I am not saying that the Original Others become white walkers. But I am saying that NK and NQ might have been previously human in a way that the Original Others were not.
Very possible, especially considering the transformation of Mel. And even the long-livedness of Mel.
I've been letting your theory percolate in the back of my mind for a while and am still working on it, so I won't drag you back to that part of the debate.
But I had one question:
Any chance both the children and the humans drove the miasma? The fighting and potential magics they did started it together?
That might help explain why the children want to help Bran--they feel they, too, helped start this mess. And would even explain why Leaf hasn't said anything--she's waiting until Bran knows more to explain that she wants to help.
I'm also wondering if that might explain why the children are dwindling. And why we see no children's children (Childlngs? Childettes? Chitlins?) If they are not dwindling just because they we hunted and isolated, but also because they lost some of their already limited fertility?
The above might fit both with your miasma idea and with the fact that Martin never seems to make any large group of people "innocent" or "pure." Everyone screws up in Martinlandia. Even the children. . . maybe.
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.
Very possible, especially considering the transformation of Mel. And even the long-livedness of Mel.
I'm hesitant to go with the show's version of Mel's long-livedness, but can see it as a point in favor. We've seen Waymar Royce rise from the dead before our eyes. We've seen a Khal ensnared by his Khaleesi with strange sorceries. We've seen a man turning to stone (Jon Con). We've seen a fickle young girl walk through a wall of fire and emerge a queen with monstrous children.
I see no reason why the woman glimpsed from atop the wall might not have undergone magical transformation. Given the tales of SSE and SotMS (and NK himself) it seems highly likely that the Nightfort was the Broad Street Pump, infecting people with miasma until they were no longer people.
I've been letting your theory percolate in the back of my mind for a while and am still working on it, so I won't drag you back to that part of the debate.
No dragging, not ever, m'lady. Am happy to dig in on any topics you'd like.
Any chance both the children and the humans drove the miasma? The fighting and potential magics they did started it together?
Doesn't work for several reasons:
GRRM always makes man accountable for his own errors, and never allows him to blame his plagues upon an-other race. I would argue this is actually his trademark surprise: begin the story blaming non-human "others," only to realize humans are the ones to blame (for a great example, see Sandkings).
Fighting was nothing new. Cotf and Giants had been fighting for eons.
Magic was nothing new in Westeros, and we are not told the First Men used any magic when fighting the cotf. What was new, were their swords, horses, and fire.
The cotf had always protected the trees. For that protection, they were rewarded with what I call the green powers (warging, skinchanging, green-dreaming, green-seeing). Thus it would make no sense for the cotf to defile their own trees, considering that is the only reason they went to war... as well as the only reason they agreed to peace.
The miasma is not adapted to affect, or infect, children of the forest. Rather than have big cat-eyes, long ears, and stand no taller than Bran... the Others are not said to have cat-pupils, any ears at all, and stand tall as a man. Another difference is that the Others ride mounts, while the cotf do not. They also carry swords, like men, and the cotf do not. And, when carrying these swords, their hands have never been described as having only three fingers and a thumb.
Thus if the cotf had a hand in driving the miasma, it seems GRRM has not made them accountable for their own errors.
That might help explain why the children want to help Bran--they feel they, too, helped start this mess. And would even explain why Leaf hasn't said anything--she's waiting until Bran knows more to explain that she wants to help.
I think the help is better explained by Bran being a Stark, and the fact that the Starks have "kept" the Old Gods. The terms of the Pact are largely a mystery except for one area. The First Men agreed they would cease harming weirwoods. House Stark kept that vow, and now that the cotf are dwindling, they need such men to preserve the trees after they are gone.
I'm also wondering if that might explain why the children are dwindling. And why we see no children's children (Childlngs? Childettes? Chitlins?) If they are not dwindling just because they we hunted and isolated, but also because they lost some of their already limited fertility?
I like Chitlins LOL
People dwindle when they have no territory. The cotf suffer from habitat loss. They are Tuf's cats (I'm lookin at you prestonjacobs ).
The above might fit both with your miasma idea and with the fact that Martin never seems to make any large group of people "innocent" or "pure." Everyone screws up in Martinlandia. Even the children. . . maybe.
Actually there's one big exception to the lack of purity and innocence in Martinlandia, and that is in humanoid races. Martinlandia's men are universally prone to defilement and dogmatic arrogance, and I can't think of a single non-human race of his that displays corruption.
The beginning of his stories seem to always have us looking at other sentient races quite suspiciously, or we disregard them as unimportant. In the end it's revealed that it was a mistake to mistrust/neglect them simply because of their odd appearances/customs. Typically, his protagonists learn mankind should emulate them (House of the Worm), or go home (A Song for Lya).
voice, not sure if you watched the show tonight, but you definitely need to. And then we need to talk. I made a post on reddit discussing Other matters and linked to your thread here, just FYI. It's getting a lot of up votes, so hopefully you'll get new traffic here.
I'll get around to responding when I have a moment, cheers!
voice , not sure if you watched the show tonight, but you definitely need to. And then we need to talk. I made a post on reddit discussing Other matters and linked to your thread here, just FYI. It's getting a lot of up votes, so hopefully you'll get new traffic here.
I'll get around to responding when I have a moment, cheers!
I'm hesitant to go with the show's version of Mel's long-livedness, but can see it as a point in favor. We've seen Waymar Royce rise from the dead before our eyes. We've seen a Khal ensnared by his Khaleesi with strange sorceries. We've seen a man turning to stone (Jon Con). We've seen a fickle young girl walk through a wall of fire and emerge a queen with monstrous children.
Exactly, And we've seen the dead rise--extra-livingness of bones. And a Stark Shade visit his children. So, yes, the extra long-livedness of the Night's King could work.
I see no reason why the woman glimpsed from atop the wall might not have undergone magical transformation. Given the tales of SSE and SotMS (and NK himself) it seems highly likely that the Nightfort was the Broad Street Pump, infecting people with miasma until they were no longer people.
YUP! Would potentially tie in with Craster's "curse"--whatever it turns out to be.
GRRM always makes man accountable for his own errors, and never allows him to blame his plagues upon an-other race. I would argue this is actually his trademark surprise: begin the story blaming non-human "others," only to realize humans are the ones to blame (for a great example, see Sandkings).
Fighting was nothing new. Cotf and Giants had been fighting for eons.
Magic was nothing new in Westeros, and we are not told the First Men used any magic when fighting the cotf. What was new, were their swords, horses, and fire.
The cotf had always protected the trees. For that protection, they were rewarded with what I call the green powers (warging, skinchanging, green-dreaming, green-seeing). Thus it would make no sense for the cotf to defile their own trees, considering that is the only reason they went to war... as well as the only reason they agreed to peace.
The miasma is not adapted to affect, or infect, children of the forest. Rather than have big cat-eyes, long ears, and stand no taller than Bran... the Others are not said to have cat-pupils, any ears at all, and stand tall as a man. Another difference is that the Others ride mounts, while the cotf do not. They also carry swords, like men, and the cotf do not. And, when carrying these swords, their hands have never been described as having only three fingers and a thumb.
Thus if the cotf had a hand in driving the miasma, it seems GRRM has not made them accountable for their own errors.
2 and 3: Agreed. But we don't yet know how the children managed to fight effectively enough against human size, strength, and armaments to bring the Tree Burning Humans to a Pact. Until we know that, we can't know that the fighting techniques they used against the humans didn't change from what they might have used against the Giants. At first, seems like the children were getting butchered. Then, enough of a draw to force a Pact. Does that mean they absolutely used supernatural elements? No--but they had some magics at their disposal. Until we know how they turned the tide, we can't know if they did nothing new.
4. Unless they saw the "defiling" as a method to protect. So, not defiling in their eyes--necessary and survival.
5. Exactly, they are the perfect method to fight the men the children struggled against.
RE: the "Thus:" The fact that the children must live in a warded cave, or at least choose to live in one, in an isolated land--that seems like they are dealing with consequences. If the weapons they created forced them out of their woods and down under ground, no longer able to be outside--that's a cost for them, no? A cost for what they might have done?
I think the help is better explained by Bran being a Stark, and the fact that the Starks have "kept" the Old Gods. The terms of the Pact are largely a mystery except for one area. The First Men agreed they would cease harming weirwoods. House Stark kept that vow, and now that the cotf are dwindling, they need such men to preserve the trees after they are gone.
Just my two coppers.
Completely legit coppers. Though, as we discussed on the Forensic File on the first Game chapter, Ned has broken somewhat with the old gods. He's now executing in the name of Robert Baratheon--Stag King descended from dragons. Not in his own name or in the name of the old gods. thelasthearth.freeforums.net/post/7147/thread
And Rickard, too, was sending Starks out of Winterfell to the south. The King who Knelt knelt to dragons, not the old gods. So, the Starks were not holding all that well to the old gods if that was part of their agreement with the children.
But if the children felt somewhat responsible for what had happened before, if they wanted to make it right--that's a powerful motive. And might explain why they haven't yet told Bran what they want him to do--they are waiting until he knows more.
People dwindle when they have no territory. The cotf suffer from habitat loss. They are Tuf's cats (I'm lookin at you prestonjacobs ).
True--but they are also largely in caves, apparently to avoid wights and probably Others, too. I'm wondering if that has to do with the decrease in fertility as well.
Actually there's one big exception to the lack of purity and innocence in Martinlandia, and that is in humanoid races. Martinlandia's men are universally prone to defilement and dogmatic arrogance, and I can't think of a single non-human race of his that displays corruption.
But, so far, the children have humanoid tendencies. Not all of them, but many. And they wanted to survive. And they did force a Pact. . . somehow. Until that's explained, the door can't be shut on what their methods were, yes?
The beginning of his stories seem to always have us looking at other sentient races quite suspiciously, or we disregard them as unimportant. In the end it's revealed that it was a mistake to mistrust/neglect them simply because of their odd appearances/customs. Typically, his protagonists learn mankind should emulate them (House of the Worm), or go home (A Song for Lya).
But that could still work here--if the children made the Others to survive, then realized this was a terrible idea and helped the Last Hero overcome it all, that IS a lesson Bran and the humans should emulate. They've thus brought Bran to re-learn the lessons from their past mistakes and how they have tried to overcome them. And, hopefully, he can come up with a better, more lasting solution.
So, still a "teaching moment."
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.
voice, not sure if you watched the show tonight, but you definitely need to. And then we need to talk. I made a post on reddit discussing Other matters and linked to your thread here, just FYI. It's getting a lot of up votes, so hopefully you'll get new traffic here.
I'll get around to responding when I have a moment, cheers!
I know you tagged voice , but I had to respond: well done on the essay! I had completely missed the "child's snow knight" reference. And now your arguments re: Sansa's making Others when she makes a snow knight finally penetrated my thick skull and I can follow you.
My apologies for making you deal with my glacial brain.
But on topic of both your OP and Voice's--the "tree warriors" references, the trees as fighters. We talked a lot in the Forensic File on the Game Prologue about the trees and sentinels and ironwoods. Starting somewhere around here: thelasthearth.com/post/8667/thread
In some cases, the sentinels and ironwoods seem like protectors. But in the case of the Others, the trees and the "warriors" are dangerous to all other life forms. Breaking the idea of the protector.
Which makes a lot of the imagery you collected in you reddit essay wonderfully double edged. Showing both sides of the power of the trees. Wonderful work.
But it also raises the question for both trees and miasma--how to "turn" the trees "back?" Does it mean "closing their eyes?" I think it means rebalancing the land and peoples as in the Song of Amergin. But I'm wondering if it also means "shutting down" the trees.
"The trees have eyes again" is the phrase used to describe the threat. Might be better to say "the trees have fighting avatars."
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've always wondered if the trees aren't being tortured through all of this. Why are their faces so horrific? Why do they scream silently and weep blood? Perhaps they don't LIKE having greenseers use their consciousness.
Someone on Reddit made a good suggestion. Perhaps the cotf created the Others imagining that they had control and a safety mechanism, having copious amounts of dragonglass on hand. But then the NK figured out how to raise the dead (using mutated greenseer magic IMO), and this the children had no answer for. That might have been the "biting off more than you bargaining for" part of this, and clearly this experiment backfired on the children.
I've always wondered if the trees aren't being tortured through all of this. Why are their faces so horrific? Why do they scream silently and weep blood? Perhaps they don't LIKE having greenseers use their consciousness.
Or they don't like how they were used to make the walkers? On the show, the man was tied to a tree and, as Maester Sam (I think) pointed out, it looks like the obsidian knife went all the way through him and into the tree. Staking him to it. Wedding him to the trees in a MUCH more violent way than the weirwood paste thing.
It would fit well with voice's miasma: both the children and the humans do things that violate the trees. The reaction from the "heart" trees of the continent is to freeze it and make it dark. The Others came form the children, but the miasma some forth in reaction to both the fire of the First Men and the frozen fire/obsidian born Others of the children.
Someone on Reddit made a good suggestion. Perhaps the cotf created the Others imagining that they had control and a safety mechanism, having copious amounts of dragonglass on hand. But then the NK figured out how to raise the dead (using mutated greenseer magic IMO), and this the children had no answer for. That might have been the "biting off more than you bargaining for" part of this, and clearly this experiment backfired on the children.
That would make sense. Or that the continent's reaction to what the children and the humans had done was to allow the dead to rise. They should go down into the earth and trees and all that. There bodies should rot. But since humans and children went too far, the earth allows for them to rise???
But I could also see the NK being like a frozen, mass-producing version of Qyburn--taking information and using it his own way.
LmL: I'm going to respond to your post on the Dany/Sauron thread here since it fits a bit better here (I think) and that way I won't commandeer winterbowl's thread. My apologies if the is annoying. Your post is here: thelasthearth.com/post/35675/thread
I've been sitting on the child's snow knights one for a while, although I have mentioned it a few times here and there.
Well caught, ser!
The trees as Others thing I only dipped my toe into, I'm quite sure voice and others who have been sniffing at this idea are on the right track. The show didn't really give up the secret of how the trees are involved in the Othering process, they just had him standing against the tree. But as book readers I think we can infer that weirwoods are a part of the process - we just don't know how exactly. There seems to be some kind of "trees bodysnatching people" thing going on, perhaps, but how does that work exactly? I will be anxious to find out.
Me, too. And makes me wonder how the image Bran sees of sacrificing to the trees fits in. The man, as you say, is tied to a tree. Seems like the knife goes through into the tree and him. Like a sacrifice, though his heart, into the heart tree. Tying all together.
I've no idea how the books will say that actually worked, but it sound like the Others are men turned into fighting avatars for the trees. Living sacrifices--stabbed through the heart and then transformed into a new form of life. Seems like the sort of thing that would have its own will and thus easy to lose control of.
Similarly, in the show it was dragonglass pushed in to that guys chest, and nameless black obelisks around the tree, but I am guessing and hoping that this is the show simplified reference oily black stone in the Heart of Winter and oily black stone being used to make Others, ideas which I have had for a while now but haven't gotten time to do a full essay on yet.
Interesting. But I've been wondering if it wasn't dragonglass for a reason. The Others as the ice dragons made with dragon glass. The World Book notes that there are a few ideas on the origin of the Others. It also notes a few theories on the origins of dragons, one of which is that they are transformed wyverns, I think. If it turn out that dragons were magically enhanced/transformed wyverns, the connection voice made upthread between the Doom and the Long Night would even be stronger: humanoids messing with nature, pushing too far, transforming life forms, and ultimately resulting in climate/geological catastrophe.
So, I think there's a decent case to make with our very scant evidence that the dragonglass plus the trees are the key. And that may be why dragon glass can undo the Others--because that's what holds them together in the first place.
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.
two definitions of canon. one is "the authentic works of the author." TWOIAF is canon by this definition.
The other is "the accepted true facts of the story." That's a whole different ball of wax. We cannot take anything Yandel says as 100%, because he's essentially a human historian with a limited view and bias and all the rest. THIS is CLEARLY what George is referring to in his quote. He's saying TWOIAF isn't 100% reliable just like anything a character says is not 100% reliable. Yandel is an "unreliable narrator," just like every POV. And again, this is what Martin was talking about.
Martin never meant "disallow TWOAIF material from convos about the series because I just let E and L jerk themselves off and I could give a fuck what's in there." That's how you guys treat this quote, and its bullshit. The only time you guys play this card is when you don't like something in TWOIAF because it cuts against your theory. This is so intellectually dishonest, and that's why it makes me want to vomit. All of the new information comes from George. Do you think he let Elio just spin some bullshit about Dawn in TWOIAF that wasn't what Martin intended? There is nothing to support this view, and statements by everyone involved to contradict it. All the eastern stuff I like, Martin wrote. Information about anything important like Dawn or the Others, Martin wrote that too. Come on, use your brain a little here. Elio and Linda are compilers of book info, and a good chunk of TWOIAF is just that, and that's what they contributed. All the new info comes from George.
So who wrote that Dawn was identical to Valyrian steel except color and glow? His name is George RR Martin, and he signed his name on the book so you would know.
It's fine to reiterate Yandel's fallibility, but this "TWOIAF doesn't count when it cuts against my theory" crap is just that, crap. Go ahead, quote the SSM again and play dumb as if you didn't know there are two definitions of canon, and as if it's not clear Martin is talking about the unreliable narrator literary device. It still won't change the fact that George RR Martin wrote TWOIAF with help from E and L, and the fact that E and L helped compile the fucking family trees doesn't invalidate any of the new info Martin has given us on the book.
This is the bullshit I have no patience for man. So over this stupid conversation with the five of you or whatever it is that cling to this idiocy.
I mean voice, when you say "Battle Isle isn't in the books" as a way of dismissing it from being worth discussing, you're just being a prick. Are you really suggesting Battle Isle doesn't exist? It's a figment of Linda's imagination? Of course it isn't. The Battle Isle section is loaded with lore and ideas about very important subjects - dragons, children of the forest, the First Men, sorcery in the Dawn Age - that's all Martin's stuff. He would not and did not let someone else invent information about his universe, particularly shit as important as the first humans in Westeros, dragons in the Dawn Age, children of the forest, etc. And you think because Elio and Linda complied all the stupid little details George doesn't want to keep track of, that Battle Isle doesn't really exist yet until it's mentioned in the books? This is purely selective on your part, and again I cry intellectual dishonesty here.
And your answers to my comments from a few days ago were really terrible. You spent all this time twisting my words around and ignoring the main point I was making, followed by a bunch of "this isn't the right thread for that." I thought Westeros was the over moderated website? I guess not. All of these topics relate, on Westeros threads we mix it up and have a lot of fun, Sly calls it the sandbox. Not sure what your deal is. We talk about a lot of things, you and I, on different places. I consider it a running discussion.
As far as viewing your theory through the lense of my own, if you're talking about the cause of the Long Night, that's quite impossible for me to just set aside my entire theory which is rooted in heavy analysis of the text for ideas which conflict with everything I am seeing. I can talk about the rest of your theory on its own but if we talk Long Night, I cannot disappear the meteors from my brain. Apologies.
I like a lot of your theory here, primarily the idea of Martin personifying the forces of nature in magical manifestations, since that's in the very beginning of my first essay. I couldn't agree more. And I told you I think the Others as a miasma is dead on. But not everything is a miasma. The meteors are certainly not. Miasma symbols are dogs and mists and things like that. Swords and dragons and meteors are a totally different symbol family.
two definitions of canon. one is "the authentic works of the author." TWOIAF is canon by this definition.
The other is "the accepted true facts of the story." That's a whole different ball of wax. We cannot take anything Yandel says as 100%, because he's essentially a human historian with a limited view and bias and all the rest. THIS is CLEARLY what George is referring to in his quote. He's saying TWOIAF isn't 100% reliable just like anything a character says is not 100% reliable. Yandel is an "unreliable narrator," just like every POV. And again, this is what Martin was talking about.
Martin never meant "disallow TWOAIF material from convos about the series because I just let E and L jerk themselves off and I could give a fuck what's in there." That's how you guys treat this quote, and its bullshit. The only time you guys play this card is when you don't like something in TWOIAF because it cuts against your theory. This is so intellectually dishonest, and that's why it makes me want to vomit. All of the new information comes from George. Do you think he let Elio just spin some bullshit about Dawn in TWOIAF that wasn't what Martin intended? There is nothing to support this view, and statements by everyone involved to contradict it. All the eastern stuff I like, Martin wrote. Information about anything important like Dawn or the Others, Martin wrote that too. Come on, use your brain a little here. Elio and Linda are compilers of book info, and a good chunk of TWOIAF is just that, and that's what they contributed. All the new info comes from George.
So who wrote that Dawn was identical to Valyrian steel except color and glow? His name is George RR Martin, and he signed his name on the book so you would know.
It's fine to reiterate Yandel's fallibility, but this "TWOIAF doesn't count when it cuts against my theory" crap is just that, crap. Go ahead, quote the SSM again and play dumb as if you didn't know there are two definitions of canon, and as if it's not clear Martin is talking about the unreliable narrator literary device. It still won't change the fact that George RR Martin wrote TWOIAF with help from E and L, and the fact that E and L helped compile the fucking family trees doesn't invalidate any of the new info Martin has given us on the book.
This is the bullshit I have no patience for man. So over this stupid conversation with the five of you or whatever it is that cling to this idiocy.
@ lml @ voice - I've always enjoyed the insights, banter and dynamic between you on the boards. Re: "canon" as you say LmL , " by this defintion" however hasn't Martin himself said that TWOIAF is "semi-canon"?
two definitions of canon. one is "the authentic works of the author." TWOIAF is canon by this definition.
The other is "the accepted true facts of the story." That's a whole different ball of wax. We cannot take anything Yandel says as 100%, because he's essentially a human historian with a limited view and bias and all the rest. THIS is CLEARLY what George is referring to in his quote. He's saying TWOIAF isn't 100% reliable just like anything a character says is not 100% reliable. Yandel is an "unreliable narrator," just like every POV. And again, this is what Martin was talking about.
Martin never meant "disallow TWOAIF material from convos about the series because I just let E and L jerk themselves off and I could give a fuck what's in there." That's how you guys treat this quote, and its bullshit. The only time you guys play this card is when you don't like something in TWOIAF because it cuts against your theory. This is so intellectually dishonest, and that's why it makes me want to vomit. All of the new information comes from George. Do you think he let Elio just spin some bullshit about Dawn in TWOIAF that wasn't what Martin intended? There is nothing to support this view, and statements by everyone involved to contradict it. All the eastern stuff I like, Martin wrote. Information about anything important like Dawn or the Others, Martin wrote that too. Come on, use your brain a little here. Elio and Linda are compilers of book info, and a good chunk of TWOIAF is just that, and that's what they contributed. All the new info comes from George.
So who wrote that Dawn was identical to Valyrian steel except color and glow? His name is George RR Martin, and he signed his name on the book so you would know.
It's fine to reiterate Yandel's fallibility, but this "TWOIAF doesn't count when it cuts against my theory" crap is just that, crap. Go ahead, quote the SSM again and play dumb as if you didn't know there are two definitions of canon, and as if it's not clear Martin is talking about the unreliable narrator literary device. It still won't change the fact that George RR Martin wrote TWOIAF with help from E and L, and the fact that E and L helped compile the fucking family trees doesn't invalidate any of the new info Martin has given us on the book.
This is the bullshit I have no patience for man. So over this stupid conversation with the five of you or whatever it is that cling to this idiocy.
@ lml @ voice - I've always enjoyed the insights, banter and dynamic between you on the boards. Re: "canon" as you say LmL , " by this defintion" however hasn't Martin himself said that TWOIAF is "semi-canon"?
Yes. If you read the statement, it says "TWOIAF is pretty damn close, BUT (here comes the part that makes it less than "canon") errors and omissions have crept in" due to the maesters. He is saying, in crystal clear language, that it is falliable because of the unreliable narrator. He's not saying TWOIAF is unreliable because Elio and Linda helped him write it.
He has to make this distinction because "Worldbook" type books are usually written from the POV of an omniscient narrator - meaning it's just the author telling you "here's what happened." In this situation every statement is "canonical" meaning that these are the known facts about the world, the second definition of canon. Martin has famously made great use of the "unreliable narrator" technique in his main series, and what he is telling is this quote - the only thing he is telling us - is that TWOIAF is written by a in-world character, and is thus subject to the same fallibility as as any POV in the main series. For example, in AGOT Cat recalls in her inner monologue the origin story of Storms End, with Durran and the storm and seven castles and all that. This is not canonical - it's Cat's headspace, and her information. We can't know if her story is true. It's unreliable. It's just the same as when Yandel tells about ancient history - he's giving us the opinion of the Citadel, and no more.
So while we always have to remember that the information in TWOIAF is not fact, but a Maester's word (which I think is a brilliant conceit fwiw), this should not be confused with "not full canon" in the sense that TWOIAF somehow is not part of the series of ASOIAF. Dunk and Egg and TWOIAF are books about ASOIAF written by the author of ASOIAF, and thus they are canon in the classic sense of the word, which is simply "the authentic works of the author."
What I strenuously object is conflating the one meaning of canon with the other. Martin is not saying that TWOIAF is not part of the authentic works of ASOIAF. That's an absurd conclusion, and it's absurd to think an author would ever say their own work is not authentic. What I strenuously object is people making theories which run up against a piece of information in TWOIAF that cuts against their theory, and then they pull out this quote to simply dismiss any information in TWOIAF as if it were just Elio's opinion or something. As if conversations about the books somehow should never mention anything from TWOIAF.
Just look a the a-hole move voice pulled - he's dismissing the fused stone fortress at Battle Isle from the conversation because it's in TWOIAF. But a huge black fortress under the Hightower of Oldtown is clearly not a thing which is up for debate. It exists, or it doesn't. The Maesters live in Oldtown, and the fortress can be seen by everyone in the city. If the maesters say a fused stone fortress exists at Oldtown, then it exists at Oldtown. Period. That is not ancient history, unverifiable. It's a fortress sitting under the freaking Hightower. But because it's inconvenient for Voice's timeline and theory, he warps this quote to mean TWOIAF isn't really part of the series and shouldn't be considered. It's utter bullshit, and it's intellectually dishonest. And when it's done selectively to favor someone's theory... bullshit is the only word I have for that. All Martin has said here is we need to remember it's not him speaking directly to is, it's the Maester and he could be wrong about things which are unverifiable.
In the case of Dawn, Yandel is quoting from "those who have seen it." That's not the same as him seeing it, and he's not a metallurgist. But, some people have obviously seen and handled Dawn - probably the Maester at Starfall, one would think - and those that do say it is in all respects similar to V steel - weight, sharpness, etc. - except color and glow. Voice doesn't think Dawn is made of metal, so he just dismisses this quote pretty much out of hand. I like his theories about Dawn, and I think there's plenty of room for Dawn to be a weapon of ice magic tied to the Others and still be a type of metal or meteorite ore, as the story says.
voice you said somewhere that meteorite iron wouldn't be good for making swords. Not the case at all - there's a famous meteor sword made by a Japanese swordsmith, certainly not said to be inferior quality, and there are a few other meteor weapons as well in the world. Strength of steel is more about the forging process, as I understand it. Getting the impurities out. More importantly, the track record of meteor swords in mythology and literature is that they are always supreme and badass weapons. So please, don't come with this crap about Dawn can't be a meteor sword because meteorite ore is impure. That's just not the case. And by the way, some of the trace elements found in meteors, like nickel and phosphors, are the exact things you can add to iron to make steel, so in a fictional world where advanced swords should not exist according to accepted chronology and history, it's well possible a meteorite would have just the right mixture of metals to forge an magical, indestructible sword, just as the legend of Dawn suggests.
None of this rules out a connection to the Others, in my opinion. Hell, the meteor story might apply to a different sword from a different land, and only have been brought their by the ancestors of Starfall from their homeland, and later associated with the amazing white sword they stole from the King Of Winter. Who knows. But when people say "heart of a fallen star" in ASOIAF, it's very clear they are using that phrase to refer to a fallen star - a meteor. You once claimed the series proper never refers to a meteor, only TWOIAF, which doesn't count in your mind. This is even more intellectually dishonest than your other assertions about Dawn's metal or Battle Isle. The series refers to meteors as hearts of fallen stars, and in case there was any doubt, the TWOIAF section on Dawn simply verifies that this is indeed what they mean. A stone that fell from the sky. That's the story for Dawn, in the 5 novels and TWOIAF. They both agree.
voice, I really cannot engage in discussion with this kind of intellectual dishonesty. And it's not even necessary to support your theory, which I mostly like a great deal. Can we cut the bullshit about TWOIAF, please?
two definitions of canon. one is "the authentic works of the author." TWOIAF is canon by this definition.
The other is "the accepted true facts of the story." That's a whole different ball of wax. We cannot take anything Yandel says as 100%, because he's essentially a human historian with a limited view and bias and all the rest. THIS is CLEARLY what George is referring to in his quote. He's saying TWOIAF isn't 100% reliable just like anything a character says is not 100% reliable. Yandel is an "unreliable narrator," just like every POV. And again, this is what Martin was talking about.
Martin never meant "disallow TWOAIF material from convos about the series because I just let E and L jerk themselves off and I could give a fuck what's in there." That's how you guys treat this quote, and its bullshit. The only time you guys play this card is when you don't like something in TWOIAF because it cuts against your theory. This is so intellectually dishonest, and that's why it makes me want to vomit. All of the new information comes from George. Do you think he let Elio just spin some bullshit about Dawn in TWOIAF that wasn't what Martin intended? There is nothing to support this view, and statements by everyone involved to contradict it. All the eastern stuff I like, Martin wrote. Information about anything important like Dawn or the Others, Martin wrote that too. Come on, use your brain a little here. Elio and Linda are compilers of book info, and a good chunk of TWOIAF is just that, and that's what they contributed. All the new info comes from George.
We actually agree on a lot of the finer points of this argument above. I only point out that GRRM himself has come just shy of canonizing the world book. There is a whole thread regarding errors that crept in at the W. Easy to blame Yandel for such things, of course, but Yandel is not the only one to blame.
Before there was an App, there was a Wiki, and the Wiki contained errors, as well as the occasional bit of unsupported speculation. Several years later, Ran and Linda populated the App with material from the Wiki. Several years after that, they used some of the same material for the World Book. This is a tradition that goes back quite some time, before you and I joined the forums. Far be it from me to ignore history.
My main issue with the WB is that it doesn't clearly define which portions were written by GRRM, and which were written by his "maesters."
There is a ton of great information in the world book, but GRRM has also said "Only the books are canon" when referring to the novels vs the app. Nothing trumps the novels, not even D&E, and certainly not the WB. The novels trump the others.
So who wrote that Dawn was identical to Valyrian steel except color and glow? His name is George RR Martin, and he signed his name on the book so you would know.
See? Why can't we debate this in the Ice=Dawn thread? I'm fine with doing it here, but it just seems far more relevant to that discussion.
It's fine to reiterate Yandel's fallibility, but this "TWOIAF doesn't count when it cuts against my theory" crap is just that, crap. Go ahead, quote the SSM again and play dumb as if you didn't know there are two definitions of canon, and as if it's not clear Martin is talking about the unreliable narrator literary device. It still won't change the fact that George RR Martin wrote TWOIAF with help from E and L, and the fact that E and L helped compile the fucking family trees doesn't invalidate any of the new info Martin has given us on the book.
This is the bullshit I have no patience for man. So over this stupid conversation with the five of you or whatever it is that cling to this idiocy.
I'm fine with letting it go. I don't think we'll be agreeing anytime soon on this one.
I mean voice, when you say "Battle Isle isn't in the books" as a way of dismissing it from being worth discussing, you're just being a prick. Are you really suggesting Battle Isle doesn't exist? It's a figment of Linda's imagination? Of course it isn't. The Battle Isle section is loaded with lore and ideas about very important subjects - dragons, children of the forest, the First Men, sorcery in the Dawn Age - that's all Martin's stuff. He would not and did not let someone else invent information about his universe, particularly shit as important as the first humans in Westeros, dragons in the Dawn Age, children of the forest, etc. And you think because Elio and Linda complied all the stupid little details George doesn't want to keep track of, that Battle Isle doesn't really exist yet until it's mentioned in the books? This is purely selective on your part, and again I cry intellectual dishonesty here.
Not at all. Rather than dismiss it, I ended up going on to agree with you re: Battle Isle...
That being said, I do have strong suspicions that the Wall was not built using human technology, so it would surprise me little if the same were true for structures like MC, Storm's End, and the fortress on Battle Isle.
And your answers to my comments from a few days ago were really terrible. You spent all this time twisting my words around and ignoring the main point I was making, followed by a bunch of "this isn't the right thread for that." I thought Westeros was the over moderated website? I guess not. All of these topics relate, on Westeros threads we mix it up and have a lot of fun, Sly calls it the sandbox. Not sure what your deal is. We talk about a lot of things, you and I, on different places. I consider it a running discussion.
I consider it a running discussion as well my friend, truly. But it did feel at times like you wanted to discuss other theories more than this one. Which is all well and good, but it just seems like there are areas where we could do it where it would help further the discussion in a more constructive way in those topics.
And, I do have a selfish reason for making my suggestion...
I'd really like to see you beef up the subforum we made for your podcasts. I have a feeling it would create a lot of interesting discussion if you populated it with your adjacent essays.
I'm a big fan of your theories LmL, and there are many other fans of them here. So I was hoping that by suggesting we move some of this discussion to that subforum that you would want to add some more of your essays over there. I apologize if it seemed like I was only trying to cut off your arguments. Far from it. I want to showcase your arguments.
As far as viewing your theory through the lense of my own, if you're talking about the cause of the Long Night, that's quite impossible for me to just set aside my entire theory which is rooted in heavy analysis of the text for ideas which conflict with everything I am seeing. I can talk about the rest of your theory on its own but if we talk Long Night, I cannot disappear the meteors from my brain. Apologies.
Precisely what I was saying to you upthread. One theory cannot refute another, we all have our own interpretations and those interpretations will always make more sense to us than another person's.
With that in mind, I can see why, from your perspective, my interpretation is woefully deficient in moon meteors. Conversely, I find your interpretations woefully deficient in miasma.
Neither of us are right, and neither of us are wrong. We're just two dorks analyzing a fictional universe that is ever so slowly materializing in the mind of another dork.
I like a lot of your theory here, primarily the idea of Martin personifying the forces of nature in magical manifestations, since that's in the very beginning of my first essay. I couldn't agree more. And I told you I think the Others as a miasma is dead on. But not everything is a miasma. The meteors are certainly not. Miasma symbols are dogs and mists and things like that. Swords and dragons and meteors are a totally different symbol family.
Actually, swords are often swung in communities afflicted by miasma.... and ancient Greeks would certainly have viewed meteors destroying their ecology as a miasmatic event.
But in any case, another clink is in order. We agree on much and more.
"I can see it. You have more of the north in you than your brothers."