Daeron the Daring Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 Just now, Jaenara Belarys said: Ah, good you have deigned to reply Mourning. Don't be provocative and try to write down what you wanna sax in a single comment to a single individual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaenara Belarys Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 Yessir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaenara Belarys Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 Sorry, just starting to get a bit ticked off. It's hard to talk to something that you've always heard talked about in stories where the white walkers Kill All Humans. I honestly don't see why Mourning can't at least agree to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron the Daring Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 14 minutes ago, Mourning Star said: have literally no idea what point you are trying to make. Honestly, have you ever gotten anyone's point yet? I mean, I saw you arguing with others on this thread, and with me too. It always ended with you not getting the point of someone's reply. And this conversation of ours ends the same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaenara Belarys Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 Think about it. Waymar has probably heard stories about The Long Night. Do you think he'll try to talk? No he won't. He'll try to fight for his life in the way he thinks best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron the Daring Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 1 minute ago, Jaenara Belarys said: Sorry, just starting to get a bit ticked off. It's hard to talk to something that you've always heard talked about in stories where the white walkers Kill All Humans. I honestly don't see why Mourning can't at least agree to that. Because he's trying to understand their intentions, but sadly approached it from a wrong direction, I think (it's my and other's opinion) Either way, neither I can completely agree with your "it's us or them" argument, altough I side closer to you than to her/him. We're different. We see things a different way. If you feel a conversation's a dead end, leave it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaenara Belarys Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 Just now, Daeron the Daring said: If you feel a conversation's a dead end, leave it. That's not how my mind works. I want to keep going until the other person concedes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaenara Belarys Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 BTW, why do you think that the WWs have no sheaths? From my POV it makes no sense that they can have armor and swords, but not sheaths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron the Daring Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 3 minutes ago, Jaenara Belarys said: BTW, why do you think that the WWs have no sheaths? From my POV it makes no sense that they can have armor and swords, but not sheaths. They might not have. They might carry it on their back. That still means they have a place to put it away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaenara Belarys Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 It will still use a sheath, like Ice or Longclaw, though. Ice is a two handed greatsword, Ned wears it on his back, methinks and Longclaw is a bastard sword, which is slung across Jon's back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaenara Belarys Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 Unless it floats magically, . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron the Daring Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 2 minutes ago, Jaenara Belarys said: It will still use a sheath, like Ice or Longclaw, though. Ice is a two handed greatsword, Ned wears it on his back, methinks and Longclaw is a bastard sword, which is slung across Jon's back. Not necesarilly. All they need is something they can attach it to. That means the blade itself isn't covered. This is just a suggestion, however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaenara Belarys Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 Speaking of Ice, if Valyrian steel cannot be melted by a common fire, then how did Tobho Mott melt Ice down for Widow's Wail and Oathkeeper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron the Daring Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 1 minute ago, Jaenara Belarys said: Speaking of Ice, if Valyrian steel cannot be melted by a common fire, then how did Tobho Mott melt Ice down for Widow's Wail and Oathkeeper? Tobho Hott is a Qohori blacksmith, and they Qohori blacksmiths are famous worldwide thanks to their abilities. They even claim to be able to make VS, but that isn't really true. But a few can rework VS. He is one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaenara Belarys Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 So far as I know, they don't claim to know how to make VS. They only know how to rework it. But, my question is, if Jeor says that no common fire can harm VS, and Aegon I's funeral pyre was prolly super hot and didn't affect Blackfyre, how did Tobho melt it down? The fire would have to be as hot as Balerion the Black Dread's dragonflame, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaenara Belarys Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 I'm going to eat lunch now, but if you put down comments now, I can get back to them after lunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaenara Belarys Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 Signing off of this thread...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Stark Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 7 hours ago, Mourning Star said: So many options... off the top of my head: First, there is the tiny sample size all involving men intent on violence. Second, there is an easy parallel to draw to dragons, in being more of a force of nature than evil aggressor. Third, its extremely easy to imagine how men would be the aggressors from their point of veiw. I have to admit your post made me roll my eyes so much I was afraid they would fall out of my skull. First you engage in a bit of whataboutism about all the violent humans being violent, which wasn't exactly a topic that anyone was disputing. The point is that the humans have so far shown no aggression towards the Others, since most humans aren't even aware the Others exist. This does make the Others aggresive actions towards humans very one sided. I agree the Others, like dragons, could collectively be seen as a force of nature. As individuals, their actions towards humanity have so far been to the human characters detriment. Like I said earlier, the Wildlings are all fleeing south, along with the giants, and no one south of the Wall is trying to go North. So how exactly are humans being aggresive towards the Others? Running away is usually not interpreted as an aggresive act. 7 hours ago, Mourning Star said: Waymar challenged the Other, the Other apparently fought one on one until Waymar was defeated... even by westerosi standards that is honorable. By Westerosi standards, butchering an enemy when they are down is considered dishonerable. 7 hours ago, Mourning Star said: They even allowed his companion to escape. And that worked out so well, didn't it? Waymar's corpse killed Will, and Ned killed Gared. Happy times were had by all. 7 hours ago, Mourning Star said: It also still seems like you can't get past the vengeance thing. Someone has to be the bigger person to break a cycle of vengeance. Being wronged is not enough of a reason to do wrong. You keep bringing up "vengeance" as if it was something I argued for. No. You may have read that into my comments. If so, you misinterpreted my argument. I am arguing that the Others are behaving with aggression and violence towards humanity, and that this being the case, humans have a right to protect themselves. If the Others attack humans, how can you expect people not to interpret them as a threat and respond accordingly? So far the "cycle of vengeance" you keep referring to is all in your imagination. There is a pattern of violence, wherein the Others attack with their weights, people die and run away, and the Others attack with their weights somewhere else. That's not a cycle of vengeance, that's a cycle of aggression, by the Others against humans. If the Others wanted to have peace with humans, they would have acted peacefully, not aggresively. 7 hours ago, Mourning Star said: No, it most certainly does not. That's kind of the whole point. Wrong again. There is no guarantee that a good deed will be reciprocated. That doesn't make it any less the right thing to do. See Ned and Cersei. The point, which you are missing, is that mercy is generally supposed to extend to children, civilian noncombatants and surrendering foes. That is why extending mercy is about limiting unneccesary bloodshed. It is why Ned offered mercy to Cersei by telling her to take her children and leave Kings Landing. If Robert had ever known the truth about Cersei's infedelity, he would have killed her and her children, as Ned knew perfectly well. What have the Others done so far to show mercy? Nothing. Instead, they actively attack humans, kill humans, and ensure that humans regard them as a threat. That is not mercy. That is aggresion. It would be foolish to extend mercy to the Others when there is no indication that doing so would make them change their own aggresive behavior. 7 hours ago, Mourning Star said: Wrong again. What you see is the difference between vengeance and justice. There is a difference between enforcing the law and a personal vendetta. What personal vendetta do humans have against the Others? What did they do to the Others that made the Others behave in an aggresive manner? The Others are the ones escalating things by attacking humans. Vengeance has nothing to do with it. People have a right to defend themselves. 7 hours ago, Mourning Star said: I would add that it is a very short sited analysis if you forget the role the brotherhood without banners plays in the story. We are talking about the role the Others play in the story. If you want to have a conversation about the BWB, open up a different thread about it. 7 hours ago, Mourning Star said: First, you learn their language, then you try to understand them as more than just evil aggressors. This applies to any meeting of cultures, and while supernatural and fantastical, is a direct parallel to a society and the "other". Whether that other is human or ice creature seems immaterial to the morality of it. Learning the Other's language requires sitting down with them and attempting communication. If the Others were interested in that, they would have reached out and tried interacting peacefully with humanity. Where's your example of this happening? When one culture is uniformally aggresive towards another culture, wars happen. The Others have been aggresive towards humans in every interaction they have had with them. The Others are acting in a warlike manner. How are humans supposed to "be the bigger person" and "extend mercy" towards beings that done nothing but massacre them? 7 hours ago, Mourning Star said: The arguments you are making could all be made about the Wildlings for instance. Taking it even further it is the sort of argument made by colonists about natives, and I would say is pretty categorically recognized as immoral. The Wildlings have shown a willingness to work with Jon and the Nights Watch, stop fighting, and even join with their old enemies to fight the Others. The Others have not shown any desire to stop fighting with humans. The humans in this story are not occupying the Others territory, extracting resources that belong to them, and imposing unjust laws on the Others in order to ensure human dominance. That is colonialism. In this story, humans are fleeing territory held by the Others, seeking refuge somewhere they can't be attacked by the Others, are taking no more from the land than they need to survive, and literally call themselves the "Free Folk." And humans south of the Wall don't even know about the Others at all. So no, there is no comparison to be made here with colonialism. 7 hours ago, Mourning Star said: And again, doing the right thing in no way guarantees a positive outcome for you personally, nor does it mean others will certainly do the right thing. By the same token, the ends do not justify the means. What we are seeing highlighted again is the core difference between tying to be moral or trying to be practical, trying to be Ned or trying to be Tywin. The right thing to do here is to protect your people from the invading army of corpses and their ice demon taskmasters who seem intent on starting a war with you. That's kinda what this whole story has been about. It's so interesting that you keep bringing up the differences between Ned and Tywin, since the Others actions seem to be so similar to Tywin's and so unlike Ned's. Your argument is fundamentally flawed because you are putting all the onus on humanity to seek peace with the Others, to try to understand the Others, to try being merciful. That's not possible if the Others don't reciprocate. The Others have to show they can be trusted. If they can't do that, why should the humans be expected to do so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CamiloRP Posted March 16, 2021 Author Share Posted March 16, 2021 6 hours ago, Jaenara Belarys said: The White Walkers are not the Native Americans. The Native Americans had a well developed civilization, which I respect since they're very clever and creative, the white walkers we know nothing about. You could talk to the Native Americans. You cannot talk to the white walkers. The Native Americans attacked settlers since the settlers were effectively breaking and entering, which is understandable. The white walkers just want to wipe out the human race. So, if you don't know anything about a culture then genocide is ok? The europeans knew nothing of the Americans when they first showed up, so was either group exterminating the other okay in that situation? specially considering all the europeans wanted to do was kill rape and steal... Also, europeans and Americans couldn't talk to each other either, they learnt too. You can, presumably, learn to talk to the Others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CamiloRP Posted March 16, 2021 Author Share Posted March 16, 2021 5 hours ago, Daeron the Daring said: Not necesarilly. This is entirely baseless, but I do think the fate of the Others will depend on human individual's decision, and the right call will be letting them survive. They are a radical humanoid species (they bring cold and windstorm with themselves, altough the storm not in every case), so I don't think they have a future in a common civilisation, but that does not exclude any other solutions to this problem. I mean, we are told the tale of the Night's King. It might be that his current portration is innacurate because the guy eventually reached what humanity couldn't, if his wife actually was a female White Walker and managed to give her his seed. All this still won't be preventing an armed conflict, I think. My two cents in all of this. The Others attacked the humans, it doesn't matter if they were provoked or not, it would've ended in war regardless. If a human saw an Other, the human would likely try to kill it, as they think they are evil. So I assume he Others would do the same. But that doesn't make them evil or worthy or extermination. They are just wrong, like humans are.* *If Im correct at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpeg.12ed2018b1b8619e85b47fcee9d9c8c9.jpeg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.