info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The Dragon of Winterfell
32 views
Skip to first unread message
Platypus
Oct 4, 2018, 1:15:25 PM10/4/18
to
Toward the end of ACOK, Summer (or Bran, through Summer's eyes) sees over the burning ruins of Winterfell a winged snake, whose roar was a river of flame. Summer growled at it, and then it was gone.
It's a blink-and-you'll miss it moment. Many don't notice it, on first read. But once you notice it, it is hard to ignore.
An unknown dragon was, for some reason, flying near Winterfell.
That is the core premise of the "theory" of the Dragon of Winterfell. It is hard to call the core premise a "theory", when it is little more than accepting the text at face value.
Of course, various theorists have moved beyond the core premise in various ways, most usually, and a bit more speculatively, by connecting the "Dragon of Winterfell" to the mysterious presence in the crypts of Winterfell that, among other things, spooked poor Hodor at one point.
But, regardless of details, this is has been a disfavored theory at Westeros.org. The moderators of the site have persistently declined to add any version of it to their "Compendium of Theories" thread. Judging from the discussions there, the sticking point for many posters seems to be the core premise itself. Opponents of the theory cannot accept that Summer actually saw a dragon. It must have been a misinterpretation of the fire, or the comet, or was some kind of symbolic vision.
I cannot buy that. Either Summer saw a dragon, or GRRM was trolling his readers for some incomprehensible reason.
But if he is trolling us, he evidently keeps doing it. The publication of A WORLD OF ICE AND FIRE, mentioned several rumors of dragons surviving in the North, including separate rumors of a dragon at Winterfell, and of a clutch of eggs at Winterfell, left by Silverwing.
The new, brief, excerpt from FIRE AND BLOOD, just published on GRRM's website, is focused on Silverwing's visit first the Winterfell and then the Wall. No eggs are mentioned, however. Maybe he's trolling us with the hope or promise of additional information in the full volume.
It's a blink-and-you'll miss it moment. Many don't notice it, on first read. But once you notice it, it is hard to ignore.
An unknown dragon was, for some reason, flying near Winterfell.
That is the core premise of the "theory" of the Dragon of Winterfell. It is hard to call the core premise a "theory", when it is little more than accepting the text at face value.
Of course, various theorists have moved beyond the core premise in various ways, most usually, and a bit more speculatively, by connecting the "Dragon of Winterfell" to the mysterious presence in the crypts of Winterfell that, among other things, spooked poor Hodor at one point.
But, regardless of details, this is has been a disfavored theory at Westeros.org. The moderators of the site have persistently declined to add any version of it to their "Compendium of Theories" thread. Judging from the discussions there, the sticking point for many posters seems to be the core premise itself. Opponents of the theory cannot accept that Summer actually saw a dragon. It must have been a misinterpretation of the fire, or the comet, or was some kind of symbolic vision.
I cannot buy that. Either Summer saw a dragon, or GRRM was trolling his readers for some incomprehensible reason.
But if he is trolling us, he evidently keeps doing it. The publication of A WORLD OF ICE AND FIRE, mentioned several rumors of dragons surviving in the North, including separate rumors of a dragon at Winterfell, and of a clutch of eggs at Winterfell, left by Silverwing.
The new, brief, excerpt from FIRE AND BLOOD, just published on GRRM's website, is focused on Silverwing's visit first the Winterfell and then the Wall. No eggs are mentioned, however. Maybe he's trolling us with the hope or promise of additional information in the full volume.
Butterbumps@Home
Jan 21, 2019, 3:11:23 AM1/21/19
to
torstai 4. lokakuuta 2018 20.15.25 UTC+3 Platypus kirjoitti:
> Toward the end of ACOK, Summer (or Bran, through Summer's eyes) sees over the
> burning ruins of Winterfell a winged snake, whose roar was a river of flame.
> Summer growled at it, and then it was gone.
No recollection of this but sure.
> Toward the end of ACOK, Summer (or Bran, through Summer's eyes) sees over the
> burning ruins of Winterfell a winged snake, whose roar was a river of flame.
> Summer growled at it, and then it was gone.
Seems pretty clear that the direwolves are pretty good at seeing important things, especially when warg-dreaming with the Stark kids.
Now, whether literal dragon or just a vision of some sort ... who knows? I rather like the idea of Daenerys's dragons being the only ones, but who knows.
> The new, brief, excerpt from FIRE AND BLOOD, just published on GRRM's
> website, is focused on Silverwing's visit first the Winterfell and then the
> Wall. No eggs are mentioned, however. Maybe he's trolling us with the hope
> or promise of additional information in the full volume.
--
C@w
Platypus
Aug 2, 2020, 4:53:55 PM8/2/20
to
On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 1:15:25 PM UTC-4, Platypus wrote:
> But, regardless of details, this is has been a disfavored theory at Westeros.org. The moderators of the site have persistently declined to add any version of it to their "Compendium of Theories" thread. Judging from the discussions there, the sticking point for many posters seems to be the core premise itself. Opponents of the theory cannot accept that Summer actually saw a dragon. It must have been a misinterpretation of the fire, or the comet, or was some kind of symbolic vision.
@Butterbumps@home
> But, regardless of details, this is has been a disfavored theory at Westeros.org. The moderators of the site have persistently declined to add any version of it to their "Compendium of Theories" thread. Judging from the discussions there, the sticking point for many posters seems to be the core premise itself. Opponents of the theory cannot accept that Summer actually saw a dragon. It must have been a misinterpretation of the fire, or the comet, or was some kind of symbolic vision.
You recently laid an accusation against that I have a "LOT" of complaints about Westeros.org, that tend to "derail" my posts. It occurs to me that you may have in mind remarks like those I made just above. If so, you are laboring under a misunderstanding, which I now hope to clarify.
I like to explore unpopular theories. The logic behind this is that if I support an unpopular theory, and it turns out to be correct, that is all the more glory for me. I also think it can be fun to explore theories that have not already been explored to death. So no, when I point out that a theory is unpopular, this is not a "complaint". It is merely an attempt to state a fact, which is often preliminary to a summary of the reasons it is unpopular and the arguments laid against it, and why I am not convinced by those arguments.
However, I do not actually know what theories are popular and unpopular in the broadest sense. I can tell, however, whether a theory is popular or unpopular on Westeros.org. So when I point out that a theory is "unpopular on Westeros.org" instead of merely "unpopular", this is merely an attempt to be precise about what I actually know and do not know.
I actually conducted an "unpopular theory poll" of the "Dragon of Winterfell" theory, on the Westeros.org site. This was on of a series of "unpopular theory polls" I conducted on that site. Turns out it was indeed unpopular: 8 for to 38 against.
I would love to be able to conduct a poll as to what theories are popular or unpopular on alt.fan.grrm. Sadly, however, such a poll would fail for lack of data.
Butterbumps@Home
Aug 3, 2020, 2:00:07 AM8/3/20
to
sunnuntai 2. elokuuta 2020 23.53.55 UTC+3 Platypus kirjoitti:
> I like to explore unpopular theories. The logic behind this is that if I
> support an unpopular theory, and it turns out to be correct, that is all
> the more glory for me. I also think it can be fun to explore theories
> that have not already been explored to death. So no, when I point out
> that a theory is unpopular, this is not a "complaint". It is merely an
> attempt to state a fact, which is often preliminary to a summary of the
> reasons it is unpopular and the arguments laid against it, and why I am
> not convinced by those arguments.
Alright.
> I like to explore unpopular theories. The logic behind this is that if I
> support an unpopular theory, and it turns out to be correct, that is all
> the more glory for me. I also think it can be fun to explore theories
> that have not already been explored to death. So no, when I point out
> that a theory is unpopular, this is not a "complaint". It is merely an
> attempt to state a fact, which is often preliminary to a summary of the
> reasons it is unpopular and the arguments laid against it, and why I am
> not convinced by those arguments.
> However, I do not actually know what theories are popular and unpopular in
> the broadest sense. I can tell, however, whether a theory is popular or
> unpopular on Westeros.org. So when I point out that a theory is
> "unpopular on Westeros.org" instead of merely "unpopular", this is merely
> an attempt to be precise about what I actually know and do not know.
Like I say, I can understand the frustration of dealing with a moderated and cliquish web forum. Been there, done that (albeit on an unmoderated rec forum) and I really shouldn't criticise on the basis of comments and perceived shoulder-chips. And westeros.org at least still has some semblance of a community.
> I actually conducted an "unpopular theory poll" of the "Dragon of
> Winterfell" theory, on the Westeros.org site. This was on of a series of
> "unpopular theory polls" I conducted on that site. Turns out it was
> indeed unpopular: 8 for to 38 against.
>
> I would love to be able to conduct a poll as to what theories are popular
> or unpopular on alt.fan.grrm. Sadly, however, such a poll would fail for
> lack of data.
- B@h
--
https://hatboy.blog/
Platypus
Aug 3, 2020, 3:32:25 AM8/3/20
to
On Monday, August 3, 2020 at 2:00:07 AM UTC-4, Butterbumps@Home wrote:
> Like I say, I can understand the frustration of dealing with a moderated and cliquish web
> forum. Been there, done that (albeit on an unmoderated rec forum) and I really shouldn't
> criticise on the basis of comments and perceived shoulder-chips. And westeros.org at least
> still has some semblance of a community.
Well, sure. But again, that was not what I was trying to say here. I enjoy discussing unpopular theories, and draw no uncomfortable levels of frustration from the mere fact that the theory is unpopular. Both fans and mods have the right to their opinions, and as long as the mods do not abuse their powers to silence discussion, I am perfectly fine with their opposition. And in the case of this particular theory at least, I am not aware that the mods ever abused their powers. Again, nothing I said here about the unpopularity of the "Dragon of Winterfell" theory was intended as a complaint or expression of frustration of any kind.
> Like I say, I can understand the frustration of dealing with a moderated and cliquish web
> forum. Been there, done that (albeit on an unmoderated rec forum) and I really shouldn't
> criticise on the basis of comments and perceived shoulder-chips. And westeros.org at least
> still has some semblance of a community.
And as far as I know, this theory may be unpopular on Westeros.org merely because it is unpopular with fans generally. I cannot be 100% certain of this, of course, but I suspect it is probably the case. I have no particular conviction that the theory would be significantly more popular on a less cliquish and less heavily moderated site.
Again, I was merely trying to say that the theory was unpopular, and phrased this as "unpopular on Westeros.org" only because I was tailoring my statement to my actual basis of knowledge.
Butterbumps@Home
Aug 3, 2020, 4:18:49 AM8/3/20
to
B@h
0 new messages