Down with the Free Folk

[Lord Varys]

39 minutes ago, SeanF said:

For all their faults, the Free Folk have still identified who the real enemy are.  The Nights Watch had unwittingly allied themselves to the Others.

The Night's Watch also still sort of knows who the real enemy is - but thanks to the wildlings being wildlings they also have another enemy who routinely attacks them. The wildlings may have realized that they cannot stand against the Others but even with a former black brother leading them they make no attempt whatsoever to try to remind the Night's Watch what they real duty is.

Also and in general: The idea that they might know how to fight the Others is completely baseless. What we do know implies they tried as long as they could, failed completely, and then decided to run collectively. They might know some more about who and what the Others are and how they fight and what they can do, but the wildlings have no clue how to kill them, to protect themselves against them, or to defeat them.

[kissdbyfire]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Oh, I didn't mean exactly like Craster. But do you have ever asked yourself how Craster was able to strike his deal with the Others if his father was a black brother? He must have learned that from his dear wildling mother or her family, kin, friends. Not all wildlings are like the better guys there. I expect many of them to worship the Others, some of which might now in south of the Wall.

What deal w/ the Others are you referring to here? The only place where there was a confirmed deal is the abomination, and I don’t take anything they’ve done as actual confirmation. Just b/c Craster’s wives believe such an arrangement exists doesn’t mean it actually does. I actually think it’s all bollocks. That even if the WWs take some of his sons, it doesn’t mean they have an actual deal. The “deal” is Craster bs-ing the women, and leaving the male babies out is Craster being his lovely self (  ) and preemptively getting rid of possible future opposition. 

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Ygritte herself is no good person, either, by the way. She is a female raider and a cold-blooded murderess. She has no problems murdering people who are defenseless and weak.

It’s all in where you’re standing. 

[Lord Varys]

18 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

What deal w/ the Others are you referring to here? The only place where there was a confirmed deal is the abomination, and I don’t take anything they’ve done as actual confirmation. Just b/c Craster’s wives believe such an arrangement exists doesn’t mean it actually does. I actually think it’s all bollocks. That even if the WWs take some of his sons, it doesn’t mean they have an actual deal. The “deal” is Craster bs-ing the women, and leaving the male babies out is Craster being his lovely self (  ) and preemptively getting rid of possible future opposition.

Well, that borders on denying the text. Or do you have any textual basis for your belief that this claim of Craster's wives is 'bollocks'? Yes, we don't have independent confirmation yet, but we do have characters who definitely have the means and the ability to find out (or know and be actively involved in) what Craster does to his sons.

But even if you were right (which I most definitely don't think you are) my general point would still stand that Craster would have developed his weird religion of sacrificing his sons to the Others from his wildling mother and/or her kin. It is not something the sworn brothers of the Night's Watch do, is it?

And of course it makes a lot of sense for both sides to makes such deals - the Others get male children which they may need to make more of their own as well as eyes and ears among the humans they plan to eventually destroy and the humans get the protection of the Others (both from other humans as well as from the cold in winter). It is very striking that Craster's Keep has no kind of walls or defenses whatsoever. A man as unpopular as Craster shouldn't live like that. It is odder still that Mance didn't force him to join him ... or kill him.

18 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

It’s all in where you’re standing. 

No, it is not. There is only one side a decent person can stand in the case of Ygritte slaying that poor man in the Gifts. The entire cause of the wildlings is wrong. Warring against the Seven Kingdoms won't help them get away from the Others, especially not if the Wall/NW is destroyed. They are fighting a war of aggression, not the Seven Kingdoms.

I personally find Qhorin and Jon murdering the people in Ygritte's original party disgusting, but the Watch is merely investigating the raising of an army that is going to attack the Watch and the Wall. They know that Mance and his people will hunt them down if they see them, so they have to kill them. But they are doing their sacred duty of protecting the realms of men while the wildlings actually do their best to do the Others' work for them by trying to invade the North and kill the people there.

[The Jingo]

16 hours ago, Lollygag said:

By southern type life, I meant how small folk live in the south, not how the highborn live. 

Bold 1: they aren't overpopulated at all and that's not how people work. People don't change cultures like they change clothes and it would be bad writing. Especially rural people who come from a very specific culture. 

Bold 2: That's it. You're supposed to sympathize with being born in a hard place and being stuck there. That's enough. You don't have to sympathize with how they handle it. They don't have good options which are believable for characters (see above). Classic GRRM.

Here's the thing though. If the lands north of the Wall are not overpopulated, then they have enough resources for the Wildlings to support themselves. They will be able to feed and clothe themselves, even if they can't have shiny things unless the land is overpopulated and can't support them.

But then, if the land is NOT overpopulated, the wildlings transform from "people who are raiding to survive and who should stop that and just move south and learn to kneel:" to "people that are just killing and raping and stealing stuff they don't need just because they want it".

Quote

I agree that Northerners have good reason to not like or trust the wildlings. I wouldn't forgive them either for their attacks or if they stole my daughter and I never saw her again. But the Northerners also signed up for it with the Wall business. That's kinda part of the Game of Thrones theme.

I don't think we're supposed to excuse or rationalize immoral acts in the books. We're just supposed to understand them. There's a difference. 

This is victim blaming.

"Yeah bro your daughter is getting raped by now and possibly eaten alive by cannibals but hey don't you think you were asking for it when you put locks on the door, bro?"

The Northmen built the Wall as a fortification against the Others. It was the Wildlings that chose to live on the other side of it rather than traveling south and kneeling to the King's Peace. It was also the wildlings that decided they'd rather live in anarchy than say "hey let's form a northern colony as a line of defense against the walkers and still be part of the kingdom even if we're on the frontier".

[Lollygag]

2 hours ago, The Jingo said:

Here's the thing though. If the lands north of the Wall are not overpopulated, then they have enough resources for the Wildlings to support themselves. They will be able to feed and clothe themselves, even if they can't have shiny things unless the land is overpopulated and can't support them.

But then, if the land is NOT overpopulated, the wildlings transform from "people who are raiding to survive and who should stop that and just move south and learn to kneel:" to "people that are just killing and raping and stealing stuff they don't need just because they want it".

This is victim blaming.

"Yeah bro your daughter is getting raped by now and possibly eaten alive by cannibals but hey don't you think you were asking for it when you put locks on the door, bro?"

The Northmen built the Wall as a fortification against the Others. It was the Wildlings that chose to live on the other side of it rather than traveling south and kneeling to the King's Peace. It was also the wildlings that decided they'd rather live in anarchy than say "hey let's form a northern colony as a line of defense against the walkers and still be part of the kingdom even if we're on the frontier".

The wildlings aren't starving and there's nothing in the text about overpopulation. 

Victim blaming? I don't care. It's true. If you screw people over, don't be surprised if they react accordingly. 

These are assumptions, not fact. There's an ice cell in the Wall where meat is stored and it's strongly hinted that it contains Other magic (way too cold, weird iron door, all of the meat has iron through it, meat is oddly preserved longer than normal freezing) hinting that the Others helped to build the Wall. And it's also an assumption that the wildlings chose to be stuck north of the Wall. There's a complicated history and books are clear that we've not yet been told how it really was. 

People don't work this way. I've said that before and you've ignored it and just repeated yourself. Also, the books are clear that the wildlings don't have the option of just moving. I said that before and you ignored that too just restating yourself.

 

If you don't want to like the wildlings, then don't. But don't make stuff up to support that dislike. GRRM's writing against the game of thrones. It doesn't make sense if GRRM is writing books where the readers are supposed to also play the game of thrones by rooting for certain groups to win or lose and this is a good thing. We're supposed to root for everyone coming together. 

I won't be reading further posts as I don't have the patience for going in circles. 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

7 hours ago, Lollygag said:

The wildlings aren't starving and there's nothing in the text about overpopulation. 

Victim blaming? I don't care. It's true. If you screw people over, don't be surprised if they react accordingly. 

These are assumptions, not fact. There's an ice cell in the Wall where meat is stored and it's strongly hinted that it contains Other magic (way too cold, weird iron door, all of the meat has iron through it, meat is oddly preserved longer than normal freezing) hinting that the Others helped to build the Wall. And it's also an assumption that the wildlings chose to be stuck north of the Wall. There's a complicated history and books are clear that we've not yet been told how it really was. 

People don't work this way. I've said that before and you've ignored it and just repeated yourself. Also, the books are clear that the wildlings don't have the option of just moving. I said that before and you ignored that too just restating yourself.

 

If you don't want to like the wildlings, then don't. But don't make stuff up to support that dislike. GRRM's writing against the game of thrones. It doesn't make sense if GRRM is writing books where the readers are supposed to also play the game of thrones by rooting for certain groups to win or lose and this is a good thing. We're supposed to root for everyone coming together. 

I won't be reading further posts as I don't have the patience for going in circles. 

Right. 

The Wildlings are "savage" in the eyes of the people south of the wall but in all reality they are no more savage than any other group in Westeros. 

I often see it argued that the Wildlings are the bad guys because the "southern folk" don't go raiding & pillaging North of the wall. But they wouldn't would they? There's nothing but snow & ice that way. You can bet if the fertile lands were there & the icy ones south of the wall there would be plenty of raiding & pillaging done by the southern folk. 

Another thing that always gets me about this discussion is the assumption that the wildlings chose to be stuck north of the wall. We just don't know that & I think it's pretty unlikely. 

They are often criticized by their way of life but if you think about it, they are much "freer" & in that sense much more like us than the people in the 7k. 

[Alexis-something-Rose]

9 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Another thing that always gets me about this discussion is the assumption that the wildlings chose to be stuck north of the wall. We just don't know that & I think it's pretty unlikely. 

I don't think they chose to remain beyond the Wall. I think they were serving a purpose there. It's just that 8,000 years is a long time to remember anything. 

This thread, though. I mean it's not like we don't have real life examples of people building walls and separating families or people wanting to build walls to prevent those who are culturally different from them to enter their country.

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

Just now, Alexis-something-Rose said:

I don't think they chose to remain beyond the Wall. I think they were serving a purpose there. It's just that 8,000 years is a long time to remember anything. 

This thread, though. I mean it's not like we don't have real life examples of people building walls and separating families or people wanting to build walls to prevent those who are culturally different from them to enter their country.

Yeah exactly. There likely was some forgotten purpose. Much as the NW had forgotten their own purpose. 

[kissdbyfire]

3 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Another thing that always gets me about this discussion is the assumption that the wildlings chose to be stuck north of the wall. We just don't know that & I think it's pretty unlikely. 

 

3 hours ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

I don't think they chose to remain beyond the Wall. I think they were serving a purpose there. It's just that 8,000 years is a long time to remember anything. 

I agree w/ you both. Also, the thing w/ the Wall is, according to Martin it took hundreds of years for it to be built, and thousands for it to reach its current height. So, no one was stuck there that didn’t want to be there, as there was plenty of time to move in either direction. We were talking about this not that long ago, in a thread about the NW vows by @The Fattest Leech; I’ll try to find a link. And one of the ideas we discussed was that, over such a period of time as long as centuries, it’s very likely that there were settlements all the way along where the Wall was being built. Families, children, etc. And at some point, some of those FM families decided to stay on the north side. Everything else came much later, and by “everything else” I mean even some parts of the vow we get now. To me it ties in w/ an ever increasing influx of knights/Andals. Maybe we’ll learn more about it eventually. There’s a passage in Dance that is very suggestive of there being settlements near the Wall, maybe even where the 19 castles are now. 

[Here's Looking At You, Kid]

On 1/16/2020 at 6:51 PM, The Jingo said:

Did anyone else get this feel when they were reading the books? Like I know the Jon Snow POVs are suppose to endear us to them and prove like I don't know, these people are 'just like us only differently cultured' and so forth. But I feel it falls flat because every time we turn around the Wildlings are just generally doing heinous stuff.

Like I don't know. I know that the Others are a thing but it's honestly hard for me to muster up anything resembling sympathy for a bunch of violent raiders and rapists. I kind of feel like you know if they could get away with it the Watch should have just forced them to stay North of the Wall.

It seems kind of unfair that they can attack and terrorize a society for thousands of years and then demand that society's protection simply because a new kid and his zombie bois move into the neighborhood. Just like the Ironborn - screw those guys too.

(Logistically impossible I know because they'd become an unstoppable corpse army, but still if it was possible)

The Free Folk are about as bad as the Ironborn.  We are not supposed to like them.  Look, just because Jon does means nothing.  The point of their plot is making common cause with an enemy for the survival of both people.  We're not suppose to like them, nor are we to overlook their barbaric ways, but we may need to cooperate with them in order to survive the white walkers.  Cooperate long enough to beat the white walkers and then push them back to their side of the wall.  

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

22 minutes ago, Here's Looking At You, Kid said:

The Free Folk are about as bad as the Ironborn.  We are not supposed to like them.  Look, just because Jon does means nothing.  The point of their plot is making common cause with an enemy for the survival of both people.  We're not suppose to like them, nor are we to overlook their barbaric ways, but we may need to cooperate with them in order to survive the white walkers.  Cooperate long enough to beat the white walkers and then push them back to their side of the wall.  

But what do they do that is more barbaric than the rest of the realm?

[kissdbyfire]

28 minutes ago, Here's Looking At You, Kid said:

We're not suppose to like them, nor are we to overlook their barbaric ways, but we may need to cooperate with them in order to survive the white walkers. 

Anyone who thinks we’re supposed to dislike any group/ethnicity/people as a whole really, really doesn’t understand the story or the author. 

 

28 minutes ago, Here's Looking At You, Kid said:

Cooperate long enough to beat the white walkers and then push them back to their side of the wall.  

Wow, just wow. Some unsolicited advice: you may want to cut your losses and drop the story now, b/c I have a feeling you’re really not gonna like the next books.

[Alyn Oakenfist]

55 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

But what do they do that is more barbaric than the rest of the realm?

Yes. The rest of the realm (besides the ironborn) do not have raping, raiding and murdering as core values of their culture.

 

48 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Anyone who thinks we’re supposed to dislike any group/ethnicity/people as a whole really, really doesn’t understand the story or the author. 

Just because some or maybe even most of the wildlings are not that bad (I find that doubtful given their culture) doesn't mean you shouldn't dislike and fear them. For one thing it probably increases the chances of not being murdered by them. I think we are supposed to dislike them as a group or at least as a culture. The same thing applies to the Ironborn and Dothraki. Sure maybe they have their own honor and values but that doesn't mean that if they come anywhere near you, you shouldn't summon your levies. That's the point however. However bad they may be the characters need to put aside all (even one who is 100% justified) in order to fight the WW. That is the idea of the book that all war is bad, however noble or righteous your motives are. 

56 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Wow, just wow. Some unsolicited advice: you may want to cut your losses and drop the story now, b/c I have a feeling you’re really not gonna like the next books.

Honestly given Mel's thoughts and their geographic position as well as their previous losses, I think they're almost all going to die.

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

3 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Yes. The rest of the realm (besides the ironborn) do not have raping, raiding and murdering as core values of their culture

I don't think they have raping & murdering as part of their culture but part of the rest of the realms culture or no they certainly rape & murder. 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

8 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Just because some or maybe even most of the wildlings are not that bad (I find that doubtful given their culture) doesn't mean you shouldn't dislike and fear them.

Actually, I think that's exactly what it means. Fear & dislike the murderers & rapist but not the people as a whole. 

[Lord Varys]

11 hours ago, Lollygag said:

These are assumptions, not fact. There's an ice cell in the Wall where meat is stored and it's strongly hinted that it contains Other magic (way too cold, weird iron door, all of the meat has iron through it, meat is oddly preserved longer than normal freezing) hinting that the Others helped to build the Wall. And it's also an assumption that the wildlings chose to be stuck north of the Wall. There's a complicated history and books are clear that we've not yet been told how it really was.

There is no textual evidence for any of that. Yes, there is magic in the Wall, but what is implied that the Children of the Forest helped with building it, not the Others. If you claim the latter you are beyond reasonable discourse, just talking about what you wish to believe, nothing that's actually in the text.

I could just as well claim that the Mad King wasn't mad at all but merely doing what the voices of the Seven in his head told him to do.

11 hours ago, Lollygag said:

People don't work this way. I've said that before and you've ignored it and just repeated yourself. Also, the books are clear that the wildlings don't have the option of just moving. I said that before and you ignored that too just restating yourself.

They certainly have the option to move if they don't invade the lands of other people with fire and sword to raid and plunder.

11 hours ago, Lollygag said:

If you don't want to like the wildlings, then don't. But don't make stuff up to support that dislike. GRRM's writing against the game of thrones. It doesn't make sense if GRRM is writing books where the readers are supposed to also play the game of thrones by rooting for certain groups to win or lose and this is a good thing. We're supposed to root for everyone coming together. 

I won't be reading further posts as I don't have the patience for going in circles. 

George is not writing against the game of thrones - he invented it. And the wildlings play it just like everybody else. How did Mance became king-beyond-the-Wall if not by playing the game of thrones on the level the wildlings play it? How did Varamyr become 'a lord of sorts' if not using his talents to acquire political power?

The wildings are not people coming together at all. They are vastly disparate and individualistic people doing their own thing. Only strength keeps them in line.

4 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Right. 

The Wildlings are "savage" in the eyes of the people south of the wall but in all reality they are no more savage than any other group in Westeros.

They have more savage customs and practices. That's just a fact. The people of the Seven Kingdoms (Ironborn aside) do not raid and plunder their neighbors, do not steal women, etc. But that's something the average wildling, be he or her a good or a person aspires to do. The raiders are their heroes - just like the reavers are the heroes of the Ironborn.

4 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I often see it argued that the Wildlings are the bad guys because the "southern folk" don't go raiding & pillaging North of the wall. But they wouldn't would they? There's nothing but snow & ice that way. You can bet if the fertile lands were there & the icy ones south of the wall there would be plenty of raiding & pillaging done by the southern folk.

The Seven Kingdoms are at pece since Aegon's Conquest. They are simply not an expansionist realm. They never declared war on any of the Free Cities, did not try to conquer other lands. They are happy with the territory they control. The wildlings are not.

4 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Another thing that always gets me about this discussion is the assumption that the wildlings chose to be stuck north of the wall. We just don't know that & I think it's pretty unlikely.

We have reasons to believe the giants and Children helped with the building of the Wall, and we do know it took a very long time to make it so mighty and powerful as it later was. The ancestors of the present-day wildlings must have known why the Wall was built and supported the effort. Else they could and would have torn it down back in the day, no?

4 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

They are often criticized by their way of life but if you think about it, they are much "freer" & in that sense much more like us than the people in the 7k. 

No, they live in a perpetual state of lawlessness. It is basically the wild west, where the strong rule and the weak are crushed. The Seven Kingdoms and our world do have laws and institutions. You don't have to expect that the neighboring village comes to raid yours for essentially no reason. Beyond the Wall you have to assume that this kind of thing happens.

4 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Yeah exactly. There likely was some forgotten purpose. Much as the NW had forgotten their own purpose. 

The Watch never forgot their purpose - they just also had to protect the realms of men against the wildlings because they were constantly raiding and attacking them. They still know that they are supposed to protect the realms of men against the Others.

It is also quite clear that the purposes of the NW never was to protect the people living north of the Wall from the Others. They lived beyond the border of the Wall. How on earth could they protect the people living in the lands of the Others while there were not willing to live south of the Wall?

1 hour ago, kissdbyfire said:

I agree w/ you both. Also, the thing w/ the Wall is, according to Martin it took hundreds of years for it to be built, and thousands for it to reach its current height. So, no one was stuck there that didn’t want to be there, as there was plenty of time to move in either direction. We were talking about this not that long ago, in a thread about the NW vows by @The Fattest Leech; I’ll try to find a link. And one of the ideas we discussed was that, over such a period of time as long as centuries, it’s very likely that there were settlements all the way along where the Wall was being built. Families, children, etc. And at some point, some of those FM families decided to stay on the north side. Everything else came much later, and by “everything else” I mean even some parts of the vow we get now. To me it ties in w/ an ever increasing influx of knights/Andals. Maybe we’ll learn more about it eventually. There’s a passage in Dance that is very suggestive of there being settlements near the Wall, maybe even where the 19 castles are now. 

That's just baseless speculation. There is no good reason to believe the vows of the NW ever changed. It could just as well have been always the same. In fact, immediately after the Long Night the need for a loyal and determined and faithful NW would have been the greatest, meaning the vows of the NW in their rigidity can certainly go back to that era. The idea that the Andals could have changed that even if they wanted to doesn't really fly considering the Watch always bordered at the First Men dominated North, meaning they certainly would have issues if their Northmen volunteers to the NW would suddenly have to swear vows of celibacy. That just doesn't make any sense.

[kissdbyfire]

3 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Just because some or maybe even most of the wildlings are not that bad (I find that doubtful given their culture) doesn't mean you shouldn't dislike and fear them. For one thing it probably increases the chances of not being murdered by them. I think we are supposed to dislike them as a group or at least as a culture. The same thing applies to the Ironborn and Dothraki. Sure maybe they have their own honor and values but that doesn't mean that if they come anywhere near you, you shouldn't summon your levies. That's the point however. However bad they may be the characters need to put aside all (even one who is 100% justified) in order to fight the WW. That is the idea of the book that all war is bad, however noble or righteous your motives are. 

The point is, any blanket statement like, “the free folk/ironborn/Dothraki/Dornish/whoever are bad” sounds very much like dumb xenophobia/racism. It’s similar to claims that “women shouldn’t x, y or z”. To put it differently, generalisations of this type seem very out of place in this story, especially when I take the author into consideration. So, claims that “we’re not supposed to like a, b, or c” come across as a huge misunderstanding of the text for me. Every group, race, people, whathaveyou will have its heroes and its cowards, good people and bad people, and so on. 

The other thing is, anyone who thinks “we’re not supposed to like the Free Folk/wildlings” has to think Martin is a terrible writer, and that’s another opinion I strongly disagree with. 

3 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Honestly given Mel's thoughts and their geographic position as well as their previous losses, I think they're almost all going to die.

Mel is a zealot, and she makes so many mistakes. It seems all she makes are mistakes. 

The FF are direct FM descendants; they’re as close as can be to the “original FM”. And now they’re manning the Wall... you know, just as it was in the first Battle for the Dawn. So, yeah, I think they’ll play a crucial role in upcoming events. 

[The Fattest Leech]

9 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Yes. The rest of the realm (besides the ironborn) do not have raping, raiding and murdering as core values of their culture.

Every single war and battle we have read about in the story has people being raped, murdered, burnt, etc, and this is coming from the southron side of the wall. Southron women are used as sex slaves and barter coins. How fair and civilized is that? You think people south of the wall don't steal from other people? Wrong. Read The Sworn Sword if you need some good examples.

9 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

 

Just because some or maybe even most of the wildlings are not that bad (I find that doubtful given their culture) doesn't mean you shouldn't dislike and fear them. For one thing it probably increases the chances of not being murdered by them. I think we are supposed to dislike them as a group or at least as a culture. The same thing applies to the Ironborn and Dothraki. Sure maybe they have their own honor and values but that doesn't mean that if they come anywhere near you, you shouldn't summon your levies. That's the point however. However bad they may be the characters need to put aside all (even one who is 100% justified) in order to fight the WW. That is the idea of the book that all war is bad, however noble or righteous your motives are. 

I think it is important to remember a few things here that the author is showing we readers very clearly: "wildlings" is derogatory term akin to the many we have in real life to given to those we "otherize" on the other side of our own walls. It is a shitty thing to call all of any one peoples names like this. Free Folk are made of many various clans and these clans have their own sets of norms, technology, organizations, etc. They are a mix of many metals and they are going to be needed during and after the long night. Readers are learning this via Jon's experiences.

• A Game of Thrones - Jon V

  Maester Aemon touched his own collar lightly, his bony, wrinkled finger stroking the heavy metal links. "Go on."

  "He told me that a maester's collar is made of chain to remind him that he is sworn to serve," Jon said, remembering. "I asked why each link was a different metal. A silver chain would look much finer with his grey robes, I said. Maester Luwin laughed. A maester forges his chain with study, he told me. The different metals are each a different kind of learning, gold for the study of money and accounts, silver for healing, iron for warcraft. And he said there were other meanings as well. The collar is supposed to remind a maester of the realm he serves, isn't that so? Lords are gold and knights steel, but two links can't make a chain. You also need silver and iron and lead, tin and copper and bronze and all the rest, and those are farmers and smiths and merchants and the like. A chain needs all sorts of metals, and a land needs all sorts of people."

  Maester Aemon smiled. "And so?"

"The Night's Watch needs all sorts too. Why else have rangers and stewards and builders? Lord Randyll couldn't make Sam a warrior, and Ser Alliser won't either. You can't hammer tin into iron, no matter how hard you beat it, but that doesn't mean tin is useless. Why shouldn't Sam be a steward?"

We see a few (very few) Iron Born have different ideas than the main ones we follow. Asha gives me hope, but I don't know all IB will follow her so readily even though the author gave the idea that the IB can be diverse moving forward. The Dothraki are there for one purpose and the author gives us just exactly what we need to know about them and nothing filler. Even their histories in the World book shows readers what they are all about.

9 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Honestly given Mel's thoughts and their geographic position as well as their previous losses, I think they're almost all going to die.

Many will, many will flee and survive as a group as they all move south (most likely, just not sure how far south yet. The Neck?)

[The Fattest Leech]

3 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

 

I agree w/ you both. Also, the thing w/ the Wall is, according to Martin it took hundreds of years for it to be built, and thousands for it to reach its current height. So, no one was stuck there that didn’t want to be there, as there was plenty of time to move in either direction. We were talking about this not that long ago, in a thread about the NW vows by @The Fattest Leech; I’ll try to find a link. And one of the ideas we discussed was that, over such a period of time as long as centuries, it’s very likely that there were settlements all the way along where the Wall was being built. Families, children, etc. And at some point, some of those FM families decided to stay on the north side. Everything else came much later, and by “everything else” I mean even some parts of the vow we get now. To me it ties in w/ an ever increasing influx of knights/Andals. Maybe we’ll learn more about it eventually. There’s a passage in Dance that is very suggestive of there being settlements near the Wall, maybe even where the 19 castles are now. 

Here ya go...

 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

21 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

They have more savage customs and practices. That's just a fact. The people of the Seven Kingdoms (Ironborn aside) do not raid and plunder their neighbors, do not steal women, etc. But that's something the average wildling, be he or her a good or a person aspires to do. The raiders are their heroes - just like the reavers are the heroes of the Ironborn.

The people of the 7k certainly raid & plunder & occasionally steal women too. 

I understand their thoughts & customs are different but their actions are much the same. 

23 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The Watch never forgot their purpose - they just also had to protect the realms of men against the wildlings because they were constantly raiding and attacking them. They still know that they are supposed to protect the realms of men against the Others

Doesn't it appear to be that they've found their purpose again rather than never having forgot it though? They didn't seem to have any idea about the Others in the beginning. Their sole purpose seemed to be keeping the wildlings out until dead men started walking. 

25 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The Seven Kingdoms are at pece since Aegon's Conquest. They are simply not an expansionist realm. They never declared war on any of the Free Cities, did not try to conquer other lands. They are happy with the territory they control. The wildlings are not

I know that & I'm saying if the lands were reversed the 7K would not be happy with the territory they control. 

27 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

We have reasons to believe the giants and Children helped with the building of the Wall, and we do know it took a very long time to make it so mighty and powerful as it later was. The ancestors of the present-day wildlings must have known why the Wall was built and supported the effort. Else they could and would have torn it down back in the day, no?

Sure, there are reasons but no definitive proof. 

As to the bolded I don't think they would have to be in support of it, just outnumbered. I think they likely were in support of it if they knew of the Others though. 

29 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

No, they live in a perpetual state of lawlessness

Nah, there are some rules & laws else how would anyone ever become "King" of them? It just isn't the same rules & laws as in the 7k. 

30 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The Seven Kingdoms and our world do have laws and institutions. You don't have to expect that the neighboring village comes to raid yours for essentially no reason. Beyond the Wall you have to assume that this kind of thing happens

Our world isn't much comparable to the 7k where laws & customs are concerned. They are there, certainly, but they aren't the same. I think the 7k probably look at the wildlings in a similar manner as to how we, today, look at feudal societies in medieval settings. There is some structure & laws but by our standards it's barbaric. 

The difference between the 7k & the wildlings isn't that the Wildlings are so much more barbaric in practice it's what they, as a society, find acceptable. The same things are done South of the wall they are just frowned upon &/or are punishable if caught. 

34 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

is also quite clear that the purposes of the NW never was to protect the people living north of the Wall from the Others. They lived beyond the border of the Wall. How on earth could they protect the people living in the lands of the Others while there were not willing to live south of the Wall

I agree. The purpose was never to protect those North of the wall. I'm not sure if you're just telling me or if you think I was arguing that but I wasn't.