Heresy 194 Underworld

[LmL]

13 minutes ago, Black Crow said:

Don't necessarily know about manipulating, but GRRM has certainly said that he's absent because he knows too much and that the Green Men will feature at some point.

Do you have the SSM about we will get to see the green men? I just laid out my theory about the green men and I thought that such an SSM existed, but wasn't sure...  The idea we will get to see them and that they exist at all is really exciting. I think they are OG greenseer Cerrunos people. 

[Bluetiger]

40 minutes ago, LmL said:

Do you have the SSM about we will get to see the green men? I just laid out my theory about the green men and I thought that such an SSM existed, but wasn't sure...  The idea we will get to see them and that they exist at all is really exciting. I think they are OG greenseer Cerrunos people. 

 

Quote

SSM, March 1999:

Linda: Will we see or hear anything of the green men on the Isle of Faces? If not, what are they like? Just a secluded order that's never bothered, and has no role in the events of the Seven Kingdoms?

George_RR_Martin: The green men and the Isle of Faces will come to the fore in later books. (Boy, it's tough to sneak anything by you guys.)

 

[Melifeather]

8 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

Now we're talking one of my three favorite theories.

I won't go full crackpot here (because you should never go full crackpot), but basically, Dany only hatched her dragons because she wasn't a full Targaryen (at least as the Targaryen bloodline stood at the time of House Targaryen's destruction).  House Targaryen went from the pureblooded Aegon the conqueror, whose incestuous relations kept their dragon riding bloodline pure, to a line descended from Viserys I who was unable to become a dragonrider, and the daughter of a Lysenean banker.  In the meantime the dragonriding line split in various directions.  It went into House Plumm, House Velaryon, and bastard lines like Blackfyre and Longwaters.

So my conclusion is Dany's birth brought several of these bloodlines back together, which made her the perfect conduit (along with all the other mumbo jumbo) to bring the dragons back from extinction.  Which also means that Dany couldn't be the daughter of Aerys and Rahella.  With the hints of a Dornish origin, my belief is if we can eliminate only one of these two, I'd eliminate Rahella as her parent.  

Which means, that Viserys lied to Dany about her origin.  In reality, Viserys didn't have a sister when he arrived in  Braavos, the problem is Viserys needed a bargaining chip to obtain an army.  Enter Oberyn who came to Braavos and signed a marriage pact with Willem Darry.  My guess is he arrived with a Dornish girl that could pass as a Targaryen princess.  (Perhaps pluched from the Water Gardens, where Doran noted to Arianne that a lesson is to be learned as the children played in the pools, you can't distinguish the rich from poor).  If you go back and look at the desription of the House boats that Arianne and company arrive at nestled in the Greenblood, it fits Dany's memory of her House with the Red Door.  Lemon orchards, brightly painted houseboats with carved wood.  

So Dany is brought to Viserys and Viserys raises her as his trueborn sister, so when she comes of age he can sell her to whoever is willing to give him an army.  Dany is told from a very young age that she was born on Dragonstone, and she is too young to remembe differently.  Except in the back of her head she has these memories from a very very young age of a house that doesn't jive with the cover story that Viserys has convinced her of.    Ironically, the bastard (black dragon) girl, scared of her own shadow, is actually the true blood of the dragon, in that her bloodline is closer to Aegon the Conqeror then her trueborn brother.

If you decide to start a thread about this, tag me.

[LynnS]

5 hours ago, Black Crow said:

 

Its all good stuff which helps us towards a better understanding and a better appreciation of the story and when it comes to open-mindedness, yes that's very important but conversely, so long as we adhere to the basic rule of respecting the opinions of others there is nothing wrong with formulating and dogmatically or otherwise pursuing a particular theory. I plead guilty of course on the centrality of Jon Snow being a son of Winterfell. You know my views and I'm sticking to them  - thus far. I'm open to other arguments, I just aint been convinced yet and there's nothing wrong with that so long as that basic rule [and the great good humour] are observed.

 

Also, it's the example of others that I look to for clarity and precision in writing.  I am not a writer and I struggle to get my ideas out in a way that makes sense.  An elegant piece of writing lights up my mind as much as the ideas that are presented.

[Frey family reunion]

9 hours ago, LmL said:

Just a quick point about Dany's bloodline - because Maekar married Dyanna Dayne and Egg married Black Betha Blackwood, and becasue this was followed by three generations of brother-sister incest, if Dany's parents are who we think the are, she is approximately 25% Dayne and 50% Blackwood (or 25% Blackwood and 25% of whomever Betha Blackwood's non-Blackwood parent was). Now, genetics doesn't work that way - each child can get a range of traits from either parent - but the point remains that Dany has a significant portion of Blackwood and Dayne blood, either of which could be the basis for a hypothesis about why Dany was able to hatch dragons.  The Daynes could well be descended of the original dragonriding civilization (which predated Valyria which I identify with Asshai and the Great Empire of the Dawn), and so an infusion of Dayne blood - OG dragonrider blood - might have made a difference. As for the Blackwood side, some have theorized that dragonbonding and skinchanging are related (I tend to think so - I'd guess dragonbonding is derivative of greenseer magic, probably altered / mutated), so the infusion of greenseer blood from the Blackwoods might have factored in also. 

Bottom line, Dayne and Blackwood are no insignificant houses. It's hard to imagine Dany's having them both is meaningless. 

Bloodlines which Dany would share with Duncan the Small, Jaehaerys the II, Shaera, Daeron, Rhaelle, Aerys, Rhaella, Rhaegar, and Viserys.  Sooo, what makes Dany special?  I don't disagree that the Rhoynish, Daynish, Blackwood bloodlines are significant.  In fact I even believe that there has been a concerted effort to steer the genetic line a certain way (a genetic blacksmith if you will), perhaps through Jon, or a surprise reveal, that will become significant.  But it isn't Dany, Dany is truly the blood of the dragon, and ironically the only way she can be a true dragon is if she isn't a true Targaryen.

 

 

[LynnS]

12 hours ago, JNR said:

There have been times, I suppose, when individuals like ATS got knocked around for espousing unusual views of various kinds.  (Personally, I remember him as one of the first to point out how thoroughly GRRM works unreliable narration to achieve impressive effects, though I didn't agree with all his theories either. ATS, if you're reading this: Well done.) 

Yes, ATS, if you are out there... can you spot the unreliable narrator in this video?

Come back and fight with me.  I dare you.

[Brad Stark]

What evidence do we have that Danny's special,  beyond how special the other Targaryens are?  The dragons could just as easily be due to the time as to who Danny is.

[Black Crow]

Nothing beyond being the last dragonlord.

I'll expand on that slightly. I don't think there is anything remarkable about Danaerys herself; rather she is like the children of Winterfell. They were normal until paired with their Direwolves. She was normal util paired with the eggs and started having dragon dreams

[Frey family reunion]

3 hours ago, Black Crow said:

Nothing beyond being the last dragonlord.

I'll expand on that slightly. I don't think there is anything remarkable about Danaerys herself; rather she is like the children of Winterfell. They were normal until paired with their Direwolves. She was normal util paired with the eggs and started having dragon dreams

We'll have to disagree on this one.  There are too many hints in the text that the dragonriders went to great lengths to keep their bloodlines in the family because of its association with dragon bonding and hatching.  And we had too many failed attempts at dragon hatching to assume that Dany either got lucky or was in the right place at the right time.  It couldn't just be the presence of the dragon eggs, because other Targaryens had eggs as well, they just couldn't hatch them.   I agree that a lot of other factors had to be present, but Dany is certainly one of the x factors.  And it has to be asked why Dany? 

GRRM is also going out of his way to drop hints about Targaryen bloodlines branching off, especially when he talks of House Plumm, and Longwaters. 

 

 

[Black Crow]

21 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

  And it has to be asked why Dany? 

That, I think is a good question which goes beyond her being the last undoubted Targaryen.

Who sent the Direwolves to the children of Winterfell and why, and who [really] sent the dragon eggs to Danaerys, and why?

But with that, its past my bedtime and so goodnight all.

[LmL]

Shierra Seastar (Quaithe) and Bloodraven are running the entire show from the heart of Winter and Asshai. BR tutors Bran, Shierra Dany, and BR and Shierra's daughter Melisandre will be tutoring (and resurrecting) Jon.

Case closed!

[Matthew.]

23 hours ago, Black Crow said:

...there is nothing wrong with formulating and dogmatically or otherwise pursuing a particular theory.

No, there's nothing wrong with that. I'm sure all of us have our own preferred interpretations for outstanding mysteries, or ideas that we find to be more plausible than others. Engaging with the ideas of others in good faith doesn't mean that we believe or accept as true what someone has proposed--it only requires a willingness to imagine what they are proposing, to run with a premise and see where it leads, if anywhere. To envision someone else's ideas does not somehow compromise or betray our own ideas.

Arguments can also be made in the spirit of open discussion, so long as the person criticizing someone else's theory is actually discussing the idea that has been proposed, rather than just asserting their own theories as a counterargument.

A willingness to imagine someone else's point of view is not just about courtesy, but a basic necessity for discussion. If Person A says "Here's my theory," and Person B responds "No, I don't believe that's possible," then...what next? What is Person A to say in response to someone who only has personal incredulity to offer in return?

The inevitable consequence of this is that no discussion of Person A's theory will occur, which is often what Person B intended in the first place--to dismiss an idea they either subjectively dislike, or that is incompatible with their own ideas. Certainly, we see this with RLJ.

Edit: I'm not saying we need to view all ideas on equal terms, or as equally plausible, or that we're obligated to get into some in depth discussion of every random idea that crops up; I am saying, instead, that taking the extra step to actively dismiss an idea is unnecessary--and, in some cases, may even make new posters feel unwelcome.

[Matthew.]

7 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

And we had too many failed attempts at dragon hatching to assume that Dany either got lucky or was in the right place at the right time. 

In my opinion, the "x-factor" with Dany is Rhaego--the overwhelming implication of her dragon dreams is that Rhaego was consumed from the inside out by fire, and it's in the aftermath of that sacrifice that she has her many dreams, and her intuition of how to hatch the eggs. Dany also has a dream early in AGOT, not long after she receives the eggs, of Drogon covered in her blood. In retrospect, I believe the meaning of this vision is that Drogon was covered in the blood of birth--Dany's son has been reborn as a dragon.

The reason that Aerion Brightflame failed, and that Aerys II would have failed, is because neither of them are following the Azor Ahai model--neither of them are truly sacrificing the thing they love most in the world. Aerion's death is not a sacrifice, because he does not truly expect to die; in his mind, he is not paying a price.

Thus, Dany's success may not be a matter of genealogy, but the fact that she's the only one that has truly paid the 'toll' that the return of the dragons demanded.

[Black Crow]

17 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

Bloodlines which Dany would share with Duncan the Small, Jaehaerys the II, Shaera, Daeron, Rhaelle, Aerys, Rhaella, Rhaegar, and Viserys.  Sooo, what makes Dany special?  I don't disagree that the Rhoynish, Daynish, Blackwood bloodlines are significant.  In fact I even believe that there has been a concerted effort to steer the genetic line a certain way (a genetic blacksmith if you will), perhaps through Jon, or a surprise reveal, that will become significant.  But it isn't Dany, Dany is truly the blood of the dragon, and ironically the only way she can be a true dragon is if she isn't a true Targaryen.

 

 

But yet, and I note your further development, how will this advance the story? I ask this as a serious question because I'm curious as to how you envisage this affecting outcomes.

[Frey family reunion]

6 hours ago, Black Crow said:

But yet, and I note your further development, how will this advance the story? I ask this as a serious question because I'm curious as to how you envisage this affecting outcomes.

You have to look at Dany's motivation for invading Westeros, she believes that it's her birthright, and she believes that by retaking it she is finally obtaining her elusive 'home'.  So it might be interesting to find out what happens if she finds out it's all a lie.   That her true home was a houseboat on the mouth of the green blood river.  And unless I miss my guess, her invasion is going to take her right into Dorne.  If she has to drag an army of Dothraki behind her, she can't stray far from land, so she's going to be traveling along the Stepstones, following the route of Queen Nymeria.  

[Black Crow]

On 1/18/2017 at 7:23 PM, Black Crow said:

Something worth considering, and I'm sure we've discussed this before, is the nature of magic or rather whether thinking of it in terms of Ice and Fire is too prescriptive or perhaps not prescriptive enough. Jojen and Meera talk, and quite rightly, or Ice and Fire and how the land is one, but are they talking only of Westeros in declaring Ice and Fire to be the same but different?

Westeros is afflicted by long summers and long winters, but what of the rest? GRRM has spoken of how Essos is not so badly affected because its landmass is not so northerly as Westeros, but does the conflict continue in another guise?

Mel we know sees the conflict not in terms of Ice and Fire but in Darkness and Light - yes the darkness is cold but its not quite the same, and as for the Summer Islands and Asshai, does Ice ever feature?

The point I'm making is that if we accept that there is a perpetual conflict waged since before history began, Ice and Fire is only one face or aspect of it, peculiar to Westeros. Elsewhere it takes other faces and therefore the Stone men may be the wights of the Rhoyne.

Just to return to this one, I've reached a Feast For Crows and come across this piece by the Damphair:

For a thousand thousand years sea and sky had been at war. From the sea had come the ironborn, and the fish that sustained them even in the depths of winter, but storms brought only woe and grief.

That business of sea and sky being at war for a thousand thousand years, clearly echoes Melisandre's pronouncement of the war between darkness and light having been waged since before time began, while the belief by the Sistermen that the Storm God and the Lady of the Waves fight because they are married, echoes the Reeds' belief that Ice and Fire are related and that the land is one.

Yes there is an eternal conflict going on, but seeing it purely in terms of Ice and Fire; of Others against Dragons is a false reading, we're talking about many faces and none

[Black Crow]

2 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

You have to look at Dany's motivation for invading Westeros, she believes that it's her birthright, and she believes that by retaking it she is finally obtaining her elusive 'home'.  So it might be interesting to find out what happens if she finds out it's all a lie.   That her true home was a houseboat on the mouth of the green blood river.  And unless I miss my guess, her invasion is going to take her right into Dorne.  If she has to drag an army of Dothraki behind her, she can't stray far from land, so she's going to be traveling along the Stepstones, following the route of Queen Nymeria.  

Its possible I suppose, but I'm not sure that it alters the outcomes. The 1993 synopsis pretty firmly speaks to Danaerys conquering Westeros before needing to rally it against the Others.

[Frey family reunion]

3 hours ago, Black Crow said:

Its possible I suppose, but I'm not sure that it alters the outcomes. The 1993 synopsis pretty firmly speaks to Danaerys conquering Westeros before needing to rally it against the Others.

I'm not saying that it alters the outcome, only that it alters her motivations.  She goes from liberator to conqueror.  Likewise, if Jon is the son of Rhaegar, it wouldn't really alter the outcome either. 

Another possibility, a remote one perhaps, is that it opens Dany up to having an involvement at the tower of joy.  (especially since I think the tower of joy battle happened much further in time from the Battle of the Trident than most are assuming).  My sneaking suspicion is that the purpose for the tower of joy was to sacrifice a number of children in furtherance of "waking a dragon".  If that's true than I wonder if Martin's story may concern the story arc of these intended sacrifices.

[Black Crow]

31 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

I'm not saying that it alters the outcome, only that it alters her motivations.  She goes from liberator to conqueror. 

I think that we get that anyway. In the 1993 synopsis, Danaerys the Dragonlord is portrayed first as a threat to Westeros and then as its conqueror, there isn't much room for liberation. I'm also mindful when thinking that this scenario will survive in the writing more than 20 years down the line that GRRM cited one of his inspirations as Jacobitism. Now we can see this quite early on in the business of secret toasts being drunk, [allegedly] banners being made [allegedly] and the small-folk longing for the return of the rightful king [allegedly]. This was indeed part of the Jacobite mythos, but of course it wasn't true. Yes there were some drinking toasts to the King over the Water, but few actually committed themselves and few followed them to disaster. The Stuarts passed unmourned and the world passed on and so, I suggest, GRRM is writing the same. Danaerys may claim to be the rightful lawful heir to the Iron Throne, but who cares, it's near 20 years since the mad king sat on that throne and the world has moved on; yes Dany might proclaim herself a liberator and promise stability after the War of the Five Kings, but she'll do so as the conqueror of the 1993 synopsis rather than as a liberator.

[Matthew.]

It's not entirely accurate to say that Dany's biography turning out to be false has no plot consequences; if she's not the daughter of Aerys II and Rhaella, or the daughter of Rhaegar as some people suggest, then she no longer fits the GoHH's claim that TPTWP will be born of the line of Aerys II and Rhaella.