Jon Snow is not dead

He is not dead, because, if he is, then George R.R Martin is one of the worst writers ever, and after over FOUR THOUSAND PAGES, I just don’t believe that’s true. He is not dead because, if he is, then the TV show has been toying with more than our emotions for five seasons.

He’s not dead because what was the WHOLE point of teasing his origins if they were going to KILL HIM before we could find out why they were important.

He’s not dead because WHY even get rid of the whole Lady Stoneheart plot if not to make it more surprising when he eventually comes back to life?

He’s not dead because…well, because Melisandre, who we KNOW can bring someone back from the dead, is conveniently at the wall.

He’s not dead because, unlike Ned, Robb, Tywin and countless others, the story doesn’t make sense without him.

In short, he is NOT dead, and it’s not because I don’t WANT him to be dead, it’s because if he is, then the STORY makes no freaking sense.

The end.

Opening your eyes is all that is needing. The heart lies and the head plays tricks with us, but the eyes see true. Look with your eyes. Hear with your ears. Taste with your mouth. Smell with your nose. Feel with your skin. Then comes the thinking, afterward, and in that way knowing the truth.
—  George R.R. Martin, A Game of Thrones
Jon is NOT dead, I repeat, NOT dead.

I feel the need to expand on my earlier post saying that Jon is NOT dead, by adding that yes, I did read all the Kit Harrington interviews. I know he’s trimmed his hair. I see your evidence.

I still don’t believe Jon is dead. 

There’s a famous quote, and like many old quotes, no one at this point is sure who said it, but my first creative writing professor used to quote it at us all the time. It goes something like this:  “If a gun is on the mantle in the first act, it must go off in the third.”

Good writers (and I consider GRRM to be a good one, despite his tendency to get lost in his own story and his love affair with new characters) know this rule. They follow it. And the reason they do is because, if you don’t, readers feel cheated. You want the reader to feel things, yes. You want them to be surprised. Amazed. Happy. You’ll even take angry.

But you never want them to feel cheated.

If Jon’s parentage has been so widely teased and we get nothing ….I’ll feel cheated.

If Jon’s importance to the overall arc has been so clearly pointed out and it turns out to be a red herring …I’ll feel cheated.

If Melisandre is conveniently close to Jon, and yet she can’t bring him back for “reasons” ….I’ll feel cheated.

If this is the end of Jon Snow, we’ll ALL feel cheated, in a way we didn’t when they killed Ned, or Robb. And emotions are good things, you want your viewers/readers engaged. But you don’t want them to feel cheated. (Right Shonda Rhimes????!)

So, ignore Kit “I lie to people about GoT Spoilers” Harrington. If there is something else coming for Jon, he might not know it. They might not need the same actor. They might have told him to SHUT his MOUTH because, if GRRM is really close to finishing The Winds of Winter, they want the reveal about Jon to come from the author himself. It doesn’t matter. IGNORE THE ACTOR. IGNORE THE INTERVIEWS. 

Focus on the books. Go re-watch the tv show. They all send the same message, and that message is clear.

Jon Snow’s story is not over yet. 

While Yellowjacket makes a decent villain here (in the comics, of course, he was actually one of Hank’s later identities, after Giant-Man and Goliath), I am tired of this Marvel movie trope where the bad guy has the same powers as the hero. The Hulk fought the Abomination, who is just a bad Hulk. Spider-Man fights Venom, who is just a bad Spider-Man. Iron Man fights Ironmonger, a bad Iron Man. Yawn. I want more films where the hero and the villain have wildly different powers. That makes the action much more interesting.

George R.R. Martin

The Game of Thrones author makes a good point about Marvel’s problematic villains.