’s what the Targ stans want, it’s what the show watchers wanted - but what does Jon want?
“Yet he could not let the wildlings breach the Wall, to threaten Winterfell and the north, the barrowlands and the Rills, White Harbor and the Stony Shore, even the Neck. For eight thousand years the men of House Stark had lived and died to protect their people against such ravagers and reavers . . . and bastard-born or no, the same blood ran in his veins. Bran and Rickon are still at Winterfell besides. Maester Luwin, Ser Rodrik, Old Nan, Farlen the kennelmaster, Mikken at his forge and Gage by his ovens . . . everyone I ever knew, everyone I ever loved.” (Jon II ASOS).
“I would need to steal her if I wanted her love, but she might give me children. I might someday hold a son of my own blood in my arms. A son was something Jon Snow had never dared dream of, since he decided to live his life on the Wall. I could name him Robb. Val would want to keep her sister's son, but we could foster him at Winterfell, and Gilly's boy as well. Sam would never need to tell his lie. We'd find a place for Gilly too, and Sam could come visit her once a year or so. Mance's son and Craster's would grow up brothers, as I once did with Robb.
"He wanted it, Jon knew then. He wanted it as much as he had ever wanted anything. I have always wanted it, he thought, guiltily. May the gods forgive me. It was a hunger inside him, sharp as a dragonglass blade.” (Jon XII ASOS).
“Red eyes, Jon realised, but not like Melisandre's. He had a weirwood's eyes. Red eyes, red mouth, white fur. Blood and bone, like a heart tree. He belongs to the old gods, this one. And he alone of all the direwolves was white. Six pups they'd found in the late summer snows, him and Robb; five that were grey and black and brown, for the five Starks, and one white, as white as Snow.”
He had his answer then." (Jon XII ASOS)
“He was the blood of Winterfell, a man of the Night's Watch. I will not father a bastard, he told her. I will not. I will not. "You know nothing, Jon Snow," she whispered.” (Jon VI ASOS)
“Ygritte answered for him. "His name is Jon Snow. He is Eddard Stark's blood, of Winterfell." (Jon VIII ACOK)
"Then you must do what needs be done," Qhorin Halfhand said. "You are the blood of Winterfell and a man of the Night's Watch." (Jon VI ASOS).
“You can't be the Lord of Winterfell, you're bastard-born, he heard Robb say again. And the stone kings were growling at him with granite tongues. You do not belong here. This is not your place. When Jon closed his eyes he saw the heart tree, with its pale limbs, red leaves, and solemn face. The weirwood was the heart of Winterfell, Lord Eddard always said . . . but to save the castle Jon would have to tear that heart up by its ancient roots, and feed it to the red woman's hungry fire god. I have no right, he thought. Winterfell belongs to the old gods.” (Jon XII ASOS)
“He sat on the bench and buried his head in his hands. Why am I so angry? he asked himself, but it was a stupid question. Lord of Winterfell. I could be the Lord of Winterfell. My father's heir.” (Jon XII ASOS).
“If I could show her Winterfell . . . give her a flower from the glass gardens, feast her in the Great Hall, and show her the stone kings on their thrones. We could bathe in the hot pools, and love beneath the heart tree while the old gods watched over us.” (Jon V ASOS).
“If he must perish, let it be with a sword in his hand, fighting his father's killers. He was no true Stark, had never been one … but he could die like one. Let them say that Eddard Stark had fathered four sons, not three.” (Jon IX AGOT).
Look, at the end of the day - we don't know how the story will go, but based off of Jon’s character arc? His thoughts? His actions? His relationships with his siblings? The fact that he has warged into a magical beast directly associated with Starks? The North? The Old Gods? The weir wood trees? I think that instead of GRRM having Jon go down the conventional disadvantaged male hero finding out he is a secret prince and thus becoming King and a proper Targ, GRRM will subvert expectations (much to audience displeasure) and do the opposite.
Learning of his true identity will just cause more angst and a major identity crisis. The one thing Jon finds real and solid, that no one can take from him - is that he is Ned Stark’s son. He raised him. Perhaps they don’t share a direct blood link. But that doesn’t matter, what matters is that he was raised by him, loved by him. So instead of choosing his father’s family; embracing the secret prince persona and fighting for the throne - he’ll choose his mother’s family. And I think that is beautifully conclusive.
But back to Jon and Sansa. GRRM is given the opportunity to explore the sort of impact this incest motif has on fundamentally good people. And I think this is what he originally intended to do with Jon and Aria.
Yes, we have Jaime and Cersei, but this is real sibling incest and rife with toxic narcissism, possession etc. We have the T@rgaryens, which are messy beyond belief and practice it due to blood purity.
But Jon and Sansa clearly differ from the rest, and that is because they exist partly as foils as to what we previously have seen. Similar to Jonnel x Sansa. By intentionally refraining from the development of a properly-close sibling relationship, making Jon and Sansa fundamental opposites visually, and associating them with entirely different cultures (yet writing their core personas as the same, their dreams compatible, their thought process and idealism similar).
GRRM manages to pave the way into such a romance that comes as a shock to the characters, the narrative, and readers themselves. Because no one, absolutely no one would see it coming, and the people who have been privy to the theory - immediately dismiss it - and become quite angry when it is brought up. Like I said earlier, a knee-jerk reaction.
To quote this brilliant meta right here:
‘Whether Jon and Sansa fall in love is up to the author and his intended exploration of literary/mythic themes that his predecessors have deployed. He is not writing from (or for) the moral values of show watchers and book readers, or their anecdotal hopes for how things “should be.” He’s writing a narrative that breaks away from conventional storytelling and what we expect from such characters.’
…
‘ I don’t believe the author is giving up completely on the romantic dream. He has made Sansa more cautious, converted her dreams into mere prayers, and has forced her to examine her assumptions, but he’s not turning her into the H0und, who is too pessimistic and fatalistic as a suitor. Sandor’s assertion that all knights are killers makes fantasy so small, it’s eliminated. I think he is setting Sansa on a path where her dreams do die, and her life becomes about as romantic as that smokestack in Cleveland - until they start to come alive again when she travels North to the Wall.’
'That cold, hard reality is still present in the fact that they are brother and sister, but once Jon’s parentage is revealed, this will change. Like an inverted Cinderella (clock striking 12), the reality will become fantasy again. But it’s still inladen with this bitter reality of their relations. So taking this into account, I believe Jon and Sansa could happen because there is no other couple in the series with which GRRM can explore his fascination with fantasy becoming “smaller,” but not completely shrinking altogether. There are no two better characters who represent these ideas, who have the same quietly domestic desires - who do not (at the moment) actively lust for power and cause it to blind them.'
So in essence, Jon and Sansa exist as the subversion of romance. In a twisted, loving sort of way that is morally conflicting to the characters and audiences (for a time). That has existed between the lines, subtly and implicitly. That the audience gives absolutely no thought, because why would they? And if they do, they are abhorred by it - but I’d argue this is the entire point. But not for the reasons you think, not because of the incest - or J0nerys would disgust them.
From the moment he started the series, GRRM has employed incest as a major motif that impacts both the narrative and the characters - the causes the war, that contributes to T@rgaryen values, legacy etc, that propels aspects of narcissism and vitriol for characters like Cersei. It’s really really interesting stuff, as uncomfortable as it is - there are no other works that explore it so messily and beautifully with such nuance.
I believe people seriously underestimate GRRM’s use of omission and subtext. Seriously, just because something is not explicitly stated, doesn’t mean it isn’t there. Unfortunately fans have such a surface level reading of the text, that they are unable to peel back the layers and get to its core. They don’t consider literary influences, or art, or the Romantic movement or anything. They claim they want a complex story that is subversive, yet they cheer for the three-headed dragon theory and all the most predictable plot points that have been absolutely done to death. But then they turn up their noses at anything that goes against the grain, or insinuates otherwise.
R + L = J is a great example of existence within the subtext, yet nobody denies that it is there. No one is called crazy or delusional for it. Ned never thinks of Jon’s true parentage despite harbouring that secret for years, because it is buried deep in his subconscious.
And much to the audience’s surprise (and dismay I'm sure) that is how Jon and Sansa will manifest. This is the human heart in conflict with Jon and Sansa, but not just them - the readers as well. It’s pointing to us, asking us how we’ll possibly handle it. We’re meant to feel this conflict of emotions - anguish and torment and yet hope for something ineffable - just like the characters.
To be able to evoke that as a writer is one of the most impressive feats I can think of - and for the majority of it to exist at this point, in a subconscious limbo? How utterly complex and painful and raw and intelligent but oh so very brilliant. Perhaps one of the most compelling things to come out of this entire series, if only the general audience was open to such discussions. But alas, we must contend with the community we have, and hope for a dream of spring to come upon us.
#jonsa#jon x sansa#meta#anti asoiaf fandom#jonsa meta#long post#lord byron#incest motif#original outline#literary subversion#sansa stark#jon snow
58 notes
·
View notes
Note
Idk if you ever talked about this but I'm reading the bronte sisters novels again and GRRM is so obviously influenced by the sisters (jeyne and the eyrie being very obviously jane eyre references) but now I cannot stop thinking about the way Sansa is literally Cathy 2 and Jon Hareton from Wuthering Heights like.... it's crazy and fits so well thematically and I always thought the ending of WH with Cathy 2 and Hareton was so romantic (Hareton being essentially an unloved "bastard" who ends up winning the heart of his cousin who grew up disliking him and is seen as a copy of her beautiful mother)
GRRM is cooking a soup and using all kinds of literary influences as ingredients. But this novel seems to have just plopped into the pot barely diced.
49 notes
·
View notes
Note
Why do Targ stans believe that Daenerys being the fire that the title of the series refers to, is a good thing? George has previously explained that the title of the series comes from the poem "Fire and Ice" by Robert Frost, and the literal first lines of the sonnet are "some say the world will end in fire, some say in ice". The poem also ends with "from what I've tasted of desire, the world will end in fire. But if it had to end twice, ice will suffice".
I’m not a Targ Stan, nor do I interact with them frequently, so I’m not the best person to answer this question. Maybe it’s because they recognize that the “song” refers to a war, much like how the Dance of Dragons refers to another war, just romanticized by singers. If the Others—mysterious cold beings who want to eradicate all life—are the ice threat and clearly evil, then the Fire being must be set up to oppose them and is thus clearly good (though that hasn’t yet been established, and the series shows there’s varying degrees of morality). Maybe it’s because they think like some GOT writers (Alan Taylor) that it’s referring to her protagonist status and contrast to ice protagonist Jon Snow, with whom she’ll have a series-defining romance that may play into saving the world, just like a romantic song (even though GRRM said she and Jon are just 10% of the story).
Of course, neither of those theories take into account Robert Frost’s poem, which goes:
Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice.
From what I’ve tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire.
But if it had to perish twice,
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice.
So then there’s the theory that Dæny will die fighting the Others in a heroic sacrifice, or even be Jon’s Nissa Nissa (which tbh is even worse for her character), thus bringing down all Ice/Fire magic in the world. Ice in the poem is described as hateful, I guess like the Omnicidal others, slow-burning, but not interesting and ends the poem on a deliberate anticlimax. Contrast the Fire, described as passionate, quick-burning, and the writer’s first choice of destruction (not unlike “shooting star” reformer character Dæny, according to a certain BNF). It’s also been theorized Dæny will burn down KL but accidentally due to the wildfire caches, but then go north to die because she actually wants to save humanity, thus I guess being a fire threat but “””ultimately good”””” don’t pay attention to the half a million corpses in the corner civilians don’t count
That said, in reference to the title it does seem that GRRM was pointing to both the Ice and Fire as threats to humanity. However, GRRM also called Hector and Achilles two heroes when Achilles was a child murderer (Troilos) and Hector was a decent family man trying to defend his city, so it wouldn’t be first time I’ve disagreed with his literary interpretations. However, with this one “People say I was influenced by Robert Frost’s poem, and of course I was, I mean... Fire is love, fire is passion, fire is sexual ardor and all of these things. Ice is betrayal, ice is revenge, ice is… you know, that kind of cold inhumanity and all that stuff is being played out in the books.” I think he’s making sense with ice and fire as opposites but destructive in different ways.
177 notes
·
View notes
Note
Hi Esther, I sent you an ask about Byronic hero Jon, and I'm soooo lucky you interpreted the ask the way I sent it, because I know anons can come off the wrong way and I realise it sounds like I'm ranting at you when I'm nodding along with you!!! 😭 Yes I sent you that ask because it's what you were already saying first, and you're completely right grounding it in Mr. Rochester terms and also of course you do have the famous Heathcliff. But I do think GRRM is doing his own thing with it, and to be honest the more I think about it, the more I wonder how it influences Jon's ending (or not). If anything Mr. Rochester's secret wife is more of a Rhaegar thing which Jon has to wrestle with, so I definitely think there's a mix of influences going on.
Although like you say, I think when you don't introduce this literary background you lose a lot about what is being said about Jon and Sansa (and Daenerys). I agree with people who say you need to understand fantasy of that era to really understand the tone of what he's going for, which is why I think GRRM is sometimes mean and sometimes writing one-handed, but I still think that background for Romantic characters is necessary.
It's no indictment on Jon if he has a long, moody face, and that's what I kind of love honestly. I think Rhaegar may have been handsome because he was both the crown prince and a Targaryen, and like Arianne expresses aversions to Targaryen features, it may have been divisive in its own way too, beautiful on the terms of conqueror-conquered. I especially enjoy the idea that Lyanna herself had that unusual wolf beauty to her, but beauty in women isn't a portent of safety after all; beauty is just another way girls and women are controlled, even if it superficially seems beneficial when attractive. So that there's some danger to beauty, and danger in Jon's face (Lyanna's, but maybe a hint of Rhaegar too?) hinting his ancestry but also disguising it through something that can be a comfort (Ned) for Sansa is really interesting to me.
(Continuation of this convo)
No worries, anon! For some reason, tumblr wouldn’t let me save, post, schedule for later, or add that post to my queue when I was writing it! I finally just exited the tab and when I got back on tumblr it would let me post an earlier, automatically saved version, as long as I didn’t try to edit it at all, otherwise I would have chatted more with you, because I had, in the version that wouldn’t post. 😅
I share your frustration with the fandom deciding that Sansa is shallow for being moved by beauty and then turning around and obsessing over poll results about whether or not their fav is pretty. I genuinely don’t care, but they clearly care a lot. 😂 I don’t like talking about the kids that way, I don’t think their appearance has anything to do with why we like them, but it just so happens that Jon and Sansa being very Stark and very Tully (look-wise) matters so here we are. And you’re absolutely right, Sansa has suffered a lot of unwanted attention because she is beautiful, so this isn’t exactly something Sansa fans take delight in.
We do get the different takes on Targ looks! For Rhaegar, I thought the emphasis was on his music as the thing that made people swoon? Martin has a thing with singers / someone singing a song seducing people that repeatedly pops up and that is the one thing we know about Lyanna’s feelings—his singing moved her. That’s a connection to Jon who reacts in a similar way to Ygritte’s singing.
I wasn’t even thinking about the secret wife thing being a connection between Rochester and Rhaegar, but bigamy was a popular trope in gothic lit and the sensationalist victorian lit that followed, so I definitely think that’s worth noting. As is the whole, family estate being destroyed in a fire, and of course, “madness.” That all would make me think the references are more about Rhaegar and Targaryen ancestry, less about projecting into Jon’s future, but depending on which spec you buy into, Jon could be in love with Sansa and forced into a relationship with Dany or potentially married to Sansa and still facing pressure from Dany to enter into a sexual relationship. If Martin wants to go dark, it’s possible the gothic “two wives” trope and the Targaryen two wives idea manifest in Jon’s own life with a twist. I still don’t see how the space for Jon and Dany to have much interaction so I’m not too fussed about it, but I certainly think it’s possible Dany sees Jon as an answer to her desire for someone to trust. 😬 Generally though, I don’t look at literary references as being a sure fire way of dictating how the story will go, but I think it’s fun to see how writers are knowingly or unknowingly influenced by certain things. I don’t know that Martin said “gothic lit has family estates burning -> I’m gonna send Summerhall up in flames” but nonetheless, there’s a reason why that would pop into his mind.
Thanks for the followup message, I enjoyed reading your thoughts on this!
14 notes
·
View notes
Note
"Her hair was a rich autumn auburn, her eyes a deep Tully blue."- Tyrion(ASOS VIII). "She had never looked more beautiful than she did that day, with a smile on her lips and the autumn sunlight shining on her golden hair."- Jaime(AFFC II). "I loved a maid as red as autumn," Rymund sang, "with sunset in her hair."- Cat(ACOK VII). Autumn in hair is used for Sansa, Cat and Cersei. Tyrion finds her wife beautiful and Jaime finds his sister beautiful. Both are foils to Jon.
These 3 ladies are the most renowned beauties of the seven Kingdoms. But despite the mention of Autumn in those quotes, the difference is that Cersei's blonde hair is associated with the daylight (sunlight), with the sun in splendor; while Catelyn and Sansa's Autumn auburn hair is associated with the sunset, with a dying sun. And George, like Le Petit Prince, is very fond of sunsets:
"One day," you said to me, "I saw the sunset forty-four times!"
And a little later you added:
"You know--one loves the sunset, when one is so sad . . ."
"Were you so sad, then?" I asked, "on the day of the forty-four sunsets?"
But the little prince made no reply.
—The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint Exupéry
“A great battle is a terrible thing,” the old knight said, “but in the midst of blood and carnage, there is sometimes also beauty, beauty that could break your heart. I will never forget the way the sun looked when it set upon the Redgrass Field… ten thousand men had died, and the air was thick with moans and lamentations, but above us the sky turned gold and red and orange, so beautiful it made me weep to know that my sons would never see it.”
—The Sworn Sword
NG: Looking back at the space operas you produced early in your career, two related features stand out: intense Romanticism, and melancholy Gothicism. What influences, what artistic and personal considerations, impelled you in these literary directions?
GRRM: I was always intensely Romantic, even when I was too young to understand what that meant. But Romanticism has its dark side, as any Romantic soon discovers… which is where the melancholy comes in, I suppose. I don’t know if this is a matter of artistic influences so much as it is of temperament. But there’s always been something in a twilight that moves me, and a sunset speaks to me in a way that no sunrise ever has.
—Sunsets of High Renown - An Interview with George R. R. Martin by Nick Gevers
George loves the sunsets so much that he makes his heroines auburn haired.
22 notes
·
View notes
Note
do you think daenerys is an unreliable narrator? 
Hello!
That's an interesting question... but I think it's worthwhile setting out some definitions and requirements of the "unreliable narrator" before I get into my own opinion on the matter...
So, according to The Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms, an unreliable narrator is:
A narrator whose account of events appears to be faulty, misleadingly biased, or otherwise distorted, so that it departs from the 'true' understanding of events shared between the reader and the implied author. The discrepancy between the unreliable narrator's view of events and the view that the readers suspect to be more accurate creates a sense of irony. The term does not necessarily mean that such a narrator is morally untrustworthy or a habitual liar (although this may be true in some cases), since the category also includes harmlessly naive, 'fallible', or ill-informed narrators. A classic case is Huck in Mark Twain's Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (1884): this fourteen-year-old narrator does not understand the full significance of the events he is relating and commenting on. Other kinds of unreliable narrator seem to be falsifying their accounts from motives of vanity or malice. In either case, the reader is offered the pleasure of picking up 'clues' in the narrative that betray the true state of affairs. This kind of first-person narrative is particularly favoured in 20th-century fiction: a virtuoso display of its use is William Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury (1929), which employs three unreliable narrators—an imbecile, a suicidal student, and an irritable racist bigot. See also POINT OF VIEW.
It's worth pointing out that a key requirement of the unreliable narrator is that it's a first-person narration (though there's some counter-arguments that make a case for 2nd and 3rd), which asoiaf obviously doesn't fully ascribe to. So, if we're being technical — even though GRRM has used the term unreliable narrator to refer to Sansa and the 'Unkiss', for example — no-one in asoiaf can actually be viewed as such. There are internal, first-person thoughts included in GRRM's pov chapters, however, and that's where we find the possibility of an unreliable narrator and where GRRM refers to.
(Also interesting to note that William Faulkner is cited above as someone who utilises multiple unreliable narrators in The Sound and the Fury, and as we know... Faulkner is a key influence on GRRM.)
As mentioned though, Sansa Stark is a prime example that gets brought up a fair amount and interestingly her kind of unreliableness can be seen as very similar to the abovementioned example of Huck — like Huck, she's a child pov, who understandably is not equipped to fully understand the significance of her encounter with the Hound and his assault. But on the whole, is she an unreliable narrator? There's certainly aspects of her first-person narrative that are, but I think that's true of all the pov characters in general, particularly the younger ones, and falls somewhat into the oft talked about 'pov trap'.
The Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms defines 'point of view' as:
The position or vantage-point from which the events of a story seem to be observed and presented to us. The chief distinction usually made between points of view is that between third-person narratives and first-person narratives. A third-person narrative may be omniscient, and therefore show an unrestricted knowledge of the story's events from outside or 'above' them; but another kind of third-person narrator may confine our knowledge of events to whatever is observed by a single character or small group of characters, this method being known as 'limited point of view' (see FOCALISATION). A first-person narrator's point of view will normally be restricted to his or her partial knowledge and experience, and therefore will not give us access to other characters' hidden thoughts. Many modern authors have also used 'multiple points of view', in which we are shown the events from the positions of two or more different characters.
From reading the above, it's clear that asoiaf uses the latter kind of third-person multiple pov approach with its characters, confining our knowledge to what they themselves know or witness, etc. This is also known as 'focalisation':
The term used in modern narratology for 'point of view'; that is, for the kind of perspective from which the events of a story are witnessed. Events observed by a traditional omniscient narrator are said to be non-focalised, whereas events witnessed within the story's world from the constrained perspective of a single character are 'internally focalised'. The nature of a given narrative's focalisation is to be distinguished from its narrative 'voice', as seeing is from speaking.
Every pov in asoiaf is a third-person 'focalised' pov, but with moments of focalised first-person narration in the form of internal thoughts. That I can say with some confidence.
But back to your question... is Dæny an 'unreliable narrator' imo? Well, are there aspects of Dæny's internal narration that are 'misleadingly biased'? Most likely, as she is a member of a certain politcal faction, but you could say the same of several characters, especially those tied to explicitly political plotlines, like Cersei for example. All the povs are biased to some degree anyway, therefore not strictly 100% reliable, such is their nature and why they work within the series.
Is she 'falsifying [her] accounts from motives of vanity or malice' though? No, I don't think so, not malice at least... exceptionalism, now that's another matter. There is a no small amount of hypocrisy to her storyline imo, but it's what makes her character compelling yet ultimately tragic. But I don't think she's an Alex DeLarge from A Clockwork Orange type of unreliable narrator by any stretch.
But you could make a case though that Dæny's view of Mirri's involvement in Rhaego's death is 'distorted' and therefore an instance where her first-person pov/internal narration is explicitly unreliable, since we hear the truth of it — that Jorah bringing her into the tent caused his death — prior to her then casting blame on Mirri. When GRRM is utilising unreliableness in his povs, I think he tends to drop the clues for his readers to pick up, add together and then come to the right conclusion... in other words, the truth will be introduced at some point, typically before, and then a character's perception, for whatever reason, will distort it, like with Sansa and her sense of self-preservation and the 'Unkiss'. Does that make sense?
So... do I think Dæny is an unreliable narrator? The ex English student in me would have to say no, because things are complicated by the presence of a third-person narrator within her pov, in addition to her internal narrative. Plus, I think she does have very powerful moments of true clarity about what she's doing and what her ultimate goals are — the gaining of and shoring up of power, the assertion and dominance of the (political) self, through conquest of the Iron Throne. Instead, like all the pov characters in asoiaf, she's someone with an 'internally focalised' point of view, but in her case, it's made all the more isolated, and therefore internal, by the fact that she rarely interacts with other pov characters.
You could actually see her hyper-focalised pov as therefore a reflection of her hyper-focalised ambition and determination, as well as her singularity, for better or worse... What will be interesting to see moving forward is how that focalised pov adapts, or reveals more about its perspective, as she comes into contact with other pov characters, such as Tyrion, and as she gets closer to Westeros.
Thanks for the ask! :)
#cappy's thoughts#anti daenerys targaryen#i mean not really#but just in case ig#more just critical#unreliable narrator#sansa stark and the unkiss#gotta have my literary definitions
26 notes
·
View notes
Note
Why do you think GRRM is so drawn to tragic romances and stories? He is happily married and now very successful, so is that coming from his own personal preference do you think, or is that how he thinks of reality and he wants his stories to feel real, or is that to emulate the Greek Myth, Shakespeare, & Histories he’s so inspired by? All of the above?
All the above, I think.
He was asked or mentioned most of the stuff that’s already been covered, but one thing he talked about that I found particularly interesting was Romanticism. He said that he is a romantic, in the classical sense. He said the trouble with being a romantic is that from a very early age you keep having your face smashed into the harshness of reality. That things aren’t always fair, bad things happen to good people, etc. He said it’s a realists world, so romantics are burned quite often. This theme of romantic idealism conflicting with harsh reality is something he finds very dramatic and compelling, and he weaves it into his work. Specifically he mentioned that the Knight exemplifies this, as the chivalric code is one of the most idealistic out there, protection of the weak, paragon of all that is good, fighting for truth and justice. The reality was that they were people, and therefore could do horrible cruel things, rape, pillage, wanton killing, made all the more striking or horrifying because it was in complete opposition to what they were “supposed” to be. Really interesting stuff.
—US SIGNING TOUR (SEATTLE, WA) - NOVEMBER 21, 2005
NG: Looking back at the space operas you produced early in your career, two related features stand out: intense Romanticism, and melancholy Gothicism. What influences, what artistic and personal considerations, impelled you in these literary directions?
GRRM: I was always intensely Romantic, even when I was too young to understand what that meant. But Romanticism has its dark side, as any Romantic soon discovers… which is where the melancholy comes in, I suppose. I don’t know if this is a matter of artistic influences so much as it is of temperament. But there’s always been something in a twilight that moves me, and a sunset speaks to me in a way that no sunrise ever has.
—Sunsets of High Renown - An Interview with George R. R. Martin by Nick Gevers
“A great battle is a terrible thing,” the old knight said, “but in the midst of blood and carnage, there is sometimes also beauty, beauty that could break your heart. I will never forget the way the sun looked when it set upon the Redgrass Field…ten thousand men had died, and the air was thick with moans and lamentations, but above us the sky turned gold and red and orange, so beautiful it made me weep to know that my sons would never see it.”
—THE SWORN SWORD
Now and again one of my readers will ask me why I don’t write sad stories of unrequited love any longer, the way I did so often in the ‘70s. Parris is to blame for that. You can only write that stuff when your heart is broken.
—DOING THE WILD CARD SHUFFLE - Dreamsongs - Volume II - George R R Martin
Thanks for your message :)
19 notes
·
View notes
Text
She then, with a trembling hand, put the key into the lock, and the door straight flew open. As the window shutters were closed, she at first could see nothing; but in a short time she saw that the floor was covered with clotted blood, on which the bodies of several dead women were lying.
These were all the wives whom Blue Beard had married, and killed one after another. At this sight she was ready to sink with fear, and the key of the closet door, which she held in her hand, fell on the floor. When she had a little got the better of her fright, she took it up, locked the door, and made haste back to her own room, that she might have a little time to get into a humor to amuse her company; but this she could not do, so great was her fright at what she had seen. As she found that the key of the closet had got stained with blood in falling on the floor, she wiped it two or three times over to clean it; yet still the blood kept on it the same as before. She next washed it, but the blood did not move at all. She then scoured it with brick dust, and after with sand, but in spite of all she could do, the blood was still there; for the key was a fairy who was Blue Beard’s friend; so that as fast as she got off the blood on one side, it came again on the other. Early in the same evening Blue Beard came home, saying, that before he had gone far on his journey he was met by a horseman, who was coming to tell him that his affair in the country was settled without his being present; upon which his wife said every thing she could think of, to make him believe she was in a transport of joy at his sudden return.
The next morning he asked her for the keys: she gave them to him; but as she could not help showing her fright, Blue Beard easily guessed what had been the matter. “How is it,” said he, “that the key of the closet upon the ground floor is not here?” “Is it not?” said the wife, “then I must have left it on my dressing-table.” “Be sure you give it me by and by,” replied Blue Beard. After going a good many times backwards and forwards, as if she was looking for the key, she was at last forced to give it to Blue Beard. He looked hard at it, and then said: “How came this blood upon the key?”
Bluebeard, Charles Perrault, 1697
'Here's proof,' I said and tumbled the fatal key out of my handkerchief on to the silken rug.
'Oh God,' he said. 'I can smell the blood.'
He took my hand; he pressed his arms about me. Although he was scarcely more than a boy, I felt a great strength flow into me from his touch.
'We whisper all manner of strange tales up and down the coast,' he said.' There was a Marquis, once, who used to hunt young girls on the mainland; he hunted them with dogs, as though they were foxes. My grandfather had it from his grandfather, how the Marquis pulled a head out of his saddle bag and showed it to the blacksmith while the man was shoeing his horse. "A fine specimen of the genus, brunette, eh, Guillaume?" And it was the head of the blacksmith's wife.'
[...]
That tell-tale stain had resolved itself into a mark the shape and brilliance of the heart on a playing card. He disengaged the key from the ring and looked at it for a while, solitary, brooding.
'It is the key that leads to the kingdom of the unimaginable,' he said. His voice was low and had in it the timbre of certain great cathedral organs that seem, when they are played, to be conversing with God.
I could not restrain a sob.
'Oh, my love, my little love who brought me a white gift of music,' he said, almost as if grieving. 'My little love, you'll never know how much I hate daylight!"
Then he sharply ordered: 'Kneel!'
[...]
'My virgin of the arpeggios, prepare yourself for martyrdom.'
The Bloody Chamber, Angela Carter, 1979
He had run before. Years ago, it seemed, when he still had some strength in him, when he had still been defiant. That time it had been Kyra with the keys. She told him she had stolen them, that she knew a postern gate that was never guarded. "Take me back to Winterfell, m'lord,” she begged, pale-faced and trembling. “I don’t know the way. I can’t escape alone. Come with me, please.” And so he had. The gaoler was dead drunk in a puddle of wine, with his breeches down around his ankles. The dungeon door was open and the postern gate had been unguarded, just as she had said. They waited for the moon to go behind a cloud, then slipped from the castle and splashed across the Weeping Water, stumbling over stones, half-frozen by the icy stream. On the far side, he had kissed her. “You’ve saved us,” he said. Fool. Fool.
It had all been a trap, a game, a jape. Lord Ramsay loved the chase and preferred to hunt two-legged prey.
Reek I, A Dance with Dragons, George R. R. Martin, 2011
#i say things#grrm and his literary influences...man...#theon greyjoy#tagging this bc ramsay-as-bluebeard is an Underrated Literary Parallel
14 notes
·
View notes
Note
What do you think GRRM is ultimately trying to do with Rhaegar as a character? And do you think he intends for the reader to buy into his romantic image or view him more critically?
I think there is a confusion with the difference between romantic and Romantic. You can have someone be romantic, as in a lover, someone who adores their partner and wants to express their affections. You can also have a character be Romantic, as in the Romanticism movement.
“Romanticism was a literary movement that began in the late 18th century, ending around the middle of the 19th century—although its influence continues to this day. Marked by a focus on the individual (and the unique perspective of a person, often guided by irrational, emotional impulses), a respect for nature and the primitive, and a celebration of the common man, Romanticism can be seen as a reaction to the huge changes in society that occurred during this period, including the revolutions that burned through countries like France and the United States, ushering in grand experiments in democracy.”
“The movement was characterized by a celebration of nature and the common man, a focus on individual experience, an idealization of women, and an embrace of isolation and melancholy.”
“Romanticism also fixated on nature as a primordial force and encouraged the concept of isolation as necessary for spiritual and artistic development.”
“Romantic writers turned inward, valuing the individual experience above all else. This in turn led to heightened sense of spirituality in Romantic work, and the addition of occult and supernatural elements.”
“Much Romantic literature is infused with the concept of women being perfect innocent beings to be adored, mourned, and respected—but never touched or relied upon.”
Quotes from Jeffrey Sommers
I would argue Rhaegar is Romantic. Not romantic.
7 notes
·
View notes
Text
Alchemy 101: The Very Special Number 7
Seven is such a significant number in physical alchemy--and literary alchemy--that it deserves its own post.
In alchemy, there are 7 metals, 7 heavenly bodies, and 7 organs of the body. I will discuss each group separately, then explain how they are interrelated.
The perfect visual representation of the 7 metals, heavenly bodies, and human organs can be found in this 1618 emblem by Johann Daniel Mylius, Opus medico-chymicum--Mundus elementaris (”The Elemental World”).
The labels are all in Latin.
Heavenly bodies
The 7 celestial bodies are listed within the concentric rings on the top left of the diagram. Alchemy emerged at a time when people believed that the sun and the planets all revolved around the earth. These 7 were the only ones visible to the naked eye. The order of the heavenly bodies on the diagram is (approximately) from most distant from the earth to closest:
1. Saturn
2. Jupiter
3. Mars
4. Sun
5. Venus
6. Mercury
7. Moon
Confusingly, the list is NOT organized in terms of importance in the Great Work. Saturn Is the least important, yes, but the Sun is the most important, as will become clear in the discussion of the 7 metals.
Metals
The 7 metals are listed in the rings on the bottom left of the diagram. From outside to inside--
1. Lead
2. Tin
3. Iron
4. Gold
5. Copper
6. Mercury (Argentvive)
7. Silver
Just as the ancients knew only 7 heavenly bodies, they were aware of only 7 metals.
From antiquity up until the mid-eighteenth century, the number of metals known and recognised as such was seven. They were: lead, tin, iron, gold, copper, mercury and silver. Brass, made from copper, was used, but people didn’t realize it was an alloy that included zinc, until the latter half of the eighteenth century. The metal which finally broke the sevenfold spell of millennia (in 1752) and was called the ‘eighth metal’ was platinum, emerging from the gold mines of Colombia. (Nick Kollerstrom, “The Metal-Planet Affinities - The Sevenfold Pattern,” alchemywebsite.com)
A basic tenet of alchemy was that all matter was organic, living. Metals were living and growing things. Beyond that, all metals were growing towards perfection; eventually, all metals would “grow”--transform--into the most perfect metal, gold. The transforming process took thousands upon thousands of years, however. Alchemists believed that they could speed up the process: they could harness and manipulate time. By subjecting a piece of rock to repeated cycles of solve et coagula (dissolution and coagulation), they could purify it into the Philosopher’s Stone, which they could then use to transmute base metals into silver and gold.
Part of the alchemists’ theory was that each metal “grew” under the influence of a particular heavenly body. They drew on earlier ideas to come up with the correspondences shown on the diagram. Nick Kollerstrom explains:
Belief in a linkage of these seven metals with the 'seven planets' reaches back into prehistory: there was no age in which silver was not associated with the Moon, nor gold with the Sun. These links defined the identities of the metals. Iron, used always for instruments of war, was associated with Mars, the soft, pliable metal copper was linked with Venus, and the chameleon metal mercury had the same name as its planet. Then, around the beginning of the 18th century these old, cosmic imaginations were swept away by the emerging science of chemistry.
Here’s the full list of the 7 metals and their associated “planets,” organized (by me) from least to most important, from basest to purest.
1. Saturn - Lead
2. Jupiter - Tin
3. Mars - Iron
4. Venus - Copper
5. Mercury - Mercury
6. Moon - Silver
7. Sun - Gold
Organs of the Body
The 7 parts of the body are listed in the bottom right circles of the diagram. From outside to inside, we have--
1. Spleen
2. Liver
3. Gall bladder
4. Heart
5. Kidneys
6. Lungs
7. Brain
For literature, the only two that are important are “Heart,” which is in the same ring on the diagram as the Sun and Gold, and “Brain”--Mind--which is in the same ring as the Moon and Silver. This is why, in an old-school story, your Male protagonist is the “Heart” character, a Hero who cares about and saves his people, while his Female partner is a “Mind” character, with great wisdom, who guides the Hero. Think of Harry Potter, with his rashness and “saving people thing,” and Hermione, his wise companion. If, on the other hand, your Hero is female, then she will be the Heart character and her male companion will be the clever one. For example, Maria and Robin in the Little White Horse, or Lyra and Will in His Dark Materials.
What’s so interesting about ASOIAF is that GRRM has TWO main protagonists, with separately unfolding narratives. Both Daenerys and Jon are Heart characters. Both care about the downtrodden--Daenerys frees the slaves and Jon allows the Wildlings through the Wall. Both act rashly at times; both display great courage.
In every other respect, however, Dany and Jon are alchemical opposites. She is Sulphur, Sun, Red; he is Mercury, Moon, White. In both cases they are given the opposite of the standard Male/Female characteristics. Dany at least has the choice of any of the Stark brothers, all marked as White, as a partner. For Jon, there is no other Red Woman for him than Dany.
Here’s the Red Sun illustration from Splendor Solis; the Sun corresponds to Gold, as I’ve just said, but also to Red.
The Mylius diagram also includes the 12 signs of the Zodiac, which are occasionally used in alchemy stories. I can post a brief explanation, if anyone is curious.
#mundus elementaris#johann daniel mylius#alchemy#metals#heavenly bodies#organs of the body#harry potter#a song of ice and fire#asoiaf#jonerys#daenerys targaryen#jon snow#splendor solis#game of thrones meta
115 notes
·
View notes
Text
Jongritte, Jonerys, and The Aeneid
Moving on with my metas about the influence of epic poems in ASOIAF, this one is about Virgil’s epic “The Aeneid”, one of the greatest literary works of all time.
In this story, the main hero Aeneas has the mission of taking his people, the trojans, to a new city after having lost the war against Greece. His mission is a political commitment: saving all his people and founding a new city. Aeneas and his people wander for years, sailing from one city to another. This reminds me of Dany, but Jon also has a lot of Aeneas in him.
During their journey, Aeneas’ ship wrecks in the city of Carthage, where the queen Dido rules. He and his people stay there for a year. She falls in love with him, flirts with him, and takes him to a cave where they make love. Sounds familiar? My guess is that GRRM was inspired in Aeneas and Dido when he wrote Jon and Ygritte’s story.
What’s the importance of this parallel? Both Dido and Aeneas had a mission of their own. Aeneas had to take his people to a new city (which would later become Rome) and Dido had to rule Carthage and lead its construction. She was a good queen, actually. But when both of them fell in love, their missions were put aside. Now, they were together all day, lovebirds who were distracted from work. This relationship was a setback for both. Likewise, Jon had a mission with his brothers of the Night’s Watch and his relationship with Ygritte was a setback to it. It distracted him from it.
In Virgil’s previous work, the Bucolics, he strongly criticizes this kind of passionate, passive love. It’s a love that binds people, that doesn’t let them go on with their lives and missions. This is what happens with Jon/Ygritte and Aeneas/Dido. But Aeneas, the hero of the story, decides to break up with Dido to continue with his mission. This is a heroic moment for Aeneas, putting his mission and his people before his personal wishes. Likewise, Jon broke up with Ygritte to go back to the Night’s Watch. It was heroic of Jon to leave her, to break a passionate and passive relationship, to continue with his mission.
Dany and Daario’s story is similar. The queen (Dany/Dido) falls in love with a man who just arrived (Daario/Jon) and this passionate relationship distracts her form her work. Likewise, Dany had a mission: to save her people and go back to Westeros. Daario was a setback, she couldn’t even go with him to Westeros. What was heroic of Dany was breaking up with Daario to go on with her mission (this has only happened on the show so far, but given the foreshadowing about Jonerys, I’m sure they’ll break up in the books too).
What about Jonerys?
Here’s where it gets more interesting. It’s not that Virgil just hates love and thinks it’s a setback for everyone. The Aeneid ends when Aeneas marries princess Lavinia and they both rule together the city of Latinum (which later would become Rome). Theirs is an active love.
This reminds me of Jonerys. It’s an active love. As active as it could be. They both save humanity together from the White Walkers, joining their armies, wit, and dragons. They complement each other as rulers and are the most fitting candidates for ruling Westeros. Their love isn’t a setback. Their love saves them and saves humanity. It’s the opposite of Dido/Aeneas or Jon/Ygritte.
So, Lavinia/Aeneas (active love) = Daenerys/Jon.
Aeneas/Dido (passive love) = Jon/Ygritte, Dany/Daario
The strong influence of epic poems in ASOIAF makes me think that GRRM is writing his own epic, as I’ve stated in previous metas, and the role of epics has always been to teach values to society through the example of epic heroes. I think these parallels show that GRRM is writing his own heroes based on the ones from epics that have served as teachers of the greek and roman societies. I think his heroes will have similar endings, happy endings, because he’s trying to teach how to be a better ruler through them, through Jon and Dany.
More on epic poems and Daenerys here
34 notes
·
View notes
Note
Tyrion is literally called the villain by GRRM. For the record, we are talking about the central romance. A villain cannot have that, its reserved for the hero or someone who is as close to it as possible in a multi pov story. That someone is most certainly Jon.
The, and let me emphasize that GRRM himself has called him that, Byronic hero Jon Snow. (Scroll down the category "Literary Influences" and read all of that. Yes, all of that. It's worth it!)
And, while villains can certainly be part of a central romance, often tragically so, that's hardly the case for Tyrion and Sansa. It's not even the case for Tyion and Tysha. He's not a romantic hero in his own hypothetical tragic romance. Just an abuser obsessed with his past trauma.
51 notes
·
View notes
Note
Hi! Do you have any book recs?
Judging by what I know of your tastes, I am happy to make some suggestions which you can take or leave, and depending on whether you are looking for something Literary or more Readable, or whether you’re looking for something fantasy-esque or not.
I know you like ASOIAF and LOTR and The Wheel of Time and Stephen King, so I’m gonna jump off there. I think some of these I’ve already tried to shove in your face, but, like, I’m a broken record, sorry.
Of course, on the more Literary side I’m gonna recommend Faulkner, because I LOVE IT and also because GRRM talks about being influenced by Faulkner and I know you like to examine what Martin’s influences are, so The Sound and The Fury is the quintessential southern gothic screwed up fantasy literary classic, also As I Lay Dying which is probably an easier read (and many POVs!) and Absalom! Absalom! which is a much harder read.
Also as far as Really Dense Literary Fantasy with a Big Screwed Up Gothic Family multiple POV structure, there’s Mervyn Peake’s Gormenghast trilogy, which I know also influenced Martin.
I know Martin is also a fan of Robin Hobb and I’ve read exactly one of her books, Assassin’s Apprentice, but it’s really good! And I’m planning on reading the second book eventually. I’d say this one’s a more easily readable fantasy than some of the others.
Also I think I already mentioned Swordspoint by Ellen Kushner to you, which I have not read but which I own and Will Read Some Day, and which Martin also has recced before, as a political intrigue fantasy with, from what I hear, some interesting gender dynamics.
A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court by Mark Twain, the classic deconstruction of chivalry and satire of humanity.
I don’t know if you like historical fiction or YA books but the best book I read recently was Between Shades of Gray by Ruta Sepetys, about a girl whose family gets deported from Lithuania to Siberia in the era of Stalin. Really intense and although it is YA, it’s a pretty mature read.
Also historical fiction, The Shadow of the Wind by Carlos Ruiz Zafon, a gothic mystery story about stories.
Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell by Susanna Clarke, often billed as Harry Potter meets Jane Austen, which is I think a good way to describe it, has a fantasy of manners feel that I think is related to ASOIAF in some ways. Really dense and will take you Forever to read though.
‘Til We Have Faces, C. S. Lewis’s retelling of the Cupid and Psyche myth from the perspective of Psyche’s big sister.
The Scar by China Mieville, weird fantasy, steampunk pirates, a wonderfully flawed female protagonist, and a couple of side characters who have a very Cersei/Jaime vibe.
The Night Circus by Erin Morgenstern, historical fantasy romance-ish? Multiple POVs.
Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishigiro, British boarding school scifi romance, I don’t want to give too much away if you don’t already know the story (ignore the movie pls)
Those are just some suggestions based on what I think you might like, although I might be way off base or you may have already read these!
107 notes
·
View notes
Note
lmao i love you but it's kind of weird as a sansa stan not wanting the best four our queen and jon would be a great choice. he's attractive, kind and protective but you probably think he's boring and basic
....being queen in a book like ASOIAF isn’t like...a prize bestowed to a character just because they’re popular and people like them and think they should have it. Neither is having an attractive kind protective boyfriend.
Its a book with themes, a narrative, an actual plot, foreshadowing etc etc
Jon and sansa have NONE of that! It’s not going to just get pulled out of GRRM’s ass because ‘oh that seems to be whats best for her’
I just CANT get over the simplicity of this line of thinking, I’m sorry. Jon isn’t a boring and basic character, he’s complex and great and has his own goals and relationships with the nights watch, arya, ygritte, his brothers, the wildlings and then himself and how he grows. Just like sansa has her own path and development and influences from catelyn, her family, the hound, baelish, her own plot in the vale right now and all that. And at NO point do their stories cross. At all!
So what IS boring and basic is thinking ‘screw literary analysis! Jon and sansa should end up together! why? because wouldn’t it be NICE lads? I think ASOIAF, a book about war, power, politics, complex relationships with our sense of self and others and how we navigate all of these things, should really just be real fair and nice!’
‘you don’t want whats best for sansa’ well no! I guess I don’t by these standards! What I want for my favourite character is for her to have an interesting and well written story! and If my idea of an interesting and well written story is different to you or the majority of other Sansa fans, I don’t know why thats makes me suddenly not a ‘valid’ fan of her.
#for a book series that really tried to emphasise how little that throne means#people REALLY need their fave to win#Anonymous
167 notes
·
View notes
Text
Asoiaf meme-
Rules: Answer the 10 questions below. Then make up 10 of your own for the next person to answer and tag people.
thanks @poesiariptide for tagging me.
1. If you could take a character’s place for one day who would it be?
Young griff . And let him know the truth Or Doran and cover up for his poor communication skills.
2. If you had to be the illegitimate child of a character who would it be?
Elia martell or catelyn because they were awesome mothers .
3. Would you prefer to settle in Westeros or Essos?
Westeros. But exclusively in Dorne.
4. Which in-universe community or social group do you wish had been portrayed differently?
Sand snakes and dothraki. Basically all the brown people.
5 .Are there any pairings that you don’t really ship in canon, but would probably like in a modern AU? (Note- modern AU implies much smaller age gaps where necessary.)
Jaime and Brienne. (Same as yours ) and young griff and Elia sand. And Quentyn and Sansa.
6. What difference between the show and books bothers you the most, personally?
DORNE!!!!!
7. One fandom habit that is widely accepted, but according to you is totally wrong?
15 year olds were not old enough or mature even in medieval times.
8. One character you wish had gotten a bigger role or more story influence?
Quentyn martell. He had so much potential. (I think you knew the answer)
9.Your top five favourite fancasts (i.e. fancasts you have either seen or made that you find absolutely perfect for the character)?
a. Anushka shetty - Arianne martell
C. Surekha sikri- Meria martell ( look at that smug smile)
b. Milind somand- lewyn nymros martell
d. Aegon vi targaryen (not young griff)- Mihir pandi ( I coloured his eyes and he is brown head to toe)
e. Oberyn Martell- Rana daggubati ( he can switch from cute to sexy to adorable to angry to scary in a split second)
f. Bonus -both Ratna pathak Shah and supriya Pathak for loreza Martell.
10. The most powerful (as in meaningful, or which left a lasting impression) moment in your favourite female character’s storyline, from your perspective?
Elia and how she was is remembered for her good nature and how gracefully she carried herself despite her poor health and how calm she remained in that dire situation. Also cat because of her adaptability in the hostile north.
My ten questions-
Are there any literary parallels between your favourite character and some other character?(I have many .I will probably make a list some day)
What's one thing you wished grrm explorer more?
Is there a character that fandom loves but you despise(apart from elia's husband)
Fave non canon pair?
If you could change one in- verse subplot what would it be?
What's the one thing about your favourite character that you can't stand or find irritating?
Is there anything that would make you defend your least favourite character?( eg- ragger was not madly in love. He was just mad)
Favourite Jon ship? (Although he is dead) do you think he will come back?
Your worst experience with fandom racists?
What do you think of Quentyn/young griff?
Sorry most of them are martell centric.
I tag- @riana-one , @ramzesfics , @infinitestalia , @alyssaallyrion , @sayruq , @incurablescribbler , @heathcliffitsmecathy, @forme-iwrite and @delrosariorg .
29 notes
·
View notes
Note
The further away from Westeros’s accepted archetype of a romantic heroine the female characters get, the more traditionally romantic their story lines become is an argument that I see by antis that Sansa will never get a romantic storyline .
Oh I have read that argument somewhere, but I’m not sure if it was before or after the show’s last season with Brienne and Arya, two “warrior women” having their romance and first sexual experience with their hot crushes...
But those readers tend to ignore that GRRM is a hopeless romantic that got married with the girl that told him she cried while reading the story he wrote when he was broken hearted (A Song for Lya).
GRRM has projected his romantic nature on Sansa Stark
GRRM has projected his love for medieval tourneys, heraldry, pageantry, knights and chivalry on Sansa Stark
Look at him and his wife cosplaying a knight with his lady love
Look at him fighting a dragon (like Saint George slaying the dragon and rescuing Princess Sabra)
And my last two findings:
Ice and Fire seems linked to a medieval time. Do you like the art of that period?
Medieval-period art is a little too crude for my tastes. I mean, these days, it looks very stylised. In terms of classic art I respond more to the later period – the Dutch masters and the Flemish masters, and the Pre-Raphaelites.
I went to a show about the Pre-Raphaelites that was going around the US in 2013 and it was amazing – all of that lush, romantic stuff, and a lot of it drawing on Romantic themes, though it wasn't painted in medieval times. You know, knights and ladies and all of that. That stuff’s gorgeous. I like that movement in general.
When we talk about artistic movements of the past, some of them are just scholars looking at people and grouping artists together and saying, 'they were doing a movement'.
But with the Pre-Raphaelites they actually were a movement, they all knew each other, they hung out together and they said, 'we are the Pre-Raphaelites'.
—Game of Thrones author reveals his favourite art
Read more in this post: GRRM, Sansa Stark & The Pre-Raphaelites
There's something about the castles, and the knights, and the age of heroes, that has always appealed to me, particularly about knighthood, I mean, I always thought that was an interesting issue to explore, I talk a lot about it in these books. If you look at human history, the code of chivalry, as was promulgated in the middle ages, is one of the most idealistic codes ever, ever put forward for a warrior. The whole idea of that using your might to defend the weak and protect the innocent, you were more, supposedly, in theory, you were more than just a soldier, you were a champion, but that was a theory, in practice of course, knights were bloodthirsty killers, and they were the great warrior in their age, and in the contradiction between the ideals and the reality, I think there's immense drama, and that's one of the things that drove me through it.
—A Dance With Dragons: George R. R. Martin - July 12, 2011
Read more in this interview and listen the audio for even more: A Dance With Dragons: George R. R. Martin
There is doom and gloom is GRRM's works, yes it's true:
“A great battle is a terrible thing,” the old knight said, “but in the midst of blood and carnage, there is sometimes also beauty, beauty that could break your heart. I will never forget the way the sun looked when it set upon the Redgrass Field…ten thousand men had died, and the air was thick with moans and lamentations, but above us the sky turned gold and red and orange, so beautiful it made me weep to know that my sons would never see it.”
—THE SWORN SWORD
NG: Looking back at the space operas you produced early in your career, two related features stand out: intense Romanticism, and melancholy Gothicism. What influences, what artistic and personal considerations, impelled you in these literary directions?
GRRM: I was always intensely Romantic, even when I was too young to understand what that meant. But Romanticism has its dark side, as any Romantic soon discovers… which is where the melancholy comes in, I suppose. I don’t know if this is a matter of artistic influences so much as it is of temperament. But there’s always been something in a twilight that moves me, and a sunset speaks to me in a way that no sunrise ever has.
—Sunsets of High Renown - An Interview with George R. R. Martin by Nick Gevers
But there is also hope:
And Santa Fe was where Parris was too, holding down the fort. We’d met at a convention in 1975, a few months before I entered into my ill-considered marriage. I knew I liked her the moment she told me that ‘A Song for Lya’ made her cry (well, she was a stone fox too, and we were both naked when we met, but never mind about that, it’s none of your business). Parris and I stayed in touch after that con, exchanging occasional letters through all the years when I was teaching Catholic girls and she was selling sno-cones and shoveling elephant dung for Ringling Brothers. In 1981 we got together at another convention, and she came to Santa Fe to stay with me a while. That ‘while’ will have lasted twenty-two years by the time you read this. Now and again one of my readers will ask me why I don’t write sad stories of unrequited love any longer, the way I did so often in the ‘70s. Parris is to blame for that. You can only write that stuff when your heart is broken.
—DOING THE WILD CARD SHUFFLE, Dreamsongs - Volume II
Thanks for your message!
40 notes
·
View notes
Last Seen Blogs
liminalkandlez
REX/KEL/MACK ☆
frostiwars
Welcome to the Crumch Chamber
littlespotintheriverbend-blog
Just Me.
sadbxysworld
•STΣVΣ•
st-pigeonations
St. Pigeonation's