Jump to content

Mister Smikes

Members
  • Posts

    1,187
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Mister Smikes

  1. That's fine. But I was discussing the significance of the lemon tree climate discrepancy. And so was GRRM, unless he failed to read the question he was answering. On the issue of the lemon-tree climate discrepancy, have you adjusted your position?
  2. Agree with "not mutually exclusive". And I will go a bit further and say I think GRRM means to keep us guessing whether Pod is alive or not. I'm afraid my memories of that Green Knight are a bit fuzzy.
  3. How is this my problem? I don't expect her ever to go back there. It isn't even what Stoneheart asked of her. And if she decides to disobey Stoneheart and spare Jaime, that is even less of a reason for her to go back there. At the moment I am arguing that, whether she kills Jaime or not, there is no reason to believe Pod and Hyle are alive, (and no reason to believe she will return to the BwB). And if she kills Jaime, it will because she swore to serve Catelyn, and because she screamed a word symbolizing acceptance of her mission. Anything more requires a complete renegotiation of their relationship after Brienne is cut down. You are conflating very different things. You can survive indefinitely with an elevated chin from a tightened noose. Pods feet were dangling before Brienne's feet were dangling. That's what matters. Only in the sense of her chin being elevated by the tightening of the noose. You completely miss the point. Hanging did not kill instantly in "The Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge" either. Hanging almost always kills, because the hangman almost never cuts you down, no matter how many words you scream. Lem is like most hangmen -- he is carrying out a sentence under orders. He does not have discretion, as far as we know. Still, we can imagine Brienne being cut down. Nothing is absolutely impossible. And (if you ignore the whole zombie thing) there is even some evidence for it since we've seen her walking and talking. But this does not require anyone else being cut down. We can even, if you like, imagine all 3 being cut down. But "I can imagine it and you can't absolutely disprove it" is not a very compelling argument. Other than the fact that they were hanged. LOL. She was asked to choose between her loyalty to Jaime and her loyalty to Stoneheart, whom she had swore to serve. She was not asked to decide whether she likes Pod better than she likes Jaime. That would require a complete renegotiation of the original terms offered here. That's what oaths are for. Her oath to serve Catelyn. Her agreement to accept the mission (via the word she screamed). There has been alot of buildup and foreshadowing regarding oaths. You just declared all that to be completely irrelevant. Exactly. Either she keeps her oath, kills Jaime, and doesn't go back. Or she breaks her oath, spares Jaime, and doesn't go back. If I were in Brienne's shoes, I would feel justified in breaking any oath I made. But Lem does not seem to mind serving her. I don't know what her zombie mind considers reasonable. But why not? She expects Lem to carry out her orders, presumably without hostages. And Brienne, like Lem, claims to have been her loyal servant.
  4. Yet when Arthur died, Excalibur was returned to its faerie custodians. Though perhaps this goes hand in hand with the notion that Arthur is not really dead, which in turn perhaps could imply that the faerie custodians are merely holding the blade for Arthur.
  5. Lonmouth is a member of the minor aristocracy, from an old established House. He squired for a prince. Lem is heavily implied to be a commoner. He is compared to a "soldier" which generally means a commoner with military experience. His mode of speech is coarse ("bloody" and "arse" and "bugger"), similar to Sandor's (the grandson of a commoner, who militantly rejects the pretentions of his family's new class as knights). Lem accepts scoldings from common innkeepers with equanimity. "We're outlaws. Lowborn scum, most of us, excepting his Lordship."
  6. @Lord Lannister, @John Suburbs, et al. I'd like to further explain why hostages are completely irrelevant to the Brienne/Catelyn/Stoneheart interactions, as they have been so far portrayed in book. Brienne took an oath to serve Catelyn -- to obey her commands. Stoneheart intends to hold her to that oath, and to that allegiance. When Brienne is brought before Stoneheart, she reasonably explains that, since they parted, she has merely been trying to carry out Catelyn's last instructions. She argues, in effect: I have been and still am your servant -- I am loyal to you. Stoneheart, however, has her doubts. There are subtle indications that Brienne's allegiance has changed. She carries a Lannister sword. And she has said certain things in her sleep. So she puts Brienne to the test, by ordering her to kill Jaime. By agreeing to comply with this order, Brienne would demonstrate that she is still Stoneheart's servant, and willing to oppose Stoneheart's enemies on command. Brienne fails the test, and Stoneheart orders her hanged (as a betrayer). Hostages are irrelevant here. Hostages are to keep your enemies honest. Your own vassals are expected to demonstrate their loyalty by obeying your commands. Stoneheart wants Pod and Hyle hanged as Lannister soldiers, and wants Brienne, as her loyal vassal, to want what Stoneheart wants. Anything else, including Brienne trying to negotiate on behalf of justice for Lannister soldiers, potentially makes Brienne a traitor in Stoneheart's eyes.
  7. My question was not whether it is impossible to imagine hanging victims surviving. The question is why it is assumed that they survived. And I was specifically asking about Pod and Hyle. Stoneheart was not even present. She was back in her cave. Which is why, after they leave the cave, Brienne addresses all her pleas to Lem. As for what trains of logic Stoneheart is capable of, or how much of this logic Lem understood, who knows? We can, if we wish imagine all kinds of things running through their minds. The question not "how is it even possible?" but rather "why the assumption?" Because, you know, normally hanging victems don't survive. It's like "The Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge" but times 3.
  8. But you don't even want or believe that Brienne will kill Jaime. So how is that even a problem? She somehow survives, lures Jaime away from his men, repents her oath, breaks her oath, and they both decide to go nowhere near Stoneheard (which, if she's going to break her oath anyway, would be insane). (And if you are talking about my theory, it is consistent with GRRM's SSM where he says fire wights are driven by their missions, not their humanity. The hostages are relevant only to her human motivations.) When she hanged Peter Pimple, was that not a huge betrayal? Also, when did Stoneheart make any offers or promises regarding Pod and Hyle? They were Lannister soldiers and to be hanged as such. The only life she ever offered Brienne was her own. Pod was hoisted first. The order in which Hyle was hoisted was unclear, since all her attention was on Pod. Not by any logic I can see. It is already a huge stretch to suppose Lem would cut down Brienne because she screamed a word. Stoneheart's orders were not conditional. But what logic would he cut down Pod and Hyle as well? I guess you can imagine it, on some logic. But my question is: why is it inevitable? Why are you so sure?
  9. Serious question to you and others. Are you not even slightly worried that Pod and Hunt might be already dead? Were they not being hanged when we last saw them? How often do people survive being executed? There's some excuse for Brienne, because we have since seen her walking and talking (even though that does not necessarily prove anything for obvious reasons). But why do so many treat the survival of Pod and Hunt as if it were established fact?
  10. Also (in addition to what I said before) because of Brienne's fever dream, where she perceives a shadow striking from her direction and killing the man she loves. In her vision, the man she loves, who is not Renly, is leading her horse through the trees. Also because GRRM in interviews has called them "wights", drawing a connection between the zombies of fire and the zombies of ice. Also because Bonifer's quote from the Seven Pointed Star suggests that Wights are regarded as sinister and unholy.
  11. Other than GRRM saying that they are in some ways not really the same persons any more? Other than GRRM hinting there is a reason that wights don't get POVs after they return? Other than UnBeric asking Thoros, are you my mother? Other than the horrible inhuman things Stoneheart does, like hanging children? Other than the fact that Stoneheart does not even bother to ask Brienne about Arya and Sansa? I don't recall ever saying that it "has to be". But it is plausible. And this is, in effect, a speculation thread. Stoneheart inhabits the physical form of Catelyn's corpse, and so in that sense is a "zombie" rather than a "ghost". Other than that, the distinction is not particularly important to me. There are different kinds of corpse revenants and different kinds of ghosts. Well, the ice zombies don't tend to talk. Except Coldhands. But, IIRC, there were suggestions that ice wights retain certain of their former memories.
  12. That's merely one way of putting it. But I explained this horror tradition in the post you were responding to above. Neither were any of the traditional examples of horror fiction I cited. Even UnBeric suspects he is an entirely different person. He asks Thoros, was I born in fire on the battlefield? Are you my mother? And Stoneheart is a "grimmer shadow" than UnBeric was.
  13. If Catelyn had any control over Stoneheart whatsoever, she would want her children as far away from Stoneheart as possible, in order to protect them from Stoneheart.
  14. Okay dude. I get it. I'm just a child at heart, and you are a sophisticated adult, who is only interested in realpolitique. Which makes you superior to me in every way. Does not change the fact that the story has zombies in it. If that makes you mad, you are lashing out at the wrong person. Maybe GRRM is a child at heart as well. I'm just taking the text as I find it,and considering the implications. And the text has zombies in it. I have not seen any evidence of chainsaws yet, but I would not necessarily rule out a supernatural animated golden hand.
  15. Generally, the chapters are in more-or-less chronological order. It's not absolute, and I'm not ruling out exceptions. I just see no particular reason to just assume that an exception will be made here. We have moved ahead to the POV of other characters, who know that Jaime is missing, and who anticipate his eventual return. We actually know more than they do at this point. And maybe that's all we are entitled to. We may find out when they find out. Seems like an unnecessary complication. Brienne by herself is more than a match for a handless Jaime. There are all sorts of ways to fill readers in on things from the past. A flashback is only one of them.
  16. I should have worded that remark better. It was not meant to be directed at all SanSan shippers, but only the brutally nihilistic ones. And don't tell me they don't exist, because I've seen them. I've nothing against Sandor and Sansa eventually getting together. But it seems to me it is mainly Sandor who must change.
  17. Not a nice god, methinks. In the old poem THALABA THE DESTROYER, a dead woman appears before her father and husband as a hideous corpse creature, apparently for the purpose of tempting her husband to despair and damnation. The father orders the husband to strike her down, but he cannot do it. So the father tranfixes the "vampire corpse" with a spear through the heart (like a stake). When the "vampire corpse" is thus dispatched, the spirit of the woman, transformed and beautiful, appears before them and thanks them for her release, offering encouragement and the promise of salvation. That's the most striking example I can find. But I think it is very typical of old school thinking regarding revenants. There is a distinction between a malicious revenant, and the spirit, if any, trapped inside. For instance, in DRACULA, when Van Helsing and his flunkies dispatch the vampire Lucy, they believe they are doing the real Lucy a favor, and Mina begs that should it be necessary, they must do the same for her, setting free her immortal spirit; and even opines that they will be setting Dracula himself free by destroying his vampire. In Jaime's weirwood dream, he sees the spirits of himself and Brienne in a state of imprisonment. Brienne, in one of her fever death dreams, sees herself menaced by a sorcerer famous for the enslavement and animation of the dead. In another fever dream, she sees herself watching helplessly as a shadow (her shadow?) strikes down the man she loves, as he walks before her leading her horse through the trees. So yeah. I think Catelyn wants out.
  18. More to the point, it appears to me that that is where GRRM is going. It's a theory, based on textual evidence. Which evidence could be discussed, and which I have in fact been discussing. When WINDS comes out, the theory will be proven right or proven wrong. But your artistic opinion on whether it is idiotic or a good idea probably will not change, one way or the other.
  19. I'm not saying it's impossible that you are right. But that's a very cynical thought. Thank you kindly. But you sound sulky. I don't recall any lamentation.
  20. The tale literally began with zombies. Nor do I think it will ruin the tale if the brutal cynical moral nihilists of King's Landing were to eventually find out that there are more things on heaven and earth than are dreamt of in their brutal cynical philosophy. That always seemed to me a major theme of the stories. Littlefinger, for instance, prances around molesting tween girls, and tittering "tee hee, everything is proceeding in accordance with my evil plan." But like most villains, there are aspects of reality that his evil plan has not taken into account. Including, but not limited to, Gods, and Dragons, and True Knights, and the impending Zombie Apocalypse. When Yoren comes to King's Landing, for instance, his warnings are rather pointedly ignored. Maybe by "how it began" what you have in mind is specifically that part of Book 1, where poor Ned gets his head chopped off, and all the villains in King's Landing gloat. This is where all the moral nihilists among the readership shout: YES, I always knew it. Dark Helmet was right. Evil will always win because Good is stupid. And these are joined by the certain SanSan shippers, who hope that stupid Sansa would realize that chivalry was total bunk, and she did not need no stinking True Knight after all, and what she really wanted was a forceful, savage, nihilistic brute. But many of the rest of us knew that the story was not over yet, and just kept reading in the hopes that the other foot would drop. And that story, admittedly, has dragged on, and the other foot has not dropped yet, in any unambiguous way. And perhaps it never will. But I see no tragedy in a horde of zombies, or other magical monkey wrench in the works, spoiling the scheming calculating realpolitique of all the machiavellians in King's Landing and elsewhere.
  21. Feebleminded humans can be warged. By Jon's final chapter, it is unclear how much Jon's warging abilities have progressed, since the text has not commented on it for some time. In Jon's last chapter, Cregan Karstark has become feebleminded. Mel tells Jon to come to her when he realizes her prophesies are real. Jon, after receiving the Pink Letter, realizes Mel's prophesies are real. It follows that the "knives" are something he must guard against. But he does not go to Mel as she instructed. Or does he? There is a conspicuous gap in the final chapter, where he makes unspecified plans. During this gap, Jon warged the feebleminded Karstark, and Mel glamored him. Thus was the vision fulfilled, while Jon remained alive. When Karstark was killed, Jon returned to his body, hiding somewhere cold. Note that Ghost was left indoors, and would not be cold.
  22. Your Moqurro/Benerro idea is interesting. But I think it is too far removed from the original context. I think your original Jaime/Cersei idea is far more likely to be correct. And perhaps, we need not forget Tyrion either. If you want to avoid the implication that Jaime/Cersei will become twisted monsters in the future, an alternative interpretation might be that they were, at that time, twisted monsters, in terms of the state of their souls. Which does not necessarily rule out future redemption.
  23. I think GRRM intends to mess with us to some extent using at least 3 characters: Jon Snow, Brienne and Jaime. Brienne and Jaime will turn out to actually be zombies. The Jon Snow case will be a fake out. GRRM will have us convinced he has become a zombie, only to have him eventually turn up fully alive and fully human. Well, first off, I don't assume Stoneheart will necessarily be the one to bring back Jaime. UnBrienne might be the one to do that. Kill him, then kiss him. Her "lips were made for kissing", after all. This thing about Jaime being brought before Stoneheart is a fan fantasy. It is a fan fantasy, inspired by the refusal to accept all the indications that Brienne is going to kill Jaime herself. There is no need for Stoneheart to be present at all. Also, I don't assume Stoneheart's inhuman mind would necessarily agree with your logic. As per the GRRM quote I gave above, fire wights are driven by their oaths/missions. Catelyn forced Jaime to take a "hundred oaths". Killing him, then kissing him, could be a way of forcing him to fulfill those oath. She has, per my theory, already used that trick with Brienne. Thirdly, fire wights and other zombies are, in my view, still dead. They have not, in any good sense, been brought back to life. So I see no contradiction in killing, then kissing. Stoneheart wants him dead, and dead he remains.
  24. The surviving central characters, the big 6, are Arya, Sansa, Tyrion, Danaerys, Jon Snow, and Bran. And I do not think even they are 100% safe. Jaime and Brienne are not central characters. They became POVs for limited and temporary purposes during the middle part of the story. Now their POVs have ceased, and the reader is left to guess at their current status. I tend to agree that Jon Snow will not become a zombie. But I do think GRRM will mess with our heads, and make us THINK that Jon Snow has become a zombie. He has many tricks up his sleeve he can use to mislead the reader. As for these 3 characters being closely connected to the idea of VOWS, I agree that that is indeed a theme. But take a peek at what GRRM says in 2011: "Each time Beric’s revived he loses a little more of himself. He was sent on a mission before his first death. He was sent on a mission to do something, and it’s like, that’s what he’s clinging to. He’s forgetting other things, he’s forgetting who he is, or where he lived. He’s forgotten the woman who he was once supposed to marry. Bits of his humanity are lost every time he comes back from death; he remembers that mission. His flesh is falling away from him, but this one thing, this purpose that he had is part of what’s animating him and bringing him back to death. I think you see echoes of that with some of the other characters who have come back from death." He uses the word "mission" and not "vows", but that should not prevent us from seeing the connection. Vows can be connected to a mission. For instance, a mission to "take the sword and slay the kingslayer". What "other characters" (besides UnBeric) is GRRM referring to? Catelyn for one, obviously. But we have also already seen Brienne, after being hanged, and looking oddly changed, appear to Jaime at midnight fingering her sword "oathkeeper". So his use of the plural is thereby explained. At least, I cannot think of any ice zombies who have showed "echoes of that." And you left out the fact that Catelyn, especially as a zombie, is defined by "keeping her word": "Robb had broken his word, but Catelyn kept hers. She tugged hard on Aegon's hair and sawed at his neck until the blade grated on bone. Blood ran hot over her fingers. His little bells were ringing, ringing, ringing, and the drum went boom doom boom." This quote from Christian scripture suggests that oaths can be an unholy thing. It is hard for me to see this as an objection to what I am suggesting. Lady Stoneheart is certainly an Unholy Thing.
×
×
  • Create New...