Post by SlyWren on May 3, 2016 3:01:45 GMT
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.
Interesting point--so, Rhaegar as split between the mystic (yes, I'm hearing Van Morrison in my head--though I'd prefer "Gloria") and the politician.
Which isn't too different from the problems Dany faces--the prophesied stallion and dragon trying to govern Meereen by herding cats.
Seems like Dany is very likely to end up like Rhaegar.
Aerys and Tywin seem unlikely influences in that regard.
Seems like Tywin was a means to an end--a way to bring about the political changes.
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.
A fair point. But Tyrion's hardly a picture of sweetness and light himself. Effective. Good at keeping the badness under control. Looking out for people--all good. But still not a paragon.
Bloodraven was a good manager and ruler--but ruthless. Rather like Tywin. And Tyrion when he needs to be.
If Bloodraven thinks it in the best interest of whomever matters to him to deep freeze the continent, then . . . seems like he'd do it if he could.
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):
Ah--so, instead of trying to purify the self by purging evil Mr. Hyde, this was a straight up conflict? I can see that.
HA! Touche, ser! But can't the trees scream without raising the cold winds? Let alone ice people?
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.
YUP!
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...
I'm thinking he was the first one taught them. Taking the song of the earth and putting git into a human . . . dialect.
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.
Possible--and could explain why the Black Gate is cold but drops warm tears. It was turned. . . cold by the Night's Kin and never properly turned back--like the horrors that happened at the Nightfort. The 79 Sentinels aloe get that done.
But Bran crosses through, it might be the beginning of warmth. Or a turn back for the Wall and the hinge it is on.
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.
Very possible. Though, given the legend, I'm thinking he at least started raising the Wall before meeting his Pretty Priestess.
Or, the Wall raised itself, turning the hinge cold. . .
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.
The info we have here is so sketchy and the timelines. . . are suspect.
My current suspicion is that neither side could win, so they pacted. But just because some people make a pact does NOT mean future generations are happy with it. And, so far, we have yet to see a completely perfect group of people. Anyone who perfectly keeps their word, let alone a whole group of people who do it. The idea that the Pact was a More Perfect Union--just seems highly suspect. At least without more info.
I'm going to try to reserve judgment, but for now. . . .I'm suspicious.
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.
HA! Do you think they have old school class rings? Fraternity shirts?
But in my current theory of Symeon, someone with knightly intent took the wight over. We've told a few times that the blue eyes of the dead see. Even when Thistle'e eyes are gone, something else sees out.
So. . . whoever is seeing out, I'm thinking "Symeon" was taken over by someone with knightly intent.