Heresy 4

[Black Crow]

Welcome to the latest incarnation of the Heresy thread, so called because this is where we challenge the orthodoxy that sometime soon the Others are going to threaten all mankind and only our heroes can stop them.

Instead we look at who the Others really are, the seemingly human origin of the White Walkers and the possibility that there may be a link with the Starks, as well as slightly more mundane matters such as working out the true history of Westeros given that the official version as retold by Maester Luwin is riddled with inconsistencies, declared by Sam to be unreliable and admitted by GRRM to be “misty”.

The main thrust of what we've been discussing over these threads can be summarised as:

1. uncertainty as to whether the Wall was originally built to stop the Others many years after the Pact was agreed, or whether the Children unleashed the Winter and then used the Wall to hold it back after the First Men agreed to the Pact

2. a growing suspicion that Azor Ahai (whoever he was) belongs to the Andal period, when they slaughtered the Children in the six southern kingdoms

3. that the Night's Watch defeat of the Others in "The Night that Ended" also belongs to this period, possibly relating to the Night's King, and resulted in the final expulsion of the Children from the kingdoms below the Wall.

4. although not much discussed of late, the involvement of the Starks in all of this remains unclear but a connection to the Children and possibly the White Walkers seems a strong possibility.

Those preceding threads can be found below:

http://asoiaf.wester...ost__p__2822016

http://asoiaf.wester...ost__p__2858186

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/60387-heresy-3/

[Ibbison from Ibben]

1. uncertainty as to whether the Wall was originally built to stop the Others many years after the Pact was agreed, or whether the Children unleashed the Winter and then used the Wall to hold it back after the First Men agreed to the Pact

The premise that the CotF unleashed the Long Winter has never seemed sound to me, mainly for the reason that the CotF are remembered fondly north of the Neck. It also paints the CotF as rather incompetent. It's one thing to explore the possibility, but it is time to reject this and move on.

2. a growing suspicion that Azor Ahai (whoever he was) belongs to the Andal period, when they slaughtered the Children in the six southern kingdoms

I honestly have no idea how AA fits into the historical picture in Westeros. He may not be a part of it at all, and been a pure eastern legend, even if he will play a part in Westeros in the present.

3. that the Night's Watch defeat of the Others in "The Night that Ended" also belongs to this period, possibly relating to the Night's King, and resulted in the final expulsion of the Children from the kingdoms below the Wall.

This should be rejected due to the evidence provided by the Moat Cailin story.

4. although not much discussed of late, the involvement of the Starks in all of this remains unclear but a connection to the Children and possibly the White Walkers seems a strong possibility.

I find a relationship between the Others and the Starks entirely plausible, as long as a break between the two occurred with the Long Winter/Brandon the Builder. Perhaps it would be better to say that the proto-Others and the proto-Starks were related (or the same).

Good luck to you, Black Crow, and thank you.

[Eyron]

Thank you for starting us up again Black Crow!

From the last thread,

Kissdbyfire wrote:

Well, we don't know for a fact that the CotF didn't stay in the North, do we? What I mean is, we don’t know for sure when they fled North and disappeared altogether (South of the Wall).

We know that after the Andals slashed and burned the weirwoods and killed all the CotF they found in the South, they are said to have vanished from both South and North. We know there are several theories regarding this, we’re told one of them by maester Luwin; I don’t think he’s deliberately lying, but I’m not positive he actually knows the truth.

Remember, regardless of how accurate or inaccurate the timeline is, we’re still talking millennia. I think it’s quite possible that the CotF lingered in some areas in the North.

And, to have the NW and the northerners turning on the CotF because they were forced to by the Andals as some sort of price for peace is, in my opinion, out of the question.

I think the Andals vs. North (with all other species, CotF, what-have-you) war was, in a way, lost by the Andals, who never managed to get past the Neck and kinda gave up in the end. :dunno:

I agree one can say the Andals lost the war when they were halted at the Neck. That is why I wonder what happened after that point in time until now that made the hostility between the north and the Andals end and peace was made. At some point the Andals became part of the Night's Watch, I am not sure when, but there have been knights in the Watch for a long time.

I don't think they were forced to throw the Children out of the north either, but I think the Childrens departure could have been a ground for the Andals and the First Men to consiliate.

I don't think all the northmen were positive toward the Children even after the pact, they were enemies - not friends, even if the pact was made. When the Andals came I see a possibility for the dissident northmen to seize the moment and loose the Children, to claim the forests perhaps, or to get rid of the ever watching greenseers, or out of old enmity that never went away completely from the wars between the First men and the Children.

All northmen are not the same as the Reeds and the Starks so I think a few could have wanted the Children gone, you have suggested that the Boltons may have been involved in sorcery at some point, maybe in creating the White Walkers, so is it really out of the question that they collaborated with the Andals and drove (or hunted?) the Children out from the north too?

PS. Black Crow, it's been a pleasure discussing with you and everyone participating here, this the most interesting thread to me and I am glad you decided to share your theory with us back when you started the original thread!

Take good care and I hope to see you back here unbent, unbowed and unbroken :grouphug: to you and all.

[kissdbyfire]

Ah, the relief I felt when I saw the 'Heresy 4' thread on the ADwD section!

I can't stop to write now, but wanted to add one thought to the mix here to see what you guys think...

Hardhome - something big and nasty occurred there 600 years ago, i.e. 300BL. The description says the conflagration burned so hot that watchers on the Wall far to the south thought the sun was rising in the north and that afterwards ashes rained down on the Haunted Forest and the Shivering Sea for almost half a year. I don’t know much about volcanoes, but doesn’t this sound like something similar? I remember a couple of years ago with the volcano in Iceland and all airports closed because of the ash... Or something that fell from the sky (meteorite type thing) and causing an aftermath similar to what a volcano might have... Could the re-surfacing of the Others be connected to this? If we consider the Long Night as the first time they appeared, could that have happened because of some cataclysmic event as well? As I read it what I've just wrote, I think it doesn't make sense. But it does in my head, only I'm not elaborating it properly. :ack:

[FanTasy]

Thank goodness we opened a new heresy shop :D

[chrisdaw]

Leaf says,

"Most of him has gone into the tree," explained the singer Meera called Leaf. "He has lived beyond his mortal span, and yet he lingers. For us, for you, for the realms of men. Only a little strength remains in his flesh. He has a thousand eyes and one, but there is much to watch. One day you will know."

That was in the dawn of days, when our sun was rising. Now it sinks, and this is our long dwindling.

If the COTF are resigned to their extinction, what is that BR means/represents/does for/to them? Why would they have any stake in the future of a world of men? Particularly when it is men that they attribute to their decline.

And why are they resigned so? They did fight once, when/why did this change?

She seemed sad when she said it, and that made Bran sad as well. It was only later that he thought, Men would not be sad. Men would be wroth. Men would hate and swear a bloody vengeance. The singers sing sad songs, where men would fight and kill.

[Free Northman]

The Children are resigned to their own gradual dwindling, but as long as nature is preserved, and the weirwoods remain, the Children will live on in spirit. Hence their stake in preventing the Others from extinguishing all life on the planet.

[Lummel]

:commie: Hats off to Black Crow, proof that heresy is good for your health!

This should be rejected due to the evidence provided by the Moat Cailin story.

What are thinking of here in particular Ibbison? Could you fill that out a bit for me please?

I agree one can say the Andals lost the war when they were halted at the Neck. That is why I wonder what happened after that point in time until now that made the hostility between the north and the Andals end and peace was made. At some point the Andals became part of the Night's Watch, I am not sure when, but there have been knights in the Watch for a long time.

I don't think they were forced to throw the Children out of the north either, but I think the Childrens departure could have been a ground for the Andals and the First Men to consiliate.

I don't think all the northmen were positive toward the Children even after the pact, they were enemies - not friends, even if the pact was made. When the Andals came I see a possibility for the dissident northmen to seize the moment and loose the Children, to claim the forests perhaps, or to get rid of the ever watching greenseers, or out of old enmity that never went away completely from the wars between the First men and the Children.

All northmen are not the same as the Reeds and the Starks so I think a few could have wanted the Children gone, you have suggested that the Boltons may have been involved in sorcery at some point, maybe in creating the White Walkers, so is it really out of the question that they collaborated with the Andals and drove (or hunted?) the Children out from the north too?

It's all so mysterious.

OK as per a couple of posts it's possible the children just died out naturally in the Stark kingdom, but we know that the Children at one time delivered 100 obsidian arrowheads (?) to the watch every year up until a time recent enough that this was recorded in writing - but then it stopped for reasons unknown.

We know there were two big events in the history of the nights watch which might have some bearing, the fall of the Nights King and the arrival of Andals. Why did the Andals start to send their people to the Watch? Was it just because it was a useful way to get rid of people or did they believe in the purpose and function of the watch?

And what about the North? The Stark kingdom of winter didn't always exist. The Starks had to beat other rivals to become the top Direwolf like the Boltons or those people that they wrestled and won Bear Island from. Is Skagos part of their kingdom/territory? My point here is who manned the defences at Moat cailin against the Andals? The Starks? The Reeds? The Nights Watch? A coalition of the first men?

And if there was fighting in the North between different Kingdoms of the first men before the eventual Stark Victory was that the time that the Children were squeezed out, or fled to avoid taking sides? Or had they already left for the far north when The Wall was raised?

Hardhome - something big and nasty occurred there 600 years ago, i.e. 300BL. The description says the conflagration burned so hot that watchers on the Wall far to the south thought the sun was rising in the north and that afterwards ashes rained down on the Haunted Forest and the Shivering Sea for almost half a year. I don’t know much about volcanoes, but doesn’t this sound like something similar?

I thought it sounded like a volcano too, mind you I thought the doom of valyria sounded like a volcano as well.

What's important to me is that GRRM choose to invent Hardhome and he choose to end it in that dramatic sounding way. Doesn't help me understand what happened though.

[Lummel]

If the COTF are resigned to their extinction, what is that BR means/represents/does for/to them? Why would they have any stake in the future of a world of men? Particularly when it is men that they attribute to their decline.

And why are they resigned so? They did fight once, when/why did this change?

Yeah, I wondered if they brought Bloodraven and now Bran in as some kind of mercenaries to fight on their behalf because they knew that as men they would fight and rage and their behalf.

[Lummel]

The Children are resigned to their own gradual dwindling, but as long as nature is preserved, and the weirwoods remain, the Children will live on in spirit. Hence their stake in preventing the Others from extinguishing all life on the planet.

I agree that Leaf sounds resigned, but I think that the preservation of nature is an assumption. Leaf thinks that the Children, Giants, Direwolves & so on will die out - well that is nature dying out, not being preserved. Will weirwoods survive in the world that the Citadel is making?

That the Others, I assume you mean White Walkers here, want to extinguish all life is also a big assumption. We've seen them kill a few people, but they don't seem to have launched a full on all out assault on humans let alone on all life either - they seem more like vicious shepherds than anything else. I don't think we know what the White walkers want at this stage.

[Eyron]

The Children are resigned to their own gradual dwindling, but as long as nature is preserved, and the weirwoods remain, the Children will live on in spirit. Hence their stake in preventing the Others from extinguishing all life on the planet.

I'm not so sure, when they die maybe the singing would stop. No one would sing to the earth and to me it seems they think the singing is very important.

[Free Northman]

I agree that Leaf sounds resigned, but I think that the preservation of nature is an assumption. Leaf thinks that the Children, Giants, Direwolves & so on will die out - well that is nature dying out, not being preserved. Will weirwoods survive in the world that the Citadel is making?

That the Others, I assume you mean White Walkers here, want to extinguish all life is also a big assumption. We've seen them kill a few people, but they don't seem to have launched a full on all out assault on humans let alone on all life either - they seem more like vicious shepherds than anything else. I don't think we know what the White walkers want at this stage.

The point that Martin has repeatedly made in interviews is one that you guys supporting this theory seem to be misssing.

It is the point that while the Houses are involved in the petty squabbling and quest for power that is their Game of Thrones, the REAL threat is building up in the North, beyond the Wall.

This isn't some misinterpreted, exaggerated danger, which will turn out to be not so bad if people just understand the Others and what motivates them. Nope, this is the real, existential threat to all of mankind.

That's what Martin's entire story is about. The pointlessness of the Game of Thrones when the real threat is ignored by all but the ragged few outcasts guarding the Wall.

[chrisdaw]

The Children are resigned to their own gradual dwindling, but as long as nature is preserved, and the weirwoods remain, the Children will live on in spirit. Hence their stake in preventing the Others from extinguishing all life on the planet.

Seems most plausible, but being resigned to a gradual dwindling doesn't explain why they've reached this point.

Yeah, I wondered if they brought Bloodraven and now Bran in as some kind of mercenaries to fight on their behalf because they knew that as men they would fight and rage and their behalf.

I wonder more at a seemingly different stage of maturity for the two species. The COTF were at least once enough like men to fight.

[FanTasy]

I have to admit I was not into all sub-heresies on this thread, for instance the one where we're discussing Hardhome.

To make a short inventory of what seems to be important, and to raise some initial questions:

- Hardhome was seen as a town beyond the Wall, it was not just a settlement, Q could it have been the capital/residence of the King beyond the Wall?

- It is a natural harbor, big ships can enter

- It was attacked long before Aegon conquered Westeros, the people killed or taken into slavery Q was it just a raid from pirates or was it meant to end the reign of the King beyond the Wall?

- it was burned and there were exceptionally high fires, you could see them from the Wall Q vulcanic fires? dragon attack? wildfyre?

- after the devastation there were visits by rangers, they talked of demons, ghouls and ghosts living in the ruins, the wildlings thought it cursed

- after Mance was defeated Mother Mole, a woodswitch, led a party to seek refuge in Hardhome, with dire consequences. Again there was killing and people were taken into slavery Q just bad luck that history repeats itself? or were the people herded there by the woodswitch?

- the woodswitch has a name: Mother Mole Q is it coincidence that there is a Mole's Town on the other side of the Wall?

- Cotter Pyke who was sent there to save the wildlings saw that there were wights and dead things in the water Q did the wights were lured there because of the warm blood of the people taking refuge there? or where the wights herded there too?

The main question is, I think, is what happened at Hardhome just bad luck/piracy or is there an interested party in killing all wildlings or in gaining profits by taking them into slavery?

[Free Northman]

If I were the Children, I would have been in favor of some kind of "fumigation" of Westeros, whereby humans are cleansed from the continent while the Children hibernate in safety in warded strongholds while the Others and the long night sweep the continent clean of humans.

However, if that was the origin of the Others, then the Children who survive today are of a different, more peaceminded faction of their species, who chose to help humans, rather than stand aside and let them be eradicated.

[kissdbyfire]

I agree that Leaf sounds resigned, but I think that the preservation of nature is an assumption. Leaf thinks that the Children, Giants, Direwolves & so on will die out - well that is nature dying out, not being preserved. Will weirwoods survive in the world that the Citadel is making?

The way I see it, yes, nature is dying, and there's no room for other species in the world created by men... Unless men open their eyes and learn a lesson.

That the Others, I assume you mean White Walkers here, want to extinguish all life is also a big assumption. We've seen them kill a few people, but they don't seem to have launched a full on all out assault on humans let alone on all life either - they seem more like vicious shepherds than anything else. I don't think we know what the White walkers want at this stage.

I think it may be an assumption to infer the WWs willingly want to extinguish all life from the text; but they are beings whose existence renders the existence of other species - including CotF, humans, animals etc - impossible.

[FanTasy]

The point that Martin has repeatedly made in interviews is one that you guys supporting this theory seem to be misssing.

It is the point that while the Houses are involved in the petty squabbling and quest for power that is their Game of Thrones, the REAL threat is building up in the North, beyond the Wall.

This isn't some misinterpreted, exaggerated danger, which will turn out to be not so bad if people just understand the Others and what motivates them. Nope, this is the real, existential threat to all of mankind.

That's what Martin's entire story is about. The pointlessness of the Game of Thrones when the real threat is ignored by all but the ragged few outcasts guarding the Wall.

I agree that this is the big picture. But I have a hunch it will not be six books throne games and in the seventh book there will be suddenly a massive infestation of ice demons and ice spiders and hey presto, they are beaten - or not. The End.

The danger that is building up in the North and that is the real danger, is a bit more layered, I suspect.

That is why discussing timelines, the origins of the Wall and the origins and development of the Nights'Watch and what happened at Hardhome might be useful to understand the darkness that is gathering :eek:

[Lummel]

I wonder more at a seemingly different stage of maturity for the two species. The COTF were at least once enough like men to fight.

Well we know that in the beginning they fought the first men and they weren't afraid to fight dirty either and use magic. But it's debatable when they stopped fighting.

I think it may be an assumption to infer the WWs willingly want to extinguish all life from the text; but they are beings whose existence renders the existence of other species - including CotF, humans, animals etc - impossible.

Why do you think that? Curious what is in the text that convinces you that the existence of the white walkers will/does/could render the existence of other species impossible?

I like this idea of Mrazny from heresy 3

The Andals carved chests could have been Fiery Hearts that turned into a seven pointed star in theory, and vice versa, the seven pointed star could've been turned into a fiery heart at the onset of the Rh'lor religion. The actual origins of Rh'lor cult aren't very explicit. We know it's practised. We know someone in Volantis takes a title of High Priest. And we're told the Azor Ahai legend was written in books in Asshai 5000 years ago.

I think yes if you were carving a fire shape round your heart with a knife doing something that looked like a seven pointed star would be an esay way to do it.

[mrazny]

Good luck to you, Black Crow, and thank you.

Seconded, Thirded, 998th'd :cool4: (without the Jon Snow like end as well)

I've also thoroughly enjoyed that this thread has not really gotten "testy". And with how easy it is for forum talk to end up in that way, big props to all the posters in here, especially Black Crow. I think you engage discussions in practically the perfect way when it comes to overall forum decor and attitude.

I really due appreciate both your thoughts Ibbison and Free Northman, because a lot of the theory making does need to temper. As you've made sure about your point of view Free Northman, that some of the thoughts here in your opinion stray from the story as you have seen it in the novels. And when it goes to "defining history", yes it's pretty easy to go too deep at times, filling in legends in ways that don't necessarily apply to the story.

The premise that the CotF unleashed the Long Winter has never seemed sound to me, mainly for the reason that the CotF are remembered fondly north of the Neck. It also paints the CotF as rather incompetent. It's one thing to explore the possibility, but it is time to reject this and move on.

The aspect that at least i'm still intrigued by is the role of the Children if there was one. If they were involved, I don't believe it was a huge middle finger to Men, here's a ridiculous winter. I'm thinking it could've been an unintentional consequence for something else. Or if the White Walkers are cursed First Men that somehow the Children's knowledge or potential involvement led those men down that path.

I honestly have no idea how AA fits into the historical picture in Westeros. He may not be a part of it at all, and been a pure eastern legend, even if he will play a part in Westeros in the present.

This was the original order of your post, but I'm going to flip this to the bottom, as it's on my mind the most right now...

This should be rejected due to the evidence provided by the Moat Cailin story.

If I'm following you correctly, you reject this because the Night's King events occur before the Andal invasion, and since the Children were a presence at Moat Cailin during the invasion that this contradicts it as to the "why" the children end up no longer in the north. The ebb and flow of the presence of the Children are a lot of the contradictions within the legends. Their history and sequence of events would probably go a long way towards clarifying a lot of the issues presented on this thread.

I find a relationship between the Others and the Starks entirely plausible, as long as a break between the two occurred with the Long Winter/Brandon the Builder. Perhaps it would be better to say that the proto-Others and the proto-Starks were related (or the same).

I think I'm with you on this. I'm curious if the Night's King episode was the defining split within the Family.

I honestly have no idea how AA fits into the historical picture in Westeros. He may not be a part of it at all, and been a pure eastern legend, even if he will play a part in Westeros in the present.

As I said above, actually tempering these histories and associations with how they relate to the current story may be the single most helpful way to reconcile a lot of our thoughts on this thread. I put this thought forward in the Jaime and Bran thread, but instead of re-hashing that in the way it was, I'm going to reduce and start a bit from scratch in some shorthand;

Jaime as AA, a list of details, some newly presented...

Jaime as a prince, Tywin sacked King's Landing. Just based on the force that overthrew the current King, Tywin could've tried to claim the throne, Jaime would be his Prince. Only matters if the Prince that was Promised is AA reborn.

Jaime's weirwood dreams featured Brienne with a Flaming Sword, fighting shadows and darkness. (yes, this supports Brienne more than Jaime)

Brienne has many details that relate to Dunk, which you could then relate Jaime as Egg (this requires a jump for sure). That could fill the gap for PTWP needs to be a targ, hint that Jaime is a targ (ugh), yadayadayada. This requires a reference to D&E, so besides this being a nice reflection, this should really only be additional supporting evidence to go with other evidence, not the core of it IMO. Though Egg was a reluctant King (Jaime is reluctant to lead), Dunk wanted to keep Egg as the squire to a Hedge Knight to teach him humility and expose him to the true problems of the land and paint a more complete picture of Westeros. Brienne led Jaime along the way to a much more noble, honor bound and humble man by the end of the 5th book than the Jaime that pushes Bran out of the window. But I think the detail that's more important is...

Jaime's reflection about his past and his deeds lead him to remark how in his youth he wanted to be Arthur Dayne, not the Smiling Knight. As we've dived in a bit, Arthur Dayne, the Sword of Morning and the sword Dawn all have some descriptive parallels to potentially the base legend that AA or a similar legend to AA.

Jon gives us the orientation of the constellation "The Sword of Morning", it's in the south part of the sky. Dawn breaks in the east, the constellation though is in the south. The chicken before the egg issues are here, are the Dayne's the sword of Morning because they are from the south, and the constellation is in the south. Or did the deeds of the Dayne's lead to the Constellation being called that, them being called that, etc.

If AA and the Daynes are relatable, and Jaime wanted to be a Dayne, or follow of the spirit of the Sword of Morning, that would be Jaime wanted to personify the same role that could've been the basis of AA.

After all that, which has its own holes and things to reconcile, my next overall thought doesn't require AA reborn to be Jaime to still have it's truth whether in whole or in part, so to keep it specific instead of vague, I'll call the current legend maker Jaime for ease.

Jaime fulfills some great role in this story's ending. As reverence to Arthur Dayne, he seeks out and claims Dawn as his own sword (not needed, I'm just flavoring here). He plays his role in this battle against darkness, perhaps (and for me at least hopefully) proving the Dawn works against White Walkers. And even though the Starks are involved, King's Landing remembers Jaime, and perhaps over-glorifies his deeds.

The Seven proclaim him "Goldenhand" and "The Warrior personified". The North may or may not call him "the Last Hero come again", or even proclaim their Stark as the true Hero or what have you. The East doesn't neccesarily care about the Stark, latches onto Jaime, proclaims him Azor Ahai reborn even though he never converted or gave a damn about Rh'lor, and since no one in the east knows a thing about Jaime Lannister, they don't even know that he wasn't a servant of Rh'lor necessarily.

The two parts to this thought that I think are important are these: Whomever fulfiles the PTWP and AA reborn won't necessarily have a single thing to do with Rh'lor. (the quick aside here is AA *reborn* wields Lightbringer, it doesn't say he forges a new one) And I just presented the case of how the Rh'lor followers in the east can latch onto a Westeros Legend and make it their own without great stretches of imagination, just some liberties which of course religions never take, right?

If my theory is correct, Dawn is translucent, and when light hits it the right way in the morning it looks like it's on fire. There's plenty of room for other fantasy style interventions, like maybe Dawn bursts into flames when introduced to the white cold that the White Walkers appear in. But in either case, the only thing that would matter to the east would be the potentially embellished story of the Westeros legend that makes them think he wielded Lightbringer.

I'm hopeful that if there is substance to our discussions here, it becomes a reflection on the *how* our Starks can fulfill their destinies within the confines of the story. Perhaps the Stark related history to the White Walkers is a parable to how Bran has to be careful with his new abilities to avoid corruption, or a much sadder revisit of history where Bran has to help overthrow his Night's King come again Jon Snow brother. I'm personally hopeful its not the latter, but I wouldn't pose that as not a GRRM possibility that Jon will take a sinister turn, or more likely if it goes that way, a misguided turn where his vengence comes at a great price, and Jon Snow becomes much like Lady Stoneheart, and play off their tension with Bran the most loved of Catelyn's children needing to stop her as well.

I'm okay with giving the story time, I'm just endlessly intrigued by a lot of these details. And if in the end these discrepancies are just errors that weren't caught in editing, I'm most like to completely forgive them.

[Lummel]

The point that Martin has repeatedly made in interviews is one that you guys supporting this theory seem to be misssing.

It is the point that while the Houses are involved in the petty squabbling and quest for power that is their Game of Thrones, the REAL threat is building up in the North, beyond the Wall.

This isn't some misinterpreted, exaggerated danger, which will turn out to be not so bad if people just understand the Others and what motivates them. Nope, this is the real, existential threat to all of mankind.

That's what Martin's entire story is about. The pointlessness of the Game of Thrones when the real threat is ignored by all but the ragged few outcasts guarding the Wall.

With the exception of your third paragraph I don't think anybody disagrees with you. We've read AGOT, we see the sinister presence of the white walkers at the beginning and we see the dragons born at the end but in between we see the game of thrones - people playing at politics without enough concern about these threats at the edges of the book.

Well what about the existential threat? We don't see any sign of this directly in the book. There's a story from Old Nan that links the white walkers to an existential threat - but that threat is endless winter not a conquering army. Both the white walkers and the winter seem magical in nature - so we ask who's doing the magic and why?

Secondly who believes in the idea of there being an existential threat in the story? Melisandre. Well for one thing she is never wrong, not ever, it is known. And for a second, how comfortable are you in taking Melisandre as the moral heart of the story? Are we meant to take her as our leading white hat?

Lastly ASOIAF is layered. We have character and situations that become more complex as the series progresses. It has conflicting and overlapping dynamic struggles between different groups of people. Characters who we start off thinking are good or bad generally turn out to have complex motivations and their own drives that don't fit comfortably under a white or black hat - why should we think that it will be any different with the White walkers?