I think the canonish difference between ASOIAF and AWOIAF can be summed up like this:
From a Jon POV chapter in TWOW: While riding his horse down the muddy track, Jon Snow farted. That's canon. Jon farted.
From TWOIAF: While riding his horse down the muddy muddy track, Jon Snow farted. While it is canon that the maester wrote that, it coulda been a squeaky saddle.
As soon as the cameras are off I am going to fuck that little dog.
My point is, just because it fits into the world Martin created, doesn't mean it's all canonical.
Well the way I view it is that we can pull content out of the World book, hold it up for everyone to see, and correctly declare:
"It is canon that the following statement was made by Maester Yandel in his book."
I guess the underlying observation I'm making is this: In the context of discussing Martin's story, the fact that certain information is canonical does not necessarily mean it's valuable on its face. Because we never receive any information except through the particular point-of-view of an in-world character. So before we can assign value to what we read, we must (at some level) consider the context and limitations of the messenger.
Basically, this is why I try to avoid using the World book to build or support theories. Because sure, if George says so, then Maester Yandel is an in-world character - he's canon. But given that:
Yandel has no particular role to play in the main story,
We can't judge the accuracy of his work until Martin finishes the main story, and
At least some portion of his stuff is almost guaranteed to be irrelevant fluff
...well, who the hell cares? Call it canon if you want to, but it's just hard to see how it matters.
So anyway. I'm perfectly willing to concede that the World book is canonical. I just can't see how it's at all necessarily valuable.
I do too. I agree with your point regarding its value, regardless of its canonical status. And I even agree that if we only judge it against itself, it is canonical. In-universe, sure, Yandel was a maester, and he wrote a coffee table book for King Robert. (Wine table?)
But in terms of the series, only the books and novellas are canon. Episodes of GoT written by GRRM are close. The worldbook is close. But they fall short for one glaring reason, they are interpretive collaborations that bear the marks of multiple creators, rather than being from the mind of the author alone. For this reason I give things like SSMs and the 1993 letter more weight than the worldbook (even though the latter has clearly been contradicted in parts and entirely superseded by the books).
RaLinda may well have had access to more things similar to the 1993 letter, used those materials to help fill in necessary areas of the worldbook (likely), and they may have even used such primary sources in order to create their app's database (unlikely). In truth, I would have appreciated a collection of such unadulterated primary sources far more than Yandel's version of them, as they would be cold hard fragments of canon. Some might be false, some might be inaccurate, others might be on the cutting room floor because they are no longer relevant, but at least they would be from GRRM and from his hand alone.
I suppose my point is that this isn't Verrocchio's workshop, as much as RaLinda might like it to be. The works of the apprentices are not by default the works of the master. It's 2015, and there is a world of difference between them.
"I can see it. You have more of the north in you than your brothers."
...in terms of the series, only the books and novellas are canon. Episodes of GoT written by GRRM are close. The worldbook is close. But they fall short for one glaring reason, they are interpretive collaborations that bear the marks of multiple creators, rather than being from the mind of the author alone. For this reason I give things like SSMs and the 1993 letter more weight than the worldbook...
I suppose my point is that this isn't Verrocchio's workshop, as much as RaLinda might like it to be. The works of the apprentices are not by default the works of the master. It's 2015, and there is a world of difference between them.
Fair enough. Though my assumption with respect to the World book is that nothing made it into print without Martin's final review and approval. And I expect that if/when the main series is completed, we may look back through Yandel's wine-table book and chuckle at things that suddenly seem more relevant, clever, or intentional on Martin's part. There's a lot of new material in there that really can only have come from Martin. It's just not easy to tell what it is.
Beyond that, it doesn't matter that much to me whether it gets called "canon," "semi-canon," or "a door-stop." What's important, in hindsight, is that I bought it at a huge discount. That keeps me from feeling guilty about the fact that I mainly just thumb through it to look at the pictures.
Fair enough. Though my assumption with respect to the World book is nothing made it into print without Martin's final review and approval. And I expect that if/when the main series is completed, we may look back through Yandel's wine-table book and chuckle at things that suddenly seem more relevant, clever, or intentional on Martin's part. There's a lot of new material in there that really can only have come from Martin. It's just not easy to tell what it is.
Agreed. This is why I find it interesting that GRRM would say "The worldbook is pretty damn close" but not canonize it. It is entirely within his power to do so, and, I'd expect Ran to assume he would. Ran believes he is in Verrocchio's workshop, and as we know, they were treating the the app as canon not long ago.
Again, I can't help but fall back into linguist-mode and attempt to translate the Martin-ese
..."but since it was written by maesters, errors and omissions have crept in."
as "but since it was written with Elio and Linda, errors and omissions have crept in."
Martin has no need for acolytes, but he does make use of his little birds once they have been made dumb. LOL geeze I should just stop.
Beyond that, it doesn't matter that much to me whether it gets called "canon," "semi-canon," or "a door-stop." What's important, in hindsight, is that I bought it at a huge discount. That keeps me from feeling guilty about the fact that I mainly just thumb through it to look at the pictures.
As you're no doubt realizing, BC is not exaggerating when he calls my arguments semantic. LOL
"I can see it. You have more of the north in you than your brothers."
And then gives them leave to cherry pick what works for them and discounting what doesn't. Seems like this was done on purpose, the writing of it I mean, not the 'evidence' used to support RLJ. And yes, it sure does seem that only the doubters are the ones to point out this get out of jail free card.
An absolutely perfect example of this is the Pact of Ice and Fire. That somehow made it into the World Book... but not the fact that Prince Jacaerys proceeded to basically fulfill the pact by marrying Cregan's sister. Like you're telling me that we absolutely had to find out about this pact, that never ends up even being fulfilled anyways and is literally like one otherwise throwaway line that could have just been explained as the Targs successfully got the Starks to fight for them in the Dance by offering up a Targaryen princess to the Starks, but who a Prince of the realm scandalously married DIDN'T make it into the World Book???
Like no offence, but Ran's explanation that there simply wasn't room for that bit of history and it got cut was bullshit. That was a huge piece of information. Prince Jacaerys, Rhaenyra's Prince of Dragonstone and heir, marrying Cregan Stark's bastard sister is an enormous scandal, which is way more important than the name of the treaty that Joffrey Velaryon struck to secure the Starks support. And we've all seen how the name "The Pact of Ice and Fire" has been interpreted since it's reveal which makes me 100% positive that it made the cut over Jacaerys' marriage because it was cherry picked.
Unless the in-universe characters know something that we do not which prevents them from drawing that conclusion.
Yeah I've wondered about this myself. That people in universe simply know a reason why Jon can't be the child that otherwise everybody in story should be wondering if he's actually Lyanna's and Rhaegar. A couple explanations I've thought of could be:
1. People actually did witness Jon's birth and the mother wasn't Lyanna and simply accept Ned saying he was the father 2. People know that Lyanna gave birth, but the baby died 3. People know that Lyanna gave birth, but the baby was a girl 4. People know that Lyanna wasn't even capable of getting pregnant (that odd "child-woman" comment that Ned uses to describe a 16 year old who undoubtedly should be a woman according to Westoros standards unless she hasn't flowered yet) 5. Timeline. People love to assume that Jon is born at X date and that Lyanna died at X date, and that Rhaegar was last with Lyanna at X date but... it's all supposition. Supposition I might add that most fans tend to figure out timelines precisely that center around RLJ and having that be the outcome, instead of simply making timelines based on known information and letting the pieces fall where/how they should. For all we know we'll find out that the TOJ occurred like a year after the Trident which makes it impossible that Rhaegar ever fathered any child on Lyanna if she dies in childbirth. Or some piece of timeline information that simply makes RLJ impossible (well actually I'd already say that the real known timeline does make it impossible, but that's another topic) 6. The cause of Lyanna's death is known and it has nothing to do with childbirth
I would have appreciated a collection of such unadulterated primary sources far more than Yandel's version of them, as they would be cold hard fragments of canon.
This is kinda what bugs me the most about the World Book. The parts that aren't written by GRRM, whichever they are, are written based off notes by him. Which means that meanings can and will be lost in dozens of places where different words and implications are used compared to the original material. And not only that, but meanings can and will be added in dozens of places. Basically, it's fairly certain that there are tons of areas in the book that might not actually be what the source originally intended/said.
I mean, we've all complained about the "SSMs" that don't actually feature GRRM answers himself, but instead feature people saying what he said or paraphrasing him. It's not the same thing at all and quite often we've seen different people say different things we're said but only one interpretation of what was said gets used (*cough* only two men left the TOJ *cough* instead of only Eddard and Howland left the TOJ *cough*). The World Book is basically one giant SSM that's just been paraphrased by Elio and Linda.
Your lordship lost a son at the Red Wedding. I lost four upon the Blackwater. And why? Because the Lannisters stole the throne. Go to King’s Landing and look on Tommen with your own eyes, if you doubt me. A blind man could see it. What does Stannis offer you? Vengeance. Vengeance for my sons and yours, for your husbands and your fathers and your brothers. Vengeance for your murdered lord, your murdered king, your butchered princes. Vengeance!
That is indisputable. "Central mystery of the story" my ass. Like hello, ice zombies?
LOL. Yeah... they do seem like a slightly more pressing part of the plot. But, if Jon is the result of R+L, tptwp, son of ice and fire, etc etc, I can see why people would view it as a central mystery. The 93 presented a very strong case against that being the case however, imo.
I'd also point out that one of Ned's primary Winterfell guards in AGOT is called Wyl, which is just the male version of Wylla.
I'm a big fan of such phonetic connections, but I still feel like Jon's Wylla is Starfall's wetnurse - before him and after him. Now, that is not to say Ned did not knock up Starfall's wetnurse, or bring her to Winterfell. Ned isn't the smartest of men, and this would have occurred when he was younger and dumber. LOL
Mayhaps Starfall kept a northwoman as a wetnurse, but in any case, I see her as being a fixture there - as Old Nan is at Winterfell (who may well be a Frey, considering Hodor's true name).
An absolutely perfect example of this is the Pact of Ice and Fire. That somehow made it into the World Book... but not the fact that Prince Jacaerys proceeded to basically fulfill the pact by marrying Cregan's sister. Like you're telling me that we absolutely had to find out about this pact, that never ends up even being fulfilled anyways and is literally like one otherwise throwaway line that could have just been explained as the Targs successfully got the Starks to fight for them in the Dance by offering up a Targaryen princess to the Starks, but who a Prince of the realm scandalously married DIDN'T make it into the World Book???
Like no offence, but Ran's explanation that there simply wasn't room for that bit of history and it got cut was bullshit. That was a huge piece of information. Prince Jacaerys, Rhaenyra's Prince of Dragonstone and heir, marrying Cregan Stark's bastard sister is an enormous scandal, which is way more important than the name of the treaty that Joffrey Velaryon struck to secure the Starks support. And we've all seen how the name "The Pact of Ice and Fire" has been interpreted since it's reveal which makes me 100% positive that it made the cut over Jacaerys' marriage because it was cherry picked.
Yeah I've wondered about this myself. That people in universe simply know a reason why Jon can't be the child that otherwise everybody in story should be wondering if he's actually Lyanna's and Rhaegar. A couple explanations I've thought of could be:
Can't Rhaegar's faithfulness to Elia be a reason? He may well have broken his marriage vows, but we really don't have any reason to assume he did. I think all readers would agree Eddard knows who Jon's mother is, at the very least. When Ned thinks of Jon's conception, he attributes it to lust, yet, he does not seem to think Rhaegar was a lustful man.
(*cough* only two men left the TOJ *cough* instead of only Eddard and Howland left the TOJ *cough*). The World Book is basically one giant SSM that's just been paraphrased by Elio and Linda.
LOL yes, that is a very interesting SSM that just so happens to align very well with what the text presents.
"I can see it. You have more of the north in you than your brothers."
Am I correct that Grrm wrote different versions of the same pieces of the woiaf then chose one to use in the final draft? Anyone? Anyone?
Gents, this thread is very, very interesting. I may *pimp* it over at IWC? because there are some users over there that have been in this fandom for long years and have a good notion of this type of question, if you don´t mind.
But, if Jon is the result of R+L, tptwp, son of ice and fire, etc etc, I can see why people would view it as a central mystery
But it doesn't though. That stuff all falls under stuff like "who is the prophesied saviour?". Not "who is Jon Snow's mother?". The two could very well be related, for those reasons provided, but it doesn't make it that the question of "who is Jon Snow's mother" is the central mystery of the story.
A very likely solution itself, and even without the northern connections it still works as there's House Wyl in Dorne that we already knew about. Which means that Wylla could just be a regular old Dornish name, which fits with a regular old Dornish servant.
Can't Rhaegar's faithfulness to Elia be a reason? He may well have broken his marriage vows, but we really don't have any reason to assume he did.
Yup. It's quite a stretch to say that because Rhaegar "loved" Lyanna, if he ever even did, that he had to have had sex with her. The guy could have indeed kidnapped her or eloped with her, all without having ever had sex with her. Nothing has to ever end up in sex, but it seems like it's just a given that fans assume that they must have. It seems to be that because the official version has Rhaegar raping her, that the love version should have them having consensual sex... which really doesn't have to have happened.
So yeah. There is entirely also the possibility that Rhaegar still did all that he did, and stayed faithful to Elia.
that is a very interesting SSM that just so happens to align very well with what the text presents.
And yet it's completely dismissed. One fan says that GRRM said that only Eddard and Howland left, which as you point out actually is exactly what the books say happened, and another said that GRRM said that only two men left the TOJ... which immediately got accepted by fans and led to all tons of theorizing that that statement leaves open that Wylla, Jon, blah blah blah were all there, so long as no other men were.
Your lordship lost a son at the Red Wedding. I lost four upon the Blackwater. And why? Because the Lannisters stole the throne. Go to King’s Landing and look on Tommen with your own eyes, if you doubt me. A blind man could see it. What does Stannis offer you? Vengeance. Vengeance for my sons and yours, for your husbands and your fathers and your brothers. Vengeance for your murdered lord, your murdered king, your butchered princes. Vengeance!
Am I correct that Grrm wrote different versions of the same pieces of the woiaf then chose one to use in the final draft? Anyone? Anyone?
I'm not sure if it's exactly what you're asking for, but there are two examples that I know of where GRRM or whoever wrote the passage in the WB pretty much just copied things that were said in the actual books, and those passages made it into the WB but slightly worded different. Jaime's investiture is almost word for word what's said in ASOS, as well as is Tyrion's thoughts on Valyrian swords left in Westoros when Tywin presents Widow's Wail and Oathkeeper in ASOS when Yandel talks about the amount of blades left in Westoros. Which at least would be a case where we have two different versions of the same event, but worded only slightly different
Your lordship lost a son at the Red Wedding. I lost four upon the Blackwater. And why? Because the Lannisters stole the throne. Go to King’s Landing and look on Tommen with your own eyes, if you doubt me. A blind man could see it. What does Stannis offer you? Vengeance. Vengeance for my sons and yours, for your husbands and your fathers and your brothers. Vengeance for your murdered lord, your murdered king, your butchered princes. Vengeance!
Am I correct that Grrm wrote different versions of the same pieces of the woiaf then chose one to use in the final draft? Anyone? Anyone?
I think you're remembering something he said about the stories told in Rogue Prince and The Princess and The Queen. I'd have to look around for the interview, but I believe GRRM prepared at least three different source POVs - then only published the material "written" by the Grandmaester, who had limited access to the other sources.
Again, I'll have to search around for a link. Obviously I'm hazy on the details.
Am I correct that Grrm wrote different versions of the same pieces of the woiaf then chose one to use in the final draft? Anyone? Anyone?
Gents, this thread is very, very interesting. I may *pimp* it over at IWC? because there are some users over there that have been in this fandom for long years and have a good notion of this type of question, if you don´t mind.
Don't know who you're asking, but sounds good to me. Pimp away, man!
"Anticlimax is, of course, the warp and way of things. Real life seldom structures a decent denouement." - Martin Silenus
But it doesn't though. That stuff all falls under stuff like "who is the prophesied saviour?". Not "who is Jon Snow's mother?". The two could very well be related, for those reasons provided, but it doesn't make it that the question of "who is Jon Snow's mother" is the central mystery of the story.
All true. I'm just saying that from certain points of view R+L=The Lightbringing Prince that was Promised, the Son of Ice and Fire. So, I can see why some would view it as central, as it ties Jon's parentage to the stoppage of the ice zombies.
A very likely solution itself, and even without the northern connections it still works as there's House Wyl in Dorne that we already knew about. Which means that Wylla could just be a regular old Dornish name, which fits with a regular old Dornish servant.
The way Edric speaks of her, I lean towards this. She may well be of northern stock, but I get the vibe she's been a fixture at Starfall. Of course, that could be due to Edric's relative youth. He's only twelve. Don't want to derail, and I know you're already more than familiar with the passage and have a thread for discussing this very topic LOL, but I'd be remiss if I didn't mention Arya VIII ASOS:
“My lady?” Ned said at last. “You have a baseborn brother… Jon Snow?”
“He’s with the Night’s Watch on the Wall.” Maybe I should go to the Wall instead of Riverrun. Jon wouldn’t care who I killed or whether I brushed my hair… “Jon looks like me, even though he’s bastard-born. He used to muss my hair and call me ‘little sister.’” Arya missed Jon most of all. Just saying his name made her sad. “How do you know about Jon?”
“He is my milk brother.”
“Brother?” Arya did not understand. “But you’re from Dorne. How could you and Jon be blood?”
“Milk brothers. Not blood. My lady mother had no milk when I was little, so Wylla had to nurse me.”
Arya was lost. “Who’s Wylla?”
“Jon Snow’s mother. He never told you? She’s served us for years and years. Since before I was born.”
“Jon never knew his mother. Not even her name.” Arya gave Ned a wary look. “You know her? Truly?” Is he making mock of me? “If you lie I’ll punch your face.”
“Wylla was my wetnurse,” he repeated solemnly. “I swear it on the honor of my House.”
In her angry haste, Arya forgot to make Edric swear that Wylla was Jon's mother. And, conveniently, GRRM has Ned the Younger give a solemn vow regarding Jon Snow, but he ends up only swearing that Wylla was his own wetnurse.
Yup. It's quite a stretch to say that because Rhaegar "loved" Lyanna, if he ever even did, that he had to have had sex with her. The guy could have indeed kidnapped her or eloped with her, all without having ever had sex with her. Nothing has to ever end up in sex, but it seems like it's just a given that fans assume that they must have. It seems to be that because the official version has Rhaegar raping her, that the love version should have them having consensual sex... which really doesn't have to have happened.
So yeah. There is entirely also the possibility that Rhaegar still did all that he did, and stayed faithful to Elia.
Barristan calls him dutiful. Ned can't imagine him frequenting brothels. These both seem like gross mischaracterizations if Rhaegar abducted her, bedded her, or tarnished her honor in any way.
And yet it's completely dismissed. One fan says that GRRM said that only Eddard and Howland left, which as you point out actually is exactly what the books say happened, and another said that GRRM said that only two men left the TOJ... which immediately got accepted by fans and led to all tons of theorizing that that statement leaves open that Wylla, Jon, blah blah blah were all there, so long as no other men were.
All the more telling, the text states only he and Howland "had lived to ride away." That seems pretty clear cut to me. But alas I'm preaching to the choir.
"I can see it. You have more of the north in you than your brothers."
Weasel Pie as usual takes matters in his own hands Honestly I don't think the World Book would be a good basis for a theory as in comparison to the ASOIAF cannon. As for SSM unless it is on video, or email or Live Journal where other people can access it I am much more skeptical on the reliability of a SSM that relies on hearsay or when people paraphrase shit.
I just came across this and it couldn't have come at a more oppurtune time.Weasel Pie thank you for this and i would like permissin to link this when ever i am broached with a statement about the app,appendix,and WB being canon as in what has happened on the RLJ essay thread.I may go back and link this just to but this baby to bed especially regarding the timeline which RLJers can't seem to understand that this ports their theory.
"The world is full of obvious things which nobody by any chance ever observes"--Sherlock Holmes"