Jump to content

Fearsome Fred

Members
  • Content count

    1,437
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Fearsome Fred

  • Rank
    Council Member
  1. It could. But a 200-year old is less likely than a 15-year old to use such language for events only 2 years old.
  2. The exact words here are "long ago", which to my ears create a stronger implication of a significant passage of time. But perhaps someone with the right program will do a text search of the volumes to see if GRRM ever uses "long ago" to refer to fairly recent events.
  3. What's your point? To admit they don't fit GRRM's words? I don't get it! You are making loose associations, without any actually correlations. To begin with, there is no evidence that the "undying" have died, and returned from death. I could go on, but what's the point? I don't think GRRM was talking about the undying, and I don't think you think so either.
  4. Why ask me? If you think they fit the pattern, then say how they fit.
  5. Casso King of Seals wrote: How so? Mission/purpose is exactly what GRRM is focussed on in the 2 sentences that precede "we see echos of that." The meaning of the word "that" can only be determined by looking at context. Yes, I get it. You don't like my theory. But that does not mean I am misreading the quote. Your preference is fueled by nothing more than the arbitrary fact that you do not like my theory. But I have not ignored that aspect. I have considered the whole context. You (however) are about to ignore that aspect of the context whenever it suits you, as you do in the UnGregor example below. With UnBrienne, I need not ignore either aspect of the context. They both fit perfectly. No. We have seen no such thing. You just made it up. We have no idea what UnGregor's "purpose in undeath" is. As you admit, for all we have SEEN, he may be serving Qyburn now. We have not seen any loss of humanity (he had as far as we know, none to lose); we have not seen any focus on a mission he had in life. You are doing nothing more than speculating that he MIGHT fit the pattern. You can point to no evidence of this that we have SEEN. GRRM claims he is referring to something he thinks we have SEEN. It does not work because it is just your speculation, not something we "have seen". You are making up that Coldhand's purpose is defending the realm from the horrors of the North. It seems to me more likely he is a servant of the Great Other. Anyway, Coldhands is not Benjen. Leaf, who is VERY old, says that Coldhands died long ago.
  6. Benjen has no particular loyalty to family, as Benjen emphasizes to Jon when he leaves on his mission. You are equating loyalty to family with loyalty to the Night Watch, when GRRM & Benjen & Jon & Aemon have gone so far to contrast them and paint them as being in conflict Benjen's mission while alive had nothing to do with Coldhands current mission: bring Bran Stark to the 3-eyed crow. They are not even remotely the same mission. If they are somehow related in some way we do not know, then it can hardly be said that WE have seen this similarity, so again, we have not seen these echoes of UnBeric. Benjen/Coldhands does not fit. Anyway, I don't think Coldhands is Benjen. Leaf says he died long ago. Look, of you are really that DESPERATE to ignore the implications of GRRM's words, I have a far more simple solution. Maybe he just misspoke. Maybe his use of the plural was an accident. Maybe the only other person he had in mind was UnCat.
  7. That must be why she told Brienne to "Take the sword and bring the Kingslayer to me ..." Oh, wait ... am I remembering that right?
  8. For the record, I agree. I did not argue her "undead" status only because I saw no need to. Regardless of whether Melisandre is or is not undead, it cannot be said that we readers have seen any echoes of the pattern he describes in UnBeric. Also GRRM's past comments seem to indicate that UnPersons do not get POVs.
  9. GRRM spoke of echoes WE HAVE SEEN. If we have not SEEN it, then it does not fit his words. Sorry! But we were not having an argument of whether or not Mel might be an unperson. Nice try with changing the subject. For the record, I concede it is possible Mel might be an unperson. But she is apparently not one of the unpersons GRRM was talking about. She does not fit his words. Nobody has explained how he does. That's a big "if", since Bran does not recognize him. But suppose he is Benjen. What mission that he had in life is he now pursuing after death?
  10. They do not fit the bill We have not seen him come back from death. We have seen no loss of humanity. We have seen no focus on mission substituting for loss of humanity. He simply does not fit, sorry. We never knew her when she was alive. Hence, we never saw her come back from death. Hence, we have seen no loss of her former humanity. We know nothing of any mission she had in life which has become her focus in undeath. She simply does not fit. Sorry. Speculating that they might fit, if we knew more, does not help. GRRM spoke of echoes WE HAVE SEEN.
  11. GRRM never suggested only 3 return from the dead. He indicated that of those characters that have returned from the dead, "some" (evidently at least 3) have shown echoes of a particular pattern: focus on mission they had in life, which they focus on to compensate for a loss of humanity. I see no argument from you that we have seen this pattern with Coldhands. And if Coldhands was Benjen, would not Bran recognize him? Given that she was being strangled by a noose, it is (at the very least) PLAUSIBLE, that the word she screamed was not intelligible to her executioners, who hence would not have cut her down. Hence, we certainly do not HAVE to accept that she MUST be alive.
  12. "My characters who come back from death are the worse for wear -- in some ways they are not even the same characters any more. The body may be moving but some aspect of the spirit is changed or transformed and they've lost something. One of the characters who has come back repeatedly from death is a minor character named Beric Dondarion, the Lightning Lord. Each time he is 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 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 that he was once supposed to marry. Bits of his humanity are lost every time he comes back from death, but he remembers that mission. His flesh is falling away from him, but this one thing -- this purpose -- that he had is part of what is animating him and bringing him back to death[*]. And I think we see echoes of that with some of the other characters who have come back from death." From a 9/19/2011 interview. [*]sic. He presumably meant to say "from death".
  13. No. I considered him, and he does not fit. That example fails for the same reason as all the other examples that have been offered in this thread. And yes. I have considered Patchface too. He does not fit either. Please, if you are going to offer examples, please explain how they fit GRRM's words. Merely being arguably "undead" is not sufficient. > GRRM's comments about the word Brienne screamed and what else he > said seems to suggest she's still alive Not to me. That she said "sword" has long been a part of my UnBrienne theory.
  14. Sorry. But like the fellow who suggested UnMelisandre and UnMoquorro, you have avoided the actual question. Apart from being undead (which was not the issue) how does Robert Strong fit? Where have we seen his loss of humanity? Did he have any humanity to lose, and, if he did, did the readers know him enough to see him lose it? Have we seen (yet) any evidence of any focus on a mission from his life?
  15. Maybe. But whether they are "undead" was not the issue. You have changed the subject, and avoided addressing the issue. Neither UnMelisandre or UnMoqorro fit GRRM's words. We, the readers, have not seen them come back from death. We have seen no hints of their loss of humanity, as we never knew them when they were fully human. We have no knowledge of any missions they were given in life that they are pursuing in undeath. By this, you mean that there is no absolute PROOF; and that you intend to militantly ignore such evidence as is offered. You are not interested in the theory. Goodbye then.
×