"Book readers" - Season 7 Episode 7 "The Dragon and the Wolf"

Daith

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Jon knows Theon's parentage.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Daith

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yes, you're talking about the guy who tells Theon that Theon has two fathers.

Then you're asking what that guy would do if he found out he had two fathers.

Completely unconnected.

.......

This post has been deleted.

matrim

Daith wrote: »

Listen to his talk with Theon again

Jon *is* the Dragon and the Wolf

Even ignoring the Theon conversation he's both. As his mother was a Stark and his father a Targaryen.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Daith

matrim wrote: »

Even ignoring the Theon conversation he's both. As his mother was a Stark and his father a Targaryen.

Yes but we're talking about what you're raised as. Not just the biological role. That's the difference here.

Ned's values are completely different to Balon's for example.

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Cos Catelyn wasn't a second father.

johnnyskeleton

Paddy Cow wrote: »

LF has spies everywhere. He would be gone in a flash if he thought they were on to him. They had to outwit him. He confessed in front of the other Lords and his execution is justified. Sansa still has the loyalty of the Vale Knights, probably more so now that she exposed LF.

But she could have done this at any time after Bran arrived. That he would confess is also out of character for a shrewd manipulator.

johnnyskeleton

Paddy Cow wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that once Bran then passed through the wall it meant that the NK would also be able to do so.

Is that shown anywhere in the TV series? That theory would imply that the magic of the wall is conditional upon the three eyed raven always livig beyond the wall, but that does not appear to be the case. The magic of the wall is far far older, so why would Bran crossing the wall make a difference? Is this to do with the books' Night King legend?

mewso

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Not sure why you keep referring to other examples. Jon simply says to Theon you can be both. You don't have to chose one or the other and the show is obviously flagging that Jon will feel the same way about Targ v Stark. Nothing to do with how the 'world' will see him.

Daith

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

But she could have done this at any time after Bran arrived. That he would confess is also out of character for a shrewd manipulator.

I thought he was confessing to a smaller crime in the hopes he would get out of a bigger one.

Blaming Lysa and passing it off as her being mental makes some sense.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Is that shown anywhere in the TV series? That theory would imply that the magic of the wall is conditional upon the three eyed raven always livig beyond the wall, but that does not appear to be the case. The magic of the wall is far far older, so why would Bran crossing the wall make a difference? Is this to do with the books' Night King legend?

Never shown. People made an assumption but it was never mentioned.

podgemonster

One is not defined by the man that fathered them, the mother that bore them or the house that raised them. They are a part of them and heavily influenced them absolutely but every character must make a choice eventually on what path to take in life. Every main character is much more complex than the animal embroided on their cloaks.

Theon is the son of a Greyjoys but raised by Starks. He's lost as to where his loyalties are, what his motivations should be (we do not sow/winter is coming). He looks to Jon for guidance and Jon tells him to embrace both.

But Jon will soon be faced with this same dilemma, he has a stark mother and raised and guided by Lord Stark. But he is a Targ which means he is heir to the throne. If going by what he said to Theon he too will embrace both the Dragon and the Wolf and this will bring conflict between him and the Queen he's knelt to.

johnnyskeleton

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Is that shown anywhere in the TV series? That theory would imply that the magic of the wall is conditional upon the three eyed raven always livig beyond the wall, but that does not appear to be the case. The magic of the wall is far far older, so why would Bran crossing the wall make a difference? Is this to do with the books' Night King legend?

The Dragon rolled a 20-Crit Hit against The Wall, with a bonus for fire being effective against ice.
That's all

johnnyskeleton

HandsomeBob wrote: »

I would have dreaded Ned's position too had he got to keep his word and tell Jon the truth. Sorry son, but you're not actually my son......you're eh, er.....the legitimate son of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lynna Stark and heir to the Iron Throne....well, would have been. Don't brood on it too much on your trip back to the Wall.

I was always struck by Benjens comment to Jon about never being able to have a family and Jon says he wouldnt want to. Benjen says "you might, if you knew what it meant"!

Daith

HandsomeBob wrote: »

I would have dreaded Ned's position too had he got to keep his word and tell Jon the truth. Sorry son, but you're not actually my son......you're eh, er.....the legitimate son of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lynna Stark and heir to the Iron Throne....well, would have been. Don't brood on it too much on your trip back to the Wall.

Did Ned know that Jon wasn't a bastard though? Lyanna didn't tell him, otherwise Bran would have known.

So the heir to the Iron Throne wouldn't have come up? Just that Jon was a bastard Targ and to be kept safe?

HandsomeBob

Daith wrote: »

Did Ned know that Jon wasn't a bastard though? Lyanna didn't tell him, otherwise Bran would have known.

So the heir to the Iron Throne wouldn't have come up? Just that Jon was a bastard Targ and to be kept safe?

She said his name was Aegon Targaryen, no reference to a bastard name. I'm sure Ned put 2 and 2 together.

Daith

HandsomeBob wrote: »

She said his name was Aegon Targaryen, no reference to a bastard name. I'm sure Ned put 2 and 2 together.

Bran didn't.

Ned would have needed proof but I guess we'll never actually know now.

A Primal Nut

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yes, but that Ned even went and became hand of the King knowing he had just sent the real King to the Wall.

Even after Robert died, he made no attempts to tell Jon who he was.

[/quote]

Ned had pledged allegiance to Robert so he wouldn't see Jon as the real king. As the Baratheons were now the lineage of the real king in his eyes.
Even when Robert died, Ned changed allegiance to his brother, rather than Jon. Probably, with good reason.

Mickeroo

Deleted User wrote: »

Yeah but he was raised by Wolves (just like Theon)

Yeah, Jon literally spelled it out himself in his conversation with Theon. He was talking about himself as much as Theon.

Daith

Have a a feeling in the books

Jon discovers who his parents are but that he's still a bastard for a while until he meets Sam who then tells him about the marriage?

Paddy Cow

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Is that shown anywhere in the TV series? That theory would imply that the magic of the wall is conditional upon the three eyed raven always livig beyond the wall, but that does not appear to be the case. The magic of the wall is far far older, so why would Bran crossing the wall make a difference? Is this to do with the books' Night King legend?

Daith wrote: »

Never shown. People made an assumption but it was never mentioned.

The 3ER told Bran he would have to leave because of the mark. The NK could tell where he was. Bran said he can't get in and the 3ER said he can now because of the mark. The children of the forest used magic to protect the 3EER and they used magic to build the wall so that's where people are getting the assumption that wherever Bran goes, because of the mark it will break any magic and allow the NK to pass. It's not said outright but it's implied.

bnt

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

But she could have done this at any time after Bran arrived. That he would confess is also out of character for a shrewd manipulator.

I made this point earlier: Sansa tolerated LF at Winterfell because of the men of the Vale he brought along. They were crucial in the Battle of the Bastards and she needed them for the defence of Winterfell and the war to come. So LF couldn't just disappear, he had to be discredited in a way that allowed Sansa to keep the support of the Vale. When she got the nod from Lord Yohn Royce, LF's goose was cooked.

From further reading e.g. here, it seems that Royce was already highly suspicious of LF when it came to Lysa's death and knew he was seeking to control the Vale - so the end of LF suits Royce very nicely. I think we'll be seeing more of him.

Daith

Paddy Cow wrote: »

The 3ER told Bran he would have to leave because of the mark. The NK could tell where he was. Bran said he can't get in and the 3ER said he can now because of the mark. The children of the forest used magic to protect the 3EER and they used magic to build the wall so that's where people are getting the assumption that wherever Bran goes, because of the mark it will break any magic and allow the NK to pass. It's not said outright but it's implied.

Oh absolutely people thought there was a connection but there is nothing to confirm it so far.

johnnyskeleton

A Primal Nut wrote: »

Is the assumption now that Robert invented the kidnapping/rape story involving R+L because he was so humiliated Lyanna left him, and to get the Starks onside and to give justification for the rebellion. If not Robert, where would the kidnapping/rape story have come from?

The events started with Brandon Stark (Ned's brother) going to Kings Landing and calling out Rhaegar. The Mad King then imprisoned Brandon and summoned Lord Stark (Ned's father) and killed them both. He wanted to do away with the Stark line, and presumably was also aware that Robert was upset about the events, so he commanded Jon Arryn to deliver Ned and Robert up to him. Jon Arryn refused and raised the rebellion. In one sense, it was more of an Arryn/Stark rebellion than a Baratheon rebellion, but my theory is that Robert was the more charismatic leader and they decided early on that he should be the future king, or maybe Ned and Jon didn't want to be King.

The kidnapping story is presumably due to Rhaegar and Lyanna running off together without telling anybody. If she had simply chosen Rhaegar over Robert, Robert would've been upset, but the rebellion probably would not have happened.

It's possible that Brandon knew they had eloped rather than her being kidnapped and was going down to assert the family honour because his father was not asked for permission to wed her, but this seems unlikely. So it seems that the kidnap narrative was the cover story for them eloping, and Robert possibly added in the raping as an embellishment.

Even after Ned takes custody of the baby at the Tower of Joy, presumably Ned still thought the baby was conceived by rape, and didn't know about the secret marriage, as that would surely have changed his view of Robert. Would have been nice if Lyanna told him but obviously she was in bad shape by that stage.

Possibly. It depends on whether "Promise me, Ned" means promise to take care of the child and not let him be killed, or whether it means promise me that you won't reveal his true name. But I never get the impression that Ned hates Rhaegar or any of the other Targaryens, the only person he seems to hate from the rebellion is Twyin Lannister, and possibly to a lesser extent Jaime Lannister.

As to changing his view of Robert, he was only reconciled with Robert after Lyanna's death (Ned and Robert had a disagreement over Twyin's sack of KL and the death of the young Targaryens). The books say that they were united in their shared grief, but I suspect Ned reconciled for self-presrevation/the preservation f his son.

Would Rhaegar have a reason to keep the entire story quiet? It would have upset the Dorne family obviously if he annulled the wedding and married someone else, but he would have known that would happen when he made the decision to do it. So what was the point of marrying Lyanna if he was going to keep it secret? Revealing the truth would have cancelled out the main justification for Robert's Rebellion. Or did he perhaps die immediately after the wedding and never got a chance?

The Dornish don't mind polygamy so much. I would like to think that in the books, Jon is not the legitimate son of Rhaegar and Lyanna as a married couple and so the heir to the throne. I think this is too much of a fairy tale move for GRRM. I suspect his parentage will allow him to ride a dragon or be the prince who was promised. Also, in the books the Dornish plot shows them to be firm Targ loyalists, so either Rhaegar never separated and remarried, he did so in secret (which is somewhat pointless in the circumstances) or their hatred of the Lannisters who killed their princess was such as to make them overlook the fact that she was spurned by the Targ heir.

As to why if they were secretly married would they not say it and cancel the justification for the war - well at that stage it was far too late. The Lord and heir of Winterfel had been murdered, Lyanna's brother, fiance and their adopted father were in open rebellion and the Mad King, who had suspicions about rebellion everywhere, was fully committed to the war. It was much too far gone to go back, and Lyanna was probably too proud to turn around and say "whoops, sorry about that folks". Also, the Mad King suspected Rhaegar of plotting treason so he wouldn't necessarily believe what Rhaegar says.

In relation to the timing of the marriage, in order for the TV series' "Jon is the trueborn heir" narrative to work, would the conception have to take place after the marriage?

HandsomeBob

Daith wrote: »

Bran didn't.

Ned would have needed proof but I guess we'll never actually know now.

I think it was just poorly done, as in no reason was given why Bran couldn't decipher Jon's real name the first name he went back, and why he could here.

Ned would have needed proof to declare Jon's real heritage, he didn't need proof for what his sister told him in her dying moments. Ned knew the truth, he just couldn't prove it even if he was inclined to do so.

johnnyskeleton

Paddy Cow wrote: »

The 3ER told Bran he would have to leave because of the mark. The NK could tell where he was. Bran said he can't get in and the 3ER said he can now because of the mark. The children of the forest used magic to protect the 3EER and they used magic to build the wall so that's where people are getting the assumption that wherever Bran goes, because of the mark it will break any magic and allow the NK to pass. It's not said outright but it's implied.

Why would the Three Eyed Raven allow him to go south of the wall and break the spells so, other than the theory that he is evil? Why would Bran do it, if he knows that it will cause the White Walkers to cross into the South? Also, if the spells were then gone, why didn't the wights attack at any stage between when Bran went south of the wall and when they did? Sure, getting a Dragon is an added bonus, but if they didn't need it to knock down the wall why wait? The Nights Watch had no way of killing them from afar, other than maybe fire arrows, and a few of those wight giants could easily knock out a few of the doors to Eastwatch/Castle Black etc.

Sleepy

Or Rhaegar didn't bother to annul his first marriage since the Targaryens were historically polygamous but the producers felt the annulment storyline was easier to sell to a TV audience...

I've enjoyed this season but the reduced number of episodes pissed me off. What the season was missing were the scenes that are cheapest to produce: the conversations between actors who had already been paid, in costumes and sets that were already made. Would it really have been *that* hard to find some decent writing talent to put some character development and exposition between the big CGI fests?

Liam McPoyle

One thing that annoyed me.

The whole Cersei truce angle.

She was safely off in her castle, everyone was going to go their separate ways and leave things as is. She comes back to say she will join them but isn't going to.

Like what was the point of that?

She told them to piss off.

Then changes her mind.

Then reveals that she isn't going to help them.

What benefit of lying to them was there?

She gains nothing as her plan would be revealed when none of her soldiers went off to fight the WW's anyway so lying to them was utterly pointless, wasn't it?

Unless her and Tyrion cut a deal and he is going to end up screwing everyone over.

johnnyskeleton

Daith wrote: »

Did Ned know that Jon wasn't a bastard though? Lyanna didn't tell him, otherwise Bran would have known.

So the heir to the Iron Throne wouldn't have come up? Just that Jon was a bastard Targ and to be kept safe?

The lost heir born in obscurity but returns to become the rightful king is a major theme in popular fantasy, most notably Aragorn in the Lord of the Rings and as parodied by Terry Pratchett in the Nightwatch series.

GRRM is a more subtle writer and the idea that someone is the secret Targaryen heir makes no odds. They would still have to seize the throne by force, and the people of the seven Kingdoms are still wary of the Targaryens.

I'm expecting the books to go down the route of R+L=Prince that was promised/Azor Ahai/fulfilling prophecy by dint of his bioloigical parentage rather than his notional legal lineage. I think the TV series is going in a different direction, using the more common "rightful heir" theme.

Daith

Business Cat wrote: »

She gains nothing as her plan would be revealed when none of her soldiers went off to fight the WW's anyway so lying to them was utterly pointless, wasn't it?

Nope, because it means all her main enemies are now up in the North. Even if Dany/Jon realise it the second they get off the ship, they can't fight a war on two fronts.

If Cersei had just said No, Dany mighn't have left Dragonstone.

johnnyskeleton

bnt wrote: »

I made this point earlier: Sansa tolerated LF at Winterfell because of the men of the Vale he brought along. They were crucial in the Battle of the Bastards and she needed them for the defence of Winterfell and the war to come. So LF couldn't just disappear, he had to be discredited in a way that allowed Sansa to keep the support of the Vale. When she got the nod from Lord Yohn Royce, LF's goose was cooked.

From further reading e.g. here, it seems that Royce was already highly suspicious of LF when it came to Lysa's death and knew he was seeking to control the Vale - so the end of LF suits Royce very nicely. I think we'll be seeing more of him.

Exactly. She was aware that Royce suspected Littlefinger and it was her testimony that kept him alive after Lysa's death. She could easily have said "actually I lied out of fear of Littlefinger" and that would be enough.

Again, I agree she couldn't dispatch LF without the Lords of the Vale's support (or at least them being outnumbered by loyal Northern Lords enough to prevent an attack), but she could easily win their trust because as above they suspected Littlefinger.

The bit I don't get is the elaborate scheming between Arya and Sansa. I suspect the TV series would explain it that Sansa only turned against LF when he revealed that he was trying to drive a wedge between her and Arya. Which would make sense if Sansa didn't go on about how he sold her to the Boltons. Sansa did not need Arya on side in order to try and execute LF.

Further, the idea that she was trying to trap LF makes little sense. Sure, it would be unfortunate if he ran off before trial, but Sansa's primary aim is to get rid of him from the North while keeping the Lords of the Vale on side. Revenge is a secondary motive if at all (it is a motive for Arya).

It was all just a bit too much of a 90s schlocky TV device rather than a well worked out plot.

johnnyskeleton

Daith wrote: »

Nope, because it means all her main enemies are now up in the North. Even if Dany/Jon realise it the second they get off the ship, they can't fight a war on two fronts.

If Cersei had just said No, Dany mighn't have left Dragonstone.

Dany wanted Cersei to agree to a truce so that she could bring all her forces up to the North. Cersei didn't need to pledge troops, she need only agree to the truce and Dany is gone, leaving time for Cersei to regroup.

The only possible reason is if in the show's logic Dany would have left a part of her army besieging KL and keeping Cersei hemmed in, but now she is not going to do that. But this doesn't really make sense - she could have done that anyway without a truce from Cersei. Equally, it's unlikely that Dany would trust Cersei and change her plans on Cersei's word (unless, of course, there is the Cersei/Tryion plot).

Daith

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Equally, it's unlikely that Dany would trust Cersei and change her plans on Cersei's word (unless, of course, there is the Cersei/Tryion plot).

Except that's exactly what happened which makes Jon and Dany (and Jaime!) idiots.

Also how will the Dothraki cope with the cold? I think Dany's army will be wiped out following the battles.

DM_7

Daith wrote: »

Bran didn't.

Ned would have needed proof but I guess we'll never actually know now.

Did Bran hear everything that Lyanna said first time around or only when he went back again this time?

Daith

DM_7 wrote: »

Did Bran hear everything that Lyanna said first time around or only when he went back again this time?

I think he heard everything. Was just a lazy trick to delay viewers knowing Jon's real name.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Daith

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

This does make sense, otherwise Bran would have told Sam what Jon's first name is, instead of fixating on Sand.

It's still poor writing. Bran zoomed out on hearing the name first?

.......

This post has been deleted.

Daith

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

The show writers made a choice in muting Jon's real name and delaying the reveal for a year. It's poor writing.

Bran is present for the name in the first flashback. He doesn't leave after the whisper.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Loafing Oaf

TheIrishGrover wrote: »

[*]Did we REALLY think that Cercie was gonna join forces after meeting with Mycroft banker a few weeks ago and mentioning the golden company?

I'm afraid I did, because I generally zone out of high-finance convos, just like in the so-called real world. I'm like Jaime, should have paid more attention when Tywin was talking about the importance of gold.:P

Less forgivably, I didn't see the Sansa/LF switch coming either.:o

Paddy Cow

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Why would the Three Eyed Raven allow him to go south of the wall and break the spells so, other than the theory that he is evil? Why would Bran do it, if he knows that it will cause the White Walkers to cross into the South? Also, if the spells were then gone, why didn't the wights attack at any stage between when Bran went south of the wall and when they did? Sure, getting a Dragon is an added bonus, but if they didn't need it to knock down the wall why wait? The Nights Watch had no way of killing them from afar, other than maybe fire arrows, and a few of those wight giants could easily knock out a few of the doors to Eastwatch/Castle Black etc.

The 3ER has seen the future. I would imagine that to defeat the NK once and for all, the NK has to go South. It's probably Jon with Dany's help that will kill him. The NK also has some sort of vision power which would be why they allowed Bran and Meera to get through the wall. Breaking the magic of the wall doesn't get rid of the 700 foot physical obstacle. They would still have to get through the gates which would have been near impossible for the wights. Their advantage is their sheer numbers and that it's really hard to "kill" them but they're not the brightest sparks. The ice dragon made it easy for the NK. He was waiting for Dany's dragons with an ice spear so he must have seen them in a vision.

The 3ER knew he would die and Bran would replace him so he sent him south to do whatever it is he is supposed to do, which is probably let Jon know his true heritage.

MrsFlushdraw

Daith wrote: »

Bran didn't.

Ned would have needed proof but I guess we'll never actually know now.

Unless there is a flashback scene with Ned and Howland Reed when he comes out the tower with the baby.

Paddy Cow

HandsomeBob wrote: »

I think it was just poorly done, as in no reason was given why Bran couldn't decipher Jon's real name the first name he went back, and why he could here.

DM_7 wrote: »

Did Bran hear everything that Lyanna said first time around or only when he went back again this time?

I just watched back the first time Bran was in the room and it looked like he was in shock watching the scene and didn't hear what Lyanna whispered to Ned. The second time he went back he was paying close attention.

martingriff

DM_7 wrote: »

Did Bran hear everything that Lyanna said first time around or only when he went back again this time?

When he went back in the second time as he only saw what we saw in season 6 as the then Third Eye Raven pulled him out

martingriff

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

I'm afraid I did, because I generally zone out of high-finance convos, just like in the so-called real world. I'm like Jaime, should have paid more attention when Tywin was talking about the importance of gold.:P

Less forgivably, I didn't see the Sansa/LF switch coming either.

That has been telegraphed so much that even a blind man should see it. I am just wondering was it a ploy all along or was it when LF tried to convice Sansa Arya wanted to be Lady Stark. Something Sansa knew couldn't be further from the truth

RobbingBandit

GerB40 wrote: »

The first season was basically all politics.

Point being?

This was the last episode of season seven, where was the carnage, The Mountain and The Hound should have had more than a squaring up, too much time was given to schemes and plotting, if the schemes and plots aren't already hatched the beginning of season eight will drag on ( ) I half expected Arya to have killed Littlefinger and been wearing his face already, Tyrion will be the betrayer of Dany next season to appease Cersei he has fallen for her faux pregnancy, I think Jon Connington will turn up too, I like that Euron made a pass at Dany telling her to go back to her island and he will go back to his to wait out winter.

The attack on the wall really should have got more time but in one sense the limited time it took for the dragon fire to cut through was an emphasis on how much damage will be done in an all out attack, seeing as that was Eastwatch if I recall where will Jon and Dany land with their envoy now and how long till the Night King gets to Castle Black or can he just March onwards now they have breached the wall.

Loafing Oaf

RobbingBandit wrote: »

can he just March onwards now they have breached the wall.

It seems to me the final reckoning between the living and the dead should logically be coming within the next couple of hours of screen time. Seems like some unforeseen obstacle to the NK's progress will have to emerge if the story is to be spun out over a full season...

Mr.Prodston

The whole Tyrion/Cersei now being in cahoots theory makes little sense to me.

Like, what does Tyrion stand to gain by betraying Dany? Save the family name? I'd have thought a man so keen in the art of baby making would have little problem in making that happen.

It sort of explains his expression on the boat but not really.

Or have I missed something?

Watching at the time I was confused as to why he was listening to the Wolf taming the Dragon but glossed over it with hell breaking loose at the wall.

Paddy Cow

martingriff wrote: »

When he went back in the second time as he only saw what we saw in season 6 as the then Third Eye Raven pulled him out

That was how I remembered it too but when I went to check on YouTube, Bran visited the Tower of Joy three times. The first time was season 6 episode 3 and he saw the fight between the kings guard and Ned and his men. Bran was shocked to discover that Ned didn't actually defeat Arthur Dayne. Arthur was stabbed from behind by Howland Reed. After the fight, Ned heard a woman scream and ran for the tower and Bran shouted "father". Ned heard him and turned around. It was at this stage the 3ER pulled Bran from the vision.

The second time was season 6 episode 10. Bran and Meera reached one of the wifi connection trees and Bran went back to the tower. He saw Lyanna lying in a pool of blood and Ned comforting her as she was about to die. We hear her clearly say "promise me Ned", "he'll kill him if he finds out", "his name is *whisper* *whisper*"

Bran realised then that Jon was Lyanna's son but he didn't realise the significance of this until his conversation with Sam. Some say it is lazy writing or drawing out the reveal but it makes sense to me. The first time Bran was there he was shocked about the way Ned "won" the fight with Arthur Dayne. If you look back at the scene, Bran is saying to the 3ER that Dayne is the better fighter but he knows his father won because he's heard the story a thousand times. The 3ER says something like "does he?"

The second time Bran is standing there watching what goes on between his father and Aunt. He finally realised that his "brother" Jon is actually not his brother and it's reasonable to me that he isn't paying too much attention to the whispers.

The first two times Bran sees the TOJ he is still very much Bran and seeing it disabuses him of everything he has learned all his life. By the time he meets Sam he is very much the new 3ER and is looking at things from a cold, analytical point of view. It makes complete sense to me. Bran has changed and so has his perspective.