Why the Others Must Not Be Merely Evil

[AlaskanSandman]

Maybe the comet fell, caused the long night, and the children used our fear and superstition of events that big, to lead us into believing a false threat existed and tricked Azor into killing his wife, but the magic also turned her into the first Other. Who returned back to him. 

Or maybe Azor created the sword to fight the children, not the Others. 

I dont think the Long Night was initially the fault of the COTF but rather this asteroid that fell independently, cause you know, asteroids fall. 

[AlaskanSandman]

13 hours ago, Tagganaro said:

Well, they were pretty big pricks during the prologue when they mocked Royce and then laughed while butchering him .

This may have been them checking for the magic sword. Im not big on the magic sword thing but it's been pointed out before and makes sense. Once they realized this guy in front of them looking like a Stark, isn't and doesnt have the magic sword. So they just laugh and kill him. 

[falcotron]

9 minutes ago, AlaskanSandman said:

True true true. Though it doesn't make sense. 

It makes perfect sense. Let's go through your points one by one.

11 minutes ago, AlaskanSandman said:

First, the walls foundations are made of stone. So there may have already been a wall before the Ice wall. We dont really know what's up with that.

Sure, there may have already been a low stone wall, or there may not. There's no real reason to assume there was, but fine. But either way, it still makes sense.

11 minutes ago, AlaskanSandman said:

Second. The Others drop out of now wheres during the long night with not a tale about how or why, other than these legends. 

Sure, humans don't know where they came from. How does that not make sense? And it's not as if your version, or 40000's version, changes that—humans still don't know where they came from.

11 minutes ago, AlaskanSandman said:

The Last Hero, Azor Ahai, or who ever supposedly meets with the children (who's magic sword may have snapped). 

Yes, and again, what part of this doesn't make sense? The quest to find the Children and make a deal with them is a pretty standard kind of quest, and it's even been repeated by Bran in the present day.

11 minutes ago, AlaskanSandman said:

They then supposedly build a giant wall, while at war (Why dont the Others prevent this?), then from here, Brandon the Builder or some unknown person forms the Night's Watch. Then, we face the Others in an epic war for the Battle of the Dawn.

Hold on. The story doesn't tell us that they built the Wall first, then formed the Watch then fought the war. The Wall could have been built in the middle of the War, after they'd already pushed the Others way into the North.

You're also neglecting the fact that the Wall was build with powerful magic in the foundation and contains magic that keeps the Others at bay. I suppose it's possible that these are entirely separate things, and the magic that keeps the Others at bay was only put in after the 700 feet of ice were completed. But it seems at least as likely, and probably a lot more likely, the magic to keep the Others at bay is part of the magic in the foundation. In which case the Others didn't prevent it because they couldn't.

11 minutes ago, AlaskanSandman said:

Then, we face the Others in an epic war for the Battle of the Dawn. Where we supposedly win. Maybe it was a truce, maybe not. 

Surely this part makes sense. People fight wars, and one side or the other wins, either by truce or by total domination.

11 minutes ago, AlaskanSandman said:

Yet, supposedly with in 13 generations or so, the Others are still alive.

And? You just suggested the war ended in a truce just one sentence ago. Why wouldn't the others be alive 13 generations after a truce?

And even if there weren't a truce, and the Others were driven completely out of the lands of men, it would still make sense that some of them would be alive.

11 minutes ago, AlaskanSandman said:

One of them, a female (Only one ever mentioned) teams up with the L.C.

Most of the Others, we're never told their sex. The only ones we know are male are the ones in the legends about siring half-human monstrosities on wildling women. And the only one we know is female is the one who married the Night's King. The rest, we have no idea. Their army could have both men and women. Or the women might usually stay back home doing women's work or priestly things or who knows what while the men are out fighting. Or plenty of other possibilities. The fact that we don't know which one of the many sensible possibilities is the truth doesn't mean it doesn't make sense.

And of course we don't even know the Corpse Queen is an Other in the first place. Maybe she's one of those half-human monstrosities. Maybe she's a human ice witch equivalent to Mel. Who knows? If you don't think a female Other makes sense, you can't assume she must be a female Other just so you can assume the story makes no sense.

11 minutes ago, AlaskanSandman said:

teams up with the L.C. and do what? Just rule there and sacrifice to the Others?

Why not? People sacrifice. Even in our world, where it has no effect, but even more so in Planetos, where it often does.

Of course we don't know why they were sacrificing—especially since, whatever their goals were, they didn't achieve them, because the King of Winter and King Beyond the Wall teamed up to stop them early.

But again, there are many answers that make sense. Maybe they believed they were following the commands of their god, the Great Other. Maybe they were trying to bring the Others back up to strength in hopes of allying with them to crush their enemies. Or many more possibilities.

And this is another case where we just got a repeat: Craster was sacrificing to the Others, and we didn't find out why, because the Watch mutineers stopped him before we could. (The difference this time is that the Others were already at strength and on the move, whereas last time they apparently weren't.)

11 minutes ago, AlaskanSandman said:

Were the Others there? Did they fight too? And how did we win this war? Was it another supposed truce? I mean, we obviously didn't beat them, again.

Nothing in the story says the Others were there and fought alongside them. In fact, the story strongly implies that the Kings who defeated the Night King didn't even know he was sacrificing to the Others until after they'd won the battle, which means the Others probably weren't there. Which makes sense, since the Others had just been decisively defeated a few generations ago, and probably weren't prepared to repeat the same war they just lost.

So, if the only reason this whole thing makes no sense to you is that you don't understand how we won this war, then the problem is simple: there was no such war, so there is no such question. You've just imagined something that isn't in the actual story, and that extra thing you've imagined makes no sense. The story we're actually told does make sense.

[falcotron]

50 minutes ago, AlaskanSandman said:

Maybe the comet fell, caused the long night, and the children used our fear and superstition of events that big, to lead us into believing a false threat existed and tricked Azor into killing his wife, but the magic also turned her into the first Other. Who returned back to him. 

You realize that this completely contradicts the story you just told a few minutes ago, right?

It seems like you're willing to believe anything and everything except what's actually in the books. Like in the other thread, where you insisted that Aerys+Ashara=Dany and Ned+Ashara=Dany, and then, from that, managed to conclude that Dany mixes Targaryen blood and Stark blood.

Meanwhile, why did the Children trick Azor Ahai into coming halfway across the world and murdering his wife? If they expected that to create the Others, you've just got the standard theory that the Children created the Others that you were trying to get away from, with the unnecessary added complication that all of the facts we have are wrong. If they didn't expect the Others, what was their goal? Just fucking with one random human from the other side of the planet for shits and giggles?

And how would the creation of the Others get twisted into a myth about the creation of a sword made of flame that's deadly to the Others? That's like saying, "Noah built an Ark for no good reason, but it was a actually a submarine that he piloted into a volcano, so he and his family and two of each kind of animal drowned in magma, while everyone else was fine, and that's where we get our story of a worldwide flood to punish mankind and Noah saving his family and two of every animal from the flood with an Ark."

[AlaskanSandman]

1 hour ago, falcotron said:

You realize that this completely contradicts the story you just told a few minutes ago, right?

It seems like you're willing to believe anything and everything except what's actually in the books. Like in the other thread, where you insisted that Aerys+Ashara=Dany and Ned+Ashara=Dany, and then, from that, managed to conclude that Dany mixes Targaryen blood and Stark blood.

Meanwhile, why did the Children trick Azor Ahai into coming halfway across the world and murdering his wife? If they expected that to create the Others, you've just got the standard theory that the Children created the Others that you were trying to get away from, with the unnecessary added complication that all of the facts we have are wrong. If they didn't expect the Others, what was their goal? Just fucking with one random human from the other side of the planet for shits and giggles?

And how would the creation of the Others get twisted into a myth about the creation of a sword made of flame that's deadly to the Others? That's like saying, "Noah built an Ark for no good reason, but it was a actually a submarine that he piloted into a volcano, so he and his family and two of each kind of animal drowned in magma, while everyone else was fine, and that's where we get our story of a worldwide flood to punish mankind and Noah saving his family and two of every animal from the flood with an Ark."

Ill just simply respond to this.

Can i not theoriez other thoughts? Can i not try and rationalize other theories? Can i not look for answers out side of my already pre-drawn thoughts? Can i not look at what others say and try to temporarily come up with something on the spot to see if it works?
 

Out side of that, im still waiting to see any worthy thoughts of yours other than just nay saying people and correcting people where you can. 

In light of all this, will i stop? Probably not  If i find time ill respond to some of your other thoughts.

As far as posting on this forum? Is to work out ideas, to find others to help work out ideas, and to share what thoughts i have in that they may inspire some one else as some others have inspired me. Others more helpful in helping others flush out their ideas, with out having it conflict with their own, and having to put down others cause their ideas differ or they're still simply just searching for answers. Simply disagreeing is good though and needed for a healthy debate, all the rest that bogs this forum down is not.

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

3 hours ago, falcotron said:

That goes well beyond speculation, into inventing a completely different story from whole cloth and then ignoring almost everything we're actually told because it doesn't fit.

Which is fine, your story is pretty cool—but inventing cool new stories is not the same thing as discussing GRRM's story.

Night's King was defeated by the King of Winter, who was the Stark in Winterfell, so he can't have also been the King of Winter. Night's King was the 13th LC, so whatever walls the Watch are about must have already existed before him. The half-human children are sired by Others, so they can't have existed before the Others did. If the Wall wasn't built at the start of the Watch, then we know nothing at all about the Wall. And so on.

Well I get your point, but I'm definitely not making anything up from whole cloth. I just didn't bother to type out an entire cohesive theory here outlining why I think those things. For instance, the thing I said about the NK being the first King of Winter, the main clue for that is that those 2 monikers effectively mean the same thing, at least in the context of the Long Night. Long NIGHT -> NIGHT'S King, aka King of the Long Night. And what was the Long Night? Well primarily it was a terrible WINTER that lasted a generation, so King of the Long Night = King of Winter = House Stark. Pretty straightforward logic for that aspect at least. And it would make sense if the NK named his castle Winterfell.

And I think you are still taking too many things at face value there. For instance we don't really know that the NK was actually the 13th LC. We don't have written records from the time period or even for thousands of years afterward. It is all just legends and myths. Obviously some things are true, like the mere existence of the Others and details like them riding dead horses. But I don't trust the legends at face value. I think they are a heavily distorted version of the truth.