The Seven: Do they have any power? Do they even exist?

[rustythesmith]

We don't know if gods exist in the story. I find it strange when people ask why X religion doesn't have any super powers because the story makes it purposely ambiguous where the miracle comes from and whether or not there was any miracle at all. The POV style of the story allows us to perceive what the characters perceive, but with that perception comes all of the character's personal beliefs, expertise, misconceptions, prejudices, experiences, and gullibility. All we know is that the characters believe gods exist and they credit certain events they perceive as miraculous to the gods. Followers of different religions attribute the same event like a comet to different gods and apply different meanings based on their views of the world and how they think it works.

One advantage of a medieval setting for fantasy stories is a lack of scientific knowledge. In a sci-fi setting where laser guns and teleporters exist, the author needs to come up with a scientific explanation of how a teleporter works because the setting demands that the characters must know how a teleporter works. If not, then who built it? How are the characters able to use it without a basic understanding of how it works? Some writers come up with a detailed explanation based in real science, but those can never hold up to analysis because we don't know how to build a working teleporter in real life. Usually the fictional science is explained through anecdotal or metaphorical means so that the ignorant protagonist and reader can understand it. There is a sense that it is beyond our understanding. This allows us to continue believing that there is indeed a character who understands the science and that the science works, but it's too complicated to explain. I think most people are satisfied to suspend disbelief and move on with the story. But for the readers who happen to know a lot about particle physics, a lackluster explanation might break their suspension of disbelief so much that they can't enjoy the story.

The same thing applies to every craft or art that exists in the story. When a singer sings a song that has supposedly existed for a hundred years, it is only believable if it is a good song. How would a bad song survive for so long? GRRM isn't a painter and he probably couldn't paint or draw a picture of the most beautiful woman in the world, so he doesn't try to. A bad attempt would be worse than no attempt when it comes to suspension of disbelief for the reader. If he wants to express that someone is the most beautiful woman in the world, when he describes Shiera Seastar or Ashara Dayne he will simply say that they were the most beautiful women in the world. Our imaginations fill in the rest.

Because of the medieval setting and the POV structure there is no in-world need for the characters to understand magic, and thus no need for the author to explain it. The fact that the characters don't understand it is central to the purpose of magic and religion in the story as well as the themes and messages at the end of it. It mimics life. People witness miraculous things, things they can't explain and it influences them. Some people are inspired by it, some are scared by it, some obsess over it and others reject it. Religion can both bring people together and push people apart and I think that's what GRRM is trying to explore. As soon as R'hllor or The Stranger become real beyond a reasonable doubt, suspension of disbelief breaks. A once grounded story would feel cheap and ruined because it no longer mimics life.

So are we going to see The Faith of the Seven do some magic super powers to prove its legitimacy to the reader? Yes and no. That is to say, we will continue to see characters who witness magical events and attribute them to gods, including the Seven. It has happened with Davos for example when he drowned at Blackwater. We will continue to see characters try to wield magic with varying success and failure as they try to work out the natural laws of king's blood, death for life and so on. Is it science or magic? It doesn't matter. Any sufficiently advanced science is indistinguishable from magic. I think we can take the author at his word when he says it is magic, but it really is just a word. The takeaway is that a perfectly replicated ritual will not necessarily have the same results as it did the first time, if any. No one's god will be the right or wrong god, the story will probably not become a war of the gods, and the feeling of not knowing is the whole point.

[Lost Melnibonean]

On 9/3/2017 at 8:47 AM, Ser Petyr Parker said:

Good one. I keep meaning to look into that again. It seemed weird, and I think even one or two characters said the ship that rescued him shouldn't have been there (I don't remember the details). If the Crone could raise her lamp and shed some light on this, I would be grateful.

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?/topic/94042-did-davos-actually-drown-after-the-battle-of-the-blackwater/

 

[Ser Petyr Parker]

51 minutes ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?/topic/94042-did-davos-actually-drown-after-the-battle-of-the-blackwater/

 

I'll have a proper read of that later. I'm trying to gather all the information I can on the various types of/perspectives on magic in Westeros, and the sea aspects seem a little neglected. The Ironborn see the Drowned God (i.e. god of the sea) and the Storm God as in opposition, but what happens to Moqorro suggests something else. It could be coincidence, but it almost appears to be a plan that he was first thrown overboard by a storm and then survived in the sea for 10 days.

[Pearly]

Didn't GRRM explicitly state that no Gods 'exist' in ASOIAF universe?

[falcotron]

1 hour ago, Pearly said:

Didn't GRRM explicitly state that no Gods 'exist' in ASOIAF universe?

Not exactly. He's said a few things that are close to this. For example;

• SSM 1308: He creates religions, not gods, because that's what he sees in the real world.
• SSM 1350: There will be no direct appearances of demigods or direct involvement from gods in the story.
• SSM 5497: "… the relation between the religions and the various magics that some people have here is something that the reader can try to puzzle out."

I think others in this thread have established that there are supernatural things that happen in the story that seem to serve a purpose that isn't the purpose of any of the people. And I think that qualifies as "gods exist" in some useful sense. But that doesn't mean it qualifies as R'hllor existing, or the Old Gods, or any other specific gods.

At the same time, clearly the religions' pictures of their gods are largely made up human explanations, not direct experience. And nobody's going to get any direct experience in the rest of the story to clarify that. But that doesn't mean that R'hllor or the Old Gods are completely made up; they could be somewhat reasonable approximations of reality even if they've invented a lot of the details to flesh them out.

My suspicion is that the reality is a lot closer to the religions being almost completely wrong than to the religions being mostly right but a little distorted. But GRRM clearly doesn't want that to be an easy question to answer.

[TMIFairy]

On 3.09.2017 at 1:09 PM, falcotron said:

In which case, the question may not be "Do the Faith exist like R'hllor does?", but "Why have the Andals built a religion that isn't based on any evident magic?" And for an answer to that, you only have to ask why Catholics or Shintoists have done the same thing in our world.

Catholics are a subset of Christians. And Christianity is built around a little act of "magic" - the Resurrection of the Messiah.

[falcotron]

2 hours ago, TMIFairy said:

Catholics are a subset of Christians. And Christianity is built around a little act of "magic" - the Resurrection of the Messiah.

I don't want to argue about whether belief in the Resurrection requires an act of faith to be meaningful, because that argument tends to take 30 years and leave half of Germany dead, but surely you'd agree that there's no evident act of magic behind Shintoism, or Hinduism, or the religious beliefs of about 5 billion current humans and another 50 billion or more dead ones, right?

[FylkirKarl]

I see the Seven as the ancestors of the Andals who were made in deities due to legends from their deeds, similar to how the Norse Gods or Greek Gods are believed to have been created.

[joluoto2]

Does it really matter? They have many who believe in them. They have some very devout followers. They have people willing to do both acts of good and evil in their name. They are real enough.

[GyantSpyder]

7 hours ago, TMIFairy said:

Catholics are a subset of Christians. And Christianity is built around a little act of "magic" - the Resurrection of the Messiah.

Not really.

Catholicism is an orthodox, traditional religion, not a revelatory, fundamentalist faith. It was built on the cultures that came before it, not just the Christian subset of Judaism, and it grew organically over time due to a lot of non-magical things. It differs from place to place based on the traditions, holidays and values of the people who live there. Even the Gospels postdate the Resurrection by hundreds of years - it's not like it sprung up fully formed from the recognition of a miracle. It's the things other than the magic that actually built the Church and concern it on a day to day basis - building communities, traveling and talking to people, dealing with oppression and persecution together as a group and trying to figure out a better way to live.

The Roman Church in particular draws a ton of its existence from the institutions of Rome that predate it. There was a Curia before there was a Resurrection. The "little act of magic" is a unifying framing device, but it's not at the heart of what is actually happening, and it didn't form the substance of the religion or its practices on its own.

It is as much if not more about history, family, being together, moral teachings, dealing with truth and mystery, and ways of life as it is about "magic." Catholic teaching is not to accept the Bible as literal fact (which is of course absurd). As Pope Francis said, "God is not a magician with a magic wand."

Of course the magical aspect is one aspect and it shows up in certain places at certain times - there are religions that invest a lot more in the immediacy of things like altered states of consciousness and shamanic sorts of rites than Catholicism does in general (like speaking in tongues and whatnot), but specifically of course there are a lot of anti-empirical rituals.

Actual Catholics at church by and large don't sit there thinking about transubstantiation, as much as it might monopolize the attention of outsiders.

To focus only on the magical stuff such that you miss everything else it does that has made it important and made it endure for thousands of years is I think to fundamentally misjudge what is happening and what a religion in the world is for the people who experience it.

[MakeThemBurn]

I don't think the Faith Militant would have had such a big part in the story if there was nothing to it other than creating some drama. I believe that time in the world of ice and fire is cyclical and the seven gods of the faith are about 7 great heroes. Those seven are Mother/Dany, Father/Jon, Maiden/Sansa, Smith/Gendry, Warrior/Jaime, Crone/Melisandre, Stranger/Night King. Their roles also hint the end game.

[The Prince who was not pro]

On 18/9/2017 at 7:41 PM, MakeThemBurn said:

I don't think the Faith Militant would have had such a big part in the story if there was nothing to it other than creating some drama. I believe that time in the world of ice and fire is cyclical and the seven gods of the faith are about 7 great heroes. Those seven are Mother/Dany, Father/Jon, Maiden/Sansa, Smith/Gendry, Warrior/Jaime, Crone/Melisandre, Stranger/Night King. Their roles also hint the end game.

You mention Jon as "father" when He is not even one, LOL.

[Reekazoid]

On ‎9‎/‎3‎/‎2017 at 7:47 AM, Ser Petyr Parker said:

tct,cfI also had some vague ideas that maybe the Maesters basically came up with this religion to steer people away from magic. Do we know how old they are? Then again, Maesters basically get to decide what history says, so if the timelines don't fit it doesn't necessarily mean anything.

 This. Reminds me of the Bene Gesserit from Dune, sending out the Missionaria Protectiva to seed the popular culture with mythology and belief to make people easier to influence and to further the long term goals of the cabal.

I see other parallels too, such as advising noble houses and monarchs, and influencing marriages and heredity. 

But yeah, masters are interchangeable and ubiquitous. Commoditized sociopolitical anchors, and over time their version of history becomes the only one that people believe. 

Unless they have an Old Nan figure to listen to while growing up, that is. 

 

 

[MakeThemBurn]

13 hours ago, The Prince who was not pro said:

You mention Jon as "father" when He is not even one, LOL.

He will be. Was pretty clear from the very first book imo. That's why there was such an emphasis on him being a bastard and how he would never father one himself. Then there's Ghost. Jon will have a child but not be part of his life. As for the main heroes making up the seven gods of the faith: good prophecies reveal themselves in the very end. Hence why Jon is listed as a father.

[Faera]

I'm sceptical as to whether any of the gods truly exist though, if a primal force is out there somewhere, then the Seven are just Seven extra faces of that. I find the Faceless Men's core idea that there is only one god - the Many-Faced God - and everyone is worshipping different aspects of that prime godhead.

[the trees have eyes]

On 06/09/2017 at 3:45 PM, GyantSpyder said:

Not really.

Catholicism is an orthodox, traditional religion, not a revelatory, fundamentalist faith. It was built on the cultures that came before it, not just the Christian subset of Judaism, and it grew organically over time due to a lot of non-magical things. It differs from place to place based on the traditions, holidays and values of the people who live there. Even the Gospels postdate the Resurrection by hundreds of years - it's not like it sprung up fully formed from the recognition of a miracle. It's the things other than the magic that actually built the Church and concern it on a day to day basis - building communities, traveling and talking to people, dealing with oppression and persecution together as a group and trying to figure out a better way to live.

The Roman Church in particular draws a ton of its existence from the institutions of Rome that predate it. There was a Curia before there was a Resurrection. The "little act of magic" is a unifying framing device, but it's not at the heart of what is actually happening, and it didn't form the substance of the religion or its practices on its own.

It is as much if not more about history, family, being together, moral teachings, dealing with truth and mystery, and ways of life as it is about "magic." Catholic teaching is not to accept the Bible as literal fact (which is of course absurd). As Pope Francis said, "God is not a magician with a magic wand."

Of course the magical aspect is one aspect and it shows up in certain places at certain times - there are religions that invest a lot more in the immediacy of things like altered states of consciousness and shamanic sorts of rites than Catholicism does in general (like speaking in tongues and whatnot), but specifically of course there are a lot of anti-empirical rituals.

Actual Catholics at church by and large don't sit there thinking about transubstantiation, as much as it might monopolize the attention of outsiders.

To focus only on the magical stuff such that you miss everything else it does that has made it important and made it endure for thousands of years is I think to fundamentally misjudge what is happening and what a religion in the world is for the people who experience it.

Everything you say is true but, to be fair, the poster you were replying to was talking about what gave birth to Christianity as a religion, not what it or the institution of the Church has evolved into over time. 

The Church =/= the religion although it has often declared itself to be with all the attendant horrors of the repression of heresies (Arminian, Cathar, Hussite to name a few) and invention of dogmas and science / history (the sun revolving around the earth, the earth being 5,000 years old) not to mention the protestant reformation and subsequent proliferation of different Christian Churches. 

But the central thing which underlines all these related faiths is the divinity of Jesus and what establishes that is a lot of magic - the resurrection which proves his divinity to believers but also the miracles that established his following and his followers' belief in him, e.g turning water into wine, walking on water, the feeding of the five thousand, healing the sick and the lame and bringing people back from the dead.  Without the magic of the miracles and the resurrection Jesus may have been merely a charismatic preacher and humanitarian figure within Judaism but not the inspiration for a new religion. 

Miracles of course were very popular in the medieval period, leading to numerous canonisations and local legends so the magic has remained very much alive and well and, arguably, central to the religion, at least for Catholicism.  E.G. Lourdes is a global pilgrimage site but the miracle that established it's fame - the alleged appearance of the Virgin Mary - only occurred in 1858.  The girl who witnessed the visions, and this in the era of science, was later canonised.  Today up to 5 million people visit Lourdes each year and over 200 million have visited since 1860.  Oh and the Catholic church has recognised 69 "miraculous" cures among those visiting Lourdes and taking the waters.  Honestly, I'd say the magic of miracles is still pretty fundamental.  Those numbers speak for themselves.

I was raised as an Anglican (C of E) but am not a practising Christian so I hope none of the above gives offence.

[the trees have eyes]

On 05/09/2017 at 5:43 AM, rustythesmith said:

< snip >

So are we going to see The Faith of the Seven do some magic super powers to prove its legitimacy to the reader? Yes and no. That is to say, we will continue to see characters who witness magical events and attribute them to gods, including the Seven. It has happened with Davos for example when he drowned at Blackwater. We will continue to see characters try to wield magic with varying success and failure as they try to work out the natural laws of king's blood, death for life and so on. Is it science or magic? It doesn't matter. Any sufficiently advanced science is indistinguishable from magic. I think we can take the author at his word when he says it is magic, but it really is just a word. The takeaway is that a perfectly replicated ritual will not necessarily have the same results as it did the first time, if any. No one's god will be the right or wrong god, the story will probably not become a war of the gods, and the feeling of not knowing is the whole point.

Good summary.  My take is that the magics we have seen are hard to attribute to any God.  A God intervening directly removes agency from our characters and feels far too heavy a touch for GRRM (and besides, we have Bloodraven for that ).  The actual magic attributable to "gods" is, in the one case where we get a good look at it, something that questions the notion of godhood: the souls or spirits of the greenseers are somehow bound up in the weirwoods.

And that makes attributing anything to the Severn particularly hard because they are chosen not so much due to any observable existence or attributable magic but as representatives of the life cycle or societal functions of humans: warrior, father, smith; mother, maid, crone; and Stranger = Death.  All human religions in real terms are man made (take Joseph Smith or L Ron Hubbard for two fairly recent examples) but if the founding principles of a religion in story seem to involve creating gods in our own image the better for us to relate to - as with the Seven - then the chance of them being real in story seems remarkably slim.  If we take the view that the seven are aspects of a single entity, which seems to echo aspects of hinduism, then we are left with a global idea that there is one god but every society or culture projects what it wants on to that God and appropriates it for itself (the argument that there is one true God but he's ours and yours is false that has blighted real world conflicts for millenia).  Otherwise there are a dozen competing gods who only care about their own followers and that seems incompatible with our idea of omnipotent and universal godhood.  And that seems to being us back to GRRM's point that there will be religions in ASOIAF as in our world but there will be no gods in story.  So Davos can ascribe his deliverance to the Seven being real but I don't buy it.

[cgrav]

Far as I can tell, the only power The Seven have is in the actions of their believers.