Heresy 136 The Heart of Darkness

[Black Crow]

Maybe neither nor? "It only ends once, everything else is just progress."

That we have to wait and see, but as I said earlier when you set up a particular situation you do rather narrow the options for the outcome, and having so carefully set up this particular one I really don't see anything so pedestrian as Bran being given the secret of how to defeat the Others and then sent on his way with a pat on the back and a handful of loose change from the poor-box. What goes down in the cave is going to be much more significant and it may not be pretty.

[alienarea]

That we have to wait and see, but as I said earlier when you set up a particular situation you do rather narrow the options for the outcome, and having so carefully set up this particular one I really don't see anything so pedestrian as Bran being given the secret of how to defeat the Others and then sent on his way with a pat on the back and a handful of loose change from the poor-box. What goes down in the cave is going to be much more significant and it may not be pretty.

Not disagreeing. Bran will go to the dark side and Meera might be the soft spot that brings him back or makes him lower his defences long enough to get killed.

[wolfmaid7]

Are we running out of Heresy?

Nah not ever.

In GRRM's version its made pretty clear to Bran that he is and always was intended as Kurtz' successor and if Bran actually does do the necessary with his sharp little knife it will be a matter of ritual rather than murder. I think its the supplementary question which is going to be more critical to the story; whether in spite of the wights he then escapes from the cave, or whether it is going to be Jon who breaks the cycle as Willard to Bran's Kurtz?

I can see GRRM making it ritualistic by having Bran kill his predecessor,but as i said before this story is shaping up and looking awfully like the "wheel of the year" and it surrounds two individuals.So its either Jon takes out BR or Jon takes out Bran(sniffles).I'm hoping that two of them can restore the cycle how its meant to be,but its intriguing that Dany's transformation mirror's Bran's so far and mabe she'll be his sub.Again though Mel's interpretation is usually wrong i think she is correct in that since the dawn of time there has been only two.The way she personfied and made one the villain was wrong because she does not understand that this is natural.But to go back to the Heart of Darkness theme its very possible for either or to get corrupted.I'm not sure 1 GS could handle the whole wheel unless GRRM goes with another interpretation where instead of two we have one that is two.

That we have to wait and see, but as I said earlier when you set up a particular situation you do rather narrow the options for the outcome, and having so carefully set up this particular one I really don't see anything so pedestrian as Bran being given the secret of how to defeat the Others and then sent on his way with a pat on the back and a handful of loose change from the poor-box. What goes down in the cave is going to be much more significant and it may not be pretty.

Yeah me neither,these forces don't mean or need to be destroyed they need to be bridled.

Not disagreeing. Bran will go to the dark side and Meera might be the soft spot that brings him back or makes him lower his defences long enough to get killed.

I hope not i really hope not,i'd hate for Jon to have to stick him with the pointy end.That will be way to bitter.

[Eira Seren]

Speaking of allusions...

In pursuing the obvious Kurtz/Bloodraven parallel I hadn't considered Dany, but given the way that this story is mirrored between Ice and Fire it makes some sense and in this context its interesting to note how the slavers' complaint that Dany has ruined the trade on the coast has its counterpart in the Manager's complaint that Kurtz has ruined the trade in the interior.

More broadly speaking I agree that the allusions are also far broader in that the overriding theme of the whole book is this business of unintended consequences; on the one hand of upsetting the natural order through the destructive encroaching on different realms and cultures and through misguidedly imposing inappropriate solutions which get disastrously out of hand.

In this particular regard both Jon and Dany have tried to impose their solutions and both have come badly unstuck. In Dany's case her bonding with the dragon and by extension Fire suggests that what happens next won't be business as usual with attitude but something more of a shift change and that in turn suggests that Jon's outcome will not be anything so pedestrian as revival by Mel, learn how to defeat the Others, maybe get to ride a dragon on the way etc etc etc, but rather an embracing of Ice as Dany is embracing Fire; but how that's going to actually work...

Well, that's Dany's campaign all over. "Embracing" is a good description. In the past it's been discussed and speculated about the cold being within, or rather becoming part of Jon. It's a nice parallel with Dany, who likes super-heated baths, and who appears to be bonding with heat and with Drogon at the same time. There's a passage in ADWD, near the end, where the fire she feels internally may not merely be the work of fever. Am willing to bet you're right, and that kind of bonding is going to involve some serious personal transformation, just as Bran's bonding will (and Bloodraven's already has).

That we have to wait and see, but as I said earlier when you set up a particular situation you do rather narrow the options for the outcome, and having so carefully set up this particular one I really don't see anything so pedestrian as Bran being given the secret of how to defeat the Others and then sent on his way with a pat on the back and a handful of loose change from the poor-box. What goes down in the cave is going to be much more significant and it may not be pretty.

Are you imagining another large-scale event? I also see Bran as having the potential to make some mistakes. . . He is so closely bonded with Summer, however, that it may help keep him on track. Both Jon and Robb ignore Ghost and Grey Wind, and make some serious errors of judgement as a result.

Nah not ever.

I can see GRRM making it ritualistic by having Bran kill his predecessor,but as i said before this story is shaping up and looking awfully like the "wheel of the year" and it surrounds two individuals.So its either Jon takes out BR or Jon takes out Bran(sniffles).I'm hoping that two of them can restore the cycle how its meant to be,but its intriguing that Dany's transformation mirror's Bran's so far and mabe she'll be his sub.Again though Mel's interpretation is usually wrong i think she is correct in that since the dawn of time there has been only two.The way she personfied and made one the villain was wrong because she does not understand that this is natural.But to go back to the Heart of Darkness theme its very possible for either or to get corrupted.I'm not sure 1 GS could handle the whole wheel unless GRRM goes with another interpretation where instead of two we have one that is two.

Yeah me neither,these forces don't mean or need to be destroyed they need to be bridled.

I agree. In fact, I think the whole series is built around this idea, and one of the main tensions is how to "bridle" them, when there are so many forces (and human hearts) involved.

[Eira Seren]

Just on a slight tangent for a giggle, I found this passage from Conrad's book to be very evocative of the pointlessness of the Nights Watch vigil and how they relate to the great unknown beyond the Wall:

Watching a coast as it slips by the ship is like thinking about an enigma. There it is before you - smiling, frowning, inviting, grand, mean, insipid, or savage, and always mute with an air of whispering, Come and find out. Thiis one was almost featureless, as if still in the making, with an aspect of monotonous grimness... We pounded along, stopped, landed soldiers; went on, landed custom-house clerks... landed more soldiers - to take care of the custom-house clerks, presumably. Some, I heard, got drowned in the surf; but whether they did or not, nobody seemed particularly to care. They just flung them out there, and on we went... Once I remember we came upon a man-of-war anchored off the coast. There wasn't even a shed there, and she was shelling the bush. It appears the French had one of their wars going on thereabouts... In the empty immensity of earth, sky, and water, there she was, incomprehensible, firing into a continent. Pop, would go one of the eight inch guns; a small flame would dart and vanish, a little white smoke would disappear, a tiny projectile would give a feeble screech - and nothing happened. Nothing could happen. There was a touch of insanity in the proceeding, a sense of lugubrious drollery in the sight; and it was not dissipated by somebody on board assuring me earnestly there was a camp of natives - he called them enemies - hidden out of sight somewhere.

The futility of the entire project. . . thanks for sharing this!

All right, I had my wife read to me the entire book on my drive from New Orleans to Shreveport today (I'm not sure if that says more for me as a poster or more for my wife as, well a good wife, probably the latter). It came back to me why I wasn't a big fan of the book in high school, namely the overly confusing narrative structure.

I do agree that this book does seem to be a big influence on Martin. I've also heard that Moby Dick is a big influence as well, maybe that should be our next book assignment.

Also, I wonder if the Russian with the jacket of many patches is our Patchface? Both seem to have a mixture of innocence and insanity and both seem to be happily oblivious to the misery around them. There has been a few threads that have questioned whether or not Patchface is talking directly to Bloodraven when he is in the rookery with the white raven. Also if you go with the comparisons with Bram Stoker's novel, Bloodraven is to Dracula as Patchface is to Renfeld.

In terms of the disjointed narrative, I think it's interesting in that (while confusing) it is symptomatic of Marlowe the traveler's experience, and perhaps also the disjointed nature of his understanding (which also has a lot of holes and confusion), and perhaps also the unraveling of his European ideas about the place going in.

Nice work, I never thought of the Russian as Patchface. Patchface has always struck me as a tad bit sinister, but maybe that's just down to the mix of 'innocence and insanity' as you put it.

In terms of the bolded, there's a suggestion that's finally made me quake in my boots. Postcolonial theory, oh, no probs, but Moby Dick? :worried: Guess I'm going to have to read it sometime in my life.

I've always had a little trouble understanding the true meaning behind HOD. Is the horror that Kurz sees, the fact that beneath our thin veil of "civilization", lies the heart of a savage?

Conrad's Africans aren't really painted in a terribly flattering light in my opinion. It seems that Conrad damns the Ivory traders in their comparisons to the savages, and the ridiculous futility of their attempt to maintain a "polite" society amongst the insanity of the jungle. In a way he (Marlow) seems to appreciate the fact that Kurtz embraces the savagery and sheds the pretenses, and in my opinion never really casts judgment on the role Kurtz takes as a deity.

On the other hand Conrad seems to acknowledge the abuses that the ivory traders heap upon the natives as well.

It's hard to make a parallel with Martin's Children and Conrad's savages (I won't use the term he uses most frequently in the book). We're given such a detailed look into the savage brutality of the kneelers, that it's hard to look at the Children whom we know very little about and make a comparison between the two. Perhaps the Wildlings may be a better comparison to Conrad's savages.

You're right, there are layers built in to how Conrad portrays the Africans. Really, very little about anyone in the novella is all that flattering. . . at times, Marlowe himself also reveals his own flaws. But I agree, the mix makes for some odd ambiguity.

Part of it may be down to Conrad himself, and the ideas he might have. In my version of HOD, a 1996 2nd edition in the "case studies in contemporary criticism" series, the introduction mentions Conrad's essay "Geography and some explorers," where he writes about his own interest in arctic exploration and also what the introduction describes as his own "lifelong fascination with maps."

(From the intro) "And it was Africa," Conrad writes,"the Continent out of which the Romans used to say some new thing was always coming," that seemed particularly fascinating. So much of that continent was unknown and unexplored that maps of whole regions of it would be covered by "exciting spaces of white paper." Thus, owing to its "regions unknown," the "heart of Africa" as represented by maps was "white and big" ("Geography" 19-20).

At about the age of sixteen, Conrad made a public committment to travel someday to unknown Africa. "One day," he recalls, "putting my finger on a spot in the very middle of the then white heart of Africa, I declared that someday I would go there" ("Geography" 24).

So from an early age, his ideas about what he'll find in Africa are already tinted with the mysterious unknown before he ever went to Stanley Falls (or the Heart of Darkness). . . (and the 'mysterious unknown' is just like the Southerner's ideas about the North). So whether or not Conrad realized it, or to what degree, helps me start to parse the definition of 'savage.' And mine is going to be different than someone who's views of a place were shaped by the late 1800's and the turn of the last century.

In GRRM's series, savages seem to be anyone North of the Wall, at least until we start poking at the idea that 'savage' may be less about a particular group of people, and more about someone's attitudes and actions toward other characters.

I like your analogy as to the consequences of trespassing, although of course the Westerosi mindset might be characterised more as the animals are properly locked up so why worry about them.

As to the Heart of Darkness/Winter, I think the point of this particular argument is that in Conrad's work as in GRRM's it has different layers of meaning: it is indeed a place - the dark realms beyond the Wall, but it's also at one and the same time those men who sought to destroy the forest culture and the weirwoods, including the Watch; those savage clans who fought the Watch; and the mad darkness of Bloodraven/Kurtz and so on. GRRM has repeatedly stressed that there is no Dark Lord, but Conrad's darkness and madness in all its forms is certainly present.

:cheers:

Its a very common theme in colonialism. The natives rub along quite happily in their own way, and then along come these tall strangers with metal weapons, horses, gunpowder, coca-cola... its not much wonder they would at the very least be regarded with awe if not outright reverence, until reality sets in. In the meantime there are also those like Kurtz, Bloodraven and the Nights King who are seduced one way or another into going native and joining the indigenous pop and even in fighting against the invaders.

I think that this is what we see all the way through this aspect of the story, with the crannogmen growing close to the children, the Nights King going native, Bloodraven doing the same and this whole unexplained connection of the Starks to Winter

Again, this reminds me of fairy tales, where a family is connected with some part of Faerie, and every few generations a family member will be in tune with or go off with the good folk. As it's sometimes described, they haven't gone native, but are just taking up with the distant cousins.

[Black Crow]

Are you imagining another large-scale event? I also see Bran as having the potential to make some mistakes. . . He is so closely bonded with Summer, however, that it may help keep him on track. Both Jon and Robb ignore Ghost and Grey Wind, and make some serious errors of judgement as a result.

Aaaargh... all quiet over the weekend and then a couple of really meaty posts just when I have to go to work, with only time to respond briefly to this para:

It probably depends on how you define a large-scale event. I'm thinking in terms of revelation rather action.

There's a certain expectation or even assumption out there in the wider forum that Bran will learn the secrets of the ancients and how to defeat the Others, that he will learn how to skinchange everything in sight from dragons on downwards and, Heavens to Betsey peer through the weirwoods of the past to see Rhaegar Targaryen wed Lyanna Stark and so on and so on...

I'm thinking in terms of something more fundamental in which we get or at least start to get revelations about what's really going on and the connections between the children and the Others and between the Starks and Winter and all or at least some of the hidden layers.

Something I think we still need to figure out properly is where Dany fits in, but more of that in a few hours.

[Frey family reunion]

Could archmaester Marwyn be playing a parallel version of Marlow? Who is off to get Kurtz (Dany) who is in or on the Heart of Darkness Drogon? the name Marwyn stuck out to me when i read Marlow probably not a connection but who knows

I agree that that Marwyn's enthusiasm in finding Dany mirrors Marlow's enthusiasm in finding Kurtz a bit. Plus both are avid travelers. It's interesting how little we've seen of Marwyn considering he was mentioned as a tutor to both MMD and Qyburn.

The futility of the entire project. . . thanks for sharing this!

In terms of the disjointed narrative, I think it's interesting in that (while confusing) it is symptomatic of Marlowe the traveler's experience, and perhaps also the disjointed nature of his understanding (which also has a lot of holes and confusion), and perhaps also the unraveling of his European ideas about the place going in.

Nice work, I never thought of the Russian as Patchface. Patchface has always struck me as a tad bit sinister, but maybe that's just down to the mix of 'innocence and insanity' as you put it.

In terms of the bolded, there's a suggestion that's finally made me quake in my boots. Postcolonial theory, oh, no probs, but Moby Dick? :worried: Guess I'm going to have to read it sometime in my life.

You're right, there are layers built in to how Conrad portrays the Africans. Really, very little about anyone in the novella is all that flattering. . . at times, Marlowe himself also reveals his own flaws. But I agree, the mix makes for some odd ambiguity.

Part of it may be down to Conrad himself, and the ideas he might have. In my version of HOD, a 1996 2nd edition in the "case studies in contemporary criticism" series, the introduction mentions Conrad's essay "Geography and some explorers," where he writes about his own interest in arctic exploration and also what the introduction describes as his own "lifelong fascination with maps."

(From the intro) "And it was Africa," Conrad writes,"the Continent out of which the Romans used to say some new thing was always coming," that seemed particularly fascinating. So much of that continent was unknown and unexplored that maps of whole regions of it would be covered by "exciting spaces of white paper." Thus, owing to its "regions unknown," the "heart of Africa" as represented by maps was "white and big" ("Geography" 19-20).

At about the age of sixteen, Conrad made a public committment to travel someday to unknown Africa. "One day," he recalls, "putting my finger on a spot in the very middle of the then white heart of Africa, I declared that someday I would go there" ("Geography" 24).

So from an early age, his ideas about what he'll find in Africa are already tinted with the mysterious unknown before he ever went to Stanley Falls (or the Heart of Darkness). . . (and the 'mysterious unknown' is just like the Southerner's ideas about the North). So whether or not Conrad realized it, or to what degree, helps me start to parse the definition of 'savage.' And mine is going to be different than someone who's views of a place were shaped by the late 1800's and the turn of the last century.

In GRRM's series, savages seem to be anyone North of the Wall, at least until we start poking at the idea that 'savage' may be less about a particular group of people, and more about someone's attitudes and actions toward other characters.

:cheers:

Again, this reminds me of fairy tales, where a family is connected with some part of Faerie, and every few generations a family member will be in tune with or go off with the good folk. As it's sometimes described, they haven't gone native, but are just taking up with the distant cousins.

I understand the method to Conrad's narrative, it just doesn't make for an easy read. As for Moby Dick, I started it a while back but didn't get very far before my attention wandered to another book. Other posters have commented that the Stannis-Davos-Melisandre dynamic mirrors the relationship of Ahab, Starbuck, and Fedallah. Although the relationship between Victarion and Moroqo seems a bit closer IMO.

[Melifeather]

I was watching a Breaking Bad marathon on Netflix this weekend and sometime early in season 2 one of the DEA officers referred to Heisenburg as "our Colonial Kurtz", presumably to describe a white American getting involved in a Mexican cartel drug ring, and of course the viewer knows the man as high school science/chemist teacher, Mr White aka "Heisenburg" who cooks a particularly pure form of meth. If you are one of a miniscule minority not familiar with the show, a quiet unassuming man recently diagnosed with lung cancer decides to manufacture meth in order to leave his family with enough money to be comfortable. Over 5 seasons we observe Walter White's descent into darkness and corruption and yet remain a sympathetic character to the viewer.

To relate this to our ASOIAF story, I think we haven't been privy to Bloodraven's dark side but the hints are there. Bran is being gently tutored and provided with a basic foundation, but the stairs going down (so to speak) are there.

[Black Crow]

You're right, there are layers built in to how Conrad portrays the Africans. Really, very little about anyone in the novella is all that flattering. . . at times, Marlowe himself also reveals his own flaws. But I agree, the mix makes for some odd ambiguity.

Part of it may be down to Conrad himself, and the ideas he might have. In my version of HOD, a 1996 2nd edition in the "case studies in contemporary criticism" series, the introduction mentions Conrad's essay "Geography and some explorers," where he writes about his own interest in arctic exploration and also what the introduction describes as his own "lifelong fascination with maps."

(From the intro) "And it was Africa," Conrad writes,"the Continent out of which the Romans used to say some new thing was always coming," that seemed particularly fascinating. So much of that continent was unknown and unexplored that maps of whole regions of it would be covered by "exciting spaces of white paper." Thus, owing to its "regions unknown," the "heart of Africa" as represented by maps was "white and big" ("Geography" 19-20).

At about the age of sixteen, Conrad made a public committment to travel someday to unknown Africa. "One day," he recalls, "putting my finger on a spot in the very middle of the then white heart of Africa, I declared that someday I would go there" ("Geography" 24).

So from an early age, his ideas about what he'll find in Africa are already tinted with the mysterious unknown before he ever went to Stanley Falls (or the Heart of Darkness). . . (and the 'mysterious unknown' is just like the Southerner's ideas about the North). So whether or not Conrad realized it, or to what degree, helps me start to parse the definition of 'savage.' And mine is going to be different than someone who's views of a place were shaped by the late 1800's and the turn of the last century.

In GRRM's series, savages seem to be anyone North of the Wall, at least until we start poking at the idea that 'savage' may be less about a particular group of people, and more about someone's attitudes and actions toward other characters.

Yes, its interesting that in the essay Conrad expressed a lot of interest in the blank spaces of the polar north as well as Africa. Rather topically he seemed to rather lose interest in the north after the expeditions to discover the fate of the Franklin expedition, hence his own journey up the Congo and the setting for Heart of Darkness. What's happening here is that GRRM has transferred the Heart of Darkness from Africa to the other blank space in the North which attracted the younger Conrad.

[Black Crow]

To relate this to our ASOIAF story, I think we haven't been privy to Bloodraven's dark side but the hints are there. Bran is being gently tutored and provided with a basic foundation, but the stairs going down (so to speak) are there.

Count me in as one of the miniscule minority, but otherwise yes, there are some pretty blatant hints in both Bloodraven and Bran talking about the darkness as something good. Both are literally in the darkness surrounded by skulls - and perhaps some of the same skulls seen by Melisandre. As Bran was seduced by Bloodraven to become part of that darkness, is Bran in his turn attempting to bring Jon into the darkness. It certainly feels that way.

[Black Crow]

I'm thinking in terms of something more fundamental in which we get or at least start to get revelations about what's really going on and the connections between the children and the Others and between the Starks and Winter and all or at least some of the hidden layers.

Something I think we still need to figure out properly is where Dany fits in, but more of that in a few hours.

You see, what bothers me a little about Dany is her relationship to Jon. On one level its easy enough to label them. Both are effectively mirrored in thought, word and deed; Jon trying to hold everything together up north and Dany likewise out east; both coming into a position of power and both coming to grief, etc etc. On that level it can be argued that Jon represents Ice and Dany represents Fire and that they are going to end up marrying or killing each other. Sorted. But of course it may not be that simple if we factor in R+L=J. Assuming this to be so its argued that Jon is the embodiment of Ice and Fire and therefore represents the balance between them. But whither then Dany? Is she just Fire and if Jon alone is the Chosen one where does that leave his mirror?

[Melifeather]

You see, what bothers me a little about Dany is her relationship to Jon. On one level its easy enough to label them. Both are effectively mirrored in thought, word and deed; Jon trying to hold everything together up north and Dany likewise out east; both coming into a position of power and both coming to grief, etc etc. On that level it can be argued that Jon represents Ice and Dany represents Fire and that they are going to end up marrying or killing each other. Sorted. But of course it may not be that simple if we factor in R+L=J. Assuming this to be so its argued that Jon is the embodiment of Ice and Fire and therefore represents the balance between them. But whither then Dany? Is she just Fire and if Jon alone is the Chosen one where does that leave his mirror?

I think Jon and Daenerys are set up as opposites, and view that as one reason to not believe Jon is Rhaegar and Lyanna's child. I think Rhaegar's child was successfully spirited away, but am torn as to whether or not that child was Aegon or Daenerys. If Jon Con wasn't with Aegon, I'd be more inclined to believe he's a fake.

....But we won't go there again...today anyway. :cool4:

[King Tyrion XX]

I don't think Jon is Ice and Fire.

Mance Rhaegar, his is the Song of Ice and Fire.

On 3 reads of the books I don't recall any hints of Jon embodying Fire.

If Mance is Rhaegar he embodies Ice and Fire together better than any other character we've seen.

[King Tyrion XX]

I think Jon and Daenerys are set up as opposites, and view that as one reason to not believe Jon is Rhaegar and Lyanna's child. I think Rhaegar's child was successfully spirited away, but am torn as to whether or not that child was Aegon or Daenerys. If Jon Con wasn't with Aegon, I'd be more inclined to believe he's a fake.

....But we won't go there again...today anyway. :cool4:

I think Darkstar was Rhaegar's son. Dany is a VERY interesting thought though :)

Black Crow: What will the next Heresy topics be focused on?

GRRM was a young man in the 60s. I could probably whip up an essay on his possible influences from Jim Morrison :P

[Melifeather]

One of the things I noticed about watching Walter White in Breaking Bad is that the viewing audience is descending into the darkness right along with "Heisenburg". You understand all the bad things he does and even start rooting for him.

I wonder if we, the readers, will feel the same about Bran as he descends into the heart of winter. Will GRRM take us there?

[Eira Seren]

I agree that that Marwyn's enthusiasm in finding Dany mirrors Marlow's enthusiasm in finding Kurtz a bit. Plus both are avid travelers. It's interesting how little we've seen of Marwyn considering he was mentioned as a tutor to both MMD and Qyburn.

I understand the method to Conrad's narrative, it just doesn't make for an easy read. As for Moby Dick, I started it a while back but didn't get very far before my attention wandered to another book. Other posters have commented that the Stannis-Davos-Melisandre dynamic mirrors the relationship of Ahab, Starbuck, and Fedallah. Although the relationship between Victarion and Moroqo seems a bit closer IMO.

Oh, sorry, of course, that's me blathering again. I think I've read it a couple of times now, and each time it seems like the pieces fit differently.

Not sure how I'll get thru Moby Dick, but will just have to soldier on. Though having a character named Starbuck makes me a little hopeful. Moquorro is such a latecomer that he tends to slip under my radar, am guessing it's no accident that he's where he is, and Qyburn, too.

To relate this to our ASOIAF story, I think we haven't been privy to Bloodraven's dark side but the hints are there. Bran is being gently tutored and provided with a basic foundation, but the stairs going down (so to speak) are there.

Would you say Bran's descent started with the stairs in the well at the Nightfort gate? Or perhaps the stairs in the Winterfell crypt. . .

If some are right, the heart of darkness winter may be underground :)

Yes, its interesting that in the essay Conrad expressed a lot of interest in the blank spaces of the polar north as well as Africa. Rather topically he seemed to rather lose interest in the north after the expeditions to discover the fate of the Franklin expedition, hence his own journey up the Congo and the setting for Heart of Darkness. What's happening here is that GRRM has transferred the Heart of Darkness from Africa to the other blank space in the North which attracted the younger Conrad.

Also, shortly after the series opens Benjen's ranging party goes missing on an expedition. . .

Aaaargh... all quiet over the weekend and then a couple of really meaty posts just when I have to go to work, with only time to respond briefly to this para:

It probably depends on how you define a large-scale event. I'm thinking in terms of revelation rather action.

There's a certain expectation or even assumption out there in the wider forum that Bran will learn the secrets of the ancients and how to defeat the Others, that he will learn how to skinchange everything in sight from dragons on downwards and, Heavens to Betsey peer through the weirwoods of the past to see Rhaegar Targaryen wed Lyanna Stark and so on and so on...

I'm thinking in terms of something more fundamental in which we get or at least start to get revelations about what's really going on and the connections between the children and the Others and between the Starks and Winter and all or at least some of the hidden layers.

Something I think we still need to figure out properly is where Dany fits in, but more of that in a few hours.

Ok, am sorry to throw that one at you right at the moment you were trying to head out the door.

One of the things I noticed about watching Walter White in Breaking Bad is that the viewing audience is descending into the darkness right along with "Heisenburg". You understand all the bad things he does and even start rooting for him.

I wonder if we, the readers, will feel the same about Bran as he descends into the heart of winter. Will GRRM take us there?

Hmm, I bet he will. Only because he set us up for it with Bran's vision into the Heart of Winter. The problem, though, will be the reveal: how to keep it satisfying.

And I bet we'll go right along with him just as we do with Walt (easy is the descent into hell). Or Tyrion. And perhaps, Stannis (though GRRM leans heavily on the fact that Stannis going to help the NW makes him a good guy). Yes, but Mel.

[Eira Seren]

You see, what bothers me a little about Dany is her relationship to Jon. On one level its easy enough to label them. Both are effectively mirrored in thought, word and deed; Jon trying to hold everything together up north and Dany likewise out east; both coming into a position of power and both coming to grief, etc etc. On that level it can be argued that Jon represents Ice and Dany represents Fire and that they are going to end up marrying or killing each other. Sorted. But of course it may not be that simple if we factor in R+L=J. Assuming this to be so its argued that Jon is the embodiment of Ice and Fire and therefore represents the balance between them. But whither then Dany? Is she just Fire and if Jon alone is the Chosen one where does that leave his mirror?

Forgot to add, that Shakespeare always seemed to get rid of the "mirror" by killing that character off :) Too simple?

[Har!]

One of the things I noticed about watching Walter White in Breaking Bad is that the viewing audience is descending into the darkness right along with "Heisenburg". You understand all the bad things he does and even start rooting for him.

I wonder if we, the readers, will feel the same about Bran as he descends into the heart of winter. Will GRRM take us there?

Not to go too far off topic, but (you knew there'd be a 'but,' didn't you?) does the audience descend with Walter White or is the audience instead introduced (as Walter White is) to a noir universe where, much as in the cinema of the 30s and 40s, the larger more systematic crimes are no longer even 'criminal' they are business?

WW has played by the rules his whole life but having been cheated out of his intellectual property is reduced to scraping by teaching HS and moonlighting as a car wash attendant, the latter of which is implicated in his contracting cancer. The future of his wife, disabled child and soon-to-be newborn are jeopardized by a medical 'industry' that bankrupts and impoverishes thousands while delivering wildly uneven medical care to the community at large.

Meanwhile he has his nose rubbed in the gross (in all senses of the word) earnings of the 'war on drugs' by his brother-in-law. It is a 'war' awash in money perpetuated by a cycle of violence that promises no end but does promise unending opportunity to its players on both sides of the legal fence.

One could say that WW the mensch 'descends' into darkness but isn't he also a chump who has awakened to find a world defined by darkness?

And with that epiphany he is confronted with opportunity and temptation, risk and reward, choice and damnation. But that knowledge also endows him with an agency he had hitherto lacked.

And so I think the audience identification is not so much with the evil deeds (well, those too insofar as they represent a big middle finger to the implacable forces that had hitherto circumscribed his life opportunities) as with the birth of autonomy. Walter White's newly discovered autonomy grants him the power of choice and he exercises it when deciding that he would rather 'rule in hell than serve in heaven.'

To bring it all back, this is where i see a tie-in with Bran (and Sansa for that matter). Both have been 'chumps' and both have endured an awakening thru the school of hard knocks. Each is currently being tutored by a 'player' and that hard-won knowledge could enable each to become a 'player.' But their budding autonomy and the choices they will be presented with will be fraught with danger.

So the audience is presented with the question: is it not better to develop the awareness and capacity of choice (even if one chooses poorly) than to remain ignorant/incapable of choice and autonomy in any meaningful sense?

The journey that results in a knowledge of darkness (and concomitant capacity to meaningfully exercise choice) may be a viewed as a descent into darkness, but isn't it really just an awakening to the existing, enveloping darkness of a flawed, corrupt universe? And isn't only thru such a journey that the resulting decisions, for good or ill, achieve true moral standing?

This narrative does seem to exclude the value of small virtues, the worth of hewing closely to the fine-texture of small deeds of compassion and kindness. This sensibility is quite likely the better moral guide than the most elaborate theology. Yet are the two schools of thought mutually exclusive? Can not one thru an awakening to the heart of darkness inherent to the world then choose to combat the darkness not thru great deed but thru small deeds of compassion and virtue? And so perhaps inspire others to do likewise?

Perhaps this is where we are confronted with the question of whether Gandhi could have halted Hitler... some moral choices, while remaining moral, may not 'measure up' to the challenge to be confronted. And so we return to the morally ambiguous choices regarding the use of deceit, threat and coercion... swords without hilts.

Will GRRM take us there?

I hope and expect so, and in order to do so he will have to fill in a bit more of backstory concerning the Singers etc in order to give the story arc the requisite emotional heft for the revelations (as noted by Black Crow) that will anchor the resulting ambiguity and prevent it from devolving into a 'white hats/black hats' scenario.

[lokisnow]

Hey heretics, long time no see though I have all the recent themed threads subscribed I have yet to read all of them.

I'm breaking in with an insight from listening to a combined of affc and adwd. From Jon 3 specifically. It is thus:

Stannis is not azor ahai reborn. He is the shrouded lord reborn!

Stannis is always described in terms of stone, especially when melisandre is described in terms of fire. He is never dedctibed in terms of fire as one would expect of rhloors champion. And his daughter bears the mark of the shrouded lord upon her face--greyscale.

Here is what Mel got wrong, she found a gods avatar she just did not find rhlloors. Stannis and the shrouded lords apoplectic blessing will reign plague down upon westeros.

It will also fill in the gaps of all four monotheistic deities. Earth and water, ice and fire. Stannis and theon, Jon and dany. Shrouded lord and drowned god, nights king and rhlloor.

And note that all four have undead servants.

Grey men consumed by greyscale.

Drowned men who can never die but rise again.

Wights and white walkers.

Melisandre and moqarro.

Theon has symbolically died and been reborn

Dany has symbolically died and been reborn.

Jon has symbolically died and is presumed to be reborn.

Stannis has ...?

[Black Crow]

Forgot to add, that Shakespeare always seemed to get rid of the "mirror" by killing that character off :) Too simple?

Not necessarily. GRRM has spoken in the past about a bittersweet ending so someone has to die. My problem with the mirror option is that [the possible complication of the R+L=J business aside] the Jon-Dany connection, fatal or otherwise seems rather too obvious. There is however another "mirror" in the contrasting fortunes of Jon and Bran and here I can see one of those sudden, brutal twists.