Hold the Door!

[UnmaskedLurker]

49 minutes ago, House Toad said:

Its a fantasy like any other fantasy so it is grounded upon fantasy using fantasy that wouldn't exist had it been different, and now I have lost what we are debating here?

Don't step on the bufferflies, there are 12 monkeys and we can save JFK, predestination'ing into who knows?

The point was rather simple which is continuously refuted with I just don't know what anymore?

Had the present not interacted with the past, it would have led to another scenario proving it had been changed, but for the sake of this argument it wasn't written differently. That means it hadn't been changed, because it was already written into the book?

Now you are even suggesting a future tense in a blanket statement, implying that the meaning is not inter-changable, but its mission is saving the future from the past, changing it constantly changing its seasons.

Who knows yet what it all means, but the information shown has meant changes to the past. But never a different story when we are watching the same show and reading the same book, that argument presented was not even 1 + 1 math. I don't know why we were arguing it, to tell me that a book follows its ink of course it does otherwise it wouldn't  have been inked.

I want to create a scenario now which probably won't happen at all, but what happens if Bran doesn't fall on ending. Hypothetically just in case you didn't know the difference?

 

 

Now I am lost as well and am not sure what we are arguing about either. But to try to clarify my basic position on the issue of time travel in GoT -- it has its own rules that have been demonstrated in the narrative and are different than the rules of time travel most commonly used in fiction. In most fiction with time travel, we can see the possibility of two different versions of events. Generally we see the version without the intrusion from time travel -- and then the time travel happens -- and we see a different and new past leading to a different and new present.

GoT is NOT using that form of time travel and has precluded that form of time travel from its narrative (at least on the TV show and presumably the books as well). Wylis was changed to Hodor in the one and only past that ever existed. There never was a past where Bran had not yet traveled to the past and caused Wylis to become Hodor. There is no different version of the past to be changed. The one and only past that ever occurred in the GoT universe is the past where Bran traveled back and caused Wylis to become Hodor. Bran cannot change the past. Bran can be part of the past -- but then he will be part of the one and only past that ever existed. There is no "re-write" of the past to "add" Bran's time travel into it -- Bran ALWAYS traveled back and affected the past.

So for any event that has already happened in the GoT world, the viewers/readers know how those events played out. The existence of time travel cannot alter those events because there is only ONE timeline. The viewers/readers might discover that events in the past happened as they did because Bran had traveled to that past affecting it (and many people this week have started speculating on what those events might be). But nothing that has already been seen/read by the viewers/readers can be "retroactively" altered by Bran time traveling because there is only one past -- so if we saw/read about that past, that is the past and it cannot be changed (unlike the majority of time travel fiction in which the event seen/read by the viewer/reader can be changed as a result of time travel).

[House Toad]

51 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

Now I am lost as well and am not sure what we are arguing about either. But to try to clarify my basic position on the issue of time travel in GoT -- it has its own rules that have been demonstrated in the narrative and are different than the rules of time travel most commonly used in fiction. In most fiction with time travel, we can see the possibility of two different versions of events. Generally we see the version without the intrusion from time travel -- and then the time travel happens -- and we see a different and new past leading to a different and new present.

GoT is NOT using that form of time travel and has precluded that form of time travel from its narrative (at least on the TV show and presumably the books as well). Wylis was changed to Hodor in the one and only past that ever existed. There never was a past where Bran had not yet traveled to the past and caused Wylis to become Hodor. There is no different version of the past to be changed. The one and only past that ever occurred in the GoT universe is the past where Bran traveled back and caused Wylis to become Hodor. Bran cannot change the past. Bran can be part of the past -- but then he will be part of the one and only past that ever existed. There is no "re-write" of the past to "add" Bran's time travel into it -- Bran ALWAYS traveled back and affected the past.

So for any event that has already happened in the GoT world, the viewers/readers know how those events played out. The existence of time travel cannot alter those events because there is only ONE timeline. The viewers/readers might discover that events in the past happened as they did because Bran had traveled to that past affecting it (and many people this week have started speculating on what those events might be). But nothing that has already been seen/read by the viewers/readers can be "retroactively" altered by Bran time traveling because there is only one past -- so if we saw/read about that past, that is the past and it cannot be changed (unlike the majority of time travel fiction in which the event seen/read by the viewer/reader can be changed as a result of time travel).

Didn't the author just interview Stephen King? No please not the Dark Tower..... Because it's magic rubber time? Excuse me for being cheeky, as that was not the essence of those books at all.

Bran ALWAYS traveled back and affected the past.  Thank you for your clarity.

I think you had my past debate confused and muddle with some other perception. I absolutely agree about how the show has followed events in its writing and in its showing and there was no debate from me about that. I don't believe I have said anything contrarily, except in saying that the past could be changed. From that point raised, it became a formality of speech, changing into some other time-travel definitions? So we have ceaselessly debated about how the past might yet become affected, but that past will probably only affect some concerns yet to become established,  but never in changing its story from what it has written in following its events.

The question I was asking and put forward previously was only in verifying that events could be affected, by proving there was this change? Now before we get back into this debate all over again, I will apologize in advance for any misunderstandings.

[UnmaskedLurker]

1 minute ago, House Toad said:

Didn't the author just interview Stephen King? No please not the Dark Tower..... Because it's magic rubber time? Excuse me for being cheeky, as that was not the essence of those books at all.

Bran ALWAYS traveled back and affected the past.  Thank you for your clarity.

I think you had my past debate confused and muddle with some other perception. I absolutely agree about how the show has followed events in its writing and in its showing and there was no debate from me about that. I don't believe I have said anything contrarily, except in saying that the past could be changed, and from that point raised. it became a formality of speech, changing into some other time-travel definitions? So we have ceaselessly debated about how the past might yet become affected, but that past will probably only affect some concerns yet to become established,  but never in changing its story from what it has written in following its events.

The question I was asking and put forward previously was only in verifying that events, could be affected, by proving there was this change? Now before we get back into all over again, I will apologize in advance for any misunderstandings.

I likely am just as responsible as you for any misunderstanding. I merely recoil a bit at the use of the word "change" as it suggests that there used to be a different past and now it is "changed" -- but as I really don't like to worry about semantic usage differences, I relent. Personally I would use the word "affect" rather than "change" but that is just my personal preference -- you certainly are entitled to your own. Merely understand that just as I misunderstood how you were using the word "change" -- others might as well. But I believe we both agree that in GoT, there is only ONE timeline and there is no alternative timeline in which Bran did not go back in time which became altered or revised after Bran went back in time. So it appears that we agree (I think). 

[House Toad]

6 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

I likely am just as responsible as you for any misunderstanding. I merely recoil a bit at the use of the word "change" as it suggests that there used to be a different past and now it is "changed" -- but as I really don't like to worry about semantic usage differences, I relent. Personally I would use the word "affect" rather than "change" but that is just my personal preference -- you certainly are entitled to your own. Merely understand that just as I misunderstood how you were using the word "change" -- others might as well. But I believe we both agree that in GoT, there is only ONE timeline and there is no alternative timeline in which Bran did not go back in time which became altered or revised after Bran went back in time. So it appears that we agree (I think). 

This formality has affected change. Sshh Toad that's just being naughty. Thank you for your definition and I will try to use better appropriation preventing any misunderstandings.

I could try to further burst your bubble in presenting my previous opening remark, I doubt there is fully that danger as that medium might not be carried at all. Using the same story, the same timeline, but having a different dream upon becoming awake.

 

 

 

[mdrake34]

From the actor that plays Hodor:

"How did you play Hodor's final moments? Some are wondering how much Bran is in there versus Hodor.

It wasn't Bran. He only gave him almost like you would slap a horse at the start of the race — a giddy-up to get him up and going.I don't think Bran would be able to do the warging thing from the situation he was in. But also remember, it wasn't Bran who told Hodor to hold the door. It was Meera. Hodor was acting under the instruction of Meera, to the start. He was terrified running down that tunnel. If he was warged, he wouldn't have been terrified. I think he realized the only way Bran and Meera could be safe was for him to be sacrificed. I don't think he was happy about it, but…"
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/game-thrones-kristian-nairn-interview-896812

[Ser Matris]

31 minutes ago, mdrake34 said:

From the actor that plays Hodor:

"How did you play Hodor's final moments? Some are wondering how much Bran is in there versus Hodor.

It wasn't Bran. He only gave him almost like you would slap a horse at the start of the race — a giddy-up to get him up and going.I don't think Bran would be able to do the warging thing from the situation he was in. But also remember, it wasn't Bran who told Hodor to hold the door. It was Meera. Hodor was acting under the instruction of Meera, to the start. He was terrified running down that tunnel. If he was warged, he wouldn't have been terrified. I think he realized the only way Bran and Meera could be safe was for him to be sacrificed. I don't think he was happy about it, but…"
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/game-thrones-kristian-nairn-interview-896812

Great article, thanks for posting. So assuming the actor knows what he's saying, that helps to clear up the "did Hodor sacrifice himself" question.

[House Toad]

It wasn't Bran anyway? It was the raven who controlled Hodor, Bran was unaware of it at that time or he would have exited his dreamstate. He was a kiddie in a movie wearing 3D glasses, powerless as the ravens power was transferring. Thank you for potential spoilers, although present Bran wouldn't have been aware until after this event. I love the way press falalala's something into something adding to its confusion.

Bran was taken into the past by the raven to complete his training. That was the dialogue, there is no time. Who controlled Hodor? What you have implied is Bran controlled Hodor, meaning what? What we saw was Bran observing the past, by being taken into the past by the raven?  I agree Hodor was only calmed by Bran previously at Queenscrown, by Bran warging where Meera and Jojen had no affect in pacifying his Hodor'ing in the storm.

[Marada78]

I am sad, I just realized that this scene is impossible to translate in many languages. I am also afraid about the localization of the same in TWOW  

[b00gieman]

11 hours ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

This first sentence of yours is why we fundamentally disagree. I believe that this past episode makes it clear that Bran did NOT change the past. There was never a different version of the past to be changed. Bran is part of the past and affected the past. But there was always only ONE past -- the past in which Bran turned Wylis into Hodor. Saying that Bran "changed" the past indicates that there was at one time a different version of the past and by Bran going back, he made the past different that what it had been. That did NOT happen. There simply never was a different past to be changed -- just the one single "time loop" past that includes Bran's time travel into the past -- that is the only version of the past that ever existed.

In the books - the fact that when Bran was in the crypts of Winterfell and hadn't made it to the cave of the 3 eyed crow and he was able to communicate with Jon Snow while he was ranging with the Halfhound tells me that a future Bran did this.   I personally subscribe to cause and effect theory of time travel.  You go back in time and do something and everyone's memory of the event changes instantaneously with you being the only one who is aware of what was before.  I'm not going to argue time travel because we don't agree on timelines being changed by the actions taken when an individual goes back and affects events.  But you said I was 100% wrong.  I only went as far as pre-calculus but unless the meaning of 100% has changed recently then you are incorrect in your assessement.  The mere fact that I was able to determine that the Children of the Forest created the White Walkers and they did so because of the conflict that they were having with the First Men cutting down weirwoods based upon the book series The Wheel of Time that a majority of people on this forum say is totally unrelated makes me either a partial greenseer or a red priest who saw it in the flames.

 

People don't get that I am not trying to push my theory as being my way or the highway.  I am simply using the events of TWOT and writing a theory as to how the same thing can play on in ASOIAF.  If I see or read something that I haven't written on before then I simply try and find it in TWOT if it is there and submit my findings.

 

Take for instance a story I got around to writing about the Faceless Men:

 

Initially when I read the books I associated the Gray Men in TWOT with the shadow assassin’s that Melisandre gave birth to but a more correct assessment would be the Faceless Men of Braavos

“Gray Men are primarily men, though there are occasionally women in their number, and even in the War of the Shadow they had no real use beyond assassination, so far as is known today. It is unknown what promises these people have been given by the Dark Lord to induce them to give up their souls, though the number discovered suggests that the motivation must have been extremely powerful.”

 

 

 

“Men, both male and female, were serving the Forsaken, but Lanfear had an antipathy toward them and did not employ them. Only Gray Men and Myrddraal did not dream, according to Lanfear.”

 

 

 

The Faceless Men train in the House of Black and White.  Mix black and white and you come up with gray.  The order seems ridiculous on the surface because what do you really get out of it to join up.  You get some cool fighting and killing skills but you can’t tell anyone about it and you give up who you are to boot.  Even the words that they all say “Valar Morghulis”, translate to “all men must die” is absurd as a saying of sorts. They aren’t needed for what is going to happen naturally anyway.  OK some people pay them to take someone out but what happens to the money.  You don’t buy any cool stuff for the clubhouse; then why take money for payment to begin with?  Basically what is their purpose?  Pretty much the same thinking in becoming a Gray Man in TWOT.  The Gray Men give up their souls and the Faceless Men give up their identities to become “no one”.  The same thing in my book.

 

 

 

Grey Men are highly effective assassins because of their ability to pass completely unnoticed, whether in busy public areas or infiltrating heavily guarded private quarters. The victim himself generally does not realize the presence of a Gray Man until he is struck. Witnesses to the murder often report seeing the victim fall and yet still failing to see the Gray Man killer.   Isn’t this pretty much what is taught in the House of Black and White?  The Faceless Men uses different faces to cover their tracks when they are noticed and simply blend in to their environment as if not there.

 

 

The Faceless Men to me are just a way to represent the Gray Men in TWOT.  You can disagree but when these things keep adding up they start to create a pattern.  

[UnmaskedLurker]

@b00gieman -- I want to clarify my position. I did not say that you were 100% wrong in everything you ever stated. I said that it was 100% clear that there is only ONE timeline and that your are 100% incorrect in your assertion that time travel in this universe can "change" the past. You have stated your view of how time travel works -- that it "instantaneously" changes everything and only the time traveler knows that the world changed. Here is the problem -- you are not the author. Yes, the version of time travel that you describe is a version of time travel that has been used in literature -- but different authors use different variations on time travel. In Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Ascaban (book 3), time travel did NOT work that way. There was only ONE time line. We never saw a change in the time line that "instantaneously" became different and only the time traveler knew it. Rather, as the main characters traveled back, they saw how these "future" selves had made an impact on their "past" selves in ways that their "past" selves had not realized. But clearly there was always only ONE timeline that ever existed.

Similarly, ASOIAF is fiction subject to the whims of GRRM. GRRM has set up a situation (assuming that the books will be consistent in this aspect from the TV show) similar to Harry Potter. There is only ONE timeline. How do I know this? I know this because we saw Wylis (Walder) be Hodor the entire length of the series (and books). We are never shown a version of the world where Hodor was not Hodor but then as a result of the time travel by Bran the past is "re-written" and only Bran knows what the universe would have been like if Bran had not gone into the past. There is not such variation on that universe. Bran knows of no other version of the past -- because there never was a different version of the past. There always was only ONE timeline -- the timeline in which Bran went into the past and cause Wylis (Walder) to become Hodor.

Please demonstrate one piece of evidence from the TV show or the books that suggests that any time traveler has knowledge of a different version of the past that was altered and "re-written" as a result of the time travel. You will not find any because there is none. GRRM has not written these books with the version of time travel that you have described. 

You might be correct about all of your analogies to WoT. I have little knowledge of that series (and based on my reading of how it ended up being wrapped up, I have no real desire to do otherwise). But even if GRRM is taking themes from WoT -- or just coincidentally coming up with similar themes on his own -- it does not mean that he is using time travel in the same way. Clearly, he is not -- because in ASOIAF, the past cannot be change or re-written or instantaneously altered in a manner known only to the time traveler. GRRM is using a different version of time travel -- more along the lines of the Harry Potter version -- where all time travel that will even happen has already had its affect on the one and only timeline and the past cannot be changed -- and genuine visions of the future (prophecies) cannot be undone or avoided.

[Dolorous Gabe]

I always imagined that any vision Bran sees in the past would be through the eyes of something living that witnessed the event, be it a weirwood face, person or animal. That would make more sense to me than there being some kind of physical presence of Bran himself witnessing the scene.

[Chonte]

On May 24, 2016 at 5:35 PM, Anythingatall said:

I honestly don't get the big deal about spoilers.  Some of ASOIAF was spoiled for me and some wasn't.  I can't say that reading Ned Starks death when I knew it was coming was less entertaining than reading the Red Wedding which I was unaware of.

Don't get me wrong some people don't like spoilers and that's cool.  I try not to spoil things for people when they care about them, it's just not nice to do things that make others unhappy when you have no reason to.  That said SPOILERS  have become some sort of bizarre taboo.  I really think people need to grow up about the whole thing.  It's just entertainment.

Agreed. We live in a social era. People want to talk and discuss their favorite shows. If i cant watch GOT when its airing i just stay off social media.

[b00gieman]

6 hours ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

@b00gieman -- I want to clarify my position. I did not say that you were 100% wrong in everything you ever stated. I said that it was 100% clear that there is only ONE timeline and that your are 100% incorrect in your assertion that time travel in this universe can "change" the past. You have stated your view of how time travel works -- that it "instantaneously" changes everything and only the time traveler knows that the world changed. Here is the problem -- you are not the author. Yes, the version of time travel that you describe is a version of time travel that has been used in literature -- but different authors use different variations on time travel. In Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Ascaban (book 3), time travel did NOT work that way. There was only ONE time line. We never saw a change in the time line that "instantaneously" became different and only the time traveler knew it. Rather, as the main characters traveled back, they saw how these "future" selves had made an impact on their "past" selves in ways that their "past" selves had not realized. But clearly there was always only ONE timeline that ever existed.

Similarly, ASOIAF is fiction subject to the whims of GRRM. GRRM has set up a situation (assuming that the books will be consistent in this aspect from the TV show) similar to Harry Potter. There is only ONE timeline. How do I know this? I know this because we saw Wylis (Walder) be Hodor the entire length of the series (and books). We are never shown a version of the world where Hodor was not Hodor but then as a result of the time travel by Bran the past is "re-written" and only Bran knows what the universe would have been like if Bran had not gone into the past. There is not such variation on that universe. Bran knows of no other version of the past -- because there never was a different version of the past. There always was only ONE timeline -- the timeline in which Bran went into the past and cause Wylis (Walder) to become Hodor.

Please demonstrate one piece of evidence from the TV show or the books that suggests that any time traveler has knowledge of a different version of the past that was altered and "re-written" as a result of the time travel. You will not find any because there is none. GRRM has not written these books with the version of time travel that you have described. 

You might be correct about all of your analogies to WoT. I have little knowledge of that series (and based on my reading of how it ended up being wrapped up, I have no real desire to do otherwise). But even if GRRM is taking themes from WoT -- or just coincidentally coming up with similar themes on his own -- it does not mean that he is using time travel in the same way. Clearly, he is not -- because in ASOIAF, the past cannot be change or re-written or instantaneously altered in a manner known only to the time traveler. GRRM is using a different version of time travel -- more along the lines of the Harry Potter version -- where all time travel that will even happen has already had its affect on the one and only timeline and the past cannot be changed -- and genuine visions of the future (prophecies) cannot be undone or avoided.

I totally disagree with your assessment because of the chicken and the egg concept.  I understand exactly what you are trying to say but that explanation throws out the concept of past present and a future.  It throws everything into the realm of history being written and you really can't change it.  The 3-eyed crow tells Bran this very thing in the books and in the TV show.  What makes me believe that I am right is the look on the 3-eyed crow's face when Bran spoke to his father and he heard him.  He looked shocked as Ned did. Most shows just dumb the concept down because it would take to long to explain.  You are trying to prove something that hasn't been fully explained.  When it is all said and done it could be like you said or like I said.  Let's just agree to disagree for right now until the truth is actually revealed and either you or I will be right.

[UnmaskedLurker]

Just now, b00gieman said:

I totally disagree with your assessment because of the chicken and the egg concept.  I understand exactly what you are trying to say but that explanation throws out the concept of past present and a future.  It throws everything into the realm of history being written and you really can't change it.  The 3-eyed crow tells Bran this very thing in the books and in the TV show.  What makes me believe that I am right is the look on the 3-eyed crow's face when Bran spoke to his father and he heard him.  He looked shocked as Ned did. Most shows just dumb the concept down because it would take to long to explain.  You are trying to prove something that hasn't been fully explained.  When it is all said and done it could be like you said or like I said.  Let's just agree to disagree for right now until the truth is actually revealed and either you or I will be right.

I am fine with agreeing to disagree. I simply believe that the truth of this matter was revealed and confirmed in the last episode (at least for purposes of the show). But if you want to wait for more evidence to confirm, I can go along with that and agree to just wait for more confirmation that I am right or new information indicating that you are right. We will both just be patient and wait.

P.S. As to the "chicken/egg" issue, yes, I agree -- that is the brilliance of the version of time travel that I suggesting is being used. It creates an impossible chicken/egg problem that simply cannot be solved. The past was created by the future affecting the past but the future was only possible as a result of the past that the future created. Brilliantly impossible -- yet narratively satisfying (to me). I certainly like it better than the more typical version of time travel where everything I watched for 8 years is wiped out because -- time travel changed it all and now a completely different history exists (but on the one time traveler knows how awful the world could have been if the time travel had not gone back and "fixed" it all). I find that variation of time travel tedious and a waste of time because none of the action I watched actually mattered.

[b00gieman]

15 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

I am fine with agreeing to disagree. I simply believe that the truth of this matter was revealed and confirmed in the last episode (at least for purposes of the show). But if you want to wait for more evidence to confirm, I can go along with that and agree to just wait for more confirmation that I am right or new information indicating that you are right. We will both just be patient and wait.

P.S. As to the "chicken/egg" issue, yes, I agree -- that is the brilliance of the version of time travel that I suggesting is being used. It creates an impossible chicken/egg problem that simply cannot be solved. The past was created by the future affecting the past but the future was only possible as a result of the past that the future created. Brilliantly impossible -- yet narratively satisfying (to me). I certainly like it better than the more typical version of time travel where everything I watched for 8 years is wiped out because -- time travel changed it all and now a completely different history exists (but on the one time traveler knows how awful the world could have been if the time travel had not gone back and "fixed" it all). I find that variation of time travel tedious and a waste of time because none of the action I watched actually mattered.

I know you haven't read TWOT but in that series they had a thing called balefire when used on an individual basically wiped what individual did from time.  So if you killed someone using a lot of the One Power you basically undid things that they did.  Most of the major story arcs within TWOT are being used in ASOIAF so this is the reason why I believe when everything is said and done we could see Bran sitting in a tree like the 3-eyed crow still trying to fix thing that he screwed up in the first place.  As a matter of fact they already foreshadowed it in A Clash of Kings when Bran communicated with Jon at a point in the story he hadn't even made it to the cave yet.

 

The call came from behind him, softer than a whisper, but strong too. Can a shout be silent? He turned his head, searching for his brother, for a glimpse of a lean grey shape moving beneath the trees, but there was nothing, only . . .

 

A weirwood.

 

It seemed to sprout from solid rock, its pale roots twisting up from a myriad of fissures and hairline cracks. The tree was slender compared to other weirwoods he had seen, no more than a sapling, yet it was growing as he watched, its limbs thickening as they reached for the sky. Wary, he circled the smooth white trunk until he came to the face. Red eyes looked at him. Fierce eyes they were, yet glad to see him. The weirwood had his brother’s face. Had his brother always had three eyes?

 

Not always, came the silent shout. Not before the crow.

 

“He sniffed at the bark, smelled wolf and tree and boy, but behind that there were other scents, the rich brown smell of warm earth and the hard grey smell of stone and something else, something terrible. Death, he knew. He was smelling death. He cringed back, his hair bristling, and bared his fangs.”

 

“Don’t be afraid, I like it in the dark. No one can see you, but you can see them. But first you have to open your eyes. See? Like this. And the tree reached down and touched him.”

 

 

That interaction with Jon and Bran took place in “A Clash of Kings” when Bran was still in Winterfell hiding in the crypts.  It took place before he had received any formal training with the Three-Eyed Crow.  What it means is that Bran did this most likely at a point in the future after “A Dance with Dragons.”  So a future Bran was able to go back and interact with his brother/cousin Jon at a point in time after the event had already occurred.

[ummester]

4 hours ago, b00gieman said:

I know you haven't read TWOT but in that series they had a thing called balefire when used on an individual basically wiped what individual did from time.  So if you killed someone using a lot of the One Power you basically undid things that they did.  Most of the major story arcs within TWOT are being used in ASOIAF so this is the reason why I believe when everything is said and done we could see Bran sitting in a tree like the 3-eyed crow still trying to fix thing that he screwed up in the first place.  As a matter of fact they already foreshadowed it in A Clash of Kings when Bran communicated with Jon at a point in the story he hadn't even made it to the cave yet.

 

The call came from behind him, softer than a whisper, but strong too. Can a shout be silent? He turned his head, searching for his brother, for a glimpse of a lean grey shape moving beneath the trees, but there was nothing, only . . .

 

A weirwood.

 

It seemed to sprout from solid rock, its pale roots twisting up from a myriad of fissures and hairline cracks. The tree was slender compared to other weirwoods he had seen, no more than a sapling, yet it was growing as he watched, its limbs thickening as they reached for the sky. Wary, he circled the smooth white trunk until he came to the face. Red eyes looked at him. Fierce eyes they were, yet glad to see him. The weirwood had his brother’s face. Had his brother always had three eyes?

 

Not always, came the silent shout. Not before the crow.

 

“He sniffed at the bark, smelled wolf and tree and boy, but behind that there were other scents, the rich brown smell of warm earth and the hard grey smell of stone and something else, something terrible. Death, he knew. He was smelling death. He cringed back, his hair bristling, and bared his fangs.”

 

“Don’t be afraid, I like it in the dark. No one can see you, but you can see them. But first you have to open your eyes. See? Like this. And the tree reached down and touched him.”

 

 

That interaction with Jon and Bran took place in “A Clash of Kings” when Bran was still in Winterfell hiding in the crypts.  It took place before he had received any formal training with the Three-Eyed Crow.  What it means is that Bran did this most likely at a point in the future after “A Dance with Dragons.”  So a future Bran was able to go back and interact with his brother/cousin Jon at a point in time after the event had already occurred.

Interesting.

So can Bran bend space and time without the trees?

No wonder the girl hobbits protect those trees so violently, the trees are not only telephones but faxes that can bend space and time. The trees are the Spice and the Spice controls life!

[b00gieman]

14 minutes ago, ummester said:

Interesting.

So can Bran bend space and time without the trees?

No wonder the girl hobbits protect those trees so violently, the trees are not only telephones but faxes that can bend space and time. The trees are the Spice and the Spice controls life!

Are Bran's visions limited to the weirwood trees?  The answer simply is NO! Here is the answer as explained in the books:

“A weirwood will live forever if left undisturbed. To them seasons pass in the flutter of a moth’s wing, and past, present, and future are one. Nor will your sight be limited to your godswood. The singers carved eyes into their heart trees to awaken them, and those are the first eyes a new greenseer learns to use … but in time you will see well beyond the trees themselves.”

[ummester]

5 minutes ago, b00gieman said:

Are Bran's visions limited to the weirwood trees?  The answer simply is NO! Here is the answer as explained in the books:

“A weirwood will live forever if left undisturbed. To them seasons pass in the flutter of a moth’s wing, and past, present, and future are one. Nor will your sight be limited to your godswood. The singers carved eyes into their heart trees to awaken them, and those are the first eyes a new greenseer learns to use … but in time you will see well beyond the trees themselves.”

Yes, Bran can see beyond the trees - but,if there were no trees at all, would greenseering be possible at all.

It's like the trees are the WAN and Bran can create his own wireless LAN on top of it - but that wireless LAN has no broader network without the trees.

[House Cambodia]

So if Bran is The Last Hero, his horse and his dog have to die - that's Hodor and Summer. Damn.

[House Toad]

8 hours ago, ummester said:

Yes, Bran can see beyond the trees - but,if there were no trees at all, would greenseering be possible at all.

It's like the trees are the WAN and Bran can create his own wireless LAN on top of it - but that wireless LAN has no broader network without the trees.

Wasn't this also why the Targ's uprooted many of them in the south, finally later devolving into the seven until dragons have brought back the flames.

Although in the show Bran is basically omnipresent. Where was the Tower of bones, tree, in Winterfell's courtyard? Perhaps his future green dreams, have also passed down to their descendants.

The weirnet links into a past that was basically everywhere, because those masts were also skyscrapers creating ravens?