Heresy 18

[SerDuck]

I don't expect we'll get all of it right, but I'm pretty confident of the core heresy; that the Others are based upon the Sidhe and that there is a Stark connection. This in turn means that the great reveal ought not to be such a shock to the system as might otherwise be the case. as I've said before I'm a lot more comfortable with the notion of the Others being the Sidhe, because I'm familiar with that folklore and it is in a sense as real as the Wars of the Roses, which everyone cheerfully identifies as the primary inspiration for the Game of Thrones. In other words if readers are happy to compare Cersei Lannister with Margaret of Anjou, then they shouldn't find it too difficult to line up Jon as Tam Lin and Val as the Queen of Faerie.

As to the how, where and when. GRRM has said we're going to see what's up there in the Land of Always Winter and although orthodox money appears to be on Bran flying up there, I expect myself that the POV will be far more substantive, and that whether or not he's accompanied by Benjen or anybody else, it will be cold hard Jon who makes the journey and learns the significance of Tam Lin's blue roses.

I'm new here so maybe it has already been explained in great detail, but where did you get the notion that GRRM was so heavily influenced by Scottish/Irish Folklore? And, what are the similarities between the Sidhe and the Others/WW because they seem radically different to me.

I also think it is a big reach to assume GRRM would base so much of his own story on previous history and/or folklore. The War of the Roses is widely regarded as an "influence" for ASOIAF but that doesn't mean it or any of the characters within are based on any real people.

You only have to look at the first couple pages of every book to see this : (From aSoS)

"A Storm of Swords is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places, and incidents either are

the product of the author's imagination or are used fictitiously. Any resemblance to actual persons,

living or dead, events, or locales is enitirely coincidental."

I've seen/heard GRRM state in interviews his favorite part about working on a book compared to a TV show/Film is the fact that his only "budget" is his own mind and imagination. He can allow his imagination to grow as big and as wild as it can and not be worried about anything holding him back from making his ideas happen because it's a book. It's fiction. It's his story. Basing the others/ww on a "real" folklore as well as major characters on other "real" people or stories/folklore is a cop-out. And GRRM wouldn't do that. I don't disagree that there might be some similarites between the Others and the Sidhe, but there are also similarites between the Others and Jack Frost (the children's movie about a man who becomes a snowman).

- As for the Others/Stark connection, that seems more plausible but only to a certain point. The starks are related to the first men who came to Westeros, fought then treated with the CoTF, settled in, then were attacked by the Others but were able to push them back with help from Azor Ahai, the Wall was constructed, the Night's Watch established, etc...

I tend to believe the Others are a supernatural force of evil (but even if they are just some other race of beings, it doesn't matter) who were in Westeros way before the First Men. It's so far back and there's not a lot of recorded history but it's widely accepted that the Children were in westeros way before the First men (12,000 years or more) and it seems to me like the Others were not brought over on ships from where ever the First Men came from which leaves them to come from Westeros, no one knows how long but at least as long as the Children. The starks' ancestry came with the First Men, therefore I don't see how they could be related to the Others.

[7V3N]

Well, the good news is that when all the readers are confused at the end, they'll have about 100 Heresy threads of explanation.

[Black Crow]

I remember reading somewhere that GRRM has said that while he doesn't really like the idea of doing it most likely ASOIAF will end kind of like Lost: a lot of questions left unanswered. The quote that I read relative to this gave me the impression that he wants to answer all the important questions by series' end but that he views it will be unlikely to happen. I feel that part of the reason for Dunk and Egg is to provide a few answers (especially for the Targ-PtwP vis-a-vis Bloodraven and Aemon ones). The World Book will also very likely have lost of little hints and prods about the true answers that only people such as heretics who really delve into it will catch/stuff that will seem normal until later in the series.

It's also possible that GRRM hasn't come up with answers for all the questions either (we do need to remember that, while Martin is a huge fan of Tolkien and is influence by him, Martin has stated that he isn't trying to create a world, only to tell an albeit epic story; as such, answering all these how and why questions, if they do not directly pertain to the plot at hand in Martin's mind, is not of tantamount importance).

I don't think that loose ends are going to be a problem. In fact I'd prefer if there were loose events because life goes on and resolving every sngle story arc and mystery by the last page will neither be convincing nor satisfying.

As to selling the heresies. Although we're making the Sidhe connection on this thread and I don't know if anybody else out in cyberspace has picked it up, the fact is that we've been led down the path to heresy by all those many hints and clues in text that all is not as it once seemed, and so many things will start slotting into place even for ordinary readers once we get up into the Land of Always Winter.

What I suspect will happen, allowing for two books as planned, is that with a title like Winds of Winter and this promise of seeing what's up there, we're going to see a fairly apocalyptic scenario unfold in which not only does the Horn get blown summoning or allowing the Sidhe to come south of the Wall, but the connection will be revealed and with it the realisation that not only are things getting bad but worse still the heroes we've been counting on to save the day may be on the other side... :devil:

Then with the last book will come redemption. The Starks (or at least some of them) win through,and the balance between Ice and Fire is restored

[mrazny]

I came back in after these "Sidhe" thoughts were established, so I'll hold that. This could very well be semantics, and how strong the word "based" is. Using modern cinema, "based" can be a small plot point only.

My personal take is "inspired by", and that the strongest inspiration was more about how to shape the personalities of our characters than specific similar plots.

As far as the Starks... like all things pre-Andal, we can't assume to *know* all that much.

[mrazny]

I'm new here so

Also, just a bit of a recommendation (since reading 18 threads of 20 pages is a HUGE mountain), don't harp too strongly on some of BC's choice of words. He does have strong opinions, and they are sometimes stated with such language as if he's stating fact... Roll with it a little. Obviously, everyone should judge for themselves. Rehashing everything is a little too much to ask for though. The commenters here actually vary quite a bit on how much they "buy in" to some of the angles, but honestly some of the most skeptical have brought some of the better insights in the early threads, so obviously all are encouraged to participate.

EDIT: Maybe we should have in our signature lines what % of Heretic we feel we are, with maybe the baseline of BC is 110% ;)

[SerDuck]

Also, just a bit of a recommendation (since reading 18 threads of 20 pages is a HUGE mountain), don't harp too strongly on some of BC's choice of words. He does have strong opinions, and they are sometimes stated with such language as if he's stating fact... Roll with it a little. Obviously, everyone should judge for themselves. Rehashing everything is a little too much to ask for though. The commenters here actually vary quite a bit on how much they "buy in" to some of the angles, but honestly some of the most skeptical have brought some of the better insights in the early threads, so obviously all are encouraged to participate.

EDIT: Maybe we should have in our signature lines what % of Heretic we feel we are, with maybe the baseline of BC is 110% ;)

hahah. This thread is great, and with an absence of new ASOIAF, I might go back to the begining and read through every thread (or at least skim)...

[Ser Leftwich]

Also, just a bit of a recommendation (since reading 18 threads of 20 pages is a HUGE mountain), don't harp too strongly on some of BC's choice of words. He does have strong opinions, and they are sometimes stated with such language as if he's stating fact... Roll with it a little. Obviously, everyone should judge for themselves. Rehashing everything is a little too much to ask for though. The commenters here actually vary quite a bit on how much they "buy in" to some of the angles, but honestly some of the most skeptical have brought some of the better insights in the early threads, so obviously all are encouraged to participate.

EDIT: Maybe we should have in our signature lines what % of Heretic we feel we are, with maybe the baseline of BC is 110% ;)

:agree:

Our goal is to have quality, mannered discourse based on textual evidence. Early on the line about not being able to be a heretic without know knowing (and heavily quoting) scripture was oft repeated.

[7V3N]

Yeah, Heresy is basically just "an intelligent dissection of Ice and Fire." We cover all sorts of topics. The thing that drives us together is our respect for the world, and our commitment to intelligence and not the too oft rants about how somebody is diminished as a person for having a contradictory view :box: . We preach tolerance. :grouphug:

[Efilnikufesin]

I'm new here so maybe it has already been explained in great detail, but where did you get the notion that GRRM was so heavily influenced by Scottish/Irish Folklore? And, what are the similarities between the Sidhe and the Others/WW because they seem radically different to me.

Did to me at first too till I started reading more on the Sidhe, there are very many parrallels. GRRM has stated that he takes much of his inspiration from history/folklore and embelishes it. Not an exact quote but.

BrosBeforeSnows had at great thread lining up many of the characters and parallels between asoiaf and stories of Ragnarok. I see quite a bit of both the Sidhe and Viking folklore.

Though I have been a proponent for a while now that what we are shown is not what it seems, you may not see it the same way.

[Black Crow]

Also, just a bit of a recommendation (since reading 18 threads of 20 pages is a HUGE mountain), don't harp too strongly on some of BC's choice of words. He does have strong opinions, and they are sometimes stated with such language as if he's stating fact... Roll with it a little.

I refer m'learned friends to the OP and the caveats contained therein. :commie:

I have indeed in the past commented that in order to preach heresy you must know scripture, and the same goes for the heresies themselves. You don't need to agree with what's proposed, but you do need to know what is proposed - and why - in order to disagree sensibly. :cool4: As Mrazny says we've had some pretty good insights here from sceptics and we've got where we are through a healthy exchange of ideas rather than a dogmatic pursuit of a particular theory.

[Black Crow]

Did to me at first too till I started reading more on the Sidhe, there are very many parrallels. GRRM has stated that he takes much of his inspiration from history/folklore and embelishes it. Not an exact quote but.

Again that's what we see with the Bael the Bard story. Its recognisable as Tam Lin because all of the elements are there, but GRRM has chopped them up and re-arranged them to make it his own.

[alienarea]

Yeah, Heresy is basically just "an intelligent dissection of Ice and Fire." We cover all sorts of topics. The thing that drives us together is our respect for the world, and our commitment to intelligence and not the too oft rants about how somebody is diminished as a person for having a contradictory view :box: . We preach tolerance. :grouphug:

And we are not afraid to be silly sometimes, are we?

BTW, if the Stark ghosts look like WWs the WWs have to be the ghosts of some people. That makes me think of Valyria. If we follow the idea the human soul is an electric charge, a nuclear explosion also destroys the soul. Not saying the doom of Valyria was a nuclear blast, but since it is described as doom I dare to compare it. The CotF caused the doom of Valyria, and destroyed souls return as WW when it is very cold (like personalized nuclear winter). The can find peace if they meet obsidian.

[Eyron]

I think this thread has developed fantastically, we are a lot of people with very varying backgrounds and input, who have very differing and even opposing ideas. Differences that we still discuss and argue about which seems healthy to me. We had and have one thing in common though and that was that as Ser Sceptic says, we were sceptic, but about everything being presented correctly regarding the history of events in the story.

We are all curious people that like to poke around and pull at loose ends, hoping to unveil some truths spread out through these 5000 something pages of litterature. There are so many small subtle statements that things unfolded differently from what we have been told at points and contradictions to the History floating around that it can't all be plain and simple. The good guys (Starks) fighting the evil guys (everyone else, except perhaps Dany), Jon and Dany become the heroes, then marries and Spring comes. I just think it is more unlikely that George goes that way. But, if the story goes something like that after all, I know I will still love it because I love George's writing (I'm only a little tired of the Slaver's bay debacle and Dany the Unburned, the Mother of blah blah... The rest is excellent :)).

I sometimes get the feeling that many think the heresy is some kind of cult, who just want to be opposing whatever is laid out as the orthodox history in the text, and that is all wrong. We don't all think the same, and we argue amongst ourselves evidently. It's an ongoing discussion about things big and small, that have the thing in common that there is something there that is not just plain to see at first look, or something that is easily interpreted as mundane but, put together with a lot of other stuff collected through out the text, paints a different picture. Just like some are dissecting Sansa's POV, we dissect other things.

For someone that has knowledge and understanding of folklore it is not a giant leap to take inspiration from that and use for a novel, look at Tolkien for example. He loved deeply and had great knowledge about mythology which coloured his writing a lot to say the least. His elves and trolls and a number of other creatures were not his originally, they came from old mythology, but he changed them to fit his story. The ideas he had came from somewhere and he developed them further and put his own spin on them, just like most high fantasy writers do.

I think George does this as well, he has said he was inspired by the War of the Roses, and Hadrian's Wall, and we can see for ourselves that there are other sources of inspiration, his own work from before and celtic, norse and greek mythology for example. That is not to say we can infer from mythology what the events and outcomes will be, only that there may be certain common elements between his story and the real mythologies, but we can't know how or what exactly, apart from the similarities already shown. The rest is up for speculation and that's what we do.

[Sword Of Mid Afternoon]

And we are not afraid to be silly sometimes, are we?

BTW, if the Stark ghosts look like WWs the WWs have to be the ghosts of some people. That makes me think of Valyria. If we follow the idea the human soul is an electric charge, a nuclear explosion also destroys the soul. Not saying the doom of Valyria was a nuclear blast, but since it is described as doom I dare to compare it. The CotF caused the doom of Valyria, and destroyed souls return as WW when it is very cold (like personalized nuclear winter). The can find peace if they meet obsidian.

When Tolkien uses the word "Doom", he most often means long-term fate/destiny ... Oft tragic, but in varying degrees. He uses it A LOT in his tales concerning the First Age.

This made me look at 'Doom of Valyria' somewhat differently, but after mulling it over, I'm inclined to believe GRRM meant Doom = Destruction.

[Sand Snake No. 9]

GRRM would base so much of his own story on previous history and/or folklore. The War of the Roses is widely regarded as an "influence" for ASOIAF but that doesn't mean it or any of the characters within are based on any real people.

Well, it's a convention of epic fantasy to borrow and/or be influenced by myths, legends and sagas. The No. 1 example is LOTR, which is a Christian-influenced rewrite of the different Ring Sagas. GRRM's sprawling work references many different legends and includes obvious shout-outs and tributes to modern authors. For example, imo, the whole Red Wedding/UnCat storyline references Greek tragedy and myth (don't desecrate the dead or Nemesis will come and get you). Yet another viewing of John Boorman's Excalibur this weekend made me realize that Jaime and Cersei are acting out the Arthurian legends: they are both Guinevere/Lancelot (Queen committing adultery with the realm's finest knight) and Arthur/Morgause aka Morgana (brother and sister incestuously producing an evil heir). In fact, I think GRRM might be a fan of Excalibur , because, among other things, Joffrey seems to be a copy of the movie Mordred in both looks and behavior. But I digress. Again. Sowwy.

In LOTR Tolkein borrowed from Norse stories of the Alfar and Celtic stories of the Sidhe to create his mostly good Elves. Considering that GRRM is writing a much darker story, kind of an un-LOTR, if you will, it's not a surprise that GRRM would use the darker parts of those legends to create his Others, but borrowing does not equal "telling the same story" by any means.

The discussions of the myths behind the story are my favorite parts of the heresy threads.

And I guess I was typing this while Eira was posting. What she said.

[Ciazio]

I refer m'learned friends to the OP and the caveats contained therein. :commie:

I have indeed in the past commented that in order to preach heresy you must know scripture, and the same goes for the heresies themselves. You don't need to agree with what's proposed, but you do need to know what is proposed - and why - in order to disagree sensibly. :cool4: As Mrazny says we've had some pretty good insights here from sceptics and we've got where we are through a healthy exchange of ideas rather than a dogmatic pursuit of a particular theory.

Damn, Heresy needs to have a true compendium of its thinking... Not a solid or unchangeable "So-speaks-heresy-book", but something fluid that collects all that was said, just like memory....... To help remember and explain. :idea:

[Elaena Targaryen]

.In LOTR Tolkein borrowed from Norse stories of the Alfar and Celtic stories of the Sidhe to create his mostly good Elves. Considering that GRRM is writing a much darker story, kind of an un-LOTR, if you will, it's not a surprise that GRRM would use the darker parts of those legends to create his Others, but borrowing does not equal "telling the same story" by any means.

My memory is failing me but does anyone else remember an interview ( maybe? ) with Martin where he talks about this? It was something along the lines of Martin specifically wanted to make any elves he wrote different than the beautiful and helpfull elves from Tolkein, or something like that?

[Tyryan Lannister]

Well, it's a convention of epic fantasy to borrow and/or be influenced by myths, legends and sagas. The No. 1 example is LOTR, which is a Christian-influenced rewrite of the different Ring Sagas. GRRM's sprawling work references many different legends and includes obvious shout-outs and tributes to modern authors. For example, imo, the whole Red Wedding/UnCat storyline references Greek tragedy and myth (don't desecrate the dead or Nemesis will come and get you). Yet another viewing of John Boorman's Excalibur this weekend made me realize that Jaime and Cersei are acting out the Arthurian legends: they are both Guinevere/Lancelot (Queen committing adultery with the realm's finest knight) and Arthur/Morgause aka Morgana (brother and sister incestuously producing an evil heir). In fact, I think GRRM might be a fan of Excalibur , because, among other things, Joffrey seems to be a copy of the movie Mordred in both looks and behavior. But I digress. Again. Sowwy.

In LOTR Tolkein borrowed from Norse stories of the Alfar and Celtic stories of the Sidhe to create his mostly good Elves. Considering that GRRM is writing a much darker story, kind of an un-LOTR, if you will, it's not a surprise that GRRM would use the darker parts of those legends to create his Others, but borrowing does not equal "telling the same story" by any means.

The discussions of the myths behind the story are my favorite parts of the heresy threads.

And I guess I was typing this while Eira was posting. What she said.

:agree:

Just furthering the argument here with the fact that GRRM has admitted many times to being influence by Tolkien but still trying to do his own thing and not be a modern Tolkien, and I think a large part of why he's been successful (IMO) in that is that, instead of relying on Tolkien for inspiration, he goes back to the things that Tolkien relied on: Nordic and Celtic mythologies. GRRM of course goes even further and puts in Greco-Roman myth (Nemesis as stated above, there's quite a bit of Oedipus going around), Shakespeare (particularly the Henry VI's and Richard III, which cover the War of the Roses), the Arthurian myths, the Canterbury Tales (which I see coming out in the AFFC Brienne chapters), most likely other Medieval-Renaissance European stories (i.e. I see some Faustian undertones in the Stannis-Mel relationship). and general European macro-history and political-geography with the following being as I see it:

Basically, take a map of Europe and rotate it so that Italy is on the right and England is on the left; it fits quite well :cool4:

Valyria: Roman Empire

Free Cities: Renaissance/Pre-Ottoman Italy and Greece

Dorne: Spain

Reach: France (rich, vast lands, very powerful)

Westerlands: England (rich and arrogant)

Iron Islands: Scandinavia (do I need to explain?)

Riverlands: Germany (many different peoples never really united for most of history/conquered by outsiders; also easy to attack)

Vale: Switzerland (I mean, the Vale even maintains neutrality for gods' sake)

The North: Russia/Eastern Slavic Lands (huge, vast territory united under one supreme ruler, thought of as a cold, dreary place)

There are of course the non-Westerosi connections as well, but eh...

My main point is that GRRM has drawn from most anything and everything he knows from history and literature as influence, leaving nothing as an "unavailable." It's also (at least to me) fairly easy to see his SciFi back ground underpinning a lot of the "magicks" (for me, the talking Wall-door really stands out as a science fiction rather than fantasy device... don't know why, but on my reread I got this big scifi vibe from it--I know that fantasy IS technically SciFi, but trying to draw on Trek vs. Rings subcategories here)

I think the best way to think about GRRM's influences is like the influences for Marvel Comics: everything is available to use (and since we know that GRRM's interest in lit stems from reading the early Marvels, that's probably where his first influences came from).

[Sand Snake No. 9]

Hmmn. It might be an interesting exercise to match each plotline with its corresponding inspiration. Not in this thread, though.

[Tyryan Lannister]

Hmmn. It might be an interesting exercise to match each plotline with its corresponding inspiration. Not in this thread, though.

But come Heresy 34 when there's still no Winds of Winter...