Good stuff SlyWren. Did Robb and Jon do better? Robb was beheaded and Jon was just stabbed with the pointy ends of his brothers.
Good point. But what I meant was that Robb's sacrifice/execution is of a man who defied his orders/oath to Robb himself. Who then murdered innocent, unarmed children. Robb swings the word himself, in his own name. Yes, it's because his own nobles have named him king. But it is also a recognition of the point: he is King in the North. Not by conquest but by the choice of the North. And he does executions himself (vs. Robert and his headsman). In front of a heart tree.
So, even though Ned gets some of the execution wrong, the basic principles--Robb and Jon have learned them. As shown by the executions of Karstark and Slynt. Jon doesn't do it in front of a heart tree, but he gets the rest right. Like Robb, he was chosen as leader.
And both Robb and Jon are murdered in a violation of oaths and ancient laws. Am thinking that will have weight later.
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.
At one time, maybe on heresy, there was a discussion about death paying to open the third eye (in a did Bran die and come back kinda way). Anyway, to continue on that route, the direwolf mama pays for the pups' eyes, Gared pays for the Stark kids. The blood goes into the roots, sacrificed by the correct person( the S in W). I don't know that the words make much of a difference; magic is usually about intent, and Ned's intentions are good.
Yes--Ned's intentions are good. And he's following the laws he knows, even if they are off.
But the idea that Gared pays for the Stark kids--still not sure it works compared to Dany's paying for her dragons. Maybe the Others are making up part of the sacrifice by killing Waymar? But that seems less sacrifice and more annoyance. And they raise him as a wight. So, maybe not.
But if you are right, reminds me again that the rules of magic and the old gods are not always all that good for humans. Seems like the execution of Gared is the rules gone wrong. Like the Night's King--was he wrong, or just seen as too close to the old gods by the humans? In the case of Gared, he has VERY important information for the humans. But is executed before he can pull himself together well enough to deliver that info. The laws of old gods and new stymie the humans.
I do think that sacrificing the magical Lady is Ned's mistake. He had no right: she is an innocent belonging to the old gods and his death avenges hers.
I agree that this works somewhat. But brings me back to the exactness of the old laws and old magics not being good for humans. No room for judgment. For realizing Ned didn't understand. Ned is also an unrighteous sacrifice at the end--and the realm is paying for it. So, this "death pays for life" rule--results in a lot of pointless death. Humans are better off without it.
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.
Jon doesn't do it in front of a heart tree, but he gets the rest right. Like Robb, he was chosen as leader.
But Jon doesn't reference that. Jon just kills Slynt.
Emmett kicked his legs out from under him. Dolorous Edd planted a foot on his back to keep him on his knees as Emmett shoved the block beneath his head. "This will go easier if you stay still," Jon Snow promised him. "Move to avoid the cut, and you will still die, but your dying will be uglier. Stretch out your neck, my lord." The pale morning sunlight ran up and down his blade as Jon clasped the hilt of the bastard sword with both hands and raised it high. "If you have any last words, now is the time to speak them," he said, expecting one last curse. Janos Slynt twisted his neck around to stare up at him. "Please, my lord. Mercy. I'll … I'll go, I will, I …" No, thought Jon. You closed that door. Longclaw descended.
If anything I'd say that Jon screwed up the most. Ned killed Gared because Gared broke King Robert's laws and referenced the fact that Robert gave him the authority to oversee his justice. Robb killed Rickard because Rickard broke his laws and referenced the fact that because he was king he himself had the authority to kill Rickard. Jon killed Janos for breaking the Night's Watch laws but didn't reference the fact that as Lord Commander of the Night's Watch he had the authority to kill Janos.
Jon committed murder, not execution. Technically speaking of course. He was well within his rights to kill Janos, but he didn't technically do it legally.
Your lordship lost a son at the Red Wedding. I lost four upon the Blackwater. And why? Because the Lannisters stole the throne. Go to King’s Landing and look on Tommen with your own eyes, if you doubt me. A blind man could see it. What does Stannis offer you? Vengeance. Vengeance for my sons and yours, for your husbands and your fathers and your brothers. Vengeance for your murdered lord, your murdered king, your butchered princes. Vengeance!
I understand the points you are both making. @mark171, I don't think the words are the point. He has the authority, the right if you prefer, to take the life. He does it himself. Where he goes wrong is not sacrificing in the grove on the other side of the wall. Slynt gets no chance for a second life in a tree. SlyWren, I think you are correct. The power of the old gods isn't really meant for humans. Humans want individual power; I think the old gods represent GRRM's Collective Hive Mind.
@mark171, I don't think the words are the point. He has the authority, the right if you prefer, to take the life. He does it himself.
Oh I don't think it's really that big of a deal. He did have the authority. But if we're trying to see which of the three did things the most "right" I'd say that it's worth pointing out that not claiming your authority is probably a mistake. Ned claimed his authority as Warden of the North when he killed Gared. Robb claimed his authority as King in the North when he killed Rickard. Jon didn't claim anything when he killed Slynt.
Robb and Ned both assert themselves as figures of authority before their gods when they commit their executions. Jon did not.
Your lordship lost a son at the Red Wedding. I lost four upon the Blackwater. And why? Because the Lannisters stole the throne. Go to King’s Landing and look on Tommen with your own eyes, if you doubt me. A blind man could see it. What does Stannis offer you? Vengeance. Vengeance for my sons and yours, for your husbands and your fathers and your brothers. Vengeance for your murdered lord, your murdered king, your butchered princes. Vengeance!
@mark171, I don't think the words are the point. He has the authority, the right if you prefer, to take the life. He does it himself.
Oh I don't think it's really that big of a deal. He did have the authority. But if we're trying to see which of the three did things the most "right" I'd say that it's worth pointing out that not claiming your authority is probably a mistake. Ned claimed his authority as Warden of the North when he killed Gared. Robb claimed his authority as King in the North when he killed Rickard. Jon didn't claim anything when he killed Slynt.
Robb and Ned both assert themselves as figures of authority before their gods when they commit their executions. Jon did not.
All fair points, but I would say Robb erred by not being "in the north" when passing his judgement and asserting himself as "king in the north". Yes, I know he claimed the Riverlands, but he was a Stark. Starks should not carry out the king's justice south of the Neck. And as Karstark pointed out, Robb was kinslaying. It would be like a stag killing his foster brother's she-wolf sister north of the neck...Hey wait a minute
"I can see it. You have more of the north in you than your brothers."
Oh I don't think it's really that big of a deal. He did have the authority. But if we're trying to see which of the three did things the most "right" I'd say that it's worth pointing out that not claiming your authority is probably a mistake. Ned claimed his authority as Warden of the North when he killed Gared. Robb claimed his authority as King in the North when he killed Rickard. Jon didn't claim anything when he killed Slynt.
Robb and Ned both assert themselves as figures of authority before their gods when they commit their executions. Jon did not.
Fair point. I was thinking of the fact that Jon was going to hang Slynt. Then realized that was wrong. So executed him himself.
So, not saying the words and asserting authority, perhaps a problem. But Jon and Robb both get some of the point. Ned did give them some knowledge.
All fair points, but I would say Robb erred by not being "in the north" when passing his judgement and asserting himself as "king in the north". Yes, I know he claimed the Riverlands, but he was a Stark. Starks should not carry out the king's justice south of the Neck. And as Karstark pointed out, Robb was kinslaying. It would be like a stag killing his foster brother's she-wolf sister north of the neck...Hey wait a minute
Kinslaying--this is another mess. Karstark defied his oath to his king and kinsman. So, Robb excited his subject and kinsman. Given that everyone in the North is somewhat related--this seems like a mess. A set of untenable rules.
Am wondering if this has anything to do with the Stark in Winterfell taking out the Night's King. . .
And also has issues for the Night's Watch per se. If they are "sworn brothers," does that make them "kin?"
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.
SlyWren, I think you are correct. The power of the old gods isn't really meant for humans. Humans want individual power; I think the old gods represent GRRM's Collective Hive Mind.
As has been pointed out elsewhere--what happens if the humans in the weirnet overrun the hive mind?
But the finding of the wolves--creates not a "hive" mind, but a pack. Even Jon, who is likely their cousin, is still their brother via Ghost. And via his upbringing. Sansa has at least one dream about Lady after she dies. The wolves remember their pack members who are killed. And, if Jojen is right, and the kids are the wolves and the wolves are them--the Stark kids are not a hive, but a pack. Which is arguably how they can survive all of this.
So, were the wolves given to help the kids against the hive mind, or to bring them into it?
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 see the wights as minions of a hive mind, but I don't see the Old Gods that way. A collective, yes. But archival, rather than proactive.
Yes--the idea of an archive leaves the humans or Children interacting with the net plenty of agency re: how they use it.
But back to the idea of sacrifice for the wolves. The mother wolf dies "for" her children. Protecting them from the stag. Not a perfect match for Ned (who's not mother) or Cat (who's not a wolf). Still--the mother for the children. Was reminded by Lord Varys over on RLJ about the Mother Rhoyne story. That she had to persuade her children to all sing together. Their singing brought back the day.
Wolves don't sing. But they do howl--together. And the pack is scattered now--vs. unified in this chapter. Unified and with the Starks in past because the mother is dead. Cat is UnCat. But she is also the Mother in the Riverlands. The Mother from the River. Am wondering if her UnCat role has another angle to it--sacrifice so her children (and should-have-been foster son) can reunite. And Sing. As Starks.
Likely crackpot. But the scene is partly about sacrifices and rituals gone wrong--with traces of what should have been done. Same with Ned and Cat's deaths and their attempts to parent their children. And wondering if, in the end, Cat might get something right. Like the dire wolf mama.
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.
At one time, maybe on heresy, there was a discussion about death paying to open the third eye (in a did Bran die and come back kinda way). Anyway, to continue on that route, the direwolf mama pays for the pups' eyes, Gared pays for the Stark kids. The blood goes into the roots, sacrificed by the correct person( the S in W). I don't know that the words make much of a difference; magic is usually about intent, and Ned's intentions are good. I do think that sacrificing the magical Lady is Ned's mistake. He had no right: she is an innocent belonging to the old gods and his death avenges hers.
This is traditional storytelling rules in these types of stories: that someone either has to die or sacrifice some body part in order to gain some sort of level up/ability. GRRM also notably mocks this reverence of people crazy enough to do this via Timmet.
But back to the idea of sacrifice for the wolves. The mother wolf dies "for" her children. Protecting them from the stag. Not a perfect match for Ned (who's not mother) or Cat (who's not a wolf). Still--the mother for the children. Was reminded by Lord Varys over on RLJ about the Mother Rhoyne story. That she had to persuade her children to all sing together. Their singing brought back the day.
Not a perfect match for Ned. I like where you went with Cat, but I'll address that below. Back to Ned...
There can be no doubt those pups had a direwolf for a father. He might live north or south of the Wall. He might be alive or dead by the time the pups are born. It makes no matter.
Though we only see the mother, they had a father. Sure his identity might be mysterious (like a certain bastard's father), but there can be no doubt those pups were sired by a direwolf (or a very ambitious regular-wolf LOL).
So it gives us even more symmetry between the pups and children. The Stark Children each received a direwolf, sired by a direwolf. And Jon Snow received a white one, with a direwolf parent.
Wolves don't sing. But they do howl--together. And the pack is scattered now--vs. unified in this chapter. Unified and with the Starks in past because the mother is dead. Cat is UnCat. But she is also the Mother in the Riverlands. The Mother from the River. Am wondering if her UnCat role has another angle to it--sacrifice so her children (and should-have-been foster son) can reunite. And Sing. As Starks.
Likely crackpot. But the scene is partly about sacrifices and rituals gone wrong--with traces of what should have been done. Same with Ned and Cat's deaths and their attempts to parent their children. And wondering if, in the end, Cat might get something right. Like the dire wolf mama.
Very cool stuff. I've been waiting a long time for Cat to do something positive for House Stark. ...still waiting... LOL
This is traditional storytelling rules in these types of stories: that someone either has to die or sacrifice some body part in order to gain some sort of level up/ability. GRRM also notably mocks this reverence of people crazy enough to do this via Timmet.
Nice catch with Timmet! Never made that connection.
"I can see it. You have more of the north in you than your brothers."
Eddard seals his own fate... by the same sword. It now looms over them...
I knew that, but I never stopped to appreciate the irony before.
also, Ice is now broken, too. I don't know if that means anything, but I wonder if the desecration of the Stark's ancestral sword is part of their curse- if Ned accidentally cursed himself.
“Never forget what you are, for surely the world will not. Make it your strength. Then it can never be your weakness. Armour yourself in it, and it will never be used to hurt you.” ― George R.R. Martin, A Game of Thrones
This is traditional storytelling rules in these types of stories: that someone either has to die or sacrifice some body part in order to gain some sort of level up/ability. GRRM also notably mocks this reverence of people crazy enough to do this via Timmet.
He does it in earnest with Jaime, though
“Never forget what you are, for surely the world will not. Make it your strength. Then it can never be your weakness. Armour yourself in it, and it will never be used to hurt you.” ― George R.R. Martin, A Game of Thrones