[TWoW Spoilers] Theon I, Part 4

[Nev yn]

(also, they do necromancy)

As do the priests of Red Rahloo, of course.

[Kuragin]

It's interesting (at least to me!) to consider the name 'Others' it's quite easy to take it to mean 'the dead' (which is in fact a common use of the term in western europe), but we know the other's to be controllers of the dead - are they themselves wraiths and spirits or are they living breathing sentient beings (for example, and as many have argued, 'the children'). It is alos important to remember theories that Westeros is part of an inverted world, is westeros part of an underworld - are the 'others' trying to reclaim it as such?

[Lady Octarina]

It's interesting (at least to me!) to consider the name 'Others' it's quite easy to take it to mean 'the dead' (which is in fact a common use of the term in western europe), but we know the other's to be controllers of the dead - are they themselves wraiths and spirits or are they living breathing sentient beings (for example, and as many have argued, 'the children'). It is alos important to remember theories that Westeros is part of an inverted world, is westeros part of an underworld - are the 'others' trying to reclaim it as such?

That's an interesting theory; it reminds me of the old notion that life can only come from destruction, death is the main generator of changes, and so on. Regardless of whether Westeros is part of an underworld or not, I believe after the march of the Others a great transformation will be effected in the 7Kingdoms, they'll be but a shadow of what we saw in AGoT, and then turn into something completely new. I mean, think about how much Europe changed after all the Black Death and the religious wars!

I'd like to add here that, well... if there is to be a battle between the "Great Other" and AA, what would be the drama in them being Jon and Daenerys? They've never met; even if they share Targ blood, that wouldn't make much sense, where the climax is concerned. Also, ASoIaF seems to be about refusing dualistic interpretations of events and human actions - do you really think it would make sense to have a dualistic big battle in the end?

[littleRickon]

do you really think it would make sense to have a dualistic big battle in the end?

That's something that has been bugging me as well. If ASoIaF turns into an epic superhero AA vs. ultimate evil story in the last books, it's a tremendous change of style and it doesn't go well at all with the whole "game of thrones" plot we've been seeing so far. When the Others come out and storming and ravaging the north, it won't matter who sits on the throne, and if they don't come storming, it takes makes most of the wall plot useless. I am really curious how GRRM is going to combine those two, but I lean strongly against it transforming into a very black and white more-standard-fantasy type of story.

[Kuragin]

I would be gutted after all the posturing, backstabbing etc of the first five books if the game of thrones comes to mean nothing. 'Bittersweet' ending makes me think this won't be the case, we may end up with the other defeated but a triumphant Littlefinger as ruler of the seven kingdoms with Cersi as his adoring bride...;)

[iamthedave]

That's something that has been bugging me as well. If ASoIaF turns into an epic superhero AA vs. ultimate evil story in the last books, it's a tremendous change of style and it doesn't go well at all with the whole "game of thrones" plot we've been seeing so far. When the Others come out and storming and ravaging the north, it won't matter who sits on the throne, and if they don't come storming, it takes makes most of the wall plot useless. I am really curious how GRRM is going to combine those two, but I lean strongly against it transforming into a very black and white more-standard-fantasy type of story.

I would lean somewhat less strongly if I were you. There's plenty of hints that things are going that way. Deep political plots do not sit well with 'Big Bad' plots, for the obvious reason that the entirety of all that lives will die. The Game of Thrones - the most interesting thing by far in this series - is rendered irrelevant by the Others invasion. I've always hated this, because it's the thing this book does which I like. The Others could simply not exist and I would like this series far more. They render any character who is not directly impacting events in the North 100% irrelevant because those characters are going to die exactly like everyone else.

And I think the bigger and badder the plot's turned, the more marked this effect has become. I'm holding a candle, but it's not like this is a sudden thing, it's been a slow progression from book one that's picked up pace significantly in ADWD. This makes perfect sense if AWOW is going to be the beginning of the climax (and given its book 6 of a 7 book series... well, the pacing fits perfectly).

So don't lean too heavily. Light a candle like me and chain it to your wrist. That way if it gets blown over you don't face plant and feel like a fool for doing it in the first place.

[estrellas]

I would lean somewhat less strongly if I were you. There's plenty of hints that things are going that way. Deep political plots do not sit well with 'Big Bad' plots, for the obvious reason that the entirety of all that lives will die. The Game of Thrones - the most interesting thing by far in this series - is rendered irrelevant by the Others invasion. I've always hated this, because it's the thing this book does which I like. The Others could simply not exist and I would like this series far more. They render any character who is not directly impacting events in the North 100% irrelevant because those characters are going to die exactly like everyone else.

And I think the bigger and badder the plot's turned, the more marked this effect has become. I'm holding a candle, but it's not like this is a sudden thing, it's been a slow progression from book one that's picked up pace significantly in ADWD. This makes perfect sense if AWOW is going to be the beginning of the climax (and given its book 6 of a 7 book series... well, the pacing fits perfectly).

So don't lean too heavily. Light a candle like me and chain it to your wrist. That way if it gets blown over you don't face plant and feel like a fool for doing it in the first place.

I really don't think you should fear that the Others are going to destroy the political side of this series. They could actually intensify it, with all sides jockeying to seize power during the chaos. I think this is where GRRM is heading with the plotline about the Faith Militant. The smallfolk are going to starve to death this winter, they're going to get absolutely hammered by the Others, and the nobles will still be ignoring them to fight over the Iron Throne. The peasantry will turn to the Faith Militant as a way to finally have some power, and in the meantime Westeros will continue to slide into chaos and destruction.

The game of thrones will NEVER be abandoned in order to fight the Others. That's not how humans work, and certainly not the cast of power-hungry maniacs we have in ASOIAF. It may be that some of the players will become preoccupied with the Others, but others, like Littlefinger and Cersei, will be all too happy to fill in the gap...

Also, the politics in this series have resulted in a Westeros that is wholly vulnerable to even a moderately bad winter, let alone the catastrophically awful winter they're in for. The game of thrones has set up a continent that could not possibly be in a worse position to fight the Others.

[Stark@heart]

I think the Others and the politics we see go hand in hand and maybe say something about the world we live in today. Watching a political debate is like watching a soap opera. They talk of moral agendas and who should pay the rent while the house burns down around us.

I wonder if the Others know this too and that's why their coming now. When the Wall and the Kingdom beyond are at their weakest.

Maybe they have glass candles of their own or something and they saw war and desolation coming and decided to take advantage of the situation. According to history and that huge ass Wall, they've tried coming south before but have been thrown back by the Wall and the Starks of Winterfell. Now that the Wall is weak and there is no Stark in Winterfell I have no doubt they will push much farther south that ever before. People in the North remember and may remember that wights can be stopped by fire but they can only hide from the Others.

Those in the south are screwed. Until Dany shows up on the Trident with her dragons....maybe.

On another tangent. I love that Tywin consider marrying Cersei to Theon at one point. What a couple they would have made. Maybe Theon will be redeemed in some way, by helping Bran seems most likely but I don't see him living long. If he's not sacrificed in front of the nearby Weirtree I fear he may very well end up back in Ramsey's hands.

Mayhaps Bran will send him back to Winterfell on a mission to the crypts. Hopefully to free those angry stone kings he was going on about, though he may not survive long amongst them. I'd love to see him unlease them and bring them into the Great Hall where Roose and Ramsey are holed up. :bowdown:

[iamthedave]

I really don't think you should fear that the Others are going to destroy the political side of this series. They could actually intensify it, with all sides jockeying to seize power during the chaos. I think this is where GRRM is heading with the plotline about the Faith Militant. The smallfolk are going to starve to death this winter, they're going to get absolutely hammered by the Others, and the nobles will still be ignoring them to fight over the Iron Throne. The peasantry will turn to the Faith Militant as a way to finally have some power, and in the meantime Westeros will continue to slide into chaos and destruction.

The game of thrones will NEVER be abandoned in order to fight the Others. That's not how humans work, and certainly not the cast of power-hungry maniacs we have in ASOIAF. It may be that some of the players will become preoccupied with the Others, but others, like Littlefinger and Cersei, will be all too happy to fill in the gap...

Also, the politics in this series have resulted in a Westeros that is wholly vulnerable to even a moderately bad winter, let alone the catastrophically awful winter they're in for. The game of thrones has set up a continent that could not possibly be in a worse position to fight the Others.

Actually my hope is that The Others invasion never really gets going and is more 'Northern Plot' that never gets a chance to sweep too far south. In some ways I think this more likely: if their invasion is much of a success, what'll be the point of the starks reclaiming Winterfell? All their people will be long dead. Whatever the bittersweetness in the ending, it's going to involve a Stark in Winterfell.

[estrellas]

Actually my hope is that The Others invasion never really gets going and is more 'Northern Plot' that never gets a chance to sweep too far south. In some ways I think this more likely: if their invasion is much of a success, what'll be the point of the starks reclaiming Winterfell? All their people will be long dead. Whatever the bittersweetness in the ending, it's going to involve a Stark in Winterfell.

I think you're going to be disappointed in that hope; Daenerys had that vision in A Storm of Swords of fighting Others at the Trident.

"That night she dreamt that she was Rhaegar, riding to the Trident. But she was mounted on a dragon, not a horse. When she saw the Usurper's rebel host across the river they were armored all in ice, but she bathed them in dragonfire and they melted away like dew and turned the Trident into a torrent. Some small part of her knew that she was dreaming, but another part exulted. This is how it was meant to be. The other was a nightmare, and I have only now awakened."

But there's no email or Facebook or CNN in Westeros, so no one's really going to know or believe what's happening north of them until the menace has swept over them like a plague, continuing south. This gives a perfect opportunity for denial and political machination in King's Landing. It's not like the whole country is going to be focused on the Others all the time.

[iamthedave]

I think you're going to be disappointed in that hope; Daenerys had that vision in A Storm of Swords of fighting Others at the Trident.

"That night she dreamt that she was Rhaegar, riding to the Trident. But she was mounted on a dragon, not a horse. When she saw the Usurper's rebel host across the river they were armored all in ice, but she bathed them in dragonfire and they melted away like dew and turned the Trident into a torrent. Some small part of her knew that she was dreaming, but another part exulted. This is how it was meant to be. The other was a nightmare, and I have only now awakened."

But there's no email or Facebook or CNN in Westeros, so no one's really going to know or believe what's happening north of them until the menace has swept over them like a plague, continuing south. This gives a perfect opportunity for denial and political machination in King's Landing. It's not like the whole country is going to be focused on the Others all the time.

Oh I think I will be disappointed, too, because the story is increasingly narrowing down to an anti-political big bad plot that leaves no room for such machinations. But you never know. Martin could pull a twist in vision and prophecy rather than bow to the increasingly tedious press of 'necessity'. This is why I hate prophecy in fantasy. It's over-used, and it narrows things down.

I'm not dreading an invasion of The Others, I'm expecting it. Wearily, in fact, because I've known it's going to happen for several books. So when it happens... what? I get the satisfaction of knowing a vision given four books ago was fulfilled?

It's like reading spoilers, only the writer really wants me to read them first. Rather baffling to me, but I know I'm unusual in this regard and most other readers get a kick out of prophetic warblings. Honestly the thing which is bothering me more than anything else is the way Martin keeps giving these prophecies and visions and then inserts some off-handed line from somebody about how prophecy can't be trusted... only we all know that every single vision and prophecy given so far as come to pass with the exception of the Stallion Who Mounts the World.

I do dislike prophecy as a plot driver, but if you're going to use it at least don't pretend you're not.

I'm kind of waiting for Martin to show me prophecies failing instead of having characters tell me it repeatedly. I'm not convinced and it's not ramping up the tension for me to see prophecies fulfilled that I'm fully aware will be.

/rant

Anyway, I'll still enjoy what twisty turny political tidbits he throws my way.

[Lady Octarina]

I don't want to see the political machinations lost either, but I do like, to a certain extent, the Others, the CoTF, some prophecies, it's the magical element every fantasy needs. And I trust Martin won't overuse it; like it's been said, it's more likely the Others' invasion will be yet another element to be used in the Game of Thrones (instead of simply deciding it).

I wonder if the Others know this too and that's why their coming now. When the Wall and the Kingdom beyond are at their weakest.

Maybe they have glass candles of their own or something and they saw war and desolation coming and decided to take advantage of the situation. According to history and that huge ass Wall, they've tried coming south before but have been thrown back by the Wall and the Starks of Winterfell. Now that the Wall is weak and there is no Stark in Winterfell I have no doubt they will push much farther south that ever before. People in the North remember and may remember that wights can be stopped by fire but they can only hide from the Others.

Hmm, that makes me wonder... a character said somewhere that now there are dragons alive again, magic is back to the world. But what if it's the opposite? What if it's the Others that bring magic back and allow dragons to awake? Which comes first, the Others or the dragons?

[Jory]

I think you're going to be disappointed in that hope; Daenerys had that vision in A Storm of Swords of fighting Others at the Trident.

"That night she dreamt that she was Rhaegar, riding to the Trident. But she was mounted on a dragon, not a horse. When she saw the Usurper's rebel host across the river they were armored all in ice, but she bathed them in dragonfire and they melted away like dew and turned the Trident into a torrent. Some small part of her knew that she was dreaming, but another part exulted. This is how it was meant to be. The other was a nightmare, and I have only now awakened."

But there's no email or Facebook or CNN in Westeros, so no one's really going to know or believe what's happening north of them until the menace has swept over them like a plague, continuing south. This gives a perfect opportunity for denial and political machination in King's Landing. It's not like the whole country is going to be focused on the Others all the time.

Oh, yeah, I'm so looking forward to Daenerys Deus Ex Machina swooping in to save the day upon her gallant dragon. Wait, I don't want that at all.

[Stark@heart]

We see the Others before Dany hatches her eggs.

Unless there are dragons we don't know about, some argue Bran's vision of dragons in Assashi are not Dany's. I happen to think they are but as to who came first.

Good Question? I never considered there to be a strong link between them. Dragons are "fire made flesh" the Others seem to be cold taking on the form of flesh, so could they be 2 sides of the same coin?

[Ice Turtle]

I really hope we will see Dany making mess and massacring forces that was meant to fight the Others, before it occurs to her that hups, those guys were here to save the mankind I probably shouldn't have murdered three quarters of them. And by the time she learns that Jon is a Targ, he will be too pissed off to ever love her.

[estrellas]

Oh, yeah, I'm so looking forward to Daenerys Deus Ex Machina swooping in to save the day upon her gallant dragon. Wait, I don't want that at all.

I don't think you understand the concept of a 'deus ex machina'...a character that has been in the story since the beginning, with her pet dragons that have been in the story since almost the beginning, arriving where they have been intending to go since the very beginning, is not a deus ex machina. It's actually bringing the plot to a conclusion. If you didn't like the whole dragon thing, you should have stopped reading after Game of Thrones.

[jon rr stark]

Hows he going to meet Dany or Moqorro in Bravos

[Ghost714]

for starters Stannis looks down and is harsh to everyone. I CLEARLY said if he couldnt find a use for them(this is a down the road kind of statement, Stannis isn't stupid and i never claimed him to be, he will get the full use of them, it could be after he gains the throne if he ever does), they would die, and its true, if they out live their use they would die. If Theon out lived his usefulness Ned wouldnt kill him.

and it would be the smart thing to do, the north is to loyal to the starks, use the boys to the max, and then replace them with someone of your choice, who is loyal to you and you alone.

My god you write 3 paragraphs about taking me out of contex.

Yeah!!! Okay!!!

The North is loyal to the Starks, so Stannis will kill off all the Starks and replace them with people loyal to Stannis. That is totally what Stannis should do! And when Stannis is done with the Starks, Stannis can kill off all the Tyrells, Martells, Tullys, Lannisters, and any other major house that commands a following of people!!!

That's how Stannis should do it! That's how you get shit done!!!

Okay on a serious note , are you even reading what your posting????

When Stannis thought that there wasn't a Stark available to rally the North, Stannis tryed to get Jon to accept his offer, because Stannis knows that the only way to hold the North is to have A STARK in Winterfell.

Stannis would not have the Starks killed, under any circumstances, because without a Stark the North would be divided amongst itself. If all the Starks died, every Northern house would think they are capapable of being "Over-Lords" of the North. The only way to keep the North under control, is to have a Stark leading the North. I mean what happened when Winterfell burned, and there was no longer a Stark in charge??? The North divided, and that's why the North is currently still fighting with each other.

I mean honestly what books have you been reading, to think Stannis would just kill off the Starks, once they are no longer of use to him? Nothing would cause a rebellion faster, and nothing would screw Stannis harder, than if Stannis were to do what you think he would do. Furthermore how would a Stark in charge of the North, ever not be useful?

Really though, why didnt Stannis just think to put someone in charge of the North- someone "loyal" to Stannis- instead of trying to get Jon to be Lord of the North?? The answer is, it's not that easy, Stannis can't just put someone of his choosing in charge of the North, or Stannis obviously would have done that in the first place, instead of asking Jon to become a Stark.

Let's hypothetically say that Stannis wins the Iron Throne, what's to say the Starks wouldn't be loyal to him?? But again even if the Starks are not "die-hard-Stannis-fans", replacing them with someone who is, would only cause chaos in the North. So there is no way in seven hells that it would be "the smart thing to do".

When Tyrion first became Hand of the King - when he first got to Kingslanding- it was "the smart thing to do", for Tyrion to replace positions, with people loyal to him. Tyrion replaced Janos Slynt, and got controll of the Gold Cloaks etc. I agree that, that was "the smart thing to do", but the same principle does not apply for Stannis, if Stannis were to replace the Starks with someone only loyal to him. The reason why is because, unlike the Gold Cloaks- who are loyal to who ever payes them- The North is only loyal to the Starks. If the Starks are not in the picture, than each Northern house would only be loyal to themselves. Stannis can't just send out a memo to the North saying "Okay guys this is your new leader, I want you all to follow him, because I'm the king and I say so"...... That's not how it works in the North.

You might recal a line that Cersei says to Joffery in the HBO GoT tv show. Joffery is saying how he would force the North to do "this and that" if he was King, and Cersei said what would you do if the North refused, then Joffrey said I would take my Royal army to the North and kill them. Cersei then tells Joffery that when winter comes, not even the gods themselves could save you and your royal army. Cersei then said that, THE NORTH CAN NOT BE HEALD BY AN OUTSIDER, because it is to big and to Wild to control and that's why the Starks are needed.

(this is in my own words, but you get the jist of it)

My point is Stannis can't just replace everyone who is not 100% loyal to him, with someone who is. Because that person who Stannis puts in charge would not have the loyalty of the people, and that is the whole reason why Stannis "would replace someone in the first place, so what's the point??? It would not work.

I really do not understand though, how you think Stannis would just kill off the people who are of no use to him. All through out the books we are told how Stannis is all about justice, If Stannis just killed off anyone who isn't useful to him, Stannis would be no different then Cersei. What would be "just" about Stannis doing, what you think he would do.... There is no justice about it, and it would be completely out of character for Stannis to kill off people, for the "reason" of no longer being of use to him.

In conclusion, it doesn't matter if it is in a month or ten years, Stannis would not just kill off Bran and Rickon, after they are no longer "useful" to him.

[Ghost714]

I don't think you understand the concept of a 'deus ex machina'...a character that has been in the story since the beginning, with her pet dragons that have been in the story since almost the beginning, arriving where they have been intending to go since the very beginning, is not a deus ex machina. It's actually bringing the plot to a conclusion. If you didn't like the whole dragon thing, you should have stopped reading after Game of Thrones.

Great post "estrellas", I agree 100% with what your saying. I really don't like it when people claim deus ex machina, when it comes to Dany and her Dragons. Yes Dany's dragons are a "game changer", but so are the Others with there zombie ice magic. If people don't like these things, then why are they even on here discussing the books, why would anyone keep reading the books, if they hate this so much.

But I agree, it really is not deus ex machina, at all.

Here is the definition of deus ex machina (straight from Wikipedia), Deus ex machina- is a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event, character, ability, or object.

Dany and the Dragons, are in no way, contrived and unexpected, unless you have seriously not been paying attention for the last 5 books. So people should get over it, or stop reading the books.

Same applys for Wargs and Warging, and the Red Priests, and the Others. NONE of it is "deus ex machina". And all of it has been going on sense the very beginning, so get over it. Because it is not deus ex machina.

[Fragile Bird]

I dont know if this has already been discussed, I didnt find it.

What is the matter with this Braavosi banker? Theon mentions two times that he has no blood.

So, is he another kind of an undead person?

I know this was asked a while ago, I thought someone would give a clear answer by now.

The banker is "bloodless" because blood = emotion, and he has no emotions in this transaction. You know the sayings about being hot-blooded or cold-blooded? People flush when they feel strong emotion, the blood moves. Centuries ago, people thought attributes belonged to parts of the body. Bravery rested in the liver - cowards had white livers ("you lily-livered coward, you") because no blood was there, brave men had blood in their livers.

Money has no emotion. Interest never sleeps. Sure I'll lend you the mortgage money with the teaser rate even though I friggin well know you'll lose your house when the rate resets. I don't care if you're Stannis, Dany, the king in King's Landing or whoever, money is neutral, and the banker is bloodless. You're not a winner, a loser, a king, a pretender, you're just a mark to lend money to. Well, if you had loser written all over you, the banker won't lend you the money - that's why we had a financial crisis in 2008, the bankers got too greedy and lent to losers. :bang: