Do we really need Maggy's prophecy? Or did it really happen?

[Pod The Impaler]

This is a problem George touched with Mel too. Apparently, she killed Renly so that he would not defeat Stannis at KL; but killing Renly directly led to Garlan wearing Renly's armour and defeating Stannis all the same. Later, Mel thought in her POV that she needs to take action to prevent the bad visions coming true ("otherwise what is the point of seeing them" she thinks). That is the recipe for getting kicked in the balls each time by a prophecy.

Mel thinks she can force prophecy into conforming with what she imagines destiny is. Man-sized cold shadow exits her vagina and kills people? "Well, I'm righteous, so that must be the will of R'Hillor."

Of course the religious rocks that she is steering her ship of state towards is that the prophecies also speak of how false prophets untimately serve the darkness. So if it turns out Stannis is not Ahor Azai, then the false prophet is her. Oops.

[Ser Clay]

It's just an extra layer of world-flavor to peel back. Needed? Not exactly. Welcome? Most certainly. At least from me!

Look at that - your post convinced me to register after lurking for 3+ years! I love the ASOIAF'verse (as do we all, otherwise none of us would take the time to be here posting/reading/discussing, right?) and I must say: I appreciate every single word of the story. Even the highest of the high-fantasy elements that I've seen quite a few people 'poo-pooing' lately on "the internetz" are welcome additions to me.

In other words, yes I like Maggy the Frog's prophecy. And nice to meet you all. :)

[Pod The Impaler]

Yeah, I also don't mind Maggy's prophecy.

Once we see Cersei's POV, it makes for some great insight into how Cersei's mind works.

[MissMatchedEyes]

I also liked the prophecy scene. Somehow, on my first read, I missed that Maggy sucked their blood. That made it even more interesting because of the whole "blood magic" business and I see how is parallels Dany's own experience with it.

[Maid So Fair]

It's a great scene, but I hate that it gives Cersei a perfectly reasonable and justified reason to move against Tyrion and be over-protective about her kids. I liked her better as an unapologetic bitch. The only good thing about it is the irony that she had the perfect tool in her hands to prevent it from coming through when she got pregnant with Robert, but refused to take it out of pride and spite.

[Hangover of the Morning]

It's a great scene, but I hate that it gives Cersei a perfectly reasonable and justified reason to move against Tyrion and be over-protective about her kids. I liked her better as an unapologetic bitch. The only good thing about it is the irony that she had the perfect tool in her hands to prevent it from coming through when she got pregnant with Robert, but refused to take it out of pride and spite.

I am not a huge fan of the "prophecy" either because I think that it was completely unnecessary, but I certainly wouldn't say that it makes Cerseis actions understandable or gives her justification to treat Tyrion the way she does. There's nothing about Tyrion in the prophecy to begin with.

IMHO, Maggy did not see the future, she was just able to correctly assess Cersei's foul character and gave her an ominous fortune reading, knowing that it will probably haunt her. Cersei is that one who is bringing it to life and making a self-fulfilling prophecy out of it.

[Maid So Fair]

I am not a huge fan of the "prophecy" either because I think that it was completely unnecessary, but I certainly wouldn't say that it makes Cerseis actions understandable or gives her justification to treat Tyrion the way she does. There's nothing about Tyrion in the prophecy to begin with.

IMHO, Maggy did not see the future, she was just able to correctly assess Cersei's foul character and gave her an ominous fortune reading, knowing that it will probably haunt her. Cersei is that one who is bringing it to life and making a self-fulfilling prophecy out of it.

I agree with a lot of what you say, and it certainly seems to be at least partially self-fulfilling - her efforts to subvert the prophecy by getting rid of Marg will probably prove her undoing and it was arguably at least partially Cersei's obsessively protective upbringing that made Joffrey into a monster that the Tyrells would rather kill then work with.

But there must be something to the prophecy since I don't think things like the number of their children were easily predictable just by observing Cersei. Especially considering that the reasonable assumption might have been that Cersei will marry Rhaegar (it's certainly what she wanted and came to ask about) who wasn't exactly known for sleeping around. And Aerys wasn't that old at the time so how did she know she would marry a King? It's possible, and even likely perhaps, that Maggy did the same thing as Mel in seeing the (possible) future and Cersei did the rest in setting it in motion. I don't think it is necessarily inevitable, but the key thing is that Cersei believes it is.

And that's the problem with Tyrion: If you have a reasonable reason to believe that Maggy was right, and Cersei does, then the knowledge that 'a little brother' will first destroy her entire life and then kill her, trying to get him first is the logical thing to do, as is going against Margeary. Her interpretation of who's who is (probably) faulty, but the conclusion that it's preferable to make the first move isn't. Bitterness over her mother's death, jealousy, pride and ambition worked much better for me because they're still perfectly believable and she still ends up spelling her own doom, but without being pre-warned about doing so. The prophecy introduces and external element, however, and if it turns out to be correct it will be a case of her not just being delusional and paranoid all this time, because they REALLY were after her. It's like saying that your kindly and loving neighbour is trying to kill you, and everyone dismissing you as crazy for taking very stupid and paranoid precautions, only for it to turn out she actually IS a serial killer after you are dead.

[SnowHeart]

I find cerise a hilarious read, so the fact that the prophecy just adds to the paranoia and crazy is fine by me.

Also I am a huge fan of Jamie and Brienne, and convinced they will fulfil it, so am desperately hoping it comes true.

[Hangover of the Morning]

I agree with a lot of what you say, and it certainly seems to be at least partially self-fulfilling - her efforts to subvert the prophecy by getting rid of Marg will probably prove her undoing and it was arguably at least partially Cersei's obsessively protective upbringing that made Joffrey into a monster that the Tyrells would rather kill then work with.

But there must be something to the prophecy since I don't think things like the number of their children were easily predictable just by observing Cersei. Especially considering that the reasonable assumption might have been that Cersei will marry Rhaegar (it's certainly what she wanted and came to ask about) who wasn't exactly known for sleeping around. And Aerys wasn't that old at the time so how did she know she would marry a King? It's possible, and even likely perhaps, that Maggy did the same thing as Mel in seeing the (possible) future and Cersei did the rest in setting it in motion. I don't think it is necessarily inevitable, but the key thing is that Cersei believes it is.

And that's the problem with Tyrion: If you have a reasonable reason to believe that Maggy was right, and Cersei does, then the knowledge that 'a little brother' will first destroy her entire life and then kill her, trying to get him first is the logical thing to do, as is going against Margeary. Her interpretation of who's who is (probably) faulty, but the conclusion that it's preferable to make the first move isn't. Bitterness over her mother's death, jealousy, pride and ambition worked much better for me because they're still perfectly believable and she still ends up spelling her own doom, but without being pre-warned about doing so. The prophecy introduces and external element, however, and if it turns out to be correct it will be a case of her not just being delusional and paranoid all this time, because they REALLY were after her. It's like saying that your kindly and loving neighbour is trying to kill you, and everyone dismissing you as crazy for taking very stupid and paranoid precautions, only for it to turn out she actually IS a serial killer after you are dead.

I understand what you are saying and you are quite possibly right and Maggy was some kind of a prophet or was honestly able to see future. I am more of a skeptic in my heart and tend to lean forward to the more non-magical explanations.

Cersei becomes certain that the prophecy is true, once her friend dies, whom she murdered herself in order to "fulfil the prophecy". So she is very much the driving force of the prophecy and her actions towards Tyrion cannot be justified by having a reasonable cause to be scared of her little brother.

The prophecy is a mixture of things that Cersei had under control of or caused herself and external events. The actual numbers of Robert's children might seem eerie but it's a common thing to use a mixture of vague statements and specifics. We have no idea if Robert truly had just 16 bastards. It's highly unlikely that it's the final number. Besides, Maggy might have predicted another number and Cersei over time "adjusted" her memory to fit the reality.

I don't think it was Maggy's intention to predict Cersei's future with 100% accuracy so we shouldn't be looking at it as such. She probably just wanted to spite Cersei for not treating her and others very nicely. Cersei is the one who reacted to the prophecy the way she did and got haunted by it, as Maggy probably expected. Once things were set in motion, even if the prophecy wouldn't fit 100%, Cersei would make it fit.

[Lost Books]

I understand what you are saying and you are quite possibly right and Maggy was some kind of a prophet or was honestly able to see future. I am more of a skeptic in my heart and tend to lean forward to the more non-magical explanations.

Cersei becomes certain that the prophecy is true, once her friend dies, whom she murdered herself in order to "fulfil the prophecy". So she is very much the driving force of the prophecy and her actions towards Tyrion cannot be justified by having a reasonable cause to be scared of her little brother.

The prophecy is a mixture of things that Cersei had under control of or caused herself and external events. The actual numbers of Robert's children might seem eerie but it's a common thing to use a mixture of vague statements and specifics. We have no idea if Robert truly had just 16 bastards. It's highly unlikely that it's the final number. Besides, Maggy might have predicted another number and Cersei over time "adjusted" her memory to fit the reality.

I don't think it was Maggy's intention to predict Cersei's future with 100% accuracy so we shouldn't be looking at it as such. She probably just wanted to spite Cersei for not treating her and others very nicely. Cersei is the one who reacted to the prophecy the way she did and got haunted by it, as Maggy probably expected. Once things were set in motion, even if the prophecy wouldn't fit 100%, Cersei would make it fit.

It's worth noting that in no other instance (that I can recall) is Prophecy in ASoIaF as exact and specific as Maggy's. It's surprising to me that more people don't find that suspicious...

[Mithras]

For me, as far as the story so far is concerned, Maggy's prophecy adds nothing to the story because Cersei's actions towards Tyrion/Marg are completely reasonable within the context. On the contrary, this prophecy contaminates the story because it gives an out-of-context motive to Cersei and since it progresses in a self-fulfilling manner, we cannot be even sure whether Cersei would do these things had she not stepped in that tent.

At one hand, we have Bran who is able to speak with past (but apparently nothing changed in the present time) and at the other hand, we have these sneak peaks of future in terms of visions and prophecies but that knowledge does not seem to change the future as well; instead, the very knowledge of that prophecized future becomes the reason of that future coming true.

Pycelle said that some doors are better be kept closed when Cersei asked him if it was possible to see the future. Is that the message of George?

[Ramsay's Penguins]

For me, as far as the story so far is concerned, Maggy's prophecy adds nothing to the story because Cersei's actions towards Tyrion/Marg are completely reasonable within the context. On the contrary, this prophecy contaminates the story because it gives an out-of-context motive to Cersei and since it progresses in a self-fulfilling manner, we cannot be even sure whether Cersei would do these things had she not stepped in that tent.

At one hand, we have Bran who is able to speak with past (but apparently nothing changed in the present time) and at the other hand, we have these sneak peaks of future in terms of visions and prophecies but that knowledge does not seem to change the future as well; instead, the very knowledge of that prophecized future becomes the reason of that future coming true.

Pycelle said that some doors are better be kept closed when Cersei asked him if it was possible to see the future. Is that the message of George?

Yeah. To me it takes away a lot of Cersei's character.

It makes her whole life revolve around a prophecy, and that is boring.

Worst decision ever, but one I can happily ignore.

It is to precise to be interesting.

[Ygrain]

I like Maggy's prophecy (and its parallels with Ned's dream) quite a lot. It fuels Cersei's paranoia and has a potential of becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy - the valonquar may turn out to be Tyrion, after all, because it was Cersei's own hatred towards him that turned him into what he is now.

[WhiteOwl18]

I like Maggy's prophecy (and its parallels with Ned's dream) quite a lot. It fuels Cersei's paranoia and has a potential of becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy - the valonquar may turn out to be Tyrion, after all, because it was Cersei's own hatred towards him that turned him into what he is now.

Or it's not Tyrion at all, and by foccusing her rage in the wrong brother, Cersei ignored the real danger. How ironic would it be if it's the brother she loves who does the deed, instead of the brother she hates? Either way, it will be very interesting to watch...

[David Selig]

I like Maggy's prophecy (and its parallels with Ned's dream) quite a lot. It fuels Cersei's paranoia and has a potential of becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy - the valonquar may turn out to be Tyrion, after all, because it was Cersei's own hatred towards him that turned him into what he is now.

How is a self-fulfilling prophecy ever a good thing? It's the laziest trick in the book for a fantasy writer.

[Hermione]

How is a self-fulfilling prophecy ever a good thing? It's the laziest trick in the book for a fantasy writer.

I disagree - it all depends on how a writer manages to make it self-fulfilling. What I like about self-fulfilling prophecies is that it's less 'well fate has spoken, nothing the character could do about that' and more 'whoops, guess they got that on themselves, see how it never pays to put stock in prophecies.' That said, I'd be a bit disappointed too if it turned out to be Tyrion without there being a further twist to it.

As for Maggy's prophecy, what I think it also did was show us Cersei's ruthlessness in the pursuit of her goals and the upkeep of her public appearance. That is, if she indeed pushed Melara down the well so Melara couldn't tell anyone about the prophecy.

[Knight Of Winter]

I agree with OP completely. Cersei need no prophecies to be vile and paranoid.

[Ygrain]

Or it's not Tyrion at all, and by foccusing her rage in the wrong brother, Cersei ignored the real danger. How ironic would it be if it's the brother she loves who does the deed, instead of the brother she hates? Either way, it will be very interesting to watch...

I am not arguing :-) I do think that Jaime is a likelier candidate, but it would be an interesting twist to let Tyrion be the valonquar both because he would be driven to it by Cersei's own actions and because he is the obvious choice, which hasn't been the case so far. It would be a deviation from the current pattern of the way prophecies are usually fulfilled.

How is a self-fulfilling prophecy ever a good thing? It's the laziest trick in the book for a fantasy writer.

Self-fulfilling prophecy means that people bring it on themselves by acting to prevent it from happening. It depends on how the author handles it, of course, but the irony of such an action has a great potential.

[Mithras]

Mel saw a vision in which Renly defeated Stannis in KL. So, she slew Renly with a shadow baby. That action started the chain of events which led to Garlan donning Renly's armor and defeating Stannis in KL.

That was nice and quick.

But with Maggy's prophecy, it is taking too long to unravel which kills all the fun for me.

[Maia]

I hate it. All the other prophecies seem to show probable futures, while Maggy's is wholly deterministic. And what is worse, it sets the path of history in stone years before respective events happened. Like, that Rhaegar could never become king, since he wouldn't have had tons of bastards. Varys only knew about 8 of them, BTW, but with infant mortality and Robert's extreme promiscuity, there certainly could be more.

For me, as far as the story so far is concerned, Maggy's prophecy adds nothing to the story because Cersei's actions towards Tyrion/Marg are completely reasonable within the context.

Actually, Cersei's self-destructive crusade against Margaery is quite insane at this point, before the order had been restored even, and does require an explanation. But Cersei having some reason to suspect that the Tyrells colluded with Tyrion in Joff's murder would have provided a mundane and completely logical reason for it.

It was also always a bit odd that Cersei suspected Tyrion of wanting to kill/harm Joff back in ACoK and felt that she needed a hostage against him, but given that we now know that she has zero family loyalty, nor any kinslaying complexes, that didn't require a supernatural explanation either.

How is a self-fulfilling prophecy ever a good thing? It's the laziest trick in the book for a fantasy writer.

Indeed. Also, quite moralizing in that "certain things mortals aren't meant to know" way.

I disagree - it all depends on how a writer manages to make it self-fulfilling. What I like about self-fulfilling prophecies is that it's less 'well fate has spoken, nothing the character could do about that' and more 'whoops, guess they got that on themselves, see how it never pays to put stock in prophecies.'

Except that sometimes, it does. See Targaryen, Aenar and his daughter Daenys the Dreamer. Had they not put stock in a prophecy, they would have died with the rest of the 40 families.

And anyway, stuff like Rhaegar, nor his son(s) becoming king(s) was hardly self-fulfilling from Maggy's prophecy. Things that led to it were quite beyond Cersei's control, for the most part.

Personally, I still hope that parts of Maggy's prophecy won't come true.

And again, the whole "magic is bad for you and needs to go away" or " magic is for childhood of persons and societies and needs to go away as they respectively mature" is so narrow-minded and 19th - 20th century. Also, massively overdone in fantasy, particularly in the billion of Arthurian re-tellings and re-imaginations, or in the books directed at children.

I really hope that GRRM doesn't intend to head down this well-trodden and massively tropy path.