Heresy 187

[Melifeather]

9 hours ago, Tyryan Lannister said:

Couldn't it be that Iron Throne is a central plot element, not in and of itself, but rather because it is entwined with the overall conflict?

Two things to consider:

1) the Iron Throne is ultimately the product of Fire.  It was created by dragon's fire--the ultimate embodiment of powers of the side of Fire--from the swords that previously belonged to now deceased or conquered lords who were brought into submission by those very same dragons.

2) More so than anything else, the Iron Throne represents the culmination of millennia of warfare which led to a Conquest of Westeros.  This Conquest was not only one of a particular group of people lording it over others, but also one of Man conquering Nature, and, in doing so, bringing Fire into the fore.

 

The Iron Throne is central not just because it has been the center piece for five published, and at least one to be published, books, but also because it's very existence poses a threat to Balance.  This Balance has long been lacking from Westeros; this Balance is inherent in the Old Oath, as given by Jojen and Meera to Bran ("I swear it by earth and water. I swear it by bronze and iron.  We swear it by ice and fire.") and the World is finally trying to find its new equilibrium.

Very well said. And I might add to this since Aegon the Conqueror united the seven kingdoms, Euron seems destined to tear them apart...at least symbolically:

“Balon was mad, Aeron is madder, and Euron is maddest of them all.” The young lord had tried to sail home after the kingsmoot, refusing to accept Euron as his liege. But the Iron Fleet had closed the bay, the habit of obedience was rooted deep in Victarion Greyjoy, and Euron wore the driftwood crown. Nightflyer was seized, Lord Blacktyde delivered to the king in chains. Euron’s mutes and mongrels had cut him into seven parts, to feed the seven green land gods he worshiped.

The sentence about how Balon was mad, Aeron madder, and Euron maddest of all echoes the madness said to be inherent in the Targaryens. Euron has sent Victarion after Dany and her dragons, and if successful he seems poised to tear the Seven Kingdoms apart as symbolized by what he did to Baelon Blacktyde. If the wheel of time is running in reverse, then the separation of the realm is part of the reversal.

 

[SerTarod]

Literally the Iron Throne (as the prize of the Game of Thrones) is still the central theme in this saga. Of all the main characters and story arches, from Mereen (Dany et al) and the Daughters of Valaria (sp) to the seven kingdoms, ONLY Jon is worried about the Others. Everyone else in the Kingdoms and neighbours are ONLY and PURELY concerned with the outcome of the Game. This is as per the current 5 books. IMHO it will either take a deus ex machina (and the author has said that will not happen) to turn the story around, alternatively, the story by its current pace will take several books more than currently appreciated to get there (nods to Phillip and his friend).

 

The following characters, that may be interested in the Others, well their intentions are unknown and still a matter of speculation:

Bran,  Quiathe, Marvyn, Maesters in general and Euron, etc.

 

[Tucu]

The Game of Thrones was central at the beginning of the story. Now it is just background fight weakening the Westeros forces while the Song of Ice and Fire is playing.

[Other other stark]

Not sure how to tie this in. But the Starks and the north forgot. Somebody knows the Starks need there army. With all the conflicts I think they could not figure out where to place all the chips and all th kids got wolves. Bran fell(opportunity seized for the greenseers), arya and Sansa went south so there out for now, Robb then went south so he's out, then there is Jon. Being courted by snowflakes and watched by the others. The iron throne is/was important until now. despite Jon being the chosen commander it's unclear wether he actually will or need to lead the walkers and the dead or defeat them. Sadly it's also not clear whether Jon and bran will not see eye to eye on this subject. It's clear to me a greenseers may not just be the one helping to raise the army. But actually guiding them. Giving Intel to the commander to help with strikes and strategizing 

[SerTarod]

1 hour ago, Tucu said:

The Game of Thrones was central at the beginning of the story. Now it is just background fight weakening the Westeros forces while the Song of Ice and Fire is playing.

I appreciate that, but its strange that this major theme is playing out with little or no interest from the main characters and 1 or 2 individuals worrying about it isn't enough (for me anyway).

[Tucu]

1 hour ago, SerTarod said:

I appreciate that, but its strange that this major theme is playing out with little or no interest from the main characters and 1 or 2 individuals worrying about it isn't enough (for me anyway).

Jon, Bran,Dany, Arya, Sam, Melisandre, Jamie, Davos, Aeron, Tyrion, Theon, Jamie and Victarion are POV characters already involved in the Song of Ice and Fire. The build-up might be slow for some of them, but is clearly present.

[Matthew.]

1 minute ago, Tucu said:

Jon, Bran,Dany, Arya, Sam, Melisandre, Jamie, Davos, Aeron, Tyrion, Theon, Jamie, Victarion are already POV characters involved in the Song of Ice and Fire. The build-up might be slow for some of them, but is clearly present.

Several of those characters are also involved in the game of thrones, which is why trying to disentangle the political and magical plots is misguided. Euron is a prime example of a character who sees the "larger conflict" (whatever that is) as the catalyst to place himself on the Iron Throne in a remade world.

The "Prince that was Promised" is clearly a part of the Song of Ice and Fire - both terms are introduced hand-in-hand in the text - and regardless of what the prophecy ultimately means, there are several in-world characters that have clearly inferred that it specifically implies an element of kingship, though whether they're correct is questionable.

It's also worth questioning why the Iron Throne was created in the first place. What was driving Aegon the Conqueror? He isn't a revolutionary, who was trying to upend the old order like Dany did in Meereen; he didn't care for day to day rule, he was content to leave that to his sisters; he wasn't trying to restore Valyria, he actually helped suppress an attempt at a Valyrian restoration; he took no joy in combat, and he only rode his dragon for travel and combat, suggesting a utilitarian relationship.

What, then, motivated such an audacious act? Did the descendent of Daenys the Dreamer have reason to believe that a united Westeros was important?

[Matthew.]

I actually don't disagree with the idea that destroying the IT may play a part in the ending, especially depending on whether or not King's Landing will be "sacrificed" (how much of the wildfire caches were used in the most recent episode of The Adaptation That Must Not Be Referenced?).

But if we're saying that the desire for the throne is destructive - and it is - does this end that evil? If this is all leading to an ending that repudiates feudalism, I would say it makes sense if the concept of the IT no longer exists, but if the IT is simply replaced by several lesser thrones, all of which could generate future civil wars, I don't know if that exactly communicates the message.

Edit: Put another way, an ending that isn't more politically revolutionary just replaces "squabbling over the Iron Throne" with "squabbling over who's King of the North, King of the Vale, King of the Iron Islands..."

[Tucu]

15 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

Several of those characters are also involved in the game of thrones, which is why trying to disentangle the political and magical plots is misguided. Euron is a prime example of a character who sees the "larger conflict" (whatever that is) as the catalyst to place himself on the Iron Throne in a remade world.

The "Prince that was Promised" is clearly a part of the Song of Ice and Fire - both terms are introduced hand-in-hand in the text - and regardless of what the prophecy ultimately means, there are several in-world characters that have clearly inferred that it specifically implies an element of kingship, though whether they're correct is questionable.

It's also worth questioning why the Iron Throne was created in the first place. What was driving Aegon the Conqueror? He isn't a revolutionary, who was trying to upend the old order like Dany did in Meereen; he didn't care for day to day rule, he was content to leave that to his sisters; he wasn't trying to restore Valyria, he actually helped suppress an attempt at a Valyrian restoration; he took no joy in combat, and he only rode his dragon for travel and combat, suggesting a utilitarian relationship.

What, then, motivated such an audacious act? Did the descendent of Daenys the Dreamer have reason to believe that a united Westeros was important?

Aegon conquest could have very mundane causes (guy with big dragons living in a small rocky island next to a desunited land) or it could be related to old Valyrians prophecies about the prince that was promised and that the doom of man would come from the west (Aegon attempting to stop the inevitable)

[Tucu]

12 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

I actually don't disagree with the idea that destroying the IT may play a part in the ending, especially depending on whether or not King's Landing will be "sacrificed" (how much of the wildfire caches were used in the most recent episode of The Adaptation That Must Not Be Referenced?).

But if we're saying that the desire for the throne is destructive - and it is - does this end that evil? If this is all leading to an ending that repudiates feudalism, I would say it makes sense if the concept of the IT no longer exists, but if the IT is simply replaced by several lesser thrones, all of which could generate future civil wars, I don't know if that exactly communicates the message.

Edit: Put another way, an ending that isn't more politically revolutionary just replaces "squabbling over the Iron Throne" with "squabbling over who's King of the North, King of the Vale, King of the Iron Islands..."

I would call the establishment of Iron Throne and the recent fights over it minor notes in the much larger song of ice and fire.

[Matthew.]

11 minutes ago, Tucu said:

I would call the establishment of Iron Throne and the recent fights over it minor notes in the much larger song of ice and fire.

But what is the Song of Ice and Fire? Are we accepting Melisandre's dualistic world view as essentially correct, that this is an eternal battle between good and evil? I don't buy her interpretation.

As far as the story goes, the "Fire" is Dany, and desire for the IT is the primary thing that makes her a threat--she doesn't even need the dragons, the very nature of her desires promises strife for Westeros. The end goal of the war for the IT is the same thing as the end goal for Dany, the Fire Priests, and the various other figures on the Fire side: dominion over men. Even the Others embody this, with the enthralled wight horde.

[Black Crow]

3 hours ago, Tucu said:

The Game of Thrones was central at the beginning of the story. Now it is just background fight weakening the Westeros forces while the Song of Ice and Fire is playing.

Thats certainly how its portrayed in the original synopsis with Westeros facing three threats: the first book being devoted to the game of thrones, the second to Daenerys the last of the Dragonlords tooling up with her Dothraki, and yes taking the Iron Throne, but then the third threat is the blue-eyed lot from the North and somehow I sense a certain lack of interest on their part as to the Iron Throne.

[Tucu]

6 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

But what is the Song of Ice and Fire? Are we accepted Melisandre's dualistic world view as essentially correct?

As far as the story goes, the "Fire" is Dany, and desire for the IT is the primary thing that makes her a threat--she doesn't even need the dragons, the very nature of her desires promises strife for Westeros. The end goal of the war for the IT is the same thing as the end goal for Dany, the Fire Priests, and the various other figures on the Fire side: dominion over men. Even the Others embody this, with the enthralled wight horde.

Probably the story of the 8000 year confrontation between fire and ice magic causing the imbalance of the seasons as remembered by the Weirwoods.

[Matthew.]

15 minutes ago, Tucu said:

Probably the story of the 8000 year confrontation between fire and ice magic causing the imbalance of the seasons as remembered by the Weirwoods.

I suppose I'll just have to chalk this up to a disagreement in interpretation. I don't believe that fire and ice in and of themselves have intent, or are naturally at war with one another, nor do I believe that there's any Great Other or R'hllor equivalent. In my view, there's magic, and there's the superstition that men apply to that magic.

To revisit the Mel example, I don't believe it's inevitable that "Fire" must wage some eternal war on the Others, or the CotF, or w/e--the war doesn't exist because the cosmos demands it, it exists because humans like Melisandre believe it exists, and fuel the war through that act of fanaticism. We could cite the Reed's oath, as well as comments like "the land is one" for the opposite view.

Since the army of fire is the only side we have insight into, I would say the core story there is still the same as the one that's fueling the political story: "Bow to me because I'm Azor Ahai" is not so far off from "bow to me, because I'm sitting the Iron Throne." Dany, Benerro, Euron, etc. all still have fundamentally political goals, even if magic is the medium they're using to achieve those goals.

[Tyryan Lannister]

While discussing importance of the Iron Throne, I feel we would be amiss if we didn't also address the whole "must be a Stark in Winterfell" thing, particularly since we don't know what it actually means, nor do you know the origin or implications of not following through on it are.

 

I have this hunch that the mere existence of the Iron Throne and what it symbolizes (a non-Stark ruling Westeros/the North) is in conflict with whatever is going on with the "Stark in Winterfell" conundrum, i.e. the magical forces could be the final culmination in the conflict set in motion either when Torrhen knelt or when Aerys killed the Ruling Stark*.

 

 

*On that note, due to none coming to mind, do we have any examples besides what Aerys and Joffrey did to Rickard/Brandon and Ned, respectively, of someone offing the Ruling Stark?  To the best of my memory, all the other stories of Stark conflict revolved around the heirs being tormented, not the Ruling Stark himself.

[Black Crow]

Meanwhile, somewhere in the Dornish Marches…

“I spy with my little eye,” said Dayne as he polished his sword. “Something beginning with R”

“Rock,” replied Whent with utter certainty

“Got it in one, go on, it’s your turn”

“I spy something beginning with R”

“Need something different”

“It is different, it’s a red rock”

“They’re all bloody red,” pointed out Hightower, scratching his crotch moodily. “Anyway, its past time to go and get the bread and milk, two pints, and see if you can get a paper while you’re at it”

“It’ll be out of date. Always is. And so’s the milk”

“I’m not bothered about the news, it’s always the same. I want to do the crossword”

“You did one of them before”

“Didn’t finish it though, did I? You got caught short that night, remember?”

“Bloody sour milk, sorry about that”

“I hear the Dothraki drink themselves silly on the stuff once its fermented”

“Might try that,” commented Dayne, wistfully.  “Getting beastly drunk has to be better than staring at rocks”

“Well who’s fault is that? Who was it got her preggers and then his nibs turns round and puts on his sanctimonious go to meeting face and says it won’t be fair to take you off to the wars and let the little bastard grow up without ever seeing his father”

“Not my fault… well I suppose it is, but what about you two?”

“Ah high politicks that one,” says Hightower loftily, then produces his famous impersonation of the last best hope of House Targaryen;  ‘I’m going to speak VERY FIRMLY to Pater about my allowance,’ says he,’and I know you can’t stand the sight of blood’

“Smell of burnt toast more like, knowing his Old Man” grumbled Whent .

“Speaking of toast, are you going for the bread or not?”

“Not my turn, I did the washing up last night”

“I don’t care, I’m the Lord Commander and what I say goes… hullo… what’s this? Riders!”

“Can’t be the guy to read the gas meter, he came last week.”

“And there’s seven of them”

“Oh shit” muttered Dayne. “Seven; warrior, smith, maiden, mother, crone and all that jazz… It’s the bloody Jehovah’s Witnesses!”

[Melifeather]

I think we will learn in future books that the Children "called" for the Targaryens to come to Westeros. Harren the Black was cutting down too many weirwood trees to build his castle, and the Andal's fanaticism was also removing heart trees from southern castles. The Targaryens were able to defeat remnants of the First Men as well as the Andals, uniting the Seven Kingdoms. The Targaryens seem like the closest to a "happy medium" compared to the First Men who perhaps abused magic at one end of the spectrum with the Andals who actively tried to eliminate magic at the other end.

[Tyryan Lannister]

31 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

I suppose I'll just have to chalk this up to a disagreement in interpretation. I don't believe that fire and ice in and of themselves have intent, or are naturally at war with one another, nor do I believe that there's any Great Other or R'hllor equivalent. In my view, there's magic, and there's the superstition that men apply to that magic.

To revisit the Mel example, I don't believe it's inevitable that "Fire" must wage some eternal war on the Others, or the CotF, or w/e--the war doesn't exist because the cosmos demands it, it exists because humans like Melisandre believe it exists, and fuel the war through that act of fanaticism. We could cite the Reed's oath, as well as comments like "the land is one" for the opposite view.

Since the army of fire is the only side we have insight into, I would say the core story there is still the same as the one that's fueling the political story: "Bow to me because I'm Azor Ahai" is not so far off from "bow to me, because I'm sitting the Iron Throne." Dany, Benerro, Euron, etc. all still have fundamentally political goals, even if magic is the medium they're using to achieve those goals.

In general I would say I agree,  The main battle is not one between Ice and Fire as entities in and of themselves, but rather is a two-fold battle, first between the beings who seek to use the magicks of Ice or Fire to meet their political endgoals, and second, and most importantly IMO, is the overarching battle between those who wish to use Magicks to further their own goals versus those who want Magick to return to its rightful place: as another aspect of Nature, akin to the cycle of life/death and the weather.

And then there's those pesky Maester's trying to subvert Magick completely. 

 

 

But, all this is to say that, in terms of the conflict of magic vs nature, the Children are just as culpable as man, for (if the Old Heresy and That Thing that Must Not Be Named are correct), the Children created the White Walkers--and also the Broken Arm, the Neck, and possibly the Iron Islands--when they decided to no longer let Magic simply exist as a part of nature, but rather tried to subvert it to their own geopolitical ends.  And this is what Man has been doing for a long time, and must be stopped.

Of course, it probably won't be stopped, cause of Man being Man, so likely part of the bitter-sweet ending is going to be that all magic must be removed from the world.

[Tyryan Lannister]

4 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

I think we will learn in future books that the Children "called" for the Targaryens to come to Westeros. Harren the Black was cutting down too many weirwood trees to build his castle, and the Andal's fanaticism was also removing heart trees from southern castles. The Targaryens were able to defeat remnants of the First Men as well as the Andals, uniting the Seven Kingdoms. The Targaryens seem like the closest to a "happy medium" compared to the First Men who perhaps abused magic at one end of the spectrum with the Andals who actively tried to eliminate magic at the other end.

This might have been part of it.  Another possibility that I was thinking about is:

• Aegon saw the kings and nobles of Westeros continuing to fight among themselves.
• He had just finished witnessing a massive conflict between his former Valyrian brethren during the Century of Blood
• Having fought alongside some of the Westorosi kings and nobles during the fighting in the Free Cities, he would have become friendly with some of them, which hurt him that much more when they went at each other's throats
• So he gives them an ultimatum: stop fighting among yourselves or me and my dragons will make you stop.
• He then tries to stop the various fights by bringing the kings and nobles in peacefully, only resorting to combat when it is his last resort, and always stopping combat as soon as the other side wants no more

 

As was pointed out, Aegon didn't really seem like he wanted to conquer, and he definitely had little to no interest in ruling.  I fell that it was a perverted humanitarian aid thing in Aegon's mind--"I'm going to invest the lives of my men, and give you to option of investing the lives of yours, to make sure that our children and their children do not fight among themselves anymore."  Or something like that

[Melifeather]

Tyryan - I do like that you've brought up "there must be a Stark in Winterfell" business, because it's likely the key to returning Westeros to "normal" or at least to return or repay something that the Children may feel they owe the Starks.

I've brought up Simon Toyne before a few pages back, how he's both the name of a character in the Kingswood Brotherhood and the name of an author who wrote The Sanctus, The Key, and The Tower which is a trilogy about returning Earth to the Garden of Eden which was taken and the truth hidden and manipulated by the Catholic church in a grab for power and control. I think GRRM has a similar plan in mind that the Citadel of the Andals has hidden "some truth" which will be ASoIaF's "Sanctus" which has been or will be shortly released. Westeros will normalize by returning the land to mankind's "genesis" which is the King in the North.