55 replies to this topic

[sarah.jenice]

Child of Spring, on 22 March 2012 - 03:00 AM, said:

If I remember correctly, it's said somewhere in the book that the magic died with the dragons. So now that the dragons are reborn, the magic is "reborn" as well.

Maester Luwin to Bran in AGoT I think. Not 100 percent sure.

[Jojen]

She's an odd one, that's for sure. In ADWD she encourages Jon's warging, and so far with all her burning, she hasn't tried to burn any weirwoods. That's not exactly the kind of behavior we'd expect from a Red Priest.

She did burn the "Horn of Winter," as far as we know, but she could have used some magic to make it look like that's what happened. I think at this point, she's more about Mel and less about Red Rahloo.

I wonder what Moqorro and Benerro would think about that.

[jarl the climber]

Jojen, on 22 March 2012 - 04:56 PM, said:

She's an odd one, that's for sure. In ADWD she encourages Jon's warging, and so far with all her burning, she hasn't tried to burn any weirwoods. That's not exactly the kind of behavior we'd expect from a Red Priest.

She did burn the "Horn of Winter," as far as we know, but she could have used some magic to make it look like that's what happened. I think at this point, she's more about Mel and less about Red Rahloo.

I wonder what Moqorro and Benerro would think about that.

She did burn the Godswood at Storms End after Stannis took it from Penrose.

If she can seduce Jon would she give birth to a shadow or would she lay an egg, a dragon egg

[Jojen]

True, I forgot about the Godswood at Storm's End. She hasn't burned any up North, though, where folks still follow the Old Ways.

Either she's getting all the power she needs now from the Wall, or she's taking a more pragmatic approach by not doing TOO much that would turn the North against her and Stannis.

[kissdbyfire]

Melisandre also made the wildlings throw weirwood branches in her bloody fires at the Wall. And wasn't there some talk of Jon having to burn the weirwood at Winterfell if he accepted Stannis offer?

[Sasha Steelsong]

Kissdbyfire, on 22 March 2012 - 05:52 PM, said:

Melisandre also made the wildlings throw weirwood branches in her bloody fires at the Wall. And wasn't there some talk of Jon having to burn the weirwood at Winterfell if he accepted Stannis offer?

I think that was good part of why Jon eventually said no. He was generally uncomfortable with the idea of Winterfell being his (since it wasn't supposed to be) but it was the idea that in order to claim it he would have to destroy the Godswood that was sort of the final straw because it would be like cutting out Winterfell's heart.

[kissdbyfire]

atpthornton, on 22 March 2012 - 06:10 PM, said:

I think that was good part of why Jon eventually said no. He was generally uncomfortable with the idea of Winterfell being his (since it wasn't supposed to be) but it was the idea that in order to claim it he would have to destroy the Godswood that was sort of the final straw because it would be like cutting out Winterfell's heart.

Just so.

[aspasia]

the maester, on 21 March 2012 - 08:20 PM, said:

WHat's so special about king's blood anyway?

One theory:   In any man who is truly a king, that is, one who rules a realm and is obeyed by subjects, a magical nature resides, made up of the respect and obedience and belief men invest in kingship.  Men believe in a mystic aspect of kingship, some mystery of anointing, of special blessing by gods.  There's not much to go on yet about the way magic works in this fictional universe, but blood and fire are supposed to be the basis of Valyrian sorcery; there's no reason that kingship could not have a magical aspect.  Ther may be some clue in the way Jon asked Rayder if he were "truly" a king, and wat he meant had nothing to do with inheritance, but with whether or not Mance could rule the wildlings and whether they would obey him.  A true king may have nothing to do with whether or not the word is used by a person... like Theon claiming to be a future king, hah! Drogo and Mance may have been true kings whereas Viserys never was, no matter how many times he insisted that he was the real king of Westeros.

Or maybe Melisandre is just wrong about the whole business.

I do rather like the way the perception of her character transforming, slowly, from the way we are shown her first in Cressen's view, as an evil witch, to a more and more sympathetic and possibly good person,  The initial view of her as a bad witch who murders Cressen is kind of like the "first impressions" of Rhaegar as a vile rapist or Jaime LAnnister as a heartless childkiller.  SHe does not in fact murder Cressen; he kills himself in the attempt to kill her, and she tries to stop him from going through with it ("IT is not too late to spill the wine, maester.") but GRRM sets us up to go along with Cressen's view of her by how lovable the old maester is and how sorry we feel for him and how wrong it seems to be that he dies.

I found myself actually irritated with how suspicious Jon was of her, the way he kept acting like everything about her was probably evil and everything she says false.  Perhaps it feels like undue arrogance in Jon, that he keeps imagining Melisandre is plotting to deceive him, as though he is somehow so important to whatever she's up to that she would take the trouble to lie to him constantly and manipulate him and trick him every time she breathes.  Does he really NOT believe that she's sincerely devoted to war against the Others?  Isn't that what Jon thinks is most important as well?  Given the fact that Melisandre is almost the only person who seems really to grasp how important this oncoming winter is, and how endangered are the realms of men, shouldn't he give her some crumb of credit?  She's practically the only person not in the Night's Watch who believes the Others are real (not that all of the black brothers seem to get it yet, either) and that all the squabbling to the south is about to become irrelevant, and the world overrun by wights wearing little lions and wolves and fish on their chests.

[Prince of Dragonstone]

I agree with everything you said. I love how we are lead to believe that Melisandre is a malevolent character, The evil "Red Witch of Asshai" but then slowly throughout the series we come to learn that she is right about the core of her mission; to save the realm of men from the Great Other and his undead minions. The *means* by which she tries to obtain her goals is wrong and horrible, of course. That's why the character is so brilliant. Like so many other ASoIaF characters we don't know whether to root for them or despise them. She calls for the sacrifice of people by burning...even children. She burns ancient relics like weirwood trees and the statues of the Faith of the Seven. She has prophetic visions that are often misleading. She also uses trickery and shadow magic. But the root of her cause IS good. It's hard to pin this lady down and that's why I find her so fascinating. My attention always perks up when the Red Witch appears....

[Lady Octarina]

Apple Martini, on 22 March 2012 - 04:55 AM, said:

Nonsense. She likely saw the deaths in her flames and tricked Stannis into thinking she was responsible using the leech theatrics. No evidence whatsoever she had any influence at all in actually getting the jobs done.

I like this interpretation, especially considering it can be based in historical evidence, which Martin seems to love. I mean, her use of leeches could be like the Indian leaders who, throughout the Americas, learned about when an eclipse of the sun would occur then trick others into believing that they were responsible for it.

atpthornton, on 22 March 2012 - 02:04 PM, said:

I agree...as magic has arguably been rising since the first chapter where we first meet the Others. They were definitely up and about before the dragons were hatched so something was cooking before the dragons were born.  That said I think the dragons turned what was a very small trickle of magic back into the world into more of a steady flow given how people can perform so much more magic so suddenly after they were born.  I also think there is a dam waiting to break and that there will be significantly more magic as we get closer to the end.

I agree with this. Also, as I said in another thread, I believed dragons might only have returned to the world because the Others have risen once more.

sarah.jenice, on 22 March 2012 - 03:11 PM, said:

Maester Luwin to Bran in AGoT I think. Not 100 percent sure.

Luwin might simply be reflecting the Citadel's hopes and illusions, since their killing the dragons was probably an attempt to eliminate magic from the world, allowing it to work according to the laws the maesters actually understood.

aspasia, on 28 March 2012 - 10:12 PM, said:

One theory:   In any man who is truly a king, that is, one who rules a realm and is obeyed by subjects, a magical nature resides, made up of the respect and obedience and belief men invest in kingship.  Men believe in a mystic aspect of kingship, some mystery of anointing, of special blessing by gods.  There's not much to go on yet about the way magic works in this fictional universe, but blood and fire are supposed to be the basis of Valyrian sorcery; there's no reason that kingship could not have a magical aspect.  Ther may be some clue in the way Jon asked Rayder if he were "truly" a king, and wat he meant had nothing to do with inheritance, but with whether or not Mance could rule the wildlings and whether they would obey him.  A true king may have nothing to do with whether or not the word is used by a person... like Theon claiming to be a future king, hah! Drogo and Mance may have been true kings whereas Viserys never was, no matter how many times he insisted that he was the real king of Westeros.

[Ned Stark's Ghost]

Maroucia, on 21 March 2012 - 12:07 PM, said:

What is so special with king’s blood anyway? The Targaryens have been Kings for only 300 years, even worse, the Baratheons for one generation… I don’t get how the blood of a man who was born a regular noble guy can chance to have special powers after he gets crowned, like with Robert after the rebellion. The same can be said of the Targaryens who once invaded Westeros, so it’s not like they are really legitimate either.

maybe this means she needs stark blood? the only bloodline who have been in power since the age of heroes?

question, if the starks are descended from Bran the Builder and are therefore from the First Men, would the bannisters also be descended from the first men, since they come from Lann the Clever??

[theWesterosi]

aspasia, on 28 March 2012 - 10:12 PM, said:

I found myself actually irritated with how suspicious Jon was of her, the way he kept acting like everything about her was probably evil and everything she says false.  Perhaps it feels like undue arrogance in Jon, that he keeps imagining Melisandre is plotting to deceive him, as though he is somehow so important to whatever she's up to that she would take the trouble to lie to him constantly and manipulate him and trick him every time she breathes.  Does he really NOT believe that she's sincerely devoted to war against the Others?  Isn't that what Jon thinks is most important as well?  Given the fact that Melisandre is almost the only person who seems really to grasp how important this oncoming winter is, and how endangered are the realms of men, shouldn't he give her some crumb of credit?  She's practically the only person not in the Night's Watch who believes the Others are real (not that all of the black brothers seem to get it yet, either) and that all the squabbling to the south is about to become irrelevant, and the world overrun by wights wearing little lions and wolves and fish on their chests.

In a land where magic and sorcery stems from a shadowy place called Asshai, which people fear to speak of, it is natural for anyone to feel skeptical and doubtful about a person from that place. Yes, both Jon and Melisandre share the common concern, i.e. protection of Westeros from the Others, but Jon seems to give more preference in first, organizing a huge army (which includes the wildlings), and then, probably, heed what Melisandre would want to say.

Throughout Dance, we could see how Jon was fussed with having the wildlings well-fed and given towers to occupy, which meant that more than what Melisandre or the Night's brothers thought about him siding with the wildlings, his main concern was to guard the wall in the most organized way he possibly could before things got out of hand. In this process, needless to say, he chose to ignore Melisandre, except when he came to her to ask about Stannis and the girl in grey. But when the girl turned out to be Alys instead of Arya, I'm sure Jon lost the little bit of faith he had in Melisandre's fires.

Also, I don't believe that the Night's watch does not believe in the Others. They faced them beyond the wall, and they know that they're out there. But having fought wildlings for years and years put together, I feel they seemed to leave the matter of Others to take a back seat when Jon decided to bring the wildlings over to this side to fight along side each other. But in their minds, I'm sure they know that Winter ain't too far.

[Mummer's Arse]

Apple Martini, on 22 March 2012 - 04:55 AM, said:

Nonsense. She likely saw the deaths in her flames and tricked Stannis into thinking she was responsible using the leech theatrics. No evidence whatsoever she had any influence at all in actually getting the jobs done.

That makes so much sense. I was really uneasy with the idea that Mel was somehow responsible for the faceless man killing Balon.

sarah.jenice, on 22 March 2012 - 03:09 PM, said:

I'm not sure about the king's blood, but doesn't Maester Aemon back it up and say she is correct? I can't remember.

He does, warning Jon about Stannis just before he leaves for Oldtown.

[Prince of Dragonstone]

Ned Stark, on 29 March 2012 - 09:21 AM, said:

maybe this means she needs stark blood? the only bloodline who have been in power since the age of heroes?

question, if the starks are descended from Bran the Builder and are therefore from the First Men, would the bannisters also be descended from the first men, since they come from Lann the Clever??

True, Lann the Clever was of the First Men, but the Lannister bloodline has become so infused with the Andals and their traditions over the years, like all men south of the Neck, that they are considered of Andal extraction themselves.

[Jojen]

That makes me think of the line from Excalibur: "You and the land are one." So in that case, maybe the older the blood and its lineage is also connected to the health of the land itself, sort of like the story of the Fisher King. Because of this, the oldest blood is the most potent, especially if it's that of the First Men (due to their connection with the Children and the Old Gods).

[bent branch]

It is important to remember TPTWP prophecy in understanding Mel's confusion over seeing Jon in relation to AA. She knows that AA was to be born of the Targaryen line. As far as Mel knows Jon has no Targaryen blood.