I'm more on board with the idea that the Night's Watch was sacrificing children to the Others for thousands of years via the Black Gate in the Night Fort. This was part of the Pact between humans and the Others. There are some good connections in the video but I have thought of a few more.
The Night's Watch has 19 castles, Craster has 19 wives. White Tree is almost directly North of the Night Fort, while Queen's Crown is directly south. The rangers are well aware of Craster's sacrifices.
It's interesting that only select Northern houses and houses of Valyrian lineages practiced the Lord's right to the first night. The Northern's practiced it to create bastards snows to be sacrificed. The Valyrians would do it to spread more Valyrian blood in order to create more dragonseeds.
The Black Gate was used by the 13th LC to make sacrifices to the Others, but if the practice were common in the North, I don't think his name would have been banished. They really wouldn't need to use the Black Gate either, if it were part of an agreement they had accepted.
I do agree that bastards were sacrifices however. Rather than be given via the Black Gate to the Others though, I think they were simply given to the Wall. Joining the Night's Watch is nothing if not a sacrifice, in and of itself. And, it makes sense to give boys named "Snow" to a wall of frozen water.
"I can see it. You have more of the north in you than your brothers."
But if he ever gets to "the land is one," he can't protect the Wall without Winterfell.
I probably sound like a broken record to you guys, but I really don't think this can be overstated. Winterfell is not like other places. The Starks are not like other men. But Winterfell might be an Other-place, and the Starks might have a whole lot in common with Other-men.
I think the Wall and the Watch were created to protect Winterfell, and that Winterfell is the place where Bran the Builder learned the language of the children of the forest (living in what is now the crypts), before he went on to learn the language of the Others (which might be the same language as the cotf).
Like Jon, the Others are being called home...and their King knows the way. But that is probably an idea more related to my Weirwood Ghost thread.
YUP!!!! I know the show's costuming is nothing even close to canon, but when Sansa came out for her marriage at the weirwood, I immediately thought she looked like a weirwood. Even the fabric had a pattern on it to give it the look of wood/bark from a distance.
I need to get to your Weirwood Ghost, thread, but for the moment: Jon's affinity with the weirwoods and all the unity of history and people they contain. . . there's a reason for this.
"Not sworn," perhaps. But also--"not aware." That oath is an invocation of unity. Living unity. And one of the key elements of unity in Westeros are those weirwoods. As voice says--they are the hearts.
So, unless you get that, how could the oath have efficacy? Sam speaks before the weir wood with Jon because of Jon. Because of his new found brotherhood with Jon. That why he and the others bring Jon back when he runs off to Robb.
Sam doesn't understand everything, but he gets that. And he's helping Gilly escape when Coldhands finds them. Seems like Sam's pretty far along with the unity mindset.
I'm now wondering if the Gate would open if Ser Allister said the words. . . or if it might just eat him.
Another big YUP!
The words matter, but I'm hesitant to say the Sept does. They seem like words composed for extremely long lived beings (gods?). Things a tree (heart) could understand.
Must admit, I've never been on board with the multiple pact angle. Speaking of the Pact, though...
I have a feeling the Isle of Faces was the place the Vows of the NW were composed. (And yes, I know, I think about this stuff WAAAY too much. LOL)
But think about it, the Last Hero would not have needed to win back the dead lands north of the Wall, he'd have needed to win back the North. The lands north of the Neck. The Wall makes sense as a protective boundary to guard the realm that the NW had reclaimed for men. This all points to WF being the place where Winter fell -- thanks to aid from the cotf.
In ancient Westeros, it makes sense to me that First Men would have sought aid from the Green Men first.
"I can see it. You have more of the north in you than your brothers."
I'm not sure if the Land truly is one, with that wall in the way...
Well, I think I might have figured out why they left the Wall in place--why it was needed in the battle--it's kinda . . . odd. But I'll post it tomorrow.
I probably sound like a broken record to you guys, but I really don't think this can be overstated. Winterfell is not like other places. The Starks are not like other men. But Winterfell might be an Other-place, and the Starks might have a whole lot in common with Other-men.
I think the Wall and the Watch were created to protect Winterfell, and that Winterfell is the place where Bran the Builder learned the language of the children of the forest (living in what is now the crypts), before he went on to learn the language of the Others (which might be the same language as the cotf).
The words matter, but I'm hesitant to say the Sept does. They seem like words composed for extremely long lived beings (gods?). Things a tree (heart) could understand.
And they are words composed to remind of unity with everything--watcher on the walls. Can't do that as one person. Period. And the heart trees would get that--since they are all connected, too.
In ancient Westeros, it makes sense to me that First Men would have sought aid from the Green Men first.
Makes sense--Bran thinks to them, too.
All art is at once surface and symbol. Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril. Those who read the symbol do so at their peril. It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors. Oscar Wilde.
Well, I think I might have figured out why they left the Wall in place--why it was needed in the battle--it's kinda . . . odd. But I'll post it tomorrow.
The dead rise--the Other dead, the ones not in the crypt. So, the ones IN the crypt/hill must defend it?
The Others and the ones in the crypts might be on opposite sides, but they might not be. Bran was the First Builder, and said to have been the one who laid the first stone of their resting place.
Rewatching Season 5 really makes me wonder about this direction. Sansa has dealt with an abusive psychopath, and is now with a creepy manipulator. The girl deserves someone honest.
And again, I can't help but retroactively must that Lyanna did too. LOL
And they are words composed to remind of unity with everything--watcher on the walls. Can't do that as one person. Period. And the heart trees would get that--since they are all connected, too.
Great point. The unity is quite explicit. Each line of the vow speaks from the perspective of a singular subject. We know the NW is a brotherhood, a collective, but it seems "they" can only be "the sword," "a watcher," "the fire," "the light," "the horn," and "the shield" if they are one.
The Others and the ones in the crypts might be on opposite sides, but they might not be. Bran was the First Builder, and said to have been the one who laid the first stone of their resting place.
I just keep thinking the wolf pack will run together. And that the Stark dead rising are very different from the drowned men, wights, or fire wights. They all seem reanimated by another force.
But the Starks with their direwolves at their feet are woken--not reanimated. I think.
Great point. The unity is quite explicit. Each line of the vow speaks from the perspective of a singular subject. We know the NW is a brotherhood, a collective, but it seems "they" can only be "the sword," "a watcher," "the fire," "the light," "the horn," and "the shield" if they are one.
Oh yeah. No telling how many walls have trees for roots. Considering how much longer weirwoods have been growing, might be they all do.
Especially since those roots don't fully die. . . it seems.
All art is at once surface and symbol. Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril. Those who read the symbol do so at their peril. It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors. Oscar Wilde.
I just keep thinking the wolf pack will run together. And that the Stark dead rising are very different from the drowned men, wights, or fire wights. They all seem reanimated by another force.
But the Starks with their direwolves at their feet are woken--not reanimated. I think.
Totally diggin the idea. I'm just wondering if the Starks and the Others aren't like the Mystics and the Skeksis.
Any Dark Crystal fans in the house??? I'll go now. lol
Especially since those roots don't fully die. . . it seems.
I think Westeros was created by their root system, or at least, their root system is what makes Westeros unique. First Men kill the trees, make a Pact after the damage had been done, then are faced with miasma. They build walls, watch the night. But always, the roots are the foundation of all.
"I can see it. You have more of the north in you than your brothers."
I think Westeros was created by their root system, or at least, their root system is what makes Westeros unique.
Okay--I'm liking this idea. I've no idea how much Martin is interested in ecology, but landscapes may shape what plants grow where, but plants (and animals) can also reshape landscapes.
Which would fit with the weirwoods since they are completely unique to Westeros (far as we know). A living land. And that would also fit with kingmonkey's assertion that the oath is like the Song of Amergin--calling on a living, magical land.
They build walls, watch the night. But always, the roots are the foundation of all.
Possible, but I'm back to wondering about that Wall and its origin. Melisandre calls it a great hinge, which, as you said elsewhere, makes it seem as if it can be changed based on who "controls" it.
But that raises the question of who raised it.
It might be a moot point--one way or another, someone will always use it eater offensively or defensively. But I do wonder who first raised it. . . and if it was the Others.
All art is at once surface and symbol. Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril. Those who read the symbol do so at their peril. It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors. Oscar Wilde.
Not following--never saw Dark Crystal. Any chance you'd elaborate?
No prob
In their greed for control, primordial beings fought for power, and the crystal cracked. What was one, previously, became two. (Sound familiar LOL)
Anyway, the crystal shed a shard - thus it was in two pieces. But so too did the beings fighting over it fracture. (Very horcrux-y)
Each primordial being split into two halves. One was a Mystic. One was a Skeksi. The crystal crack in the Wall always struck me as very dark-crystal-y, as has Night's King's emergence from the 13th Lord Commander.
When they broke the balance, they fractured themselves into two distinct creatures. One good and wise and methodical. The other, hateful and obsessed with power and eternal life.
Okay--I'm liking this idea. I've no idea how much Martin is interested in ecology, but landscapes may shape what plants grow where, but plants (and animals) can also reshape landscapes.
Which would fit with the weirwoods since they are completely unique to Westeros (far as we know). A living land. And that would also fit with kingmonkey's assertion that the oath is like the Song of Amergin--calling on a living, magical land.
I'm glad you like it.
I thought it was a given before I joined heresy and found not everyone had realized that weirwoods are unique to Westeros. I still get flack for it from time to time. There are weirwood bows and doors in Essos. Objects made from the harvested wood, but no growing weirwood trees.
Instead, they have their black trees with blue leaves and blue warlock wine. A Tree of Undying, rather than the Tree of Life.
Possible, but I'm back to wondering about that Wall and its origin. Melisandre calls it a great hinge, which, as you said elsewhere, makes it seem as if it can be changed based on who "controls" it.
Indeed. One man's white milkglass is another's sword alive with light. That light might be blue, or red. It dances around the edges like a curtain of light... This dichotomy is the song of ice and fire, imo.
It might be a moot point--one way or another, someone will always use it eater offensively or defensively. But I do wonder who first raised it. . . and if it was the Others.
Again, we are told Brandon raised it. The First Stark. Builder from the Age of Heroes.
I'm guessing that as he gave his seed and soul and sacrifices and enslaved his brothers with strange sorceries, the Builder found he had plenty of labor and a novel means of construction.
Symeon Star Eyes, Serwyn of the Mirror Shield. These are loyal brothers, but strangely labelled, no? Interesting how they are all attributed to the Night's King's fort.
"I can see it. You have more of the north in you than your brothers."
Any Dark Crystal fans in the house??? I'll go now. lol
Great movie! one of the foundations of my childhood. I heard rumors of a live action remake that will be coming out soon...
Regarding the NW oath, it is fairly obvious by the language used in the different parts that they are not contemporary to each other, and i agree that the portion used to pass the black gate is the heart of the vow. Honestly, i think it all boils down to being "the shield that guards the realm of men." This is what the purpose of the NW should be, all the rest is filler. contrasting the KG and NW, isn't there some sort of superiority found in rejecting lands and crowns and children and glory? it seems to me like a sense of false modesty added to cover the fact that the institution turned into little more than a penal colony instead of the honorable and noble institution it was founded as...
Regarding the dragonlord angle you mentioned... How does this mesh with BR and Maester Aemon coming to the wall together (unless i'm mistaken that they took their vows and arrived at the wall at the same time)? are there things in the scrolls and tomes of Castle Black that Aemon and BR came there to remove/obfuscate? along this line of thought, i've always viewed Aemon as one of the 'shining light' characters of the series, and he seemed to get along with BR well. How does this factor in if BR isn't such a benevolent person? was Aemon's advice to the LC's and Jon in particular actually what was best for them and the watch, or was he working on bringing the institution down from the inside? Would their end game be to force the PtwP to come to fight what the NW was supposed to prevent?
just questions that came to me while reading through this thread...
Regarding the NW oath, it is fairly obvious by the language used in the different parts that they are not contemporary to each other, and i agree that the portion used to pass the black gate is the heart of the vow.
Honestly, i think it all boils down to being "the shield that guards the realm of men." This is what the purpose of the NW should be, all the rest is filler.
Not sure ALL of the rest is filler. I think all of the "I ams" are pretty key. Not promising to be something or sacrifice something. But claiming, asserting what one is. Very different from an oath. Just a declaration and a claim.
contrasting the KG and NW, isn't there some sort of superiority found in rejecting lands and crowns and children and glory? it seems to me like a sense of false modesty added to cover the fact that the institution turned into little more than a penal colony instead of the honorable and noble institution it was founded as...
Agreed--and, as others have said, the KG get to compete in tournaments. Fight in battles. They may eschew lands and children, but they still get plenty of glory. The Watch does not. Given that the Targs claim to have come up with the KG in part based on the Watch, I can't help but think that they made the KG into the primo organization. And the "crowns and glory" stuff was added to limit the Watch--how do you recruit on that basis without making it into a penal colony?
Regarding the dragonlord angle you mentioned... How does this mesh with BR and Maester Aemon coming to the wall together (unless i'm mistaken that they took their vows and arrived at the wall at the same time)? are there things in the scrolls and tomes of Castle Black that Aemon and BR came there to remove/obfuscate?
Okay--that's an angle I had not thought of. I doubt Aemon or Bloodraven would hide information. But the idea of having them on the Wall--potentially permanently interfering with the Wall? Reinforcing that the Wall is exile vs. honor?
Aemon never stopped believing in the Prince that was Promised stuff. But BLoodraven married a tree. Seems like he is either trying to join his dragon tendencies with the Watch's history OR got taken over by the children's ideology completely.
Given that Alysanne interfered with the Wall, makes me think (once again) that Bloodraven might be interfering with the Children.
Would their end game be to force the PtwP to come to fight what the NW was supposed to prevent?
A VERY interesting question. Perhaps Aemon thought there would be info at the Wall? Hmmmm I'm trying to think of anything that might point to Aemon's reasons for going to the Wall as not being legit.
Can you think of anything??
All art is at once surface and symbol. Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril. Those who read the symbol do so at their peril. It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors. Oscar Wilde.
Thanks for the welcome, and please teach me the ways of your multi-quoting (i lost my first response in abject frustration due to this). not terribly important, but when you get time...
regarding the shield comment: to me, the "I ams" portion of this is just describing how the NW will be the shield for the realms of men from the Others. sword in the darkness, watcher on the walls, horn that wakes the sleepers, so i shouldn't have implied that these points are worthless, but i just view them as the How they will be the shield that guards the realms of men, and that is what is important.
RE: recruiting/penal colony: You can't. and i'm starting to think that was the point. I get the feeling that the Targ Kings viewed the NW as a military force outside of their control that they couldn't amalgamate into their rule without forcing certain areas (the North in particular) from forming a rebellion after the conquest, and therefore they had to neutralize it. Why else create a similar institution and do the other things they did. I could be off base on this, as it is a line of thought that has recently come to me, but i think with the strength of the watch dropping by 90% in 300 years, it has to be intentional (it could be a consequence of uniting 6 kingdoms into one, but i don't think so).
i have trouble seeing Maester Aemon as being a plotter. He seems to be one of the few characters like Davos and Ned. i had a lightbulb moment when first replying and recalled the discussion with Tyrion and Aemon after Tyrion mocks Thorne over the crabs... paraphrasing here, but: T - "You are too kind" A - "I've never been called kind before" I can't say for certain if this is two of the smarter people in Westeros having a harmless joke, or if there is something more sinister behind the blind, frail, and honorable facade Aemon puts on... When i get time for another reread, i'll pay particular attention to Aemon's discussions with Jon and Sam (as well as this convo with Tyrion) to see what i think (life is crazy busy atm, so might not be able to reread for a while...)
We do know that Aemon and Rhaegar continued correspondence while Aemon was in the NW, and they both believed in tPtwP. Initially they both believed it to be Rhaegar, but he later changed his mind that it was his son, and Aemon during feast comes to believe it is Dany... I don't find it out of the realm of possibility that Aemon and BR came to the wall due to the prophecy, but i struggle to see either BR or Aemon as having sinister/nefarious motives... BR is ruthless, but he's always put his house in front of his own interests (admittedly i have little info on BR to go on, but the way he's spoken of in D&E makes me think he's talked badly of by the commoners because of his otherness (albinoism, warg, sorcery), similar to the "demon monkey" Tyrion in the current storyline). I don't recall offhand what got BR sent to the wall, but i've got a feeling that the story we're given is mostly just a cover to get BR where he wanted to be in the first place... there is a typical from the black cells to the wall thing going on, but i don't know why BR was in the black cells, and i have a feeling whatever that was is just a ploy by BR to get up north where he wanted to go...
i'm somewhat convinced that Aemon went to the wall to get out of the Game. I think he was tired of being used by other people to try and fracture his house and spur another DwD, but with BR involved that could just be another ploy... oh, to be a raven in the brush while those two talked...
Regarding the NW oath, it is fairly obvious by the language used in the different parts that they are not contemporary to each other, and i agree that the portion used to pass the black gate is the heart of the vow. Honestly, i think it all boils down to being "the shield that guards the realm of men." This is what the purpose of the NW should be, all the rest is filler. contrasting the KG and NW, isn't there some sort of superiority found in rejecting lands and crowns and children and glory? it seems to me like a sense of false modesty added to cover the fact that the institution turned into little more than a penal colony instead of the honorable and noble institution it was founded as...
Yup. And I have a feeling the dungeon rabble manning the Watch will prove to be its salvation from implacable, cold, half forgotten demon-heroes of First Men now known as the Others.
Regarding the dragonlord angle you mentioned... How does this mesh with BR and Maester Aemon coming to the wall together (unless i'm mistaken that they took their vows and arrived at the wall at the same time)? are there things in the scrolls and tomes of Castle Black that Aemon and BR came there to remove/obfuscate?
Yes, Bloodraven and Aemon went to join the Night's Watch together, and were escorted there by one Ser Duncan the Tall...who just happened to be Lord Commander of King Aegon V's Kingsguard. I mention this because it might be one and only time a Lord Commander of the KG knew the Lord Commander of the NW personally. It might also be the one and only time a Lord Commander of the NW and a King of Westeros were related by blood.
Easy to imagine BR and a fellow Targaryen arriving to harvest scrolls and tomes, but I don't think they were. Just a hunch of course. I'm sure they were far more interested in the Annals and archive of Castle Black than men like Jeor and Benjen, but I don't see them removing or hiding them. Possible, but not likely imo.
along this line of thought, i've always viewed Aemon as one of the 'shining light' characters of the series, and he seemed to get along with BR well. How does this factor in if BR isn't such a benevolent person? was Aemon's advice to the LC's and Jon in particular actually what was best for them and the watch, or was he working on bringing the institution down from the inside? Would their end game be to force the PtwP to come to fight what the NW was supposed to prevent?
I think this is a good example of why BR might be benevolent. Ser Duncan's escort does as well.
Like Tyrion after him, BR was seen as a evil Hand of the King. Like Tyrion, I think a lot of that had to do with him looking different from everyone else. People fear that which they do not understand, and BR was mysterious. His ability and effectiveness made him seem all the more sinister, but without his tenure, Aegon V would never have sat easily upon the throne.
I don't think they would have been able to do much ptwp stuff at Castle Black, but that very predicament might explain why Brynden left it.
Thanks for the welcome, and please teach me the ways of your multi-quoting (i lost my first response in abject frustration due to this). not terribly important, but when you get time...
Highlight the text and a box will appear with a button that says "quick quote"...click that, and the selected text will be stored in the reply box. If you are using a mobile browser, you will have to tap the selected text before the "quick quote" button appears.
regarding the shield comment: to me, the "I ams" portion of this is just describing how the NW will be the shield for the realms of men from the Others. sword in the darkness, watcher on the walls, horn that wakes the sleepers, so i shouldn't have implied that these points are worthless, but i just view them as the How they will be the shield that guards the realms of men, and that is what is important.
The "I ams" are definitely important. And, I believe, the elder and more powerful part of the oath. I think all the words matter, but some are relevant for events that occurred more recently than others. The Black Gate lies below the eldest of all the NW castles, and I think it likely predates the Wall as we know it. So it makes sense to me that it would respond to the heart of the oath.
RE: recruiting/penal colony: You can't. and i'm starting to think that was the point. I get the feeling that the Targ Kings viewed the NW as a military force outside of their control that they couldn't amalgamate into their rule without forcing certain areas (the North in particular) from forming a rebellion after the conquest, and therefore they had to neutralize it. Why else create a similar institution and do the other things they did. I could be off base on this, as it is a line of thought that has recently come to me, but i think with the strength of the watch dropping by 90% in 300 years, it has to be intentional (it could be a consequence of uniting 6 kingdoms into one, but i don't think so).
i have trouble seeing Maester Aemon as being a plotter. He seems to be one of the few characters like Davos and Ned. i had a lightbulb moment when first replying and recalled the discussion with Tyrion and Aemon after Tyrion mocks Thorne over the crabs... paraphrasing here, but: T - "You are too kind" A - "I've never been called kind before" I can't say for certain if this is two of the smarter people in Westeros having a harmless joke, or if there is something more sinister behind the blind, frail, and honorable facade Aemon puts on... When i get time for another reread, i'll pay particular attention to Aemon's discussions with Jon and Sam (as well as this convo with Tyrion) to see what i think (life is crazy busy atm, so might not be able to reread for a while...)
Agreed. I don't see Aemon as a plotter either. But still, he is a dragon. Dragons are not used to being called kind, I think.
We do know that Aemon and Rhaegar continued correspondence while Aemon was in the NW, and they both believed in tPtwP. Initially they both believed it to be Rhaegar, but he later changed his mind that it was his son, and Aemon during feast comes to believe it is Dany... I don't find it out of the realm of possibility that Aemon and BR came to the wall due to the prophecy, but i struggle to see either BR or Aemon as having sinister/nefarious motives... BR is ruthless, but he's always put his house in front of his own interests (admittedly i have little info on BR to go on, but the way he's spoken of in D&E makes me think he's talked badly of by the commoners because of his otherness (albinoism, warg, sorcery), similar to the "demon monkey" Tyrion in the current storyline). I don't recall offhand what got BR sent to the wall, but i've got a feeling that the story we're given is mostly just a cover to get BR where he wanted to be in the first place... there is a typical from the black cells to the wall thing going on, but i don't know why BR was in the black cells, and i have a feeling whatever that was is just a ploy by BR to get up north where he wanted to go...
BR was sent to the Wall for kin-slaying. But the kin he slew was a threat to his king (and nephew), Aegon V.
But yes, I too find it hard to imagine Aemon/BR as having nefarious motives. BR sacrificed himself for Aegon V. Aemon sacrificed himself for the Night's Watch. And now, BR seems to still be (quite literally) giving himself to the realm via weir-roots.
i'm somewhat convinced that Aemon went to the wall to get out of the Game. I think he was tired of being used by other people to try and fracture his house and spur another DwD, but with BR involved that could just be another ploy... oh, to be a raven in the brush while those two talked...
According to Archmaester Marwyn:
"If I tell you, they may need to kill you too." Marywn smiled a ghastly smile, the juice of the sourleaf running red between his teeth. "Who do you think killed all the dragons the last time around? Gallant dragonslayers armed with swords?" He spat. "The world the Citadel is building has no place in it for sorcery or prophecy or glass candles, much less for dragons. Ask yourself why Aemon Targaryen was allowed to waste his life upon the Wall, when by rights he should have been raised to archmaester. His blood was why. He could not be trusted. No more than I can."
"I can see it. You have more of the north in you than your brothers."
Thanks for the welcome, and please teach me the ways of your multi-quoting (i lost my first response in abject frustration due to this). not terribly important, but when you get time...
ETA: Looks like voice beat me to this. But just ask if the quick quotes function gives you any trouble.
but i just view them as the How they will be the shield that guards the realms of men, and that is what is important.
Very possible. And I do think they are clues to what will happen. But exactly what it means to be a fire, a light, etc. . . could those just be general protecting things? Sure. But the Song of Amergin makes it seem more like the words are a call to "be" something specific.
RE: recruiting/penal colony: You can't. and i'm starting to think that was the point. I get the feeling that the Targ Kings viewed the NW as a military force outside of their control that they couldn't amalgamate into their rule without forcing certain areas (the North in particular) from forming a rebellion after the conquest, and therefore they had to neutralize it. Why else create a similar institution and do the other things they did. I could be off base on this, as it is a line of thought that has recently come to me, but i think with the strength of the watch dropping by 90% in 300 years, it has to be intentional (it could be a consequence of uniting 6 kingdoms into one, but i don't think so).
Have you seen voice's warg blocking thread yet? It fits with what you are saying really well.
i have trouble seeing Maester Aemon as being a plotter. He seems to be one of the few characters like Davos and Ned. i had a lightbulb moment when first replying and recalled the discussion with Tyrion and Aemon after Tyrion mocks Thorne over the crabs... paraphrasing here, but: T - "You are too kind" A - "I've never been called kind before" I can't say for certain if this is two of the smarter people in Westeros having a harmless joke, or if there is something more sinister behind the blind, frail, and honorable facade Aemon puts on... When i get time for another reread, i'll pay particular attention to Aemon's discussions with Jon and Sam (as well as this convo with Tyrion) to see what i think (life is crazy busy atm, so might not be able to reread for a while...)
I don't recall offhand what got BR sent to the wall, but i've got a feeling that the story we're given is mostly just a cover to get BR where he wanted to be in the first place... there is a typical from the black cells to the wall thing going on, but i don't know why BR was in the black cells, and i have a feeling whatever that was is just a ploy by BR to get up north where he wanted to go...
Very possible--we see Ned's choosing the Wall for strategic and emotional reasons. Still, not sure that makes Bloodraven benevolent. Just means he has his own reasons.
And now, BR seems to still be (quite literally) giving himself to the realm via weir-roots
[/b].[/quote]
Possible. But Bloodraven does what he does for HIS reasons. His family reasons are gone. So, what are his reasons now? Ned's are tied to family. So are Aemon's. The idea of Bloodraven's suddenly being the ultimate martyr. . . I have a hard time seeing that in Martinlandia.
All art is at once surface and symbol. Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril. Those who read the symbol do so at their peril. It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors. Oscar Wilde.
When they broke the balance, they fractured themselves into two distinct creatures. One good and wise and methodical. The other, hateful and obsessed with power and eternal life.
It's worth watching.
1. Very sorry for missing this, voice. I honestly didn't see it.
2. Very cool. But seems like there's a good chance Martin (if using this model) changed it to be less Jekyll and Hyde and more. . . splitting humanity. Vs. splitting good from evil.
Instead, they have their black trees with blue leaves and blue warlock wine. A Tree of Undying, rather than the Tree of Life.
Though the weirwoods, too, seem to be "abused" at times--the screaming trees. The blood sacrifices. Something's up with that. The Undying might just be misusing their trees of life in different ways from the weirwoods.
I'm guessing that as he gave his seed and soul and sacrifices and enslaved his brothers with strange sorceries, the Builder found he had plenty of labor and a novel means of construction.
Or, he raised it first and they realized he could get more power with his white priestess. Do more than just "pact" with the children. Perhaps he even though he could defeat them???
Symeon Star Eyes, Serwyn of the Mirror Shield. These are loyal brothers, but strangely labelled, no? Interesting how they are all attributed to the Night's King's fort.
Yes--in Symeon's case, a wight/Other with knightly intent. If I'm right, just as someone was able to use the Wall for multiple intents/purposes, sounds like the wights can be used that way, too.
All art is at once surface and symbol. Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril. Those who read the symbol do so at their peril. It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors. Oscar Wilde.
Agreed. Though I could see whatever info or counsel Aemon gave to Rhaegar as being instrumental in Rhaegar's plots.
Oooh..had not considered that! Great point. Rhaegar (in my mind's eye) was being raised by Tywin, but he was not a lion cub. A dragon is a mystical beast, and Tywin was not a mystical man. Therefore, Rhaegar must find a way to satisfy the whisperings of his dreams, and his more fanciful instincts. Dany has her (motherly?) woman's voice coming from the stars... Rhaegar likely had Aemon, and I could definitely see Aemon advocating the power of books and learning (and the higher mysteries?) for a coming-of-age dragonprince.
Aerys and Tywin seem unlikely influences in that regard.
Possible. But Bloodraven does what he does for HIS reasons. His family reasons are gone. So, what are his reasons now? Ned's are tied to family. So are Aemon's. The idea of Bloodraven's suddenly being the ultimate martyr. . . I have a hard time seeing that in Martinlandia.
HIS reasons, yes. But, the same could be said of Tyrion as Hand. Per the smallfolk, both were controlling their kings diabolically, and damning the realm. I think that was a gross mischaracterization in both cases. Tyrion's, we learn of first-hand. BR's is obscured by second-hand historical fragments. But from what we see of him in D&E, I tend to think he was actually, to tzalaran's point, "benevolent."
It is easy to assume a man with mismatched eyes, deformities, and odd hair is evil. Yet, in Martin's writings, this often proves to be wrong. Instead, the handsome knight with the perfect smile is the one actually killing the king.
1. Very sorry for missing this, voice. I honestly didn't see it.
2. Very cool. But seems like there's a good chance Martin (if using this model) changed it to be less Jekyll and Hyde and more. . . splitting humanity. Vs. splitting good from evil.
1. No worries! That's the magic of the forum. It houses conversations that we can pick up at our leisure.
2. Without a doubt. The Dark Crystal is not a Jekyll/Hyde split. Here are the two halves that had been torn and separated from one another (due to a misuse of magic):
Mystics
Skeksis
Can you guess which race raised the hero-bastard in the story?
The Undying might just be misusing their trees of life in different ways from the weirwoods.
Most likely, but the Undying themselves seem to be the resulting miasma. Rather than their house blocking the admittance of corpses that have forgotten they were dead, it seems to be housing them.
YUP! Which would put him in the unique position to turn it, misuse it, or abuse its power.
Big time. And his internal struggle during this time... just imagine that. A Heart in conflict with itself during the Long Night. That's tough. Few people could endure that sort of divide... which, I believe, is the genesis of our Night's King.
Or, he raised it first and they realized he could get more power with his white priestess. Do more than just "pact" with the children. Perhaps he even though he could defeat them???
Mayhaps. The Vows of the Night's Watch seem to suggest otherwise. Bran the Builder is given credit for the formation of the Night's Watch, so it is likely he either composed their vows or was at least a very early speaker of them...
And whether or not one believes he became Night's King, it is highly likely he was familiar with the Nightfort - it is both the oldest castle and the traditional seat of authority for the Night's Watch.
Therefore, it becomes hard to reconcile the existence of the Wall with the version of the Vow spoken beneath the Nightfort by Samwell, particularly the second line of it:
I am the sword in the darkness.
I am the watcher on the walls.
I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men.
Lowercase. No proper noun. No landmark visible from space. And plural.
Now I've been known to make semantic arguments, so take that as a disclaimer that I do not deny, and never will. LOL
But, doesn't that sound like the Vow was composed in a time before the Wall existed?
It is hard to imagine the Night's Watch without the Wall, but it makes a lot of sense if their order predates it. First and foremost, I think it makes the story of the Last Hero make a lot more sense (particularly if he was Bran the Builder). It also seems to make this story seem a bit more plausible with Old Nan's version of the Long Night and the first coming of the Others.
I've always been a stickler for the details when it comes to the northern myths, and as a stickler, it has always stood out to me that there would be no need for the Last Hero's trek if the Wall had stood. Nor would Bran the Builder need to build it if the Last Hero had already found the means of defeating the Others with his dragonsteel blade (the one the cannot "stand" against). Thus, I always thought of these as simultaneous events. Splintered, fractured, and retold as individual stories for some strange reason... then I reread ASOS. And it was a lightbulb moment. The story of the Night's King (and his banned name) explained the split. After all, his story is all about the splitting of the self, and about the foregoing of the self in the interest of the other.
So yes, I tend to split semantic hairs, but it is always in the interest of finding the overarching, forgotten truths, that might explain the similar, yet seemingly different, tales.
To come back to your point. I think the Vow contradicts this idea directly by use of the lowercase, improper, plurality of walls. If he raised it first and later realized he could get more power with his white priestess, the Vow should be worded differently. And indeed, it does seem to have been amended after his tenure... but this part remains, and I think it bespeaks a reality that predates the Wall.
Regarding the Pact made with the children at the Isle of Faces, I don't think so. The Pact came thousands of years before the Long Night and the creation of the Wall. If instead you mean latter pacts with the children, it's possible. Certainly, the Last Hero met with them, but all we are told is that he was aided by them, and that Brandon the Builder learned their language.
Regarding the notion that the LH/BtB thought he could defeat the cotf... they don't really seem to have been a threat any longer. They had already been defeated for all intents and purposes, and according to Maester Luwin, they had already been friends with the First Men in a peace that lasted four thousand years.
Another point against this notion of cotf being the puppetmasters behind the Others is that even after the LH/BtB, the Others, and the Long Night, this alliance persisted. First Men and the cotf fought the Andals together. By that time the First Men and the cotf even shared the same gods. This alliance and religious conversion is only peculiar if we assume the children were the ones behind the Long Night.
Yes--in Symeon's case, a wight/Other with knightly intent. If I'm right, just as someone was able to use the Wall for multiple intents/purposes, sounds like the wights can be used that way, too.
Definitely. Though I think the mere fact that Symeon was seen as a heroic knight is enough to prove he was not a wight. Wights do not seem to have any autonomous personality.
No Ser Ree Bob, have a feeling Ole Symeon is still riding next to his Lord Commander.
(Left to Right: Serwyn, Lann, Brandon, Symeon)
"I can see it. You have more of the north in you than your brothers."