Jump to content

the trees have eyes

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by the trees have eyes

  1. On 10/19/2022 at 1:35 AM, Arthur Peres said:

    She hold part of the blame, but Ned and Catelyn being the biggest responsables.

    Sansa already saw Joffrey threat her younger sister with a real sword. She already saw Cersei demand her Wolf's head. She was already told that her father and his men were ambushed in the streets of KL, and that Jory, someone she knew personally was slain.

    She still went and use Cersei as a friendly sholder to cry upon and tell on her own father.

    If she and Arya were safe in White Harbor, a lot would change.

    Remember she intended to go to Robert and get him to order Ned to let her marry Joffrey.  But she was scared of loud, drunk, boorish Robert so went to Cersei as more approachable.  Naïve?  Sure.  Willing to ignore the flaws in Joffrey's character out of puppy love and to ignore the flaws in Cersei's because most of the time Cersei acted like her idea of a proper Queen and showed her a kind face?  Absolutely.

    Even an adult overcome with love and seeing their hopes and dreams dashed could be foolish and display poor judgment but she's a 12 year-old child not an adult and we should always bear that in mind.

    Not a lot would change.  Ned would still send his best guards with Beric, warn Cersei to flee, ignore Renly's offer of assistance and advice to strike first and trust LF to bring the Goldcloaks in on his side.  Ned would still be captured, Robert murdered and the Lannisters seize power.  Robb would still raise his banners and come south to rescue Ned who would still be executed by a spiteful Joffrey, just without declaring his guilt in an effort to save his daughters.  TWot5K would still rage and Robb be murdered at The Red Wedding.  If Sansa and Arya had returned north to WF either they would have ended as Theon's prisoners and Sansa as Theon's wife as he fantasized before ultimately becoming Ramsay's bride; or they would have hidden in the crypts and be on the run as Bran and Rickon are.  Stannis would still look to make Jon king in the North Lord of Winterfell and it's likely Robb, still believing Sansa and Arya dead or captive, would make Jon his heir.

    GRRM is taking House Stark down: in KL, at WF and at The Twins.  Sansa's crush on Joffrey (the result of a betrothal arranged by the King and her parents) is not to blame.

  2. 20 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

    The funny thing there actually is that Jon doesn't really have a deeper or meaningful connection with Ygritte. Theirs is the perfect example for a romance or affair which works for a time almost completely on the basis of adolescent hormones running amok. Jon doesn't think Ygritte is pretty until after they start having sex - which fits with him being basically drunk on hormones.

    Not everyone falls in love at first sight.  People grow on one another.  As for Jon being drunk on teenage hormones or blinded by sex, his view of her changes long before they sleep together:

    A Storm of Swords - Jon II

    The wildlings seemed to think Ygritte a great beauty because of her hair; red hair was rare among the free folk, and those who had it were said to be kissed by fire, which was supposed to be lucky. Lucky it might be, and red it certainly was, but Ygritte's hair was such a tangle that Jon was tempted to ask her if she only brushed it at the changing of the seasons.
    At a lord's court the girl would never have been considered anything but common, he knew. She had a round peasant face, a pug nose, and slightly crooked teeth, and her eyes were too far apart. Jon had noticed all that the first time he'd seen her, when his dirk had been at her throat. Lately, though, he was noticing some other things. When she grinned, the crooked teeth didn't seem to matter. And maybe her eyes were too far apart, but they were a pretty blue-grey color, and lively as any eyes he knew. Sometimes she sang in a low husky voice that stirred him. And sometimes by the cookfire when she sat hugging her knees with the flames waking echoes in her red hair, and looked at him, just smiling . . . well, that stirred some things as well.
    But he was a man of the Night's Watch, he had taken a vow. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. He had said the words before the weirwood, before his father's gods. He could not unsay them . . .
    There's your sexual predator.  A girl singing in a low husky voice and smiling at the man she is stirring things in.  He even regrets he can't, i.e. shouldn't, sleep with her.
    19 hours ago, SeanF said:

    YMMV, but I think it does matter.  This isn't about harassing a monk who wants to remain chaste.  It's about harassing someone who (unknown to you) is already planning your death.  Jon does not specifically intend for Ygritte to die, but he is planning on betraying the wildlings to their deaths.

    Exactly, e.g. later on in the caves:

    A Storm of Swords - Jon V

    "Yes." His voice was thick. "First we'll live."
    She grinned at that, showing Jon the crooked teeth that he had somehow come to love. Wildling to the bone, he thought again, with a sick sad feeling in the pit of his stomach. He flexed the fingers of his sword hand, and wondered what Ygritte would do if she knew his heart. Would she betray him if he sat her down and told her that he was still Ned Stark's son and a man of the Night's Watch?
    Or at Greyguard:

    A Storm of Swords - Jon V

    If the Magnar takes Castle Black unawares, it will be red slaughter, boys butchered in their beds before they know they are under attack. Jon had to warn them, but how? He was never sent out to forage or hunt, nor allowed to stand a watch alone. And he feared for Ygritte as well. He could not take her, but if he left her, would the Magnar make her answer for his treachery? Two hearts that beat as one . . .
    They shared the same sleeping skins every night, and he went to sleep with her head against his chest and her red hair tickling his chin. The smell of her had become a part of him. Her crooked teeth, the feel of her breast when he cupped it in his hand, the taste of her mouth . . . they were his joy and his despair. Many a night he lay with Ygritte warm beside him, wondering if his lord father had felt this confused about his mother, whoever she had been. Ygritte set the trap and Mance Rayder pushed me into it.
    Of course he cares for her and the knowledge that he will betray her and likely cause her death troubles him deeply.
  3. 10 hours ago, Aebram said:

    In a culture where a man acquires a wife by stealing her from her family, the concept hardly even seems to apply.

    There's also the point that, as Jon spares her life when he captures her, she considers he already stole her:

    A Storm of Swords - Jon III

    And when the Thief was in the Moonmaid, that was a propitious time for a man to steal a woman, Ygritte insisted. "Like the night you stole me. The Thief was bright that night."
    "I never meant to steal you," he said. "I never knew you were a girl until my knife was at your throat."
    From our pov she definitely pressures him for sex and he is conflicted because he is still a man of the NW and does not want to get too close to the enemy.  He definitely wants to, though, that's obvious.  The clincher is after the slaughter on The Fist is discovered and both The Magnar and Mance suspect Jon of being a spy but Ygritte vouches for him.
    8 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

    Just because the person in question is fifteen, constantly horny, and eventually receptive to her advances doesn't make it right. Neither does the fact that Jon doesn't view himself as a victim there.

    The victim impact statement would be fascinating but it seems you would disregard all of it.  Where is the harm to Jon?

  4. 18 hours ago, The Commentator said:

    White Tree only had a few people. A band of Mance’s raiders could have easily killed them. The remains were cremated and fed to the tree to insult the Others.  More so if these were Craster’s people and came from the Stark bloodline. 

    Raiders do their thing south of The Wall not north of it.  And Mance is King of The Wildlings so why would he or "his" raiders destroy Whitetree?  Whitetree is the closest wildling community or village to The Wall, that's all.

  5. 8 hours ago, The Lord of the Crossing said:

    Craster was not burning his children.  The White Walkers were not killing them.  They were turning them.  His children had something in them that was special.  Their DNA.  They share the same DNA as the father of the White Walkers, the Night's King, who was a Stark. 

    The villagers at Whitetree were killing their offerings.  It's not the same thing other than they are all sacrifices one way or another.  Craster was giving to the White Walkers.  Whitetree people were giving to the Weirwood.  That they both live without getting murdered by the White Walkers meant they were somehow doing something which benefited. 

    Whitetree was abandoned, though.  Like all the other wildlings the villagers went to join with Mance and are fleeing south or are dead.

    Craster freely gives The Others what they want.  That makes him unique among humans north of The Wall - and he is reviled by the other wildlings for breaking this taboo - but there is nothing to say he is special in any other way.

  6. On 10/7/2022 at 11:13 PM, Darth Sidious said:

    You know, that is only a theory. And a poor one at that. Me, I believe Mance + Lyanna = Jon Snow. 

    Most of the damage in Westeros have so far been the result of a Stark’s poor decision. So I can agree with Khal Rhaego Targaryen. From Catelyn’s illegal arrest of Tyrion, Robb’s rebellion, to Jon’s inept leadership at the Wall. It’s the Starks causing problems. 


    On 10/8/2022 at 3:04 AM, Khal Rhaego Targaryen said:

    Who said jon is a Targaryen? D&D?? LMFAO :lmao:

    That's cute.  But neither of you is as funny as you think you are :rolleyes:

  7. On 10/3/2022 at 3:28 AM, Nevets said:

    Of course he wants FArya back.  She's his hostage against the Northerners.  Without her safety to worry about, there's nothing stopping them from tearing him into itsy bitsy pieces.  Her absence probably isn't known yet, but it will be, and he needs her back.

    Indeed, (F)Arya is essential to his claim to WF succeeding.  Until she bears him an heir he can claim to be the grandchild of Ned Stark he is on incredibly shaky ground.  He needs her back to cement his claim and establish his dynasty.  And as you say she is his hostage for the Northern Lords' good behaviour.  Without her he's a bastard Bolton in a Stark castle with no legitimacy and a whole host of enemies.

    Tywin proposed the same marriage-inheritance plan to Tyrion but with Sansa as bride.  That plan would collapse as well if Sansa ran off without Tyrion having an heir.

    I'm surprised there is an argument Ramsay doesn't want or need (F)Arya back.

  8. 11 hours ago, Rondo said:

    Jon is not the son of Rhaegar.  He is the son of Mance or even Brandon with Lyanna.  

    This made me laugh.  If there is an award for intentionally (or unintentionally) silly posts this is a contender.

    11 hours ago, Rondo said:

    Jon Snow attacked Ser Aliser.  

    Thorne is a political exile who chose The Wall over execution.  He didn't choose this life and he despises the boys he is obliged to train and is a bitter bully who taunts and abuses them.  Jon's original confrontation with Thorne and the reason for Thorne's enmity was Thorne urging the boys to continue beating the pitiful Sam who had yielded in the practice yard after being soundly thrashed.  Jon's first leadership role in the NW is to protect one of the recruits from a jaded and unpleasant bully.

    When Jon lashes out at Thorne it is after Thorne has taunted him over his father, "Not just a bastard, but a traitor's bastard".  Mormont showed his view of Thorne's behaviour by removing him from his position and sending him to KL to get him out of the way.

    11 hours ago, Rondo said:

    Oh yeah, Slynt disagreed with him and Jon murdered him.  

    Oh yeah, in a strictly hierarchical medieval military society "disagreeing" with your superior, actually open defiance, contempt and repeated refusal to carry out orders is called mutiny and is punishable by execution. 

    This isn't rocket science.

    12 hours ago, Rondo said:

    Jon is not going to sort anything out.  He created the problem at the wall.  

    The combined actions and mistakes of The Wildlings, Others and Mormont have created the larger problem and it is the arrival of Stannis together with Jon's promotion and policies that have steadied the ship.  Marsh and Ramsay may f*ck it all up but that remains to be seen.

  9. 6 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

    I always thought they wanted the babies because the babies could be made into new Others/White Walkers and not just wights like all the other dead people.

    Yes, that seems their object as evidenced by

    A Storm of Swords - Samwell II

    "The boy's brothers," said the old woman on the left. "Craster's sons. The white cold's rising out there, crow. I can feel it in my bones. These poor old bones don't lie. They'll be here soon, the sons."

    My point point is that are Craster's sons in some way special or just the most easily and reliably obtained human children, as in why look a gift horse in the mouth?

    1 hour ago, Melifeather said:

    Because any man of the Watch that accepts paternity is acknowledging that they are an oathbreaker and can be executed. An oathbreaker is cursed by the gods.

    Good point.  What would happen to the ranger who recognised the child as his?

    A Game of Thrones - Jon VI

    "Hear my words, and bear witness to my vow," they recited, their voices filling the twilit grove. "Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come."
    It's not so much about this conjecture, imo:
    On 9/25/2022 at 4:37 PM, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

    Why was baby Craster turned away at the wall?  Probably because his presence would create an awkward situation for a noble family who was particularly prickly about their honor.  Craster's father was a Stark. 


  10. On 9/25/2022 at 4:37 PM, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

    Craster's sons were special though.  The White Walkers allowed Craster, might have even protected him, to live in his keep.  All Craster did in return was to give them his sons.  His sons were more acceptable to the White Walkers and we have to ask why. 

    There is nothing to suggest that Craster's sons are special or preferable in any way.  As to why they take his sons, well, why not?  It's the same reason we domesticated animals, you keep them and tend them (or let them wander at pasture) and take a lamb or calf when you need one.  Much less effort than hunting or trapping though in this case the supply is not for food but for "adoption" or "conversion".

  11. 12 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

    If the story goes as written up until Daenerys gets the dragons but she doesn't get the dragons then no, I cannot see how she would be able to follow the storyline she did with the dragons. It would be a different story.

    Indeed.  No dragons, no bloodriders or Dothraki followers and off to the Dosh Khaleen with her.  No dragons, nothing to bargain for The Unsullied.

    The best way to see the dragons is as part of her.  She is the mother of dragons but without them she would have been in a tight spot after Drogo's death.  It's possible GRRM could have conjured up some escape with Ser Jorah but then she's in the middle of the Dothraki Sea with one follower.

    Of course she was doing just fine without dragons before Drogo's death, having embraced her role as Khaleesi, won Drogo's love and, after the botched assassination attempt, his commitment to conquer Westeros.  But GRRM then did one of his signature rug pulls by taking it all away from her except, for once, he made it a net win by giving her the dragons.

  12. On 9/9/2022 at 8:14 PM, Springwatch said:

    Cersei, at the time of the coup, to Sansa (who already knows the truth): "Why else should you have come to me and told me of your father's plan to send you away from us, if not for love?"

    Cersei, much later, to the brother she hates: "[...] If Sansa hadn't come to me and told me all her father's plans . . ."

    That is a big, big change, from, the plan to send you away, to all your father's plans. Cersei is not being honest here.

    Indeed, the only thing Sansa knows is that her father is sending her and Arya away and that she won't be allowed to marry Joffrey, which as an immature pre-teen she considers horribly unfair and so goes to the "kind" Queen rather than the "scary" King to try and get them to order her father to allow the marriage to go ahead.  I've never understood the condemnation of Sansa for "betrayal" rather than naivety and childishly poor judgment, things normally seen as eminently understandable and forgivable if frustrating.  Ned makes far too many mistakes of his own yet either Sansa or Cat seem to get the blame.  As far as Sansa knows her father and the King are best friends and she is betrothed to The Crown Prince, a Barratheon, so she is approaching the King through his wife, hardly an enemy from her pov.

    The exact timing of the strongwine given to Robert to induce boaricide is unclear but I think Ned has already told Cersei he knows about the paternity of her children and that she is moving against Robert and laying plans for how to deal with Ned.  The key element in Cersei's success / Ned's failure is of course LF's betrayal and the consequent trap Ned walks into, not Sansa's revelations.  At best, you could argue that Sansa's news make Cersei aware of the need for speed by clueing her into the fact that Ned is not just planning to lay his findings before Robert when he returns but to make his family safe and that this gives her tactical advantage and Sansa as a hostage (an unused hostage until later) but surely she has spies and can observe Ned's guards (few since he sent so many with Beric).  Without the Goldcloaks (i.e. LF) Cersei would have failed.

  13. 10 hours ago, Evolett said:

    I'm not saying it was. I'm saying the possible abduction of the young Lannister fits a pattern particular to Littlefinger. He's a long term planner capable of utilizing chaos to his advantage.

    It seems too great a risk and Tyrek is too incidental a character to take that risk for.  And direct intervention in a riot that saw one of the KG killed and the High Septon slaughtered could just as easily ended with Tyrek dead whatever LF intended.  LF's m.o. is to cause chaos, stand back and see which way events unfold then try and latch on to that.  An abduction seems too dangerous to both him and the intended abductee and I'm not sure how this would further any aims of his.

  14. 3 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

    This is the problem with introducing glamour magic.

    Well, I meant that people will see what they want to see if it entertains them or fits their theory, magic or no magic involved.  There is nothing for any of these assumptions and the glamour / Faceless Man magic works by assuming someone else's appearance. 

    The allegation that Craster is a Stark rests on the idea that his father was a ranger but we of course have no idea who and no idea if there was even a Stark / Stark bastard in The Watch when he was sired.

  15. 1 hour ago, Craving Peaches said:

    But is there any proof? Otherwise you can claim that anyone's a Stark.

    If Howland Reed can be the High Septon or Euron can be The Dusky Woman (or Daario Naharis) then anyone can be anyone :)

  16. 7 hours ago, The Mourning Knight said:

    Funny. I’ve actually always seen a parallel between the legend of The Night’s King and Jon’s career in The Watch. But I always thought that was the author’s way of showing how history becomes twisted as it passes into myth and hinting that the Night’s King may be more complex than a villain who simply gets off on how awesome the cold and darkness is.

    Interesting.  I never saw any reason to put any more stock in the tales of The Night King than in Garth Greenhand or Lann the Clever.  Or The Thing that Came in the night.  Stories that are Westeros's equivalent of Hercules or Pandora or Count Dracula.  But there is definitely something about how history becomes distorted and turned about over time and the stories of The Last Hero and Azor Ahai and maybe The Night King too are all in play.

    7 hours ago, The Mourning Knight said:

    I think a good ASOIAF conspiracy fills gaps and challenges the connections between characters and alliances etc., In order for this to have any pay off, GRRM would have to spend who knows how many pages revealing why this even matters. 

    I agree.  The apparent relevance I can see would be

    • The Others take Craster's children to join them.  Whatever ritual that required could be used on Jon / Jon's corpse if they recognised some kinship with him
    • The Others want Gilly's babe as an "offering" stolen from them and are determined to recover their lost brother
    • It ties the Starks to The Others as Craster "Stark" is shown to gift them his sons

    Against this it has to be said

    • the wight sent to kill Mormont had no problem trying to kill Jon and there seemed no recognition or consideration of  a Stark bloodline
    • Benjen has been missing since AGOT so, either they had no problem snuffing him out as well (or, if you prefer, you could argue they have already co-opted him into their ranks)
    • The Others' schemes were in motion long before Gilly gave birth.  Her babe's presence/absence seems an irrelevance to whatever they are intending
    • It appears to give Craster a pivotal role in the return of The Others, in a sense creating them with his "Stark"  sacrifices.  But there had to be someone for him to sacrifice to, so the argument becomes circular and his apparent importance diminished.

    It all feels a bit contrived and irrelevant to me.  I understand the thematic desire to equate Starks with Ice as Targaryens are equated with fire but I don't think that fits.

  17. 1 hour ago, Maia said:

    He also has to realize that Stannis came because, among other things, Melisandre made him believe that there was a real danger behind the Wall, while the NW has done shamefully little to try to convince other lords of the same.

    I think Davos brought Aemon's letter to him.  That combined with what Stannis sees in Mel's flames sways him.  The NW do write to everyone.  Only Stannis comes.

    1 hour ago, Maia said:

    That fool Thorne didn't even bother to show the wight hand around while Tyrion was snubbing him.

    I'm pretty sure the hand disintegrated on the voyage so there is no eerie twitching evidence to display.

    1 hour ago, Maia said:

    Jon announced that he was going to attack Winterfell with about 200-250 wildling who were present in the Shieldhall, rather than meet Ramsay somewhere on the Night Watch lands, though.

    A Dance with Dragons - Jon XIII

    Horse and Rory fell in beside Jon as he left the Shieldhall. I should talk with Melisandre after I see the queen, he thought. If she could see a raven in a storm, she can find Ramsay Snow for me.

    I know he says he will go to Winterfell alone if need be, but it doesn't seem like he's marching on Winterfell, he needs Mel to find Ramsay not the Kingsroad.

    1 hour ago, Maia said:

    Particularly after Jon repeatedly thought to himself in his PoVs that many in NW didn't approve of him and of what he was doing, after he himself questioned if letting the wildlings in wasn't a betrayal and a horrible mistake on the eve of welcoming Tormund's group  and after even that latter warned him that many crows would disagree with it.

    GRRM is all about how difficult leadership is.  If all the decisions were easy there would be no problems.  He goes a bit too far for me as all his leaders fail and usually quite spectacularly because they face impossible quandaries or betrayal.

  18. 13 hours ago, Nevets said:

    Another point: Jon can obviously say that Arya is a fake, which she is.  It doesn't mean he will be believed.  The Boltons will brand him as a liar, and Jon has clear motive in any event.  I suspect the Northerners would suspect he was lying to protect his sister, as well as cause trouble for the Boltons, although they would be happy to use Jon's statement against the Boltons.  Not that it's likely to matter.  FArya will probably come and go while Jon is out of commission.

    There is also (F)Arya herself.  As long as she is believed to be Arya Stark the Boltons need to possess her so Ramsay can have her produce what he claims is a Bolton-Stark heir to rally the Northerners around.  Her only options out are death, flight and hiding, or to reveal she is really Jeyne Poole and beg for mercy/asylum.  There is already suspicion about her identity, we see that with Mors Umber questioning her to see if she knew the people of Winterfell, sadly mostly now dead.  Her identity could be corroborated by either Jon or whatever survivors taken from Winterfell to The Dreadfort still live.

    13 hours ago, Hrulj said:

    (1) Tactically sound decision is not to attack and give Jon to Ramsay if he comes for him. That’s all. (2) It has no defenses south for that exact reason. 

    (3) as member of NW he can’t do that without involving NW. He swore an oath and has to stay at the wall. If he decides to leave watch should kill him. It is pathbreaking and crime is his and punishment was just. 

    (4) He can sit and surrender himself to Ramsay if it comes to that. Watch takes no part. 

    (5) wrong. Jon makes selfish decisions over and over again. If he wanted what’s best for the wall he’d accept Stannis offer or surrender himself. He’s a selfish teen who only looks out for things he cares for. 

    1.  But Ramsay has not just demanded Jon and he has not just threatened Jon if the other people he has demanded are not handed over, he has threatened The NW.

    2.  Obviously it's because Castle Black has no defences that Jon intends to meet him on ground he can have some advantage on.

    3.  There is no need to repeat (well, maybe there is) but Jon intends to take no members of The NW with him to face Ramsay.  He's threading the eye of the needle but given Ramsay's demands he's doing it pretty well. 

    4. Killing Jon or Jon surrendering is not the answer to anything.  Imagine if Ramsay turned up at Castle Black to demand Arya and then impaled Marsh and The NW present (like the Ironborn at Moat Cailin) for not complying.

    5. Jon refuses Stannis's offer to make him Lord of Winterfell, despite how much he reflects that he wants it.  He embraces duty instead.  How is refusing Stannis selfish? :huh:

    13 hours ago, Julia H. said:

    Lorch was following an order, not the law. The order, however, violated the principle of NW neutrality, which is a sign that this neutrality is not taken seriously by the royal court, and the NW should draw the conclusions. The order also targeted a boy who had done nothing wrong. That is very different from what Ned did with an obvious lawbreaker. And Ned was taking full responsibility for his verdicts, which is another reason why the comparison with Lorch does not hold. Lorch was a paid executioner not interested in whether the order he was following was just, while Ned himself made the decision that he thought was best for the country.

    Cersei sent six Goldcloaks after Gendry.  Lorch led one of the three reaving forces Tywin unleashed on The Riverlands (Gregor Clegane and Amory Lorch the others).  As well as causing mayhem, Lorch was looking for Dondarrion and I always thought he simply didn't believe Yoren's claims that they were not his men.

    12 hours ago, Nevets said:

    He sent Mance and the spearwives to the region near Long Lake to rescue the gray girl on a dying horse fleeing a wedding that Melisandre saw in a vision and believed was Arya. (It was apparently Alys Karstark). There is nothing in the text about Jon sending them to Winterfell, and his previous thoughts clearly indicated his belief that he could do nothing for her while she was under Bolton control.

    Why Mance went to Winterfell is a very good question; one we don't have an answer to.  I don't believe it's because Jon purposely sent him there.

    I don't really understand why Mance went to Winterfell given how far it is and he could easily have missed (F)Arya while heading there. 

    It could be he is determined to secure her so he could force Jon to hand over The Monster in exchange but I don't know if he knows his son is out of reach or why he would go to Winterfell rather than search around Long Lake assiduously.

  19. 8 minutes ago, Hrulj said:

    It has to be maintained by some nonetheless. Doesn’t matter. Jon should wait until Ramsay attacks and defend himself. He has no right to raise arms and attacks or defend off the wall. 

    It works both ways.  If Ramsay threatens The NW they can make tactically sound decisions.  Castle Black has no defences to the south so waiting for Ramsay to attack would be suicide.  And Jon of course takes no member of the NW to meet Ramsay (or at least that was the plan). He's attempting to meet Ramsay's challenge without involving the NW, that much is clear:

    A Dance with Dragons - Jon XIII

    The roar was all he could have hoped for, the tumult so loud that the two old shields tumbled from the walls. Soren Shieldbreaker was on his feet, the Wanderer as well. Toregg the Tall, Brogg, Harle the Huntsman and Harle the Handsome both, Ygon Oldfather, Blind Doss, even the Great Walrus. I have my swords, thought Jon Snow, and we are coming for you, Bastard.
    Yarwyck and Marsh were slipping out, he saw, and all their men behind them. It made no matter. He did not need them now. He did not want them. No man can ever say I made my brothers break their vows. If this is oathbreaking, the crime is mine and mine alone.
  20. This whole thing honestly baffles me.

    The only reason to connect The Night King with the Starks is Old Nan's ghost story told to Bran to give him the creeps.  In other words, if you don't see Old Nan as something magical or the Mystic Meg of Westeros, nothing at all.

    Warging or greenseeing are rare abilities that are connected to bloodlines but the Starks as a bloodline are hardly unique in this.  Borroq, Varamyr, Haggon, Bloodraven are all examples who have nothing to do with the Starks.

    Even then, what The Others are and how they control the wights is unknown.  There is no reason to presume reanimating and controlling a legion of corpses is a special warg ability.

    There is no reason to suppose Craster is a Stark.  As the son of a ranger we would need a suitable Stark ancestor a generation before Benjen to even be in the NW, something we have no indication of. 

    Craster propitiates "The Cold Gods" with sacrifices and is known as a friend to The Watch, in other words he plays it both ways.  He's an ambiguous bit part character with little page time who died several books previously.

    If Monster has this magical bloodline then so do all his brothers.  That would make Bran the ultimate red herring and the whole Leaf wandering the 7K looking for "the Bran boy" when there's a greenseer factory north of The Wall a colossal misunderstanding.  Why not try and poach one of them rather than let The Others take them all?

    The NK is supposed to have married a female Other.  That defies interpretation at present but a corpse bride would be more Lady Stoneheart than Arya.

    Where's all this Brandon and Lyanna incest talk coming from?  It's totally unsupported.

    I understand this sounds dark and subversive and turns our understanding and expectations on their heads, hence it's appeal, but it seems like it rests on one leap after another.

  21. 15 minutes ago, Hrulj said:

    Apples and oranges. People coming to aid the watch is not the same as watch raising arms and attacking warden of the North. 

    So we agree neutrality is unfeasible and undesirable in certain circumstances?

    Jon didn't.  Ramsay threatened him personally, the NW generally and Stannis's family and adherents specifically.  A lot of that refers to apples and oranges without any discrimination. 

    Of course Ramsay and the Boltons are threatened by (F)Arya reaching Jon.  He'll refute her identity and loyalty to "Ned's little girl" is all that is keeping the Boltons on their precarious and murderously-gained perch.  Mance's actions are obviously a provocation but as Stannis provides an alternative source of legitimacy and power to the Boltons the apples or oranges would both point them against The NW anyway. 

    Unless they had a man on the inside, or just a useful idiot, to take care of things for them.

  • Create New...