Heresy 124

[Black Crow]

I'm sure this must have been asked before, but if they came for the first time during the LN, doesn't that imply they came more than once?

This is indeed what the text implies, but some people just don't like the notion. :cool4:

[wolfmaid7]

I agree with BC and the Shadow Dragon idea,and that's not to say this isn't significant.Shadows aren't just shadows in this story and who is to say what that really means,but it means something.

[Black Crow]

really!!! i must have missed that discussion when did that happen? I got thrown of path with the LN ended when the Others left comment.Well just for a short sum who was suppossed to have caused it from your point of view.I'm sorry i totally missed that conversation.

Its all tied up with the argument that if the white walkers are Craster's sons, then they are human changelings, not a different race, and if they are being changed them someone higher up the food chain is doing the changing and the white walkers are just the hired help rather than the masters.

[Black Crow]

I agree with BC and the Shadow Dragon idea,and that's not to say this isn't significant.Shadows aren't just shadows in this story and who is to say what that really means,but it means something.

That's why I used an initial capital for Shadow and suggested that if Redriver's theory about Winterfell is correct its not something so abstract as the absence of a Stark which is causing it, but the direct consequence of that Shadow being released by the destruction of the castle.

[Uldra I]

Its all tied up with the argument that if the white walkers are Craster's sons, then they are human changelings, not a different race, and if they are being changed them someone higher up the food chain is doing the changing and the white walkers are just the hired help rather than the masters.

Do you think this could be a mirror to Dany controls dragons; "the great other" controls WWs?

[wolfmaid7]

That's why I used an initial capital for Shadow and suggested that if Redriver's theory about Winterfell is correct its not something so abstract as the absence of a Stark which is causing it, but the direct consequence of that Shadow being released by the destruction of the castle.

Gotcha

[Black Crow]

Do you think this could be a mirror to Dany controls dragons; "the great other" controls WWs?

Depends how you define control I suppose, but at all events I'm not ready to buy into Mel's script and recognise R'hllor and the Great Other as the protagonists in this story.

[Uldra I]

Depends how you define control I suppose, but at all events I'm not ready to buy into Mel's script and recognise R'hllor and the Great Other as the protagonists in this story.

Me either. Just seems Martin uses a lot of symmetry in his story, or yin & yang. My thoughts were, since the dragons (fire made flesh) have a human controller, then, maybe the WWs (ice made flesh) side does too. Still the ever vigilant athiest, I don't subscribe to the R'hllor/Great Other theory either. Still believe there could be beings controlling either side of the argument though.

[Melifeather]

Feather Crystal, on 26 Jun 2014 - 10:22 PM, said:

I always thought this meant that the Night's King would rule the LN? Of course, he wasn't there during the first LN. Then wondered if the NK's transformation into a WW was only partial. That would mean he could still come out in the light of day to interact with men. Imo, WWs having someone who could parlay with the NW would have been reason to send the WW woman in to seduce the LC. They gained an ambassador. Talk about Icy Politics! This caused me to start thinking of Val, and her changes when she came back with the wildlings... grey eyes turned blue... wearing her sister Dalla's special white dress and slippers. (Queen beyond the wall garb?) She is out in the daylight so she isn't a full-fledged WW, she isn't a wight, dead with black hands, so what is she now? The Cracked Pot (me) says, she has been sleeping with an Other. (that 'lil hussy, oh the shame! :P)

ETA if Val is some sort of "ambassador" for WWs now, maybe she will be the one to tell us more about them and their motivations in TWoW.

Many times when Bran, Jon or Arya are in their wolves, they are dreaming. Sometimes I wonder if it is simply a wolf dream since there have been instances where they could not have been happening in real time like when Jon was Ghost running away from the moon and waking up in the morning with feathers in his face. However, this scenario of sleeping and being inside their direwolves makes me think that the Nights King also would "sleep" and rule the night as a White Walker. I am beginning to come around to the idea that there are skinchangers inside the White Walkers. Craster's sons would still be needed to create these white shadows, because they need to be birthed, but once made a skinchanger slips their own skin to inhabit the icy creature. This leaves room for a "corpse" Queen, as the 13th Commander could have chased the female Other, and maybe stumbled upon the sleeping skinchanger. She then could have taught him how to skinchange into his own icy creature, and the sacrifices were to make more for the Nights King's followers. Craster may not have been aware of what was happening to his sons. Actually, I'm pretty confident that he had no idea and was taught the practice by his wives.

[addicted to snow]

“The Others.” Sam licked his lips. “They are mentioned in the annals, though not as often as I would have thought. The annals I’ve found and looked at, that is…

“The Others come when it is cold, most of the tales agree. Or else it gets cold when they come. Sometimes they appear during snowstorms and melt away when the skies clear. They hide from the light of the sun and emerge by night… or else night falls when they emerge. Some stories speak of them riding the corpses of dead animals. Bears, direwolves, mammoths, horses, it makes no matter so long as the beast is dead. The one that killed Small Paul was riding a dead horse, so that part’s plainly true. Some accounts speak of giant ice spiders too. I don’t know what those are. Men who fall in battle against the Others must be burned, or else the dead will rise again as their thralls.”

“We knew all this. The question is how do we fight them?”

“The armor of the Others is proof against most ordinary blades, if the tales can be believed,” said Sam, “and their own swords are so cold they shatter steel. Fire will dismay them, though, and they are vulnerable to obsidian” He remembered the one he had faced in the haunted forest, and how it had seemed to melt away when he stabbed it with the dragonglass dagger Jon had made for him. “I found one account of the Long Night that spoke of the last hero slaying Others with a blade of dragonsteel. Supposedly they could not stand against it.”

“Dragonsteel?” Jon frowned. “Valyrian steel?”

Please note what has been bolded in the above quote… It is quite clear that Sam has found written accounts of old tales… Tales that Sam himself doubts...

[redriver]

That's why I used an initial capital for Shadow and suggested that if Redriver's theory about Winterfell is correct its not something so abstract as the absence of a Stark which is causing it, but the direct consequence of that Shadow being released by the destruction of the castle.

That would make my theory incorrect,which it may well be,it's just a theory afterall.I think the shadow dragon thing was just a direwolf's perception of the burning of Winterfell.No dragon or anything other supernatural released imo.

[MaesterSam]

My thinking so far is they have been around, latently or 'other'wise since the beginning of the seasons on planetos. I agree with wolfmaid that WWs aren't normally aggressive. Something I has got them stirred up.

I'll try to find the text about the changes in Val.

I would really like this to be true. In the real world, wild animals are often misunderstood. They fight when provoked, or when you're in their territory, or if they have young nearby. Obviously the ww's are much more intelligent than animals, but I would still really enjoy learning that they are only attacking b/c "x" happened, and humans should have known better than to let "x" occur.

I believe you on Val, come to think of it I'm pretty sure it's come up before. As Black Crow mentioned, it's hard to say whether it was intentional or just a GRRM "oops" moment. (He really should post a list of known mistakes on his website, so we can know which discrepancies are real vs not).

A real one would have involved massive structural damage which some fool is bound to have noticed - and I'm not talking about Ramsay knocking the place about a bit because it must have come from deep down. This is why I suggest it wasn't a real one but a Shadow dragon and that the destruction of Winterfell didn't wake it but released it.

Ok yes, good point. If it was real it would have to have been a small one. Unless it somehow exited through the pools? Bran/Summer wouldn't have seen that part from his vantage point, if there is an exit from the lower levels that doesn't go by way of the stairs. The lowest level is said to be partially collapsed.....

But I realize I'm reaching here. It just seems strange that GRRM would bother putting in a random "oh look, there's a dragon above WF" moment, and then have it not really mean anything.

[addicted to snow]

When asked about Val's eye color change, GRRM said that he has made a number of mistakes on eye color & the sex of given horses… Interestingly, you will note, that he never said "Val's eye color change was a mistake"… You have to be very careful when interpreting GRRM's statements...

[Uldra I]

I would really like this to be true. In the real world, wild animals are often misunderstood. They fight when provoked, or when you're in their territory, or if they have young nearby. Obviously the ww's are much more intelligent than animals, but I would still really enjoy learning that they are only attacking b/c "x" happened, and humans should have known better than to let "x" occur.

I believe you on Val, come to think of it I'm pretty sure it's come up before. As Black Crow mentioned, it's hard to say whether it was intentional or just a GRRM "oops" moment. (He really should post a list of known mistakes on his website, so we can know which discrepancies are real vs not).

Ok yes, good point. If it was real it would have to have been a small one. Unless it somehow exited through the pools? Bran/Summer wouldn't have seen that part from his vantage point, if there is an exit from the lower levels that doesn't go by way of the stairs. The lowest level is said to be partially collapsed.....

But I realize I'm reaching here. It just seems strange that GRRM would bother putting in a random "oh look, there's a dragon above WF" moment, and then have it not really mean anything.

Mel birthed a man-sized shadow creature from an small woman-sized womb. ;) and I agree, surely Martin wouldn't have wasted time on a detail like that if it was meaningless. It could however have been only a foreshadowing of the real dragons to come.

[JNR]

Secondly, and less mischievously. According to Sam they are mentioned in the Annals and by the nature of such annals that will be actual records of their turning up somewhere, not the vague references in passing suggested by JNR, but Sam also says that they are not mentioned as often as he would have expected.

It's curious that you read "mention" and you assume this must mean some sort of encounter.

Heresy itself is filled to the bursting point with countless mentions of the Others, yet I daresay not a man among us has encountered them... at least, none that I recall...

If one were to do a text search of all the books for mentions of the Others, one would discover the same. They are mentioned endlessly, but only encountered twice.

“The Others come when it is cold, most of the tales agree. Or else it gets cold when they come. Sometimes they appear during snowstorms and melt away when the skies clear. They hide from the light of the sun and emerge by night… or else night falls when they emerge. Some stories speak of them riding the corpses of dead animals. Bears, direwolves, mammoths, horses, it makes no matter so long as the beast is dead. The one that killed Small Paul was riding a dead horse, so that part’s plainly true. Some accounts speak of giant ice spiders too. I don’t know what those are. Men who fall in battle against the Others must be burned, or else the dead will rise again as their thralls.”

Notice how closely this parallels Old Nan's stories... which, btw, five books into a seven book series, only reference the Others as having come in the Long Night.

Never are we told that she has a tale about any subsequent appearance. So it's not very surprising when Jon says

"We knew all this. The question is how do we fight them?”

They knew it because it's just standard mythology on the Others (cf. Old Nan), plus Sam's discovery of the power of dragonglass.

What is very surprising is that in looking over Sam's long quotation above, we find...no references to Craster of any sort. Nor anyone acting like Craster. Nothing whatsoever, not a wee spoonful, about men giving up babies in the woods and these babies becoming Others.

Not then... not later... not ever, to show that he sees Craster or Craster types as directly linked to the Others. Not in Sam's speech, nor in his thoughts.

If Sam sincerely believes Craster or his wives have a thing to do with the Others, he's done a astonishingly good job of concealing that notion from Jon, himself, and us.

I'm sure this must have been asked before, but if they came for the first time during the LN, doesn't that imply they came more than once?

Well, suppose I say that in 1960... for the first time... America elected a Catholic for its president. Would that perfectly true statement imply it's happened more than once?

I think the main point is that the Others never came before the Long Night, never in any tales Old Nan has heard. Which, phrased another way, is to say that they never once came in all the endless millennia that Westeros was ruled by the CotF and giants, and they never came in the Dawn Age, either. They came long after.

[JNR]

Another interesting quotation:

The Others are as dead as the children of the forest, gone eight thousand years.

The speaker is Ned Stark, latest in an endless chain of Starks, whom Heresy believes to have a direct connection with the Night's Watch.

In fact, I've frequently seen it suggested that the Stark in Winterfell can actually issue commands to the Watch in certain cases. That suggestion has considerable merit. Artos Stark, for instance, commanded the Watch to take specific action in the time of Raymund Redbeard, only 200 years or so back.

Hence my question: If the Others encountered the Night's Watch more recently than eight thousand years ago... how is it possible that the Stark in Winterfell (Ned) never heard of any such event, as the above quote conclusively proves? Never heard a rumor, a myth, a legend, a hint, an account? Not a thing?

We can just say "Oh, Ned is wrong" -- as indeed he is, for they aren't dead and gone.

But if we do that, then we must let go of the idea that the Starks and the Watch are directly connected, because they can't be. Such a thing as a new encounter with the Others, even once, would have echoed from the Wall down to the Starks long, long before, and never been forgotten.

[TheButcherCrow]

<snip>

What is very surprising is that in looking over Sam's long quotation above, we find...no references to Craster of any sort. Nor anyone acting like Craster. Nothing whatsoever, not a wee spoonful, about men giving up babies in the woods and these babies becoming Others.

Not then... not later... not ever, to show that he sees Craster or Craster types as directly linked to the Others. Not in Sam's speech, nor in his thoughts.

If Sam sincerely believes Craster or his wives have a thing to do with the Others, he's done a astonishingly good job of concealing that notion from Jon, himself, and us.

<snip>

If I might hazard an explanation for Sam not mentioning the Craster connection that may be a bit more plausible to you than my usual, "he was in shock when she said it" argument (a fine argument if you ask me but whatever :) )

Your own characterization of Sam when raising this issue may just hold the key. He is intelligent, westerosi-intelligent, that means the dubious wisdom of the Maesters. Is it possible JNR, that Sam has simply done what you've done and dismissed Mrs Craster's assertion as fantasy ?

Well, suppose I say that in 1960... for the first time... America elected a Catholic for its president. Would that perfectly true statement imply it's happened more than once?

It's still an open ended phrase, "in the Long Night the Others came for the first time", so either they have come again since the first time they came or they haven't, the phrase itself really proves nothing (which I now suspect was your point ;) )

[Phillip Frye]

When asked about Val's eye color change, GRRM said that he has made a number of mistakes on eye color & the sex of given horses… Interestingly, you will note, that he never said "Val's eye color change was a mistake"… You have to be very careful when interpreting GRRM's statements...

'I don't know what you mean by "glory",' Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. 'Of course you don't — till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'

'But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument",' Alice objected.

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'

[Uldra I]

'I don't know what you mean by "glory",' Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. 'Of course you don't — till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'

'But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument",' Alice objected.

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'

:lol:

PF: is there an actual Humpty Dumpty tale you referenced? Think I would enjoy reading it. :)

eta: every author, aspiring or old hat, should keep these words posted on the wall in front of them.

[Mace Cooterian]

snip

What is very surprising is that in looking over Sam's long quotation above, we find...no references to Craster of any sort. Nor anyone acting like Craster. Nothing whatsoever, not a wee spoonful, about men giving up babies in the woods and these babies becoming Others.

Not then... not later... not ever, to show that he sees Craster or Craster types as directly linked to the Others. Not in Sam's speech, nor in his thoughts.

If Sam sincerely believes Craster or his wives have a thing to do with the Others, he's done a astonishingly good job of concealing that notion from Jon, himself, and us.

If I might hazard an explanation for Sam not mentioning the Craster connection that may be a bit more plausible to you than my usual, "he was in shock when she said it" argument (a fine argument if you ask me but whatever :) )

Your own characterization of Sam when raising this issue may just hold the key. He is intelligent, westerosi-intelligent, that means the dubious wisdom of the Maesters. Is it possible JNR, that Sam has simply done what you've done and dismissed Mrs Craster's assertion as fantasy ?

I would offer another possible explanation and parsing this down to its finite elements......Sam is in the same boat as we readers. He has not been able to read enough books (and information) to formulate an answer or an explanation for Jon. Sam has explained that there are other books that he has not read......and we as readers are in a holding pattern until TWoW.

It is as they say in the South....putting a mud ball on the end of a stick and slinging it. You don't know where it's going to fall.