Is Bran at risk of becoming addicted to Cannibalism (serious discussion, not for Stark hate)?

[KingAerys_II]

54 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

I’ll ask again, quote please? I’d like to see the context.

So is it taboo in the north or ‘almost normality’? I’m confused, since you’ve argued both.

It's hinted in Ser Alliser words when he mocks Samwell Tarly, but that's the show, in the books there is this dialogue:

Sam: Sick. The smell ...
Edd: Never knew Bannen could smell so good. I had half a mind to carve a slice off him. If we had some applesauce, I might have done it. Pork's always best with applesauce, I find.

Edited August 16, 2023 by KingAerys_II

[kissdbyfire]

So you changed your mind from the initial claim that in the north it is ‘almost normality’ (your words)?

ETA: just saw you replied separately.

Edited August 16, 2023 by kissdbyfire

[kissdbyfire]

3 minutes ago, KingAerys_II said:

It's hinted in Ser Alliser words when he mocks Samwell Tarly, but that's the show, in the books there is this dialogue:

Sam: Sick. The smell ...
Edd: Never knew Bannen could smell so good. I had half a mind to carve a slice off him. If we had some applesauce, I might have done it. Pork's always best with applesauce, I find.

I will never consider something done in the abomination as evidence for anything in the books. 
 

As to the book quote… are you serious? Because that kind of supports the opposite as seen in Sam’s reaction. What Edd says is just Edd being Edd, with his dark sense of humour. 

[KingAerys_II]

1 hour ago, kissdbyfire said:

So you changed your mind from the initial claim that in the north it is ‘almost normality’ (your words)?

ETA: just saw you replied separately.

"Almost normality" as brutal act, I don't think in a region like the North, where Ramsey likes hunting peasant girls to flay them alive, where there are the cannibals in Skagos, Wildings as the weeper who likes to remove the eyes of the Night's Watch member or they eat flesh of defeated enemies, cannibalism for necessity should be considered so heinous, it's a taboo, it's obvious but not so scandalous

[Aejohn the Conqueroo]

17 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Pun intended!

Caught me.

 

[Aejohn the Conqueroo]

3 hours ago, KingAerys_II said:

"Almost normality" as brutal act, I don't think in a region like the North, where Ramsey likes hunting peasant girls to flay them alive, where there are the cannibals in Skagos, Wildings as the weeper who likes to remove the eyes of the Night's Watch member or they eat flesh of defeated enemies, cannibalism for necessity should be considered so heinous, it's a taboo, it's obvious but not so scandalous

Then why do the old men 'go hunting' instead of hoping in the stew pot? It would likely be some sort of exchange so that people could avoid eating their own parents, but if cannibalism is accepted why are they letting all of that good meat go to waste?

[Ser Arthurs Dawn]

8 minutes ago, Aejohn the Conqueroo said:

Then why do the old men 'go hunting' instead of hoping in the stew pot? It would likely be some sort of exchange so that people could avoid eating their own parents, but if cannibalism is accepted why are they letting all of that good meat go to waste?

You're in for a long ride now, just so you know.

[Aejohn the Conqueroo]

29 minutes ago, Ser Arthurs Dawn said:

You're in for a long ride now, just so you know.

I got nothin going on this morning. I'll read it.

[KingAerys_II]

44 minutes ago, Aejohn the Conqueroo said:

Then why do the old men 'go hunting' instead of hoping in the stew pot? It would likely be some sort of exchange so that people could avoid eating their own parents, but if cannibalism is accepted why are they letting all of that good meat go to waste?

Cannibalism is taboo

[Craving Peaches]

Someone mentioned this before, but I agree that the 'Skagosi are cannibals' idea comes from distortion of an event where there was a really severe winter and they had to eat the dead to survive or something like that. I doubt they are casually cannibals of their own free will.

[kissdbyfire]

28 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Someone mentioned this before, but I agree that the 'Skagosi are cannibals' idea comes from distortion of an event where there was a really severe winter and they had to eat the dead to survive or something like that. I doubt they are casually cannibals of their own free will.

Yeah, that’s my impression as well. 
 

[KingAerys_II]

I hope Skagosi are ferocious and I want Rickon to be like "the hungry wolf", it would be wonderful , considering that in the show they  portrayed him as a kid who can't make a zig zag walk

Edited August 16, 2023 by KingAerys_II

[SeanF]

I like the idea that doing something taboo is a step towards gaining magical power.

In The First Law, Khalul and his followers eat the flesh of men to gain immortality, but they can never then stop.

[Lord Varys]

Rickon's journey to a feral, half-human child is already very much established when we last see him in ACoK. The creature we might meet again in TWoW is very likely to be more wolf than man ... a process that might not be reversible in light of the age of the boy. Not that it matters much if he is not going to survive the story. But I kind of expect Rickon not exactly to represent the 'sane' or 'rational' or 'merciful' side of House Stark (and neither Arya, of course).

Don't buy Bran will ever get 'addicted' to human meat, but he is an abomination now. Skinchangers are, in my opinion, rightfully viewed as freaks by the Westerosi people. Their abilities cause them to adapt animal mannerisms and behaviors - which is odd as hell and not something I'd like to see in a family member or close friend -, their abilities themselves give them a huge advantage over normal people, especially in the spying and killing department - which is not something you would trust people in your circles to not abuse -, and then they act out sexual acts or cruelty in animal guise. All that can reasonably be viewed to be disgusting.

And greenseers are the same dialed up in the extreme. Bloodraven and Bran are monsters not just wit a thousands eyes, but a thousand cocks, a thousand vulvas, a thousand asses ... they can literally fuck or bugger themselves in animal guise.

Worst, though, is the fact that their entire magic is based on mind rape, on the mental enslavement of other sentient beings. We get the worst of it with Hodor, of course, but chaining the direwolves and the other animals is also abuse and enslavement. I'm completely in team Varamyr's snow bear and shadow cat. They got their due in the end. The entire thing might be kind of relevant and okay plot-wise ... but there is clearly a dark(er) side to it and the reader should be abhorred by it to a point.

By comparison, the dragonrider bond is completely harmless and a much more equal partnership. It is a monogamous union, not the kind polygamous harem people like Varamyr and Bran have.

[Hugorfonics]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Rickon's journey to a feral, half-human child is already very much established when we last see him in ACoK. The creature we might meet again in TWoW is very likely to be more wolf than man ... a process that might not be reversible in light of the age of the boy. Not that it matters much if he is not going to survive the story. But I kind of expect Rickon not exactly to represent the 'sane' or 'rational' or 'merciful' side of House Stark (and neither Arya, of course).

Don't buy Bran will ever get 'addicted' to human meat, but he is an abomination now. Skinchangers are, in my opinion, rightfully viewed as freaks by the Westerosi people. Their abilities cause them to adapt animal mannerisms and behaviors - which is odd as hell and not something I'd like to see in a family member or close friend -, their abilities themselves give them a huge advantage over normal people, especially in the spying and killing department - which is not something you would trust people in your circles to not abuse -, and then they act out sexual acts or cruelty in animal guise. All that can reasonably be viewed to be disgusting.

And greenseers are the same dialed up in the extreme. Bloodraven and Bran are monsters not just wit a thousands eyes, but a thousand cocks, a thousand vulvas, a thousand asses ... they can literally fuck or bugger themselves in animal guise.

Worst, though, is the fact that their entire magic is based on mind rape, on the mental enslavement of other sentient beings. We get the worst of it with Hodor, of course, but chaining the direwolves and the other animals is also abuse and enslavement. I'm completely in team Varamyr's snow bear and shadow cat. They got their due in the end. The entire thing might be kind of relevant and okay plot-wise ... but there is clearly a dark(er) side to it and the reader should be abhorred by it to a point.

By comparison, the dragonrider bond is completely harmless and a much more equal partnership. It is a monogamous union, not the kind polygamous harem people like Varamyr and Bran have.

Yea I think there's a lot of like professor x and the bad guy wears a helmet so he doesn't get mind raped in there too. Not exactly sure about the whole x men thing but GRRM is.

So to kinda answer the op but to respond to you, do you think Bran will get addicted to mind enslavement? Or that he'll realize it's wrong and like, not violate his stableboy? Because I think there's a decent chance Bran will turn from his teachings.

I think the thing with Varamyr is he was a warlord who took his animals and made them do carnage and stuff, or like, idk, couldn't share or something? They're definitely different then the direwolves who run up to their master like Ghost, climbing walls like Ygritte or whatever. Or even Arya with the cat, it's like the difference between invading and spending the night. Very presumptuous but kinda regal like Robert staying at his lords for dinner.

Also

 

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

20 hours ago, Nevets said:

Meera is still alive, I think

I just want to second this. I think Meera is still alive (Jojen I think is not, and I do subscribe to the Jojen-paste idea). However, I think Meera still being alive will be important to Bran as a character, and we'll see what choices he makes. 

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

When I was in the Philippines on vacation in Palawan, the tour guide made a very big deal about the local tribes that practiced cannibalism within the older generations' lifetimes. However, after traveling there, I looked up more about the tribes and 1. The cannibalism was more ritualistic than a main source of food, and 2. They stopped doing it basically because better meat sources were available. The reason for the cannibalism in the first place was that rainforests offer a low amount of good protein options for humans to consume and not some obsession with eating human flesh. They stopped being cannibals...because they had more pig, chicken, fish, etc. now available to consume, which they immediately preferred as a food source. 

[Aebram]

On 8/15/2023 at 3:45 PM, Aejohn the Conqueroo said:

Greenseers turned out to be wholly sustained by blood spilled at their tree's roots or something in that vein.  

"... in that vein," indeed ...    :^)

[sweetsunray]

20 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

I will never consider something done in the abomination as evidence for anything in the books. 
 

As to the book quote… are you serious? Because that kind of supports the opposite as seen in Sam’s reaction. What Edd says is just Edd being Edd, with his dark sense of humour. 

Exactly. And Edd says this at Craster's, where babies and dead men as flesh is alluded to by George a few times both in aCoK and aSoS. And it should be noted that Edd's allusions of humans as meat (lamb or pork) only occur at Craster's, not in the other chapters north of the Wall. Edd alludes to it either in relation to Craster as a murderer and his secret larder, or in relation to him sacrificing babies to the Others, aka the babies are food for a the Other's "maw".

It's not meant to imply that the Night's Watch engange in cannibalism knowingly or willingly, let alone regularly. 

Edited August 17, 2023 by sweetsunray

[sweetsunray]

As for this idea that skinchanging is by definition evil and dragonriding is wholesome:

Complete rubbish. George has time and time again written about magical beings, where there are plenty of "good guys" who aim to be better than their magical nature might predict, and contrast them to "evil guys" who use their magical nature as a defence to keep on doing the evil even when faced with opportunities to do better. When they are "evil" they usually are as wasteful of their own magical kind than they are of non-magical "prey".

Skin Trade includes werewolves. Plenty of them are good or even heroic people who go out of their way not to harm, although they may have had a bad historical incident that taught them to avoid the harm. But there are also an evil wherewolf, who cannot make the change at all, but desires the power and finds a way to acquire for a while. To do so, he needs to have the skin of another werewolf. So, he has innocent werewolves hunted and killed, to then work the change and kill non-werewolf people.

Fevre Dream revolves around a species who are vampiric. On the one hand you have a vampire who managed to make a drink that quells the thirst for human blood and he manages to gather other vampires to join in. On the other hand you have a vampire who learns of it, has ample opportunity to go along with it, but refuses to do so. Not only does he refuse it. He kills or sets up other vampires, especially those who willingly joined the first one, and attempts to force the first one from his abstinence. 

The evil ones in Skin Trade and Fevre Dream would be villains without their magical powers. They'd be serial killers and murderers and rapists anyhow.

There have been villainous dragonriders who enjoy burning non dragonriders as well as fellow dragonriders. But there have been dragonriders who just enjoy flying a dragon and never would even consider harming anybody with them, including plenty of unnamed Targaryens who were fine and dandy with just flying their dragons from Dragonstone without even conquering anything or burning castles down. And then there are the likes of Maegor the Cruel, Aegon II and his brother Aemon who loved feeding other dragons and dragonriders to their dragon. Maegor, Aegon II and Aemon were shitholes who would have been cruel and murderous without a dragon, just like the Mad King was. That's why George has Vhagar being ridden by Laena Velaryon without Vhagar ever killing anyone, but then has Vhagar being ridden by Aemon to eat a kid dragon and kid rider. Vhagar is not inherently evil or villainous. Their rider is or is not.

Likewise there have been skinchangers and greenseers who have a respectful bond with the animals they skinchange and have no interest in any other animal, let alone another human. And then there is Varamyr. He killed his baby brother via a dog. But he would have likely done so anyhow, as long as he believed he could get away with it. Varamyr not only harms people from a young age who have no abilities. He turns it against other skinchangers as well, to kill them and steal their animal. Varamyr is no different than Chett is, except that he has a magical power that Chett did not have.

Bran is not like Varamyr. He's a kid who makes mistakes, he'll no doubt learn from. But he's no Varamyr who enjoys harming people.