Heresy 42 (The Black Watch edition)

[Black Crow]

Welcome to Heresy 42, this week’s edition of what appears to have become something of an institution on the Westeros forums, currently complete with its own Re-Read franchise.

So what’s Heresy all about and why is it so successful?

The short answer is that it offers an alternative interpretation of the Song of Ice and Fire.

Heresy essentially is about challenging the orthodoxy that the Others are evil incarnate; that the Children of the Forest will give Bran the knowledge of how to defeat the Others and that Jon is Azor Ahai, and will save Westeros astride one of Dany’s amazing dragons before taking his rightful place alongside her on the Iron Throne as Jon Targaryen First of his Name. We also have a very strong suspicion that far from being something built by men as a bulwark against the Others, the Wall is itself the cause of the imbalance in the seasons and far from being a disaster its fall will be necessary to achieve a resolution of the conflict between Ice and Fire.

Moreover the Heresies have a sound basis in the text, especially as the story has moved on from those easy assumptions in the beginning to become much more complex, darker and a lot less certain – especially as far as the Starks are concerned.

After all, as GRRM himself has stated:

…it was always my intention: to play with the reader’s expectations. Before I was a writer I was a voracious reader and I am still, and I have read many, many books with very predictable plots. As a reader, what I seek is a book that delights and surprises me. I want to not know what is gonna happen. For me, that’s the essence of storytelling and for this reason I want my readers to turn the pages with increasing fever: to know what happens next. There are a lot of expectations, mainly in the fantasy genre, which you have the hero and he is the chosen one, and he is always protected by his destiny. I didn’t want it for my books.

Instead we think it far more important that if R+L really does =J, it is more important that he is the son of Lyanna Stark rather than the lost heir to the Iron Throne, and far from being Azor Ahai he and his magical white direwolf may be on the other side.

As to that Other side, we look closely at who or what the Others really are, noting both GRRM’s reference to them being like the Sidhe made of ice and to the way they behave not as an invading army but like the Wild Hunt of legend. Inevitably then this means drawing not just on the books themselves but on the real world mythologies, chiefly Celtic but Norse as well, which underpin Martin’s version of the Faerie realms, leading us through the Arthurian Legends, the Mabinogion, the Tain bo Culaidh and the Norse Eddas amongst others to discover Bran the Blessed, Tam Lin, Cu Chulainn and above all the Morrigan – the Crow Goddess, associated with death and with three human aspects as maiden, mother and crone.

It was the Crone who let the first raven into the world and we note the way in which crows (same difference) dominate the whole story, which is why some of us have our suspicions about their true significance, because after all, according to the Ironborn they belong not to the Children but to the Storm God – and oddly enough as it happens the Goddess of the Wind is another attribute of the Morrigan. The crows in short, including Mormont’s (and now Jon’s) raven, appear to be players in their own right rather than convenient vessels for warging.

Conversely its hard to avoid the fact that the Children (who so far have conspicuously said nothing to Bran about the Others) are not just of the Forest, but of the Darkness as well, that darkness feared and hated by Melisandre and the followers of the Lord of Light. Certainly whatever the real motives of the Children, it can cheerfully be assumed that they are no friends of the Red lot.

As heretics we neither promote nor defend a particular viewpoint, in fact we argue quite a lot, but we do reckon that the Starks’ role in all of this is a lot darker and more ambiguous than once it seemed. They are after all the Kings of Winter.

If you’re already actively involved in the Heresy business it needs no further introduction. If you’re new, or simply intimidated by the sheer scale of it all, not to mention the astonishing speed with which it moves, and wonder what we’re talking about and why we’ve come to these peculiar ideas, just ask. We’re friendly and we don’t mind going over old ground again, especially with a fresh pair of eyes.

All that we ask is that the debate be conducted by reference to the text, with respect for the ideas of others, and above all great good humour.

[Black Crow]

Just to start things off for the benefit of those waking up early on a Saturday morning and running 6 hours behind the OP:

Discussion on the last page of Heresy 41 was considering whether Old Nan's story of the Night's King and his defeat by Stark of Winterfell, and the accounts discovered by Sam of the commanders of the Nightfort and the Snowgate first going to war with each other, then slaying their Lord Commander (Osric Stark?) before being defeated by Stark of Winterfell, might be different perspectives on one and the same incident.

[nanother]

Jumping back to the Faceless Man/CotF comparisons from the last thread, I 'll repeat a question I asked back then:

If the CotF stand for nature, and the natural cycle of life and death (which I'd be inclined to think based on the overall impression we're given), how did they end up with the weirwoods, the only lifeforms I know of that are considered immortal?

ETA: @ Black Crow IIRC the Snowgate/Nightfort story is well known, nt discovered by Sam, but is told to either Jon or Bran by either Benjen or some other senior NW member. It's the records of Osric that are discovered by Sam.

[Black Crow]

It'll have been Jon, rather than Bran, but the point remains that we could be looking at two different perspectives on the same story, which is what GRRM does all the time.

[Toccs]

Discussion on the last page of Heresy 41 was considering whether Old Nan's story of the Night's King and his defeat by Stark of Winterfell, and the accounts discovered by Sam of the commanders of the Nightfort and the Snowgate first going to war with each other, then slaying their Lord Commander (Osric Stark?) before being defeated by Stark of Winterfell, might be different perspectives on one and the same incident.

Just to clarify, the account of the Nightsfort/Snowgate war and the subsequent events comes from Benjen who told it to Jon. The tale of Osiric Stark and his 60 year tenure as Lord Commander does indeed come from Sam. It is only by lining up the dates given for the 2 stories that it becomes likely that Osric Stark was the Lord Commander involved.

[Black Crow]

Yes, got it now, it was while they were on their way to the Wall; but yes, I agree it looks like Osric Stark was tied into the story, either because he was getting old and losing his grip - and then his head - or because he shuffled off his perch through natural causes and the new guy messed up because he couldn't establish his authority.

[NitzanLeo]

Jumping back to the Faceless Man/CotF comparisons from the last thread, I 'll repeat a question I asked back then:

If the CotF stand for nature, and the natural cycle of life and death (which I'd be inclined to think based on the overall impression we're given), how did they end up with the weirwoods, the only lifeforms I know of that are considered immortal?

I don't really think they 'ended up' up with them.

[kephv]

This has nothing to do with what you guys are discussing now but --

Has the possibility been discussed (sorry I haven't kept up with these threads) that the Wall was built by the Others to keep men out of their lands to the north? Just wondering if that's not what BC was trying to say here:

"far from being something built by men as a bulwark against the Others"

[Black Crow]

It is one of the permutations that has been discussed - it is after all largely comprised of ice and magic. If there's any sort of consensus among heretics its that the Wall, so far from being something so mundane as Hadrian's Wall writ large, is what Mel calls a hinge - a magical demarcation line between the realms of Ice and of Men, and a probable cause of the unbalanced seasons.

Some of us also have a shrewd suspicion its nothing to do with Bran the Builder.

[Ponys123]

The Black Watch edition? What do those bloody Scots have to do with this? :cool4:

[Black Crow]

Sigh... the Black Watch (geddit?) are the 42nd Highlanders - and anyway I'm Scottish :commie:

[Ponys123]

OH, that was so obvious I didn't even notice. I feel stupid now. I thought you were just creatively referring to the NW.

[Midnight Diamondstar]

Where can I find the re-read section of Heresy at the main menu. BTW, ancestral surname is Fae..

[Black Crow]

Seek and ye shall find:

[Tyryan Lannister]

Yes, got it now, it was while they were on their way to the Wall; but yes, I agree it looks like Osric Stark was tied into the story, either because he was getting old and losing his grip - and then his head - or because he shuffled off his perch through natural causes and the new guy messed up because he couldn't establish his authority.

I'm far more inclined to believe this one. The scenario that I picture is that you have Osric leading the NW for 60 years. He dies of natural causes. The new LC is not a Stark. As such, when the Snowgate and Nightfort Commanders start having their row, they see that they no longer have a Stark in charge, so they think that, since this new LC is not of blood with The Stark, they can get away with more without The Stark trekking north to writ out justice. Of course, they're wrong...

[Black Crow]

Not at all dissimilar perhaps to what we saw at Castle Black, except that there was no son of Winterfell available and so the two main candidates refused to rally behind the compromise one, mind you it sounds a bit familiar...

ETA: mind you I still think it may be part of the true story of the Nights King.

[Little Wing]

Oh, my... You guys have been... productive! :wideeyed:

I have to catch up, just dropped by to share this piece of fan art, because it is so heretic - it's divine! :commie:

ETA: It actually says: Jon Snow - The Others' King :eek:

[nenya~]

Not at all dissimilar perhaps to what we saw at Castle Black, except that there was no son of Winterfell available and so the two main candidates refused to rally behind the compromise one, mind you it sounds a bit familiar...

ETA: mind you I still think it may be part of the true story of the Nights King.

There's also what's currently happening at Hardhome... and Hardhome was destroyed about 600 years ago and slaves were said to be carried off then.

[Black Crow]

Oh, my... You guys have been... productive! :wideeyed:

I have to catch up, just dropped by to share this piece of fan art, because it is so heretic - it's divine! :commie:

ETA: It actually says: Jon Snow - The Others' King :eek:

How to upset R+L=J in one easy lesson :commie:

[Melifeather]

Mmmm... yes, I think either possibility fits better than Feather's theory about a Rickard Stark originally being a Rickard Snow, because they both have a pretty solid "presence". The Wildlings certainly bang on about how they remember things and one of them could be something to do with the Snowgate.

Something else that occurs to me as I'm writing this is that given the way stories get twisted over the years...

According to the stories

(1) The Nights King was a commander of the Nights Watch who went native and ruled from the Nightfort, but was eventually cast down by Stark of Winterfell and Joruman of the Wildlings. But (old Nan aside) we don't don't know any more about him because his name was stricken from the records.

(2) The commanders of the Nights Watch at the Nightfort (name unknown) and the Snowgate first went to war with each other, then topped their Lord Commander, Oscric Stark, and had to be put down by the Stark in Winterfell.

Are they one and the same story?

Hello!

My you all are such busy beavers....hard to keep up these days!

No wonder you are so confused about my theory, Black Crow...this isn't accurate. My theory about why Ygritte thinks Jon Snow's name is a bad luck name is in regards to King Jon Stark, who I theorize was also previously named Jon Snow, bastard son of an unknown Lord Stark of Winterfell.