Heresy 168

[SerWalterPuffsAlot]

-@ sly wren. The COTF being too dangerous to leave alone is something i hadn't really thought about we could tie that in with the the Targs having dragons being too dangerous to leave alone as well

[Voice]

Lol you know, you my boy.

Agreed,i don't think the relationship followed the normal coventions of colonialization myself and i think to follow the patterns.Different clans did their own thing.So i find it intriguing and something worth considering how well recieved was the Pact on the isle of faces. Was it something they all agreed to or just some.This is just a subtle observation,i don't think the COTF understood the art of War and handled the FM as united front i think wherever clans met resistance they and their greenseers fought to the best of their ability.

We've nothing to suggest the Pact was a half-measure, by any involved. It wasn't a "treaty." Again, the parallels go only so far. From the Singers' point of view, the Pact was a religious event, rather than a political one. It seems that FM felt the same way, as they left their own gods behind and began to worship the Old Nameless Gods of the Wood.

Now, of course, since that time, the waters have become muddier. But all we have read of FM and Singers suggests, to me, that they continue to honor the Pact. The Isle of Faces is so named not because the faces there observed the Pact, but rather, because every tree on the island was given a face to commemorate the event. There were no abstentions.

For the cotf, all we have read suggests they have done nothing but honor the Pact. I'm still waiting for BC to tell me how FM dishonored it, but from what I can see, FM have honored it as well. The Andals were not involved in the Pact, were not bound by the Pact, and thus, even they didn't break it when they took the land, killed the weirwoods, and exiled the cotf.

Quick clarification--I'm not really arguing "noble savage," but "mystical knowledge." That's where I think the Native American argument fits in with my take on the Children. I still think the Children are too powerful and different to ever really be "safe" in human eyes.

And I, too, hope they don't just stay the odd, distant creatures we've been shown so far. Trying to think how Martin could construct a POV that wouldn't "otherize" the Children--at present, I've got nothing.

Noble savage is a very real possibility here, particularly given that they aren't human, and definitely aren't noble in medieval terms. Humans, thus far, seem the race most prone to weakness, disregard, selfishness, and evil. The cotf are easy to mistrust because they aren't human, but I think we err to do so. I may be proven wrong, but as of yet, the text supports my position. Thus far, they seem incredibly selfless.

Sometimes I feel the same way. There is so much leftout from the Others and cotf and the Long Night and NK etc. Plus Dany and King's Landing and Dorne and blah blah blah, how will it all fit into 2 books. Hopefully the next two will be mammoth sized books.

Mammoths are cool. But as we know, bigger isn't always better ;) Here's hoping for a very lean mammoth :)

[SerWalterPuffsAlot]

@ WOLFMAID- my first impression wasnt of them being naive at all, just an impression tho. Then you look at the facts and say HOW THE HELL DID THEY LOSE TO ANYBODY!!! I mean imagine a Green seer as a battle commander controlling animals and setting ambushes it makes no sense for them to lose to anybody regardless of weapons so how the hell did they get pushed into making a pact unless they were literally naive of the ways of men and were suckered into deal after deal getting pushed further and further back ( any number of Indian tribes meet this criteria.

[SerWalterPuffsAlot]

And i would bet a "Lobstah" dinner that this story doesnt get finished in 2 books. His mouth is saying "finished in 2 books" but his hand and pen are saying "screw you". - syrio forel ( or he said something like that lol

[wolfmaid7]

We've nothing to suggest the Pact was a half-measure, by any involved. It wasn't a "treaty." Again, the parallels go only so far. From the Singers' point of view, the Pact was a religious event, rather than a political one. It seems that FM felt the same way, as they left their own gods behind and began to worship the Old Nameless Gods of the Wood.

Now, of course, since that time, the waters have become muddier. But all we have read of FM and Singers suggests, to me, that they continue to honor the Pact. The Isle of Faces is so named not because the faces there observed the Pact, but rather, because every tree on the island was given a face to commemorate the event. There were no abstentions.

For the cotf, all we have read suggests they have done nothing but honor the Pact. I'm still waiting for BC to tell me how FM dishonored it, but from what I can see, FM have honored it as well. The Andals were not involved in the Pact, were not bound by the Pact, and thus, even they didn't break it when they took the land, killed the weirwoods, and exiled the cotf.

Noble savage is a very real possibility here, particularly given that they aren't human, and definitely aren't noble in medieval terms. Humans, thus far, seem the race most prone to weakness, disregard, selfishness, and evil. The cotf are easy to mistrust because they aren't human, but I think we err to do so. I may be proven wrong, but as of yet, the text supports my position. Thus far, they seem incredibly selfless.

Mammoths are cool. But as we know, bigger isn't always better ;) Here's hoping for a very lean mammoth :)

I agree and disagree with you a bit.Political has nothing to do with it nor is it truly a spiritual thing. I do think it was half measure no Native peoples would say " take most of my land please."But i also believe and again its subtle reading of clues for me.in a situation where language is a barrier some first contact situation took place where some of the First men were telpathically connected in additon of course though late to do anything seeing the power a GS can yield is enough to make anyone change their religion. Its happening now.How many people have abandoned the 7 or the Old gods for the Red god?

Another note hwo did some of the treaty work out for the Native indians? How many of them when they entered into treaties thought they were getting one thing and ended up getting stones for bread?

As to the specifics of the pact and what was agreed upon.

First men get most of the lands,open,mountain,plains

COTF agree to the Deep woods

No Weirwoods are to be cut down any where

Men in the form of the NW and people in general still go in the deep woods

Weirwoods were still being cut as humans expanded

Recently weirwoods were being burn to show Mel some of the wildlings had given up their gods.

@ WOLFMAID- my first impression wasnt of them being naive at all, just an impression tho. Then you look at the facts and say HOW THE HELL DID THEY LOSE TO ANYBODY!!! I mean imagine a Green seer as a battle commander controlling animals and setting ambushes it makes no sense for them to lose to anybody regardless of weapons so how the hell did they get pushed into making a pact unless they were literally naive of the ways of men and were suckered into deal after deal getting pushed further and further back ( any number of Indian tribes meet this criteria.

I'm thinking because their Greenseers at the time were COTF who didn't know the art of warfare.A human greenseer now that would give anyone the chills.

[SerWalterPuffsAlot]

ok im going to be continued

[Sly Wren]

Noble savage is a very real possibility here, particularly given that they aren't human, and definitely aren't noble in medieval terms. Humans, thus far, seem the race most prone to weakness, disregard, selfishness, and evil. The cotf are easy to mistrust because they aren't human, but I think we err to do so. I may be proven wrong, but as of yet, the text supports my position. Thus far, they seem incredibly selfless.

I don't disagree. My argument is about how human perception of them perhaps drove the historical human reactions to them. Drives the distrust despite the Children's help. Not making an argument any more controversial than that.

Edited to excise my own drivel.

[Voice]

And i would bet a "Lobstah" dinner that this story doesnt get finished in 2 books. His mouth is saying "finished in 2 books" but his hand and pen are saying "screw you". - syrio forel ( or he said something like that lol

Oh ye of little faith!

All we need are a few more chapters like Quentyn's last one and there will be many less loose ends to deal with :devil:

[Voice]

I don't disagree. My argument is about human perception of them perhaps (key word being "perhaps") drove the historical human reactions to them. Drives the distrust despite the Children's help. And the fact that they seem unsettling to readers (or at least to this reader) in a POV given by a human--seems to underscore the clash. Readers aren't in Bran's shoes; we've no actual reason to find Leaf unsettling--only impressions. But I still find her unsettling. It's just a difficult clash. Nor making an argument any more controversial than that.

I can completely respect that reaction. They aren't human, after all.

Here's my counterargument. We've no accounts of distrust between FM and cotf after the Pact. To the contrary, when FM get in deep shit, they look for the cotf.

Also, Bran doesn't find her unsettling at all. In fact, she reminds him of Arya... ;)

[wolfmaid7]

I can completely respect that reaction. They aren't human, after all.

Here's my counterargument. We've no accounts of distrust between FM and cotf after the Pact. To the contrary, when FM get in deep shit, they look for the cotf.

Also, Bran doesn't find her unsettling at all. In fact, she reminds him of Arya... ;)

How could we though everything is given from a human point of view.In fact the whole history.I think we will get a true account via Bran.Plus and i will repeat this the children have no guile they may not recognize the need to be distrustful of anyone.

i.e Gendel and Gorne tricking a clan of children and giants into giving up a cave that they(G+G) really wanted.When they were called in to mediate the situation between that clan and a family of giants.Noooo idea of deception,no idea they were being dupped.

The pact was told from a human perspective so it was repackaged as an agreement without coming out and saying.....We dupped them

[Voice]

If that were true, they could never bear a grudge. It would be hard to organize a resistance movement among such a group.

[Sly Wren]

I can completely respect that reaction. They aren't human, after all.

Here's my counterargument. We've no accounts of distrust between FM and cotf after the Pact. To the contrary, when FM get in deep shit, they look for the cotf.

Also, Bran doesn't find her unsettling at all. In fact, she reminds him of Arya... ;)

1. You responded before I could finish editing--sorry. See edited post #67 above re: drivel.

2. Absolutely--the FM turn to the Children. They know the Children have knowledge and/or power outside and beyond their own. But they also have to look for the Children--the Last Hero story makes it sound like an almost Herculean task. That's partly where I'm assuming (and I fully admit it's an assumption based on conflating way too many Irish myths and Arthurian Legends and French courtly stories about fairies and Tolkien with Martin's works--my brain's glomming it all together and I'm trying to parse it out) that there may be unease. If everything were really, really cozy, perhaps it would not have taken so long to find the Children.

The respect and recognition of the Children's knowledge and power could go hand in hand with the distrust that otherness unfortunately brings.

Bottom line--I'm pretty sure I'm not fundamentally disagreeing with you.

[Voice]

1. You responded before I could finish editing--sorry. See edited post #67 above re: drivel.

2. Absolutely--the FM turn to the Children. They know the Children have knowledge and/or power outside and beyond their own. But they also have to look for the Children--the Last Hero story makes it sound like an almost Herculean task. That's partly where I'm assuming (and I fully admit it's an assumption based on conflating way too many Irish myths and Arthurian Legends and French courtly stories about fairies and Tolkien with Martin's works--my brain's glomming it all together and I'm trying to parse it out) that there may be unease. If everything were really, really cosy, perhaps it would not have taken so long to find the Children.

The respect and recognition of the Children's knowledge and power could go hand in hand with the distrust that otherness unfortunately brings.

Bottom line--I'm pretty sure I'm not fundamentally disagreeing with you.

Ha! Sorry, didn't see the edited post. But I see no drivel :cheers:

Disagreement is the name of the game here friend, so no worries.

Here's the thing about the last hero...

1. While it was indeed a Herculean effort, we don't know how long it took for him to find the cotf...

2. He was most likely beckoned by a specific greenseer, like Bran...

There may well have been cozy settlements of children next door, but mayhaps the Last Hero needed help from the greenseer at what would soon become Winterfell ;)

[wolfmaid7]

If that were true, they could never bear a grudge. It would be hard to organize a resistance movement among such a group.

You are 100% correct. I think that is more BC's belief than mine.I am of the mindset that the Children per the main series and the World book are led and have always been led by a Greenseer. The Greenseers in play are human and I believe they are being misled again.

[wolfmaid7]

Ha! Sorry, didn't see the edited post. But I see no drivel :cheers:

Disagreement is the name of the game here friend, so no worries.

Here's the thing about the last hero...

1. While it was indeed a Herculean effort, we don't know how long it took for him to find the cotf...

2. He was most likely beckoned by a specific greenseer, like Bran...

There may well have been cozy settlements of children next door, but mayhaps the Last Hero needed help from the greenseer at what would soon become Winterfell ;)

According to Old Nan's story it took years.i'll translate that to it took a long time.

I agree totally with point 2.

[wolfmaid7]

Another point with regards to the Children and their relationship with men.And this Voice may be a point against the cotf trustfulness or it could be a matter of their continued survival.I'm speaking ofcourse of the ones in BR's cave.

Why the secrecy about their existence? Especially now if there is a so called bigger threat. At one time some of them traded wth the Watch,so why not warn them the moment the wws and the wights were on the move.I don't think there's any excuse for that,not when you have an individual that can go beyond the trees and wear any skin.BR is said to have 1,000 eyes and one you mean to say a Child of the forest could find its way to a castle and warn them.It would be a shock,but surely the stories give them a pass.

Leaf knows thw common tongue for heavens sake and she claimed t have walked the world of men for 200 yrs.Why not utilize those same skills and warn the Watch?There is so many alternatives and certainly one that woud have ensured preparation of the North.

[Sly Wren]

Ha! Sorry, didn't see the edited post. But I see no drivel :cheers:

Disagreement is the name of the game here friend, so no worries.

Here's the thing about the last hero...

1. While it was indeed a Herculean effort, we don't know how long it took for him to find the cotf...

2. He was most likely beckoned by a specific greenseer, like Bran...

There may well have been cozy settlements of children next door, but mayhaps the Last Hero needed help from the greenseer at what would soon become Winterfell ;)

You are too kind re: drivel. I thank you.

1. I'm with wolfmaid on this--the stories suggest a long time. The stories are old--Martin could clearly reveal it was easier--but right now: long time.

2. Assumption seems reasonable given Bran and Bloodraven--but I'll need more evidence to be completely sold (and Martin may not give it). For now--it's viable. I can work with that.

3. But I still assert: neither point 1 nor point 2 (nor the combination thereof) denies the idea that the relationship may have been uneasy or distant due to otherness. Or that the Children and the First Men, while now sharing a religion, kept their distance from each other. The Last Hero's search at least leaves that possibility open--that they are distant also dispenses with the need to assume cozy next door settlements . . . so a bit easier? Not really an argument in its favor, but it's late and I'm a bit loopy.

[wolfmaid7]

It could be a type of non contact relationship to the point of the Children fading from memory for most.

Per Osha statement im still thinking there's probably a bit of contact still way beyond the Wall.

[Sly Wren]

It could be a type of non contact relationship to the point of the Children fading from memory for most.

Per Osha statement im still thinking there's probably a bit of contact still way beyond the Wall.

Yes--but I was thinking more limited contact--which fits with the Osha statement.

And fits with the stories from the World Book and novels about people marrying Children (that's Artys Arryn, right? I don't have my books and am working from memory, which may not be a good idea . . .), seeking Children out for help, siding with them or against them in various conflicts.

The First Men trust their knowledge enough to change their religion, to revere and admire them, to have family stories ("did you know your ancestor was fabulous enough to marry a COTF?" "Great, Great, Great Grandpa Ed lived with the Children and became very wise," etc.). But there's also mistrust--statements about the First Men warring with the Children, the fact that they have to be sought out, that they keep to themselves--it at least opens the door to an uneasy relationship.

[Prince of Ghost]

Earlier someone mentioned on the heresy thread of discussing the Lannisters more and I had an interesting thought. In a Feast for Crows in Cersei’s 8^th chapter, the prophesies of Maggy the Frog are remembered by Cersei. Often when discussing the section of Cersei being strangled by the Valonqar there is much talk about how Cersei believes it to be Tyrion. Many readers think it is Jamie because he is also a younger sibling of Cersei. However in the text it says “the Volanqar” NOT “Your Volunqar". Now I believe Valonqar is High Valyrian for “little brother”. So I take that to mean that “the younger brother” will strangle her. So I personally think Jamie would be too obvious to fulfill the role of being the Valonqar and to kill Cersei however, would Stannis being the Valonqar and killing Cersei be…heretical? (at least in some places in the forum)