Jump to content

The vagaries of time travel or why Mel can't catch a break


The Sleeper

Recommended Posts

Yes , I want to talk about prophecies not actual time travel, but as prophecies are esssentially about gaining infromation from the future, the same rules should apply.

For instance we have a classic example of a time loop. Melisandre sees "Renly" defeating Stannis and also sees that Renly's murder would gain Stannis Renly's army. Seems a no brainer and information from the future causes that future to happen. So, why can't she change the future? For that we need turn to another staple of sci fi time travel: the paradox. Mel can't see a future she would prevent, because seeing it would prevent it from happening therefore she can't see it. Like the guy who goes into the past to murder his grandfather.  The effect negates the cause.

So can the future be changed through prophecy? Melisandre is after all alive and we have seen her dodge an assassination attempt, so she can use the information to good effect. But has she changed the future or has it always been so? I believe the latter as the future is shaped by peoples' choices and people's choices depend on the information they have. It is just that cause and effect get a little restless sometimes and do a little dance. It is also probably a moot point because after all the future hasn't happened yet.

Some things we can get out of this, other than a headache, is that if someone is to play with time like Bran seems he might be inclined to, it has already happened and whatever effects they have had are already part of the story. Also the things one can and can't see could depend on their attitude and intentions.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

"Why would the gods send a warning if we can't heed it and change what's to come?"

Meera, on Bran V ACOK.

You provide examples of Mel seeing a future that does not happen, and she does think she can shape the future, with Renly's victory for example. I think the important thing to think about is, is she being manipulated by the one sending the visions? are the visions predictions, possibilities or recipes? Who sends the visions and what do they have to gain?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not aware of any vision that has been proven wrong. I am also working on the assumption that the visions are not sent but it is a magical skill she has. 

There are characters who can send visions but it doesn't seem to be the case with Mel as she watches the flames of her own initiative. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, The Sleeper said:

I am not aware of any vision that has been proven wrong. I am also working on the assumption that the visions are not sent but it is a magical skill she has. 

There are characters who can send visions but it doesn't seem to be the case with Mel as she watches the flames of her own initiative. 

I didn't sya wrong tho, I said a future that doesn't happen, for example, her seeing Davos killing her, she prevents it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, CamiloRP said:

I didn't sya wrong tho, I said a future that doesn't happen, for example, her seeing Davos killing her, she prevents it.

I think it works like this: in the case of maester Cressen she probably saw something like him like holding a cup with serpents to go with same symbolism as the ghost of High Heart. And we know that intangible things like intent can be seen. 

So yeah, the visions are good as an early waring system. She looks for danger to herself after all. What I am proposing is that she can't see her death for instance, unless she can't prevent it, isn't willing to or for some reason seeing it facilitates it coming to pass. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jojen insisted the dreams were true and couldn't be changed. As CamiloRP quoted above, Meera couldn't understand what use the dreams were if you couldn't change them. I always thought the problem was they thought only one of them could be right. For example, after a battle the field looks much the same in victory or defeat. Corpses, blood, scavengers, mud, etc. The vision of the bloody aftermath could be telling you that a given battle is inevitable but knowing about it ahead of time might still let you change the outcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, The Sleeper said:

I think it works like this: in the case of maester Cressen she probably saw something like him like holding a cup with serpents to go with same symbolism as the ghost of High Heart. And we know that intangible things like intent can be seen. 

So yeah, the visions are good as an early waring system. She looks for danger to herself after all. What I am proposing is that she can't see her death for instance, unless she can't prevent it, isn't willing to or for some reason seeing it facilitates it coming to pass. 

This seems to apply to Jojen's fatalistic attitude. His attitude about nothing can alter the future I see (symbolically or literally) from happening, enables him to see his manner of death (according to him).

I agree that Mel is able to see attempts at her life, but not the actual outcome of them in the flames.

We can also apply this on what Jojen sees as future for Bran and Rickon at the hands of Reek... he didn't actually see both boys, just that they were dressed like them. Now, if Bran and Rickon had not hidden and gotten away from Theon, it would have been Bran and Rickon actually being killed (as it was Ramsay's plan to kill the potential Stark heirs as soon as he had a chance to do so). But they hid, and Ramsay managed to convince Theon to kill two boys and pretend they were Bran and Rickon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Groo said:

Jojen insisted the dreams were true and couldn't be changed. As CamiloRP quoted above, Meera couldn't understand what use the dreams were if you couldn't change them. I always thought the problem was they thought only one of them could be right. For example, after a battle the field looks much the same in victory or defeat. Corpses, blood, scavengers, mud, etc. The vision of the bloody aftermath could be telling you that a given battle is inevitable but knowing about it ahead of time might still let you change the outcome.

Not quite. I think of a foreseen event like a thrown rock. It will fall eventually. What one can do is avoid being hit by it. In your example the battle would come to pass as seen. What one can do is for instance get caught in the battle or be ready to make nice with the victor afterwards. One example from the books is the second siege of Riverrun. Thoros foresaw it, so the BwB avoided getting caught up in it. 

 

58 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

This seems to apply to Jojen's fatalistic attitude. His attitude about nothing can alter the future I see (symbolically or literally) from happening, enables him to see his manner of death (according to him).

I agree that Mel is able to see attempts at her life, but not the actual outcome of them in the flames.

We can also apply this on what Jojen sees as future for Bran and Rickon at the hands of Reek... he didn't actually see both boys, just that they were dressed like them. Now, if Bran and Rickon had not hidden and gotten away from Theon, it would have been Bran and Rickon actually being killed (as it was Ramsay's plan to kill the potential Stark heirs as soon as he had a chance to do so). But they hid, and Ramsay managed to convince Theon to kill two boys and pretend they were Bran and Rickon.

Well, not exactly. Mel could see Cressen poisoning he cup and therefore activate her throat ruby thingy and neutralize the poison. 

Jojen's dreams would have been seen with his actions accounted into them. But yes this is a case where an outcome was shaped by knowledge from the future. Maybe Theon would have just kept Bran and Rickon hostage or killed them but it is certain that the actual outcome came to pass because of Jojen's involvement. 

And yeah, had Jojen's attitude been "fuck that shit" he would have never gone to Winterfell and therefore not seen the things he's seen. 

This vibes somehow with the doctrine "only death can pay for life" as the miller's boys died in place of Bran and Rickon because of magic. I don't think this is a hard and fast rule hear, but it does fall under the purvue of unintended consequences. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The Sleeper said:

Not quite. I think of a foreseen event like a thrown rock. It will fall eventually. What one can do is avoid being hit by it. In your example the battle would come to pass as seen. What one can do is for instance get caught in the battle or be ready to make nice with the victor afterwards.

That's very individualistic thinking. If you're responsible for protecting your people and land and an invader is coming then you can't just avoid the battle. It isn't some random rock in the air that you're free to run from. Also, the full analogy would be that Jojen had a dream of you getting hit by a rock. Jojen claims the dream can't be changed. If he's right then you can't simply duck because you know it's coming. My point is that Jojen might be right but that other important aspects of the event might be changed if you know the rock is coming. This would make the prophesy both useful and unavoidable. Keep in mind that every writer has to deal with the basic issue that it isn't "prophesy" if the event doesn't actually occur. If you were warned that a rock was coming and you ducked then it wasn't prophesy. It was a warning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Groo said:

That's very individualistic thinking. If you're responsible for protecting your people and land and an invader is coming then you can't just avoid the battle. It isn't some random rock in the air that you're free to run from. Also, the full analogy would be that Jojen had a dream of you getting hit by a rock. Jojen claims the dream can't be changed. If he's right then you can't simply duck because you know it's coming. My point is that Jojen might be right but that other important aspects of the event might be changed if you know the rock is coming. This would make the prophesy both useful and unavoidable. Keep in mind that every writer has to deal with the basic issue that it isn't "prophesy" if the event doesn't actually occur. If you were warned that a rock was coming and you ducked then it wasn't prophesy. It was a warning.

I am not talking about responsibility. I am talking about mechanics.

As to the bolded part: if I'm right you wouldn't be able to see it coming if you could duck it. That ability would preclude the ability to foresee the event. 

The other point is that any information from the future would already have the ability to see them taken into account, like Mel's actions depending on information she has from the visions. 

The difference is this to go with the rock throwing analogy. One can see a person with the intent of throwing a rock or they can see a rock thrown in the heir. In the first case one can prevent said person from throwing the rock in the first place. In the second one can avoid being hit by it. 

Jojen is actually a pretty good working case. His visions can't prevent the loss of Winterfell, but they do prevent Bran and Rickon from being prisoners or dying. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, The Sleeper said:

Yes , I want to talk about prophecies not actual time travel, but as prophecies are esssentially about gaining infromation from the future, the same rules should apply.

For instance we have a classic example of a time loop. Melisandre sees "Renly" defeating Stannis and also sees that Renly's murder would gain Stannis Renly's army. Seems a no brainer and information from the future causes that future to happen. So, why can't she change the future? For that we need turn to another staple of sci fi time travel: the paradox. Mel can't see a future she would prevent, because seeing it would prevent it from happening therefore she can't see it. Like the guy who goes into the past to murder his grandfather.  The effect negates the cause.

So can the future be changed through prophecy? Melisandre is after all alive and we have seen her dodge an assassination attempt, so she can use the information to good effect. But has she changed the future or has it always been so? I believe the latter as the future is shaped by peoples' choices and people's choices depend on the information they have. It is just that cause and effect get a little restless sometimes and do a little dance. It is also probably a moot point because after all the future hasn't happened yet.

Some things we can get out of this, other than a headache, is that if someone is to play with time like Bran seems he might be inclined to, it has already happened and whatever effects they have had are already part of the story. Also the things one can and can't see could depend on their attitude and intentions.

 

There is no value to prophecy if the future has already been determined.  George says this is the story about the human heart.  Thus, his fantasy world is not predestined.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not predestination. Prophecies do have an effect. Mel and Jojen establish that conclusively. This is more about there being a single time line and ultimately no second chances. And as I explicitly stated the future is determined by people's choices. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Unit A2 said:

There is no value to prophecy if the future has already been determined.  George says this is the story about the human heart.  Thus, his fantasy world is not predestined.  

I was thinking along those lines.  Jojen has a nasty case of hopeless predestination.   This is interesting given how close I always thought the Crannogmen were to the COTF.  Meera may have some agency for arguing against immutable destiny and exercise some control of her life on a more intellectual, maybe spiritual way.   Growth is possible in ground like Meera's.  Bran has no idea what he's doing with visions, other than losing control of himself and being a presence in the past.  As @The Sleeper has maintained here, Bran can affect the future from the past.  And so on and so forth with each character's heart.   Meilsandre is a true believer along the lines of zealotry.  I can see her believing her visions are God given and intended to have her manipulate something for the even she sees.   It's an amazing lot of existentialism driven by prophecy.  I'm not sure the prophecies or even potential time travel matter so much as what we and perhaps the characters think about them.   I look really forward to seeing what The Others actually are and how they fit into all this weird prophecy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think of my GoT book sometimes as made from a weir wood tree. I can flow back and forth. I can only see through the eyes of one person at a time. I can re-read a chapter but it never changes. (My interpretation certainly has.) I can predict  what will be written or may have seen distant danger, but once the ink dries. Jojen may think he’s lost in the past or know he is and wants to go foreward with fresh red ink.

I was imagining walking around the Nightfort. I saw the Axe man and chained children in the Halls. I went to the kitchen and saw the rat cook. Strange, a well in the kitchen. Down I walked. I saw no weir wood door. I saw a giant white worm. Hungry and drooling. A garbage disposal of the kitchens midden heap.

No idea if I’m correct or what it could mean. Just an idea of Bran and co. devoured.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see many of Mel's visions and Jojen's dreams as simple warnings and not as prophecies. A prophecy seems to be something that's going to happen and cannot be avoided - either because it has some sort of "universal" importance (PTWP?) or perhaps because the people involved are unable to avoid it. Mel seeing an attempt on her life is probably a warning - "something is going on, be careful". We don't know when Mel saw this vision with Cressen, but it would fit my view better if she saw it when Cressen was already planning something. Also, Jojen saw a symbolic dream foretelling the Ironborn invasion of Winterfell, but no one interpreted this dream correctly, so there was no way to prevent it - and even if someone had realized what it meant, it is a question how much could have been done (in the actual circumstances) to avoid it or at least to make the blow less severe. 

Jojen's dreams of Bran and Rickon may have been exactly what happened later (and in this case he only thought the boys were Bran and Rickon) or he may have seen what could have happened to Bran and Rickon; and what happened, eventually, to the miller's sons serves as information for the reader that Jojen's dreams are worth paying attention to. 

I think Mel somewhere admits that a vision she sees can be of the future or of the past. When it's about her own life, it's probably easier to recognize it as something that has or has not happened yet, but with visions like "grey girl on a horse", everything is up to her very subjective interpretation. I don't think any of this is a prophecy, but rather some sort of information she has the ability to see in her fires and then she can do with it whatever she thinks best. In this sense, she does not alter the future any more than every other person does, only she has a source of information (probably about what's already happening on some level) that most other people don't have access to and she can act on the information thus obtained just as everyone else acts on information they have.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Julia H. said:

I see many of Mel's visions and Jojen's dreams as simple warnings and not as prophecies. A prophecy seems to be something that's going to happen and cannot be avoided - either because it has some sort of "universal" importance (PTWP?) or perhaps because the people involved are unable to avoid it. Mel seeing an attempt on her life is probably a warning - "something is going on, be careful". We don't know when Mel saw this vision with Cressen, but it would fit my view better if she saw it when Cressen was already planning something. Also, Jojen saw a symbolic dream foretelling the Ironborn invasion of Winterfell, but no one interpreted this dream correctly, so there was no way to prevent it - and even if someone had realized what it meant, it is a question how much could have been done (in the actual circumstances) to avoid it or at least to make the blow less severe. 

Jojen's dreams of Bran and Rickon may have been exactly what happened later (and in this case he only thought the boys were Bran and Rickon) or he may have seen what could have happened to Bran and Rickon; and what happened, eventually, to the miller's sons serves as information for the reader that Jojen's dreams are worth paying attention to. 

I think Mel somewhere admits that a vision she sees can be of the future or of the past. When it's about her own life, it's probably easier to recognize it as something that has or has not happened yet, but with visions like "grey girl on a horse", everything is up to her very subjective interpretation. I don't think any of this is a prophecy, but rather some sort of information she has the ability to see in her fires and then she can do with it whatever she thinks best. In this sense, she does not alter the future any more than every other person does, only she has a source of information (probably about what's already happening on some level) that most other people don't have access to and she can act on the information thus obtained just as everyone else acts on information they have.  

This does raise the questions of the intentions of whomever sent the "sea coming to Winterfell" dream. When there's an attempt on Mel's life she can see it clearly, but this prophecy was vague enough that it didn't serve as an actual warning. Maybe the one who send it wanted credibility in future dreams, but didn't want Bran to prevent the invasion. After all, it's the invasion what allowed Bran to travel North of the Wall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/2/2021 at 2:29 AM, The Sleeper said:

So can the future be changed through prophecy? Melisandre is after all alive and we have seen her dodge an assassination attempt, so she can use the information to good effect.

It's an interesting question.  But whether or not Melisandre can change it or even believe she can change it, she certainly can use it for her own gain.  For example, Melisandre foresees the death of the three kings.  She then makes a big production of burning the three leeches filled with Edric's blood, and voila the three kings die.  Perhaps the whole production of burning the leeches was for show, to convince Stannis of the power in sacrificing Edric's blood, so she can then convince him later to sacrifice the lad in total.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CamiloRP said:

This does raise the questions of the intentions of whomever sent the "sea coming to Winterfell" dream. When there's an attempt on Mel's life she can see it clearly, but this prophecy was vague enough that it didn't serve as an actual warning. Maybe the one who send it wanted credibility in future dreams, but didn't want Bran to prevent the invasion. After all, it's the invasion what allowed Bran to travel North of the Wall.

I guess the author's intention may well have been to establish Jojen's credibility as a greenseer with the reader. If there was an in-world sender of the dream, that person may have had the same purpose - to show Bran how valuable Jojen was. But it is also possible that seeing green dreams is just an ability, and the dreams come randomly, maybe somewhat depending on what the dreamer's mind is occupied with when awake. Magical abilities are limited. 

45 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

It's an interesting question.  But whether or not Melisandre can change it or even believe she can change it, she certainly can use it for her own gain.  For example, Melisandre foresees the death of the three kings.  She then makes a big production of burning the three leeches filled with Edric's blood, and voila the three kings die.  Perhaps the whole production of burning the leeches was for show, to convince Stannis of the power in sacrificing Edric's blood, so she can then convince him later to sacrifice the lad in total.

That's totally possible and would be in character with Mel. The question is how far ahead she can see in the future - can she see possible events no one is even planning yet? Another possibility is that she was planning herself to arrange several assassinations, not only Renly's, and in this case, too, the leeches were only for show. Later, however, she realized that Stannis couldn't give him new shadow babies (which may have been at least partially due to the subconscious guilt Stannis was feeling about Renly), but the killings were done anyway, by others. The trick with the leeches definitely seems suspicious. I doubt Mel can magically start chains of events that eventually lead to the deaths of people far away - though she may be able to inflict "bad luck" on somebody, and when a war is going on, that could easily cost a person their life.   

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Julia H. said:

I see many of Mel's visions and Jojen's dreams as simple warnings and not as prophecies. A prophecy seems to be something that's going to happen and cannot be avoided - either because it has some sort of "universal" importance (PTWP?) or perhaps because the people involved are unable to avoid it. Mel seeing an attempt on her life is probably a warning - "something is going on, be careful". We don't know when Mel saw this vision with Cressen, but it would fit my view better if she saw it when Cressen was already planning something. Also, Jojen saw a symbolic dream foretelling the Ironborn invasion of Winterfell, but no one interpreted this dream correctly, so there was no way to prevent it - and even if someone had realized what it meant, it is a question how much could have been done (in the actual circumstances) to avoid it or at least to make the blow less severe. 

Jojen's dreams of Bran and Rickon may have been exactly what happened later (and in this case he only thought the boys were Bran and Rickon) or he may have seen what could have happened to Bran and Rickon; and what happened, eventually, to the miller's sons serves as information for the reader that Jojen's dreams are worth paying attention to. 

I think Mel somewhere admits that a vision she sees can be of the future or of the past. When it's about her own life, it's probably easier to recognize it as something that has or has not happened yet, but with visions like "grey girl on a horse", everything is up to her very subjective interpretation. I don't think any of this is a prophecy, but rather some sort of information she has the ability to see in her fires and then she can do with it whatever she thinks best. In this sense, she does not alter the future any more than every other person does, only she has a source of information (probably about what's already happening on some level) that most other people don't have access to and she can act on the information thus obtained just as everyone else acts on information they have.  

One would need to qualify the difference between warnings and prophecy. For instance Thoros foresaw the siege of Riverrun and as the result the BwB chose not to go there. It is the case that whatever scrying Mel does, does not confine itself to depiction of events past, present or future. An example from Jojen would be the chained winged wolf which could be described as a situation. However, both Mel and Jojen (Bran, the Undying, Thoros, the Ghost of Hight Heart, Maggy the Frog, etc) have had visions of future events that came to pass. After all Mel did see Stannis' defeat at King's Landing.

Jojen in particular is batting a thousand, seeing specifics of people who would come to die. The flaying of the faces is the detail clinches it in that particular vision, as Ramsay actually flayed the faces of the Miller Boys in order to pass them as Bran and Rickon, which the dream can also be said to depict.

18 hours ago, CamiloRP said:

This does raise the questions of the intentions of whomever sent the "sea coming to Winterfell" dream. When there's an attempt on Mel's life she can see it clearly, but this prophecy was vague enough that it didn't serve as an actual warning. Maybe the one who send it wanted credibility in future dreams, but didn't want Bran to prevent the invasion. After all, it's the invasion what allowed Bran to travel North of the Wall.

Why do you think someone sent it? What would they hope to achieve? It was also Jojen's vision. Lacking context it was first misunderstood. Ironicalle later Maester Lewyn speculated that it does depict Winterfell falling to Theon, but still he wouldn't act without more information, nor was there much to be done at that time. If it could have been prevented by Jojen seeing it wouldn't have happened and therefore coud not have been seen. The qualifying difference is Jojen and Meera's presence in the first place, which facilitated Bran's escape and survival and led him to BR.

The issue of assuming a sender and an agenda ultimately merely transposes the source. We still have valid visions of future events regardless of who originally had them.

15 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

It's an interesting question.  But whether or not Melisandre can change it or even believe she can change it, she certainly can use it for her own gain.  For example, Melisandre foresees the death of the three kings.  She then makes a big production of burning the three leeches filled with Edric's blood, and voila the three kings die.  Perhaps the whole production of burning the leeches was for show, to convince Stannis of the power in sacrificing Edric's blood, so she can then convince him later to sacrifice the lad in total.

That is pretty much canon in my view. Her own POV where we see her practice of deliberately exaggerating her powers to gain influence and manipulate people further reinforces this point. What is interesting in this case is that this episode kicked off the series of events involving Edric Storm's evacuation to Lys, Davos's imprisonment and perhaps his elevation to Stannis's Hand. I think it would be more accurate to say rather than Mel being able to change the future she can't undo the things she has seen. And due to her belief that they can and her attitude of directly trying to shape the future based on her visions, she is alternately trapped and blindsided.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/2/2021 at 3:29 AM, The Sleeper said:

So can the future be changed through prophecy? Melisandre is after all alive and we have seen her dodge an assassination attempt, so she can use the information to good effect. But has she changed the future or has it always been so? I believe the latter as the future is shaped by peoples' choices and people's choices depend on the information they have. It is just that cause and effect get a little restless sometimes and do a little dance. It is also probably a moot point because after all the future hasn't happened yet.

 

 

I think there might be a distinction between visions (Mel, Jojen, Patchface, etc), prophecies (various Targs from Daenys the Dreamer to Danaery the Dreamed), and non-linear time-experience (Bran in the weirnet)- visions being essentially a symbolic, dreamlike message from "outside of linear time" that represents the future in some way that be interpreted or misinterpreted in the case of Melisandre (Cassandra+Amelia Bedelia) but can, from the experience of the person receiving vision, potentially change the future.

Prophecy binds history along the course of its vision, allowing no deviation, while Bran's weirnet experience could represent an actual violation of causality as he seems to have a conservation with Jon that takes place in this way.

I think we also can't rule out the possibility that someone is sending false visions by means of glass candle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...