Jump to content
Black Crow

Heresy 220 and the nature of magic

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Are there any living characters who would know who Jon's parents were?

I know some of you will say Howland, but Howland can only confirm what Ned saw at the tower of joy or what the true cause of death was for Lyanna when Ned was found holding her hand, but what if Lyanna isn't Jon's mother? Would Howland be able to identify any other mother? 

I think most readers are expecting Septa Lemore to be an assumed identity for someone else. I think she's Ashara, but she could also be Rhaella or [insert your favorite]. If Ashara is Jon's true mother, then I guess she could tell us.

Arya plans to tell Jon that his mother was Wylla and that she was a servant of House Dayne. That might lead him on a wild goose chase. Who knows, but it might lead him to Ashara.

Maybe Mance is Jon's father? I believe Arya is retracing Lyanna's steps, and Arya was helped out of Kings Landing by a man of the Night's Watch. Yoren was with Arya until their group was attacked by Armory Lorch in a deserted town near the God's Eye. I wonder if that town was remnants from Whitewalls? If true, that would be very interesting, because I think Ned's men died near some ruins sometime after the Battle of the Bells when Ned's army was trying to regroup with Jon Arryn's. I have posited that Lyanna was found in the ruins of the sept where Whitewalls used to be. It would be easier for Ned to pull an already crumbling tower down to make cairns than it would be to pull down an intact one. Circling back to Mance - if he used to make rounds around the realm like Yoren, then he could have came into contact with Lyanna. I know this is far-fetched, but I'm still going to include it.

If Jon is the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna - what character (still alive) could tell him?

Edited by Feather Crystal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Then there are times when I think to myself well, if Jon isn't Rhaegar's son - why the need to string this secret out? He either is a hidden prince or George wants us to believe he's a hidden prince.

If he's a hidden prince, then there does appear to be a reason to drag this secret out, because Jon will have a future purpose to fulfill. Subverting the trope would be for him to never find out, and to become the Night's King and go on a revenge killing spree.

If he's not the hidden price, but George just wants the readers to think he is, what would be reasons for the author to string this secret out? Was his presumed hidden prince status intended to help conceal the true hidden prince or princess?

Edited by Feather Crystal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:
  Hide contents

The story seems to be setting up a fairly common trope of more modern day vampire stories.  Where it appears that we have a “good” vampire hunting down and killing the bad vampires who are killing humans.  But instead we learn that it’s a tad more complicated than that.  That the “good” vampire isn’t trying to punish the “bad” vampires but instead is trying to cure their bloodlusts In the hope that they can evolve as a people and match or overtake the advances that humans have made over them.

 

Funny you should bring this up as I am re-watching old episodes of Angel.  The Night King of the show seems to fit the Thrall Demon Trope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

Then there are times when I think to myself well, if Jon isn't Rhaegar's son - why the need to string this secret out? He either is a hidden prince or George wants us to believe he's a hidden prince.

If he's a hidden prince, then there does appear to be a reason to drag this secret out, because Jon will have a future purpose to fulfill. Subverting the trope would be for him to never find out, and to become the Night's King and go on a revenge killing spree.

If he's not the hidden price, but George just wants the readers to think he is, what would be reasons for the author to string this secret out? Was his presumed hidden prince status intended to help conceal the true hidden prince or princess?

He can be the son and not a prince right ? I mean look at Edric Storm. Not many people would consider him a prince. So why should Jon be ? This entire RLJ thing has blown way out of proportion. Orys Baratheon is not a Targaryen prince and so on. Jon is, at best, a secret Stark-Targaryen pact through a wedding and at worst a failed political pact. After all marriages and children are part of the feudal system and result in pacts. 

We have a lot of those in the books. Take one of the many Bracken-Blackwood marriages. If one of the houses stop to exist, nobody would present the child at a feast for the king. That's the way I read it, at best. 

Granted, the books are also very inconsistent when it comes to the political place. Take Daenerys, the daughter of a queen who should not be recognized by Robert as a thread, if we take the same social rules presented in other parts of the books. No more a thread than any female Blackfyre. 

So yeah, I don't fucking know. He shouldn't be a prince, but who knows with all this Robert fears Dany stuff. Would probably be best just to be a little bit more open about it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, SirArthur said:

He can be the son and not a prince right ? I mean look at Edric Storm. Not many people would consider him a prince. So why should Jon be ? This entire RLJ thing has blown way out of proportion. Orys Baratheon is not a Targaryen prince and so on. Jon is, at best, a secret Stark-Targaryen pact through a wedding and at worst a failed political pact. After all marriages and children are part of the feudal system and result in pacts. 

We have a lot of those in the books. Take one of the many Bracken-Blackwood marriages. If one of the houses stop to exist, nobody would present the child at a feast for the king. That's the way I read it, at best. 

Granted, the books are also very inconsistent when it comes to the political place. Take Daenerys, the daughter of a queen who should not be recognized by Robert as a thread, if we take the same social rules presented in other parts of the books. No more a thread than any female Blackfyre. 

So yeah, I don't fucking know. He shouldn't be a prince, but who knows with all this Robert fears Dany stuff. Would probably be best just to be a little bit more open about it. 

Those are all valid comments, but they don't address the need for concealment. The concealment is part of the story somehow, and is deliberate on the author's part. I'm trying to figure out 'why'.

Edited to add: In GRRM's eyes the concealment isn't who Jon's father was. It's who his mother is.

Edited by Feather Crystal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

I know you had this in spoiler tags, but I don't think it was necessary.

Oh good! I wasn't sure, mostly because I know they have strict rules here about mixing show and books. But I think you're right, since none of the elements of this idea are new, only the suggestion that this latest episode seems to support it. 

4 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

We've discussed Jon being the Night's King many times before, and to me it's so obviously true. The Night's King was a Lord Commander who was taken down by mutiny in cooperation with the Lord of Winterfell and the King Beyond the Wall. Isn't that exactly what happened to Jon?

It's close enough, anyway. The original Night's King had a wife and was overthrown after ruling at the Nightfort for some time,  whereas Jon was killed first and now may go on to rule there. I wonder if he will take a queen? He seems interested in Val, and if your theory of wildlings = Others is correct, then she would be a great equivalent to Night's Queen. 

I'm curious about this theory, actually. It certainly makes sense that the term Others would be used for another group of people. We are also told that wildling women lay with Others in the Long Night and gave them children - which at least hints at cooperation or understanding of some kind between the wildlings and Others. And of course we see Craster having some kind of understanding with them even to this day.

But where do you propose the white walkers (for lack of a better term) come from? I mean originally, not Craster's sons. Are they wildlings that adapted to the cold somehow (presumably through magic, similar to how the Valyrians gained heat resistance)? In the show at least we are directly shown that ALL white walkers were once human beings, so I suppose that could be true in the books as well... 

3 hours ago, Matthew. said:

I agree with everything you're saying here, but it also highlights why "subverting tropes" is a pseudo-literary phrase that seems to be of limited value in describing and understanding a work, despite its near omnipresence in fan discussion. Being subversive is worth aspiring to, and has broad implications for an author's intent with theme and message; subverting tropes, on the other hand, is stuff like "Books A - C depict their orcs as unfailingly cruel, but Book D's orcs love kittens!"

I don't disagree at all with any of this, but GRRM has actually given us a few subtle hints that the Others may not be all bad or a generic evil. We hear that wildling women lay with Others in the Long Night rather than "Others chased and raped human women" like we hear about Ramsay. Night's King actually married one of them and ruled with her for many years. This suggests a possibility for communication and physical intimacy between humans and Others. (The fact that he saw her from the Wall and decided to chase her rather than kill her or sound the alarm is also intriguing. As LC of the Watch he really should have known better! Or maybe they were not enemies at the time?) 

The Last Hero story is also suspicious, as an important component of him saving mankind was the learning of a new language from the COTF. 

We have Symeon Star Eyes, who was likely an Other and who served in the Watch at the Nightfort. So at least twice in history we've had Others living in NW castles on the Wall. That certainly makes one question the notion that they are the reason the Wall was built in the first place, never mind that it's made of ice and humans can't build that type of structure. 

So all in all, if we learn new information making us re-think the Others as an evil fantasy army in a future book, it won't be coming totally out of left field. It would be the equivalent (using your example) of Tolkien's characters noticing that after orcs sack a town, everything is dead except for the odd kitten that is found unharmed. Maybe after a battle, a kitten is found sitting next to a dead orc. It's not enough to make us see the orcs as "good", but when we later hear they love kittens it wouldn't be completely unexpected. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

Those are all valid comments, but they don't address the need for concealment. The concealment is part of the story somehow, and is deliberate on the author's part. I'm trying to figure out 'why'.

Because more people than expected know about the Blackfyre invasion (and she may already be en route in the Riverlands during the first book). And it would be very bad in the current situation to have a Targaryen marriage at court. Robert is talking about a coming war back before Dragons or Dothraki were even a thing. 

I always expected Tywin to attack for a purpose and not just to provoke war. I think the Jon situation is very comparable to the secret Dorne wedding pact with Viserys: it's a secret for a political reason. Even if it may not be related to an inpending invasion. The reasons are prob. political nature and have to do with Tully or Arryn. 

Edited by SirArthur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, MaesterSam said:

But where do you propose the white walkers (for lack of a better term) come from? I mean originally, not Craster's sons. Are they wildlings that adapted to the cold somehow (presumably through magic, similar to how the Valyrians gained heat resistance)? In the show at least we are directly shown that ALL white walkers were once human beings, so I suppose that could be true in the books as well... 

I think the white walkers are humans transformed into ice, which would be the opposite of fire made flesh into dragons. Dragons appear to require human sacrifice to hatch - at least most of the time - because there are a couple oddball dragons that are considered "wild" like Sheepeater. How did that one hatch? Dany also had that dream where she was reborn through fire, and many Targaryens thought they could be reborn as a dragon. So I posit that white walkers are an opposite transformation of flesh made ice. Maybe the mummers version had that part right that a human would be sacrificed - give up your human existence and be reborn as a magical creature made out of ice. The show had an obsidian blade pressed into a man's heart. It may not be that process exactly, but it's essentially a 'high note'. ;)

I suspect that the wildlings that Waymar, Gared, and Will were tracking actually transformed into the white walkers that Waymar and Will saw. They were acting pretty strangely before they disappeared, and Waymar pointed out that it was too warm to freeze to death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Matthew. said:

Again, your latter point about human cruelty vs. the actions of the Others is excellent, and the question you raise about Tywin highlights why "the Dark Lord trope" is unreliable in the first place--it is not a concrete term, but an inexact idea where no two fans might even agree on what it means, or whether an author has successfully avoided it.

Thank you, ser. :bowdown:I would say the very fact that we are discussing the nature of evil suggests GRRM is doing something right. In Tolkien, it's not ambiguous: Sauron wants to kill or enslave all living beings on Middle Earth, for no apparent reason. He is not a tragic figure seeking revenge for the loss of a loved one, nor is he trying to win a war to make life better for his people. There is zero possibility of humans/elves/hobbits learning his language and having a conversation, let alone actual diplomacy or reaching an agreement. Redemption is not possible for him because he doesn't even want it. The only way to avoid being killed by him is to kill him first. 

Tywin is the head of a great House who grew up watching his father ridiculed and manipulated, and swore he would be respected. His "evil" deeds were intended to benefit House Lannister, and one could argue that they did. He was shaped by abuse from his former friend Aerys and the loss of his beloved wife Joanna. IMO he is actually a very human character who hides his emotional pain behind a tough exterior. So he is a good distance away from being in true Dark Lord territory, IMO. 

Now Euron.... is another story. 

3 hours ago, Matthew. said:

For example, how do we define Euron as a character? He operates with cartoonish levels of sadism, drops B-movie dialogue like "I am the storm," and appears in visions to Aeron adorned in the imagery of deicide, making over-the-top declarations regarding his ultimate ambitions--so what is the essential quality that makes Euron not a cheesy Dark Lord? If all else about his motives and dialogue were exactly the same, but he was a supernatural entity, would he become a Dark Lord? Is his species the only thing keeping him from ostensibly becoming a bad trope, or is he already a bad trope?

This is a great question, and not one I have an answer to. IMO Euron is in real danger of becoming (or already being?) a Dark Lord, and GRRM needs to tread carefully with this character. He is evil on a level rarely seen even in this series (with the possible exception of Ramsay), and he seems set on destruction and death rather than any real goals or personal motivations. 

I assume you've heard the idea that BR recruited him first, but then changed his mind later on. I would feel better if we were to get a backstory on Euron that at least partly explains the way he is. Maybe a corrupting influence in the weirnet, something that triggered the worst in him. Or he felt betrayed and abandoned when BR dumped him. Many child molesters were molested themselves, many wife beaters watched their moms get beaten. A backstory would go a long way in humanizing Euron and inching away from the Dark Lord trope his character is currently representing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, MaesterSam said:

Thank you, ser. :bowdown:I would say the very fact that we are discussing the nature of evil suggests GRRM is doing something right. In Tolkien, it's not ambiguous: Sauron wants to kill or enslave all living beings on Middle Earth, for no apparent reason. He is not a tragic figure seeking revenge for the loss of a loved one, nor is he trying to win a war to make life better for his people. There is zero possibility of humans/elves/hobbits learning his language and having a conversation, let alone actual diplomacy or reaching an agreement. Redemption is not possible for him because he doesn't even want it. The only way to avoid being killed by him is to kill him first.   

So, a heretic question. Is R'hllor different ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Mullocose said:

How many episodes are left? 

not enough for show-bran to become an antagonists...

This is a belated response, but there was a moment in the prior episode where I thought this is what was happening, as the white walkers gathered in the Godswood, and the pacing of the episode was almost taking on a fever dream quality, it just felt to me like it was building to some weird reveal with Bran. Apparently not.
 

23 minutes ago, MaesterSam said:

This is a great question, and not one I have an answer to. IMO Euron is in real danger of becoming (or already being?) a Dark Lord, and GRRM needs to tread carefully with this character. He is evil on a level rarely seen even in this series (with the possible exception of Ramsay), and he seems set on destruction and death rather than any real goals or personal motivations. 

Years ago, on a different forum, I read a theory about Euron and Ramsay being a matched pair as a part of some broader thematic vision that GRRM is trying to achieve with the back half of the series.

The premise roughly went like this: magic has returned to the world, it is increasing in prominence, and as it increases, GRRM's storytelling approach is shifting to fit that theme. The natural laws of the world become more unsettled, POV chapters go from succinct character names to increasingly fairy tale-esque descriptions, and even characters become heightened and surreal--with Ramsay representing extreme carnality - crimes of flesh - and Euron representing extreme blasphemy - crimes of spirit -.

I'm not sold on that premise, but I always appreciate a unique interpretation.

47 minutes ago, MaesterSam said:

I assume you've heard the idea that BR recruited him first, but then changed his mind later on. I would feel better if we were to get a backstory on Euron that at least partly explains the way he is. Maybe a corrupting influence in the weirnet, something that triggered the worst in him. Or he felt betrayed and abandoned when BR dumped him. Many child molesters were molested themselves, many wife beaters watched their moms get beaten. A backstory would go a long way in humanizing Euron and inching away from the Dark Lord trope his character is currently representing.  

You're right, and I do think precedent would suggest that we'll get some context about Euron's behavior beyond him just being bad by nature. Joffrey, for example, is a mixture of nature and nurture--certain things about the way he's written might imply that he has Antisocial Personality Disorder, but the way he turned out is also a consequence of Robert being a violent drunk, and Cersei being a malignant, paranoid narcissist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Matthew. said:

To wrap it back around to the Others, it's not that I doubt that GRRM has done something with the Others that, to his own subjective tastes, is more interesting and nuanced than Tolkien's evil army--it's that I'm just not sure whether he's actually right in that assessment. To my tastes, by making the Others figures of antiquity that have remained largely off-screen, they've already lost the potential to match the human antagonists in nuance, no matter what is subsequently revealed about them.

I still have hope that they could end up being truly fascinating. They may turn out to be more human than we think. The fact that they have a language, wear armor and fight one-on-one with swords is pretty much a giveaway that, even if not entirely human, they are a close relative. In terms of technology/magic they are clearly more advanced than the humans in this story, which I find intriguing. (Examples would include the shifting camouflage armor, the swords that shatter steel and of course their unique and extremely useful take on the concept of skinchanging). What makes it even more intriguing is that they have apparently been dormant for thousands of years, which means they had reached this level of technology prior to the Long Night. We have a few castles in Westeros that are more advanced than they should be for their age (e.g. round towers at Winterfell and Storm's End), suggesting a loss of technology at some point. The most likely point is of course the Long Night, when much was surely lost and forgotten. But the Others kept their state of technology, and their knowledge. Which makes sense of course if they were the victors. They did not regress like the other men. Imagine all the things they know! (Why are the seasons messed up? What really happened at the Hammer of the Waters? Why do they exist?) I would love nothing more than an Other POV to show us their side of this story. 

Now to be fair, I am probably being overly optimistic here. I believe GRRM was asked once in an interview if the Others had a culture, and he hesitated and said something like "I hadn't really thought about it". So I'm not ruling out that they will mostly just be an antagonist, or at best an army to fight for Team Stark. I just don't think it's impossible for them to still end up being more than that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MaesterSam said:

 I still have hope that they could end up being truly fascinating. They may turn out to be more human than we think. The fact that they have a language, wear armor and fight one-on-one with swords is pretty much a giveaway that, even if not entirely human, they are a close relative. In terms of technology/magic they are clearly more advanced than the humans in this story, which I find intriguing. (Examples would include the shifting camouflage armor, the swords that shatter steel and of course their unique and extremely useful take on the concept of skinchanging). What makes it even more intriguing is that they have apparently been dormant for thousands of years, which means they had reached this level of technology prior to the Long Night. We have a few castles in Westeros that are more advanced than they should be for their age (e.g. round towers at Winterfell and Storm's End), suggesting a loss of technology at some point. The most likely point is of course the Long Night, when much was surely lost and forgotten. But the Others kept their state of technology, and their knowledge. Which makes sense of course if they were the victors. They did not regress like the other men. Imagine all the things they know! (Why are the seasons messed up? What really happened at the Hammer of the Waters? Why do they exist?) I would love nothing more than an Other POV to show us their side of this story. 

 Now to be fair, I am probably being overly optimistic here. I believe GRRM was asked once in an interview if the Others had a culture, and he hesitated and said something like "I hadn't really thought about it". So I'm not ruling out that they will mostly just be an antagonist, or at best an army to fight for Team Stark. I just don't think it's impossible for them to still end up being more than that. 

I think that early in TWoW, Jon (inside Ghost) will go looking or the Heart of Winter. GRRM has already revealed that we're going to get a POV Character in the Heart of Winter.

I'm betting that Jon will find his Uncle there, & Benjin will be well on his way to becoming an Other... 

Regardless of how it all goes down, I feel like our information regarding the Others & their Culture (or lack of) will be significantly expanded...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

In the book, my money is on the Others fighting for the side of the Good Guys... 

By 'Good Guys' I mean House Stark...

--

In fact, I'll take it a step further & say that the Other are House Stark...

Edited by Mullocose
grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, MaesterSam said:

Thank you, ser. :bowdown:I would say the very fact that we are discussing the nature of evil suggests GRRM is doing something right. In Tolkien, it's not ambiguous: Sauron wants to kill or enslave all living beings on Middle Earth, for no apparent reason. He is not a tragic figure seeking revenge for the loss of a loved one, nor is he trying to win a war to make life better for his people. There is zero possibility of humans/elves/hobbits learning his language and having a conversation, let alone actual diplomacy or reaching an agreement. Redemption is not possible for him because he doesn't even want it. The only way to avoid being killed by him is to kill him first. 

Tywin is the head of a great House who grew up watching his father ridiculed and manipulated, and swore he would be respected. His "evil" deeds were intended to benefit House Lannister, and one could argue that they did. He was shaped by abuse from his former friend Aerys and the loss of his beloved wife Joanna. IMO he is actually a very human character who hides his emotional pain behind a tough exterior. So he is a good distance away from being in true Dark Lord territory, IMO. 

Now Euron.... is another story. 

This is a great question, and not one I have an answer to. IMO Euron is in real danger of becoming (or already being?) a Dark Lord, and GRRM needs to tread carefully with this character. He is evil on a level rarely seen even in this series (with the possible exception of Ramsay), and he seems set on destruction and death rather than any real goals or personal motivations. 

I assume you've heard the idea that BR recruited him first, but then changed his mind later on. I would feel better if we were to get a backstory on Euron that at least partly explains the way he is. Maybe a corrupting influence in the weirnet, something that triggered the worst in him. Or he felt betrayed and abandoned when BR dumped him. Many child molesters were molested themselves, many wife beaters watched their moms get beaten. A backstory would go a long way in humanizing Euron and inching away from the Dark Lord trope his character is currently representing.  

This is a story of dualities: two sides of a coin, black and white, ice and fire. Just as white walkers are the opposing magical creature to dragons, I see Euron as the opposing force to Bloodraven and Bran. B&B are underground and see through the weirwoods, while Euron is the Crow’s Eye view from high in the sky and/or perhaps the glass candles, and drinks the inky blue sap of the ironwood trees in order to do it. Where did he gain this knowledge? There should be a counter to the Children of the Forest somewhere in Essos. Pyat Pree was a warlock, so maybe warlocks are the opposite of Children?

Edited by Feather Crystal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/30/2019 at 8:29 PM, JNR said:

And of course Jon is Aegon Targaryen, brother of Aegon Targaryen, rightful heir to the throne of all Westeros and trueborn son of Rhaegar, who after having two children with his wife Elia,magically annulled that marriage.  

I don't think the books will gives us an annulment.  Elia couldn't, wouldn't or didn't want to have more children, so Rhaegar took another wife (or wives).  The show was already criticized for the amount of incest, they didn't want to include polygamy if it could easily be avoided.  Aegon the Conqueror had 2 wives, so precedent was there for Rhaegar.  An annulment is unheard of in the books for any character, and has no precedent.

In my own family tree, naming a newborn child after their dead sibling was shockingly common.  Infant mortality was high, and names stayed in the family, so you wouldn't give up on a name just because a child died.  We have yet to see evidence of this in Westerous, although infant mortality is higher than modern times.

It seems unlikely Jon was named Aegon, especially if he was born to Rhaegar before his first son was killed.  We've seen some foreshadowing in the books that Jon's real name was Aemon, so that's my guess.  Rhaegar named his first 2 children after Aegon and his sisters, so if he had a girl, Visenya would likely be the name.  But with Rhaegar having a young brother Viserys favored by Aerys, I doubt he'd name his own son Viserys.  So really any Targaryen name EXCEPT Aegon makes sense.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, SirArthur said:

So, a heretic question. Is R'hllor different ? 

Who?

We only have Our Mel's word for it, that such an entity exists.

His or her documented input into the text is hovering somewhere between zero and zilch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, MaesterSam said:

I still have hope that they could end up being truly fascinating. They may turn out to be more human than we think. The fact that they have a language, wear armor and fight one-on-one with swords is pretty much a giveaway that, even if not entirely human, they are a close relative. In terms of technology/magic they are clearly more advanced than the humans in this story, which I find intriguing. (Examples would include the shifting camouflage armor, the swords that shatter steel and of course their unique and extremely useful take on the concept of skinchanging). What makes it even more intriguing is that they have apparently been dormant for thousands of years, which means they had reached this level of technology prior to the Long Night. We have a few castles in Westeros that are more advanced than they should be for their age (e.g. round towers at Winterfell and Storm's End), suggesting a loss of technology at some point. The most likely point is of course the Long Night, when much was surely lost and forgotten. But the Others kept their state of technology, and their knowledge. Which makes sense of course if they were the victors. They did not regress like the other men. Imagine all the things they know! (Why are the seasons messed up? What really happened at the Hammer of the Waters? Why do they exist?) I would love nothing more than an Other POV to show us their side of this story. 

Now to be fair, I am probably being overly optimistic here. I believe GRRM was asked once in an interview if the Others had a culture, and he hesitated and said something like "I hadn't really thought about it". So I'm not ruling out that they will mostly just be an antagonist, or at best an army to fight for Team Stark. I just don't think it's impossible for them to still end up being more than that. 

What he said was that we would learn more of their history, but "I don't think that they have a culture."

There are various ways of interpreting this and I'm working on something [and some other related issues] for Heresy 221

As for the technology, in historical terms round towers are easier than square ones and should therefore be an indicator of antiquity

Edited by Black Crow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Asking if white walkers have a culture is like asking if dragons have one.

I think the warlocks of Essos are the opposite side of the coin to the Children, and their House of the Undying is the opposite side of the coin to the Cave of Skulls. The implications are eye-opening, because the corrupt, rotting, blue human heart that Dany saw beating is the opposite side of the coin to a weirwood heart tree. The small dwarf that was a servant inside the HOTU is the flip side to Coldhands. The Undying Ones are the flip side to greenseers, which makes me wonder if Bloodraven really is fading away? It may be a trick to get Bran to stay, just as the Undying use glamours to look beautiful, but in reality they are old and wizened. Daenerys was able to perceive the ugliness hiding under the splendor, and she was able to get away. Will it be the same with the Children? Are they as 'good' as they seem, or are they playing at revenge?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

Asking if white walkers have a culture is like asking if dragons have one.

Ah to be fair the White Walkers are touted as a mysterious race, so the question is a fair one, even if the answer may not be straightforward

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×