Heresy 197 the wit and wisdom of Old Nan

[Black Crow]

20 minutes ago, wolfmaid7 said:

I tend to think she was somewhat of a Melissandre contemporary but the reverse.Better yet how Val looked when she returned.

We have to achknowledge when a story teller embelishes a bit.Or suffers from bias based on what they want us to think about a character.

Was this woman really ice cold? the NK's poor dick.Story tellers wanted to make a strong association to the Others that they did.Old Nan just followed suit.I think it would be more pleasant to stick it to Mel than ice queen 2.0.

If she's the Queen of Winter and dressed in white, she has to be cold, its in the rules of storytelling 

 

Welcome back. You've been missed

[JNR]

39 minutes ago, wolfmaid7 said:

I tend to think she was somewhat of a Melissandre contemporary but the reverse.Better yet how Val looked when she returned.

I'm sure you remember Black Crow once guessing that the Night's Queen had drawn the Night's King's eye by "wiggling her bum at him."

[Melifeather]

1 hour ago, JNR said:

One also has to wonder what sort of man would spy a wight and say... in a voice thick with lust... "I'd tap that."

It could at that.  Very creative.

I wish I could take credit for it, but I read it somewhere...I think Voice is the one who should be credited. If I'm wrong about that, my apologies to whomever said it first!

[wolfmaid7]

1 hour ago, Black Crow said:

If she's the Queen of Winter and dressed in white, she has to be cold, its in the rules of storytelling 

 

Welcome back. You've been missed

Hence my allusion to Mel and how's she described by Jon.Sooo not zombie but whatever type Mel may be and but certainly comfortable enough to engage in coitus without freezing dude's member off.

True dat.Happy to be back.

45 minutes ago, JNR said:

I'm sure you remember Black Crow once guessing that the Night's Queen had drawn the Night's King's eye by "wiggling her bum at him."

Haha.I remember.

[aDanceWithFlagons]

Has anyone else had the thought that the Giants who supposedly helped build the Wall, and whatever else, could have been a twisted story about the Umbers? Their sigil, a Giant in broken chains, could go back to a time when they were enslaved and broke free or were broken free by an outside source. Conversely the Umbers could have been the folks who freed giants from bondage. And subsequently procreated to become the human-giants of which their are tales of wielding swords, wearing boots and such.

Just throwing it out there. 

[Black Crow]

I rather suppose it depends how you define giants; the ones we have encountered don't accord with Old Nan's stories as told to Jon.

[JNR]

18 hours ago, aDanceWithFlagons said:

Has anyone else had the thought that the Giants who supposedly helped build the Wall, and whatever else, could have been a twisted story about the Umbers?

Yes, but never with any specific conclusion.  I just find it conspicuous that they are based so close to the Wall, closer than any other major northern family (see also the name of their keep) and have that sigil.  It does suggest a historical connection of some sort to true giants.

[Black Crow]

1 hour ago, JNR said:

Yes, but never with any specific conclusion.  I just find it conspicuous that they are based so close to the Wall, closer than any other major northern family (see also the name of their keep) and have that sigil.  It does suggest a historical connection of some sort to true giants.

The sigil does seem significant, and I'd be inclined as I've said to question whether Mag the Mighty and his people are the giants of Old Nan's stories. If the sigil is an unchained Umber it begs the question as to who held them - the Nights King?

[JNR]

Well, it does bring up a logical point.

If you look at the wiki's rendering of the sigil, it seems to be a giant as we find them to be in ASOS.  Not a human being; a different primate altogether, covered in fur, a different type of face, etc.

But in the time of the story, the true appearance of giants is obviously not even remembered! We know this because Jon consciously thinks, on seeing true giants, that they look different than he expected -- he's surprised.  And yet Jon's surely seen the Umber sigil before in his life.

So it seems apparent that the Umber sigil in the wiki is wrong (surprise, surprise).  And when we're told in the text that it's a giant with shattered chains, that means it depicts a giant of the Old Nan type: an outsized human. 

Well, that's basically an Umber -- they're seven-footers.  So this leaves me thinking that indeed the sigil is about the history of the Umbers themselves (though it still remains true that in the dimly-remembered Age of Heroes they may have been connected to true giants, the Wall and all that).

[The Fattest Leech]

Well, we do have the Greatjon still in chains... so maybe a clue for that?

• And even that I failed at. He'd cozened the huge northman into drinking enough wine to kill any three normal men, yet after Roslin had been bedded the Greatjon still managed to snatch the sword of the first man to accost him and break his arm in the snatching. It had taken eight of them to get him into chains, and the effort had left two men wounded, one dead, and poor old Ser Leslyn Haigh short half an ear. When he couldn't fight with his hands any longer, Umber had fought with his teeth.

Spoiler

However, if I remember correctly, something bad may possibly happen to Greatjon in TWOW according to that very piecemeal screenshot... that could not be accurate in the final version.

 

[Black Crow]

2 hours ago, JNR said:

Well, it does bring up a logical point.

If you look at the wiki's rendering of the sigil, it seems to be a giant as we find them to be in ASOS.  Not a human being; a different primate altogether, covered in fur, a different type of face, etc.

But in the time of the story, the true appearance of giants is obviously not even remembered! We know this because Jon consciously thinks, on seeing true giants, that they look different than he expected -- he's surprised.  And yet Jon's surely seen the Umber sigil before in his life.

So it seems apparent that the Umber sigil in the wiki is wrong (surprise, surprise).  And when we're told in the text that it's a giant with shattered chains, that means it depicts a giant of the Old Nan type: an outsized human. 

Well, that's basically an Umber -- they're seven-footers.  So this leaves me thinking that indeed the sigil is about the history of the Umbers themselves (though it still remains true that in the dimly-remembered Age of Heroes they may have been connected to true giants, the Wall and all that).

Not seen that Wiki version before and I note that its based on an article in the Citadel, so dubious as to canon. I have a clear recollection of an earlier version, here or elsewhere, depicting a "normal" looking giant in 7 league boots. I certainly agree that Jon on meeting those north of the Wall does not recognise any resemblance to the Umber sigil.

As to the Umbers themselves on the other hand we have the famous Harmond Umber "the drunken giant" - my emphasis, and, again whatever the true story behind it that sigil is a proud reference to the Umbers not some inhuman other giants beyond the Wall.

[JNR]

2 hours ago, The Fattest Leech said:

Well, we do have the Greatjon still in chains... so maybe a clue for that?

So the Umber sigil as literary symbolism designed to predict future plot, as opposed to in-world symbolism representing past history? 

Yep, I can get behind that, and I bet Feather Crystal can too.

I'll also add that I suspect the Hightower house words fall in the same class, in that they tell us something about GRRM's future books as well as Westeros' (extremely) ancient past.

59 minutes ago, Black Crow said:

I note that its based on an article in the Citadel, so dubious as to canon.

Meaning that in our world the Citadel is just about as accurate as in GRRM's. Heh.

[Brad Stark]

The giants not looking like Jon expected adds realism to the story,  and shows Old Nan's tales may have grown taller as they were told.

We've seen evidence that humans and giants can hybridize, so I think the Umbers literally have giant's blood.  The sigil could be a hybrid and look more man like.  It is also a sigil, not a photo.  Look at the coat of arms of Albania and compare it to a real eagle.

The broken chains are the part I find most interesting.  We've been told giants helped build the wall, and I assumed they were asked nicely and happy to help.  Seems this might not be the case.

[Black Crow]

Not necessarily on the hybridisation;we have all that stuff in the World Book about a lost civilisation of very tall people so I'm still not inclined to look for a link between the Umbers and Mag the Mighty's people. Nevertheless the sigil does clearly point to the Umbers having at some point been freed from bondage and the story of the Nights King has that connection. Ok Old Nan speaks of the Watch being freed from bondage but they are unlikely to have been the only people ruled by the King.

[Melifeather]

13 hours ago, JNR said:

So the Umber sigil as literary symbolism designed to predict future plot, as opposed to in-world symbolism representing past history? 

Yep, I can get behind that, and I bet Feather Crystal can too.

I'll also add that I suspect the Hightower house words fall in the same class, in that they tell us something about GRRM's future books as well as Westeros' (extremely) ancient past.

Meaning that in our world the Citadel is just about as accurate as in GRRM's. Heh.

Not just literary symbolism to predict future plot, but also a reversal of the timeline beginning with the Year of the False Spring. I think Howland did more than pray for a way to win, he opened Pandora's box. When Rhaegar goes in search of the Knight of the Laughing Tree it's a repeat of Howland searching for a way to be a knight. Howland is attacked by three squires - Rhaegar defeats three knights. Lyanna stands up to the squires becoming Howland's heroine - Rhaegar makes Lyanna his Queen of Love and Beauty. Prior to Harrenhal we have the attack of the Kingswood Brotherhood on Elia. Shortly after Harrenhal we have the abduction of Lyanna. Before Elia's attack we have the Defiance of Duskendale where King Aerys is held hostage. After Lyanna's abduction we have Jon Arryn's refusal to give up future king Robert Baratheon. Before the Defiance of Duskendale, Tywin eradicated two of his bannermen families the Reynes and Tarbecks. After Jon Arryn refused to give up Robert, Aerys had Rickard and Brandon Stark executed. Of course this is just a small sampling, but it goes on and on with each major event repeating in reverse order. The Umbers therefore are a repeat reversal of actual giants. The reversal of the timeline does have it's parallels, but the outcomes are different.

[JNR]

5 hours ago, Brad Stark said:

We've seen evidence that humans and giants can hybridize, so I think the Umbers literally have giant's blood.

What evidence is that?  They're a different species.

 

[Matthew.]

5 hours ago, Brad Stark said:

It is also a sigil, not a photo.  Look at the coat of arms of Albania and compare it to a real eagle.

This was my reaction to that whole "the giants didn't look the way Jon expected, ergo the Umber sigil isn't a giant" line of speculation as well; sigils, by their nature, are often vaguely detailed silhouettes, or are highly stylized. For example, the Lannister lion, as depicted in the appendix, would hardly be an accurate reference point for what an actual lion looks like--that doesn't mean it's not a lion.

 

5 hours ago, Black Crow said:

Nevertheless the sigil does clearly point to the Umbers having at some point been freed from bondage and the story of the Nights King has that connection.

Related to this, I also wonder whether or not we might not use Bran and Hodor as a reference point for the sorts of magical abuses that may have been common place during the Age of Heroes--might humans, giants, and other vulnerable targets have found themselves enslaved by skinchangers and greenseers, forced to fight their battles or perform unpleasant labor (such as building a giant ice wall)?

At the least, the giants seem to have been left out of the Pact, and may not have been particularly well treated by either the humans or the CotF.

[Black Crow]

24 minutes ago, JNR said:

What evidence is that?  They're a different species.

 

We have a number of human giants turning up in this tale of happy country-folk.

There is the lost civilisation connected with Lorath, albeit only in the World Book

There are the Umbers, and explicitly the Drunken Giant - although I believe to judge from his descendants and kinfolk, that he was renowned for his drinking rather than his height, which may have been unremarkable for Umbers

There is Ser Duncan the Tall

And then there are Hodor and Brienne, both of whom are hinted to be descended from Ser Duncan.

And not forgetting the Mountain that Rides

All of them are human and while "freakishly big" enough to attract the epithet of giants they are clearly not connected with Mag's people.

[JNR]

16 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

This was my reaction to that whole "the giants didn't look the way Jon expected, ergo the Umber sigil isn't a giant" line of speculation as well; sigils, by their nature, are often vaguely detailed silhouettes, or are highly stylized.

 

It's hard to imagine the canonical Umber sigil is so "stylized" that it could be either

1) a human being or

2) something that looks like this:

Quote

These were something else, more bearlike than human, and as wooly as the mammoths they rode. Seated, it was hard to say how big they truly were. Ten feet tall maybe, or twelve, Jon thought. Maybe fourteen, but no taller. Their sloping chests might have passed for those of men, but their arms hung down too far, and their lower torsos looked half again as wide as their upper. Their legs were shorter than their arms, but very thick, and they wore no boots at all; their feet were broad splayed things, hard and horny and black. Neckless, their huge heavy heads thrust forward from between their shoulder blades, and their faces were squashed and brutal. Rats' eyes no larger than beads were almost lost within folds of horny flesh, but they snuffled constantly, smelling as much as they saw.

Unless the Umber sigil is a Rorschach inkblot, I guess. 

Jon would have to be the world's most absentminded teen to see anything remotely like 2) in the Umber sigil, forget it, and then be so surprised on seeing true giants.   I conclude the giant in the Umber sigil in no way resembles the above description.

4 minutes ago, Black Crow said:

All of them are human and while "freakishly big" enough to attract the epithet of giants they are clearly not connected with Mag's people.

Yes, and you left out Left and Right, Olenna's guards, and Andrik the Unsmiling ("a giant of a man"), among other freakishly tall men. 

There is no very sound reason to think the tall Umbers have crossbred with the different species described above.  Westeros is loaded with tall people.

[Black Crow]

1 hour ago, JNR said:

There is no very sound reason to think the tall Umbers have crossbred with the different species described above.  Westeros is loaded with tall people.

With the proviso that they are freakishly tall and deserving of the epithet of giants and as such are more likely to be the origin of Old Nan's tales about giants than those creatures found north of the Wall,