[ SECRET POST #4463 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4463 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.








Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 42 secrets from Secret Submission Post #639.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

06. https://i.imgur.com/TCTT6eE.jpg

[11thmirror]

I didn't know he'd complained about the resurrection of Gandalf, but it doesn't seem particularly out of character for GRRM - he does seem to have a certain amount of disdain for anything that involves hope and joy

[(Anonymous)]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/0/george-rr-martin-coming-back-dead-should-change-characters/

He isn't against resurrecting characters, it's that Gandalf wasn't really changed,

"If someone comes back from being dead, especially if they suffer a violent, traumatic death, they’re not going to come back as nice as ever.”

In the books, the resurrected characters like Stoneheart and Beric are left damaged. The same will probably be true for Jon in the books as well, since Martin said Beric was set up as foreshadowing for Jon's storyline.

[(Anonymous)]

when an author so fundamentally misunderstands that much about Gandalf I'm not going to like their book. calling that right now. no I've never read his books but I've been eyeing them out of desperation for something to read.

[11thmirror]

Ah, so it's not that Gandalf wasn't changed, it's that he didn't become evil. That sounds very... GRRM.

[(Anonymous)]

Not necessarily evil, Beric wasn't evil, and I doubt Jon will be either.

Lady Stoneheart is vengeful, but she's only going after the people responsible for her and her family's murder.

[(Anonymous)]

"Not nice as ever" doesn't necessarily mean "evil," but regardless, I don't think the regular rules apply to Gandalf, since he was a Maia, not a human being. Maiar are used to changing forms and they can't really die, it's only the body that dies.

[(Anonymous)]

He ... didn't read LotR very closely, did he? Gandalf did change between White and Grey. He came back bigger, more aloof, more the Maiar than the humble wizard he'd been/seemed before. A creature as much at home commanding kings as sitting in a hobbit hole, which we didn't really see in Gandalf the Grey. He also, I always thought he came back more determined to get the job finally done and go home.

And there's a bit of a difference in context of the resurrections as well. Iluvatar and the Valar aren't the distant, capricious, ambiguously-real gods of Westeros. I mean, Gandalf knew them personally. Before his resurrection. The death was a massive gamble, but he at least knew and trusted what was waiting for him on the other side if he made it there. He came back tired and changed and having faced death and despair, but he also came back having been reassured in his purpose by beings he knew.

[(Anonymous)]

Keep in mind GRRM is talking about he felt reading it as a thirteen year old.

[(Anonymous)]

Well, yeah, but then he talks about how he got older and still felt the same way.

[(Anonymous)]

Honestly, I do think he has a point, because I really felt like the difference between Grey and White actually came across. I understand he was supposed to change but it really did seem like the same guy.

[tabaqui]

Wow. So if you somehow manage to come back from a horrible (but heroic) death, you can only come back changed for the *worse*?

Fuck that.

[(Anonymous)]

Not necessarily, Beric isn't evil.

[tabaqui]

I have no idea who that is; i read three or four of the GOT books and got so frustrated with them i gave up.
I haven't watched any of the show.

I think his comment is pretty ridiculous, though, and if that's his big objection to Gandalf, he maybe should re-read/re-watch, because Gandalf *was* changed, just not some 180 difference.

[(Anonymous)]

That's a pretty bad faith read, and isn't even in keeping with what Martin's done in his own work. Of the three so-far resurrected characters (who aren't mindless husks enslaved to horrible ice zombies) in the books, only one of them has definitively changed for the worse, and that's the woman who saw her son and many of her friends betrayed and murdered before being brutally murdered herself, and snapped from the trauma even before she died. The other two are decent and committed to doing what they consider the right thing - they've paid for their resurrections with a loss of some of what makes them human, but that's human in the sense of "being a still-living member of the species animated by biology and not terrifying eldritch magic", not the ability to be moral and compassionate.

He's saying resurrection should cost and be hard and not have the character bounce immediately to who they were before, or who they were before but better. Which, valid.

[tabaqui]

I don't remember the books i read and haven't seen the show, so i'll take you at your word.

I think he's confused in his statement, because Gandalf *was* changed. Also, his death, while unpleasant, wasn't the horror-show of the GOT deaths, and he had a very different 'afterlife' experience.

Also, Gandalf isn't actually human, so there are going to be some differences.

My cold read of that quote is that he's being kind of arrogant about writing and his writing in general (though that could be from the perspective of someone who wasn't all that impressed by his books, so....).

[(Anonymous)]

they've paid for their resurrections with a loss of some of what makes them human

What if the character wasn't human, and what they come back as is closer to what they were before they took on their more human seeming? Because that's the case with Gandalf.

[(Anonymous)]

"If someone comes back from being dead, especially if they suffer a violent, traumatic death, they’re not going to come back as nice as ever.”

Oh, pfft, like he knows how it works!

[(Anonymous)]

Considering the wealth of psychological research into the effects of trauma, even with our imperfect modern understanding of exactly how traumatic events shape people, it's a reasonable extrapolation.

[(Anonymous)]

That psychological research applies to wizard demi-gods?

And I mean, there are real humans who have medically died and come back to life. Really not all of them are traumatized.

[(Anonymous)]

NA

I would not agree because most things about personality or personal development are not absolutes. I will agree that people can be changed by experiences, especially traumatic ones. However, how it changes a person depends on a lot. Some people, after near-death experiences or bad injuries or illnesses or other traumatic events, re-evaluate and prioritize being kinder, more compassionate, more generous, and more thoughtful.

[(Anonymous)]

He's clearly a huge fan of Tolkien, he just thinks there are things he would do differently. He isn't trying to bash him.

"People are always trying to set up this me-vs.-Tolkien thing, which I find very frustrating because I worship Tolkien, he’s the father of all modern fantasy, and my world would never exist had he not come first! "

http://time.com/4791258/game-of-thrones-george-r-r-martin-interview/

[(Anonymous)]

...But zombies have been a thing since the second or third book. Remember Catelyn, a main character who died and came back?

[(Anonymous)]

I'm so pissed we never got Lady Stoneheart in the show.

[(Anonymous)]

+1

I think I just got old. Also no one reads my shit and it got lonely.