Jump to content

Bran is the Night King


Samwell_Tarly

Recommended Posts

I think a big clue is when Bran warged into that crow. And the night King saw him instantly as if he knew it was going to happen. I mean how perceptive and observant the Night King is. If he can see a crow in a horde which is warged with an eye that easily. What chance would a faceless man have. He would probably see the faceless man from a Mile away.

It seems as if the Night King already knows what is going to happen because he has seen it before. And this could be another reason why Bran is the Night King. Cause the Night King used to be Bran and he has already been through this time loop. Now another example is how he could easily see Bran when he was in his dream state. The other White Walkers and Wights had no idea. And hence the fact he marked Bran could also indicate they are the same person.

If they are not the same person then the Night King is an even more powerful individual with  most of the powers of Bran except some and then some more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, pinoyathletics said:

I think a big clue is when Bran warged into that crow. And the night King saw him instantly as if he knew it was going to happen. I mean how perceptive and observant the Night King is. If he can see a crow in a horde which is warged with an eye that easily. What chance would a faceless man have. He would probably see the faceless man from a Mile away.

It seems as if the Night King already knows what is going to happen because he has seen it before. And this could be another reason why Bran is the Night King. Cause the Night King used to be Bran and he has already been through this time loop. Now another example is how he could easily see Bran when he was in his dream state. The other White Walkers and Wights had no idea. And hence the fact he marked Bran could also indicate they are the same person.

If they are not the same person then the Night King is an even more powerful individual with  most of the powers of Bran except some and then some more.

Yeah, good point.  Really, the big tell was when the NK touched Bran.  The true meaning of that hasn't really been thought through.

Bran was having a "vision" of the Army of the Dead, WW and the NK.  But just like with ToJ and Hodor, it wasn't really "just" a vision ... Bran was actually going back into the past (in the case of Hodor) or the present (in the case of the army of the dead/NK( and seeing events as they actually, historically or in the present, happened - in "real time".

If it was just a "vision", then Ned could not possibly have reacted to Bran's voice and turned around.

If it was just a "vision", then Bran in the vision couldn't have physically warged into Wyllis.

Bran can simultaneously and physically exist:

1.  In his body in the cave.

2.  In his body in the vision

- otherwise how could he warg into Wyllis or speak to Ned?

So, when Bran is having his "vision" of the NK he is both simultaneously in the cave and actually present in some other physical way near the NK.

Then, what is the difference between the NK scene where Bran is touched by the NK, and the other 2 scenes (ToJ and Wyllis)?

1.  In the NK scene, Bran didn't say anything or try to communicate, or warg - he was just "standing". Despite that the NK saw him.

2.  In the NK scene, the NK not only sees him, but reaches out and touches him.

Remember, there is no evidence that the 3ER or any prior greenseer could ever do what Bran has done - and actually affect the past.

Yet, by the NK touching Bran it shows that he has the same magic level as Bran.

The NK is able to not merely "perceive" or exist passively in the vision (a la 3ER), but physically act and intrude into the other person's vision.

But there is no indication the CoTF or any other greenseer ever had this power ... so why would the NK also have this magical power?  It doesn't follow simply from the fact that the CoTF created him.

Boiling it all down:

1.  Only Bran and the NK has been shown to have this power to "break the magic mirror" and turn dream into reality.

2.  There is no indication the NK can affect the past

3.  There is no explanation as to why the NK has that level of magic.

4.  The tragic consequences of the time loop/ink is dry have not been fully explained or concluded by the Hold the Door.

It follows that either the NK "just has" that magic - unsatisfyingly, story wise - or it is somehow related to Bran.

It must follow that either:

1.  Bran is the NK; or

2.  Bran unintentionally created or empowered the NK, just as the CoTF made a mistake in creating him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Three-Eyed Raven is the Night King. Some comments in here suggesting Night King wants to kill his younger self, but according to the rules that can't happen because "the ink is dry" - there's no way to alter the past. Also I'm not recalling anything onscreen showing Three-Eyed Raven trying to stop things from happening; correct me if I'm not remembering something.

Problems with the theory is that Three-Eyed Raven can't be caught by Children of the Forest; he is not physically there, and I don't see how they could catch someone who is not really there. Night King touched him, but Bran just ended the 'vision' so he can just end a vision, don't see how he could be 'caught'. If he travels physically, same thing. How can a being that can disappear in time ever be caught?

Some mention Three-Eyed Raven warging into the man caught by the Children and getting 'stuck' but there's no evidence to suggest such a thing could happen, and I don't think introducing such unexplained things would do anything but greatly complicate the narrative, and confuse a large portion of viewers. How does someone get stuck in a warg? It would need to somehow be explained, and set up; and I can't think of explaining 'stuck in a warg' with any kind of credibility narrative-wise.

Three-Eyed Raven would already be able to know what was going to happen in the past, how can a man who see the past not know the past? Sets up a confusing narrative. The writers are surely going to tread safely in tying all this up, and avoid overcomplicated, and confusing narratives; I should think.

I do think Three-Eyed Raven is the Lord of Light, and is a counterpart to Night King; but not the same person. We know Three-Eyed Raven can speak to people in visions, and that is what the Lord of Light does. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, John Meta said:

I don't think Three-Eyed Raven is the Night King. Some comments in here suggesting Night King wants to kill his younger self, but according to the rules that can't happen because "the ink is dry" - there's no way to alter the past. Also I'm not recalling anything onscreen showing Three-Eyed Raven trying to stop things from happening; correct me if I'm not remembering something.

Problems with the theory is that Three-Eyed Raven can't be caught by Children of the Forest; he is not physically there, and I don't see how they could catch someone who is not really there. Night King touched him, but Bran just ended the 'vision' so he can just end a vision, don't see how he could be 'caught'. If he travels physically, same thing. How can a being that can disappear in time ever be caught?

Some mention Three-Eyed Raven warging into the man caught by the Children and getting 'stuck' but there's no evidence to suggest such a thing could happen .... How does someone get stuck in a warg? It would need to somehow be explained, and set up; and I can't think of explaining 'stuck in a warg' ...

Three-Eyed Raven would already be able to know what was going to happen in the past, how can a man who see the past not know the past? 

It is not clear what "the rules" are just because the (now dead) 3ER said that to Bran, if only because it is not clear what "the ink is dry" actually means.

Bran seems more powerful than the three-eyed raven (Bloodraven) and any previous greenseer, because he can affect the past.  

Re: how can CoTF affect him when he's not really there - that is the point - Bran is really physically there in the visions.  He can physically affect, and in turn be physically affected.  We have proof that Bran can affect the past. We have proof that Bran can be physically affected in a vision (the NK scene) - he didn't just escape - he is permanently marked (in the real world) by the NK.

The whole point with Bran is that the magic and the real, the literal and the metaphorical, become one (a la Jojenpaste) ..... so the idea of him being permanently affected or perhaps trapped is definitely a live possibility.

The question re: "the ink is dry" is whether, in affecting the past, Bran makes a new present/future or simply creates/reinforces the present/future.

Bran created Hodor from Wyllis only at the point we saw him do it (in the cave, in the vision).

But Hodor was already Hodor in the present ... so Bran didn't change the present, he made the present.

So Bran can affect the past, but by doing so only unintentionally creates the present.

In other words, "the ink is dry" does not mean Bran can't affect the past.

Rather, it means Bran can affect the past but every time he does so he only confirms the present.

So Bran now knows the past, present (and future?) - but is unable to change it.  Though whether he has fully accepted "the ink is dry" is unknown.

If he hasn't realised, then it's possible that he will make another Hodor-like mistake - i.e. while in the past, physically affecting the past .... but by doing so he only ever ends up creating the current situation.

And when you say "how can a man who knows the past not know the past" --- that is the key.  Bran is both more powerful than previous greenseers but also way less prepared.  He is like a wildfire greenseer, uncontrolled and volatile.  

The whole theory is premised on another Bran "mistake".

Re: NK killing Bran .... it's sort of like NK and Jon.  I think NK could easily have killed Jon and could easily have killed Bran .... but chose not to in order for the plot to be fulfilled.

In other words, NK stormed the cave only in order to kill the 3ER ... because only by doing that could the NK ensure that Bran's powers would be immature ... and only by doing that would his own creation by Bran be ensured.

This leads me to another point ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NK = Bran theory also explains how GRRM has treated the WW, the Others, the NK from the start.

If Others are simply evil, it doesn't make sense.

If Others are not evil, it doesn't make sense.

The only way it makes sense is if the Others and in particular the NK are not only evil but good, via some twist.

In other words:

it now seems very certain that the Others/NK/WW are meant to be evil.

Yet there is almost no backstory and set-up for them besides what we get in the Show re: CoTF.

How could that be?  

If GRRM knew the Others were simply going to be the deus ex machina baddies then why wouldn't he set up their back story more?

I mean he had unlimited time and space to do so, but so far nothing in the Books.

Think about that.

This theory creates a very good reason for this: it is a twist too big to be given any real supporting evidence like RLJ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also go back to LOTR ... what was ultimately unsatisfying about LOTR?

Imo, it was that Sauron the Dark Lord was just implacably and absolutely evil.

Yet even the Dark Lord had more of an explanation for his evil, in much shorter books, than what GRRM has described about the WW and the Others.

How can this be?

Reading LOTR, the characters that oscillate between evil/good are mainly Gollum/Smeagol, Saruman, Boromir, the king of the Rohirrim ... yet Sauron is merely a cipher.  So disappointing!

Surely GRRM wants to go one better, especially given the major plot significance of the WW as the main plot engine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why isn't there are NK in the books?  The WW don't even have a leader, or we haven't been informed of one.

What if that is because the way GRRM plays it out in the books is that the leader only gets revealed to be late and at the same time as Bran's role in his creation (or that Bran is the leader) is revealed?

I like the idea of Bran paying thousands of years of penance in the frozen North by being the NK, waiting until now to move South so as to allow himself to be unmade at the God's Eye --- just payback for Hodor!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Aemon Targaryen said:

Btw, first scene of season --- NK on horse with chains clinking.

He already knew he would need chains to pull out Viserion.

I thought the same thing last night.  No other reason for the army of the dead to be walking around with these huge, long heavy chains unless the NK knew specifically when and why he would need them...

My question now though is who swam down to wrap them around Viserion?  It would seem from everything else we saw that wights are not swimmers, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every time I see the NK now, all I can see is Bran's face.  He certainly doesn't favor the guy tied to the tree, right? 

Also, assuming the catspaw dagger is a weapon of significance in the upcoming war, did anybody notice how Bran looked when he handed it to Arya?  The moment she actually took it from his hand, he pulled his hand away in a strange manner and looked at it almost like he didn't really want to hand it over.  He looked at it in a way like "Well, there it goes.  Next time I see that it will be thrust into my heart..."  Like he didn't want to give it to her almost, but had to...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm all for Arya killing Bran but I don't see how her training fits into this. Bran is tied to a chair. She doesn't need fighting skills to kill him. Bran is family, so no need for Arya to change faces to get close. And as a living person she could never sneak up to the Night King.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, MakeThemBurn said:

I'm all for Arya killing Bran but I don't see how her training fits into this. Bran is tied to a chair. She doesn't need fighting skills to kill him. Bran is family, so no need for Arya to change faces to get close. And as a living person she could never sneak up to the Night King.

I made my point based on my belief that Bran is indeed the NK.  I think either Arya or Jon kill him in that form...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Aemon Targaryen said:

It is not clear what "the rules" are just because the (now dead) 3ER said that to Bran, if only because it is not clear what "the ink is dry" actually means.

Bran seems more powerful than the three-eyed raven (Bloodraven) and any previous greenseer, because he can affect the past.  

Re: how can CoTF affect him when he's not really there - that is the point - Bran is really physically there in the visions.  He can physically affect, and in turn be physically affected.  We have proof that Bran can affect the past. We have proof that Bran can be physically affected in a vision (the NK scene) - he didn't just escape - he is permanently marked (in the real world) by the NK.

The whole point with Bran is that the magic and the real, the literal and the metaphorical, become one (a la Jojenpaste) ..... so the idea of him being permanently affected or perhaps trapped is definitely a live possibility.

The question re: "the ink is dry" is whether, in affecting the past, Bran makes a new present/future or simply creates/reinforces the present/future.

Bran created Hodor from Wyllis only at the point we saw him do it (in the cave, in the vision).

But Hodor was already Hodor in the present ... so Bran didn't change the present, he made the present.

So Bran can affect the past, but by doing so only unintentionally creates the present.

In other words, "the ink is dry" does not mean Bran can't affect the past.

Rather, it means Bran can affect the past but every time he does so he only confirms the present.

So Bran now knows the past, present (and future?) - but is unable to change it.  Though whether he has fully accepted "the ink is dry" is unknown.

If he hasn't realised, then it's possible that he will make another Hodor-like mistake - i.e. while in the past, physically affecting the past .... but by doing so he only ever ends up creating the current situation.

And when you say "how can a man who knows the past not know the past" --- that is the key.  Bran is both more powerful than previous greenseers but also way less prepared.  He is like a wildfire greenseer, uncontrolled and volatile.  

The whole theory is premised on another Bran "mistake".

Re: NK killing Bran .... it's sort of like NK and Jon.  I think NK could easily have killed Jon and could easily have killed Bran .... but chose not to in order for the plot to be fulfilled.

In other words, NK stormed the cave only in order to kill the 3ER ... because only by doing that could the NK ensure that Bran's powers would be immature ... and only by doing that would his own creation by Bran be ensured.

This leads me to another point ....

Bran was touched, yes; but he did escape with ease. That's really the point. The theory rests on the Children catching Three-Eyed Raven. My problem with that is that they can't catch someone who can disappear in the blink of an eye. Without being able to catch him, can't tie him up and put obsidian into him. Plus, if the guy tied up is in fact the Night King, that guy is clearly not Three-Eyed Raven. He looks nothing like him, and is much older.

The warg idea is trying to circumvent this problem but only raises serious narrative problems. One, why would Three-Eyed Raven possibly try to warg a man who is clearly being subject to uncertain procedures; two, the man's eyes show no sign of being warged; three, what would be the point? Four, why would Three-Eyed Raven warg when the result of Bran's warg was an ill-cause for Hodor's state? It doesn't make sense. And I would re-iterate that this is being written by writers whose goal is to end the series in a satisfactory way for a mainstream viewing audience, and unless they can pull it off in some really easy to follow and understand way, they're going to put off the majority of their mainstream audience. I just can't see any of this doing anything but creating a very contrived and difficult to follow - if not outright defiance of reason - narrative.

And what would be the point? Three-Eyed Raven is trying to stop the Night King from ever being? That would create a self-contradictory paradox in which Three-Eyed Raven stops the Night King from being created, thus Three-Eyed Raven would never have to stop the Night King from being created, thus the Night King would be created, thus Three-Eyed Raven would stop him from being created, etc. The only paradox we have in the story is a self-sufficient and non-contradictory paradox in which cause-effect cannot be determined. Even if the writers were to say, whatever, we will just ignore the self-contradictory paradox; they would be introducing a serious contradictory paradox that would inevitably be decried by a huge swath of the viewing audience.

And what is the Night King's purpose? To kill Three-Eyed Raven? Before Three-Eyed Raven wargs the past? That creates another self-contradictory paradox. If the writers again ignore it, then what happens if the Night King never was? Reality changes and everything is different? Is Night King killing Three-Eyed Raven after he wargs the past? To what end? Nothing would change. Night King just wants to die? Does Night King know he was Three-Eyed Raven? Then why murder thousands of people? Where is Three-Eyed Raven's morality? 

There are many more narrative problems in the theory, for sake of brevity, those above are issues with the theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Aemon Targaryen said:

Why isn't there are NK in the books?  The WW don't even have a leader, or we haven't been informed of one.

What if that is because the way GRRM plays it out in the books is that the leader only gets revealed to be late and at the same time as Bran's role in his creation (or that Bran is the leader) is revealed?

I like the idea of Bran paying thousands of years of penance in the frozen North by being the NK, waiting until now to move South so as to allow himself to be unmade at the God's Eye --- just payback for Hodor!!

 

Penance is when you do good to repay wrong. I would propose that the murder of thousands due to Long Winter and army building is the exact opposite of penance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, MakeThemBurn said:

There's a massive plot hole here if Bran is not the Night King. Or how else are we to believe that the Night King's master plan was to wait behind the Wall for some random chick to fly in and bring him a dragon to burn the Wall with?

Not really, Night King can have precog abilities without being Three-Eyed Raven (which itself creates serious narrative problems; so it's like saying "There is a massive plot hole here if a theory that creates massive plot holes isn't true") - Night King is counterpart to Three-Eyed Raven, the story is based on counterparts: ice-fire. Lord of Light knows the future, does that mean Night King is Lord of Light? They are counterparts which need balanced. I'm fairly sure Three-Eyed Raven will be critical in this balance with Night King; just as Jon (ice+fire).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Aemon Targaryen said:

Btw, first scene of season --- NK on horse with chains clinking.

He already knew he would need chains to pull out Viserion.

They both do seem to be counterparts. But, elaborate on the clinking chains in first season; I've forgotten the scene - how do you connect the two? Is there simply the sound of clinking chains, and thus you connect the sound to the latest episode? Sounds interesting, but as said I've forgotten the scene.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Jaehaerys Stark said:

I made my point based on my belief that Bran is indeed the NK.  I think either Arya or Jon kill him in that form...

While the Brandon Stark of the series' opening scene (and also of the book's) might conceivably somehow turn out to have some time-warping connection with the legendary Bran the Builder who in aeons past created the Wall, Winterfell, and Storm's End using powerful magic noöne today understands, it is not possible for our own young Bran to somehow "be" the Night King.

Here's why:

The show's writers specifically created this "Night King" as a standard plot device. They wanted a singular, identifiable antagonist to counterbalance the shows protagonists, someone for folks both in-universe and out-universe to focus on. This is a typical Hollywood-style motif  used to create "dramatic tension" and payback when at last and  at "great cost", "our heroes" finally defeat this supervillain-like opponent.

Being a show-only invention, there's no way that what Martin had planned for Bran can possibly be this.  And while the showrunners' adaptation can and has changed things and even created their own elements, everyone with the most intimate understanding of how it all fits together has repeatedly explained that the show will "get to the same place" as the books, just along its own paths.

So for example that means that if in the books, Jaime Lannister isn't really the secret love-child of Ned Stark and Ashara Dayne who's destined to be the One True Hero who saves the world by wielding Dawn in his restored right hand and afterwards takes both of his secret half-sisters Arya and Sansa to wife so that the three of them can rule over a reunited Seven Kingdoms just like Aegon (=Jaime) and Visenya (=Arya) and Rhaenys (=Sansa) did the first time around, you can be plenty sure that in the show that isn't going to happen, either.

And why not, you ask?

Because it isn't getting to the same place via a different paths; instead it's gone haring off like a Mad Hatter pursing some crackpot fan fiction that makes no sense in the grand scheme of things, that violates all the foreshadowing carefully laid out by both book and show alike. 

Because the show's "Night King" character is only a facile Hollywood plot device and not something from Martin's own universe or design, there's no way that Bran's ultimate purpose in is to become the immortal incarnation of pure evil from ten thousand years ago.  

Just because you get a simplified Hollywood spin on things, doesn't mean you should also expect some corny comic book's spin on them that would break everything Martin set off to do in the big picture.

Not going to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/3/2017 at 1:35 AM, Samwell_Tarly said:

Sorry if this has been posted before but I did a little search and nothing has come up. After Brans little creepy episode, his emotionless robotic style must mean something, are they building him up to be the villain of the story. Well heres why I think Bran could be the Night King.

  • Warging Abilities - He can warg animals/humans. Maybe this could possibly hint at the fact Bran might warg the nights King, rather than age or transform into him.
  • Time Travelling - Bran has already created one time travelling conflict. Bran created the injury to Hodor. When the Three-Eyed Raven says the ''Ink is dry'', we actually now know it isnt but more a metaphor to the fact that it shouldnt be re written or messed with.
  • Hounds vision - Does this mean that Brans presence at the Wall is connected to the NK
  • WW creation - Bran saw all this in his training - his reaction to Leaf creating the WW as a defence against the first men was to flinch a way that suggested it was like the shard was going into him, like all them years ago he was that man. He could possibly go back in time to save the Children of the Forest, consequently becoming the NK.
  • Leafs confession -  Leaf explains why she and the other children of the forest created the WW, she says ''we needed to defend ourselves......from you'' after a light pause she then says ''from men'', was this a slip up and was aimed directly at Bran. As said maybe he travels back to save the children of the forest after hes messed around with his own time stream, unintentionally allowing them to turn him into a monster.
  • Men can only become WW - The WW have been using Crasters son to increase their regime. Bran is magically gifted so it's possible that this ability could be explained not only by the Night King's origins, but by Bran's powers acting as a channel.
  • Bran was touched - Unlike any other vision that NK was able to see him and touch him therefore nullifying any power that stopped them entering the cave. The reason why the NK was able to see Bran is because they are already physically connected due to being the same person.
  • Identity crisis - Jojen called Bran the raven foreseeing his training with the three eyed raven. When Bran is touched, the three eyed raven says 'its time for you to become me' this could essentially mean he will need to adopt different identities to ensure the fate of the word.

Is this plausible?, please discuss, Id love to know what people think.

Also, dead Jon's wolf is named Ghost, Arya's is named Nymeria after warrior princess, Sansa's is named Lady, and Bran's is named...Summer - the anti-Winter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Illiterati said:

Also, dead Jon's wolf is named Ghost, Arya's is named Nymeria after warrior princess, Sansa's is named Lady, and Bran's is named...Summer - the anti-Winter.

I like the idea, 

Arya has become a warrior ''princess'' to speak

Sansa is a Lady

Bran could become the Summer, a reference to stopping the WWs

Ghost - ????? How do we thing Ghost references Jon?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...