Lies and Arbor Gold: Well Look What We Found

[lady m]

Arbor Gold implies deceit

but

deceit does not imply Arbor Gold.

Other associations, "ravens as ominous messengers," "crows with death" probably have closer to a 1:1 association; they're more balanced. Blue roses = Lyanna, etc.

All your Arbor Gold examples, esp LF, and the honeyed words trope are good, but "deceit" is such an ever-present them in the books that saying "Arbor Gold -> deceit" may sound like a theory of everything. Which, I don't think you all are trying to make this sound like.

And yet, peaches foretell death, but all deaths aren't foretold by peaches. There's a lot of death and deceit in these books, each don't have the same qualitative or quantitative value. I think going through the various wines was the attempt of those that were involved in the thread's inception and other posters as well, to try and hone in on the various types of wines and put a qualitative match to them, and even to drill down to a particular thread of deceit in the case of Arbor gold.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Fine and dandy. However, the message that comes across to me as I was reading what I thought was an interesting thread was: don't bother posting if you don't agree.

No, it's "don't bother posting if you don't agree and keep moving the goalposts when you're presented with evidence that you ask for but for whatever reason you refuse to consider it."

[Ser Creighton]

Arbor Gold = Sign of Duplicity/Lies (h/t to co-conspirators and fellow Harpies butterbumps!, Dr. Pepper and Lady M)

Littlefinger uses the "lies and Arbor Gold" line and uses the wine to convince the Lords Declarant of the Vale to side with him, when in fact he's playing them against each other and being duplicious. (Sansa serves it to Nestor Royce.)

Tyrion is allowed to drink a bunch of the quality vintage stuff in Illyrio's house, in which he is most certainly being fed a load of BS.

Sansa pours Arbor Gold for Tyrion on their wedding night; most people assume they're consumating the marriage and they're not.

Manderly tells the people present for the Ramsay/"Arya" wedding feast to "wash it down" with Arbor Gold — right when he's serving Frey Pies disguised as pork pies.

Taena gives some Arbor Gold to Cersei — Taena who is obviously playing both sides and spying on her.

The Redwyne Olenna Tyrell seems to be lying or manipulating over a whole pantload of stuff.

Hizdahr develops a taste for it in Meereen — he's almost certainly not being truthful to Dany, or it could point to the misleading conclusion that he's the Harpy when he isn't.

If you expand this a little more broadly, Dany's would-be assassin offers her Arbor red wine, just not Arbor Gold.

It's used to toast Joffrey's health at a council meeting. *snickers*

Aegon — Aegon who is almost certainly not real — claims that Varys paid the switchling's father with a jug of wine ... Arbor Gold.

Arbor gold? This is kind of intresting

Don't agree with Tyrion and Sansa, what other people assume is not a lie.

The obvious lie with Tena and Cersie is Cersei openly lies about Robert.

Did they actually drink and toast Joffery with Arbor Gold or just mention it and the Cersei lost it?

Is the theory about everytime Arbor Gold is mentioned or everytime it is drunk in a scene.

The wine Tryion drinks in Pentos is not Arbor Gold. It is from the arbor, but it's, a private stock and a deep purple. Arbor gold, would seem to be a gold. A Chardonnay would be my guess. Do we have a descriton of Arbor Gold. White wines have been described as gold in the books. Penny through a cup of gold wine in Tyrions face.

In the litter lllyrio is serving blackberry wine.

Hizdahr developed a taste for sweet reds and Arbor gold. Sure he is probably lying but is there lying going on when it's mentioned. Or are you counting that Arbor Gold is mentioned with his name hinting he is a liar?

While it hold some validity maybe you would like to flush it out a little more. The theory is a little broad and undefined right now.

[KOM]

omg that would be so many bushels of peaches!

And yet, peaches foretell death, but all deaths aren't foretold by peaches.

Good counter-example. The peaches theory doesn't really get that kind of resistance.

Maybe part of the difficulty is that Arbor Gold is a double-signifier? Crows seem to always mean death nearby, and even if a death isn't occuring in the scene, crows are meant to imply death, e.g. Euron. But Arbor Gold at the first level is meant to show off first-rate wine, best wine in the world, and the status of both the owners/givers, and the act of hospitality in which Arbor Gold gets offered. And you're saying on top of all that it's also functioning as a leitmotif of deception.

It could be useful to compare it then to other signifiers of deception and fakery, like mummers? Mummers' versions are the cheap shoddy inferior knockoffs. But, in this theory, Arbor Gold is the sleight of hand, manipulation of awareness. Show people the Arbor Gold while they swallow the lies, or poisons, or whatnot. The sugar to the medicine.

I still think about this Arbor Gold in terms of Roose Bolton and his "power sweetened by courtesy" quip. But courtesies also include hospitality, and part of hospitality is offering a drink, even if not an full-blown guest rite.

So, when offering Arbor Gold, there's a breach of trust by the giver, which is intentional, e.g., LF, the Dany poisoner.

Then there's the more "accidental" happenings, when Ned and Robert are drinking Arbor Gold (whatever that example was), that's not intentional lying and using Arbor Gold to help coat it.

And just for kicks, when Griff asks his servant person for wine, he asks for the worst vintage, bc he just wants vinegar (vinegar substitute?). That's not meant to disprove the theory, that's just adding a datapoint for other uses of food/drinks and deception or uses, etc.

oh, and if Aegon's fake, then Varys can just be making up that whole story post-hoc. That jug of Arbor Gold doesn't even have to exist.

(fyi, I'm not trying to move goal-posts, I'm just trying to think this out.)

[Leto]

No, it's "don't bother posting if you don't agree and keep moving the goalposts when you're presented with evidence that you ask for but for whatever reason you refuse to consider it."

What do you mean no?

The message that got across to me was exactly what I told you it was, and there are obviously others that got the same message. It might do your cause good to aknowledge that.

And pointing out the causality issue with a correlation observation is not by any means moving goalposts. Saying it's fiction does not change the nature of correlation. Sure Martin puts the words there for a reason and they correlate with your theory, this doesn't prove this is the reason he put the words there. A causes B, B causes A and C causes A and B still applies in fiction as much as in any other aspect of the world.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

What do you mean no?

The message that got across to me was exactly what I told you it was, and there are obviously others that got the same message. It might do your cause good to aknowledge that.

And pointing out the causality issue with a correlation observation is not by any means moving goalposts. Saying it's fiction does not change the nature of correlation. Sure Martin puts the words there for a reason and they correlate with your theory, this doesn't prove this is the reason he put the words there. A causes B, B causes A and C causes A and B still applies in fiction as much as in any other aspect of the world.

My cause is fine, thanks. The compiled arguments are all here for anyone who wants to look at them. If you don't believe it, you don't and perhaps we ought not to waste each other's time.

[Leto]

My cause is fine, thanks. The compiled arguments are all here for anyone who wants to look at them. If you don't believe it, you don't and perhaps we ought not to waste each other's time.

This is kinda what I mean by agree or get out atmosphere in this thread... and I havn't even stated if I buy your theory or not.

[nirolo]

And pointing out the causality issue with a correlation observation is not by any means moving goalposts. Saying it's fiction does not change the nature of correlation. Sure Martin puts the words there for a reason and they correlate with your theory, this doesn't prove this is the reason he put the words there. A causes B, B causes A and C causes A and B still applies in fiction as much as in any other aspect of the world.

This is true.

That said, I don't think Apple Martini et al are necessarily looking to establish a causation from a correlation. Their observation that Arbor Gold is highly associated with instances of deceit is suspicious enough to justify paying special attention to in future books:

Regardless, this correlation could still be of future value. It adds another chit to the "Aegon is fake" pile. You can also look to see where it's referenced later in the series and be on the lookout for subterfuge.

What is also interesting to me is that Little Finger GRRM has purposefully revealed to us that Arbor Gold goes with lies. GRRM didn't have to do that, but he did. This combined with the unusually high correlation makes me think that the Harpies are onto something.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

This is kinda what I mean by agree or get out atmosphere in this thread... and I havn't even stated if I buy your theory or not.

If you've read through 10 pages of the thread and are still on the fence, I'm afraid I can't help you.

[Anook of the North]

A nice little aside to support this thread would be to mention the other Arbor gold, gold that is SPECIFICALLY deceptive, that being the "gold from the Reach, from before the Conquest" that Olenna Tyrell (Redwynne) carries in her wheelhouse. The gold is half the weight of newly minted gold dragons, and she uses it to rip off people thatr have pissed her off. I know calling it "Arbor" gold may be a bit of a reach (pun intended), but as she is a Redwynne, who own the Arbor, its not so hard to connect. I think this just supports the claim made here that Arbor Gold = deception and lies. Thoughts?

Oh, and I can't find the Olenna thread you have all been reffering to, so if this point has been made a dozen times to support the wine theory so be it!

[Leto]

This is true.

That said, I don't think Apple Martini et al are necessarily looking to establish a causation from a correlation. Their observation that Arbor Gold is highly associated with instances of deceit is suspicious enough to justify paying special attention to in future books:

What is also interesting to me is that Little Finger GRRM has purposefully revealed to us that Arbor Gold goes with lies. GRRM didn't have to do that, but he did. This combined with the unusually high correlation makes me think that the Harpies are onto something.

I know, I just don't see the value of rather agressivly dismissing the people who raise the issue. And I find this interesting as well, that's why I read the thread :)

[Leto]

If you've read through 10 pages of the thread and are still on the fence, I'm afraid I can't help you.

I've never said anything about being on any kinds of fences or other deviding barriers. And if I were, I'm certain that there isn't a 10 page requirement to take a stance.

[Ser Creighton]

You know in Crows I think Martin played with the theme a little, and was using it to make the connection to Aegon. Lies and Arbor gold and Aegon and Arbor gold. With some hints here and ther in other chapters. But Arbor gold is not the clue of lies in the books. You can find lies in just about every chapter of every book, Arbor gold didn't even get mentioned in AGoT or CoK and only twice in Swords. But we know they are full of lies.

You know Varys mentions Arbor Gold is some contrived story and Littlefinger with Lies and Arbor Gold. It's an easy connection. But the other stuff does not really matter. Cersie lied while drinking Arbor Gold once or twice, and a couple of hundred times without it. Tyrion Lies, Illyrio lies and does not always have Arbor gold with him, Varys lies, they all lie for the most part and on an alarmingly regular basis for many of them.

[Dr. Pepper]

I know, I just don't see the value of rather agressivly dismissing the people who raise the issue. And I find this interesting as well, that's why I read the thread :)

The particular comment you quoted that was to a particular poster represented a bit of bleed-over from other threads. The poster that was being replied to knows why it was said. That poster was also asked repeatedly for specific evidence against the theory and refused to provide it. I can assure you that the OPs of this thread are quite interested in re-evalution of the thesis which is why textual evidence and analysis has been requested.

Other than that, do you have anything to include as it pertains to the thread topic?

[nirolo]

I know, I just don't see the value of rather agressivly dismissing the people who raise the issue. And I find this interesting as well, that's why I read the thread :)

Sometimes the adversarial nature of these debates makes people appear more hostile then they probably are, and this forum as the medium we use for our debate is partially to blame for that.

Funny how you weren't even arguing for or against this theory in your initial post. I blame the internet for that as well. :D

[Leto]

The particular comment you quoted that was to a particular poster represented a bit of bleed-over from other threads. The poster that was being replied to knows why it was said. That poster was also asked repeatedly for specific evidence against the theory and refused to provide it. I can assure you that the OPs of this thread are quite interested in re-evalution of the thesis which is why textual evidence and analysis has been requested.

Other than that, do you have anything to include as it pertains to the thread topic?

I had but I lost interest in contributing :)

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

I had but I lost interest in contributing :)

Pity.

[Dr. Pepper]

I had but I lost interest in contributing :)

Great. Moving on.

You know in Crows I think Martin played with the theme a little, and was using it to make the connection to Aegon. Lies and Arbor gold and Aegon and Arbor gold. With some hints here and ther in other chapters. But Arbor gold is not the clue of lies in the books. You can find lies in just about every chapter of every book, Arbor gold didn't even get mentioned in AGoT or CoK and only twice in Swords. But we know they are full of lies.

You know Varys mentions Arbor Gold is some contrived story and Littlefinger with Lies and Arbor Gold. It's an easy connection. But the other stuff does not really matter. Cersie lied while drinking Arbor Gold once or twice, and a couple of hundred times without it. Tyrion Lies, Illyrio lies and does not always have Arbor gold with him, Varys lies, they all lie for the most part and on an alarmingly regular basis for many of them.

It was pointed out early in this thread that it would make a stronger case if Arbor wine were mentioned at any time prior to ASOS. We discovered it was mention as early as AGOT and both mentions were explicitly deceptions. In one case, Dany's attempted poisoner switched out Dornish Red for Arbor when he discovered who she was. (by the way- and this isn't to you Ser Creighton but for anyone who cares - this is the type of scrutiny that is constructive and useful to discourse).

It was never the intention to claim that all lies are couple with Arbor wine. No one claims that all deaths are coupled with peaches (another food symbolism that has been discussed elsewhere). However, the correlation of Arbor wine and deceit is intentional for a reason. Some good questions to consider as we move forward would be why certain deceptions get an Arbor mention while others don't or what the significance is who is drinking or serving the wine etc.

[KOM]

It was never the intention to claim that all lies are couple with Arbor wine. No one claims that all deaths are coupled with peaches (another food symbolism that has been discussed elsewhere). However, the correlation of Arbor wine and deceit is intentional for a reason.

That seems to be a common misreading of many thread viewers of the OP.

Some good questions to consider as we move forward would be why certain deceptions get an Arbor mention while others don't or what the significance is who is drinking or serving the wine etc.

And do the cooks of the OP team have initial ideas as to why some deceptions get the AG ref and some don't? (Have I just missed those from earlier in the thread?)

Also, fyi, the other gold coins were from the reach, pre-conquest, Kingdom of the Reach, ruled by House Gardener. wiki: http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Currency

[Anook of the North]

The Kingdom of the Reach includes the Arbor, an Island controlled by House Redwynne, pre-conquest and after i believe, which is why I thought the connection to be valid. Another reference (apart from LF's quote "lies and Arbor gold") maybe to the deceptive nature of those who pay with such coin, or indeed those who serve up such a tasty drop ;)