ByDaniel Blick, writer at
Arthouse Film/Superheroes/Tommy Wissou enthusiast
Daniel Blick

Many have begun season 6 of "Game of Thrones" already on a cliffhanger, asking; what will happen to Jon Snow?! But what if you know nothing of the true importance of Jon Snow's resurrection? Whether Snow returns to the realm of the living, or not, could have massive repercussions far greater than may at first seem apparent. Whether he lives or dies could represent not only what writer George R.R. Marten's ultimate plans for the concluding storyline is, but also on his philosophy of whether man is destined to prosper, or doomed to extinction. Let's take a look at the evidence.

A Game of Thrones - Has The End Already Happened?

If the ultimate story of "Game of Thrones" was really about just getting a good, moral person on the thrown for a change, we kind of already got that in season one. Eddark Stark effectively took a seat on the iron thrown toward the end of season one. Unfortunately it was the very qualities that made Stark a worthy king, that led to his demise. George R.R. Martin clearly stated this in an interview. When talking about GoT he confirmed the influence Machiavellian philosophy has had on his work. This can be seen in the destiny of Stark. He was a good man. So when he found out about the illegitimacy of Cersei's bastard children, rather than go straight to the King with the news, Eddark gave Cersei the opportunity to leave the realm and save her children. However, whilst this decision was certainly a moral one, it was not a politically astute one. It gave Cersei ampt time and opportunity to assassinate the King and arrest Stark instead, ultimately leading to his own death, and ironically the subsequent death of his wife and many of his children as well. This showed that ultimately the game of thrones is a selfish, short-sighted and evil game that simply kills-off any good men who try to play it, even if they have become the most powerful player in it.

How Will The Song of Ice and Fire End the Game of Thrones Then?

In line with this ultra-realist take on the political game is the ever-impeding threat of the super-natural. At the start of our story, both 'White Walkers' and dragons had become nothing more than myth and fallacy. However, as we approach the latter stages of the tale, both these sources of super-natural phenomena have taken far greater precedence within story-lines. The White Walkers originate from the north, representing ice, and the dragons have originated in the south, and of course represent fire. Both are slowly heading in the direction of Westeros - the literal and symbolic centre of where the game of thrones is played.

With this in mind, the question is how will the game of thrones end when these two forces finally meet? Will the short-term oriented, greedy motives of weak-willed leaders guarantee man's end, or will greater men rise to the occasion? The key word in the title of "a song of ice and fire" os "song" . This is because for man to be saved, the song will have to be orchestrated by someone who can bring people together, an egalitarian who focuses on the harmony of equilibrium. In other someone who doesn't divide and conquer in the machievliean way we have seen so many politicians play in the game of thrones so far. There are very few people prepared for this, the best of which may well be Jon Snow.

Why Jon Snow Is So Important To A Song of Ice And Fire

R + L = J.

For anyone who knows what this equation means, they may get where I'm coming from. R = Fire, and L = Ice. Therefore, J = a song of ice and fire.

The presence of of Daenery's proves that Targaryen's literally has dragon blood flowing through their veins. The sigil of the Stark's is literally "winter is coming". This shows that clearly Jon Snow is the only character in the entire story that literally has the song of ice and fire running through his veins. Also, his surname is literally Jon Snow. Furthermore, Snow's actions have more than been adequate at proving he is worthy. Selflessly putting the greater interest above his own on many different occasions. For example the fact that he invited the wildlings to come and reside behind The Wall for protection.

Therefore if Snow is in fact dead, this means that humanity's most likely saviour has been killed, ironically, by humanity itself. This could be Martin's way of showing that our own self-interested, short-term oriented motives will doom us to extinction. We are so focused on the quibbles of the past, and the wants of the now, that we fail to recognise our own inevitable demise that results from it. Most of the Night's Watch refused to side with Snow on letting the Wildling's through the gate based on past atrocities and selfish motives. As a result this delayed the process so much so that Snow's ultimate fear, of the Wildling's becoming White Walkers was on the most-part realised. On top of that, this self-less, enlightened decision by Snow got him killed, by the very people that will need him most when the White Walkers finally approach The Wall.

On the other hand of course, Jon Snow may be resurrected. If that is the case, then here are my predictions:

Either: Melisandre realises that Snow is meant to live, and as such resurrects him herself as the true king that she mistook Stannis to be for so long. This would be Martin's way of saying that it is directly in man's nature to save himself from his own greedy mistakes, because man has consciously re-surrected Jon; their saviour.

Or: Snow's corpse is captured by the Night's Watch and then burnt to ensure that he does not become a White Walker. However, similar to Daenerys in season one, the dragon blood inside him is awoken whilst in the flames and he is resurrected like a phoenix from the ashes. This would show that fate is in fact on man's side, more by luck than design and ultimately prove that R + L really does = J.

What Could George R.R. Martin Be Saying About Our Own Destiny With This?

Clearly the relationship between man and nature is a theme in GoT that can be easily applied to our own world too. Rather than 'winter is coming', global warming is coming. Yet politicians being driven by the short-term aims of multinational corporation lobbyists and the need for re-election has meant that this fact has been conveniently ignored, and as such ineffectively countered. Is this simply in our nature? Or can we change this trend and end our own game of thrones from which the television series was based? Just as "Game Of Thrones" has often been a reflection of our own history, it may also become a reflection of our future too. I guess that's a cliff-hanger I don't know if I want to find out!

Valar Morghulis.


Latest from our Creators